The URL can be used to link to this page

0635 Replacement of Comp Plan ORDINANCE NO. 635 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA, AMENDING, REVISING AND REPLACING IN ITS ENTIRETY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA, WHICH WILL CONTROL FUTURE LAND USE, GUIDE PUBLIC FACILITIES AND PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES PURSUANT TO THE • LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT (CHAPTER 163, PART II, FLORIDA STATUTES) , INCLUDING A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT; TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT; HOUSING ELEMENT; SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, DRAINAGE, POTABLE WATER AND NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE ELEMENT; CONSERVATION ELEMENT; RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT; INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT; AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, empowers the City Council of the City of Okeechobee, Florida to prepare and enforce comprehensive plans for the development of the City; and WHEREAS, Sections 163.3161 through 163.3215, Florida Statues, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, empowers and mandates the City of Okeechobee, Florida to (a) plan for the City' s future development and growth; (b) adopt and amend comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof, to guide the future growth and development of the City; ( c) implement adopted or amended comprehensive plans by the adoption of appropriate land development regulations; and (d) provisions and purposes of the Act; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3174( 1 ) , Florida Statutes, the City Council of the City of Okeechobee acts as the Local Planning Agency for the City of Okeechobee; and WHEREAS, all meetings and workshops of the City Council acting as the Local Planning Agency and the local governing body have been duly publicized and encouraged the citizens of Okeechobee to assist in the formulation of goals, objectives and policies for the comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, supporting data and analysis documentation was prepared as background and justification of the comprehensive plan' s goals, objectives and policies; and WHEREAS, the Okeechobee City Council, empowered by the above-cited laws and ordinances, and by Sections 163.3161 through 163.3215, Florida Statutes, has altered and replaced in its entirety the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan to address more adequately and prepare for the City of Okeechobee' s future growth and development; and WHEREAS, the Okeechobee City Council has, in the preparation of the revised version of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan, caused the collection of relevant and appropriate data; the holding of numerous public hearings, workshops and meetings; and has effectively provided for full public participation, broad dissemination of proposals and alternatives, opportunity for written comments, open discussion, and consideration and response to public and official comments; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, the Okeechobee City Council as the Local Planning agency held public meetings and hearings on the revised version of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan with due public notice having been provided, and having reviewed and considered all comments received during the public hearings and meetings and having provided for necessary revisions, on September 4, 1990 , recommended the revised . version of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan to the Okeechobee City Council for approval; and Ondinance #635 Page 1 o 5 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, the Okeechobee City Council held several public workshops, meetings and hearings on the revised version of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan with due public notice having been provided, to obtain public comment, and having considered all written and oral comments received during said work sessions and public hearings, including support documents and the recommendation of the Local Planning Agency, and having provided for necessary revision, on September 4, 1990 approved the comprehensive plan as revised in its entirety for transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency (Department of Community Affairs) for review and comment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, Okeechobee City Council on September 13, 1990, transmitted nine (9) copies of the revised version of the comprehensive plan to the Department of Community Affairs as the State Land Planning Agency for written comment, and transmitted one (1) copy to the Central Florida Regional Planning Council as requested; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs, by letter dated December 21, 1990, transmitted its objections, recommendations and comments on the revised version of the comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the revised version of the comprehensive plan was further revised in view of objections, recommendations and comments received by the Department of Community Affairs and other state agencies, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, on March 19, 1991, Okeechobee City Council held a public hearing with due public notice having been provided, on the revised version of the comprehensive plan, and with written advance notice of such public hearing having been provided to the State Land Planning Agency; and WHEREAS, Okeechobee City Council further considered all oral and written comments received during public hearings, including support documents, and objections, recommendations and comments of the Department of Community Affairs and other state agencies; and WHEREAS, in exercise of its authority, Okeechobee City Council has determined it necessary to adopt the revised version of the comprehensive plan to preserve and enhance present advantages; to encourage the most appropriate use of land, water and resources consistent with the public interest; and deal effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within the City of Okeechobee. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Okeechobee, Florida as follows: Section 1. This exercise Planning 163.3215, Purpose and Intent Ordinance is enacted to carry out the purpose and intent of, and the authority set out in, the Local Government Comprehensive and Land Development Regulation Act, Sections 163.3161 through Florida Statutes, and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, as amended. Section 2. Title of Comprehensive Plan The revised version of the comprehensive plan for Okeechobee, Florida, shall be entitled "The City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan." Section 3. Future Land Use Element The Future Land Use Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include: Ordinance #635 Page 2 o6 5 (a) The text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference: (1) Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, or exhibits. (2) Plan implementation requirements. (b) Future Land Use Map. Section 4. Traffic Circulation Element The Traffic Circulation Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include: (a) The text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, or exhibits. (b) Future Traffic Circulation Map. Section 5. Housing Element The Housing Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, or exhibits. Section 6. Sanitary Sewer, Sold Waste, Drainage, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element The Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, or exhibits. Section 7. Conservation The Conservation Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, maps, or exhibits. Section 8. Recreation and Open Space Element The Recreation and Open Space Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, maps, or exhibits. Section 9. Intergovernmental Coordination Element The Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, or exhibits. Section 10. Capital Improvements Element The Capital Improvements Element of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include: Ordinance #635 Page 3 5 (a) The text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein: Goals, objectives and policies, and any specifically incorporated appendices, tables, or exhibits. (b) Schedule of capital improvements. (c) Procedures for annual monitoring and evaluation. Section 11. Definitions The Definitions section of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. Section 12. Monitoring and Evaluation Section The Monitoring and Evaluation Section of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted to include the text attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. Section 13. Applicability and Effect The applicability and effect of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan shall be as provided by the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Sections 163.2161 through 163.3215, Florida Statutes, and the Ordinance. Section 14. Severability If any provision or portion of this Ordinance is declared by any court of competent jurisdiction to be void, unconstitutional, or unenforceable, then all remaining provisions and portions of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 15. Copy on File A certified copy of the enacting Ordinance, as well as certified copies of the City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan and any amendments thereto, shall be filed with the City Clerk. The City Clerk shall also make copies available to the public for a reasonable publication charge. Section 16. Effective Date This Ordinance Shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Introduced and passed on first reading this 5th day of March, 1991. ATTEST: Bonnie S. Thomas, CMC, City Clerk ames E. Kirk, Mayor OndJ.nance #635 Page 4 o6 5 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED, with a quorum present and voting, by the City Council of the City of Okeechobee, Florida this 19th day of March, 1991. ATTEST: Bonnie S. Thomas, CMC, City Clerk y T Res E. Kirk, Mayor UadLnance #635 Page 5 o.6 City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan Data and Analysis Adopted March 19, 1991 Amended May 19, 1992 Prepared Under Contract By: Central Florida Regional Planning Council P. 0. Box 2089, 490 East Davidson Street Bartow, Florida 33830 (813) 534-7130 rr,., 1 CITY OF OKEECHOBEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DATA AND ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 42 TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT 34- S2 HOUSING ELEMENT 51 SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, DRAINAGE, POTABLE WATER AND NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE ELEMENT 85 CONSERVATION ELEMENT 115 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT 143 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT 161 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT 191 March 1991, Amended May 19, 1992 Future Land Use Element TABLE OF CONTENTS `' I. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 2 A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 5 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 5 Existing Land Use Patterns 6 Residential 6 Commercial 7 Industrial 7 Recreational 7 Public Buildings and Grounds 7 Vacant and Undeveloped 7 Natural Features 8 Topography 8 Soils 8 Wetlands 8 Historic Resources 8 Existing Development: Availability of Public Services 9 Traffic Circulation 9 Sanitary Sewer 9 Solid Waste 10 w.. Potable Water 10 Drainage 10 Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge 10 Analysis: Vacant Land 10 Topography 11 Soil Types 11 Natural Resources 14 Groundwater 15 Development Review Process 16 Historic Properties 18 Analysis: Flood-Prone Areas 18 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 18 Future Land Use Designations 19 Single-Family Residential 19 Multi-Family Residential 19 Commercial 19 Industrial 19 Public Facilities 19 Projected Future Land Use Needs 20 Future Land Use Map 21 Analysis: Need for Redevelopment 22 1 p...L.dth.ar aer el ckaa c,�.r.s.e rim May 19.1992 Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan 23 Summary of Land Use Issues 24 Inconsistent Land Uses 24 Urban Sprawl 25 Concurrency 25 Taylor Creek Water Quality 25 Land Development Regulations 26 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1, Population Growth, 1970-2000 6 Table 1.2, Land Use Acreage Needs, Year 2000 21 LIST OF MAPS Map L1, Existing Land Use 27 Map 1.2, Natural Features 29 Map 1.3, Future Land Use 31 2 Pomp Led the Freest My of Oteoctsabw Compeobooiw flan 1ia�1972 I. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT ""'` A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT The purpose of the Future Land Use Element is to guide decision-making in the City of Okeechobee relative to land use. The element outlines the future distribution, extent, and location of land uses in the city during the period 1990-2000. This information is graphically depicted on the Land Use Map for the City of Okeechobee. The map, together with the Goals, Objectives and Policies, is adopted in accordance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, as the city's official statement of its intentions toward future development. This element is structured to meet the requirements of Chapter 163 and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The State of Florida has mandated that each local government prepare a Future Land Use Element as a component of its Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Element is set forth in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis C. Issues and Recommendations In addition to the map and narrative, the element includes maps and other relevant graphics. B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS The City of Okeechobee is located in the southern portion of Okeechobee County, approximately 1.5 miles north of the lake Okeechobee shoreline. It is the county's only incorporated city, serving as a shopping and employment center for an area with a permanent population of 36,000 and a peak seasonal population of nearly 50,000. Although its population currently is less than 5,000, the City of Okeechobee 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 lands just outside the city in unincorporated Okeechobee County. The city is situated at the intersections of US routes 98 and 441, and SR 70. US 98 connects the city with Sebring, approximately 50 miles to the west, while SR 70 links the city with Ft. Pierce, 30 miles to the east. US 441 approaches the city from the Orlando area, then continues south toward West Palm Beach. The population of the City of Okeechobee has grown approximately 1.4 percent annually since 1970, as shown in Table 1.1. U.S. Census figures show a population of 3,715 °'r'' 5 Future Land Use Element GJ of Otoerltbee Co prdrmwe Plan May 191992 in 1970, while the 1990 population is estimated to be 4,770. As the projected population figures suggest, substantial amounts of land will be needed for future growth. Table 1.1, Population Growth, 1970-2000 City of Okeechobee Permanent Average Yearly Year Population Growth 1970 3,715 -- 1980 4,225 1.4% 1990 (est.) 4,770 1.3% 1995 (est.) 4,923 0.6% 2000 (est.) 5,086 0.7% Source Projections of Population Households and Income in Central Florida, Florida Applied Demographics,February 1990 Existing Land Use Patterns The City of Okeechobee is separated by many miles from other urban areas; this relative isolation has created a land use pattern that provides the full range of employment and commercial services needed by its residents, as opposed to being primarily a "bedroom community." Existing land use is shown on Map 1.1 (page 25). For the purposes of this element, the city's land uses are grouped according to the following categories. rm„r Residential The largest user of land, this land use category encompasses approximately 715 acres, or 33 percent of all land within the city. It is found in virtually all parts of the city. A housing survey conducted by Central Florida Regional Planning Council staff in 1988 indicates that single-family dwelling units account for 75.4 percent of the city's housing,while multi-family units comprise 14.5 percent and mobile homes 10.1 percent. Single-family homes are located throughout the city, while multi-family dwelling units are to be found mostly in scattered locations between Park Street and the Seaboard Coast Line railroad right-of-way. Although small un-subdivided areas remain, most of the city (approximately 60 percent) is platted into lots of 50 by 150 feet. Considering additional land reserved and used for road right-of-way, this translates into an existing single family residential density of up to 3.5 units per gross acre. This figure also represents the lower limit of multi-family development,which ranges up to approximately 10 units per acre, as prescribed by the city's zoning regulations. 6 Fuute Lane Ur Bement Cary of Oteed,oe.e Compeeeenwe ran Maw 1942 Commercial Approximately 171 acres (7.8 percent) of land within the city is being used for Now commercial development. The highest concentrations of commercial land use can be seen along Parrott Avenue, running the length of the city from north to south, and along Park Street from the city's western to eastern boundaries. Industrial Approximately 11 acres (0.5 percent) of the city's land is being used for industrial purposes. The city's few industrial properties are located along the south side of the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad right-of-way between West 4th Avenue and East 5th Avenue Recreational The city offers a number of public recreation facilities, accounting for approximately 15 acres (0.7 percent of total land area). These include public parks as well as athletic facilities owned by the Okeechobee County School Board. The most prominent recreation site is the Park Avenue Greenbelt, extending from West 7th Avenue to Parrott Avenue Other sites are distributed throughout the city. Public Buildings and Grounds Public facilities occupy approximately 36 acres (1.6 percent) of land in the city. Such facilities include City Hall, the Okeechobee County Courthouse, the county's civil defense building, city police and fire stations, and several schools. Vacant and Undeveloped Approximately 645 acres (29.3 percent) of land within the city is vacant or undeveloped. This land represents a valuable asset in terms of planning for future development in the city. The development of this land would discourage urban sprawl. People are moving to the Okeechobee area and if they cannot buy land in the City they will buy in scattered areas in the unincorporated areas of the County. Three particularly large tracts of vacant land are located in the area east of Taylor Creek and north of SR 70; in the southeast corner of the city south of South 8th Street; and in the southwest portion of the city between West 10th and West 7th Avenues. Although these three vacant parcels may have been classified as either wetlands or environmentally sensitive areas before the channelization of Taylor Creek and the dredging and filling of properties adjacent to the creek, they are now pasturelands. The wildlife which exists on these three tracts are adaptable wildlife such as squirrels, rabbits, and birds. City sewer and water line connections are readily available to these three large tracts of undeveloped land so that septic tanks and well water would not be necessary for their development. One of these three tracts is a 160 acre parcel owned by the City which has been designated industrial and described further on page 19 of the Data & Analysis of the Future Land Use Element under the subsection *"'' 7 Future Land Use Sawa( Cy of Okeechobee compeeem.re Pfau Star 19.1992 referred to as "Future Land Use Map, Economic development". Smaller tracts of vacant property are found throughout the city. Natural Features Future development in the City of Okeechobee must take into account a number of distinctive features, both physical and biological, to ensure that important elements of the natural environment are preserved and that people and property are protected from natural hazards. Certain features represent a constraint to development, while others can be helpful. Map 1.2 (page 27) shows physical characteristics of the land on which the city is built. Topography The city occupies an upland area adjacent to the edge of the historical floodplain of Lake Okeechobee. Ranging from 25 to slightly more than 30 feet in elevation, this area is extremely flat. Because of the level terrain, soil erosion does not represent a significant danger; however, drainage can be a problem in periods of heavy rainfall. Soils The majority of the City of Okeechobee is underlain by soil types known as Immokalee and Myakka fine sands. These soils typically are firm and Ievel, and pose only moderate limitations to building construction. However, because of poor drainage and a high water table (normally 30 inches below the surface or less), these soils create severe limitations on the use of septic tanks and sanitary landfills. Wetlands Taylor Creek historically has been subject to flooding, and once generated a substantial system of wetlands in southern Okeechobee County. However, an extensive channelization effort and the digging of the L-63(N) Canal has turned the creek into what amounts to a conveyance system for stormwater. Remaining wetlands within the City of Okeechobee are isolated and sparse in nature, and are generally characterized as temporarily or seasonally flooded (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Wetlands Inventory). Historic Resources Registers maintained by the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, list two historically significant structures in the City of Okeechobee. These are the Freedman-Raulerson House (600 S. Parrott Avenue) and the Old School House (410 S. Parrott Avenue). The locations of these structures are shown on the Existing and Future Land Use Maps. 8 Fuca'—Ua.E]mmc City of Okeechobee Caeoprebsime FLe Man*1992 Existing Development: Availability of Public Services The City of Okeechobee provides potable water and sanitary sewer service to areas N... both inside and outside its corporate limits. The city maintains a system of collector and local streets to serve short-range traffic, while the State of Florida has responsibility for all arterial roads carrying traffic into and through the city. Storm drainage facilities have been provided by the state along its own roads, while the city has provided swales and ditches to accommodate drainage along other roads. Groundwater aquifer recharge is also an important concern because many city residents obtain potable water supplies from private wells. The six public facilities/services to be addressed in this Comprehensive Plan are discussed briefly below. Traffic Circulation As noted above, the City of Okeechobee is served by a system of local roads as well as state roads. Due to limited data, only the latter type of road is considered in the Traffic Circulation Element's analysis of existing traffic conditions. US 98 is a federal highway entering the city from the northwest, proceeding through the west half of the city as Park St., then turning south and continuing toward Lake Okeechobee as Parrott Avenue US 441 enters from the north, joining US 98 at the intersection of Park Street and Parrott Avenue, then proceeding south as Parrott Avenue to the city's southern boundary. SR 70 bisects the city from west to east, coinciding with US 98 from the western city limits to Parrott Avenue, Nor then continuing east toward Fort Pierce. State roads in the City of Okeechobee are divided for analysis purposes into six segments, all of which currently are operating at Level of Service A or B. This indicates generally good conditions of traffic flow and speed. However, a segment of SR 70 from Parrott Avenue to the eastern city limits will reach LOS D by the year 2000. Road segments reaching LOS F by that year will be a portion of SR 70 near the western city limits and US 441 from CSX Railroad to Cemetery Road. Projected service levels on these three segments indicate that improvements are needed to accommodate projected growth. Sanitary Sewer The city's sewage treatment plant serves a total of 905 connections, both inside and outside the city limits. The plant currently operates at 53 percent of its 600,000 gallon-per- day capacity. However, this will become insufficient by 1995 with projected population growth and the improvement of an existing but unused portion of the sewage collection system, which will bring many of the city's current residents on-line. Projections indicate that the plant's capacity will need to be expanded to 1.2 million gallons per day (MGD) by 1995. v■. 9 Future Loa the 0mmc City o(ot_..caetpteteorYe flan May It 1592 Solid Waste Okeechobee County's 80-acre sanitary landfill receives solid waste generated by the ''""e City of Okeechobee. This facility has ample capacity to serve the city through the year 2000 and beyond. Potable Water The city's water treatment plant draws water directly from Lake Okeechobee, serving 3,887 direct connections both inside and outside the city, as well as a private distribution system for several outlying developments. The plant's current capacity of 2.8 MGD is scheduled for expansion to 4.88 MGD by 1995. The expanded capacity will be sufficient to meet the city's water service area through the planning period. Drainage Approximately 10 of the city's 50 miles of streets are served by storm drainage facilities constructed by the State of Florida in the 1950s and early 1960s. The balance of the city's road system is served by swales and ditches constructed and/or maintained by the city. Drainage improvements are needed in the area of Northwest 4th Street,where fill has been placed in a natural wetland, displacing floodwaters. Future development in the city will be guided by provisions in the land development regulations which ensure the provision of adequate drainage facilities. Nonstructural approaches to stormwater management will be encouraged wherever possible, preserving •.�+P natural drainage features and limiting development in areas which are subject to flooding. Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge The City of Okeechobee has a low rate of recharge to the underlying aquifer, and almost all city residents are served by public potable water service. Therefore, aquifer recharge does not represent a constraint on development in the city, as it may in unincorporated areas of the county, where many residents rely on private wells. Analysis: Vacant Land The City of Okeechobee's supply of vacant/undeveloped land represents an important resource in providing for future development, although much of it presents significant constraints to development. Constituting 29 percent of the city's land area, this vacant land is scattered in small parcels, but there are several relatively large undeveloped tracts. These are to be found in the city's northeast corner (east of Taylor Creek and north of SR 70); in the Taylor Creek area near the southern city limits; and in the southwest section of the city between West 7th and West 10th Avenues. Map 1.1 (page 25) shows vacant lands, while Map 1.2 (page 27) shows wetlands and soil types found within the city. Niary 10 FLEUR land Us Element Qty at Okeadaatos Campraboarar Mao Mamb 1992 Topography U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps show minimal slopes in the City of Okeechobee, with elevations ranging from 20 to 30 feet above sea level in most locations. Vacant lands adjacent to Taylor Creek tend to be somewhat lower than the rest of the city, i.e., below 20 feet. It is possible that these areas have not previously been developed because they represent the creek's historic floodplain, and more readily usable properties have been available. However, channelization of the creek has virtually eliminated the threat of flooding, and these areas probably can accommodate some amount of development if construction takes place with the proper design features. Erosion is not a significant problem on any vacant properties due to the city's level terrain, but this same topographic characteristic makes drainage a particular concern in all parts of the city. The need for adequate drainage facilities will be addressed in the city's land development regulations. Soil Types All of the City of Okeechobee, including many of the city's Iarger vacant areas, is underlain by soil types posing moderate to very severe limitations to development, according to Soil Survey: Okeechobee County, Florida, issued September 1971 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This same document shows that the entire city experiences severe limitations for septic tank use, due to a high water table and periodic flooding. Map 1.2 shows soil types grouped according to degree and type of development limitation, as depicted in the USDA Soil Survey. These soil groupings are described in the box on the following page. Although the soil survey depicts widespread development constraints in the city, it should be understood that limitations posed by soil characteristics are not absolute and can be overcome through proper engineering measures.The USDA qualifies the soil information it presents with the following statement: The terms used [in the Soil Survey] to indicate degree of limitation do not indicate suitability [for development], because suitability involves more than the soil properties. Most soils can be made suitable for many uses if they are managed so that the limitations or hazards are overcome. The ratings do show the degree of intensity of the problems that must be overcome if the soils are used for [development]. Soils may have severe limitations for a specified use; they can be made suitable for that use, however, if it is feasible to apply the intensive treatment needed to overcome the limitations. The purpose of the soil information presented in this element is to provide a general guide to soil characteristics and possible development limitations which these conditions may create. However, the data source may not reflect changed conditions in vacant properties which have arisen in the years since the survey was published. Changes in surface and groundwater conditions may also affect the accuracy of the ratings assigned to the various soil types. Therefore, decisions regarding appropriate development types on properties 11 Fumes Land Ur Deem= City at Okeechobee Com¢ehmw'•Pie May 19.1992 rated as Severe or Very Severe should be based on up-to-date surveys of soil conditions and any physical alterations which may have created more favorable conditions for development. The Development Review Process process (see Policy 2.2) will ensure that the city has adequate information to make such decisions when development is proposed. Development limitations posed by soil conditions can be mitigated through dredging and filling, construction using stilts or pilings as a foundation, or other measures. Land • development regulations can be used to protect groundwater/surface water quality, unique vegetative communities, and wildlife habitat. Although development can proceed in areas of unfavorable soil characteristics, the financial cost to the developer is higher because of physical constraints. Also, the cost to the city is higher because of the potential disruption of natural systems and the need for increased regulatory oversight. Now 12 Puma Land Ilaa Element aey at Otemdoeas Ccmpemm..s P'ao Mans 1992 Predominant Soil Types in the City of Okeechobee Naar Limitations for Building Limitations for Name Description Construction Septic Tank Use Group 2: Adamsville Fine Sand(Ad) Somewhat poorly drained, Moderate:high water Severe: high water deep sandy soil along fringes table table of flatwoods areas bordering • sloughs and ponds Ft.Drum Fine Sand (Fr) Somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soil found in flatwoods and hammock areas • bordering sloughs and depressions Group 3: Immokalee Fine Sand(Im) Deep,poorly drained,sandy Moderate:high water Severe: high water soil found in broad flatwoods table•, periodic flooding table; periodic areas flooding Myakka Fine Sand(My) Similar to Im Group 5: Basinger-Placid Complex Deep,sandy soils occurring in Severe high water table; Severe: high water (Bc) wide sloughs and covered with frequent flooding table-, frequent shallow water throughout the flooding year Basinger/Pompano Fine Similar to Bc Sands,Ponded(Bm) Delray Fine Sand(De) Very poorly drained,sandy soil found in depressions and drainage-ways ,yam Placid Fine Sand (Pf) Very poorly drained,dark- colored,sandy soil found in low areas throughout the county Pompano Fine Sand(Pn) Deep,poorly drained soil found in grassy sloughs and depressions Group 6: Manatee,Delray and Very poorly drained soils Severe frequent flooding; Severe frequent Okcelanta Soils(Mo) found on marshy floodplains high water table; low flooding; high bearing capacity,high water table; shrink-swell potential in a moderate few areas. permeability Group 7: Okeelanta Peat(Oe) Very poorly drained,organic Very severe frequent Very severe: soil found in depressions and flooding;high water table frequent flooding; broad marshes high shrink-swell potential high water table in most arras;low bearing capacity Source:Soil Survey,Okeechobee County,Florida,September 1971,U.S.Department of Agriculture Where soil conditions create limitations, the preferable types of development are those which have the smallest effect on their surroundings, both in terms of physical design of the site, and of its intended use. Commercial and industrial development generally 13 Fundy Land Ur Etkunant Gry of r5+aeethneee Cae¢ehenwe Flan Mar,))',199 require substantial site alteration (this is true even on sites where soil types are suitable), involving large amounts of impervious surface and the use of heavy equipment. Subdivisions and high-density residential development frequently create the same situation. These land use types also have the potential to generate high volumes of traffic with the attendant problems of disruptive road construction, noise, and chemical-laden stormwater runoff. Bearing this in mind, the preferable development types in the areas of high soil limitations are low-impact recreational uses involving minimal site alteration, and low-density residential use. However, more intense uses can be considered if consistent with the Future Land Use Map, if appropriate site design features are used, and if proper safeguards to the city's natural resources are provided. Outside these high-limitation areas, most other vacant properties in the city have Myakka and Imokalee soil types, which are typically firm and dry, posing the same slight to moderate development limitations affecting the rest of the city. Natural Resources Taylor Creek is the city's major concern relative to the effect of new development on natural resources. Taylor Creek runs from north to south along the eastern portion of the City. The only surface water body to be found within city limits, the creek and lands adjacent to it have been altered through channelization and dredging and filling to the point that they can only loosely be called a natural resource. The level of water in the creek has been controlled since the 1960's by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to a Ievel of 13.5 feet. The creek flows into the rim canal that runs outside of the Lake Okeechobee dike. During dry seasons the Taylor Creek locks are open allowing water from Taylor Creek to run into the lake and during the wet season the locks are closed and water is then pumped into Lake Okeechobee. The water level of Taylor Creek cannot exceed 13.5 feet. Since the average elevation of land in the City is above 18 feet sea level, the City is free of any flood threat from the creek. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers did extensive canalization of the creek in the 1930's and in the 1960's the SFWMD created the present system with pumping stations, dikes, locks and levees, etc., that prevented flooding in the City. The residents of Okeechobee can remember no time when Taylor Creek flooded. As a result of the practices of the federal government and the SFWMD in managing Taylor Creek over the past 60 years for state and regional flood control purposes, localized flooding has been eliminated and environmentally sensitive lands and wetlands which used to be located within the City adjacent to the creek have been lost. Therefore, as a legal, historical and practical matter the City of Okeechobee has very little control over Taylor Creek due to the management of this body of water by the SFWMD. However,water quality in the creek has a substantial effect on water quality in Lake Okeechobee. For this reason, the city should cooperate with the District and Okeechobee County in establishing standards for new development which will help to reduce levels of nr+t f aax l�oa u.Bear= City of ot..choee.campabew.Plan M1992 phosphorus and other pollutants entering the creek. At the same time, such efforts will improve the creek as a habitat for fish and other wildlife. New development should also .,,., protect such native vegetative communities as may still exist in the Taylor Creek area. other water quality improvement measures have been taken by the District. In order to reduce the phosphorus content flowing into Lake Okeechobee by Taylor Creek, the SFWMD installed the C-61 canal which connects with Taylor Creek approximately 1.5 miles north of the City and transports water southeasterly to the City. This considerably reduced the nutrient content of Taylor Creek running through the City. The SFWMD is requiring property owners large tracts of property to have their property checked for phosphorous discharge and is requiring a reduction of this discharge. Studies are also currently being done by the WMD to determine the amount of nutrients, if any, that lands associated with feed businesses located within the City are presently contributing to Taylor Creek. Should the results of these studies show unacceptable degradation of Taylor Creek's water quality, regulatory programs currently in place at the District and DER level will require remedial actions. Taylor Creek no longer presents a practical flooding threat. As a result of previous dredging and filling and flood control practices of federal, state and regional agencies, many of the wetlands or environmentally sensitive lands adjacent to the banks of Taylor Creek which formerly existed within the City have been lost. Some wetland areas, however, still exist in the creek's historic floodplain (see Map 1.2). Isolated wetlands also exist some distance from the creek. The city's wetlands are largely of the palustrine type, defined as including vegetated wetlands normally described as marsh, swamp, bog, fen and prairie. Most of the city's wetlands are characterized by the National Wetlands Inventory (U.S. Department of the Interior) as persistently wet areas which are seasonally, temporarily or semi-permanently flooded. While many wetland areas exist in the city, they are small and widely scattered, and do not pose a significant limitation to development in the city. Groundwater As there are no commercially significant mineral deposits within city limits, groundwater is the city's only other noteworthy natural resource. While most city residents are connected to the city's public potable water system, private wells are used by some residents for drinking, lawn watering and other purposes. The city should conserve groundwater supplies, as well as water withdrawn from Lake Okeechobee, in accordance with the policies and guidelines of the South Florida Water Management District; however, the major concern relates to protecting groundwater from contamination. This resource is still the major source of drinking water for unincorporated Okeechobee County, and hazardous chemicals entering the water table inside the city cannot be contained within city limits. Land uses which produce hazardous chemical or biological waste must be prohibited, limited in scope, or placed in areas where they cannot contaminate groundwater. Puma.laud Um 9emot City of Ok..thme.CCmn.b.o..P1.n Wry!R 1592 Development Review Process As a means of protecting its natural resources, the City should develop and "' implement a program of land use and land development regulations aimed at minimal disruption of soils,floodplains and surface water quality. In addition to directing certain uses away from areas where they are incompatible, a variety of regulatory and site design techniques can be employed to protect the natural functions of environmentally sensitive areas. Land development regulations can be used in a variety of ways to control the impacts of development on natural resources. Pollutant-laden runoff into surface waters can be minimized through special setback requirements from water bodies. Standards limiting impervious surfaces can protect groundwater quality and quantity by encouraging natural infiltration on the development site. Landscaping and land clearing standards ensure the preservation of vegetation on a development site to discourage erosion, slow the movement of floodwaters and provide a filtering action for pollutants. The city has determined that the most effective approach to protecting its natural resources is through the Development Review Process (DR), described in Policy 2.2. Through this mechanism, the property owner or developer will, as part of the site plan or permit approval process, provide the city with accurate and current information as to the physical characteristics of the site, as well as the location and extent of any natural resources that may be present. Using the submitted information, in conjunction with other available data sources, city officials will have the opportunity to formulate appropriate conditions for approval, and ensure that the development is "tailor-made" to fit the characteristics of the *100' site on which it will be located. The advantage of this process is that it generates accurate information about the location and degree of sensitivity of the city's natural resources. Rather than regulate development on the basis of data sources which predate many existing conditions and may no longer be reliable, the DR will ensure that up-to-date information is available when development decisions are made. As time passes, this information can be collected to give the city a far more detailed picture of its natural resources than could be obtained through standard reference materials. The city's revised land development codes will refine the Development Review Process process and provide further detail as to appropriate means of protecting natural resources. Although not specifically required through adopted policy statements, the following techniques may be considered and possibly incorporated into the development regulations during the amendment process. 1. Cluster zoning-. A standard feature of planned unit developments, this development pattern allows for clustering of residential dwelling units on the development site, leaving large tracts open for recreation or preservation uses. These open areas are then set aside from development, and their acreage is added to that of the residential tracts in calculating the overall density of the development site. Requirements protecting 16 Noire lend Ur F]®eac City of Okeechobee Coespreb000s Pi= hued'1992 natural features are incorporated into the site's development plan as part of the local government review process. 2. Transfer of development rights. In this regulatory approach, development rights are transferred from specific properties which can accommodate little or no development to other properties which can accommodate higher densities or intensities. Transfers may be made within a single parcel (i.e., from more sensitive to less sensitive locations), or between separate parcels. Generally, the latter technique is more difficult to achieve because it requires the local government to identify receiving areas where higher intensity development is appropriate. Also, an elaborate tracking system is needed to ensure that properties protected in this manner remain undeveloped in the future, and that development credits generated by the transfer are used appropriately. 3. Overlay zones. Where there is a particular need for protection and sufficient information is available, the city may designate an overlay zone. In this approach, an area is identified which has or may have particular characteristics which warrant special development restrictions. Especially useful in situations where information is sketchy as to the extent and exact Iocation of sensitive areas, this technique operates by specifying those conditions (i.e., soil types, wetlands, aquifer recharge areas) which are considered important, and imposing appropriate restrictions in areas where these conditions exist. If reliable information is presented to show that the specified conditions are not present on the development site, the parcel is subject only to restrictions applying to the underlying Future Land Use designation and not to those of the overlay. In addition to using broader concepts such as those discussed above, the city may wish to protect its resources through site-specific measures that could be imposed through the DR or other suitable mechanism. The following are examples of best management practices (BMPs) recommended by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) in A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management as ways of conserving soil and vegetation, and reducing the quantities of sediment and pollutants entering surface waters. 1. Street cleaning and construction site source control. This practice involves the removal of dirt, debris and chemicals from streets, and to contain these materials or impede their flow from construction sites. As construction proceeds, special actions can be taken to reduce erosion(such as mulching areas of bare ground)and control the use of pesticides and other chemicals on-site. Also, relatively large objects can be strained from runoff through storm sewer inlet filters. 2. Detention basins. This practice involves providing water impoundments, either serving individual development sites or several sites, where runoff is temporarily captured and released at a controlled rate. When the water's motion is reduced, soil and other particulates settle out,nutrients are absorbed into plants,and some water may filter into the ground. 3. Grassed waterways and swales. This practice involves using grassed surfaces to reduce runoff velocities,enhance infiltration and remove runoff contaminants, thus improving runoff quality and reducing the potential for downstream degradation and sediment pollution. *or 17 Fugue Land Me Bement ruy of Okeechobee Comprebaame Ftao Mary 19,199Z 4. Underdrains and stormwater treatment systems. This practice usually consists of a conduit, such as a pipe and/or a gravel-filled trench which intercepts, collects and conveys drainage water following infiltration through the soil. Pollutant removal primarily occurs as the stormwater passes through the sand, gravel, and filter cloth which usually surrounds the conduit. These systems may be used in conjunction with other measures where space, soil permeability, or high water table conditions limit the amount of pollutant removal that can be achieved through natural percolation or other means. 