Issuu on Google+

Previous JCCI Studies STUDY 1977 1977 1977 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980 1980 1981 1981 1982 1982 1982 1983 1983 1984 1984 1985 1985 1986 1986 1987 1987 1988 1988 1989 1989 1990

CHAIR Local Government Finance* Robert Davis Housing* Thomas Carpenter Public Education (K-12)* Robert W. Schellenberg Public Authorities* Howard Greenstein Strengthening the Family* Jacquelyn Bates Citizen Participation in the Schools* Susan Black Youth Unemployment* Roy G. Green Theatre Jacksonville* Richard Bizot Civil Service* Max K. Morris Planning in Local Government* I. M. Sulzbacher Capital Improvements for Recreation* Ted Pappas But Not In My Neighborhood Pamela Y. Paul The Energy Efficient City* Roderick M. Nicol Coordination of Human Services* Pat Hannan Higher Education* R. P. T. Young Disaster Preparedness* Walter Williams Jr. Teenage Pregnancy* Mari Terbrueggen Downtown Derelicts* Earle Traynham Mass Transit* David Hastings Indigent Health Care* Linda McClintock Jacksonville’s Jail Eleanor Gay Growth Management* Curtis L. McCray Visual Pollution Doug Milne Minority Business* Jack Gaillard Private Delivery of Public Services George Fisher Mental Health and Drug Abuse Services for Children and Youth* Flo Nell Ozell Child Day-Care Services George W. Corrick Infrastructure* Joan Carver Local Election Process* Jim Rinaman School Dropout Prevention* Gene Parks Reducing the Garbage Burden* Jack F. Milne & James L. White III Independent Living for the Elderly Roseanne Hartwell Future Workforce Needs Yank D. Coble Jr.

JCCI studies are available free to interested individuals. Most studies may be downloaded from our website at www.jcci.org. Those marked with a star are out of print; copies available at $7.00 each. STUDY 1990 Philanthropy in Jacksonville* 1991 Adequate Water Supply* 1991 Positive Development of Jacksonville’s Children* 1992 Long-Term Financial Health of the City of Jacksonville 1992 Young Black Males* 1993 1993 1994 1994 1995 1995 1996 1996 1997 1997 1997 1998 1998 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001

Planning for Northeast Florida’s Uncertain Military Future Public Education: The Cost of Quality* Reducing Violence in Jacksonville Schools* Jacksonville Public Services: Meeting Neighborhood Needs* Teenage Single Parents and Their Families* JAXPORT: Improvement and Expansion Creating a Community Agenda: Indicators For Health and Human Services* Leadership: Meeting Community Needs* Improving Public Dialogue Transportation for the Disadvantaged Children with Special Needs* The Role of Nonprofit Organizations Incentives for Economic Development* Improving Adult Literacy Arts, Recreation and Culture in Jacksonville Affordable Housing Improving Regional Cooperation Services for Ex-Offenders

CHAIR Juliette Mason Russell B. Newton Jr. Henry H. “Tip” Graham Mary Alice Phelan Chester A. Aikens & William E. Scheu David L. Williams Royce Lyles Dale Clifford Michael Korn Afesa Adams Jim Ade Bruce Demps Bill Brinton Jim Crooks Cathy Winterfield Virginia Borrok Sherry Magill Henry Thomas Edythe Abdullah Ed Hearle Bill Bishop Jim Rinaman Dana Ferrell Birchfield

Nonprofit Org. U.S. POSTAGE

PAID Permit No. 1999 Jacksonville, FL

Jacksonville Community Council Inc. 2434 Atlantic Boulevard, Suite 100 Jacksonville, Florida 32207 E-mail address: jcci@jcci.org Web address: http://www.jcci.org

JCCI is a United Way Agency

Jacksonville Community Council, Inc.

STUDY

GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVISITED

A Report to the Citizens of Northeast Florida • Summer 2001


Summary Duval County is growing. Residents have children, and people and businesses arrive daily. Growth management is the effort of the local and regional community to preserve the quality of life while accommodating population and economic growth. JCCI released its first Growth Management Study in 1984. That study looked at the mechanisms necessary to maintain and enhance the quality of life in Jacksonville in the face of predicted growth. Among other recommendations, it called for the adoption and enforcement of a Comprehensive Plan, increased media coverage of growth management, and increased citizen awareness and involvement in the growth-management process. In 1985, Florida passed a Growth Management Act, creating a statewide system for enforcing growth management. In 1990, Jacksonville adopted its own Comprehensive Plan. In 2000, the State of Florida began review of its growth-management regulations, and the 2001 Growth Management Study Commission report called for increasing local responsibility for growth management. In this study, JCCI examines the outcomes of Duval County’s growth-management efforts over the last fifteen years and identifies steps to improve implementation of growth management in Duval County. The study committee explored how legislative mandates, community goals, and other factors have influenced growth management; examined the effectiveness of past and current strategies; reviewed the regional implications of growthmanagement efforts; and discussed how growth-management approaches from across the country might be adapted to local efforts. This study accepts current projections that growth will continue in Duval County. For the purposes of this study, growth management refers to programs and policies intended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencing the rate, location, design, and quality of development, including new development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymous with stopping growth.

Major Concerns

Recommended Solutions

State growth-management efforts have increased the cost of development while creating unintended negative consequences for local communities.

Restructure the Florida growth-management process by delegating responsibilities and authority to appropriate levels of government.

The natural environment traditionally has been given insufficient consideration in growth-management decisions.

Protect the natural environment by including assessment of development impacts on the natural environment in decision making.

The complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of the Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) process discouraged its use.

Streamline and simplify the DRI process, transferring review authority to the Regional Planning Councils.

Historically, growth-management efforts in Duval County have focused more on new growth than on redevelopment of existing neighborhoods.

Encourage and fund coordinated efforts to revitalize older neighborhoods.

Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology for determining the full costs and benefits to the community of proposed development.

Develop and use a process to determine the full costs and benefits of proposed developments, including tax-payer impacts and impacts on the natural environment.

2

Growth Management Revisited 2001

Board of Directors Sue Butts, President** Edgar Mathis, President-Elect** Pat Brzozowski, Secretary** Edward Hearle, Treasurer** Edythe Abdullah John Anderson Oliver Barakat** William Bishop Lizanne Bomhard Virginia Borrok Vanessa Boyer Michael Boylan Sherry Burns** Charles A. Clarkson John R. Cobb** John Daigle Jr. Edward Eng David Foster Charles Griggs Dave Hemphill Howard Kelley William Mason III John Rutherford Mary Ellen Smith** Paula Weatherby Gerald Weedon Susie Wiles **Executive Committee

Executive Director Lois Chepenik

Highlights

Committee Membership and Work

Past Presidents J.J. Daniel Jack H. Chambers Yank D. Coble Jr. Robert D. Davis George W. Corrick Howard R. Greenstein Jacquelyn D. Bates David M. Hicks James C. Rinaman Kenneth W. Eilermann J. Shepard Bryan Jr. Juliette Woodruff Mason Lucy D. Hadi Charles P. Hayes Jr. Steve Pajcic Tracey I. Arpen Jr Guy Marvin III Luther Quarles III W.O. Birchfield Michael J. Korn William E. Scheu Afesa Adams William D. Brinton Sherry Burns

Committee members met together on 25 Tuesday mornings from October through May. In addition, the management team met several times to provide guidance and direction for this study. The committee received information from 23 knowledgeable resource people and additional written materials researched by JCCI staff.

CHAIR

Allan T. Geiger

MANAGEMENT TEAM

James Argrett, Jr. J. Shepherd Bryan John Crofts Pat Greason Hawley Smith Jerry Spinks Trip Stanly Henry Thomas Quinton White

COMMITTEE Judy Aranda Lynda Aycock Tony Bates Richard Berry Bill Bishop Flossie Brunson John Cannon Jeane Chappell Carmen Chronister Bucky Clarkson

Jeff Clements Richard Darby Gary Davenport Daniel Davis Dan Donaldson Mary Eaves George Fisher Holly Kartsonis Kirk Lewis David Lipp

William Mahoney Hugh O'Malley Bob Ottesen Marvin Reese Sylvia Simmons Richard Skinner Jr. Lindner Smith Jim Varian Denise Wallace

JCCI Staff

Planning Staff

Support Staff

Lois Chepenik Executive Director

Laura Lane Cheryl Murphy Jennifer Parsons Ben Warner *

Earlene Hostutler Michelle Simkulet Lashun Stephens * Wanda Tivey

David Swain Associate Director

* Staff for this study

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

23


References

Table Of Contents

The following written materials offered useful information related to the study issue.

4

FINDINGS

Barnett, Cynthia, and Mary Ellen Klas, Managing Growth: 10 Steps Toward a More Livable Florida (Florida Trend), December 2000. City of Jacksonville, Jacksonville Into the 21st Century: Growth Management Task Force Recommendations, 1997. Duany, Andres, The Science of Smart Growth (Scientific American), December 2000. Florida Department of Community Affairs, Growth Management Survey Report, February 2000. Florida Growth Management Study Commission, A Liveable Florida for Today and Tomorrow: Growth Management Study Commission Final Report, 2001. Hollis, Linda; Porter, Douglas; and Holly Stallworth, Assessing the Impacts of Development Choices: Prepared for the Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South Florida and its Full-Cost Accounting Committee, 1997. Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Growth Management: A Report to the Citizens of Jacksonville, 1984. Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida: A Study Report to the Citizens of the First Coast, 2000. Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, 2010 Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report, 1997. Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, The Citizen’s Guide to Zoning (draft), 2001. The National Neighborhood Coalition, Smart Growth, Better Neighborhoods: Communities Leading the Way, 2000.

Introduction

4

Community goals

4

Impacts of growth on Duval County Population and economic growth Factors affecting development patterns Resulting development patterns Resulting community impacts Transportation Environmental impacts Growth distribution

5 5 6 7 8 8 8 9

Growth management tools and their effectiveness State regulation Areas of Critical State Concern Developments of Regional Impact Comprehensive Planning Concurrency Growth Management Study Commission Local efforts Comprehensive Planning Zoning Land acquisition

9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13

Infrastructure Targeted economic incentives Fair-share agreements Downtown redevelopment Neighborhood and sector plans Brownfields Visual environment Historic preservation Affordable housing Regional coordination Approaches from other communities Indianapolis, Indiana Portland, Oregon Charlotte, North Carolina Rhode Island Maryland

13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16

CONCLUSIONS

17

RECOMMENDATIONS

19

RESOURCE PEOPLE

21

REFERENCES

22

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

23

Nelson, Arthur, and James Duncan, Growth Management Principles and Practices, 1995.

Mission Statement

Nicholas, James C., and Ruth L. Steiner, Growth Management and Smart Growth in Florida (Wake Forest Law Review), 2000. Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Growth Management Meetings with Northeast Florida Stakeholders, 1999. Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Strategic Directions: Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan, 1997. The Reubin O’D. Askew Institute, Jacksonville and the 21st Century: Building a Stronger Community, Fall 1999.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc. is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, broad-based civic organization which seeks to improve the quality of life in Northeast Florida by positive change resulting from informed participation of citizens in community life, through open dialogue, impartial research, and consensus building .

Cover design and layout by Angela Edwards On the cover: Map of Duval County, Florida. See page 7 for legend.

22 Growth Management Revisited 2001

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

3


Findings

Findings represent the information received by the committee. They are derived from published materials, from facts reported by resource people, and from a consensus of the committee’s understanding of the opinions of resource people.

Resource People

The JCCI study process relies on information supplied by knowledgeable resource people, in addition to published reference materials. We wish to thank the following for their contributions to this study.

INTRODUCTION The goal of growth management is to accommodate population and economic growth while also maintaining or enhancing the community’s quality of life, all without jeopardizing individual rights. Successful growth-management efforts result in a vibrant community with a healthy environment, viable transportation choices, and shared economic prosperity, without undue stress on taxpayers. Accomplishing these goals was already difficult before the release of JCCI’s 1984 Growth Management Study, and it will continue to be complex and difficult in the future. Growth management is a balancing act—balancing the right of property owners to develop their properties as they wish with the right of the community to influence the consequences of development for overall community benefit. Growth management is often debated in terms of what others should do—ride the bus, live in downtown apartments, or leave the land in its pristine natural condition—so that I can continue to enjoy use of my personal car and my house in the suburbs. Growth management also concerns the rights of those who already live in a community to enjoy its quality of life, versus the rights of others to move in and join them. Balancing competing needs is an active process involving tradeoffs, as this description demonstrates: Growth management is active and dynamic …; it seeks to maintain an ongoing equilibrium between development and conservation, between various forms of development and concurrent provisions for infrastructure, between the demands for public services generated by growth and the supply of revenues to finance those demands, and between progress and equity. Douglas R. Porter, Managing Growth in America’s Communities, 1997

Finding the right balance and maintaining the quality of life, under the pressures of population and economic growth currently being experienced in Duval County and Northeast Florida, requires revisiting JCCI’s 1984 study and efforts since then to discover solutions for tomorrow’s growth based on 17 years of experience. The Florida legislative debate in 20002001 about the proper roles of state and local governments in growth management provided an even more urgent context for determining how Duval County can best improve implementation of its own growth-management efforts. While this study concentrates on Duval County and the c o n s o l i d a t e d Jacksonville-Duval County government, growth and its impacts

4

Growth Management Revisited 2001

are occurring throughout the metropolitan region. Therefore this study examines Duval County’s growth-management efforts in a regional context. This study defines growth management as programs and policies intended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencing the rate, location, design, and quality of development, including new development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymous with stopping growth.

COMMUNITY GOALS Concerns about the impacts of growth have spurred efforts over the years to articulate community goals for growth management in Duval County and Northeast Florida. These goals are remarkably consistent in their visions of desired growth-management outcomes. Over the past quarter-century, a number of gatherings of citizens under public and private auspices have articulated goals and expectations about the quality of life in Duval County and Northeast Florida. These statements have served as guiding principles to define desired outcomes of growth-management efforts. • The Amelia Island Conference of business and civic leaders in 1974 listed as a priority the adoption of a comprehensive land-use plan with emphasis on recreation areas, conservation, and preservation, and establishment of standards for waterfront development to ensure public access to the river and ocean. • JCCI’s Growth Management Study (1984) outlined community goals for growth management, including natural-resource protection and citizen involvement. • T h e First Coast Planning Conference convened by the Jacksonville Chamber of Commerce (1987) created a regional vision for 2005, calling for development approaches that would preserve the environment and enhance the quality of life. • The City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan (developed in 1990) included over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives to manage growth. Its 1997 Evaluation and Appraisal Report confirmed the same goals, policies, and objectives, and noted the City’s progress in accomplishing them. • JCCI’s Quality of Life Indicators Targets for 2000 (set in

Bill Brinton Allen, Brinton, & McCarthy

Ed Lehman Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council

Joan Carver Jacksonville University

Greg Matovina Matovina & Company

Alex Coley Hallmark Partners

Tim McLendon University of Florida

Joe Debs Reynolds, Smith & Hills

Lynn Pappas Pappas, Metcalf, Jenks, & Miller

John DeGrove emeritus professor, Florida Atlantic University

Shannon Scheffer Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council

John Delaney Mayor, City of Jacksonville

Aage Schroder Florida Department of Transportation

Jeff Elledge St. Johns River Water Management District

Darrell Smith Jacksonville Transportation Authority

Jeannie Fewell Jacksonville Department of Planning and Development

Lance DeHaven Smith Florida State University

Susan Grandin Trust for Public Lands T.R. Hainline Rogers Towers Bailey Jones & Gay Lee Harris Community Alliance

Brian Teeple Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council Lane Welch Greenscape Walter Williams Coldwell Banker Walter Williams Realty Inc.

Alberta Hipps President, Jacksonville City Council

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

21


resources and currently available water-supply processes and technologies. The District also should examine technically and financially realistic new potable water processes and technologies to determine their potential effect on capacity and their fiscal impacts. 9. Independent of state and regional action, the Mayor of Jacksonville should take the lead to continue to improve the City of Jacksonville’s growth-management processes on matters of local impact by: • encouraging roadway patterns in new developments that include connections to adjacent developments and land uses; • retrofitting existing developments to include more roadway connections to adjacent developments and land uses; • encouraging City departments and independent authorities to coordinate their efforts for growth-management purposes; • providing funding, through various entities and sources, for the Downtown Master Plan to restore and revitalize Jacksonville’s downtown area; • improving and enforcing City codes regarding neighborhood appearance and upkeep; • encouraging and funding efforts to revitalize older neighborhoods, including those designated Historic, by using

the following kinds of tools, as needed: revisions to the Zoning Code, targeted economic incentives, coordinated condemnation and code enforcement efforts, affordablehousing assistance, infrastructure repair and replacement, and development and implementation of a brownfields cleanup and redevelopment program; • encouraging and funding infill development by u s i n g similar tools; and • developing and using a comprehensive m e t h o d o l o g y to determine the full costs and benefits of each p r o p o s e d development, including its impacts on taxpayers (schools, roads, utilities, public safety, and other infrastructure, as well as tax revenues) and the natural environment. This analysis also should include consideration and support for targeted community goals, such as affordable housing, for which public incentives are important. 10. The City of Jacksonville should improve its public-involvement process related to growth management by providing citizens with information and assistance to participate fully and effectively in its growth-management processes, including land-use and zoning regulation.

