HomeMy WebLinkAboutComp Plan - Sections 8-12
CHAPTER 8
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
Prepared by:
St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Department of Growth Management
ADOPTED - January 9, 1990
REVISED - March 5, 2002 (Ord. 02-008)
REVISED - January 6, 2004 (Compliance Agreement)
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
8
8 - 1
8-2
8-2
8 - 10
8 - 11
8 - 13
8 - 13
8 - 14
8 - 15
8 - 15
8 - 16
8 - 16
8 - 19
8 - 19
8 - 21
8 - 21
8 - 21
8 - 21
8 - 22
8 - 22
8 - 23
8 - 25
8 - 25
8 - 26
8 - 27
8 - 28
8 - 28
8 - 28
8 - 29
8 - 30
8 - 31
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NTRODUCTION
NVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF NATURAL RESOURCES
A. WATER RESOURCES ..............
1. Surface Waters .............
2. Surface Water Quality Concerns
3. Floodplain .................
4. Groundwaters ..............
5. Demand for Water . . . . . . . . . . .
6. Groundwater Quality Concerns .
B. AIR............................··
C. SOILS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D. MINERALS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E. FISHERIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F. UPLAND VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES,
1. Xeric Uplands .............'
2. Coastal Uplands ...........
3. Mesic Flatwoods ...........
G WILDLIFE ........................... . .
1. Wildlife within Upland Ecological Communities
2. Wildlife within Wetland Ecological Communities
3. Birds .................................... .. . .
4. Species Listed as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern
POTENTIAL FOR CONSERVATION, USE OR PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
A. WATER RESOURCES ......................................
1. Surface Waters .....................................
2. Groundwater .......................................
COMMERCIALLY VALUABLE MINERALS...................····
SOIL EROSION ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES.....................············
VEGETATION, WILDLIFE, FISHERIES, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
NATURAL AREA PRESERVES.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
GOALS. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
3
9
3
4
5
7
2
7
8
20
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
LIST OF TABLES
St. Lucie County Water Use and Projected Demands. . . . . . . . .
Commercial Saltwater Fish Landings for St. Lucie County, 1994-1998
LIST OF FIGURES
Wetland and upland vegetative communities in the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County
Water Quality Classifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Indian River Aquatic Preserve. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
St. Lucie County - Wetland Areas of County. . . . . . . .
St. Lucie County - Generalized 100 Year Floodplain. .
St. Lucie County - Generalized Soils Map . . . . . . . . . . .
St. Lucie County - Generalized Mining Locations .....
St. Lucie County - Approved Shellfish Harvesting Areas
TABLE 8-1
TABLE 8-2
Figure 8-1.
Figure 8-2
Figure 8-3
Figure 8-4.
Figure 8-5.
Figure 8-6
Figure 8-7
Figure 8-8
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
NTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Conservation Element is to promote the conservation, appropriate use and protection of the large variety of natural resources within St. Lucie
County. The Goals, Objectives and Policies are designed to establish the long-term course of action and implementation activities for conservation programs
throughout the County.
St. Lucie County is located along the upper reaches of Florida's southeast coast. The County comprises approximately 600 square miles in area, with approximately
500 square miles within the unincorporated areas under the authority of the St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners. The balance of the County consists of the
incorporated municipalities of Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie, and St. Lucie Village.
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council estimates that historical wetlands covered about 51 percent of the County and uplands covered the remaining 49
percent of the County. The most recent estimates of land use cover for St. Lucie County indicates that agricultural now accounts for about 53 percent of land cover,
urban development 21 percent, wetlands 7 percent, and upland natural communities 19 percent (Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, 1995).
The estimated 1999 Countywide population was 186,905, the unincorporated area population for the same time period was 64,640. By the year 2020, the Countywide
permanent population is projected to increase to 295,773. This represents a 58% increase over the 21 year period. As development pressures increase, effective
resource protection measures are critical to maintain the functions and values of the remaining natural areas, and to maintain and improve the quality of life for all
residents and visitors to St. Lucie County.
NVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF NATURAL RESOURCES
St. Lucie County still contains a mosaic of upland and wetland natural features and the diverse wildlife associated with the areas natural communities (Figure 8-1).
In 1992, KBN Engineering and Applied Sciences released a detailed report commissioned by St. Lucie County entitled Wetland and Upland Habitat Inventory: St. Lucie
County. This study estimated the 1991 acreage of each Florida Natural Areas Inventory community in St. Lucie County. The study identified 80,358 acres of native
habitat within St. Lucie County consisting of 50,018 upland acres and 30,340 wetland acres, over 9,000 acres of these natural communities were on state and private
preserves. Since that time almost 8,000 additional acres have been placed in public ownership.
The wetland and upland inventory also evaluated the loss of natural areas between 1986-1991. The study identified a 19.3 percent loss of the county's native
communities within the five year time frame. The continuation of this rate of loss could quickly decimate the County remaining natural resources. Maintaining the overall
ecological integrity of the County's most important natural resources will require protecting and preserving native habitats, encouraging proper management
enhancement, and restoration of ecologically functional natural areas throughout the County.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
1
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
WATER RESOURCES
The Florida Administrative Code names the 305(b) report as a primary source of water quality assessment information. The information complied in the 305(b) report
has been used to select SWIM priority waters, develop ecosystem management area plans and to meet the Clear Water Act [Section 303(d)] requirement to assess
the quality of navigable water and report the results to Environmental Protection Agency. The 1996 Water Quality Assessment for the State of Florida Section 305(b)
Report and follow-up 1998 303(d) Report, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Ecosummaries were used for the water quality component of
this element. Figure 8-2 depicts the water quality classification of St. Lucie County surface waters.
A,
These waters are within the:
There are several areas within the county that are classified as Outstanding Florida Waters (Figure 8-2)
* Ft. Pierce Inlet State Recreation Area;
* Indian River Aquatic Preserve - Vero Beach to Ft. Pierce
* Indian River Aquatic Preserve - Ft. Pierce to Jupiter Inlet;
* North Fork, St. Lucie Aquatic Preserve; and
* Savannas State Reserve.
Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) are waterbody's with special protection due to its natural attributes (403.061 FS). The intent of an Outstanding Florida Waters
designation is to maintain ambient water quality, even if these designations are more protective than those required for the classification of the individual waterbody.
Most OFWs are located within the state or federal park system, such as aquatic preserves, estuaries, national seashores, or wildlife refuges.
Surface Waters
1.
Lagoon
The Indian River Lagoon, an Estuary of National Significance, is recognized as the most productive and diverse estuary in North America, with more than 4,300 species
of animals and plants. The brackish body of water, is a system of three interconnected estuarine lagoons situated between the mainland portion of a six county region
and a series of low barrier islands that front the Atlantic Ocean. Along the eastern shore of the lagoon, within St. Lucie County, lie North and South Hutchinson Islands;
two low coastal barrier islands. Slopes along the island are very gradual. There are dense mangrove swamps and many small islands and bays such as Big Starvation
Cove, St. Lucie Cut, Wildcat Cove, Bear Point Cove, Middle Cove, Blind Creek, Big Mud Creek, and Herman's Bay.
ndian River
a.
Most of the Indian River Lagoon has been designated an Aquatic Preserve by the State of Florida (Figure 8-3). In St. Lucie County, the Aquatic Preserve extends
from the southern limits of the City of Vero Beach in Indian River County to the Jupiter Inlet in northern Palm Beach County, exclusive of an area within the municipal
limits of Ft. Pierce [Chapter 258.39(8) and (9), Florida Statutes). In 1995, the Indian River Lagoon Nation Estuary Program prepared and adopted the Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan for the Indian River Lagoon to further protect the ecosystem. The specifics of this management plan are reviewed in greater
detail in the Coastal Management Element
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
2
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
f
N
C'\J
C()
Q)
ll-
:J
Q)
LL
-0
c
(])
0)
(])
....J
'"
.s
~
'"
'"
<ó
(5
'"
Ìjj
«í
s:
'"
'"
<ó
(5
~
c ~
i j
:.= c¡:¡
~ ~
~.. LL
£i
.2 æ
~ 11
cr :J
<: 0
u
ro -§
¿g ~
(j')
'-
(])
êõ
S
(])
g
-
'-
::J
({)
-
2&
~
¡:j
:B
j
200
23,
January
t
..
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
5
8
Aquatic Preserve
ndian River
Figure 8-3
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The natural watershed of the Indian River Lagoon has been significantly enlarged. Historically, the western portions of the County did not drain into the lagoon under
normal conditions. Over the years however, extensive drainage systems have been installed which discharge either directly into the Lagoon at Taylor Creek, or into
the North Fork of the St. Lucie River which ultimately reaches the Indian River Lagoon, via the St. Lucie Estuary. Although effective, these drainage improvements
have greatly enlarged the drainage basin boundaries of the lagoon and affected the lagoons natural balance. Drainage modifications and land use intensification in
the watershed have dramatically increased wet-season flows to the Indian River Lagoon and significantly reduced dry-season inflows. Dry-season inflows to the
estuary are reduced due to the storage of water in the canal systems and the reduction in groundwater flows caused by lower groundwater tables (St. Lucie River
Issue Team, 1998).
The 1996 Water Quality Assessment for the State of Florida 305(b) reported the water quality of the I ndian River Lagoon as generally good, especially south of the
City of Fort Pierce. At Ft. Pierce, the lagoon receives nutrients and excess freshwater from C-25 Canal and Moore's Creek, which drain citrus groves, rangeland and
urban areas (Hand, 1996). In southern St. Lucie County, the Indian River Lagoon receives nutrients and excess freshwater from urban runoff and the St. Lucie Estuary
which receives waters from the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and major drainage canals, C-23, C-24, and C-44 Canals. The development of these secondary canals
that drain urban and agricultural lands within the St. Lucie River watershed is most often responsible for changing the quantity and quality of flows to the St. Lucie
Estuary and Indian River Lagoon (St. Lucie River Issue Team, 1998).
Lucie River
The North Fork of the St. Lucie River is a Blackwater Stream flowing 16 miles south where it widens into the tidal embayment known as the St. Lucie Estuary in Martin
County (Graves, Ecosummaries: North Fork of the St. Lucie River and St. Lucie Estuary, 1997). The St. Lucie River receives water from Five Mile and Ten Mile Creeks
and three major canals, the C-23, C-24, and the C-44 Canal, prior to reaching the St. Lucie Estuary and, ultimately, the Atlantic Ocean through the St. Lucie Inlet.
Although the C-44 Canal is not within St. Lucie County, it does effect the quality of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River.
North Fork of The St
b.
Within the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserve, virtually the entire length of the North Fork and its natural tributaries, Five and Ten Mile Creeks, were channelized
in the early 1900's to increase drainage in its upper reaches. Oxbows cutoff from the river and spoil banks along its shoreline result from the channelization of the
river. Still, the river contains a complex of hardwood swamp, mesic pine flatwood and scrub communities along a riverine corridor meandering through the urbanized
area of the City of Port St. Lucie. The Floodplain of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River is a fairly pristine natural resource made up of wetlands which not only provide
high quality wildlife habitat but also valuable storage of flood waters
In 1972, the Florida Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund recognized the importance of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River by designating it an Aquatic
Preserve and Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW). These lands represent an exceptional area of submerged lands set aside to protect their biological, aesthetic, and
scientific value. The river basin sustains a variety of fish and wildlife, including the West Indian manatee, bald eagle, wood stork, and eastern indigo snake.
Approximately 1,500 acres along the shoreline of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its natural tributaries have been purchased to protect the river and adjacent
uplands. Another 1,500 acres are targeted for purchase through the Conservation and Recreational Lands program and the County's Environmentally Significant Lands
program. Access to the North Fork of the St. Lucie River is provided by several local parks with boat ramps, as well as the County's Environmentally Significant Land
(ESL) properties and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection North Fork of the St. Lucie River Buffer Preserve lands.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
6
8
81. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Data source: SFWMD,1995
Florida land Use & Cover Classification System, Level
Wetlands
This map is for presentation, discussion
and general illustratlon purposes only
t is NOT intended to be used
or wetland delineation purposes
Lucie County
Wetlands
C<1mm-c!l1ItyDlW!lbpm\l!\1
Gll<:Xirgp'1ln ¡rfrnin¡¡~oo $y!;!emS
t
II
Note:
St
s,,,,
Sunshml
A"
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
7
8
WETLAND AREAS OF COUNTY
Figure 8-4
8t. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The other large contiguous natural wetland systems east of the 1-95 - Turnpike Corridor exist along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, Five Mile Creek, and Ten
Mile Creek. Wetland systems west of 1-95, in the county's agricultural areas, include wet prairies and depressional marshes as well as Basin Swamp and Baygall
communities.
Quality Concerns
Habitat loss and reduced species diversity are believed to be caused by land use changes, development and agricultural practices that impact surface waters
Continued loading of the Indian River Lagoon by suspended matter and nutrients threaten to transform the seagrass-driven system to a phytoplankton-based system
This has the potential to damage existing estuarine resources within the lagoon. Although only a small percentage of development occurs along the Lagoon's shoreline,
nearly all the recharge water in the Surficial Aquifer system, as well as stormwater runoff, eventually discharge eastward into the Indian River Lagoon from natural
and constructed drainage systems (Moses, Septic Tank Study for St. Lucie County, 1993).
Surface Water
2.
n 1998, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection released the 303(d) list required under the Clean Water Act. The 303(d) list includes waters not meeting
water quality standards or not supporting their designated uses. The North Fork of the St. Lucie River, Ten Mile Creek, C-24 and C-25 Canals were listed as impaired
water bodies. Nutrients and dissolved oxygen were parameters of concern in all of these water bodies.
The St. Lucie River Watershed, which includes the North Fork of the St. Lucie River basin, is a high priority area for protection under the Surface Water Improvement
and Management program. The St. Lucie River Watershed includes all of St. Lucie County except the extreme northeast and southeast areas. There is a growing
concern over the pollution entering the County's waterways from urban runoff and drainage from canal systems which carry large quantities of runoff from agricultural
areas. Particularly, the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its tributaries, which receive excess runoff from increased urban development and nutrients and excess
freshwater from canal systems that drain the western agricultural areas (Janicki, St. Lucie Watershed Assessment 999).
Water quality problems in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River basin have primarily been attributed to Ten Mile Creek, the major tributary to the North Fork of the St.
Lucie River. In response to an extensive fish kill in 1994 and pesticides revealed through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast District Surface
Water Ambient Monitoring program, additional water samples in the Ten Mile Creek basin were collected and analyzed. In June 1995, the results of Ten Mile Creek
water quality analysis were reported in an Ecosystem Management Report entitled Pesticide Contamination in Ten Mile Creek. Fourteen different pesticides were
detected in Ten Mile Creek, several exceeding State water quality standards, three pesticides were the highest concentrations ever detected in Florida. The
contamination and resultant biological impairment documented a loss of Class III function for Ten Mile Creek waters. The study also confirmed pesticide contamination
in the OFW by detection of pesticides in the northern end of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River Aquatic Preserve. These pesticides are related to extensive citrus
farming in the Ten Mile Creek basin (Graves, Pesticide Contamination in Ten Mile Creek, 1995).
The primary concem in the C-25 Canal system is the transport of pesticides and heavy metals into the estuary. Ft. Pierce Farms Water Control District Canal #1 and
the C-25 Canal merge prior to discharge to Taylor Creek (Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2000). Water quality samples of phosphorous and nitrogen
from Ft. Pierce Farms Canal indicate values about twice what was observed in the C-25 Canal, and are similar to C-23 and C-24 Canals which discharge into the
impaired St. Lucie Estuary (Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Ecosummary: Ft. Pierce Farms WCD Canal #1, 2000). Samples of sediments from the
Ft. Pierce Farms Canal contain the highest concentrations of heavy metal copper and the pesticide ethion ever detected in the southern portion of the Indian River
Lagoon (Florida Department of Environmental Protection,)Ecosummary: Ft. Pierce Farms WCD Canal #1, 2000). Because the C-25 canal is located at the mouth of
the Ft. Pierce inlet, during outgoing tide, freshwater exits the inlet taking with it contaminants as well as floating vegetation (Graves, South Florida Water Management
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
J
10
)
8
8t. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
)
1998)
The C-23 and C-24 Canals drain into the North Fork of the St. Lucie River in southern St. Lucie County. The C-24 Canal basin was identified in the Indian River Lagoon
Swim Plan (1994) as a specific problem area because of the area's heavy agricultural uses and the amount of herbicide and pesticide chemicals found in the North
Fork of the St. Lucie River. Water quality studies of the C-23 and C-24 Canals have detected several pesticides in canal waters, however, only ethion was detected
at concentrations exceeding Class III standards.
District Canal C-25
Pesticides have been detected in all the County's major canal systems and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River Aquatic Preserve. Pesticides can cause contamination
of water and injury to plants and animals that were not the target of pesticides (EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs, 1999). Ethion is a pesticide commonly used in the
citrus industry in Florida and has been detected in all the County's major canals systems as well as the North Fork of the St. Lucie River (EPA, Office of Pesticide
Programs 1999; Graves, Ecosummaries:1997-2000). Ethion is highly toxic to freshwater and marine fish as well as freshwater invertebrates, and poses a moderate
to low risk for terrestrial animals (EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs, 1999).
A major problem in the southern reach of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon has been the large release of freshwater from Lake
Okeechobee through the C-44 Canal into the St. Lucie Estuary in Martin County. Large fish kills in the St. Lucie Estuary, of the St. Lucie River in 1998 has been
associated with the large releases of freshwater from Lake Okeechobee through the C- 44 Canal (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish Health
in the St. Lucie Estuary, 2000). These large freshwater releases from Lake Okeechobee also result in fish kills in the Indian River Lagoon and the North Fork of the
St. Lucie River. It is likely that the lower salinity water from Lake Okeechobee releases and associated increased color and turbidity also reduced seagrass growth
in the Indian River Lagoon in southern St. Lucie County (St. Lucie River Issue Team, Interim Report, 1998). The Florida Marine Research Institute continues to monitor
fish kills and abnormalities in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. Although not attributed to Lake Okeechobee releases, during 2000, six
cases of fish kills or fish with abnormalities were reported in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, south of the C-24 Canal and two cases were reported in the Indian
River Lagoon in southern St. Lucie County.
Although the Savannas State Reserve has fairly good water quality, other environmental problems are present (Hand, Water Quality Assessment of the State of
Florida, 1996). Historically, nearly all the water entering the Savannas Marsh was from rainfall. The marsh system was so pure, the introduction of even small amounts
of pollution had drastic results. Beginning in the 1950's residential development west of the Savannas began to achieve drainage and flood control by discharging
runoff directly into the Savannas without treatment. Stormwater runoff carries a high concentration of phosphorus which promotes plant growth which alters the unique
character of the Savannas marsh ecosystem
Floodplain
Figure 8-5 depicts the flood hazard boundaries within the unincorporated areas of the County as prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Areas
subject to flooding during the 1 OO-year flood (Zonlil A) occur along the coastline of the Atlantic Ocean, along both sides of the Indian River Lagoon, in the Savannas,
and along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its major tributaries. There are a few smaller areas subject to the 1 OO-year flood in isolated low areas, especially
near the coast. Areas of 1 OO-year coastal flood with wave action (Zone V) extend into the Indian River Lagoon along its western side. Riverine flooding occurs when
the flow of rainwater runoff exceeds the carrying capacities of the natural drainage systems. During extended periods of heavy rainfall, certain low-lying neighborhoods
within the county are subject to considerable flood damage caused by the inability of natural and mechanical drainage systems to
3.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11
8
8t. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
12
8
100 Year Floodplain
Lucie County - Generalized
St.
Figure 8-5
8t. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
revelws, refer
insurance rate,
Lucie County office of
For specific property
to FEMA 1984 flood
Maps available in the St.
Community Development.
100 Year Flood
Note:
S~$hlne stßIe PaIkway
Year Flood Plain
May 18, 1999
t
iii
""'00
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
effectively remove the water
The North Fork of the St. Lucie River contains an extensive floodplain, with a significant portion of its floodplain completely or partially isolated from the river's main
branch.(Dames and Moore, USACOE Section 1135 Project Feasibility Study: North Fork of the St. Lucie River, 1996). Approximately 1,600 acres of the floodplain
and adjacent uplands along the North Fork and it's major tributaries, Ten Mile and Five Mile Creeks, are in public ownership. An additional 1 ,500 acres along the
North Fork of the St. Lucie River are targeted for acquisition by state and local environmental land acquisition programs. Preservation and restoration of the river's
natural floodplain will enhance the flood protection functions of the river.
Groundwaters
The County's water needs are met by both the Surficial Aquifer System and the Floridan Aquifer System. The Surficial Aquifer system is the major source of potable
water in St. Lucie County. Yields from the Surficial Aquifer are low and water quality is fair. Problems with water quality are usually associated with excess iron, and
hardness, but high chloride content can also be a problem where abandoned Floridan wells have contaminated the Surficial Aquifer (SFWMD, Districtwide Water
Supply Assessment, 1998).
4.
The Floridan Aquifer system is primarily used as a backup source of agriculture irrigation water when rainfall is low and surface water from the major canals is not
available (SFWMD, Districtwide Water Supply Assessment, 1998). Its quality is considered low with high concentrations of dissolved salts. Grove managers and
ranchers tend to mix the water from the Floridan wells with surface water and ground water from the better quality Surficial Aquifer System (SFWMD, Upper East Coast
Water Supply Plan, 1998). This dilutes the brackish Floridan water to a level acceptable for citrus irrigation, allowing growers to augment their surface water supplies
when the canals are low.
Water
St. Lucie County is a major agricultural area with citrus being the dominant crop with significant water demands. In recent years, the coastal area has experienced
rapid urban development, which has given rise to increasing public utility and self-supplied water demand. The following table depicts water 2020 water supply
demands projected for domestic, industrial/commercial and agricultural uses. Total demands between 1995 and 2020 are projected to increase by 17 percent. Urban
demands are projected to grow by 74% between 1995 and 2020, and agricultural demands are projected to rise by 8 percent during that period (SFWMD,Districtwide
Water Supply Assessment, 1998).
Demand for
5.
2020
Assessed
MGY'
1995
Assessed
MGY'
% Change
1990-2020
-
120.1%
-24.5%
%01
Total
%01
Total
%01
Total
7.9%
2.21%
11,665
3.245
4.09%
2.66%
5,121
3.325
5.7%
4.7%
1990
Use
~
5,300
4.300
Urban and Agricultural
Demands
Public 8u
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
13
8
81. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
2020
Assessed
MGY
1995
Assessed
MGY
% Change
1990-2020
-
902.7%
387.2%
45.66%
59.1%
%of
!.2!!!
2.05%
8.6%
79.19%
3,008
2,668
116,384
146,970
%of
Total
.49%
5.77%
85.78%
862
7,225
107,354
125,157
%of
Total
-
0.3%
2.8%
86.5%
1990
Use
MGY
-
300
2,600
79,900
92,400
Urban and Agricultural
Demands
ndustrial/Commercial
Recreation Self Su¡:>
Agricultural
Total
998
The Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan concludes that the surficial aquifer system in the coastal portion of the region is not sufficient to meet projected water
demands. The plan states that the Floridan Aquifer is the most promising source for future urban potable water needs, and has sufficient supplies to meet future urban
and agricultural demands (SFWMD, Districtwide Water Supply Assessment, 1998). Aquifer Storage and Recovery technology is a potential means of storing water
in aquifers for future use. Water quality, particularly regarding untreated surface water limits the ability to currently use Aquifer Storage and Recovery (Comprehensive
Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), Appendix D, 1999). Water recovered from the Aquifer Storage and Recovery system may not have the appropriate quality for
its intended use. A pilot study for large-scale Aquifer Storage and Recovery system is being implemented through the Comprehensive Everglades study. Several issues
are to be addressed including environmental and health concerns regarding water quality (CERP, Appendix D, 1999).
995, Jul
SFWMD - Ä¡:>ri
1998)
time.
Quality Concerns
The Surficial Aquifer Systems is easily contaminated by activities occurring at the lands surface (SFWMD, Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan,
disposal or accidental spills of even small amounts of hazardous substances can contaminate large quantities of groundwater in a relatively short
Groundwater
6.
mproper
The St. Lucie County Health Department Environmental Health section permits and monitors various projects with environmental risk to underground water supplies.
Potential groundwater contaminants sources include landfills, petroleum storage tanks, on-site sewage disposal systems, hazardous material storage tanks, and
industrial waste sites (SFWMD, Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan, 1998).
St. Lucie County is designated as part of the South Florida Water Management District's Critical Water Supply Problem area, with some areas designated as a
Reduced Threshold Area, and a Restricted Allocation Area. These designations are given to geographic areas where water resource supply problems are critical,
or are expected to become critical.
The Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan identified several potential water problems projected to occur by 2020. Within St. Lucie County, areas along the Indian River
Lagoon shoreline and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River shorelines were identified as potential areas for saltwater intrusion. (South Florida Water Management
District, 1998). A summary of Water Supply Issues for St. Lucie County are shown below:
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
14
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
NLAND ISSUES
Cumulative impacts (wetlands)
Surface Water availability
Saltwater intrusion vulnerability
discharges to the IRL and SLE
Watershed management
Floridian water quality
Watershed management - discharges to the IRL and SLE
Source: Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan, Chapter 5, 1998
AIR
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection provides the measurements of ambient air quality and provides monitoring throughout the state. Legal limitations
on pollutant concentration levels of ambient air have been established for six pollutants: carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur
dioxide (FDEP, Air Quality Report, 1999)
B.
Environmental Protection
monitoring station at the
Currently, there are two sites in St. Lucie County that are part of the State/Local Air Monitoring Station Network. The Florida Department of
maintains a monitoring station at 101 Rock Road where ozone, particulate matter, and nitrogen oxide are monitored and a particulate matter
St. Lucie County Landfill on Glades Cut-Off Road (FDEP, Air Quality Report, 1999).
The 1999 Air Quality Report, published by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, reported no exceedances of ambient air quality standards within the
County. In 1998, one exceedance of the 8-hour Ozone concentration was detected. Ozone is not emitted directly into the atmosphere but results from a series of
reactions between nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds. Nitrogen oxides are emitted primarily from high-temperature combustion sources such as power
plants. Volatile Organic Compounds are emitted primarily from motor vehicles, but may arise from the evaporation of gasoline and solvents (FDEP, Air Quality Report,
1999).
SOILS
The Soil Conservation Service issued the St. Lucie County Soil Survey in 1980. This survey contains maps covering virtually all of the land areas of the County at
a scale of 1 :20,000. In addition, the County has a database of soil classifications within 10-acre grid cells. Figure 8-6 presents a general soil map of St. Lucie County
which shows broad areas of soils, relief and drainage. The general soil map can be used to compare the suitability of large areas for general land uses
c.
Sand is the predominant soil texture (in relation to silt and clay) within the upper horizons for most of the soils. Loamy soils (sand with silt and clay) are more prevalent
in lower horizons. Several soils are predominantly muck in the upper horizons. Most of the major soil groups found in the County have severe limitations for
development activities including excavation, dwellings and small commercial buildings, roads and streets, drainage, septic tank absorption fields, and sewage lagoon
areas. These limitations are due to slope, wetness, cutback caves, seepage, slow percolation, cemented pan, ponding, excess humus, floods, subsidence, and low
strength. Even with proper site modification, some limitations cannot be overcome and additional site development usually includes fill.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
15
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
MINERALS
Sand and shell rock mining generally occurs within or near the Atlantic Coastal Ridge and in the western parts of the County. There are currently thirteen mining
operations active in St. Lucie County. Four of these operations mine coquina and nine mine sand. Because of the abundance of fill materials in Florida and the cost
of transporting them, they are only valuable on a large scale and are generally mined near the site of their eventual disposition. One exception is the mining of silica
sand which is shipped to the Bahamas from the Port of Ft. Pierce. Figure 8-7 shows the locations of mining operations in St. Lucie County.
D.
FISHERIES
The ichthyofauna community of the Indian River Lagoon complex is recognized as the most diverse of United States waters with more than 600 species having been
identified. The reasons for this diversity are many. The Lagoon spans several biogeographic provinces and has both a tropical and temperate influence. The Lagoon
complex also has a high diversity of habitats including tidal inlets, sand bottoms, seagrass meadows, and adjacent mangrove forests and freshwater creeks. A higher
diversity in the southern portion of the Lagoon has been ascribed to greater abundance of inlets, presence of reef-like habitats not present in the north, and greater
tropical representation (Woodward-Clyde, Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Plan, 1994).
E.
The surface waters of St. Lucie County support a wide variety of fish species which are valuable resources for both commercial and sport fishing. The bay anchovy
has been reported as the most numerically abundant fish in the Lagoon, while the pinfish is the most abundant species in the important seagrass habitat. Red drum,
spotted seatrout, and common snook are also three of the most sought recreational fish in the Lagoon, while the bay anchovy and striped mullet are important
commercial species. Other saltwater and freshwater sport fishing in the County include sailfish, dolphin, white and blue marlin, tarpon, speckled trout, cobia, grouper,
snapper, croaker, shark, sheepshead, largemouth bass, black crappie, bluegill, redear sunfish, and speckled perch. The major sources of consumable shellfish within
the Indian River Lagoon are blue crab, the southern hard clam and the northern hard clam, and the American oyster. St. Lucie County has one area of conditionally
approved shellfish harvesting north of Ft. Pierce Inlet (Figure 8-8).
The landings in Table 8-2 were obtained from the Division of Marine Resources landings report for St. Lucie County. Wholesale and retail seafood dealers, following
the mandatory reporting requirements report, purchases of saltwater products from fisherman by dealers. Please note that these are the landings reported in St. Lucie
County, this does not ensure that all seafood caught within St. Lucie County is reported within St. Lucie County.
Historically, scrub formed a virtually continuous zone along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge and in St. Lucie County, along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and its
tributaries (Fernald, 1989). Because scrub occupy the highest coastal ridges, railroad and highway construction historically occurred first in these communities,
predisposing them to subsequent development. Currently, there is very little protected scrub or scrubby flatwoods habitat in the County except for the Savannas State
Reserve and Bluefield Ranch. The South Savannas Reserve contains 732 acres of scrub along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge. This area constitutes the largest continuous
tract of scrub in the County. Another 607 acres of scrub have been purchased through the County's Environmentally Significant Lands program. The largest tract
purchased through the ESL program consists of two areas of sand pine on Bluefield Ranch totaling 507 acres. The remaining 100 acres of preserved scrub occurs
along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and the Atlantic Coastal Ridge.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
16
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
WI\VElA"O-iJI)'IfM'OOP OONPlEl( PEPHfSSl(;NAL
WI\\ÆlA"ID.{)R-:lAN
WlNÖf;\ lOAVYSANO
,OST"'RL."-SMtl,
IWJJNùffiM'lJ
ll£IICHES
.v.u~P,NESANO
l'J.EC'lAA fINE SI\NP.OTO ô PIJœ-n SLOPES
",-MDllN4SANO.Dl'PRffiSQw.t
t
II
Mine
Inactive Mine
ie County
Operations
f
II
"''-
Si.mal1íl'lll
TABLE 8-2
Commercial Saltwater Fish Landinas for St.
1998
pound:TE'x-vesse
value
997
Ex-vesse
value
Lucie County,
Year
1996
Ex-vesse
value
1995
pound:f'Ex-vesse
value
1994
pound:f'Ex-vesse
value
58313,997,076
67,673 42,095
Pounds
3.637,834 2,972,858 3,742,847 3,011
28,044 109,482 55,906
208,706 353,321
Pounds
34,343 62,628
,600,832 5,502,830 3.927,345
4,363,35814,453,22213,428,23414,696,69712.750,029
53,488
,367,030
33,391
,558.153
56,022
,071.100
Sub-group:
=in Fish
nvestebrates
=ood Shrimp
Bait Shrimp
otal
ill 124
5,490,480 16,044,76614,858,75216,331 ,87318,315,48717,593,22313,291 ,04614,152,07513,079,30814,039,294
UPLAND VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES
KBN Engineering and Applied Sciences' January 1992 report "Wetland and Upland Habitat Inventory: St. Lucie County" identifies the natural plant communities
remaining based on several informative sources. The report sources included the Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida (FNAI, 1990), Soil Conservation
Services Soil Survey of St. Lucie County, South Florida Water Management District, and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Landsat Land-Cover,
1989. The KBN study documentation of remaining native plant communities is utilized to fulfil(the 1990 Conservation Element directive requiring the preservation of
25% of the County's remaining native uplands. This directive is primarily implemented through the County's Environmentally Significant Lands program which has
acquired almost 3,000 acres of native upland habitat for preservation purposes.
F.
Three major classifications of upland vegetative communities were identified, each incorporating ecological variations of the original category. They are: Xeric Uplands,
Coastal Uplands, and Mesic Flatlands.
Xeric Uplands
The xeric uplands are sand pine and oak scrub communities and are located on well-drained, sterile sands. Sand pine and scrub sites are classified as scrub and
overgrown thickets where oaks have grown into trees are considered xeric hammock. These habitats typically occur on white sand ridges either along the Atlantic
Coastal Ridge or on "islands" of high ground in the southwest part of the County. Because of their rarity, scrub communities are ranked imperiled statewide and globally
by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI, 2000).
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
19
8
1
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
20
8
Approved Shellfish Harvesting Areas
Lucie County-
St.
Figure 8-7.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
8-8
Areas
Class II Approved Harvesting Waters
Data source: FDEP, 2000
Nt
Community Development
Geographic Information Systems
Map prepared March 20,2000
'D
cr.:
è:'
"CO
o
l0-
a
~
I-
Coastal Uplands
Located primarily on the barrier island, this category consists of grassy beach dune, which grades into shrubby coastal strand and then into maritime hammock. This
category occupies areas formed along high energy shorelines, and is influenced by wind, waves, and salt spray. Associated with the coastal upland habitats are old
sand bars, as well as old Indian mounds, both shell and burial mounds. In St. Lucie County, these habitats have a mixture of tropical and temperate vegetation.
However, due to development in the coastal areas of the County, the boundaries of this habitat category have been significantly reduced. Maritime hammock, coastal
strand and beach dune communities are imperiled statewide because of their rarity or their vulnerability to extinction (FNAI, Tracking List of Rare, Threatened and
Endangered Plants, Animals and Natural Communities of Florida, 2000)
2.
Mesic Flatwoods
The mesic flatwoods category includes upland habitats that are inland from the coastal ridge. This category includes the open dry prairies of native grasses and
wildflowers, the mesic flatwoods of slash pine and palmetto, the more xeric scrubby flatwoods with an understory of scrub species beneath the slash pines, and the
prairies hammocks of cabbage palm and live oak. At the current rate of habitat conversion, mesic f1atwoods, once one of the most abundant upland habitat in South
Florida, is in danger of becoming one the rarest habitats (USFWS, South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, 1999).
3.
WILDLIFE
This section provides an overview of the wildlife within St. Lucie County. Although an extensive inventory is not available, ecological communities support particular
kinds of wildlife. The Florida Natural Areas Inventory is a private, non-profit organization dedicated to gathering, interpreting and disseminating information critical
to the conservation of Florida's biological diversity. The organization tracks rare plant and animal species, and high quality natural communities throughout the state.
They also provide a summary of Rare Species and Natural Communities occurring or likely to occur by county (Appendix 8-A-2).
G
Wildlife within Upland Ecological Communities
A host of animal species supported by xeric upland habitats utilize the scrub in St. Lucie County. Vertebrates generally found in scrub habitats are the Florida mouse,
Florida scrub-jay, Florida scrub lizard, gopher tortoise, white-tailed deer, bobcat, gray fox, eastern indigo snake, Florida pine snake, bobwhite, cotton mouse, gopher
frog, downy and hairy woodpecker, great crested flycatcher, and rufous-sided towhee. Scrub is often considered Florida's most distinctive ecosystem. An estimated
40 to 60 percent of it's species are endemic (Myers, Ecosystems of Florida, 1990).
1
Wildlife species associated with the coastal upland communities include the following: raccoon, loggerhead turtle, green turtle, gopher tortoise, pileated woodpecker,
least tern, yellow and black-crowned night herons, eastern indigo snake, coachwhip snake, black skimmer, beach mouse, cotton mouse, eastern cotton tail rabbit,
armadillo, opossum, and gray fox.
n 1994,the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Strategic Habitat Conservation Areas were identified for four rare natural communities, one of which
occurs in St. Lucie County, scrub. Scrub is known to support many rare and imperiled plants and animals, and protection of the community will accomplish the
protection of many species at one time (Cox, Habitat Conservation Needs of Rare and Imperiled Wildlife in Florida ,2000). In St. Lucie County, 10-15 acre conservation
areas for rare plants, 15-20 acres for territories of the Florida Scrub-jay, and 50 acre conservation areas for larger scrub communities were recommended for
conservation by Fernald (Cox, Closing the Gaps in Florida's Wildlife Habitat Conservation System, 1994).
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
21
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Among the flatwoods associations, the following are some of the species generally found in St. Lucie County: Florida sandhill crane, red-cockaded woodpecker,
pileated woodpecker, raccoon, red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, eastern meadowlark, fox squirrel, great horned owl, gray fox, burrowing owl, bald eagle,
Audubon's crested caracara, white-tailed deer, bobcat, cotton rat, least shrew, Florida mouse, Florida scrub-jay, southeastern kestrel, and swallow-tailed kite. Avian
densities are typically low throughout the year, with some increase in winter due to the influx of migratory winter residents (Abrahamson and Hartnett, 1990). In South
Florida mesic flatwoods are known to support, 28 mammal, 116 birds, 29 reptile and 13 amphibian species. Fifteen (15) of these species are federally listed species
(USFWS, South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, 1999).
Wildlife within Wetland Ecological Communities
Wetland ecosystems in Florida are one of the most productive and rich with species diversity. The 1992 KBN "Wetland and Upland Habitat Inventory: St. Lucie
County", identified the following wetland plant communities: wet prairie, wet flatwoods, hydric hammock, floodplain forest, floodplain swamp, floodplain marsh, swale,
slough, stand swamp, bog (bayhead) depression marsh, dome swamp, saltmarsh and mangrove swamp. Within these communities, a host of species have been
reported to occur, including: swallow-tailed kite, snail kite, wood stork, brown pelican, least tern, tri-colored heron, crested caracara, white-tailed deer, Florida panther,
bobcat, great blue heron, white ibis, little blue heron, roseate spoonbill, great egret, bald eagle, red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, pileated woodpecker, barred
owl, great horned owl, and sandhill crane.
2.
Birds
For the last 34 years, the Ft. Pierce Christmas Bird Count has recorded wintering birds and other species which may breed or pass through the County. A total of 241
avian species have been recorded in the County between 1957-1998 (1991-1994 the Christmas Bird Count was not conducted). Between 1990 and 1998, 174 avian
species have been observed during the Christmas Bird Count, including the following species which are listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special
concern
3.
and
Little blue heron
Tri-colored heron
Brown pelican;
Wood stork;
Red-cockaded woodpecker;
Crested caracara;
Florida scrub-jay;
Roseate spoonbill;
Limpkin;
Snail kite;
Southern bald eagle;
Southeastern American kestrel
Florida sandhill crane.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
The total number of sightings by specie recorded for the years 1990 through 1998 is included in (Appendix 8-A-3). Other species known or suspected to occur in the
County, but not sighted on the day of the Audubon Christmas Bird Count are the burrowing owl, Wilson's plover, red-headed woodpecker, ruby-throated hummingbird,
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
22
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
and the Bachman's warbler
One of the reasons for such avifaunal richness is the Indian River Lagoon, which provides a wide array of habitats for wading birds and wetland-dependent avian
species. These habitats include open water, mangroves, salt marshes, spoil islands, and mosquito impoundments, which attract and sustain numerous avian species.
As a result, the Lagoon provides habitats for resident and wintering species, as well as migratory species utilizing the Eastern Flyway. In fact, in the Lagoon, numerous
rookeries have been documented due to the presence of suitable nesting substrates, isolation, protection from predators, and proximity of feeding areas (Woodward-
Clyde, Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program, 1994).
Species Listed as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern
Endangered and threatened species are those plants and animals in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered,as designated by both the federal government
(Endangered Species Act of 1973) and the State of Florida (Chapter 372.072, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 39-27, Florida Administrative Code). The State also
lists species whose survival potential is of special concern
4.
The following describes some of the listed species known or suspected to occur in St. Lucie County by reason of distribution and habitat (Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission, Closing the Gaps in Florida's Wildlife Habitat Conservation System, 1994). The Florida Natural Areas Inventory Summary of St. Lucie County
Rare Species which indicates the protected status of State and Federal isted species is also included in Appendix 8
Native species of bromeliads, cactus, ferns, orchids, and palms, all of which are considered threatened by the Florida Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services, except those specifically exempted or listed under other categories;
and
but do not breed in the County and are listed because of loss of breeding habitat
Migratory bird species that occur
n the offshore waters of the County.
Listed species are frequently dependent upon a particular habitat and reductions in the habitat are frequent causes of listing. It is impossible to manage a listed species
without protection of the required habitat. Particularly important habitats for listed species in St. Lucie County are the dunes and beaches, mangroves and coastal
marshes, freshwater marshes, and sand pine scrub.
Species of whales and dolphins that may occur
Critical habitats have been designated within St. Lucie County for the Florida snail kite (50 CFR, 17.94, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995). and the West Indian
manatee. These are areas of particular importance for the continued existence of the species and are not meant to imply that the species occur nowhere else in the
County. In fact, the Florida snail kite is regularly seen in the Savannas, which has not been designated critical habitat, but is a wildlife preserve.
There are various causes for a species being listed. Some species have never been common. Some species are vulnerable because they are restricted to a limiting
resource or habitat. Lakela's mint and the red-cockaded woodpecker are representatives of this category in St. Lucie County. The most serious threat to the
continued existence of many listed species is the alteration of their habitat by man. Even clearing and alteration of natural areas will encourage exotic plant species
to invade native habitats, often resulting in shading out native plant species. It is impossible to discuss all of the factors which affect each listed species in St. Lucie
County, but several of the more conspicuous factors will be discussed.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
23
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Many of the listed plant species are threatened because of collection pressure. The ferns, coontie, orchids, cactus, and bromeliads are especially vulnerable to
collection. The fragrant prickly-apple is restricted to a very small range on private land and could be eliminated were the location widely known
Another major threat to many of the plant species is loss of habitat to development. Species such as Catesby's lily, Lakela's mint, and Curtiss' milkweed occur in
flatwoods or sand pine scrub that are prime areas for development. Several beach and dune species, such as sea-lavender, beach creeper, and inkberry, are also
subject to loss of habitat to development.
The beaches of east central Florida, including St. Lucie County, are an important breeding ground for several species of sea turtle. The leatherback, green, and
loggerhead sea turtles have all been recorded breeding on the beaches of St. Lucie County in recent years. The nests of these turtles are highly vulnerable to natural
predators and to disturbance on the beaches. Projects have been established in many sea turtle nesting areas to monitor and protect the nests of sea turtles and
encouraging results have been obtained. Another threat to the hatchlings is the increasing light pollution that accompanies development along beaches and causes
disorientation as they attempt to find the ocean after birth. The County's sea turtle protection regulations restricts the hours and months that artificial light can shine
on the beach area, however, it is becoming apparent that interior lights (mostly from existing development) are a major cause of hatchling disorientation.
The gopher tortoise, although locally common in St. Lucie County, is a species of special concern statewide (Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Florida's
Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern, 1997). The gopher tortoise is important because its burrows are frequently inhabited
by other animals, some of which occur nowhere else and some of which are themselves listed species. Among the listed species that occur with gopher tortoises,
though not necessarily exclusively, are the Florida gopher frog, Eastern Indigo snake, and Florida mouse.
Many colonial waterbirds are common in St. Lucie County and use a variety of wetlands for feeding and roosting. Breeding colonies of great egret, great blue heron,
little blue heron, tri-colored heron, and wood stork were documented in St. Lucie County (Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Closing the Gaps in Florida's
Wildlife Habitat Conservation System, 1994). Brown pelicans and snowy egrets also nest within the County.
Bald eagles are seen regularly in St. Lucie County and at least one bald eagle nest is documented in the County. Pairs of bald eagles are highly variable in their
tolerance of human activity around the nest.
The red-cockaded woodpecker nests only in mature pines and almost exclusively in those with red-heart disease. Nests in northern Florida are generally in longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris), but slash pine (Pinus ellioti) is also used in south Florida. The woodpeckers frequently have non-breeding helpers within a family unit referred
to as a "clan". A clan requires large areas for its home range. An average of 200 acres per clan has been reported. Logging practices that remove all the old trees
have severely endangered this woodpecker. Red-cockaded woodpecker clans have been located in St. Lucie County, generally in areas that are slated for
development. At the time of this writing at least one active colony is known in St. Lucie County and it is in an area of active development.
The Florida scrub jay, is restricted to scattered and isolated patches of scrub oak habitat much of which has been cleared for urban development (Florida Game and
Freshwater Fish Commission, 1991). It is known to inhabit several areas within the County (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, County biologist, 1997). A sizable
population exists within the Savannas State Reserve with several other families located throughout the County. However, the South Savannas Florida scrub-jay
populations may not be viable long-term unless additional scrub habitat is protected and managed for their use (Kautz, 2000).
The American oystercatcher nests on broad sandy beaches, but suitable habitat is rare and restoration and protection of suitable nesting areas are necessary to halt
their decline (FGFWFC, 1982).
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
24
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Manatees are still common in the Indian River Lagoon. Many of the manatees congregate at the Moores Creek Fort Pierce Utility Power Plant Florida Power and
Light- St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant, and, to a lesser extent, in the canals and coves north and south of the inlet. Manatees also frequent the North Fork of the St.
Lucie River. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection maintains surveys of the manatee's population, distribution, and fatalities.
Due to boat collision with the slow moving manatee, the State has established idle/no wake and slow speed zones within the Indian River Lagoon and the North Fork
of the St. Lucie River. Available data indicates that collisions with watercraft may be the single largest human-related cause of mortality within the Lagoon, and that
it is positively correlated with the amount and density of boat traffic (Woodward-Clyde, Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program, 1994). St. Lucie County has
commissioned the preparation of a Manatee Protection Plan to further protect these endangered species.
