1991-01-10 DCA to Taylor Proposed Comp Plan Review •
Pqyb
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
2 7 4 0 C E N T E R V I E W D R I V E • TALLAHASSEE , F L O R I D A 3 2 3 9 9 - 2 1 0 0
Lawton Chiles THOMAS G.PELHAM
Governor Secretary
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mr. Walter Taylor
Okeechobee County
FROM: M,n Bob Nave, Director
1 ' ' Division of Resource Planning and Management
DATE: January 10 , 1991
SUBJECT: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Review
Enclosed are the Department' s Objections, Recommenda-
tions and Comments Reports on proposed comprehensive plans from
the following local government (s) :
Okeechobee
These reports are provided for your information and
agency files. Following the adoption of the plans by the local
governments and subsequent compliance review to be conducted by
this agency, we will forward copies of the Notices of Intent
published for each local government plan.
If you have any questions, please contact Robert
Arredondo at SunCom 277-4545 or (904) 487-4545 .
/per
Enclosures
•
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT • HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
RECEIVED JAN 1 4 1991
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
FOR
OKEECHOBEE
December 23 1990
Division of Resource Planning and Management
Bureau of Local Planning
•
This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 93-11.010
RECEIVED JAN 1 4 1991
v
INTRODUCTION
The following objections, recommendations and comments are
based upon the Department's review of the comprehensive plan
pursuant to s. 163 . 3184, F.S.
Objections (A. in the attached report) relate to specific
requirements of relevant portions of Ch. 9J-5, F.A.C. , and
Ch. 163, F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one
approach that might be taken to address the cited objection.
Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations.
Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of
the other state agencies. If there is a difference
between the Department's objection and the state agency advisory
objection or comment, the Department's objection would take
precedence.
Each of these objections must be addressed by the local
government and corrected when the plan is resubmitted for our
compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may result
in a determination that the plan is not in compliance. The
Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data
and analysis items which the local government considers not
applicable to its plan. If that is the case, a statement
justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-11. 004 (2) (f) ,
F.A.C. , must be submitted. The Department will make a
determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if
the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered
addressed.
The comments (B. in the attached report) which follow the
objections and recommendations section are advisory in nature.
Comments do not represent objections and will not form bases of a
determination of non-compliance. They are included to call
attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be
substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or
logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar,
organization, mapping, and reader comprehension.
Appended to the back of the Department's report are the
comment letters from the other state review agencies and other
agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are
advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental
objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in
this report.
RECEIVED JAN 1 it 1991
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
City of Okeechobee
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5. 004
The public participation procedures on page 34 do not
address amendments to the comprehensive plan and
evaluation and appraisal reports. It appears that
these procedures concern only the preparation of the
plan itself. For example, items 2, 3 , and 5 refer only
to the "adoption of the Comprehensive Plan or element
or portion thereof. "
Recommendation
Expand the public participation procedures to include
provisions ensuring public participation for amendments
to the comprehensive plan and evaluation and appraisal
reports.
DATA AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5. 005 (2) (a) ; s. 163 . 3177 (6) (a) , (8)
As pointed out throughout this report, a number of
goals, objectives and policies, standards, findings and
conclusions within the comprehensive plan are not
supported by relevant and appropriate data. These
include but are not limited to goals, objectives and
policies and standards (including policies setting
densities and intensities of land uses) that do not
address in a positive and specific way current or
potential problems identified in the data and analysis.
For specific instances, reference should be made to the
objections under each element of the plan included in
this report.
Recommendation
Revise the goals, objectives, policies, standards,
findings and conclusions objected to in this report
(including but not limited to any densities or
intensities of use for objections that have been
•
1
RECEIVED JAN ' 1999
raised) to reflect the data and analysis for the plan
and to address in a positive and specific way any
current or potential problems identified in the data
and analysis.
POPULATION ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS
A. OBJECTIONS
None
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5. 005 (6) , 9J-5. 003 (36) , 9J-5. 003 (61) 9J-5. 003 (68)
(a) Goals which do not state a long-term end towards
which programs or activities are directed are not
acceptable.
(b) Objectives which are not measurable, not supported
by the data and analysis and are stated in an
unspecific, tentative and/or conditional manner
are unacceptable.
(c) Policies which are tentative or conditional, or do
not describe the activities, programs and land
development regulations which will implement the
plan, are unacceptable.
(d) Requirements identified in Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C. ,
which are required to be addressed by objectives
and policies must be based upon relevant and
appropriate data.
(e) Land development regulations to be adopted
pursuant to s. 163. 3202, F.S. , must be adopted and
implemented within one year after the due date for
submission of the revised comprehensive plan.
Recommendation
A goal must be written to state the long-term desired
result (Rule 9J-5. 003 (36) , F.A.C. ) . Objectives must be
written in a way that provides specific measurable
intermediate ends that mark progress toward a goal
(Rule 9J-5. 003 (61) , F.A.C. ) . A measure such as a
quantity, percentage, etc. and a definite time period
for its accomplishment must be included in the
objectives. Policies answer the question of "how" by
specifying the clearly defined actions (programs and
2
•
activities) local governments will take to achieve each
objective and ultimately the identified goal (Rule 9J-
5.003 (68) , F.A.C. ) .
If desired, local governments may choose to assign the
measurability to a policy; however, it must be clearly
linked to the pertinent objective and the final
combination must provide a clear basis for assessing
the effectiveness of the plan.
It is also incumbent upon the local government to
establish that it has met the intent of the Rule when
it deviates from the requirement related to measurable
objectives. The Department is primarily concerned that
local governments provide the basis for assessing the
effectiveness of their plan.
Goals, objectives and policies must be written using
the words "shall" or "must" instead of "should" unless
the local government includes in the plan language
plainly stating that the word "should" to be
interpreted to be mandatory and not discretionary. The
goals, objectives and policies must establish mandatory
standards that will control the activities of the local
government under the plan.
For the comprehensive plan elements, objectives and
policies must be written for each of the requirements
identified in Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C. , unless there is a
valid explanation why the requirement does not apply.
These requirements, by themselves, are not objectives
or policies and cannot be used as such in the elements.
All goals, objectives and policies within the plan
shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data.
Objectives and policies need to be supported by the
data and analysis in order to have validity within the
plan.
Objectives and policies related to land development
regulations pursuant to s. 163 . 3202 , F.S. , must reflect
that the regulations will be adopted and implemented
consistent with the requirements of s. 163 .3202, F.S.
INTERNAL CONSISTENCY
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5. 005 (5) (b)
Maps depicting future conditions in the plan (including
the Future Land Use Map) do not reflect goals,
objectives and policies in each element, as those
•
3
goals, objectives and policies exist or are revised to
meet the requirements of Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C. , Chapter
163, F.S. , the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187,
F.S. ) and the comprehensive regional policy plan, as
recommended in this report.
Recommendation
Revise the future conditions maps as necessary to
reflect goals, objectives and policies in each element,
as they exist or are modified to meet requirements as
recommended in this report.
CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5. 0055 (1) (a)
Policies associated with the City's concurrency
management system do not establish level of service
standards for all public facilities and services.
Policies 1.1.1 (p. 39) and 2. 1 (p. 40) , which address
level of service standards for sanitary sewer, potable
water and solid waste indicate that level of service
standards are to be effective "by 1995. " This does not
establish level of service standards which will be
effective upon plan adoption. Additionally, the
Drainage/ Stormwater Management level of service, cited
in Policies 1. 1. 1 and 2. 1, does not include a water
quality component.
Recommendation
Revise Policies 1. 1.1 and 2.1 to establish level of
service standards which will be effective upon plan
adoption. The City should delete the term "by 1995"
when establishing level of service standards. All
public facilities must have level of service standards
which are effective upon plan adoption. Revise the
level of service standard for drainage to include a
water quality component. In establishing a water
quality component, please see the recommendation made
for the objection raised to 9J-5.011(2) (b) c. of the
Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water
and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element.