• • •

1991) established community goals for indicators of wellbeing in relation to the economy, natural environment, mobility, and other aspects of the community’s quality of life. The Jacksonville Insight visioning process (in 1992) developed citizen-based goals for effective transportation, a healthy environment, planned economic development, and thriving neighborhoods and downtown. The Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan of the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council (1997) focused on five strategic subject areas: affordable housing, economic development, emergency preparedness, natural resources of regional significance, and regional transportation. The River Agenda Summit convened by the Mayor of Jacksonville in 1997 outlined environmental strategies for protection of the St. Johns River. The Vision for Downtown Jacksonville (1997) articulated community goals for downtown revitalization. The Jacksonville Growth Management Task Force convened by the Mayor (1997) identified community issues and recommended specific steps Jacksonville could take to improve the type of growth and effectiveness of its growthmanagement efforts. Economic Summits convened by the Mayor of Jacksonville in 1995 and 1998 focused on neighborhood and regional economic development, tourism, and the transportation element of growth management in Jacksonville. JCCI F o rw a r d ’ s Forum for the Fu t u r e (1999) called for improved protection of natural resources, enhanced design quality of the built environment, and regional integration of growth-management efforts. Growth management meetings with Northeast Florida stakeholders conducted in 1999 by the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council outlined areas of community consensus on goals for growth management, including environmental-protection initiatives. The Better Jacksonville Plan (2000) laid out a community growth-management vision that included environmental preservation, downtown revitalization, and infrastructure improvements (see page 13). The 2001 Mayor and City Council priorities for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2001 highlight growth-management goals including improving the city’s transportation system, encouraging downtown housing, redeveloping older neighborhoods, and encouraging mixed-use development in targeted areas of the county.

These public and private statements combined speak of desires for a vibrant community with a healthy environment, viable transportation choices, and shared economic prosperity. These desires are not unique to Northeast Florida. They have also provided the political impetus for extensive efforts by the State of Florida, especially since 1985, to regulate development throughout the state. H o w e v e r, private behavior does not always match public consensus. While the community may agree that a viable masstransit system would provide some traffic relief, individual citizens still choose to drive a personal automobile rather than ride the

20 Growth Management Revisited 2001

bus. Average weekday bus ridership as a percentage of the population has declined by 35 percent between 1984 and 1999. Similarly, growth-management efforts to promote higher density and multi-use development often run into opposition from citizens who may agree that such efforts benefit the community but do not want such development located near their own homes.

IMPACTS OF GROWTH ON DUVAL COUNTY Over the last two decades, Duval County has experienced substantial population and economic growth. State regulation, city programs and policies, and other factors have influenced the kinds and locations of development. The resulting landuse patterns have had a significant impact on the quality of life in Duval County and have prompted renewed concern for managing future growth.

Population and economic growth The population of Duval County and Northeast Florida has increased steadily in the last few decades and will continue to increase in the foreseeable future. The region has also experienced substantial economic growth. In 1940, the total population of Florida was less than 2 million; by 2000, it had grown to nearly 16 million, with further growth to 23 million expected by 2030. As the State of Florida seeks to accommodate its population growth, the density of development in South Florida is encouraging growth to move northward. In 1940, Duval County was home to just over 200,000 people; in 2000, the population was nearly four times that. Between 1980 and 2000, Duval County grew by 36 percent, adding over 200,000 people in 20 years. By 2030, Duval County is expected to have a population of over one million, with 1.6 million living throughout the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)—Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns Counties.

Population growth in the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) County

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

Baker

18,486

22,259

25,600

29,000

32,200

Clay

105,986

140,814

173,700

208,200

241,000

Duval

672,971

778,879

874,200

972,700 1,064,900

Nassau

43,941

57,663

70,900

84,900

98,100

St. Johns

83,829

123,135

160,800

200,600

239,000

925,213 1,122,750 1,305,200 1,495,400 1,675,200 Total Source: U.S. Census, University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Data for 2010-2030 are projected.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

5


Population growth rates in the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) County

1980-1990

1990-2000

2000-2010

2010-2020

2020-2030

Baker

20.9%

20.4%

15.0%

13.3%

11.0%

Clay

58.1%

32.9%

23.4%

19.9%

15.8%

Duval

17.9%

15.7%

12.2%

11.3%

9.5%

Nassau

33.6%

31.2%

23.0%

19.7%

15.5%

St. Johns

63.4%

46.9%

30.6%

24.8%

19.1%

Total

25.4%

21.4%

16.3%

14.6%

12.0%

Source: U.S. Census, University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Data for 2010-2030 are projected.

The rate of growth in Duval County is expected to continue to slow, as growth spreads into other counties in the region. Although the rate of growth is slowing, the numbers of people being added to the existing population base continue to be high, and the land area and natural resources to accommodate the growth remain finite. Duval County contains 840 square miles, of which 774 square miles are land; wetlands comprise 25 percent of the total land area in Duval County. Population growth in Duval County comes from a combination of net immigration and natural population increase. Natural increase occurs when the number of births in a year exceeds the number of deaths; of the population growth between 1999 and 2000, 55 percent was due to natural increase. Net immigration occurs when more people move into a community than move out; net immigration accounted for 45 percent of the population increase from 1999 to 2000. The age composition of the population is also changing, as the current population ages and increased numbers of retirees move to the Jacksonville MSA. Throughout Florida, retirees typically live one county away from large cities, close to the services they require but away from the urban center. The same pattern is developing throughout Northeast Florida. In 2000, only seven percent of Duval County’s population were over 65, while 28 percent in St. Johns County were 65 or older. By 2015, Duval County’s retirement-age population is expected to grow to 13 percent of the total, with St. Johns County reaching 36 percent age 65 or older. The region has experienced substantial economic growth as well. Between 1984 and 1999, Duval County added 137,000 new jobs and 94,000 housing units. By 2010, Duval County is expecting a net gain of 104,000 jobs and 57,000 housing units, while the other counties in the region add 30,000 more jobs and 40,000 housing units.

Factors affecting development patterns State regulation has created increasingly detailed requirements to manage growth that have been implemented through local-government policy. Development patterns have been

6

Growth Management Revisited 2001

affected by a combination of state regulation, city programs and policies, and other factors such as the availability of less expensive land, geographic considerations, infrastructure availability, active recruitment efforts, and housing demand. State legislative mandates, especially the Growth Management Act of 1985, have established certain growth-management requirements for Florida’s counties, including comprehensive planning, requiring that infrastructure is available upon completion of development, and review of large developments that have a regional impact. While many of the effects of these state regulations have been positive, they have not always achieved their desired outcomes, and in some cases have had unintended negative results; many consider state regulation to be primarily a burdensome regulatory checklist that adds to the costs of development. State mandates have structured Duval County’s growthmanagement processes and strengthened local efforts to manage growth. These efforts include local comprehensive planning and zoning, as well as other policies and programs not mandated by the State. Other factors that have influenced development in Duval County have been: • Geography: The locations of rivers, marshes, and other land features have been an important determinant of development. Wetlands, for example, have shaped patterns of development and prevented contiguous development. The location of locally-unwanted land uses and industry, from landfills to paper mills, has influenced the development patterns in neighboring areas. • Availability and cost of land: The availability of less expensive land has encouraged growth into previously undeveloped areas. Environmentally contaminated, abandoned lands have discouraged reuse or urban infill in some areas because of the liability and cost of cleaning up the property. However, more expensive land in southeastern Duval and northern St. Johns County has continued to be a focus for development even as the price of land has increased. • Infrastructure: Infrastructure refers to the physical facilities needed to serve a community, including roads, schools, fire stations, solid-waste management, drainage, parks, and water, s e w e r, and electric utilities. The availability of existing infrastructure, including utilities and roadways, has drawn growth toward certain areas; for example, extension of electric, sewer, and water infrastructure into certain geographic areas has effectively subsidized the cost of development and encouraged development of property accessible to the utilities. Perceptions of the quality of public facilities, such as schools, also have affected development patterns. Because the St. Johns River divides Duval County, the locations and addition of bridges have influenced patterns of growth. Construction of J. Turner Butler Boulevard and of the Buckman Bridge influenced development into areas

Recommendations

Recommendations are the committee’s specific suggestions for change, based on the findings and conclusions.

1. The Florida growth-management process needs to be revised, restructured, and streamlined. The Florida Legislature should redistribute growth-management responsibilities and authority to appropriate levels of government. This restructuring should not create additional regulatory burdens or redundant levels of review and should ensure continuation of natural-environment protections. 2. Aspects of growth management that have statewide impacts should continue to be conducted at the state level. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) should retain regulatory oversight of: • comprehensive-planning elements that directly impact natural resources of statewide significance; •transportation facilities and infrastructure of statewide significance; • natural-disaster responses and emergency-preparation issues of statewide significance; and •other specific items of statewide significance, as determined by the Florida Legislature. The State budget should provide sufficient funding for DCA to perform these functions adequately. 3. The Florida Legislature should delegate all remaining state regulatory oversight of local comprehensive planning to Regional Planning Councils, because growth management has regional impacts beyond the scope of local-government authority. The Legislature should authorize Regional Planning Councils to obtain sufficient, broad-based resources, including funding and staffing, to perform these additional functions effectively. In addition, the Florida Legislature should expand the authority of each Regional Planning Council to: • take the lead in coordinating growth management among local, regional, and state interests; • coordinate the development of a regional growthmanagement vision; • implement its Strategic Regional Policy Plan; and • ensure the integration of local/regional transportation and land-use planning. 4. The Florida Legislature should add public safety and public schools as mandatory elements in local-government comprehensive plans. The Legislature should authorize appropriate, broad-based funding mechanisms for local governments to implement these elements.

5. The Florida Legislature should maintain the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process, with some modifications. Modifications should include: • streamlining and simplifying the process, while maintaining its comprehensive nature; and • delegating review authority to the Regional Planning Councils, with appeal of their decisions to the courts. 6. The Florida Legislature should ensure that enforcement of all natural-environment protections under the current system are retained and appropriately assigned. The Legislature should further improve protection of the natural environment in Florida by: • ensuring that Regional Planning Councils identify and map natural resources of regional significance to ensure their accurate identification and protection; • including assessment of the impacts of development on the natural environment in the regional-development review process; • encouraging the use of incentives to developers for protection of the natural environment; •creating a system to transfer development rights for protection of environmentally sensitive areas; and • limiting the use of exceptions in the growth-management process that negatively impact natural resources. 7. Because transportation in Northeast Florida has become a regional and not solely a local matter, the Florida Legislature should amend the charter of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, expanding its jurisdiction to regional as well as local transportation concerns, renaming it accordingly, and authorizing appropriate, broad-based regional funding mechanisms. In addition to coordinating transportation planning and implementation in the region, the First Coast Transportation Authority should: • improve the process used to secure land for future rightof-way needs by allowing land owners to retain reasonable and appropriate access and use rights until construction begins; and •identify transportation corridors within the region in which land-use densities may be increased to support effective public transportation. 8. To provide needed information for local growth-management decision making, the St. Johns River Water Management District should determine the total population that can be supported in Northeast Florida with currently used water

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

19


• Impact analysis: Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology for determining the full costs and benefits to the community of proposed development, including its fiscal impact on taxpayers as well as its impact on the natural environment. 7. Northeast Florida has had a number of gatherings of citizens under public and private auspices to articulate their community goals for growth management. These ongoing activities of reviewing progress and setting community goals have benefited Duval County by increasing attention to issues related to growth management. However, implementation of these community goals remains incomplete because of private values and behaviors that vary from community goals, as well as insufficient commitment of resources. 8. Anticipated population, housing, and employment growth in Duval County will continue to pressure natural resources and public infrastructure. Duval County lacks sufficient knowledge about the size of the population that its natural resources and water supply can sustain. Managing continued growth is a complex task that will require Duval County to maintain all of these resources effectively. 9. The success of growth-management efforts is in the implementation, not just the planning. Growth-management efforts require the following to be successful: • • • • •

sufficient funding; strong executive leadership; involvement and commitment of private sector leaders; public awareness, participation, and support; interagency coordinated use of multiple strategies and multiple public objectives; • sufficient information and the tools to analyze that information; • focused goals; and • continuity of effort, plans, and implementation.

10. Traditionally, private property rights have been granted great weight in the growth-management process. Growth management requires balancing private property rights with the public interest and goals established by the community. The right to own property is not a right to taxpayer-financed assistance in developing that property. 11. Successful growth management in Northeast Florida requires regional cooperation. Northeast Florida has insufficiently integrated growth-management efforts across county lines. The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida similarly found that growth-management efforts in the First Coast cannot succeed unless they are coordinated at the regional level. 12. Citizen involvement, while increasing since the late 1990s, has been primarily reactive to unwanted land uses adjacent to existing neighborhoods. While individuals have learned how to participate in the difficult growth-management process, the general public has not been sufficiently involved proactively in the planning and permitting processes. The growth-management process would benefit from increasing public awareness and eliminating impediments to citizen involvement. 13. Nationally, few communities have successfully managed their growth. While many communities have implemented innovative growth-management strategies, the results of those efforts are mixed. The combined experiences from these communities suggest that growth-management approaches are more effective when tailored to the needs and goals of the community. Jacksonville can continue to learn from the mistakes and successes of other communities.

served by these roadways, as did the Acosta and Matthews Bridges in earlier times; as of the time of this study, the Dames Point Bridge is attracting the same strong growth. Highway construction has made commuting feasible between downtown and the suburbs. • Recruitment: The pattern of development has also responded to the efforts of private developers and the City to recruit businesses to certain areas, such as the office parks in southeastern Duval County. Residential development has followed commercial development into these areas. The City of Jacksonville in 1997 began targeting its use of economic incentives to recruit business to downtown and north and west of the St. Johns River (see p. 13). • Housing demand: The market demand for housing has focused on a typical house with a yard on a cul-de-sac, in a neighborhood with similar homes. This type of residential development is termed low-density, single-family development, disconnected from the larger traffic network. Residents have been willing to commute longer distances to work in order to have the type of housing they want, even if the house is located in another county from their employment. Builders have responded to this demand in their choices of what kinds of residential developments to construct.

Definitions of Density

Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential

0-2 dwelling units per acre 3-7 dwelling units per acre 8-20 dwelling units per acre 21-60 dwelling units per acre

Population change per planning district Planning District 1985 Population 2000 Population Percent Change

Urban Core Arlington Southeast Southwest Northwest North

55,125 123,214 118,177 115,323 145,586 37,660

Atlantic, Jacksonville,and Neptune Beach

42,635 186,072 195,721 133,867 128,848 48,474

-22.7% +51.0 +65.6% +16.1% -11.5% +28.7%

32,268

41,628

+29.0%

1,528 628,881

1,634 778,879

+6.9% +23.9%

Baldwin Total

Source: City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department

Between 1985 and 2000, the majority of residential and commercial development in Duval County occurred in its southeast quadrant. The population south and east of the St. Johns River (Arlington and Southeast Planning Districts as well as Atlantic Beach, Jacksonville Beach, and Neptune Beach) grew by approximately 150,000 during this time period, which accounts for nearly all of the population growth of the county. Other outlying areas, especially in northern and western Duval County, have not been as intensively developed; population dropped by 11.5 and 22.7 percent in the Northwest and Urban Core planning districts, respectively. The clustering of office parks in southeastern Duval County has contributed to the differences in development patterns. Development Patterns in Duval County, 2000

Source: City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Resulting development patterns Duval County’s rapid population growth over the past two decades has occurred primarily in the southeastern quadrant. Development has spread southward beyond Duval into St. Johns and Clay Counties. The pattern of development has been characterized by low-density, single-family residential development, served by strip commercial development, with commercial/residential development clusters around office parks and shopping malls. At the time of this study, development patterns were beginning to change in response to City policies and programs. Duval County covers 480,043 acres, excluding Baldwin and the Beaches municipalities. By 2000, 214,987 acres, or 45 percent of the total land area, had been developed. Of the remaining land area, 21,338 acres were federal or state parks or otherwise designated conservation land.

18 Growth Management Revisited 2001

Agricultural, parkland, or undeveloped land Residential development Industrial, commercial, or military development Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

7


Development has spread southward into Clay and St. Johns Counties as well. Building permits for single-family homes in Duval County have remained relatively constant from 1998 to 2000; during the same three years, building permits in St. Johns and Clay Counties have grown by 17.6 and 13.8 percent, respectively. Development patterns have favored low-density, single-family residential development. The Jacksonville Planning and Development Department projects that, between 1990 and 2010, more than 88 percent of the City’s new housing will be developed at an average density of less than four units per acre. As development has increased, infrastructure requirements for roads, schools, and parks have increased as well. Building infrastructure to meet development needs spurs additional development, which quickly exceeds the capacity of available infrastructure.

Resulting community impacts Increased population and economic growth and the corresponding development to accommodate that growth have impacted the quality of life in Northeast Florida in several ways. Growth has increased pressures on transportation systems, the environment, and the financial resources of local government. The locations and kinds of development have impacted some older urban neighborhoods and have spread across county lines to create interjurisdictional issues. As Northeast Florida has grown, the impact to the residents’ quality of life has correspondingly increased. Growth affects the community, particularly its transportation system, natural environment, and social environment. Growth also creates pressures on Duval County’s financial resources and requires improved intergovernmental coordination with the surrounding counties.

Transportation Traffic on Duval County roadways has increased. Existing commercial and residential development patterns rely on a few collector roads and major arterial roads. Many residential and commercial developments have only limited direct access to another development, in part because previous regulations discouraged connector roads. This funnels traffic onto a few major roads and increases trip lengths and trip times, leading to traffic delay and increased maintenance needs of existing roadways. Subsequent road-widening projects on major thoroughfares have provided some relief, but growth continues to expand. The spread of bedroom communities in Clay and St. Johns Counties has created cross-county commuting backups, as U.S. 17 and Blanding Boulevard in Clay County and State Road 13, A1A, Philips Highway, and Interstate 95 in St. Johns County carry increasing numbers of cars. Duval County’s mass-transit system has not attracted sufficient ridership to effectively relieve traffic congestion.