Several listed species have adapted to urban areas. The least tern, a summer resident, historically nested on beaches but have begun to utilize gravel rooftops,
parking lots and other such landscapes in the County where beaches have been disturbed (FGFWFC, 1982). On the mainland, Florida sandhill cranes and woodstorks
are often sighted along roadside and in residential neighborhoods.
POTENTIAL FOR CONSERVATION. USE OR PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
As a general rule, maximizing habitat diversity in protected areas and providing connections between habitats enhances biodiversity and the longterm viability of
wildlife, marinelife and vegetative species. If these resources are not protected the loss of the natural qualities of our resources can negatively effect the county's
economic viability as well as the viability of the county's wildlife, marinelife and vegetative communities. The protection and management of native habitats offer
opportunities to provide passive recreational uses, environmental education programs and open space areas that contribute to a better quality of life within St. Lucie
County.
WATER RESOURCES
Conservation, use, or protection of surface waters on a local scale can best be handled through cooperation and support of State and Federal initiatives to improve
the estuarine environment (such as the National Estuary and Comprehensive Everglades Restoration programs), as well as through local initiated conservation and
water quality improvement projects. Other local measures include, public education on the value of habitat protection, effective enforcement of existing habitat
protection regulations (such as shoreline stabilization or buffer requirements), and establishment of new mechanisms for surface water conservation.
A.
Several local projects have been implemented to protect the County's water resources, including the public purchase of lands that protect surface and groundwater
resources, impoundment restoration, stormwater improvements, and restoration of degraded natural areas. These public projects, in conjunction with the County's
resource protection standards and water conservation programs, will assist the County in protecting its water resources.
Surface Waters
With the exception of small areas in the extreme northeast and southwest, St. Lucie County is within the St. Lucie watershed which is designated a high priority area
for protection under the State of Florida's Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Act. The SWIM Act requires management and restoration plans
1
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
25
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
for preserving or restoring priority waterbodies and setting Pollutant Load Reduction Goals for these waterbodies. The 1999 Florida legislature also enacted the Florida
Watershed Restoration Act to provide a process for restoring waters through the establishment and implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) for impaired
waters. TMDLs are the maximum level of pollutant loading a waterbody can receive while meeting the overall pollutant load reduction goals needed to restore and
maintain state water quality standards. TMDLs are required for all waters not meeting water quality standards or not supporting their designated uses (DEP, Total
Maximum Daily Load Program, 2000). TMDLs and Pollutant Load Reduction Goals are required for all the County's major canal systems, Ten Mile Creek, and the
North Fork of the St. Lucie River. The development of TMDLs for all of the County's listed water bodies, except Ten Mile Creek, are considered a high priority and
are projected to be established by the year 2005. Ten Mile Creek is listed as a low priority with TMDL development projected to be developed in 2010.
The large volume of freshwater and the poor quality of water entering the Indian River Lagoon from the St. Lucie River Watershed led to the establishment of the Water
Preservation Area Task Force, which includes Martin County and St. Lucie County representatives. This task force, sponsored by the Army Corps of Engineers,
recommended sites for the establishment of a water preserve area within the St. Lucie Estuary Watershed. The work of the task force was ultimately carried forward
by the authorization of the Restudy and the release of the Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Study. The Indian River Lagoon study is a portion of the Central and South
Florida Ecosystem Restoration and Restudy efforts. In early 1999, the Indian River Lagoon Feasibility Study team was brought together to work on the implementation
of this portion of the Restudy. The Indian River Lagoon Project Implementation team is developing specific recommendations for the project implementation phase
of the study to improve water quality and wildlife habitats within St. Lucie and Martin Counties. The final draft of the Indian River Lagoon Implementation Plan was
released in the summer of 2001.
In 1996, the Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Water Management District nominated the Ten Mile Creek Water Preserve for funding under Section 528
of the Water Resources Development Act, Critical Restoration Project program to begin restoration projects in the St. Lucie River basin. The Ten Mile Creek Water
Preserve Project is a natural resource conservation and infrastructure project that has the potential to serve as the catalyst for the restoration and enhancement of
the St. Lucie River. The proposed project includes the acquisition of approximately 700 acres in the Ten Mile Creek Basin and construction of a water attenuation
facility. The majority of the lands targeted for this purchase have been purchased and improvements are currently under design. The facility is expected to be
constructed within the next two to three years.
In early 1998, there was a fish lesion epidemic in the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. As a result, a multi-agency team, the St. Lucie Issues Team, was brought
together to identify short term projects which would address local stormwater issues that were negatively impacting water quality in the basin. Since 1999, the Florida
legislature has allocated $17.5 million to implement St. Lucie Issue Team projects that will improve the quality of the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon.
Restoration projects include stormwater retrofit, reconnection of ox-bows along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, restoration of degraded natural areas, and
research projects that are expected to result in improved water quality in the St. Lucie River Estuary.
The State has also implemented a Best Management Practice program to improve the quality of surface waters. Under the Best Management Practice (BMP) program,
citrus growers are urged to perform an environmental assessment of their crop management operations. Members of the Indian River Citrus League took action to
reduce harmful discharges by spear heading an initiative to utilize best management practices in their citrus operations. A multi-party steering committee of State,
Federal and citrus growers guided the development of Best Management Practices for the Indian River area citrus growers. Local growers are encouraged to utilize
the 'Water Quality/Quantity BMPs for the Indian River Area Citrus Groves" manual to implement practices to improve the quality and quantity of water draining into
the Indian River Lagoon and St. Lucie Estuary. Implementation of agricultural Best Management Practices should have a significant impact on pollutant loadings to
the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and downstream estuaries, the St. Lucie Estuary and the Indian River Lagoon
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
26
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
To address a decline of water quality in the South Savannas, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection Ambient monitoring program (1997) carried out a study entitled ,"Stormwater Impact on the Savannas State Reserve" to investigate the effects of stormwater
on the Savannas ecology. This study found that biological communities in the area of the Savannas, adjacent to Indian River Estates, are degraded due to the
introduction of untreated stormwater (Graves, Stormwater Impact on the Savannas State Reserve, 1997). St. Lucie County, in cooperation with the South Florida
Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, have proposed to retrofit this subdivision with improved stormwater controls.
St. Lucie County should continue it's participation in programs striving to improve the quality and quantity of the County's water resources. Some of these programs
and projects include: the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary program, Surface Water Management Improvement program, the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration
and the Central and South Florida Restudy. The County should also continue to coordinate with state and regional agencies to implement programs and capital
projects to improve the quality of urban and agriculture stormwater runoff entering the County's surface waters.
Groundwater
As previously seen in this Element, the County's water needs are met by the Surficial Aquifer System and the Floridan Aquifer System. Known pollution problems
with the shallow aquifer come from groundwater contamination by hazardous substances, salt water intrusion, and poor quality recharge. The South Florida Water
Management District, St. Lucie County, Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie, and St. Lucie Village have initiated public wellfield programs which should effectively reduce the
potential threat of groundwater contamination, as will the continuation of the abandoned artesian well plugging program by the County and the South Florida Water
Management District.
2.
The Water Resources Act of 1972 mandated each water management district to "promote the conservation, replenishment, recapture, enhancement, development,
and proper utilization of surface and groundwater" (Section 373.013 F.S.). St. Lucie County continues to support the South Florida Water Management District's water
conservation program which helps to prevent loss of water resources and potential contamination of the Surficial Aquifer. Another water conservation measure the
District and the County are proposing is a series of reservoirs and water preserve areas in the western portion of the County, that will allow the storage of water that
is currently lost to tide.
Water conservation refers to water use practices and technologies that provide the services desired by the users while using less water. Water conservation measures
achieve long-term permanent reductions in water use. St. Lucie County continues it's support and participation in state and federal programs to improve surface water
quality, and consider adoption of a water conservation ordinance which helps to prevent loss of water resources and potential contamination of the Surficial Aquifer.
The South Florida Water Management District requires individual permit applicants for public water supply permits to submit a water conservation plan as a condition
of issuance. The conservation plan must include the following: adoption of an irrigation ordinance; adoption ofaXeriscape landscape ordinance; adoption of a rain
sensor devise ordinance; adoption of a water conservation-based rate structure; implementation of a leak detection and repair program; implementation of a water
conservation public education program; and an analysis of reclaimed water feasibility.
and a
conservation
St. Lucie County has adopted several water conservation ordinances including: water conservation based rate structure, a rain sensor device ordinance
Xeriscape ordinance. The County should consider adopting additional water conservation measures and promote the implementation of the district's water
measures in all public water supply facilities.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
27
8
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Sand mines are required to have a plan of reclamation
stormwater treatment, however; additional measures are needed to reduce
COMMERCIALLY VALUABLE MINERALS
The value of the sand, shell, and other fill materials on a local basis varies depending on need and location
prior to excavating reclaimed mines may be used for urban development, recreation, or
the impacts of mining activities on wildlife habitats and adjacent properties
B.
SOIL EROSION
The Soil Conservation Service (1980) classifies individual soils with regard to water and wind erosion. Most of the soils in St. Lucie County have severe limitations
for urban development activities. The limitations include slope, wetness, cutback caves, seepage, slow percolation, cemented pan, ponding, excess humus, floods
subsidence and low strength. Even with proper site modification, some limitations cannot be overcome and site development usually includes fill.
C.
Lucie River and
the North Fork of the St
removed
Areas of known erosion in St. Lucie County include the beach shoreline, dikes along drainage canals in agricultural areas
the Indian River Lagoon and their natural tributaries where native vegetation that stabilizes the shoreline has been
Dredge spoil has been confirmed to occupy roughly 8.9 miles or 16.2% of the 55 mile main branch of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River (Beal, 2000). The existing
spoil berms along the riverfront are 2-18 feet high and 10-30 feet wide (Beal, 2000). High spoil berms eroding along Ten Mile Creek from the Gordy Road to its
confluence with Five Mile Creek have resulted in trees and sediment accumulations in the waterway. This section is also heavily infested with Brazilian pepper to the
point of obstructing the waterway upstream of Selvitz Road (Beal, 2000). Brazilian pepper trees may be undermining the soil stabilizing features that native plant
species provide along the riverbanks. Restoration needs should be identified and projects implemented to restore and stabilize the shoreline of the North Fork of the
St. Lucie River and it's major tributaries.
Significant erosion in agricultural areas generally occurs when crop land is allowed to lie fallow for extended periods of time and is particularly noticeable in fallow
vegetable fields, pastures, and citrus groves. Beach erosion is addressed in detail in the Coastal Management Element; generally, the most serious problems have
been attributed to storms and the interruption of littoral drift by the jetties at the Ft. Pierce Inlet primarily affecting South Hutchinson Island.
The Soil Conservation Service has developed Best Management Practices for the different soil series to prevent or reduce erosion and oxidation of organic soils.
Procedural practices include developing land in phases so that it is not denuded at the same time; alternating development to leave windbreaks; leaving vegetated
buffer zones adjacent to waterways; plowing, and discing at right angles to the prevailing winds; and rotating stock to prevent overgrazing. Structural approaches
include retention/detention of stormwater, grassed swales and flow ways, dusVcohesion control chemicals, and early replacement of vegetative cover
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Hazardous wastes are materials which, because of their quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics "may pose a substantial present
or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly transported, disposed of, stored, treated, or otherwise managed" [FS 403.703(21 )].
D.
Hazardous substances pose a potential threat to the surficial water supply in St. Lucie County. Improper disposal or accidental spills of even small amounts of
hazardous substances can contaminate large quantities of groundwater in very short time since the water table is generally high and upper layer soil horizons are
permeable. Potential threats exists within residential, commercial, and industrial areas as well as at existing and closed landfills. Known pollution problems are Ft.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
28
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Pierce Utility Authority water supply wells and direct contamination of some of these wells from gasoline and organic solvents, respectively.
There are various means to reduce the threat of contamination. State initiatives include, but are not limited to legislation directed at hazardous waste management
(Chapter 403, Part IV, Florida Statutes) and well field protection (Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes).
n 1986, St. Lucie County prepared a countywide Hazardous Waste Management Assessment. The assessment included a detailed inventory of hazardous waste
generators and analyzes management practices. The County continues to evaluate hazardous waste management inventories and practices through the evaluation
of 20% of potential generators each year. In 1999, the County contained approximately 600 hazardous waste generators.
Another related County program which addresses potential generators has been implemented cooperatively between the Public Heath Unit (PHU) and the County.
This program requires an applicant for an occupational license to be interviewed by the PHU. If the proposed business involves hazardous substances, the PHU
performs an on site inspection to determine if proper management of the substances has been addressed, prior to issuance of the license by the County.
To ensure the proper disposal of household hazardous waste, the County's Solid Waste Management Division operates a facility that allows the free disposal of up
to 100 pounds of household waste. This facility is open every Friday and the second Saturday of each month. Public education programs are also conducted each
year through local newspapers.
The County's Well-field Protection Ordinance identifies cones of influences around public well fields and restricts potentially hazardous land uses within this area.
These regulations are implemented through the County's site planning and building permit process
VEGETATION. WILDLIFE, FISHERIES, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
The various native habitats throughout the County are subject to intense urban and agricultural development and invasion by exotic plant species. The Florida Natural
Areas Inventory tracks listed plant and animal species and their habitats throughout Florida, in an effort to protect declining habitats and listed species. St. Lucie
County's evaluation is shown in Appendix 8-A-2. One of the more sensitive and unique habitats is the sand pine scrub community which lies along the Atlantic Coastal
Ridge. Since it is on high, dry ground, it is especially attractive for development. Most development takes place in all types of upland habitats where regulatory
requirements are less than wetlands. The results of uncontrolled development in upland natural areas include: the loss of wildlife habitat and associated flora and
fauna, including species listed as endangered, threatened, or of special concern; the loss of soil and water retention, shading and buffering capabilities; and the loss
of functional ecosystems. Physical damage caused by off-road vehicles and the dumping of trash, garbage and other waste within these communities also occurs.
Of particular concern is the damage from off-road vehicles within dune and xeric communities.
E.
There are many ways to conserve unique vegetative communities and associated wildlife yet maintain appropriate levels of use for urban and agricultural development.
These include better coordination with State and Federal agencies during development review processes, the establishment of criteria to identify environmentally
sensitive habitats and incentives for property owners to conserve and manage them, the identification of and application to public programs for acquisition and
management of the more valuable habitats, and the prohibition or regulation of activities (such as the use of off-road vehicles) in sensitive ecosystems.
The conservation of fisheries on a local scale can best be handled through cooperation and support of State initiatives to improve the freshwater and estuarine
environments (such as Surface Water Improvement and Management projects on water quality and seagrasses), as well as through local initiatives such as public
education on the value of habitat protection, effective enforcement of existing habitat protection regulations, and implementation of habitat management techniques
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
29
8
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The County should continue to identified programs and implement projects to improve the quality of its surface
(such as shoreline stabilization or buffer requirements)
waters
NATURAL AREA PRESERVES
Natural area preserves are those lands maintained and managed in essentially their natural state with the primary objective of conserving and protecting their
environmentally unique, irreplaceable and valued ecological resources, including the plant and animals species they support. Natural area preserves protect
biodiversity and can provide recreation and aesthetic benefits to the public. Public use and enjoyment of these lands are only limited to the extent required to maintain
the natural resource values of the natural area preserve
F.
In November 1994, County voters approved a $20,000,000 bond referendum to finance the costs of acquiring environmentally significant :Iands and wildlife habitat.
Through the St. Lucie County Environmentally Significant Lands (ESL) program, lands are identified, assessed, prioritized and purchased or protected by some other
means. The Land Acquisition Selection Committee, which was formed to review and recommend sites for purchase, has targeted almost 20,000 acres for purchase.
Matching funds, primarily through the Preservation 2000 program, have been secured, and approximately 6,000 acres of natural areas have been purchased to date
(Figure 8-9). Through public acquisition and proper land management the County's Environmentally Significant Lands program will ensure the long term viability of
natural areas throughout St. Lucie County.
The qualifying criteria used to identify environmental uplands for purchase include:
* The presence of unique ecological communities;
* Quality of the native uplands;
* Presence of rare and endangered plant and animals species;
* Land that safeguards water quality;
* Vulnerability to development;
* Proximity to other preserves and greenways;
* Land that provides passive resource-based recreational opportunities.
The ESL bond referendum and the Preservation 2000 program have had a major impact on the County's future. Some benefits derived from the purchase of ESLs
include: protection of the biodiversity of plant and animal communities, protection of natural buffers that filter stormwater runoff along our waterways, areas for
residents and visitors to exercise and experience native Florida vegetative communities and wildlife, lands for outdoor classrooms for all ages, and protection of scenic
roadways for travelers. The connection of public and private conservation lands to parks and cultural sites into a greenway network can also create a more livable
community by stimulating eco-tourism and environmentally friendly business, providing alternative modes of transportation, and,isafeguarding ecological systems and
wildlife corridors. The County should continue efforts to connect its cultural and natural resources and provide spaces and amenities that enhance the public use of
these areas while promoting and protecting the County's remaining natural areas.
The approximately $4,000,000 remaining in the Environmentally Significant Lands Bond Fund will cover the County's share of costs to acquire part, but not all, of the
estimated 11 ,000 acres identified as suitable for preservation. The Land Acquisition Selection Committee and the Board of County Commissioners have selected over
11,000 additional acres for purchase. Many of these lands have received approval for matching funds from various Preservation 2000 programs. While it is not
expected that all of these lands can be purchased, the acquisition of all selected lands would require:,an estimated $6,000,000 in local matching funds. Therefore,
following the expenditure of funds generated from the current bond program, natural areas will remain in need of public purchase. A strategy to protect the unaquired
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
30
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
the current and future financial
lands should be developed. This can be addressed through the re-establishment of the Land Acquisition Finance Committee to review
needs of the Environmentally Significant Lands program.
In 1999, the Florida legislature created the Florida Forever program, the successor to Preservation 2000, which will continue the State's effort to protect natural areas
over the next 10 years. Unlike its predecessor, Florida Forever emphasizes land management, water resource development, and acquisition of parks in urban areas
in addition to the protection of native plant and animal species. To participate in the Florida Forever Program, an additional source of local matching funding must
be identified. Some of the ways this could be accomplish include: impact fees for environmental lands, set aside requirements for uplands that provide an alternative
to contribute to a upland mitigation fund, and a second Environmentally Significant Lands bond referendum
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
1990
Objectives, and Policies are modifications of the portions of the Element as adopted in
31
8
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The following Comprehensive Plan Goals
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY SHALL BE PROTECTED, APPROPRIATELY USED, OR CONSERVED IN A MANNER WHICH
MAXIMIZES THEIR FUNCTIONS, AND VALUES.
GOAL 8.1
(NAAQS) for all pollutants measured by the Florida
Air Quality Standards
Air quality within St. Lucie County shall meet or surpass National Ambient
Department of Environmental Protection
Objective
8.1.1
needed
If
methods
quality violations and the proper abatement
Annually review existing air quality reports and confer with the FDEP on the source(s) of air
regulations will be developed to enforce clean air standards
Policy
8.1.1.1
St. Lucie County shall facilitate development that maximizes energy efficiency and sustainability. This shall include implementing Land Development Code
standards that promote the types of land use patterns and development techniques that will reduce the total fossil fuel energy required to build and maintain urban
land uses. This shall include standards that promote mixed land use patterns, urban infill, public transit and provide non-motorized interconnections between
land use types to reduce auto dependance and vehicle miles traveled.
Policy
8.1.1.2
The County land development regulations shall address requirements to reduce the amount of total suspended particulates from construction activities. At a
minimum, construction practices including but not limited to seeding, wetting, and mulching which minimize airborne dust and particulate emission generated
by construction activities shall be undertaken within five (5) working days of completion of clearing work.
Policy
8.1.1.3
The County land development regulations shall address excessive dust and suspended particulates with regard to site clearing and stabilization. vegetation
removal, and other factors associated with construction.
Policy
8.1.1.4
quality report indicate that NAAQS are not being met
FDEP air
pollution
The County shall enact additional land development regulations which prevent air
Policy
8.1.1.5
The County shall continue to enforce land development regulations which require the conservation, appropriate use, and protection of surface waters.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
32
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Objective
8.1.2
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
the following
management including
The County land development regulations shall address comprehensive stormwater
a. The use of stormwater detention and/or retention;
b. Streambank and shoreline buffer zones;
c. General design and construction standards for on-site stormwater management
d. Best management practices for urban and agricultural development; and
e. standards for new discharges to Outstanding Florida Waters.
Policy
8.1.2.1
St. Lucie County shall continue to implement stormwater improvement projects consistent with the Stormwater Management Plan and apply for state and federal
funding programs to supplement local programs in the implementation and construction of stormwater management projects.
Policy
8.1.2.2
Lucie County shall evaluate the use of the following mosquito control techniques during the development of the new stormwater regulations
Maintenance of any required littoral areas and upland buffers;
A one (1) foot, or other appropriate buffer between the bottom of stormwater ponds and the water table; and
Fish ponds for use during low water periods.
St
a.
b.
c.
Policy
8.1.2.3
St. Lucie County shall request from the South Florida Water Management District with appropriate administrative and/or fiscal support, a project which evaluates
the economic and environmental feasibility of a reservoir in the County. At a minimum, the project should consider reductions of freshwater inputs and stormwater
pollutants to the surface waters within the County, as well as conservation of water resources.
Policy
8.1.2.4
The land development regulations stormwater management provisions shall require a vegetated and functional littoral zone to be established as part of the surface
water management system of upland water bodies occurring on development sites.
Policy
8.1.2.5
natural waterways through the site plan review process.
St. Lucie County shall encourage the preservation of natural scenic views of
The County shall not support the reclassification of any surface water body within County boundaries to acknowledge lower water quality conditions, unless
necessary to protect the public health, safety, or welfare. The County shall support any effort to reclassify surface water bodies to accommodate higher standards
Policy
8.1.2.6
Policy
8.1.2.7
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
33
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
restoration projects in the County in order
The County shall take an active role in the funding and development of appropriate attenuation facilities and ecosystem
to eliminate pollutant flows into the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary and the St. Lucie River.
Policy
8.1.2.8
waters
St. Lucie County shall restrict the construction of artificial waterways (canals) which provide access to any of the rivers, streams, creeks, canals, or other
of the State or their tributary systems for the purposes of navigation, aesthetics, recreation, and or enhancement of property.
Policy
8.1.2.9
Management and
Lucie County according to South Florida Water
The County shall maintain, and where unacceptable, improve surface water quality within St
Florida Department of Environmental Protection regulations and standards.
Policy
8.1.2.10
St. Lucie County shall support and assist with projects that further the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Initiative goals to restore and maintain ecosystem
elements most resembling natural, heathy functions of a complex balanced aquatic system.
Policy
8.1.2.1
(flow and
require the protection and maintenance of the natural functions
The County shall continue to enforce land development regulations which
storage) of the 100-year floodplain.
Objective
8.1.3
The County's land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain floodplain, such as reduced parking, conservation easements,
cluster site planning and micrositing of buildings. The County shall continue to strictly enforce regulations that direct development away from floodplains and
provide upland buffers along the floodplain.
Policy
8.1.3.1
The County shall continue to acquire floodplain through the Environmentally Significant Lands Program and cooperative agreements with state and federal
acquisition programs.
Policy
8.1.3.2
Appropriate floodplain management initiatives for unincorporated areas which may impact or be beneficial to other areas within the watersheds shall be developed.
Policy
8.1.3.3
The County shall continue to enforce Wetland Protection Standards within the land development regulations which reqlJire the preservation, creation
and restoration of wetlands in a manner that results in no net loss of function and value within the County's jurisdiction.
Objective
8.1,4
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
34
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
and
development
The land development regulations shall require the following information on site plans for
a. The location and extent of wetlands located on the property;
b. Measures to assure that normal flows and quality of water will be provided to maintain wetlands after
c. Measures to mitigate for any unavoidable wetland impacts proposed as part of the development.
new development
Policy
8.1.4.1
or
The land development regulations shall provide criteria for
a. Project modification measures to reduce wetland loss and degradation. All projects shall be required to maximize design modifications to ensure wetland
impacts are avoided or minimized;
The evaluation of proposed wetland alteration for permitted uses;
The mitigation of wetlands alteration which include, but are not limited to,
enhancement of functions and values provided by existing habitats
wetlands,
additional
creation of
restoration of disturbed wetlands,
the
b.
c.
Policy
8.1.4.2
The County shall continue to require a minimum fifty (50) foot buffer zone of native upland and transitional vegetation along rivers, creeks, and estuaries, to be
maintained from the landward extent of state waters or from Mean High Water of the rivers, creeks, and estuaries; whichever is greater. However. setbacks for
the North Fork of the St. Lucie River shall be governed by those set out in the Land Use Element.
Policy
8.1.4.3
The land development regulations shall require a buffer zone of native upland edge (Le, transitional) vegetation to be planted or maintained around wetland and
deepwater habitats which are constructed or preserved on new development sites. The buffer zone may consist of preserved or planted vegetation but shall
include canopy, understory, and ground cover of native species only. The edge habitat shall begin at the upland limit of any wetland or deepwater habitat. As
a minimum ten square feet of such buffer shall be provided for each linear foot of wetland or deepwater habitat perimeter that lies adjacent to uplands. This upland
edge habitat shall be located such that no less than 50 percent of the total shoreline is buffered by a minimum width of ten feet of upland habitat.
Policy
8.1.4.4
The County shall cooperate with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers on their dredge and fill permitting responsibilities by providing comments where appropriate on any applicable County wetland regulation.
Policy
8.1.4.5
The land development regulations shall include the use of programs to protect or maintain wetlands, such as reduced paving, conservation easements. cluster
site planning and micrositing of buildings.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
35
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.4.6
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The County shall provide appropriate administrative support in the acquisition of additional wetlands and uplands as part of the Savannas State Reserve.
Policy
8.1.4.7
The County shall support wetland mitigation programs by federal and state agencies that will not weaken local regulatory authority and will ensure no net loss
of wetland functions and provide for a measured increase in restored wetland function and acreage. Any wetland impact occurring within St. Lucie County shall
be mitigated within St. Lucie County, unless waived by the Board of County Commissioners
Policy
8.1.4.8
The County shall continue to identify and analyze wetland areas which should be considered environmentally sensitive. The County shall provide for the
protection, appropriate use and conservation of these areas based on criteria which consider the administrative and fiscal constraints of the County. Potential
mechanisms shall include acquisition, restriction or prohibition of activities, and incentives to protect and maintain wetlands.
Policy
8.1.4.9
be permitted
for stormwater run-off, wi
untreated point source discharges Into estuarine and coastal waters
No new
Policy
8.1.4.10
Regulations.
require that setback requirements from open bodies of water are maintained by continued implementation of the Land Development
The County shal
Policy
8.1.4.1
The County shall require the identification of on site wetlands for all new applications for development or construction. Protection of wetlands and other surface
waters is preferred to destruction and mitigation due to the temporal loss of ecological value and uncertainty regarding the ability to recreate certain functions
associated with these features. Mitigation will be considered only after the applicant has complied with the land development code requirements regarding the
avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. In certain cases, mitigation cannot offset impacts sufficiently to approve a project. Such cases may include
activities which degrade Outstanding Florida Waters, adversely impact habitat for listed species, or impact wetlands or other surface waters not likely to be
successfully recreated. The current condition and value of wetlands functions will be considered in determining if proposed adverse impacts and mitigation
measures to off-set wetland impacts are reasonable.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
36
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.4.12
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The County shall require that all on-site wetlands be preserved unless the applicant demonstrates that practicable use of the property cannot not otherwise occur.
If wetland impacts are determined unavoidable, wetland mitigation shall first be provided on-site to the maximum extent possible prior to considering offsite
mitigation. All wetlands and adjacent buffers preserved on the development site shall be protected by a conservation easement that is dedicated to a government
agency or other entity acceptable to the Board of County Commissioners. Said conservation easement shall provide for the protection and perpetual maintenance
of the wetland.
Policy
8.1.4.13
within 90 days, whichever
restoration shall be required before any development permits are issued, or
When it is determined that a wetland violation has occurred
occu rs fi rst.
Policy
8.1.4.14
and special protective measures to ensure that the biological, scenic qualities of
The County shall conduct a study to identify wetland areas of special concern
these wetland areas are maintained.
Policy
8.1.4.15
The County shall continue to enforce land development regulations which require the conservation, appropriate use, and protection of the quality and
quantity of groundwater.
Objective
8.1.5
Lucie County shall enforce the Well Field Protection program standards, including
Assure adequate and safe water supplies to present and future citizens of the County;
Comply with Federal and State regulations in the best interests of the County and its future growth and development
Avoid crisis water supply situations through careful groundwater resources planning and conservation;
Identify and protect the functions of public well field areas, including recharge of those areas, and provide incentives to keep the present and future public
well fields compatible with the needs expressed in a. above;
Ensure that new development is compatible with existing local and regional water supply capabilities; and
Protect present and future public well fields against depletion and contamination through appropriate regulation,
St
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Policy
8.1.5.1
incentives, and cooperative agreements.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
state, and local agencies in monitoring groundwater levels and quality.
37
8
St. Lucie County shall cooperate with federal
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.5.2
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
St. Lucie County shall request appropriate administrative and financial support from the SFWMD to identify potable water supply areas. Upon completion of such
a study, identified areas shall be presented to the County Commission to be adopted as an amendment to the Land Development Code along with policies to
protect the functions of these areas, such as maximizing stormwater retention to minimize drainage.
Policy
8.1.5.3
SFWMD to properly seal unpermitted active drainage wells and abandoned free- flowing artesian wells.
Lucie County shall continue to cooperate with
St
Policy
8.1.5.4
The County shall conduct a study to identify existing and potential threats to the quality of waters within the Taylor Creek Wellfield Protection Area. The study
shall be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with recommendations for any corrective measures required to safeguard the Taylor Creek Wellfield
Protection Area.
Policy
8.1.5.5
the following policies and regulations.
The County shall protect and conserve the natural functions of soils which includes, at a minimum
Objective
8.1.6
The County shall require through the land development regulations the consideration of hydrologic, topographic, and vegetative cover factors in the site plan
review process of proposed developments,
Policy
8.1.6.1
The County shall enforce regulations which prohibit the use of off-road vehicles in areas identified as environmentally sensitive pursuant to policies under
Objective 8.1.12 or that are subject to soil erosion. For the purposes of this policy, the Savannas State Reserve, Atlantic Coastal Ridge, and dunes on Hutchinson
Island shall be considered environmentally sensitive.
Policy
8.1.6.2
erosion
minimizing soi
Assist the St. Lucie County Soil and Water Conservation District in those activities directed at
Policy
8.1.6.3
The County shall coordinate with other agencies and organizations to initiate a data collection program to acquire water quality and turbidity information at five
year intervals, as it relates to soil erosion
Policy
8.1.6.4
for construction on the single family lot shall be limited
a building permit
Clearing of native vegetation on newly platted subdivision lots prior to the issuance of
to that which is necessary for roads, utilities installation and drainage.
Policy
8.1.6.5
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
38
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The County shall continue to regulate mining to ensure the conservation, appropriate use, and protection of minerals in a manner that safeguards
all of the County's remaining natural resources, including ground and surface waters and upland plant communities.
Objective
8.1.7
The land development regulations shall include criteria developed as a result of a continuing monitoring and evaluation program of the County's drainage systems,
wetlands, and other surface waters. Mechanisms to maintain the functioning of drainage systems, wetlands, and surface waters that existed prior to resource
extraction shall be developed.
Policy
8.1.7.1
The land development regulations shall include locally determined criteria for buffers which address sight, sound, and airborne particulate matter between resource
extraction activities and adjacent existing and future land uses. The airborne particulate matter criteria shall also address trucking operations access points to
be utilized as part of the mining operation.
Policy
8.1.7.2
The land development regulations shall include locally determined criteria which specifies suitable conditions for reclamation. These criteria shall address the
potential for landforms capable of supporting diverse and beneficial land uses, time limits on implementation of reclamation, revegetation to minimize wildlife
habitat lost, and shoreline treatments for water bodies which address appropriate safety and environmental considerations.
Policy
8.1.7.3
where practicable
The land development regulations shall encourage the use of recycled materials for roadway construction
Policy
8.1.7.4
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
such an area;
feet of
At a minimum mining shall not be permitted in the following environmentally sensitive areas
a. The North and South Savannas;
b. Atlantic Coastal Ridge;
c. Within any identified environmentally sensitive area or within
d. Coastal High Hazard Area;
e Hutchinson Island; or
1. Environmentally sensitive areas as defined under
two hundred (200)
12
39
Objective 8.
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.7.5
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The County shall protect native upland habitats, and shall prevent the net loss of listed species and their habitat. This shall be accomplished through
the County Environmentally Significant Lands Acquisition program, ongoing natural resource protection programs and the implementation of land
development regulations.
Objective
8.1.8
The County shall reqUIre all nuisance and invasive exotic vegetation (e.g. Brazilian pepper, Australian pine and Melaleuca) be removed and eradicated at the
time of development or redevelopment of a non-residential use and residential site plan projects and, where appropriate, replaced with native or drought tolerant
species that are adapted to existing soil and climatic conditions.
Policy
8.1.8.1
The County shall require the protection of endangered and threatened plant and animal populations and the conservation of the native habitat, including intact
canopy, understory and ground cover; upon which these populations depend for survival. Possible mechanisms would include:
Policy
8.1.8.2
or
Assisting in the application of and compliance with federal and state regulations;
Consulting with appropriate federal and state agencies during development reviews when endangered or threatened species may be onsite;
Establishing management programs with incentives for private landowners to protect or conserve habitats, such as reduced parking, landscaping
credit for park and recreation impact fees;
Using conservation easements, cluster site planning and micrositing of buildings; and
Assisting the state in developing an education program to promote the preservation of endangered and
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
threatened species
for preservation shall be preserved and managed for the long term viability of
Lands acquired through the County's Environmentally Significant Lands Program
the listed species
Policy
8.1.8.3
flexible methods of land
or other
The land development regulations shall include criteria which allow utilization of Transfer of Development Rights (TORs)
development transfer that would direct development from unsuitable lands to those most suitable for active use.
Policy
8.1.8.4
The County shall require all development, to proceed in a manner compatible with the conservation of wildlife and natural systems. All lands within development
sites proposed as conservation and open space areas shall be held in single-ownership by a homeowners association or other entity that will be responsible
for the long-term maintenance of the conservation or open space area. Open space and conservation areas shall not include lands utilized to meet the minimum
lot size requirements.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
40
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.8.5
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
require the use of native or drought tolerant vegetation adapted to existing soil and climatic conditions In landscaping
The County shal
St. Lucie County shall review as part of each Evaluation and Appraisal Review of the Comprehensive Plan, beginning in scheduled review of 2007, the existing
criteria and standards for the protection of the remaining native plant communities within the County. For the purpose of this plan, native plant communities shall
be preserved in viable condition with intact ground cover, understory and canopy. The criteria and standards shall include the preservation of viable native plant
communities occurring within areas required to be maintained in order to meet other minimum development standards, such as setback, open space and
landscaped areas.
Policy
8.1.8.6
Policy
8.1.8.7
The County shall require the submission of an environmental impact report, which addresses concerns for habitat preservation and species protection for projects
greater than ten acres, or that are located on the barrier island, the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, or are adjacent to public conservation lands
Policy
8.1.8.8
The County shall acquire and support the public acquisition of a diversity of natural habitat types to ensure maximum diversity of native wildlife species.
Land use decisions shall consider the effects of development impacts on fish, wildlife and habitat and the cumulative impact of development and redevelopment
upon wildlife habitat. In cases where rare, endangered, threatened or species of special concern are known to be present, a condition of approval will be that
a management plan prepared and approved by appropriate state and federal agencies be completed prior to development approval. Classification of listed fish,
wildlife and habitat is defined by the Federal government, the State of Florida, including the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Florida
Natural Areas Inventory. In addition, this policy shall apply to any species or native habitat the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council determines to be
regionally rare, endangered or threatened with extinction. To ensure adequate protection, protected plants and animals, which cannot be provided with sufficient
undisturbed habitat to maintain the existing population in a healthy, viable state on site, shall be effectively relocated in accordance with local, state and federal
regulations.
Policy
8.1.8.9
Policy
8.1.8.10
The County shall continue to support the County Land Acquisition Selection Committee whose function is to utilize the 1992 Upland and Wetland Inventory and
federal, state, and local resources, to formulate a master acquisition list of lands having native upland habitat. The overall objective is to ensure the preservation
of a minimum of 12,500 acres of the 1992 remaining native upland habitat, with the highest priority being those classified as endangered or threatened as well
as those properties having habitats that are facing destruction as a result of urban development and which recognizes relationships to those areas of native habitat
already under public and/or private preservation,
Policy
8.1.8.1
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
41
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The County shall, by July 1, 2001, reappoint a Land Acquisition Finance Committee whose function shall be to develop a recommendation as to how to fund the
master acquisition list formulated pursuant to Policy 8.1.8.11. The Committee may be organized as a subcommittee of the Land Acquisition Selection Committee
The Committee shall monitor the current and future finances of the Environmentally Significant Lands program
Policy
8.1.8.12
The County shall continue to request assistance in public acquisition of natural areas under federal, state and regional programs including, but not limited to
Preservation 2000, Florida Forever, Florida Communities Trust, Conservation and Recreation Lands, and Save Our Rivers programs.
Policy
8.1.8.13
The County shall provide multiple use opportunities on County-owned natural preserve areas, consistent with natural resource protection and conservation, to
provide for passive recreation, wildlife habitat, watershed protection, erosion control, maintenance or enhancement of water quality, aquifer recharge protection
or other such functions .
Policy
8.1.8.14
The land development regulations shall provide that existing on-site native upland habitat be incorporated into required site plans as a part of open space areas
in lieu of the installation of new plant materials to meet the minimum site plan requirements.
Policy
8.1.8.15
The County shall require clustering of dwelling units and/or open space for land development projects which contain environmentally sensitive lands and critical
habitats within its project boundaries, in order to preserve these resources.
Policy
8.1.8.16
Habitats supporting endangered and threatened species should be preserved, protected and managed so as to continue the value of the habitat to the endangered
and threatened species found to be dependent on it.
Policy
8.1.8.17
status, and distribution of endangered ecosystems and other environmentally sensitive lands when reviewing land
The County shall consider the abundance
use proposals and acquisitions
Policy
8.1.8.18
St. Lucie County shall assist to prevent the destruction of Florida's Cypress Strands through Land Development regulations that prohibit the use of Cypress Mulch
for any non-residential landscaping areas or projects. The use of cypress mulch is also to be discouraged on all residential projects.
Policy
8.1.8.19
for the proper recycling, storage, collection, and disposal or transfer of hazardous
program
The County shall develop a hazardous waste management
materials and wastes.
Objective
8.1.9
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
42
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
transfer facility for household and small quantity generators of hazardous wastes.
The County shall establish a storage
The County shall develop emergency response plans to handle accidents involving hazardous materials or wastes.
Policy
8.1.9.1
The County shall continue the recycling program which includes public education on the beneficial use of hazardous wastes using publicized lists of approved
recyclers and by subscription to the Southern Waste Information Exchange
Policy
8.1.9.2
Policy
8.1.9.3
The County shall continue to support State sponsored Amnesty Days to collect hazardous wastes in the County; and shall evaluate the need for scheduling local
Amnesty Days.
Policy
8.1.9.4
wastes before they enter the landfill and implement an inspection or
waste pesticides, or chemicals from spill cleanups.
The County shall implement an employee training program to properly identify and inspec
screening program to exclude hazardous items such as drums, tanks from unknown sources
Policy
8.1.9.5
region to develop a regional hazardous waste transfer and storage facility and
The County shall participate with the FDEP and other local governments In the
collection network, if appropriate.
Policy
8.1.9.6
The County shall seek funding from FDEP's Local Hazardous Waste Collection Grants Program to manage hazardous wastes.
any owner in seeking funding to respond to any groundwater
and assist
The County shall conduct a Countywide underground storage tank assessment
contamination resulting from leaking tanks
Policy
8.1.9.7
Policy
8.1.9.8
The County shall continue a public education program regarding household hazardous wastes, the proper methods of their disposal and alternative non-hazardous
substitutes in cooperation with schools, news media, and civic organizations, and in conjunction with Amnesty Day awareness programs
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
43
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.9.9
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
require the conservation. appropriate use and protection of current and projected potable water
The County land development regulations shal
sources.
Objective
8.1.10
The County shall prepare and adopt an emergency water management conservation plan in cooperation with SFWMD.
Policy
8.1.10
treatment plants operating above 250,000 gallons per day. Any new
require wastewater reuse plans for new sewage
The land development regulations shal
reuse plan shall be approved by FDEP
Policy
8.1.10.2
regarding various methods of water conservation at the household and small business level
mplement a public education program
The County shal
Policy
8.1.10.3
St. Lucie County shall promote the protection of natural buffer areas to lessen the adverse effects which adjacent developments might have on the
managed conservation areas, such as the Savannas State Preserve, Ft. Pierce Inlet State Park, and lands purchased for preservation purposes through
Federal, State and local land acquisition programs.
Objective
8.1.11
management programs that provide for the protection of native habitats within the County.
St. Lucie County shall cooperate with the FDEP in their
Policy
8.1 .11.1
All appropriate land development regulations required by this Comprehensive Plan shall include the protection of native habitats, including those identified in the
Recreation and Open Space Element.
Policy
8.1.11.2
not degrade the natural
Proposed land use activities adjacent to public natural area conservation and recreation lands, shall be limited to activities that wi
physical, biological, aesthetic, or recreational functions of such lands.
Policy
8.1.11.3
recreation
application materials, shall identify public and semi-public conservation and
Land use applications, including site plan removal and construction permit
lands on or adjacent to the development site
Policy
8.1.11.4
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
44
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The biodiversity of the County's natural areas shall be protected and enhanced through public land acquisition, conservation easements, land
development regulations, and implementation of Management Plans prepared for public owned and managed natural areas. The County shall enact,
enforce, and continually review and update land use regulations and land management plans that provide for the protection of natural resources.
Objective
8.1.12
The County shall continually evaluate the Resource Protection Standards section of the land development regulations and update any portion of the standards
that do not adequately protect the County's natural resources.
Policy
8.1.12
All appropriate land development regulations required by this Comprehensive Plan shall include the protection of environmentally sensitive upland and wetland
areas.
Policy
8.1.12.2
St. Lucie County will continue to cooperate with adjacent local governments to conserve, appropriately use, or protect ecological greenways located within more
than one jurisdiction
Policy
8.1.12.3
In addition to other conservation policies, any proposed development situated within Imperiled and Critically Imperiled vegetative communities, as defined by
the Florida Natural Areas Inventory, including but not limited to scrub, maritime hammock, coastal dune; and all jurisdictional wetlands shall be considered
Environmentally Sensitive Areas for conservation, appropriate use, and protection to further the goals, objectives, and policies of this Element and County land
development regulations. Development proposals within these areas shall adhere to the following conditions
Policy
8.1.12.4
as part of the site plan approval
Proposed development projects within a defined Environmentally Sensitive Area, as described above, must submit
process an Environmental Assessment Report. The report shall contain
a)
An inventory of existing vegetation and wildlife based on a field survey;
An identification of wildlife or vegetation listed as endangered, threatened or a species/plant of special concern:
An assessment of the land that will identify the location of all environmentally sensitive habitat or vegetation and wi
the resource;
An analysis of the functional viability and quality of the various habitats;
A discussion of the impacts, both positive and adverse, on the resources;
A discussion of how the proposed development plan maximizes efforts to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the environment
A discussion concerning whether there is any potential for irreplaceable or irretrievable environmental damage; and
If reasonable use of the property cannot occur without adversely impacting on-site natural resources, a mitigation plan shall be required that
describes actions to be taken that replace those functions and values of the resource as a result of impacting the resource
to protect
contain a plan
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
45
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
require a clustering of allowable density to more suitable areas for
Those Environmentally Sensitive Areas identified as worthy of preservation may
development. Only footpaths or entryways will be permitted in such areas.
b)
Proposed site clearing activities within the known range of endangered or threatened species or where such species are expected to occur based upon habitat
suitability and species ranges shall be surveyed by qualified environmental consultants and/or government ecologists prior to approval and commencement of
such activities to determine whether or not populations of endangered, threatened or plant and animal species of special concern occur.
Policy
8.1.12.5
Where feasible, the County shall protect critical habitat through acquisition, establishment of public or private conservation easements, purchase of development
rights, or through other available means as deemed appropriate.
Policy
8.1.12.6
No fill or regrading of property shall be allowed except to establish required road elevations for driveways, unless the environmental assessment shows that fi
or regrading will not adversely affect the environment and fill is available on site.
Policy
8.1.12.7
All native upland and wetland habitats, including Environmentally Sensitive Areas as defined in Policy 8.1.12.5, to be preserved as part of a development project
shall be protected through a conservation easement or other method acceptable to the County. The proposed preservation areas shall be designated on all site
plan and permit application materials.
Policy
8.1.12.8
St. Lucie County shall support nature based eco-tourism activities on public preserves that are primarily designed for appreciation of the County's native habitats
and wildlife species that can be accomplished in a manner that does not disrupt wildlife or negatively impact their habitat. The type of recreational activity deemed
appropriate for the County's public preserves will depend on the type of native vegetative community on the site. This includes, but is not limited to, hiking,
wilderness camping, canoeing, swimming, and wildlife viewing. Activities centers, including, educational centers, museums, and botanical centers will be
provided at suitable locations throughout the County. All eco-tourism facilities shall be operated in a manner that does not degrade or reduce the inherent natural
functions and values of the natural resources utilized for the eco-tourism use. County owned or managed lands purchased through public land acquisition
programs targeting the protection of the natural resources shall only provide access and recreational opportunities that can be provided without degradation of
the native plant communities and listed plant and animal species values.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
46
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.12.9
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
impacts
If
impacts which threaten natural areas.
Lands purchased through the County's Environmentally Significant Lands program shall be monitored for visitor
to natural areas are identified a plan shall be prepared to mitigate or eliminate the negative impacts.
Policy
8.1.12.10
The County shall develop a greenway plan to facilitate the implementation of ecological and recreational greenways within its jurisdiction. At a
minimum the plan shall include a map of existing and proposed greenways, identify gaps in the greenway network, and set forth strategies for the
maintenance and expansion of the existing network.