5. Erosion and sediment control practices. These include a wide variety of structural and nonstructural techniques to block, divert, channel and/or filter stormwater on construction sites and in other settings to prevent soil from being carried into surface waters. Historic Properties Parcels of land having historical significance to the city do not generally represent a constraint to development, since they already contain structures and are not classified as undeveloped. Any historic properties which may be located in blighted areas, meet criteria for substandard housing;or pose a safety threat due to age and structural deterioration, may be addressed through programs that focus on restoration or demolition and redevelopment. The city must deal with historic resources on a case-by-case basis. Further discussion is provided in the Housing Element. Analysis: Flood-Prone Areas The City of Okeechobee is protected from most flooding situations by the L63(N) .rro Canal, which diverts water from Taylor Creek directly into Lake Okeechobee, bypassing the city. Because the flooding danger has largely been eliminated, the city does not participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, and no Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is available to identify flood prone areas. Areas historically subject to flooding can be roughly identified by soil types which indicate frequently wet conditions (see discussion of soil types under Analysis: Vacant Land). As these areas are almost entirely undeveloped, there is no need to consider redevelopment in the city's flood-prone areas, assuming they are still flood- prone. Future development on properties which may once have been subject to flooding will be guided by the Development Review Process process and other conservation-related provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. • C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS The previous section of this element presented data and analysis relating to existing land use patterns, resources, public services, and the availability of vacant land to satisfy future development needs. This section considers the City of Okeechobee's future land use needs as well as issues and constraints that will affect the city's growth. vorr 18 Puree Lane Ur Femme On d Okearbobas Compte esw Plan Nana 1992 Future Land Use Designations For purposes of planning and regulating new development in the city, future land uses will be grouped into the following categories: Single-Family Residential This category is and will continue to be the most extensive land use designation in the city. It permits one dwelling unit on each lot, along with structures accessory to the residential use. Also permitted are mobile home parks and public facilities. Land development regulations will include compatibility guidelines for the location of single-family structures and mobile homes within this Iand use designation. Maximum density is four units per acre for residential dwellings on individual lots,six units per acre for mobile home parks. Where a single family development includes affordable housing as provided in Housing Policy 1.6, a maximum density of five units per acre shall be permitted. Multi-Family Residential The presence of more than one dwelling unit (other than mobile homes) on a single piece of property distinguishes this category from single-family residential. Permitted uses include apartments, duplexes, condominiums and public facilities in addition to single-family houses. Maximum density shall not exceed 10 units per acre. Where affordable housing is provided in accordance with Housing Policy 1.6, a maximum density of 11 units per acre shall be permitted. Mow Commercial All business uses would be permitted within this designation, including retail activities. wholesaling, warehousing, and offices. Public facilities also are permitted. Compatibility guidelines will be provided in the land development regulations to ensure that non-retail types of commercial do not have negative impacts on surrounding land uses. Industrial Large-scale manufacturing or processing activities are permitted in the Industrial land use designation. Because these activities typically create noise, smoke or other unpleasant effects, they should be kept separate from other land uses as much as possible. Public facilities also are permitted. Public Facilities The Future Land Use Map shows existing sites for recreation facilities, schools, government buildings, fire stations and other public properties as Public Facilities. This designation includes recreational and non-recreational facilities which are publicly owned and provide a.service to the general public. It also includes privately owned facilities which 19 haute Liod the Gry d°texi:o a Cmpreeenen+Plan May 19 1992 provide a needed public service, such as utility plant sites or electric power substations. Future sites for such facilities are not identified on the Future Land Use Map; however, the , other land use designations include sufficient land area to accommodate them. Projected Future Land Use Needs At various times of the year, the City of Okeechobee experiences significant but temporary increases in population as seasonal workers and northern retirees seeking warm weather come into the area. In order to reflect the city's needs accurately, projections of required acreage for future land uses must take these temporary residents into account. A demographic study prepared by a consultant for the Central Florida Regional Planning Council determined that the city's peak population includes nearly 200 seasonal residents. Population estimates used to make land use projections have been adjusted accordingly. Future land use acreage needs generally were calculated using population Year Permanent Seasonal Total projections together with ratios of current 1990 4770 188 4,958 land use acreages and current population. For example, the 1990 commercial land use 1995 4,923 194 5,117 area of 171 acres divided by the population 2000 5,086 200 5,286 of 4,958 yields a figure of approximately Sour= Projection of Population Households and Income 0.034 acres per person. At this rate of in central Florida,Florida Applied Demographics, acreage use, the 1995 population of 5,117 February 1990 would require 176 acres, while the 2000 population of 5,286 requires 182 acres. A total additional land area of 11 acres is needed by the end of the planning period. While this technique was used for commercial, industrial, public facilities and parks, residential acreage was calculated in a different way. Through a methodology presented in the Housing Element, a projected number of additional housing units for the year 2000 was calculated. This element also provides a percentage breakdown between single- and multi- family housing needs through the planning period. The number of required units of each type was divided by the permitted maximum densities for the Single-Family and Multi-Family land use designations to calculate the needed acreage for each. Table 1.2 summarizes projected acreage needs and actual allocations on the Future Land Use Map for all land use designations. 20 Rowe Land Use ward Carl of otseaeoeee CmprabIo a Pim M 1972 Table 1.2, Land Use Acreage Needs,Year 2000 City of Okeechobee ,`, Land Use Add'l Acres Land Use Add'l Acres Allocations Provided Category 1990 1995 2000 Needed L (FLU Map) 1 (Buildout) Single Family 681 697 715 65 1,657 976 Multi-Family 34 35 36 3 77 43 Commercial 171 176 182 16 318 147 Industrial 11 11 12 1 178 167 Public Facilities 51 52 54 3 82 31 ROW 606 625 646 — -- -- Vacant 813 769 722 — 55 2 — Total 2,367 2,367 2,367 — 2,367 -- 1 Figures include needed right-of-way 2 Water bodies only Source: CFRPC Future Land Use Map Now The City of Okeechobee's expected future land use patterns are depicted in Map 1.3 (page 29). The Future Land Use Map is generally based on projected future land use acreage requirements, but also encompasses other values and concepts relating to the city's needs and desires. As Table 1.2 shows, the various land use designations show a substantial difference between calculated acreage needs based on population growth and actual land allocations shown on the Future Land Use Map. Providing minimally adequate acreage for the city's various land use types should be viewed as only one of several roles played by a map of future land use. Other important values, concepts and functions include: • Protection of neighborhoods. Single-family neighborhoods should be protected from intrusive land use types which generate traffic and other activities inconsistent with the quiet residential character of the area. • Economic development. The city's economic base can be strengthened by the provision of varied and plentiful sites for industrial and commercial development. Okeechobee County has lost much of its dairy industry because of SFWMD's policies of requiring dairies in the area to reduce phosphorous flow into Lake Okeechobee. Dairies have been paid per cow to move to other areas and the remaining dairies have been required to reduce the phosphorous content run off from their properties. In order `'a" 21 Fawn Land Ups Meant Gty d Oteectobaa C®perbmwe Pie May 19.1992 to partially off-set the economic loss to the community due to the policy of the SFWMD to encourage the relocation of the dairy industry outside ,40 of Okeechobee County, a 160-acre tract in the city's northeast corner has been designated industrial as a result of the community's desire and expectation of industrial development at that location. • Distribution of activity centers. While protecting neighborhoods, the Future Land Use Map should also ensure that high-activity types of land uses are equitably distributed through all sections of the city. Convenient placement of commercial and multi-family sites can reduce traffic congestion and increase safety by placing residences closer to employment and shopping facilities. • Public information. While the Comprehensive Plan contains much discussion of land use types and their distribution, the Future Land Use Map graphically depicts the city's land use policies in a tangible form. The information is more easily understood, eliminating a great deal of potential confusion on the part of citizens and city officials. Due to these considerations, acreage allocations on the land use map generally exceed projected needs based on mathematical calculations. It should also be remembered that the City of Okeechobee is the only incorporated municipality in Okeechobee County and it serves as the center of commerce and employment of a geographical area encompassing half a million acres. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect commercial and industrial growth in ..r+ excess of the city's own individual growth rate. In fact, this "overdevelopment" trend is desirable for the overall community since it encourages businesses to place their facilities in an existing urban area rather than at outlying locations in the county where they could contribute to urban sprawl. Analysis: Need for Redevelopment The city has a significant need to identify blighted areas and implement programs aimed at redevelopment and renewal of those areas. Chapter 163.340, Florida Statutes, defines blighted areas as having a"substantial number of slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures and conditions which endanger life or property by fire or other causes." A housing survey conducted by the Central Florida Regional Planning Council in 1988 noted exterior structural conditions of the city's housing stock. This survey identified 28 residential structures as being beyond corrective maintenance,while 400 were in need of repairs beyond routine maintenance (see Housing Element for further information). As a first step toward formulating a program addressing this redevelopment need, the city is including a definition of standard and substandard housing conditions as part of the Housing Element. It then must identify areas to be targeted for redevelopment activities. These activities may include, but are not limited to, rehabilitation or demolition of existing 22 Plain Land Use F3®a: Airy of Oteeebobee Cowl:bmme Fan 1942 housing stock, developing and managing publicly assisted housing, and identifying alternate housing for persons displaced by rehabilitation efforts. The city's program will be tailored to the community's desires and the availability of resources. Funding for redevelopment of blighted areas will always fall short of actual needs; however, an array of state and federal programs, identified in the Housing Element, is available to provide grants, loans and other types of assistance. A great deal can be accomplished by taking advantage of this assistance. The city can also address redevelopment needs through increased code enforcement, and review/revision of its existing codes and ordinances to eliminate weaknesses which permit blighted conditions to occur. Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan The Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage Basins is a wide-ranging document addressing growth management and conservation issues in the watershed area of the lower Kissimmee River. The Resource Management Plan's objectives, which were specifically designed to provide optimal benefit to the people of the state and region, rather than property owners, taxpayers and residents of Okeechobee City, include maintenance or improvement of water quality in the Kissimmee River and in Lake Okeechobee, and carrying out economic development and comprehensive planning-related activities in such a way as to protect the area's natural resources. The committee which developed the Resource Management Plan believed that the Plan's objectives were compatible and could be achieved through balancing three �, implementation actions: (1) Land Acquisition; (2) Water Quality Protection; and (3) Economic Development. Although the committee designed the plan to maximize benefits to the state and region, the committee did not fully address how the costs of implementing the plan should be allocated among state government,The region, local governments located within the study area and property owners. For instance, although the committee stated that a balancing of implementation actions, including land acquisition, would be essential if the plan's objectives were to be achieved, the committee also made findings with regard to the Taylor Creek Area Floodplain, Spoil Areas and Uplands which are inconsistent with the plan's statement concerning the need to "balance" competing regulatory and property owner interests: . "In the Taylor Creek Basin, because of its relatively greater percentage of agricultural and urban development, the emphasis must be on improving water quality. Therefore, land acquisition may not be needed." In view of the committee's decision not to fully endorse a balancing of the plan's three implementation actions within the Taylor Creek Basin, the City shall coordinate with the Resource Management Plan only to the extent that such coordination: (a) is consistent with the principle that local governments and landowners alone should not be forced to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole; and (b) would not result in inverse condemnation. __- 23 Future Laud Ur Boma Ciy d Otaatobee Compceemws Flan May 19.1.972 The City of Okeechobee is located in the Taylor Creek drainage basin, and therefore was one of the participants in the plan's development. Its primary involvement in the plan's implementation is through the establishment of comprehensive plan policies and land development regulations to protect the water quality of Taylor Creek. As are all local governments within the study area, the City is required to do its fair share to support the plan's objectives by adopting ordinances to implement best management practices to control erosion and nonpoint source pollution. The city will meet its obligations with regard to the Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan through the following actions: 1. Establishment of development review procedures designed to provide the City with the opportunity to review proposed development to ensure that direct and irreversible impacts on environmentally sensitive areas are minimized. 2. Adoption of Future Land Use Element policies to minimize the flow of polluting substances into Taylor Creek, and to coordinate its activities with those of other local governments involved in the Resource Management Plan. 3. Adoption of Conservation Element policies to establish development standards for environmentally sensitive areas and cooperate with the South Florida Water Management District's surface water monitoring program. 4. Adoption of land development regulations to implement relevant policies of the Imre Comprehensive Plan. Summary of Land Use Issues While many topics have been addressed in this discussion, several can be identified as key issues in the future development of the City of Okeechobee. Some of these are important because of state requirements, while others are a function of some unique characteristic of the city. Inconsistent Land Uses Under the requirements of Rule 9J-5, provision must be made for the elimination or reduction of land uses which are inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Inconsistent land uses must be prevented from growing in size and/or intensity and,where feasible, eliminated or brought into conformity with the plan. Such uses which were established legally prior to the adoption of the plan may remain as non- conforming uses, but could no longer be expanded. If discontinued, they could not be reestablished. Nirov 24 Fusee Land Use deism Cry d Oteacbabm Camgcebmwc Flan Maras 1992 Properties which are not zoned in accordance with the Future Land'Use Element will have to be reclassified. Zoning and other codes may have to be revised in terms of how they address non-conforming uses. The city may wish to consider amortization requirements for certain uses, in which property owners would have a certain period of time in which to bring their property into conformity with the plan. Increased code enforcement is another tactic that may be used in fostering consistency with the Future Land Use Element. Urban Sprawl The term "urban sprawl" refers to scattered, untimely, and poorly planned development that occurs in urban fringe or rural areas, bypassing more urbanized locations where public services are more readily available. This type of development pattern is considered undesirable because it ignores conveniently located property in favor of outlying areas which may not have potable water and sanitary sewer service or adequate roadway capacity. Urban sprawl is considered an inefficient use of public services and facilities because the community as a whole often pays to improve these facilities for the benefit of a relatively small number of people. As the City of Okeechobee is still relatively compact, urban sprawl has so far not been a major factor in its development. However, as the area's primary provider of public sewer and water service, the city is in a key position to prevent urban sprawl -- particularly in unincorporated areas with the potential for annexation -- through efficient placement of utilities. Concurrence After adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the city will establish a Concurrency Management System to ensure that adequate public facility capacity is available to serve development. The public facilities to be addressed are roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, and parks. Minimum acceptable levels of service for each of these facilities are adopted in the Traffic Circulation, Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge, and Recreation Elements. After the concurrency requirement goes into effect, development permits cannot be issued unless the facility capacities required to meet these levels of service are in place or programmed to be in place by the time the impacts of the development are created. The Future Land Use Element can aid the city in meeting the Concurrency requirement by encouraging development patterns that make efficient use of public facilities. Taylor Creek Water Quality Taylor Creek has been identified as a major contributor of phosphorus to Lake Okeechobee. This substance, generated by dairy farming activities in the creek's drainage basin, acts as a nutrient which feeds algal growth, upsetting the lake's ecological balance. Although the city's influence on water quality in Taylor Creek thus far has been relatively *me 25 Fue r Land Use Dmmc Qty of Otm:boas Cceoprobcome P'ao May 19.1992 minor, urban growth does pose a significant threat as fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals flow into surface water bodies with stormwater runoff. The city must implement standards for new development which will minimize this threat through all available '41.0 techniques, ranging from stormwater retention/detention requirements to effective management of hazardous materials to landscape regulations emphasizing native plants. Because of its influence on Lake Okeechobee, the county's primary recreational and economic resource, Taylor Creek represents a major land use issue to be addressed by both the city and Okeechobee County. Land Development Regulations After adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, land development regulations in effect within the city will need to be revised to ensure consistency with the plan's goals, objectives and policies. Extensive coordination will be required between city staff and the joint City- County Building and Zoning Office to ensure that the city's unique needs are addressed through changes in applicable codes as well as in development review and code enforcement activities. Regulations which may be revised include the zoning and subdivision ordinances. Many of the objectives and policies expressed in the Housing, Traffic Circulation and other elements, in addition to Future Land Use, will be carried out through the land development regulations. Besides implementing the Comprehensive Plan, the city may use this revision process to address other needs, such as facilitating code enforcement and reorganizing ordinance documents to make them more understandable. Nasor Nasso 26 Putney lid Use Banos ary a otaaabobee campeaem..e em Naafi 1992 ........ ro----------.------------------ i;+11;71"-•-•LAND USE ( CITY OF OKEECHOBEE . , ' •-• --. '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''---,.-7. 1 , ••.• , . • . • .". • •.,.... ••.•-• : . LEGEND 2... ex ..•• .•.... ...• . . . . . .. CU. ••'• -. • . . I . ....•...... . -- '••••• - • '"•- . .• ' - . ---. ...... • -- . . - • Yak vff, ACI• Alai - •• • •Ara UT. S 0; a •'...: .. 7 " -' •• '. • MI • ;:. !!!!!!!!!!!!"1111111111111111 . •• ..... -••• MI •--.: . ..-.. UYV4: •‘•74:4:•4:•.:Cli. .. .* -.••••••"•" •••" '. . • MO &•■••0 ' •■•I.••P.41-- ir --.• • - ..... E .• ...•-. • • rill •" ............ • ..• •••.... .. .......... ."..•......• ,/\ . . . . . . . . • • . • . . • . . . . . . . . . • • - • • • Single-Family Residential i%14%...... . Multi-Family Residential •••••••••.111/'4 ''.4:744...r.,..:.:411 Commercial 9.1.......... I . Industrial I ••.... .. .4i777...... ,,:i..r. :. ...J.: [.-siiti- ......... . •....••.•.•• ••..••..• ......'''''''' ''.'''''''' ".."•. ' 111111111111 Public Buildings and Grounds .............. . . _ . . -" -.....-"---- .-er •‘• 4. ............ -- • • -- 71 ,_.=.. -"--••-" Recreation/Open Solace/Parks -777 raw '''''•.•. • -.-• •••• sc.: ',soot. t ............- '4'. liq Vacant/Undeveloped • N.v (771(--::1 .... .. --- 06000•<.. :.dI gail.... .•.• 1 %......" : 1„.......1 IN ;.....,:. •••. . ••... cifill ,--- - ilk 0.1111•11.1M1 VI •" .... FR :•:••••••:: firt:g arl MI ...1.1 1000 .... .... -. ..-. -•.- ---:. , 11•11•MINIS .••• .--... .7,011,4 ..... •••• .....--'• ..-".. ....t. I ...-:. ''''' .- .• . ..• . . . . .• ' • • ... •-••• ..... • '••-• . ..... ' •-••- • '-•• Mean; OA•••■•# .•,N\%\ Agricultural • .- Wetlands . ( vgroorguegto. :Tref'Yfe ...-::: r.....-.- • -.....-• .:,..j. 1 IISS, •----• '''' "'• (SW .... .... .--. .... ._.. ..-" i?;42 R..:72 ::.-.: :.:::: -..-.....:: :.-•::, .i....i.: ...:-:-j il ..": ... • ---- -........ mu,. Historic Sites ....v. - : - • reeee,,,,,...... ...... .----• sm. ---- .- . . ---•• 70...0 ,.... .....• • - • • ....4000rog ......,0..... ..vo......,.......v..m.A.~.4v.....v.v....A,44, 1 Old School House Fa..., .. , ..., ..-17, ,,,,,,,,,,,, . , se ..cta ,,,....*: .47163 3,,,,ct• 2 ,.....4 ze..., fie:g 1/40", tr.*: ,-.-.-- -'•'7,.....,„,,..,,,,,,,,„„.., ••••■•••0000••••■•••••■••••,•■1414v.v.v.veregeow•Uvo,,,wawg ■•••••• ••• _ •• .-...-■••••■•••■••••••••4••••• •••••••••■•••••••~•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••■•••••■•■•An 111 ,7erert p_, NZ , :, "4.!!Al ?eve !eve .t...re Ten 'øt -eve e. , feel iyme ME VA et.=.4..,-- 'tree:Net:Tee ___ . .... 2 Freedman-Roulerson House t.S.t.1 7 ,...„..„ ,.. ,,:.., ;______ ...„:„...„ ....„,..„,„. .......„, • .:„..._ ,..;...:. ___ „ ::,:. ;JAVA; iii.i,"17.. 11.41;.1 ;■37:;:' ;■;•1;11.7,11.;■;11&V.!.654.7a;.451;i. ;a mr.F1.7.1.,A.:4;■.;./; •;■;■_;■'50;A:76'''''''';t■Ti.v. :::::: Fi-1,7,1-.17., ally..:::::::.74.: ... — err me - 4.,..4.4 ..,•00 : ' ....., Du:: it,* ifin ... :let,:me nit:cc:ewe ....- --Weis••••.=isit-e NE EE gig NM .v.0.7, Too. r. ..y... „„„,..„ see an,.......1.=mo.=....ex ME EWE rfiCCIAVD — ... •• • IA a.......... . . • .... .... Ma- st•••••••■1•1 .17:-:" .-. — '''' --" '-"..', '1;X; :,;'1747■7.0. ...% 7...n.. INS- UM ...• ... ..-. ••• PAX: ■■•A•■• • ,■-...-., • .. .... ...- .... .... • '''''..... .... .... VAVO 0.1%V. &..■,/ • . ' . .......... ............ 0/01 lai r • mite.to ..,V..■•■ .... . •.•"• • -..• ..... 1.141/04, . 1 : 1 : -.1-------.• [-.71CIFIT:::::7 • Ns ea C:1 ••- .... .... .... ---• .-", "-• ::: ----, ........ , .,...,. •"0---, , - •.-.•-.•■.•I•r•.•r.•.•"-:..•7.-.•'. . ■_L•.••.7 F---..--..-.,_„..,......7z.....•—.__••-•••-_••---•,a•.•:•":■••••:.12-"i 1,:• iiW-i: EF T . LI1 III..,.... lin C i - . .... : ..• •••--• --------• - . ..A. '''''' F...........) ''''''.. t..... ....-. -•-- -C--". -•-. ........... .v.voi,•• ...-.-.- _.u..,.L:..2. ......-- ••- .••. ••.•.... -.--• .......... . . . .•. •... .__ -,--iir-L-rf--) •... ::::::: .. ... .... , . ..... ....r , ,,, ..... •a•c ••■•••••• i ... ' IlliE20 DO' 1 E E. . . __.. •....• .... •••• ,.... . ..,... •". , , ..........- . •.•. .."_. . •"• :: ... , .... , „„„ to ill. --..-- . - - . :: .. • -••••- . • .. .... ,... .... .... ...... '''''• .. .......2 • f••... . :: : • .. ..... ••. - . • . -.- ......... -•---•-•• • • .........I 11 ! ... - •--•••••- ; ••--' •-..-.. —. ""•-• "•-• vo-a! oeg .:21 - 1 f , ......... .__. C".! ....... .. -"- .•. .... .... .... .... .... '0. "-.• "•- -"- "- 7' :-.:11::... **- -*--"•-•-• ...... ... ""•"" ..... ..... .. ,........ ..._ .... ......... ""- 4 !i_zeniii- t ....... .... .... ......... .... .... • ._ ....... ___ __,. _ t • ••.• •.• ,.. •••"••• ..... .... .... • •• , . ,...._, . ....... . ... .. ... ..... ."....... ••• , , ,.%,... ... _ ....... • . < .... •...••. ....... ...... . ... ...... .... . . ( • ...... .... .... . .... . •... ..... .. .... , ........... •• ...... .... „ , : -.-- nr77-1[77-1 -/ P......■o. Gone.11.....■■,,,,....,n.....,c,...... / ._ " '' '• . • lit , .... ( r _ • . • lanThiata I •■••ir,-I '''''''''...........1 • .1 .... .......... 1. .."....] . II I. ............... ................. ' . "'• .. . .................. -'''•'' OM •-...... -• "....•-••-••-• ; MAP 1.1 ...a N 1.114\ ATURAL FEATURES ( CITY OF OKKEECHOBEE - - / e / /,/..,/ - , „. , / .11.11.M.........-41114 . •••••••••••.•••••••••■••••• ! 1 , , , , ,_,,„,,,,,_ . .i . HE----i.a. ......_ , .. ,........,_„... IIIIIMINII 11 �•••••••�••.�....................• -• .••. • ••••♦ ••• • 4•• Ir ::•:::�:•:::-:--:::•::•::::..................L: •:�.�:" 1 1 1 1 I'1 111 I t 1 I 1 1 t 1 .......^ •. ••••••••••••••••� - ....... ..... I I l 1 ( I i l t :I/ •• ••••••••••••••••. ............ 4 .. `l 11'1'I'11 t i 111 1 i _� s •••••••••••••• 11•• .�. . . . }- .-. .�:: ::: :'. 1111`['1 L —'-• 44 =NOW ......... . t 1 ` �•••.• � �i 1 i t I I t i l l '1 1I i.....`.. LEGEND �'�.�' 1 1 1 1 1 1 i• i'1 t �••/ 1 1 t 1�•V I 1 1`1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ �� :!'.t'. ••••• •I 'i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11• I 1 t 1 1 t 1 t I t 1 1 I I 1 1 I t t 1 1 t If.'/•_ .1 I I 1 I I I 1 t It t 111111( _ 11 ..::::.1. ... . I,II II 1 1 1+`il' ,_■•.�._�: 1 It t 1I i t`It - - li I �. ■/�.= . : , , , 1 1 1 "1i 1 t t III 1 I 1 •❖•••,•,•; 2 atte-+•- . .. t-•- C �� „j .a I I•I-:�.■.o ��"It ' ll 'lr�l',`1 • p Illt•, Group 3 • : �_ :._ +-_ } _ •_■ Grou 4 •••0 En ,_, ,. .�= [�' f 1 � Group 6 P li . E ' . �� 'VGroup7 .0 MNI=1 - '—t 'J _�� ■_ 1 I 1 I- �. _ Q ,•C:1 III:III'1 Filled Areas. i •in7N-u.m.-.—•am.••• l , - : t- -=.`. _■ l . . _ - -=_=_ Borrow Pits• 1. " - l Oy1. 11r7. • Wetlands •. . • I111111.•7• 11MIN•g.n6 la I= 1111:•_1111.1.. �•••, I .�,.3. f •'� See Analysis: Vacant ■�... .. ��- Land, for explanation • - 1102 . of soil groups • I ••:rrc•ra:r.•. • •.►•••• lig [ . Mir latar nor Not - • ill•s•••.•.•• -1 (!��1 I '. 7E l ..... s i4•:«•��i�•i� I I � rMi • iiih� •• ♦•••? F 1 I . .„:._�; 1 C--, I..•.....>; C_•.!VW 11.M...■Ilw'M Coal Lva. : C•7 d O...O..w. MAP 1.2 • .:,, l,', . 427-1.-------------------Th' FUTURE LAND ;USE: 2000 CITY......O..,L.. O"Hat ---ci . 111111...,.......1111.11, . , • a,11...............►, ,1 . 11111111..111111,111111M111111 1r _ 1111,1111,11111111111111,11.1111 mum 111111•111111111111111111111111•1111111111111 E.1-17 ..]_____... .A,"' • ....11,11..........1 ..I �I I .■..■■■..■.■..■1111 '.! 1111. 11,11,11.11,11,1111„..11 .AI.DV.1 7 1111111111,■1111■■■,11111111 MOM= _.�.. •� iiiiiiiiiiiiiill 1: ., . 11.■11111..11.111 _...... ',...,„111,11111111 a r a, Ak '111111■1111 - " –dr.ZMZ. • ■■1111.■11,11,.11■1111111! IS VA'Ti fp. . ■■■■■11uU!F--- 4 ��!►...�a • ...11....11/ ./.i�t ;v�:.1 - inunnu ./' riu.I t!►..UD: 1111. --- ■■■■■ttr- . ail imam 1111.. - ��._.,.., ( I C - Ern... I . ■r. .. MIFA:.r ..... ,EW'. 121111111 11111 11NTAWA;IMRE!'..11.• Iralli. I vraratraLy. (z_ _ . ill •. 121111,1)■ — ,rmi xi!AYA tl 1..,= _ t ►•�i► trite�i. ti, rr Jr��-�Ei ';2 , I OFIE F1111111 11111 1111111111 l�.�5►1 ;roxiti�/ TA.�t11111111i i•.•1li,..•1,1.,, , C _ .... 11.1 r �r..�.�.�. -La:J*VA+�Vv.. -+.w�+�—.�.r��r-- �v��r. �� ►�r�A��_��'��/--��r_p��1_��_�� ,.�i%L ia��.►,.r.�e►,►��►� m■1 .1---Aiii i� �-t.Ialiri iiiATd IVii ii��iAvailiF-1.7 ......�..►Aiii i I ,�..A.a....�_�.i..�.A AIAM "mwIty: mar.Ismer '5WATIV.AMIE ,�..7�1'I..�\1.15L ir∎�I rsonyi►>•..I�'��.�/A 1122M,A. % .7 ,f•1I...1.'.7..YA I..i p.....�.7 vAvA, • v.•.9F.L►V.....1 WATIP_TAISate tris•AIIVELI 4Paff ez7. ea`i�cv1vi�00—A_rAMIK0itir�►li�l1 1`war��a��i�ad♦TELV`wW Ari C.TartiE s4�a�,w�_ -t!.s rAv*raw_.�sAtwas_s_..:�ar'czRvalr nlrp►i r 15k,.i►�C,,i..7►1.'frAIM /.7...'1�.7Jr IOWA,��Ij•.'AgrAv I�I��VIVi 1ar.. 3r A 1'OMO'�AIV.lilyA Ter /:/..xl.ign'7.ACM!1►. % •tYAZG1i.Y/,TATA1.►�...TCrt ir• .►�.w,r•.�►►..Arie11■111 ►...i.�3vi97.��vi��. ►��►. . ►►bVV MY.��..1��✓Y►..=IA:.ilri►7.Ii►AIIIWA:,0i1��.1S►7.Vi.WA YAW,►..VA��i►..i!�YAr�..��.7;%emitgrA t�■ 1211,,1 F. ��•.►,an k r•..1AYA2a...1, ( • Iva _1 ■ ■ i li. f ,,..m R.►.,i..aINLonya..�L.V, �1�EMI L t.Mrs : . . .te , ! n 1111.j--t Fats r��- t t1,1111■ 1211,111 �.�`, /Ii1,�...�1 1 , nI I °'�-,4111 ie-aa! 1111.... _ . ltj�gni , ■1111 IvATrinL igil Arii.N. _.��►�.�t,1&�.Na7`..�� • �.�Z...... ►I w.�.1......� 11Th_I f;vAmilat.w.47.71 — -1111-. C ( 1 t Is `. � �.��..�- iii miss---- � II \�\ ', qtJI:�......; �� t P C L 1 [ 1 FDA! IU■■ nnn:t� t>.��..=.�.. � , 1 1 1111. � 1_ri L ,r�.�,:�_ , L E G E N D - :::::. 1111. pol.:0� t-- — I Single Family 1 1 - : :1111 ::: '�.T1�►�a�.v - ' Multi-Family 1: ----1 t=` • 1111 -�..n mw•..e n - �.�_,�,w. ..�.h •...9., I WI• -- ,,u, -- Commercial ,......�� = —t Industrial iiiiii _ 17%[ss, a l ._�_� I ' • • 1 1111.. rgoi: i' - Public Facilities \��\ M rl■ 4 1M_ f i f f _ _� Historic Sites �- - - �- Note: Map 1.2 of the Data & Analysis document is incorporated by reference ....a Future y rP y erenca into the F Land s Use Map for informational purposes only, and may be revised as warranted when additional ,,.,.�,.., or improved data becomes available through the Environmental Site Review process or other appropriate means. MAP 1.3 1111.....,. `""`”'•.M....`..,o.... . Traffic Circulation Element TABLE OF CONTENTS II. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT 28- , A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 29 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 29 Discussion 29 Major Roads 30 Concepts in Measurement of Traffic Demand 31 Average Daily Trips 31 Peak Hour Trips 32 Peak Season Trips 32 Design Hour 32 Volume/Capacity Ratio 32 Levels of Service 32 Acceptable Level of Service 33 Analysis of Traffic Demand 34 Current LOS 35 Projected Demand 36 Future Facility Needs 37 Planned Improvements 38 Other Issues 38 N.. Local Road Data 38 Beautification and Safety 38„ Concurrence 39 Bicycles 39 Funding Sources 40 C. LIST OF SOURCES 41 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1, Average Daily Traffic Counts 34 Table 2.2, Rate of Change at Count Locations 35 Table 2.3, Peak Hour Demand and LOS of Existing Road System 36 Table 2.4, Classification of FDOT Road Segments 36 Table 2.5, 1995 Peak Hour Demand and LOS 37 Table 2.6, 2000 Peak Hour Demand and LOS 37 LIST OF MAPS Map 2.1, Existing Traffic Circulation Pattern 42 Map 2.2, Future Traffic Circulation Pattern 43 Tire Cocukaoe Elora CO'd Otasm-w C.MOnbaw.!'Y. Mena MI II. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT The purpose of this element is to analyze the City of Okeechobee's existing transportation., conditions, and determine its future transportation requirements. The proposed goals,\objectives, and policies are intended to contribute to the development and maintenance of a,transportation system which will allow safe, convenient, and efficient movement within the city. This traffic circtation element is structured to satisfy the requir- lents of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. Th- tate of Florida has mandated that each local government prepare a traffic circulation el: s ent consisting of the types, locations, and extent of existing and proposed major thorou• ,i ares and transportation routes. The traffic circulation element is set forth in the fo1j.6'wing format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis In addition to the above referenced n'a rative, maps and other graphics of relevance are included. /-\\\ .4410 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS' An effective transportation network is one of th- key elements in an effective plan for development. Transportation is fa service which allo• s people, businesses, and other organizations to carry on activities in separate locations. M ese activity centers require a coordinated transportation system' to provide access and visi. 'ty. In order to ensure that these requirements are met, a;careful analysis of the existing ' affic circulation system is required. f' Discussion \\, One of the most important physical elements of a community is 'ts transportation system. Transportati n affects virtually every aspect of planning because t transportation network allows for zfiovement of people and goods as well as access to lan A close relationship exists between transportation and land use. Land oft becomes more attractive/for development when access is improved. Development of land esults in increased population and business activity, resulting in higher levels of travel deman . This often results in an overload of the transportation network which in turn must be improved Male f vie Circuisoos Berm 29 Cry of Oteabob..Co.paes•■Ph. bards 1901, II. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT The purpose of this element is to analyze the City of Okeechobee's existing transportation conditions, and determine its future transportation requirements. The proposed goals, objectives, and policies are intended to contribute to the development and maintenance of a transportation system which will allow safe, convenient, and efficient movement within the city. This traffic circulation element is structured to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The State of Florida has mandated that each local government prepare a traffic circulation element consisting of the types, locations, and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares and transportation routes. The traffic circulation element is set forth in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis In addition to the above referenced narrative, maps and other graphics of relevance are included. B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS An effective transportation network is one of the key elements in an effective plan for development. Transportation is a service which allows people, businesses, and other organizations to carry on activities in separate locations. These activity centers require a coordinated transportation system to provide access and visibility. In order to ensure that these requirements are met, a careful analysis of the existing traffic circulation system is required. Discussion One of the most important physical elements of a community is its transportation system. Transportation affects virtually every aspect of planning because the transportation network allows for movement of people and goods as well as access to land. A close relationship exists between transportation and land use. Land often becomes more attractive for development when access is improved. Development of land results in increased population and business activity, resulting in higher levels of travel demand. This often results in an overload of the transportation network which in turn must be improved 33 New hale Cua,latiaa F3®mc Cry of Otaxboeaa Coespreemeve Ptah M 1991 to respond to the increase in demand. This "land use-transportation cycle" is continually repeated as development depends on transportation to serve its needs, and transportation depends on development as its reason for existence. The coordination of land use planning and transportation planning is very important. Land use exhibits a strong impact on transportation because new developments determine new transportation needs. If land is overdeveloped, the transportation system can become overburdened and ineffective. As a result, good transportation planning is based on future land use projections, and good land use planning is coordinated with good transportation planning. Automobile travel is the focus of this element as the City of Okeechobee is a relatively small urban area which, in the foreseeable future, is unlikely to experience sufficient demand to support a mass transit system. Bicycle facilities are addressed, but this also is a relatively minor mode of transportation when compared with the private motor vehicle. Although Okeechobee is a relatively small city, it does experience some traffic congestion, particularly during the winter months. This element provides projections of future traffic loads based on available data and notes needed improvements in the traffic circulation system. The existing traffic circulation pattern for the City of Okeechobee and vicinity is shown in Map 2.1 (page 47). Major Roads While the City of Okeechobee occupies a relatively small land area, it is the transportation hub of Okeechobee County, since nearly all major roads pass through it. Transportation concerns do not stop at city boundaries; therefore it is important to consider val " the county's road system as a whole. Roadway functional classifications and principal elements of this system are discussed below. 1. Expressway: devoted entirely to high-speed, long distance traffic movement with limited access to surrounding land. 2. Arterial: serves major movements of traffic within or through urban areas. 3. Collector. serves internal traffic movements within an area of the city, and connects the area with the arterial system. 4. Local Streets: provide access to adjacent land. The Florida Turnpike, a four-lane limited access toll road, is the only expressway in Okeechobee County; however, there is no access directly from the County. The turnpike's two closest access points to Okeechobee County are via US 441 through Osceola County, and SR 70 through Street Lucie County. 34 .r+' Traffic Orman=deeseat Or j of Okeenbobes Comptebeorw Plan Mania 1992 US 441 is a two-lane arterial road entering Okeechobee County from the north near Yeehaw Junction in Osceola County. In the southern part of the county, it is a main route for carrying traffic to western Palm Beach County. US 98 is a two-lane arterial road which enters Okeechobee County from the west across the Kissimmee River, and proceeds through the City of Okeechobee toward West Palm Beach and other highly populated southeast Florida areas. The south portion of US 98 in Okeechobee County combines with US 441 to provide a connecting link between the City.of Okeechobee and western Palm Beach County. SR 710 is a two-lane arterial road which connects the City of Okeechobee with Indiantown and West Palm Beach. SR 70 is a two-lane arterial road which provides a connecting link with Fort Pierce to the east and Arcadia to the west. It is the major east-west thoroughfare through the City of Okeechobee. SR 78 is a two-lane arterial highway which provides a connecting link with US 27 in Glades County. It originates at the south edge of the City of Okeechobee and extends southwesterly around the west side of Lake Okeechobee. SR 700 is a two-lane arterial highway which originates in the City of Okeechobee and combines with US 98 to provide a connecting link with Sebring. Okeechobee County is also served by a number of two-lane county roads which serve primarily as collector roads feeding into the state road and US highway system. In addition to the highway network, other transportation systems are available in Okeechobee County. Rail freight service in the County is provided by the CSX System, and Amtrak currently has a passenger stop at the old Seaboard Depot on US 441. The Okeechobee County Airport provides facilities for small private aircraft as well as a charter airplane service. Concepts in Measurement of Traffic Demand Traffic volume levels are the product of many different variables working together. In analyzing the traffic problems of a community, it is important to define and understand the relevant terms and concepts. A summary of these is provided below. Average Daily Trips An examination of traffic counts at the same roadway location over a long time span can give a general indication of overall trends in traffic loads. Average daily trips (ADT) represents a measurement of the average number of vehicles passing a given point each day. ,Now 35 Traffic art:Wawa 9 Cry of Ot— es Compeetw Elm Marco 1991 Seasonal and weekly variations over the course of a year are averaged together to form a single number indicating generalized traffic volumes. Peak Hour Trips ,gure While ADT indicates overall traffic loads, it is also important to consider the change in traffic volumes from one part of the day to another. The performance of a road in terms of congestion relates more directly to maximum rather than average traffic loads. Peak Season Trips In Florida, the presence of large numbers of tourists and retirees means that population, and therefore traffic levels, fluctuates significantly from season to season. Design Hour Since it is not economically feasible to build roads to accommodate the largest traffic volumes experienced (perhaps once or twice a year), traffic engineers generally recommend that facilities be designed for traffic volumes associated with somewhat lower volumes of traffic. Generally, the 30th maximum hour is used for a design standard. That is, the 30 highest hourly traffic counts of the year are arranged in descending order, and a road is designed for the amount of the last hour on the list. Volume/Capacity Ratio Volume/capacity ratio is a comparison of actual traffic volume with rated capacity of vain a road. As this number increases, available space for more traffic decreases, until at a ratio of 1.0, design capacity is reached. A V/C ratio in excess of 1.0 indicates that a roadway is carrying more traffic than it was designed for and that improvements are needed. Levels of Service The best measure of facility conditions, past, present or future, is Level of Service (LOS). The LOS of a roadway relates traffic volumes to desip capacity, with the various service levels representing gradations of facility use ranging from a low traffic, free-flowing state to a heavy congestion that literally fills the road to capacity. The standardized descriptions of service levels used in transportation planning are: LOS A: Primarily free-flow traffic operations at average travel speeds. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Travel delay at intersections is minimal. LOS B: Represents reasonably unimpeded traffic flow operations at average travel speeds. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and intersection delays are not bothersome. Drivers are not generally subjected to appreciable tensions. 36 Traffic Oreukwxe lament C IT of Ote cbobee Compcebsowe Rao ?dumb 1992 LOS C: Represents stable traffic flow operations. However,ability to maneuver and change lanes may be more restricted than in LOS B, and longer queues and/or adverse signal coordination may contribute to lower average travel speeds. Motorists will experience an appreciable tension while driving. Nifty LOS D: Borders on a range in which small increases in traffic flow may cause substantial decreases in speed. This may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or some combination of these factors. LOS E: Represents traffic flow characterized by significant delays and lower operating speeds. Such operations are generally caused by some combination of high signal density, extensive queuing at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing. LOS F: Traffic flow is characterized by extremely low speeds. Intersection congestion is likely at critical signalized locations, with high approach delays resulting. Adverse signal progression frequently contributes to this condition. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has established general highway peak hour capacities based on a complex methodology derived from the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council, Washington, D.C. In determining LOS for roads, the FDOT methodology considers a number of variables in addition to observed traffic volumes, including the following: 1. whether the road is in a rural or urban area; 2. number of lanes; 3. functional classification (i.e., arterial, collector, etc.); and 4. number of traffic lights per mile. Acceptable Level of Service The Florida Highway System Plan, Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual has set minimum acceptable operating levels of service for regional highway facilities. The box at right shows the established standards which apply to jurisdictions with populations of under 50,000. The roads considered in FDOT's traffic analysis are classified as principal Facility Type LOS arterials; hence the minimum acceptable level of service for these roads, as Principal Arterials C recommended by the highway system plan, Minor Arterials D is C. The city should also set a minimum Other Roadways D All LOS for collectors and local streets, to be used when the Concurrency Management (see page 43) program is implemented. 37 r Orculs000 Doom Cary of of—meee cceoproboomme em Marco 1991 Analysis of Traffic Demand Current and past average daily traffic volumes in Okeechobee County are presented in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. Five of the 17 count stations for which historical data are available are located within or on the city's boundaries. Table 2.1, Average Daily Traffic Counts Okeechobee City/County Average Daily Count By Year Station Number 1970 1975 1980 1985 1988 2' 4,453 6,561 6,685 8,794 11,901 3 903 1,623 1,961 2,167 3,069 6 1,971 2,416 2,643 5,308 5,747 7 4,658 4,765 9,572 15,745 16,231 14 2,286 3,363 2,085 2,489 3,398 16 2,274 3,752 3,121 3,495 3,870 19' 4,660 6,956 10,752 11,825 15,103 23 1,946 1,407 1,743 1,945 3,113 103' 10,957 10,171 16,069 19,622 20,600 104 2,368 2,260 4,387 5,640 5,759 105 4,011 6,053 5,876 6,134 8,238 111 1,935 1,904 1,854 1,750 2,090 112 3,666 4,279 5,362 5,602 8,157 114 2,099 1,932 1,838 3,355 3,722 119' 6,739 9,555 10,142 15,220 16,066 123' 5,467 7,342 10,138 14,854 20,760 129' 6,554 6,834 13,267 18,758 21,633 ' Station inside city limits Source Florida Dept.of Transportation,Tragic Counts System.Counts History Report.January 1986;and Bureau of Transportation Statistics,1988 Traffic Counts. Table 2.2 shows changes in traffic volumes for four multi-year periods since 1970; all five of the stations show substantial growth in traffic volume in the 1985-88 period. The most significant traffic increases in the city occurred at Station 2 (US 441, north city limits) with a 35.3% increase, and at Station 123 (US 441, south city limits), with a 39.8% increase. 