8

Growth Management Revisited 2001

Increasing population is only part of the traffic issue, as the existing population continues to take more trips and longer trips, and has decreased its use of mass transit, carpooling, or biking/walking as commuting methods. Past development patterns have not always been pedestrian friendly, either by providing sidewalks or by locating residential development within walking distance of retail or employment. These patterns also discourage the use of bicycles and mass transit. The City of Jacksonville in 1999 significantly strengthened its policy for provision of sidewalks to address this issue.

Environmental impacts A growing population has placed greater pressure on potable water resources. From 1980 to 1999, demand for water supplied by public sources in Duval County increased from 73.25 to 112.47 million gallons per day. Of the nearly 40 million gallon increase, approximately 10 million gallons a day resulted from people shifting from personal wells to public water supply. Commercial and industrial withdrawal of groundwater decreased by 20 million gallons per day during the same period. Some of that decrease came from shifting water use to the public water supply, and some came from actual decreases in water usage due to conservation efforts. In all, net water use in Duval County increased between 1980 to 1999 by 10 million gallons per day. Stormwater runoff, which carries fertilizer and pesticides into the St. Johns River, threatens the health of the river by increasing algae and bacteria growth, which can lead to fish kills, contaminated shellfish, and habitat degradation. Leakage from faulty septic tanks can also pollute the river. Although residential development has increased, the number of new septic-tank permits issued annually by the City of Jacksonville decreased by 80 percent between 1987 and 1999. The Better Jacksonville Plan also set aside $75 million for septic-tank remediation. The loss of trees to development can increase stormwater runoff, as a moderate-sized tree can absorb up to 400 gallons of stormwater per day. The St. Johns River Water Management District (WMD) regulates new development to require that the first inch of stormwater is retained on site. Watering restrictions, limiting the time of day that Duval County residents can water their lawn, were adopted by the WMD in 1991 and are currently enforced. In addition, the WMD issued water shortage warnings in 1999 and 2000.

Conclusions

Conclusions express the value judgements of the committee based on the findings.

1. Growth-management efforts of the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have not kept pace with local initiatives. The DCA has focused on "checklist" bureaucracy instead of taking a visionary or leadership role. As a result, cumbersome growth-management regulations have increased the cost of development while creating unintended negative consequences for local communities. 2. Natural-resource regulatory efforts of the State, along with federal regulations, have influenced growth-management efforts by providing tools to protect the natural-environment in Duval County, especially water resources, wetlands, and air quality. The results of these natural resources protection efforts have been mixed, as the natural environment traditionally has been given insufficient consideration in permitting and development decisions. 3. The Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review process is an important tool for growth management. The DRI process in Northeast Florida is most effective in: • fostering interagency and intergovernmental coordination; and • providing a comprehensive review of proposed development impacts, including economic, transportation, public-school, and public-safety impacts. However, the complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of the process encourage developers to modify the size of developments to avoid it. 4. The State of Florida has historically regulated growth through Areas of Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact, Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency. The 2000 Growth Management Study Commission recommended substantial revisions to state growth-management policy, transferring much of current state oversight of growth management to local governments. Such recommendations, if enacted by the Florida Legislature, will require local government responses that encourage a balanced and effective approach to growth management.

Increased development, more vehicles, and increased traffic congestion contribute to air pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the pollution from increased driving will offset all of its air pollution-reduction efforts by 2010.

5. The City of Jacksonville recently has taken positive steps in its growth-management efforts, becoming one of the more successful communities in Florida in managing its growth.

Loss of land to development decreases natural resources and wildlife habitats available and pressures the natural environment to maintain sustainable ecosystems.

• the Mayor taking a strong community-leadership role in growth management; • the City of Jacksonville preserving natural resources and guiding development patterns through land acquisition;

These steps include:

• the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission encouraging the location of development in specific sites through targeted economic incentives; • the City Council and the Department of Planning and Development implementing policies to encourage alternative development patterns such as multi-use development, traditional neighborhood design, and allowing housing downtown; • the Department of Planning and Development using new processes for managing growth and encouraging citizen involvement; • public authorities (such as the JEA) and the City of Jacksonville improving coordination of growth-management efforts; and • citizens increasing their involvement in growth-management, including self-imposing a half-cent sales tax in 2000 to support the Better Jacksonville Plan. 6.

Although Jacksonville has made considerable progress in growth management processes, elements of concern remain. These include:

• Older neighborhoods: Historically, growth-management efforts in Duval County have focused more on new growth than on redevelopment of existing neighborhoods. While some public and private interests have promoted creative reuse of historical neighborhoods through use of several tools (including overlay zoning), other tools for historic preservation, such as interagency coordination and state and federal tax incentives, are underutilized in Duval County. In addition, Duval County lacks sufficient incentives to encourage infill development in core city neighborhoods and redevelopment of environmentally contaminated brownfields. Building infrastructure for new development when vacant homes, underutilized commercial properties, and under-capacity schools exist in older neighborhoods creates natural and social costs to the community and to the neighborhoods passed over by growth. • Transportation: The City of Jacksonville has fostered and permitted disconnected subdivisions, residential and commercial developments, and communities. Disconnected developments create a negative impact on the road system by increasing the number of auto trips and the length of auto trips citizens have to take to meet their daily needs. Lack of coordination between land-use planning and transportation planning in Northeast Florida has exacerbated traffic congestion by not accommodating higher residential densities which promote and support alternative travel options such as mass transit, walking, or bicycling. Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

17


and envisions that successful downtown revitalization would be an effective growth-management tool. The report recommended that Indianapolis use infrastructure placement as its potentially most effective growth-management strategy to influence the rate, location, and density of development. The report concluded that successful growth-management efforts would require regional cooperation. Land acquisition and transfers of development rights were recommended as ways to preserve open space; impact fees, unless assessed regionally, were not recommended, as they would only encourage development to continue to spread outside of the county.

Portland, Oregon Portland’s primary growth-management tool is a strong urban growth boundary. In Oregon, local governments must designate an urban growth boundary according to state criteria and can amend the boundary only if the proposed amendment complies with state regulations for an exception. The urban growth boundary has been successful in controlling development patterns within Portland’s jurisdictional limits and in increasing urban density. The goal for Portland is a minimum density of 10 housing units per net acre; the maximum lot size is 3,850 square feet. Mass transit, including light rail, has been one success stemming from increased density and concentration of housing and retail near bus and light-rail stations. However, these growth-management efforts have increased the cost of housing significantly within the urban growth boundaries. They also have not stopped spreading development patterns, as low-density, single-family residential development has jumped rural areas and gone outside of Portland’s jurisdiction and across the state line. Vancouver, Washington, for example, now sends 50,000 commuters daily to Portland.

Charlotte, North Carolina North Carolina lacks strong growth-management regulation at the state level, though it does have some specific programs, such as its Coastal Area Management Act, which have had successes. Instead, local governments are given authority to implement a range of growth-management policies. By the late 1990s, observed development patterns and environmental impacts suggested that the current growth-management system was ineffective. In 1999, the State Legislature established a North Carolina Smart Growth Commission to recommend improvements in the state system; the same year, Charlotte/Mecklenburg County commissioned a Smart Growth Audit to examine its growthmanagement programs in the light of nationally recognized growth-management principles. In 2001, the Smart Growth Commission recommended the following:

16 Growth Management Revisited 2001

• increasing the authority of local governments to manage growth; •providing state funds for land-acquisition programs; and • using state transportation funding allocations to encourage communities to manage growth. Charlotte/Mecklenburg County has been most successful in its residential downtown development initiatives: in 2000, approximately 7,000 people were living downtown. The Bank of America, headquartered in Charlotte, has led the way by financing downtown residential development; in addition, many of the bank’s executives, including its CEO, live downtown.

Rhode Island Grow Smart Rhode Island is a community-interest group of planners, environmentalists, government agencies and officials, developers, and others concerned about development in Rhode Island. Their mission is to bring together diverse interests to preserve the quality of life in Rhode Island. To do so, they are promoting business and residential growth in town centers and preserving agricultural land and open spaces in order to maintain the character of the state. The coalition is chaired by a leading corporate figure in Rhode Island. As a result of Grow Smart’s efforts, Rhode Island: • passed a $34 million bond issue for open space land acquisition; • created a new building code for rehabilitation projects because existing codes prevented rehabilitation of older buildings; • began work on brownfields programs to encourage infill redevelopment; and • strengthened staff support for the statewide planning system. The Sierra Club recognized Rhode Island in 1999 as one of the nation’s leaders in managing growth. Particularly noted were the efforts to build new train stations, ferry lines and a 50-mile network of bike paths.

Maryland In 1997, the State of Maryland created a Priority Funding Area (PFA) designation for specific areas targeted for growth. Local governments identify these areas, which must meet certain state criteria. State funds for infrastructure assistance and economic development assistance can be spent only within the certified PFA. This has resulted in elimination of $360 million in highway funds for projects outside the PFAs. It has also led to a sharp increase in school-construction funds allocated to rehabilitation of schools in older communities rather than for new construction in the suburbs—84 percent of these funds in 2000 compared to 43 percent in 1995. Maryland also has an aggressive rural-lands protection program, with the goal of preserving 200,000 acres by 2011. Its Rural Legacy Program is purchasing development rights on this land. By 2000, it had already acquired 47,000 acres.

Growth distribution

State regulation

The locations and kinds of development have created disparate impacts within Duval County and in adjoining counties. The extensive development of office-park and commercial development in southeastern Duval County, especially around Southpoint and Baymeadows, has also attracted widespread residential development to this area. The rest of Duval County has lagged behind, particularly the urban core and some neighborhoods north and west of the St. Johns River.

The State of Florida began regulating development for growth-management purposes in the 1970s and significantly strengthened its role through the 1985 Growth Management Act. The growth-management process identifies specific roles for the state, regional organizations, and local governments. This process was under intensive review during this study, and Florida’s growth-management system is likely to change significantly over the next several years.

Between 1989 and 1999, over half of all commercial development and three-fourths of all residential development in Duval County occurred south and east of the St. Johns River. In the North and Northwest Planning Districts, however, development is increasing; commercial development in 1999 exceeded the average annual adjusted value of new building permits from the previous ten years by 89 percent, and residential development similarly grew by 114 percent.

After actively encouraging growth for many years, the State of Florida began responding in the 1970s to the increasingly negative impacts of unregulated growth through a process of top-down growth management. The Legislature strengthened these efforts in the 1985 Growth Management Act, including a requirement that local governments not issue building permits unless the infrastructure necessary to support the development was in place concurrently with the development. In 2000, after legislative debate on significant amendments to the growth-management process, the Governor established a Growth Management Study Commission to review growth-management regulation and recommend improvements. The Study Commission reported to the Governor and Legislature on February 15, 2001 and recommended that the Legislature adopt significant changes to the process. The current process, established in 1985, has relied on four major regulatory tools: Areas of Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact, Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency.

Development in Duval County has impacted other areas in Northeast Florida. St. Johns and Clay Counties have become bedroom communities for Jacksonville workers. While those two counties are exporting employees, they lack adequate transportation infrastructure for their own commuters and the commercial tax base needed to provide adequate services to their residents. At the same time, Duval County is required to provide roads and public services to commuters from other counties. Current efforts to attract growth to northern Duval County have the potential to create growth pressures in Nassau County as well. As development has spread across county lines, local governments have responded within their jurisdictions to manage growth. However, Northeast Florida lacks a formal political structure to integrate growth-management efforts across county lines. The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council works on an informal basis to encourage local governments to coordinate growthmanagement efforts. The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida concluded that growth-management efforts in Northeast Florida "cannot succeed unless they are coordinated at the regional level."

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS Duval County’s efforts to manage growth have been both strengthened and limited by the state’s growth-management process, which was under statewide debate at the time of this study. Local efforts to manage growth have intensified in recent years, with a variety of programs beginning to demonstrate their effectiveness. Growth-management efforts in certain other communities may reveal approaches to improve local efforts.

One strength of this process has been its relative stability. Over time, local governments, developers, and citizens have become relatively comfortable with the process, and "grandfathered" projects (those not subject to the regulation because they had begun prior to 1985) have largely been either developed or sold.

Areas of Critical State Concern The State limits development in certain large geographical areas that are of major, unique environmental value through the Areas of Critical State Concern (ACSC) program. To date, the State has identified only four such areas—Apalachicola Bay, Green Swamp, Big Cypress Swamp, and the Keys—none of which is in Northeast Florida. Despite initial local litigation and conflict, the program has been effective in managing growth and preserving these areas. Because no proposal has been made to designate an Area of Critical State Concern in Northeast Florida, this program has had no effect in Duval County. In 1993, the State required Regional Planning Councils to identify natural resources of regional significance in a Strategic Regional Policy Plan. This has been used in Northeast Florida to coordinate preservation of environmental areas on a regional basis. A recommendation by the Growth Management Study Commission to create a new regulatory category of "natural resources of statewide significance" has the potential to affect Duval County in one of two ways: Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

9


• by enhancing local preservation efforts if local natural resources are classified as having statewide significance; or • by diminishing local efforts if the designation "natural resources of regional significance" is eliminated.

Developments of Regional Impact The State regulates large regional developments with substantial off-site impacts through a Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) review and approval process. Proposed developments that meet certain threshold levels must go through DRI review before seeking building permits. The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC) coordinates the DRI process in this part of the state, determines the extent of regional impact of proposed developments, and recommends how developers can mitigate negative offsite impacts. Local governments with jurisdiction over DRIs review the RPC recommendations and include in their final development orders the steps the developer must take to receive building permits. After local governments issue development orders, the RPC reviews the DRI again and recommends to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) whether to approve or appeal the development orders. The DRI process manages growth in several ways, by: • ensuring that development is responsive to community standards; • resolving disputes among different jurisdictions; and • reducing or resolving the impacts of large-scale development. However, because the DRI process adds significant upfront time and costs to the development process (resource people estimated as long as two years and a minimum of $1 million in consulting and legal fees), it has had unintended negative effects on growth management. The number of developments just under DRI size thresholds, some of them adjacent to one another, has increased, thus avoiding DRI review but increasing offsite impacts and encouraging piecemeal development.

Comprehensive planning In 1985, the State refined its top-down comprehensive land-use planning process. The State Comprehensive Plan is intended to guide regional plans that in turn provide a framework for local comprehensive plans consistent with each other, the regional plans, and the state plan. Jacksonville adopted its comprehensive plan for 2010 in 1990. It has been in force since then and is amended periodically, in accordance with the state process. DCA reviews and approves local comprehensive plans and plan amendments for consistency and compliance with state law and administrative rules. Amending the comprehensive plan has intentionally been made time consuming and complicated, involving reviews, hearings, and comments from the Regional Planning Council, Water Management District, Department of Transportation, and Department of Environmental Protection, before DCA review. Every seven years, each local government must do an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of its

10 Growth Management Revisited 2001

comprehensive plan to assess actual development against plan objectives. Jacksonville completed its most recent EAR in 1997 and is scheduled for another in 2004. The comprehensive planning process had some immediate benefits. Across the state, local communities placed a higher emphasis on growth management. Creating comprehensive plans required assessing development patterns and establishing community priorities, as well as creating ordinances and revising zoning to fit the local Comprehensive Plan. However, by 2000, most observers agreed that the State’s intent to provide guidance and oversight for land-use regulation and growth management through a comprehensive planning process had several shortcomings: • Success of the process at the local level requires guidance from a strong, clear State Comprehensive Plan. Two attempts by the state to create this plan have failed to provide a clear guiding document for regional and local planning efforts. • The process mandates DCA review of every plan, plan update, and sizable plan amendment throughout the state—467 county and municipal plans through the late 1980s to 1990 and over 30,000 plan amendments through the 1990s. In response to this volume, the process evolved into assuring compliance with a state checklist instead of coordinating growth-management efforts. • Funding for local governments to complete the mandated comprehensive-planning process was not provided. • Implementation requires local political will to deny exceptions to the comprehensive plan that are detrimental to growth management. This has proven problematic in many areas in the state.

Concurrency The provisions in comprehensive plans gained additional strength when the State began to require that sufficient infrastructure be in place concurrently with the new development. Required infrastructure includes water, sewer, roads and mass transit, solid waste, parks and recreation, and drainage. Because school districts are autonomous in Florida, schools are not included in concurrency requirements. If the necessary infrastructure will not be in place in time to accommodate a new development when it is completed, local government is not allowed to issue building permits. New developments had traditionally incorporated most of these infrastructure demands; however, until 1985 no one had been measuring the transportation demands of new development, including how many trips the development would generate and the capacity of the roads to handle the traffic. In practice, Concurrency created significant problems for local growth-management efforts. Concurrency regulations were intended to be supported with additional state funding for infrastructure improvements, so that existing development would meet the new concurrency standards. However, the funding was not provided. This severely constrained efforts by local governments to guide the siting of new developments for growthmanagement purposes.

Historic-preservation and urban-revitalization efforts have several advantages, including:

for and implement complementary growth-management strategies and infrastructure development.

• enhancing property values in the community; • increasing employment opportunities; • increasing community visibility; and • improving community pride.

As of early 2001, formal regional growth-management efforts were effective, but limited.

The City of Jacksonville’s Comprehensive Plan has a Historic Preservation Element. The seven-member Historic Preservation Commission, appointed by the Mayor and staffed by the Department of Planning and Development, administers historicpreservation efforts. Rehabilitation and reuse of historic properties are encouraged by federal tax credits, local property-tax abatements, and state preservation grants. In various combinations, these incentives are available to private, commercial, and government property owners. Riverside Avondale is one successful example of historic preservation in Jacksonville. Efforts to preserve the historic character and nature of the neighborhood began in 1974 when a group of citizens founded Riverside Avondale Preservation (RAP). The residents voted to designate the neighborhood an historic district and in February 1998, city ordinance created the Riverside Avondale Historic District. Springfield is another example of Jacksonville’s historicpreservation efforts. Its revitalization efforts have included public and private investment, a zoning overlay, a neighborhood plan, and participation in the State’s Mainstreet program to improve design, promote the area, build public-private partnerships, and recruit economic development. From 1998 to 2001, the appraised value of property in Springfield has increased from $30 per square foot to $70.