Objective
8.1.13
The County shall coordinate with the state and federal land acquisition programs to encourage connectivity between privately and publicly owned recreational
and conservation lands.
Policy
8.1.13
state, federal. and private organizations to plan and assemble the greenway network.
The County shall pursue grants from local
The County shall encourage multi-use of greenways, as appropriate, to facilitate the development of shared recreation and wildlife corridor ecological greenways.
Policy
8.1.13.2
Non-
The County shall establish guidelines within the Land Development Code that facilitate usable open space that is accessible to cyclists and pedestrians
paved bicycle and pedestrian access shall be encouraged between uses where paved access would negatively impact existing habitats.
Policy
8.1.13.3
Policy
8.1.13.4
roads, sidewalks, bicycle paths, pedestrian
encourage planting standards that promote
the extent practicable.
The County shall develop a beautification and improvement program for areas used by the general public
walkways, parks and open space areas) to enhance vehicular and non-vehicular movements. The program
the use of appropriate native plants in road and utility rights-of-way to restore the original native plant community to
(e.g.
shal
Policy
8.1.13.5
rights-of-way as wildlife corridors and pedestrian areas.
ink existing public parks,
utilize, where possible, existing
The County shall coordinate with appropriate state and federal agencies to identify natural area greenways and wildlife corridors to
preserve areas and similar areas for conservation and habitat preservation purposes.
The County shal
Policy
8.1.13.6
Policy
8.1.13.7
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
47
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The County shall consider incentives that encourage the granting of conservation easements for natural linear greenways and/or
Policy
8.1.13.8
scenic drives.
The County shall support the reconnection of impounded wetlands to the Indian River Lagoon to improve the productivity of estuaries; and the implementation
of adaptive management strategies for saltwater marshes and mangrove systems which are consistent with Best Management Practices for mosquito control.
Policy
8.1.13.9
The County shall promote the maintenance of native plant communities In a contiguous manner to provide wildlife corridors and pedestrian pathways.
St. Lucie County shall, by December 2004, amend its land development regulations to include a locally developed and regulated wetland classification
system for purposes of protecting wetland functions and values within the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County based upon a wetland
classification survey of all areas in the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County to be completed by July 2004, consistent with the Policies cited
below.
Policy
8.1.13.10
Objective
8.1.14
As a part of the locally developed and regulated wetland classification system described in Objective 8.1.14. St. Lucie County shall use the following general
classification system for the purposes of protecting wetland functions and values within the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County. This classification system
is to include a qualitative assessment of the value of the wetlands and shall be based upon the standard WRAP analysis methods employed by the State of
Florida.
Policy
8.1.14.
Category I wetlands - shall include any wetlands having hydrological connection to natural surface water bodies; any isolated wetland 20 acres or larger
or wetlands containing Strategic Habitat Conservation Areas as identified by the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission.
a)
Category II wetlands - shall include any isolated wetlands which have been connected to other surface water drainage and are greater than or equal
to five acres, or are less than 20 acres and do not qualify as Category I wetlands
b)
wetlands.
St. Lucie County shall require identification of Category I, II, and III wetlands prior to staff review of all land development proposals, including future land use,
zoning, site plan or construction applications. Except for, those development proposals seeking a Final Development Order approval, as defined under Policy
11.1.3.6, a formal jurisdictional line determination shall not be required as part of this review.
or
five (5) acres that do not qualify as Category
shall include isolated wetlands less than
wetlands
Category
c)
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
48
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
of standards and regulations to enforce
St. Lucie County shall. by December 2004, amend its land development regulations to provide for the implementation
this policy.
except as follows
wetland or any wetland buffer associated with these wetlands
or
n a Category
development
The County shall not permit
Policy
8.1 .14.2
Clearing and lor constructing of walking trails;
a)
management shelters, footbridges, observation desks
boardwalks/catwalks for direct access to water bodies; construction of wildlife
structures not requiring a dredge or fill for their placement; and
wastewater infrastructure as needed to provide public service
water or
Construction of
and simila
Clearing and/or construction of electric/ cable utility, stormwater management
that does not impair the long term viability of the wetland system
b)
c)
for the above activities
as necessary
required wetland buffer.
wetlands, and the
and
Alteration is permissible within Category
d)
No other reasonable alternative exists and avoidance cannot be achieved;
policies of the Comprehensive Plan
Such activity complies with the requirements of all Federal, State and Local agencies claiming jurisdiction over wetland alteration and adequate
mitigation of any adverse hydrological and physical alterations is provided.
Such activity is consistent with other
2.
3.
.14.3;
percent of any Category I wetland is impacted, except as noted in Policy 8.
No more than
4.
.14.3
mpacted, except as noted in Policy 8.
15 percent of any Category II wetland is
No more than
5.
Appropriate mitigation is provided
In addition to the alteration provisions of Policy 8.1.14.3(c), alteration of a Category I or II wetland may be allowed when no other reasonable alternative exists
and avoidance and minimization of impacts cannot otherwise be achieved. Any provision of this Comprehensive Plan or the land development code related to
the preservation of a Category I or II wetland that precludes all reasonable economically viable use of the property or would prohibit a reasonable public use
of the property and which if applied would result in a compensable taking of the property may be waived to the extent necessary to provide the minimum
6.
Policy
8.1.14.3
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
49
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
reasonable use, public or private, of the property. These provisions shall only be waived following the review and approval of the Board of County Commissioners,
or their designee, in a manner set forth in the Land Development Code. The standards for the granting of any waiver shall be set forth in the Land Development
Code and shall be consistent with the general standards and intent of the Comprehensive Plan
Alteration of a Category III wetland may be allowed when no reasonable alternative exists and avoidance and minimization of impacts cannot be achieved Any
provision of this Comprehensive Plan or the land development code related to the preservation of a Category III wetland that precludes all reasonable
economically viable use of the property or would prohibit a reasonable public use of the property and which if applied would result in a compensable taking of
the property may be waived to the extent necessary to provide the minimum reasonable use, public or private, of the property. These provisions shall only be
waived following the review and approval of the Board of County Commissioners, or their designee, in a manner set forth in the Land Development Code. The
standards for the granting of any waiver shall be set forth in the Land Development Code and shall be consistent with the general standards and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.14.4
The County shall require a minimum 50-foot buffer between Category I or II wetlands and new development activity in order to protect water quality, preserve
natural functions, and preserve wildlife habitat. The buffer, as measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line, shall be maintained in a natural vegetative
state and be free of exotic and nuisance species as defined by the Florida Pest Council.
Policy
8.1.14.5
All new development on lots less than 5 acres and not containing a Category I or II wetland shall provide a minimum 25-foot buffer between the wetland
jurisdictional line and the area of development. The buffer, as measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line, shall be maintained in a natural vegetative
state and be free of exotic and nuisance species as defined by the Florida Pest Council. No development shall occur within the wetland buffer except as identified
in 8.1.14.2.
Policy
8.1.14.6
St. Lucie County shall assess the specific and cumulative impacts of all proposed new development or redevelopment activities, including single family building
permits, on all wetlands that may be located on the property in order to ensure that the natural functions of the wetlands are protected and conserved through
the implementation of wetland protection standards which shall include consideration of the types, values, functions, sizes, conditions, and locations of wetlands.
Policy
8.1.14.7
Removal, encroachment, or alternation of Category III wetlands may be allowed with the extent of such activities being determined on a case- by-case basis in
conjunction with applicable regulatory agencies and in the interest of public benefit.
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
50
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
8.1.14.8
Conservation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
51
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Conservation -
Revised:
52
8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CHAPTER 9
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
Prepared by:
St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Department of Growth Management
ADOPTED - January 9, 1990
REVISED - March 5, 2002 (Ord. 02-008)
REVISED - January 6, 2004 (Compliance Agreement)
9-1
9-5
9-1
9-1
9-1
9-2
9-2
9-8
9-8
9-10
9-10
9-11
9-12
9-14
9-4
9-6
9-7
9-9
9-10
2
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
T ABLE OF CONTENTS
NTRODUCTION ............................................ .
OVERVIEW OF CURRENT CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. CURRENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. OPEN SPACES: ..........................................................
D. SCHOOL FACILITIES: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E. OTHER PRIMARY RECREATION FACILITIES: ..................................
NEEDS ANALYSIS ......................................................................
A. SERVICE POPULATION PROJECTIONS: ......................................
B. RECOMMENDED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS ...........................................
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES ......................................................
LIST OF TABLES
Table 9-1 Recreational Facilities ......................................................
Table 9-2 Ft. Pierce Parks ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 9-3 Port St. Lucie Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 9-4 St. Lucie County Golf Courses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Table 9-5 1990 and Projected Populations for Unincorporated St. Lucie County, Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie. and St. Lucie Village
Table 9-6 Desired Outdoor Recreation Standards for St. Lucie County .........
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 9-1 Recreational Facilities
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
INTRODUCTION
The Recreation and Open Space Element presents a review of the current recreation facilities and opportunities in St. Lucie County, and includes Level of Service
Standards and Goals, Objectives and Policies designed to assist the County in meeting the future recreation needs of its residents and visitors
Recreation facilities are important components of a community's physical development pattern. They contribute to the attractiveness of the area, as well as the health
and well-being of its citizens. St. Lucie County's location along the Atlantic Ocean provides abundant water-oriented recreational opportunities. The County has
historically placed the highest emphasis of its recreation facility development on those water-oriented opportunities, with non-water oriented development being
primarily limited to ballfield development. However, it is important that the County provide and maintain a range of recreational facilities and open space areas for all
persons having diverse recreational interests and needs, and not focus all of its efforts on the construction of ballfields and water related activities.
OVERVIEW OF CURRENT CONDITIONS
The St. Lucie County Parks and Recreation Department operates facilities and conducts programs throughout the County. These activities are conducted at
County-owned recreational facilities which are under the management of the Parks and Recreation Department. Several park facilities within the City of Ft. Pierce
are under the maintenance responsibility of the City; however, program administration has, through an interlocal agreement, been delegated to the County. The City
of Port St. Lucie operates and maintains their own park facilities and programs
n addition to the local facilities, the State of Florida owns/operates/administers approximately 8,000 acres of recreational and open space lands within the County.
the
Additional recreation opportunities are available at various school sites within the County. In one Instance, joint facilities have been developed. In other cases
public may use school facilities during non-school hours without any formal agreements in place .
CURRENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
A,
current classifications)
5 for
Lucie County have in the past been loosely grouped into the following categories (see pp 9-13,14, and
Special Facility
o
Beach Park
Environmental Land
Regional Park
o
o
o
Beach Access
Community Park
Neighborhood Park
Recreational facilities in St
o
o
o
These categories have generally been patterned to follow the class groupings put forward by the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA)
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES
Table 9-1 summarizes existing recreation and open space facilities owned, operated, and maintained by St. Lucie County, as well as those facilities operated by the
State of Florida within the County. The location of the facilities listed in Table 9-1 is indicated on Map 9-1. This inventory was compiled by the St. Lucie County
Department of Parks and Recreation and the St. Lucie County Department of Community Development.
B
further classifies these recreational facilities as either resource or activity based or both
Resource based, or passive, facilities are those recreation facilities which are based on natural, historic, or archaeological resources. These facilities usually
offer relatively passive forms of recreation which are based on the particular resource. Camping, fishing, hiking, canoeing, birdwatching, and museum or
historic tours are examples.
Table 9-1
.
Activity based recreation facilities usually have specific facilities for active recreation. such as athletic fields, ball diamonds, tennis courts. or swimming access
points.
.
As Table 9-1 indicates, St. Lucie County contains 7,499 acres of activity based recreation and open space lands. Regional resource based parks, which include the
beach accesses, beach parks, and Environmentally Significant Lands purchased since the establishment of the ESL program, total 8,500 acres. The Environmentally
Significant Lands program has been responsible for the acquisition of 5,807 acres of land in St. Lucie County. Ownership of and responsibility for the management
of the recreational lands in St. Lucie County falls to a mixture of state and local agencies.
Pierce and Table 9-3 for the City of Port St. Lucie.
These County facilities are supplemented by city facilities as shown In Table 9-2 and Map 9-2 for the City of Ft
parks in St. Lucie County. These are
Jack Island State Park (958.0 acres)
Ft. Pierce Inlet State Recreation Area (338.0 acres)
Avalon Tract (571.0 acres)
South Savannas (4855.0 acres)
John Brooks Park (406.8 acres)
five major
The State of Florida owns
o
o
o
o
o
passive
Open space areas are undeveloped lands suitable for
OPEN SPACES
Several of the recreation facilities mentioned above have been classified as open space areas
recreation or conservation uses.
C
In 1994, the citizens of St. Lucie County approved a 20 million dollar bond issue to purchase environmentally significant lands for preservation and passive recreational
uses. The County has been able to leverage that amount into 40 to 60 million dollars of purchasing power, primarily through funding partnerships with state agencies
funded through the P2000 program. Significant areas have been purchased along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, on Hutchinson Island, in the Savannas, and
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-3
isted in Table 9-1
in the western portion of the County. These areas are
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-4
Table 9-1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Table 9-1
...., F....1ty Open ... H8IId1cap Re" Play Feel Dune ComIRec: 0wnen/I1p Mgml ~
~ F....1ty Type Aern -- FIelda CouIta PooIa PnJng A_" R_ Equip IIheItera IIho-. ae.ctl Crou c.n18r
SpedeI FIlCiIltea
SI He.IhcoI. Bolanlcal Garden AcIivIty 3.5 50 Ves SLC Heelhcl
52 Indrio School Houae AcIivIty . 8.1 Ves Ves Ves Ves SLC
53 Old Fort PIcnIc SIte Ac:liviIy 2.3 10 SlC FP
54 SI. Lucie CounIy CIvtc Center Ac:tlvlty 8 365 Ves v.. Ves SLC
55 SI. Lucie CounIy SpqIIs Complex AcIi.ity 100 7 2600 Ves Ves Ves SLC
58 lawnwood SpoI18 ~.x AcIivIty 117.4 7 10 1600 Ves Ves 3 Yes SlC Exan:lse Tra"
S7 H_I Museum ActivIty 20 Yes Ves SLC
58 IACC Auditorium Ac:liviIy Yes Yes Yes
~I 239.3 14 10 0 4645 Yes 3 0 0
HelghbolhoOd PIIrlls AudIlorium
HI CoIlna Parle Aclivlty 0.8 Ves I SLC
N2 Indian RIver Estates Ac:tlvlty 8 20 Yes Yes Yes SlC
H3 Maravilla ActivIty 8.1 2 2 22 Ves Ves Yes Ves SLC
N4 Paradise ActivIty 1.7 1 1 20 Yes Ve. Yes SLC
H5 Sheraton Plaza Ac:liviIy 5.7 1 I 40 Y., Yes SlC SLC
H8 North 25th ANa Ac:tlvlty 7.3 SLC
SublolaI 30.4 4 4 102 1 0 0
Ileec:h Access
BAl BUnd Creek Resource 14 16 500 FPl SlC
BA2 Exch8nge Parle Resource 4.3 16 285 SLC
BA3 Hennan', Bay Resource I 16 100 I SlC SLC
BM Middle Cove ~rce 1 16 100 I SLC SlC
BAS Normandy beech R....rce 1 14 100 I SLC SLC
BAlI Avalon (South beech) Resource 0.2 10 80 SlC Fla
BA7 See Oat, Dr. R....rce 0.4 70 SLC
BAlI Bryn M.wr (pn...., R.-.rce 1.3 300
BA9 ShorewInds Dr. Resource 0.2 40
BAl0 MoorlngIln. Resource 0.4 70
BAIl flamingo Blvd R....rce 0.2 40 SLC
SWlotaI 24 0 0 0 88 0 1645 3
Ileac:h P.rlls
BPI W.velend Resource 3.6 65 Ves 1 270 1 SLC SLC
BP2 Frederlc:k Douglass R....rce 13.7 50 Yes 3 1 1040 SLC SLC
BP3 South Ileec:h Boardwalk ~rce 5.8 94 Ves Ves 4 1 1240 SLC FTP
BP4 WaI10n Roc:lcI R.source 24 150 Ves Ves 2 3388 3 FP&L SLC
BPS Pepper Ileac:h Resource 52.4 3 254 Yes 3 Ves 16 1 1380 5 Fla SLC Museum. FIshIng PIer,Dod
BPS Dolman Beach R....rce 143.7 Yes Ves 1765 SlC SLC
BP7 Ocean Bay Resource Yes SLC SLC
SWlotaI 243.2 0 3 0 613 25 ~ 8
Cormu1I1y P.rk,
Cl Martin Luller KIng Ac:tlvlty FTP SLC
C2 Ell' P.rk Ac:liviIy 12.4 7 120 Ves I SLC
C3 Horallo Grtsby AcIivIty 8.3 2 200 Ve. v., FTP
C4 Nor1hpoI1 Msrlna Island AcIivIty 18 80 Ves SLC H,ture TreH - Boal Ramp
C5 lakewood P.rk AcIivIty 7.3 I 5 45 Ves Ves Yes 2 SLC
C8 Uncoln Parle Com Center AcIivIty 1.4 2 6 Yes Ves Yes SLC
C7 11ou, Ells MemoI1aI Park AcIivIty 15.7 2 3 200 Yes Yes Ves 1 FTP SLC
C8 Spoflsman', P.rk Weal AcIivIty 8.5 2 41 Ves Ves PSl SLC Track
C9 WaI10n CommunI1y Center Ac:tlvIty 0.9 30 Ves Ves Ye, SLC
CIO WhIle City P.rk ActivIty 17 40 Yes Ve. Ves 5 SLC SLC
Cll While City School P.rk Aclivlty 7.8 3 20 Ves Ves
C12 ~an River Velerans Mem Ac:liviIy 14.9 130 ' Ves Ves SLC Amphlthe.t~·
Table 9-1
... F.....1Iy ()pen .. Hllnellcep "'" ...., Feet Dune ComIIlec o-.hlp Ygml Other
Rerer.- F....1Iy Tm A_ -- FIelcI8 Courta Pool. PRIng A...... 11_ Equip ~--- BeeCh Crou Center
C13 North Cau_.Y AcIlvIly 11.5 30 V.. V.. 1 SlC 5LC IIœt~
C14 South Ca.......y AclIvlty 16.6 30 V.. 6 SlC SlC 1Iœ1~
CIS HIIrbor Poinle 20 5LC 5LC
CIS BIllc:kPurt ActlvlIy 2 40 V.. V.. 5LC IIœI Ramp
Subtotal 160.3 15 13 1 992 16 0 0
lIeg1ona1 P.rke
RI Jeck I...nd AcIlvIly 958 V.. 15 Fie FIe
R2 Fl. PI...,. InIel AcIlvIly 250 V.. 350 V.. FIe FIe
R3 John IlIooke AcIlvIly 406.8 V.. 40 FIe 5LC
R4 South SlIvennehe AcIlvIly 4855 V.. 10 Fie FIe
R5 SlIvennehe Rec Arell ActIvlIy 600 V.. 50 V.. V.. 2 V.. FIe 5LC Canwound
SIØIobII 7069.8 0 0 0 465 2 0 0
ESt.
ESl.l BInd Creek Reeoun:e 409 V.. V.. 6441 FIe 5LC
ES1.2 IIllIIr PoInt R.-m:e 13 V_ 5LC 5LC
ES1.3 G..... Cove 5wamp R.-m:e 513 V.. SlC 5LC
ESt.4 King'. leIend RetKlun:e 173 V.. SLC 5LC
ES1.5 .- North SlIvennehe Reeoun:e 278 V_ Sl.C 5LC Tre"
ESl.6 51. Luc:ill P-... R........,. 742 V_ 5LC 5LC
ESt.7 OlIkHllnmoc:k R......,. 65 V.. PSI. PSI.
ESlB Oceen 8lIy Reeoun:e 15 V_ 5LC 5LC
ESl.9 IllueIIeId Rench R._ 3265 V_ 5LC 5LC
ESl.l0 North Fork P~ Reeoun:e 1345 V_ FIe Fie
ESl.l1 W.1ton Scnlb R.-m:e 33 V.. Ves V.. I 5LC SlC
ESl.12 Avelon lNofthIlMd1) R.-m:e 571 V.. 1 FIe FIe
0.-..'. I...nd Reeoun:e 255 V..
Sublolal 7697 0 0 0 0 1 6441 1
Tolal 15464 33 30 2 6905 46 17149 13
NoIn:
51. Lude County Sc:hool DielrIcl ell.. ... oIlen .v_ lor recrMtlon. ThIs ell.. hllve not been lnvenlof1ed whe.. on formel .gr""",,,", .xllla.
Tha County .... no reguIatlon _ would prohibit fishing wI1hIn any _ .....
Hunting la not pannlIlacI on )ltlIlc lend wI1hIn 51. Lude County.
_Ol/Z1111t
ßS
'"
'"
Orange
Ave
"
cr:
u
cr:
~i
is
"
I
",,'
m
u
Sunshine
Slate
Parkway
Figure
JCle nty
E n lities
legend
I Special Facilities
Þ Facilities
¡. Park Facilities
Environmentally Sensitive
lands Areas
t
N
A IRPO~~
~
ST. LUCIE BLVD.
LEGEND
CITY 1(1)1
COUNTY IIDI CITY LlllITS LINE
_ CITY P~RKS
PARK INDEX
~
tJ)
~
p..,
¡.:¡
U
p:::
¡.:¡
H
p..,
.
H
µ..
N
I
C'I
¡.:¡
.....:l
:Q
<
H
I. SOUTH eTH STREET PARK
2.DRC~WL~ND P~RK
3. "~IR"~Y P~RK
4.CLIDDEN PARK
6. COODWIN P~RK
e.HAYES ROAD PARK
7.ILOUS ELLIS P~RK
8. SA yeEE P~RK
8.I£%TY PARK
10. XïWBERL Y BERCALIS PARK
tl. MELODY L~NE RIVERW ALK PARK
12. NORTH 10TH STREET PARK
13. PINECREST PARK
14. PINEll'OOD P~RK
IS. PIONEER P~RK
UI. ROT~RY P~RI:
17. SOUTH ZllTH STRCET PARK
Ie. SURP'SID£ PARK
CITY
'CU eM "~""''''''''~...-&.L...u....
PARKS
...... .,.;.........,.
t&
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
PARK
Avalon Beach Access
Coconut Drive Park
Coon Island Bird Sanctuary
Martin Luther King Park
Fairway Drive
Garden Center
Goodwin Botanical Park
Gulfstream Beach Crossing
Hayes Road Park
Hills Court Recreation
Indian River Memorial
Jaycee Park
Jetty Park
Kimberly Bergalis Park
Melody Lane Park
lolus Ellis Park
Pinecrest Subdivision Park
Pinewood Park
Pioneer Park
Porpoise Beach Crossing
Rotary Park
St. Lucie Beach Access
Savann~hs
Surfside Park
South 8th Street Park
North 10th Street Park
South 29th Street Park
Table 9-2
Ft. Pierce
City Parks
ACREAGE
0.22
o.n
30.67
17.40
0.19
4.45
3.70
0.28
0.35
4.55
15.66
17.16
1.80
2.18
0.46
16.02
1.98
3.69
8.80
0.20
5.50
0.23
467.33
2.50
0.72
1.44
1.92
610.17 TOTAL
TABLE 9-3: Publicly Owned and Developed/Maintained Park or Recreation Sites within the City
NAMEIlOCA TION SIZE IN ACRES DESIGNATION NOTES
Kiwanis Park 3.08 SNP - AlP
PSl Sec. 3 Blk 426 Tract A
Harborview Park 4.80 SNP-P
PSl Sec. 6 Tract A
Turtle Run Park 10.00 lNP - AlP
PSl Sec. 9 Tract E
Ooat Street Park 2.44 SNP-P
PSl Sec. 13 Blk 588 All
F.R.I.E.N.D.S. Park 5.54 SNP - P
PSl Sec. 18 Tract C
Council on Aging Community Center 8.87 SNP/CP - AlP leased to Council on
PSl Sec. 18 Tract K Aging
Girl Scout Friendship Park 8.38 LNP -AlP
PSl Sec. 25 Blk 7 Tract B
Swan Park 6.26 CP-A
PSl Sec. 27 Blk 80 Tract C
Jaycee Park 6.43 LNP - AlP PSL Jaycees lease a
PSl Sec. 28 Blk 227 Tract A 70' x 100' parcel
Whispering Pines Park 30.00 CP-A City leases from school
PSL Sec. 42 Tract F board
Windmill Point Park 5.00 LNP - A school owns, mutual use
PSl Sec. 42 Tract F with city
Rotary Park 8.30 LNP - AlP
PSL Sec. 49 Tracts A, B
Sandhill Crane Park 19.01 CP . AlP
PSL Sec. 53 Tract B
Recreation Center 1.00 SNP - AlP
PSL Sec. 60 Tract K.
Sportsmans West Overflow Parking 4.59 parking leased to county
PSl Sec. 66 Tracts A-1, A-2
Sportsmans West Park 8.52 LNP - A leased to county
plo 529 T36 R40
Sportsmans Park 15.95 CP . AlP
plo 529 T36 R40
Gulfstream Park 5.81 SNP - P
FP Unit 1 Tract B
Loyalty Park 0.82 SNP·P
SPSL Unit 1 Tract A
NAMEIlOCA TION SIZE IN ACRES DESIGNATION NOTES
l yngate Park 16.01 CP - AlP
SPSl Unit 16 Tracts B, C
Veteran's Memorial Park at Rivergate 27.73 CP - P
plo S10 T37 R40
McChesney Park 11.28 CP - AlP
SlW Parcel 18-A
Total Developed/Maintained Park or
Recreation Sites - 22
209.82
(
SNP - Small Neighborhood Park
lNP - large Neighborhood Park
CP - Community Park
P - Predominately passive Recreation
A - Active Recreation
· See inventory data for other SNP sites which are not developed, but are designated for Open Space
Recreation, or Open Space Conservation.
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-7
Table 9-3 Port St. Lucie Parks
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The Indian River Lagoon, from Vero Beach to Jensen Beach, (exclusive of the Port of Ft. Pierce), and the North Fork of the St. Lucie River are identified as Outstanding
Florida Waters. These bodies of water represent a vitally unique resource/activity based recreation resource to the community. For the purposes of this element these
areas are considered as open space. Further elaboration on them in regard to their environmental and economic influences on the community can be found in the
Coastal Management and Conservation Elements of this Comprehensive Plan.
SCHOOL FACILITIES
The playgrounds and sports activity areas found at the community's schools provide excellent recreation opportunities on a neighborhood service level. The St. Lucie
County School Board operates 32 schools; five high schools, five middle schools, and 19 elementary schools. In addition, there are three exceptional education
centers existing or under construction. Public access to the high school grounds and their potential for use as recreational facilities is presently restricted due to
security fencing but could be made available for the public. With the exception of a few sites within the City of Ft. Pierce, all other County School Facilities are not
fenced, leaving their open areas available for public use during non-school hours.
D.
St. Lucie County and the School Board have constructed lighted tennis and basketball facilities as well as a lighted softball/little league field at the White City
Elementary School Site. Through the construction of the new White City school, the field was shortened so that use as a softball field is not recommended. The field
is adequate for little league practice. These facilities are utilized by the students during the school hours and are then available to the general public for league softball
and other activities. Primary maintenance of the recreation facilities is the responsibility of the County. Development of school parks such as this represents a viable,
land efficient method for meeting the community's neighborhood park needs.
The public high school and Magnet School of the Arts auditoriums are also leaseable for public events
OTHER PRIMARY RECREATION FACILITIES
Golf courses are an important component in the recreational activities of both resident and visitor to the South Florida region. There is presently one public golf course
(Fairwinds) in the County. There are also 12 private golf courses which, depending upon the season, permit general public play. Table 9-4 identifies the existing golf
courses and whether public play is permitted.
E.
The St. Lucie Sports Complex, located in Port St. Lucie, and the auditorium at Indian River Community College in Ft. Pierce, are under the special facility category.
These facilities are available to the public, through leasing agreements, for concerts, special promotion events, productions, ball camps and other sporting events.
In addition to public facilities, St. Lucie County has a number of large developments that have private recreational facilities such as golf courses, tennis courts, pools,
and trails. Most residential development projects that use the Planned Unit Development zoning furnish some type of recreational facilities for their residents. These
facilities satisfy some proportion of the total recreation demand for the residents of these communities.
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TABLE 9-4
Lucie County Golf Courses
st.
Semi-Private
Private
Public
# Holes
Course Name
X (2)
9
Spanish Lakes
X(2)
9
Spanish Lakes Golf Village
X (2)
18
Spanish Lakes County Club Village
X (2)
18
Savannah Club PUD
X (2)
18
Pantherwood PUD
X (2)
36
Club Med
X (2)
36
Harbour Ridge Yacht & C. Club
X (2)
18
The Floridian
X (2)
18
PGA Village/ The Legacy
X (2)
54
PGA Village/ The Reserve
X (2)
18
PGAJ St. Lucie West CC
X (2)
9
Island Dunes CC
X (2)
18
Indian Pines CC
x
18
ndian Hills CC
x
Seasonal play denotes short term memberships (summer or winter) and the ability to play the course on a daily
greens fee only basis. Membership not always required but nonmembers must defer to members for sCheduling of
available time.
18
Fairwinds
NOTES:
Course developed in conjunction with private residential community. Course operation not always associated with
residential developments, however access to clubhouse facility often through security controlled community
entrance.
2:
Departments
Source: Sl. Lucie County Leisure Services and Community Developmen
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-9
SI. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
NEEDS ANALYSIS
SERVICE POPULATION PROJECTIONS
St. Lucie County has not conducted any surveys on the present demand for recreation and open space facilities. In order to assess the present need for these
facilities, ratios have been used which are based, in part, upon national standards and, in part, upon the desired standards of the St. Lucie County Recreation Advisory
Board.
A.
Population estimates and projections for St. Lucie County from the year 1990 to 2010 are shown in Table 9-5. For the purposes of this Plan, the future recreation
demand relative to neighborhood and community parks are based upon the unincorporated County population only. The future recreation demand relative to regional
facilities and open space is based upon the County population as a whole. However, it is recognized that interlocal agreements and coordination between the County
and the Cities of Ft. Pierce and Port St. Lucie will enhance the recreational opportunities for residents throughout the County.
TABLE 9~5
1990 AndProjectedPoÞLlI~ti9P$ For Unincorporated St. Lucie County, Ft.Pierç~jPói't§.~ Lucie, àl"\çf st. Lucie. VUlage
Jurisdiction E::¡~ir'!iå~".ª 1997populåticln Rf9Ifil¢!ed2Ql0f Ropulå!iqn
Unincorporated County 63,058 70,951 76,246
72,764' 77,400*
Ft. Pierce 37,484 37,210 37,097
Port St. Lucie 77,985 111,571 130,452
St. Lucie Village 606 602 594
Total 179,133 220,334 244,389
with
As Table 9-5 indicates, the total County-wide permanent population is ·expected to increase from 179,133 in 1997 to 244,389 by the year 2010, an increase of 36.4%.
The unincorporated areas of the County are expected to account for 31.5% of the total population. However, in the short term planning period from 1997 to 2005,
the unincorporated County population is expected to climb from 63,058 to 70,951. an increase of 12.5%.
'1990 u.S. Census (consistent
University of Florida Bureau of Business and Economic Research and Shimburg Center for Affordable Housing;
1997 Florida Estimates of Population
Housing Element)
Source:
It should be noted that, for the purpose of this Plan, only the permanent population estimates are being utilized. Seasonal population influences on the County's
recreational services have historically occurred when the local demand/use for those facilities is at its lowest. Stated simply, the local population does not use the
beach a lot in the winter and the seasonal visitor does not use the softball fields in the summer. So long as this trend continues, and St. Lucie County foresees no
changes in the seasonal visitation patterns for this area, the permanent population estimates will be those utilized for determining facility needs
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-10
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
RECOMMENDED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
In November 1987, the St. Lucie County Recreation Advisory Board developed an updated classification system for recreational space. Except for the elimination
of the mini or pocket park, the County is not proposing changes to the existing system. Mini- parks are difficult and expensive to maintain. Existing mini- parks have
been included in the neighborhood or beach access category as appropriate.
B
The classification system provides the basis for determining future level of service standards
The system. as approved by the Recreation Advisory Board, has three major categories which have, in turn, been further broken down mto sub-categories as follows
Recreational facilities that serve a limited population size and that are located close to residential areas
Neighborhood Recreation Area: Area for intense and diverse recreational activities that may include, but are not limited to, field games, court
games, sport fields, playground apparatus areas, picnic areas, landscaping and gardens. or senior citizen areas, and have a service area radius
of .5 mile and a desirable size of 5 acres.
Local Recreation Spaces:
a.
Community Recreation Area: An area that provides a diverse range of recreational and leisure activities or contains areas of environmental or
aesthetic quality, and that has a service area radius of 1f2 to 3 miles and a desirable size of 30 to 50 acres. Facilities and activities may include,
but are not limited to, athletic fields, swimming pools, gymnasiums, performing and design art centers, crafts buildings, and any facilities associated
with neighborhood or mini-park recreation areas.
b.
metropolitan population
Regional/Metropolitan Recreation Area: Area providing facilities designed for outdoor recreation and leisure activities that may
include, but are not limited to, boating, fishing, or camping; bicycle, hiking, or horse trail systems; botanical gardens, nature centers,
or zoo or husbandry centers; museums; performing and design art centers; and activities included under community neighborhood,
or mini-park recreation areas. Area typically has a service area of 60 miles and a desirable size of 100 acres.
natural quality that are designed to serve a regional or
Areas of aesthetic or
ReqiQnal Recreation Spaces
a.
2.
Outdoor Reserve Recreation Area: Area primarily designed with consideration for outdoor recreation and nature preservation,
including, but not limited to, areas for viewing and studying land, aquatic, or avian wildlife, conservation activities, swimming, hiking,
camping, trail facilities, natUre centers, or botanical gardens. Area typically has a service area radius of 60 miles and a desirable
size of 500 acres. with the majority of the area preserved and managed in its natural environment.
b.
recreational activity.
recreational and leisure activities that may
ranges. outdoor theaters, historic
unique recreational activities or for a Single
Areas/Facilities: Areas designed for a single purpose or specific
imited to, activities such as zoos, conservatories, golf courses,
Reqional: Spaces developed for
Unique Recreation Spaces, Either Local or
Recreation
are not
Specia
include, but
a.
3.
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
gun or archery
9-11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
facility size may vary.
Conservation/Open Space Area: Area preserved and managed to protect its natural environment or aesthetic quality, or to protect
health, safety, and welfare by providing open spaces between roadways or development, with recreation and leisure activity serving
as a secondary function
sports. The service area and desirable
water
marinas, botanical gardens, athletic complexes, or
sites
b.
Linear Recreation Area: Area developed to provide travel routes for one or more types of recreational or human-operated vehicles
such as horseback riding, bicycling, hiking, jogging, or motorcross riding
c.
rivers
is designed primarily for aquatic-related recreation and leisure activities and that abuts
Recreation Area: Area that
lagoons. or saltwater bodies.
Waterfront
lakes,
d.
Service area and desirable park size can vary.
Activity Area: Waterfront area providing recreation and leisure activities or facilities that may include, but are not limited to
swimming, water sports, boating, sunbathing, picnicking, playground apparatus, dressing rooms and showers, boat ramps
and docks, boardwalks and pavilions, or concession stands.
Beach Access Area: Area developed to provide access to waterfront areas.
2.
LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
n order to establish an appropriate level of service standard for each class of facility, national standards and standards for other communities In southeast Florida
were reviewed.
C.
Integral to the level of service is the base year population on which to set the service standard. For the purpose of this Plan, the year 1997 has been established as
the base year. The estimated 1997 population, as provided by the St. Lucie County Department of Community Development for the identified recreational facilities
is as follows:
63,058
79,133
Community Park
Regional Park
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-12
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The extent to which level of service standards are met for the current population was determined, as was the demand for additional facilities to serve the projected
populations for the initial planning period ending in the year 2005, and the second planning period ending in the year 2015. The results of this analysis serve as the
basis for the determination of future recreation demand. The methods of funding the short term needs to the year 2005, are addressed in the Capital Improvements
Element
Table 9-6 indicates the desired level of service standards for recreational facilities in St. Lucie County. As a guide in planning recreation and open space standards,
it is imperative that a basic determination be made as to the level of service considered to be appropriate, desirable, and affordable by a given community. Such level
of service standards represent a significant policy statement within the Comprehensive Plan and provide an orderly basis for a land acquisition and facility development
program, which responds to increases in a community's population
Lucie County
for St.
TABLE 9-6
Recreation Standards
Desired Outdoor
Persons Served
Service Area Radius
Site Size
Standard Per 1000 Population
Facility
up to 5,000
0.5 miles
5.0 acres
.5 acres (service area)
Neighborhood Parks
30,000-50,000
10.0 miles
30-50 acres
(service area)
5.0 acres
Community Park
no standards
60 miles
1 00 acres
(service area)
5.0 acres
Regional Parks
no standards
60 miles
500 acres
no standard
Open Space Reserves
no standards
no standards
no standards
no standards
no standards
no standards
Special Purpose
Special Recreation Areas/Facilities
Conservation/Open Space Areas
Linear Recreation Areas
Beach Access
Beach Park
Waterfront Activity Area
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-13
Source: SI. Lucie County Department of Community Development
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
990
Objectives, and Policies are modifications of the portions of the Element as adopted in
9-14
GOALS. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The following Comprehensive Plan Goals
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
RECREATION SUB-ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
PROVIDE ADEQUATE RECREATION FACILITIES AND OPEN SPACE AREAS THAT OFFER A BROAD RANGE OF ACTIVITIES TO ALL CITIZENS AND
VISITORS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY.
GOAL 9.1
Active and passive recreation facilities and open space areas for the residents and visitors of St. Lucie County shall be provided in a manner consistent
with the level of service standards set forth in this element. Consistency with these standards shall be maintained in subsequent years.
Objective
9.1.1
Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows
Level of Service for
Policy
9.1.1.1
000 residents In the unincorporated area.
Community parks: 5 acres/1
.
through an equitable and systematic land acquisition
mprovements Elements
Regional parks: 5 acres/1000 residents county wide
Accept and achieve the level of service standards as set forth in this and the Capital
and development program
.
Policy
9.1.1.2
The County will continue to correct and improve upon existing deficiencies through additional land acquisition and development, and through expansion or
renovation of existing parks and recreational facilities through projects specified in the Capital Improvement Element.
Policy
9.1.1.3
No residential or commercial
All areas having the Conservation Public Land Use designation will be used solely for preservation and/or passive recreation
development will be permitted other than development typically related to park service and security functions.
Policy
9.1.1.4
Lucie County
means, St.
Through the use of public funds, gifts, contributions, mandatory fees and/or deductions, cooperative agreements, or other
will coordinate public and private resources to meet the recreation and open space needs of its residents and visitors.
Objective
9.1.2
The County shall pursue development and enhancement of its recreational programs In the following programs:
Policy
9.1.2.1
mpact fee In order to partially fund new park development
Continue to administer the countywide parks
a.
Supplement facility needs through interlocal agreements, operational practices, user fees and public/private cooperative efforts.
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
9-15
b.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
RECREATION SUB-ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
the parks impact fee to acquire additional open space and natural preservation areas and to develop necessary
The County shall use monies collected from
facilities.
Policy
9.1.2.2
ocal government to provide for the reciprocal use of recreation. school and other facilities
units of
The County shall continue to work with other
Policy
9.1.2.3
Lucie County School Board. to use
other governmental agencies, such as the St
The County shall allow, to the extent legally possible, and whenever practical
the St. Lucie County Sports Complex.
Policy
9.1.2.4
ities as
The County shall maintain a detailed Recreation and Open Space Inventory that indicates the general location of existing and proposed sites and faci
well as functional classification, nature of improvements, usage, size, priority, and other appropriate considerations.
Policy
9.1.2.5
St. Lucie County shall provide vehicular and pedestrian access to all public recreation facilities, including barrier-free design features at entrance
points to facilities such as buildings used for group assembly, spectator seating areas, and beaches and shores.
Objective
9.1.3
Acquire and develop easements or rights-of-way as required to provide adequate access for public recreation facilities. Construct access ways which are
compatible with the character and needs of the facility, as well as being harmonious with surrounding development patterns.
Policy
9.1.3.1
Continue to provide public access to Atlantic Ocean beaches, and continue to give careful consideration to providing related parking areas and dune cross-over
facilities without disturbance to the dune environment, natural habitats, and designated areas of particular concern.
Policy
9.1.3.2
Plan
By January 2002, update the Countywide Facilities Master
Objective
9.1.4
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Assess the County's recreational needs based on this Level of Service Standards as defined in this plan
6
9-
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
9.1.4.1
RECREATION SUB-ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Continue to seek funding for acquisition and development of recreational infrastructure.
Policy
9.1.4.2
nfrastructure as required
Provide recreational
Policy
9.1.4.3
Lucie County.
n St.
mplement strategies to encourage eco-tourism
Develop and
Objective
9.1.5
Identify appropriate sites to develop as eco-tourism destinations.
Policy
9.1.5.1
Provide required infrastructure to attract visitors to and protect eco-tourism destinations.
Office, publicize the improved eco-tourism sites and St. Lucie County as an eco-tourism destination.
Development
Policy
9.1.5.2
Lucie County.
n conjunction with the County's Tourist
Develop and implement strategies to adequately manage Environmentally Sensitive Lands In St.
Policy
9.1.5.3
Objective
9.1.6
management of Environmentally Sensitive Lands
future funding for
Encourage the State of Florida to provide
mprovement and management of Environmentally Sensitive Lands
Policy
9.1.6.1
Seek funding from outside sources for
Budget for personnel and equipment for management of Environmentally Sensitive Lands to ensure that these lands are preserved, enhanced, and developed
for uses that will maintain wildlife habitat, open space, aesthetic value, and passive recreation.
Policy
9.1.6.2
Policy
9.1.6.3
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
7
9-
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Recreation - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
RECREATION SUB-ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Objective Provide for an integrated system of Greenways and Trails in St. Lucie County.
9.1.7
Policy By July 1, 2002, finalize the Greenways and Trails Masterplan for St. Lucie County.
9.1.7.1
Policy Seek funding from outside sources for development and management of Greenways and Trails.
9.1.7.2
- -
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
9-18
CHAPTER 10
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
Prepared by:
St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Department of Growth Management
ADOPTED - January 9, 1990
REVISED - March 5, 2002 (Ord. 02-008)
REVISED - January 6, 2004 (Compliance Agreement)
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
NTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
0-1
10-1
10-4
10-4
10-5
10-5
10-5
10-5
10-6
10-6
10-6
10-6
10-6
10-7
10-7
10-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.................................. .
ST. LUCIE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . .
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
ST. LUCIE COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ST. LUCIE COUNTY MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL. . .
ST. LUCIE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
NTRODUCTION
NVENTORY
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
HURRICANE EVACUATION........
A. EVACUATION TIMES ......................
B. EVACUATION NETWORK AND CRITICAL LINKS
GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
ANALYSIS
COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL POLICY PLAN
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
0-1
LIST OF TABLES
Existing and Proposed Coordination Links
0-1
TABLE
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
NTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
NTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element, as identified by Chapter 163, F.S. and Fla. Admin. Code Rule 9J-5.015, is to "identify and resolve
incompatible goals, objectives, and policies, and development proposed in comprehensive plans and to determine and respond to the needs for coordination processes
and procedures with adjacent local, regional, and state agencies." St. Lucie County believes that a well-developed communication network among all applicable public
and quasi-public entities will enhance the long-range growth and prosperity of the County.
St. Lucie County is governed by an elected Board of five Commissioners with an appointed County Administrator. There are three (3) independent municipalities within
the County: Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie, and St. Lucie Village. Each of these municipalities has a strong council form of government. The cities of Ft. Pierce and Port
St. Lucie include an elected mayoral position in the composition of their council. St. Lucie Village appoints a mayoral position from the elected councilmen (aldermen).
The cities of Ft. Pierce and Port St. Lucie each have an appointed City Manager
Ft. Pierce, the County seat, had a 1990 Census population of 36,830, Port St. Lucie, 55,866, St. Lucie Village, 584 with the remainder of the County at 56,855 for a
total County Population of 150,171. Between April 1 , 1990 and April 1 , 1999, the estimated population of the unincorporated areas of the County increased to 64,640
(Source Bureau of Economic and Business Research) which was an increase of 13.5%. However, the population for the County as a whole increased 24.5% over
the 1990 figures during this same period. The primary influence on that growth rate was the City of Port St. Lucie, increasing by over 49% of its 1990 population to
a total of 83,254 (April 1 ,1999). Ft. Pierce indicated a 4.3% increase to 38,401 and St. Lucie Village a 4.5% decrease, to 610. This rate of rapid growth makes it
essential that close cooperation be maintained among the incorporated municipalities and the unincorporated County, as well as with surrounding governments.
INVENTORY
There are numerous independent governmental agencies which affect the quality of life in St. Lucie County. Table 10-1 provides an identification of all the public
and quasi-public entities with which either the County does, or needs to coordinate. Table 10-1 also indicates a relationship of the various components of the
Comprehensive Plan with each appropriate agency.
Intergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TABLE 10-1
Existing and Proposed Coordination Links
Transportation
X
Capital
Impro~ments
X
Recreation
Open ,;pace
X
Conservation
Coastal
Infrastructure
Housing
Future Land Use
Coordinating Entity
X
X
X
X
X
Ft Pierce
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Port St. Lucie
X
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
St. Lucie Village
X
X
X
X
X
X
Indian River
X
X
X
X
Martin
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Okeechobee
X
X
X
X
X
TCRPC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SFWMD
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COG
Treasure Coast
X
X
X
x
X
X
SLC School District
X
X
X
X
SLC Fire District
X
X
X
Mosquito Control
X
Housing Finance
X
x
X
MPO
X
X
X
FPFWCD
X
X
x
NSLRWCD
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
FOOT
DEP
Intergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TABLE 10-1
Existing and Proposed Coordination Links
Transportation
Capital
Improvements
Recreation
Open Space
Conservation
Coastal
Infrastructure
Housing
Future Land Use
Coordinating Entity
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
DCA
x
x
x
x
HRS
x
x
FF&W
x
x
x
x
BEBR
x
x
Historical Resources
x
x
x
x
Forestry
AG & Consumer
Services
x
x
EPA
x
x
ACOE
FAA
x
x
FHWA
x
UMTA
x
x
FPUA
x
x
PSL
x
x
FPL
x
x
Bell South
x
x
x
x
Conservation Alliance
ntergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-3
Marine Resource
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TABLE 10-1
Existing and Proposed Coordination Links
Transportation
x
X
Capital
Imorovements
X
X
Recreation
Open Soace
X
X
Conservation
X
X
Coastal
X
X
Infrastructure
X
X
Housing
X
X
Future Land Use
X
X
Coordinating Entity
Study Group
Media
Lucie County must coordinate with on a
The following paragraphs provide a brief description of the various agencies, authorities, boards and organizations that St
frequent or daily basis.