38 N.ri' Trams amdae= cq of Oteerbobee Campcebevire Ptao Marcia 194t Table 2.2, Rate of Change at Count Locations Okeechobee City/County Percent Change 'am. Station - Number 1970-75 1975-80 1980-85 1985-88 2* 47.3 1.9 31.5 35.3 3 79.7 20.8 10.5 41.6 6 22.6 9.4 100.8 8.3 7 2.3 100.9 64.5 3.1 14 47.1 -38.0 19.4 36.5 16 65.0 -16.8 12.0 10.7 19* 49.3 52.0 11.9 27.7 23 -27.7 23.9 11.6 60.1 103* -7.2 58.0 22.1 5.0 104 -4.6 94.1 28.6 2.1 105 50.9 -2.9 4.4 34.3 111 -1.6 -2.6 -5.6 19.4 112 16.7 2.5.3 4.5 45.6 114 -8.0 -4.9 82.5 10.9 119* 41.8 6.1 50.1 5.6 ,,a,,, 123* 34.3 38.1 46.5 39.3 129' 4.3 94.1 41.4 15.3 • Station inside city limits Source Central Florida Regional Planning Council It will be noted that certain count stations have experienced a temporary decline in traffic volumes at different times in the past; this can be explained by road improvements rerouting traffic, economic fluctuations which dampened tourism and population growth, and other factors. However, it is clear that the long-term trend for all of Okeechobee County is toward ever higher volumes of traffic at all locations. Current LOS Because FDOT's traffic analysis technique works in terms of peak demand and uses road segments rather than count stations, the figures in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 cannot be used . to determine current levels of service. However, that information is provided in a proper format in Table 2.3. Six segments are analyzed which lie at least partly within the city. These are on Parrott Avenue (US 441) and Park Street (SR 70). All are currently operating at LOS B or better. 39 TrafBe cecuIaaioo Bement Cy al ot*ecbeama come.Flan Mania 1991 Table 23, Peak Hour Demand and LOS of Existing Road System City of Okeechobee LOS Without NINO Segment Peak Hour Traffic Suggested LOS With Number Count Improvements Improvements 1 2,220 B -- 2 1,920 B — 3 1,410 B A 4 970 A A 5 1,840 A 6 2,230 B — Sourcc FDOT Projected Demand Peak demand projections have been generated for the same six road segments along US 441 and SR 70, covering the period 1990 through 2000. Table 2.4 describes the segments, while Tables 2.5 and 2.6 summarize peak hour traffic projections and levels of service through the end of the planning period. Table 2.4, Classification of FDOT Road Segments CIty of Okeechobee `nrd' FDOT Segment Number Recommended Number Road From To of Lanes Status Class Improvements* 1 US 441 SR 78 SR 70 2 Urban Arterial None 2 US 441 SR 70 CSX Railroad 6 Urban Arterial None 3 US 441 CSX Railroad Cemetery Road 2 Urban Arterial 4 Lanes 4 SR 70 US 98 Beginning of 4 Lanes 2 Urban Arterial 4 Lanes 5 SR 70 Beginning of 4 US 441 4 Urban Arterial None Lanes 6 SR 70 US 98/441 End of 4 Lanes 4 Urban Arterial None Sourcc FDOT 40 "tom Trot:Be G ano=dement Ci 1 d Otme o —Comprehensive Plea Marsh 1992 Future Facility Needs Table 2.5 indicates that level of service F will be reached on US 441 between the �... CSX Railroad and Cemetery Road before 1995 unless improvements are constructed. A similar situation will exist by the year 2000 on SR 70 between the US 98 junction and SW 7th Avenue Four-laning of these segments will be necessary to keep service levels within an acceptable range during the planning period. Map 2.2 (see page 49) shows future traffic circulation. Table 2.5, 1995 Peak Hour Demand and LOS City of Okeechobee LOS Without Segment Peak Hour Suggested LOS With Number Traffic Count Improvements Improvements 1 2,650 B — 2 2,380 B — 3 1,730 F A 4 1,340 B A 5 2,260 C — 6 2,600 B — Sourtc: FDOT 'ear Table 2.6, 2004) Peak Hour Demand and LOS City of Okeechobee LOS Without Segment Peak Hour Suggested LOS With Number Traffic Count Improvements Improvements 1 3,080 B — 2 2,840 B — 3 2,030 F A 4 1,720 F A 5 2,680 C — 6 2,970 D — Source FDOT • 41 Tragic arcuboon Elevate' Cary of Okeechobee C®gcehmatie?ha March 1991 Planned Improvements FDOT's 6 Year Work Program covering the years 1989-1995 proposes several road ,000 improvements for state-owned highways within the city. These are as follows: 1. Preliminary design and engineering for six-laning US 441 from CSX Railroad to Cemetery Road is proposed for the 1992-93 fiscal year. 2. Design improvements for the intersection of US 441 and SR 70 are scheduled for construction in the 1992-93 fiscal year. 3. The CSX Railroad crossing at US 441 is scheduled for resurfacing in the 1989-90 fiscal year. Other Issues Local Road Data As the City of Okeechobee is not a metropolitan area, it has no metropolitan planning organization (MPO), as larger cities do, to conduct in-depth transportation studies to determine its traffic needs. Therefore, available information on traffic volumes, both current and projected, has been provided by FDOT and is limited to state roads. Like most small cities in Florida, Okeechobee Iacks an ongoing program for measuring traffic on the city's collector roads and uses the 1985 Highway Manual methodology to predict future needs, as I-DOT has done with the arterials. The city should consider establishing such a ,fir program, perhaps as a joint effort with Okeechobee County, in filling this unmet need. Beautification and Safety The city is in need of some basic improvements along state-owned roads to reduce maintenance costs and improve the appearance and safety of the city's road system. These projects, as identified by the City Administrator, are: 1. Improve curbing of 15 median strips along US 441 from SW 8th Street to SW 23rd Street 2. Change the present design of median strips on US 441 south to provide left- turn lanes where needed. 3. Replace damaged landscaping and grass on 15 median strips on US 441 south, redesign medians to prevent further damage. 4. Replace grass strips with concrete between sidewalk and curb on US 441 between NW 8th and SW 23rd Streets, and on SR 70 from SE 7th to SE 13th Avenues. 42 Traffic arcuirace dement Qty of Oteemobss C . Pao Mute 1992 5. Eliminate grass dividers on SR 70 from SE 7th Avenue to SE 13th Avenue Replace with inlaid brick with a center containing palm trees. 6. Install suspended street identification signs over all portions of US 441 and SR 70 to help motorists better locate streets. 7. Conduct a study of stormwater drainage facilities on US 441 south and SR 70 and notify FDOT of needed improvements. 8. Stripe portions of US 441 south to prevent parking in front of fire hydrants and ensure that parked vehicles are kept the proper distance from corners and driveways. 9. Widen SR 70 from US 98 to the SCL railroad crossing. If this project cannot be completed within a short period of time, consider adding a center turn lane. 10. Four-lane US 441 north from the railroad crossing to Cemetery Road. Attempt to accelerate the funding and construction time frame. 11. Widen the intersection of US 441 and SR 70. Attempt to accelerate the funding and construction time frame. 12. Repair railroad crossing on SR 70 west at 8th Avenue Concurrency Non-state road data analysis will be crucial in implementing the Concurrency Management System subsequent to adoption of this Comprehensive Plan. Concurrency will require that public facility capacity, particularly on roads, be available to serve development at or prior to the time it occurs. "Concurrency Management System" means the procedures and/or process that the local government will utilize to assure that development orders and permits are not issued unless the necessary facilities and services are available concurrent with the impacts of development. Without this capacity, development orders could not be issued. Therefore, it will be necessary for the city to have an ongoing program to monitor traffic volume so that transportation improvements can be made concurrently with increases in demand. Bicycles As state funds are frequently available for bikeway improvements on state roads, the city may wish to consider the possibility of a system of bicycle facilities. Such a system could reduce traffic congestion as well as improve recreational opportunities for city residents. This mode of transportation is becoming more and more popular and represents an important alternative to the motor vehicle. Bicycle facilities typically include paved 43 Tr &°maim=Breoenc Cry o[Okeechobee CcovrThenaroa Man z March 1991 shoulders, designated bicycle lanes, or separate bicycle paths; design of the city's system would depend on need and availability of funds. Funding Sources Traditionally,transportation programs have been supported by taxing the users of the transportation system. Typical user taxes include motor fuel taxes, motor vehicle fees, and revenue bonds secured by a pledge of the county motor fuel tax collections. These funding mechanisms may prove to be insufficient for correcting existing deficiencies. There are other finance options available to the City of Okeechobee. The city can consider special assessments, redevelopment fees, or even impact fees to help with the cost of transportation improvements. It may also provide transportation improvements and impose a special assessment upon properties that benefit directly from the improvements. The Capital Improvements Element,and resulting Capital Improvements Program,identifies and estimates the cost of future transportation needs. Funding mechanisms,funding sources, and potential revenue are discussed in detail in that element. Intergovernmental coordination is essential to providing needed traffic circulation improvements in a cost-efficient manner. It is fiscally impossible for the City of Okeechobee to address all the traffic circulation needs outlined in this element. It will be necessary for the city to review transportation plans or programs prepared by Okeechobee County and FDOT. Coordinated efforts between the city, county and FDOT will help insure the maximum improvement for the dollars expended. 44 VINO Tame Cbaiiaoca PJ®eot City of Oteedooba Co i probmoR Pbm Marcia 1992 C. LIST OF SOURCES Florida. Department of Transportation. December 1989. "Analysis of Traffic Conditions - - Okeechobee County." Computer spreadsheet. National Research Council. Transportation Board. 1985. 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209. Washington, D.C. Okeechobee, City of. 1988. Data Base for Preparation of the City-County Comprehensive Plan. Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Bartow, Florida. Voorhees, Alan M., Walter G. Hansen, and A. Keith Gilbert. 1979. "Urban Transportation," Chapter 8 of The Practice of Local Government Planning. International City Management Association. Washington, D.C. 45 Talk CSeoioon Elmo* C3y of Otombobea Comp/abeam Pfau Maeda 1991 EXISTING TRAFFIC CIRCULATION CITY OF OKEECHOBEE f- - - •° — - -t- - — — — _ — 771 L __.s. li .1 ___u_____ LE G ____ \ D I Lin , .... E = ilL ■ ■ ■ :•■ I ® Principal Arterials i ■ ■ ■ ■ � nl •1 • - '—"'. Major Collectors 1■ : ■ ■ (w - _ -«----- Minor Collectors . . -1 ri Notes: 1. All roads not otherwise collector/feeder i r/feeied are part of the local collector/feeder system. [ tLILUV [ 2. US 441 is a 2 ane rad rom railroad - - crossing to north city limits. ■-Rik ■ ■ ■ • • �, Otherwise, all Principal Arterials _ -- ------ - - are 4-lane roads. {_LI II I 1111 ..■ ,. i ....m....---- : F _ =- . ____I___- . f _ :. _, _ ,•••. , ii:j . , . L____I Lai . - t 1 1 --\ [--.0 .. .,.,e - - � 111 � I. j ■ pi I • ••.• . see , ... L�1 ,-.-... ..L-.-1L�L ■■ l II I J I II Ii iI 111 1 F-1 IJ COAST e/ ••, i .- il l 1 ' _ I r m war nos IOW .4(440, 1 —1 fl IA' . uoy.iecn _ _ ____ _ _. ... ..„ ii II if II Peeoeea b. C.nVd FlaWO Regional Plw,.,y Cwd Soe•e Retie Deportment of Gemoorte4on MAP 2.1 f°,,, FUTURE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION CITY OF OKEECHOBEE f- — as • —I NM ■■•■•• Nal ■1 MO •■••■•••• .0 •■••10 MO •••■ 4■1 woman MA ••■•■11 MI 11=11■••••/•■• 7.1 1••,H7 L f_ CE \ D, ,, ,. , , ...1,..ixe- ....1 .. , ---- _ - ,.. 0- . . ® Principal Arterials I .0.4 1 nn , �: I ( l ( ` • Major Collectors —1 ,,, (-w I Minor Collectors ( Notes: 1. All roads not otherwise identified are ri . _ _ UI ,. part of the local collector/feeder system. i s.0 I a ., - — � � _ 2. PrinciPall Aorthteerris al orer 2— ane raodasd. - 1 LL_ a ' - •, III Ii 1 . . 1 111111 . _ [ 111 ■ _ . . N OM < \c3q i _ 1 urine lunir-isELI• Dry 1 1 i_C-- .IN P IIF of r�n �nr� -ri�� Fup1 p[ .9 I _ U, [ . - - I : ,i'. _( L _ . J_ 1 s Gov ,e.s ,xs m.s. . C•••, I di i SCALE Ray.itn11 Progenoil Og Central Magda Regional PLarembig Coed MAP 2.2 Housing Element TABLE OF CONTENTS III. HOUSING ELEMENT 53 A. INTRODUCTION 53 B. INVENTORY 53 Characteristics of the Existing Housing Stock 53 Owner-Occupied and Renter-Occupied Dwelling Units 53 Value of Housing 54 Monthly Gross Rent 55 C. ANALYSIS 56 Projected Population 56 Seasonal Population Projections 56 Household Size 57 Households 57 Household Sizes 59 Median Household Income and Income Distribution 60 Projected Housing Needs 62 Total Dwelling Units 62 Households by Tenure 63 Projected Housing Types 64 Projected Housing Costs 65 Allowance for Vacancies 66 `"aw Housing Costs for Renter- and Owner-Occupied Units 66 Land Requirements for the Estimated Housing Need 69 Private Sector Housing Delivery Process 70 Provision of Housing with Emphasis on Low and Moderate Income Households 73 Farmworker Housing 74 Provision of Adequate Sites for Low- and Moderate-Income Bureau I Assistance X55 Bur ea�f of Community Assistance 78 Community Development Corporation Support and Assistance Section 78 Community Redevelopment Section 78 Community Services Section 79 Weatherization Assistance Section 79 Housing Finance Agency 79 Housing Conditions and Structural Conditions of Housing 79 Residential Structure Type 80 Residential External Condition 80 Provision of Adequate Sites for Mobile Homes 82 Conservation, Rehabilitation and Demolition Activities 83 51 Housing Element Cry a[Oteecbobee Cocoprebenow Plan Marcia 1991 Provision of Adequate Sites for Group Homes 83 Historically Significant Housing or Neighborhoods 84 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1, 1980 Tenure Characteristics of Housing Stock in Okeechobee and Okeechobee County 54 Table 3.2, Value of Owner-Occupied Housing, City/County of Okeechobee, 1980. . 55 Table 3.3, Monthly Gross Cost of Renter-Occupied Units 1980 55 Table 3.4, Population, Dwelling Unit & Household Trends & Projections 58 Table 3.5, Household Size Projections: 1970 - 2000 59 Table 3.6, Income Distribution: 1979 61 Table 3.7, Income Distribution: 1980 - 2000 61 Table 3.8, Year-Round and Seasonal Housing Units: 1970 - 1988 63 Table 3.9, Household Tenure: 1970 - 2000 64 Table 3.10, Housing Types: 1970 - 2000 65 Table 3.11, Projected Housing Costs 65 Table 3.12, Average Monthly Gross Rental Rates: 1980 66 Table 3.13, 1979 Costs of Housing Units As A Percentage of Income 67 Table 3.14, Projected Rental Unit Needs by Income 68 Table 3.15, Projected Owner-Occupied Unit Needs by Income Range 69 Table 3.16, Building Permit Activity: 1980 to 1990 71 Table 3.17, Households by HUD Income Categories: 1979 74 Table 3.18, Projected Farmworker Housing Needs 75 __ Table 3.19, Year-Round Housing Unit Age: 1980 81 very 52 Houma;Suomi Gry d Okeecbobee Camptebm.we Pbm March 1992 III. HOUSING ELEMENT a.. A. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this element is to provide a summary of existing housing conditions in the City of Okeechobee, to analyze housing trends, to identify existing and projected housing supply, and to develop appropriate plans and programs to assure an adequate supply of safe and affordable housing to all city residents. Unlike other elements of this comprehensive plan, identified needs will be left primarily to the private sector to fulfill. The private sector is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the majority of the housing stock. The city and county have housing codes, health codes, and fair housing ordinances which enforce the minimum, but beyond these, local government's role is minor. The city's development regulations only guide the private sector in the development and construction of housing. This housing element is structured to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The State of Florida has mandated that each local government will prepare an element of the comprehensive plan which assists in the development of plans and policies to demonstrate a commitment to meet existing and projected deficiencies in housing supply. B. INVENTORY *toe Characteristics of the Existing Housing Stock 1. Owner-Occupied and Renter-Occupied Dwelling Units The 1980 Census showed that 1,034 residential units, or 70 percent of the city's occupied housing stock, was owner-occupied, while 442 units, or 30 percent, were renter- occupied. As Table 3.1 shows, 946 of the owner-occupied units were owned by whites, or 91.5 percent. Black ownership accounts for 7.4 percent of the owner-occupied units, and the Hispanic group accounts for 2.6 percent. Census figures indicate that 177 units, or 9.9 percent, of the housing stock was vacant in the City of Okeechobee; however, this figure includes vacant seasonal and migratory housing, and other vacant housing. Twenty units were for sale and 43 were for rent. Based on the ideal vacancy rates (3 percent on units for sale and 8 percent for rentals), Census figures showed a `very low" 1.1 percent owner vacancy rate, and a "tight" 2.6 percent rental • vacancy rate. Table 3.1 shows the tenure characteristics of the City of Okeechobee and (for comparison purposes) Okeechobee County. 53 Homing Hemet* Col d Okeechobee camprebmebe Pao March 1991 Table 3.1, 1980 Tenure Characteristics of Housing Stock In Okeechobee and Okeechobee County City of Unit Type Okeechobee County Okeechobee Year-round units 7,458 1,780 Occupied units 6,256 1,476 Owner-occupied 4,689 1,034 Percent owner-occupied 75% 70% White-occupied 4,137 946 Black-occupied 511 76 Hispanic-occupied 48 27 Renter-occupied 1,567 442 Percent renter-occupied 25 % 30 % White-occupied 248 334 Black-occupied 410 70 Spanish Origin 88 33 Vacant housing units 1,041 177 Vacant seasonal and 161 127 migratory ‘ftiro For sale only 55 20 Homeowner vacancy rate .07 1.1 % For rent 177 43 Rental vacancy rate 2.4 2.4 Other vacant 174 70 Sourcc Bureau of the Census,Detailed Housing Characteristics,Tables 94,95,97,98. 2. Value of Housing The 1980 U. S. Census reported that the median value for non-condominium housing units was $34,600 in the City of Okeechobee, slightly lower than the county's $34,900 median value. The city had a significant number of single-family units, 21.7 percent, valued within the $20,000-$29,999 bracket, and 22.6 percent valued within the $30,000-39,999 bracket. These percentages are generally consistent with those of the county in the same value brackets. Table 3.2 shows the distribution of housing units by value. 54 Housem Element City at OW:bonet Comgtebmwe Pea Man*1992 Table 3.2,Value of Owner-Occupied Housing, City/County of Okeechobee, 1980. City County Value Now No. % No. Less than S 10,000 44 5.1 114 4.0 $ 10,000 - S 19,999 101 11.8 332 11.5 $ 20,000 - $ 29,999 186 21.7 591 20.6 S 30,000 - $ 39,999 193 22.6 699 24.4 S 40,000 - S 49,999 125 14.6 418 14.6 S 50,000 - S 79,999 155 18.1 488 17.0 S 80,000 - S 99,999 27 3.2 96 3.3 5100,000 - $149,999 17 2.0 93 3.2 $150,000 and more 8 0.9 40 1.3 Total 856 100% 2,871 100% Median Value S34,600 $34,900 Source: Bureau of the Census, General Housing Characteristics, 1980, Table 48. 3. Monthly Gross Rent The 1980 median monthly gross rent for renter-occupied housing units in the City of Okeechobee was $157, as reported in the Census. Of the 426 total rental units, 28.6 percent fell into the $150-$199 per month range. Approximately 12.4 percent of the rental stock had rents below $100 per month, and 8.9 percent of the units fell within the "no cash rent" category. Table 3.3 shows the rent ranges of the rental housing stock. Table 3.3, Monthly Gross Cost of Renter-Occupied Units 1980 Monthly Gross Rent Number of Units Percent of Units Less than $100 53 12.4 $100 to $149 108 25.3 $150 to 5199 122 28.6 $200 to 5299 92 21.6 $300 to 5399 12 2.8 S400 or more 1 .2 • No cash rent 38 8.9 Total 426 100 Median Monthly Rent $157 Source: Bureau of the Census, Summary Tape 1980, Tables 124, 127 55 Howson Fhmmr Cry of OteerboJe-Com+tabosswa P% Marco 1991 C. ANALYSIS Projected Population The City of Okeechobee is the only municipality and urbanized area in Okeechobee County. The city has experienced rather modest yet steady population growth since 1970. The majority of the new population growth has occurred in the unincorporated portion of Okeechobee County. Between 1970 and 1980, the city grew from 3,715 to 4,225 residents, or at an average annual growth rate of 1.2 percent. During the same time period, Okeechobee County grew from 11,233 to 20,264 residents at an annual average growth rate of 4.4 percent. The data suggest that while the city is growing at a slower rate than the county as a whole, it is clearly absorbing a significant portion of the county's total population growth. These trends are very likely to continue in the future based upon increasing tourism demand around Lake Okeechobee and the availability of less expensive land and construction costs relative to South Florida. Population projections for this element and the rest of the Comprehensive Plan were prepared by a demographic consulting firm at the request of the Central Florida Regional Planning Council. While population growth averaged approximately 1.4 percent annually in the 1970s and 1.3 percent in the 1980s, the current projections assume a yearly growth rate of 0.66 percent. This figure is the result of several different methodologies working together Year Permanent Seasonal Total and represents the most accurate available assessment of the city's future population growth 1990 4,770 188 4,958 (see the Population Projections section of Goals, 1995 4,923 194 5117 Objectives & Policies for more detailed discussion 2000 5,086 200 5,226 ' of projection techniques). The box at right shows sour= Projection of Population Households and population projections for the city through the year Income in Central Florida,Florida Applied 2000. Demographics,February 1990. Seasonal Population Projections In addition to permanent population, estimates have been developed for seasonal residents of the City of Okeechobee. This segment of the population is an extremely important factor in the city's housing situation and is considered in this element's analysis of future housing needs. Seasonal population levels were projected by determining the current number of seasonal residents and assuming the ratio of seasonal to permanent residents would remain the same throughout the planning period. The analysis includes migratory laborers and northern retirees or "snowbirds." Seasonal population is shown in the box above. 56 Housing aetoeot Ory of Okeechobee Comprabcome Mao Mirth 1992 Household Size The average household size, or persons per household '�- (PPH), in Florida and the United States has been steadily Average Household Size ( ) y C1ty o!Okeechobee decreasing during the past two decades. The end of the post- World War II "baby boom" in the 1960s was the initial factor in i84 this decline. However, the 1970s and 1980s saw an increase in ` �0(" ? '> `' 2.72 single-parent households along with a decreasing marriage rate. 1995(es*.) z ,: 2.67 Florida has seen a further decline in average household size due z000'(eaj 2.62 to the increasing number of households made up of elderly • so„r iaapi; . people. Demographics According to the U.S. Census, there were an average of 2.84 persons per household in the City in 1980. Average household size, as shown in the box at right, is expected to decline during the planning period, and is calculated by dividing the size of the projected household population for each year by the projected number of households for that year. Households In order to project future households (or occupied year-round dwelling units) in a community, several calculations must be made. Household population is the first determinant. Projected household population is calculated by subtracting projected group quarters population from the projected total population. The 1980 U.S. Census indicated that 2 percent of the city's total population resided in group quarters. These were defined ''r""` as residents living in nursing homes, halfway houses or other types of institutional settings. The methodology assumes that a 2 percent share of the city's permanent population will reside in group quarters for the remainder of the planning period (seasonal residents are assumed not to contribute to the group quarters population). Projected household population is then divided by the projected average household size (PPH) to derive projected households in the future. These projections are illustrated in Table 3.4. Households are expected to increase from 1,835 in 1990 to 2,090 by the year 2000. Special significance is given not only to the total number of households in terms of planning for future housing needs but also to the distribution of projected households by size and income range. Future housing projections by size and income range are important considerations in assessing the type, tenure and affordability of future housing needs. — 57 Hauling&meat G,of otas b.'—comprw�.e+.o March 1S% Table 3.4, Population, Dwelling Unit & Household Trends & Projections City of Okeechobee: 1980 - 2000 (IIH) '44101 Year PopN GrPopt HII Pop= Tot DU' Occ Rate' Occ YR DUs PPH` 1980* 4,225 85 4,190 1,757 0.83 1,457 2.84 1988* 4,801 96 4,705 1,965 0.89 1,749 2.69 1989* 4,878 98 4,780 1,989 0.90 1,790 2.67 1990 4,958 95 4,863 2,039 0.90 1,838 2.65 1991 4,990 96 4,894 2,045 0.91 1,861 2.63 1992 5,022 97 4,925 2,066 0.91 1,880 2.62 1993 5,053 97 4,956 2,095 0.91 1,906 2.60 1994 5,089 102 4,987 2,124 0.91 1,933 2.58 1995 5,117 98 5,019 2,146 0.91 1,953 2.57 1996 5,151 99 5,052 2,153 0.92 1,981 2.55 1997 5,185 100 5,085 2,185 0.92 2,010 2.53 1998 5,218 100 5,118 2,208 0.92 2,031 2.52 1999 5,252 101 5,151 2,240 0.92 2,060 2.50 2000 5,268 102 5,184 2,272 0.92 2,090 2.48 • Does not include seasonal population Sources: Florida Applied Demographics, Projections of Population, Households and Income in Central Florida, February 1990; U.S. Department of Commerce, 1980 Census of Population and Housing; University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research; Okeechobee County, Department of Building and Zoning; Central Florida Regional Planning Council. NOTES: 1. The group quarter population consists of three subgroups(1)elderly living in nursing homes;(2)elderly living in group homes;and(3)all other institutional population. 2. The household population is the permanent population minus the group quarter population, plus the seasonal population. 3. 1988 total dwelling units are based upon 1980-1988 building permit data from the Okeechobee County Department of Building and Zoning. Documented residential demolitions for the same period were not available. However, the Building and Zoning Department estimated the number of demolitions per year to be insignificant in terms of the entire City housing stock. Projections of future dwelling units were derived from the formula:Occupancy Rate Multiplier X HH's =Total Dwelling Units. 4. The households to total dwelling units percentage is an occupancy rate. The 1980 and 1988 occupancy rates have been derived by dividing the households by the resident dwelling units. The future occupancy rates have been assumed including both seasonal and year-round dwelling units. S. Projected households are equal to the household population divided by the persons per household(PPH). 6. Persons per household methodology tracts the decline of average household size in Okeechobee County from 1980 to 1988. Assumes the same rate of decline applies to the city for the remainder of the planning period. 58 NS Houma Element City d Okasbobee Cam.rehm.i.S Plea Starch 1992 Household Sizes One- and two-person households accounted for more than 53 percent of all .�,., households in 1980. The trend toward smaller family size is projected to continue, comprising 62 percent of the city's households by 2000. Three-person households are expected to remain constant. Four-person households, while showing a slight increase in absolute numbers, will decline as a share of the total household distribution. Large households of five or more persons should shrink both in number and in share of the total household population. Table 3.5 illustrates the household size distribution for the base period from 1970 to 1980 and projections for five-year intervals until 2000. Projections were based upon assumptions made about the rate of change of relative household sizes between 1970 and 1980. Table 3.5, Household Size Projections: 1970 - 2000 City of Okeechobee 1970 1980 1990 1995' 2000 Size No. % No. T No. % No. To No. % 1 Person HH 136 12.6 329 22.6 507 27.6 562 28.8 629 30.1 2 Person HH 307 28.5 447 30.7 584 31.8 625 32.0 675 32.3 3 Person HH 188 17.5 255 17.5 322 17.5 342 17.5 366 17.5 4 Person HH 189 17.6 214 14.7 243 13.2 252 119 261 12.5 5+ Person HH 256 23.7 212 14.5 182 9.9 172 8.8 159 7.6 Total 1111's 1,076 100.0 1,457 100.0 1,838 100.0 1,953 100.0 2,090 100.0 Avg. HH Size 3.34 2.84 2.65 2.57 2.48 • 1990 Projection based upon 1/2 the percent change between 1970-1980 added to 1980 percentage. • 1995 Projection based upon interpolation between 1990-2000. • 2000 Projections based upon 1/4 the percent change between 1970-1980 added to 1990 percentage. Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1970 and 1980 Census of Population and Housing; Central Florida Regional Planning Council Changes in the distribution of household size often reflect social or economic trends that may have an important impact on the housing market. Smaller households, especially single-parent households, are likely to increase the demand for less expensive multi-family and renter-occupied units. Therefore, attention should be given to households of special concern which require special housing needs not always readily available in the housing market. These types of households include large families (five or more persons) which accounted for 15 percent of total county households in 1980; female head-of-households, which accounted for over 7 percent of all households in 1980; minorities, who accounted for over 10 percent of the total population in 1980; and elderly households, (65 and over) which 59 Hain`Element City or Olmenneme comptenm.M.Plan Mentz 1991 accounted for over 13 percent of the 1980 total. These households of special concern may be limited by income and mobility in their choice of housing. o The city should take steps to monitor the needs of these household sectors to insure ""' sufficient "market niches" occur to accommodate the population. If these needs are not being met, the city should explore the options discussed later in this section regarding federal and state programs to aid in the delivery of housing for unmet needs. Median Household Income and Income Distribution The city's median household income stood at$12,047 in 1979. This income level was almost identical to the $12,074 median income of the county at the same time. However, the city's 1979 income level stood at only 82 percent of the state's median household income of $14,675. The predominance of agriculture in the county, along with an emerging Iow- paying service sector in the city, generally contributes to keeping income levels low. The city's Iack of a concentrated industrial base also lessens the demand for higher-skilled workers and higher-wage employment. The economy of the city is rather locally dependent upon servicing the tourist industry and agricultural needs. The city functions as the market center for a large unincorporated county area as well as for a significant seasonal population within the region. In order to determine future housing needs, households are projected by income range to help predict the type and affordability of future housing units. Data from the 1980 Census (using 1979 Constant Dollars) indicate that 40 percent of all households in the city earned less than $10,000 annually. Approximately 32 percent had incomes between $10,000 *me and $20,000 annually, while 28 percent had incomes in excess of $20,000 per year. Converting the 1979 constant dollar figures into 1987 current dollar amounts allows for an up-to-date examination of household income. The 1987 adjusted incomes are based upon the assumption that household income increased by approximately 6 percent annually for the period 1979-1987. This income growth factor is a rough estimate for planning purposes only. It was derived from comparing per capita income growth from the city and the county during the same time period with the actual growth of national median household income. The data suggests that real income growth in the city and county exceeded the rate of inflation during the 1980's. Table 3.6 presents the data. 60 "" Hamm;Elcomot (5ty of Oteebobss Com4rebmros Rao Marsh 1992 Table 3.6, Income Distribution: 1979 CIty of Okeechobee 1979 Annual Number of Percent of • vloor Household Income Households Households Less Than $ 5,000 277 19% $5,000 - 5 9,999 306 21% $10,000 - $14,999 277 19% 515,000 - $19,999 190 13% $20,000 - $24,999 160 11% $25,000 - S34,999 102 7% $35,000 - $49,999 87 6% More Than 550,000 58 4% Total 1,457 100% At this point, projections are made for five-year intervals until the year 2000 based upon the income distribution present in 1980. The lack of data currently available at the city level makes it very difficult to predict whether a favorable shift in income distribution will occur during the remainder of the planning period. However, indications are that if real income growth continues to occur at a faster rate than inflation, and other things being equal, a favorable shift, i.e., a movement from low to moderate income, may occur. Table 3.7, Income Distribution: 1980 - 2000 ,or City of Okeechobee Projections Annual Household Income 1987 Current Range 1990 1995 2000 Less Than S 7,400 349 371 397 S 7,400 - S14,799 385 410 439 $14,800 - S22,199 349 371 397 $22,200 - S29,599 238 254 272 $29,600 - 536,999 202 215 230 $37,000 - S51,799 129 137 146 551,800 - 573,999 110 117 125 More Than 574,000 74 78 84 Total 1,838 1,953 2,090 • • 1979 Percentage of Households by Income Range is assumed to remain constant throughout the planning period,i.e.,income increases will equal cost of living increases throughout the planning period. ■ 1987 Adjusted Incomes are based upon the assumption that incomes increased 48%during the period 1979-87,and a 6%annual income increase for per capita income in Okeechobee County for 1979-85. r..• 61 Haulm'Elam= MI of Ot-4-.-Compreban i.-Pt= Marco 1991 Projected Housing Needs Total Dwelling Units err+ Total dwelling units (D.U.'s) are projected to increase from 2,039 D.U.'s in 1990 to 2,272 by 2000. This represents an approximate average increase of 23 D.U.'s annually throughout the planning period. However, this figure does not factor in demolitions to occur as the housing stock ages during the next decade. Information on residential demolitions in the city during the 1980s was not available. The city, however, estimated the demolition rate to be about four units per year. Using this assumption, the average annual increase in D.U.'s will more than likely range from 18-19 new permitted units in order to account for the four or five units annually absorbed by the replacement of substandard or dilapidated units. In order to project future housing activity in the city, an occupancy rate must be established. In 1980, there were 1,757 housing units in the city with 1,457 of them occupied - - a subsequent occupancy rate of 83 percent. The 1988 occupancy rate was estimated using the ratio of estimated occupied units to total units. By this method, the 1988 occupancy rate jumped to 89 percent. The total dwelling unit count, however, (and subsequent projections in Table 3.8) include all vacant and seasonal units held for occasional use as defined by the Census. The occupancy rates, therefore, do not reflect year-round occupied dwelling units exclusively. Instead they are used to generate total projected units which include both seasonal and year-round units. The overall occupancy rate is assumed to increase to 91 percent by 1995 and to 92 percent by 2000. Seasonal units are more slowly absorbed into the housing market due to the sensitivity of these units to changing economic conditions. �# A breakdown of occupied year-round D.U.'s to total year-round D.U.'s gives a better indication of a true occupancy rate. A comparison of these figures between 1970 and 1988 indicates an occupancy rate that has stabilized at 95 percent in 1988. Conversely, this represents a 5 percent vacancy rate which allows for residential mobility and a degree of housing choice, thus insuring healthy competition in the housing market. The information presented in Table 3.8 illustrates the breakdown of year-round to seasonal housing units. Using figures calculated from this table, seasonal housing units can be expected to account for an approximate 6 percent share of the total projected dwelling units for the city during the planning period. In this way, a 6 percent factor can be applied to the total projected dwelling units forecast in Table 3.4 in order to arrive at an approximate number of seasonal units. 62 Housing denerst Orr of Okoothobot Comprebaurre elan 1992 Table 3.8,Year-Round and Seasonal Housing Units: 1970 - 1988 City of Okeechobee Vacant Yr.Rd. Occupancy N" Yr. Rd. Occupied Yr. Rd. Vacant D.U./ Rate Dwelling Yr. Rd. Occupied Seasonal Total Total (Yr. Rd. Year Units D.U. D.U. D.U. D.U. D.U. Units) 1970 1,169 1,076 93 18 1,187 .98 .92 1980 1,634 1,457 176 123 1,757 .93 .89 1988 1,847 1,749 98 118 1,965 .94 .95 Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1980 Census of Population and Housing; Central Florida Regional Planning Council Households by Tenure Census figures for owner-occupied and renter-occupied units for 1970 and 1980 were analyzed to project future tenure characteristics. Between 1970 and 1980, the number of owner-occupied units increased by 2 percent while the number of renter-occupied units fell 2 percent. In most communities, there tends to be a strong correlation between owner- occupied and single-family units. The same relationship generally holds true for renter- occupied and multi-family units. The recent building activity data in the city since 1980 seems to support this relationship. Single-family construction has continued at a steady clip. Multi-family units are showing an increase since 1980, yet the rate of increase is slowing down. Owner-occupied households in 1980 accounted for 70 percent of occupied units in the city. Renter-occupied units comprised the remaining 30 percent. This is generally considered a "healthy" housing tenure ratio in a community housing stock. It allows for a perceived preference for single-family home ownership while providing affordable housing access to households of lower income or greater mobility. Therefore, it was assumed that the 70/30 percent ratio of owner- to-renter-occupied households would remain constant for the duration of the plan. The projections are shown in Table 3.9. Naar 63 Houma;Element Cry at Oteabobat Campr*aearra Pfau Marcia 591 Table 3.9, Household Tenure: 1970 - 2000 City of Okeechobee Owner- Renter- Total Occ. * • Year Occupied % Occupied % Units 1970 731 68% 345 32% 1,076 1980 1,020 70% 437 30% 1,457 1990 1,284 (70%) 551 (30%) 1,835 1995 1,367 (70%) 586 (30%) 1,953 2000 1,463 (70%) 627 (30%) 2,090 Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1970 and 1980; Census of Housing; Central Florida Regional Planning Council Projected Housing Types Single-family units lost more than 6 percent of the market share during this period. Multi-family structures made the largest gain, increasing market share by 4 percent. Mobile homes more than doubled in the city and increased their share of the total housing units by 2 percent. These trends appear to follow the movement towards increasing 1- and 2-person households. The demand is increasing for smaller homes, mobile homes, duplexes and apartments which are better suited for smaller households than the larger and more Nage expensive single-family unit. Comparison of the more recent 1980-1988 period with the 1970-1980 trends indicates that the movement towards smaller multi-family and less- expensive mobile homes is increasing at a slower rate than in the past. Therefore, for projection purposes, it is assumed that these trends will stabilize by 1995 and remain at that percentage share until 2000. This information is shown in Table 3.10. Provision of multi- family units should be a major concern of the city in order to meet the projected household needs forecast in the plan. These needs will, no doubt, be augmented by the requirements of households of special concern. 64 Hamm;Element City ot.— --Commensally*rm Matt 1992 Table 3.10, Housing Types: 1970 - 2000 City of Okeechobee Single-Family Multi-Family Mobile Homes (Yr.Rd.) D.U.'s Year Units % Units % Homes % Total 19701 999 85.0% 87 7.4% 83 7.1% 1,169 19802 1,307 80.0% 180 11.0% 147 9.0% 1,634 1988; 1,454 78.6% 212 11.5% 181 9.8% 1,847 1990' 1,495 (78.0%) 230 (12.0%) 192 (10.0%) 1,9175 19954 1,553 (77.0%) 262 (13.0%) 202 (10.0%) 2,0175 2000' 1,644 (77.0%) 278 (13.0%) 214 (10.0%) 2,1365 NOTES: 1. 1970 Census of Housing,Housing Characteristics for States,Cities and Counties,State of Florida,Table 23. 2. 1980 Census of Housing,General Housing Characteristics,State of Florida,Table 36. 3. 1980 Census data base plus building permits issued,1980-1988. 4. 1990 figures extrapolated from 1980-1988 trend analysis. 1995 figure projected from 1980-1990 trend. 2000 projections held constant. 5. Assumes 94 percent of projected total D.U.'s are year-round units. Projected Housing Costs The city's projected housing costs were estimated through extrapolation from 1990 to the year 2000. A 4.5 percent yearly inflation rate was assumed for the purpose of the estimates. The 1990 single family housing was priced at the high end, at an average cost of $500. Multi-family units were priced at an average of $400 per month, and it should be noted that there are only two apartment complexes in the city, comprising a total of approximately 100 dwelling units. Mobile homes were priced from $350-$500, depending on location and condition. The area surrounding Lake Okeechobee is in highest demand, especially for seasonal rentals. The 1990 average mobile home price for the city was $350. Table 3.11 shows the actual 1990 and the projected 1995 and 2000 estimates. Table 3.11, P:oj.._ted Housing Costs Year Single- Family Multi- Family Mobile Homes 1990 5500 5400 5350 1995 5612 5490 5430 2000 5750 5600 5530 Source: City of Okeechobee Chamber of Commerce, 1991, CFRPC. 65 Hoeing[3emeot Cary o(Okeechobee Coo:ptebe m Pfau Muds 1991 Allowance for Vacancies Vacancy rates usually differ for seasonal and year-round housing units. The city has a rather high mobility in the seasonal housing market owing to the transient nature of the "snowbird" population and the tourism industry. Migratory workers also contribute to this seasonal fluctuation, but to a lesser extent. The housing market is generally considered to function best, i.e., a sufficient amount of opportunities for choice among those seeking housing and competition among those supplying the housing,when the vacancy rate in rental units ranges from 5-8 percent and the rate of for-sale units ranges from 3-5 percent. Vacancy rates during the planning period for all units (both rental and year-round) are projected to decrease slightly from 10 to 8 percent. The vacancy rate for year-round units is projected to stabilize at 5 percent for the remainder of the planning period. These numbers are generally acceptable vacancy rates. However, it is not unusual for communities with such fluctuations in seasonally-occupied housing units to experience a slightly higher than normal vacancy rate. Absorption of the projected 40 units per year for the duration of the plan would be necessary at the occupancy rates previously indicated in order to maintain an adequate vacancy rate. Housing Costs for Renter- and Owner-Occupied Units The median gross rent in the City of Okeechobee was $225 in 1980, compared with $213 for Okeechobee County. Table 3.12 shows the distribution of rental units by gross monthly rent for both the city and the county in 1980. Gross rent is calculated as the rent amount plus the average monthly utility bill paid by the renter. ,isso Table 3.12, Average Monthly Gross Rental Rates: 1980 CIty/County of Okeechobee Renter-Occupied Housing Units Gross Monthly Rent City of Okeechobee Okeechobee County No Rent 34 (7.9%) I 395 , (22.3%) < S100 50 (11.6%) 263 (14.8%) S100 - $199 79 (18.4%) 708 (39.9%) S200 - S299 181 (42.2%) 338 (19.1%) > S300 85 (19.8%) 68 (3.8%) Total 429 100.0% 1,772 100.0% Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1980 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Tape 3A In the city, approximately 38 percent of rental units cost less than $200 per month. Conversely, in the county, approximately 77 percent of rental units cost the same amount. 66 Noe Horgan Bement City d Otmrdobee Coavrebeasme Plan March 1992 The majority of renter-occupied units in the city (62 percent) have rents in excess of$200 while the same rental costs account for only 23 percent of renter-occupied units in Okeechobee County. Clearly, the city accounts for a larger percentage of higher-rate rental 'taw units while the county has the majority of lower-rent units. Rent-to-income ratios are indicators of the amount of annual income spent on rent. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development sets rent-to-income guidelines for federal programs providing subsidized housing and mortgage assistance. Current guidelines recommend that rental or owner costs should not exceed 30 percent of annual household income. Rent-to-income ratios for the city are presented by income range in Table 3.13. The data shown is taken from the 1980 Census and reflects 1979 constant dollar ranges. Table 3.13, 1979 Costs of Housing Units As A Percentage of Income Owner- Renter- Housing Costs as a Occupied Occupied Household Income %of Income Units Units Less Than $5,000 Less Than 20% 49 0 20 - 24% 13 0 25 - 34% 19 15 35% or More 59 29 Not Computed 34 15 S5,000 - $9,999 Less Than 20% 72 36 20 - 24% 14 31 ,,r,, 25 - 34% 15 22 35% or More 32 42 Not Computed 0 3 510,000 - SI4,999 Less Than 20% 55 24 20 - 24% 40 20 25 - 34% 31 47 35% or More 19 0 Not Computed 0 9 S15,000 - $19,999 Less Than 20% 114 24 20 -24% 0 13 25 - 34% 9 0 35% or More 19 0 Not Computed 0 0 $20,000 or More Less Than 20% 205 26 20 - 24% 27 7 • 25 - 34% 10 0 35% or More 8 0 Not Computed 0 16 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1980 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Tape 3A. 'o-- 67 Housing Elat000t CL,of Ottactzetwe O'— co�ebez.r.e,.o Maeda 1991 The data indicate that the total number of renter households with rent-to-income ratios exceeding 35 percent are in the low income ranges. It is not surprising that the majority of households that spend a higher percentage of their income on housing are in the low income brackets. In fact, those paying 35 percent or more of their income on rent account for 18 percent of total renter households in the city. Low income renter households (incomes of $10,000 or less) generally account for 45 percent of all renter households. Census documents from 1980 provide a breakdown of the numbers and percentages of rental units available in 1979 which were affordable to families in five distinct income groups. Future needs for units in these income ranges were projected for 1995 and 2000 assuming the 1979 proportions to remain constant. These figures are presented in Table 3.14. Table 3.14, Projected Rental Unit Needs by Income CIty of Okeechobee Household % of 1979 1995 2000 Income Total Units Units Units • <S5,000 15.57% 59 91 98 S5,000-9,999 3536% 134 207 222 S10,000-14,999 2639% 100 155 165 S15,000-19,999 9.76% 37 57 61 S20,000+ 12.93% 49 76 81 Total Units 100.00% 379 586 627 "'NW Sources:U.S.Dept.of Commerce, 1970 and 1980 Census of Housing; Central Florida Regional Planning Council Owner-occupied housing costs are presented in Table 3.13. Owner costs are calculated for owner-occupied non-condominium housing units. These costs include households with and without mortgages. The median monthly owner cost for mortgaged units is $272. Those units without a mortgage had a median monthly owner cost of $90. These cost figures do not include insurance, utilities and taxes. The data shown are taken from the 1980 Census and reflect 1979 constant dollar amounts. Homeowners generally appear to be much better off than renters in terms of the proportion of income spent on housing. This is to be expected, since buying a home usually requires greater financial resources than renting. In addition, housing units without a mortgage, or those acquired in the past when costs and interest rates were lower, contribute to the large number of homeowners who spend less than 20 percent of their income on housing. 