New Policy Direction on Growth Management

Presented by: Kerry Godwin, Planning and Design DirectorOsceola County Community Development

Osceola County Planning CommissionWorkshop

May 26th, 2020

A clear Vision+ a strong Comprehesive Plan+ enforced by a complete LDC= Higher Quality Development Goals

Good Land Use Planning supported by strong Transportation Planning makes the DRI requirements redundant.

Or how Osceola County stopped relying upon the DRI processes and regional regulatory agencies to handle their growth management issues.

2006-2007 Urban Land Institute Panel

7

Impact of the Real Estate Boom

Lake Toho – 5 proposed DRIs 32,000 housing units 3.7 million square feet retail 840,000 square feet industrial

ULI Findings/Recommendations Remaining rural is not an option Recommended a vision for

growth Mixed-use communities Multimodal transportation

2006-2007 Comprehensive Land Amendment Future Land Use

Comprehensive Plan Update

Instituted an Urban Growth Boundary• Clear separation of urban and

rural• Directs growth to urban areaIntroduced the Mixed Use Districts (MXDs)• Embody Plan’s growth principles• Higher densities, intensities• Mixed uses designated areas• Highly connected road network• Multimodal transportation• Balance of jobs and housing

34

2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Report

Extended Planning Horizon to 2025.

Added three Conceptual Master Plan for MXD Districts.

Deleted all Redundancies within Elements.

Deleted all References to Specific State Agencies.

34

2010-2012 Comprehensive Plan Amendments

Mixed Use Districts (MXDs)

Conceptual Master Plans adopted• East of Lake Toho• South Lake Toho• Northeast District

MXD Land Development Code• Place types and land uses• Density and intensity• Road connectivity• Urban form34

2010-2013 Land Development Code

34

Restructured Land Development CodeChanged framework of code for ease of use From 22 chapters to 5 Added Siting Standards to Use Table Eliminated 100+ Conditional Uses Added limited Architectural standards Introduced Special areas standards

Narcoossee OverlayMixed Use Districts

Land Development Code

Chapter 1 Administration, Boards, and Committees

Chapter 2 Development Processes and Procedures

Chapter 3 Performance and Siting Standards

Chapter 4 Site Design and Development Standards

Chapter 5 Vested Rights Determinations

2009TransportationStudies

Cluster Development Study Existing Centers Proposed Centers Potential Centers Transportation and Transit

Patterns Included Cities

34

Update Transportation Analyses Zones (TAZ)October 2009

42

Transportation Vision

2010-2011 Identified Regional

Multi-lane Facilities (Red)

Proposed New boulevard designations and expansion

Introduced Avenues for moving local traffic

Created an interconnected Grid

Lessened reliance on regional transportation Systems

34

HB 7207 (2011) Established favorable language for Mobility Fees)Established Mobility Plans and associated Mobility Fees as a principle means: Equitably mitigate its transportation impact Fund multimodal improvements.

The intent of the Mobility Fee is to: Streamline Simplify Allows greater flexibility In urban areas (§163.3168(2), F.S.)

i. Urban service area designations,ii. Urban growth boundaries, andiii. Mixed-use, high- density development

11

Transportation Funding Study 2011 - 2012

Transportation Network Costs

Capital & Operations & Maintenance Roadways Transit Bicycles/Pedestrian/Trails

Revenues Ad Valorem Gas Tax Sales Tax User Fees

34

Repeal of Impact Fee OrdinanceSeptember 2012

Reviewed the unintended consequences of the existing policies:

Incentivized Residential Development with similar fees.

Penalized Small Businesses/Start-Ups.

Lost more jobs to the region. As very little Impact Fee revenue

was being generated, it did not affect the overall roadway projects.

34

New Dedicated Funding Mechanisms (Funding Source #1) November 2012

New Growth Properties: Contribute 33%

Other Properties: Contribute 18.2%

34

Transportation Element – 2025 & 2040August 2013Worked with DEO for Extended Time Frame for Map Series to match MetroPlan Planning Horizon and eases funding opportunities. Introduced New Roadway Types of Multimodal Corridor, Boulevards, Avenues, Roadways.

34

Land Development Code Update - 2014Implements new Transportation Approach

34

DRI Exemption - November 2013

34

November 8, 2013

Mr. Mik e McDanielComprehensiveve PlanningManagerFlorida Department of Economic Opportunity Caldwell Building l07 E. Madison Street Tallhassee,Florida 32399

DEPARTMENT O F Re: FLoridaStatutes 2013, 380.06 (29) (c) l. And 3&0.06 (29) ( c) 3. COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT Dear Mr. McDaniel:

Th.i.s letteris offeredas a courtesy to your office to detail Osceola County's qualifications for exemptions applicable for Dcn,_1e Urban Land Areas (DULA)

DAVE TOMEK The County qualifies under Florida Statues,Section380.06 (29) (c)sub 1 &sub 3. ADMINISTRATOR which states in pertinent part;

2013 Florida Statutes380.06 Development o f Regional Impact.(29) EXEMPTIONS FOR DENSE URBAN LAND AREAS.

(c) If a county that doesnot qualityas a dense u rban land areadesignate any of the following areas in its comprehensive plan, anyproposeddevelopment within the designated area is exemptfrom thedevelopment-of-regional-impact process:

1. Urban infill as definedin s. 163.3164 l, Urban infill and redevelloppment under s.163.2517; or 3. Ur ban Serviceareas a defined in s. 163.3 163

2013 Florida Statutes163.. 3164 Community Planning Act; definitions. k-As usedin this act:(50) "Urban servicearea" means areasidentified in the comprehensiveplan where public facilitiesand services, including but not limited to,central water and sewer capacity and roads. arealready in ploc;.o or areidentified in the, comprehensive plan a urbanservice areas, regardless of local government limitation.

Osceola County has established an Urban Growth Boundary within our Comprehensive Plan (Objective 1.1-Future Land Use Elemen t). Further Policy

Osceola I.I.I and 1.1.l identify additional characteristics of the UGBthat mark this area as

County having infrastructure already in place or to be in placewithin the planning horizonof the ComprehensivePlan. ThesePolicies and Objective meet the requirements or

l 1 COURTHOUSE S- QUARE SUITE 1100F.S. 380.06(29) (c.) 1 & 3. In addition, P.S. 163.3164 (50) p.-ovidn the necessary definitional identificationto show the UGBas anestablished Urban Service Area.

KISSIMMEE

PH: 407-742-020FL 34741

0 FAX: 407-742-0206www.osceola.org

Rick Scott GOVERNOR DEO Jesse Pa11uccio

Executive Director

FLORIDA DEPARTMENTECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

November 7. 2014

Kerry Godwin Director, Planning and Zoning Osceo la County 1 Courthouse SquareSuite 1100 Kissimmee., Florida 34741

Dear Mr. Godwin:

Recently the Coun ty requested the Department confirm the COunty's in terpretation t hat theu rban Growth Boundary (UGB) adopted in the Com prehensive Plan functions as an urban servicearea as defi ned In Section 163.3164(50), Florida Statutes (F.5.), thus exempting develo pment s within i t from development of regionalimpact (DRI) process pursuantto 380.06(29)(c)3., F.S.ThedDepartment concurs with the County t hat the UGB functions as an urban service area and thatthis areais exempt fro m DRI review.

An a Richmond ChiefBureau of Community Planning

AR/

Enclosure: OsceolaCounty Letter Dated No vem b er 8, 2013

cc : Hugh Harling, PE, Executive Director, East Central Florida Regional Planning CouncilNancv Linnan Esq., Carlton Fields Jordon Burt (via email)

, ... ,,L,,,.,,.,.,.1,.., .rr rl,.; \·; ._ .-.• • IJ .ll-.c L, l•1.>l ••t I~' • t J:'"4

::.;.;. :t•r . • :.I~~· ·., .;H ~ ..... ..Li ' · ,l, • r I ,., .. ,-·., " · I•.-. -... 'ct :f '"'::'1 1 _,-:t. )~·•

Developments of Regional ImpactIn 2012, there were 28 DRIs. 2012: -1 Abandonment2013: -1 Rescission

-1 Expiration2014: -3 Rescission

-1 Expiration2015: -1 Rescission

-1 Essentially B/O2016: -5 Rescission

-1 Annexation2017: -1 Rescission2018: -1 Expiration2019: -1 RescissionAs of 2019, there are 10 DRIs remaining. (12-Rescissions, 3-Expirations, 1-Abandonment,1-EBO, and 1-Annexation)34