2. 9J-5. 0055 (2) (a) , (b) , and (c)
While provisions 1 and 2 of the City's proposed
concurrency management system (pgs. 37-42) are
consistent with the flexibility allowed for in the
4
above rule citations, Provisions 3 and 4 are
inconsistent with these citations. Provision 3, which
states that the necessary facilities are the subject of
a binding contract executed for the construction of
those facilities at the time a development permit is
issued, can only be used in conjunction with parks and
recreation, roads and mass transit facilities.
Additionally, the binding executed contract must
provide for the commencement of the actual construction
of the required facilities within one year of the
issuance of the development order. Provision 4 is not
consistent with any of the minimum requirements for
concurrency.
Recommendation
Revise the concurrency management system to be
consistent with all the requirements of 9J-5. 0055. (2) ,
(a) , (b) and (c) . Provisions 1 and 2 can be applied to
all facilities. Provision 3, with the modification
outlined above, can be applied only to parks and
recreation, roads and mass transit facilities.
Provision 4 should be deleted. If the City wishes to
allow additional flexibility for roads and mass
transit, it can incorporate all the provisions of 9J-
5. 0055 (2) (c) 1.-9. into its concurrency management
system.
3. 9J-5. 0055 (2) (e)
The concurrency management system does not include the
methods and procedures for determining the available
capacity of public facilities for applying level of
service standards to development applications and for
determining when the test for concurrency must be met.
Recommendation
Expand the concurrency management system to include
guidelines for interpreting and applying level of
service standards to applications for development
orders and permits and for determining when the test
for concurrency must be met. The guidelines should
indicate how the City will assess the demand placed on
public facilities. The guidelines should include the
means by which the City of Okeechobee will monitor
changes in the level of service provided by the
facilities. The guidelines should also indicate that
the City will reserve the capacity in the public
facilities necessary to serve proposed developments
following approval of a development order or permit and
that such development orders or permits will include a
5
time limit by which development must commence or the
reserved capacity forfeited and criteria to determine
that a development is continuing in good faith in order
to maintain capacity reservations. Note that the
latest point in the application process for the
determination of concurrency is prior to the approval
of an application of a development order or permit
which contains a specific plan for development,
including densities and intensities of development.
4. 9J-5.0055 (2)
The definition used for "Concurrent with the Impacts of
Development" on page 47 of the "List of Definitions"
section, does not correctly reflect the requirements
for concurrency management systems. The definition
states: "For recreation facilities, concurrency may
also be met by adherence to 9J-5.0055 (2) (b) . For
roads, concurrency may also be met by adherence to 9J-
5. 0055 (2) (c) . " However, 9J-5. 0055 is not itself a
concurrency management system. Rather, Section 9J-
0055 establishes minimum requirements for concurrency
management systems.
Recommendation
Revise the definition of "Concurrent with the Impacts
of Development to delete the sentences: "For
recreation facilities, concurrency may also be met by
adherence to 9J-5.0055(2) (b) . For roads, concurrency
may also be met by adherence to 9J-5. 0055 (2) (c) . " If
the City wishes to use the additional flexibility of
these provisions, the City's concurrency management
system must itself include methods or procedures which
will be used to ensure providing facilities and
services in accordance with 9J-0055 (2) (b) and (2) (c) .
Note, that if the City desires to use the additional
flexibility for roads provided by section 9J-
5.0055 (2) (c) , the provisions of 9J-5.0055 (2) (c) 1.-9.
must also be incorporated into the concurrency
management system.
6
;E VdVED JAN ''
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data
1. 9J-5. 006 (1) (a)
The existing land use map does not depict historic
resources. The plan element incorrectly states (p. 6)
that " [R]egisters maintained by the Florida Department
of State, Division of Historical Resources, list no
historically significant structures in the City of
Okeechobee. " However, the Freedman-Raulerson House,
site .80K12, and the Old School House, site 80K9, are
listed in the Florida Master Site File.
Recommendation
Revise the existing land use map to depict these
historic resources.
2 . 9J-5. 006 (1) (b)
The existing land use map series does not depict
existing and planned waterwells and cones of influence
or soils.
Recommendation
Revise the existing land use map to depict these
natural resources.
4 . 9J-5. 006 (1) (b)
The existing land use map series does not depict
wetlands existing within the City. Although the text
(p. 6) states that there are " [N]o significant
wetlands" in the City, the term "significant" has not
been defined. Therefore, the actual extent of wetlands
cannot be ascertained and the statement is not
supported by data.
Recommendation
Revise the existing land use map to depict wetlands.
4 . 9J-5. 006 (1) (c)
While the text (pgs. 4-5) identifies the approximate
acreage of existing land uses the general range of
7
density or intensity of each existing land use category
is not provided.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify the ranges of
density or intensity for each existing land use
category.
Analysis
5. 9J-5. 006 (2) (a)
An analysis of the character and magnitude of existing
vacant land in order to determine its suitability for
use has not been included. Although the plan element
states (p. 8) that there are "significant constraints"
on the development of vacant land, identifies vacant
land as having "poorly drained sandy soils" (p. 9) , and
that Taylor Creek is a "major concern relative to the
effect of new development on natural resources" (p. 9) ,
no analysis has been undertaken with respect to the
specific limitations these conditions place on future
development.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an analysis of the
character and magnitude of existing vacant land in
order to determine its suitability for use. This
analysis should specifically address the limitations
placed on development by natural resources (e.g. ,
soils, floodprone areas, and effects of development on
water quality) . The analysis should address the
constraints placed upon development of vacant areas
shown on Map 1.2 as being floodprone and/or having
sever limitations. This analysis should include
recommendations for the type and density or intensity
of development on vacant land. The analysis should
also address .appropriate measures which could be
undertaken to protect the natural functioning of soils,
floodplains and the quality of surface water. This
analysis should then serve as the basis upon which land
use designations on the Future Land Use Map are made.
Revise the Future Land Use Map consistent with the
required analysis.
6. 9J-5. 006 (2) (e)
An analysis of proposed development and redevelopment
of floodprone areas has not been included.
8
Recommendation
Include an analysis of proposed development and redevelopment
of floodprone areas. Although the Conservation
Element (p. 100) indicates that there are no Flood Rate
Insurance Maps available, the City should consider other
sources for this information such as Flood Hazard
Boundary Maps or U.S. Geological Survey maps.
Additionally, Map 1.2 of the plan element identifies
floodprone areas. This information should be
incorporated in analyzing proposed development in such
areas. The Future Land Use Map should be revised based
upon the required analysis.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
7. 9J-5. 006 (3) (b) 6.
Objective 7 (p. 5) , which concerns coordinating future
land uses with the Resource Management Plan for the
Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage
Basins, is not supported by the data and analysis.
While the objective indicates that proposed land use
activities will not be inconsistent with this plan, the
provisions of the plan have not been discussed or
analyzed. Therefore, it cannot be determined if
proposed future land uses as shown on the Future Land
Use Map are supported by the data and analysis and are
in fact consistent with the goals of the management
plan.
Recommendation
Revise the plan element to include an analysis of the
resource management plan. Include an analysis of the
suitability of future land uses in order to support the
goals of the management plan. If necessary, revise the
Future Land Use Map to show uses which are consistent
with and further the resource management plan.
8. 9J-5. 006 (3) (c)
Policy 3.3 (p. 3) does not correctly reflect the
requirements, pursuant to section 163.3201 (1) and (2) ,
F.S. , that land development regulations which implement
the comprehensive plan be adopted within one year of
the submission due date of the plan. The policy states
that the City will delay amending its zoning maps to be
consistent with the Future Land Use Element "by 1993 . "
9
Recommendation
Revise Policy 3.3 to provide that the City will amend
its zoning regulations to be consistent with the Future
Land Use Element, and the Future Land Use Map, within
one year of the submission due date of the
comprehensive plan. As the submission due date of the
plan was September of 1990, the City's zoning
regulations should be amended by September of 1991.
9. 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 1.
A policy which provides for regulation of subdivisions
and areas subject to seasonal or periodic flooding has
not been included.
Recommendation
Include a policy which provides for regulation of
subdivisions and areas subject to seasonal or periodic
flooding.