ST. LUCIE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
The St. Lucie County School District is an autonomous board established under Chapter 230, Florida Statutes. The district school system is controlled by an elected
five (5) member School Board supported by an appointed superintendent. Each School Board member represents the specific district in which they live: however
they are elected through the at-large voting practice.
C.
Traditionally, the School Board and its staff, and the elected county officials and their staff, along with those of the various municipalities, have worked closely in facility
and project planning. Examples of these coordinated efforts include the implementation of voluntary school impact assessment for new residential developments
in the early 1980's, the location of new school sites in the most rapidly growing areas of the community and the development of a County-wide mandatory School
Impact Fee Ordinance (1988).
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
In 1949, the Florida Legislature created the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District, whose charge, among other activities, was to regulate the problem
of seasonal flooding from a regional perspective. In 1976, the Florida Legislature consolidated the various drainage and flood control districts throughout the State
into five. St. Lucie County, then a member of the Central and Southern, became a part of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). In addition to the
traditional charges given to the District, the District has been given joint responsibility (with the Department of Environmental Protection) for water quality programs
affecting all aspects of community development
B.
Primary coordinating efforts with St. Lucie County are in regard to stormwater management and water quality issues. It is expected that, within the planning period
of this Comprehensive Plan, the subject areas of wellfield protection, aquifer recharge and water withdrawals/reserve quantities will become equally as important.
The South Florida Water Management District, through the "Save Our Rivers" program, has also been an important funding partner for the County. Through this
program, the SFWMD has participated with the county to preserve environmentally sensitive lands in the Savannahs, along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River, and
in the western portion of the County.
Intergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-4
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ST. LUCIE COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The St. Lucie County Fire District was established by special act of the Florida Legislature in 1959. This district provides full-time fire and emergency medical services
for all of St. Lucie County. The Fire District currently operates 15 stations located throughout the County.
C.
The Fire District is governed by a seven (7) member Board, comprised of two members from the Board of County Commissioners, the Ft. Pierce City Commission,
and the Port St. Lucie City Council. Since the Fire District is a special taxing district, empowered to levy taxes, there is also one (1) at-large member who is appointed
to the Fire Board by the Governor.
In addition to the required coordination for taxing purposes, the Fire Marshal's Office provides fire protection and building inspection related services to the County
and municipalities.
ST. LUCIE COUNTY MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT
The St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District is an autonomous agency created by the Florida Legislature in 1927. The District is controlled by the Board of County
Commissioners acting as the Mosquito Control Board. The District serves the area from the Atlantic Ocean to approximately 10 miles west of the coast.
D.
the District is funded
this function
The function of the St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District is to manage the mosquito population in St. Lucie County. To fulfi
by a special taxing district and funds from the State.
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) was created in October, 1976, through an interlocal agreement pursuant to Chapter 186, Florida Statutes.
The Council's principal goal is to ensure that future growth within the Indian River, St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach County Region occurs in a manner consistent
with state and regional planning objectives and that a high quality of life will be achieved for all the regional citizens. Toward accomplishing this goal, the Treasure
Coast Regional Planning Council maintains a forum for identifying, as well as promoting, public understanding of local and regional issues and problems. To promote
the implementation of plans and programs which address regional issues and problems, the Council acts as a regional information clearinghouse and
intergovernmental data source, conducts research for the purpose of developing and maintaining regional goals, objectives, and policies, and assists in the
implementation of a number of local, state, and federal programs.
E.
ST. LUCIE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
In 1983, a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Interlocal Agreement was executed between St. Lucie County, the cities of Ft. Pierce and Port St. Lucie, and
the Florida Department of Transportation. The authority and responsibility of the MPO is for the management of a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive
transportation planning process and the programming of transportation improvements for the St. Lucie County urbanized area.
F.
Pierce City Commissioners and
Lucie City Councilmen: two Ft
The MPO is composed of ten voting members: four St. Lucie County Commissioners; three Port St
a representative of the Community Transit Agency.
Intergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-5
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
n addition to the governmental agencies described above, there are City, County, State, and Federal agencies with which the County coordinates and cooperates
on matters of mutual interest and concern. Table 10-1 contains listings of the various local, regional, state, and federal agencies interacting with St. Lucie County.
G.
HURRICANE EVACUATION
The Jensen Beach Bridge in Martin County has been an essential part of the traffic circulation system for the southern portion of St. Lucie County's south island. As
noted in the BIAS (Bridge Impact Assessment Statement) (Kimley-Horn, 1986), development in this portion of the south island will not be allowed beyond the
commencement level without either the construction of the Walton Road Bridge or improvements to structures in Martin County. However, since most of the
undeveloped land in this portion of the island can be developed at the commencement level, as defined in Section 3.01.03 AA Hutchinson Island Residential District,
and, in fact, is mostly developed to date, greater dependence on the Martin County structures is not anticipated. For a more detailed discussion of Hurricane
Evacuation, see the Coastal Management Element
the high
Evacuation Times
If the northbound Florida Turnpike traffic uses 3 of the 4 lanes out of Southeast Florida and the Treasure Coast Region Instead of the normal 2 of 4 lanes
evacuation time of 22.5 hours can be reduced to 16.25 hours.
mprovement Plan (TIP) or have been
5 are identified in the County's approved 5-year Traffic
Evacuation Network and Critical Links
Of the 10 critical links identified in the Coastal Management Element
improved.
nks have been identified in the needs analysis of the Transportation Element
of the critical
For 2020, al
GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
The three adjoining counties have predominantly agriculture uses adjacent to St. Lucie County's agriculture borders, although Okeechobee County has placed a large
land fill adjacent to St. Lucie County, and, to the best of our knowledge, they are not proposing any changes along these borders. Land uses along the non-agricultural
portions of the common borders are generally consistent with County land uses and do not require amendments to the Future land Use Element or other elements
of this plan.
boundaries are adjacent to the more urbanized areas of the unincorporated
The City of Ft. Pierce is not proposing any changes to their land use and currently their
County. Fort Pierce has a rather aggressive annexation policy.
The City of Port St. Lucie is not proposing any changes in their land use. They have commercial and residential uses adjacent to St. Lucie County's boundaries. These
uses are consistent with uses adjacent and within the County.
Intergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-6
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
St. Lucie Village is, for the most part, a residential community, and they are not proposing any changes. Land uses within the Village are consistent with those in the
unincorporated County along their borders. While the expansion of the services and/or facilities at the St. Lucie County International Airport, if it should occur, could
affect the Village, the County's adopted Business Plan for the Airport has significantly scaled back the proposed expansion.
The St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan has been written in such a manner that it is compatible with the Treasure Coast Regional Policy Plan. No specific needs
for additional coordination with the Council have been identified due to the direction provided for growth and development in the Future Land Use Element or other
elements of this Plan.
ANALYSIS
In addition to the matrix representations provided in Table 10-1, an analysis of these local and regional coordinating entities is provided in Appendix A of this
element. This analysis examines St. Lucie County's relationship with those entities with which it currently coordinates. The analysis also looks at on which issues
or problems the two entities most often coordinate, the method of coordination, the effectiveness of this coordination, and any perceived deficiencies in this system
of coordination.
COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL POLICY PLAN
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan addresses the provision of public services and facilities on topics ranging from
"Improving Student Performance" to "Expanding Agricultural Opportunities". The plan focuses on 25 goals as they have been identified in the comprehensive plan
for the entire State. The regional plan furthers these goals with 75 policy clusters. The policy clusters identify specific issues within the Treasure Coast Region in
relationship to the overall State goal. The Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan
provides background on each issue;
ists significant resources applicable to the specific issue that are available within the region
2.
identifies the agencies and organizations that are directly involved; and
3.
be evaluated
The intergovernmental coordination cluster of the Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan seeks to eliminate unnecessary duplication of programs and activities
Significant coordination currently takes place between St. Lucie County and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council in the form of Developments of Regional Impact
(DRI) reviews and local comprehensive plan reviews.
the corresponding policies. and the measures by which the effectiveness or success of the policy wi
specifies the regional goal
4.
990
Objectives. and Policies are modifications of the portions of the Element as adopted in
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The following Comprehensive Plan Goals
Intergovernmental - March 5, 2002
Revised: January. 2004
0-7
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
NTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
ESTABLISH EFFECTIVE COORDINATION MEASURES AMONG ALL PERTINENT PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC ENTITIES TO BEST MAINTAIN ST. LUCIE
COUNTY'S QUALITY OF LIFE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES.
GOAL 10.1
St. Lucie County shall establish specific means of coordination with adjacent municipalities; with local, state, and federal agencies who have
permitting and regulating authority; and with quasi-public entities which provide services but lack regulatory authority in St. Lucie County; with
County volunteer groups; and with interested citizen groups who have notified the County of their interest.
Objective
10.1.1
Pierce to complete the ongoing Alternate
Lucie and Ft
Martin County, and the cities of Port St
Regional Planning Counci
Coordinate with the Treasure Coast
Land Use Study.
Policy
10.1.1.1
Lucie Village of all applications for rezoning and land use amendments which are contiguous to
Notify in writing the cities of Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie, and St
their borders or within an area of planned annexation.
Policy
10.1.1.2
be
Through the development review process. coordinate all development in the unincorporated County with local governments that are adjacent to or wi
impacted by the development.
Policy
10.1.1.3
Charge the County Administrator with continuing responsi.bility for developing and enforcing an effective Intergovernmental coordination program for St. Lucie
County.
Policy
10.1.1.4
and
ndian River
Support the Treasure Coast Council of Governments to provide a regular formal forum in which to deal with issues unique to Martin. St. Lucie
Okeechobee Counties.
Policy
10.1.1.5
Continue cooperative education programs between the County and regulatory agencies to inform the public and development community about applicable laws
and regulations. This could be accomplished by including brief informational pamphlets in utility bills or other means of widespread general circulation.
Policy
10.1.1.6
Lucie Village designate their anticipated future annexation
there is change to these plans.
By January 3151 of each calendar year, formally request in writing that Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie and St.
areas, inform the County as to the nature of such plans, and provide further notification in the event
Policy
10.1.1.7
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
NTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
and coordinate with the FDOT relative to state level of
transportation service volumes and levels of service as they relate to state roads
Continue to review
service standards.
Policy
10.1.1.8
Coordinate with communities within the unincorporated area as they explore the impacts of incorporation
Policy
10.1.1.9
Annexation and joint
By January 1, 2003, meet with representatives of Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie and St. Lucie Village to identify potential joint planning areas
infrastructure are to be considered and discussed; more specifically, the following areas may be considered:
Policy
10.1.1.10
Areas adjoining Okeechobee Road from Hartman Road to Eleven Mile Road
Area adjoining existing city limits
Pierce
Ft
Existing enclaves
LTC Ranch/Midway Road area
1-9S/Gatlin Boulevard area
Port St. Lucie
No areas identified.
2003, establish procedures to deal with future municipal incorporation proposals.
Lucie Village
By January
St
Policy
10.1.1
The County shall coordinate the revision of level of service standards for public facilities with any state, regional or local entity having operational
and maintenance responsibility for such facilities; and coordinate on the provision of public facility improvements with the capital facility plans of
any other governmental entity providing public facilities within St. Lucie County.
11
Objective
10.1.2
1990, to ensure that required services
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
be implemented by August
wi
Concurrency Management procedures, as outlined in the Capital Improvements Element
will be available when needed.
0-9
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
10.1.2
NTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Establish a Planning Forum, to meet at least quarterly, to coordinate programs of infrastructure development and improvement between the County, the
municipalities, and interested public groups so that adopted levels of service can be maintained throughout the entire County.
Policy
10.1.2.2
f they would be
local governments do not appear as
nformal mediation when conflicts with other
for
Regional Planning Counci
Use the Treasure Coast
otherwise resolved.
Policy
10.1.2.3
The Director of Community Development shall continue to be responsible for coordination of County activities with the comprehensive plans of
adjacent municipalities, St. Lucie County, the adjacent counties, and other units of local government such as the School Board providing services
but not having regulatory authority over the use of land.
Objective
10.1.3
Lucie County boundaries
review copies of all proposed plan or rezoning amendments for areas adjacent to St
Continue to receive and
Continue to request liaisons regarding proposed plan or rezoning amendments with the St. Lucie County School Board, St. Lucie County Fire District, South
Florida Water Management District, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority, Florida Power and Light, and adjacent local
governments.
Policy
10.1.3.
Policy
10.1.3.2
mprovements
In conjunction with other affected parties, including interested public groups, continue to evaluate existing interlocal agreements when the Capital
Element is undergoing annual review to determine if current funding is proportional to services rendered.
Policy
10.1.3.3
Continue to coordinate closely with the School Board on the location of future school locations In relation to the projected population and land use
Policy
10.1.3.4
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Continue to support joint use agreements between the County and the School District
10-10
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
10.1.3.5
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
By August, 1990, the County, through the County Administrator, shall establish an intergovernmental coordination process to ensure ful
consideration is given to the impacts of developments proposed in the County Comprehensive Plan on other governmental entities and vice versa.
Objective
10.1.4
Lucie
Support the development and adoption of interlocal agreements with the affected municipalities to coordinate the management of the St
River, Indian River Lagoon (includingthe Intracoastal Waterway), and Savannas
Policy
10.1.4.
to identify regional issues and to assist in the periodic updating of the Comprehensive
Continue to work with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Counci
Regional Policy Plan.
Policy
10.1.4.2
corporate limits
Agree to abide by regulations of the municipalities when developing within their
Policy
10.1.4.3
the Comprehensive Plan of Ft. Pierce.
Review port activities In coordination with
Objective
10.1.5
The Board of County Commissioners shall coordinate with the City of Ft. Pierce, other governmental entities, and interested public groups to resolve problems
related, but not limited to, transportation, development and land use, natural and man-made hazards and disasters, and protection of natural resources at the
port.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
10.1.5
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2
0-
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-13
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
APPENDIX A
ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
10-14
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-15
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Pierce
Coordinating Agency: City of Ft
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County
City of Ft. Pierce
Beach Access
Provision of Social Services
Traffic Flow
Annexation
Wellfield Protection
Existing Issues or Problems
Adjacent Land Uses
Beach Renourishmen
Extension of Services
Downtown Redevelopment
Port Development
Administration and Collection of
Fees
mpact
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
All Elements
Coordination
Three formally authorized forums exist for the review of matters of local concern: the MPO, Treasure Coast Council of Governments and Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council. The fault with these bodies is that they do not include, as regular members, the entire elected bodies of the two jurisdictions. No other formal
mechanism currently exists. At the department level, informal coordination regularly takes place. Interlocal agreements exist between the City and County concerning
the MPO, the administration of impact fees, Wellfield Protection and for the provision of recreation facilities. Occasionally, the City and County Commissions hold
joint meetings to review and form combined decisions on matters of mutual interest.
Existing Method of
Policies for the Port of Ft. Pierce were included in prior St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plans. Since this area is within the corporate limits of Ft. Pierce, all such
policies have been removed from this plan. All land use regulation for this area is the responsibility of the City. The County Commission will work with the City in the
development of the Port to meet the needs and goals of the City and the citizens of the County.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-16
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
nformal
the two elected bodies.
scheduled interaction between
(i.e. Authority):
Aside from the three formal points of exchange, no duly authorized forum exists that would perm
staff communication exists for the purpose of informational exchanges as directed.
Nature of Relationship
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Differs by issue
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
by issue and office
However, this measure may differ
the City and County is adequate
coordination between
Generally, staff
in occasional conflicting
result
channels of communication can
a lack of formal meetings or
Deficiencies and Needs
Existing administrative coordination is generally satisfactory. However,
goals and objectives
Additional Coordinating Entities
Erosion Control Board. FDOT, and Mosquito Control District
SLC-FP Fire District
of Governments
Counci
FPUA, MPO, TCRPC, Treasure Coast
Recommendations
Closer coordination is needed on all issues between the City and County, especially concerning matters of annexation, utility service, and the Port of Ft. Pierce.
Explore the formal inclusion of administrative representatives to the St. Lucie Development Review Committee and establish a system of coordinated input for issues
of local concern
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0.1.4.3
0.1.3.3; 10. . .4.1
3.2
0-17
o
0...3.
O. ..2.2
0.. .2.1
8
.1
o.
5
1.1
10
.1.4
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy Reference
.2
.1
0.1
0.1.1.1
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Lucie
Port St.
Coordinating Agency: City of
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County
City of Port St. Lucie
Administration and
collection of Impact Fees
Annexation
Wellfield Protection
Existing Issues or Problems
Adjacent Land Uses
Traffic Flow
Extension of Services
Provision of Social Services
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
All Elements
Coordination
Three formally authorized forums exist for the review of matters of local concern: the MPO, Treasure Coast Council of Governments and Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council. The fault with these bodies is that they do not include, as regular members, the entire elected bodies of the two jurisdictions. No other formal
mechanism currently exists. At the department level, informal coordination regularly takes place. Interlocal agreements exist between the City and County concerning
the MPO, the administration of impact fees, Wellfield Protection. Occasionally, the City and County Commissions hold joint meetings to review and form combined
decisions on matters of mutual community interest
Existing Method of
nformal
two elected bodies
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
the
scheduled interaction between
it
(i.e. Authority):
Aside from the three formal points of exchange, no duly authorized forum exists that would perm
staff communication exists for the purpose of informational exchange as directed.
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-18
Relationship
Nature of
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Differs by issue
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Generally, coordination between the City and County is adequate. However, this measure may differ by issue and office
in occasional conflicting
result
a lack of formal meetings or channels of communication can
Deficiencies and Needs
Existing administrative coordination is generally satisfactory. However,
goals and objectives
Additional Coordinating Entities
FDOT, and Mosquito Control District
of Governments, SLC-FP Fire District
Port St. Lucie Utilities. FPUA, FPL, MPO, TCRPC, Treasure Coast Counci
Recommendations
Closer coordination is needed on all issues between the City and County, especially concerning matters of annexation, utility service, and roadway improvement.
Explore the formal inclusion of administrative representatives to the St. Lucie Development Review Committee and establish a system of coordinated input for issues
of local concern
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
3.3; 10. . .4
o.
.3.2
0-19
10
O. ..3
0.1.2.2
O. ..2
.1.8
o.
5
.1
10.
.4
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy Reference
.2
.1
o.
.1.1
o.
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Lucie Village
Coordinating Agency: St.
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County
St. Lucie Village
Annexation
Airport Expansion
Existing Issues or Problems
Adjacent Land Uses
Provision of Public Services
Wellfield Protection
Administration and Collection of
Fees
mpact
Affected Comprehensive Plan Elements(s):
All Elements
Existing Method of Coordination
support.
time administrative staff
Village does not have any fu
Extensive coordination is non-existent
through the part
Primary contact with the Village is conducted
(i.e. Authority):
A very limited relationship exists due to the non-existence of any St. Lucie Village administrative staff
time Village Attorney. The Village does participate in County-wide impact fee programs.
Nature of Relationship
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-20
and County Attorney
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Department of
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
timely manner.
problems in a
This hampers addressing joint
to the lack of administrative structure
Limited. due
a lack of formal meetings or channels of communication
However,
Deficiencies and Needs
Existing administrative coordination is generally satisfactory given conditions unique to the situation
can result in occasional conflicting goals and objectives.
Additional Coordinating Entities
TCRPC, SLC Fire District
Explore
Recommendations:
Closer coordination is needed on all issues between the Village and County, especially concerning matters of utility service, and roadway improvement
improved communication for development issues adjacent to the Village and establish a system of coordinated input for issues of mutual concern
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10. . .4.3
0.1.4
3.3;
o.
0.1.3.2
10-21
0.1.3
O. ..2.2
O. ..2
.1.8
10
5
.1
.4; 10.
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy Reference:
2
.1
o.
1
10
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
County
ndian River
Coordinating Agency:
Participating Entities
Indian River County
St. Lucie County
Sanitary Sewer
Potable Water
- Storm water
Existing Issues or Problems
Adjacent Land Uses
Coastal/Environmentallssues
Transportation
Solid Waste
Conservation
Infrastructure
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Coastal Management
Traffic Circulation
Governments. Limited administrative coordination
Council of
Regional Planning Council and Treasure Coast
Existing Method of Coordination
Formal forums of coordination include the Treasure Coast
as the issue warrants
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
Limited
and County Attorney
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-22
of
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Department
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Current methods of coordination meet current needs, however, they do not lend themselves to providing effective solutions to common problems facing each
community.
Deficiencies and Needs:
A more formalized method of coordination is needed in order to ensure the compatibility of each County's land use and environmental issues.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
TCRPC and Treasure Coast Council of Governments
Recommendations:
Regular and standard lines of communication and coordination need to be established and maintained. An expansion of the Treasure Coast Council of Governments
could possibly serve this function.
Policy References:
0.1.1.2; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.5: 10 3. 0.1.4.
St. Lucie County Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
0-23
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Martin County
Participating Entities
Martin County
St. Lucie County
Stormwater
Sanitary Sewer
Potable Water
Existing Issues or Problems
Transportation
Adjacent Land Uses
Coastal/Conservation issues
Solid Waste
Conservation
I nfrastructu re
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Future Land Use
Coastal Management
Transportation
Existing Method of Coordination
Formal forums of coordination include the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and Treasure Coast Council of Governments. There is limited administrative
coordination, as the issue warrants. Occasional joint meetings of the County Commissioners take place in order to deal with matters of mutual community concern
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
Limited
and Department of Public Works
Office with Primary Responsibility:
County Attorney, Department of Community Development
County Administrator,
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-24
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
facing each
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Current methods of coordination meet current needs: however, they do not lend themselves to providing effective solutions to common problems
community.
Deficiencies and Needs
ity of each County's land use and environmental issues.
coordination is needed in order to ensure the compatib
A more formalized method of
Additional Coordinating Entities
of Governments, and SFWMD
Counci
FDOT, TCRPC, Treasure Coast
of Governments
Counci
An expansion of the Treasure Coast
Recommendations
Regular and standard lines of communication and coordination need to be established and maintained
could possibly serve this function.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-25
.4.
0.1
3
1
10
.1.5
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy References
10.
4;
.1
10
.2
10
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Okeechobee County
Participating Entities
Okeechobee County
St. Lucie County
Okeechobee Fire Department
St. Lucie County - Ft. Pierce Fire District
St. Lucie County Sheriff's Department
Okeechobee County Sheriff's Department
Existing Issues or Problems
Adjacent Land Uses
Emergency Service Response
Conservation
Solid Waste
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Traffic Circulation
of Governments. However, both the St. Lucie County Sheriff's Department
to provide first response emergency service to the Bluefield Road area in the
Existing Method of Coordination
The only formal forum of coordination is the newly established Treasure Coast Counci
and the Fire District have interlocal agreements with Okeechobee County authorities
extreme western portion of the County, due to distance from Ft. Pierce.
(i.e. Authority):
imited. except for an interlocal agreement between Okeechobee and St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office and Fire District
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-26
relationship is
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Nature of Relationship
The
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Sheriff and Fire District (active)
Department of Community Development
County Attorney, and County Administrator (inactive)
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
transportation, and conservation issues may become necessary.
n the future. coordination on land use
Coordination is adequate to meet present need. but
An expansion of the
Deficiencies and Needs
A more formalized method of coordination is needed in order to ensure the compatibility of each County's land use and environmental issues
Treasure Coast Council of Governments could possibly serve this function.
Additional Coordinating Entities
Governments
SFWMD and Treasure Coast Council of
Regional
the Treasure Coast
Ex-officio membership to
Recommendations
Regular and standard lines of communication and coordination need to be established and maintained
Planning Council may be one avenue open to greater communication.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-27
O. ..4.
3.
o.
5
0.1.1
.4
.1
10
.2
.1
o.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy References
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Marine Resources Counci
Participating Entities
Marine Resources Counci
St. Lucie County
Existing Issues or Problems
Stormwater
Indian River Lagoon
Watershed Action Committees Issues
Infrastructure
Future Land Use
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Coastal Management
Conservation
Existing Method of Coordination
The Marine Resource Council is an independent organization that strives to provide coordination among all the municipalities bordering the Indian River Lagoon.
The Council provides a forum where individuals, special interest groups, governmental officials and educational entities may discuss, and attempt to address through
recommended policy, issues of regional impact to the Lagoon system
(i.e. Authority)
Relationship
Nature of
The Council is an advisory forum
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
County Commissioners
0-28
County Attorney, and Board of
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
of
Department
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5. 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-29
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
The Council sufficiently fulfills its purpose.
Deficiencies and Needs:
No deficiencies are found in the present system
Additional Coordinating Entities:
SFWMD
Recommendations:
Existing levels of coordination have been determined to be sufficient.
Policy References:
10.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6 0.1.1.7 0.1.4.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District
Coordinating Agency:
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
City of Ft. Pierce
City of Port St. Lucie
St. Lucie Village
St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District
Department of Environmental Regulations
Department of Natural Resources
Lagoon
Existing Issues or Problems
Mosquito Control Activities
Effects of Mosquito Impoundments on the Indian River
Environmentally sensitive land acquisition
Capital Improvements
Future Land Use
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Conservation
Coastal Management
Existing Method of Coordination
Lucie County Commissioners
five St.
The Mosquito Control Board is comprised of the
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
(i.e. Authority)
The Mosquito Control Board is comprised of the five St. Lucie County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
0-30
Nature of Relationship
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-31
Office with Primary Responsibility:
County Administrator, Community Development and County Attorney
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient.
Deficiencies and Needs:
No deficiencies are noted at the present time.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
None
Recommendations:
Existing levels of coordination have been determined to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.1.5; 10.1.3.3.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Lucie County Fire District
Coordinating Agency: 81.
Participating Entities
S1. Lucie County
City of F1. Pierce
City of Port 81. Lucie
S1. Lucie Village
Existing Issues or Problems
Maintenance of adequate levels of emergency response service for the community
Development review
Ports and Aviation
Capital Improvements
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
I nfrastructu re
Land Use
Traffic Circulation
Review
Existing Method of Coordination
Two County Commissioners are members of the Fire District Board of Directors. A representative of the Fire District is a member of the Development
Committee. Through this representation, the Fire District is kept apprized of current development and construction activities within the County.
the Fire Board by
its operations. Membership on
(i.e. Authority):
The Fire District is a semi-autonomous authority. The Board is empowered to levy a special tax to support
representatives of the County Commission provides budgetary input to the operation of the Department
Nature of Relationship
Office with Primary Responsibility:
and Department of Community Development
County Administrator
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-32
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient
Deficiencies and Needs
roads)
water supply,
(i.e
to be able to provide the services to growth areas
res the expansion of infrastructure so as
re district requ
The
Additional Coordinating Entities
Forestry
State Department of
Recommendations
Existing levels of coordination have been determined to be sufficient
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-33
Policy References
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
1
0.1.2
.4;
.1
0.1
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
St. Lucie County School District
Coordinating Agency:
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County School District
St. Lucie County Library District
School Busing Zones
Location of New Facilities
Existing Issues or Problems
Multi-use of
Program Fu
Land Use
Administration and Collection of applicable School
ities
School Faci
nding
mpact Fees
Housing
Infrastructure
Transportation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Coastal Management
Recreation and Open Space
Existing Method of Coordination
Forums for the formal coordination of issues effecting the two political bodies are limited to the Metropolitan Planning Organization - Technical Advisory Committee.
Informal lines of communication exist between administrative staffs. Special joint meetings of the County Commission and School Board may be scheduled for issues
of mutual community concern. When necessary, specific interlocal agreements may be entered into between the two bodies.
mited with the exception of specific purpose programs.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Contacts between Boards are generally
0-34
(i.e. Authority)
relationship exists between the two bodies.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Relationship
Nature of
No formal
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development, Department of Recreation and Parks, and Library Board
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient.
Deficiencies and Needs:
No deficiencies or needs have been identified at the present time.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
None
Recommendations:
Existing levels of coordination have been determined to meet current needs.
Policy References:
0.1.1.4; 10.1.2.1; 10.1.3.2 0.1.3.4.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-35
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
Coordinating Agency: St.
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County
City of Ft. Pierce
City of Port St. Lucie
Existing Issues or Problems
Transportation
Capital Improvements Programs
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Capital Improvements
Transportation
Existing Method of Coordination
locally.
transportation dollars are to be spent
MPO membership jointly determines how federal and state
their
recommend changes through
to
of the County Road System be made except
mprovements off
that roadway
(i.e. Authority)
re
Nature of Relationship
The County has no authority to requ
representative members of the MPO.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-36
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Through the current system, the County has coordinated all transportation decisions.
Deficiencies and Needs:
The existing system is found to be generally sufficient.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
FDOT, FHW A, and TCRPC
Recommendations:
Existing levels of coordination have been determined to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.1.9; 10.1.2.1; 10.1.2.2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
0-37
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Housing Authority of the City of Ft. Pierce
Participating Entities:
St. Lucie County
City of Ft. Pierce
City of Port St. Lucie
Existing Issues or Problems:
- Very Low to Moderate Income Housing
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Housing Future Land Use
Capital Improvements
Existing Method of Coordination:
The Board of County Commissioners has assisted the housing authority in locating a small amount of public housing and Section 8 housing units in the unincorporated
area.
Nature of Relationship (i.e. Authority):
There is no formal representation of the County Commissioners on the Housing Authority.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
County Administrator, County Attorney, and Department of Community Development
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
The Housing Authority has no jurisdiction in the unincorporated County. The Authority's effectiveness in the County would benefit from having their jurisdictional
boundaries expanded.
St. Lucie County ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
0-38
n the
Also, more data are needed to define the housing problem
Deficiencies and Needs
Housing for very low to moderate income persons needs to be addressed on a county-wide basis
County.
Additional Coordinating Entities
DCA. TCRPC, HUD, and St. Lucie County Housing Finance Authority
Recommendations
Investigate the advantages and disadvantages of having the Housing Authority of Ft. Pierce expand its operation to include unincorporated areas of the County. The
County shall establish a housing data base and a county-wide Housing Task Force to investigate the need for affordable housing for various income groups in the
County.
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-39
Policy References
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.4.
.1
o
ANAL YSIS WORKSHEET
Regional Planning Council (TCRPC)
Coordinating Agency: Treasure Coast
Participating Entities
Palm Beach County (including municipalities)
Martin County (including municipalities)
St. Lucie County (including municipalities)
Indian River County (including municipalities)
Environmental Issues
Comprehensive Plans
Existing Issues or Problems
Developments of Regional Impact
Intergovernmental Coordination Review
All Elements
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Existing Method of Coordination
As a participant with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, two County Commissioners sit as voting members of the Council. Among the duties the Council
is charged with are the primary review of all Developments of Regional Impact and the review and monitoring of all local government comprehensive plans for
consistency with the goals, objectives, and polices of the Regional Comprehensive Plan. The Council also provides mediation services between units of local
government when necessary.
(i.e. Authority):
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council was created in 1976 pursuant to Chapter 186, Florida Statute. Membership on the Council is as stipulated in this
Chapter and currently includes one additional representative from St. Lucie County other than the two County Commissioners.
Nature of Relationship
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-40
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
current needs
The existing level of coordination has been determined to meet
Deficiencies and Needs
None noteworthy.
Additional Coordinating Entities
All municipalities In the above mentioned counties
provides for the exchange of
advantage of the forum
taking fu
Regional Planning Counci
Recommendations
St. Lucie County should maintain an active role in the Treasure Coast
information in the resolution of issues of regional concern
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-41
4.3.
4.2;10.1
3.2; 10.
1
10
2.3;
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy References
6
5;10.1.1
0.1.1
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
of Governments
Counci
Coordinating Agency: Treasure Coast
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County (including cities
Martin County (including cities)
Indian River County (including cities)
Okeechobee County (including cities)
Solid Waste/Infrastructure
Economic Development
Existing Issues or Problems
Transportation
Land Use
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
All Elements
issues that are of a more local concern than
Existing Method of Coordination
163.02, Florida Statutes, this Council provides a forum for the expression and review of
the Regional Planning Council level
Established pursuant to Chapter
would otherwise be reviewed at
(i.e. Authority)
Relationship
Nature of
This Council is purely an advisory body. No regulatory authority has been granted to this Counci
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
1 0-42
Office with Primary Responsibility:
and County Attorney
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
County Administrator
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Limited due to the Informality of the Council's meetings and internal structure
Deficiencies and Needs
Limited effectiveness could be overcome through using the Council as the coordinating entity for quad-county/quad-community projects
Additional Coordinating Entities
None
regular and standard lines of communication
could take the lead in establishing and maintaining
on a sub-regional basis
Recommendations
The Council could be of even more benefit
between local governments
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-43
Policy References:
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
6
.1
o.
5
10
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
Participating Entities: (Local Only)
St. Lucie County
City of Ft. Pierce
City of Port St. Lucie
St. Lucie Village
Existing Issues or Problems
Lucie River estuary network)
Drainage and Stormwater Management Permitting
Implementation of SWIM Bill (and its effect on the Indian River Lagoon/St.
Water Quality/Quantity
Wetland/Upland Protection (including inland isolated wetlands)
Environmentally Sensitive Land Acquisition
Taylor Creek
Sediment Transport
Future Land Use
Capital Improvements
Recreation and Open Space
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Infrastructure
Conservation
Coastal Management
Transportation
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-44
Existing Method of Coordination
Local Government Assistance Program
- Data Documentation Manual
Liaison by staff
Permitting through District
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Nature of Relationship (i.e. Authority):
- Participates in the Review of all Developm~nts of Regional Impac
- Reviews/permits stormwater management facilities for any development greater than 10 acres
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development and Department of Public Works
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Coordination/communication between the County and SFWMD has been greatly improved since the District has provided a full-time liaison.
Deficiencies and Needs:
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
Army Corp of Engineers ACOE and Department of Environmental Protection urisdictional wetlands
Recommendations:
Existing methods of coordination have been determined to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6 0.1.1.7 0.1.3.2 0.1.4
St. Lucie County Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
0-45
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: U.S. Soil Conservation Service
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County
Soil Conservation Service
Existing Issues or Problems
Soil Stabilization
Agricultural Best Management Practices
Protection/Erosion Control of St. Lucie River
Shoreline
Coastal Management
Future Land Use
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Infrastructure
Conservation
Existing Method of Coordination
Coordination with the County is Informal and infrequent.
The Soil Conservation Service is a federal entity associated with the Department of Agriculture
(i.e. Authority):
Relationship
Nature of
The existing relationship is adequate.
Office with Primary Responsibility
Department of Community Development and Agricultural Extension Services
Coordination Mechanisms
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient
Effectiveness of
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
ntergovernmental Coordination -
Revised:
0-46
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are noted at present
Additional Coordinating Entities
Environmental Protection. and Drainage Districts
Department of
SFWMD, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission
Recommendations:
current needs
Existing levels of coordination have been found to be sufficient to meet
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-47
.7.
.1
o.
6
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy References
0.1.1.4
.3
.1
o
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
itative Services (HRS)
Coordinating Agency: Florida Department of Health & Rehabi
Participating Entities
Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
of Health and Rehabilitative Services
St.
Department
Social Service Issues
Septic Permits
Air Quality
Problems
Hazardous Waste
Groundwater Contamination
Wellfield Protection
Existing Issues or
Future Land Use
Housing
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Infrastructure
Conservation
Existing Method of Coordination
Very informal coordination exists between HRS and St. Lucie County. What coordination does take place is primarily between the County Department of Community
Development. and the HRS Environmental Health Unit.
(i.e. Authority):
Nature of Relationship
This is an advisory relationship
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-48
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Department of
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
at the present time
coordination efforts have been determined to be sufficient
Present
Deficiencies and Needs
Lucie County and HRS
No clear channels of communication exist between 81.
Additional Coordinating Entities
Department of Environmental Protection
This should focus on informing the public about household hazardous wastes, proper disposal methods
In addition, the County should develop methods of coordination for review and comment on social
Recommendations
A cooperative education program needs to be undertaken
and less environmentally harmful substitutes for these products.
issues requiring special permitting from the Department.
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-49
7
.1
o.
.1.6
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy References
.4
.1
10
3
0.1
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission
Existing Issues or Problems
Protection of Endangered Species
Environmentally Sensitive Land Acquisition
Conservation
Transportation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Coastal Management
Future Land Use
Existing Method of Coordination
nformation
communications for the purpose of exchanging
nfrequent. informal staff
the County is not actively involved
However,
(i.e. Authority)
Fish Commission conducts a periodic survey to determine endangered or threatened species.
Nature of Relationship
The Game and Freshwater
in this.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
of
Department
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
The existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient in meeting the present needs.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-50
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination· March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are presently found in the methods of coordination.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
Department of Environmental Protection and US Fish & Wildlife
Recommendations:
Existing levels of coordination have been determined sufficient to meet present needs.
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6 0.1.1.7.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-51
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(DEP)
Coordinating Agency: Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Participating Entities:
Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
of Environmental Protection
St.
Department
Dredge & Fill
Hazardous Waste
Potable & Nonpotable Water
Air quality
Existing Issues or Problems
Mangrove Protection
Solid Waste Disposal
Sewage Disposal
Wellfield Protection
Wetlands Encroachments (Tidal & Non-tidal)
Water Quality (Tidal & Non-tidal)
Environmentally Sensitive Land Acquisition
Infrastructure
Conservation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Coastal Management
Future Land Use
Ports and Aviation
Existing Method of Coordination
imited to administrative contacts.
of Environmental Protection and St. Lucie County is generally informal
Coordination between the Department
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
to preserve Environmentally
the County's efforts
in
relationship, assisting in the Implementation of State and local regulations.
the Department of Environmental Protection is an important funding partner
This is an advisory
Through the State's P2000 program
Sensitive lands
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-52
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Office with Primary Responsibility:
and Department of Public Works
Community Development
of
Department
Coordination Mechanisms
Effectiveness of
needs.
n meeting present
to be generally sufficient
coordination are found
Existing methods of
Deficiencies and Needs
None noted
Pierce Utilities Authority, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission and Department of
Coordinating Entities
U.S. Wildlife Service, EPA, SFWMD. HRS, Ft.
Additiona
Army Corps of Engineers
Environmental Protection
n addition. a local
Recommendations
A cooperative education and public relations program informing the pUblic of environmental regulations and programs would be beneficial
government liaison, such as provided by SFWMD, might be beneficial in reducing unnecessary delays.
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-53
4
o.
.7
.1
o
6
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy References
4
.1
o
1.3
10
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA)
Participating Entities:
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Department of Community Affairs
Existing Issues or Problems:
- Update of Comprehensive Plan
- Areas of Critical State Concerns
- Developments of Regional Impact
- Community Development
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
All Elements
Existing Method of Coordination:
The County is required to coordinate its Comprehensive Plan, development regulations, and DRl's with DCA.
Nature of Relationship (i.e. Authority):
DCA has review and approval authority over the County's Comprehensive Plan and DRI's.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Methods of coordination between the County and DCA need improvement One problem is the physical distance between the County and Tallahassee which can
St. Lucie County Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
10-54
cause a misunderstanding of local needs and issues.
Deficiencies and Needs:
There is need for greater understanding of local concerns. DCA needs to be more responsive to the local government structure and issues.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
TCRPC and all adjacent municipalities and counties
Recommendations:
DCA should establish a local government liaison using the program piloted by SFWMD as an example
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6 0.1.1.7.
St. Lucie County Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
0-55
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(FDOT)
Coordinating Agency: Florida Department of Transportation
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Department of Transportation
Bureau of Aviation
Existing Issues or Problems
Improvement of the Transportation Network
Airport Expansion
Alternate Rail Systems
Capital Improvements
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Future Land Use
Transportation
for
Development
Existing Method of Coordination
FDOT maintains staff liaison
- Through MPO and Department
transportation planning;
- Through Public Works Department for construction and design
Through the St. Lucie Port and Airport Authority for issues
pertaining to them.
Community
of
The Port and Airport Authority will establish a task force to deal with land use compatibility issues should there be an expansion of the function, operation and
geographic area of the airport. This task force will include representatives of St. Lucie Village, the City of Ft. Pierce, St. Lucie County, the Port and Airport Authority,
the Florida Department of Transportation, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, and the Federal Aviation Administration.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-56
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Nature of Relationship (i.e. Authority)
FDOT has authority over MPO and is responsible for the primary transportation facilities in the County.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development, Department of Public Works and St. Lucie MPO
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Coordination is found to be lacking at times due to FDOT unresponsiveness to local issues. Coordination is hampered by the lack of a local FDOT planning office.
Deficiencies and Needs:
The allocation of funds for improvements and the timing of construction is unresponsive to local needs. There is a need for a local FDOT planning office.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
MPO
Recommendations:
Improved communication and open a local FDOT planning office.
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6 0.1.1.7 0.1.1.9; 10.1.4.3
St. Lucie County Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
10-57
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA)
Coordinating Agency: Ft.
County Commissioners
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of
City of Ft. Pierce
Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority
Existing Issues or Problems
System
and Sewer
Water
Expansion of
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
I nfrastructu re
and FPUA prior
Lucie County. Existing coordination is primarily between the County Public Works Department
Existing Method of Coordination
Informal coordination exists between FPUA and St.
to County construction projects.
(i.e. Authority)
Relationship
Nature of
Review and permitting procedures handled on project by project basis.
two entities
relationship exists between the
No formal
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Public Works
Department of
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-58
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Deficiencies and Needs
Lucie County and FPUA.
in coordination between St.
No serious deficiencies are found at the present
Additional Coordinating Entities
Pierce
City of Ft.
Recommendations:
Existing levels of coordination have been found to be sufficient. However, consideration needs to be given to the inclusion of the FPUA in the County's Development
Review Committee in order to minimize any long term utility/development conflicts.
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-59
3.2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy References
.4;
.1
o.
3;
.1
o.
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
University of Florida, Population Program
Coordinating Agency: Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR)
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board Of County Commissioners
Bureau of Business & Economic Research
Existing Issues or Problems
Population Growth and Projection
Land Use
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
All Elements
Existing Method of Coordination
from BEBR on population projections.
The County receives publications
figures in the Comprehensive
to use the high population
St. Lucie County has been approved by the DCA
(i.e. Authority)
figures for Florida.
Nature of Relationship
BEBR publishes official state population
Plan Update.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
of
Department
time
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-60
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are found at the present in coordination between St. Lucie County and BEBR
Additional Coordinating Entities:
State of Florida
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
No Specific Policy References
SI. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
0-61
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Environmental Protection Agency
Existing Issues or Problems
Land Use
Environmental
Coastal Management
Transportation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Conservation
Coordination
Existing Method of
regulations
the federal
regulations which in turn comply with al
the state environmental
The County complies with al
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
the Congress of the United States
Regulatory as charged by
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
Department of
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-62
Deficiencies and Needs
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Lucie County and EPA.
No deficiencies are found at the present time in the indirect coordination between St.
Additional Coordinating Entities
Environmental Protection
of
HRS and Department
Recommendations:
needs. Expand as needed.
Existing methods of coordination have been found to meet current
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-63
7.
.1
o.
6;
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy References
4; 10
0.1.1
3;
1.1
10
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
US Army Corp of Engineers
Existing Issues or Problems
Environmental
Coastal Management
Transportation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Infrastructure
Conservation
and
Community Development
of
Coordination
Informal coordination exists between the ACOE and St. Lucie County. Existing coordination is primarily between the Department
the ACOE concerning dredge/fill and dock permits.
Existing Method of
(i.e. Authority)
Relationship
Nature of
Regulatory as charged by the Congress of the United States
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Community Development
Department of
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-64
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are found at the present in coordination between St. Lucie County and USACOE
Additional Coordinating Entities:
Department of Environmental Protection, EPA and SFWMD
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6 0.1.1.7 0.1.4.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-65
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Federal Highway Administration (FHW A)
Participating Entities
St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization
Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Existing Issues or Problems
Transportation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Transportation
Existing Method of Coordination
through the Metropolitan Planning Organization
Adm in istrative/reg u lato ry
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
regulatory relationship.
This is a
Office with Primary Responsibility:
and MPO
Department of Community Development
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-66
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-67
Deficiencies and Needs
None noted.
Additional Coordinating Entities
FDOT, UMTA and St. Lucie County
Recommendations:
Maintain existing levels of contact.
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(UMTA)
Coordinating Agency: Urban Mass Transportation Administration
Participating Entities
St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization
Urban Mass Transportation Administration
Transportation
Existing Issues or Problems
Transportation Disadvantaged
Alternate Transportation Modes
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Transportation
Existing Method of Coordination
through the Metropolitan Planning Organization
Adm I n istrative/reg u I atory,
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
This is an advisory/regulatory relationship
Office with Primary Responsibility:
and MPO
Community Development
Department of
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-68
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-69
Deficiencies and Needs
None noted.
Additional Coordinating Entities
FDOT, FHWA, TCRPC and 81. Lucie County
Recommendations:
Maintain existing levels of contact
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Bell South Telephone
County Commissioners
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of
Bell South Telephone
Existing Issues or Problems
Population Growth
Providing Services
nfrastructure
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Transportation
Coordination
Very informal coordination exits between Bell South and St. Lucie County. Existing contacts are primarily with the Public Works Department concerning County
construction projects and telephone line locations
Existing Method of
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
relationship
This is an informal
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Public Works
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-70
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are found at the present time in coordination between St. Lucie County and Bell South.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
None
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.7; 10.1.3.2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-71
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Florida Power and Light (FP&L)
Participating Entities:
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Florida Power & Light
Existing Issues or Problems:
. Population Growth
- Providing Services
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Future Land Use Infrastructure
Transportation
Existing Method of Coordination:
Informal coordination exits between FP&L and St. Lucie County. Existing points of contact are found between the Departments of Public Works and Community
Development.