68 "'10' Hawing at,ot Okeechobee C 's iee Plea Marcia 1992 However, of those households with housing costs exceeding 35 percent of income, the majority are concentrated in the low and very-low income categories. This situation may be indicative of a shortage of accessible low-income owner-occupied housing units. The Now, "filtering process" of occupancy may be in effect here as well. Low-income homeowners, whether by choice or circumstance, move into better and more expensive housing. This improves family living conditions, but at the same time may require that a greater percentage of their income be spent on housing. Future owner-occupied housing needs by income range were projected using the same methodology as the projections for renter-occupied units. These are presented in Table 3.15. Table 3.15, Projected Owner-Occupied Unit Needs by Income Range CIty of Okeechobee % of Total 1979 Units 1995 Units 2000 Units Household Income <$5,000 20.62% 174 282 302 S5,000-9,999 15.76% 133 215 231 S10,000-14,999 17.18% 145 235 251 S15,000-19,999 16.82% 142 230 246 $20,000 + 29.62% 250 405 433 Total Units 100.00% 844 1,367 1,463 Sources: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1970 and 1980 Census of Housing; Central Florida Regional Planning Council Land Requirements for the Estimated Housing Need In 1990, residential land uses pccupied approximately 527 acres of developed land in the City of Okeechobee. Using a base figure of 1,965 dwelling units, the city currently has a general residential density of approximately 0.26 gross acres per dwelling unit, or 3.9 units per acre. For projection purposes, this density includes all types of housing, including single- family, multi-family and mobile homes. Current projections indicate a need for an additional 233 dwelling units to be built in the city from 1990 to 2000 in order to accommodate the projected population growth. Of these projected additional units, approximately 169 are single-family units, 28 are multi- family units, 22 are mobile homes and an additional 14 units of various types will serve as seasonal units. Averaged out over the planning period, this would account for an absorption rate of approximately 23 units per year. If these units were provided at current densities it would require approximately 58 acres of land suitable for residential development. This Atm, 69 Housing Demur[ City of Oteeebobea Compeeb _...Plan Mardi 1991 means that suitable sites for accommodating residential development should be indicated on the Future Land Use Map, and appropriate services and infrastructure needs, such as roads, sewer, water and utilities, should be provided. • vori The existing land use map of the city indicates that over 900 acres (40 percent of the city's total area) is currently vacant or being used for agricultural purposes. These lands represent a significant resource in terms of planning for future growth within the city. These lands include large parcels suitable for subdivision development but requiring the extension of services as well as smaller existing lots already serviced and suitable for infill development. The supply of undeveloped land is capable of absorbing the additional demand for dwelling units during the planning period. Appropriate zoning designations and land use categories ensuring the availability of land for residential development will be discussed in the Future Land Use Element. Private Sector Housing Delivery Process A successful housing delivery system requires the coordination of a number of professionals, firms, businesses, and industries. However, these players cannot function without the support and assistance of numerous other participants, including landowners, real estate brokers, title companies, architects, engineers, surveyors, lawyers, lending institutions, etc. Housing delivery in the City of Okeechobee has generally been the role of the private sector, and projected housing needs are expected to be met by the private sector and other non-profit organizations in the future. Table 3.16 summarizes the City of Okeechobee's building permit activity from 1980 to 1990. Single-family units have historically been and continue to be the preferred type of housing in the city. Multi-family unit construction has seen a small but steady market increase. Mobile home placement has shown a recent upward swing. Lacking complete information, however, it is difficult to assess how many of the permitted mobile homes were new units rather than replacements of older existing units. In addition, the total number of mobile homes installed is probably under-counted, owing to the lack of available data prior to 1985. 70 viro Hamm;Deresent Cry or Oteacbobs.camprebroiwr Pho Mrs 1992 Table 3.16, Building Permit Activity: 1980 to 1990 Type of Permit Issued 'Now Fiscal Year Single- Multi- Mobile Family Family Home Demolitions 1980 15 18 * * 1981 14 6 * 1982 10 3 * * 1983 24 4 • • 1984 41 3 • 1985 11 0 4 * 1986 24 3 10 1987 7 0 9 • 1988 16 0 14 • 1989 9 0 8 * 1990 4 0 7 * Total 175 37 52 • * Data Not Available Source: Okeechobee County Department of Building and Zoning; University of Florida,Bureau of Economic Now and Business Research Land: The availability of land for housing construction in the City of Okeechobee does not represent a problem. There is adequate land available to serve the housing industry through the planning period. Services: The availability of services associated with the construction of housing is a major concern. The permitting and installation of necessary infrastructure can often be a tremendous financial burden to local governments. This issue is addressed in detail in the Infrastructure Element. Financing: Historically, four major financing mechanisms have been provided by the private sector: 1. Conventional Mortgage 2 Home Improvement Loan 3. Secondary Mortgage Loan 4. Rent Restructuring The chief private sector participants in lending authorization are financial institutions such as banks, savings and loans, and mortgage companies, as well as developers. 71 Housing Eleamet cry at orncboeee camvreheows P Mardi 1991 However, few developers can complete a project using only their own money. Most of them look to mortgage lenders and to equity investors for a major share of project financing. ' The availability of mortgages and home improvement loans depends on overall money market conditions. When credit gets tight, mortgage and home improvement loans may be difficult to obtain or prohibitively expensive. This can slow down the real estate market and lower values. The private sector financing mechanisms typically meet the needs of the middle and upper income housing market. However, the housing needs the lower income housing market often are the focus of special attention, usually in the form of public assistance. The projections of future housing needs for the city indicate an increasing percentage of multi-family units will be required due to the majority of low- and moderate- income households in the city and the declining average household size. Should the private sector fail to supply those units on demand, some form of public intervention into the market may be required. Regulations and administrative roles of government agencies to identify problems and opportunities affecting the capacity of the private sector housing delivery system: Community development and assisted housing are comparatively recent additions to the functions of local and state governments. Significant activity began in the early 1930s as a result of federal government initiatives. Although concern about slums .ttr► and blight can be traced back to far earlier origins, major ongoing activity began as a result of the Great Depression. Significant federal legislation has spurred the expansion of local and state functions. From a local government perspective, three primary housing responsibilities and functions have emerged from the past decades: 1. Conserving and rehabilitating existing housing and neighborhoods:The evolution of housing occupancy codes, slum clearance, urban renewal, neighborhood improvement, and community development combined with developments in local property taxes and shifting housing markets have created a new local government concern — maintaining and managing the existing housing supply. 2. Developing and managing assisted housing: The evolving activities of public housing, low- and moderate-income housing assistance, leasing of private housing, locally funded housing development, local tax-exempt mortgage bonds, and the local housing assistance plan have combined to produce a second local government concern — providing and monitoring housing assistance for low- and moderate- income families. 72 Houmris Saw= Cary d Otesthobee Compeebesive Plan Staab 1992 3. Responding to the impact of housing dynamics: The major disruptions in local housing markets and neighborhoods since 1960 have added a new element to . housing in the local community -- the need to define public policies and programs to deal with both poor and strong local housing markets. The development and management of housing in the United States has traditionally been reserved for private enterprise; however, the development and management of housing for unmet needs in the form of assisted housing first appeared in the 1930s with the initiation of the public housing program. The public housing program provided special assistance to low-income families who could not afford the housing provided by the private market. While the future direction of federal support for assisted housing is not completely clear, indications are that exclusive reliance on federal assistance is at an end. State and local governments must assume added responsibilities if housing assistance is to continue at a significant level. To strengthen its role in housing assistance, the local government must learn about the private housing finance and development process as well as the sources and mechanisms of federal and state assistance. Local governments must also understand the character and resources of the local community and how all the available resources and participants can be brought together for housing development to the best advantage of the total community. Provision of Housing with Emphasis on Low and Moderate Income Households Now The private sector has traditionally Very Low Income Las than 50%of Median been the major developer of housing in the Household Income(MHI) U.S. The public sector enters the housing ,Incomc 50-80%of MHI market only where there has been a breakdown in the private sector's ability or Moderate Income 80- 120%of MHI willingness to provide housing for Middle Income 120-150%of MHI economically less feasible developments, Upper MiddleIHIUgh More than 150%of MHI such as low and very-low income housing Income needs. When incomes become too low, there are inadequate housing dollars for a family to secure acceptable housing without some form of assistance. Publicly assisted housing is available in both Okeechobee County and the City of Okeechobee. Tanglewood, Ltd., located just outside the city limits, offers 14 one-bedroom and 12 two-bedroom units. Doan's Court, in the northwestern section of the city, offers 124 housing units with 76 percent owner occupancy. In addition, the Okeechobee Rehabilitation Group Home offers "Section 202 Direct Loans" targeted toward the elderly. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has devised a formula for classifying local household population by income range according to the categories shown in the box (top right). The City of Okeechobee had a household median income of$12,047 73 Hawn`flemmt City d Okeechobee Compreeessee Ptao Mares 1991 reported in 1980, assuming 1979 constant dollars. Table 3.17 presents the breakdown of households by HUD income standards for the city in 1979. Table 3.17, Households by IIUD Income Categories: 1979 Category Income Range House-holds' Percent Very Low Income <S6,024 343 23% Low Income 56,024 - S9,638 240 16% Moderate Income $9,639 - S14,456 280 19% Middle Income 514,457 - 518,070 116 8% Upper Middle/High Income >S18,070 485 33% Total 1,464 100% Source: Central Florida Regional Planning Council t The number of households assigned per income range utilized the technique of tabular interpolation and assumed an even distribution of households per income range as reported in the 1980 Census. Nearly 40 percent of the city's households fell into the low- and very-low income groups in 1979. All low- and moderate-income households together accounted for nearly 60 percent of all households in the city. These numbers, coupled with the fact that the majority of renter- and owner-occupied households with rent-to-income ratios exceeding 35 percent are in the low-income ranges, indicate a need for low-income housing assistance to be addressed in the planning process. A joint city-county approach to housing assistance offers the most efficient method of application and coordination for state and federal program grants. Farmworker Housing Very little information is available as to the numbers and housing needs of seasonal farmworkers within the City of Okeechobee. Florida Applied Demographics estimates that 50 such persons live in the city, but cautions that this number represents "the characterization of local sources of information that `most' of the seasonal laborers live outside the city limits." Although hard data on this population is scarce, it is more than reasonable to accept FAD's assessment and assume that the city accommodates very few farmworkers, who find their livelihood in the rural areas of Okeechobee County. Most available farmworker population information addresses Okeechobee County as a whole. The Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services conducted a study on the state's farmworker population in 1986. Okeechobee County's population was reported to be 31 percent farmworkers. This figure includes two different categories of farmworkers. "Migrant" farmworkers, which are defined as those who travel to the place of harvest and stay overnight, numbered 6,590. "Seasonal" farmworkers, which are defined as viro 74 Hogan EICCOCOI Of!at others CJ—.s P e Mate 1992 those who live and do harvest work in the same general place and are usually unemployed for part of the year, numbered 397. As part of its seasonal population analysis, Florida Applied Demographics projected farmworker population in Okeechobee County. FAD's estimates vary from the HRS estimates, but the consultant's figures also consider additional data from farmworker dependent children enrolled in Okeechobee County schools, and their place of residence. : Okeechobee County has 13 migrant labor camps with 1990: : 1995 MOO space for a total of 526 persons, and it is assumed that Fa iworkeis.•<:; 4,437 5,136 ;<:;.5,690 these facilities are used to capacity. The remaining De ndents Z/66 2778 farmworkers seek housing in ordinary types of housing Total .;:< 6,603 7,643, 8,468 units throughout the county and city. The box at left so 'iZoriaa Applied Dczeographks shows the projected farmworker population for Okeechobee County through the year 2000. The city's 50 seasonal farmworkers represent approximately 0.7 percent of the county's total farmworker population. Based on the city's average household size of 2.72 persons per unit, it can be assumed that farmworkers occupied 18 housing units within the city in 1990. Future farmworker housing needs for the city can be calculated using this same percentage of county farmworker population and the projected average household sizes for 1995 and 2000 (see Household Size section of this element). Table 3.18 shows these figures. Table 3.18, Projected Farmworker Housing Needs City of Okeechobee — 1990 1995 2000 County Farmworker Population 6,603 7,643 8,468 City Farmworker Population 50 58 64 Number of Housing Units (City only) 18 22 24 Sources: Florida Applied Demographics, CFRPC The table shows a need for six additional housing units for farmworkers by the year 2000. This number can easily be accommodated through the private housing market, and specific programs undertaken by the city to address farmworker needs would be impractical on this scale. However, the city should coordinate and cooperate with any programs which may be established by the county or the state to address farmworkers' needs. _ Provision of Adequate Sites for Low- and Moderate-Income Families The provision of housing assistance in the future by the city and county may take on very different approaches from those traditionally employed in the past. Direct coordination with private-sector and not-for-profit developers in the delivery of low-and moderate-income housing is one example. Public-private partnerships and "sweat equity" programs are further 75 Haring Element cry ar ogee.campre�w.Mao Merin 1991 examples of more locally oriented processes that can achieve excellent results based upon increased public involvement. voioe A description of the variety and range of some local programs aimed at delivering affordable housing follows: Housing Trust Fund Establish a local Housing Trust Fund which will provide low- or no-interest financing for the purpose of new construction, land purchases undertaken as part of a land banking program, and second mortgages for housing rehabilitation. Organized as a revolving fund, developers and mortgagees would repay the fund, ensuring a permanent source of funding for affordable housing. Possible sources of seed money for the fund would need to be identified. Inclusionary Zoning Amend the city zoning laws to require each developer to build or provide for a certain percentage of affordable units. Alternatively, allow the developer to pay a fee based on the number of units constructed into a city-wide Housing Trust Fund which would finance the construction of affordable units elsewhere in the city. Density Bonuses Provide for density bonuses to reward builders of low- and moderate-income units r.ri according to the income category served. As part of the Comprehensive Plan, the city has adopted a policy granting one additional unit per acre on residential development projects in which 10 percent of all units qualify as affordable housing. Publicly Owned Land Bank Land banking represents an effective tool in promoting future lower-income housing opportunities, since the cost of land is such a large proportion of total development costs. Over the past several years, due to escalating real estate prices and the expectations that land prices will continue to increase in the future, purchasing developable land now and holding it until the city is ready to develop lower-income projects should prove fruitful in decreasing development costs. In addition, publicly owned land, uncommitted for any other purpose and lots gained through tax foreclosure could likewise be land-banked for housing. Similar programs are often referred to as "urban homesteading." Building Code Improvements The building code includes requirements which may go beyond the minimum "public health, safety and welfare" standard, and unnecessarily add to the cost of housing. Frequently mentioned are setback lines, off-street parking requirements, lot landscaping 76 Housing Bement City of Okeechobee Compeebeorre Mao Meech 1992 requirements, energy saving insulation requirements, fire retardation standards, electric service requirements, floor slab thickness and minimum room sizes. Those requirements 101110, found to be unnecessary or excessive should be amended or lessened, provided that existing neighboring developments are not harmed by these changes. Not-for-profit Development Encourage the formation of additional not-for-profit developers by providing them with seed-money for land purchases and pre-development costs, giving them priority in obtaining property through the land bank, and supporting their efforts with technical assistance and other related activities, such as coordinating federal and state expenditures with such developments. Area-wide Housing Finance Authority The city, by participating with the county in an Area-Wide Housing Finance Authority, could co-sponsor a Mortgage Revenue Bond program. The need for such a program is highly dependent upon the prevailing mortgage interest rates available in the marketplace. The Department of Community Affairs' Division of Housing and Community Development offers a number of programs to assist local governments like the City of Okeechobee in providing housing. The major programs offered in 1987-88 are summarized below: New Research and Program Development Section Collects information, conducts research and provides policy analysis on issues relating to housing and community development. Focuses on issues critical to Florida such as the need for low- and moderate-priced housing and the special housing needs of the elderly. Publishes Housing in Florida, an annual booklet detailing statewide housing trends, needs and number of units available by category. Rural Housing Section: Awards loans and grants to eligible sponsors to pay for redevelopment costs, land acquisition, and/or site improvements for property to be used to house low-income rural residents and farmworkers. Eligible sponsors include local governments, housing authorities, non-profit organizations and federally- recognized Indian tribes. Section 8 Housing Assistance Section: Pays rent subsidies to low- and moderate-income families who qualify for the program in 21 north and east Florida counties. Benefits landlords and tenants alike by guaranteeing rent money will be available each month. Avow 77 Home*Element Cry of Okeechobee Coabo:benn *Plan Mandl 1991 Codes Section: State Minimum Building Codes.Program: establishes minimum building construction requirements for all buildings constructed in Florida. Model Energy Efficiency Code For New Buildings: Construction: develops and updates biennially the Florida Energy Code, as required by the Legislature. The code, which establishes minimum statewide standards for thermal efficiency in building construction, is distributed to local building inspectors, architects, engineers, and contractors throughout Florida. Conducts seminars around the state to acquaint interested parties with code requirements, including new residential provisions effective April 1, 1986, and to advise officials about enforcement. Accessibility For Handicapped Persons: functions as information bureau for architects, developers, local government officials and others seeking information about Florida's handicapped accessibility law. The law, passed in 1974, establishes minimum construction requirements regarding accessibility for the disabled in new buildings. Also acts on applications for waivers in hardship cases. Manufactured Buildings Program:monitors for construction defects all manufactured buildings sold or erected in the state with the exception of mobile homes which are regulated by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Certifies that all buildings meeting minimum safety standards. Bureau of Community Assistance Community Development Corporation Support and Assistance Section Community Development Corporation Support and Assistance:provides grants and loans to local non- profit Community Development Corporations to finance revenue-generating projects to foster economic development in distressed areas. Florida Enterprise Zone Program: promotes public/private partnerships by providing tax incentives and reduced regulation to businesses operating in Enterprise Zones, severely distressed areas designated for participation in the revitalization program. Community Contribution Tax Incentive Program: assists non-profit corporations conducting community development projects by offering a 50 percent corporate income tax credit or insurance premium tax credit to businesses donating to approved projects. Community Redevelopment Section Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program: awards Community Development Block Grants of up to $650,000 to cities with populations under 78 Housing cm,al Otaccbobas c®pmamao.Plea Mama 1992 50,000 and counties with populations under 200,000 which meet certain federally-mandated criteria. Grants must be used for housing or neighborhood revitalization activities, such as rehabilitating housing in blighted neighborhoods or upgrading community road, water and sewer systems. Grants must provide at least 51 percent of the benefits to low- and moderate- income citizens. Community Services Section Community Services Block Grant: provides technical assistance to local governments, community action agencies and migrant and seasonal farmworker organizations. The money, which is earmarked for low-income persons, must be used to provide basic needs such as food, shelter and heat in emergency situations. Weatherization Assistance Section Provides weatherization monies for economically disadvantaged persons through grants to community action agencies, local governments, federally recognized Indian tribes and non-profit community organizations. Grants in 1985 ranged from $25,000 to $400,000. The money must be used to improve the heating efficiency of low-income housing and may be used specifically for weather stripping, caulking, ceiling and floor insulation and storm window and door installation. Housing Finance Agency The Florida Housing Finance Agency, an independent agency housed under DCA, was created by the Legislature in 1980 to set up programs to provide affordable housing to Iow-, moderate- and middle-income Floridians. Through the sale of tax-exempt bonds, the agency administers a statewide program to provide below-market mortgage loans for first- time home buyers. Additionally, it administers a multi-family rental housing program that allows developers to use tax-exempt bond financing to build their projects as long as a set percentage of the rental units are set aside for low- and moderate-income families. In the first five years of its existence, the Florida Housing Finance Agency issued $2.2 billion in bonds, providing some 26,000 units of housing throughout the state. In 1985 alone, the agency sold $1.1 billion in tax-exempt housing bonds, an all-time record among state housing bond issuers. Local governments should establish policies to encourage coordination with state agencies providing housing assistance. Utilization of all appropriate programs will assist both the city and the county in assuring that housing needs are met. Housing Conditions and Structural Conditions of Housing In order to characterize the city's housing stock more accurately than the 1980 census data allow, CFRPC staff members conducted a housing survey in March 1988 for the 79 Haan F3®aat City a[Otecebobee Comprthmsm PLo Maeda 1991 purpose of determining the type and external condition of residential structures in the city. The results of that survey are shown in the box below. Residential structures were classified in the survey, according. to their structural conditions, as being sound, deteriorating, or .,.,, dilapidated. Those dwelling units which showed no major defects were classified as being sound. Minor defects, such as the need for exterior painting,were not considered to be a significant environmental or structural defect. Structures in need of repair other than routine maintenance were considered to be deteriorating, while structures that appeared to be beyond corrective maintenance were ' categorized as dilapidated. Structures in ` :` T7Pe of Hoaaiag Total a deteriorating or dilapidated condition u>uta Total" were indicated to be substandard. Ai =single=Family;Good Condition 1,046 7.5A% A2-.Single-Famtly,Fair Condition 282 It should be noted, however, that :' =s-tngle-Family,.poop c�ditlon many interior housing characteristics B1= Good Condition 162 143% a B2= Multi-Family,Fair Condition 99 which could not be observed during )13 = Multi-Family,Poor Condition 0 housing survey are also indicative of substandard housing. As a result, = Mobile Home,Good Condition 161 10.1% g t, C2=Mobile Home,Fair Condition 20 substandard conditions may exist in the C3=Mobile Home,Poor Condition 0 city which are not reflected in the Total 1,797 100.0% housing survey. The classification system used in this survey, based solely on physical appearance, is largely subjective. In order to minimize this subjectivity, the survey classifications were .tar` correlated with 1980 Census data and more recent building permit activity. The CFRPC estimates the survey to be a 90 percent sample of all housing units in the City of Okeechobee. In conducting the survey, a code was established for purposes of locating each structure on a base map. This code allowed for nine possible classifications based on several criteria. The survey methodology is explained below: Residential Structure Type A = Single-family residential structure B = Multi-family residential structure C = Mobile home; single- and double-wide Residential External Condition I = Unit is in good physical condition with no obvious need for repairs noted; minor • defects, such as the need for exterior painting,were not considered to be a significant environmental or structural defect. 2 = Unit exhibits an obvious structural or environmental defect; included in this category were structures that showed a significant deterioration or number of deteriorations. -.110 80 �lageocce �01ot Plan sumo 1992 Severe roof damage, rotting pillars and crumbling steps or porches are examples of such deterioration. Also included in this category were living units, either mobile home or conventional structure, which were supported on blocks with no underpinning. 3 = Unit exhibits a number of structural or environmental defects suggesting a condition beyond corrective maintenance; included in this category were structures in a dilapidated condition as well as abandoned structures in a state of decay. The survey indicates that less than 2 percent of the city's housing stock is in poor condition. Approximately 22 percent of the housing stock was labeled as being in fair condition, while the majority of the housing stock (76 percent) was found to be in good condition. Substandard housing may become more of an issue in the future as the city's housing stock becomes older. According to the 1980 Census, less than one-fifth of the city's housing stock will be 50 years old or older by 1990. Conversely, the single largest number of housing units have been built since 1970, reflecting the city's rapid growth during the 1970s and 1980s. The second-largest group of homes are those built from 1940-59, reflecting the population and building boom following World War II. Table 3.19 shows the City's housing stock in 1980. Table 3.19, Year-Round Housing Unit Age: 1980 City of Okeechobee Year No. of Units Percent of Total Pre-1939 258 15% 1940-59 459 28% 1960-69 425 26% 1970- 513 31% Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1980 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Tape 3A As previously mentioned, internal characteristics of the housing stock in the city were not evaluated in the visual survey. However, 1980 Census gives some indications of internal characteristics. According to the Census, of the 1,655 year-round housing units in the City of Okeechobee: 35 (3 percent) lacked complete kitchen facilities; 46 (2.7 percent) lacked complete plumbing facilities; 721 (44 percent) had incomplete heating facilities; 289 (17 percent) lacked a telephone; and 534 units (32 percent) had no air conditioning. Through Policy 3.1, the city has established a local definition of "standard" and "substandard" housing. A standard housing unit is a sound structure, in a healthy and safe 81 Hawing Bean= City dot go:bobs.0 .4*thmrnRao Mann 1991 condition for occupation. The substandard housing definition was based on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Section 8 Existing Housing Program. A substandard housing unit is a structure having a deteriorated or dilapidated appearance and .rriv one or more of the following conditions: 1. The only possible access to the unit is through another unit. 2. There is no alternative means of exit in case of fire which meets state or local regulations. 3. There is evidence of infestation by mice or vermin. 4. There is an accumulation of garbage or debris. 5. Inadequate covered facilities for refuse disposal are provided. 6. Neighborhood conditions are present which would seriously and continuously endanger the health or safety of residents (e.g., evidence of flooding, proximity to open sewage,fire hazards). 7. Evidence exists of an unsound or hazardous foundation. 8. There are unsound or hazardous stairs, porches,balconies, or decks. 9. Roof bucks or sags, has holes or decayed soffits. 10. Exterior surfaces are decayed or otherwise defective. 11. Chimney is leaning or disintegrating. 12. Mobile homes are placed on the site in an unstable manner. Provision of Adequate Sites for Mobile Homes There are currently five mobile home and recreational vehicle parks in the Mobila Hone/RV Pmlct City of Okeechobee which are licensed by the Florida Department of Health and Name Number or ;Yumber of P Street/01y Address Zia spaces RV spaces Rehabilitative Services (see box). Significantly more mobile home and RV Okeechobee g �` 60 ° — parks are found in the unincorporated areas 5th street and Taylor Creek surrounding the city and adjacent to Lake Ann's Trailer Court 9 0 Okeechobee. Also, two mobile home 600 N Parrott Ave. subdivisions are located within the Chalk ward's Trailer Part 8 0 corporate limits of the City of Okeechobee. 104 SE 10th Ave. River Bend Trailer Paris 88 38 The placement of mobile homes is 1305 S.Parrott Ave. more restricted in the city than in Lucy talana 8 o Okeechobee County. Mobile homes often SE sth Ave.Eaensicn provide a viable alternative for low- and moderate-income housing needs. They Mobile Home Subdivisions account for approximately 50 percent of the county's housing stock while accounting for &Ink- Project Name Howl` Family vacant only 10 percent of the city's dwelling units. and Location some. Homes Lots Mobile homes are permitted uses in several Taylor Cove 51 3 0 of the county's land use classifications; in off Pitt Ave. the city, mobile homes are restricted to River 29 Residential Mobile Home zones which Run Resort 6 0 Hwy.70 East allow travel trailer parks, RV parks and mobile home subdivisions. They are not 82 Howe*somas Gry of Otaslwbee Compr=benrn Rae March 1992 permitted in areas zoned for single-family or multi-family use. However, large parcels suitable for mobile home parks and subdivisions are available within the city. Conservation, Rehabilitation and Demolition Activities Conservation areas are those housing areas where structural deficiencies are minimal. These areas should be protected from blight and maintained at least at their present standard of development. Strict enforcement of zoning, a minimum housing standards ordinance, and vigilant maintenance of community facilities and private property are key conservation tools. Rehabilitation areas are usually those areas where some basic structural deterioration is noted. These are areas that can be restored to standard conditions within realistic economic guidelines. Some typical rehabilitation measures include spot condemnations of buildings, enforced building repairs, provision of missing sanitary facilities, public improvements programs, and campaigns for voluntary building maintenance. Demolition is reserved for those areas where blight has advanced to such a degree that no other approach is practical in economic terms. Typically, the existing structures are cleared to create vacant space for new development. These activities are primarily carried out by the private sector in both the city and the county. The joint City/County Building and Zoning Department monitors most rehabilitation and demolition activities through the permitting process. Such a joint venture may provide an excellent venue from which to pursue a joint City/County housing assistance program. �• Utilizing state and federal funding sources,including Community Development Block Grants, such a program could provide financial assistance to low-and moderate-income households or interested developers. Such a program can promote infill development in those areas where demolitions have taken place. Infill development can be cost effective if public services, such as sewer and water, are already in place. Finally, the city can better promote housing conservation through stricter enforcement of its housing code. Provision of Adequate Sites for Group Homes There are a number of group homes and related facilities licensed by the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to provide care for residents of Okeechobee County and the City of Okeechobee. These include three foster group homes, two long term residential care facilities, one adult congregate living facility and twenty foster family group homes. The following is a list of HRS licensed facilities. `�- 83 Hauling Element c.,of Olusebotee Coracrebeowe?kw Marcel 1991 City of Okeechobee Okeechobee County . Residential Services, Inc. Men's Facility Duenklin Rest Home , 501 NW 6th Street 407 N.W. 2nd Avenue Capacity: 8 Capacity: 20 Residential Services, Inc. Women's Facility Okeechobee House Care Facility 311 3rd Street 1646 Hwy. 441 N Capacity: 8 Capacity: 150 Eckerd Youth Development Center 7200 Hwy. 441 N Capacity: 130 Eckerd Youth Challenge Program Facility 1117 NE 39th Blvd. Capacity: 30 Source: Okeechobee HRS office, 1991. The city and county zoning ordinance does not define or refer to group homes; however, there are provisions for rooming and boarding houses in the RG (Residential General) district. Historically Significant Housing or Neighborhoods The Freedman-Raulerson House at 600 S. Parrott Avenue as well as the Old School House are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. There may be other historic houses and historic structures in the area which have not yet been identified; therefore, the r.r� city will coordinate efforts with Okeechobee County to seek information and grant fund assistance of local and state historic preservation organizations to develop a survey of historic and architecturally significant structures in the city. When renovations or demolitions are proposed, structures will be evaluated to determine their historic significance. Other structures of local significance are the Okeechobee Bank Building, CSX Train Station, Raulerson Department Store, Box Home, Okeechobee Hardware, City Hall, the Okeechobee County Courthouse, and the First Methodist Church. 84 Houma(Elea= Cry of O1'— .Mee compr • P M1991 ioge Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element TABLE OF CONTENTS IV. SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, DRAINAGE, POTABLE WATER AND NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE ELEMENT 87 A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 87 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 87 Sewage Treatment 87 Other Facilities 88 Solid Waste 88 Potable Water 89 Private Systems 89 Drainage 90 Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge 90 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 92 Sewage Treatment 92 Elements Affecting Demand 94 Projected Demand 94 Additional Capacity Needs 95 Adopted Level of Service 95 Unincorporated Areas 96 Solid Waste 97 Projected Demand 98 Waste Processing Plant 99 Recycling 99 Potable Water 100 Projected Demand 100 Conservation 101 Municipal Water Wells 102 Drainage 103 Design Standards 103 Stormwater Management Techniques 104 Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge 105 D. LIST OF SOURCES 107 85 Smeary Sewer—E emea Qty of Oteeabooes c�i:bea...Plac Matrb 1991 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1, Sewer Connections 88 `W''` Table 4.2, Water Connections 89 Table 4.3, Projected Sewer Demand 95 Table 4.4, Recommended Changes in Sewer Demand Variables 96 Table 4.5, Projected Use of Landfill Capacity 98 Table 4.6, Water Demand Projections 101 LIST OF MAPS Map 4.1, Sewer Service Area 109 Map 4.2, Water Service Area 111 Map 4.3, Urban Residential Area 113 Nair tirr� 86 Sammy Sr —Element Cry d Oksectiobee Comptebeerme Pk= Mae*1992 IV. SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, DRAINAGE, POTABLE WATER AND NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE ELEMENT A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT This element analyzes the City of Okeechobee's existing situation in terms of infrastructure, specifically the sanitary sewer, potable water, solid waste and drainage systems, as well as protection of the natural groundwater resource. The purpose of the analysis is to identify any additional facilities or changes in policy that might be needed. This document is structured to meet the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code and is set forth in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis C. Issues and Recommendations Maps, charts, tables and other relevant graphics are provided in addition to the text. B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS The City of Okeechobee provides water and sewer service to its residents, while solid waste is collected and transported to the county's sanitary landfill by a private company. A discussion of these and other components of the infrastructure follows. Sewage Treatment The City of Okeechobee presently operates a sewage treatment plant on a 400-acre site leased from the State of Florida on Cemetery Road approximately one mile east of US 441. The plant utilizes a primary and secondary activated sludge treatment process, handling approximately 0.32 million gallons per day (MGD) and serving a total of 905 connections (numbers and types of sewer connections are shown in Table 4.1). Treatment steps include aeration, which allows organic materials to be broken down biologically; screening and settling to remove suspended solids; and chlorination to remove hazardous microorganisms. The plant has a design capacity of 0.6 MGD and meets state-mandated effluent quality standards (Rule 17-6, F.A.C), with 98% removal of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and 90% removal of total suspended solids. Effluent is spray irrigated on property adjoining the plant site. The solids are then spread on the same site. Its high degree of effectiveness in removing bacteria and harmful substances from effluent indicates the plant is functioning extremely well. Impacts on surrounding natural resources are minimal because waste products are filtered through soil rather than being allowed to enter surface streams or groundwater. 87 r s _Hamm City of Oteacbobee Camped:m w Poo Math 1991 Table 4.1, Sewer Connections' CIty of Okeechobee Residential Commercial r•r Connections Inside City Limits 402 282 Connections Outside City Limits 115 106 Total Connections 517 388 * December 31, 1989 Beginning in 1990, the majority of the city's effluent (up to 0.3 MGD) was put to use as irrigation water in a nearby agricultural operation. The remainder continues to be spray irrigated on the current site. Map 4.1, page 109, indicates the service area of the city's plant. The predominant land use served by the plant is residential,which comprises 57% of current connections. Commercial makes up the remainder. In 1989, the facility had a service population of 2,165, including about one-third of all residents of the city. Other Facilities The Eckerd Youth Development Center,a juvenile detention facility north of the City of Okeechobee, owns its sewage treatment plant, which is operated by the City of Okeechobee. The plant has a capacity of 0.2 MGD and is operating well below capacity. The effluent is piped to the city plant for disposal. In addition to these two facilities, package plants are in operation outside the city limits at several Iocations, including Taylor Creek Isles, Pine Ridge Mobile Park, McArthur Park Apartments, the Okee-Tantie Recreation Area, the Town and Country Mobile Home Park, the Big "0" Campground, American Adventure, and King's Bay. Approximately two-thirds of the residents of the City of Okeechobee currently are served by individual septic tanks. Septic tank systems are usually used to serve single housing units located outside the service area of sewage treatment plants. Solid Waste Solid waste collection and disposal services for the City of Okeechobee, as well as Okeechobee County, are provided by L. P. Sanitation, which is owned by Waste Management Corporation, a national company. Approximately 3,500 households and businesses are using this service, including several large dairy farms. Okeechobee County operates an 80-acre sanitary landfill on the southeastern county line, approximately thirteen miles east of the City of Okeechobee. All but 8 acres of this facility is lined with a plastic-type material called HDPE with a 60-mil thickness. Two of the landfill's twenty four-acre cells are lined with 20-mil PVC. The purpose of the liner, .r� 88 Sammy Scour— Of,of a �etooloos Plan Musts 1992 required by the Department of Environmental Regulation(DER),is to prevent groundwater contamination through leaching. Monitoring wells have so far detected no such pollution. The county generates approximately 25,000 tons of solid waste per year, of which 45% or 11,250 tons are contributed by the City of Okeechobee. Although no recycling or incineration programs are currently in effect, it is anticipated that this site will be sufficient to serve Okeechobee County through the planning period. Potable Water The City of Okeechobee owns and operates a water treatment plant which provides potable water to the urbanized areas in the southern section of the county. The plant draws water directly from Lake Okeechobee and is located on SR 78 opposite the lake. The treatment plant serves 3,887 direct connections (see Table 4.2) and a private distribution system for several outlying developments. Current average daily demand on an annualized basis is 2.14 MGD. The plant has a design capacity of 2.88 MGD. The water distribution system is also supported by two 250,000 gallon overhead storage tanks and 1.5 million gallons of storage available at the plant itself, for a total storage capacity of 2.0 million gallons. Water pressure averages 60-90 pounds per square inch (psi) at the treatment facility, and 30-40 psi at the tap. The plant is currently operating at approximately 74% of capacity. The City of Okeechobee closed a bond in December 1989 to expand the plant capacity to 4.88 MGD during the early 1990s. Map 4.2 (page 111) indicates the existing service area. Residential is the predominant land use served by the public water facility, comprising approximately 80% of all connections; the remaining 20% is commercial. �.