10. 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 3 .
Policy 1.1 (p. 2) does not clearly convey the meaning
of concurrency. The policy states that development
proposals will be approved "only if consistent with the
city's adopted minimum levels of service for public
facilities and services. " The term "consistent with"
does not provide that development orders and permits
will be specifically conditioned on the availability of
facilities and services necessary to serve the proposed
development at adopted level of service standards.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1. 1 to clearly indicate that development
orders or permits will be specifically conditioned on
the availability of facilities and services necessary
to serve the proposed development and that the
facilities meet adopted level of service standards.
11. 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 3 .
A policy which ensures that facilities that provide
utility service to the various land uses are authorized
at the same time as the land uses are authorized has
not been included.
10
Recommendation
Include a policy which ensures that facilities that
provide utility service to the various land uses are
authorized at the same time as the land uses are
authorized.
12 . 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 6.
Policy 1.3 (p. 2) , which provides that new development
may make temporary use of private well and septic
tanks "subject to the requirement that it will connect
to public potable water and sanitary sewer service once
such service becomes available" does not establish a
date 'by which connection must be made. Additionally,
the policy would allow industrial land uses to use
septic tanks where disposal of toxic or other hazardous
chemicals is possible. This provision is inconsistent
with section 381.272 (9) , F.S.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1. 3 to establish a date by which
connection to central sanitary sewer and potable water
facilities will be mandatory. Revise the policy to
indicate that septic tanks and drainfield installations
will be prohibited in areas zoned for industrial or
manufacturing use, or equivalent, where possible use is
to dispose of toxic waste or chemicals. The City may
choose to address this issue by including a policy
which requires review of septic tank disposal systems
utilized for industrial and/or manufacturing purposes
and prohibition of septic tank use by other types of
businesses (e.g. , dry cleaning, funeral homes, etc. )
which generate wastes that are non-domestic types of
wastes.
13 . 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 6.
Policy 1.4 (p. 2) does not correctly reflect the
requirement pursuant to section 163 . 3202 (2) that
land development regulations which protect
environmentally sensitive lands be adopted within one
year of the submission due date of the comprehensive
plan. Additionally, the policy is not specific because
it does not identify the criteria or densities and
intensities of development which will used to guide
development where soil types or topography is not
conducive to development. Further, the policy is not
supported by data and analysis because the plan has not
11
included an analysis of the character and magnitude of
existing vacant or undeveloped land in order to
determine its suitability for use.
Recommendation
Revise the policy to indicate that land development
regulations protecting environmentally sensitive lands
will be adopted within one year of the comprehensive
plan's submission due date. Revise the policy to
include criteria which the development regulations will
provide. For example, the City could choose to
prohibit septic tanks in areas with poorly drained
soils or ensure that densities and intensities of use
are low in such areas. Revise the plan element to
identify areas referred to in the policy and provide an
analysis of the suitability of use for such areas.
13 . 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 6.
Policy 5. 1 (p. 4) does not correctly reflect the
requirement pursuant to section 163 . 3202 (2) that
land development regulations which protect
environmentally sensitive lands be adopted within one
year of the submission due date of the comprehensive
plan. Additionally, the policy is not specific because
it does not establish criteria for new development to
prevent degrading the water quality of Taylor Creek.
Recommendation
Revise the policy to indicate that land development
regulations protecting the water quality of Taylor
Creek will be adopted within one year of the
comprehensive plan's submission due date. The City
could choose to establish specific water quality
standards for Taylor Creek which will be maintained.
Development or activities which would degrade the water
quality of Taylor Creek below the standard could then
be prohibited or design requirements be established
which ensure the maintenance of water quality.
14. 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 6.
Policy 5. 3 (p. 4) does not correctly reflect the
requirement pursuant to section 163 . 3202 (2) that
land development regulations which protect
environmentally sensitive lands be adopted within one
year of the submission due date of the comprehensive
plan. Additionally, the policy is not specific because
criteria or actions which the referenced development
standards will provide have not been identified.
12
Recommendation
Revise the policy to indicate that land development
regulations protecting groundwater supplies will be
adopted within one year of the comprehensive plan's
submission due date. Revise the policy to include
criteria or actions which development standards will
provide in order to protect groundwater quality. For
example, the land development regulations could require
that wellfield protection zones be established. Within
these zones the policy could require the following:
regulation of the use, handling, production and storage
of regulated substances; prohibiting new underground
fuel 'and other hazardous chemicals within these areas;
requiring existing facilities to demonstrate that
adequate technology is being employed on-site to
isolate the facility from the water supply; and, future
wellfield protection zones which are relatively
undeveloped will be planned for low density and
intensity land uses.
15. 9J-5.006 (3) fc) 7.
Policy 2.1 (p. 3) does not establish densities or
intensities of use for the following land use
categories:
(a) Commercial; (b) Industrial; and
(c) Public Facilities.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 2. 1 to establish densities or intensities
of use for the above land use categories.
16. 9J-5. 006 (3) (c) 8.
Policy 5.4 (p. 4) is not specific because it does not
identify how the City will protect historically
significant resources. The policy states only that the
City will "implement programs and procedures to
preserve and protect them. "
Recommendation
Revise Policy 5.4 to be specific by including criteria
or standards which the City will use to protect
historical resources. For example, the City could
require that facades of historical buildings remain in
the original condition, that the exterior structure of
buildings not be altered, that renovation of structures
13
be required to use similar materials to the original
and that new development adjacent to historical
resources must be architecturally compatible.
Future Land Use Map(s)
17. 9J-5. 006 (4) (a)
The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) does not depict
conservation land uses. The data and analysis
indicates that Taylor Creek is the "city's major
concern relative to the effect of new development" and
that "water quality in the creek has a substantial
effect on water quality in Lake Okeechobee. " The plan
element goes on to recommend that "the city should
cooperate with Okeechobee County in establishing
standards for new development which will help to reduce
levels of. . .pollutants entering the creek. " However,
the City has located industrial and residential land
uses adjacent to the creek without establishing
provisions to ensure that water quality is maintained
and improved.
Recommendation
Revise the FLUM to depict conservation land uses. The
City may choose to establish conservation uses
immediately adjacent to Taylor Creek thereby providing
a setback to buffer the Creek from the impacts of
development. This land use buffer, along with other
performance controls, should be sufficient to ensure
that development impacts such as stormwater runoff and
septage discharge do not enter the Creek. The City
could also protect the remaining wetlands by including
these in a conservation land use.
18. 9J-5. 006 (4)
The FLUM is not adequately supported by data and
analysis as raised in the objections cited for Rules
9J-5.007 (1) (c) , 2 (b) , and 2 (e) . These address lack of
densities or intensities for existing land uses;
missing analysis of the character and magnitude of
existing vacant land; and the proposed development and
redevelopment of floodprone areas.
Recommendation
Include the data and analyses noted above and revise
the Future Land Use Map as needed consistent with the
required analysis.
•
14
19. 9J-5.006 (4)
The depiction of industrial land uses as shown on the
FLUM is not supported by the data and analysis. Table
1.2, on page 12, identifies a need of one (1)
additional acre of industrial land by the year 2000.
However, the FLUM allocates a total of 178 acres to
industrial uses.
Recommendation
Revise the FLUM to allocate land for industrial use in
a manner and extent supported by, and consistent with,
the data and analysis.
20. 9J-5. 006 (4) (a)
The PLUM does not show historic properties.
Recommendation
Revise the FLUM to show historic properties.
21. 9J-5. 006 (4) (b)
The FLUM does not show existing or planned water wells
and cones of influence.
Recommendation
Revise the FLUM to show existing or planned water wells
and cones of influence. The FLUM should show the
private well identified on page 78 of the
"Infrastructure" element.
22 . 9J-5. 006 (4) (b) 3 . , 4. . and 5.
The FLUM does not show the following natural resources:
(a) floodplains; (b) wetlands; and (c) minerals and
soils.
Recommendation
Revise the FLUM to show the above natural resources.