Affordable housing Neighborhood revitalization, urban renewal, and historicpreservation efforts risk increasing the cost of housing or displacing current residents. JCCI’s 2000 study on Affordable Housing found that 71,000 households in Duval County needed affordable housing or housing assistance programs, of which 19,000 were receiving some form of federal, state, or local housing assistance. The City of Jacksonville has addressed displacement and housing affordability in its revitalization programs. For example, in Springfield, both a program to encourage infill construction and a repair and rehabilitation program for existing properties are available for both new and existing owners, encouraging renovation while keeping costs down.

Regional coordination As development occurs within Northeast Florida, it not only creates interjurisdictional impacts, it also necessitates cooperative efforts among involved counties and municipalities to plan

• The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council has been reviewing comprehensive plans for consistency with its regional growth-management plan and is seeking to resolve disputes between local governments, primarily through the DRI process but also by serving as a neutral convener. • The St. Johns River Water Management District reviews comprehensive-plan amendments and regulates water issues on a regional basis. • The First Coast Metropolitan Planning Organization plans transportation improvements in Duval and parts of Clay and St. Johns Counties. Informal cooperative efforts were just beginning, such as coordinating land-acquisition programs in adjoining counties with the Jacksonville Preservation Project or joint planning between Clay and Duval Counties for the Cecil Commerce Center redevelopment effort.

Approaches from other communities Across the country, state and local governments are implementing policies to manage growth. While most of these efforts originate at the state level, some cities and counties have taken the lead to manage growth. Indianapolis, Indiana; Portland, Oregon; and Charlotte, North Carolina are examples of concerted local efforts to manage growth. Rhode Island and Maryland are two states with recent growth-management initiatives.

Indianapolis, Indiana Indianapolis/Marion County, like Jacksonville/Duval County, is a consolidated city-county government. In 1999, the City formed a Marion County Growth Advisory Committee to recommend improvements to its growth-management system. The report, released in February 2000, examined the impacts of sustained regional growth, which had resulted in "leapfrogged" residential development patterns that passed over undeveloped land in Marion County to formerly agricultural land in the surrounding counties. Indianapolis relies on comprehensive planning and zoning as its primary growth-management tools. It has introduced flexibility into the zoning ordinances to better manage growth, including zero-lot-line options, cluster subdivisions, and planned unit developments. Its most effective zoning tool is a requirement for adequate sewer and water facilities, which inhibits residential development outside of designated areas. Indianapolis has also begun to encourage downtown redevelopment

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

15


Downtown redevelopment A vibrant downtown is a strong growth-management tool because it encourages centralized, higher density development and provides alternatives to spread out development into the suburbs. The City of Jacksonville has invested heavily in downtown-redevelopment efforts. For example, its 1993 River City Renaissance program spent $230 million, including a new performing arts center, city hall, and football stadium downtown. In 2000, the Better Jacksonville Plan provides $435 million for a new coliseum, children’s park, county courthouse, baseball stadium, and library, all located downtown. Additional City efforts to revitalize downtown use a range of approaches: • The Downtown Master Plan, approved in 2000, is designed to coordinate urban design, transportation, commercial, and residential-development efforts. • The Zoning Code was amended in 1997 to allow housing downtown. • Residential development has been encouraged through economic incentives. At the time of this study, approximately 500 downtown housing units, ranging from riverfront condominiums to loft apartments, were proposed, approved, or under construction. • Additional commercial development has been encouraged through economic incentives, such as a new hotel. • Synergistic efforts with the School Board created a new LaVilla performing-arts middle school and a renovated Ritz Theatre downtown to encourage and showcase the arts. • Transportation improvements, including completion of the Automated Skyway Express and introduction of a trolley service, are designed to encourage mobility within the downtown area. • Completed and planned improvements to aesthetics, streetscaping, greenspaces, and parks are intended to make the downtown experience more appealing. The effectiveness of these efforts to revitalize downtown for growth-management purposes depends in part on the influx of private investment to sustain a vibrant downtown.

Neighborhood and sector plans A sector plan creates a detailed design for future land use within a specific area. A neighborhood plan does the same thing in a still smaller area. Such plans, which usually have benefited from direct community input and buy-in, can provide strong guidance for growth management. They can also address issues of historic preservation and maintaining the "sense of place" in a neighborhood. The City has begun developing neighborhood and sector plans in areas targeted for redevelopment efforts. The Cecil Field redevelopment plan, for example, was designed to anticipate and coordinate growth with the transition of Cecil Field from a military base to a commercial/residential development. On a

14 Growth Management Revisited 2001

smaller scale, the Kings Road/Beaver Street Neighborhood Action Plan discusses redevelopment in a context of crime reduction, infrastructure improvements, and neighborhood beautification efforts. Two larger plans addressing development on the Northside and the Westside are expected to be developed in 2001.

Brownfields Growth-management efforts can more effectively discourage spreading development patterns if they successfully encourage infill and reuse of urban properties. Some urban properties, called "brownfields," are expensive to redevelop because previous land uses have contaminated the property, creating clean-up and potential liability costs. In 1998, the City began a pilot Brownfields Redevelopment Program, in partnership with the State of Florida and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop a process to identify and determine the extent of the pollution problems, clean them up, and redevelop brownfield properties. The effectiveness of this program in redirecting development to infill sites cannot yet be determined, since no brownfield site has yet been redeveloped in Duval County.

Visual environment A key community goal in managing growth involves aesthetics, or protection of the visual environment. The City of Jacksonville uses several tools to manage the visual environment, including: • a sign ordinance to regulate the appearance and size of on-site commercial signs and the number of off-site signs; • a tree ordinance to preserve or replace trees of a certain type and size from development; • a Landscape Commission to encourage aesthetic standards for public areas; • landscaping site-development requirements in the Zoning Code; • a downtown architectural review process; • strengthen cell-tower ordinances; • a tree-planting initiative, which distributed one million trees through 2001; and • an aggressive anti-litter campaign.

As a result, concurrency has been a major factor in pushing development away from established cities into suburbs and hinterlands where excess road capacity exists, exactly the opposite of what was intended.

Growth Management Study Commission In 2000, the Governor created a Growth Management Study Commission to assess the effectiveness of the growthmanagement system and to recommend changes to the Legislature. The Study Commission was specifically charged to consider the proper roles of the State, regional organizations, and local governments in growth management, as well as the role and responsibilities of citizens in developing and enforcing comprehensive plans. In February 2001, the Study Commission presented its report to the Governor and the Legislature. Among its recommendations were the following: • Replace the State Comprehensive Plan with a vision statement placing a healthy, vibrant, and sustainable economy as Florida’s priority. • Develop a uniform method to review the costs and benefits of local land-use decisions. • Empower citizens to understand and participate in the growthmanagement process. • Restrict state review of local comprehensive-plan amendments to those affecting compelling state interests. • Replace the DRI process with regional cooperation agreements. • Include public-school facilities in local comprehensive plans. • Authorize incentives for urban revitalization and infill development, including infrastructure needs. • Develop an incentive-based rural policy that includes public purchase of conservation and agricultural easements and transfer of density allocations. In the 2001 regular session, the Legislature debated growth management but, outside of passing a farmland protection bill, did not make any major changes to the state growth- management system.

Local efforts

Many of these efforts had not been effective through the 1 9 9 0 s , according to resource people, due in part to lack of enforcement stemming from insufficient funding and staffing. Frustration with the lack of enforcement led to a citizen-led charter amendment in 2000 to preserve trees, when many felt that the City Council had insufficiently addressed the issue.

Since the 1980s, local growth-management efforts primarily responded to state regulatory requirements. Beginning in the mid-1990s, the City of Jacksonville initiated several efforts, that go beyond state requirements, to manage growth within Duval County. These efforts show promise for managing growth.

Historic preservation

Growth has generally been encouraged in Jacksonville. For many years the prevailing sentiment among local political leaders was that plenty of room for development existed in Duval County’s 840 square miles. As the county and region experienced rapid population growth and the State began passing legislation to regulate growth, the City began placing greater

Growth-management efforts often have as their objectives the encouragement of higher density, multi-use, pedestrian friendly land uses with a distinctive sense of place. Historic-preservation efforts can accomplish these objectives.

emphasis on growth-management efforts. In 1980, it established a Department of Planning and Development and approved by resolution a 2005 Comprehensive Plan. However, JCCI’s Growth Management Study in 1984 found that Jacksonville’s growth-management system at that time lacked "policy direction, commitment, and coordination." After the 1985 Growth Management Act was passed, Jacksonville adopted by ordinance the 2010 Comprehensive Plan in 1990 and in 1991 revised its Zoning Code to align with the plan. In 1996, the Mayor and City Council President established a Growth Management Task Force to examine the City’s land-use policies, the implementation of those policies, and the infrastructure needs that must accompany them in order to preserve and improve the quality of life for all Jacksonville’s citizens. The task force’s report, released in 1997, has provided both policy guidance and the basis for several new growth-management initiatives, including the Downtown Master Plan, Brownfields Program, Transportation Master Plan, Neighborhoods Department, and the Better Jacksonville Plan. In 1997, the City also completed its first Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, concluding that a great deal had been accomplished and that efforts were ongoing to meet additional community needs. By 2001, this increased local emphasis on growth management was beginning to yield tangible results. However, because these initiatives were still relatively new, their long-term effectiveness could not yet be determined.

Comprehensive planning The 2010 Comprehensive Plan provides the framework for growth-management activities by identifying 17 categories of allowable uses for all land parcels in Duval County. The plan contains over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives to provide policy guidance for land-use decisions. If a property owner proposes development that is incompatible with the designated land-use category for the property, a c o m p r e h e n s i v e-plan amendment is required. Amendments involving property of less than ten acres can be filed at several times during the year and then undergo three public hearings. Amendments involving ten or more acres require a longer process, that usually takes about nine months. These applications can be filed at only two times during a year, and multiple public hearings are required, as they are reviewed by the Regional Planning Council, Water Management District, Department of Transportation, Department of Environmental Protection, and Department of Community Affairs. In May 2000, to increase effectiveness of its comprehensive planning, the City of Jacksonville: • created a new land-use category to allow multi-use development —places where people can live, work, and/or shop in one location—to encourage higher density d e v e l o p ment and decrease trip lengths; and

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

11


• added an emphasis on more roadway connections between developments and between residential and commercial developments to decrease reliance on major arterial roads. The effectiveness of comprehensive planning to significantly alter development patterns or manage growth has been limited because: • implementation of land-use planning has not always been coordinated with school siting, placement of water and sewer infrastructure, transportation, and economic-d e v e l o p m e n t planning; • the Comprehensive Plan does not address planning for public safety; and • while the City Council generally has followed the recommendations of the Department of Planning and Development, some developments have been approved that are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. To improve effectiveness of growth-management efforts, the City of Jacksonville began in the mid-1990s to increase reliance on other growth-management tools.

1997 Comprehensive Plan amendments: 72 Introduced 63 Passed 1 Still pending 6 Withdrawn 2 Denied

1998

1999

2000

51 44 0 4 3

56 46 1 9 0

80 64 11 5 0

Source: Jacksonville City Council

Zoning The Zoning Code provides another tool for managing land use. Thirty-five zoning classifications, arrayed among the 17 general land-use categories, provide more specific provisions for allowable land uses. Changing a property’s zoning is very different from amending the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning is "quasi-judicial" rather than legislative. Decisions are designed to be made based on facts and evidence, not political judgment. City Council members, when deciding on rezoning requests, are expected to act as impartial judges of the evidence presented to determine if the proposed land-use change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets all other criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The zoning process was changed in several ways during the 1990s: • Increased citizen involvement: A dramatic increase in citizen involvement has occurred, especially on the part of citizen organizations. Some increased involvement has resulted from more effective use of written notices to affected individuals

12 Growth Management Revisited 2001

and organizations. The City sends a notice to property owners within 350 feet of a proposed zoning change, as well as to all Citizen Planning Advisory Committees—citizen organizations working with the Neighborhoods Department in each planning district—and to any other organization that registers to receive them. Citizen involvement in some cases has supported development that fosters growth management; in other cases, citizen involvement has discouraged efforts to build higher density development or site locally unwanted land uses. • Planning Commission: The Planning Commission is a ninemember body, appointed by the Mayor, that reviews proposed site plans and reviews and decides whether to approve zoning variances and exceptions. Their decisions can now be appealed to the City Council. The Planning Commission can be authorized to act as a coordinating agency for programs and activities of executive agencies and independent agencies involved in land-use planning . • Planned Unit Developments (PUDs): Under a PUD zoning classification, applicants create their own unique zoning category for a particular development. They provide a detailed written description of the development planned for a particular land parcel. The use of PUDs is increasing as developers and citizen groups work to identify mutually acceptable land uses; from 1997 to 2000, the City approved 166 new PUDs. Administration and interpretation of a PUD is a complex and sometimes problematic task, and changes to a PUD can be difficult to track. • Revisions to the Zoning Code: In 1995, the City created the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) classification to allow higher density, multi-use, traditional neighborhoods. The first TND project was approved in 2001. The City also created a Historic Overlay for Springfield, an older neighborhood with historic homes, to encourage renewal and preservation of these homes; another Historic Overlay was being developed for the Riverside/Avondale area at the time of this study. In 2001, the Department of Planning and Development was preparing revisions to the Zoning Code designed to increase flexibility and to respond to changing land-use patterns and new types of development not covered by the existing code (such as ebusinesses.) By providing greater specificity in zoning classifications, the planned changes are intended to decrease t h e need for PUDs.

Rezoning ordinances: Introduced Passed Still pending Withdrawn Denied

1997

1998

1999

2000

187 156 1 22 8

154 129 1 16 8

184 150 5 22 7

170 132 26 9 3

Source: Jacksonville City Council

Land acquisition Another growth-management strategy is for government to purchase undeveloped land to remove it from future development. Environmentally sensitive land can be protected through land acquisition, and targeted land acquisition can direct growth according to community priorities. Purchase or transfer of development rights and conservation easements are similar strategies that do not require the government to purchase land but which preserve lands from development. In 1999, the City expanded its land-acquisition efforts with the Preservation Project, designed to remove land from development and to improve air and water quality. Funding for the effort comes from federal, state, and local sources, private foundations, and mitigation agreements. The initial goal of purchasing 20 square miles of land was met in 2000; by 2001, the City had acquired 19,360 acres, or over 30 square miles of land, for conservation. The Project continues to acquire land, as the Mayor ‘s stated goal for Jacksonville is to have the largest urban park system in the country. Land acquisition can have economic benefits as well. The Cedar Swamp Report, issued in February 2000, estimated that development of the Cedar Swamp area would have cost the government $2.45 to provide services for every $1.00 of new tax revenues generated by the development. According to this estimate, the City saved over $200 million by purchasing the property and taking it out of development.

Infrastructure The location, capacity, and condition of existing infrastructure are key components in decision making for new development. Local government guides the location and kinds of growth by providing necessary infrastructure in certain areas and not in others. The addition of concurrency requirements has made infrastructure availability even more important to development decisions. The City of Jacksonville has taken the following steps to make its location of new infrastructure more effective in managing growth: • In September 2000, Duval County voters approved the Better Jacksonville Plan, a half-cent, local-option sales tax increase to fund capital improvements and transportation infrastructure in the county. The City promoted the measure as a growth-management initiative because it seeks to accommodate the infrastructure requirements of existing growth and to make infras t r u c t u r e improvements in areas targeted as desirable for future growth. • A new working relationship between the City and JEA has been formalized in the comprehensive plan to coordinate placement of water/sewer lines with land-use planning.

• The Jacksonville Transportation Authority has begun reviewing development plans to ensure that they can accommodate future mass-transit needs. • Increased coordination between the Department of Planning and Development and the Duval County Public Schools is seeking to better coordinate the siting of schools, recreational facilities, and residential development. The effectiveness of these approaches can be evaluated only after the policies have had a chance to influence several years of siting and development decisions.

Targeted economic incentives Local governments offer financial incentives to certain businesses to encourage economic development. In 1997, the Mayor of Jacksonville set a goal to use incentives to attract businesses toward the area north and west of the St. Johns River and downtown, away from the crowded southeastern quadrant. In 1998, this goal became City policy, as the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission discontinued approving incentives for developments in the southeastern area of the county. This policy was designed to encourage development in locations where development supports growth-management goals. Between 1997 and 2000, 45 new economic-development projects promising 3,740 jobs and approximately $550 million in capital investment were approved for the targeted areas north and west of the St. Johns River. The total value of City incentives provided for these projects was $58.6 million.

Fair-share agreements Since its implementation in 1991, the concurrency requirement has limited local government’s ability to determine where development should occur. In response, Jacksonville has developed a "fair-share agreement" process, through which developers can obtain permission to build if they pay for infrastructure improvements in proportion to the additional impacts the development will generate. Fa i r-share agreements are similar to another growthmanagement strategy other Florida counties use called "impact fees." Impact fees are typically imposed on all new developments, based on their size alone, to pay for infrastructure improvements. Fair-share agreements, in contrast, are assessed based on a calculation of the specific impacts of the development that will exceed available road capacity within a two mile radius, and fair-share payments are now spent on roadway improvements in the same sector from which are collected. Through December 2000, 63 fair-share agreements totaling over $13 million had been approved in Duval County. Several needed projects had been funded with "fair-share" funds, including widening of Kernan Boulevard and intersection improvements along Old St. Augustine Road and Hodges Boulevard.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

13


• added an emphasis on more roadway connections between developments and between residential and commercial developments to decrease reliance on major arterial roads. The effectiveness of comprehensive planning to significantly alter development patterns or manage growth has been limited because: • implementation of land-use planning has not always been coordinated with school siting, placement of water and sewer infrastructure, transportation, and economic-d e v e l o p m e n t planning; • the Comprehensive Plan does not address planning for public safety; and • while the City Council generally has followed the recommendations of the Department of Planning and Development, some developments have been approved that are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. To improve effectiveness of growth-management efforts, the City of Jacksonville began in the mid-1990s to increase reliance on other growth-management tools.