Nature of Relationship (i.e. Authority):
This is an informal relationship.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development and Department of Public Works
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time.
St. Lucie County ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
0-72
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are found at the present time in coordination between St. Lucie County and FP&L.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
None
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
10 1.3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.7 0 3.2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-73
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Authority (SLCW &SA)
Lucie County Water and Sewer
Coordinating Agency: St.
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County Water and Sewer Authority
Regulation of Utility Companies
Existing Issues or Problems
Population Growth
Providing Services
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Infrastructure
Future Land Use
County
The Board of
Existing Method of Coordination
The Water and Sewer Authority is a body charged with reviewing and approving the rates that may be charged by non-public utility operations
Commissioners acts as an appeal Board to the authority in matters that need further review.
(i.e. Authority)
Relationship
Nature of
County Commissioners.
made by the Board of
The authority is a semi-autonomous body, with appointment to
Office with Primary Responsibility:
and County Attorney
County Administrator
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-74
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-75
Deficiencies and Needs
None.
Additional Coordinating Entities
HRS and Department of Environmental Protection
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
No Specific Policy References
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(FP Farms WCD)
Control District
Pierce Farms Water
Coordinating Agency: Ft
Participating Entities
Ft. Pierce Farms Water Control District
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Water Conservation
Irrigation
Existing Issues or Problems
Drainage
Land Use
Conservation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Infrastructure
Existing Method of Coordination
through the Department of Public Works
activities are coordinated
Most
(i.e. Authority)
The Ft. Pierce Farms Water Control District is a taxing body that is concerned with drainage, conservation of water and control of water levels to provide water for
irrigation of lands within the District. The District is primarily an agricultural purpose district that, because of development activities, is converting into a more urban
drainage district.
Nature of Relationship
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Public Works
of
Department
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-76
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-77
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are noted at the present time,
Additional Coordinating Entities:
SFWMD and North St. Lucie River Water Control District
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.4.1.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Control District (NSLRWCD)
Water
Lucie River
Coordinating Agency: North St.
Participating Entities
North St. Lucie River Water Control District
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Water Conservation
Irrigation
Existing Issues or Problems
Drainage
Land Use
Conservation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Infrastructure
Existing Method of Coordination
activities are coordinated through the Department of Public Works
Most
(i.e. Authority)
The North St. Lucie River Water Management District is a taxing body that is concerned with drainage, conservation of water and control of water levels to provide
water for irrigation of lands within the District. The District is primarily an agricultural purpose district that, because of development activities, is converting into a more
urban drainage district.
Nature of Relationship
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Public Works
Department of
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-78
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-79
Deficiencies and Needs
No deficiencies are noted at the present time.
Additional Coordinating Entities:
SFWMD and Ft. Pierce Farms Water Control District
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient.
Policy References:
10.1.4.1.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Lucie Utilities
Coordinating Agency: Port St.
Participating Entities
Port St. Lucie Utilities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
City of Port St. Lucie
Existing Issues or Problems
System
and Sewer
Water
Expansion of
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
I nfrastructu re
Coordination
Existing Method of
nformal coordination exists between Port St. Lucie Utilities and St. Lucie County. Existing coordination is primarily between the County Public Works Department
and Port St. Lucie Utilities prior to County construction projects.
(i.e. Authority)
Relationship
Nature of
Review and permitting procedures handled on project by project basis
relationship exists between the two entities.
No formal
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Public Works
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
Coordination efforts are found to be sufficient at the present time
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-80
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Deficiencies and Needs
Lucie Utilities
Lucie County and Port St.
No serious deficiencies are found at the present in coordination between St.
Additional Coordinating Entities
Authority
& Sewer
St. Lucie County Water
Lucie Utilities In the County's
the Inclusion of the Port St.
to
Recommendations
Existing levels of coordination have been found to be sufficient. However, consideration need be given
Development Review Committee in order to minimize any long term utility/development conflicts
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-8
3.2
10
7
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
o.
Policy References
.4;
.1
3; 10.1
o.
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Intergovernmental Coordination -
Revised:
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Participating Entities:
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Existing Issues or Problems:
Airport Operations
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s):
Transportation
Existing Method of Coordination:
Formal coordination exists between the FAA and the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners.
Nature of Relationship (i.e. Authority):
This is a formal relationship with the FAA supervising airport operations.
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Airport
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms:
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient
Deficiencies and Needs
None noted.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
10-82
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-83
Additional Coordinating Entities
FDOT
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy References:
0.1.4.3.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Coordinating Agency: Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources
Existing Issues or Problems
Protection of Historical Resources
Conservation
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Housing
Coordination
The Division of Historical Resources provides planning and technical assistance, assists local communities with their historic preservation efforts by helping them
identify, evaluate and maintain or mitigate damage to significant historical resources. Projects with any state or federal involvement (CDBG, airports, DRI's, etc.) must
be submitted for review to determine the effects the projects may have on significant historical resources.
Existing Method of
(Le. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
relationship.
This is an advisory
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development
n meeting present needs.
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
coordination are found to be generally sufficient
Existing methods of
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-84
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-85
Deficiencies and Needs
None noted.
Additional Coordinating Entities
None.
Recommendations:
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient
Policy Reference:
0 3; 10.1.1.4; 10.1.1.6: 10.1.1.7.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Services
Coordinating Agency: Florida Division of Forestry, Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Participating Entities
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
Fla. Division of Forestry, Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer
Services
Land Use
Existing Issues or Problems
Conservation
Wildland Fire Protection
Coastal Management
Recreation & Open Space
Affected Comprehensive Plan Element(s)
Future Land Use
Conservation
Coordination
St. Lucie County contracts annually with the Florida Division of Forestry, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for the assistance of a professional urban
forester as well as wildland fire protection. A small portion of the urban forester's salary is paid by the cities of Ft. Pierce and Port St. Lucie and St. Lucie County.
The County Agriculture Extension office provides office space for the urban forester.
Existing Method of
(i.e. Authority)
Nature of Relationship
Lucie County.
residents of St.
is available to assist al
This is an advisory relationship. The urban forester
Intergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
0-86
Office with Primary Responsibility:
Department of Community Development
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Effectiveness of Coordination Mechanisms
n meeting present needs
Existing methods of coordination are found to be sufficient
Deficiencies and Needs
None noted
Additional Coordinating Entities
Lucie
Port St.
the City of
Pierce and
City of Ft.
Recommendations
Existing coordination is found to be sufficient.
Policy Reference
in the County's efforts to preserve Environmentally
ntergovernmental Coordination - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
the Department of Environmental Protection is an important funding partner
10-87
.1.7
Through the State's P2000 program
Sensitive lands.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
O.
.6
.1
0.1
.4
.1
o
Intergovernmental Coordination· March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
10-88
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CHAPTER 11
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
Prepared by:
St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Department of Growth Management
ADOPTED - January 9,1990
REVISED - March 5, 2002 (Ord. 02-008)
REVISED - January 6, 2004 (Compliance Agreement)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
11-1
11-1
11-2
11-2
11-4
11-4
11-5
11-5
11-6
PURPOSE
RELATIONSHIP OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT TO THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
How Capital Improvement Costs Were Estimated: .......
List of Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adequacy of Public Education and Health Systems
Local Policies and Practices ........
County Policies and Practices . . . . . . .
Other Agencies' Policies and Practices
11-8
11-10
11-11
11-12
11-14
11-17
11-19
11-21
11-21
11-21
11 -22
11-23
ANALYSIS OF CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS
Aviation .............
Corrections . . . . . . . . . . .
Stormwater Management
Government Buildings
Libraries . . . . . . . . . .
Parks and Recreation
Potable Water
Sanitary Sewer
Solid Waste
Roads .
Ports
11-25
11 -25
11-27
FISCALANALYSIS. .......
Financial History And Forecast:
Revenues Sources of St. Lucie County:
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-1
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
MILLAGE RATES. PROPERTY VALUES AND PROJECTIONS THROUGH
TAX YEAR 2020:
11-33
11-36
MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES
11-41
GAS TAXES
11-45
EXPENDITURES
11-49
PROJECTION OF DEBT CAPACITY
11 -52
MAJOR OUTSTANDING DEBTS
11-56
GOALS. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
APPENDIX A
CONCURRENCY IMPLEMENTATION
5-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN, FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004)
APPENDIX B
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
LIST OF TABLES
A Summary of Repair/Replacement, Existing Deficiency
and Future Need Cost, by Public Facility
11-1
Table
11-10
11-29
999/2020
Estimates
985/1 998
Actual
Lucie County
S1.
Revenues for
11-2
Table
11-34
2020
985
Lucie County Millage Rates, Values and Projections/
S1.
11-3
Table
11 -38
11-43
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Revenue Sources
Road Tax Collection for S1. Lucie County
Actuals Through 1998 - Projections 1999/2020
11·2
Major
11-4
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11-5
Table
Table
11 -46
11-51
11 -53
11-30
11 -30
11-31
11 -39
11-44
11-47
11-47
11-47
11-55
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
Expenditures for St. Lucie County
Actual 1980 Through 1999, Estimates 2000 Through 2020
Analysis of Revenues Available for St. Lucie County - Bond Capacity
Current Major Debts of St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners
LIST OF FIGURES
St. Lucie County Millage Rate History/ Countywide Millages ...
Comparison of Major Intergovernmental Revenues - FY 2000 . .
St. Lucie County Sources of Revenue for General Use - FY 2000
Major Revenue Sources - FY 2000 ...................
Sources of Revenue for Transportation Program - FY 2000
General Government Expenditures ............
Public Safety/Law Enforcement Expenditures. . . .
Overall Distribution of Expenditures - FY 2000 ...
Distribution of Debt FY 2000 .. .
11-3
Table 11-6
Table 11-7
Table 11-8
Figure 11-1
Figure 11-2
Figure 11-3
Figure 11-4
Figure 11-5
Figure 11-6
Figure 11-7
Figure 11-8
Figure 11-9
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) is to identify the need for, and program the provision of, all necessary public facilities which are required to
maintain the highest possible quality of life for the citizens of St. Lucie County. This is to be done through ensuring the availability of all necessary public facilities
at the time those facilities are needed as new development activities are completed.
The result of the process followed in developing the CIE is a demonstration that a reasonable, measurable, affordable plan to reduce, eliminate, or prevent facility
deficiencies within a specified time has been established. For purposes of this Element, a Capital Improvement is defined as a substantial facility (land, building or
major equipment) that costs at least $25,000, which may be paid for or contracted for in phases, and which is required to meet the adopted level of service standards
as set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Improvements Element was developed to fulfill the requirements of Rule 9J-5.016 of the Florida
Administrative Code.
RELATIONSHIP OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT (CIE) TO THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Capital Improvements Element (CIE) summarizes the needed capital facilities as identified in the other elements of the County's Comprehensive Plan. These
needs include those necessary to correct existing deficiencies in meeting level of service standards while providing for future needs. Deficiencies were determined
by comparing the current facilities to the currently adopted/proposed level of service standard.
The CIE considers the cost of reducing, eliminating, or preventing deficiencies as well as the ability of the County to pay that cost. In 1990, the County's initial analysis
of its needs showed that, in most cases, the demand for new facilities outstripped the County's ability to provide for them. Review of the County's fiscal position in
FY 2000 indicates that there are still several areas where future needs cannot be met through the existing sources of revenue available to the County. Maintaining
a financially feasible plan requires re-examination of the County's Levels of Service Standards, increases in the levels of current funding sources, identification of new
funding sources, use of cost reduction measures, or a combination of two or more of these actions.
The sections of this element build on each other In a logical progression and consist of
fiscal resources and local government practices concerning provision of capital improvements
improvements, based on historic and projected revenue and
fiscal ability to provide adequate capital
an overview of capital needs,
analysis of capital facility needs and the County's
expenditure patterns
.
.
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
for
goals, objectives, and policies to guide decision-making about capital facilities with specific mechanisms being provided to monitor progress and allow
periodic corrections, and to provide for consistency among Comprehensive Plan elements; and
be met
financing needs wi
improvements and an outline of how the
five-year schedule of capital
an implementation strategy, including q
.
.
Overview
The County's "Needs" through FY 2005 were derived through several processes. First, those Comprehensive Plan elements dealing with specific facility improvements
needed to meet the demands of both existing and future development were identified. Second, capital projects already planned for the County were considered as
"needed" in order to maintain existing levels of service and to correct any existing deficiency. Third, existing deficiencies also were identified by comparing current
inventories of various facility types to the level of service standards found in this Comprehensive Plan.
Future deficiencies occur when population growth triggers the need for additional facilities in order to maintain the locally adopted level of service standard for that
facility type. An iterative process has been used to refine the level of service standards, project or equipment costs, and other factors to arrive at a schedule of needs
which the County can afford to provide, based on available revenue sources. Needs beyond FY 2005 will be addressed during the annual review and update of the
Capital Improvements Element.
There are three primary areas of capital needs which have been identified by this balancing process that the County needs to address. They are transportation,
recreation and open space (park facilities), and solid waste. Road transportation needs were derived from FDOT transportation improvement programs, MPO data,
and local knowledge and have been adjusted to funding availability. Recreation and open space needs were arrived at by comparing existing facilities to the existing
adopted level of service standard. Solid Waste needs are based on projected needs for maintaining the County's Solid Waste Program.
A number of localized projects recognized as needs by the County have been included in the Capital Improvement Program. Additionally, several studies are planned
in various functional areas during the planning period which are expected to generate recommendations for additional capital facilities. These needs will be addressed
in future updates of this element.
Costs Were Estimated
Preliminary costs were developed for all areas of the Comprehensive Plan that called for needs, improvements, or specific construction projects. Transportation costs
were derived from local historical cost data, from FDOT unit costs, and from cost estimates from various planning documents. Recreation and open space costs were
developed from information supplied by the Parks and Recreation Department. Solid waste disposal costs were derived from the Public Works Department based
on historical capital and operating data and known expansion needs. Drainage costs were obtained from the Public Works Department
How Capital Improvement
As described further in the Infrastructure Element, St. Lucie County presently provides limited water and wastewater services to three (3) areas of the County. The
City of Port St. Lucie and the City of Ft. Pierce provide some limited utility services outside of their municipal limits, but for the most part, these utilities limit their service
areas to properties within their corporate boundaries. Because the County Commission does not provide any direct or indirect funding support to these municipal
utility providers, the cost to provide their services to the unincorporated parts of the County are not include in this Capital Improvement Element. Funding for any
such expansion is to be borne by the particular utility or individuals seeking to obtain those services
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-2
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Since 1994, the County has required that all solid waste generated by single family homes in the unincorporated areas of the County, east of the Turnpike/I-95 Corridor.
be subject to mandatory collection. The County does not operate this collection service and the cost of this service is not a part of any county budget or operation.
The County has awarded a collection franchise to a private hauler and that hauler bills the individual homeowner based on data supplied by the County. The City
of Port St. Lucie has a contract with St. Lucie County to dispose of the solid waste collected in the City at the St. Luce County Landfill. Ft. Pierce currently sends its
solid waste to the Okeechobee Regional Landfill in Okeechobee County.
Port facilities were costed by using best available cost estimates for the improvements cited in Appendix B. With the dissolution of the St. Lucie County Port and Airport
Authority in 1999, the Board of County Commissioners has assumed all management and operational responsibility for the Port area. In 1999, the "Port" was added
as a dependent Department of the Board of County Commissioners. Future cost estimates for improvements to the Port area will be provided as part of the Port
Master Plan development referenced in Goal 2.8 of the Transportation Element. Upon the completion of this updated master plan, appropriate amendments will be
made to the Capital Improvement Element.
Improvements at the St. Lucie County International Airport are based upon the level of planned improvements to this facility for only the current five year planning
period (Through FY 2005). Further revisions to the Airport Needs Plan will be made following the completion of the pending master plan update for the St. Lucie
County International Airport.
needs and costs for this function have not been addressed
The County currently does not provide or directly support mass transit services in the county. Therefore
in this element.
List of Needs
All "needs" fall into one of two categories. The first category reflects those existing needs, or the shortfall currently experienced in light of the community's desired
level of service. The second category involves those further needs which are over and above the first group and are necessary to meet the level of service
requirements identified as needed through 2005. The specific list of needs is provided in the Schedule of Improvements found in the Implementation Strategy Section
(Appendix B) of this Element
Adequacy of Public Education and Health Systems
Both the public education district and the health system are County-wide; however, the County itself does not have direct fiscal responsibility for these systems. In
1988, the County enacted an Educational Facilities Impact Fee in an effort to help the school district provide for new educational facilities needed by growth. There
currently are 31 public schools (20 elementary, 6 middle, 5 high schools) and five (5) special purpose schools in the County. Over the next five year period (FY 2005)
there are no new public education facilities planned for construction. Existing and new schools will be located in existing infrastructure service areas or designated
expansion areas.
.
In 1990, the St. Lucie County Public Health Unit opened a branch center in the South County, in the Village Green Shopping Center. The St. Lucie County Public
Health Unit has recently completed the construction of a new main public health unit office in the City of Port St. Lucie, relocating most administrative functions from
their previous offices in Ft. Pierce. This office is intended to provide general public health services to the residents of the southern portion of the County. The Health
Unit still maintains offices in Ft. Pierce to serve the northern areas of the County. No other significant expansion of the public health system is contemplated through
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-3
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
n the County. The following paragraphs summarize the
facilities development
financial responsibility for al
the year 2005.
· Local Policies and Practices
St. Lucie County does not provide all services or have
different responsible parties.
County Policies and Practices
St. Lucie County historically has not been able to adequately fund a 5-year Schedule of Capital Improvements for all capital needs. Transportation improvements
are scheduled on a five year basis, with funding reviewed annually. Appropriations for recreation improvements have been decided on an annual basis at the
completion of the regular budget review process. Until the recent enactment of the county's Investment for the Future program, funding for all but maintenance
activities has been essentially non-existent. With the Investment for the Future funding, the County has been able to fund a limited capital improvement program
An overview of the methods used by the County to fund capital improvements is described in the section of this element entitled "Fiscal Analysis"
.
The County currently provides sewage collection, treatment and disposal, and potable water services to three (3) limited areas of the County. The City of Port St.
Lucie and the City of Ft. Pierce provide some limited services outside of their municipal limits, but for the most part these utilities limit their services areas to properties
within their corporate boundaries. Should unincorporated areas seek to obtain services from Ft. Pierce, they are required to annex into the municipality once their
property is contiguous. If unincorporated areas seek service from Port St. Lucie they may pay a surcharge. Those areas served by the County with water and sewer
services have been so serviced through the establishment of local special taxing districts for that purpose. No general tax funds have been used to develop, operate
or maintain these systems. Future expansion of these systems will be done in a similar manner.
Currently, mass transit
Solid waste collection is provided by private contract haulers and disposal facilities are provided by the County and funded through user fees.
services are unavailable within the County and there are no current financially feasible plans to provide such facilities.
Historically, not having developed a separate capital improvements program, the County did not have a formalized system of tying identified needs to the support
of efficient land development through timing and location. This is a situation that has undergone significant change with the adoption of the 1990 Comprehensive
Plan including the goals, objectives and policies within this element that provide the criteria upon which capital improvement priorities are to be determined. The Land
Use Element, which represents a portrayal of the future physical fabric of this community, in turn, becomes the guide by which facility needs are scheduled for
construction. As an example, the Transportation Element is shaped to serve the land use needs identified in the Land Use Element and, in turn, provide a portion
of the overall project listing found in this element. The resulting road pattern serves the uses of land in location and in timing as phased in this element in a manner
that puts individual facilities in place concurrent with the uses of land which generate the facilities need.
Agencies' Policies and Practices
The Board of County Commissioners serves as the ex-officio governing board of two dependent districts: the St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District and the Erosion
Control District. There are other public entities located within the County for which the County has no financial oversight responsibility. The major entities are listed
below
Other
.
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-4
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
St. Lucie County District School Board;
St. Lucie County Fire District;
City of Ft. Pierce;
City of Port St. Lucie;
Village of St. Lucie;
Indian River Community College;
St. Lucie County Health Department;
North St. Lucie River Water Control District
Ft. Pierce Farms Water Control District;
St. Lucie County Law Library Association;
Elements of the Judicial System;
Office of the Medical Examiner - 19th Judicial District of Florida;
South Florida Water Management District.
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
timing of services provided by these agencies generally is governed by the availability of funds
Two major State agencies influence the location and timing of certain capital projects in St. Lucie County: the Florida Department of Transportation and the South
Florida Water Management District. The Florida Department of Transportation maintains a multi-year transportation improvement program, which is updated annually
in coordination with the St. Lucie County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The Florida Department of Transportation does not fund road projects in coastal
high hazard areas unless they are necessary for emergency evacuation and are included in local comprehensive plans. Since the MPO and County Community
Development Department share staff, the working relationship is close and will permit constant monitoring of the effect of Department of Transportation proposals
on the location and timing of development.
The extension and
South Florida Water Management District issues permits for the consumptive use of water, well construction, and surface water management Permits are issued
only after public testimony is received at board meetings and public hearings. The District is conducting a feasibility study on one or more attenuation areas in the
western portion of St. Lucie County. The County works closely with the District's designated staff liaison on local issues affecting the timing and location of
development.
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-5
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ANALYSIS OF CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS
As required by Rule 9J-5.016(2)(b), a general analysis is provided below of the fiscal implications of the existing deficiencies and future needs for each type of public
facility. Table 11-1 summarizes the cost breakdown among repairing or replacing existing facilities, remedying existing deficiencies, and meeting future needs for
each type of capital facility based on the approved Five Year Capital Improvement program for the County included as part of the County's annual budget.
For the purpose of determining facility needs, the County, in 1990, established, under Policy 11.1.1.2, four classifications of public facilities. Used in conjunction
with the adopted level of service standards for the various parts of the Comprehensive Plan, these classifications are to be a guide in determining the need for, and
then the development of, any capital improvement projects that are required to meet the growth demands of the community. The classification of facilities is as
follows
Category A Public Facilities are arterial and collector roads, mass transit, stormwater management, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, and parks
and recreation facilities used for concurrency and owned or operated by St. Lucie County, all of which are addressed in other elements of this Comprehensive
Plan.
A.
Category B Public Facilities are libraries, corrections, courthouse, administration, mosquito control, Port of Ft. Pierce, and St. Lucie County International
Airport as owned, operated or developed by St. Lucie County. Category B Public Facilities are not used for concurrency purposes as provided for in the
Concurrency Management System
B.
Category C Public Facilities are arterial and collector roads, mass transit, stormwater management, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, and parks
and recreation facilities used for concurrency and owned or operated by Federal, State or municipal governments, independent districts, and private
organizations, all of which are addressed in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan.
C
Category D Public Facilities are public health and public education facilities owned or operated by Federal, State, or municipal governments, independent
districts, and private organizations. Category D Public Facilities are not used for concurrency purposes as provided for in the Concurrency Management
System.
D.
Relative priority of need among facility types has been indicated through the extent of improvements included in this section. At this time, the County is able to
adequately fund all facilities, except transportation, that are needed to satisfy the minimum level of service requirements for the existing population. As long as it
can afford to do so, the County intends to take advantage of various non-local revenue sources that can be earmarked for specific purposes to repair and improve
existing facilities. Although this limits the usefulness of theoretical priorities among types of facilities this has, over the past ten years, been the only way that the
County has been able to maintain a minimum Capital Improvement Program
At such time as the revenue sources of the County are not sufficient to fund all identified capital facility needs, relative priority among facility types will be determined
through the setting of levels of service (LOS) in the various elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Non-LOS related facilities will have a lower priority than facilities
for which levels of service are adopted.
5.
.1
The timing and location of capital improvements to public facilities as outlined in this element supports the Future Land Use Element and specifically Objective
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-6
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
This objective states that future development shall be directed to areas where provision of facilities can be ensured. A policy under this objective delineates an Urban
Service Boundary, and another policy allows for amendment, by the Board of County Commissioners, of that boundary every two years
These densities and intensities have determined the
The Urban Service Boundary corresponds to the densities and intensities shown on the Future Land Use Map
projects shown as attributable to future needs in the Schedule of Capital Improvements
The capital facility needs identified in the various elements, as well as other needs known to the County, are briefly described below. Cost and scheduling of each
improvement is shown in the Schedule of Capital Improvements. Revenue source for each type of capital facility is shown on the chart entitled "Projected Costs and
Revenues". Facility needs are identified below, along with appropriate information regarding location, service area, purpose, and general characteristics of each
improvement.
AVIATION
A specific level of service standard for the Category B Public Facilities, Airport, has not been established. Appendix B outlines a number of projects planned for the
St. Lucie County International Airport over the period FY 00 through 05. As of the development of this Comprehensive Plan, the Board of County Commissioners
for St Lucie County is in the process of redeveloping a Comprehensive Capital Improvement Program for the St. Lucie County International Airport through the
conducting of a complete update to the master plan for the airport. Upon the completion of that master plan update, the capital improvement element will be amended
to reflect the approved plans and programs for the community.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-7
-
-
other
-
-
$200,000
$1,262,000
$2,500,000
$386,000
$3,500,000
$1,302,000
t!b/d
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
cien
A Summary of Repair/Replacemen.,
and Future Need Cost, by Public Facility
Table 11-1
future needs
existing deficiency
repair/
replacement
$12,000,000
$500,000
$3,000,000
Aviation
Corrections
$272,100
$275,000
$1,350,000
$1 ,000,000
$75,000
$37,500
Drainage
Govt. buildings
$8,200,000
$7,500
$125,000,000
$3,800,000
t!b/d
800,000
t!b/ d
$1
$567,000
t!b/d
Libraries
Mosquito control
recreation
los related
Parks &
Ports
Roads
$75,000,000
$24,000,000
$25,000,000
$2,800,000
non-Ios related
wastewater
treatment!
reclaimed water
Sewer
$6,000,000
11-8
$500,000
Water
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
repair/ existing deficiency future needs other
replacement
-
-
Erosion control $1,507,000 $200,000
-
-
Totals $35,836,500 $2,575,000 $254,479,600 $9,150,000
CORRECTIONS
The level of service standard for the Category B Public Facilities, Corrections, shall be as follows:
0.004 beds per capita.
Using this level of service standard the following Table outlines the expected correctional facility needs through the year 2020.
7
Õ
80
(165)
250
Countywide
Population
192695
212000
232000
253250
274500
0.004
0.004
0.004
0.004
0.004
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-9
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
748 permanent
'*'
St. Lucie County was under court order to reduce overcrowding in the jail system in the early 1980's. A new facility was constructed and occupied in 1987, with several
expansions and additions to this facility having taking place since that time. The jail is again approaching overcrowded conditions. The next phase of expansion at
this facility will include the construction of a new 100 to 150 bed facility. No specific construction schedule for these facilities has been established, and therefore these
facilities are not part of the current Five (5) Year Capital Improvement Program.
Corrections facilities are not pertinent to concurrency management, but they have been incorporated into this Capital Improvements Element for local information and
to demonstrate the County's commitment to providing the necessary facilities to meet the needs of an increasing population.
ities, Stormwater Management Systems and other major stormwater conveyance systems, shall be as
STORMW AIER MANAGEMENT
The levels of service standards for Category A Public Faci
follows:
72 hr.
<FFE
<1.0 ft.
<1.0 ft.
<1.5 ft.
00 yr.
72 hr
<FFE
<0.5 ft.
<0.5 ft.
<0.75 ft.
o yr.
24 hr
1/2W
<0.5 ft.
o yr
Structure/Facility
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-10
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
based on available data.
(FFE)
floor elevation
(finished
than first
Peak flood stages less
the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Counci
one travel lane
Y2 of the roadway width (W)
routes as defined by the County and
Flooding limited to each side of the road such that
is not flooded.
Evacuation
2
3
respective
or
to a
are the only access
that
Roads with four or more travel lanes, or roads
area/development (secondary evacuation routes).
4
be used to estimate encroachment
which wi
Other roads which are not critical for evacuation, but
on FFEs.
5
In June of 1997, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Stormwater Management Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) as part of the County "Investment
for the Future" Program. The mission of the County Stormwater Management Program is: to manage County Stormwater systems to prevent flooding and property
damage and to protect water quality for the safety and enjoyment of the citizen's of St. Lucie County and the preservation of the environment and enhancement of
wildlife habitat. This MSTU allows the County to levy an annual ad valorem assessment in the unincorporated areas of the County, with the funds generated to be
used solely for providing stormwater management services.
through FY 2005
funds
to be constructed with these MSTU
projects
improvement
the planned stormwater
outlines
Appendix B
GOYERNMENT BUILDINGS
Government buildings will not be taken into account for concurrency purposes, but the County's planned expenditures for new buildings are of local interest and are
related to the County's capacity to support new development. The projects shown in the Schedule of Capital Improvements indicate that the County has considered
future growth needs by planning for expansion of existing facilities to meet the new population demands.
shal
follows:
be as
Courthouse
Category B Public Facilities
The standard for level of service for
capita
the following Table outlines the expected Public Facilities, Courthouse facility needs through the year 2020
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
.839 square feet per
11-11
Using this level of service standard
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
LOS Countywide
Standard Population
2000 0.839 192695 61671 178704 7033
- - - -
2005 0.839 212000 77868 178704 836
- - - -
2010 0.839 232000 194648 178704 (15944)
- - -
2015 0.839 253250 212476 178704 (33773)
- - -
2020 0.839 274500 230305 178704 (51602)
- - -
- - -
-
The standard for level of service for Category B Public Facilities, Administrative and Maintenance, shall be as follows:
1 .253 square feet per capita
Using this level of service standard the following Table outlines the expected Public Facilities, Administrative and Maintenance facility needs through the year 2020.
-
IAINTENAt
Min. SF (gro
Required BE
Requsfirel
- -
2000 .253 192695 241447 247455 6008
- -
2005 .253 212000 265636 247455 (18181)
- -
2010 .253 232000 290696 247455 (43241 )
- -
2015 .253 253250 317322 247455 (69867)
- - -
2020 .253 274500 343948 247455 (96493)
-
-
St. Lucie County Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
11-12
the rationale behind each project is explained below, in the order in
Since government buildings are not described in any other element of the Comprehensive Plan
which the projects occur in the Schedule of Capital Improvements
COURTHOUSE EXPANSION. The original St. Lucie County Courthouse was built in the early 1960's. The expansion will provide ten courtrooms, jury rooms,
hearing rooms, law library and judge's chambers. In 1991, the county completed an expansion to this facility that provided for ten new courtrooms, jury
rooms, hearing rooms, law library and judges chambers. A three story parking garage was also constructed to provide parking in the area.
Pierce Courthouse Complex and at the South
be located at both the existing downtown Ft
Additional court space has been determined to be needed and wi
County Courthouse Annex.
ROAD & BRIDGE COMPOUND. The County now occupies a site for the County Road Compound which also includes the automobile service station,
building maintenance operations, and mosquito control operations. The site cannot be physically expanded due to it's location. Planning has begun for the
eventual relocation of portions of the activities located at the compound, but any relocation is a minimum of five (5) to six (6) years out (2005/2006) and is
not included as part of the five year budget process.
LIBRARIES
Category B Public Facilities, Libraries. shall be as follows
.525 square feet of library per capita; and
1045 books per capita.
level of service for
The standards for
Using this level of service standard the following Table outlines the expected Library Buildings/Books needs through the year 2020.
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-13
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Countywide
Population
10975
3700
(6800)
115000
115000
115000
115000
155000
01165
111300
121800
132956
144113
92695
212000
232000
253250
274500
.525
.525
.525
.525
.525
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
(17956)
(29113)
9851
(19149)
(49962)
317251
317251
317251
317251
307400
336400
367213
398025
212000
-
232000
-
253250
274500
.45
.45
.45
.45
.45
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
(80774)
gross book needs on a system
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
At present (June 2001)
mprovements consist of these items
Books. Book needs system-wide were calculated according to a formula shown in Policy 11.1.1.21
basis have been determined to meet the minimum LOS standard for this Category B facility.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11-14
The library projects included in the Schedule of Capital
South County Service Area (south of Midway Road): Through the planning period of this Comprehensive Plan, the St. Lucie County Library System is
proposed to be expanded to include two (2) new facilities in the Port St. Lucie Area and expansion/renovations to two of the existing three (3) County facilities
in the City. These new facilities would be located at a site the County currently owns in the vicinity of Southern Oaks Middle School. The second would
be at a site yet to be determined in the southwestern part of Port St. Lucie. No specific construction schedule for either facility has been established and,
therefore, neither facility is part of the current Five (5) Year Capital Improvement Program
During this same planning period, it is proposed that the existing St. Lucie County Library Branches on Prima Vista Boulevard and on Morningside Boulevard
be renovated/expanded to meet increasing service demands. The Port St. Lucie Branch (River Park) is to be renovated in FY 2001. No other specific
construction schedule for expanding either facility has been established and, therefore, neither facility is part of the current Five (5) Year Capital Improvement
Program
Central County Service Area (St. Lucie Boulevard to Midway Road): Through the planning period of this Comprehensive Plan, the St. Lucie County Library
System is proposing to expand the existing library system in the central county by one new facility, Ft. Pierce Beach, and to provide for an expansion to one
of the existing facilities in northwest Ft. Pierce; the Zora Neale Hurston Branch.
Lucie County Library System
the St
North County Service Area (north of St. Lucie Boulevard): Through the planning period of this Comprehensive Plan
is proposing no new or expanded facilities in the areas north of St. Lucie Boulevard.
buildings and
facilities
Recreation
follows:
County Parks and Recreation, shall be as
PARKSÞ.f\JD RECREATION
The standards for level of service for Category A Public Facilities
improvements) are included in the cost of park land.
.e
,000 population County-wide.
Regional/metropolitan = 5 acres per 1
A
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
through the year 2020
the unincorporated area
the following Table outlines the expected Parks needs
11-15
,000 population in
Community park land = 5 acres per 1
Using this level of service standard
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
B.
14767
14767
4767
14767
14767
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
3804
3707
13607
13501
3395
88
63
40
11
(20)
427
427
427
427
427
Countywide
Populat,lon
2000 .005 192695 963
- - -
2005 .005 212000 1060
- - -
2010 .005 232000 1160
- - -
2015 .005 253250 1266
- - -
2020 .005 274500 1373
- - -
- - -
* acreage total Includes Environmental Significant Lands sites
- -
INIT' ,RKS
-
1; Ac
~roSi
~qulr
-
-
2000 .005 67765 339
-
2005 .005 72764 364
-
2010 .005 77400 387
-
2015 .005 8~205 416
-
2020 .005 89445 447
-
- =
* acreage total Includes Beach Access and Beach Parks
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11-16
As of the development of this Comprehensive Plan , the Board of County Commissioners for St Lucie County is in the process of redeveloping a
Comprehensive Capital Improvement Program for the County Parks and Recreation System. Upon the completion of that program, the capital improvement
element will be amended to reflect the approved plans and programs for the community.
POTABLE WAIER
Systems. shall be:
The standard for level of service for Category A Public Facilities, County Potable Water
88 gallons per capita per day.
As detailed in the Potable Water Sub-element, the County provides only limited potable water facilities. A master plan study has been programmed to meet the ongoing
needs of comprehensive planning and to provide guidance in the acquisition and/or construction of potable water facilities. Future Plan amendments are expected
as a result of the study, but the County will provide potable water capital facilities only to the extent that offsetting user fees can be imposed.
SANITARY SEWER
The level of service standards for sanitary sewer systems, other than those owned and operated by Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority, in the unincorporated area of the
County shall be 100 gallons per capita per day. The Holiday Pines Utility operates at a level of service for sanitary sewer at 280 gallons per each equivalent residential
connection. Upon completion of the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan, any necessary change in the level of service standard will be made through a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
As explained in detail in the Sanitary Sewer Sub-element of this plan, the County provides only limited sanitary sewer facilities. A master plan study has been
programmed to meet the need for comprehensive planning and to provide information needed for making decisions about acquiring and/or constructing sewer systems.
Based on the study, plan amendments will be proposed. Like potable water facilities, sanitary sewer facilities will be provided by the County only to the extent that
user charges support those facilities. The net effect of the addition of County-owned water and sewer facilities on the financial feasibility of the Capital Improvements
Element should be zero
SOLID WASTE
Solid Waste, shall be
Category A Public Facilities
The level of service standard for
pounds of solid waste per capita County-wide per day at the landfi
rates
lined cell disposal capacity at current fi
9.31
Seven (7) years of landfi
A.
B.
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-17
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
rates.
The County currently operates the only solid waste disposal facility in the community. Therefore, all items listed under the capital facilities budget in Appendix B pertain
to the County's one active landfill on Glades Cut-off Road near the Florida Turnpike. This is the service area for all solid waste improvements is the entire County,
excluding the City of Ft. Pierce.
raw land capacity at current fi
Thirty years of landfi
C.
ROADS
Roads shall be as follows:
for
The level of service standard for Category A Public Facilities
Maintain
Maintain
D
D
C
(local
Non-State roadway
(major city/county road)
Non-State roadway
E
D
C
Maintain
E
E
D
Non-State roadway (arterial)
Maintain
B
B
B
(rural
Limited Access/
Freeway
nterstate/ FIHS
Maintain
B
B
B
Controlled Access
Maintain
D/E
DIE
DIE
nterstate/ FIHS (urban)
Limited Access/
Freeway
Maintain
E
D
D
Controlled Access
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-18
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
D/E
B/D
Other State Roads
Multi-lane
(Rural/Urban)
measures
D/E
Transportation System Management and Transportation Demand Management
be used to maintain and improve traffic flow.
C/O
Two lane
wi
This element describes road, bridge, and intersection improvements that are necessary to meet adopted level of service standards, as well as other
improvements that consist of necessary repairs and expansion projects to meet existing and future needs. Appendix "C" represents a summary table of the
County's road network and its expected LOS activity based upon the MPO's approved 2025 cost feasible plan.
PORTS:
As of the development of this Comprehensive Plan, the Board of County Commissioners for St Lucie County is in the process of redeveloping a Comprehensive Master
Plan for the Port of Ft. Pierce. Upon the completion of that revised master Plan, the capital improvement element will be amended to reflect the approved plans and
programs for the community.
Some of these types of public facilities, including corrections, courthouse, administrative buildings, libraries, and mosquito control, are included in this element for
public information and are not required by Rule 9J-5. However, the current level of service provided by each type of facility is included in this element as useful local
information. These levels of service do not pertain to concurrency management requirements.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Financial History And Forecast:
The history and forecast of the financial status of St. Lucie County spans a period from 1980 through 2020. This history was extracted from the annual audit reports
which are presented each year as provided by State Statute. The forecast was developed by using the history of the County's land valuations and trends of other
revenues received from other sources. The expenses were derived by using the historical data and predicting the completion time of projects now in process
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-19
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The data presented is based on a constant growth factor that may not be effected by minor fluctuations in the economy of the area. St. Lucie County depends greatly
on the tourist, agriculture and construction industries for creating a solid economic environment. As the County grows, this may not always be the situation.
It is anticipated that, over the next several years, it will be very hard to keep the millage rate below the ten mill cap. The growth in land valuation is the key to keeping
the millage rates at the current level. The level of expenditures have been controlled by the maximum amount millage which the Board of County Commissioners
are able to levy. It should be noted that, at no time, does the aggregate millage rate ever exceed 9.5 mills.
An optional element of St. Lucie County's Comprehensive Plan, the Economic Development Element, addresses the general economic issues currently facing St.
Lucie County and identifies potential future economic issues and opportunities that the community should address in order to provide for a diversified economic base
and to provide for adequate revenues to meet our community needs. Although this is not a required element, economic development is considered to be critical to
the planning of St. Lucie County's future if the County is to seek a means, other than simple increase in residential land valuations, to support the required community
services. A plan that provides direction for the future will: assist local government and property owners/developers in informed investment decision-making; diversify
and promote a more sustainable tax base; protect the integrity of real estate investments; protect against overbuilding and urban sprawl; protect against unnecessary
losses of resource land; protect against losses of open space and natural systems; stimulate job growth in the targeted industries such as aerospace/engineering,
marine, biotech/medical, pharmaceutical, agricultural, aquaculture, electronics, tourism, as well as cultural and arts industries; and improve global competitiveness.
The Economic Development Element recognizes that St. Lucie County needs to act in coordination with neighboring municipalities and private enterprise, because
of the economic relationships that exist between geographic areas and the private sector
Lucie County:
St. Lucie County depends upon a number of sources for funding its operations. Table 11-2 provides a breakdown of this funding indicating amounts by source. It
provides both a historical view of what actually happened back through 2000, as well as annual projections through the year 2025. The following paragraphs provide
specific information related to each of the funding sources listed in Table 11-2:
Revenues Sources of St.
TAXES, AD VALOREM:
St. Lucie County collected $80,459,486 million in ad valorem taxes during the fiscal year ending September 30,2003. This amount represents 9.0092 mills
for operating and .1620 mills for voted debt. Unique to St. Lucie County is the fact that the County has a separate Fire Control District which levies its own
millage. The Fire Board has the ability to levy up to 3.000 mills. In 1993, the County obtained an opnion from the State that recognized the Fire Board as
an independent special taxing district; thus allowing the County Commission to no longer include the Fire Board millage as part of the general county wide
millage.
1)
LICENSES AND PERMITS:
These sources of revenue are continually being reviewed by the County. The fees which produce the largest volume of revenue are the fees and permits
charged for new construction. The County also receives funds from occupational licenses collected by the Tax Collector
(2)
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-20
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
NTER-GOVERNMENT AL:
The largest source of revenue, other than ad valorem taxes, is inter-governmental revenues. The two largest sources are the One-Half Cent Sales Tax and
State Revenue Sharing. The balance of revenues received consists of Race Track Tax, Insurance Agent Fees, Beverage Licenses and County Gas Tax.
The remaining gas taxes are not included in this column due to the fact that those taxes are used primarily for capital expansion. (NOTE: In 1986, the drop
in revenue was caused by a $2.0 million allocation of One-Half Cent Sales Tax collections to road construction.)
(3)
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
(4)
related fees.
the sale of items, user fees at recreational areas, and library
Primarily, this revenue is derived from
FINES AND FORFEITURES:
This source of revenue continues to grow each year with the increase of the population and traffic. The fine collection, which is the duty of the Clerk of Court,
generates the majority of the revenue. The balance of the revenue is bond forfeitures collected by the Sheriff and Clerk of Court.
(5)
NTEREST AND MISCELLANEOUS
The St. Lucie County Finance Department invests surplus funds for the Board of County Commissioners. This has been an unpredictable source of revenue
due to the economic changes in interest rates. The balance of the revenue is mostly from the concession sales and donations made to the County to improve
public areas (i.e. recreation, library books, etc.).
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-21
(6)
1
&
103,936,792
97,657,456
1
3,032,673
GOVERNMENTAL
1
8,608,522
& Budget
1,450,104
1,542,386
of Management
69,183,835
69,620,784
8
°
214,237,910
Lucie
TAXES
FISCAL
YEAR
END
2000
2001
2002
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
SOURCE: 81.
10.0000
9.0000
8.0000 /
7.0000
ill 6.0000
ro
0:::
ill 5.0000
0>
..!!! 4.0000
~
3.0000
2.0000
1.0000
0.0000
Figure 11-1
MillAGE RATES 1994 THRU 2005
GENERAL AND FINE & FORFEITURE FUNDS
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 199920002001 2002200320042005
11-2
Comparison of Major Sources of Inter-Governmental
Revenue -
FY 2003
IMPACT FEES
20%
STATE REVENUE
SHARING
17%
CABLE & TELECOM
TAXES
5%
TAX
1%
ELECTRIC
FRANCHISE FEES
19%
ONE~HALF CENT
SALES TAX
38%
SOURCE: St. Lucie County Office of Management & Budget
I mIFORFEITUREl
mGENERAL J
.
. Fie 1-3
St. Lucie County Sources of Revenue· FY 2003
INTEREST &
MISCELLANEOUS
FINES & FORFEITURES 6%
3%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
3%
INTER-GOVERNr0ENT AL
17%
LICENSES & PERMITS
2%
SOURCE: 51. Lucie County Office of Management & Budget
-f'~~ '1"~{'oi:;~;t-f'~ .. .. .. .. .. .. '.. ..
+-fo. {'o+l"1"tfo.~...-f-.."'-l''f"f'f'f'·~~'' .. .. .. .. ..
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:t~. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. : .. :
...................................._......-...-...... .. .. .. .. '"' .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
........................................................-.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
....-.........."........................-....... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
........-....-.-......"..-............. ...................................
~~~}~{::::::::::':"'~', : :':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':
.. .. ~ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . ~ ~ ~ .. .. . .. .. . . . . .. .. ~ .. . .. .
.. .. .. .. ~ . ~ . .. ~ .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. w .. .. . ..
. .. .. . .. " .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
......~~ ...~~~.. .......~"....... ..... ...
.. . .. . .. .. . . . . ~ .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . . .. . .. .
.. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. ~ . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . ..
.. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. ..
.. .. " .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. " .. .. .. . . .. .. .
. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. ..
. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . . . .. . .. . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ .. .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. .. . .. . ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. " .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . . .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
.. .. " .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. ..
.. .. . .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. . . .. ..
IJO
TOTALS:
(7)
11·2.
The total of all revenues used for operating expenses of St. Lucie County Is shown In Table
MILLAGE RATES, PROPERTY VALUES AND PROJECTIONS THROUGH TAX YEAR 2025:
Ad valorem taxes have been and will continue to be the most significant source otfundlng for St. Lucie County. Table 11·3 provides a description of how actual taxes
levied are derived from the ad valorem tax base. Similar to the earlier tableintþls SElptioÒ¡Jt PJo¥!çles Y10tpnly a historical perspective of this tax source back to the
year 2000, it also includes annual projections through the year 2025. T~~Joll.oV'ln9"par~9raph~qprovidlilspeciflc Information related to each of the column headings
found on Table 11-3: ". '. .. ...'.
. ~ ".".
',," ./':,".·..t}<'·,_·;:·,:.", :.";).{"),
'fRr,tÞ~'$µb$eq\ièn~6Û9getyear~}(~rnple: Tax Year 1988 is basis for budget year
1~~~,)""'" . ,/.,~:,
TAX YEAR:
. . .