15
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data
None
Analysis
1. 9J-5. 007 (2) (a)
On page 30 of the plan element it is stated that the
minimum level of service standard for urban arterials
is "D" . However, SR 70 and SR 700 are rural principal
arterials and should have a minimum level of service of
"C".
Recommendation
Revise the plan element to indicate that the minimum
level of service standard for rural principal arterials
is "C"
2 . 9J-5. 007 (2) (a)
The plan element (p. 31) incorrectly identifies
preliminary design and engineering for four-laning US
441 from CSX Railroad to Cemetery Rd. as proposed for
FY 1991-92. The correct date is FY 1992-93 .
Additionally, the project is for six-laning the
facility rather than four-laning.
Recommendation
Revise the analysis to reflect the correct information
noted above.
Goals. Objectives and Policies
3 . 9J-5. 007 (3) (c) 1.
The analysis presented in Tables 2.5 and 2 . 6 (p. 35)
projects that by the year 1995 the segment of US 441
from CSX Railroad is projected to become backlogged and
that by the year 2000, SR 70 from US 98 to the
beginning of the four lanes, and from US 98/441 to the
beginning of the four lanes will become backlogged.
However, the plan element does not include a policy
providing for actions or programs to address these
future deficiencies.
16
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a policy
establishing actions, programs or activities which the
City will undertake in the event one or more of these
facility segments fall below the adopted level of
service standard and/or become backlogged. For
example, the City could include a policy which provides
for cooperation with the Florida Department of
Transportation in adopting strategies, timetables, and
commitments to bring the operating conditions back to
acceptable levels of service over a reasonable period
of time.
4 . 9J-5:007 (3) (c) 1.
Policy 2 .2.1 (p. 11) indicates that minimum peak hour
operating conditions in the City will be consistent
with "those set forth in the Central Florida
Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan". However, peak
hour level of service standards on highways on the
state highway system should be consistent with those in
the "Florida Highway System Plan, Level of Service
Standards and Guidelines Manual. "
Recommendation
Revise Policy 2 .2 . 1 to ensure that minimum peak hour
level of service standards for highways on the state
highway system will consistent with those in the
"Florida Highway System Plan, Level of Service
Standards and Guidelines Manual. "
5. 9J-5. 007 (3) (c) 2 .
Policy 2 . 1.3 (p. 11) incorrectly reflects the
requirement pursuant to section 163.3202 (1) that land
development regulations which implement the
comprehensive plan be adopted within one year of the
submission due date of the plan.
Recommendation
Revise the Policy to indicate that land development
regulations will be adopted which "meet or exceed FDOT
standards, to control access to arterial and collector
roads. . . " by September, 1991.
•
17
Traffic Circulation Map
6. 9J-5.007 (4) (c)
The Future Traffic Circulation Map does not identify
the proposed number of lanes for each roadway.
Recommendation
Revise the Future Traffic Circulation Map to identify
the proposed number of lanes for each roadway.
B. COMMENTS
The minimum right-of-way requirements identified in
Policy 1.2. 1 may not be adequate to handle the proposed
six-lane cross-section on US 441, as well as proposed
work on SR 70. It is suggested that the City establish
special setback requirements in the comprehensive plan
and its development regulations to address these
circumstances. Please see the enclosed comments from
the Florida Department of Transportation.
18
HOUSING ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data
1. 9J-5. 010 (1) (a)
An inventory showing the number of dwelling units by
value has not been included.
Recommendation
Include an inventory showing the number of dwelling
units by value.
2. 9J-5. 010 (1) (c)
Although the plan element indicates criteria used by
the Central Florida Regional Planning Council to
determine the external condition of residential
structures in the City, a locally determined definition
of "standard" and "substandard" housing conditions has
not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a locally determined
definition of "standard" and "substandard" housing
conditions.
3 . 9J-5. 010 (1) (e)
An inventory of group homes licensed by the Florida
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services,
including the type, number, generalized location and
capacity, has not been included.
Recommendation
Include an inventory of group homes licensed by the
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services including the type, number, generalized
location and capacity.
4 . 9J-5. 010 (1) (g)
The inventory of historically significant housing
listed on the Florida Master Site File does not include
site 80K9, the "Old School House" .
19
Recommendation
Expand the inventory of historically significant
housing listed on the Florida Master Site File to
include site 80K9, the "Old School House".
Analysis
5. 9J-5. 010 (2) (b)
The housing need of the anticipated populations by cost
or rent and tenure has not been identified.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify the housing need
of the anticipated populations by cost or rent and
tenure.
6. 9J-5. 010 (2) (b)
An estimate of the housing need for rural and
farmworker households has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an estimate of the
housing need for rural and farmworker households.
7. 9J-5. 010 (2) (d)
An estimate of the portion of the housing need which
can be projected to be met by the private sector
within current market conditions, shown by type,
tenure, cost or rent, and income range of households
served has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an estimate of the
portion of the housing need which can be projected to
be met by the private sector within current market
conditions, shown by type, tenure, cost or rent, and
income range of households served.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
8 . 9J-5. 010 (3) (b) 1.
A specific and measurable objective providing adequate
and affordable housing for the existing population and
anticipated population, including farmworker housing,
20
has not been included. Objective 1 (p. 14) states only
that the City will "assist the private sector and other
public agencies in providing adequate and affordable
housing. . . ." Although the plan element indicates (p.
63) that " [N]early 40 percent of the city's households
fell into the low- and very-low income groups in 1979"
and that low- and moderate-income households "together
accounted for nearly 60 percent of all households in
the City, the objective does not commit the City to
provide any amount of affordable housing.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a specific and
measurable objective providing adequate and affordable
housing for the existing population and anticipated
population, including farmworker housing. For example,
an objective may be included setting a specific amount
of low-and moderate-income housing which will be
provided, or a percentage increase in affordable
housing which will serve a basis to assess progress
toward providing such housing.
9. 9J-5.0l0 (3) (b) 2 .
Objective 2 (p. 15) defers until 1993 efforts to
"identify, prevent and/or eliminate substandard housing
conditions. " It is not clear why the City is delaying
for three years these activities. Additionally, the
objective does not address the structural and
aesthetic improvement of existing housing.
Recommendation
Revise Objective 2 to establish a more timely date by
which the city will implement actions, programs or
activities to eliminate substandard housing. Expand
the objective (or include a new objective) to provide
for the structural and aesthetic improvement of
existing housing.
10. 9J-5.0l0 (3) (b) 3 .
Objective 4 (p. 16) is not measurable because it does
not include an amount of sites, or acreage, to be
provided for sites for low- and moderate-income
housing.
Recommendation
Revise Objective 4 to be measurable by establishing a
specific amount of sites, or acreage which will be
21
provided for sites for low- and moderate-income
housing. For example, the City, after undertaking the
analysis for the housing need of the anticipated
population, as cited in the objection to 9J-5.010(2) (b)
above, could establish the specific land requirements
for housing for low- and moderate-income housing.
Objective 4 could then be revised to provide this
amount of land.
11. 9J-5. 010(3) (b) 6.
While Objective 6 (p. 17) states that the City will
ensure that revitalization and stabilization efforts
will "not cause displacement or homelessness" the
objective does not provide for relocation housing.
Recommendation
Revise Objective 6 to provide for relocation housing.
12. 9J-5. 010(3) (c) 2 .
Policy 1.3 (p. 14) does not indicate how the City will
implement improvements to the "housing-related and
permitting processes within the city. " The policy
states only that the City Administrator "will assess
and recommend improvements. "
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1. 3 to establish actions which implement
improvement in the City's regulatory and permitting
processes. The City should consider the following:
waiving processing fees for affordable housing
projects; reducing or eliminating impact fees for
affordable housing projects; flexible zoning
(automatic increased density) ; reduction in setbacks;
inclusionary zoning; "fast-track" review for affordable
housing projects; and, consolidation of multiple
public hearings.
13 . 9J-5. 010 (3) (c) 3 .
Policy 3 . 1 (p. 15) is not supported by the data and
analysis. While the policy indicates that owners/
landlords "shall maintain their property in standard
condition", a locally determined definition of
"standard" and "substandard" has not been included as
cited in the objection raised for 9J-5. 010 (1) (c) .
•
22
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a locally determined
definition of "standard" and "substandard" housing
conditions.
14 . 9J-5. 010(3) (c) 7.
The additional requirement placed by Policy 7.1 (p. 18)
on the City's seeking subsidies for housing do not
ensure that the City will secure and utilize such
subsidies. The purpose of such subsidies is to provide
for adequate affordable housing. By requiring that
subsidy programs "offset the costs of city housing
efforts, return tax revenue to the community, provide
local employment, and/or leverage private-sector
investment in residential areas", Policy 7.1 is
inconsistent with the intent of section 187.201 (5) 3 . ,
F.S. , and section 163 . 3177 (6) (f) 4 . , F.S. , which require
adequate housing for low-income and moderate-income
families.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 7. 1 to delete the second sentence
stating that federal, state, local and private funding
or assistance should "offset the costs of city housing
efforts, return tax revenue to the community, provide
local employment, and/or leverage private-sector
investment in residential areas. "
23
SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, DRAINAGE, POTABLE WATER, AND NATURAL
GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE ELEMENT
SANITARY SEWER SUB-ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5. 011 (1) (e) 2 .
Map 4.1 which is referred to as showing the service
area of the City's sanitary sewer facilities shows only
the City itself and does not depict the area in the
unincorporated County served by the City's facilities.
Recommendation
Revise Map 4. 1 to show the entire service area for the
City's sanitary sewer facilities.
2 . 9J-5. 011 (1) (f) 2.
An analysis of the impact of septic tanks on adjacent
natural resources has not been included.
Recommendation
Include an analysis of the impact of septic tanks used
in the City on natural resources.
3 . 9J-5. 011 (1) (f) 2 .
An evaluation of the adequacy of the current level of
service provided by the City's sanitary sewer
facilities has not been included.
Recommendation
Include an evaluation of the adequacy of the current
level of service provided by the City's sanitary sewer
facilities.
4 . 9J-5. 011 (1) (f) 4 .
An analysis of soil surveys for areas served by septic
tanks and an explanation of the suitability of those
soils for such facilities has not been included.
24
Recommendation
Include an analysis of soil surveys for areas served by
septic tanks and an explanation of the suitability of
those soils for such facilities.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
5. 9J-5. 011 (2) (b) 2.
Although the data and analysis indicates (p. 83) that
"how much sewer service the city should provide to
unincorporated Okeechobee County is of critical
importance to growth management. . . " and that " [S]ervice
should be limited to a relatively compact urban
area. . . " an objective addressing this concern has not
been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an objective
providing for coordination with Okeechobee County in
extending service into the unincorporated area. For
example, the City could identify the person or office
responsible for coordination, establish service
agreements with the County and require joint planning
regarding land use decisions such as determining the
extent of Urban Residential land use in the County as
referenced in Policy 1.3 . 3 (p. 21) .
5. 9J-5. 011 (2) (c) 1.
Policy 1.3. 3 (p. 21) stating that water and sewer
service will not be extended beyond the boundaries of
the Urban Residential land use shown on the Okeechobee
County Future Land Use Map, is not supported by the
data and analysis. Additionally, Policy 1.3 . 3 does not
provide any controls for the extending service if the
County expands the Urban Residential land use category.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a map showing the
area of the unincorporated County to which water and
sewer service will be extended. A policy should also
be included indicating how the City will address the
provision of service in the event of land use
amendments expanding the Urban Residential area of the
County. For example, a policy establishing joint
planning methods for plan amendments concerning the
County's Urban Residential Area might be included.
25
6. 9J-5. 011 (2) (c) 2.a.
Policy 1.1.1 (p. 19) does not establish a level of
service standard for sanitary sewer facilities which
will become effective upon plan adoption. The policy
indicates that a level of service of 100 gallons per
capita per day is to be provided "by 1995. "
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1.1.1 to establish a level of service
standard which will become effective upon plan
adoption.
SOLID WASTE SUB-ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5.011(1) (c)
On page 84 of the plan element, the statement is made
that "45% or 400, 000 cubic yards [of solid waste
facility capacity] is assumed to be 'reserved' for the
City of Okeechobee. " However, there is no data or
information supporting this assumption.
Recommendation
Revise the plan element to include data supporting the
assumption that capacity at the County solid waste
facility has been reserved. For example, supporting
documents such as service agreements or contracts
should be included to substantiate this assumption.
2 . 9J-5. 0l1 (1) (e) 3 .
The available capacity of the Okeechobee County
landfill has not been identified.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify the available
capacity of the Okeechobee County landfill.
3 . 9J-5. 011 (1) (f) l.a. b. and c.
The plan element indicates (p. 77) that the County's
landfill "will be sufficient to serve Okeechobee County
through the planing period. " However, this statement
is inconsistent with the comments made by the
•
•
26
Department of Environmental Regulation stating that the
County's landfill is estimated to be at capacity within
the next ten (10) months (see pages 21 and 22 of the
enclosed Dept. of Environmental Regulation comments) .
Recommendation
Revise the plan element to resolve this inconsistency.
4. 9J-5. 011(1) (f) 1.a. b. and c.
The facility capacity analysis presented in Table 4. 6
(p. 84) of the plan element is based upon the
assumption that 45% or 400,000 cubic yards of facility
capacity is reserved for the City. However, as noted
above, this assumption has not been substantiated.
Additionally, the analysis addresses only the City's
demand upon the facility relative to the assumed
reserved capacity. An analysis which is based upon
total facility capacity and total (i.e. , City and
County) demand upon the facility has not been included.
Recommendation
Revise the plan element to demonstrate that facility
capacity assumed to be reserved is in fact reserved for
the City. Revise the plan element to include an
analysis of facility capacity based upon total facility
capacity and total demand on the County's landfill for
existing conditions, the initial increment of the
planning period and the remaining increment of the
planning period.
5. 9J-5. 011 (1) (f) 2 .and 3 .,
As noted above, the statement that County solid waste
facilities are adequate to provide for service demands
through the year 2000 is not supported by the data and
analysis and is inconsistent with the comments of the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.
Recommendation
If the solid waste facilities are near capacity the
plan element should be revised to include an analysis
of problems and opportunities for solid waste facility
replacement, expansion and new facility siting.
27
Goals. Objectives and Policies
6. 9J-5. 011(2) (b) 3 .
An objective addressing the requirement to, by 1994,
reduce the volume of solid waste requiring disposal by
30% has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an objective
addressing the requirement to, by 1994, reduce the
volume of solid waste requiring disposal by 30%. As
the City has a higher per capita generation rate than
the County, the City should include an objective to
coordinate with the County to cooperate in the
formation and implementation of solid waste reduction
programs.
7. 9J-5. 011 (2) (c)2.b.
Policy 1. 1.1 (p. 19) does not establish a level of
service standard for solid waste facilities which
will become effective upon plan adoption. The policy
indicates that a level of service of 13 pounds per
capita per day is to be provided "by 1995. " Also, the
level of service standard is not supported by the data
and analysis as noted in the comments made by the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
regarding the County's landfill capacity.
Additionally, the proposed level of service for solid
waste does not incorporate a measure relating to
landfill capacity availability (e.g. , 3 years of
landfill capacity remaining) .
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1. 1. 1 to establish a level of service
standard which will become effective upon plan
adoption. Revise the level of service standard to be
consistent with, and supported by, the data and
analysis. Revise the level of service standard to
include a standard in terms of landfill capacity
availability (e.g. , landfill capacity available to
accommodate existing and approved development for at
least 3 years from the projected date of completion of
the proposed development or use) .
28
DRAINAGE SUB-ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5.011(11 (d) through 1(h)
With the exception of indicating that drainage
facilities are provided by ditches and swales, that
some detention ponds exist, and that the City is
"generally drained by Taylor Creek", the plan has not
included the data and analysis required by section 9J-
5.011.