1997 Comprehensive Plan amendments: 72 Introduced 63 Passed 1 Still pending 6 Withdrawn 2 Denied

1998

1999

2000

51 44 0 4 3

56 46 1 9 0

80 64 11 5 0

Source: Jacksonville City Council

Zoning The Zoning Code provides another tool for managing land use. Thirty-five zoning classifications, arrayed among the 17 general land-use categories, provide more specific provisions for allowable land uses. Changing a property’s zoning is very different from amending the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning is "quasi-judicial" rather than legislative. Decisions are designed to be made based on facts and evidence, not political judgment. City Council members, when deciding on rezoning requests, are expected to act as impartial judges of the evidence presented to determine if the proposed land-use change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets all other criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The zoning process was changed in several ways during the 1990s: • Increased citizen involvement: A dramatic increase in citizen involvement has occurred, especially on the part of citizen organizations. Some increased involvement has resulted from more effective use of written notices to affected individuals

12 Growth Management Revisited 2001

and organizations. The City sends a notice to property owners within 350 feet of a proposed zoning change, as well as to all Citizen Planning Advisory Committees—citizen organizations working with the Neighborhoods Department in each planning district—and to any other organization that registers to receive them. Citizen involvement in some cases has supported development that fosters growth management; in other cases, citizen involvement has discouraged efforts to build higher density development or site locally unwanted land uses. • Planning Commission: The Planning Commission is a ninemember body, appointed by the Mayor, that reviews proposed site plans and reviews and decides whether to approve zoning variances and exceptions. Their decisions can now be appealed to the City Council. The Planning Commission can be authorized to act as a coordinating agency for programs and activities of executive agencies and independent agencies involved in land-use planning . • Planned Unit Developments (PUDs): Under a PUD zoning classification, applicants create their own unique zoning category for a particular development. They provide a detailed written description of the development planned for a particular land parcel. The use of PUDs is increasing as developers and citizen groups work to identify mutually acceptable land uses; from 1997 to 2000, the City approved 166 new PUDs. Administration and interpretation of a PUD is a complex and sometimes problematic task, and changes to a PUD can be difficult to track. • Revisions to the Zoning Code: In 1995, the City created the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) classification to allow higher density, multi-use, traditional neighborhoods. The first TND project was approved in 2001. The City also created a Historic Overlay for Springfield, an older neighborhood with historic homes, to encourage renewal and preservation of these homes; another Historic Overlay was being developed for the Riverside/Avondale area at the time of this study. In 2001, the Department of Planning and Development was preparing revisions to the Zoning Code designed to increase flexibility and to respond to changing land-use patterns and new types of development not covered by the existing code (such as ebusinesses.) By providing greater specificity in zoning classifications, the planned changes are intended to decrease t h e need for PUDs.

Rezoning ordinances: Introduced Passed Still pending Withdrawn Denied

1997

1998

1999

2000

187 156 1 22 8

154 129 1 16 8

184 150 5 22 7

170 132 26 9 3

Source: Jacksonville City Council

Land acquisition Another growth-management strategy is for government to purchase undeveloped land to remove it from future development. Environmentally sensitive land can be protected through land acquisition, and targeted land acquisition can direct growth according to community priorities. Purchase or transfer of development rights and conservation easements are similar strategies that do not require the government to purchase land but which preserve lands from development. In 1999, the City expanded its land-acquisition efforts with the Preservation Project, designed to remove land from development and to improve air and water quality. Funding for the effort comes from federal, state, and local sources, private foundations, and mitigation agreements. The initial goal of purchasing 20 square miles of land was met in 2000; by 2001, the City had acquired 19,360 acres, or over 30 square miles of land, for conservation. The Project continues to acquire land, as the Mayor ‘s stated goal for Jacksonville is to have the largest urban park system in the country. Land acquisition can have economic benefits as well. The Cedar Swamp Report, issued in February 2000, estimated that development of the Cedar Swamp area would have cost the government $2.45 to provide services for every $1.00 of new tax revenues generated by the development. According to this estimate, the City saved over $200 million by purchasing the property and taking it out of development.

Infrastructure The location, capacity, and condition of existing infrastructure are key components in decision making for new development. Local government guides the location and kinds of growth by providing necessary infrastructure in certain areas and not in others. The addition of concurrency requirements has made infrastructure availability even more important to development decisions. The City of Jacksonville has taken the following steps to make its location of new infrastructure more effective in managing growth: • In September 2000, Duval County voters approved the Better Jacksonville Plan, a half-cent, local-option sales tax increase to fund capital improvements and transportation infrastructure in the county. The City promoted the measure as a growth-management initiative because it seeks to accommodate the infrastructure requirements of existing growth and to make infras t r u c t u r e improvements in areas targeted as desirable for future growth. • A new working relationship between the City and JEA has been formalized in the comprehensive plan to coordinate placement of water/sewer lines with land-use planning.

• The Jacksonville Transportation Authority has begun reviewing development plans to ensure that they can accommodate future mass-transit needs. • Increased coordination between the Department of Planning and Development and the Duval County Public Schools is seeking to better coordinate the siting of schools, recreational facilities, and residential development. The effectiveness of these approaches can be evaluated only after the policies have had a chance to influence several years of siting and development decisions.

Targeted economic incentives Local governments offer financial incentives to certain businesses to encourage economic development. In 1997, the Mayor of Jacksonville set a goal to use incentives to attract businesses toward the area north and west of the St. Johns River and downtown, away from the crowded southeastern quadrant. In 1998, this goal became City policy, as the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission discontinued approving incentives for developments in the southeastern area of the county. This policy was designed to encourage development in locations where development supports growth-management goals. Between 1997 and 2000, 45 new economic-development projects promising 3,740 jobs and approximately $550 million in capital investment were approved for the targeted areas north and west of the St. Johns River. The total value of City incentives provided for these projects was $58.6 million.

Fair-share agreements Since its implementation in 1991, the concurrency requirement has limited local government’s ability to determine where development should occur. In response, Jacksonville has developed a "fair-share agreement" process, through which developers can obtain permission to build if they pay for infrastructure improvements in proportion to the additional impacts the development will generate. Fa i r-share agreements are similar to another growthmanagement strategy other Florida counties use called "impact fees." Impact fees are typically imposed on all new developments, based on their size alone, to pay for infrastructure improvements. Fair-share agreements, in contrast, are assessed based on a calculation of the specific impacts of the development that will exceed available road capacity within a two mile radius, and fair-share payments are now spent on roadway improvements in the same sector from which are collected. Through December 2000, 63 fair-share agreements totaling over $13 million had been approved in Duval County. Several needed projects had been funded with "fair-share" funds, including widening of Kernan Boulevard and intersection improvements along Old St. Augustine Road and Hodges Boulevard.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

13


Downtown redevelopment A vibrant downtown is a strong growth-management tool because it encourages centralized, higher density development and provides alternatives to spread out development into the suburbs. The City of Jacksonville has invested heavily in downtown-redevelopment efforts. For example, its 1993 River City Renaissance program spent $230 million, including a new performing arts center, city hall, and football stadium downtown. In 2000, the Better Jacksonville Plan provides $435 million for a new coliseum, children’s park, county courthouse, baseball stadium, and library, all located downtown. Additional City efforts to revitalize downtown use a range of approaches: • The Downtown Master Plan, approved in 2000, is designed to coordinate urban design, transportation, commercial, and residential-development efforts. • The Zoning Code was amended in 1997 to allow housing downtown. • Residential development has been encouraged through economic incentives. At the time of this study, approximately 500 downtown housing units, ranging from riverfront condominiums to loft apartments, were proposed, approved, or under construction. • Additional commercial development has been encouraged through economic incentives, such as a new hotel. • Synergistic efforts with the School Board created a new LaVilla performing-arts middle school and a renovated Ritz Theatre downtown to encourage and showcase the arts. • Transportation improvements, including completion of the Automated Skyway Express and introduction of a trolley service, are designed to encourage mobility within the downtown area. • Completed and planned improvements to aesthetics, streetscaping, greenspaces, and parks are intended to make the downtown experience more appealing. The effectiveness of these efforts to revitalize downtown for growth-management purposes depends in part on the influx of private investment to sustain a vibrant downtown.

Neighborhood and sector plans A sector plan creates a detailed design for future land use within a specific area. A neighborhood plan does the same thing in a still smaller area. Such plans, which usually have benefited from direct community input and buy-in, can provide strong guidance for growth management. They can also address issues of historic preservation and maintaining the "sense of place" in a neighborhood. The City has begun developing neighborhood and sector plans in areas targeted for redevelopment efforts. The Cecil Field redevelopment plan, for example, was designed to anticipate and coordinate growth with the transition of Cecil Field from a military base to a commercial/residential development. On a

14 Growth Management Revisited 2001

smaller scale, the Kings Road/Beaver Street Neighborhood Action Plan discusses redevelopment in a context of crime reduction, infrastructure improvements, and neighborhood beautification efforts. Two larger plans addressing development on the Northside and the Westside are expected to be developed in 2001.

Brownfields Growth-management efforts can more effectively discourage spreading development patterns if they successfully encourage infill and reuse of urban properties. Some urban properties, called "brownfields," are expensive to redevelop because previous land uses have contaminated the property, creating clean-up and potential liability costs. In 1998, the City began a pilot Brownfields Redevelopment Program, in partnership with the State of Florida and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop a process to identify and determine the extent of the pollution problems, clean them up, and redevelop brownfield properties. The effectiveness of this program in redirecting development to infill sites cannot yet be determined, since no brownfield site has yet been redeveloped in Duval County.

Visual environment A key community goal in managing growth involves aesthetics, or protection of the visual environment. The City of Jacksonville uses several tools to manage the visual environment, including: • a sign ordinance to regulate the appearance and size of on-site commercial signs and the number of off-site signs; • a tree ordinance to preserve or replace trees of a certain type and size from development; • a Landscape Commission to encourage aesthetic standards for public areas; • landscaping site-development requirements in the Zoning Code; • a downtown architectural review process; • strengthen cell-tower ordinances; • a tree-planting initiative, which distributed one million trees through 2001; and • an aggressive anti-litter campaign.

As a result, concurrency has been a major factor in pushing development away from established cities into suburbs and hinterlands where excess road capacity exists, exactly the opposite of what was intended.

Growth Management Study Commission In 2000, the Governor created a Growth Management Study Commission to assess the effectiveness of the growthmanagement system and to recommend changes to the Legislature. The Study Commission was specifically charged to consider the proper roles of the State, regional organizations, and local governments in growth management, as well as the role and responsibilities of citizens in developing and enforcing comprehensive plans. In February 2001, the Study Commission presented its report to the Governor and the Legislature. Among its recommendations were the following: • Replace the State Comprehensive Plan with a vision statement placing a healthy, vibrant, and sustainable economy as Florida’s priority. • Develop a uniform method to review the costs and benefits of local land-use decisions. • Empower citizens to understand and participate in the growthmanagement process. • Restrict state review of local comprehensive-plan amendments to those affecting compelling state interests. • Replace the DRI process with regional cooperation agreements. • Include public-school facilities in local comprehensive plans. • Authorize incentives for urban revitalization and infill development, including infrastructure needs. • Develop an incentive-based rural policy that includes public purchase of conservation and agricultural easements and transfer of density allocations. In the 2001 regular session, the Legislature debated growth management but, outside of passing a farmland protection bill, did not make any major changes to the state growth- management system.

Local efforts

Many of these efforts had not been effective through the 1 9 9 0 s , according to resource people, due in part to lack of enforcement stemming from insufficient funding and staffing. Frustration with the lack of enforcement led to a citizen-led charter amendment in 2000 to preserve trees, when many felt that the City Council had insufficiently addressed the issue.

Since the 1980s, local growth-management efforts primarily responded to state regulatory requirements. Beginning in the mid-1990s, the City of Jacksonville initiated several efforts, that go beyond state requirements, to manage growth within Duval County. These efforts show promise for managing growth.

Historic preservation

Growth has generally been encouraged in Jacksonville. For many years the prevailing sentiment among local political leaders was that plenty of room for development existed in Duval County’s 840 square miles. As the county and region experienced rapid population growth and the State began passing legislation to regulate growth, the City began placing greater

Growth-management efforts often have as their objectives the encouragement of higher density, multi-use, pedestrian friendly land uses with a distinctive sense of place. Historic-preservation efforts can accomplish these objectives.

emphasis on growth-management efforts. In 1980, it established a Department of Planning and Development and approved by resolution a 2005 Comprehensive Plan. However, JCCI’s Growth Management Study in 1984 found that Jacksonville’s growth-management system at that time lacked "policy direction, commitment, and coordination." After the 1985 Growth Management Act was passed, Jacksonville adopted by ordinance the 2010 Comprehensive Plan in 1990 and in 1991 revised its Zoning Code to align with the plan. In 1996, the Mayor and City Council President established a Growth Management Task Force to examine the City’s land-use policies, the implementation of those policies, and the infrastructure needs that must accompany them in order to preserve and improve the quality of life for all Jacksonville’s citizens. The task force’s report, released in 1997, has provided both policy guidance and the basis for several new growth-management initiatives, including the Downtown Master Plan, Brownfields Program, Transportation Master Plan, Neighborhoods Department, and the Better Jacksonville Plan. In 1997, the City also completed its first Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, concluding that a great deal had been accomplished and that efforts were ongoing to meet additional community needs. By 2001, this increased local emphasis on growth management was beginning to yield tangible results. However, because these initiatives were still relatively new, their long-term effectiveness could not yet be determined.

Comprehensive planning The 2010 Comprehensive Plan provides the framework for growth-management activities by identifying 17 categories of allowable uses for all land parcels in Duval County. The plan contains over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives to provide policy guidance for land-use decisions. If a property owner proposes development that is incompatible with the designated land-use category for the property, a c o m p r e h e n s i v e-plan amendment is required. Amendments involving property of less than ten acres can be filed at several times during the year and then undergo three public hearings. Amendments involving ten or more acres require a longer process, that usually takes about nine months. These applications can be filed at only two times during a year, and multiple public hearings are required, as they are reviewed by the Regional Planning Council, Water Management District, Department of Transportation, Department of Environmental Protection, and Department of Community Affairs. In May 2000, to increase effectiveness of its comprehensive planning, the City of Jacksonville: • created a new land-use category to allow multi-use development —places where people can live, work, and/or shop in one location—to encourage higher density d e v e l o p ment and decrease trip lengths; and

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

11


• by enhancing local preservation efforts if local natural resources are classified as having statewide significance; or • by diminishing local efforts if the designation "natural resources of regional significance" is eliminated.

Developments of Regional Impact The State regulates large regional developments with substantial off-site impacts through a Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) review and approval process. Proposed developments that meet certain threshold levels must go through DRI review before seeking building permits. The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC) coordinates the DRI process in this part of the state, determines the extent of regional impact of proposed developments, and recommends how developers can mitigate negative offsite impacts. Local governments with jurisdiction over DRIs review the RPC recommendations and include in their final development orders the steps the developer must take to receive building permits. After local governments issue development orders, the RPC reviews the DRI again and recommends to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) whether to approve or appeal the development orders. The DRI process manages growth in several ways, by: • ensuring that development is responsive to community standards; • resolving disputes among different jurisdictions; and • reducing or resolving the impacts of large-scale development. However, because the DRI process adds significant upfront time and costs to the development process (resource people estimated as long as two years and a minimum of $1 million in consulting and legal fees), it has had unintended negative effects on growth management. The number of developments just under DRI size thresholds, some of them adjacent to one another, has increased, thus avoiding DRI review but increasing offsite impacts and encouraging piecemeal development.

Comprehensive planning In 1985, the State refined its top-down comprehensive land-use planning process. The State Comprehensive Plan is intended to guide regional plans that in turn provide a framework for local comprehensive plans consistent with each other, the regional plans, and the state plan. Jacksonville adopted its comprehensive plan for 2010 in 1990. It has been in force since then and is amended periodically, in accordance with the state process. DCA reviews and approves local comprehensive plans and plan amendments for consistency and compliance with state law and administrative rules. Amending the comprehensive plan has intentionally been made time consuming and complicated, involving reviews, hearings, and comments from the Regional Planning Council, Water Management District, Department of Transportation, and Department of Environmental Protection, before DCA review. Every seven years, each local government must do an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of its

10 Growth Management Revisited 2001

comprehensive plan to assess actual development against plan objectives. Jacksonville completed its most recent EAR in 1997 and is scheduled for another in 2004. The comprehensive planning process had some immediate benefits. Across the state, local communities placed a higher emphasis on growth management. Creating comprehensive plans required assessing development patterns and establishing community priorities, as well as creating ordinances and revising zoning to fit the local Comprehensive Plan. However, by 2000, most observers agreed that the State’s intent to provide guidance and oversight for land-use regulation and growth management through a comprehensive planning process had several shortcomings: • Success of the process at the local level requires guidance from a strong, clear State Comprehensive Plan. Two attempts by the state to create this plan have failed to provide a clear guiding document for regional and local planning efforts. • The process mandates DCA review of every plan, plan update, and sizable plan amendment throughout the state—467 county and municipal plans through the late 1980s to 1990 and over 30,000 plan amendments through the 1990s. In response to this volume, the process evolved into assuring compliance with a state checklist instead of coordinating growth-management efforts. • Funding for local governments to complete the mandated comprehensive-planning process was not provided. • Implementation requires local political will to deny exceptions to the comprehensive plan that are detrimental to growth management. This has proven problematic in many areas in the state.

Concurrency The provisions in comprehensive plans gained additional strength when the State began to require that sufficient infrastructure be in place concurrently with the new development. Required infrastructure includes water, sewer, roads and mass transit, solid waste, parks and recreation, and drainage. Because school districts are autonomous in Florida, schools are not included in concurrency requirements. If the necessary infrastructure will not be in place in time to accommodate a new development when it is completed, local government is not allowed to issue building permits. New developments had traditionally incorporated most of these infrastructure demands; however, until 1985 no one had been measuring the transportation demands of new development, including how many trips the development would generate and the capacity of the roads to handle the traffic. In practice, Concurrency created significant problems for local growth-management efforts. Concurrency regulations were intended to be supported with additional state funding for infrastructure improvements, so that existing development would meet the new concurrency standards. However, the funding was not provided. This severely constrained efforts by local governments to guide the siting of new developments for growthmanagement purposes.

Historic-preservation and urban-revitalization efforts have several advantages, including:

for and implement complementary growth-management strategies and infrastructure development.

• enhancing property values in the community; • increasing employment opportunities; • increasing community visibility; and • improving community pride.

As of early 2001, formal regional growth-management efforts were effective, but limited.

The City of Jacksonville’s Comprehensive Plan has a Historic Preservation Element. The seven-member Historic Preservation Commission, appointed by the Mayor and staffed by the Department of Planning and Development, administers historicpreservation efforts. Rehabilitation and reuse of historic properties are encouraged by federal tax credits, local property-tax abatements, and state preservation grants. In various combinations, these incentives are available to private, commercial, and government property owners. Riverside Avondale is one successful example of historic preservation in Jacksonville. Efforts to preserve the historic character and nature of the neighborhood began in 1974 when a group of citizens founded Riverside Avondale Preservation (RAP). The residents voted to designate the neighborhood an historic district and in February 1998, city ordinance created the Riverside Avondale Historic District. Springfield is another example of Jacksonville’s historicpreservation efforts. Its revitalization efforts have included public and private investment, a zoning overlay, a neighborhood plan, and participation in the State’s Mainstreet program to improve design, promote the area, build public-private partnerships, and recruit economic development. From 1998 to 2001, the appraised value of property in Springfield has increased from $30 per square foot to $70.

Affordable housing Neighborhood revitalization, urban renewal, and historicpreservation efforts risk increasing the cost of housing or displacing current residents. JCCI’s 2000 study on Affordable Housing found that 71,000 households in Duval County needed affordable housing or housing assistance programs, of which 19,000 were receiving some form of federal, state, or local housing assistance. The City of Jacksonville has addressed displacement and housing affordability in its revitalization programs. For example, in Springfield, both a program to encourage infill construction and a repair and rehabilitation program for existing properties are available for both new and existing owners, encouraging renovation while keeping costs down.

Regional coordination As development occurs within Northeast Florida, it not only creates interjurisdictional impacts, it also necessitates cooperative efforts among involved counties and municipalities to plan

• The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council has been reviewing comprehensive plans for consistency with its regional growth-management plan and is seeking to resolve disputes between local governments, primarily through the DRI process but also by serving as a neutral convener. • The St. Johns River Water Management District reviews comprehensive-plan amendments and regulates water issues on a regional basis. • The First Coast Metropolitan Planning Organization plans transportation improvements in Duval and parts of Clay and St. Johns Counties. Informal cooperative efforts were just beginning, such as coordinating land-acquisition programs in adjoining counties with the Jacksonville Preservation Project or joint planning between Clay and Duval Counties for the Cecil Commerce Center redevelopment effort.

Approaches from other communities Across the country, state and local governments are implementing policies to manage growth. While most of these efforts originate at the state level, some cities and counties have taken the lead to manage growth. Indianapolis, Indiana; Portland, Oregon; and Charlotte, North Carolina are examples of concerted local efforts to manage growth. Rhode Island and Maryland are two states with recent growth-management initiatives.

Indianapolis, Indiana Indianapolis/Marion County, like Jacksonville/Duval County, is a consolidated city-county government. In 1999, the City formed a Marion County Growth Advisory Committee to recommend improvements to its growth-management system. The report, released in February 2000, examined the impacts of sustained regional growth, which had resulted in "leapfrogged" residential development patterns that passed over undeveloped land in Marion County to formerly agricultural land in the surrounding counties. Indianapolis relies on comprehensive planning and zoning as its primary growth-management tools. It has introduced flexibility into the zoning ordinances to better manage growth, including zero-lot-line options, cluster subdivisions, and planned unit developments. Its most effective zoning tool is a requirement for adequate sewer and water facilities, which inhibits residential development outside of designated areas. Indianapolis has also begun to encourage downtown redevelopment

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

15


and envisions that successful downtown revitalization would be an effective growth-management tool. The report recommended that Indianapolis use infrastructure placement as its potentially most effective growth-management strategy to influence the rate, location, and density of development. The report concluded that successful growth-management efforts would require regional cooperation. Land acquisition and transfers of development rights were recommended as ways to preserve open space; impact fees, unless assessed regionally, were not recommended, as they would only encourage development to continue to spread outside of the county.

Portland, Oregon Portland’s primary growth-management tool is a strong urban growth boundary. In Oregon, local governments must designate an urban growth boundary according to state criteria and can amend the boundary only if the proposed amendment complies with state regulations for an exception. The urban growth boundary has been successful in controlling development patterns within Portland’s jurisdictional limits and in increasing urban density. The goal for Portland is a minimum density of 10 housing units per net acre; the maximum lot size is 3,850 square feet. Mass transit, including light rail, has been one success stemming from increased density and concentration of housing and retail near bus and light-rail stations. However, these growth-management efforts have increased the cost of housing significantly within the urban growth boundaries. They also have not stopped spreading development patterns, as low-density, single-family residential development has jumped rural areas and gone outside of Portland’s jurisdiction and across the state line. Vancouver, Washington, for example, now sends 50,000 commuters daily to Portland.

Charlotte, North Carolina North Carolina lacks strong growth-management regulation at the state level, though it does have some specific programs, such as its Coastal Area Management Act, which have had successes. Instead, local governments are given authority to implement a range of growth-management policies. By the late 1990s, observed development patterns and environmental impacts suggested that the current growth-management system was ineffective. In 1999, the State Legislature established a North Carolina Smart Growth Commission to recommend improvements in the state system; the same year, Charlotte/Mecklenburg County commissioned a Smart Growth Audit to examine its growthmanagement programs in the light of nationally recognized growth-management principles. In 2001, the Smart Growth Commission recommended the following:

16 Growth Management Revisited 2001

• increasing the authority of local governments to manage growth; •providing state funds for land-acquisition programs; and • using state transportation funding allocations to encourage communities to manage growth. Charlotte/Mecklenburg County has been most successful in its residential downtown development initiatives: in 2000, approximately 7,000 people were living downtown. The Bank of America, headquartered in Charlotte, has led the way by financing downtown residential development; in addition, many of the bank’s executives, including its CEO, live downtown.

Rhode Island Grow Smart Rhode Island is a community-interest group of planners, environmentalists, government agencies and officials, developers, and others concerned about development in Rhode Island. Their mission is to bring together diverse interests to preserve the quality of life in Rhode Island. To do so, they are promoting business and residential growth in town centers and preserving agricultural land and open spaces in order to maintain the character of the state. The coalition is chaired by a leading corporate figure in Rhode Island. As a result of Grow Smart’s efforts, Rhode Island: • passed a $34 million bond issue for open space land acquisition; • created a new building code for rehabilitation projects because existing codes prevented rehabilitation of older buildings; • began work on brownfields programs to encourage infill redevelopment; and • strengthened staff support for the statewide planning system. The Sierra Club recognized Rhode Island in 1999 as one of the nation’s leaders in managing growth. Particularly noted were the efforts to build new train stations, ferry lines and a 50-mile network of bike paths.

Maryland In 1997, the State of Maryland created a Priority Funding Area (PFA) designation for specific areas targeted for growth. Local governments identify these areas, which must meet certain state criteria. State funds for infrastructure assistance and economic development assistance can be spent only within the certified PFA. This has resulted in elimination of $360 million in highway funds for projects outside the PFAs. It has also led to a sharp increase in school-construction funds allocated to rehabilitation of schools in older communities rather than for new construction in the suburbs—84 percent of these funds in 2000 compared to 43 percent in 1995. Maryland also has an aggressive rural-lands protection program, with the goal of preserving 200,000 acres by 2011. Its Rural Legacy Program is purchasing development rights on this land. By 2000, it had already acquired 47,000 acres.

Growth distribution

State regulation

The locations and kinds of development have created disparate impacts within Duval County and in adjoining counties. The extensive development of office-park and commercial development in southeastern Duval County, especially around Southpoint and Baymeadows, has also attracted widespread residential development to this area. The rest of Duval County has lagged behind, particularly the urban core and some neighborhoods north and west of the St. Johns River.

The State of Florida began regulating development for growth-management purposes in the 1970s and significantly strengthened its role through the 1985 Growth Management Act. The growth-management process identifies specific roles for the state, regional organizations, and local governments. This process was under intensive review during this study, and Florida’s growth-management system is likely to change significantly over the next several years.

Between 1989 and 1999, over half of all commercial development and three-fourths of all residential development in Duval County occurred south and east of the St. Johns River. In the North and Northwest Planning Districts, however, development is increasing; commercial development in 1999 exceeded the average annual adjusted value of new building permits from the previous ten years by 89 percent, and residential development similarly grew by 114 percent.

After actively encouraging growth for many years, the State of Florida began responding in the 1970s to the increasingly negative impacts of unregulated growth through a process of top-down growth management. The Legislature strengthened these efforts in the 1985 Growth Management Act, including a requirement that local governments not issue building permits unless the infrastructure necessary to support the development was in place concurrently with the development. In 2000, after legislative debate on significant amendments to the growth-management process, the Governor established a Growth Management Study Commission to review growth-management regulation and recommend improvements. The Study Commission reported to the Governor and Legislature on February 15, 2001 and recommended that the Legislature adopt significant changes to the process. The current process, established in 1985, has relied on four major regulatory tools: Areas of Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact, Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency.

Development in Duval County has impacted other areas in Northeast Florida. St. Johns and Clay Counties have become bedroom communities for Jacksonville workers. While those two counties are exporting employees, they lack adequate transportation infrastructure for their own commuters and the commercial tax base needed to provide adequate services to their residents. At the same time, Duval County is required to provide roads and public services to commuters from other counties. Current efforts to attract growth to northern Duval County have the potential to create growth pressures in Nassau County as well. As development has spread across county lines, local governments have responded within their jurisdictions to manage growth. However, Northeast Florida lacks a formal political structure to integrate growth-management efforts across county lines. The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council works on an informal basis to encourage local governments to coordinate growthmanagement efforts. The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida concluded that growth-management efforts in Northeast Florida "cannot succeed unless they are coordinated at the regional level."

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS Duval County’s efforts to manage growth have been both strengthened and limited by the state’s growth-management process, which was under statewide debate at the time of this study. Local efforts to manage growth have intensified in recent years, with a variety of programs beginning to demonstrate their effectiveness. Growth-management efforts in certain other communities may reveal approaches to improve local efforts.

One strength of this process has been its relative stability. Over time, local governments, developers, and citizens have become relatively comfortable with the process, and "grandfathered" projects (those not subject to the regulation because they had begun prior to 1985) have largely been either developed or sold.

Areas of Critical State Concern The State limits development in certain large geographical areas that are of major, unique environmental value through the Areas of Critical State Concern (ACSC) program. To date, the State has identified only four such areas—Apalachicola Bay, Green Swamp, Big Cypress Swamp, and the Keys—none of which is in Northeast Florida. Despite initial local litigation and conflict, the program has been effective in managing growth and preserving these areas. Because no proposal has been made to designate an Area of Critical State Concern in Northeast Florida, this program has had no effect in Duval County. In 1993, the State required Regional Planning Councils to identify natural resources of regional significance in a Strategic Regional Policy Plan. This has been used in Northeast Florida to coordinate preservation of environmental areas on a regional basis. A recommendation by the Growth Management Study Commission to create a new regulatory category of "natural resources of statewide significance" has the potential to affect Duval County in one of two ways: Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

9


Development has spread southward into Clay and St. Johns Counties as well. Building permits for single-family homes in Duval County have remained relatively constant from 1998 to 2000; during the same three years, building permits in St. Johns and Clay Counties have grown by 17.6 and 13.8 percent, respectively. Development patterns have favored low-density, single-family residential development. The Jacksonville Planning and Development Department projects that, between 1990 and 2010, more than 88 percent of the City’s new housing will be developed at an average density of less than four units per acre. As development has increased, infrastructure requirements for roads, schools, and parks have increased as well. Building infrastructure to meet development needs spurs additional development, which quickly exceeds the capacity of available infrastructure.

Resulting community impacts Increased population and economic growth and the corresponding development to accommodate that growth have impacted the quality of life in Northeast Florida in several ways. Growth has increased pressures on transportation systems, the environment, and the financial resources of local government. The locations and kinds of development have impacted some older urban neighborhoods and have spread across county lines to create interjurisdictional issues. As Northeast Florida has grown, the impact to the residents’ quality of life has correspondingly increased. Growth affects the community, particularly its transportation system, natural environment, and social environment. Growth also creates pressures on Duval County’s financial resources and requires improved intergovernmental coordination with the surrounding counties.

Transportation Traffic on Duval County roadways has increased. Existing commercial and residential development patterns rely on a few collector roads and major arterial roads. Many residential and commercial developments have only limited direct access to another development, in part because previous regulations discouraged connector roads. This funnels traffic onto a few major roads and increases trip lengths and trip times, leading to traffic delay and increased maintenance needs of existing roadways. Subsequent road-widening projects on major thoroughfares have provided some relief, but growth continues to expand. The spread of bedroom communities in Clay and St. Johns Counties has created cross-county commuting backups, as U.S. 17 and Blanding Boulevard in Clay County and State Road 13, A1A, Philips Highway, and Interstate 95 in St. Johns County carry increasing numbers of cars. Duval County’s mass-transit system has not attracted sufficient ridership to effectively relieve traffic congestion.

8

Growth Management Revisited 2001

Increasing population is only part of the traffic issue, as the existing population continues to take more trips and longer trips, and has decreased its use of mass transit, carpooling, or biking/walking as commuting methods. Past development patterns have not always been pedestrian friendly, either by providing sidewalks or by locating residential development within walking distance of retail or employment. These patterns also discourage the use of bicycles and mass transit. The City of Jacksonville in 1999 significantly strengthened its policy for provision of sidewalks to address this issue.

Environmental impacts A growing population has placed greater pressure on potable water resources. From 1980 to 1999, demand for water supplied by public sources in Duval County increased from 73.25 to 112.47 million gallons per day. Of the nearly 40 million gallon increase, approximately 10 million gallons a day resulted from people shifting from personal wells to public water supply. Commercial and industrial withdrawal of groundwater decreased by 20 million gallons per day during the same period. Some of that decrease came from shifting water use to the public water supply, and some came from actual decreases in water usage due to conservation efforts. In all, net water use in Duval County increased between 1980 to 1999 by 10 million gallons per day. Stormwater runoff, which carries fertilizer and pesticides into the St. Johns River, threatens the health of the river by increasing algae and bacteria growth, which can lead to fish kills, contaminated shellfish, and habitat degradation. Leakage from faulty septic tanks can also pollute the river. Although residential development has increased, the number of new septic-tank permits issued annually by the City of Jacksonville decreased by 80 percent between 1987 and 1999. The Better Jacksonville Plan also set aside $75 million for septic-tank remediation. The loss of trees to development can increase stormwater runoff, as a moderate-sized tree can absorb up to 400 gallons of stormwater per day. The St. Johns River Water Management District (WMD) regulates new development to require that the first inch of stormwater is retained on site. Watering restrictions, limiting the time of day that Duval County residents can water their lawn, were adopted by the WMD in 1991 and are currently enforced. In addition, the WMD issued water shortage warnings in 1999 and 2000.

Conclusions

Conclusions express the value judgements of the committee based on the findings.

1. Growth-management efforts of the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have not kept pace with local initiatives. The DCA has focused on "checklist" bureaucracy instead of taking a visionary or leadership role. As a result, cumbersome growth-management regulations have increased the cost of development while creating unintended negative consequences for local communities. 2. Natural-resource regulatory efforts of the State, along with federal regulations, have influenced growth-management efforts by providing tools to protect the natural-environment in Duval County, especially water resources, wetlands, and air quality. The results of these natural resources protection efforts have been mixed, as the natural environment traditionally has been given insufficient consideration in permitting and development decisions. 3. The Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review process is an important tool for growth management. The DRI process in Northeast Florida is most effective in: • fostering interagency and intergovernmental coordination; and • providing a comprehensive review of proposed development impacts, including economic, transportation, public-school, and public-safety impacts. However, the complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of the process encourage developers to modify the size of developments to avoid it. 4. The State of Florida has historically regulated growth through Areas of Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact, Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency. The 2000 Growth Management Study Commission recommended substantial revisions to state growth-management policy, transferring much of current state oversight of growth management to local governments. Such recommendations, if enacted by the Florida Legislature, will require local government responses that encourage a balanced and effective approach to growth management.

Increased development, more vehicles, and increased traffic congestion contribute to air pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the pollution from increased driving will offset all of its air pollution-reduction efforts by 2010.

5. The City of Jacksonville recently has taken positive steps in its growth-management efforts, becoming one of the more successful communities in Florida in managing its growth.

Loss of land to development decreases natural resources and wildlife habitats available and pressures the natural environment to maintain sustainable ecosystems.

• the Mayor taking a strong community-leadership role in growth management; • the City of Jacksonville preserving natural resources and guiding development patterns through land acquisition;

These steps include:

• the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission encouraging the location of development in specific sites through targeted economic incentives; • the City Council and the Department of Planning and Development implementing policies to encourage alternative development patterns such as multi-use development, traditional neighborhood design, and allowing housing downtown; • the Department of Planning and Development using new processes for managing growth and encouraging citizen involvement; • public authorities (such as the JEA) and the City of Jacksonville improving coordination of growth-management efforts; and • citizens increasing their involvement in growth-management, including self-imposing a half-cent sales tax in 2000 to support the Better Jacksonville Plan. 6.

Although Jacksonville has made considerable progress in growth management processes, elements of concern remain. These include:

• Older neighborhoods: Historically, growth-management efforts in Duval County have focused more on new growth than on redevelopment of existing neighborhoods. While some public and private interests have promoted creative reuse of historical neighborhoods through use of several tools (including overlay zoning), other tools for historic preservation, such as interagency coordination and state and federal tax incentives, are underutilized in Duval County. In addition, Duval County lacks sufficient incentives to encourage infill development in core city neighborhoods and redevelopment of environmentally contaminated brownfields. Building infrastructure for new development when vacant homes, underutilized commercial properties, and under-capacity schools exist in older neighborhoods creates natural and social costs to the community and to the neighborhoods passed over by growth. • Transportation: The City of Jacksonville has fostered and permitted disconnected subdivisions, residential and commercial developments, and communities. Disconnected developments create a negative impact on the road system by increasing the number of auto trips and the length of auto trips citizens have to take to meet their daily needs. Lack of coordination between land-use planning and transportation planning in Northeast Florida has exacerbated traffic congestion by not accommodating higher residential densities which promote and support alternative travel options such as mass transit, walking, or bicycling. Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

17


• Impact analysis: Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology for determining the full costs and benefits to the community of proposed development, including its fiscal impact on taxpayers as well as its impact on the natural environment. 7. Northeast Florida has had a number of gatherings of citizens under public and private auspices to articulate their community goals for growth management. These ongoing activities of reviewing progress and setting community goals have benefited Duval County by increasing attention to issues related to growth management. However, implementation of these community goals remains incomplete because of private values and behaviors that vary from community goals, as well as insufficient commitment of resources. 8. Anticipated population, housing, and employment growth in Duval County will continue to pressure natural resources and public infrastructure. Duval County lacks sufficient knowledge about the size of the population that its natural resources and water supply can sustain. Managing continued growth is a complex task that will require Duval County to maintain all of these resources effectively. 9. The success of growth-management efforts is in the implementation, not just the planning. Growth-management efforts require the following to be successful: • • • • •

sufficient funding; strong executive leadership; involvement and commitment of private sector leaders; public awareness, participation, and support; interagency coordinated use of multiple strategies and multiple public objectives; • sufficient information and the tools to analyze that information; • focused goals; and • continuity of effort, plans, and implementation.

10. Traditionally, private property rights have been granted great weight in the growth-management process. Growth management requires balancing private property rights with the public interest and goals established by the community. The right to own property is not a right to taxpayer-financed assistance in developing that property. 11. Successful growth management in Northeast Florida requires regional cooperation. Northeast Florida has insufficiently integrated growth-management efforts across county lines. The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida similarly found that growth-management efforts in the First Coast cannot succeed unless they are coordinated at the regional level. 12. Citizen involvement, while increasing since the late 1990s, has been primarily reactive to unwanted land uses adjacent to existing neighborhoods. While individuals have learned how to participate in the difficult growth-management process, the general public has not been sufficiently involved proactively in the planning and permitting processes. The growth-management process would benefit from increasing public awareness and eliminating impediments to citizen involvement. 13. Nationally, few communities have successfully managed their growth. While many communities have implemented innovative growth-management strategies, the results of those efforts are mixed. The combined experiences from these communities suggest that growth-management approaches are more effective when tailored to the needs and goals of the community. Jacksonville can continue to learn from the mistakes and successes of other communities.

served by these roadways, as did the Acosta and Matthews Bridges in earlier times; as of the time of this study, the Dames Point Bridge is attracting the same strong growth. Highway construction has made commuting feasible between downtown and the suburbs. • Recruitment: The pattern of development has also responded to the efforts of private developers and the City to recruit businesses to certain areas, such as the office parks in southeastern Duval County. Residential development has followed commercial development into these areas. The City of Jacksonville in 1997 began targeting its use of economic incentives to recruit business to downtown and north and west of the St. Johns River (see p. 13). • Housing demand: The market demand for housing has focused on a typical house with a yard on a cul-de-sac, in a neighborhood with similar homes. This type of residential development is termed low-density, single-family development, disconnected from the larger traffic network. Residents have been willing to commute longer distances to work in order to have the type of housing they want, even if the house is located in another county from their employment. Builders have responded to this demand in their choices of what kinds of residential developments to construct.

Definitions of Density

Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential

0-2 dwelling units per acre 3-7 dwelling units per acre 8-20 dwelling units per acre 21-60 dwelling units per acre

Population change per planning district Planning District 1985 Population 2000 Population Percent Change

Urban Core Arlington Southeast Southwest Northwest North

55,125 123,214 118,177 115,323 145,586 37,660

Atlantic, Jacksonville,and Neptune Beach

42,635 186,072 195,721 133,867 128,848 48,474

-22.7% +51.0 +65.6% +16.1% -11.5% +28.7%

32,268

41,628

+29.0%

1,528 628,881

1,634 778,879

+6.9% +23.9%

Baldwin Total

Source: City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department

Between 1985 and 2000, the majority of residential and commercial development in Duval County occurred in its southeast quadrant. The population south and east of the St. Johns River (Arlington and Southeast Planning Districts as well as Atlantic Beach, Jacksonville Beach, and Neptune Beach) grew by approximately 150,000 during this time period, which accounts for nearly all of the population growth of the county. Other outlying areas, especially in northern and western Duval County, have not been as intensively developed; population dropped by 11.5 and 22.7 percent in the Northwest and Urban Core planning districts, respectively. The clustering of office parks in southeastern Duval County has contributed to the differences in development patterns. Development Patterns in Duval County, 2000

Source: City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Resulting development patterns Duval County’s rapid population growth over the past two decades has occurred primarily in the southeastern quadrant. Development has spread southward beyond Duval into St. Johns and Clay Counties. The pattern of development has been characterized by low-density, single-family residential development, served by strip commercial development, with commercial/residential development clusters around office parks and shopping malls. At the time of this study, development patterns were beginning to change in response to City policies and programs. Duval County covers 480,043 acres, excluding Baldwin and the Beaches municipalities. By 2000, 214,987 acres, or 45 percent of the total land area, had been developed. Of the remaining land area, 21,338 acres were federal or state parks or otherwise designated conservation land.

18 Growth Management Revisited 2001

Agricultural, parkland, or undeveloped land Residential development Industrial, commercial, or military development Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

7


Population growth rates in the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) County

1980-1990

1990-2000

2000-2010

2010-2020

2020-2030

Baker

20.9%

20.4%

15.0%

13.3%

11.0%

Clay

58.1%

32.9%

23.4%

19.9%

15.8%

Duval

17.9%

15.7%

12.2%

11.3%

9.5%

Nassau

33.6%

31.2%

23.0%

19.7%

15.5%

St. Johns

63.4%

46.9%

30.6%

24.8%

19.1%

Total

25.4%

21.4%

16.3%

14.6%

12.0%

Source: U.S. Census, University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Data for 2010-2030 are projected.

The rate of growth in Duval County is expected to continue to slow, as growth spreads into other counties in the region. Although the rate of growth is slowing, the numbers of people being added to the existing population base continue to be high, and the land area and natural resources to accommodate the growth remain finite. Duval County contains 840 square miles, of which 774 square miles are land; wetlands comprise 25 percent of the total land area in Duval County. Population growth in Duval County comes from a combination of net immigration and natural population increase. Natural increase occurs when the number of births in a year exceeds the number of deaths; of the population growth between 1999 and 2000, 55 percent was due to natural increase. Net immigration occurs when more people move into a community than move out; net immigration accounted for 45 percent of the population increase from 1999 to 2000. The age composition of the population is also changing, as the current population ages and increased numbers of retirees move to the Jacksonville MSA. Throughout Florida, retirees typically live one county away from large cities, close to the services they require but away from the urban center. The same pattern is developing throughout Northeast Florida. In 2000, only seven percent of Duval County’s population were over 65, while 28 percent in St. Johns County were 65 or older. By 2015, Duval County’s retirement-age population is expected to grow to 13 percent of the total, with St. Johns County reaching 36 percent age 65 or older. The region has experienced substantial economic growth as well. Between 1984 and 1999, Duval County added 137,000 new jobs and 94,000 housing units. By 2010, Duval County is expecting a net gain of 104,000 jobs and 57,000 housing units, while the other counties in the region add 30,000 more jobs and 40,000 housing units.

Factors affecting development patterns State regulation has created increasingly detailed requirements to manage growth that have been implemented through local-government policy. Development patterns have been

6

Growth Management Revisited 2001

affected by a combination of state regulation, city programs and policies, and other factors such as the availability of less expensive land, geographic considerations, infrastructure availability, active recruitment efforts, and housing demand. State legislative mandates, especially the Growth Management Act of 1985, have established certain growth-management requirements for Florida’s counties, including comprehensive planning, requiring that infrastructure is available upon completion of development, and review of large developments that have a regional impact. While many of the effects of these state regulations have been positive, they have not always achieved their desired outcomes, and in some cases have had unintended negative results; many consider state regulation to be primarily a burdensome regulatory checklist that adds to the costs of development. State mandates have structured Duval County’s growthmanagement processes and strengthened local efforts to manage growth. These efforts include local comprehensive planning and zoning, as well as other policies and programs not mandated by the State. Other factors that have influenced development in Duval County have been: • Geography: The locations of rivers, marshes, and other land features have been an important determinant of development. Wetlands, for example, have shaped patterns of development and prevented contiguous development. The location of locally-unwanted land uses and industry, from landfills to paper mills, has influenced the development patterns in neighboring areas. • Availability and cost of land: The availability of less expensive land has encouraged growth into previously undeveloped areas. Environmentally contaminated, abandoned lands have discouraged reuse or urban infill in some areas because of the liability and cost of cleaning up the property. However, more expensive land in southeastern Duval and northern St. Johns County has continued to be a focus for development even as the price of land has increased. • Infrastructure: Infrastructure refers to the physical facilities needed to serve a community, including roads, schools, fire stations, solid-waste management, drainage, parks, and water, s e w e r, and electric utilities. The availability of existing infrastructure, including utilities and roadways, has drawn growth toward certain areas; for example, extension of electric, sewer, and water infrastructure into certain geographic areas has effectively subsidized the cost of development and encouraged development of property accessible to the utilities. Perceptions of the quality of public facilities, such as schools, also have affected development patterns. Because the St. Johns River divides Duval County, the locations and addition of bridges have influenced patterns of growth. Construction of J. Turner Butler Boulevard and of the Buckman Bridge influenced development into areas

Recommendations

Recommendations are the committee’s specific suggestions for change, based on the findings and conclusions.

1. The Florida growth-management process needs to be revised, restructured, and streamlined. The Florida Legislature should redistribute growth-management responsibilities and authority to appropriate levels of government. This restructuring should not create additional regulatory burdens or redundant levels of review and should ensure continuation of natural-environment protections. 2. Aspects of growth management that have statewide impacts should continue to be conducted at the state level. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) should retain regulatory oversight of: • comprehensive-planning elements that directly impact natural resources of statewide significance; •transportation facilities and infrastructure of statewide significance; • natural-disaster responses and emergency-preparation issues of statewide significance; and •other specific items of statewide significance, as determined by the Florida Legislature. The State budget should provide sufficient funding for DCA to perform these functions adequately. 3. The Florida Legislature should delegate all remaining state regulatory oversight of local comprehensive planning to Regional Planning Councils, because growth management has regional impacts beyond the scope of local-government authority. The Legislature should authorize Regional Planning Councils to obtain sufficient, broad-based resources, including funding and staffing, to perform these additional functions effectively. In addition, the Florida Legislature should expand the authority of each Regional Planning Council to: • take the lead in coordinating growth management among local, regional, and state interests; • coordinate the development of a regional growthmanagement vision; • implement its Strategic Regional Policy Plan; and • ensure the integration of local/regional transportation and land-use planning. 4. The Florida Legislature should add public safety and public schools as mandatory elements in local-government comprehensive plans. The Legislature should authorize appropriate, broad-based funding mechanisms for local governments to implement these elements.

5. The Florida Legislature should maintain the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process, with some modifications. Modifications should include: • streamlining and simplifying the process, while maintaining its comprehensive nature; and • delegating review authority to the Regional Planning Councils, with appeal of their decisions to the courts. 6. The Florida Legislature should ensure that enforcement of all natural-environment protections under the current system are retained and appropriately assigned. The Legislature should further improve protection of the natural environment in Florida by: • ensuring that Regional Planning Councils identify and map natural resources of regional significance to ensure their accurate identification and protection; • including assessment of the impacts of development on the natural environment in the regional-development review process; • encouraging the use of incentives to developers for protection of the natural environment; •creating a system to transfer development rights for protection of environmentally sensitive areas; and • limiting the use of exceptions in the growth-management process that negatively impact natural resources. 7. Because transportation in Northeast Florida has become a regional and not solely a local matter, the Florida Legislature should amend the charter of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, expanding its jurisdiction to regional as well as local transportation concerns, renaming it accordingly, and authorizing appropriate, broad-based regional funding mechanisms. In addition to coordinating transportation planning and implementation in the region, the First Coast Transportation Authority should: • improve the process used to secure land for future rightof-way needs by allowing land owners to retain reasonable and appropriate access and use rights until construction begins; and •identify transportation corridors within the region in which land-use densities may be increased to support effective public transportation. 8. To provide needed information for local growth-management decision making, the St. Johns River Water Management District should determine the total population that can be supported in Northeast Florida with currently used water

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

19


resources and currently available water-supply processes and technologies. The District also should examine technically and financially realistic new potable water processes and technologies to determine their potential effect on capacity and their fiscal impacts. 9. Independent of state and regional action, the Mayor of Jacksonville should take the lead to continue to improve the City of Jacksonville’s growth-management processes on matters of local impact by: • encouraging roadway patterns in new developments that include connections to adjacent developments and land uses; • retrofitting existing developments to include more roadway connections to adjacent developments and land uses; • encouraging City departments and independent authorities to coordinate their efforts for growth-management purposes; • providing funding, through various entities and sources, for the Downtown Master Plan to restore and revitalize Jacksonville’s downtown area; • improving and enforcing City codes regarding neighborhood appearance and upkeep; • encouraging and funding efforts to revitalize older neighborhoods, including those designated Historic, by using

the following kinds of tools, as needed: revisions to the Zoning Code, targeted economic incentives, coordinated condemnation and code enforcement efforts, affordablehousing assistance, infrastructure repair and replacement, and development and implementation of a brownfields cleanup and redevelopment program; • encouraging and funding infill development by u s i n g similar tools; and • developing and using a comprehensive m e t h o d o l o g y to determine the full costs and benefits of each p r o p o s e d development, including its impacts on taxpayers (schools, roads, utilities, public safety, and other infrastructure, as well as tax revenues) and the natural environment. This analysis also should include consideration and support for targeted community goals, such as affordable housing, for which public incentives are important. 10. The City of Jacksonville should improve its public-involvement process related to growth management by providing citizens with information and assistance to participate fully and effectively in its growth-management processes, including land-use and zoning regulation.

• • •

1991) established community goals for indicators of wellbeing in relation to the economy, natural environment, mobility, and other aspects of the community’s quality of life. The Jacksonville Insight visioning process (in 1992) developed citizen-based goals for effective transportation, a healthy environment, planned economic development, and thriving neighborhoods and downtown. The Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan of the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council (1997) focused on five strategic subject areas: affordable housing, economic development, emergency preparedness, natural resources of regional significance, and regional transportation. The River Agenda Summit convened by the Mayor of Jacksonville in 1997 outlined environmental strategies for protection of the St. Johns River. The Vision for Downtown Jacksonville (1997) articulated community goals for downtown revitalization. The Jacksonville Growth Management Task Force convened by the Mayor (1997) identified community issues and recommended specific steps Jacksonville could take to improve the type of growth and effectiveness of its growthmanagement efforts. Economic Summits convened by the Mayor of Jacksonville in 1995 and 1998 focused on neighborhood and regional economic development, tourism, and the transportation element of growth management in Jacksonville. JCCI F o rw a r d ’ s Forum for the Fu t u r e (1999) called for improved protection of natural resources, enhanced design quality of the built environment, and regional integration of growth-management efforts. Growth management meetings with Northeast Florida stakeholders conducted in 1999 by the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council outlined areas of community consensus on goals for growth management, including environmental-protection initiatives. The Better Jacksonville Plan (2000) laid out a community growth-management vision that included environmental preservation, downtown revitalization, and infrastructure improvements (see page 13). The 2001 Mayor and City Council priorities for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2001 highlight growth-management goals including improving the city’s transportation system, encouraging downtown housing, redeveloping older neighborhoods, and encouraging mixed-use development in targeted areas of the county.