". :.....
The tax roll that is completed each year is the basis of iheVé11LÌ,ª~'~
beginning October 1988 and ending September Wl:l9,orbudg'éï~
(1 )
,".':" .. .,'..';'"
This column Is the taxable value used to calculate'hel~VY of adve.lc)r~~t.~ê~~
FINAL GROSS TAXABLE VALUE:
(2)
re9ardle~~of VJ~etl:Ïer tfïêÿàreilpçåied in an Incorporated municipal area or not.
.,." " .~:c.'··· ,,' x ·_···:,.-...t'·i·:~':~/:·
COUNTYWIDE MILLAGE:
This column Is the millage rate applied to all properties IntheCOl,lrity,
(3)
UNINCORPORATED AREA MILLAGE:
. ....
This column Is the millage rate applied only to those properties In the unlncorpore.t~d ar~a()nheêbunty.
(4)
whether they are located in an Incorporated municipal area or not, that
VOTED DEBT MILLAGE:
This column is the millage rate applied to all properties in the County, regardless of
has been approved through local voter referendum .
(5)
TOTAL ANNUAL MILLAGE:
This column Is the calculated millage to produce the total collections
(6)
Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11·26
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
. . .
(7) CALCULATED VALUE OF ONE MILL:
This column is the calculated value of one mill divided by $1 ,000 and the final gross taxable values shown In column one.
(8) TOTAL COLLECTIONS:
"
Total amount of ad valorem taxes to be collected for all County operating expenses, capital outlay and debt service.
-
St. Lucia County Capltallmprovamants . March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
11-27
TABLE 11-3
ST. LUCIE COUNTY MILLAGE RATES. VALUES AND PROJECTIONS THROUGH 2025
TOTAL.
COLLECTIONS
CALCULATED
VALUE OF
ONE MILL
TOTAL
ANNUAL
MILLAGE
UNINCORP VOTED
AREA DEBT
MILLAGE MILLAGE
COUNTY-
WIDE
MILLAGE
PERCENT
CHANGE
FINAL GROSS
TAXABLE
VALUE
TAX
YEAR
69,183,835
69,620,784
74,657,077
80,459,486
94,941,601
97,030,316
99,164,983
101,346,613
103,576,238
105,854,916
108,183,724
110,563,766
112,996,168
115,482,084
118,022,690
120,619,18~
123,272,811
125,984,813
,128,756,479
131,589,122
134,484,082
137,442,732
140,466,472
143,556,735
146,714,983
1.49,942,712
8,139,395
8,667,692
9,440,471
10,794,450
13,635,068
14,044,120
14,465,443
14,899,407
15,346,389
15,806,781
16,280,984
16,769,414
17,272,496
17,790,671
18,324,391
18,874,123
19,440,346
20,023,557
20,624,264
21,242,991
21,880,281
22,536,690
23,212,790
23,909,174
24,626,449
25,365,243
9.3617
9.2981
9.3009
9.1712
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9~0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
9.0946
0.4161
0.3525
0.2917
0.1620
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
0.14~0
0.1490
0.1490
0.1490
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1]541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
1.0541
7.8915
7.8915
7.9551
7.9551
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
7.8915
Soupr;.E: St. Lucie County Office of Management & Budget
-"
-0.62%
6.49%
8.92%
14.34%
26.32%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3:00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.000;0
3.00%
8,139,395,362
8,667,691,605
9,440,470,969
10,794,450,475
13,635,067,852
14,044,119,888
14,465,443,484
14,899,406,789
15,346,388,992
15,806,780,662
16,280,984,082
16,769,413,604
17,272,496,013
17,790,670,893
18,324,391,020
18,874,122,750
19,440,346,433
20,023,556,826
20,624,263,531
21,242,991,437
21,880,281,180
22,536,689,615
23,212,790,303
23,909,174,013
24,626,449,233
25,365,242,710
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
.
.
.
MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES
The County has a number of major revenue sources that are derived outside of any direct tax levies or fees that it collects. Table 11-4 provides a breakdown of the
monies included within this category. It also provides a historical insight as to the impact of these monies upon County operations as well as provides a projection
of the amounts that might be anticipated from these sources through the life of this plan. The following paragraphs provide a general description of these funding
sources:
STATE REVENUE SHARING:
(1
The State distributes a portion of the intangible personal property taxes, and one cent of the cigarette tax to the Counties each year.
is unlikely
It
through para-mutual betting taxes.
RACE TRACK TAX:
This Is a guaranteed amount established by Florida Statute for counties that do not generate enough tax
that St. Lucie Countywillreceive more.than this amount for a number of years
(2)
ONE-HALF CENT SALES TAX:
This tax is the largest source of a single non-ad valorem tax for St. Lucie County. The entire amount canbe used for debt service and the potential for growth
is good. In 1983, the tax was established to give relief to the property owners and after a number of years, the restrictions on the millage Increases have
gradually decreased. Presently. there are no restrictions on the use of the revenue and its relationship with the County millage.
(3)
ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEES:
This Is a license fee assessed to all retail utility providers for the use of public rights-of-way for the transmission of electrical services in the unincorporated
areas of the County. These funds are to be used for the County's Invf?sJment for the Future ProBram.
(4)
CABLE FRANCHISE FEES
This is a license fee assessed to all cable television providers for the use of public rights-of-way for the transmission of cable television services in the
únincorporated areas of the County. These fúnds are to be used for the County's Investment for the Future Program,
(5)
MP ACT FEES:
This is a generalized estimate of all impact fee collections in the unincorporated areas of the County. The growth of this source of revenue is unpredIctable
because the economy of the State and Nation easily effects the construction industry. This revElnue cannot be used to pledge for repayment of debt
because it Is not a constant source of funds. '
(6)
Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11·29
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TABLE 11-4
SELECTED REVENUES FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY ACTUAL THRU 2003
ESTIMA TES 2004 THROUGH 2025
FISCAL
YEAR STATE REVENUE ONE-HALF CENT ELECTRIC CABLE &
END SHARING RACING TAX SALES TAX FRANCHISE FEES TELECOM TAXES IMPACT FEES
$2,036,334
$1,214,814
$2,133,698
$3A33,690
$5,271,858
$5,377,295
$5,484,841
$5,594,538
$5,706A29
$5,820,557
$5,936,968
$6,055,708
$6,176,822
$6,300,358
$6A26,365
$6,554,893
$6,685,991
$6,819,710
$6,956,105
$7,095,227
$7,237,131
$7,381,874
$7,529,511
$7,680,102
$7,833,704
$7,990,378
$557,157
$576,567
$829,179
$927,867
$939,765
$1,089,221
$1,140A14
$1,194,014
$1,250,133
$1,308,889
$1,370,407
$1A34,816
$1,502,252
$1,572,858
$1,646,782
$1,724,181
$1,805,217
$1,890,063
$1,978,896
$2,071,904
$2,169,283
$2,271,239
$2,377,988
$2,489,753
$2,606,771
$2,729,290
$2,685,154
$3,116,733
$3,125,667
$3A04,742
$3,873,505
$3,996,712
$4,184,557
$4,381,232
$4,587,150
$4,802,746
$5,028,475
$5,264,813
$5,512,259
$5,771,335
$6,042,588
$6,326,590
$6,623,939
$6,935,265
$7,261,222
$7,602A99
$7,959,817
$8,333,928
$8,725,623
$9,135,727
$9,565,106
$10,014,666
$5,238,723
$5,612,462
$6,081,560
$6,475,795
$7,683,515
$6,793,919
$7,133,615
$7A90,296
~7,864,ß10
$8,258,051
$8,670,954
$9,104,501
$9,559,726
$10,037,713
$10,539,598
$11,066,578
$11,619,907
$12,200,902
$12,810,948
$13,451,495
$14,124,070
$14,830,273
$15,571,787
$16,350,376
$17,167,895
$18,026,290
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200\925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,925
$200,926
$200,927
$200,928
$200,929
$200,930
& Budget
Management
$3,390,231
$2,914,571
$2,911,097
$3,024,654
$3,343,384
$3,387,830
$3A23,063
$3A58,663
$3,494,633
$3,530,978
$3,567,700
$3,604,804
$3,642,294
$3,680,174
$3,718,447
$3,757,119
$3,796,193
$3,835,674
$3,875,565
$3,915,871
$3,956,596
$3,997,744
$4,039,321
$4,081,330
$4,123,776
$4,166,663
Office of
Lucie County
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
SOU"'"'E: St.
.
.
.
11·4
TOTAL MAJOR REVENUES: A total of the major revenue sources is shown in Figure
(7)
GAS TAXES
Roads represent the single largest infrastructure investment made by SI. Lucie County and, based upon the Information contained within the Capital Improvements
Element, that will remain true. There are a number of revenues derived from motor fuel taxes, as well as Impact fees that are tied directly to this system. Table 11-5
provides a breakdown of these funding sources and amounts giving again a historical perspective as well as an indication of what can be anticipated through the year
2025, which Is the time horizon of this plan. The following paragraphs provide a description of each of these funding sources as listed in Table 11-5
CONSTITUTIONAL GAS TAX:
Distribution of this gas tax is done in twoparts,a 20% and 80% portion. .S~V$r~i-(;ÞOntl~j:'hay~'pl~dged one of these portions to bond repayment. St. Lucie
County has no outstanding bond Issues for road construction. All of the ft)ndscoHl;l(:t!:ldf~9mthlf\revenue source are directed towards operations and
maintenance programs . -. '. . . .' .
(2)
AND
(1
The proceeds of the tax Is distributed to the three
/1·6 cent
The State has given authority to the County to levy up to six cents a gallon o'Jl:'9~~9)¡rw,soldltfílieCoq~ty;
cities and the County, based on a formula agreed on in an interlocé¡ll. ~~reer'r1êiii:', -- ." ..
LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX
(3)
/ 9th cent
. .
The State has given authority to the County to[~vyaone c.~nt a 9élllon taxon:9a~~pr:1,~SQJ~ll1t~eCóul1~.;'the proceeds of the tax are retained by the county
and used for maintenance purposes. ". .... ¡.... .' .." "
LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX
(4)
The proceeds of the tax is distributed to the three
LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX / 1·5 cent
. .
The State has given authority to the County to levy up tofiye cel1t~aga'l~tiqp;9~~,9Ii~~ sole! In the County.
(3) cities and the County, based on a formula agreed on in an interlocaFagreelT;)~O~' .
(5)
An additlolîal one cent can be levied through voter approval
Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
COUNTY GAS TAX:
Presently, this source of revenue Is being used to maintain the road system of the County.
To date, this additional one cent has not been sought from the citizens.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11·32
(6)
11-4
FIGURE
FY.2003
ONE-HALF CENT SALES
TAX
38%
Use
RACING TAX
1% .
Lucie County Major Sources of Revenue for General
STATE REVENUE
SHARING
17%
MPACT FEES
20%
CABLE & TELECOM TAXES
5%
sot I....~E: St. Lucie County Office of Management & Budget
..-'
St.
~
¡
¡
f
í
j
I
r
t
!:
¡
I
~
/
.
.
MOTOR FUEL REBATE
.
(7)
H
-
TOTAL GAS TAXES:
revenue sources that are required to be used tor road construction and maintenance is shown In Figure 11·5
Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
11-33
The total of al
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TABLE 11-5
GAS TAX COLLECTIONS FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ACTUALS THROUGH 2003 , 2004 - 2025 PROJECTED
CONSTITUTNL CONSTITUTNL LOCAL OPTION 1· LOCAL OPTION LOCAL OPTION 1· COUNTY GAS MOTOR FUEL TOTAL
80% 20% 6 CENT 9TH CENT 5 CENT TAX REBATE GAS TAXES
8,169,174
8,576,359
8,474,655
8,662,652
8,918,877
9,297,006
9,616,556
9,814,623
10,017,545
10,225,453
10,438,482
10,656,768
10,880,453
11,109,684
11,344,608
10,723,622
4,815,333
4,942,686
5,073,455
5,207,734
5,345,618
5,487,203
5,632,592
5,781,886
5,935,192
6,092,619
103,506
104,862
101,073
79,106
67,400
75,750
76,508
77,273
78,045
78,826
79,614
80,410
81,214
82,026
82,847
83,675
84,512
85,357
86,211
87,073
87,943
88,823
89,711
90,608
91,5'14
92,429
952,503
949,074
990,317
1,001,764
1,065,704
1,144,691
1.179,032
1,214,403
1,250,835
1,288,360
1,327,011
1,366,821
1,407,826
1,450,060
1,493,562
1,538,369
1,584,520
1,632,056
1,681,017
1,731,448
1,783,391
1,836,893
1,892,000
1,948,760
2,007,223
2,067,439
1,367,702
1,740,749
1,631,155
1,728,545
1,671,489
1,875,827
2,062,102
2,123,965
2,187,684
2,253,314
2,320,914
2,390,541
2,462,257
2,536,125
2,612,209
2,354,253
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1,118,904
1,152,824
1,137,455
1,200,420
1,302,014
1,380,269
1,394,072
1,408,012
1,422,093
1,436,313
1,450,677
1,465,183
1,479,835
1,494,634
1,509,580
1,334,091
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2,464,154
2,459,238
2,361,784
2,371,692
2,390,354
2,425,104
2,449,355
2,473,849
2,498,587
2,523,573
2,548,809
2,574,297
2,600,040
2,626,040
2,652,301
2,343,971
o
°
o
o
o
o
°
°
o
°
& Budget
Management
432,261
433,181
450,087
455,743
484,383
479,060
491,084
503,411
516,046
528,999
542,277
555,888
569,841
584,144
598,806
613,836
629,243
645,037
661,228
677,824
694,838
712,278
730,156
748,483
767,270
786,529
Lucie County Office of
1,730,144
1,736,431
1,802,784
1,825,382
1,937,533
1,916,305
1,964,404
2,013,711
2,064,255
2,116,068
2,169,181
2,223,627
2,279,441
2,336,654
2,395,305
2,455,427
2,517,058
2,580,236
2,645,000
2,711,389
2,779,445
2,849,209
2,920,725
2,994,035
3,069,185
3,146,222
st.
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
.'
SI
.
11-5
Fie
.
FY 2003
Lucie County Gas Tax Revenue
st.
MOTOR FUEL REBATE
1%
COUNTY GAS TAX
12%
CONSTITUTNL 80%
21%
CONSTITUTNL 20%
5%
LOCAL OPTION 1-6 CENT
27%
& Budget
1-5 GENT
Lucie County Office of Management
LOCAL OPTION
2Q%
SOURCE: St.
EXPENDITURES
The previous discussion reviewed the various funding or income sources currently utilized by St. Lucie County. This section discusses how those monies are allocated
to meet the County's needs. The expenses are provided In Table 11·6 from a historical perspective back to 2002 and have been projected through the life of this plan.
The following paragraphs provide a general discussion of the expenditure categories provided in Table 11·6:
GENERAL GOVERNMENT:
The expenses accumulated In this coiumn are for the legislative. administrative, legal, financial, comprehensive planning, and general maintenance functions.
Due to the additional facilities to be constructed during the next fewyears,.the ne~d for additional staffing wlll increase the cost of operating. Maintenance
of existing facilities will continue to be necessary in order to keep areas .c;le~ri;s~feand uptp. current building codes.
(1 )
PUBLIC SAFETY:
The majority of the expenses in this category are for financial support ofth~ St. Lucie County SlÌeriff'sop.erations, including the Correctional System. Other
activities In this category are for the Youth Hall,Central Com":lunicati~hs·(~11), and Emerg.ency.Management
(2)
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT:
The main activity of expense In this category IsSt.Luoie Coul1ty's c09p~lativå'èffort with the Institute of Fóod and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) to supply
technical agricultural support to this industry~ Th.edepartmentalsopròvii:l~s training to citizens with regard to gardening, nutrition and 4·H programs.
(3)
TRANSPORTATION:
., ,. .
Funds in this column would be used to suppprt ~~eperatlons of sy.çh·.mat\~rs.~~'r94c:1\Nay.impro~erne,nt, transit support, pedestrian enhancements and other
similar transportation improvements. This coillmn Includes the persgnnèlahdgE!fleral'malntenanÞe"cpst8 of these functions, but not the' cost of new capital
construction and expansion of such facilities. . ., ? ...... "';
(4)
ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT:
The Board of County Commissioners have been supporting epOn911l!cçjeveIÔp,rn~nt Jnthe County through support of the Chamber of Commerce, the St. Lucie
County Economic Development Council and formation of an ECQnÓml¢qe"e!PPr:rÎe'nt Division within the Community Development Department
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
/
Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
/
11·36
(5)
.
1-6
r1Þ
EXPENDITURES FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
ACTUAL 2002 THROUGH 2003. ESTIMATES 2004 THROUGH 2025
TOTALS
CAPITAL.
OUTL.A Y
DEBT
SERVICE
CUL. TURE/REC
COURT·
REL.ATED
HUMAN
SERVICES
ECONOMIC
ENVIRON.
TRANSPORTA
TION
PHYSICAL.
ENVIRON.
PUBL.IC
SAFETY
GENERAL.
GOVERN.
5,646,208 133,542,803
29,527,034 184,351,307
30,530,953 166,903,897
31,569,006 176,428,589
32,642,352 183,899,299
33,752,192 192,483,519
34,899,766 220,110,687
36,086,358 218,985,326
37,313,294 222,255,816
38,581,946 234,350,791
39,893,733 246,581,102
41,250,120 261,121,281
42,652,624 277,98,3,347
44,102,813 296,668,225
45,602,308 317,187,446
47,152,787 340,359,850
48,755,982 365,400,976
50,413,685 392,650,057
52,127,750 424,669,450
53,900,094 460,600,233
55,732,697 500,917,825
57,627,609 545,839,312
59,586,947 596,580,750
61,612,904 653,374,002
9,806,522
36,035,775
11,690,719
13,762,835
13,160,234
12',975,626
31,053,43.0
19,501,451
11,358,009
10,926,429
9,374,853
8,715,222
8,774,264
8,841,682
8,688,163
8,857,862
8,252,984
6,855',259
6,819,084
6,819;924
6,8.01,714
6;374:,783
6,062,424
5,305,452
8,801,135
9,739,296
9,904,864
10,073,247
10,244,492
10,418,648
10,595,765
10,775,893
10,959,083
11,145,388
11,334,860
11,527;552
11,723:,521
11,922¡820
12,125;508
12,331,642
12,541,280
12,754,482
12,971,308
13,191,820
13,416,081
13,644,154
13,876,105'
14,111,999
11697588
13,091,713
14,963,828
17,103,655
19,549,478
22,345,053
25,540,396
29,192,673
33,367,225
38,138,738
43,592,578
49,826,316
56.951,479
65,095,541
74,404¡203
85,044,004
97,205,297
1,11,105,655
126,993,763
145,153,871
165,910,875
189,636,130
216,754,097
247,749,932
5,549,952
5,755,525
6,578,565
7,519,300
8,594,560
9,823,582
11,228,354
12,834,009
14,669,272
16,766,978
19,164,656
21,905,201
25,037,645
28,618,02ß
32,710,406
37,387,999
42,734,478
48,845,508
55,830,416
63,814,165
72,939,591
83,369,952
95,291,855
108,918,591
1,598,102
2,300,772
2,629,782
3,005,841
3,435,677
3,926,978
4,488,536
5,130,397
5,864,044
6,702,602
7,661-:,074
8,756,608
10;Q08;802
11,440,061:
13,075,990
14,945,857
17,083,114
19,525,999
22,318,217
25,509,722
29,157,613
33,327,151
38,092,934
43,540;223
9,553,781
11,135,097
11,357,799
11,584,955
11,816,654
12,052,987
12,294,047
12,539ï928
12,7~O.,726
13,.816¡.9-41
1~iiØ07,472
13;573,~?'t
13,,8~5i09:4
14;12.1;995
14;404,435
1~;9~2,524
14,~~9;.37 4
t5!289,102
15,591,824
19J~Ø9¡·6~1
16;22};734
16,546,168
16,877,092
17,214,634
Management & Budget
2,913,452
4,928,961
5,027,540
5,128,091
5,230,653
5,335,266
5,441,971
5,550,811
5,661,827
5,775,063
5,890,565
6,008,376
6,12~,54~r
6,251,11'4 '
6,376,137 .'.
6,503,699 .
6,63$;733,
6i76S',407 -
6,901;735
7;039,770
7,180,565
7,324,)77
7,470,660
7,620,074
SOURCE: St. Lucie County Office of
38,654,144
41,962,141
43,388,854
44,864,075
46,389,453
47,966,695
49,597,562
51,283,880
53,027,531
54,830,467
56,694,703
58,622,323
60,615,'482
62,676,409
64,807.407
67,010,858
69,289,228
71,645,061
74,080,993
76,599,747
79,204,139
81,897,079
84,681,580
87,560,754
29,321,919
29;874,993
30,830,993
31,817,585
32,835,747
33,886,491
34,970,859
36,089,926
37,2.44,804
38,436,638
39,666,610
40,935,942
42,245,892
43,597,760
44,992,889
46,432,661
47,918,506
49,451,898
51,034,359
52,667,459
54,352,817
56,092,108
57,887,055
59,739,441
.
FISCAL.
YEAR
END
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Figure 11-6
Figure 11-7
General Government Expenditures
FY 2002-3 Actual, FY 2004-2010 Projected
Pu~lic Safety Expenditures
FY 2002-3 Actual, FY 2004-2010 Projected
.....,."
40,000,000
35,000,000
30,000,000
1! 25,000,000
~ 20,000,000
o
o 15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
o
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Fiscal Year
60,000,000
50,000,000
II) 40,000,000
~ 30,000,000
o
o 20,000,000
10,000,000
o
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Fiscal Year
Figure 11-8
St. Lucie County ComparisoriExpenditures
FY 2003
CAPITAL OUTLAY
16%
GENERAL GOVERN.
16%
DEBT SERVICE
20%
. . . . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .: . PUBLIC SAFETY
23%
CUL TURElREC~
5%
~ PHYSICAL ENVIRON.
3%
HUMAN SERVICES
3% ,:,'ECONOMIC EN R~NSPORTATION
1%
6%
SOURCE: St Lucie County Office of Management & Budget
.
.
.
HUMAN SERVICES:
The County Is required to participate In Medicaid and Medicare programs with the State and Federal governments. The County has provided a hospital
indigent program for a number of years and recently, with the Health Care Responsibility Act and State/County Share Program, the potential for increased
expens!3s Is possible. The County also funds the St. Lucie County Health Department, Indian River Community Mental Health Clinic and various non-profit
org-anlzations that provide help to the indigent, elderly, abused and animal control.
(6)
CUL TURE/RECREA TION:
8t. Lucie County operates a number of beach accesses, recreåtional areas, a civic center and sports complexes throughout the County. The expenses In
this column are for s~aff maintenance .and general operating costs of the façilities. A number of the activities have user fees and, as the expansion of certain
facilities occur, this practice may be expanded. . . ..
(7)
Identifies, in greater detal
11-6
DEBT SERVICE:
This column Identifies the total amount of outstanding debt service to be retired over the planning period through 2020. Table
the specltlc debt service obligations to be retired !'Ind the schedule for their retirement.
(8)
CAPITAL OUTLAY:
(9)
minor expansion of faclllties and furnishing for buildings.
This column represents the cost of equipment replacement and additions
This does not
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
TOTALS:
This Is the total of all operating expenses, debt service and capital items that are used in the normal operations and maintenance of facilities.
Include any major building or facility construction
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11-41
(10)
PROJECTION OF DEBT CAPACITY
One of the ways in which capital needs are provided Is through debt. The primary rationale for becoming obligated for such facilities through Indebtedness Is that
it spreads the cost of the facility over its useful life and, thus, It Is pai.d for by those who are there to use It. St. Lucie County has historically used debt for providing
capital facilities and it is quite likely to do so In the future. A key factor in determining how debt can be factored Into the provision of necessary Infrastructure Is to
examine the County's capacity to handle debt. Table 11-7 provides a projection, beginning in 2000 through the year 2025, of the County's capacity for debt. The
following paragraphs provide a general description of each of the revenue sources identified in Table 11·7 which can be directly obligated to the retirement of debt:
GENERAL BONDABLE REVENUES:
This column Is the total of revenues which can be used as collateral to Issue bonds for the County. The main sources are the State Revenue Sharing, Half·
Cent Sales Tax, Race Track Tax and Fines & Forleitures. Refer to Table 11-7 for more information about these revenues.
(1 )
NON-AD VALOREM COVERAGE:
This column represents the amount of revenues that are to be held in reserve /escrow in order to Insure adequate coverage of any c¡ne years outstanding
debt service.
(2)
EXCESS GENERAL BONDABLE REVENUES:
(3)
This column represents the amount of funds that are in excess of any required reserves that could potentially be bonded out for general government purposes.
GENERAL REVENUE BOND CAPACITY:
(4)
This column represents the maximum amount of bonding capacity that the County may be expected to have based upon anticipated revenues.
BONDABLE GAS TAX:
(5)
11.7 includes additional Information on the types of gas taxes available for road construction.
Table
GAS TAX COVERAGE:
This column represents the amount of revenues that are to be held In reserve /escrow In order to Insure adequate coverage of anyone years outstanding
debt service. .'
(6)
related
reserves that could potentially be bonded out for. transportation
required
EXCESS GAS TAX COVERAGE:
This colu~n represents the amount o.f funds that are in excess of any
purposes.
(7)
Capital Improvements - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
"
11·42
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
.
GAS TAX BOND CAPACITY:
the maximum amount bonding capacity that the County may be expected to have, based upon anticipated revenues
that may be issued in these time periods. This column is used to determine
Capital Improvements . March 5. 2002
Revised: january, 2004
This column represents
NTEREST RATE:
This column represents the anticipated Interest rates to be paid on any bonds
the amount of funds necessary to cover debt service obligations.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11·43
.
(8)
(9)
11-7
TABLE
ANALYSIS OF REVENUES AVAILABLE FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOND CAPACITY
nterest
Rate
Bond
Capacity
Excess
Bondable
Bondable
Gas Tax
General Rev
Bond
Capacity
Excess
General
Bondable
6
6
6.25
6.25
6.25
6.25
6.25
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
6.75
25,721,691
26,690,040
44,058,000
45,446,000
46,879,000
48,357,000
49,883,000
50,440,000
52,0321000
53,676;000
55,372,000
57,123;000
57,777;'000
59,605,000
61,491,000
63,438,000
65,447,000
65,447,000
65,447,000
65,447,000
65,447,000
65,447,000
3,540,591
3,673,884
3,688,502
3,816,020
3,894,940
3,975,800
4;058,651
4,143,547
4,230,543
4,319,696
4,411,063
4,504,705
4,255,979
1,892,328
1,942,932
1,994,898
2,048,265
2,103,070
2,159,352
2,217,152
2,276,511
2,337,471
Coverage
(2.5 Times)
5,310,886
5,510,826
5,532,754
5,724,029
5,842,410
5,963,700
6,087,976
6,215,321
6,345,815
6,479,544
6,616,594
6,757,057
6,383,968
2,838,493
2,914,397
2,992,347
3,072,397
3,154,605
3,239,028
3,325,728
3,414,767
3,506,207
8,851,477
9,184,710
9,221,256
9,540,049
9,737,350
9,939,499
10,146,627
10,358,868
10,576,358
10,799,239
11,027,657
11,261,762
10,639,947
4,730,821
4,857,329
4,987,245
5,120,662
5,257,674
5,398,381
5,542,881
5,691,278
5,843,678
6,340,270
257,525
12,420,619
10,005,732
20,413,955
3.5,092,251
50,867,407
65,437,827
74,896,192
95,092,026
103,922,090
113,057,260
123,842,191
132,083,019
148,520,489
183,216,770
196,420,847
209,623,840
223,763,341
245,184,232
265,438,795
293,621,882
872,738
35,448
1,104,968
890,134
1,816,075
3,121,892
4,526,288
5,938,905
6;797,313
8';·630,215
9;43·1,601
10,260,676
11,463,685
12,226,513
13,748,078
16,959,805
18,182,065
19,404,225
20,713,074
22,695,939
24,570,841
27,179,661
& Budget
=
Management
Non-Ad
Valorem
Coverage
(1.5 Times)
15,168,356
16,483,159
14,977,607
15,834,995
15,581,576
14,979,696
14,313,171
13,670,953
13,620,143
12,632,789
12,716,740
12,814,717
12,582,497
12,836,315
12,379,477
10,282,889
10,228,626
10,229,886
10,202,571
9,562,175
9,093,636
7,958,177
Non-Ad
Valorem
Bondable
Revenues
16,041,094
16,518,607
16,082,575
16,725,130
17,397,651
18,101,588
18,838,459
19,609,859
20,417,456
21,263,004
.22,148,341
23,075,393
24,046,182
25,062,828
26,127,555
27,242,694
28,410,690
29,634,111
30,91 &,645
32,258,114
33,664,477
35,137,839
Lucie County Office of
FISCAL
YEAR
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
"2012
·2013
"2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
SOl ''''~E: St.
TABLE 11-8
CURRENT DEBT SCHEDULE - ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMiSsioNERS
Total Debt
Service
Capital
Leases
Other Debt
Secured by
Special
Assessments
Other Long-
Term
Notes
Payable
Bonds-
Special
Assessment
Funds
Bonds-
Enterprise
Funds
Bonds -
Government
Funds
Bonds-Gen
Obligation &
Limited Ad
Valorem
FISCAL
YEAR
12,073,350
13,762,835
13,160,234
12,975,626
31,053,430
19,501,451
11,358,009
10,926,429
9,374,853
8,715,222
$,774,264
8,841,682
8,688,163
8,857,862
8,252,984
6,855,259
6,819,084
6,819,924
6,801,714
6,374,783
6,062,424
5,305,452
;
569,943
704,635
447,676
286,992
123,966
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
121,416
108,396
118,836
118,509
112,633
91,433
79,237
72,971
41,626
27,826
25,055
14,443
28,821
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Obligations
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,782
69;782
6~,782'
69,782
69,782'
69,782
69,782
69,782
69,781
63,772
55,358
55,358
55,358
55,358
2,231,549
3,200,109
2,833,306
2,831,333
21,082,314
2,533,629
2,531,885
2,476,086
2,476,626
1,826,688
1,825,905
1,828,312
1,825,209
1,824,580
1,695,553
786,065
756,040
753,390
754,600
754,438
752,904
o
319,021
586,593
586,593
586,593
586,593
586,593
816,246
,030,089
,027,759
,028,745
,027,875
,025,500
861,225
,059,225
,055,025
,054,150
,051,475
,051,875
,050,225
,051,400
,050,225
,041,875
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,812,946
2,151,641
2,151,961
2,144,259
2,148,694
9,286,968
931,472
931,724
930,634
937,596
932,794
936,904
934,429
935,841
930,681
934,019
930,494
935,356
928,100
498,594
500,581
501,513
Management & Budget
5,117,580
5,117,616
5,126,917
5,119,197
5,113,736
5,118,059
5,113,493
4,533,317
4,533,670
4,531,223
4,596,417
4,668,205
4,668,865
4,668,116
4,501,944
4,011,244
4,011,294
4,015,531
4,013,431
4,014,994
3,703,356
3,706,706
Lucie County Office of
1,831,113
1,824,063
1,825,163
1,818,963
1,815,713
1,814,988
1,815,895
1,812,460
294,758
293,363
296,438'
298,538
299;831
300,319
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
SOUPCE: St.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
In order to provide needed capital facilities, the County, in the past, has utilized bonded indebtedness as a funding mechanism. In order to complete this discussion
of revønues, expenditures and capacity for debt, it is important to know the nature of existing debt. Table 11-8 provides a breakdown of the various current bond issue
obligations of the County by annual payment and interest costs.
11-45
Capital Improvements· March 5, 2002
Révlsed: January, 2004
.
MAJOR OUTSTANDING DEBTS
.
.
.
11-9
F.
.
Distribution of Current Debt Payments
FY 2004
Lucie Count
st.
Other Debt Secured by
Special Assessments
1%
Bonds-Gen Obligation &
Limited Ad Valorem
15%
Capital Leases
5%
Funds
Government
42%
, . . . . . .
. . , . . , ~
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
, . . .. . . . I
., ....,....
. . . . . . . . , . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . , . . . . . . . , .
. , . . . . . . , . . . .
. . . . , . . . . . . . , . ,
· . . , , . . I . . . , , . .
. . . . . I I , . . , . . . , _I
· . . , . . . . . . . . . . ,
, . . . . . . . . I I . . .
· . . . . . , . . , . . . .
, . . . . . . . . . . . ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. , . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . , . . . , .
. . . , . . . . . . . . . , .
. . . , . . . . . . . . , . .
· . . . . . . . , . . . . . .
· . . . . . . . . . . . . .
· . . . . . . . . . . . .
· . . . . . . . . . . . , ,
· , . . . . . , . . . . ,
· . . . , I , I . , , .
· . . . . . . . . . . .
· . . . . . . . . . ,
· . . . . . . . . . .
, , . . . , .
· . . . . .
, . . . .
Other Long-Term Obligations
1%
Notes Payable
18%
Bonds-Special Assessment
Funds
3%
Bonds-Enterprise Funds
15%
& Budget
Lucie County Office of Management
SOURCE: St.
Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
,
,)
11-47
FY 2000
DIstribution of Debt
Figure
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
11·9
. . .
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The following Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies are modifications of portions of the Element as adopted In 1990. The numbering system is
consistent with the 1990 plan.
St. Ll.lcle County Capital Improvements . March 5, 2002
Comprehensive Plan Revised: January, 2004
11·48
TO PROVIDE PUBLIC FACILITIES NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN THE ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
CONCURRENT WITH DEMAND THROUGH FISCAL~ Y SOUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING AND BUDGETING. l
:::,:=::=:==:=-====:!,:::~::,:=::.:::,'~::>:::,'::,:>:=~::::~~~:.~:.::,::r=--==:=:':::;=:==:==::;:';:;;::'::":,~::::.:::::,:~=,:~,:,:::::::J¡;
Define types of public facilities, establish standards for level of service fqr each type of public facility, and determine what capital ¡
Improvements are needed In order to achieve and maintain those standards (as well as to repair or replace existing public facilities). J
:=:~:~::::::::::::~-=~"J=.:::2~::;':;::::::::::::',:=:::::·::::.::,::~~::=;r=..:~=::·:==~::~::.:.::.===';::::":::::~::,:~:.::=~::::::,~7:~::;:.::=:::'::7::;:i
Public facilities means the capital improvements and systems of each of the following: arterial and collector roads, mass transit, storm water \'
management, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, parks and recreation, libraries, jails, courthouse facilities, administrative facilities,
mosquito control, Port of Ft. Pierce, St. Lucie County International Airport, public education and public health facilities and shall include land, I
structures, the initial furnishings and equipment, design, permitting, and construction costs. Other "capital" costs, such as motor vehicles and ,
motorized equipment, computers and office equipment, office furnishings, and small tools are considered In the County's annual budget, but ~
such items are not "public facilities" for the purposes of this Comprehensive Plan, or the Issuance of development orders. 1
==.---:====::=;-~::::,:::=-"':::::.::':=,'='.:::.~,::~:.:-"::::::~.;-:~=.::c::~ .~_:==,:::,::~::==::::::::'::'::=~':,~,'.:::~:,:,'.::;~:;~:":':::::':::-==9
The County shall establish standards for levels of service for four categories of public facilities, as follows: '
Category A Public Facilities are arterial and collector roads, mass transit, stonnwater management, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid I
waste, and parks and recreation facilities used for concurrency and owned or operated by St. Lucie County, all of which are addressed II
in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan.
I
Category B Public Facilities are libraries, corrections, courthouse, administration, mosquito control, Port of Ft. Pierce, and St. Lucie I
County International Airport as owned, operated or developed by St. Lucie County. Category B Public Facilities are not used for I
concurrençy purposes as provided for in the Concurrency Management System.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
i-'
I
i
,
A.
B
I
GOAL 11.1
F<;>.:;"v.¡.,:.:....>\.''*'~·~'''l'~,...~,lt..,.
r~Jbl~.tt-·!(I.Ml1<~~---'
¡ ,Objective
¡ t 11.1.1
i ,
""""""1>ll<;~."'~-..uH
\
t'-r-r!N <'~~-
i I Policy
\ ! 11.1.1
¡ I
lL
~"1 ~
I Policy
I
¡ 11.1.1
1
2
Category C Public Facilities are arterial and collector roads, mass transit, stormwater management, potable water, sanitary sewer,
solid waste, and parks and recreation facilities used for concurrency and owned or operated by Federal, State or municipal governments,
independent districts, and private organizations, all of which are addressed in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan.
C.
Category D Public Facilities are public health and public education facilities owned or operated by Federal, State, or municipal
governments, Independent districts, and private organizaUons. Category D publio Facimles are not used for concurrency purp:~es -J
provided for in the Concurrency Management System
~')f.~.~. tflllt(W .:. ~~'W;;~
----- ..-----
D.
!
l
I
¡
¡
¡
I
,
!
,
ì
I
,
¡
,
I
I
I
I
¡
I
I
¡
I
I
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
.___.._.~--':'''':r-
Aq
11
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
--...--- ........._·.·..__·__w.· '.--"1
;:::~~,~: ~j:':~f*Jtrm'1lìt" ". ·.1 '
»¡(~tY.~~V¿¡j; ~,lI>~l.,~\q.~~
The quantity of public facilities necessary to eliminate existing deficiencies and to meet the needs of future growth shall be determined for every !
type of public facility by use of the following calculation: ¡
i
í
a=~x~·E :
I
,
Where:. a is the quantity of pµblicfacility needed, " ¡
'5 is the standard for lèv~1 orservice, !
D is the demand, such as the population, and I
E Is the inventory of existing facilities.':: . I
The calculation will be used for existing demand in orderto determine existing deficiencies. The calculation will be used for projected demand I
In order to determine needs of future growth. The estimates of projected demand will account for demand that Is likely to occur from previously I
issued development orders as well as tuturegr9wth. Public facilities to serve demand from previously issued development orders shall be I
included in "0" (demand) in the preceding" calculation. " . ¡
Iil-""'¡' IJJ~ _........Iltt1l.: ~~~zt\INIIJØ,_...._l'<'l'~'Ul':';'.~~___~ ï l*,*~~~J.l ITW'lIl1' ..Uw.....l il'~l"........~~ ~1_"'4. ·...~~;,:,r¡.c,'l'..l"<#"'l'1"A:~',,~..,,:·:'llW::lIIIl;WINfJ#~~'_lW<·
_~~~__110'111 :11 ._: ____..,...l<.,'V<I':~....~"'...¡".~...~1I'l#~~_'t~~~_.._~J>_ ~~--4>.~ "'t;' _A'_·~~_,A_~"';"'~(\':\I"'_~'_""_~~'Nfn'(_'lI'liI'._~t'l:l::¡
The p~blic facility for~ula will be used for current demand in order to dete.rmine existin~ deficiencies. ~he public facility formula will b.e used I
for projected demand In order to determine needs of future growth. The estimates of projected demand wIll account for demand that Is likely to 1
occur from previously issued development orders as well as future growth. I
~-~~.~ ~~~N"ll<~i't'1
~~~;l'"f~' ,_~~"'~,:Oll:~;
.
.."'----.
.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
1'''''''
i
I
I
I
¥
.:{
i
t
:;
1
.
r.
~
I
I
ì Policy
j !
: i 11 .1.1.3
) ~
! I
1
,
,
;
j
! I
f ~
I I
I ,
! ~
r-J..--"
rf;;-
í .. 11.1.1.4
¡ !
, ¡
~., ;
'~(~:f,,'¥$I.'iØ'1olllfll'
Demand that is likely to occur from previously issued development orders will be addressed by the County "reserving" capacity of public facilities
for development orders that Were iss\Jed by the County prior to the adoption of this Comprehensive Plan and that are determined to have vested
rights for purposes of the concurrency management system
.5
Policy
11.1.1
,
The .Cou~tY. requires persons "Yith le~it!m~te and s~bstantial;yest~? rights to c~ntinu~, develo.prnent in good faith in order to reserve capac~ty of ¡
public facilities. The County will not reserve capacity of public facilities for previously Issued development orders that do not have vested rights I
~~~~.~.s~~~~~n~y m~n~~e~;~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~=--=~~--==::::;::==:~~
There are three circumstances in which the standards for levels of service are not the exclusive determinant of need for a public facility: .
-~.._,.______J
Calculated needs for public facilities in coastal high hazard areas are subJeçt to a,lIlimits and conditions In the Conservation, Coastal
Management, and Future Land Use Elements of this Plan (see Policy 11.1.5.1).
A.
.6
,
I
I
I
¡
!
,
~
f"-l'~~~~
¡
I
I
¡
I
I
Policy
11.1,1
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6. 2004
50
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
i
¡
l
'ii-
I
I
t
~
,
¡
I
1
\
,
í
,
1
!
!
;
I
I
County
"V'~'ltJ\~~~"!l
;t~~~~~.~jj~
be determined by the Board of
wi
aMI
renovation
Replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities, and repair, remodeling and
Commissioners upon the recommendation of the County Administrator.
Public facilities that provide levels of service in excess of the standards adopted in this Plan may be constructed or acquired at any time
as long as both. 90ndi~ions, 1 and 2 and at least one of the conditions 3 through 5. are met:
B.
the
maintain
facility of the sarne'type that is needed to achieve or
the facility does not m~ke financially Infeasible a.ny public
standards for levels of service adopted ih this Plan,
C.
1)
or alter the achievement of the overall goals. objectives and policies of this Plan
for levels of
maintain standards
limit
the excess capacity is an integral part of a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or
service,
the facility does I')ot contradict
2)
I
!
~
I
'~
1
l
~
,
t
I
acquired at
if
less expensive than a comparable amount of capacity
it
the excess capacity provides economies of scale making
a later date,
3)
I
¡
l
I
,
!
I
I
conservation,
for
designated by the County as necessary
or
the asset acquired is land that is environmentally sensitive,
recreation or protection of high hazard coastal areas.
4)
5)
_*1":--- ~.... -.-
__~1 1: ~~11 I~'''' J _..J
Any public facility that is determined to bè needed as a result of the factors listed in Policy 11.1.1.6 shall'be included in the regular Schedule of '.,
Capital Improvements contained in this Capital Improvements Element. All capital improvement projects for such publiC facilities shall be I
~vad In tha sama mannar as tha proJacts that ara Ida~tlflad according to tha public facility formula dascrlbad ~~ ~ 1.1. !:!:..,_~
, . :--'" ::: '=1 . ...::_~:;~~:==: ,,,;:; I - :;... : ~~: = " .----~, . .~
The determination of location of improvements to expand publicfacillties Will take into consideration projected growth patterns. Where applicable, I
public facility improvements will be coordinated with the capital facility plans of any other governmental entity providing public facilities within St. I
Lucie County. ..
-~
Policy
11.1.1.7
Policy
11 .1.1 .8
r
I
I
I
I
!
I
L.
L
Capitallmprovementl$
Revised through January 6. 2004
/
51
,~~::c:=:=~.~,==;.~,~:~~:::
11
_...:.r:~'
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
.
~~--'1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
.
r----············
!
All public facility improvements that are based on achieving and maintaining a standard for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan l
~ are included in the financially feasible Schedule of Capital Improvements contained in this Capital Improvements Element. The relative priorities I
~ among types of public facilities (Le., roads, drainage, aviation, etc.) are established by adjusting the standards for levels of service and the I
i available revenues until the resulting public facilities needs became financially feasible. I
I Legal restrictions on the use of many revenue sources limit the extent to which types of facilities maybe prioritized because they do not compete i
~ for the same revenues. During each annual prioritization process, no further prioritization among types of public facilities in the Schedule of !,
I Capital Improvements will occur unless they are financially feasible, programmed for improvement, and will be completed according to the I
I S?h?dule. Each ~ear, howe~er,priorit~zation among types of facilities is redetermined byreaffirming or revising standards for level of service i
I within the constraints of available restricted revenues. ,
tt:.'::.:::::::::=:.::-----. _..::==.:=r:I=.::=~.,^::::::·:;;:~:'::.::~::.'::,::~::~~~:.:::=,::l:::~,..::~-~_::=::=::~:;::,=:::.~:::~::::.::::=::=::':':=:~:~~:::::"::':~::::::::,:::=:::1
. .. .. ,.. t
I The following pu~lic .facility improvements, within a facility type, are to be considered in the following order of priority, as determined by the Board !
~ of County CommiSSioners ¡
I
~A.
~
B.
C.
I D.
that contribute to achieving and/or
remodeling and renovation of facilities
repair,
including
Replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities,
maintaining levels of service.
Policy
111.1.1.9
,
i
ì
I
, ~
I .
lL_-
rT;~~~;'~""~'
¡ ,11.1.1
¡ I
I
!
o
otherwise eliminated by
service.
eliminate public hazards not
that
facilities that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies In levels of
New public facilities, and improvements to existing public facilities,
Improvements prioritized according to Subsections a or b, above
New
New or expanded facilities that provide the adopted levels of service for new development and redevelopment during the next five fiscal
years, as updated by the annual review of this Capital Improvements Element.' St. Lucie County may acquire land or right-of-way in
advance of the need to develop a facility for new development. The location of facilities constructed pursuant to this Subsection shall
conform to the Future land Use Element, and specific project locations shall serve projected growth areas within the allowable land use
categories.
¡
I
maintaining levels !
I
...,¡
of achieving and/or
the operating cost
significantly reduce
facilities, and new facilities that
mprovements to existing
of service.
i
I .
I I
I I E.
L ~
-""'-'---~
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
52
11
81. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
;---_.......,..."......".."
¡
i
i
I
,
i
I
¡
I
~
,
I
¡ I
II Project evaluation may also Involve additional criteria
l...L-_...____"'2~s Come.,rehensive Plan.
l
r~~lWi
11.1.1.11
fiscal years by either:
five
new growth during the next
service for
facilities that exceed the adopted levels of
New
F.
fiscal years, or
may be needed by future growth beyond the next five
facility capacity that
providing excess public
1)
the County's normal design criteria for such facilities.