Recommendation
Revise the plan element to include all data and
analysis required by s. 9J-5. 011 for drainage
facilities in the City.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
2. 9J-5. 011(2) (b)
As noted in the above objection raised for missing data
and analysis requirements, the City has not adequately
addressed 9J-5.011 Rule requirements for drainage
facilities. Although the plan element states (p. 87)
that " [T]he city still has a significant need in terms
of addressing the problems of drainage and stormwater
management", objectives and policies to correct these
deficiencies have not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an objective to
address, in a timely and reasonable manner, the lack of
data and analysis for drainage facilities and
determining facility needs and identifying implementing
activities and programs to correct facility
deficiencies. The City should undertake a master
drainage study to determining existing conditions and
facility needs. Policies should be included indicating
that the study will be designed to, at a minimum,
fulfill all data and analysis requirements of s. 9J-
5. 011, F.A.C. A policy should be included that the
comprehensive plan will be amended to include the
results and recommendations of the drainage study.
29
3. 93-5. 011 (2) (c) 1.
A policy establishing priorities for replacement,
correcting existing facility deficiencies and providing
for future drainage facility needs has not been
included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a policy
establishing priorities for replacement, correcting
existing facility deficiencies and providing for future
drainage facility needs.
4 . 9J-51011 (2) (c) 2 .c.
The level of service standard for drainage facilities
established by Policy 1.1. 1 (p. 19) is not supported by
data and analysis.
Recommendation
As the City does not currently have adequate data and
analysis to support a level of service standard for
drainage, the City should adopt an interim standard. A
policy should be included that, upon completion of a
master stormwater drainage study, the plan element will
be amended to include a level of service standard
supported by the resulting data and analysis and
recommendations.
5. 9J-5. 011(2) (c) 2 .c. and 9J-5. 0055 (1) (a) 4 .
The level of service standard for drainage facilities
established by Policy 1. 1. 1 (p. 19) does not include a
water quality component.
Recommendation
Revise the level of service standard to include a
water quality component. All stormwater facilities
should be required to meet the design and performance
standards established in Chapter 17-25, Section 17-
25. 025, F.A.C. , with treatment of the first inch of
runoff on-site to meet water quality standards required
by Chapter 17-302, Section 17-302 . 500, F.A.C.
Stormwater discharge facilities must be designed so as
not to degrade the receiving water body quality below
the minimum conditions necessary to assure the
suitability of water for the designated use of its
classification as established in Chapter 17-302, F.A.C.
The policy must state that all standards in these
30
citations are to apply to all new development and
redevelopment and that any exemptions, exceptions or
thresholds in these citations, including project
thresholds are not applicable.
6. 9J-5. 011 (2) (c) 4.
Policy 3.2.1 (p. 22) is not specific because it does
not include standards or criteria which will be
established in the City's land development regulations
to protect the function of natural drainage features.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 3.2 .1 to include standards or criteria
which will be established in the City's land
development regulations to protect the function of
natural drainage features.
POTABLE WATER SUB-ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5. 011 (1) (c)
The proportional capacity of the City's potable water
facilities allocated to serve the unincorporated County
has not been identified.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify the proportional
capacity of the City's potable water facilities
allocated to serve the unincorporated County. If no
specific allocation has been established, identify the
percent of total demand upon the facility attributable
to the unincorporated County.
2 . 9J-5. 011 (1) (f) 2 .
An analysis evaluating the impact of the City's potable
water facilities upon adjacent natural resources has
not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an analysis
evaluating the impact of the City's potable water
facilities upon adjacent natural resources.
•
•
31
3. 9J-5.011(1) (f) 3 .
Although the plan element indicates that the City's
water plant will be expanded before 1995 (p. 85) and
analysis of the problems and opportunities for
expansion and new facility siting has not been
included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an analysis of the
problems and opportunities for expansion and new
facility siting. If the City is considering using
groundwater sources for potable water, rather than Lake
Okeechobee surface water, an analysis of using
groundwater (e.g. , effect on the aquifer, requirements
to protect waterwells, appropriate land uses adjacent
to wellfields) should also be included.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
4. 9J-5. 011 (2) (c) l.
Policy 1.3 .3 (p. 21) stating that water and sewer
service will not be extended beyond the boundaries of
the Urban Residential land use shown on the Okeechobee
County Future Land Use Map, is not supported by the
data and analysis. Additionally, Policy 1.3 .3 does not
provide any controls for the extending service if the
County expands the Urban Residential land use category.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a map showing the
area of the unincorporated County to which water and
sewer service will be extended. A policy should also
be included indicating how the City will address the
provision of service in the event of land use
amendments expanding the Urban Residential area of the
County. For example, a policy establishing joint
planning methods for plan amendments concerning the
County's Urban Residential Area might be included.
5. 9J-5.011 (2) (c) 2 .d.
Policy 1.1. 1 (p. 19) does not establish a level of
service standard for potable water facilities which
will become effective upon plan adoption. The policy
indicates that a level of service of 119 gallons per
capita per day is to be provided "by 1995. "
32
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1. 1.1 to establish a level of service
standard which will become effective upon plan
adoption.
6. 9J-5. 011 (2) (c) 3 .
Policy 3.1. 1 (p. 22) is not specific because it does
not identify the "other appropriate means" which will
be used to conserve potable water.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 3. 1.1 to be specific by identifying means
which the City will use to conserve potable water. For
example, the City should include provisions to conserve
water through the required use of water conserving
plumbing fixtures, xeriscape landscaping and amending
local building codes or ordinances to strengthen the
local effectiveness or the enforcement of Chapter 553,
F.S. (Building Construction Standards) .
NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE SUB-ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5.011 (1) (h)
Although the plan element states that the City
currently has no ordinances specifically addressing
development and/or protection of recharge areas,
applicable regional or state regulations or programs
governing land uses and development of recharge areas
have not been identified or analyzed.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify and analyze
regional or state regulations or programs governing
land uses and development of natural groundwater
recharge areas.
Goals. Objectives and Policies
2 . 9J-5.011(2) (c)4.
Policy 3.2.2 (p. 22) is not specific because it does
not identify the "provisions protecting the function
. . .of natural groundwater recharge areas. "
33
Recommendation
Revise Policy 3.2.2 to identify the provisions which
will be included in the land development regulations to
protect the functions of natural groundwater recharge
areas.
34
a ,
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5. 013 (1) (a) 1.
Wetlands existing within the City have not been
identified or analyzed.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify and analyze
wetlands existing within the City.
2 . 9J-5. 013 (1) (a) 2 .
Although Map 1.2 of the Future Land Use Element shows
floodprone areas within the City an analysis of these
areas has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an analysis of
floodprone areas.
3 . 9J-5. 013 (1) (a)5.
The information concerning wildlife, marine habitats,
and vegetative communities found in pages 100 through
104 is a general analysis for Okeechobee County and
does not address these resources specifically for the
City.
Recommendation
Include an analysis of wildlife, marine habitats, and
vegetative communities for the City of Okeechobee. As
the City contains 645 vacant or undeveloped acres (29%
of the total land area) , which include some large
tracts, an analysis addressing wildlife and vegetative
communities should be undertaken for the City.
4 . 9J-5. 013 (1) (b)
An analysis of the potential for conservation, use or
protection of areas containing wildlife, fisheries, and
vegetative communities has not been included. For
example, although the plan element states (p. 9) that
" [N]ew development should. . .protect . . .native
vegetative communities as may still exist in the Taylor
35
Creek area" no analysis addressing this concern has
been included. Similarly, on page 108 the statement is
made that " [M]easures to minimize urban runoff and
maintain control of hazardous waste will prevent the
degradation of water quality in Taylor Creek,
preserving fisheries. . . . " However, no analysis is
made concerning what measures should be taken by the
City to protect these resources.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an analysis of the
potential for conservation, use or protection of areas
containing wildlife, fisheries, and vegetative
communities existing within the City.
5. 9J-5. 013 (1) (c)
An analysis addressing existing levels of water
conservation, use and protection and applicable
policies of the South Florida Water Management District
has not been included.
Recommendation
Include an analysis addressing existing levels of water
conservation, use and protection and applicable
policies of the South Florida Water Management
District.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
6. 9J-5.013 (2) (b)
Although the plan element (p. 98) states that the
"city's impact on pollutant loading in Taylor Creek has
not been documented" and identifies urban runoff and
the "proliferation of septic tanks in the city" as
concerns affecting the water quality of the Creek, an
objective addressing these problems has not been
included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an objective
addressing the City's impact upon the water quality of
Taylor Creek. For example, a study of the current
water quality of the Creek could be undertaken and the
impacts of existing development and new development
upon water quality determined. The suitability of
using septic tanks in areas adjacent to the Creek could
also be determined and strategies for preventing
36
degradation of surface water quality should be
undertaken. An analysis of land uses suitable for
areas adjacent to the Creek should also be done and
specific recommendation made for uses which maintain or
improve water quality. Policies to implement the
recommendations of the study should be included.
7. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 1.
Policy 2.2 (p. 23) is not specific because it does not
identify how the City will protect water quality and
quantity. The policy only references the Future Land
Use Map and "applicable land development regulations"
as providing protection. However, the Future Land Use
Map does not depict cones of influence, waterwell or
recharge areas. Additionally, neither the plan element
nor the policy identify what land development
regulations will be used and how the regulations will
protect water quality and quantity.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 2.2 to be specific by identifying
actions, programs or activities which the City will
undertake to protect the quality and quantity of
drinking water supply. If the City intends to provide
such protection through land development regulations,
Policy 2.2 should identify criteria or standards which
will be included in the regulations to protect potable
water supplies.
8. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 3 .
A policy establishing implementing activities to
protect native vegetative communities from destruction
by development activities has not been included.
Policy 3.4 only addresses vegetative communities that
"cross jurisdictional boundaries. "
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a •specific policy
establishing implementing activities to protect native
vegetative communities from destruction by development
activities.
9. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 5.
Policy 4.2 (p. 24) is not specific because it does not
identify how the City will protect the habitat of
endangered and threatened wildlife. The policy only
references the Future Land Use Map and "applicable land
37
development regulations" as providing protection.
However, the Future Land Use Map does not depict
wildlife habitat. Additionally, neither the plan
element nor the policy identify what land development
regulations will be used and how the regulations will
protect wildlife habitat.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 2.2 to be specific by identifying
actions, programs or activities which the City will
undertake to protect the habitat of endangered and
threatened wildlife. Revise the Future Land Use Map,
if appropriate, to depict these wildlife habitat areas.
If the City intends to provide such protection through
land development regulations, Policy 4.2 should
identify criteria or standards which will be included
in the regulations to protect such habitat.
10. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 6.
A policy to protect and conserve the natural functions
of wildlife habitat has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a specific policy to
protect and conserve the natural functions of wildlife
habitat.
11. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 6.
Policy 4 .1 (p. 24) is not specific because it does not
identify how the City's land development regulations
will improve the water quality in Taylor Creek.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 4. 1 to identify specific standards or
criteria which will be included in the City's land
development regulations in order to protect and improve
the water quality in Taylor Creek.
12. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 6.
A policy protecting and conserving the natural functions
of wetlands has not been included.
•
38
RECEIVED JAN 1 4 1991
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a specific policy
establishing implementing activities to protect and
conserve the natural functions of wetlands.
13 . 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 6.
A policy protecting and conserving the natural functions
of floodplains has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a specific policy
establishing implementing activities to protect and
conserve the natural functions of floodplains.
14 . 9J-5.013 (2) (c)9.
Policy 3 .3 (p. 24) does not identify the criteria which
will be used to designate environmentally sensitive
lands. Additionally, the policy is not specific
because the land development regulations which will be
used to protect these lands also have not been
identified.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 3.3 to identify the criteria which will
be used to designate environmentally sensitive lands.
If the City intends to protect these lands through land
development regulations, Policy 3.3 should identify
criteria or standards which will be included in the
regulations to ensure this protection. Revise the
Future Land Use Map, as necessary, to show
environmentally sensitive lands.
15. 9J-5. 013 (2) (c) 10.
A policy identifying how the City will provide for the
management of hazardous wastes to protect natural
resources has not been included. Policy 3 . 1 (p. 24)
states only that the City will cooperate with the
County to develop and implement a hazardous waste
management program and does not identify a date by
which such a plan will be undertaken.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to identify how the City will
provide for the management of hazardous wastes to
protect natural resources. If the City intends to
39
develop a waste management plan with the County, a
policy identifying how the City will manage hazardous
waste in the interim should be included. Policy 3 . 1
should be revised to include a date by which a joint
management plan will be undertaken. Additionally, a
policy should be included to amend the comprehensive
plan to incorporate the recommendations and provisions
of a joint plan with the County.
•
40
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data
None
Analysis
None
Goals, Objectives and Policies
1. 9J-5‘014 (3) (c) 1.
Policy 1.1 (p. 25) does not correctly reflect the
requirement pursuant to s. 163 .3202 (1) , F.A.C. , that
land development regulations which implement the
comprehensive plan be adopted within one year of the
submission due date of the plan. The policy delays
until 1992 the adoption of specific open space
definitions and standards.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1. 1 to provide that specific open space
definitions and standards will be included in the
City's land development regulations by September, 1991.
2 . 9J-5. 014 (3) (c) 3 .
A policy which maintains or improves shoreline access
has not been included.
Recommendation
Include a policy which maintains or improves shoreline
access. The City should include a policy maintaining
or improving access to Taylor Creek.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data and Analysis
1. 9J-5. 015 (1) , (2) and (3)
Although the statement is made (p. 6) that the City
should coordinate with other agencies regarding the
Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River
•
•
41
and Taylor Creek Drainage Basins, the plan element does
not address means for coordination or activities to
implement the Resource Management Plan.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include data analysis and
implementing policies to address coordination with the
Resource Management Plan. Policies implementing the
Resource Management should also be included in the
Future Land Use and Conservation elements.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
2 . 9J-5:015 (3) (c) 1.
A policy or policies establishing coordinating
activities and programs in order to implement the
Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River
and Taylor Creek Drainage Basins has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a policy or policies
establishing coordinating activities and programs in
order to implement the Resource Management Plan for the
Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage Basins.
The City should establish coordinating mechanisms with,
but not limited to, the County of Okeechobee and the
South Florida Water Management District to address the
implementation of the Resource Plan.
42
RECEIVED JAN 1 4 1991
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
A. OBJECTIONS
Data
1. 9J-5. 016 (11 (a)
The Capital Improvements Element is not based on all
the public facility needs identified in the other
comprehensive plan elements. The element does not
address the drainage needs identified in the Sanitary
Sewer, Solid Waste, Potable Water, Drainage and Natural
Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element.
Recommendation
Revise the Capital Improvements Element to include data
and analysis relevant to determining and correcting
current drainage facility deficiencies and providing
for future growth. The plan element should include,
but not be limited to: the general fiscal
implications of the existing deficiencies and future
needs for drainage facilities; the costs of needed
capital improvements for drainage facilities; and, an
assessment of the City's ability to finance drainage
facility improvements.
Analysis
2 . 9J-5. 016 (2) (c)
An explanation of the basis of cost estimates for
expanding the City's water treatment and wastewater
treatment plant has not been included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include an explanation of
the basis of cost estimates for expanding the City' s
water treatment and wastewater treatment plant.
3 . 9J-5. 016 (2) (f) 1.
Table 8.2 (p. 185) , entitled "Projected Revenues City
of Okeechobee" includes a revenue source identified as
"Miscellaneous. " While this source accounts for 30% of
total revenues the composition of the category is not
identified. That is, the plan does not identify what
revenues make up this category.
•
• 43
Recommendation
Revise Table 8.2 to clearly identify the revenue
sources which make up the "Miscellaneous" category.
The City could choose to decompose the category and
identify the individual revenue sources.
4. 9J-5. 016 (2) (f) 1.
Table 8.2 (p. 185) , entitled "Projected Revenues City
of Okeechobee" includes a revenue sources identified as
"Debt Service", "Public Fac. Improvements", "Law Enf.
Special Fund" and "Public Facilities Revenues."
However, these revenue sources are not identified in
the inventory of existing revenue sources.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to clearly identify the revenue
sources as cited above.
5. 9J-5. 016 (2) (f) 1.
The budget surpluses derived from subtracting projected
revenues (Table 8.2) from projected expenditures (Table
8. 3) are not consistent with the amounts of surplus
identified in the text on page 184 and shown in Table
8 .5, "Projected Budget Surplus" on page 186.
Recommendation
Resolve this inconsistency. If additional expenditures
are forecast by the City, revise Tables 8.2 and 8 .5 as
necessary.
6. 9J-5. 016 (2) (f) 1.
The projected amounts of debt service through fiscal
year 1994-95 shown in Table 8. 2 (p. 185) is
inconsistent with the amount of debt service shown in
Table 8.4, entitled, "Debt Service Ratios" on page 186.
Recommendation
Resolve this inconsistency.
7. 9J-5. 016 (2) (f) 3 .
A projection of the City's millage rate for five years
has not been included.
44
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include a projection of the
City's millage rate for five years.
8 . 9J-5. 016 (2) (f) 4 .
Projections of revenues identified in the inventory of
revenues (pgs. 174-184) for five years has not been
included.
Recommendation
Expand the plan element to include projections of
revenues identified in the inventory of revenues (pgs.
174-184) , and currently used by the City, for five
years.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
9. 9J-5. 016 (3) (b) 3 .
Objective 2 (p. 29) is not supported by the data and
analysis or the Schedule of Capital Improvements
because the City has not address the need for drainage
facilities, as indicated in the Sanitary Sewer, Solid
Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater
Aquifer Recharge Element.
Recommendation
Revise the Capital Improvements Element and the
Schedule of Capital Improvements to support Objective 2
by addressing, in a timely and reasonable manner,
existing drainage deficiencies and providing for future
drainage needs.
10. 9J-5. 016 (3) (b) 4 .
Objective 3 (p. 30) is not specific because it does not
indicate the extent to which future development will
bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements.
Recommendation
Revise Objective 3 to be specific by indicating that
costs of new public facilities will be allocated on the
basis of the benefits received by existing and future
residents.
45
11. 9J-5. 016 (3) (c) 4 . and 9J-5. 0055 (1) (a) 2 .
Policy 2 . 1 (p. 30) does not establish level of service
standards for sanitary sewer facilities which will
become effective upon plan adoption.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 2.1 to establish level of service
standards for sanitary sewer which will be effective
upon plan adoption. The City should delete the term
"by 1995. "
12 . 9J-5. 016 (3) (c) 4. and 9J-5. 0055 (1) (a) 2 .
The level of service standard for drainage established
by Policy 2.1 (p. 30) does not include a water quality
component.
Recommendation
Revise the level of service standard for drainage
established by Policy 2 . 1 (p. 30) does not include a
water quality component. Please see the recommendation
made for the objection raised to 9J-5. 011(2) (c) 2 .c.
12 . 9J-5. 016 (3) (c) 9.
Policy 1.2 (p. 29) delays until 1993 the integration of
the City's planning and budgeting process. However,
the planning process is integral to the budgeting
process. For example, land use decisions must be
coordinated with with available or projected fiscal
resources to maintain adopted level of service
standards. The extension of facilities and services
must be evaluated with the fiscal and budgetary
capabilities of the City. This policy is inconsistent
with the requirement that the City use fiscal policies
to direct expenditures for capital improvements that
recognize and further the other elements of the
comprehensive plan.
Recommendation
Revise Policy 1.2 to include a more timely and
reasonable date by which the City will integrate its
planning and budgeting process. At a minimum, the City
should undertake this integration by the time land
development regulations, including the City's
concurrency management system, are required to be
adopted (i.e. , September, 1991) .
46
Implementation Requirements
13 . 9J-5. 016 (4) (a)
The schedule of capital improvements (p. 45) does not
include the expenditure of $608, 000 shown in Table 8. 3
(p. 185) for expansion of the wastewater treatment
plant.
Recommendation
Expand the schedule of capital improvements to include
this expenditure.
14 . 9J-5:016 (4) (a)
The schedule of capital improvements (p. 45) does not
reflect the existing facility deficiencies and facility
requirements to meet future demand because it does not
include any expenditures to meet drainage deficiencies
indicated in the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage,
Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge
Element.
Recommendation
Revise the schedule of capital improvements to reflect
the need to reduce existing drainage deficiencies and
provide for future drainage demands. The City should
include expenditures, at a reasonable date, to
undertake a master drainage study to determine exiting
conditions and future needs. The City should also
revise the Capital Improvements Element to include a
policy which ensures that recommendations of the study
are carried out and that the level of service standard
for drainage is maintained. Note, the level of service
standard for drainage must be revised to include a
water quality component as cited in the objection
raised for 9J-5.011(2) (c) 2.c.
Monitoring and Evaluation Requirements
15. 9J-5. 016 (5)
The section entitled "Comprehensive Plan Monitoring"
(p. 44) does not provide that the Capital Improvements
Element will be reviewed on an annual basis.
•
47
Recommendation
Revise the procedures for monitoring the comprehensive
plan to provide for an annual review of the Capital
Improvements Element.
STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5. 021
The proposed plan does not adequately address the
following State Comprehensive Plan goals and policies:
(a)' Goal 5 (Housing) , Policies 1 and 3
(b) Goal 8 (Water Resources) , Policies 1,2,5, 8-13
(c) Goal 10 (Natural Systems and Recreational Lands) ,
Policies 1-7 and 9-13
(d) Goal 16 (Land Use) , Policy 16
(e) Goal 18 (Public Facilities) , Policies 1,5,6,7
(f) Goal 26 (Plan Implementation) , Policies 2 and 3 ,
and 4
Recommendation
Revise the proposed plan to include objectives and
policies that are supported by the data and analysis
and are consistent with and further the above
referenced goals and policies of the State
Comprehensive Plan.
Goal 5 can be furthered by including provisions for
housing with supporting infrastructure for the
anticipated population, with particular emphasis on low
and moderate income households as well as providing
sites for this housing types.
Goal 8 can be furthered by including in the adopted
plan objectives and policies to protect water sources
and water conservation strategies that are supported by
relevant data and analysis.
Goal 10 can be furthered by the protection of natural
habitats and ecological systems, fish, wetlands and
environmentally sensitive lands throughout the City.
Goal 16 can be furthered by considering the impact of
land use on water quality and natural resources.
48
A
A
Goal 18 can be furthered by including provisions to
maximize the use of existing public facilities and
provide data and analysis of existing and future needs.
Goal 26 can be furthered by establishing level of
service standards which will be effective upon plan
adoption and including a policy to simplify, streamline
and make more predicable the existing permitting
procedures.
REGIONAL POLICY PLAN CONSISTENCY
A. OBJECTIONS
1. 9J-5.021(1)
The proposed plan does not adequately address and
further the following regional goals and policies:
(a) Housing (Regional Policy 1) ;
(b) Water Resources (Regional Policy 1) ;
(c) Natural Systems and Recreational Lands (Regional
Policy and 1 and 2) ;
(d) Public Facilities (Regional Policy 2) ; and
Recommendation
Revise the proposed plan to include objectives and
policies that are supported by the data and analysis
and that are consistent with and further the above-
referenced goals and policies of the Central Florida
Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan.
Regional Policy 1 for the Availability of Housing can
be furthered by establishing provisions for housing
with supporting infrastructure for the anticipated
population with particular emphasis on low and moderate
income housing as well as providing sites for this
housing type.
Regional Policy 1 for the Protection of Water Resources
can be furthered by establishing procedures to protect,
manage and conserve surface water and aquifer resources
for unimpaired future use.
Regional Policy 1 and 2 for the Protection of Natural
Systems can be furthered by establishing procedures to
mitigate land development impacts on the City's natural
systems and protecting environmentally sensitive
natural areas.
• 49
R
Regional Policy 1 and 2 for the Planning of Public
Facilities can be furthered by providing a schedule of
capital improvements for the public facility
deficiencies and needs identified in the plan.
50