These public and private statements combined speak of desires for a vibrant community with a healthy environment, viable transportation choices, and shared economic prosperity. These desires are not unique to Northeast Florida. They have also provided the political impetus for extensive efforts by the State of Florida, especially since 1985, to regulate development throughout the state. H o w e v e r, private behavior does not always match public consensus. While the community may agree that a viable masstransit system would provide some traffic relief, individual citizens still choose to drive a personal automobile rather than ride the

20 Growth Management Revisited 2001

bus. Average weekday bus ridership as a percentage of the population has declined by 35 percent between 1984 and 1999. Similarly, growth-management efforts to promote higher density and multi-use development often run into opposition from citizens who may agree that such efforts benefit the community but do not want such development located near their own homes.

IMPACTS OF GROWTH ON DUVAL COUNTY Over the last two decades, Duval County has experienced substantial population and economic growth. State regulation, city programs and policies, and other factors have influenced the kinds and locations of development. The resulting landuse patterns have had a significant impact on the quality of life in Duval County and have prompted renewed concern for managing future growth.

Population and economic growth The population of Duval County and Northeast Florida has increased steadily in the last few decades and will continue to increase in the foreseeable future. The region has also experienced substantial economic growth. In 1940, the total population of Florida was less than 2 million; by 2000, it had grown to nearly 16 million, with further growth to 23 million expected by 2030. As the State of Florida seeks to accommodate its population growth, the density of development in South Florida is encouraging growth to move northward. In 1940, Duval County was home to just over 200,000 people; in 2000, the population was nearly four times that. Between 1980 and 2000, Duval County grew by 36 percent, adding over 200,000 people in 20 years. By 2030, Duval County is expected to have a population of over one million, with 1.6 million living throughout the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)—Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns Counties.

Population growth in the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) County

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

Baker

18,486

22,259

25,600

29,000

32,200

Clay

105,986

140,814

173,700

208,200

241,000

Duval

672,971

778,879

874,200

972,700 1,064,900

Nassau

43,941

57,663

70,900

84,900

98,100

St. Johns

83,829

123,135

160,800

200,600

239,000

925,213 1,122,750 1,305,200 1,495,400 1,675,200 Total Source: U.S. Census, University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Data for 2010-2030 are projected.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

5


Findings

Findings represent the information received by the committee. They are derived from published materials, from facts reported by resource people, and from a consensus of the committee’s understanding of the opinions of resource people.

Resource People

The JCCI study process relies on information supplied by knowledgeable resource people, in addition to published reference materials. We wish to thank the following for their contributions to this study.

INTRODUCTION The goal of growth management is to accommodate population and economic growth while also maintaining or enhancing the community’s quality of life, all without jeopardizing individual rights. Successful growth-management efforts result in a vibrant community with a healthy environment, viable transportation choices, and shared economic prosperity, without undue stress on taxpayers. Accomplishing these goals was already difficult before the release of JCCI’s 1984 Growth Management Study, and it will continue to be complex and difficult in the future. Growth management is a balancing act—balancing the right of property owners to develop their properties as they wish with the right of the community to influence the consequences of development for overall community benefit. Growth management is often debated in terms of what others should do—ride the bus, live in downtown apartments, or leave the land in its pristine natural condition—so that I can continue to enjoy use of my personal car and my house in the suburbs. Growth management also concerns the rights of those who already live in a community to enjoy its quality of life, versus the rights of others to move in and join them. Balancing competing needs is an active process involving tradeoffs, as this description demonstrates: Growth management is active and dynamic …; it seeks to maintain an ongoing equilibrium between development and conservation, between various forms of development and concurrent provisions for infrastructure, between the demands for public services generated by growth and the supply of revenues to finance those demands, and between progress and equity. Douglas R. Porter, Managing Growth in America’s Communities, 1997

Finding the right balance and maintaining the quality of life, under the pressures of population and economic growth currently being experienced in Duval County and Northeast Florida, requires revisiting JCCI’s 1984 study and efforts since then to discover solutions for tomorrow’s growth based on 17 years of experience. The Florida legislative debate in 20002001 about the proper roles of state and local governments in growth management provided an even more urgent context for determining how Duval County can best improve implementation of its own growth-management efforts. While this study concentrates on Duval County and the c o n s o l i d a t e d Jacksonville-Duval County government, growth and its impacts

4

Growth Management Revisited 2001

are occurring throughout the metropolitan region. Therefore this study examines Duval County’s growth-management efforts in a regional context. This study defines growth management as programs and policies intended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencing the rate, location, design, and quality of development, including new development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymous with stopping growth.

COMMUNITY GOALS Concerns about the impacts of growth have spurred efforts over the years to articulate community goals for growth management in Duval County and Northeast Florida. These goals are remarkably consistent in their visions of desired growth-management outcomes. Over the past quarter-century, a number of gatherings of citizens under public and private auspices have articulated goals and expectations about the quality of life in Duval County and Northeast Florida. These statements have served as guiding principles to define desired outcomes of growth-management efforts. • The Amelia Island Conference of business and civic leaders in 1974 listed as a priority the adoption of a comprehensive land-use plan with emphasis on recreation areas, conservation, and preservation, and establishment of standards for waterfront development to ensure public access to the river and ocean. • JCCI’s Growth Management Study (1984) outlined community goals for growth management, including natural-resource protection and citizen involvement. • T h e First Coast Planning Conference convened by the Jacksonville Chamber of Commerce (1987) created a regional vision for 2005, calling for development approaches that would preserve the environment and enhance the quality of life. • The City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan (developed in 1990) included over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives to manage growth. Its 1997 Evaluation and Appraisal Report confirmed the same goals, policies, and objectives, and noted the City’s progress in accomplishing them. • JCCI’s Quality of Life Indicators Targets for 2000 (set in

Bill Brinton Allen, Brinton, & McCarthy

Ed Lehman Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council

Joan Carver Jacksonville University

Greg Matovina Matovina & Company

Alex Coley Hallmark Partners

Tim McLendon University of Florida

Joe Debs Reynolds, Smith & Hills

Lynn Pappas Pappas, Metcalf, Jenks, & Miller

John DeGrove emeritus professor, Florida Atlantic University

Shannon Scheffer Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council

John Delaney Mayor, City of Jacksonville

Aage Schroder Florida Department of Transportation

Jeff Elledge St. Johns River Water Management District

Darrell Smith Jacksonville Transportation Authority

Jeannie Fewell Jacksonville Department of Planning and Development

Lance DeHaven Smith Florida State University

Susan Grandin Trust for Public Lands T.R. Hainline Rogers Towers Bailey Jones & Gay Lee Harris Community Alliance

Brian Teeple Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council Lane Welch Greenscape Walter Williams Coldwell Banker Walter Williams Realty Inc.

Alberta Hipps President, Jacksonville City Council

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

21


References

Table Of Contents

The following written materials offered useful information related to the study issue.

4

FINDINGS

Barnett, Cynthia, and Mary Ellen Klas, Managing Growth: 10 Steps Toward a More Livable Florida (Florida Trend), December 2000. City of Jacksonville, Jacksonville Into the 21st Century: Growth Management Task Force Recommendations, 1997. Duany, Andres, The Science of Smart Growth (Scientific American), December 2000. Florida Department of Community Affairs, Growth Management Survey Report, February 2000. Florida Growth Management Study Commission, A Liveable Florida for Today and Tomorrow: Growth Management Study Commission Final Report, 2001. Hollis, Linda; Porter, Douglas; and Holly Stallworth, Assessing the Impacts of Development Choices: Prepared for the Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South Florida and its Full-Cost Accounting Committee, 1997. Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Growth Management: A Report to the Citizens of Jacksonville, 1984. Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida: A Study Report to the Citizens of the First Coast, 2000. Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, 2010 Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report, 1997. Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, The Citizen’s Guide to Zoning (draft), 2001. The National Neighborhood Coalition, Smart Growth, Better Neighborhoods: Communities Leading the Way, 2000.

Introduction

4

Community goals

4

Impacts of growth on Duval County Population and economic growth Factors affecting development patterns Resulting development patterns Resulting community impacts Transportation Environmental impacts Growth distribution

5 5 6 7 8 8 8 9

Growth management tools and their effectiveness State regulation Areas of Critical State Concern Developments of Regional Impact Comprehensive Planning Concurrency Growth Management Study Commission Local efforts Comprehensive Planning Zoning Land acquisition

9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11 12 13

Infrastructure Targeted economic incentives Fair-share agreements Downtown redevelopment Neighborhood and sector plans Brownfields Visual environment Historic preservation Affordable housing Regional coordination Approaches from other communities Indianapolis, Indiana Portland, Oregon Charlotte, North Carolina Rhode Island Maryland

13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16

CONCLUSIONS

17

RECOMMENDATIONS

19

RESOURCE PEOPLE

21

REFERENCES

22

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

23

Nelson, Arthur, and James Duncan, Growth Management Principles and Practices, 1995.

Mission Statement

Nicholas, James C., and Ruth L. Steiner, Growth Management and Smart Growth in Florida (Wake Forest Law Review), 2000. Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Growth Management Meetings with Northeast Florida Stakeholders, 1999. Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Strategic Directions: Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan, 1997. The Reubin O’D. Askew Institute, Jacksonville and the 21st Century: Building a Stronger Community, Fall 1999.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc. is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, broad-based civic organization which seeks to improve the quality of life in Northeast Florida by positive change resulting from informed participation of citizens in community life, through open dialogue, impartial research, and consensus building .

Cover design and layout by Angela Edwards On the cover: Map of Duval County, Florida. See page 7 for legend.

22 Growth Management Revisited 2001

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

3


Summary Duval County is growing. Residents have children, and people and businesses arrive daily. Growth management is the effort of the local and regional community to preserve the quality of life while accommodating population and economic growth. JCCI released its first Growth Management Study in 1984. That study looked at the mechanisms necessary to maintain and enhance the quality of life in Jacksonville in the face of predicted growth. Among other recommendations, it called for the adoption and enforcement of a Comprehensive Plan, increased media coverage of growth management, and increased citizen awareness and involvement in the growth-management process. In 1985, Florida passed a Growth Management Act, creating a statewide system for enforcing growth management. In 1990, Jacksonville adopted its own Comprehensive Plan. In 2000, the State of Florida began review of its growth-management regulations, and the 2001 Growth Management Study Commission report called for increasing local responsibility for growth management. In this study, JCCI examines the outcomes of Duval County’s growth-management efforts over the last fifteen years and identifies steps to improve implementation of growth management in Duval County. The study committee explored how legislative mandates, community goals, and other factors have influenced growth management; examined the effectiveness of past and current strategies; reviewed the regional implications of growthmanagement efforts; and discussed how growth-management approaches from across the country might be adapted to local efforts. This study accepts current projections that growth will continue in Duval County. For the purposes of this study, growth management refers to programs and policies intended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencing the rate, location, design, and quality of development, including new development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymous with stopping growth.

Major Concerns

Recommended Solutions

State growth-management efforts have increased the cost of development while creating unintended negative consequences for local communities.

Restructure the Florida growth-management process by delegating responsibilities and authority to appropriate levels of government.

The natural environment traditionally has been given insufficient consideration in growth-management decisions.

Protect the natural environment by including assessment of development impacts on the natural environment in decision making.

The complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of the Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) process discouraged its use.

Streamline and simplify the DRI process, transferring review authority to the Regional Planning Councils.

Historically, growth-management efforts in Duval County have focused more on new growth than on redevelopment of existing neighborhoods.

Encourage and fund coordinated efforts to revitalize older neighborhoods.

Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology for determining the full costs and benefits to the community of proposed development.

Develop and use a process to determine the full costs and benefits of proposed developments, including tax-payer impacts and impacts on the natural environment.

2

Growth Management Revisited 2001

Board of Directors Sue Butts, President** Edgar Mathis, President-Elect** Pat Brzozowski, Secretary** Edward Hearle, Treasurer** Edythe Abdullah John Anderson Oliver Barakat** William Bishop Lizanne Bomhard Virginia Borrok Vanessa Boyer Michael Boylan Sherry Burns** Charles A. Clarkson John R. Cobb** John Daigle Jr. Edward Eng David Foster Charles Griggs Dave Hemphill Howard Kelley William Mason III John Rutherford Mary Ellen Smith** Paula Weatherby Gerald Weedon Susie Wiles **Executive Committee

Executive Director Lois Chepenik

Highlights

Committee Membership and Work

Past Presidents J.J. Daniel Jack H. Chambers Yank D. Coble Jr. Robert D. Davis George W. Corrick Howard R. Greenstein Jacquelyn D. Bates David M. Hicks James C. Rinaman Kenneth W. Eilermann J. Shepard Bryan Jr. Juliette Woodruff Mason Lucy D. Hadi Charles P. Hayes Jr. Steve Pajcic Tracey I. Arpen Jr Guy Marvin III Luther Quarles III W.O. Birchfield Michael J. Korn William E. Scheu Afesa Adams William D. Brinton Sherry Burns

Committee members met together on 25 Tuesday mornings from October through May. In addition, the management team met several times to provide guidance and direction for this study. The committee received information from 23 knowledgeable resource people and additional written materials researched by JCCI staff.

CHAIR

Allan T. Geiger

MANAGEMENT TEAM

James Argrett, Jr. J. Shepherd Bryan John Crofts Pat Greason Hawley Smith Jerry Spinks Trip Stanly Henry Thomas Quinton White

COMMITTEE Judy Aranda Lynda Aycock Tony Bates Richard Berry Bill Bishop Flossie Brunson John Cannon Jeane Chappell Carmen Chronister Bucky Clarkson

Jeff Clements Richard Darby Gary Davenport Daniel Davis Dan Donaldson Mary Eaves George Fisher Holly Kartsonis Kirk Lewis David Lipp

William Mahoney Hugh O'Malley Bob Ottesen Marvin Reese Sylvia Simmons Richard Skinner Jr. Lindner Smith Jim Varian Denise Wallace

JCCI Staff

Planning Staff

Support Staff

Lois Chepenik Executive Director

Laura Lane Cheryl Murphy Jennifer Parsons Ben Warner *

Earlene Hostutler Michelle Simkulet Lashun Stephens * Wanda Tivey

David Swain Associate Director

* Staff for this study

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

23


Previous JCCI Studies STUDY 1977 1977 1977 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980 1980 1981 1981 1982 1982 1982 1983 1983 1984 1984 1985 1985 1986 1986 1987 1987 1988 1988 1989 1989 1990

CHAIR Local Government Finance* Robert Davis Housing* Thomas Carpenter Public Education (K-12)* Robert W. Schellenberg Public Authorities* Howard Greenstein Strengthening the Family* Jacquelyn Bates Citizen Participation in the Schools* Susan Black Youth Unemployment* Roy G. Green Theatre Jacksonville* Richard Bizot Civil Service* Max K. Morris Planning in Local Government* I. M. Sulzbacher Capital Improvements for Recreation* Ted Pappas But Not In My Neighborhood Pamela Y. Paul The Energy Efficient City* Roderick M. Nicol Coordination of Human Services* Pat Hannan Higher Education* R. P. T. Young Disaster Preparedness* Walter Williams Jr. Teenage Pregnancy* Mari Terbrueggen Downtown Derelicts* Earle Traynham Mass Transit* David Hastings Indigent Health Care* Linda McClintock Jacksonville’s Jail Eleanor Gay Growth Management* Curtis L. McCray Visual Pollution Doug Milne Minority Business* Jack Gaillard Private Delivery of Public Services George Fisher Mental Health and Drug Abuse Services for Children and Youth* Flo Nell Ozell Child Day-Care Services George W. Corrick Infrastructure* Joan Carver Local Election Process* Jim Rinaman School Dropout Prevention* Gene Parks Reducing the Garbage Burden* Jack F. Milne & James L. White III Independent Living for the Elderly Roseanne Hartwell Future Workforce Needs Yank D. Coble Jr.

JCCI studies are available free to interested individuals. Most studies may be downloaded from our website at www.jcci.org. Those marked with a star are out of print; copies available at $7.00 each. STUDY 1990 Philanthropy in Jacksonville* 1991 Adequate Water Supply* 1991 Positive Development of Jacksonville’s Children* 1992 Long-Term Financial Health of the City of Jacksonville 1992 Young Black Males* 1993 1993 1994 1994 1995 1995 1996 1996 1997 1997 1997 1998 1998 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001

Planning for Northeast Florida’s Uncertain Military Future Public Education: The Cost of Quality* Reducing Violence in Jacksonville Schools* Jacksonville Public Services: Meeting Neighborhood Needs* Teenage Single Parents and Their Families* JAXPORT: Improvement and Expansion Creating a Community Agenda: Indicators For Health and Human Services* Leadership: Meeting Community Needs* Improving Public Dialogue Transportation for the Disadvantaged Children with Special Needs* The Role of Nonprofit Organizations Incentives for Economic Development* Improving Adult Literacy Arts, Recreation and Culture in Jacksonville Affordable Housing Improving Regional Cooperation Services for Ex-Offenders

CHAIR Juliette Mason Russell B. Newton Jr. Henry H. “Tip” Graham Mary Alice Phelan Chester A. Aikens & William E. Scheu David L. Williams Royce Lyles Dale Clifford Michael Korn Afesa Adams Jim Ade Bruce Demps Bill Brinton Jim Crooks Cathy Winterfield Virginia Borrok Sherry Magill Henry Thomas Edythe Abdullah Ed Hearle Bill Bishop Jim Rinaman Dana Ferrell Birchfield

Nonprofit Org. U.S. POSTAGE

PAID Permit No. 1999 Jacksonville, FL

Jacksonville Community Council Inc. 2434 Atlantic Boulevard, Suite 100 Jacksonville, Florida 32207 E-mail address: jcci@jcci.org Web address: http://www.jcci.org

JCCI is a United Way Agency

Jacksonville Community Council, Inc.

STUDY

GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVISITED

A Report to the Citizens of Northeast Florida • Summer 2001


2001 Study: Growth Management Revisited