Facilities not described in Subsections A through E, above, but which the County is obligated to complete, provided that such obligation
is evidenced by a written agreement the County executed prior to July 31, 1990.
than are contemplated In
facilities
providing higher quality public
2)
I
,
G
that are unique to each type of public facility, as described in other elements of
:i.:A",'.æ:i:òir\ ('ft~w:~, ___A'l~~~t~Iot¡"¡''$M."",,~,'~··''''''W~~4
llW»fW4¡w"..-:.'~~~,~¡j,!'~>'f·;.:µ...~~,,·,
the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, as I
-"'~""""'"".::::~:....=l
,~~~~~()ftlllld!~";V"'""-~'-
~===?====:::c::
St. Lucie County adopts the, following roadway level of service standards for application within
setforth in Tablø 11-10, and Table 2-4:
'-"""""iI-""
~~~It'\I\~~'\~~
its adopted
,~-~'
-.:~"".
service below
---
--
When any County arterial or collector road or segment of such a road is determined to be operating one level of
standard, the County shall exercise one of the following options
~,~
T
Enter Into a contract that will result in the' addition of capacity to the facility within six months of the determination ~hat the facility is
operating below its level of service standard, and delay issuance of development orders until the contract has been executed;
A.
Policy
11.1.1.12
provide for the upgraded facility;
wi
service at the next opportunity; or
that new development
agreement that specifies
to lower the level of
nto an enforceable development
Amend the Comprehensive Plan
Enter
B
C.
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
53
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
.~_"."....-,_¥~""__._"".,,___.._,,,,_ _,'w
.
.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Î
;
~
i
I
The purpase .of praviding far the temparary aperatian belaw the adapted level .of service is ta pravide a reasanable periad .of time to ¡
restore the level .of service thraugh apprapriate improvements ta roads that are farecast ta .operate at the adapted level .of service, but ¡
which may unexpectedly apérateat a lawer level .of service. All develapment .orders issued pursuant to this palicy shall becanditlaned l
an the attainment of the adapted level of service. Hawever, this policy shall nat impair the Caunty's right ta refuse ta issue a I
develapment .order pursuantta this palicy if the Board .of Caunty Cammissianers determines that the resultant lower level .of service ¡
caused by the prapased develapment .order wauld constitute a threat to public health .or safety. :
:::'::::::"':--=-:--'-=r:=:~:=.~=:~::==::=::"".:=r::::====.:=====.:::.:::::.::::==:::::=======::i
The standards far levels .of service far Category A Public Facilities, Mass Transit, shall be as follaws: !
. I
Na mass transit level .of service has been established althaugh the need has been recagnized far variaus areas .of the county. When I
mass transit service becames feasible, and prior ta its becoming available in the Caunty, the level .of service will be set by plan ¡
amendment ¡
,~!tilll/"~~~~'~
"..............."'-"l
starmwater
impacted area.
the
permits in
issue any develapment
Nat
D.
~:
!0
r
~
~
;
~
~
j
,
I
,
¡
~*~..'-_....."""-~-"
!......r-·
¡ I Policy
i ¡
! 11.1.1
i
.
!
i
13
major
Systems and ather
Management
Caunty Starmwater
')iIo,.~
,~~~<;~
The standards far levels .of service far Categary A Public Facilities,
conveyance systems, shall be the 10 year/1 day starm event.
Palicy
11.1.1
4
DE
¡
__~_,~~__.,,___~_._._~~J
72 hr.
<FFE
<1.0 ft.
<1.0 ft.
<1.5 ft.
......_-~-
100 yr.
72 hr.
<FFE
<0.5 ft.
<0.5 ft.
<0.75 ft.
...""',..._--_...".......~..---...~..
o yr.
24 hr.
<FFE1
1/2W3
1/2W
<0.5 ft.
·_______r."""'_''''M_~_,
1 0 yr.
Structure/Facility
Hauses/Building
Evacuation Rautes2
Arterial Raads'
Other Raads5
-,
¡
!
i
í
\
¡
I
¡
:...-,,~"--
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6. 2004
54
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
·......".'.'.."..)
I
I
~~>.rø>í~~
~~*Ä~P."~)(,~
l
1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
\
1
I
,
¡
¡
¡
j
(secondary evacuation I
i
¡
,~"~",..."....",,..l
",:¡;(.~,~~~N.!;,^·'·:" "..'~
!
~~
i!f~~~~)'~,> ','
,"::<' '.", . . ""',
....-r- 0<11\ ,.'-
(finished) floor elevation based on available data.
Regional Planning Counci
the Treasure Coast
travel lane is not flooded.
anes, or roads that are the only access to a respective area/development
for evacuation, but which will be used to estimate encroachment on FFEs.
~,~.~~,~~=:~.::::::~:~=::.~;:;:~~:;:n4t...__w ~ ===::':~~:::::::=~=~=:::
shal
capita per day.
be 88 gallons per
Systems,
County. Potable Water
¡
I
! .
í .'
I i
i ¡
: ¡
I j
Ill~
!
I 5 Other roads which are not critical
. .~~"v#*.tt~""'_'~'~'&-""-'l-_"-'-~~'''M·~,;!t~r,Y~~''~~/l~-''-l ,''>,~,,;,,,
~-'~~''''''''~r«<>«<( "LI~.'<ol>i;:l'flo~lf~~''''''_'''A'''''«X':'''''.,;¡.#ô.'~-''*''rs:m¡,.--,. ¡¡",~,~"",~:",_~{<'r~
Policy The standard for level of service for Category A Public Facilities
11.1.1.15
'~1A:~'(¡'t~~,..;;;>.__~,\>¡.o,)"';,\<~~''''''_ llIØ,'
first
flood stages less than
Peak
1
r-~---'----"'--'
routes as defined by the County and
Evacuation
2
:l
~
~
~
ï
~
~
Y2 of the roadway width (W) or one
that
imited to each side of the road such
Flooding
3
travel
more
or
Roads with four
routes)
4
~M.'f~' 1f,~1I>o, "A' ." J ~~~4-;J ,:~;"U"'·~~'~:<'Io.·'ol''''·'-':''"'í
",""1« INI__.~)tl,t~""",,--,~~f ..v'l.'i,,,~·w~>>Ml;~tII'>4
j
follows:
I
I
........4lt~~~~rs!~~>t..,$#1f.~.....~,~-"'~)'\l',.,....,.._..~~.:!''J'f>.:.Jw''1
~l<lt~~--~~""""'~~
systems owned by Ft. Pierce Utilities
~~'(;.¥J.'
~ -~..
The standard for level of service for those areas of the unincorporated County served by sanitary sewer
Authority shall be 130 gallons per capita per day.
....If ..__ ,...·,IiI.~:_·i',.t..,,_...o.Mt~~ - l M~'4~
"*t"",,~,.'tX..._~II~"IØMKf.l
A Public Facilities,
Polley
11.1.1
'~ffJI'"
;-"...,~_.
County Solid Waste. shal
16
be as
Category
service for
level of
for
The standards
17
Policy
11.1.1
solid waste per capita County-wide per day at the landfi
pounds of
9.31
A.
rates.
disposal capacity at current fi
Seven years of permitted landfi
B.
I The standards for level of service for Category A Public Facilities, County Parks and Recreation. shall be as
~ buildings and improvements) are included in the cost of park land.
_1 A.
facilities (I.e.
follows: Recreation
raw land capacity at current fill rates.
,~:~.I
'~<.A'~~.l
Thirty years of landfl
C.
Policy
11.1.1
,ODD population County-wide.
----...-..,-......,-. --
18
I
I
I
!
i
!
t._
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
55
11
Regional/metropolitan = 5 acres per 1
-' -'~
51. Lucia County
Comprehensive Plan
.
."'-.---.......--.--.
.
.
1
.....-........--.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
í----·'-·-..·'·--·-'
I
.~~
Community park land = 5 acres per 1,000 population in the unincorporated area.
~~~,::::::¡:::~:~==::~:C:::~7::~:;f"";"~' ""," ·~""·'~~~·~'~,:~::='::=.:=::J::::::·:::,~:::,:':::w::=':::=:==;~.~'
The standard for level of 1 0 acre parks.
B
"""',·_7"·,W:.>.~~.·~¡"'*'~'"1 ,,.,,...,1..) ,¥""'u.·'l#.·',;'l'f{M~b~l')I!".I<IlI'.,....·,..'·~f;I.W:"d"''''''·''4-''
')1. ':~~J""''''l'>.Y'<>'''-~' :""'IN~~\ ;"~~""'<, '~"""IJ.,,*,\V"'¡"f""'."',,";'~,·"; vö\lt,#,:"": ',1':"" ~,,^
be applied in increments of
serviceforcommunitY'parks wi
~~~~~::::=:::~·~M ~_1X:=::::'::::': :'~~~:::,:=:::=--rr=~~:.':,====:=--==::::':~'~~:~~~:~:::::'::~:::::::,:::=;=:~~=::~
The standards for level of service for Category B Public Facilities, Libraries, shall be as follows:
'.",",..~r~·"'="'"'·""i"'_"_"""""",,\_b'''''''''''__''''"'''''''''''·'_''''''':¡''''~''."'.,'"..""'_."'...,M."""".........--,;.,,"--"""''''...~'''''''''J
,~",~¡M;'(~~~~~,f.$.<.h~~~,~~ltUß~~~,¢,~~~".,~"F"')<,:....:;'*1'1·'l".t<~:>:.::t..~...·!,~·t{':.~.;.?¡I'~~,.::........~~.~1~..'~;.r'#~lr4
Public Facilities. Corrections, shal be as follows: I
l
=:. '.::: :;=~,;::·=::::=~::=:=::====::-=d
be ·as follows: !
I
I
~~-~~
'__Uf~
.525 square feet of library per capita; and,
1.45 books per capita.
,'¡QI~"*'1t'ft':'ltl'\.
fW"'i'h~M-,:",,
~:~~,~'1"'i
Category B
~"iN'Æòirií'\l~
The standard for level of service for
J ~
~l'Jl.t""~_'":'II">'\<I,lI·*II"'-"I¡""""
I
{"'''4_'T.'ll:..m\,.,.'.~WI:lW~'_~"«.>1<~."!<..
: ! Policy
í f,1.1.1.19
~' . ~.wa,,,,,,,_·-._~'
r ~\~~:
i I
~t.'<,j¡~!&'.lliIlt~ø-'"
~~"ff,;.">4;I~:1
! . Policy
11.1.1.21
l\1CVN:L-oWillIllWl~ ,,~¡
____ '~"'_~1
Courthouse. shal
..,,,....~iI'l'><1~
t..-,,""·.'·..-,J<)~"'~-.~'
Public Facilities
~~W<¥<,
t\!1.'_lt-.<I>l,U~~·."~
Category B
0.004 beds per capita.
r ~~ "'''<1>_
rlWT .._____l~
The standard for level of service for
~.--.-~'"'_.
w.,_,»'_~·~~ll
.'I;~~·,..~:'.-.;.((."ftI:~·~.'hib'~"'._\_,l
Category B Public Facilities, Administrative and Maintenance,
.839 square feet per capita
'N_'
level of
Policy
11.1.1 .22
~-_.-.:,\,...
~r~-""'-'
Policy
11.1.1.23
shall be as follows:
service for
The standard for
specific capital
feet per capita
'__ill
A specific standard for leveLof servic.e for Category B PuÞlic Faci itie.s, MosqlJitoGontrol has not been determined. but
improvements have been included within the capital needs listing in order that the listing be comprehensive.
~;J<,..""(,"""";
~.1¡MI1_¡~WAl
1.253 square
Policy
11.1.1.24
¡
__'/It""ÃlMI I '-.....-~' ~l;:.lI'
A specific standard tor levelofs~rvicefor Category B Public Facilities, Airport, has not been determined. The capital improvement projects
included within the capital facilities needs listing are showniri order that the. listing be comprehensive. Future Airport Capital Projects will be
identified as part of the updated Airport Master Plan to be completed in accordance with. Objective 2.2.1. of the Transportation Element.
_"""",_,.,.;_: . . ____l:,."'·_'_..._..___""--.___'l'-.'..i!
Policy
11.1.1.25
I
I
¡
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
56
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
·~.~..
11., " ,:' \ _,: ~~
.~.; ,M~. ,- .~ .,'.
. __''''''''~'~.~____.._.......,.~''~--.~~.~---,...._--''~,.". _.~'''''~K~~'''_.'''''·· -",."-"""",",-"",""...~....""",-"~,_...--""".~~.....".,"\-,~.,,,,,,~~~.,,,,--,,----"""'i
i ¡ Policy !j A spøcific standard for level of service fqr Category B Public Facilities, Port ofFt. Pierce, has not been determined. The capital improvement I
I à 11.1.1.26 ; projects included within the capital facilities needs listing relate to channel rTlaintenance and are shown in order that the listing be comprehensive. i
! Î § Future Airport Capital Projects will be identified as part of the updated Airport Master Plan to be cpmpleted In accord with Objective 2.2.1 of the 1
i ! i Transportation Element. I
~=t=~=~~~f~0f;/~~~:~==~~;;'~~~;;~~~
r~~~-:::;:-·~:::::=:~:;;::::::::::.:::r=:=:.:::-='=:::=:::::=;::'::::::':::::;::;:::==-1'··
I -
I Policy The standards for peak direction, peak hour level of service for Category C Public Facilities, Federal and State Roads, shall be as follows:
I 11.1.1.28 !
i In coordination With. FOOT, the following facilities shall be classified as backlogged/constrained facilities and shall increase no more than .¡'
five (5) percent in peak hour, peak direction traffic volume through the end of the fiscal year (FY) indicated for improvement, and then
be maintained at level of 'service "0" peak season, peak hour or better thereafter: I
I
I
¡
,
I
,
ì
¡
I
!
¡
,··--------1
.v.y.,.,""',.___....___.___¥..y_.___v~.._y,....__...__........__.._.......-..v_·~....·___
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT.
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
."'._._.........__..___v...·.........-__..''''...._.._·__···__w__._'
A.
FlY IMPROVEMENT
PLANNED
SEGMENT
RÒADWA Y
None
None
None
05/06
None
Orange Ave. . North A·1·A
Orange Ave. . Edwards Rd.
Edwards Rd. . Midway Rd.
Midway Rd. . Prima Vista Blvd
Okeechobee Rd. . No. US #1
No. US #1
So. US #1
So. US #1
So. US #1
Kings Hwy.
"~t;W.l:X,,,~(~~.l 1'1fr -.-'
ability of the County to fund the facilities from County revenues,
r gl«s from other sources.
~~:I
___~1IMr""MIlf~
.....----.---..,.---.-""'-
_:~~
,_..~~~...-'
Provide needed public facilities that are within the
proportionate share and contributions and grants 0
i
~
~~..._~-..¥¥_........_--
Objective
11.1.2
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
57
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
..--------.-.---¡
I
I
';\~'!il~"IN'·~· " - , ~.d
- Uö-.s i'l-~')¡"',.l;~~'),¡..' . ~i
~' w,;;,¡" .;r~:".,.. ..1".....' ' , , t
~ Policy ~ The estimated costs of all needed capital improvements shall not exceed conservative estimates of revenues from sources that are available ¡
i ¡ 11.1.2. ~ to the Countypursuantto or not precluded by current statutes, and which have not been rejected bY referendum, if a referendum is required to ¡
< , ~ .' . .' J
l.,,,L-........_,,,.l,,~~~~~~~~~~!!~~~,~~.>f,,._,.ç."..,~1ir.,,,,,,..,"·w,·.·.·. ,·,""'.,Ä.····.· .,.M·.·.,·. .....!"g ;',.,.."""'-'"";r'."""'..."'...,""""'.,.,."...." M'" .'.~".""..""_....."""...."""..._"''''....,__,.., '''' ,.'."",.,,,...><.""""""".-...;"",.....,,,'-".,,,.'.,...,
;~:,~~."J(~:W$II~T(¡'~""",\v>t,¡.;<l',~~~~ UL/lllU ' :.It ;~~¥;_..~'f.t""'I~N~,:..·-~~'":!!"'>.>~;I,'jrr"'~'.,.._~\,,~~<..:""',,;,-·,''i__:,':""..<~·.J><M·~'.'t:,"' .,"..,',.,.,S'~Å-)....,'#<,~<l-''''''~~~·,!l'$..~)~)Xtt;.~~~.....~,·.;:~'(I.....;..I;'~"(::.."'~...._·x..~,;.:\.~\".:.i';-,.'i$-:...~ll;.:~K't~": .;',..,.,~,"v :.,~.t<.'.~'r{:,~'-;:'~~.¡';;\'1\iÞ~)<w,t.'.:.rl.;.,.;..a;:I~:'i'-'1
: I Policy ~ The County will allocate the costs of new public facilities on the basis of the benefits received by existing and future residents so that current ¡
! .' 11.1.2.3 ~ residents will not subsidize new development. l
r~'-' <-"'=~:;::..,"'=:;..::=-...:.=I..==:::;;:::.:::::,':::.~~:::~:.==:I::===.:~:;;::~:.::.-="":~::=::.,-=.:;:':~=::===.::::';~
in. . Policy Future development . . I
! 11.1.2.4 I
¡ j Future development shall pay for 100% of thecapital improvements needed to address the Impact of such development. Future I
i ; developq¡ent'sproportion ofthecostof.capitalImprovements needed to address the impact of such development shall be determined, 1
: I in part, by the County's impact fee ordinances and supporting studies, which shalf include credits for other payments by future ¡
; ¡ d(1velopment Impact fees, enterprise fund user charges, connection fees, and other user fees paid by new development shall be ¡
¡ , reviewed every two Years to assure that provision of capital improvements. needed toagqress the impact of futuredevelopmentwilf not I
! j increase ad valorem tax rates. Upon co.mpletion of,construçti,on, "future" development becomes "present" development, and shalf ¡
¡ I contribute to payir¡g the costs..of the replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities as described in subsection B below. ¡
I Future development's payments may take the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary contributions for the benefit of any public facility, I
I impact fees, capacity fees, dedications of land, provision of public facilities, and future payments of user fees, special assessments and
! taxes. Future development shall not pay impact fees for the portion of any capital improvements that reduces or eliminates existing I
I deficiencies.
I Existing development . I
I Existing development shall pay for the capital improvements to facilities that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies, and some or all I
í of the replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities. ¡
I k
I f"\ d
..~u.. {1Jt~"'!.
'.....·..._,',____"...............^..............A-,
.
.
·----··f
"--'
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
'/l:! m~-'
LVi' .': ;"~.3i).~'
"f' ~ '1.'FIt>"ì')1
B
i
.,
~
I
I
~
ì
I
I
1
taxes.
and
fees, special assessments,
Existing development's payments may take the form of user
'lIØimiIill. - '1' 1c~ ~~'R_~~~
...~------------,.,""'_..,,~..'''''..'''.,..__..^---,
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
58
-.
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
-·-1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
r"'---'--'-~'
I
,~Mo.:."",-",,;~~·~.·"/V.1""'~i;;··,,¡o.~.N.l·"'·l
~,'-"W>;'-'.~~;,;o~" <";;'·<'-'M.1'.:Þ~..!
1
I
~
be j
I
I
costs paid by grants, entitlements or provision of public facilities from other levels
,:~~:=:,::.~:::::r:=:;:::;::~::(:~~:=:7~'::~=:::~:::::::=~~l'~M_'''~
. . . .
follows:
shal
and solid waste)
sanitary sewer
be managed as
(I.e.. automated services, potable water,
Debt to be repaid by user fees and charges for enterprise services, or
or
uses and current revenue)
ssets.
The financing of the capital cost of public facilities with non-enterprise funds (i.e., roads, stormwater management and parks) shall be
from current revenue, equity or debt, or a combination of current revenue; equity and debt, whichever may be most cost effective and
consistent with prudent assetand liability management, given the useful life of the assets to be financed and efficient use of the County's
debtcapacity. .
financed by debt shall be conditioned on the
issued by the County which require pUblic facilities that will be
the sl"Ibstltution of a comparable amount of non-debt revenues.
1Jl'~ll';
..-"
1- r
: Polley ~ Both existing and future development may have part of their
~ 11, 1.2.5 ~ of government and independent districts. .
r ~~w.;."·r·"'''ft,:n_'_~ arJ~~~~~~~'4\ ~'~'''''''"",,~,v,,'':;!';'¡'
!~~--''''''''''~J~"-",------""""""",,.---,,.,~_,._m'''''.,''.''''"'"'''''''''~"~,,
'Policy I Capital Improvements may be financed. and debt shal
11.1 .2.6
~ A.
I, I
¡ I
I I
I
I
I
I
,
I
¡
¡
ì
funds
financed by County enterprise
Public facilities
financed by
1)
reserves. surpl
(Le
assets
Current
2)
A combination of debt and current a
3)
B
C. All development orders
issuance of the debt, or
'~¡
l$H~~
..~1
if the County is unable to pay for the
-.
The County shall not provide a public facility, nor shal It accept the provision of a public facility by others
subsequent annual operating and maintenance costs of the facility.
T ::;;~~~::.~.
Policy
11.1.2.7
l
h
I
L"
'~ ~~~À IIW~~"~~
=~_=:::::::~:~:;:,:= 1: ~.....~~~
n the event that sources of revenue listed under the heading "Costs and Revenues by Type of Public Facility" of this Element require voter
approval in a local referendum that has not been held, or a referendum is held and is unsuccessful, th.is Comprehensive Plan will be amended
_*,_~_.......,."..__......_, _I ~ "-""----,
Polley
11.1.2.8
I
I
...
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
59
11
81. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
~~~¿~~¡Ji
to Include one or more new revenue sources which shall not increase the County's existing debt. Alternatively, this Comprehensive Plan may
b~ amended to adjust for the lack of revenues, in any of the following ways:
.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
~t~t~~i(~~~~~f:m__rm ~
ncrease the use of other sources of revenue
facilities that Is inherent
more public facilities.
Decrease the cost, and therefore the quality, of some types of public facilities while retaining the quantity of the
in the standard for levels of service.
4. A combination of the above alternatives.:
~~~=~==::::'::=~~~:::¡:::'~'~l:,~:::~~:::::::~=::~~:~::t::=~-==:::=;::::;:=::::::::~==::~::;:~:::~;::~:~:::::::'=:,j
ì
All development orders issued by the County which require Category A public facilities that will be financed by sources of revenue which require ¡
voter approval in a local referendum that is yet to be held shall be conditioned on the referendum being approved, or the substitution of other ¡
sources of revenue to ensure that facilities are provided concurrent with need. I
--,~~ MIf.'~W ,_. , :,', _I'm"~\_- ~-: . = '=:::C ~' j~~~ ~" ': =~_'.i.(1_fn,_.....t\.""'tl_~.«Ft --<¡Wl'tW":ll~--""""""'~
-~- ,-~,"~..~.~-~"' ::..".~"_.,' ,.""-.....-.. . : -_.~-""""'.......__.~_...--¡
Recognizing that future funding opportunities may be less than or greater than originally anticipated and that overall the County will operate within l
a constrained financial setting, the first priority for allocation of monies for capital purposes is for the maintenance of the County's present facilities I
mml- so as to~~n~u~e pr~otection ~~~~~!~.)~':'UCh..!..~i:~~..:[: "" :~:~:--~-::::.--==. .,.,_._n :J
,
Within the County's financial capability, provide needed capital ,Improvements for. repair or replacement of obsolete or worn out
facilities, eliminating existing deficiencies, and meeting the needs of future development and redevelopment caused by previously
Issued and new development orders.
.
I
¡
.
,
¡
I
1
~
,
I
¡
I
¡
¡
, ï
I I
~Í-____~.
!-r;:;~~
¡ i 11.1.2.9
I i
l>_~.
1-. '
¡ Policy
I 111.1.2.1 0
, "
, i
Frc,:;.ctlv~
I 111.1.3:
¡
.
Reduce the standard for levels of service for one or
2.
3.
Improvements of
.,~::::~-=::===:=1::'~-===~-=.~:=~_________-:':~=::::>=
Capital
the Schedule of
in
¡sted
facilities
the public
provide
~.\
~:¡.to¡;p.ol'.~~:
to
The County shall provide. or arrange for others
Improvements Element
r
I Policy
I . 11.1.3.1:
b..1'.- -.-.
_~=::'__'___''''N__._
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
60
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
...-,..__.__.~-_..-
I
I
r l Policy pursu';'tto Section 163.3187, Florida Statutes, the Schedule of Capital Improvements may be amended two times during any calendar year.
i ¡ 11.1.3.2 and as allowed for emergencies, developments of regional impact, and certain small scale development activities.
t::=::=..-:: "::=:'~:,~.::"::.:.~~~;:'::::::::::-:-:::--=.c:::::.:::'::',::::=.'::~.:',::=.::,::~=:::::::::,~.:c=.:,::======::.~::~::~::'::'::~:::;:;:'::::::'.:::.::~::::::'::::::::::::::1
: ~ Policy Pursuant to Section 163.3177, Florida Statutes, the Schedule of Capital Improvements may be adjusted by ordinance not deemed to be an I
j l 11.1.3.3 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for corrections, updates, and modifications concerning costs; revenue sources; acceptance of facilities ¡
lJ.-- .. .r~~~~;;r::~~ are .co~~:t::::_~:::"~::~::~~:~:~~:~:::::::~~~~~~e~:~.~
f\~~'1"'''''''''~-''''''''--r--'''''''''''''-''''w,"",-"",,---~''''-''''''''''.'''''''"'',....'.'..·,,,·,,,w ......,.,_......""..~ .,_"""",.,w""~_~_,,,,~·.,_""""'~···~~~,"'~·M''"''~'''.'''''~'''''V'''''~''~-"'.......Y'..'."... '..'."......."""M_.............¡
! i Policy I The County shall adopt a capital budget as part of the 8:nnual bydgeting process that includes all the capital impr,ovements projects listed in the I
: i 11.1.3.4 I Schedule of Capital Improvements for expenditure during the appropriate fiscal year, except that the County may omit from its annual budget ~
i , l any capital improvements for which a binding agreement has bee'n executed with another party to provide the same project In the same fiscal 1
I.. I ï year. The ,County may also include In the capital approprlatio,ns of Its annual budget addlüonal public facility projects that confor~o~,1
..~ I 11.1.1.10.E.
~~__j.~~ i-"«;!'r~'~"IL~~;f.' ",'ftIffC(lf_IlIlll,,"Ji«l'C.~~ I hll. .~jb1ll8ll'l'E~_"~ llI.M...l........,.......¡¡..,IC(i''<tIlllØ·' lIfO~-.......IIf"lllICll...
" ._........;......_,,....". _........,... "....._"""""'''''"''~_''''...' "'. __...."""._1 "" =:;:;;;;;;:,:::.... - J _..__._...'''''''' _._....._
. I
¡ i The impacts of development on public facilities within St. Lucie County are found to occur at the same time as development authorized by a final I
I ! development order. The Soard defines final development order as a building permit. conditional use approval. Board of Adjustment approval. I
¡ or any other development order which has an immediate and continuing impact upon the infrastructure. The County shall determine, prior to the '
i issuance of final development orders, whether or not there is sufficient capacity of Category A and Category C pUblic facilities to meet the
~, standards for levels of service for ~dsting POP~:~~,:.~:~~~~ed development concurrent with the propose~ development:..
~~~~._~~ '....1
I,
Policy
11.1.3.5
preliminary plat approval, preliminary development
or any other development order other than a final
A preliminary development order is defined as a DRI Development approval, zoning approval,
plan approval, Plan amendment approval, preliminary Planned Unit Development approval,
development order and for which there are not found to be any impacts of development.
'-,"
Policy
11.1.3.6
the
-
nt orders on
.-
"'''',~
i\t~ ¡lei! !i:llï~~~
Category A and Category C public facilities shall be applied to the issuance of developme
The standards for levels of service of
following geographical basis:
Public facilities which serve the entire County shall achieve and maintain the standard for levels of service on a County-wide basis. No
_____. ___"".___....-,~_.__....,___________...-\ ,_,..____...__..___.__w.~___,.__--
Policy
11.1.3.7
I
I
I I
IJ
~ '
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
61
11
A.
81. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
.
.
·,'_.........W.__'AA_....'~~__·"_,___....~""·___,,,,·.._,~W·....
""....
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
,------
!
\
.
f the standard for levels of service Is not achieved and I
j
j
!
j
i
¡
)
i
j
Public facilities which ~erve less than the entire County shaU achieve and maintain the standard for levels of service within their assigned
service area as defined by the Board of County Commissioners. No development order shall be issued in an assigned service area or i
impact area if the stand,ards for levels of service are not achieved throughout the assigned service area or impact area for the following ¡
public facilities: ¡
I
Arterial and Collector Roads: In order to achieve and maintain the level of service standards as adopted in the transportation!
E:lement, devel('lpments shall address the mitigation of aU potential project impacts on the roadway network in their traffic ¡
circulation plans. j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
,'--......__.___...._.._____._______".._.._1
development order shall be Issued in any part of unincorporated S1. Lucie County
maintained throughout the County for the following public facilities:
.
¡¡
I
Solid Waste
Regional. Parks
1)
2)
1)
B
Systems:
Management
Storm water
2)
Drainage Sub-Basin
Systems:
Potable Water
3)
Service Area
Plant
Treatment
Systems:
Sanitary Sewer
4)
Service Area
Plant
.Treatment
Parks and Recreational Facilities:
Planning Aréa
--...----.
District
5)
í I
I., _1..
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6. 2004
6~
11
81. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
·~....._"'...__......_-_......._-_...-......._..._........__.._.
CAPITAL. IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
~;{Z;~.
~.~. ^.' ...:~~¡¡:¥iÚ·
'.'" ..~,'~,<r.
,·"_....·..,..~."".<.nnt:...",,,
.,'.-..-----....-.-'.
~;';:·-r;o~~;e·~~;;·~~<;~f>CIS Ons and ;~~;:w~le or projected fiscal resources with a schedule of capital Improvements that maintains ¡
: l11.1.4 i adopted level of service standards and meets existing and future facility needs. I
~;,:::::;::,·:,·:::::~·:.:":f,,:=::;,~===::~~~:~:::::::=..:;~r-:=:~::""... '." ,... '.. '::"~.:~:=':::::::.::::~:::J:,7.;·:'·~:"~::.:=:==::~::=::::~:,:::'~;~~:~:..'::,:=::::~:~;:;:::::'.:::-::',,:,'~:'::::::,::::::'::::',1
: ! Policy £ All Category A public facility capital improvements shall be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the appropriate elements of this !
. I ~ ~
, 1 11.1.4.1' Comprehensive Plan. , . I
!:::t:=::::::~::::·:t==.::.=.=:::::::::::. '..=,:~:::::;;:~~:;':',',:..,.., ..,....:,:,.,::,:':=,::::..::::::.:::~:~::::::::::.::~....=:::::::::~~==:::.=~:.::,::,:~~:::;':=:::::2::=::::":'::·~~::1
I ~ Policy ~ The County shall Integrate its land use planning and decisions with its plans for public facility capital improvements by using the policies listed I
I ; 11.1.4.2 I in this section of the Capital Improvements Element. The location of, and level of service provided by, projects in the Schedule of Capital
I .l . I., Improve. ments shall maintain adopted stand. ard..s. fO. .r. ieve.is of service for eXlst.i.ng .and future developmen. t I.n a manner and location consistent I
I l wllh the Future Land Use Eiement of this Gomprehensive Plan. Individuelland use decisions shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan I
~_ ~;::::=- '~~~~~,,:~~~~:,~,~~~~~:~~~~~:~~~,!~:i:~,:I~:~:~::~:~J::;=:':':="'__m~<.<;:,::7;::,:;::.",::::::::::::~:':;:-:::7w=::=:::::=d
I .
¡ Policy , The County shall amend its land development regulations to provide for a system of review of various applications for development orders which ~
I 11.1.4.3@..apPlicatlons,ifgranted,wouldimpactthe levels of service of Category A and Category C public facilities as defined in Policy 11.1.1.2. SUCh!
~ system of review shall aSsure that no final development order shall be issued which results in a reduction in the levels of service identified in ¡
¡ Policies 11.1.1.12 through 11.1.1.35. The land development regulations shall address the following, at a minimum, in determining whether a ¡
I development order can. be IS$ued. ¡
, I
I A. No final development ord~r shall be issued by the County unless there shall be sufficient capacity of Category A and Category C public I
I facilities to meet the standards for levels of service for the existing and committed development and for the proposed development ¡
! according to the following 'deadlines: !
I I
I 1) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the following public facilities: !
¡
I
WP~~w~~ ¡
~~~~~ I'
(c) Solid waste.
Ll 2). Prior to the issuance of the building permit, assurance as to the completion for the following public facilities within the next twelve I
_____ ".~A'.""."'.".""""."""""'''''''''__''''''''''~'''''''''''''''''_''''''''''''''''.........._..............___.................._M..................._........''''''N....'.....,.....~.,..-...". .,..,...............,........................__........_................................~.._........_..........,......_..~...._...........~._.._..-_.._..............................,......_.................-...._..................__.........M..H............,...................._.........................·~
!.~Jj:;~!'t~~~ "~~"t~
~~.~,,¡~~~~~1¡;¡:,~~
'>l'!I4$WI'I"""'I.)-.J,~llfl:<;'..... '""""'·~V, j¡l,"W".,......N"1 <.A.:,:....;;"f~..w;.
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
63
11
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
.
.w.-_.,-'''...,..,.",'.__....____'''.'''''.___.........,___....___...''''..___.._.....""._"w·
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
,..(~~;5IT!~~~~1 .--~~?~
.
r-----'--T
"~;H"~·~· ~.~. '.' ß':¡~, ..,' .··.·r"
'v·...·)"f ", ... '.'.. ,';" ~."r ,,'. 4 ..' , ~ ~
"'" ^ ",~., I>'t ,t' ¡'<; ,... ,....-, . _. "
months must be provided:
ArtariplandGollector roads.
Storm water management
facilities shall be determined for preliminary development orders according to one
The capacity of Category A and Category C public
of the following:
B
~
i
¡
i
¡
¡
¡
ì
i
I
I
¡
~
¡
¡
i
!
¡
l
¡
¡
I
¡
,j
a determination of such capacity as part,ofthe revIew and approval of the preliminary development
The. applicant may request
order provided that:
1 )
The. determination that such capacity is avai.lable shall apply only to specific uses, densities, and intensities based on
information provided by the applicant, and included in the development order, and
(a)
The determination that such capacity is available shall be valid for development that Is completed within a period:
(b)
not to exceed two years, or
any period of time acceptable to the County and the applicant, provided thaUhe period of time is explicitly set
forth ina binding development agreement as authorized by Florida Statutes, and the applicant provides one or
more of the following assurances, acceptable to the County in form and amount, to guarantee the applicant's
pro rata share of the County's financial obligation for public facilities which are constructed by the County for the
benefit ofthe subject property:
performance bond,
irrevocable letter of credit,
prepayment of impactfees,
prepayment of capacity (i.e., prepayment of capacity connection charges), or
formation of a Community Development District pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes.
[a]
[b]
[c]
[d]
[e]
(a)
(b)
.
l:
~
I
I
1
I
I
!
(1 )
(2)
1_____
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
ß4
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
the County shall do one
contract with the applicant for the full cost of the facility, including terms regarding reimbursement of the
applicant for costs in .excess of the applicant's pro rata share, or
¡
obtain assurances similar to those in subsection (b)[2] from other sources, or I
i
amend this Comprehensive Plan to modify the adopted standard for the level of service so as to reduce the ¡
required facility to' equal the applicant's needs. ¡
¡
Pursuant to a and b, above, no further determination of capacity for the subject property as required by Policy 11.1.3.6 ¡
shall be,required prior to the expiration of the determination of capacity for the preliminary development order, except ¡
that any change in the density, Intensity or land use that requires additional public facilities or capacity Is subject to ¡
review and approval ordenial by the County. The determination of capacity for the preliminary development order shall ~
be considered a reservation of capacity until the end of the time periods specified in Policy 11.1.4.3.(6){1 )(b) above, or I
until the County is notified in writing by the applicant that the project will not be undertaken during those time periods ¡
and that the applicant voluntarily yields the reserved capacity. Public facility capacity that is determined to be available ¡
pursuant to this subsection shall be reserved on behalf 01. the preliminary development order In such a manner as to ¡
prevent the overuse or over commitment of the same public facility capacity. ¡
í
Notwithstanding the procedures outlined in Policy 11.1.4.3.(6)(1), all approvals at the preliminary C evelopment order stage shall !
include a condition that the final development order containing a specific plan for development, including the densities and ¡
intensities of development, will not be issued unless public services and facilities exist or are assured to be available to meet !
or exceed the level of service standards concurrent with the impacts of development. í
I
I
The applicant may elect to request approval of a preliminary development order without a determination of capacity of Category ¡
A and Category C public facilities provided that any such order is issued subject to requirements in the applicable land ¡
development regulation or to specific conditions contained in the preliminary development order that: !
I
¡
...,.............._.......J
----·-·1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
r-·----
~J~~~~~i
cost of the facility,
ful
iãií
is less than the
rata share of a public facility
Whenever an applicant's pro
of the following:
(c)
(1 )
(2)
(3)
(d)
2)
3)
t
~
\.
~':
~
~
¡,
1:
i
~
f
I
I
¡
í
I
,
!
I
!
!
!
i
;
i
,
!
,
I
I
I
!
I
i
I
I
I
!
¡
ì
I
i
L~-
i
I
¡
~
¡
i
~
J
i
I
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
65
11
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
.
..,................""..... ~......
.
.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
~"-
I
I
I
(a) Final development orders for the subject property are s~bj~éttõ a dete¡~¡~~Ìion of capac¡iÿ'õi ë~tElg~ry A and Catego;Y"l
C public facilities, as required by Policy 11.1.3.6, and i
t
(b) No rights to obtain final development orders, nor any other rights to develop the subject property have been granted or ¡
Implied by the County's approval of the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public :
facilities. !
(c) Applicants for development orders may offer to provide public facilities at the applicant's own expense in order to ensure ¡
sufficient c9,pacity o.f Category A and Cat~gory C public facilities, as determined according to Paragraphs a and b, above. i
Development orders may be issued'subject to the provision of public facilities by the applicant subject to both of the ¡
following requirements: ¡
¡
¡
(1) The County and the applicant enter into an enforceable development agreement which shall provide, at a !
minimum, a schedule for construction of the public facilities and mechanisms for monitoring to insure that the i
public facilities are completed concurrent with the impacts of the development, or the development will not be ¡
allowed to proceed. ¡
¡
(2) The publicfacilities are contained In the Schedule of Capital Improvements of the Comprehensive Plan. i
,
I
(d) If public facilities are provided at an applicant's own expense, as allowed in sub- paragraph (c) above, the facility shall i
not be provided later than the fiscal year for-which that facility was programmed in the Schedule of Capital ¡
Improvements. i
.~~~~.~~_~.h.~R~_.._._...~_~_._...~'.~h.~....~_.,~.~~.'~.~R~.~r=::::::~#;(~\:~,.y~~~.~<>.~~~N~"~Å>~,r.'~~6':::::=;::::'1==:W7~~~~~~~>'A'~~~;WM~~::..:::~:y.:..."::_,,,,:::::::~:::=~:,::::::::,,~::::,,=:::::::j
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
66
11
"if>
i
1,
-~
~.
;.
~
,
"
f
~
l'
~
t
t
f
i
~
~
¡
(
í
I
i
¡ !
I ~
I
II I
t:- l...
___,__w_..~r
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
--r-"----·-
r
,
J
~
~
i
i
I
Con.tralned ¡Backlogged
Facility
Maintain'
~i1RIiW
MIIRIiIR~
Malntalni
Maintain'
Maintain'
Maintain'
Maintain'
-
-
-
-
nla
-
Maintain'
-
-
nla
-
M.a1ntaln'
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
Inside a Transportation
Concurrency Management
Areal
D
E
E
nla
nla
D(E)
E
nla'
nlal
Q
Peak Hour /Peak
Direction
67
D
D
B
B
C (0)
C
11
E
B
D
C
D
Facility Type
.
Non-State roadway (local)
Non-State roadway (major city/county road)
Non-State roadway (arterial)
Intrastate/ FIHS (rural)
Umited Access! Freeway
Controlled Access
Intrastate/ FIHS (urban)
Umited Access! Freeway
Controlled Access
Other State Roads
Multi·lane (RuraVUrban)
=:3 N'.
urban
Two lane (RuraVUrban)
-
rural
-
urban
-
St. LucIe County
Comprehensive Plan
.
.
.
Con.tralned IBacklogged
Facility
Insida a Transportation
Concurrency Managamant
Araal
Peak Hour ¡Peak
Direction
Facility Type
Level of Service Standard Inside of parentheses apply to general use lanes only when exclusive through lanes exlst
Transportation Concurrency Management Areas are geographically compact areas designated In local government comprehensive plans where Intensive
development exlsts or Is planned In a manner that will ensure an adequate level of mobility and further the achievement of Identified Important state planning goals
and policies, Including discouraging the proliferation of urban sprawl, encouraging the revitalization of exlsting downtowns and designated redevelopment areas
protecting natural resources, protectirlg historic resources, maximizing the efficient use of exlstingpubllc facilities, and promoting public transit, bicycling, walking
and other alternatives to the single occupant automobile, Transportation concurrency management areas may be established In a comprehensive plan in
accordance with Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code.
)
1.
be set in a transportation mobility element that meets the requirements of Rule 9J -5.0057.
Maintain means continuing operating conditions at a level such that significant degradation doel! .not occur based on conditions existing at the time of local
government comprehensive plan adoption. For roadways in rural areas, transltionlng urbanized areas. urban areas or communities, significant degradation means
(1) an increase In average annual dally traffic volume of 5 percent below the speed, of the adoPI§d LOS l¡tandard. For roadways ·In urbanized areas, for 100th
highest hour of 5 percent below the speed, of the adopted LOS standard. For roadways in urbaniæd areas, for roadways parallel to exclusive transit facilities, or
for intrastate roadways in transportation concurrency management areas, significant degradatlorimeans..(1) an Increase In average annual dally traffic volume of
10 percent above the maxlmum service volume, or (2) a reduction In operating speed for the peak directions In the 100th highest hour of 10 percent below the
speed, of the adopted LOS standard. For other state roads in transportation concurrency management areas, significant degradation means that amount defined
in the transportation mobility element. For constrained roadways meeting or exceeding the leve¡¡~f service standàrds, "maintain" does not apply until the roadway
is operating below the applicable minimum level of service standard.
means the level of service standard wi
2.
3.
Capital Improvements
Revised through January 6, 2004
68
11
Information not available
N/A
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
APPENDIX A
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
CONCURRENCY IMPLEMENTATION
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capita/Improvements·
ReviSed: January, 2004
\
, INTRODUCTION
. A central focus of the comprehensive planning processing mandated by the local Government
Comprehensive Planning and land Development Regulation' Act, Part II, Chapter 163, Florida
Statutes, is the so-called ·concurrency" requirement The Florida Department of Community Affairs
has stated that ·the concurrency requirement is the teeth of the 1985 Growth Management Act; it
'distinguishes growth management frorn mere planning·.
The statutory concurrency requirements direct localgovernmênts, in theh' comprehensive plans,
to establish acceptable levels of service for pubJicfacilities and-to adopt standards to ensure the
availability of adequatepublicfacilities[S16R3177(3) (a)3, Florida Statutes (1987)]. Moreover,
locål governments are reqÜiredto adopt land develOpment regulations to implement the adopted
comprehènsive plans. Specifically, those regulations must:
Provide that public facilities and services meet or exceed the standards established in the
capital improvelTients eiement requirèd by S163.3177 and are available When needed for
the devéloþment, or that dê'Velopmentorders ánd permits are'oonditiòned on the availability
6t'thésepublicfacilities and services nebessarytosenie the proposed development. Not
later than one year after Its due date established by the State land planning agency's rule
for submissioriof loeal comprehensive plans pursuant to 8163.3167(2), a local government
shall not issue a development order or permitwhich results in a reduction in the level of
services for the affected public facilities below the "level 'of services provided in the
comprehensive plan of the locål government. [S163.3202(2)(g), F.S. (1987) (emphasis
supplied)] .
.
Inådoptingthese statutory requirements, the Legislature observed that adoption and maintenance
ofaéceptable levels óf service for public fåcilitièS is necessary to·preserve, promote, protect, and
improve the pdblic health, safèty, comfort; good order, appearance;' convenience, lâwenforcement
and fire prevention, and general welfare· and to "facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of
tran'sportation, water, sewera,ge, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other
rëquirements and services...·' [S163:3161 (3), Florida Statutes (1987)]. Furthermore, the statutory
requiremèntsare deemed to be the ·minimum requirements necessary to accomplish the stated
intènt,þllrposesand objectives of [the]aâ'. [S164.3161 (7), F.S.(1987) (emphasis supplied)].
The concllrrencyrequirement is applicable to seven types of public facilities: potable water; sanitary
sewer; solid waste; drainage; traffic circulation, mass transit, and recreation facilities. The
requiremenfis'applicable to all such facilities within a local government'sjurisdiction, whether or
notsuchfacilities' are owned and/or operated by the local government.
. ,
TtieDepartment of COmmunity Affairs has recognized that the concurrency requirement must be
applied in a reasonable manner so as to avoid results which are unworkable or'unintended by the
legislature. To satisfy the statutory findings and requirements as set forth above, the County has
dèviseda concurrency implementation and monitoring system. Various aspects of this system are
described by the goals, objectives; and poliCies included within the various elements of the
Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of this Appendix is to generally describe, in one location, the
Sl,l,Ocie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvements
Revised: January, 2Ö04
.
concurrency implementation and monitoring system utilized in the Plan. Inasmuch as the
description contained herein does not describe each and every goal, objective, or policy relating
to concurrency and may be more generalized than the plan's goals, objectives, and policies, to the
extent of any inconsistency the goals, objectives, and policies shall govem actions taken by the
County.
CONCURRENCY IMÞLEMENTATION AND MONITORING SYSTEM
A. Objectives and Policies. Chapter 9J-5.016(3)(c), FlQrida Administrative Code, requires Jocàl
governments to address programs and activities for eliminating existing public facility
capacity deficits, considering locational . needs based on projected growth pattems,
accommocJàting new development· and rectevelopmentfacility demands, considering·
financial feasibility, and establishing levei of service standards for public facilities. The
Comprehensive Plan accomplished this by:
(1)
I
I
I
!
i
j
I
I
!
i
I
i
I
!