- Potable water service is available to all city residents. Table 4.2,Water Connections* City of Okeechobee Residential Commercial Connections Inside City Limits 1,542 517 Connections Outside City Limits 1,587 241 Total Connections 3,129 758 • December 31, 1989 Private Systems The Okeechobee Beach Water Association (OBWA) purchases water from the City of Okeechobee and supplies it to private residences in the Treasure Island, Taylor Creek Island and Buckhead Ridge developments. At present, the association serves 3,113 residential units and purchases an average of 17.95 million gallons per month (0.59 MGD) from the City, although seasonal fluctuations range from 14.3 million gallons per month in summer to 22.6 million in winter. Treated water is piped from the City facility to the OBWA facility on State Road 78. The water is then pumped into two 75,000-gallon Nair 89 s. Saw_a ch of Okocceobee cosireb�»Pbo Maceb 1991 overhead storage tanks until it is distributed. The contract between the city and OBWA allows for the purchase of up to 0.75 MGD. The Eckerd Youth Development Center operates a water treatment plant with a 0.18 MGD capacity. The Development Center also treats water from two deep wells (800 to 1,000 feet). The treatment consists of aeration for removal of sulfides and iron. The remainder of Okeechobee County and City residents receive their water from shallow wells. Drainage The City of Okeechobee has approximately 50 miles of streets, of which about 20% are served by storm drainage facilities constructed by the Florida State Road Dept. (now the Dept. of Transportation) in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Drainage on the remainder of the city's roads is accommodated by swales and ditches. Drainage facility improvements are needed, particularly in the area of NW 4th Street, where a former wetland was filled, creating frequent drainage problems. The City of Okeechobee is located within the Lake Okeechobee integrated drainage basin. The city in general is drained by Taylor Creek to the east, although some runoff may flow directly south into Popash Slough and Lemkin Creek. There are currently three mechanisms for governing the land use and development of natural drainage features. These mechanisms are: 1. Okeechobee County Zoning Ordinance, adopted March 28, 1974 and amended in 1985 to govern both Okeechobee County and the City of Okeechobee. 2. City of Okeechobee Subdivision Ordinance, adopted in 1977 to govern the platting and subdividing of land within the city, and to set road and drainage standards for new development. 3. City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1978 and amended in 1983, to help the City maintain consistency and compatibility when making development decisions and to guide future land use patterns. Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Okeechobee County and the City of Okeechobee are underlain by the Floridan Aquifer, although there is virtually no recharge to the aquifer within Okeechobee County. The thick limestones of the Floridan Aquifer provide all of the state, except the southern fringe, with potable water supplies. Along much of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal areas, the aquifer contains highly mineralized water. 90 Saari Sewer Cary a(Otoecbobee Comprebearve Pt= —Mascot Mrm 1992 The Floridan Aquifer includes many layers of limestones from different geologic ages. In some areas the aquifer is exposed at the surface, but over much of the state it lies beneath several hundred feet of sandy sediments. The thick semipermeable beds which overlie the aquifer, except in the aquifer's outcrop areas, restrict the upward movement of water and cause the aquifer to have artesian pressure. The altitude to which water will rise in artesian wells generally ranges from a few feet above mean sea level in areas near the coast, to more than 130 feet above mean sea level in Polk County. In southern Florida, along coastal areas, and in low stream valleys, the artesian pressure is sufficient to cause wells to flow. However, in some areas of heavy water withdrawal such as eastern Duval County and southern Bay County, the water level has been lowered below sea level. Water in the central and southern Floridan aquifer is replenished by rainfall; from the central part of the state in northern Florida the aquifer is recharged by rainfall from southern Alabama and Georgia. Some replenishment in central Florida occurs where the confining material is breached by sinkholes. Wells developed in the Floridan Aquifer vary in size, depth, and yield. Domestic wells are usually at least two inches in diameter and the large municipal and industrial wells may be thirty or more inches in diameter. The depth of wells ranges from about fifty feet to more than 1,000 feet depending on the local geologic and hydrologic conditions and the yield required. The yield of wells developed in the Floridan aquifer ranges from a few gallons per minute for small diameter wells to several thousand gallons per minute for some of the large diameter industrial wells. The amount of water that can be produced is controlled by the diameter of the well, the capacity of the pump, and the hydrologic properties of the aquifer. The City of Okeechobee currently has no ordinances specifically addressing the development and/or protection of recharge areas. However, a framework of policies has been established at the state and regional levels aimed at fostering an awareness of issues related to aquifer recharge and guiding the activities of government accordingly. The State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.) includes the following policies: • Identify and protect the functions of water recharge areas and provide incentives for their conservation. • Ensure that new development is compatible with existing local and regional water supplies. • Protect aquifers from depletion and contamination through appropriate regulatory programs and through incentives. Also, the Central Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan (Central Florida Regional Planning Council, 1987) contains policies addressing aquifer recharge. These include the following: 91 s-r•--s--— a,dOe_.t mob=C... m...P M1991 • ...land and water use/development plans and regulations shall identify and protect present and future well fields and aquifer recharge areas from development and potential contamination which could have an adverse .rr► effect on ground water quality. • ...land and water use/development plans and regulations shall include provisions to identify, permit, and review newly proposed activities which could pose a threat to ground water resources. • Land and water use plans and approvals shall identify, adopt, and enforce provisions to protect recharge areas and wellfields from contamination by incompatible activities through inclusion of measures to meet state agency standards for recharge area/weilfield protection. • Aquifer recharge areas and well fields shall be protected through local, regional, and state land use and development controls to ensure only compatible uses on land identified with aquifer recharge. The intended effect of these policies is to ensure that government functions are carried out with aquifer recharge-related issues in mind. These include activities by local governments, state agencies, and regional entities such as water management districts and regional planning councils. Comprehensive plan policies and implementing regulations adopted at the local level must be consistent with state and regional goals, and implement state and regional policies. The result of this cooperation between the various levels of government will be to protect one of the state's most vital natural resources from depletion or further damage as Florida's population continues to grow. Nose C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS In order to effectively address the issues and recommendations identified through data collection and analysis of this element, each sub-category will be addressed individually as follows: Sewage Treatment Solid Waste Potable Water Drainage Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Issues and recommendations identified within each sub-category serve as the basis for the formulation of goals, objectives, and policies for this element. Sewage Treatment As mentioned earlier, more than half the city's residents rely on septic tanks for disposal of sewage. This represents an unfavorable situation for future development, as much of the soil underlying the City of Okeechobee is of a type having severe limitations for NNW 92 s.m,y sews— cc, Ottedxibce Camped coma em u.m 1992 Septic to nk use. According g t o the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture's h •Soil Type Degree of Liinifatiot `foi k U "` Soil Survey for Okeechobee Septic Tanse :. `w County, the predominant soil types in the city are Immokalee Adamsviile fine sand Seven..high.water table : and Myakka fine sands which • Ft Drum fine sand : ;;;:;: have a low degree of suitability :.:. :::> :..:;:.:.; for filtration of sewage due to Imtnokalee fine sand::::::::::;::::;: `: ::Sever high water table,'; periodic flooding-- high water table conditions and • Myahka fine sand periodic flooding. .Basinger-Placid complcc::::..' Severe:high water table, Although public sewer . . ... ::. .. . frequent flooding service is not available to all ••. Basmger/P°mpan°fine sands, pondcd .: properties,sewer lines have been • placed in all sections of the city • Delray fin`sand .. rather than being concentrated in Placid tine ialid specific areas. Just as sewer Pompano fine sand facilities are found in all parts of the city, septic tanks are likewise `ee Delray and O nta sous found in all parts of the city, and no particular area can be said to be served by septic tanks only. Okeelanta peat Very sever=frequent Y P y flooding,high water table Therefore, soil suitability is an issue that affects the city as a Saud U.S.Dept.of Agriculture,1971.soil Survey for Okeechobee county, Florida whole. Of the various soil types represented in the Soil Survey as being present in the City of Okeechobee, not a single one is rated as having Iess than severe limitations for septic tank use, due to the presence of a high water table (see above box). However, it should be noted that large amounts of property within the city have been filled or otherwise physically altered so as to make the use of septic tanks practical regardless of the original, natural soil characteristics. Also, state regulations administered by the Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services are in place to ensure the safe and effective use of septic tanks through proper design standards, setbacks, and limitations on land use. These standards ensure that, with proper limitations, septic tanks can be used effectively without contaminating water supplies or creating other health hazards. Aside from health-related issues, septic tanks are also inconsistent with the densities and intensities associated with urban development. Even in ideal soils, large lots and separation intervals are required for effective use of this disposal method. The conditions that make septic tanks usable on an individual basis encourage urban sprawl and work against the city's need to "fill in" empty spaces and increase densities so that it can make efficient use of all of its public facilities (including water, solid waste collection, and roads). Therefore, the sanitary sewer use projections provided in this element are geared not only "9"' 93 Sookary Serer—Mom= Coy or oraoeboboo emproeoorot Mao Mods 1991 toward meeting future needs but also toward making more efficient use of the sewage treatment system. Nor Elements Affecting Demand System specifications are shown in the box below. Demand projections and other relevant information on future use of the city's sewage treatment system are presented in Tables 4.3 and 4.4. Several variables need to be considered in planning for future use of the city's sewer system: Sewer System.Specifications (1.989) Level of Service, the number of gallons per capita per day Current City Population 4,958 generated by residents of the city city Population on Sewer 1,636 and surrounding unincorporated Current Service Population 2165 areas having sewer service. ) Average Daily Flow(MOD) 032 • Average Daily Flow, average Peak Daily Flow(MGD) 0.43 amount of sewage treated by the Peak Factor 1.35 plant on a daily basis. Inflow/Infiltration Factor 135 U r Population LOS(y�da) 146 • Peak Flow, largest amount of flow generated at any one time due to Current Capacity of Treatment Facility 0.6 variations in rainfall, population, or other factors. Now • Inflow/Infiltration, the amount of water entering the sewage collection system through cracked pipes, poorly sealed joints and other sources. Inflow refers to surface water entering the system, while infiltration refers to groundwater seepage. • City Service Coverage, the percentage of city population having sewer service. • County Capacity Share, the percent of Average Daily Flow generated by residents of unincorporated areas, as distinguished from city residents. Projected Demand Table 4.3 shows projected sewer demand for the City of Okeechobee. These figures are based on population growth projections provided in the Population Projections section of the comprehensive plan. In addition to population, they are a function of projected service coverage within the city, the city's expected share of total sewer capacity, inflow/infiltration, and levels of service. Peak flow is estimated by city officials as being 35% greater than average daily demand. Inflow/infiltration also is 35%; it is a problem because it increases the total amount of sewage flow significantly above the amount generated by the population. Although it probably cannot be entirely eliminated, this factor is assumed to be rr' 94 —Sewer—nom afy of MannWear campr.nm.K Plan Minns 1992 reduced to 28% by 1995 and 20% by 2000 through system maintenance and improvement programs. %or City Service Coverage is another critical influence on future demand levels. Service coverage, now approximately 33%, should be increased for reasons of health (the city's low level of suitability for septic tanks is discussed above), convenience for city residents, and efficient use of the city's public facilities. In fact, it will rise substantially in the early 1990s when an existing but substandard system of sewer lines and related facilities is improved to current design standards and brought into use. This will add 800 connections, all within city limits, to the current 905. This translates into a 74% service coverage within city limits. City Service Coverage is expected to remain at approximately this level through the years 1995- 2000. Table 4.3, Projected Sewer Demand City of Okeechobee 1990 1995• 2000• Average Daily Flow (MGD) 032 0.69 0.68 Percent of Capacity Needed 52.8% 57.6% 56.6% Peak Flow (MGD) 0.43 0.93 0.92 Percent of Capacity Needed 71.2% 77.6% 76.3% • assumes plant otpansion to 1.2 MGD Sources Central Florida Regional Planning Counal Additional Capacity Needs With the city's high rate of growth and the addition of the 800 connections mentioned above, demand for sewer service is expected to outstrip existing sewage treatment capacity before 1995. When the planned expansion takes place, capacity will rise from 0.6 to 1.2 MGD. The projections presented in Table 4.3 are based on this proposed improvement, already funded and included in the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements. With this expansion, average daily demand as a percentage of system capacity will remain relatively stable through the planning period, in the vicinity of 55%. Peak demand on the system will not exceed 78%. Adopted Level of Service The sewer demand projections in Table 4.3 show a slight drop from 1995 to 2000. This is due to an assumption, included in the calculations, that infiltration and inflow into the system will be reduced from 34% to 20%. In other words, increasing efficiency in the system's physical components will counterbalance rising demand during the planning period, resulting in a slight decline in sewer use after 1995. 95 s.e.or,sewer—Elea= My d Otaazhcara Coaaratecasat Phu Match 1991 This assumption is the basis for determining the city's adopted level of service (LOS), shown in the Goals, Objectives &Policies document. As Table 4.4 shows, User LOS stands at 146 in 1990, drops to 138 in 1995, and eventually reaches 130 in the year 2000. As INS utilized in these calculations, User LOS represents a the best estimate as to actual water use per person per day. The expected reduction in infiltration/inflow, described above, accounts for the change. The adopted LOS figure has a different purpose than the User LOS and is not intended to duplicate it. Table 4.4, Recommended Changes in Sewer Demand Variables 1990 1995 2000 User LOS (g/c/d) 146 138 130 Inflow/Infiltration 35% 28% 20% City Service Coverage 33% 74% 75% County Capacity Share 24% 24% 24% Not=The percentage do not total 100. Source Central Florida Regional Planning Council Adopted LOS is a policy statement by which the city commits to providing a certain amount of sewer capacity per person per day. If urban growth results in a User LOS lower than Adopted LOS, the city must make, or require others to make, capital improvements to the facility which will make up for the deficiency. Adopted LOS is a standard, enforced through the Comprehensive Plan, which the city must observe while the plan is in effect. ,w,r While it must be based on realistic assumptions, Adopted LOS need not and generally should not be the same as User LOS. Unless User LOS is unusually low and there is doubt as to whether it accurately reflects sewer demand, Adopted LOS should be somewhat lower. Adopted LOS should reflect a service level which the city can comfortably maintain with a smoothly-running system. If too high a figure is used, the city may be committing itself to system expansions to accommodate factors which distort the true picture of sewer demand, such as leaking pipes and defective metering equipment. In Okeechobee's case, the year 2000 LOS figure of 130 g/c/d was chosen for the Adopted LOS, as it represents generally the same rate of use as today, but factors out some of the current system's inefficiencies. Unincorporated Areas The amount of sewer service to be made available to unincorporated Okeechobee County is of critical importance to growth management in both jurisdictions. The presence or absence of sewer facilities is crucial in determining the type and intensity of development which can be built in a particular location. As the unincorporated urban area outside the 96 Sow scow—nit Qty of oheectioE--Cm9eehmrre Moo Ma 1992 City of Okeechobee grows, it is reasonable to expect that sewer facilities will be extended to accommodate some of this new demand. Now The city recognizes that some system enlargements will occur outside municipal boundaries, but also that some practical limits must be imposed to discourage urban sprawl and maximize the efficiency of its capital investments. Therefore, a policy decision has been made that future extensions of sewer and potable water service will remain within the Urban Residential area as established in the Okeechobee County Comprehensive Plan (see Map 4.3, page 113). While this land use designation generally corresponds to the city and surrounding urbanized areas, it is relatively large and should not be interpreted as a future service area. Within the Urban Residential boundaries, the city may provide sewer service to specific locations based on several considerations, including the following: • location and/or physical features of the site which determine whether the project is feasible from an engineering standpoint; • costs associated with the project; • available capacity in the sewage treatment plant; and • competing priorities for capital improvements within the city. In addition, future decisions to extend sewer service outside city limits may hinge on the issue of maximum efficiency of use (see List of Definitions) of the facilities. Such extensions are more likely if there is unused capacity remaining in the system after other priorities (such as serving city residents) have been met. In cases where the city can meet demand for service in unincorporated areas without major system improvements (e.g., �.er increasing the capacity of the sewage treatment plant), it has maximized the efficiency of its own public investments. Currently, 24% of the city's sewer flow is generated by development in unincorporated Okeechobee County. The analysis presented in this Element assumes this percentage will remain constant throughout the planning period. However, it should be understood that the absolute amount of sewer capacity allocated to the county, measured in gallons per day, will increase substantially with the city's planned sewage treatment plant expansion (see previous section). Solid Waste The City of Okeechobee generates solid waste at a rate of approximately 11,250 tons per year. This represents 45% of the county's solid waste stream, while the city has only 11% of the population. Such a discrepancy can be explained by the presence of businesses and industries in the city, as well as large numbers of people living an urban or suburban lifestyle, as contrasted with the rural/agricultural nature of outlying areas. It also suggests that some solid waste in unincorporated areas may be disposed of outside the county's organized collection system, through such methods as burning, burial, or even improper dumping. These factors help explain the city's relatively high level of service (LOS) of 12.4 97 Swart steer—Element cry of oteem,e.—campreem..e Pile Mane 1991 wrl■� lbs. per capita per day; the overall figure for the entire county is approximately 3.2 lbs. per capita per day. Imo Although the City of Okeechobee does not own or operate the landfill, its ability to dispose of its solid waste adequately depends on the overall demand being placed on the facility. Therefore, the following analysis considers the entire capacity of the landfill and waste amounts generated by all of Okeechobee County. In order to project landfill capacity use rates it is necessary to translate the LOS figure from pounds per capita per day to cubic yards (CY) per capita per year. Using the standard conversion factor of 900 pounds of solid waste per cubic yard, 3.2 lbs./capita/day becomes 1.3 CY/capita/year. Projected Demand The remaining capacity of the Okeechobee County Landfill is approximately 0.92 million cubic yards. This space is being consumed at an average rate of 3.16 lbs./capita/day or 1.28 CY/capita/year. In light of the Solid Waste Management Act of 1988, which mandates a 30% reduction in solid waste volumes by the end of 1994, it is assumed that these levels of service will decline accordingly by 1995. Table 4.5 projects the county's use of this landfill capacity through the year 2000. Table 45, Projected Use of Landfill Capacity City of Okeechobee Amount Deposited Remaining Capacity Year (cubic yards) (cubic yards) luso 1990 55,556 868,889 1991 53,868 815,021 1992 51,969 763,052 1993 49,861 713,191 1994 47,543 665,647 1995 45,015 620,632 1996 45,987 574,645 1997 46,981 527,664 1998 47,996 479,669 1999 49,032 430,636 2000 49,877 380,760 Sources:Okeechobee County,Central Florida Regional Planning Council As the table shows, there will be approximately 381,000 cubic yards of capacity remaining in the landfill at the end of the planning period. At the 1990 level of service, this . represents 6.9 years of available capacity; if Okeechobee County is successful in meeting the 98 S Sewer— Cky of Okmmobs Comprebmwe Plao Marcel 1941 required volume reduction goals, this capacity will meet the county's needs for 7.6 years of the subsequent decade. Waste Processing Plant In addition to volume reductions due to recycling and related activities, the county expects to achieve further reductions through construction of a waste processing plant. To be built on part of the existing county landfill site, this facility would produce organic compost for use in agricultural activities. Through a low-heat process lasting 72 hours, waste material would be decomposed to a degree that would take years through natural processes in the landfill. The plant would receive 70% of the county's solid waste (the balance being construction debris and other inorganic material); one-fifth of this amount eventually would be deposited in the landfill, while the rest would be sold as a usable commodity. Total reduction of solid waste to be placed in the landfill would be approximately 60%, should this facility be built. In this event, the city's level of service for landfill use would drop by an equivalent amount. However, the plant is not necessary for adequate disposal of the City of Okeechobee's solid waste and has not been included in the landfill capacity analysis presented in this plan. Recycling As a means of further reducing its solid waste volume, the city may wish to consider establishing a recycling program in a cooperative effort with Okeechobee County. Such an '"at" effort would be aimed at removing useful materials such as aluminum, glass and paper, making them available for sale to private industry. The program could potentially generate revenue for the city and would support solid waste management goals included in the Solid Waste Management Act of 1988. This statute encourages municipalities and counties to form cooperative arrangements to implement recycling activities to achieve several objectives, including the following: • At a minimum, a majority of the newspaper, aluminum cans, glass and plastic bottles must be separated from the solid waste stream prior to final disposal at a solid waste disposal facility and must be offered for recycling. • Local governments are encouraged to separate all plastics, metals, and all grades of paper for recycling prior to final disposal and are further encouraged to recycle yard trash and other mechanically treated solid waste into compost available for agricultural and other acceptable uses. • The goals [of the program] shall provide, at a minimum, that the amount of municipal solid waste that would be disposed of in the absence of municipal solid waste recycling efforts is reduced by at least 30 percent by the end of 1994. • Nur 99 Sameec of Otm+hrbea cacaprebm...Pho Marsh 1991 Potable Water vaiso The city's water plant, built in the 1920s, will be expanded from a 2.88 MGD capacity to 4.88 MGD before 1995. As a result, future projections show that water supplies should be more than adequate during the planning period. Storage capacity is also more than adequate at 2.0 million gallons; this represents 93% of average daily flow, while the Florida Dept. of Environmental Regulation requires at least 50%. The City of Okeechobee's water system currently serves approximately 17,000 people or 3.4 times the city's population. It is assumed in the projections below that this ratio will continue to hold true. Projected Demand Potable water System SPa atio►u Avg.Annual Daily Flow(MGD) 2.14 Table 4.6 shows projected Peak Flow(MGD) 211.8 water demand levels through the Peak>aao< 15096 year 2000. Average daily flow (ADF) is expected to rise from Storage Catty(MGD) 200 its current level of 2.14 MGD to Storage/Maximum Daily Flow 69.4% 2.29 MGD by 2000; however, the Design Capacity of Facility(MGD) 2.88 portion of plant capacity used Future Design Capacity(MGD) 4.88 will drop from nearly three- quarters to less than half, due to l of Service(g/c ) 126 the planned facility expansion. These projections arise from a Moriber of Connections complicated series of calculations Kett. Cow, Totals ,,,, + using information provided in the accompanying box (at right). 517 2,059 out of city 1,587 241 1,828 In order to predict future Totals 3,129 758 3,887 demand, it is first necessary to determine a service level, Sem."P°Pdaskin measured in gallons/capita/day, Estimated Peak Pop,of City(1990) 4,958 which can be related to future Percentage of City Pop.with Water Service 94% population growth. Assuming Number of In-Gty Connections 2,059 that this operating level of service remains the same through Persona/Connection on City System 220 the end of the planning period, Tom moons on City System 3,887 prediction of future demand is Service Population(excluding OBWA) 8,551 generally a simple matter of OBWA Service Population 8,405 multiplying this figure by future (at 2.7 persona/connection) population. The City of Total Service Population 16,957 Okeechobee's case is complicated,however,by the fact that the city serves a portion of unincorporated Okeechobee County. Although this outer service area is relatively close to city boundaries, it is not a sharply defined jurisdiction for which population growth estimates 100 Swart sewer—P3emme Gq of Ote cbatee CoegreEmwe Plan %wax 1992 are available. Therefore, the population of this unincorporated service area cannot be predicted as reliably as the future population within city boundaries. Table 4.6,Water Demand Projections City of Okeechobee Service Area 1989 1995 2000 Avg. Daily Flow (MGD) 114 2.21 2.29 Percent of Capacity 74.4 45.3 4.6.8 Source Central Florida Regional Planning Council Because county customers comprise such a large part of the use of the city's water treatment facility, there is a critical need to make some kind of estimate of future service population, including residents of unincorporated areas. In solving this problem, it was necessary to assume that this number would grow at the same rate as city population. Using the city's Public Works Department's population standard of 2.2 persons for each of the 3,887 connections, it is apparent that there are 8,551 city and non-city residents using the city-owned facilities for distributing potable water. An additional factor to be considered is the Okeechobee Beach Water Association (OBWA), an independent distribution system which purchases treated water from the city. OBWA's standard of 2.7 persons per connection, multiplied by 3,113 connections, yields an estimate of 8,405 persons using city water in addition to those on the city system. The total number of area residents using the city's water supplies is estimated to be 16,956. This number represents approximately 3.42 times the population of the city itself, and this ratio is assumed to hold steady through the planning period (this assumption is equivalent to reserving approximately 30% of total capacity for the city). Hence, city population figures for 1995 and 2000 are multiplied by 3.42 to indicate future service area populations. These estimates are then multiplied by level of service (126 g/c/d) to predict future water demand. Conservation As central and southern Florida continue to experience water shortages due to rising populations and diminishing supplies, conservation has become an important concern in the area of public policy. The State Comprehensive Plan (Ch. 187, F.S.), the Florida State Water Use Plan (Dept. of Environmental Regulation, 1986) and the Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan (Central Florida Regional Planning Council, 1987) all encourage the protection of potable water sources and the reduction of per capita use. Objective 8, presented in the Goals, Objectives and Policies document,states that the city will reduce its per-capita water consumption by 10% by the year 2000. Conservation could play an important role in maintaining water quality. Elevated phosphorus levels and 101 s_sow—Mama ary of Otoodaotee campr .ePim Maindi 1991 bacterial concentrations have been noted in the north end of the lake, and excess water use aggravates these problems. Some reduction in water use may be achieved merely through routine maintenance and repair of the distribution system, such as fixing any leaks in water lines or joints, and by ensuring that all water meters are functioning properly. The city already encourages conservation of water through a 25% surcharge on residential water use in excess of 15,000 gallons per month. An additional strategy is to require water-saving measures in new development through the amendment of building codes and other appropriate regulations. Municipal Water Wells The city is considering establishing public supply wells as a means of meeting its increasing water needs. The proposal, currently under review by the South Florida Water Management District, would involve pumping approximately 2.0 MGD on city-owned property immediately west of Douglas Park. One issue to be addressed in the District's analysis of the city's permit application is whether the aquifer can meet the demand to be placed on it by the new facility on a continuing basis. A preliminary engineering study commissioned by the city indicates that the proposed use of wells as a public water supply is feasible. Expected to be in use by early 1993, the wells would supplement, rather than replace, the existing treatment facility which draws water from Lake Okeechobee. Use of groundwater is favored over increased lake withdrawals because groundwater is more consistent in quality than surface water, and requires less treatment. Also, for technical reasons, it is more cost-effective for the city to build a new treatment plant at the wellfield site than to expand the existing lakeside facility. r.rr' Although the specific locations of the wells have been proposed to SFWMD, final approval of these sites has not yet been granted. As soon as possible after the sites have been approved, the city should assist and cooperate with SFWMD in identifying the cones of influence for its municipal wells, or undertake a study on its own if funding is available. Within these areas,which will have a tremendous impact on the quality of the city's drinking water supplies, land uses must be regulated so as to prohibit activities and development types which could contaminate or reduce the supply of water being withdrawn from the wells. Since the wellfield property is located adjacent to the city boundary, coordination with Okeechobee County may be necessary to ensure that adequate regulatory mechanisms are in effect on all sides of the wells. Several features of the city's comprehensive plan address groundwater protection. For example, Policy 5.3 of the Future Land Use Element requires the city to establish development standards for wellfield protection zones through its land development regulations. These standards will serve the following functions: • regulate the use, handling, production and storage of regulated substances; • prohibit new underground fuel and other hazardous chemicals within these areas; • require existing facilities to demonstrate that adequate technology is being employed on- site to isolate the facility from the water supply, and err ` 102 Smog se-.r- G,d Okse tsobee Comprebmwe elan Mash 1992 • require that future wellfield protection zones which are relatively undeveloped will be planned for low density and intensity land uses. *Il.. In addition to these regulations, an Environmental Site Review process (see Future Land Use Policy 2.2) will be established which will evaluate a proposed development in terms of the characteristics of the individual site, and allow the city to condition development approval on whatever measures are necessary to ensure the conservation and preservation of natural resources. Protection of groundwater quality is specifically named as an objective of the process. Drainage As has been mentioned earlier, most of the city's drainage facilities consist of swales and ditches,which may not be adequate to serve projected growth. Therefore, the drainage system should be expanded as much as possible. The primary concerns relating to drainage are (1) that the conveyance system be adequate in size to prevent flooding in all but the most severe weather events; and (2) that erosion and nonpoint-source water pollution be minimized. The best way to address these concerns is through a comprehensive stormwater management strategy ensuring that new development will not increase the volume, flow rate or pollutant loading of runoff as compared to pre-development conditions. Design Standards This situation is achieved by establishing a uniform set of design standards and procedures applied to all new development through the City's development review process, *`"' then ensuring adequate maintenance of system components once they are constructed. The typical design standard used by most localities in Florida is the 25-year storm of 24-hour duration. This is the most intense storm which would be predicted on a statistical basis to occur in a 25-year period, with all rainfall received within a one-day time span. This design event establishes an amount and rate of flow which the drainage system would be engineered to accept without causing flooding or environmental damage. Unfortunately, there is insufficient data relating to runoff and stormwater facilities to determine accurately the capacity of the city's drainage system. in contrast to the situation for potable water, sanitary sewer and solid waste facilities, the "capacity per unit demand" concept of level of service is not applicable to stormwater management. However, the City of Okeechobee abides by Chapter 17-25 of DER's rules for the discharge of stormwater, and has incorporated them into its required level of service for drainage. This level of service, expressed in Policies 1.1 and 1.5 of this element, reads as follows: Stormwater treatment and disposal facilities shall be designed for a 25-year storm event of 24-hour duration. Such facilities shall meet the design and performance standards established in Section 17-25.025, F.A.C. The first inch of stormwater runoff shall be treated on-site, pursuant to Section 17-3.051, FAG Stormwater discharge facilities shall be designed such that the receiving water body shall not be degraded below minimum conditions necessary to ``i 103 Sweaty Samar—Hams Cory d ae.rem..deem...Plan March 1991 assure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification as established in Chapter 17-3, F.A.C. These standards shall apply to all development and redevelopment. rrrf� Because of the scarcity of information regarding capacities, deficiencies and needed improvements in the city's existing drainage system, the above standard has been adopted on an interim basis. As written, the standard represents an average set of conditions which could be found in many locations throughout the state. However, the city's individual needs may be different. For example, it could be appropriate to require a greater storage capacity than that needed for the 25-year storm event, or more stringent design standards than those established in Chapter 17-3, F.A.C. to protect the quality of receiving waters; these factors are not presently known. Prior to establishing a permanent level of service, the city must undertake and complete a comprehensive stormwater management study to determine what drainage facilities and standards are appropriate for the City of Okeechobee. Information requirements to be addressed in the study are set forth in 9J-5.011, F.A.C., and include the following: • design capacity; • current level of service; • existing deficiencies; and • major natural drainage features. Possible outside sources of funding for the study include the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department of Transportation. When revenue sources have been identified, the city will budget the funds and amend its 5-Year Schedule of Capital *00 Improvements to reflect the study. After completion of the study, the capital improvements schedule will be amended as appropriate to include facility improvements needed to eliminate identified deficiencies and meet future needs. Stormwater Management Techniques A wide array of techniques, both structural and nonstructural, is available to achieve the goals of stormwater management. Structural techniques emphasize detention, the slowing of runoff flow rates, and retention, the actual diversion of runoff into basins and ponds where it remains until it evaporates or filters into the ground. Detention ponds act to hold and filter runoff temporarily prior to entering Taylor Creek and other drainage pathways. Additional nonpoint source pollution control consists of small on-site retention ponds for individual subdivisions and commercial developments. The city also has contracted with a private firm for street sweeping to further reduce the potential for nonpoint source contamination of surface waters from dirt, chemicals and petroleum products present on public streets. These measures have the effect of reducing pollutant amounts and slowing down overall flow through the system, allowing harmful solids to settle out and floating pollutants such as oil to be skimmed off before the stormwater reaches its ultimate outfall in Lake Okeechobee. 104 stew sewer_Ebner= Clef or Okeechobee caeepw.bse-ye Rao Maem 1992 The nonstructural approach to stormwater management involves the use of municipal ordinances, plans and policies to encourage the preservation of natural drainage features and limiting development in areas subject to flooding. Zoning and other land development regulations which preserve the floodplain's natural function form the cornerstone of nonstructural floodwater management, as well as reducing pollution in the state's natural waterways. Some localities have gone to the extent of recreating disrupted or destroyed wetlands in order to restore this natural purification effect. The city should emphasize the passive or "soft" approach wherever possible, not only for its ecological benefits, but for the smaller public expenditures involved in maintaining natural drainage. Aside from street sweeping activities, the City of Okeechobee has no responsibility for drainage or drainage-related problems on state roads. At present, the city's zoning regulations do not address the issue of floodplain development, although the subdivision regulations provide for adequate drainage facilities in some new developments. The city still has a significant need in terms of addressing the problems of drainage and stormwater management. Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge The City of Okeechobee has a very low rate of recharge to the underlying aquifer because of the presence of relatively impermeable beds of rock and soil that prevent water from filtering down to lower levels. As a result, aquifer recharge is not as great a concern here as it is in other parts of the state. However, the city should cooperate with the South Florida Water Management District and other appropriate agencies in programs directed ®... toward the protection of any recharge areas which might affect its own water supply. The city does not currently have an aquifer or groundwater protection ordinance, but pertinent regulations will be developed as part of the land development regulation revision process. Although there are no high recharge areas in the city, it is still reasonable to give special consideration to aquifer recharge in land use planning and regulation activities. There are many practical methods of protecting groundwater quality and the recharge function which are worth considering in the land development regulations. These measures are summarized below: Performance standards:These include density limits,impervious surface coverage requirements and stormwater retention design considerations. Performance standards should mitigate the loss of natural recharge capacity due to land clearing. Aquifer protection ordinances: Where areas of particular sensitivity have been identified, the city may adopt special land use regulations applicable to those areas. Fee simple acquisition: This method requires the purchase of land by government or private agencies or individuals for preservation purposes. Once purchased, the Iand may be used for compatible uses, such as a hiking trail. New 105 cry of Otatchobse c��.K Rao Mesc6 1991 Transfer of development rights: This technique is used to transfer development from an area of known recharge to another location. Development in the new location or receiving area is permitted at a greater density than ordinarily allowed. Artificial recharge as mitigation: This method will allow development in an area of known recharge if this loss is counteracted or mitigated. Mitigation measures include injection wells, seepage basins and drainage wells. Public awareness and education of groundwater contamination threats and solutions can be the least costly and most effective part of a groundwater protection program. Providing helpful information for septic tank maintenance and the disposal of solvents, lubricants, fertilizers and pesticides are two good examples. Since aquifers are not confined to political boundaries,intergovernmental cooperation is essential. Each level of government has an appropriate role to play. The City of Okeechobee, because it has the authority to regulate land development, is well suited to manage and protect groundwater recharge areas. The city must also work with the South Florida Water Management District and other state agencies so that local and regional needs can be efficiently and effectively met. r.ro Nisro 106 Sammy serer—Bement cy d O1'— i.e.compcetcowe e+.o Muds 1992 D. LIST OF SOURCES Central Florida Regional Planning Council. 1988. Data Base for Preparation of the City- County Comprehensive Plan. Bartow, Florida. Elders, Chuck. Director of Public Works. 1989. Telephone interview December 6. Florida. Department of Environmental Regulation. 1986. 1986 State Water Use Plan. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida. Southwest Florida Water Management District. June 1989. Groundwater Supply Protection, Technical Information Planning Series 89-1. Brooksville, Florida. Fortner, Landon C. Public Utilities Director. City of Okeechobee. 1989. Telephone interview December 14. Frederick Bell Consulting Engineers, Inc. April 1977. 201 Facilities Plan Prepared for Okeechobee County and Okeechobee City, Florida. Miami, Florida. Helton, Shelby. Okeechobee Beach Water Association. 1989. Telephone interview December 14. Stratton, William. Okeechobee Public Utilities Department. 1989. Telephone interviews December 6 and 14. Reese, William. Engineering consultant. 1991. Telephone interview March 26. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service. September 1971. Soil Survey. Okeechobee County, Florida. Washington, D.C. Yeomans, Larry. Okeechobee County Landfill Superintendent. 1989. Telephone interview December 14. w.. 107 Sammy scour—es.mmt Col Otarcbotes Camprebensw PI= Sirereb 1991 ( ( SEWER SERVICE AREA CITY OF OKEECHOBEE tt I immsai 7 ,; illu..1 a 04 • A1.1114,,, =j I. ,s .". • • amj�j i n ;. _ ___ _ _ _ ___I ■ III■■ ■■ ■. 17p❑1111 ■ . ■ ■I❑U❑117Yi1❑C =- -----7 i I_ ( II 1 II - 1.1• 11.001,101:1-• 11❑=■ ■ II liI■ glimur c■I 1• ■� n •❑1t111PIII= ` ■ ■l1l1I II' ' mot! ' , w�1MIY1lw ■ �_ I E D� - 1: 1��1■1■.■II ■ . �. IiiuIJiUIJ! 5L.. ■`t ■ ■ Y71 � 1'1:■ rll � 1 ■ v� b,'..,. .. .. ..I _ _ . - , . :____....,. , r • m 71 1_ -.■ ].■ Din. ❑ 1 ,, 11:11 I� i IMO :i �r ill I . 1IHIFIIIIUII1II _ __- ; EL I I I I _ iiiii:iiiiiiiIliIIa8Eu i { ( - MAP 4.1 P __ _ .....% .--",,,..^-—--s-,-..r1w.0,--•—..--..--,_.-......,--,—,-,-- _ ___ ___ __ ____ __ ___ __ __. __________ _________ _ _____ ____ _ _______ ____ _ _ WATER SERVICE AREA , .14CITY OF OKEECHOBEE MIMI , I _____ I . r — siE: .'.....441 i . itani. : mi... .. , i unik 11--- ili - Ili1111 / irl111111111111111111111 ,11111ffluSimili . 44S ill111111111.011111M1111111111. .. I 1 1 111 E • illilliMillir111-11111. L.._FL 11..1H111 = =.Aiii milimiliiiu 11 OWN Mb all LI I II MAI • I - -—1 ‹. : 111111E1n 111E11 :..111n11 [ 1 HI I:1 11111,11.114111 111•111:1:11111121_n■ 1111111111110 ;MEW filLII III, 11,-.11 II: • 1111111111-7. -1111111H1 111111mIri'rlyillillimkillifILMr: nruiligirlrim oignimpinipfillg _AI _All-NM JIMMIE ,"'"': I : 111111111111116111 =.111111111111111111111111 Ilista' EIJI . . 1 ailmal IAfirwriii T11,:i Ail Niii■IIMIllbr I 1 1 NI IWIINE • Piiiii—rei 1 —rl . .„ „ „ „:„..., , „ „, ,, _ . . . . . . .r.:—., ,„„...,, ,,, . ,..... ...,...4.9„ . . .. .,._ . . .,. . ,,,,, „ ,„ ,,„ , „ . , „ .z. . ii ... ,, , . , i :: : 1 s,.., :,..... . . , i , ., ., ii .",. . . „ _ • I I .. I.Now.0. Oa..MN....id 1.••••amm• %wee : Mr 4■•■•■•••• MAP 4.2 }' OKEECHOBEE COUNTY URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREA ( from Okeechobee County Future Land Use Map. . ,!PI r II ,a10,4 ___ i '!w 411111 tittllipllii___ 1. %AI El � , i r 11102111-.X2.1:MU 15� :;�� ' J! jj ■r r r., , ` / 1 Co(•11511B i E ti (i) , 0 ' Q \,. . 11 1 / 7 I g v 1 , \ i alij ....,,.. ( . -I e l•\ , . . ,....,...., I• •\ , . . • .. c•. • „.-------- .- N,.. `\ =-1'� LAKE OKEECHOBEE ' . - \ ill / D // _ C, ` n O 7� O G . i. \ M . A 1,1,11,11114,4,.. o .s � i.s 2____„..,:.„, -<0• ii• . . . . . SCALE IN MILES Prepared by. Central Florida Regional Planning Council 1 _ Source: Okeechobee County Future Land Use Mop a \II. . MAP 4.3 i , Conservation Element L TABLE OF CONTENTS • V. CONSERVATION ELEMENT 117 A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 117 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 117 Surface Water Bodies 118 Wetlands 119 Floodplains 121 Commercially Valuable Minerals 121 Vegetative Communities, Fisheries, Marine Habitats and Wildlife 121 Conservation and Protection of All Ecological Communities 123 Natural Areas Network 123 Soil Erosion Problems 124 Pollution Problems 124 Species Listed as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern 124 Current and Projected Water Needs 124 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 128 Water Conservation 128 Air Quality 129 D. LIST OF SOURCES 130 Nur LIST OF TABLES Table 5.1, 1980 Potable Water Use 125 Table 5.2, 1985 Potable Water Use 125 Table 5.3, 1985 Water Use by Category 126 Table 5.4, Okeechobee County Agriculture 1985 Acreage 126 Table 5.5, Public Water Facility Projected Water Use: 1985-1994 127 Table 5.6, Total Projected Water Demand 128 LIST OF MAPS Map 5.1, Upper Kissimmee River Water Quality 133 Map 5.2, Lower Kissimmee River Water Quality 135 Map 5.3, Lake Okeechobee Water Quality 137 Map 5.4, Wetland and Deepwater Habitats, Okeechobee County 139 Map 5.5, Wetlands, City of Okeechobee 141 �• 115 Coosa vatieu Elemece cry of Okeechobee comprehmme PSan March 1991 V. CONSERVATION ELEMENT A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT Nraw According to Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., conservation uses refer to "activities within land areas designated for the purpose of conserving or protecting natural resources or environmental quality and includes areas designated for such purposes as flood control, protection of quality or quantity of groundwater or surface water, floodplain management, fisheries management, or protection of vegetative communities or wildlife habitats." The purpose of this element is to analyze the City of Okeechobee's existing natural resources and determine future conservation requirements. The proposed goals, objectives, and policies are intended to contribute to the protection and maintenance of natural resources and natural systems within the City of Okeechobee. This element is structured to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The State of Florida has mandated that each local government prepare a conservation element to promote the conservation, use and protection of natural resources. The Conservation Element is set forth in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis C. Issues and Recommendations In addition to the above referenced narrative, maps and other graphics of relevance are included. B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS The use and/or preservation of natural resources is largely controlled by economic and political concerns. Effective conservation efforts result in the wise use of resources for the maximum benefit of the city's residents. Public awareness of the importance of natural resources is one of the first steps in developing programs targeting their preservation. While this element specifically addresses the City of Okeechobee, it also includes discussion of natural resources to be found in unincorporated Okeechobee County. Most natural resources having economic and recreational value are outside the city limits and therefore must be considered jointly with those lying within the city's jurisdiction. Natural systems do not recognize political boundaries and likewise are available to all residents of the Okeechobee community, regardless of where they live. Now 117 eooaenu;en Sao= O y c otsemoeee compceaeoaam e,ao Man*1991 Surface Water Bodies Taylor Creek is the only significant surface water body within the City of Okeechobee. Rising from small tributaries in the central part of the county, it flows southward through the eastern half of the city and then into Lake Okeechobee. Much of Taylor Creek's course through the city is channelized, and a significant amount of its flow is diverted around the city by the L-63(N) Canal, meeting the creek at a point 1.5 miles north of the city limits. Water quality is a problem, as the loss of wetlands has impaired natural purification processes. Also, Taylor Creek has been identified as a major contributor of phosphorus into Lake Okeechobee due to agricultural activities within its basin. The city's impacts on pollutant loading in Taylor Creek have not been documented; however, urban runoff, carrying oil, fertilizers and various other chemicals, presumably has a substantial effect on the creek's water quality. Adding to the problem are a proliferation of septic tanks in the city, and a high water table, which impairs the ability of the wastewater treatment plant to dispose of effluent through spray irrigation. The only river in proximity to the City of Okeechobee is the Kissimmee River, which originates near Orlando, in Orange County. The headwaters of the Kissimmee River, made up of Shingle Creek and Reedy Creek, are sluggish streams that travel through swampy land emptying into Lake Tohopekaliga and then Cypress Lake. The river then continues southward through two more lakes and 150 miles of rangeland, agricultural lands and wetlands to its mouth at Lake Okeechobee. The Arbuckle Creek drainage area, forming the western edge of the Kissimmee River basin, begins near Reedy Lake in Polk County. This ,mo lake drains through Reedy Creek and Livingston Creek to Lake Arbuckle southward to Lake Istokpoga. The Istokpoga Canal connects Lake Istokpoga to the Kissimmee River 35 miles above Lake Okeechobee. Several tributaries to the Kissimmee River, and other streams, including Taylor Creek and Nubbin Slough, also flow through Okeechobee County. Water quality in the Kissimmee River has been degraded by sewage treatment plant discharges and urban/agricultural runoff in the Orlando area. Structural changes in the river itself have had a negative impact on the lower portion of the river. From Lake Kissimmee to Lake Okeechobee, the Kissimmee River is a deep channel with little or no floodplain as a result of a channelization project by the Army Corps of Engineers. Although the water quality in the channel does not appear to be poor, nutrient-rich runoff from agricultural and rangeland areas flows quickly through the river to Lake Okeechobee and aggravates eutrophication problems there. Recent efforts to restore parts of the river to its natural, meandering course have shown a degree of success. Efforts to restore the rest of the lower Kissimmee River are continuing. Maps 5.1 (page 133) and 5.2 (page 135) indicate average overall water quality for the upper and lower Kissimmee River basin. •■rrr 118 Cmire.00s deems Cry d Otaothober Campee8ermwe Pbo Mardi MI There are no lakes in the City of Okeechobee, although Lake Okeechobee, which forms the County's southern boundary, is nearby. Lake Okeechobee encompasses 727 square miles. The lake receives drainage from numerous sources in the Kissimmee River .., basin,including the Kissimmee River, Indian Prairie Canal, Fisheating Creek, and the Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough area. The primary land use adjacent to the northeast edge of the lake is dairy farming. Water quality problems in the north end of the lake include elevated phosphorus and coliform concentrations, and in the south part of the lake increased nutrients and pesticide problems are caused by backpumping. Consequently, in different locations and different seasons, the lake receives varying amounts and types of pollution. Map 5.3 (page 137) indicates average overall water quality of Lake Okeechobee. Wetlands Taylor Creek historically has been subject to flooding, and once generated a substantial system of wetlands in southern Okeechobee County. However, an extensive channeli7ntion effort and the digging of the L-63(N) Canal has turned the creek into what amounts to a conveyance system for stormwater. Remaining wetlands within the City of Okeechobee are isolated and sparse in nature, and are generally characterized as temporarily or seasonally flooded (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Wetlands Inventory). Although minimally present in the city, wetlands are relatively plentiful in Okeechobee County and are generally undisturbed. They support a variety of plant and animal life, as can be seen in the discussion following. The following analysis was taken from Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, prepared by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service in 1979: Wetlands are generally defined as Iands where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining the nature of soil development and the type of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface. The single feature that most wetlands share is soil or substrate that is at least periodically saturated with or covered by water. The water creates severe physiological problems for all plants and animals except those that are adapted for life in water or saturated soil. Of the five major wetlands systems(Marine,Estuarine,Riverine,Lacustrine,and Palustrine), three are present in Okeechobee County. The Riverine System is defined as including all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channeL A channel is an open conduit,either naturally or artificially created,which periodically or continuously contains moving water,or which forms a connecting link between two bodies of standing water. Nor 119 Comarvahoo Sams Cry of O —''."-- M rch i991 The Kissimmee River and its floodplain would be . . . classified as part of th e Riverine e S Ys to m Th e river • Wetlands Map bottom is composed primarily of sand and mud, constituting an unconsolidated bottom. The shore ,taro Map 5.5 at the end of this element shows wetlands aieas ::<:'.f: is also composed of unconsolidated materials as-identified.,by the,US..Department of:the;Interior;: National Wetlands Invento NWI.ma use a iem of ;.: including sand, mud, organic materials, and some - letters and numbera io rtc*ify-and describewetlands and;:; vegetation. The dominant species supported by ab Eii'M.e 1 this system include the mayfly,freshwater mollusk, the same systctn:has been used is talc element:; F::; :.• the.class eat on oosi cs o tt ee:letters;::a one gif sewage worm, crayfish,cocklebur,and horse tail. ' defined as including System is The Lacustrine s I1�c fi at letta.;ridic$ies.the geaerat caiegory Th L system,. i:e, Palustrine; I aarstrine,:Riveriae:.._ :Most. permanently flooded lakes and reservoirs, wetlands in tae City of Okeechobee are of the Palustrine_;;` intermittent lakes, and tidal lakes. Where a river variety:`.::` :`'=» >:`":` enters a lake, such as the Kissimmee River • The next two leuers.aad a numbertndia[a the class and :: . emptying into Lake Okeechobee, the extension of subclass.:within:;the.:wetlands. system. For Palusirine-..::: the Lacustrine shoreline forms the Riverine- Lacustrine bounds Lake Okeechobee and its wetlands,.these areas follows:- boundary. shoreline would be classified as part of the t7B a Uacousot;dated Bottom Lacustrine system. The lake has a bed of aquatic t.••Cobble-gravel moss,algal,rooted vascular vegetation and floating 2..:sand vegetation. The lakeshore is primarily composed 4.` . • . of unconsolidated materials including sand, mud,organic organic materials, and vegetation. The dominant = Aquatic Bed species supported by this system include stonewort, al&g: moss, widgeon grass, duckweed, leech, freshwater 2:"aquatic moss 3.•rooted vascular mollusk, pond snail, midge larvae, and goosefoot. 4. floating vascular The Palr.strine System is defined as including EM, Emergent vegetated wetlands traditionally referred to as 2. persistent marsh, swamp, bog, fen, and prairie. These types 2. non-persistent of wetlands are found throughout the United SS =Scrub-shrub States. This category also includes permanent or 1. broad-leaf broad—leaf deciduous intermittent ponds. This type of wetland supports 2. needle-leaf deciduous a variety of plant and animal life depending upon FO - Forested the characteristics of the wetland area. 1.. broad-leaf deciduous 2. needle-leaf deciduous Map 5.4 (page 139) identifies wetland and 4: evergreen deepwater habitats in Okeechobee County. S. dead Map 5.5 (page 141) identifies wetland areas 6. deciduous within the City of Okeechobee. The final letter of the code,which may not be present in all cases, is it modifier which denotes the degree or frequency of.flooding In the wetland. These are as follows Floodplains A .Temporarily Flooded C..Seasonally Flooded F Semfpermaneatly Flooded The City of Okeechobee is protected from G=Intermittently Exposed most flooding situations by the L63(N) H=Permanently Flooded Canal, which diverts water from Taylor Creek directly into Lake Okeechobee, bypassing the city. Because the flooding 120 c n.ay.om Mem= Ca!of otoe=coceprebm:=Plan Vatdt 1992 danger has largely been eliminated, the city does not participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, and no Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is available to identify flood prone areas. Areas historically subject to flooding can be roughly identified by soil types which indicate frequently wet conditions. Future development on properties which may once have been subject to flooding will be guided by the Environmental Site Review process (see Future Land Use Element) and other conservation-related policies. Commercially Valuable Minerals The only mineral resources noted in or near the City of Okeechobee are sand and sand with clay and kaolin. Vegetative Communities, Fisheries, Marine Habitats and Wildlife The Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI), a joint program of the Florida Department of Natural Resources and private, non-profit funding, has developed and classified 81 natural communities that have been identified as collectively constituting the original, natural biological associations of Florida. A natural community is described, by the FNAI, as "a distinct and reoccurring assemblage of populations of plants, animals, and fungi naturally associated with each other and their environment." Natural communities are characterized and defined by a combination of appearance, vegetation structure and composition, topography, and soils. They are named for their most characteristic biological or physical feature. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Commission has identified five major upland vegetative y- communities within the city. The identified communities are Dry Prairies, Pinelands, Xeric Oak Scrub, Mixed Hardwood Pine Forests, and Hardwood Hammocks and Forests. A brief discussion of the major characteristics of each of these communities is included as follows: a. Dry Prairies Dry prairies are large native grass and shrublands occurring on very flat terrain interspersed with scattered cypress domes and strands, bayheads, isolated freshwater marshes, and hardwood hammocks. This community is characterized by many species of grasses,sedges,herbs,and shrubs,including saw palmetto,fetterbush,staggerbush,tar flower, gailberry, blueberry, wiregrass, carpet grasses, and various bluestems. Many of these areas have been converted to improved pasture. In central and south Florida, palmetto prairies,which consist of former pine flatwoods where the overstory trees have been thinned or removed, are also included in this category. These sites contain highly scattered pines which cover less than 10 to 15 percent of an area. b. Pinelands The Pinelands category includes north and south Florida pine flatwoods,south Florida pine rocklands, and commercial pine plantations. Pine flatwoods occur on flat sandy terrain where the overstory is characterized by longleaf pine, slash pine, or pond pine. Generally,flatwoods dominated by longleaf pine occur on well-drained sites,while pond pine is found in poorly drained areas, and slash pine occupies intermediate or 121 caaaavadoo Elmore Cky d Oteachable Ca lapiaemrwe Pb,o March 1991 moderately moist areas. The understory and groundcover within these three communities are somewhat similar and include several common species such as saw palmetto, gallberry, wax myrtle, and a wide variety of grasses and herbs. Generally wiregrass and runner oak dominate longleaf pine sites, fetterbush and bay trees are NIS found in pond pine areas,while saw palmetto,gallberry, and rusty lyonia occupy slash pine flatwoods sites. Cypress domes,bayheads,titi swamps,and freshwater marshes are commonly interspersed in isolated depressions throughout this community type,and fire is a major disturbance factor. Scrubby flatwoods is another pineland type which occurs on drier ridges. Longleaf pine or slash pine dominate the overstory, while the groundcover is similar to the xeric oak scrub community. c. Xeric Oak Scrub Xeric oack scrub is a xeric hardwood community typically consisting of clumped patches of low growing oaks interspersed with bare areas of white sand. This community occurs on areas of deep, well-washed, sterile sands, and it is the same understory complex of scrubby oaks and other ground cover species that occurs in the sand pine scrub community. This condition frequently occurs when the short time periods between severe fires results in the complete removal of sand pine as an overstory species. The xeric oak scrub community is dominated by myrtle oak, Chapman's oak,sand-live oak, scrub holly, scrub plum,scrub hickory, rosemary, and saw palmetto. Fire is important in setting back plant succession and maintaining viable oak scrubs. cL Mixed Hardwood Pine Forests This community is the southern extension of the Piedmont southern mixed hardwoods. Younger stands may be predominantly pines, while a complex of various hardwoods become co-dominants as the system matures over time through plant succession. The overstory consist of shortleaf and loblolly pine, American beech, mockernut hickory, southern red oak, water oak, American holly, and dogwood. Also included in this category are other upland forests that occur statewide which contain a mixture of conifers and hardwoods as the co-dominant overstory component. These communities contain longleaf pine, slash pine, and loblolly pine in mixed association with live oak, laurel oak, and water oak, together with other hardwood species characteristic of the upland hardwood hammocks and forests class. e. Hardwood Hammocks and Forests This class includes the major upland hardwood associations that occur statewide on fairly rich sandy soils. Variations in species compositions,and the local or spatial distributions of these communities are due in part to differences in soil moisture regimes, soil type, and geographic location within the State. The major variations within this association are xeric hammocks and live oak or cabbage palm hammocks. Xeric hammocks occur on deep, well-drained, sandy soils where fire has been absent for long periods of time. These open,dry hammocks contain live oak,sand live oak,bluejack oak,blackjack oak, southern red oak, sand post oak, and pignut hickory. Live oak and cabbage palm hammocks are often found bordering large lakes and rivers. Conservation and Protection of All Ecological Communities Protection of natural habitats is vital in insuring the future of many rare species of plants and animals. Often times development takes precedence and natural communities 122 cos.v.Om Bement Car of Otma,oeee compreamire Pan Marta 1992 are destroyed with little thought to the long-term impacts on the plants and animals of that community. Disturbance and destruction of ecological communities are the primary causes for the decline and loss of plant and animal species. It is imperative that local officials realize the impacts future development will have on threatened or endangered species and make decisions that give adequate consideration to the protection and preservation of those species. The city should recommend in the Iand development regulations, conservation and protection provisions such as: 1. preserve the most sensitive portions of the community; 2. require developers to provide a development plan which promotes clustering of structures away from sensitive portions of the community associations; 3. discourage the fragmentation of large community associations. 4. require new developments to provide buffers adjacent to ecological communities; and 5. require sustaining management programs to restore affected disturbed parts. Natural Areas Network A natural areas network would enhance the movement of wildlife within the area, from the headwaters of Taylor Creek, through the city and south to Lake Okeechobee. A management plan should be developed in coordination with Okeechobee County to guide future acquisitions, develop strategies to link natural areas, and establish coordination and support from private landowners and governmental agencies. The city and the county could Now use several methods, such as fee simple purchases, transfer of development rights, and conservation easements, for the maintenance of the network. Also, cooperative efforts with Iandowners should be pursued to encourage voluntary protection of the natural area network. Adjacent land uses should be specially regulated to ensure that low-intensity activities border the natural areas network_ Soil Erosion Problems According to the Okeechobee County Soil Conservation Service, there are no areas of severe soil erosion in the city. This is due primarily to the flat terrain and dense surface vegetation found in undeveloped areas. Soil erosion sometimes occurs, however, when land is cleared for development or agricultural purposes and left without surface vegetation for extended time periods or during dry, windy weather. Pollution Problems The quality of water resources for Okeechobee County was discussed extensively earlier in this element. The air quality for the Central Florida region, of which the City of Okeechobee is a part, is "considered to be attainment or unclassifiable for all criteria air pollutant currently regulated..." (Central Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, p. II- 123 caoaavat;m Semas City d oteeeobe.comprebeow.Moo Math 1991 171). The Regional P oli cv Plan a nd l !d F n n o t d e a we v er t ha t mos t of the Ce n teao region has no predicted air quality problems for the immediate future. Fisberks S tted Common Species Listed as Endangered, Threatened, ............................................. ........ mm > : Comm or of Special Concern > co w to r an and Freshwater a Florida Game The Th Fl : :'emoafh bass Co Fish Commission compiled ed a listing of 1 g endangered and potentially endangered <'iii a s cuir Commo". e tember i on snook s fauna and flora in Florida in S p p� 1986. The box on the right side of this Special concern g page lists the species and classifications ;: >All ga o Species oc. ,. located in the City of Okeechobee. Special�O°"� Eastern indigo snake Threatened Current and Projected Water Needs Gopher turtle Species of Special Concern The South Florida Water • : Everglade mink Threatened Management District, which serves the Manatee Threatened majority of Okeechobee County (62,720 . acres in the northeastern section of the Round-tailed muskrat Species of special Concerti county are in the St. Johns Water Threatened Management District), has prepared '' American kestrel background data on actual water use, and ter$ Threatened vaile population and per capita estimates for Snail kite Fnrtangered 1980 and 1985. Tables 5.1 - 5.6 indicate the Great white met Species of sources and consumption of water for these Special COncern two time frames. It should be noted that Little blue heron Species of water use figures and related data provided Special Concern below predate the Comprehensive Plan by short-tailed hawk Threatened several years and were developed for other White-tailed kite Threatened purposes; therefore, they may not be of precisely consistent with equivalent figures Limpkin Species in the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Burrowing owl Species of Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and special Concern Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Florida saAahin crane Threatened Element. Bald eagle Threatened Table 5.1, 1980 Potable Water Use Wood stork Endangered • Osprey Species of Special Concern 124 vow cmrorradm FSem= ac,or cites errmpeabere Pbo Mingo 1992 Service Utility Pumpage Daily Total Area In Million Gal. Treated/ Permanent Gal. Per Max. Day/ Total sir Utility Name Population Capita Avg. Day Raw Avg. Day Annual Total Florida School for Boys 457 .09 33.1 197 N/A N/A City of Okeechobee 11,203 1.5 550.0 134 1.4 .84 Residential Self- 8,284 1.31 479.0 158 N/A N/A Supplied & SmalI Utilities County Total' 19,944 2.90 1062.1 146 * Patin cf Quay ixhx datSFWMC N/A=Nola Source: IS)Rat Vier T Da Be SIAM:)-11hit Minadm I Table 5.2, 1985 Potable Water Use Okeechobee County Total Population 24,545 Total Land & Water Area (sq. mi.) 780 SFWMD Portion Population 24,545 Land Water Area (sq. mi.) 677 Population Public Supply 13,715 Population Domestic Self Supplied 10,427 Gallons/Capita/Day 151 Acres Irrigated 4,941 Source: IS Ve 11 II EkV vEria N1sszi4 18 The SFWMD also provided a breakdown of water use by category for 1985: Table 5.3, 1985 Water Use by Category Okeechobee County (mgd) Ground Surface Total Public 0.00 1.93 1.93 Domestic 1.57 0.00 1.57 °�.► 125 Coreervauce FJ®eat Cry of Okeechobee compcetrohne Pfau Math 1991 4 Industrial 0.16 0.00 0.16 Agricultural 15.04 2.72 17.76 Thermoelectric 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 16.77 4.65 21.42 Agricultural irrigation accounts for 12.96 mgd water consumption. Table 5.4 indicates the water use for 1985 acreage by the irrigation system type. Table 5.4, Okeechobee County Agriculture 1985 Acreage by Irrigation System Type Irrigated Low Water Use Crop Type Acres Sprinkler Flood Volume (mgd) Cabbage 0 0 0 0 0.00 Cucumbers 0 0 0 0 0.00 Peppers 0 0 0 0 0.00 Potatoes 0 0 0 0 0.00 Tomatoes 0 0 0 0 0.00 Sweet Corn 0 0 0 0 0.00 Miscellaneous Vegetables 50 0 50 0 0.04 Citrus 2944 270 226 244.8 8.29 Strawberries 0 0 0 0 0.00 Watermelons 200 0 200 0 0.22 Miscellaneous Fruit 0 0 0 0 0.00 Field Com 0 0 0 0 0.00 Rice 0 0 0 0 0.00 Sorghum 400 0 400 0 0.54 Soybeans 0 0 0 0 0.'00 Sugar Cane 0 0 0 0 0.00 Miscellaneous Grains 200 0 200 0 0.40 Flower & Foliage 0 0 0 0 0.00 Woody Ornamentals 125 0 125 0 0.65 Improved Pasture 262 0 262 0 0.25 Sod 660 260 400 0 2.34 ~ Turf 100 100 0 0 0.23 . Total 4941 630 1863 2448 12.96 126 r•rr' coo.eer.e;oo Element Cry or Okee boeee Coespreboome Plan Mae*1991 Based on estimated service area population, the City of Okeechobee has projected water use through 1994. Table 5.5, following, outlines these projections. w.. Table 5.5, Public Water Facility Projected Water Use: 1985-1994 City of Okeechobee - Okeechobee County Projected Number of Total Average Maximum Service Area Units* Annual Day Day Year Population (Cumulative) (MG) (MGD) (MGD) 1985 19,389 6,463 708 1.939 288 1986 20,799 6,933 761 2.08 3.10 1987 22,401 7,467 818 224 3.33 1988 24,099 8,033 880 2.41 3.60 1989 26,001 8,667 946 2.60 327 1990 27,999 9,333 1,017 280 4.16 1991 30,000 10,000 1,093 3.00 4.47 1992 32,301 10,767 1,175 3.23 4.80 1993 34,701 11,567 1,263 3.47 5.16 1994 37,299 12,433 1,358 3.73 5.55 Source: South Florida Water Management District, Utility Permit Applications, August, 1987 w Using a nationally accepted standard of 150 gallons per day per person, estimated water demand for Okeechobee County through 2000 is as follows: Table 5.6, Total Projected Water Demand City of Okeechobee - Okeechobee County I Gallons I Projected Per Day Daily Year Population Per Capita Demand 1985 25,000 150 3,750,000 1990 30,975 150 4,646,250 1995 35,855 150 5,378,250 2000 39,729 150 5,959,350 Source: University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, 1989. 'Ai. 127 cm...e ciy of oluncbo..Comprabernwe Plan Marna 1991 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS The City of Okeechobee lies within a predominantly rural county serving as host to a wide variety of plant and animal species. The wise use and careful management of these abundant resources will result in the maximum possible social and economic benefits from them. While these resources are available for the enjoyment of all area residents, the city's particular challenge is to protect those elements of the natural environment which still exist within its boundaries. Preservation of wildlife habitat and important vegetative communities can be addressed through land acquisition, development incentive programs, landscape or tree preservation ordinances, and other means. Measures to minimize urban runoff and maintain control of hazardous waste will prevent the degradation of water quality in Taylor Creek, preserving fisheries and helping to protect the city's potable water supply (Lake Okeechobee). Water Conservation The city presently encourages water conservation through a 25% surcharge on residential water use in excess of 15,000 gallons per month. Also, a policy has been adopted for reduction of per capita water use by 10% by the year 2000. Coordination and cooperation with the plans and policies of the South Florida Water Management District is critical, especially in times of severe shortage. Strategies to protect water quality and quantity will be implemented through the development review process and land development regulations. The city should coordinate water conservation programs with the county addressing public education, technical advice, and reuse of water. These programs should include the use of print media, advertising, and public service announcements on radio highlighting and advocating several water conservation strategies including, but not limited to: • creating incentives for water recycling activities • adopting incentives for household and commercial use of appliances with low water consumption rates • creating a demand for low water use appliances by publishing ratings of water use efficiency for appliances analogous to the energy efficiency ratings for electrical appliances • • encouraging homeowners and buildings/grounds managers to maintain water systems properly through timely repair of dripping faucets, broken or maladjusted sprinkler heads, etc. • installing alternatives to spray irrigation devices for lawns and grounds management such as drip or seep systems 128 rrrw' Crowned=ammo Cry of Otaethobs Comprebeews Mao Mods 1992 • encouraging the use of drought-tolerant plants according to the principles of 'txeriscaping," and demonstrating the uses of native vegetation in landscaping • .v Air Quality The City of Okeechobee is fortunate in that air pollution problems are minimal to nonexistent. The following steps should be taken to assure that negative impacts from future development are minimized. a. Emission data for new industries should be considered as part of the development review process and when issuing development orders or permits. b. Land use patterns should be compatible with a desired level of air quality. If possible, urban land uses should be buffered from stationary and linear sources of emissions with open space. Dense vegetation can be utilized in intense industrial and commercial areas. c. . Land use categories which allow hospitals, nursing homes, orphanages and recreation centers should be located away from emissions sources. 129 coon Element Ctq of Otas:obos Camp ebmws? Mandl 1991 4 • D. LIST OF SOURCES Central Florida Regional PIanning Council. 1986. Updated February, 1987. Okeechobee County Data Base for Preparation of the City-County Comprehensive Plan. Bartow, Florida. Central Florida Regional Planning Council. 1987. Central Florida Comprehensive Policy Plan. Bartow, Florida. Cutler, Susan L, et al. 1985. Exploitation, Conservation, Preservation: A Geographic Perspective on Natural Resource Use. Totowa,New Jersey:Rowman and Allanheld. Florida. Department of Community Affairs. Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. Adopted February 1986. Amended September 30, 1986. • Florida. Department of Community Affairs. Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River and Tay_ for Creek Drainage Basins. Adopted by the Kissimmee River Resource Planning and Management Committee, August 1985. Florida. Department of Natural Resources. Natural Areas Inventory. 1986. Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida. Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 1986. Official Lists of Endangered and Potentially Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida. St. Johns Water Management District. 1987. Telephone Interview. Palatka, Florida. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. 1983. 1980 Potable Water Use Data Base. West Palm Beach, Florida. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. 1989. Interim Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan for Lake Okeechobee. West Palm Beach, Florida. Florida. South Florida Water Management District. Save Our Rivers Program. 1986. Five Year Acquisition Plan. West Palm Beach, Florida. Franz, Richard. 1979-1982. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida, Volumes One-Six. Gainesville, Florida. Hand, Joe et al. Bureau of Water Quality Management. Water Quality Monitoring and Quality Assurance Section. Division of Environmental Programs. 1986. Florida Water Quality Management Assessment: 305(b) Technical Report. Tallahassee, Florida. 130 vole Qty d Okeemobac ComRrhmum Pie With 1992 National Audubon Society. 1986. Wildlife Sanctuaries Department. New York. Okeechobee County. Board of County Commissioners. 1980. Okeechobee County Comprehensive Plan. Prepared by Buchart-Horn, Inc., Engineers and Planners. Memphis, Tennessee. Okeechobee County. Soil Conservation Service. November 12, 1986. Telephone conversation. U.S. Bureau of Mines. 1956. U.S. Geological Survey. Mineral Resources and Industries of Florida. Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Department of Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Classifications of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies: 1976. 1978. Washington, D.C. 4"", 131 cm.ay.000 E]emm[ Cry of Okeechobee Compcebe we Rao M1991 KISSIMMEE RIVER BASIN (UPPER) ORLANDO AREA I ) 1 LAKE ' ` n I `— UTLER �'� . \ �t �i I' \/ f \ - 1J 1 •J. SHINGLE CR_ 37-1 \ \� 35 - 3i _Z t 1 36 3 :' 3I.5 EAST \ N. 1 4; n 2T.1 1 LAKE TOHO %,,,. 1 1 26 • 2z7 �._ST- CLOUD WWTP \ RCID* :. f 1 \ LAKE `t RE=DY: 25 'r 6• TOHOPE:�CA— ALLIGATOR p """ 1 CR. ALIGA LAKE ! 1 1 - "g- 34_5 1.�CYPRESS ! •1 LAKE =4 LAKE ,- _J 1 RUSSELL'" h 2o.i ,1 17 L 18 LAKE t - . Zi? HATCHINEHA l 6 1 14 KISSIMMEE N. 7Z 17S RIVER l AVERAGE OVERALL VATER DUALITY 1970-1987 STORET OATH RIVERS/STREAMS LAKES/ESTUARIES G003 El I 1 1 F1 a. .l.• __ _. _—._ avoR { 1- Mao location wocu '.74 --1: EPA WATER Aril) FLORIDA TROPMIC I QUALITY INDEX STATE ItroEx Souttz 1988 Florida Water Quality Assessment 303(b)Tocttnscl Report. Page 112 MAP 5.1 KISSIMMEE RIVER BASIN (LOWER) 7 \ LAKE l 4111, e .• �KISSIMMEE 42 40 \ J \ / 43 • _7 M` 10 11• \ 44 9 • — v'' 6 \ iii J / - 1 \` S9 REEDY / LAKE \/\\4 6p�, S8 •K E .../, ,, t"'1> `` s7 �i�RBUCKLE KISSIMMEE \ 62 56 a) RIVER \ 53 \ 3 l 63 ARBUCKLE 52 I CR. ' \ ... I 6< 51 \ Noire \ 68 50,1 k 11 SO .NN. 1 KISSIMMEE f \ : 68.1 ... 48 RIVER i::!_ / %. 49-2 : 1 49.1 > 1 NO - : . it I 1 49 / LAKE \ / \ 65 ISTOKPOGA \ 1 \ 66 ., 1S \ C� �! \ 67 I C-41A \ \ X 1 1 \ i I \ / \ I ` / AVERAGE OVERALL uATER DUALITY \ \ 1970-1987 STORE' DATA l \\ \ Fla. / RIv£RS/STREAnS LAKES/ESTUARIES ' ` ` -� —_ LAKE GOOD Fl I 1 OKEECHOBEE FAIR FT . Wp Location E— 1_1 room T ',' UNKNOL'N -ouree_ 1988 Florida Water Quality Assessment 305(b)Technical Report, EPA YATER AND STATE INOEx FLORIDA TROFMtIC MAP 5.2 Paac1I3 QUALITY INDEX __—______-------------------------m. LAKE OKEECHOBEE - TAYLOR CR- / •..•.....;::::."-:.; :,. NUBBIN SLOUGH / ::-*.-...--...".-....-::::. .....:::-.:.:.:.:......:-.....,... KISSIMMEE RI V ER -----......../.1:-.:;.::....:-.,:....-..1..-.:.1.:.:.:.4::..-...3-.1:.........,-..i..:-...3.......:.......:....:....:...............:........:...:.......:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.....:.....:...:.......:.:: :-. LETTUCE CR - . / 1". - :.7.--::::::-..:4:-•--:-.......- :-:::::::::::.:.:•;.::::::::::::.,.........:::::•:. i l / :::::::-:::-::::::::-::::::::::::-.:•:::::-,-.....:::;::.,:::::::::.,:::::::. , c-60 , ST LUCIE CANAL ..: .......... : : ::: :::: ::•% . . :-*/::--:.:-:::::::::-:- -.,-:---...:.:......:.;.:........-,..-.................,....... ---.., •::-:::::::.:: 5 ''...:.---::::::::-::::::::- ::::::....-:::::::::.-.-:::14.:::::..........-......................,.‘ ( ....;:.-.....-:-:-. .....-.-:-:-.:::.:-:-.:.:.::.- -..../...:.:-.:.: .:.-..:.......:.:.:./........::............‘ C-41 ••••••••••:::•;:-•-•::.•-•::::':'•::::::::':'::•::::•:::::; ;:::.:.:•:... ,..........:,.....................„.....;:.......... •. •••..•:-••••••••."'''''••••••••'"."---•.•...-........ „...........„..............................,..... \e. / ;::::::;:;-:::::':',...•:::":'•:.**:::::•:•:-.1::::".'N:-......:•:::::: ;-',-;:::::://,.......;.;•:.::::::::;•.:::::::-.:.:-",:::;:.: •••••••••%-•-"-....*:............. F I SHEATING CR. GATOR .'.::".-:---::::.::.::*.---:.::.:"-:f-.:.-::..:::::•-- ::::::%-:.::::.:::.:::-:.::. _-.:Aittl:..:p:..:..:.:g.:.:.:.:.:.:g.:.:.:.:,:. .:..:......:...:..:...::.:..:....:-.:..:.:..:...,::.-.:::.:;:::..:,:.:.:...'..;4.'..-1 SLOUGH I ..-.,.-.*..:.:-.—:...:-.::-..::.:-:-::.:.:::::.:::.:...:..,.:...-.:...-;:.-.:.:..:.:.::.-....:.—...:...:...:... I '.' -.--...-...-.,,....s 3 .../::::::::-::::::::•::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-:::::::::*: ::::::::.:::::::::->xt*::::::::::-:•:.*:.:.::::: PALM I BEACH CANAL MOORE HAVEN •-•:".....":*::::::::::::::::::::-:-..-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:::::-:-:-.:-:-:-:: ::::::::.-...-.....:.:.:-...:.:.:.....:;.:::::.;::::.- GlI .::::::::::::::::::•:::::-............::::::://.::::::::::::::::::::::::::- -:::-:::-.... ''..:::::::::::::::,:,:::.:.• / ::::::•::::::::::*??•••.:::::::::.•:•;.::::::::::::::::•:::*:::::..5.: •:::::::::::. 3.3-, .:::::::: i ••%.:".......::::::: 11 :•:-..........:-.............".".:::.:::::.:.: .:::.'-:.:. ..:.:.:-:•:::::::••• / , •••••••::-::•.........::::. ............:"...-:•::::•::::::.:.:.:,:::. :.:::::::.:....X.::::::::::.:: ..,„ CALOOSAHATCHE= —..... .....-.-.,..-.....-.-.-.-.-...-.-......-................. ...................... -1 V ER --1 —_,..I ................. . _ ■ .-.......-.7.-.-...-.............,..,........, ...____......... .".• :-:-:-:•:-:::::::::::::::::-::::::::::::::::::::::::_:::::- .::::::::::::.:: -:::_:::::::: *.:-"-:-.---.•••••-•--.----:-:::-:-:-:-:-:•:•.-.-:::: .::::::::::::: :::::::: . OK E Et C HOB EE RIM CANAL ,..., *---'-'•--* ...... •-::::-..: *-:-.*:-.. ........ / ..:.:: • BELLE GLADE 1. • MIAMI .iner" 0 CANAL ....... -... I HILLSBORO CANAL NORTH NEW RIVER 4.1..TER num-ITY CANAL 4vERAE cjvtPALL - oAtit. 1970-1987 Vogt' - t r. E51E5TuotiE5 RivERsiSTREASS ..--------- GOOD r-1 111113 F 1 a poOR E_ --3 ___--- uN .0,... ---: Kap LoCACion tt,oRIDA TROPHIC Epp, WATER A143 slAtE tROEI QuALITY INDEX MAP 5.3 Sow= 1988 Florida Water Quainy Assessment 305(b)Tectuucal Report. Page 121 LAKE OKEECHOBEE TAYLOR CR_ / ';`► NU88IN SLOUGH KISSIMMEE *'"• RIVER --``., / ' i3..:= LETTUCE CR_..*:.1%- � / t• C-40 ., • S. LUCIE CANAL —__ .5: r 4.2 C-41 FISHEATI NG CR. • GATOR . SLOUGH 1 { WEST PALM 3 EACH CANAL :j 8 MOORE HAVEN G S.1 - / CALOOSAHATCHE -TV ER �.- .1 :/ OKEECHOEEE 4•:::: • = :::-= RIM CANAL `, / • QBELLE GLADE MIAMI CANAL / HILLSBORO NORTH CANAL NEW RIVER AVERAGE OVERALL w;,tEa DUALITY CANAL 1970-19nl STORET DATA RIVERS/STRESS Lc[£SESTUARIES r cAIR ;—.=;;;;;;;;;;; F1A. POOR ��►— UHKNOYt:� „ C goA WATER ANA ►lOR1DA TROP►41C Kap LOUC1On DUALITY INDEX STATE INOEx �" Water Oualiry pg�smcac 305(b) lod+n,ca► MAP 5.3 sou 1988 Florida Page 121 s T . LUCIE COUNTY 1M AR TIN COUNTY LEGEND 1 Or r 4iillOPIIIP4*,0 .11P. 41111111P' Altdi Ilk A due 0 . .. .............. ..................... ....................... ......................... .......................... ........................... ............................... "....".•"•"..••••••••.•.•_••••• .02. FRESHWATER FORESTED ................ lir Altfigr 111rWIVV, it 6 VII FDREEESpHwWAATETRERHHAEBF:TBAATCsEOU S z 1)110 0 00, .•••••••....•.••.......••................. c.) obi ifir ............................................ .............................................. -••..- ................................................. ............... ,................ r 40111~ip 71Pir . , UPLAND RIVER 40 ARA rot it ... •1111, IrIC ......................................... Ir., •WEI■ < , .... ireAlL41131411411111b1.. g 1.1 Niliiii. V ' of Tr mrirdar hmiii. :••,:•■■••■ /lir 1110-- ... ° 1 •...........•...•••...............•.....•••.•..••.......••.•..•.........:„• .. ...„..•.••••..•.............. • .................................................................. ............................ ........................... ...................................... , it.- PAW WWII a / "I% .-. @ ..................................... ...... •------•-•----•"-.".•-"................. 4111"iiat A..._ OIP / r I rm . 4..1!Air -4-.--...:---:-..--.-1 ::::-::::-:-- • • • .......................... ..........................„.............. ..... ......................................... .......................................... . ,;„,... 1 ti ..., AdIrA 4 41,1br' # „,,,At .. ......................................... ......................................... .......................................... ........................ .:( CD>- ................................................... i-- .................................................................. m z )_. 4„, z I 410 Of _I 11 . 0 --1,. <0 Nor It It -a 1 11 et ., A ra 1 e ., • ) . •• 01 %A in•-$ Aill ..i....,.. _, , 11 ■• - d . ..... g ---....., < illiZIO V ....2 ". 0 • - ......• -4 \) W . . . . _411rwilmr411111.7110± . ::•.1. .....,7_ 40.1000000.__ „iii0.::, .7.7.*.".. 4:.... ... ........... . ......... O .. ........... v) .. 0 . .. WETLANDS AND DEEP WATER HABITATS "P 010,,k ? • 4001,,,,toji„,.,...:-::.. ..............,...........-.. 1..... e P'-‘1.4 C) OKEECHOBEE COUNTY - FLORIDA # ... 4:Nio 11): a*. AN. „. 7.. - ,..a-7..7* -•--------'-----------------.------ 4- _.1 Prepared by the 0 .5 1 2 3 4 miLES 0 CL .... ..... SOURCE: United States Fish and CENTRAL flORIDA REGIONAL "•• ...."'' Wildlife Service PLANNING COUNCIL SCA .• •••••• ." ""•" National Wetlands inventory. 1985 January 1988 LE ,,, . •............_ __ • .. ........ . .A.to_..^. . ---. •. \,.._ • MAP 5.4 1 ( WETLANDS CITY OF OKEECHOBEE I— - - PFO , PEMIA PEMIC VIII " FP& FOIC PEMIF •1- i I 1: PEMIC aa,ir PEMIA / PEMI• l l= 1 r P 41 11114L • • PSSIC � ^ • • (:;:b ` } ,- LI ... 1 ,,,,. .. PUSH Q t _ f1 E r —1 IIIII sr A.m i . o �/ 4 PEMIC ' ri PE,R ! � i. - 06C t i� L _ _J (,,,_ H 111 II 1111 ,nn ii - PFOIC- � , . . [:11,. . ...6-,--1 1.----J I I Fl . . _. . , M 1 111, Li ILIILJ _ -• fl. -. =, ' .---1--- I ; LI' 1-7-4 ... - _ 111E1 nMUIliStc---7:1 � PUBH 1 •1 71 i 111 I 1 ',l 1Q L I MI < --1 r -i . 1 NM -- - ■A 11�-- C•.if li•( • Vii_ • I -- -.. ..-• r 1 , 1 PEMIA PEMIC See text for explanation of classification system. _ •,• - PEMIC tIt i ,= P MI•• ( = _ PEMIF _•.,. - _ n I 4 a- •_.II- ••.---- ----s zs ,(•v ,f•s mer i,.__,_:_,_,) I"Elvl II . " LI wx .•.•l $1011.C1 PrgaR•►% CaNral ilald•Rgta,al Plarµp Cwc( Sa rac Na(IpRa WNarb%wate y i \**40 MAP 5.5 - Recreation and Open Space Element TABLE OF CONTENTS VI. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT 145 A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 145 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 145 Park Classifications 146 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 155 D. LIST OF SOURCES 158 LIST OF TABLES Table 6.1, Existing Recreation Sites and Facilities 147 Table 6.2, Population Guidelines for Resource-Based Outdoor Recreation Activities 149 Table 6.3, Population Guidelines for Activity-Based Outdoor Recreation Activities 150 Table 6.4, Current Demand for Activity-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 150 Table 6.5, Current Demand for Resource-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 151 Table 6.6, Year 2000 Demand for Resource-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 152 Table 6.7, Year 2000 Demand for Activity-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 152 Table 6.8, Future Demand for Resource-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 156 Table 6.9, Future Demand for Activity-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 156 LIST OF MAPS Map 6.1, Location of Recreation Facilities in Okeechobee County 159 NNW 143 ReaeaOoo and opco Spy Dame e Cary ot ogee compreboo.K elan Marctt 1991 VI. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Nvow A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT • The purpose of this Recreation and Open Space Element is to assist the City of Okeechobee in providing and protecting recreation sites and open space. This element assesses the existing recreation and open space system, analyzes future needs, and outlines goals, objectives, and policies to assist the city in providing adequate recreation and open space sites to meet public demand. This Recreation and Open Space Element has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The State of Florida has mandated that each local government prepare a recreation and open space element outlining public and private sites available for recreation use. This element is set forth in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis C. Issues and Recommendations In addition to the above referenced narrative, maps and other relevant graphics are included. B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS The population of Okeechobee County has experienced a tremendous increase (52%) between 1980 and 1990. The City of Okeechobee's population alone increased 17% during that period. As a result, the demand for greater recreational opportunities and valuable open space resources have become important issues. This element will assess current and future needs for recreation sites and facilities based on estimated recreation demand, the availability of recreation to the public, and the adequacy of existing recreation sites and facilities. Recreational planning should begin with examining the community's stock of recreational sites and facilities. In order to better understand the purposes served by the sites and facilities, it is best to first understand what characterizes some sites and facilities from others. The following is a discussion of recreational classifications. Recreational sites are frequently classified as resource-based or activity-based. Resource-based sites and facilities are centered around particular natural resources and may provide opportunities for picnicking, hiking, hunting, water sports, fishing or simply enjoying nature. Activity-based recreational sites and facilities are developed for the enjoyment of 145 Recreation sod Opts Spar Flume City ac Otadlobee Comprebecume plan Man*1991 particular activities such as basketball, baseball/softball, or football, recreational programs such as aerobics and painting, senior citizen activities, and many spectator sports. The distinction between these two types is not clear-cut since many resource-based recreation • „ , sites often contain activity-based facilities. Recreation encompasses a range of activities that can be categorized as either active or passive. Active recreational opportunities involve the user as an active participant, such as most any sport; e.g., baseball, golf, aerobics. On the other hand, passive recreational opportunities are pursued in a more leisurely manner or primarily as a spectator; e.g., nature walks, fishing, picnicking, movie-going. Some activities, such as hiking and bicycling, may be either active or passive, depending upon the effort expended. Park CIassifications Parks are areas permanently dedicated to recreational, aesthetic, educational, and/or cultural uses, and generally serve as the principal recreational sites for cities and counties. They can be used for both passive and active forms of recreation and may contain both resource- and activity-based facilities. The following is a listing of the different classifications used to define the City of Okeechobee's parks: "Mini-Park": A park of less than one acre in size; serves the population of a neighborhood and is generally accessible by walking or bicycling;generally contains landscaping,playground equipment,and/or monuments;and is used to create small'pockets'or"infills"for low impact recreational activity. "Neighborhood Park": A park containing from less than 1 acre and up to 10 acres; serves the wry population of a neighborhood and is generally accessible by walking or bicycling; generally contains more facilities than mini-parks; and may contain a mixture of various facilities,both resource- and activity-based. "Community Park': A park containing from 10 to 100 acres; serves the population of the entire city and may be reached by walking, bicycling or driving; contains a wide variety of facilities,both resource- and activity-based; and offers opportunities to participate in a wide array of activities within a particular area. "Special Park": A park building or area containing less than 5 acres: serves either a neighborhood, a group of neighborhoods or the entire city and may be reached by walking, bicycling or driving; usually characterized by one particular facility, such as a boat ramp or community center, but may be complemented by other facilities. Okeechobee County currently has a variety of both resource- and activity-based recreational sites and facilities. Table 6.1 is a listing of existing sites and facilities. Map 6.1 (page 159) indicates the generalized location of recreation sites in the county. go 146 `` Ramadan sod Open Spica Eleoect cq,or Olteacbabas cosspaebm...? Marca 1992 Table 6.1, Existing Recreation Sites and Facilities Okeechobee City/County • Area in Naar Site Name Category/Type Facilities Available Acres City-Maintained Sites and Facilities: Taylor Creek Boat Ramp' Resource-based Boat launch 2 (Special park) Park Avenue Greenbelt' Activity-based Benches 5.4 (Neighborhood park) Bandstand Tables County-Maintained Sites and Facilities: UptheGrove Beach Resource-based Swimming 3 (Special park) Picnicking Woodland Park Resource-based Undeveloped 18 Okeechobee Historical Park Activity-based Museum/Archives site 2 (Spy park) Okeechobee Racquetball' Activity-based 2 Racquetball courts 2.5 (Spy park) Okeechobee Swimming Pool' Activity-based Swimming pool 1 (Special park) Bath house Okeechobee Recreational Park' Activity-based 2 Ball fields 5 (Community park) 2 Tennis courts Picnic tables Play equipment Okeechobee Softball Complex Activity-based Ball diamond 7S (Community park) Dugouts Bleachers `ow" Okeechobee Teen Center' Activity-based Game room 32 (Special park) Meeting room Douglas Park Ballfield Activity-based Softball Geld 2 (Special park) Douglas Brown Community Center Activity-based Football Geld 8A (Special park) Baseball practice field 2 Basketball courts Play equipment Okeechobee Civic Center Activity-based 3 Shuffleboard courts 9 (Special park) BBQ pits Okeechobee Sports Complex Activity-based Pool 38 (Special park) (Baseball,soccer,racquetball facilities under construction) Bassinger Community Center Activity-based Basketball court 3.4 (Special park) BBQ pits Plaits Bluff Park Resource-based Swimming 12.41 (Community park) Boat ramp Wayside Park Resource-based Boat launch ramp 30 (Community park) Fishing Picnicking Lake Okeechobee Public Use Area Resource-based Beach 30 (Lock 7) (Regional park) Fishing pier 11 BBQ pits 10 Tables '"' 147 .oa opm sp... Cay d Otmcsobac Coraprehersve Ptao Match 1991 Area in Site Name Category/Type Facilities Available Acres School Board-Owned Sites and Facilities (Providing limited access to residents): Okeechobee Senior High School Activity-based Football stadium – Football practice field Baseball field Track 4 Tennis courts • Okeechobee Junior High School Activity-based 2 Ball fields – 4 Tennis courts Play equipment Central Elementary School• Activity-based Basketball court – Play equipment South Elementary School Activity-based Play equipment – North Elementary School Activity-based Play equipment – Everglades Elementary School Activity-based Softball field – 2 Basketball courts Play equipment 5th &6th Grade Center School' Activity-based Softball Geld – Basketball court Play equipment Seminole Elementary Softball Geld – (under construction) 2 Basketball courts Play equipment - State-Owned Sites and Facilities: Okee-Tantie Recreation Area Resource-based Boat launch 137 (Regional park) Dock facilities Camping .-r Picnicking Nubbin Slough Resource-based Boat ramp 2 (Special park) Henry Creek Resource-based Boat ramp 1 (Special per) Ramp #35 Resource-based Boat ramp 1 (Special park) Privately-Owned Sites and Facilities (providing public access): American Adventure I Activity-based 1 1 Auditorium 123 (Regional park) Recreation Center 4 Tennis courts 10 Shuffleboard courts 9-hole Golf course 2 Pools 3 BBQ pits Okeechobee Rodeo Activity-based Rodeo 4 • (Special park) Okeechobee Golf and Country Club Activity-based 9-hole Golf course 78 (Special park) Clubhouse • Facility located within city limits 148 Remmic a mod opm Spas Bent On of okesctoeee camprebereme Pt+n Marna 199Z The inventory provided in Table 6.1 indicates the majority of recreational facilities are provided at the county, school board and state levels. The City of Okeechobee's jurisdiction applies only to the Taylor Creek Boat Ramp and the Park Avenue Greenbelt. Combined, these facilities amount to less than 8 acres of recreational land. However, city residents do have access to all county- and state-maintained facilities and several school sites. Therefore, in pursuing a joint planning approach, the city may participate with the county in providing 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 can be combined. Provision of recreational facilities for future population could be achieved through inter-local agreements. Population guidelines are used to determine the amount of resources and facilities that are required to serve a given population optimally. Tables 6.2 and 6.3 indicate the population guidelines established by the Department of Natural Resources for resource and activity based sites and facilities. These guidelines were established after a careful analysis of several existing guidelines including community recreation and parks departments, the National Recreation and Park Association,and the Florida Recreation and Park Association. Table 6.2, Population Guidelines for Resource-Based Outdoor Recreation Activities Population Served Activity' Resource/Facility Minimum Maximum Median Swimming(non-pool),freshwater or saltwater Mile of beach 25,000 200,000 100,000 gor Fishing (non-boat), freshwater or saltwater 800 linear feet of pier, 2.500 10,000 5,000 shoreline,catwalk or jetty Fishing, power boating,water skiing,sailing, Boat ramp 4,300 5,000 4,700 freshwater or saltwater Camping(RV/trailcr&tent) Acre of camp area 100 25,000 5,600 Picnicking Acre of picnic area 250 2.5,000 500 Horseback riding Linear mile of equestrian trail 4,500 10,000 5.000 Bicycling Lineattini le of bicycle trail 1,000 10,000 5,000 Hiking Linear mile of hiking trail 500 10,000 6.750 Nature study Linear mile of nature trail 2.500 10,000 6.250 Source: Department of Natural Resources; Outdoor Recreation in Florida-1986. 149 �eetion mod OSpat Eleaseet Cm,of Okeechobee Comprmmwe Mao Meech 1991 Table 63, Population Guidelines for Activity-Based Outdoor Recreation Activities Population Served Activity Resource/Facility Noe Minimum Maximum Median Golf 9-hole Golf course 20,000 32,500 25,000 Golf 18-hole Golf course 25,000 65,200 50,000 Tennis Tennis court 1,000 7,500 2,000 Baseball/softball Baseball/softball field 1,500 6,000 3,000 Football/soccer Football/soccer field 4,000 15,000 4,000 Handball/racquetball Handball/racquetball court 1,000 10,000 0,000 Basketball Basketball court 1,000 5,000 5,000 Swimming (pool) Swimming pool* 1,500 25,000 8,700 Shuffleboard Shuffleboard court 700 10,000 1,000 * Based on a standard community swimming pool measuring 81 feet x 60 feet (4,860 square feet). Source: Department of Natural Resources; Outdoor Recreation in Florida-1986. The existing need for recreation sites and facilities based on current population, using the preceding population guidelines, is displayed by Tables 6.4 and 6.5. The various uses identified are not, however, unique to Okeechobee County. The activities were derived from the Department of Natural Resources, 1986 Statewide Supply of Outdoor Recreation „ne, Resources and Facilities. In order to more accurately address recreation needs, consideration has to be given to the area's unique natural resources -Lake Okeechobee and the Kissimmee River. Table 6.4, Current Demand for Activity-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 1990 City of Okeechobee Peak Population = 4,958 1990 Unincorporated Okeechobee County Peak Population = 38,380 fl DNR Maximum Required I Required 1 IActivity Population Standard for City for County Existing +/- 9-hole Golf 1 per 32,500 0.2 1.2 2 +0.6 18-hole Golf 1 per 65200 0.1 0.6 0 -0.7 Tennis 1 per 7,500 0.7 5.1 24 +18.2 . Baseball/Softball 1 per 6,000 0.8 6.4 13 +5.8 Football/Soccer 1 per 15,000 0.3 2.6 2 -0.9 Handball/Racquetball 1 per 10,000 0.5 3.8 2 -2.3 Basketball 1 per 5,000 1.0 7.7 24 +153 - imor 150 R.sm n and ope Sprat Smoot My a[Okeechobee campm*eenam plan ?iamb 1992 DNR Maximum Required Required Activity Population Standard for City for County Existing +1- - %or Swimming 1 per 25,000 0.2 1.5 8 +6.3 Shuffleboard 1 per 10,000 0.5 3.8 26 +21.7 Source: Okeechobee County, Recreation Department. Summary of Developed Recreational Facilities of Okeechobee County. October 1986. Table 6.5, Current Demand for Resource-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities 1990 City of Okeechobee Peak Population = 4,958 1990 Unincorporated Okeechobee County Peak Population = 38,380 DNR Maximum Required Required Activity Population Standard for City for County Existing +/- Freshwater/Beach 1 mile per 200,000 130 feet 1,013 feet 725 ft. -418 ft. Fishing 800 ft of shore per 397 feet 3,070 feet 20,000 ft. +16,533 ft. 10,000 Boat ramp 1 per 5,000 1 ramp 7.7 ramps 11 ramps +2.3 ramps Camping 1 acre per 25,000 0.2 acres 1.5 acres 12 acres +10.3 acres Picnicking 1 acre per 25,000 0.2 acres 1.5 acres 12 acres +103 acres Bicycling 1 mile per 10,000 0.5 miles 3.8 miles 16.2 miles +11.9 miles ow Hiking . 1 mile per 10,000 0.5 miles 3.8 miles 16.2 miles +11.9 miles Nature Study 1 mile per 10,000 0.5 miles 3.8 miles 16.2 miles +11.9 miles Source: Florida Department of Natural Resources. 1986 Statewide Supply of Outdoor Recreation Resources and Facilities. October 29, 1986. In order to estimate future recreation needs for the residents of incorporated and unincorporated Okeechobee County, projections were done for the year 2000. These projections were based primarily on the population standards identified in Section B for resource- and activity-based recreation sites and facilities. The results of these projections are displayed in Tables 6.6 and 6.7. 151 ReQeoon.v4 Opm span&max Qty d Oteschobss Cotoprebeism Pilo M4rth 1991 Table 6.6, Year 2000 Demand for Resource-Based Recreation Sites &Facilities (Based on Florida DNR Maximum Population Standard) City County Total Total rrri' Additional Additional Additional (Add'1 + Activity Needs* Needs* Needs Existing) Freshwater/beach 71 feet 670 feet 741 feet 1,466 feet Fishing -- — -- 20,000 feet Boat ramp — — — 11 ramps Camping -- -- -- 12 acres Picnicking — — — 12 acres Bicycling — — — 16.2 miles Hiking — — — 16.2 miles Nature study — — — 16.2 miles Based on population projections provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research (1989), and Florida Applied Demographics (1990). Table 6.7, Year 2000 Demand for Activity-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities (Based on Florida DNR Maximum Population Standard) City County Total Total Additional Additional Additional (Add'l + Activity Needs* Needs* Needs* Existing) ,fir 9 hole golf — — — 2 18 hole golf 0.1 0.8 1 1 Tennis — — — 24 Baseball/Softball — — — 13 Football/Soccer 0.1 0.7 i 1 3 Handball/Racquetball 0.1 1.1 2 4 Basketball — — — 24 Swimming — — — 8 Shuffleboard — — — 26 • Based on population projections provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research (1989), and Florida Applied Demographics (1990). 152 `- Roseman sod Open specs Bement Cny at Okoe bobee cmeepeeEen»Plan 1992 These projections, however, are of limited use for planning future recreation needs. Several reasons exist for these limitations. Now 1. The projections do not take into consideration user demand. Certain facilities may be of much greater local interest due to unique characteristics of the jurisdiction. For example, much undocumented information is available that a local demand for additional boat ramps has been voiced. As a result, surveys will be undertaken during the next phase of the planning process to determine user demand and identify deficiencies in this category. 2. The projections fail to take into consideration certain "special" recreation needs such as facilities for the physically or emotionally impaired. 3. Population projections fail to consider the age distribution of the locality, thus doing little to address recreational needs of the elderly or the very young. The City of Okeechobee recognizes the limitations addressed above and will undertake additional studies to more adequately address their recreation needs. The demand based on population projections and standards developed by the Florida Department of Natural Resources will be considered in determining recreation issues; however, the city will also rely heavily on information obtained from the Okeechobee County Recreation Department. Information from both sources will be used to establish the county's recreation standards and assist in addressing identified deficiencies and special needs. As a result of these limitations and the limited availability of additional data about ""'' the anticipated need for recreational facilities, some conclusions must be drawn from what is known about the county. Okeechobee County is unique in the Central Florida region because it is bounded on two sides by water — the Kissimmee River to the west and Lake Okeechobee to the south. These two natural resources provide numerous recreation opportunities. The Kissimmee River serves as Okeechobee County's western boundary and offers a number of public and private recreation facilities. There are three public boat access areas. The Plaits Bluff facility is located approximately eleven miles north of Lake Okeechobee. This facility offers boat access, bank fishing, picnicking, and camping. There is also an unimproved public access area located approximately six miles north of Lake Okeechobee. This facility offers boat access and bank fishing. The Okee-Tantie Recreation Area is located on the shores of the Kissimmee River where it empties into Lake Okeechobee. This site offers a number of facilities including boat access to both the Kissimmee River and Lake Okeechobee, bank fishing, boat and motor rentals, dock rentals, guide services, commercial services (food, beer, fishing licenses, ice), picnicking, camping, showers, potable water, and sewer hook-ups. Now 153 Raaesoo and Ops spas Element City ac Okeechobee Caa4t.bee.y.P n Maws 1991 In addition to its access to the Kissimmee River, Okeechobee County has approximately sixteen miles of shoreline on Lake Okeechobee. Public and private facilities located near the shores of the lake provide numerous opportunities for fishing and boating. The Okeechobee Park site is located near the City of Okeechobee on the north shore of the lake. It consists of approximately 10 acres of easement lands, is operated by Okeechobee County and is accessible from US 441 via an unpaved road over Hoover Dike. The site currently has picnic facilities, a large dirt parking area, a fishing pier, beach, and a boat launching area. Okeechobee Park is located on a broad, flat sandy area and provides unobstructed views of Lake Okeechobee. The area is fairly open with scattered palms in the picnic area and a dense stand of Australian pines in the boat launching area. Existing roads and parking areas are unpaved. Flooding occurs on the road to the boat launching area when lake levels are elevated. The site has no electricity, potable water, or sanitary facilities. Florida Trail Association volunteers work with state and federal agencies, as well as private landowners, to develop and maintain the Florida Trail from the Panhandle to the Everglades. Portions of the levee system around Lake Okeechobee are used as part of this continuous, cross-country trail. Nearly sixteen miles of the Florida Trail are in Okeechobee County providing opportunities for hiking. The Okissimmee Fish Camp is a private commercial facility located within one mile of Lake Okeechobee on the shore of the Kissimmee River. This facility offers boat access and bank fishing as well as fishing supplies, boat and motor rentals, and snack foods. There are also camping and picnic areas, cabins, showers, potable water, toilets, and sewer hook- ups. Although fishing and boating are the primary recreation activities along the Kissimmee River and Lake Okeechobee, other opportunities do exist. Nature lovers are afforded numerous opportunities in bird watching and animal sightings. Lake Okeechobee marshes support several wading bird species. A number of the sited species are considered to be of special concern by the state because of rapid declines in their populations. The marshes of Lake Okeechobee also provide year-round habitat for several species of water fowl. Sightings have included wood ducks, coots, and gallinules. Migratory fowl are also heavy users of these marsh areas. Osprey are also commonly sighted along the Kissimmee River and Lake Okeechobee. These areas provide excellent resources for feeding and nesting. Bald eagle nesting sites are also known to occur in this area. NINO 154 Reamdco sod Op.o spec.F]emeot ary of okeassoee.Compresses Aso Mame 19n The Lake Okeechobee and Kissimmee River areas also support all four North American groups of reptiles. The most notable is the American alligator, one of Florida's largest reptiles. There are thirty-four native species of mammals including the manatee. itaw The manatee is recognized by the state as an endangered species. Given Okeechobee County's unique natural resources, opportunities for innovative recreation planning are abundant. Planning efforts should give special consideration to this unique environment capitalizing on the attraction and easy access of nearby natural resources. C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS The opportunity for recreation is an essential element adding to the quality of life in any community. The demand for recreation sites and facilities is influenced by many factors including the economic and social characteristics of the citizens. Perhaps the most significant factor influencing this demand is growth. The demand for recreation programs and facilities continues to run ahead of the Stslndards for Recreation Sites &Facilities ability of local government to finance • Activity Standard recreational opportunities. In order to Freshwater 1 mile per 200,000 provide basic recreational opportunities to Beach 800 ft-of shore each community and neighborhood in the mg X5'000 city and meet increasing tourist demand, it Boat ramp 1 per 4,000 becomes imperative that all potentials for p'ng 1 ate` 000 implementation of a recreation and open Picnicking 1 acre per 25,000 Now space plan be explored and utilized as Bicycling 1 mile 10,000 appropriate. Hiking 1 mile per 10,000 Nature study 1 mile per 10,000 In order to adequately plan for 9-hole Golf 1 per 25,000 existing and future recreation demand, a 1s-bolt Golf I per 50,000 standard or level of service must be Trani I per 3,000 determined. This standard or level of Baseball/Softball 1 per 4,000 service is a numerical approximation of the Football/Soccer 1 per 15.000 number of recreation sites or facilities Handball/Racqur.ball I per 10,000 required to meet the demands of the Basketball 1 per 5,000 existing or projected population. Swimming 1 per 25,000 Shualeboard 1 per 10,000 The box at right outlines the Sower: F a 3r Stunt and Edward 1 Raison standards recommended for future 1 LTA=Land Use ela n,. UnI.aricr Cheap;Moon. recreation planning in the City of °`Moos?reek Okeechobee. These standards are to serve Depe�°e°` Parke"°d R�eati. De�ttmra 1988 otaecbobeS Amide' guidelines for planning future facilities State al Merida Department a[Natural and can be modified to meet special needs. Racism°Outdoor M nde.Recreation m Florida -1981 Taiahrre�Monde. '` , 155 Recreation and opal Span.Mende Gry at Okeechobee Cosh ehanwe plan March 1991 Tables 6.8 and 6.9, following, outline resource and activity based recreation demand based on projected population for the year 2000. The tables also indicate the existing facilities to assist in identifying any potential future deficiencies. The projection and deficiencies were identified using the standards recommended above. Table 6.8, Future Demand for Resource-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities Based on Projected Population Requirement* 2000 Activity Existing (39,729) Freshwater/beach 725 ft 0 Fishing 20,000 ft 6,356 ft Boat ramp 11 ramps 9.9 ramps Camping 12 acres 1.6 acres Picnicking 12 acres 1.6 acres Bicycling 16.2 miles 4.0 miles Hiking 16.2 miles 4.0 miles Nature study 16.2 miles 4.0 miles Table 6.9, Future Demand for Activity-Based Recreation Sites & Facilities Based on Projected Population Requirement* 2000 Activity Existing (39,729) 9-hole Golf 2 1.6 18-hole Golf 0 0 Tennis 9 13.2 Baseball/softball 9 9.9 Football/soccer 2 2.6 Handball/racquetball 2 3.9 Basketball 6 7.9 Shuffleboard 13 3.9 Swimming 3 1.5 Okeechobee County has unique opportunities for recreation planning. The Kissimmee River serves as the county's western boundary and offers a number of public and private recreation facilities. In addition to its access to the Kissimmee River, Okeechobee County has approximately sixteen miles of shoreline on Lake Okeechobee. Public and private facilities located near the shores of the lake provide numerous opportunities for fishing and boating. 156 Raavdm sod Open Spam Dec ma Cry d Oba6oea-Compe'6msme Plan Nan 1992 Okeechobee County remains a predominantly rural/agricultural county. As a result, the demand for recreational facilities is quite different from the demands in large urban areas. Many opportunities for passive recreation exist outside the confines of a designated recreation area. Enjoying the natural amenities of the abundant open space is one of the advantages of this rural atmosphere. •�,,, 157 Racreadoe and Opm Sprat Elam' Oryotoreedioe:c .Pho Mardi 1S91 D. LIST OF SOURCES Central Florida Regional Planning Council. 1987. Okeechobee County Data Base for Iw Preparation of the City-County Comprehensive Plan. Bartow, Florida. Chapin, Stuart F. and Edward J. Kaiser. 1979. Urban Land Use Planning. Chicago, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. Enfinger, Darrell. Okeechobee County. Parks and Recreation Director. Interview August 1986. Interview June 1987. Interview August 1988. Florida. Department of Community Affairs. Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. Adopted February 14, 1986. Amended September 30, 1986. Florida. Department of Natural Resources. 1985. Participation/Demand Calculations by Activity for Tourists. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida. Department of Natural Resources. 1986. Outdoor Recreation in Florida (Draft). Tallahassee, Florida. Krueckeberg, Donald A. and Arthur L. Silvers. 1974. Urban Planning Analysis: Methods and Models. New York: John Wiley and Sons. U.S. Department of the Army. Corps of Engineers. 1986. Lake Okeechobee, Okeechobee Waterway Master Plan. Jacksonville, Florida. 158 .""""p Eleamt aq d ornedioe.e campeeAm.re elan Mardi 1992 (: ST . LUCIE COUNTY .______-__ _ IMAR TIN COUNTY RECREATIONAL SITES 14\ CITY OF OKEECHOBEE \ OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA Si Ns. r : i e.4 ■ 0 . : . W ! . RIVER , 0,Is. of to co : o . LI \r/ if Y o Z 1/4'117 / .4401.1040w .• \ ---1 Lu ■:.' < ." Illertg6 • . z....... .mAlli: Allgr Y -......... \ 0 1 Z A407* ...1■11 Ili ‘ J.,,,,...4.161,,,,,L_Nor g)49 vi. ----- -ri., _____ _ t3 coy°. a w 11111L .0-1.4 _joiram,. _ --____ _........ o[:) ..>:_ 8 cj N w■\•44th ---__ -- - m >- ---- _1 2 I Apr . a 5 ,.....(e9 -- ---- - -_______. -- < 0 c3 ,--,, • 0 I,_ 5 .6 6 • cc" N NI -as- ,-.:. • •111142•1 4 0 "FiEr.:4:•X..". .--.--Ii4.75-..7,:. e "7:7:7.:F.- .71F1:^Zi^:-:-:-::1-': ••• -.". .,,* "'. ..==-.,"÷",".•:,--1'...:. ,-..:-.4:-.--.• -=::..Z.,.-,:,.-7.-:, 0 67,pi &4ki I 11‘77 .1 II ta < \ Cd CI ll: bo'-----ti i , . .1 \..) Epitrg...CDO. 000 01.min— .---1 .....-, 1E9:LI Oa (MI cif --ilaweb""-4"Nla q, \ c o 1:1 01013 UUD c-, ,,,_ (-) \ 1-0111D l_f_10000 9 n 7 -:::EHDASFEEPPEEHEmoDEE:np.::71... is ...fe \ ..____ - 1 ••=11:1000001 1Diaili cOm moms 0 1 0 g 44: ' . .• .i.iyo 4.. "(\., s . fk- 6\ G C) S , LEGEND • BOAT RAMPS \ I _ ini■EINCINEIEMICIDOCLO ==.1 ..1. 11:41:0:11 :1:01.12000 L___JL_J re \ omo 1:mall==IR MOOD 5 ER i■ I I 111 I — Nu — g im'''' 1111111111•111M iHO ODOE AMID 1:31:1 7' efall ._ -1 1.11111i0a I RECREATION/PARKS ' \ I 1111 111111 1111,1---.-FIR- -.., 1 f ' 1 OKEE. RACQUETBALL III I IIIIIDIIII 111 0 ! DE d ' ..-- 8' 2 OKEE. SWIMMING POOL - Y 4 r 3 OKEE. RECREATIONAL PARK 0 .5 1 2 3 4 0_ 4 OKEE. TEEN CENTER SCALE IN MILES ( \.., .- -Cr- - _1.41( 5 CENTRAL ELEM. 6 5th 8c 6th GRADE CENTER SEPTEMBER, 1990 Prepared by. Central Florida Regional Planning Council Source: ■ Okeechobee County City of Okeechobee MAP 6.1 kiffte Intergovernmental Coordination Element � I TABLE OF CONTENTS VII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT 163 A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 163 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 163 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 183 Comprehensive Plan Elements: Problems and Needs 183 Future Land Use Element 183 Traffic Circulation Element 183 Housing Element 184 Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element 184 Conservation Element 185 Recreation and Open Space Element 186 Capital Improvements Element 186 Coordination Called For in Regional Policy Plan 187 Region-wide Coordinating Councils/I'ask Forces 187 Networks of Involved Agencies 188 D. LIST OF SOURCES 189 161 lotcripecramearal Caa+30000 a� Cry d Otee )oEee Cao prchearm Pfau Match 1991 LIST OF TABLES Table 7.1, Coordinating Entities 164 liov Table 7.2, Intergovernmental Coordination Matrix 165 LIST OF ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS Okeechobee County Board of County Commissioners 166 Okeechobee County School Board 167 Central Florida Regional Planning Council 168 South Florida Water Management District 169 Cablevision Industries Inc. 170 United Telephone Company 171 LP Sanitation 172 Florida Power & Light 173 Florida Department of Transportation 174 Department of Community Affairs 175 Department of Natural Resources 176 Department of Environmental Regulation 177 Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission 178 Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services 179 Soil Conservation Service 180 Department of Housing and Urban Development 181 Department of Housing and Urban Development 181 `in` Chamber of Commerce 182 VII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT • A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT The purpose of this element is to examine existing intergovernmental coordination processes between the City of Okeechobee and appropriate local, regional, and state agencies. Deficiencies identified in the existing system will be used as a basis for formulating goals, objectives, and policies which improve intergovernmental coordination mechanisms. This Intergovernmental Coordination Element is set forth in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis C. Issues and Recommendations The element is structured to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. The State of Florida has mandated that each local government prepare an intergovernmental coordination element of the comprehensive plan "stating principles and guidelines to be used in the accomplishment of coordination of the adopted comprehensive plan with the plans of school boards and other units of Iocal government providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land,with the comprehensive plans of adjacent municipalities, the county, adjacent counties, or the region, and with the state comprehensive plan, as the case may require and as such adopted plans or plans in preparation may exist. This element of the local comprehensive plan shall demonstrate consideration of the particular effects of the local plan, when adopted, upon the development of adjacent municipalities, the county, adjacent counties, or the region or on the state comprehensive plan, as the case may require." B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS The City of Okeechobee is the only municipality in Okeechobee County. It is governed by a five-member City Council, with an appointed City Administrator. The city's current estimated population is 4,958 (peak season) with a projected population of 5,286 (peak season) in the year 2000. As the city grows, its governmental functions must be coordinated with those of other levels of government and related public agencies. Table 7.1 lists public and quasi-public agencies with which the City of Okeechobee needs to interact. Table 7.2 relates each entity to the appropriate element of the Comprehensive Plan. Additional information is provided in the analysis worksheets which follow. "� 163 loorgoweroeseotal co o ammo' Cal'of O—Okoccaotes co�.aeeo...e,.o Mareb 1991 Table 7.1, Coordinating Entities City of Okeechobee Okeechobee County Government Entities Okeechobee County School Board Central Florida Regional Planning Council South Florida Water Management District Cablevision Industries Inc. Regional Organizations Florida Power & Light United Telephone of Florida Department of Transportation Department of Community Affairs Department of Natural Resources State Agencies Department of Environmental Regulation Game and Freshwater Fish Commission Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services Soil Conservation Service Federal Agencies Housing and Urban Development Chamber of Commerce ,ammo Other LP Sanitation Now 164 iera,mamrmr C ordireuee tloo®r Qty of Okeechobee Comprebeas e P+e March 1998 Table 7.2, Intergovernmental Coordination Matrix City of Okeechobee F T HI C R C Now L R S N O E I U A G F N C P Okeechobee County x x x x x x x Okeechobee County School Board x x x x Central Florida Regional Planning Council x x x x x x x South Florida Water Management District x x Florida Department of Transportation x x Department of Community Affairs x x x x x x x Department of Natural Resources x Department of Environmental Regulation x x Game and Freshwater Fish Commission x Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services x x Housing and Urban Development x Okeechobee Chamber of Commerce x x x Legend: +n✓ FLU Future Land Use Element TRA Traffic Circulation EIement HSG Housing Element INF Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element CON Conservation EIement REC Recreation and Open Space Element CEP Capital Improvements Element 165 Ingo ate+ccaran.om Deco= Cry or oteacboeaa compreaomoe elan Maids 1991 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.1 New Coordinating Agency: Okeechobee County Board of County Commissioners Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Okeechobee County Existing Issues or Problems: Land Use Compatibility Housing Annexation Parks/Recreation Solid Waste Disposal Sanitary Sewer/Potable Water Service Transportation Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): All elements Existing Method of Coordination: Meetings, interlocal agreements Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): Primarily advisory, although city's comprehensive plan must be '41w consistent with the county's comprehensive plan Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate 166 �+cooed'oamo Element Cary d Oteseoeae compecbmwe Rao Mania 1992 ANALYSIS WORKSIHFET 7.2 Coordinating Agency: Okeechobee County School Board Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Okeechobee County School Board Existing Issues or Problems: Provision of infrastructure to schools Recreation facilities Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Future Land Use Recreation and Open Space Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: The City of Okeechobee provides water and sewer service to Okeechobee Co. School Board facilities within city limits. School Board policy allows use of its facilities by city residents. Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): Advisory Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Good Additional Coordinating Entities: Okeechobee County 167 beersomeromeohl Coordemboo Meaux Cry of Okeechobee compeedme.e Plan M,eeb 1991 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.3 Coordinating Agency: Central Florida Regional Planning Council Participating Entities: All local governments in Okeechobee, DeSoto, Hardee, Highlands and Okeechobee Counties Existing Issues or Problems: Consistency of comprehensive plan with Regional Policy Plan Conflict mediation Developments of Regional Impact Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): All elements Existing Method of Coordination: Formal notification through comprehensive plan requirements and DRI review procedures. Also, CFRPC has been hired by the city to prepare its comprehensive plan. Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): CFRPC has review authority over local government comprehensive plans and DRI's, and provides an informal mediation process to resolve conflicts between local governments relating to comprehensive plans Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate 168 lagargootrnalencal Cooninatice Boma CRT of ot..ctio6r Compri:beams Pao Maeth 1972 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.4 Coordinating Agency: South Florida Water Management District Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee All local governments within South Florida Water Management District Existing Issues or Problems: Water conservation Consumptive use permits WellfieId protection Drainage permits Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Conservation Future Land Use Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: Comprehensive planning process, ''s' development review and permitting Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): Permitting of drainage facilities for development, allotment of consumption and establishing water use restrictions, provision of information and advice on water- related issues Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate N+.• 169 Ircergoeccomescal Condn.nnn 9 ciy o(Okeechobee Compesdm...Plan Macro 1991 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.5 virio Coordinating Agency: Cablevision Industries Inc. Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Cablevision Industries Existing Issues or Problems: Provision of cable television service Existing Method of Coordination: Okeechobee has a franchise agreement with Storer to provide cable television service within city limits Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate vioo 170 tar noworo ao-Coordinate acorn Cry of Otee:Ooan Cceentarries Pao Mane 1992 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.6 11O Coordinating Agency: United Telephone Company Existing Issues or Problems: Provision of telephone service Existing Method of Coordination: The City of Okeechobee has a franchise agreement with United Telephone to provide telephone service within city limits Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate 171 LoLergovanoweal Coonie.000 Marmot c�or orsocboeee comprebeome elan Marcia 199t ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.7 Coordinating Agency: LP Sanitation Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Okeechobee County LP Sanitation Existing Issues or Problems: Solid waste collection Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: The City of Okeechobee has a franchise agreement with LP Sanitation to provide solid waste collection service within city limits Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate `✓ 172 Numb 199': ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.8 '..• Coordinating Agency: Florida Power & Light Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Florida Power & Light Existing Issues or Problems: Provision of electric power service Existing Method of Coordination: The City of Okeechobee has a franchise agreement with Florida Power & Light to provide electric service within city limits. Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate 173 Coordination Element Cry of Oknemoeee C ,..mane Plan M 19 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.9 laire Coordinating Agency: Florida Department of Transportation Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Florida Department of Transportation Existing Issues or Problems: Maintenance/improvement of state roads Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Traffic Circulation Future Land Use Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Conservation Capital Improvements Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: Formal coordination through planning and permitting processes; informal coordination through dialogue regarding roadway problems/deficiencies." Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): FDOT is responsible for maintenance/improvement of Okeechobee's primary transportation arteries. Office with Primary Responsibility: Public Works Director Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Poor Deficiencies and Needs: Better communication 174 r �r Coonin.000 Eiammc ay Ohba Comprebassive Ft= tc ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.10 Nr, Coordinating Agency: Department of Community Affairs Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Department of Community Affairs Existing Issues or Problems: Comprehensive planning Developments of Regional Impact Housing programs Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): All elements Existing Method of Coordination: Formal review and approval of comprehensive plan and DRI's, provision of financial and technical assistance for housing- related programs Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): DCA is the state land planning agency and is responsible for ensuring local government NOP' compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (Chapter 163, F.S.). Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate Deficiencies and Needs: DCA should work to accommodate the particular needs of small municipalities by encouraging appropriate changes in administrative regulations and state statutes 175 Irate gwenmmd coandeenan Element art a(Oteecl oeee cmpmmme Peso Manta 1991 t ' ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.11 Coordinating Agency: Department of Natural Resources Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Department of Natural Resources Existing Issues or Problems: Funding for parks/recreation Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Future Land Use Recreation and Open Space Conservation Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: Informal Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): DNR provides various grants and loans for parks and recreation facilities. Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate Deficiencies and Needs: Continue to seek DNR funds for parks and recreation facilities. Niro 176 Sanaa City of Oteebohee Coawabcowa ago ?Jamb 1992 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.12 Coordinating Agency: Department of Environmental Regulation Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Department of Environmental Regulation Existing Issues or Problems: Sewage/hazardous waste disposal Water quality Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Conservation Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Future Land Use Capital Improvements Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: Development review/permitting Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): DER regulates drinking water quality and effluent discharge; also responsible for review and permitting of development proposals affecting wetlands. Office with Primary Responsibility: Public Utilities Director City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate Deficiencies and Needs: Flexibility in implementation and enforcement of state rules and regulations Additional Coordinating Entities: Environmental Protection Agency Department of Natural Resources South Florida Water Management District 141110' 177 cu,ac Okeechobee campcehmrira Plan March 199t ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.13 Coordinating Agency: Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission Department of Natural Resources Department of Environmental Regulation Existing Issues or Problems: Protection of fish/wildlife habitat and endangered species Implementation of Kissimmee River Resource Management Plan Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Conservation Future Land Use Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: Informal Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): No direct relationship Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate 178 toucpenimmo!coareb.om Element, Ot,at oreemob..costspebenwe Ran Marcia 1992 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.14 Coordinating Agency: Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services Existing Issues or Problems: On-site sewage disposal systems Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Conservation Future Land Use Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: HRS is the permitting agency for most residential and small commercial on-site sewage disposal systems, including septic tanks and "package plant" systems. -.saw Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): Advisory Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate Additional Coordinating Entities: Department of Environmental Regulation South Florida Water Management District Okeechobee County Now 179 nuneatal C Cry a otaxboee.Ccmardieo.e Mao Mardi 1991 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.15 Coordinating Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Soil Conservation Service Existing Issues or Problems: Soil erosion Development review relative to soil suitability issues Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Future Land Use Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Conservation Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: Informal Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): Advisory Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator r.r►' Public Works Director Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Adequate Additional Coordinating Entities: Okeechobee County Department of Environmental Regulation South Florida Water Management District 180 Cr,of O Math 199% ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.16 ,,,. Coordinating Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Department of Housing and Urban Development Okeechobee County Existing Issues or Problems: Provision of affordable and special needs housing Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): Housing Future Land Use Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Intergovernmental Coordination Existing Method of Coordination: HUD's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides federal funding for housing rehabilitation and the construction of new housing for low- to moderate-income families. Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): HUD establishes guidelines for the use of federal housing assistance funds. Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Inadequate for small cities due to lack of funding arid staff. Deficiencies and Needs: A coalition of agencies, financial institutions, and private organizations is needed to develop methods of providing affordable/special needs housing county-wide. `fir sr 'Si ►� nr coaa�m Bement Cry of Oteaeeobae ccmpeeeenn.a Plan Marcel 1991 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 7.17 • Coordinating Agency: Chamber of Commerce Participating Entities: City of Okeechobee Members of the business community Okeechobee County Existing Issues or Problems: Economic development Enhancement of quality of life Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s): All Elements Existing Method of Coordination: Informal Nature of Relationship (i.e., Authority): Advisory Office with Primary Responsibility: City Administrator Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanism: Good rah' 182 coo,ae.nn Ekmeun cY,or oteaeeoe.a comproba we elan 1942 C. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Effective intergovernmental coordination tends to be rare. As growth pressures `hew increase, however, local governments must confront the questions associated with the usefulness and necessity of coordination among political jurisdictions. Coordination among different jurisdictions is not an easy task. Each governmental entity has a different perception about responsibilities and obligations.There are also widely varying experiences in daily administration that can promote competition among the jurisdictions. These, and numerous other complications, contribute to the tendency of jurisdictions to confine control to their own political boundaries. Comprehensive Plan Elements: Problems and Needs The success of the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan is largely dependent upon effective coordination with involved local, regional, and state agencies. The various coordination mechanisms for each plan element are outlined below. Future Land Use Element Planning for future land use requires coordination between the City of Okeechobee and Okeechobee County; in fact, much of this coordination has already been achieved through a joint city-county building and zoning office. By combining their land use regulatory functions, the city and county have a very useful mechanism for fostering consistency on land use issues. Effective coordination is necessary to prevent proposed land uses in one law jurisdiction from disturbing existing or future land uses in the neighboring jurisdiction. It can also eliminate or reduce future disputes related to annexation. The city should coordinate with Okeechobee County and appropriate state and regional agencies to ensure that its future development patterns are consistent with the Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage Basins and other applicable resource planning and management plans prepared under Chapter 380, F.S. Traffic Circulation Element Growth in the municipalities results in extension of city road networks into the unincorporated areas. Coordination is required between Okeechobee County and the City of Okeechobee to assure that: 1. Future rights-of-way are protected; 2. Road alignment is consistent; 3. Level of service standards are maintained; and, 4. Funding and implementation strategies are well planned. %ow 183 Imerserseromenni cooea_& Ehnen' Cry of Okeechobee Comprehensive Pon 1991 In addition to local coordination, the City of Okeechobee must also work with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The city has an informal relationship with FDOT to address problems concerning the state road network. The city, however, has no authority to require FDOT to make improvements on state highways.The city can only point out problem areas and recommend improvements. It is important that the City of Okeechobee continue to effectively communicate its concerns and needs to FDOT. Housing Element Coordination between the City of Okeechobee and Okeechobee County is necessary to ensure the provision of adequate housing types and quantities to accommodate the needs of all residents of the community. A housing-related issue in which coordination is particularly important is the provision of hurricane shelter space for residents of mobile homes so as to minimize injury and loss of life in emergency situations. Another area in which cooperation is warranted is the identification and preservation of housing (and other types of structures) having historical significance. In addition, the city and county should consider using their joint building and zoning function as a basis for increased inspection and code enforcement activities aimed at elimination of substandard housing and housing rehabilitation. The Federal Section 8 Rental Assistance Program is available to the city, providing federal money to subsidize rent for low- and moderate-income households. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) receives funds for this program from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). DCA distributes funds and provides administrative services to the city, which is responsible for providing information, screening applicants, distributing subsidies, and monitoring the landlords and clients. Increased coordination with DCA could result in additional funding for the city's housing activities. The primary coordinating entities for the Housing EIement are: Okeechobee County Department of Community Affairs Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage. Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element Effective intergovernmental coordination will help to assure that land use decisions for contiguous areas result in adequate provisions for public services. A formal coordination mechanism is needed to ensure compatibility in land use and public facility/service provision between the City of Okeechobee and Okeechobee County. This mechanism could take the form of adopting Okeechobee County's designated urban area (which surrounds the city) as the future service area for sanitary sewer and potable water service. trossmeromeetal Og of Okeechobee Comp.e-e Pho March 1992 The county's cooperation should also be sought for effective regulation of land uses having the potential to contaminate groundwater. The primary coordinating entities for the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element are: Okeechobee County Department of Community Affairs Department of Environmental Regulation South Florida Water Management District Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services Conservation Element The conservation element requires intergovernmental coordination in three major areas: 1. Development in floodplains or wetlands; 2. Protection and conservation of natural systems and natural habitats; and, 3. Permitting development in wetlands. Coordination in these three areas is minimal. Several state, regional, and local agencies are involved in the permitting and review process. Developers must seek permits from each individual agency. As growth pressures increase, the City of Okeechobee will need to develop coordination mechanisms to assist in the protection and preservation of natural 'r"' resources. Specific problems and needs in the area of Conservation which would benefit from improved intergovernmental coordination include the following: • Water quality in Taylor Creek should be monitored and appropriate measures taken to reduce pollutant loading in order to protect water quality in'Lake Okeechobee. • Collection, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes. • Protection of rare/unique vegetative communities or wildlife habitat crossing jurisdictional boundaries. • • Water conservation. New, 185 r� nn al Ob amneaa campreboora.Phan Maw 1991 The primary coordinating entities for the Conservation Element are: Okeechobee County Department of Natural Resources Department of Environmental Regulation Department of Community Affairs South Florida Water Management District Recreation and Open Space Element The City of Okeechobee should make provisions to identify those recreation needs which cannot be met within the city or with the city's resources. The city must coordinate with Okeechobee County and appropriate state and federal agencies to identify needed recreational lands and facilities, and obtain funding to provide them. The primary coordinating entities for the Recreation and Open Space Element are: Okeechobee County Department of Natural Resources Capital Improvements Element The primary objective of this element of the comprehensive plan is to assure that public facilities and services needed to serve development are in place concurrent with the development.Successful implementation of the plan will depend largely on a communication system by which the City of Okeechobee and Okeechobee County inform each other about anticipated development and associated infrastructure needs.Possible mechanisms to achieve coordination could include: • use of the joint city-county building and zoning department as a mechanism to exchange information on recent building permits issued near jurisdictional boundaries outlining the location, size and type of development, including number of units, number of square feet/acres; • estimates of infrastructure required by the city to service new development; • review by all involved governmental entities of each others' 5-year capital improvements program. The primary coordinating entities for the Capital Improvements Element are: Okeechobee County Department of Transportation Department of Environmental Regulation vase 186 Inurriasenstaaaal Coardirodors Elam* Cry d oteareobs•corapr s em 1992 Coordination Called For in Regional Policy Plan • The Central Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan was adopted July 1, 1987 `- and establishes goals and policies for a wide range of regional issues. Subsections of the plan include Education, the Elderly, Housing, Public Safety, Water Resources, Natural Systems and Recreational Lands, Mining, Property Rights, Land Use, Public Facilities, Transportation, Agriculture, Tourism, Employment, and Plan Implementation. Effective implementation of the goals set forth in the Regional Policy Plan requires extensive coordination among numerous agencies and jurisdictions. Many of the necessary relationships and coordination mechanisms involving the City of Okeechobee and other entities have been outlined in the previous inventory and analysis. Other coordination needs called for in regional plan policies that may require the involvement of the City of Okeechobee and that are not covered in the above analysis are outlined below. These mechanisms are to be initiated by the Central Florida Regional Planning Council but may require the active involvement of the city in some form. Region-wide Coordinating Councils/Task Forces 1. Issue: Reducing Hazardous Waste and Materials Policy: By 1991, establish a regional network to include the involved agencies for this issue which shall ensure compliance and enforcement of hazardous waste regulations. 2. Issue: Economic Stability Policy: By 1991, a coordinated regional approach to economic development, including business recruitment and small business expansion assistance, will be developed and implemented. Policy: Establish a regional economic development steering committee. 3. Issue: intergovernmental Coordination Policy: By 1992, an intergovernmental task force shall be established to review and make recommendations concerning intergovernmental coordination and consistency of regulation within the central Florida region. Policy: An intergovernmental task force shall be established, and shall have a balanced membership consisting of representatives of, at a minimum, local elected officials, local staff-level officials, the regional planning council, state agency district offices and water management districts. 187 -er-,.eromeora-Co«amam F]amaat Cagy d Otsactobea Caeoprobarsmi Ptao Numb 1991 Networks of Involved Agencies 1. Issue: Protection of Natural Systems Policy: By 1991, the region will have adopted provisions to evaluate, protect, and manage natural systems for the functioning of these systems, to be accomplished through a network of the "involved agencies" for this issue. 2. Issue: Protection of Endangered Species Policy: By 1991, public and private agencies in the region will have identified and adopted provisions by which rare, endangered, threatened, and special concern species and their habitats are protected from further decline. This shall be accomplished through a network of the "involved - agencies" for this issue. 3. Issue: Protection of Endangered Species Policy: An updated inventory shall be maintained by the Regional Planning Council of plant and animal species in the planning region that are listed as endangered, threatened, of special concern, or under review for listing. This inventory shall be available for use by public and private agencies in land use and development plans and programs. lauxtowenaarecal Caardnaoce oarocac Cs,of Otaechobae ccmpnebm.we Fish March 1m D. LIST OF SOURCES Central Florida Regional Planning Council. 1987. Central Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan. Bartow, Florida. Central Florida Regional Planning Council. 1988. City of Okeechobee Data Base for Preparation of the City Comprehensive Plan. Bartow, Florida. Central Florida Regional Directory, Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Bartow, Florida. Water Management Districts of Florida, prepared by SFWIVID, December 10, 1976, Rev. August 23, 1983 Telephone conversation, City Clerk, Okeechobee. July 26, 1988. Planning Advisory Service, American Society of Planning Officials. 1978. Urban Growth Management Systems. Chicago, Illinois. Nor 189 losergoeenceeccal cooravcco Berne* Cat of Okeechobee caeq.ebe—..Rao Math 1991 Capital Improvements Element TABLE OF CONTENTS • VIII. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT 193 A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 193 B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 193 Existing Capital Needs and Funding Mechanisms 194 Capital Improvement Needs Resulting from Comprehensive Plan 194 Existing Revenue Sources and Funding Mechanisms for Capital Improvement Financing 196 Local Sources 196 Shared Revenues Including State Sources 200 Federal and State Grants and Loans 202 Analysis of Timing, Location, and Fiscal Impacts of Capital Facility Improvements 203 Current Practices 203 Estimated Costs of Existing and Future Capital Improvement Needs 204 Capital Improvements and the Future Land Use Element 204 Projected Revenues and Debt Service Capability 204 Projected Expenditures and Surplus/Deficit 207 C. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION 209 D. LIST OF SOURCES 210 LIST OF TABLES Table 8.1, Federal Grants: Sample List of Administering Federal Agencies and Program Titles 202 Table 8.2, Projected Revenues 206 Table 8.3, Projected Expenditures 208 Table 8.4, Debt Service Ratios 208 Table 8.5, Projected Budget Surplus 208 Table 8.6, 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements 209 LIST OF MAPS Map 8.1, Locations and Geographic Service Areas for Public Education/health System Components 211 191 t Cory atO - i Comprobrowe ems, M1991 VIII. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT A. PURPOSE AND FORMAT 'err. The purpose of the Capital Improvements Element is to assess the costs of improvements to capital facilities which are needed as a result of the Comprehensive Plan and other factors, and examine the City of Okeechobee's ability to fund these improvements. Structured to meet the requirements of Chapter 163, F.S. and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C., this element begins with an inventory of capital improvement needs, estimates costs of these improvements, then projects revenues needed to fund the improvements. The element is presented in the following format: A. Purpose and Format B. Inventory and Analysis C. Capital Improvements Implementation A map and relevant tables are also provided. B. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS In the 1985 legislation known as the Growth Management Act,the Florida Legislature required each of the state's local governments to ensure that public facilities and services would be available to support development proposed in that local government's comprehensive plan. The Capital Improvements Element (CIE) meets this requirement. The CIE has four main functions: 1. Evaluate the need for public facilities in support of all plan elements; 2. Estimate the costs of improvements for which local government has fiscal responsibility; 3. Analyze the fiscal capability of the local government to finance and construct improvements; and 4. Adopt financial policies to guide the funding and construction of improvements. "Capital improvement" is defined by Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., as a "physical asset constructed or purchased to provide, improve or replace a public facility and which is large in scale and high in cost. The cost of a capital improvement is generally nonrecurring and may require multi-year financing." Capital improvements on a scale smaller than $25,000 need not be included in the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements. A capital improvement does not include routine maintenance and repairs. Part B of this element is divided into sections on current capital improvement needs and funding mechanisms, and an analysis of current practices and possible future funding sources for capital facility improvements. 193 Ocy of Okeechobee ccmpseaor.e? March 1991 Existing Capital Needs and Funding Mechanisms Capital Improvement Needs Resulting from Comprehensive Plan vie The Comprehensive Plan identifies certain specific needs and potential needs for capital improvements in the City of Okeechobee. In addition to identified needs, some elements contain policies which could create the need for capital improvement expenditures in the future. A brief explanation follows: 1. Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Potable Water, Drainage, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element. Policy 7.1 of this element requires the city to undertake a stormwater management study to identify water quality and drainage facilities, and meet all data requirements set forth in S. 9J-5.011, F.A.C. In adopting this policy, the city acknowledges that insufficient information currently exists to address this issue adequately, and that future expenditures will be needed, both to fund the study and the needed improvements which it identifies. In accordance with this policy, the city will budget any available funds of its own for the study, as well as seek assistance from the South Florida Water Management District. 2. Future Land Use. This element includes a policy which addresses the adequate provision of public services and facilities. Policy 1.2 requires the city to "ensure that needed public facilities will be in place prior to or concurrent with new development."While most improvements needed for new development probably would be financed by developers, it is possible that some costs could be imposed on the city in maintaining required levels of service. 3. Traffic Circulation. Policy 4.1 of this element calls upon the city to "implement a program to monitor and evaluate the impacts of existing and proposed development on the transportation system" to ensure that minimum levels of service will be maintained. In support of this policy, the Concurrency Management System will identify any LOS problems and corresponding needs for capital investment in road improvements. 4. Recreation and Open Space. Policy 2.1 commits the city to identifying properties within its boundaries having the potential to meet recreation needs, and making "reasonable efforts to secure those properties for recreational use" through direct purchase or other appropriate means. Future capital improvement needs could be created through this policy. 194 Capital Impeaweseacs meet Cry d Otmebobee comprabess a Plan Maeda 194E Locations of Major Educational and Public Health Facilities' Nokow Public Education Systems 5th and 6th Grade Center 813-763-0264 610 S.W. 2nd Ave. Okeechobee, FL 34972 Okeechobee High School 813-763-3191 2800 US 441 N Okeechobee, FL 34972 Okeechobee Junior High School 813-763-2188 92.5 S.W. 23rd Lane Okeechobee, FL 34972 South Elementary School 813-763-3182 575 S.W. 28th Street Okeechobee, FL 34972 North Elementary School 813-467-2110 3000 N.W. 10th Terrace Okeechobee, FL 34972 Everglades Elementary 813-467-5800 650 S.E. 36th Terrace Okeechobee, FL 34972 Seminole Elementary 813-763-0264 2690 N.W. 42nd Ave. Okeechobee, FL 34972 vr,.s Public Health Systems Dept. of Health & Rehab. Services 813-763-6421 Economic Services 625 E. North Park Street Okeechobee, FL 33472 Dept. of Health & Rehab. Services 813-763-0236 Food Stamps Program 625 E. North Park Street Okeechobee, FL 33472 Okeechobee County Public Health Unit 813-763-3419 501 N.W. 5th Avenue Okeechobee, FL 33472 Indian River Community 813-763-1191 Mental Health Center 1008 N. Parrott Ave. Okeechobee, FL 34972 • Map 8.1 identifies locations and geographic service areas for the facilities listed above. 195 Qt,of Oteemoeee Coombe:owe PI= once 1941 Existing Revenue Sources and Funding Mechanisms for Capital Improvement Financing Revenue bonds have been a major funding source for capital improvements within vie the City of Okeechobee, particularly for the more costly capital expenditures involving water and sewer system. However, the City of Okeechobee currently funds most smaller-scale capital improvements through General Fund or Enterprise Fund expenditures. Special assessment districts currently are not used. Various federal funding sources (such as grants from the Farmers Home Administration and Environmental Protection Agency) have been used, or may be used in the future for some capital improvements. The city also uses its share of the collected fuel taxes to assist in funding needed public works improvements. In February 1987, the City of Okeechobee adopted Ordinance Number 590, an ordinance providing for a public service fee in the incorporated limits of the city. The primary purpose of the public service fee is to provide the additional revenue necessary to expand the city service delivery system to meet the demands of additional growth and development in a particular area where the increased demand is not attributable to the public at large. The City of Okeechobee does not currently have a Capital Improvements Program. Capital needs are identified annually as part of the budget process. In order to effectively plan for needed capital improvements, and to arrange for necessary financing through the budgeting process, a first step is to inventory the various sources of funding available to the City of Okeechobee. In fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget), the total revenue available to the city was $14,722,068. The general fund generated $3,167,322 and public utilities funds totaled $11,554,746. 4600 The following list of revenue sources comprises a working inventory from which the city's ability to secure the needed revenue for capital improvements will be assessed in later phases of the planning process. The current status of each financial resource is indicated also. The following list includes all major financial resources available to the city and is not limited to those sources which will be used only for capital improvement projects. 1. Local Sources Local revenues are those that the City of Okeechobee may levy, by referendum or City Council legislative action, collect, and disburse at the local level. a. Property Taxes(ad valorem): Property taxes are based on a millage rate (one mill is the equivalent of $1 per $1000 of assessed value or 0.1 percent) which is applied to the total taxable value of all real property and other tangible personal property. Revenue from ad valorem taxes may be used to fund operating costs and capital projects, depending upon the policies set by the City Council. The State Constitution limits the millage rate to 10 mills (1 percent of assessed value). A local referendum may raise the millage rate above 10 mills for provision of municipal-type services within the city. Even if the current millage rate is less than 10 mills, a local referendum can impose an additional millage for specific general 196 Caved Impeobansys aer d ote.bob.e ca epeeb....eb }flees 1992 obligation bond issues, generally for a clearly defined length of time and/or amount to be raised. �... Current Status: The City of Okeechobee levies ad valorem taxes at a rate of 4.15 mills. Ad valorem tax revenues for the fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget) are projected at$479,360. b. Franchise Fees: Franchise fees are levied on a corporation or individual by the local unit of government in return for granting a privilege, sanctioning a monopoly, or permitting the use of public property, usually subject to regulation. Current Status: The City of Okeechobee collects franchise fees for electric, telephone, cable television, and solid waste collection services. Revenues for 1989-90 (proposed budget) are expected to be as follows: Electricity $212,000 Telephone $4,000 Cable $12,000 Solid Waste $40,000 c. Utility Tax: These taxes are levied by the local government on the purchase of utility services within the boundaries of its jurisdiction. Current Status: Utility taxes are collected for residential and commercial use of electricity, telephone and propane. Utility taxes are expected to contribute $267,600 in FY 1989-90 (proposed budget) to the General Fund. d. Other Taxes. Fees and Charges: In the City of Okeechobee, this category includes business license taxes, public service fees, fines and forfeitures, charges for current services, interest, surplus city property sales and other miscellaneous accounts. Current Status: These various accounts contributed$263,480 to the city's General Fund in fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget). e. Special Sources of Revenue: Additional funding sources, available at the local level, may be necessary to finance required capital improvements. There are several optional sources of these revenues. (1) Impact Fees: These fees are charged in advance of new development and are designed to pay for infrastructure needs, but not operating costs, which directly result from new development. These fees must be equitably allocated to the specific group(s) which will directly benefit from the capital improvement, and the assessment levied must fairly reflect the true costs of these improvements. 197 c_Improweeeents Bums CSry of Mae:hobee ComprebmrYe?to ?Ards 1991 Current Status: The City of Okeechobee currently has no impact fee ordinance. (2) Special Assessments: Like impact fees, special assessments are levied against residents, agencies or districts who directly benefit from the new service or facility. For example, a new sewer system for an existing neighborhood can be financed through a special assessment of that neighborhood's homeowners,rather than through the city's general fund. To require all city residents to pay for the new sewer system through ad valorem taxes or other city-wide resources, when only one neighborhood will directly benefit, may be less than equitable. Current Status: The City of Okeechobee currently has no special assessment districts. (3) Borrowing: The extremely high cost of many capital improvements requires local governments occasionally to resort to borrowing, either through short-term or long-term financing. Short-term financing, perhaps through local banks, is one option available to raise required revenue for periods of perhaps, one to five years. The more customary method, however, is to authorize long-term bond issues, normally for five to forty years. The following are examples of types of bond issues which the city may use: (a) General Obligation Bonds: These bonds are backed by the full `— faith and credit of the local government, and are required to be approved by voter referendum. General obligation bonds offer lower interest rates than other bonds, as they are, in effect, secured by the taxing power of government. Revenues collected from the ad valorem taxes on real estate and other sources of general revenue are used to service the government's debt. Capital improvements financed through general obligation bonds should benefit the city as a whole rather than particular areas or groups. Current Status: The City of Okeechobee currently has a general obligation bond issued for the purpose of making street improvements. Debt service on this bond totals $40,000 for fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget). (b) Revenue Bonds: Unlike general obligation bonds, revenue bonds are financed by those directly benefiting from the capital improvement. Revenue obtained from the issuance of these bonds is used to finance publicly-owned facilities such as parking garages or electric power plants. Charges collected 198 Cry at otoommt—C®pesem...P Nab*194Z from the users of these facilities are used, in turn, to retire the bond obligations. In this respect, the capital project is self- supporting. Interest rates tend to be higher than for general obligation bonds, and issuance of the bonds may be approved by City Council without voter referendum. Current Status: The City of Okeechobee has outstanding revenue bonds issued for the purpose of expanding the sewer collection system, the sewer treatment plant and water treatment plant. Debt service on these bonds is $438,000 per year.A new revenue bond, issued in 1989 for similar public works improvements, will create a yearly debt service expenditure of$425,000 beginning in 1991. (c) Industrial Revenue Bonds: This type of bond is issued by a local government, but is actually assumed by companies or industries who use the revenue for construction of plants or facilities. The attractiveness of these bonds to industry is that they carry comparatively low interest rates due to their tax-exempt status. The advantage to the local government is that the private sector is responsible for retirement of the debt and that new employment opportunities are created in the community. Current Status: There are no outstanding industrial revenue bonds. (d) Other Debt: The City of Okeechobee also has undertaken a S1.3 million loan from C & S Bank for the purpose of street paving. Current Status: This debt is funded by the local option gas tax. Annual debt service for fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget) was $195,000. f. Public Utility, User Charges and Enterprise Funds: These charges are derived from the operation of publicly owned and operated utilities, such as electricity,water, sewer, solid waste removal and mass transit. In the City of Okeechobee, the potable water and sanitary sewer systems have been established as enterprise funds. Enterprise funds are used to account for the following types of operations: (1) those financed and operated in a manner similar to private business • enterprises, where the intent of the governing body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or 199 cap.,Icepromeats ca,of Okeechobee com ireemr.s PhD March 1591 (2) where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, ,,fir accountability, or other purposes. Current Status: For fiscal year 1989-90, Water and Sewer revenues totaled $2,182,745 (proposed budget). 2. Shared Revenues Including State Sources The City of Okeechobee, like other municipalities in Florida, depends on annual disbursements from the state government to supplement its operating and capital budget revenues. This section addresses those funds which are generated locally, but collected and later returned by state agencies to the city; adopted as a local option tax or license fee, collected and returned by the state; or shared by the state in the form of grants to the local government, but originate from state general revenues. Amounts available from these sources may vary widely from year to year, depending upon legislative actions. a. Revenue Sharing Trust Fund: County and municipal revenue sharing in Florida are essentially a return of the state-collected cigarette tax (11 cent portion), intangibles tax and the 8th cent of the motor fuel tax. The funds are distributed to counties and cities to allow for the exercise of local discretion in providing for public service needs. In large measure counties and cities can tailor their expenditures to the priorities which affect the local community. Thus, in addition to providing revenues needed by the local governments, revenue sharing is designed to provide maximum local priority determination. varif Current Status: Expected revenues from the State Revenue Sharing Cigarette Tax totaled $123,000 in 1989-90 (proposed budget), while the 8th cent motor fuel tax yielded $52,000 for a total of$175,000. b. Other Shared Revenue: Within this category are several major financial resources which, like the Revenue Sharing Trust Fund, are shared between city, county and state agencies. The following taxes and licensing fees generate a substantial amount of revenue for the City of Okeechobee. (1) Sales Tax: The current sales tax in Florida is 6 percent, and is levied on retail sales, and such things as commercial rentals, admission fees to entertainment facilities, and motor vehicle sales. While there are many exemptions from the sales tax authorized by the Legislature, about $8 billion is collected annually by the state. The amount returned to local governments is 1/2 of the 5th cent of the sales tax. This tax is also called the 1/2 cent sales tax or the 5th cent sales tax. Current Status: The city's revenues from this source were $158,500 in 1989-90 (proposed budget). Noro 200 c ow i Otembobee Comprebenwe elan 19QL (2) Two-cents Additional Cigarette Tax: Besides the cigarette tax distributed to local municipalities through the state revenue sharing trust fund, additional revenue is provided to cities and counties through an-additional two cents per pack cigarette tax. The total amount returned to local governments is determined by the quantity of cigarettes sold in each county; the funds are allocated within the county through a population-based formula. Current Status: This tax contributed $95,000 to the city's General Fund in fiscal • year 1989-90 (proposed budget). (3) Other Shared Sources of Revenues include mobile home licenses, alcoholic beverage licenses, and municipal vehicle gas tax rebates. Current Status: In fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget), these sources contributed $4,700 to the General Fund (proposed budget). (4) Okeechobee County: The City of Okeechobee receives funds from Okeechobee County for its share of county business licenses and a fire tax. Current Status: The city received$2,500 from these sources in 1989-90 (proposed budget). c. Local Option Taxes: Currently, there are several possible sources of revenue for the city under this category. All of the revenue is generated locally, but the funds are toe., collected and administered by the Florida Department of Revenue. These revenue sources may only be used with a vote by the Okeechobee County Board of County Commissioners or by county-wide referendum. The share of such revenue allocated to the City of Okeechobee is determined by formula. (1) County Optional Sales Tax: In 1987, the State of Florida granted counties the option, by local referendum, to impose an additional sales tax of up to 1 cent, for a period of up to 15 years, on all transactions subject to the state-wide 6 percent sales tax in that county. The proceeds from this tax may only be expended on infrastructure. Current Status: Okeechobee County has not voted for the County Optional Sales Tax. (2) County Local Option Gas Tax: The local option gas tax may be levied at a one- or two-cent per gallon rate by majority vote of the county commission. The rate may be increased to three to six cents by an extraordinary vote (majority vote plus one) of the commission, or by referendum. This tax revenue may only be used for transportation purposes. 201 Capra' My of otsaeosA camprae�..Phu 1991 Current Status: The Okeechobee County Board of County Commissioners has approved a 6 cent per gallon Local Option Gas Tax, collecting$289,210 in 1989- 90. .,r1 3. Federal and State Grants and Loans The U.S. State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972, which formerly provided for a system of federal general revenue sharing, has now been substantially modified. Federal funds are now allocated to state agencies which administer block grants in accordance with the programs which they monitor, or else reserved at the federal agency level and are disbursed as block grants directly to state and local agencies or other eligible organizations and individuals. The purpose of the block grant program is to enable greater latitude by recipients in actual use of the funds, although recipients are still required to use the funds for specific categories of projects. These funds are not distributed by allocation, but rather require competitive applications. Consequently, these grant monies are generally a non- recurring source of funds, and as such cannot be accurately projected for budgeting purposes. Table 8.1, Federal Grants: Sample List of Administering Federal Agencies and Program Titles Department of Commerce Public Works and Development Facilities Support for Planning Organizations Public Works Impact Projects Public Telecommunications Facilities Construction and Planning v tie Department of Health & Human Services Community Health Centers Department of Housing and Urban Development Housing Development Grants Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)/Entitlement CDBG/Sma11 Cities Program Urban Development Action Grant Department of the Interior Outdoor Recreation — Acquisition, Development, Planning Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program Department of Transportation Urban Mass Transportation Capital Improvement Grants Urban Mass Transportation Technical Studies Grants Environmental Protection Agency Construction Grants for Wastewater Treatment Works Comprehensive Estuarine Management Source: "Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance", 1984 Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. loge 202 Capai Impnaamma Menem dry d Otembobas Compcsdowe Plan Marda 1992 Table 8.1 shows a partial list of available federal grant sources. Other grants are administered at the state level, with state executive departments acting as "pass-through agencies" for federally-funded project grants. An example of a federally funded project grant program is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which administers the program, allocates 70 percent of its CDBG funds for"entitlement communities," or the larger urban areas. These entitlement communities may apply for and receive grants for financing specific projects from a list of eligible activities outlined in Title I statutes, such as infrastructure improvements, housing projects, and commercial revitalization. The remaining 30 percent of the funds are disbursed to state pass-through agencies --in Florida's case,the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). DCA administers these grants for the same types of projects, but restricts their availability to "small cities" and counties. In addition to block grants, several federal agencies offer direct loan programs, but their applicability to capital improvement projects is extremely limited. State loans, on the other hand, are usually available to finance such capital projects as land acquisition for low- income housing. DCA's Bureau of Housing administers loans and grants for these purposes through eligible local governments. Current Status: The City of Okeechobee was awarded a $1 million Farmers Home Administration grant in 1984 and expects to receive the remaining installment of$323,850 for fiscal year 1989-90 (proposed budget). Analysis of Timing, Location, and Fiscal Impacts of Capital Facility Improvements Current Practices 1. Fiscal Impacts. The city's general practice in meeting capital improvement needs has been to utilize General Fund revenues, Enterprise Fund revenues, or short term borrowing where feasible. Larger facility needs, such as improvements in the water and sewer systems, are being met through revenue bonds. The city's budgetary practices do not currently include a 5-Year Capital Improvements Plan as a means of reserving funds for future facility needs. As a result, capital improvement funds are allocated one year at a time, and decisions to improve facilities in a given year are made only during the budget process for that year. 2. Timing and Location. Prior to adoption of this Comprehensive Plan, the scheduling and placement of capital improvements were based primarily on decisions and priorities set by the City Council and city staff. Upon adoption of the plan, level of service standards for roads, sanitary sewer, potable water and other public facilities will be considered in determining the need for capital improvements as well as their timing and location. 203 - CitrdPho Mares 1991 Estimated Costs of Existing and Future Capital Improvement Needs In order to maintain adopted levels of service, the City of Okeechobee needs to expand its water and sewer treatment facilities. Needed improvements, costs, and expected years of construction are as follows: 1. Water treatment plant: Expansion from 2.88 million gallons per day (MGD) to 4.88 MGD in 1992-93. Projected cost is $5 million. 2. Wastewater treatment plant: Expansion from 0.6 MGD to 1.2 MGD in 1993-94. Projected cost is $5 million. Capital Improvements and the Future Land Use Element The Capital Improvements Element is consistent and compatible with the Future Land Use Element. The sanitary sewer system currently serves less than half the city,while an existing but unused network of sewer lines will soon be upgraded, and will increase coverage to approximately 90 percent of the city's population. Additional sewage treatment plant capacity, as discussed in the Infrastructure Element, will be required to serve those lines as they come into use, and to accommodate the needs of expected new residents of the City of Okeechobee. This facility expansion will support the city's projected development patterns (as shown on the Future Land Use Map) by allowing residential and commercial growth to occur at densities and intensities appropriate for an urban area. As recreation needs are limited to improving facilities on existing properties, no land is needed to meet required service levels for recreation through 1995. Maintenance of traffic circulation levels of service is an issue that relates to State roads, for which the city has no responsibility. As currently identified, capital improvements needs are a function of population growth and do not stem directly from land use patterns described in the Future Land Use Element. Projected Revenues and Debt Service Capability This section addresses the city's projected revenues, its ability to incur additional debt to fund capital improvements, and other factors affecting availability of funds for capital improvements. 1. Revenues. Projections of revenue have been calculated using past city budgets for the fiscal years 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88, 1988-89, and the proposed budget for 1989-90. The revenue portion of the budget is divided into General and Public Utilities funds. Within the General Fund are subcategories for debt service, public facilities improvements, and law enforcement. Projections generally were calculated by determining the individual growth rates for each fund in the past, and extending it into the future to arrive at estimates for each year of the five-year period beginning in 204 impea�Element aev o or e-Caespreboorm Phes Marcia 1992 1990. In some cases, yearly growth rates and future revenue estimates were provided by city staff. Revenue projections developed in this element show a general increase in funds through 1993-94 (although a slight drop in revenue levels is expected in 1994-95), and include all revenue sources. Projected revenues are shown in Table 8.2. 2. Ad Valorem Tax Base. The city's property tax rate is currently set at 4.15 mills. Ad valorem tax revenues have been increasing at an average of 7.7 percent per year due to rising property values and other factors. Projections indicate that ad valorem tax revenues will rise from the current $479,360 (1989-90 proposed budget) to $693,330 in 1995. The following table relates general revenue sources described in this element to actual funding categories used in the City of Okeechobee's Administrative Operating Budget and Table 8.2 [ Revenue Source Budget Category Property Taxes 1 Franchise Fees 2 Utility Taxes 2 Other Taxes, Fees & Charges 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Revenue Bonds 10 Other Debt 10 Public Utility, User Charges & Enterprise Funds 8 Revenue Sharing Trust Fund 3, 10 Sales Tax 3 2-Cent Cigarette Tax 3 Other Shared Revenues 3 Okeechobee County 3 County Local Option Gas Tax 9 Federal/State Grants & Loans 2 Bode Categories 1. Ad Valorem Taxes 7. Other Revenues 2. Other Taxes 8. Operatings Transfers: In 3. Intergovernmental Revenue 9. Debt Services 4. Charges for Current Services 10. Public Facilities Improvement Fund 5. Fines,Forfeitures&Penalties 11. Law Enforcement Special Fund 6. Uses of Money St Property 205 Geed luspeweauots M CAT 1 Otod o es Camprabeco e Plan Maccb 1991 Table 8.2,Projected Revenues City of Okeechobee FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 General Fund: Ad Valorem Taxes 516,080 555,614 598,175 643,997 693,330 Other Taxes 580,331 602,907 626,361 650,728 676,043 Intergov.Revenue 374,019 364,468 355,161 346,092 337,254 Charges for Current Services 252,430 265,052 278,304 292,219 306,830 Fines,Forfeitures at Penalties 61,370 71,196 82,595 95,820 111,161 Uses of Money 8t Property 9,112 6,750 5,000 3,704 2,744 Other Revenue 19,384 26,004 34,884 46,796 62,776 Operating Transfers:In 440,454 462,477 485.601 509,881 535,375 Debt Service 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 Pub. Fac.Improvements 683,538 717,215 752,576 789,705 828,690 Law Enf.Special Fund 2,579 2,679 2,779 2,879 2,979 Public Facilities Revenues Operating Fund 1,827,412 2,030,365 2,255,859 2.506,396 2,784,758 Debt Service Fund 438,000 863,000 863,000 863,000 1.288,000 Improvement at Replacement Fund 425,000 446,250 468,563 491,991 516,590 Wastewater Collection System Fund 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 Water Treatment Plan Construction 0 0 2,500,000 2,500,000 0 Fund Wastewater Treatment Plant Fund 608,000 0 0 2,500,000 2,500.000 Total All Revenues 7,627,709 6,803,976 9,698,858 12.633,207 , 11,036530 3. Projected Debt Capacity. According to a generally accepted financial standard, a local government normally should not allow debt service to exceed 20 percent of revenues. The city's current debt service is primarily on revenue bonds for improvements to the water and sewer system. At the current level of $673,000 (1989-90 proposed budget), debt service represents only 4.7 percent of the city's revenues. Projections, shown in Table 8.4, indicate that this percentage will fluctuate, due to the issuance of revenue bonds, during the upcoming five-year period. The city's debt service ratio will rise to . approximately 9 percent by fiscal year 1990-91, rise to 16 percent in 1991-92, then drop dramatically before climbing to approximately 14 percent in 1994- 95. While this variable shows itself to be erratic, it does not approach the proposed limit of 20 percent. Clearly, the City of Okeechobee has the capacity to assume additional debt for capital improvements. 206 Ct cty d otzeebobes comseebeceme Plan March 1992 4. Operating Costs. This variable represents a set of factors which could affect the city's ability to fund capital improvements, but cannot be figured into projections because of uncertainties or insufficient information. Among these factors are costs of utilities and supplies which the city uses in conducting its business, such as electricity, gasoline, and paper goods. A major concern is the cost of insurance, including liability and workmen's compensation. In addition to market forces, insurance costs are affected by state rules and regulations, which change frequently and with little prior notice. State legislation also imposes unpredictable costs on the city by mandating new programs and activities, often without new funds to pay for them. Projected Expenditures and Surplus/Deficit This section examines projected expenditures by the city and any remaining funds available for capital improvements after expenditures have been met. - 1. Expenditures. Projected expenditures were determined with the same methodology used to project revenues. These are shown in Table 8.3. 2. Budget Surplus. As Table 8.5 shows, the City of Okeechobee's projected revenues exceed projected expenditures by an amount ranging from approximately $1.2 million (1990-91) to more than $2 million (FY 1994-95). Although mandatory capital improvements resulting from the Comprehensive Plan are covered within existing budget categories, these surplus funds could prove beneficial in meeting unforeseen needs, or in financing studies called for in the plan. 207 Capeta1 faeprwmmo FJ®eel Cky of Okeeefob=CompretmaMe Mae Man&1941 Table 8.3, Projected Expenditures City of Okeechobee FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 General Fund: Miscellaneous 2,230,477 2,343,222 2,462,138 2,587,576 2,719,911 Debt Service 233,930 233,930 233,930 233,930 233,930 Public Facilities Improvements 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 Law Enforcement 0 0 0 0 0 Public Facilities Operating Fund 1,557,917 1,606,185 1,655,949 1,707,254 1,760,149 Wastewater Collection 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 System Water Treatment Plant Expansion 0 0 2,500,000 2,500,000 0 1 Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion 608,000 0 0 2,500,000 2,500,000 Improvement&Replacement 207,980 245,074 288,784 340,291 400,983 Public Utn.Debt Service Fund 438,000 863,000 863,000 863,000 1,288,000 Total All Expenditures 6,401,304 5,416,411 8,128,801 I 10,857,051 I 9,027,973 Table 8.4, Debt Service Ratios City of Okeechobee FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 Projected Revenues 7,627,709 6,803,976 9,698,858 12,633,207 11,036,530 Total Debt Service 671,930 1,096,930 1,096,930 1,096,930 1,521,930 Debt Service Ratio 8.81% 16.12% 11.31% 8.68% 13.79% Table 8.5, Projected Budget Surplus CIty of Okeechobee FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93 FY 93-94 FY 94-95 � r I 1,226,405 1,387,565 1,570,057 1,776,156 I 2,008,557 Source: Central Florida Regional Planning Council 208 cow uaaaeeecook ty of ote.boe«compeb—..e Plan Muth 1992 C. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION Capital • improvement needs identified in this element will be met through implementation of a 5-year Schedule of Capital Improvements. This schedule is adopted by the City Council along with Goals, Objectives and Policies, and must be consistent with the Capital Improvements Element. The purpose of the Schedule is to ensure that the city has adequate revenues to implement the Comprehensive Plan. • There are no existing deficiencies in the City-of Okeechobee, although projections indicate that there will be a need for additional water and wastewater treatment capacity by 1995. Future studies may be conducted as a result of the Comprehensive Plan which could identify capital improvement needs which are not currently apparent. Until these studies are completed, however, it is not possible to determine the impact of future needs for capital improvements. The 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements focuses on the capital outlay required to meet existing deficiencies and to maintain adopted level of service standards planned for public facilities in the plan. The following table summarizes the City of Okeechobee's capital improvement needs. Table 8.6, 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements 1990/91 through 1994/95 Consistency With Projected Revenue Comprehensive Project Schedule Location Cost Source Plan - Water Treatment 1992-93 Existing Plant S5 million Revenue Policy 1.1.1, Plant Expansion Site Bonds Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Wastewater 1993-94 Existing Plant S5 million Revenue Natural Treatment Plant Site Bonds Groundwater Expansion Aquifer Recharge Element • .,, 209 cep,d Okeechobee c.OUIPeeeo.�ergo Marsh 1991 D. LIST OFPURCES „ • • Florida Department of Community Affairs, Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code; Nms# adopted Febniary 1986, -Ainended Sepiernber 30, 1986. :City of Okeechobee. 1987. Administrative Operating Budget. Okeechobee, Florida. City of Okeechobee. 1986. Financial Statements With Auditors' Report Thereon. Okeechobee, Florida. vaif • 100 210 Cenral Immoweenno Element Cry at Otnebobee Camprennorm Mrs Mame 1992 Map 8.1, Locations and Geographic Service Areas for Pub: a`Education/health •System Components • vr,, • r4, °` • .d ' *tar 211 Cayce al Imprmemmu Beams Cry of°tee :mina Coa____a plea - - March 1991