Transportation Ad Hoc Committee completes Funding RecommendationsMay 2012 - 2014

Mobility Fee Study Move forward with referendum on implementation of

Charter County Surtax (Delayed) Work with Cities of Kissimmee and St. Cloud on

partnership agreements Establish non-partisan oversight board to insure that tax

payer dollars are not wasted (Delayed) Establish transportation funding education program for

citizens (Website) 2nd Option Fuel Tax

16

Second Local Option Fuel Tax (Funding Source #2)March 2015

34

Mobility Fee Adopted (Funding Source #3) March 16, 2015 - Mobility Fee Ordinance AdoptedOctober 1, 2015 – Reduced Rate Fee EffectiveJanuary 1, 2016 – Full Rate Fee Effective June 20, 2016 – Amended Mobility Fee Ordinance Included Corporate Headquarters Allowed Transfer of Excess FeesApril 17, 2017 - Amended Mobility Fee Ordinance Revised Mixed Use Development DefinitionJanuary 8, 2018 - Amended Mobility Fee Ordinance Added Average Construction Cost of Roadway Tied Annual Increase to National Highway

Construction Cost Index Payment Due at Time of Building Permit

34

2014 Fire & Recue Element Comprehensive Plan Amendment

Used TAZ Data for Population Projection

Established Levels of Service.

Projected Future Station Locations.

Developed Prototypical Station Design and Costs.

Raised Impact Fees to today’s costs.

Have built 3 new stations since 2014.

Parks and Recreation Element 2015 -2018

Phase I – 2015 Existing Parks Evaluation Benchmarking of Parks LOS, Operation

and FundingPhases 2 & 3 – 2016-2018 Public Involvement Process Calculation of future needs – 2025 &

2040 Development of Parks Prototypes CIP future needs Recommendation of Comprehensive

Plan PolicesPhase 4 – 2018 Adopt New Parks & Recreation Element Draft and Adopt new Parks Impact Fee

34

Parks Master Planning Process Community Park Prototype

Used TAZ Data for Population Projection

2017 Sustainability Report

Approached in 3 phases: Fiscal sustainability Affordable housing Jobs/housing balance

34

Taxable Value

2005

$5.2 M Office: 75,000 square feet

Residential: 300 units

Retail/Restaurants: 370,000 square feet

Shopping

center

renovation

Property assembly

and redevelopment

Single site

redevelopment

New

townhomes

Taxable Value

2005

$5.2 M

Taxable Value

2010

$42 M

Taxable Value

2018

$94 M

Single site

redevelopment

Sin

gle

site re

develo

pm

ent

Restaurant

renovation

Retail

renovation

Connectivity supports Sustainability

Supports Neighborhood to Neighborhood Access.

Allows local traffic to avoid Framework Roadways.

Better access for school transportation.

Better access for Fire & Rescue.

34

2017 EAR Comprehensive Plan AmendmentData & Analysis Study

E-Commerce Lifestyle Authentic experiences New forms of centers Small-scale Neighborhood Centers Natural and agrarian settings Flexibility built-in Commercial floor area shrinking Third Spaces Groceries still anchor Regional Urban Centers as magnets Higher Density necessary to support

retail34

Reserved areas to ensure balanced growth.Beginning to restore road network connectivity.Development occurring in MXD areas and Urban Infill Centers.Variety of housing product types.Development at Tupperware SunRail station – higher density/intensity, connectivity at station.Processes developed to work with school district and fire departments – integrating school and fire department planning with development and into Centers as Urban footprints.

EAR Comprehensive Plan Results - 2019

EAR Update – Future Land Use Element - 2019Greenfield Development Area–Employment Center

34

Aerial Analysis

Future Land Use Designation

EAR Update – Future Land Use Element - 2019Infill Development Area-Urban Center

34

Aerial Analysis

Future Land Use Designation

Land Development Code - 2019

Established Centers in LDC Neighborhood Community Urban Employment

Established development standards Mix of uses Form of Development Architectural

34

Customer Service remains Priority #1! Continuosly revamping Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Land Development

Applications for expedited reviews and processing while increasing development standards.

Utilizing the new Comprehensive Plan has a real planning tool. Revamped transportation funding to take place through three revenue sources:

dedicated ad valorem tax, enacted mobility fee, later raised the fees and implemented additional gas tax.

Utilize strong liaison through land development working group, Transportation Funding Advisory Group and Moratorium Focus Group before implementing Mobility Fees.

Expediting construction of multimodal transportation network with private land development introducing Developer Agreements for roadway construction in advance of collection of Mobility Fees.

How is it working so far?