¡
,I
!
I
j
i
I
i
(2)
, (3)
I
j
st. Lucie County ,
Comprehensive Plan
Adopting level of service· standards which. have been developed to meet local
conditions, and which do not necessarily ren~ct level of· service standards
recOmmended by other gòvernmental agencies or professional organizations. In
adopting standards for levels of service, the County has, to the maximum extent
feasible as determined by the Board of County Commissioners, made the County's
standards consistent.withthe State Compr.ehensive Plan and the regional policy
plan. Any County standard that differs from State or regional plans .is, in the
judgement of the Board of County Commissioners, the maximum extent to which
such standard can be made consistent with State and regional plans.
Adopting level of service standards that are phased to correlate to specific fiscal
years in order to reflect current levels of service as well as the County's financial
ability to eliminate deficiencies and increase public facility capacity over time.
Applying adopted level of service standards within appropriate, identified,
geographical areas of the County. Standards for some types of public facilities are
applied to development orders based on the level of service throughout the County~
Standards for other types of public facilities are applied . to development orders on
the basis of levels of service within appropriate geographical areas as identified
within the Capital Improvements Elementand the relevant functional element.
(4)
Specifying. in Policy 11.1.1.13 that if a road or road segment is found to be
operating below the adopted level of seivice, the County must enter into a contract
that will result in additional capacity, enter into a development agreement whereby
a developer adds capacity, amend the plan .to adopt a lower level of service, or stop
issuing development orders in the impacted area.
(5)
Permittil19 temporary deviations from the adopted levels of service for drainage,:
traffic circulation, and recreation facilities by permitting final development orders to
be issued if adequate capacity for such public facilities will be available within twelve
Capital Improvements
Revised: January, 2004
.
.
.
..
months of the issuance of a building permit. Water, sewer, and sölid waste facilities
are held to a higher standard because of their affect on health: they must be
available before the issuance of a building permit.
(6)
Recognizing the Couhty's ability to withhold issuance of development orders which
might otherwise be issuable under the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan if the
County determines that a permitted deviation from the adopted level of service
poses a threat to the health or safety,of the community.
(7)
Establishing a five-year schedule of capital improvements which is 100 percent·
financed by revenue sources available to the localgovemment under current law
and which is designed to achieve thè adopted level ofservicè standards based on
the growth projections included within the Comprehensive Plan.
Providing· that, in making a determination of whether sufficient capacity of public
facilities will be available to serve the impacts of a proposed development, the
County. shall· take into consideration. the difference in the· timing of the actual
impacts of development caused by different types of development orders. Final
developrnent orders (such as building permits and site plan approvals) generally
irnpact public facilities within a matter of months, and are issued based on the
availability of public facilities either atthe same time as orwithin tWelve months of
the issuance of the building permit, as described above. Preliminary development
orders (such as rezonings, and developments. of. regional impact) have less
immediate impacts on public factlities, and the determination of the availability of
public facilities can be deferred until the issuance of a final development order if the
applicant acknowledges that no rights to develqp the subject property have been
acquired as a result of receiving apreliminary development order.
(8)
B. Monitoring. The Comprehensiv~ Plan requires the County to establish a system to
monitor, on an annual basis, the actual levels of service and capacity of public facilities, and
to forecast anticipated capacity for the five succeeding fiscal years. (This monitoring report
will provide primafacie evidence of the availability of public facilities for the current fiscal
yeår and Will, therefbre, guide the County in the issuance of development orders.) Annual
monitoring was chosen because it:
(1) Corresponds to annual capital expenditures based on the County's fiscal year;
(2) Adequately accounts for seasonal variations in levels of service; and
(3) Is cost effective and will utilize a consistént methodology.
In addition to the annual monitoring, the County is required to develop a mechanism to
consider, in comlection With the issuance of development orders, the cumulative impacts
of development orders previously issued during the year since the most recent annual
monitoring.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvements
Revised: January. 2004·
C.
Implementation. To implement the statutory concurrency provisions quoted above, Chapter
9J-5, Rorida Administrative Code, requires local governments to adopt policies and·
implementation strategies to assure that public facilities and services which meet the
adopted level of service standards are available concurrent with the impacts of
development, and that no development order will be issued which results in a reduction in
the levels of service belo~ the adoptèd standards. [9J-5.016(3){c)6 and (4)(b), F.A.C.]
,:...'''......
To achieve these mandates in a reasonable manner, the Comprehensive Plan directs the
County to adopt land developmënt regulations which: '
(4) Provide for a review of applications for final development orders to assure that no
final order or permit \}Jill be issu~d by the County unless there will be sufficient
capacity of public facilities to meetthe adopted level of service standards at the time
of issuance of the building permit in the case of water, sewer, and solid waste
facilities, and in the twelve month period following the issuance of the building
permit for roads, pârks and drainage.
(5) Provide for prioritization of competing applications for public facility capacity as
follows:
a. previously approved development orders permitting development;
b. new development orders permitting redevelopment;
c. new development orders permitting new development.
(6) Provide for deferral or re-review of applications, in the event of inadequate public
facility capacity, on the basis of rational criteria.
(7) Provide that development shall commence within a specified reasonable period of
time after issuance of a development order or that the development order shall
expire, and provide criteria for reasonable extensions of time.
st. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvements
Revised: January, 2004
.
.
.
(8)
Allow a developer to provide the necessary public facilities at the developer's own
expense, provided that the public facilities are consistent with the Schedule of
Capital Improvements in the Comprehensive Plan and that the County and the
developer enter into an enforceable development agreement which shall provide,
at a minimum, a schedule for construction of the necessary public facilities and
mechanisms for monitoring so that the public facilities will be available concurrent
with the impacts of the development or the development will not be allowed to
proceed.
CONCLUSION
The concurrency implementation and monitoring system described above is designed to satisfy the
requirements of the law in a manner which is reasonable in application and administration, as well
as in effect. The concurrency system will be subject to the annual review and refinement in the
same manner as the Capital Improvements Element.
Sl Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvements
Revised: January, 2004
Economic Development
Adoption:. March 6, 2002
l
APPENDIX "8"
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL PLAN
FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004
(On file in the Growth Management Department)
51. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
CHAPTER 12
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
Prepared by:
St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Department of Growth Management
ADOPTED - January 9, 1990
REVISED - March 5, 2002 (Ord. 02-008)
REVISED - January 6, 2004 (Compliance Agreement)
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
12-1
12-1
12-2
12-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NTRODUCTION ................................
A. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
B. GEOGRAPHIC SETTING .......
C. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
12-6
12-6
12-6
12-6
12-7
12-8
12-8
12-8
12-9
12-9
2-9
IMPORTANT ECONOMIC ISSUES.................
A. AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY, FISHING
B. MANUFACTURING...............
C. TOURISM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D. ECOTOURISM, HERITAGE, AND CULTURAL TOURISM
E. WHOLESALE TRADE ....... . . . . . . .
F. RETAIL TRADE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
G. CONSTRUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
H. SERViCES.......................
I. DEVELOPING ECONOMIC CLUSTERS
12-10
12-10
12-11
12-12
12-12
MARKET ACCESS
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ......
A. TRANSPORTATION .......
B. LOCAL BUSINESS CLIMATE ..........
C. PUBLIC INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENT
D. TAXES. .
2-12
QUALITY OF LIFE
2-12
ESTABLISHING LOCATIONS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
2-12
TARGETED INDUSTRIES
2-13
ECONOMIC BENCHMARKS
2-13
2-15
CONCLUSION
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
12-2
12-3
12-3
12-4
12-9
2-10
LIST OF TABLES
Population Projections for St. Lucie County, Florida, 2000 through 2020 - Medium Projection
1997 County Income Average Earnings Per Job. . . . . . . . . . .
Employment by Industry Group St. Lucie County Florida, 1998
Industrial/Commercial Acreage in St. Lucie County .. .
Building Permit Activities For St. Lucie County 1995 998
Per Capita Income on a Place-of-Residence Basis
TABLE 12-1
TABLE 12-2
TABLE 12-3
TABLE 12-4
TABLE 12-5
TABLE 12-6
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
INTRODUCTION
The Economic Development Element is an optional element of St. Lucie County's Comprehensive Plan. This element addresses general economic issues facing
St. Lucie County today and identifies potential future economic issues. Although this is not a required element, economic development is important enough to be
considered in the planning of St. Lucie County's future. A plan that provides direction for the future will: assist government and developers in informed investment
decision-making; diversify and promote a more sustainable tax base; protect the integrity of real estate investments; protect against overbuilding and urban sprawl;
protect against unnecessary losses of resource land; protect against losses of open space and natural systems; stimulate job growth in the targeted industries such
as aerospace/engineering, marine, biotech/medical, pharmaceutical, agricultural, aquaculture, electronics, tourism, as well as cultural and arts industries; and improve
global competitiveness.
The Economic Development Element recognizes that St. Lucie County needs to act in coordination with neighboring municipalities and private enterprise, because
of the economic relationships that exist between geographic areas and the private sector. This Element is a starting point and the base of the "economic development
tool box". The Economic Development Element describes the current conditions in the county, selects a direction for economic development and develops goals,
objectives, and policies to advance the plan for economic development.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
In 1993, the U.S. Economic Development Administration awarded St. Lucie County a grant to fund a countywide economic plan. The result of this effort was the St
Lucie County Economic Development Base Study, which was completed in 1995. This document quantifies local economic conditions to more effectively set a course
of action. Subsequently, the county went through a visioning process, which resulted in a document called "Vision St. Lucie", which is attached as Exhibit A. These
two documents provide much of the information included in this element. The Community Vision developed for Fort Pierce, Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie Village and the
unincorporated areas recommends
A.
An education system and business partnership that provides a work force competitive in the global economy;
all ages and cultures to live, learn, work, and play;
A public/private partnership that creates a political and business climate conducive to economic development and high quality job growth while protecting
our natural environment
An uncompromised quality of life for
2.
3.
nfrastructure that supports the education, quality of life, and economic development visions;
with a minimum of duplication of services
Streamlined government
4.
5.
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development
Revised
12-1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
infrastructure, and
A public/private partnership providing the leadership to achieve the shared vision for education, quality of life, economic development
government.
6.
Lucie County's
GEOGRAPHIC SETTING
St. Lucie County is one of the fastest growing areas in the United States. Located about two-thirds of the way down the Atlantic Coast of Florida, St
626 square miles contain three municipalities: Ft. Pierce, Port St. Lucie, and St. Lucie Village.
B.
One of the greatest influences upon the mobility and economic development of St. Lucie County is the highway network. The proximity of Interstate 95 and the Florida
Turnpike, combined with US Highway #1 , SR A-1-A, and the St. Lucie County International Airport, provide access to markets throughout Florida, the United States,
South America, and the world. As economies globalize, St. Lucie County's linkages with other geographic areas become more evident and more important. It is
therefore necessary, to view the county's economy not as an isolated unit, but within a broader context.
St. Lucie County also enjoys a reputation as vacation destination with the theme: "St. Lucie County is the pure Florida - still uncrowded, still unspoiled." Among the
many attractions for residents and visitors alike are 21 miles of beach, the Indian River Lagoon, the 500 acre Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, Smithsonian
Marine Institution, canoeing on the St. Lucie River, or visiting one of the many museums in the county.
POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
The county's population as of early 1997 was estimated at a total of 175,458, with 62,658 living in the unincorporated area. Over the next 5 to 6 years St. Lucie County
is projected to grow to a population of 213,300 (see Table 12-1). The increase in population results in an increase in labor force. The Florida Department of Labor
reported an increase of 1674 in labor force (employable persons between 18 and 65 years of age) from 1997 to 1998, with an increase in employment of 2078. This
indicates that theoretically all of the new labor force was accommodated by new jobs, and that an additional 404 jobs were created to reduce the average annual
unemployment rate from 10.7 percent in 1997 to 9.9 percent in 1998. However, lack of high paying employment opportunities has lead St. Lucie County to have a
lower average earnings per job rate than the State or its neighboring counties (see Table 12-2). This is partly due to the disproportionately high number of low paying
retail and service sector jobs.
C.
2000
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
276,500
Economic Development -
Revised:
254,500
233,400
999, Bureau of Economic & Business Research, University of Florida
12-2
213,300
92,000
Source: Florida Statistical Abstract
S1. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
TÄBLE12~2
1997 County Inc()ll' eAvè~~gøEêlrning$ P~r Job
Statewide $27,511
St. Lucie County $24,097
Martin County $25,301
Indian River County $24,920
Source: Florida Statistical Abstract 1999, Bureau of Economic & Business
Research, University of Florida
other
public
service
fire
retai
wholesale
transportation
manufacturing
construction
agriculture
206
9195
12286
2256
10104
900
2581
2602
2751
5225
1%
<
18.80%
25.10%
4.60%
20.70%
3.90%
5.30%
5.30%
5.60%
.70%
48,860
total employment all groups
Economic & Business Research, University of Florida
999. Bureau of
Source: Flo[ida Statistical Abstract
industrial uses. and 4.377 acres zoned for commercial uses.
EXISTING LAND USE
Currently the county has 5,398 acres zoned for
D.
March 5, 2002
January. 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12-3
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Number of
Industrial Parks
TABLE 12-4
ndustrial/Commercial Acreage in St.
Acres zoned
commercial
3
1
4
8
5,339*
193
o
15,532*
3,208
1,712
1,048
5,968
8,639
504
666
9,809
JUrisdiction
St. Lucie County(1)
City of Ft. Pierce (2)
City of Port St. Lucie (3)
Total
Acres zoned
industrial
St. Lucie County Planning Department 1999
Ft. Pierce Planning Department 1999
Port St. Lucie Planninq Department 1999
(1)
(2)
3
Sources:
Lucie County the majority of
n St
industrial
The zoning designation under mixed use is not necessarily commercial or
designated mixed use areas are agricultural zoning districts.
Depending on their individual requirements, businesses may find that their immediate needs for property can be met in areas already developed for commercial or
industrial activities. St. Lucie County currently has eight such developments. The description provided below includes information such as the availability of central
utilities. This information is provided to give some indication of the development potential within each of the parks.
AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK
Unincorporated St. Lucie County. Contains 180 acres, zoned light industrial, located just east of the St. Lucie County International Airport. Available utilities include
FPUA water and electric service, and natural gas service. St. Lucie County Utilities is in the process of extending its central sewer service lines to the Airport Industrial
Park. The project is divided into 118 lots, approximately 1.25 acres each. The project is approximately 85 percent built out. Only a few undeveloped lots are contiguous
to another. Nine undeveloped contiguous lots owned by the county are located along Industrial Ave One, which has to be constructed prior to utilization of these lots.
Included in the Foreign Trade Zone. St. Lucie County is planning expansion of industrial development at the airport through the potential development of an Airport
Industrial Park West and an Airport Industrial Park North.
KINGS HIGHWAY INDUSTRIAL PARK
Unincorporated St. Lucie County. Contains 100 acres, zoned light industrial, located west of Ft. Pierce at the intersection of Angle Road and Kings Highway. Available
utilities include FPUA water, sewer, natural gas and electric services. The project is composed of 97 lots, approximately 0.75 to 1.5 acres each. The project is
approximately 75 percent built out and included in the Foreign Trade Zone.
2.
Economic Development· March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
2-4
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
FT. PIERCE BUSINESS PARK
Unincorporated St. Lucie County. Contains approximately 42 acres, zoned heavy industrial, located on Selvitz Road. Available utilities include FPUA water and electric
services. Rail siting is available. Sewage disposal is by septic tank, which limits the development potential of undeveloped parcels. The project contains 20 lots,
approximately 2 acres each and to date only six lots are developed.
3.
CROSSROADS PARK OF COMMERCE
City of Ft. Pierce. Contains 209 acres, zoned Commercial. The project is located between the Flonda Turnpike and 1-95, and south of SR 70 (Okeechobee Road).
Available utilities include FPUA water, sewer and electricity. The project currently contains 22 lots, approximately 1 to 7.3 acres in size and to date only four of the
lots have been developed. In addition, there is an 85 acre unplatted property to the south of the existing park.
4.
RESERVE COMMERCE CENTER
City of Port St. Lucie. Contains approximately 228 acres, zoned industrial, commercial and institutional, located in the northwest corner of Port St. Lucie at the
intersection of Midway Road and Glades-Cut Off Road. Available utilities include central water and sewer service by the Reserve Utility Corporation. Rail siting is
available. The project contains 34 lots, approximately 2-4 acres in size, includes 126 acres of undeveloped property and to date only seven lots are developed.
5.
ST. LUCIE WEST COMMERCE PARK
City of Port St. Lucie. A well-established industrial park, which contains approximately 440 acres, zoned light industrial and commercial, located adjacent to 1-95, just
north of St. Lucie West Boulevard. Available utilities include water and sewer service by the St. Lucie West Utility Corporation, and natural gas service. Parcels
available from 1/3 acre to 200 acres and included in the Foreign Trade Zone.
6.
and Business Park Drive, one mile south of Prima Vista
ST. LUCIE BUSINESS PARK
Unincorporated St. Lucie County. Contains 23 acres, zoned commercial and light industrial, located at US#1
Boulevard. All services are available. The project contains 13 lots in total with only a few lots available
7.
The project contains 48
PORT ST. LUCIE INDUSTRIAL PARK
City of Port St. Lucie. Contains 50 acres, zoned light industrial, located off US#1 in Port St. Lucie. Utilities include central water and sewer
lots, approximately one to two acres in size and about 55 percent of the project is developed.
8.
In addition to commercial and industrial subdivisions, St. Lucie County also contains several major industrial and commercial districts. The City of Ft. Pierce also
includes several industrial and commercial districts, including the Port of Ft. Pierce, the railroad switching yard, and the County's only true downtown commercial
district. The City of Port St. Lucie lacks a central business and entertainment district, but instead, relies on separate commercial centers.
Economic Development - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
12-5
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
IMPORTANT ECONOMIC ISSUES
AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY, FISHING
Agriculture is still an important factor in St. Lucie County's economy. These activities typically have large land area requirements, and are mostly found in rural areas,
where there is less competition for land and hence lower land costs. In St. Lucie County, these activities are primarily located within the western unincorporated areas
of the county. There are however some activities such as fruit packing facilities that require a more urban infrastructure and are found closer to 1-95 or the Turnpike.
The agricultural industry in 1998 accounted for about 10.7 percent of the total jobs in St. Lucie County (see Table 12-3). By comparison, this division accounts for
only 2.74 percent of the total jobs in the State. The leading agricultural activities in St. Lucie County generally provide lower paying, labor intensive, and seasonal
employment. According to the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security, crop production, crop services and farm labor and management in St. Lucie
County paid an average of $13,912 per year. The median income for migrant workers is estimated to be much lower. The seasonal nature of employment in the
agricultural sector is reflected in St. Lucie County's monthly fluctuations in unemployment as well as its relatively high annual rates of unemployment.
A.
A promising recent development in the local agricultural sector was the relocation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Research Lab to St. Lucie County from Orlando.
As part of these plans, a 150,000 square foot research building has been completed at Picos Road and Rock Road. The facility will employ about 100 researchers
and office workers. An adjacent 640 acres will be used for growing crops for educational and experimental purposes.
The University of Florida through its Institute for Food and Agricultural Science (IFAS), Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, the Florida Atlantic University, and
Indian River Community College are also in the process of establishing aquaculture as a specialized form of agriculture in St. Lucie County. Aquaculture is more and
more perceived as the "Farm of the Future" and may present an alternative to the traditional cattle rancher or citrus grower for diversification in the future
As a result of the concentration of so many nationally and internationally recognized research and development and educational institutions, including the University
of Florida, Florida Atlantic University, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, Smithsonian Institute, USDA, and many others, St. Lucie County has developed a
reputation as a center for research and development, and is actively promoting the further development of the county as a research and development cluster.
MANUFACTURING
Manufacturing industries comprise the smallest of the four employment divisions of St. Lucie County's economy. Compared to the state, manufacturing industries
within St. Lucie County have had little impact in terms of employment and earnings. Only about 5.3 percent of county jobs are in the manufacturing sector (see Table
12-3). These industries are viewed as desirable because they are usually high value- added activities that possess great potential in creating higher paying jobs that
provide an overall diversification in the economy. According to a 1998 survey, a majority (approximately 73 percent) of the manufacturers in St. Lucie County had
fewer than 20 employees and only about 5 percent had over 100 employees. This employment structure works to reduce shocks caused by economic changes like
those experienced in areas that rely on a few large employers.
B
TOURISM
Tourism provides strong support to 8t. Lucie County's economy. There are two basic types of tourism - active and passive. Each type has different impacts on the
economy. In general, active tourism requires a higher level of service, and therefore creates a higher amount of employment per tourist. Private interests generally
C.
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
2-6
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
provide active recreation facilities and are revenue producing. Common examples include golfing, fishing tournaments, boat charters, and eco-heritage tourism tours.
Sports and recreation facilities act as an additional tourist attraction for an area. St. Lucie County offers many top quality golf courses and the relocation of the
Professional Golfers' Association (PGA) to the county offers the opportunity to expand on the areas attractiveness and quality of life to golfing tourists. According
to the "Destination: Florida Golf' magazine, golf travel continues to be a growing component of the golf industry. Golf tourism increased 50 percent from 1989 to 1998,
with 12 million golf travelers in the US in 1998. Also in 1998,3.53 million golfers traveled to Florida and spent $3.92 billion, excluding green fees and golf equipment
purchases and rentals (1998 National Golf Foundation Study of the US Golf Travel Market). These golf travelers accounted for 6.36 million hotel room nights.
Major league spring training games and regular season minor league games held at the St. Lucie County Sports Complex attract many avid fans. Combination tour
offers such as "Fly & Golf" or "Fly & Fish", in cooperation with the St. Lucie County Airport, would attract many recreational pilots and their families and friends.
Opportunities for passive recreation in St. Lucie County include its 21 miles of unspoiled and uncrowded beaches along North and South Hutchinson Island; the Indian
River Lagoon, a unique estuarine habitat where tropical ocean waters meet temperate zone waters and are recognized for its biological diversity and marine life; and
the St. Lucie River.
there is a need to expand the tourist
The seasonal pattern of tourism, however, creates a gap of low economic activity during the summer months, To close this gap
season, and capture a larger share of the international market.
ECOTOURISM. HERITAGE, AND CULTURAL TOURISM
This form of tourism represents an emerging and rapidly expanding tourist market in Florida. Successful protection, development and promotion of natural
environment, historical elements, and the quality of life in an area can improve the economic viability of a community. Eco-heritage tourism involves direct-guided
experience of the natural environment or historical elements, and education about natural & historical resources, without threatening the environment. St. Lucie County
contains large areas of pristine natural habitats & historical sites that could provide ideal settings for establishing ecotourism operations. Encouraging the development
of this market with private/public partnerships in activities such as backpacking, bird watching, horseback riding, canoeing, camping, and fishing will help expand the
tourist season and reduce the seasonal unemployment gap. The "Ecotourism/Heritage Tourism Advisory Committee Report", Sept. 18, 1997, provided the following
statistics:
D.
995.
65.3 million people traveled as heritage tourists in the United States In
~
The top two favorite family vacations were visits to the ocean/beaches (41 %) and historic sites (40%)
~
million out-of-area visitors a year.
.1
attracts approximately
The 32-mile Pinellas Trai
~
995.
For every $1.00 paid to canoe outfitters, customers spend $5.00 for other trip related
6-mile St. Marks Trail grew by 103,000 to 224,000 in
year
Seventy canoe liveries in Florida generate $38.5 million per
expenditures such as gas, food, and lodging.
Visitors to the
~
~
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
Florida is the second ranked state In the nation with $447 million in retail sales generated by bird watching
12-7
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
~
WHOLESALE TRADE
Wholesale trade is a relatively minor activity in St. Lucie County and in 1998 accounted for 3.9 percent of total employment (see Table 12-3). Despite the relatively
minor role of wholesale trade, jobs in this sub-sector have increased by 52 percent between 1981 and 1992. This large, continuing increase of the
wholesale/distribution sector in the county can be explained by the tremendous population growth as well as the favorable interrelationship between transportation
systems, mainly 1-95 and the Florida Turnpike.
E,
RETAIL TRADE
Over 20 percent of the total jobs in St. Lucie County are in retail trade (see Table 12-3). Rapid population growth is the reason for the demand in retail jobs, largely
fueled by the single-family residential growth in the City of Port St. Lucie. The more regional markets of Martin County and Indian River County have also benefitted
from St. Lucie County's population growth. The attractiveness of these retail markets can be attributed to the availability of more products and the proximity of Port
St. Lucie to these regional markets. The tendency of St. Lucie County residents to patronize these markets is exacerbated by the lack of a centralized commercial
shopping district in Port St. Lucie, and a consumer preference for newer shopping facilities. The City of Ft. Pierce contains a downtown commercial district which
is attracting more and more customers; however, the retail activities in that area are more specialized and serve more of a local market, and do not offer the variety
of products and newness preferred by consumers
F.
CONSTRUCTION
The construction sector in St. Lucie County comprises 5.6 percent of total employment (see Table 12- 3). This share has grown by one percent since 1992. The rapid
population growth and its need for additional housing and infrastructure explain this increase. Building permit activities for St. Lucie County are provided in the Table
12-5 below.
G.
trends in population. income, availability and interest of loans, and to some extent the funding of
be affected by long-term
II
wi
The future performance of this sector
public works projects
TABLE 12-5
Activities for St. Lucie Count
Permit
# of Single Fa
Buildin
Residential
,Its
Total # of Building
Permits
Year
48
51
41
39
117
157
109
3
9
11
14
348
403
367
350
58,838,647
65,827,362
61,901,144
59,321,885
542
587
586
514
995
996
997
998
Source: St. Lucie County Building & Zoning Department 1998
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
2-8
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
This table shows primary building permits issued only. This table does not include permits for accessory structures such as pools, screens, decks, etc, and
does not include any of the electric, mechanical, gas or roof sub-permits. The total number of permits issued for any of the above years and the respective
value is therefore higher than shown.
*
SERVICES
H
nto three divisions
The services sector is divided
2-3)
Lucie County (see Table
Services sector employment accounts for a total of 48.5 percent of the jobs In St
nsurance. Real Estate (FIRE) with 4.6 percent
Finance
1 )
percent; and
2) Commercial and Professional Services with 25
8.8 percent.
In contrast to the other major economic divisions and sectors which are more closely associated with an area's natural resources and infrastructure, activities within
the services sector are more related to an area's demographic character
3) Public Administration Services with
DEVELOPING ECONOMIC CLUSTERS
Clusters of industries form when similar companies locate near other industries that have similar characteristics and require similar types of employees, products,
and services, or have a producer/supplier relationship. Marine science related and aquaculture industries are a recognized industry cluster in St. Lucie County. The
location and expansion of several new university programs, the United States Department of Agriculture Research Lab, Indian River Community Colleges Health
Science Center have created another very attractive industry cluster. Both of these relatively new industry clusters need to be utilized as a sound marketing foundation
to attract related industries to the county, such as the Federal Aquaculture Research Lab.
I.
The Individual
MARKET ACCESS
St. Lucie County's location relative to the geographic area of demand of the business community is an important factor in economic development
markets for goods and services vary widely; therefore, the following is limited to a more general discussion of market access.
St. Lucie County's location, at the southeastern portion of a large peninsular state, restricts access throughout much of the United States. The county, however, is
strategically located at the northern end of the large South Florida market, and also interacts with Central Florida through its proximity to Orlando. The St. Lucie County
Economic Base Study reported that a little more than 79 percent of the State's population - over 10 million people - live within 150 miles of St. Lucie County. The South
Florida market is also recognized as the gateway to the Caribbean and Latin America.
At the regional level, St. Lucie County offers the advantage of being located in the center of the Treasure Coast. The combined population of Martin, St. Lucie, and
Indian River counties in 1998 was at 409,282 (BEBR 1999). If Okeechobee County is included, the population increases to 444,341. An analysis of market access
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development-
Revised:
2-9
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
must not only consider the ability of an area to provide access to a large population, but must also describe the income of that population which influences the
disposable income. St. Lucie County's per capita income, the total income divided by the total population, is less than that of the State of Florida, Indian River and
Martin counties. The relatively higher per capita income of residents in Martin and Indian River counties helps explain the tendency of businesses to locate in northern
Martin County and southern Indian River County.
TABLE 12-6
Per Capita Income on a Place-of-Residence Basis
$24,799
Statewide
$19,606
St. Lucie County
$36,301
Martin County
$34,997
ndian River County
999, Bureau of Economic & Business Research, University of Florida
Source: Florida 8Jatistic_aLAbstract
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
The ability of a community to attract and sustain economic development depends on the quality of the community's infrastructure. Infrastructure includes roadways
and bridges, airports, drainage and stormwater facilities, water and wastewater systems, electric generation and transmission systems, natural gas lines, solid waste
collection, recycling and disposal facilities, schools, and parks. These facilities are the skeletal structure that supports community life, determines quality of life, and
supports economic development. The planning of these facilities should occur in a sustainable manner that promotes the development and redevelopment of existing
and/or underutilized land in already developed areas and promotes the development of more compact, mixed-use and more pedestrian oriented developments.
TRANSPORTATION
A.
2-3)
Roads are the predominant feature of St. Lucie County's transportation network. Interstate 95 and the Florida Turnpike are the primary access ways on which people
and goods travel to and from the county and the rest of southeast Florida. In St. Lucie County, these two roadways diverge within a mile of each other. From St. Lucie
County, 1-95 continues north up the eastern edge of the United States, whereas the Florida Turnpike turns northwest across the State where it connects to Orlando
and to Interstate 75. State Road 70 is another important roadway that provides a connection to the western coast of Florida. US Highway #1 is another important
north-south roadway that carries mostly local and regional traffic.
which includes trucking and warehousing, provided 2,583 jobs or 6.4 percent of the total jobs in St. Lucie County (see Table
998, transportation
In
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12-10
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
The St. Lucie County International Airport is located north of Ft. Pierce. It is a general aviation airport that serves several flight schools, an airplane manufacturer, and
several businesses ancillary to airport and flight operations. It serves charter flights to and from the Bahamas, as well as, flights throughout the continental United
States. Federal Express and United Parcel Services have flight operations from here. Currently, there are 32 businesses at the airport with a total of approximately
400 employees and an estimated annual payroll of $5,700,000. The Airport Industrial Park, just to the east of the airport, also benefits from the proximity to the airport
and its services. There are 52 businesses at the Airport Industrial Park with a total of 868 employees. The airport and adjacent industrial areas are an important
economic engine of the St. Lucie County economy, and improvements to ensure a first class general aviation airport, with ancillary aviation related industry, need
to be a focal point of the County's economic development program
The Port of Ft. Pierce is the region's only deep water port. It is largely undeveloped except for a privately owned cargo operation at the south end of the port. The
company operates an export business consisting mostly of citrus, but on occasion accommodates general and other refrigerated cargo. Otherwise the port is used
for the importation of Caribbean and Bahamian fruits and vegetables as well as aragonite and other building materials. The Port of Fort Pierce Charrette was
conceptually accepted by the Fort Pierce City Commission and the Board of County Commission in 1996, as a guiding document for the development of the Port;
however, it was never officially made part of the Port Master Plan. The Charrette generally limits the definition of the Port to the 87 undeveloped acres of the Port
and divides this vacant area into three zones: cargo in the southern third, commercial tourism and recreation activities in the northern third, and a flex zone in the
middle third. Currently, the majority of the property is privately owned. Any development of the Port will need to take into consideration the sensitivity of the Indian
River Lagoon and the revitalization efforts for downtown Fort Pierce. The county is pursuing the update of the existing Port Master Plan with an anticipated completion
date of December 2001.
In addition to the facilities discussed above, interstate bus service is available locally. Rail cargo service by FEC and CSX is available. The FEC main line runs along
the Coastal Ridge in eastern St. Lucie County. South of Ft. Pierce, a secondary route, providing access to the CSX railroad system, runs through the southwest part
of the city. The railroad provides access to several important commercial and industrial areas, primarily within the unincorporated county and the City of Ft. Pierce.
AMTRAK is planning to provide passenger rail service along the east coast, with a proposed station in Ft. Pierce. An extension of Tri-Rail from West Palm Beach
to St. Lucie County is considered a possibility for the future.
Central water and wastewater services are especially critical to economic development, since the ability to connect to these services often determines the types and
intensities of development that can be constructed and operated. The high costs of extending lines and constructing additional treatment facilities limits many types
of development to locations where central water and wastewater services currently exist, or to areas which will likely receive those services in the near future. These
costs, which must be paid prior to completion of construction, represent a significant portion of the start-up expenses associated with a business. The City of Port St.
Lucie is currently expanding its utility infrastructure to provide additional opportunities for economic development. St. Lucie County has finalized its Utility Master plan
which outlines the expansion of its utility infrastructure to include such important economic areas as the airport and airport industrial parks.
LOCAL BUSINESS CLIMATE
St. Lucie County strives to provide for a climate conducive to conducting business while maintaining its outstanding quality of life. This effort by the county and its
municipalities has led to the location of many new companies and expansion of existing companies within the last two years.
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12-11
B.
S1. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
PUBLIC INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENT
Incentives are typically considered in the latter stages of the site selection process through which a company proceeds. They become critical in the decision to invest
in an area. Incentive programs have become a popular method used to attract companies to relocate or expand. There are extensive incentive programs offered by
the State and local governments for attraction and expansion of businesses. Enterprise Florida is an example of a public/private partnership at the state level for the
promotion of economic development efforts. Programs include tax exemptions, tax abatement programs, business and employee relocation assistance grants, up-front
cash investment, job creation investment vouchers, tax credits, industrial revenue bond financing, utility rate & deposit waivers and reductions. When the incentives
are utilized to attract high wage job opportunities from targeted industries for the local community, the use of such incentives should be encouraged.
C.
TAXES
Taxes, which are necessary for the provisions of many public services associated with growth, can also negatively influence business investment if they are
substantially higher than those of competing markets. A lower millage rate may not always offer a competitive advantage to businesses, particularly in areas where
the failure to fund public services because of lower taxes has an effect on the quality of life.
D.
is critical for many businesses in determining
recreation, culture, education, crime,
QUALITY OF LIFE
The Treasure Coast Region enjoys an excellent quality of life. The perception of an area having a good quality of life
whether to invest in a particular location. Factors influencing the quality of life of a community include natural environment,
housing, and health services.
Investments in the natural environment, such as the Indian River Lagoon, recreation, and culture, affect not only the quality of life of an area, but also have an effect
by encouraging tourism. Major recreational features in St. Lucie County include almost 25,000 acres of aquatic preserve, 21 linear miles of unspoiled beaches, almost
7,000 acres of public parks, 1 public golf course, and more than 12 private golf courses, most of which are open to non-members. St. Lucie County also offers unique
exhibits and museums such as Heathcote Botanical Gardens, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, the Smithsonian Institution, the St. Lucie County Historical
Museum, the UDT-SEAL Museum, the Manatee Observation Center and the AE. "Bean" Backus Gallery. Indian River Community College in Ft. Pierce offers visitors
a variety of concerts, lectures, exhibits, and a planetarium
ESTABLISHING LOCATIONS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Priority should be given to renovating existing and creating new locations for economic development and businesses. Land use planning, zoning, infrastructure
planning, and fiscal policy should encourage patterns of development that will foster redevelopment and infill of existing commercial and industrial areas, and
encourage new areas to form in a way that will increase the number and availability of good locations for economic development. Criteria for good business locations
include a good transportation network, dense infrastructure, close proximity to neighborhoods (employees), high density of customers and support businesses, and
proximity to cultural, recreational, and educational opportunities.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12-12
TARGETED INDUSTRIES
According to previous focus and vision groups and the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. St. Lucie County is targeting the industries listed below as those that need to
be encouraged to locate or expand in this area.
Aerospace/Engineering
Marine Related Manufacturing incl. Retrofitting, Servicing, and Housing
BioTech/Medical/Pharmaceutical Industries
Agriculture/Aquaculture/Food Processing Research and Development
Electronic Related Industries
Tourism (including Eco-Heritage Tourism, and
Cultural & Arts Industries
Golf and Recreation Industries
Transportation Resource Based Development
International Trade
High Tech Industries
regional Sports events)
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
ECONOMIC BENCHMARKS
In 1995, a Visioning Summit was held by Luke Planning, Inc, as a part of the formulation of "Vision St. Lucie", in order to more clearly define the wants and needs
of the community in regard to education, quality of life, economic development, infrastructure, and government. From the visioning process, the following benchmarks
emerged to measure the progress of economic development in the county through 2010.
ncrease high tech. such as communications and electronics Industries, and manufacturing jobs to ten percent of total jobs.
~
ncrease the growth rate of average earnings per job to the highest level of any county in Florida or at least one percent per year
~
Lucie County per capita income to above the U.S. per capita income.
ncrease St
~
the private sector, and the public to ensure that the directions taken by the County in regard to
CONCLUSION
The County must work closely with other government agencies
economic development meet common needs and goals.
the best possible environment for economic development opportunities that will benefit county residents. The County's business climate
expansion, retention, and relocation of desirable businesses. This goal can be achieved if the County pursues the following objectives:
The County's role is to create
should encourage the creation
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development-
Revised:
12-13
diversify the economic base county wide;
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
increase the skill level in the available work force;
·
wages;
increase availability of higher skilled jobs with higher
·
education and higher education
ncrease educational opportunities for adult
ncrease the availability of executive style housing to attract high skill and high wage work force;
encourage a neighborhood style school system to ensure competitiveness with neighboring counties
future needs; and
ndustrial, and tourist/recreational related parcels and structures exist to meet current and
ensure that adequate areas of commercial
·
financial incentives to encourage desirable development in those areas.
provide the proper regulatory and
·
imited to
They include but are not
The County has a variety of means at its disposal to accomplish these objectives
support the location and expansion of industry;
provide infrastructure that wi
encourage business centers and growth centers;
consider land use and zoning policies that wi
to attract target industries; and
develop and implement a competitive incentives program
·
retention, and relocation of businesses
explore sources of seed capital and venture capital to provide opportunities for creation, expansion
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The Goals, Objectives, and Policies that follow this section are intended to expand in detail on the above objectives and means for planning and implementation of
sound economic growth in St. Lucie County.
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12-14
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
its residents.
Lucie County and
Lucie County economy.
Develop and implement activities designed to improve the overall prosperity of St.
Improve the St.
GOAL 12.1
Objective
12.1.1
Attract investors to help diversify the Industrial base. broaden the economic tax base and strengthen the job market
Policy
12.1.1.1
promote economic development opportunities
Encourage redevelopment projects that wi
Policy
12.1.1.2
for projects in order to encourage Investment and assist targeted industries in the approval process.
Develop a program
Policy
12.1.1.3
Lucie County.
projects that are consistent with the smart growth policies of St
Place a high priority on inf
assist in the attraction of higher paying job opportunities.
Encourage more construction of executive housing stock that wi
Policy
12.1.1.4
Lucie County to effectively compete in the global
allow St.
wi
Diversify the year round economy and establish an economic and cultural climate that
economy.
Policy
12.1.1.5
GOAL 12.2
Support efforts to diversify St. Lucie County's economy and to make the county an effective competitor.
with smart growth principles
ncrease opportunities for business and industry consistent
Develop an area-wide land use plan that wi
Objective
12.2.1
Policy
12.2.1
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12-15
.1
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
provide year-round employment opportunities.
the target industry sectors that wi
businesses from
Recruit
Policy
12.2.1.2
that would benefit from being located near related industries
Identify locations for and encourage development of economic clusters for business and industry
in the area.
Policy
12.2.1.3
Encourage the development of clusters of industries such as aerospace, aquaculture, research and development at appropriate locations in St. Lucie County.
Policy
12.2.1.4
Prepare and maintain an inventory of incentives, business programs, and housing stock, and available sites to accommodate new businesses and business
expansions in St. Lucie County.
Policy
12.2.1.5
nternational trade and tourism to occur.
Support public/private partnerships and communications and provide for an atmosphere for
Policy
12.2.1.6
Assist in the promotion, development and implementation of Foreign Trade Zone services in St. Lucie County.
Policy
12.2.1.7
Lucie County.
Establish procedures and tools to encourage business development and assist economic development in 51.
Objective
12.2.2
Establish a point person or inter-agency and inter department permitting team whose purpose is to facilitate the movement of targeted economic development
projects through the regulatory process.
Policy
12.2.2
Establish a "toolbox" to assist developers and businesses in locating appropriate facilities for their needs and to provide all necessary statistical information to
encourage outside investors to locate in St. Lucie County.
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development-
Revised:
12-16
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Policy
12.2.2.2
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Lucie County Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)
Promote and encourage the implementation of the Treasure Coast and the St
Encourage the provision of appropriate educational opportunities, programs, and facilities to meet business and industry needs.
Policy
12.2.2.3
Objective
12,2.3
more vocational programs to meet business and industry needs.
Encourage the development of
businesses and employees.
benefit
Encourage the cultivation of education/business partnerships to develop education and training support programs that wi
Policy
12.2.3
Lucie County.
Encourage education and training programs that encourage high-tech. and research and development businesses and industry to locate in St
Policy
12.2.3.2
Policy
12.2.3.3
USDA laboratory, IFAS, Smithsonian
support the expansion of manufacturing,
Encourage and support research and development opportunities provided by Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution
Institute, FAU. and University of Florida, to encourage and enhance clustering of high tech industry, and to
agriculture/aquaculture, marine and tourism industries in St. Lucie County.
Policy
12.2.3.4
marketing efforts.
Lucie County in the development and implementation of
Assist the agency charged with the marketing and promotion of St.
Objective
12.2.4
or expansion, including international trade.
relocation
n marketing St. Lucie County as a location with opportunities for business location
Assist
Policy
12.2.4
ncrease cooperation between public agencies and private organizations to present a unified positive Image of St. Lucie County.
Policy
12.2.4.2
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
2-17
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
high wage workers
Encourage the provision of executive style housing to attract companies which employ high ski
Policy
12.2.4.3
the sustainability, expansion, and diversification of
to increase
agricultural land base
Expand agricultural activities, and maintain a sufficient
agricultural activities throughout St. Lucie County.
GOAL 12.3
Increase and diversify the agricultural economic base
Objective
12.3.1
ncrease and diversify the agricultural economic base
Develop specialty foods, farmers market products, and food processing mdustries to
Policy
12.3.1.1
to increase and diversify the agricultural economic base.
maintain, and expand industries, such as the equine mdustry and aquaculture mdustry,
Encourage
Policy
12.3.1.2
Encourage and support agricultural and aquaculture research and education programs and development activities
Policy
12.3.1.3
Lucie County's economy.
Maintain and improve existing features that contribute to the attraction of tourists.
Maintain and expand the tourism sector of St.
12.4
Objective
12.4.1
GOAL
and enjoyment of future residents and visitors
Protect St. Lucie County's natural resources and countryside to ensure their continued existence for the benefit
Policy
12.4.1
enhance quality of life, and add to the
Protect and reuse St. Lucie County's historic sites and buildings to preserve its heritage, promote economic development
tourist experience.
.1
Policy
12.4.1.2
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
2-18
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
natural and cultural heritage.
Support local initiatives to preserve St. Lucie County's art, architecture
Policy
12.4.1.3
Initiate marketing efforts and seek new opportunities to promote tourism
multiple outdoor recreation and natural resources, historic sites, cultural activities and facilities.
Lucie County as a vacation destination with
Objective
12.4.2
Market St
Promote cooperative efforts between public agencies and private organizations to present a unified positive Image of St. Lucie County.
Policy
12.4.2
Develop ecotourism opportunities to help extend the tourist season in St. Lucie County, help sustain large areas of open space, preserve natural habitat
discourage sprawling, low density development, and broaden the economic base.
Policy
12.4.2.2
Policy
12.4.2.3
Promote and market entertainment and sports activities In St. Lucie County domestically and internationally to Increase the County's tourism market
and professional regional multi-sports
Encourage and strengthen the role of sports activities in the economic development by attracting and soliciting amateur
events, including regional equestrian competitions and sports fishing tournaments, throughout the county.
Policy
12.4.2.4
Policy
12.4.2.5
and professional arts events and businesses
Encourage and strengthen the role of the arts in economic development by attracting and accommodating amateur
throughout the county.
Policy
12.4.2.6
and
redevelopment
Economic Development - March 5, 2002
Revised: January, 2004
the
facilities, and encourage
Encourage patterns of development that are less costly to provide with public services and
revitalization of older residential, industrial. and commercial areas.
12-19
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
12.5
GOAL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Promote patterns of development that allow public services and facilities to be provided more cost-effectively.
Objective
12.5.1
mixed-use development.
Encourage the use of compact,
Policy
12.5.1.1
Coordinate land use planning and the provision of public facilities
Policy
12.5.1.2
safety, and welfare are not compromised
Simplify and shorten the review and approval process while ensuring that the public health
Policy
12.5.1.3
attract outside businesses and assist in the retention and expansion of existing businesses.
Develop and utilize appropriate business incentive programs that wi
Policy
12.5.1.4
educational facilities, and residents
Lucie County.
nkages between business centers
mprove Infrastructure linkages throughout St.
nfrastructure
Encourage and support improved
GOAL 12.6
Objective
12.6.1
mprove transportation opportunities throughout 8t. Lucie County in order to provide improved access to industry and commercial locations for other businesses
and the labor force, and provide easier access to educational facilities.
Policy
12.6.1
to allow for adequate capacity for future economic growth
mprove and expand the water and sewer system
Policy
12.6.1.2
Expand the water and sewer system to encompass all industrial and commercial land use areas located within the urban service area and utilize grant funds when
available.
Policy
12.6.1.3
March 5, 2002
January, 2004
Economic Development -
Revised:
12·20
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
flight
Economic Development
Transmittal Draft: June 12, 2001
Encourage and improve the use of the St. Lucie County International Airport as a first class general aviation facility, to improve safety for existing and new
training facilities, to improve access for business and industry, to improve access for residents, and to encourage outside investors to locate in the area.
12-21
Policy
12.6.1.4
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Economic Development
Transmittal Draft: June 12, 2001
2·22
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Economic Development
Adoption: March 5, 2002
EXHIBIT A
VISION ST. LUCIE
(On file In the Department of Growth Management)
12-23
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan
Economic Development
Adoption: March 5, 2002
12-24
St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan