2001 study: growth management revisited

Previous JCCI StudiesJCCI studies are available free to interested individuals. Most studies maybe downloaded from our website at www. j c c i . o r g. Those marked witha star are out of print; copies available at $7.00 each.

STUDY CHAIR1977 Local Government Finance* Robert Davis1977 Housing* Thomas Carpenter1977 Public Education (K-12)* Robert W. Schellenberg1978 Public Authorities* Howard Greenstein1978 Strengthening the Family* Jacquelyn Bates1979 Citizen Participation in the Schools* Susan Black 1979 Youth Unemployment* Roy G. Green 1979 Theatre Jacksonville* Richard Bizot1979 Civil Service* Max K. Morris1979 Planning in Local Government* I. M. Sulzbacher1980 Capital Improvements for Recreation* Ted Pappas1980 But Not In My Neighborhood Pamela Y. Paul1980 The Energy Efficient City* Roderick M. Nicol1981 Coordination of Human Services* Pat Hannan1981 Higher Education* R. P. T. Young1982 Disaster Preparedness* Walter Williams Jr.1982 Teenage Pregnancy* Mari Terbrueggen1982 Downtown Derelicts* Earle Traynham 1983 Mass Transit* David Hastings1983 Indigent Health Care* Linda McClintock1984 Jacksonville’s Jail Eleanor Gay1984 Growth Management* Curtis L. McCray1985 Visual Pollution Doug Milne1985 Minority Business* Jack Gaillard 1986 Private Delivery of Public Services George Fisher1986 Mental Health and Drug Abuse

Services for Children and Youth* Flo Nell Ozell1987 Child Day-Care Services George W. Corrick1987 Infrastructure* Joan Carver 1988 Local Election Process* Jim Rinaman1988 School Dropout Prevention* Gene Parks1989 Reducing the Garbage Burden* Jack F. Milne &

James L. White III1989 Independent Living for the Elderly Roseanne Hartwell1990 Future Workforce Needs Yank D. Coble Jr.

STUDY CHAIR1990 Philanthropy in Jacksonville* Juliette Mason1991 Adequate Water Supply* Russell B. Newton Jr.1991 Positive Development of Jacksonville’s

Children* Henry H. “Tip” Graham1992 Long-Term Financial Health of the

City of Jacksonville Mary Alice Phelan 1992 Young Black Males* Chester A. Aikens &

William E. Scheu1993 Planning for Northeast Florida’s

Uncertain Military Future David L. Williams1993 Public Education: The Cost of Quality* Royce Lyles1994 Reducing Violence in Jacksonville

Schools* Dale Clifford1994 Jacksonville Public Services: Meeting

Neighborhood Needs* Michael Korn1995 Teenage Single Parents and Their Families* Afesa Adams1995 JAXPORT: Improvement and Expansion Jim Ade1996 Creating a Community Agenda: Indicators

For Health and Human Services* Bruce Demps1996 Leadership: Meeting Community Needs* Bill Brinton1997 Improving Public Dialogue Jim Crooks1997 Transportation for the Disadvantaged Cathy Winterfield1997 Children with Special Needs* Virginia Borrok1998 The Role of Nonprofit Organizations Sherry Magill1998 Incentives for Economic Development* Henry Thomas1999 Improving Adult Literacy Edythe Abdullah1999 Arts, Recreation and Culture

in Jacksonville Ed Hearle2000 Affordable Housing Bill Bishop2000 Improving Regional Cooperation Jim Rinaman2001 Services for Ex-Offenders Dana Ferrell Birchfield

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.2434 Atlantic Boulevard, Suite 100Jacksonville, Florida 32207E-mail address: [email protected] address: http://www.jcci.org

JCCI is a United Way Agency

Nonprofit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPermit No. 1999Jacksonville, FL

STUDY

JacksonvilleCommunityCouncil, Inc.

GROWTHMANAGEMENTREVISITEDA Report to the Citizens of Northeast Florida • Summer 2001

CommitteeMembership and Work

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

Board of DirectorsSue Butts, President**

Edgar Mathis, President-Elect** Pat Brzozowski, Secretary**Edward Hearle, Treasurer**

Edythe AbdullahJohn Anderson

Oliver Barakat**William Bishop

Lizanne BomhardVirginia BorrokVanessa BoyerMichael BoylanSherry Burns**

Charles A. ClarksonJohn R. Cobb**John Daigle Jr.Edward EngDavid Foster

Charles GriggsDave HemphillHoward Kelley

William Mason IIIJohn Rutherford

Mary Ellen Smith**Paula WeatherbyGerald Weedon

Susie Wiles

**Executive Committee

Executive DirectorLois Chepenik

Past PresidentsJ.J. Daniel

Jack H. ChambersYank D. Coble Jr.Robert D. Davis

George W. CorrickHoward R. Greenstein

Jacquelyn D. BatesDavid M. Hicks

James C. RinamanKenneth W. Eilermann

J. Shepard Bryan Jr.Juliette Woodruff Mason

Lucy D. HadiCharles P. Hayes Jr.

Steve PajcicTracey I. Arpen Jr

Guy Marvin IIILuther Quarles IIIW.O. BirchfieldMichael J. Korn

William E. ScheuAfesa Adams

William D. BrintonSherry Burns

JCCI StaffLois Chepenik

Executive Director

David Swain Associate Director

Planning StaffLaura Lane Cheryl MurphyJennifer ParsonsBen Warner *

Support StaffEarlene HostutlerMichelle Simkulet Lashun Stephens *Wanda Tivey

* Staff for this study

Jacksonville Community Council Inc. 23

CHAIRAllan T. Geiger

Judy ArandaLynda AycockTony BatesRichard BerryBill BishopFlossie BrunsonJohn CannonJeane ChappellCarmen ChronisterBucky Clarkson

Jeff ClementsRichard DarbyGary DavenportDaniel DavisDan DonaldsonMary EavesGeorge FisherHolly KartsonisKirk LewisDavid Lipp

William MahoneyHugh O'MalleyBob OttesenMarvin ReeseSylvia SimmonsRichard Skinner Jr.Lindner SmithJim VarianDenise Wallace

MANAGEMENT TEAMJames Argrett, Jr.J. Shepherd BryanJohn CroftsPat GreasonHawley SmithJerry SpinksTrip StanlyHenry ThomasQuinton White

COMMITTEE

Growth Management Revisited 20012

Summary

Highlights

Duval County is growing. Residents have children, and people and businesses arrive daily. Growth management is the effortof the local and regional community to preserve the quality of life while accommodating population and economic growth.

JCCI released its first Growth Management Study in 1984. That study looked at the mechanisms necessary to maintainand enhance the quality of life in Jacksonville in the face of predicted growth. Among other recommendations, it calledfor the adoption and enforcement of a Comprehensive Plan, increased media coverage of growth management, andincreased citizen awareness and involvement in the growth-management process.

In 1985, Florida passed a Growth Management Act, creating a statewide system for enforcing growth management. In1990, Jacksonville adopted its own Comprehensive Plan. In 2000, the State of Florida began review of its growth-man-agement regulations, and the 2001 Growth Management Study Commission report called for increasing local responsi-bility for growth management.

In this study, JCCI examines the outcomes of Duval County’s growth-management efforts over the last fifteen years andidentifies steps to improve implementation of growth management in Duval County.

The study committee explored how legislative mandates, community goals, and other factors have influenced growthmanagement; examined the effectiveness of past and current strategies; reviewed the regional implications of growth-management efforts; and discussed how growth-management approaches from across the country might be adapted tolocal efforts.

This study accepts current projections that growth will continue in Duval County. For the purposes of this study, growthmanagement refers to programs and policies intended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencing the rate,location, design, and quality of development, including new development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymouswith stopping growth.

Major ConcernsState growth-management efforts have increased the c o s tof development while creating unintended negativeconsequences for local communities.

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

The complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of theDevelopments of Regional Impact (DRI) process dis-couraged its use.

Historically, growth-management efforts in Duval Countyhave focused more on new growth than on redevelopmentof existing neighborhoods.

Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology fordetermining the full costs and benefits to the community ofproposed development.

Recommended SolutionsRestructure the Florida growth-management process bydelegating responsibilities and authority to appropriate levelsof government.

Protect the natural environment by including assessment ofdevelopment impacts on the natural environment indecision making.

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

Encourage and fund coordinated efforts to revitalize oldern e i g h b o r h o o d s .

Develop and use a process to determine the full costs andbenefits of proposed developments, including tax- p a y e rimpacts and impacts on the natural environment.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

Table Of Contents

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

FINDINGS 4

Introduction 4

Community goals 4

Impacts of growth on Duval County 5Population and economic growth 5Factors affecting development patterns 6Resulting development patterns 7Resulting community impacts 8

Transportation 8Environmental impacts 8Growth distribution 9

Growth management tools and their effectiveness 9

State regulation 9Areas of Critical State Concern 9Developments of Regional Impact 10Comprehensive Planning 10Concurrency 10Growth Management Study Commission 11

Local efforts 11Comprehensive Planning 11Zoning 12Land acquisition 13

Cover design and layout by Angela Edwards

On the cover: Map of Duval County, Florida. See page 7 for legend.

Infrastructure 13Targeted economic incentives 13Fair-share agreements 13Downtown redevelopment 14Neighborhood and sector plans 14Brownfields 14Visual environment 14Historic preservation 14Affordable housing 15Regional coordination 15

Approaches from other communities 15Indianapolis, Indiana 15Portland, Oregon 16Charlotte, North Carolina 16Rhode Island 16Maryland 16

CONCLUSIONS 17

RECOMMENDATIONS 19

RESOURCE PEOPLE 21

REFERENCES 22

COMMITTEE MEMBERS 23

3

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

Barnett, Cynthia, and Mary Ellen Klas, Managing Growth: 10 Steps Toward a More Livable Florida (Florida Trend), December 2000.

City of Jacksonville, Jacksonville Into the 21st Century: Growth Management Task Force Recommendations, 1997.

Duany, Andres, The Science of Smart Growth (Scientific American), December 2000.

Florida Department of Community Affairs, Growth Management Survey Report, February 2000.

Florida Growth Management Study Commission, A Liveable Florida for Today and Tomorrow: Growth Management StudyCommission Final Report, 2001.

Hollis, Linda; Porter, Douglas; and Holly Stallworth, Assessing the Impacts of Development Choices: Prepared for the Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South Florida and its Full-Cost Accounting Committee, 1997.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Growth Management: A Report to the Citizens of Jacksonville, 1984.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida: A Study Report to the Citizensof the First Coast, 2000.

Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, 2010 Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report, 1997.

Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, The Citizen’s Guide to Zoning (draft), 2001.

The National Neighborhood Coalition, Smart Growth, Better Neighborhoods: Communities Leading the Way, 2000.

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

Nicholas, James C., and Ruth L. Steiner, Growth Management and Smart Growth in Florida (Wake Forest Law Review), 2000.

Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Growth Management Meetings with Northeast Florida Stakeholders, 1999.

Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Strategic Directions: Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan, 1997.

The Reubin O’D. Askew Institute, Jacksonville and the 21st Century: Building a Stronger Community, Fall 1999.



Resource PeopleThe JCCI study process relies on information supplied by knowledgeableresource people, in addition to published reference materials. We wish to thankthe following for their contributions to this study.

Bill BrintonAllen, Brinton, & McCarthy

Joan CarverJacksonville University

Alex ColeyHallmark Partners

Joe DebsReynolds, Smith & Hills

John DeGroveemeritus professor, Florida Atlantic University

John DelaneyMayor, City of Jacksonville

Jeff ElledgeSt. Johns River Water Management District

Jeannie FewellJacksonville Department

of Planning and Development

Susan GrandinTrust for Public Lands

T.R. HainlineRogers Towers Bailey Jones & Gay

Lee HarrisCommunity Alliance

Alberta HippsPresident, Jacksonville City Council

Ed LehmanNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council

Greg MatovinaMatovina & Company

Tim McLendonUniversity of Florida

Lynn PappasPappas, Metcalf, Jenks, & Miller

Shannon SchefferNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council

Aage SchroderFlorida Department of Transportation

Darrell SmithJacksonville Transportation Authority

Lance DeHaven SmithFlorida State University

Brian TeepleNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council

Lane WelchGreenscape

Walter WilliamsColdwell Banker Walter Williams Realty Inc.


Findings

INTRODUCTIONThe goal of growth management is to accommodate populationand economic growth while also maintaining or enhancing thecommunity’s quality of life, all without jeopardizing individualrights. Successful growth-management efforts result in a vibrantcommunity with a healthy environment, viable transportationchoices, and shared economic prosperity, without undue stresson taxpayers. Accomplishing these goals was already difficultbefore the release of JCCI’s 1984 Growth Management Study,and it will continue to be complex and difficult in the future.

Growth management is a balancing act—balancing the right ofproperty owners to develop their properties as they wish withthe right of the community to influence the consequences ofdevelopment for overall community benefit. Growth manage-ment is often debated in terms of what others should do—ridethe bus, live in downtown apartments, or leave the land in itspristine natural condition—so that I can continue to enjoy useof my personal car and my house in the suburbs. Growthmanagement also concerns the rights of those who already livein a community to enjoy its quality of life, versus the rights ofothers to move in and join them.

Balancing competing needs is an active process involvingtradeoffs, as this description demonstrates:

Growth management is active and dynamic …; it seeks tomaintain an ongoing equilibrium between developmentand conservation, between various forms of developmentand concurrent provisions for infrastructure, between thedemands for public services generated by growth and thesupply of revenues to finance those demands, and between progress and equity.

Douglas R. Porter, Managing Growth in America’s Communities, 1997

Finding the right balance and maintaining the quality of life,under the pressures of population and economic growth currently being experienced in Duval County and NortheastFlorida, requires revisiting JCCI’s 1984 study and efforts sincethen to discover solutions for tomorrow’s growth based on 17years of experience. The Florida legislative debate in 2000-2001 about the proper roles of state and local governments ingrowth management provided an even more urgent context f o rdetermining how Duval County can best improve implementationof its own growth-management efforts. While this s t u d yconcentrates on Duval County and the c o n s o l i d a t e dJacksonville-Duval County government, growth and its impacts

are occurring throughout the metropolitan region. Thereforethis study examines Duval County’s growth-management effortsin a regional context.

This study defines growth management as programs and policiesintended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencingthe rate, location, design, and quality of development, includingnew development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymous with stopping growth.

COMMUNITY GOALSConcerns about the impacts of growth have spurred efforts overthe years to articulate community goals for growth managementin Duval County and Northeast Florida. These goals are remark-ably consistent in their visions of desired growth-managementoutcomes.

Over the past quarter-c e n t u r y, a number of gatherings of citizensunder public and private auspices have articulated goals andexpectations about the quality of life in Duval County andNortheast Florida. These statements have served as guidingprinciples to define desired outcomes of growth-managementefforts.

• The Amelia Island Conference of business and civic leadersin 1974 listed as a priority the adoption of a comprehensive land-use plan with emphasis on recreation areas, conservation,and preservation, and establishment of standards for water-front development to ensure public access to the river andocean.

• JCCI’s Growth Management Study (1984) outlined communitygoals for growth management, including natural-resourceprotection and citizen involvement.

• T h e First Coast Planning Conference convened by theJacksonville Chamber of Commerce (1987) created a regionalvision for 2005, calling for development approaches that wouldpreserve the environment and enhance the quality of life.

• The City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan ( d e v e l o p e din 1990) included over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives tomanage growth. Its 1997 Evaluation and Appraisal Reportconfirmed the same goals, policies, and objectives, andnoted the City’s progress in accomplishing them.

• JCCI’s Quality of Life Indicators Targets for 2000 (set in

Findings represent the information received by the committee. They are derived from publishedmaterials, from facts reported by resource people, and from a consensus of the committee’sunderstanding of the opinions of resource people.


1991) established community goals for indicators of wellbeingin relation to the economy, natural environment, mobility,and other aspects of the community’s quality of life.

• The Jacksonville Insight visioning process (in 1992) developedcitizen-based goals for effective transportation, a healthyenvironment, planned economic development, and thrivingneighborhoods and downtown.

• The Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan of theNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council (1997) focusedon five strategic subject areas: affordable housing, economicdevelopment, emergency preparedness, natural resources ofregional significance, and regional transportation.

• The River Agenda Summit convened by the Mayor ofJacksonville in 1997 outlined environmental strategies forprotection of the St. Johns River.

• The Vision for Downtown Jacksonville (1997) articulatedcommunity goals for downtown revitalization.

• The Jacksonville Growth Management Task Force convenedby the Mayor (1997) identified community issues andrecommended specific steps Jacksonville could take toimprove the type of growth and effectiveness of its growth-management efforts.

• Economic Summits convened by the Mayor of Jacksonvillein 1995 and 1998 focused on neighborhood and regionaleconomic development, tourism, and the transportationelement of growth management in Jacksonville.

• JCCI F o rw a r d ’ s Forum for the Fu t u r e (1999) called forimproved protection of natural resources, enhanced designquality of the built environment, and regional integration ofgrowth-management efforts.

• Growth management meetings with Northeast Floridas t a k e h o l d e r s conducted in 1999 by the Northeast FloridaRegional Planning Council outlined areas of communityconsensus on goals for growth management, includingenvironmental-protection initiatives.

• The Better Jacksonville Plan (2000) laid out a communitygrowth-management vision that included environmentalpreservation, downtown revitalization, and infrastructureimprovements (see page 13).

• The 2001 Mayor and City Council priorities for the fiscalyear beginning October 1, 2001 highlight growth-manage-ment goals including improving the city’s transportation system,encouraging downtown housing, redeveloping older neigh-borhoods, and encouraging mixed-use development intargeted areas of the county.

These public and private statements combined speak of desiresfor a vibrant community with a healthy environment, viabletransportation choices, and shared economic prosperity. Thesedesires are not unique to Northeast Florida. They have also pro-vided the political impetus for extensive efforts by the State ofFlorida, especially since 1985, to regulate development through-out the state.

H o w e v e r, private behavior does not always match publicconsensus. While the community may agree that a viable mass-transit system would provide some traffic relief, individual citizensstill choose to drive a personal automobile rather than ride the

bus. Average weekday bus ridership as a percentage of thepopulation has declined by 35 percent between 1984 and1999. Similarly, growth-management efforts to promote higherdensity and multi-use development often run into oppositionfrom citizens who may agree that such efforts benefit thec o m m u n i t y but do not want such development located near theirown homes.

IMPACTS OF GROWTH ON DUVAL COUNTYOver the last two decades, Duval County has experiencedsubstantial population and economic growth. State regulation,city programs and policies, and other factors have influencedthe kinds and locations of development. The resulting land-use patterns have had a significant impact on the quality oflife in Duval County and have prompted renewed concern formanaging future growth.

Population and economic growth

The population of Duval County and Northeast Florida hasincreased steadily in the last few decades and will continue toincrease in the foreseeable future. The region has alsoexperienced substantial economic growth.

In 1940, the total population of Florida was less than 2 million;by 2000, it had grown to nearly 16 million, with further growthto 23 million expected by 2030. As the State of Florida seeks toaccommodate its population growth, the density of developmentin South Florida is encouraging growth to move northward.

In 1940, Duval County was home to just over 200,000 people;in 2000, the population was nearly four times that. Between1980 and 2000, Duval County grew by 36 percent, adding over200,000 people in 20 years. By 2030, Duval County is expectedto have a population of over one million, with 1.6 million livingthroughout the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area(MSA)—Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns Counties.

Population growth in the JacksonvilleMetropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)

County 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Baker

Clay

Duval

Nassau

St. Johns

TotalSource: U.S. Census, University of Florida Bureau of Economic

and Business Research. Data for 2010-2030 are projected.

3 2 , 2 0 0

2 4 1 , 0 0 0

1 , 0 6 4 , 9 0 0

9 8 , 1 0 0

2 3 9 , 0 0 0

1 , 6 7 5 , 2 0 0

2 9 , 0 0 0

2 0 8 , 2 0 0

9 7 2 , 7 0 0

8 4 , 9 0 0

2 0 0 , 6 0 0

1,495,400

18,486

1 0 5 , 9 8 6

6 7 2 , 9 7 1

4 3 , 9 4 1

8 3 , 8 2 9

9 2 5 , 2 1 3

25,600

1 7 3 , 7 0 0

8 7 4 , 2 0 0

7 0 , 9 0 0

1 6 0 , 8 0 0

1 , 3 0 5 , 2 0 0

22,259

1 4 0 , 8 1 4

778,879

5 7 , 6 6 3

1 2 3 , 1 3 5

1,122,750

resources and currently available water-s u p p l y processesand technologies. The District also should examine technically and financially realistic new potable water processes and technologies to determine their potentialeffect on capacity and their fiscal impacts.

9. Independent of state and regional action, the Mayor of Jacksonville should take the lead to continue to improve the City of Jacksonville’s growth-management processes on matters of local impact by:

• encouraging roadway patterns in new developments that include connections to adjacent developments and land uses;

• retrofitting existing developments to include more road-way connections to adjacent developments and land uses;

• encouraging City departments and independent authoritiesto coordinate their efforts for growth-management purposes;

• providing funding, through various entities and sources, for the Downtown Master Plan to restore and revitalizeJacksonville’s downtown area;

• improving and enforcing City codes regarding neighbor-hood appearance and upkeep;

• encouraging and funding efforts to revitalize older neigh-borhoods, including those designated Historic, by using

the following kinds of tools, as needed: revisions to the Zoning Code, targeted economic incentives, coordinated condemnation and code enforcement efforts, affordable-housing assistance, infrastructure repair and replacement, and development and implementation of a brownfields cleanup and redevelopment program;

• encouraging and funding infill development by u s i n gsimilar tools; and

• developing and using a comprehensive m e t h o d o l o g yto determine the full costs and benefits of each p r o p o s e ddevelopment, including its impacts on taxpayers (schools, roads, utilities, public safety, and other infrastructure, as well as tax revenues) and the natural environment. This analysis also should include consideration and support for targeted community goals, such as affordable housing, for which public incentives are important.

1 0 . The City of Jacksonville should improve its public-involvementprocess related to growth management by providing citizens with information and assistance to participate fully and effectively in its growth-management processes, including land-use and zoning regulation.



1. The Florida growth-management process needs to be revised, restructured, and streamlined. The Florida Legislature should redistribute growth-management respon-sibilities and authority to appropriate levels of government. This restructuring should not create additional regulatory burdens or redundant levels of review and should ensure continuation of natural-environment protections.

2. Aspects of growth management that have statewide impacts should continue to be conducted at the state level. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) should retain regulatory oversight of:

• comprehensive-planning elements that directly impact natural resources of statewide significance;

•transportation facilities and infrastructure of statewides i g n i f i c a n c e ;

•natural-disaster responses and emergency-preparation issues of statewide significance; and

•other specific items of statewide significance, as determinedby the Florida Legislature.

The State budget should provide sufficient funding for DCA to perform these functions adequately.

3. The Florida Legislature should delegate all remaining state regulatory oversight of local comprehensive planning to Regional Planning Councils, because growth management has regional impacts beyond the scope of local-government a u t h o r i t y. The Legislature should authorize Regional Planning Councils to obtain sufficient, broad-based resources, including funding and staffing, to perform these additional functions effectively.

In addition, the Florida Legislature should expand the authority of each Regional Planning Council to:

• take the lead in coordinating growth management among local, regional, and state interests;

• coordinate the development of a regional growth-management vision;

• implement its Strategic Regional Policy Plan; and• ensure the integration of local/regional transportation and

land-use planning.

4. The Florida Legislature should add public safety and public schools as mandatory elements in local-government comprehensive plans. The Legislature should authorize appropriate, broad-based funding mechanisms for local governments to implement these elements.

5. The Florida Legislature should maintain the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process, with some modifications. Modifications should include:

• streamlining and simplifying the process, while maintaining its comprehensive nature; and

• delegating review authority to the Regional Planning Councils, with appeal of their decisions to the courts.

6. The Florida Legislature should ensure that enforcement of all natural-environment protections under the current system are retained and appropriately assigned. The Legislature should further improve protection of the natural environmentin Florida by:

• ensuring that Regional Planning Councils identify and map natural resources of regional significance to ensure their accurate identification and protection;

• including assessment of the impacts of development on the natural environment in the regional-development review process;

• encouraging the use of incentives to developers for protection of the natural environment;

•creating a system to transfer development rights for protection of environmentally sensitive areas; and

• limiting the use of exceptions in the growth-management process that negatively impact natural resources.

7. Because transportation in Northeast Florida has become a regional and not solely a local matter, the Florida Legislature should amend the charter of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, expanding its jurisdiction to regional as well as local transportation concerns, renaming it accordingly, and authorizing appropriate, broad-based regional fundingmechanisms. In addition to coordinating transportation planning and implementation in the region, the First Coast Transportation Authority should:

• improve the process used to secure land for future right-of-way needs by allowing land owners to retain reasonable and appropriate access and use rights until construction begins; and

•identify transportation corridors within the region in which land-use densities may be increased to support effective public transportation.

8. To provide needed information for local growth-management decision making, the St. Johns River Water Management District should determine the total population that can be supported in Northeast Florida with currently used water

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


The rate of growth in Duval County is expected to continue toslow, as growth spreads into other counties in the region.

Although the rate of growth is slowing, the numbers of peoplebeing added to the existing population base continue to behigh, and the land area and natural resources to accommodatethe growth remain finite. Duval County contains 840 squaremiles, of which 774 square miles are land; wetlands comprise25 percent of the total land area in Duval County.

Population growth in Duval County comes from a combinationof net immigration and natural population increase. Naturalincrease occurs when the number of births in a year exceedsthe number of deaths; of the population growth between 1999and 2000, 55 percent was due to natural increase. Net immi-gration occurs when more people move into a community thanmove out; net immigration accounted for 45 percent of the pop-ulation increase from 1999 to 2000.

The age composition of the population is also changing, as thecurrent population ages and increased numbers of retireesmove to the Jacksonville MSA. Throughout Florida, retireestypically live one county away from large cities, close to theservices they require but away from the urban center. The samepattern is developing throughout Northeast Florida. In 2000,only seven percent of Duval County’s population were over 65,while 28 percent in St. Johns County were 65 or older. By2015, Duval County’s retirement-age population is expected togrow to 13 percent of the total, with St. Johns County reaching36 percent age 65 or older.

The region has experienced substantial economic growth aswell. Between 1984 and 1999, Duval County added 137,000new jobs and 94,000 housing units. By 2010, Duval County isexpecting a net gain of 104,000 jobs and 57,000 housing units,while the other counties in the region add 30,000 more jobsand 40,000 housing units.

Factors affecting development patterns

State regulation has created increasingly detailed requirementsto manage growth that have been implemented throughlocal-government policy. Development patterns have been

affected by a combination of state regulation, city programsand policies, and other factors such as the availability of l e s sexpensive land, geographic considerations, infrastructure avail-ability, active recruitment efforts, and housing demand.

State legislative mandates, especially the Growth ManagementAct of 1985, have established certain growth-managementrequirements for Florida’s counties, including comprehensivep l a n n i n g, requiring that infrastructure is available upon completionof development, and review of large developments that have aregional impact. While many of the effects of these state regulations have been positive, they have not always achievedtheir desired outcomes, and in some cases have had unintendednegative results; many consider state regulation to be primarilya burdensome regulatory checklist that adds to the costs ofdevelopment.

State mandates have structured Duval County’s growth-management processes and strengthened local efforts to managegrowth. These efforts include local comprehensive planningand zoning, as well as other policies and programs not mandatedby the State.

Other factors that have influenced development in DuvalCounty have been:

• Geography: The locations of rivers, marshes, and other landfeatures have been an important determinant of development.Wetlands, for example, have shaped patterns of developmentand prevented contiguous development. The location oflocally-unwanted land uses and industry, from landfills topaper mills, has influenced the development patterns inneighboring areas.

• Availability and cost of land: The availability of less expensive land has encouraged growth into previously undevelopedareas. Environmentally contaminated, abandoned landshave discouraged reuse or urban infill in some areas becauseof the liability and cost of cleaning up the property. However,more expensive land in southeastern Duval and northern St.Johns County has continued to be a focus for developmenteven as the price of land has increased.

• Infrastructure: Infrastructure refers to the physical facilitiesneeded to serve a community, including roads, schools, firestations, solid-waste management, drainage, parks, and water,s e w e r, and electric utilities. The availability of existinginfrastructure, including utilities and roadways, has drawngrowth toward certain areas; for example, extension of electric,s e w e r, and water infrastructure into certain geographic areashas effectively subsidized the cost of development andencouraged development of property accessible to the utilities.Perceptions of the quality of public facilities, such as schools, also have affected development patterns.

Because the St. Johns River divides Duval County, thel o c ations and addition of bridges have influenced patterns of growth. Construction of J. Turner Butler Boulevard and of the Buckman Bridge influenced development into areas

Population growth rates in the JacksonvilleMetropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)

County BakerClayDuvalNassauSt. Johns

Total

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

1980-1990

2 0 . 9 %

5 8 . 1 %

1 7 . 9 %

3 3 . 6 %

6 3 . 4 %

2 5 . 4 %

1990-2000

2 0 . 4 %

3 2 . 9 %

1 5 . 7 %

3 1 . 2 %

4 6 . 9 %

2 1 . 4 %

2000-2010

1 5 . 0 %

2 3 . 4 %

1 2 . 2 %

2 3 . 0 %

3 0 . 6 %

1 6 . 3 %

2020-2030

1 1 . 0 %

1 5 . 8 %

9 . 5 %

1 5 . 5 %

1 9 . 1 %

1 2 . 0 %

2010-2020

1 3 . 3 %

1 9 . 9 %

1 1 . 3 %

1 9 . 7 %

2 4 . 8 %

1 4 . 6 %


served by these roadways, as did the Acosta and MatthewsBridges in earlier times; as of the time of this study, theDames Point Bridge is attracting the same strong growth.Highway construction has made commuting feasible betweendowntown and the suburbs.

• R e c r u i t m e n t : The pattern of development has also respondedto the efforts of private developers and the City to recruitbusinesses to certain areas, such as the office parks in south-eastern Duval County. Residential development has followedcommercial development into these areas. The City ofJacksonville in 1997 began targeting its use of economicincentives to recruit business to downtown and north andwest of the St. Johns River (see p. 13).

• Housing demand: The market demand for housing hasfocused on a typical house with a yard on a cul-d e-sac, in aneighborhood with similar homes. This type of residentialdevelopment is termed low-d e n s i t y, single-family development,disconnected from the larger traffic network. Residents havebeen willing to commute longer distances to work in orderto have the type of housing they want, even if the house islocated in another county from their employment. Buildershave responded to this demand in their choices of what kinds of residential developments to construct.

Resulting development patterns

Duval County’s rapid population growth over the past twodecades has occurred primarily in the southeastern quadrant.Development has spread southward beyond Duval into St.Johns and Clay Counties. The pattern of development hasbeen characterized by low-density, single-family residentialdevelopment, served by strip commercial development, withcommercial/residential development clusters around officeparks and shopping malls. At the time of this study, devel-opment patterns were beginning to change in response toCity policies and programs.

Duval County covers 480,043 acres, excluding Baldwin and theBeaches municipalities. By 2000, 214,987 acres, or 45 percentof the total land area, had been developed. Of the remainingland area, 21,338 acres were federal or state parks or otherwisedesignated conservation land.

Between 1985 and 2000, the majority of residential andcommercial development in Duval County occurred in its south-east quadrant. The population south and east of the St. JohnsRiver (Arlington and Southeast Planning Districts as well asAtlantic Beach, Jacksonville Beach, and Neptune Beach) grew byapproximately 150,000 during this time period, which accountsfor nearly all of the population growth of the county. Other out-lying areas, especially in northern and western Duval County,have not been as intensively developed; population dropped by11.5 and 22.7 percent in the Northwest and Urban Core planning districts, respectively. The clustering of office parks insoutheastern Duval County has contributed to the differences indevelopment patterns.

Definitions of Density

Rural Residential 0-2 dwelling units per acreLow Density Residential 3-7 dwelling units per acreMedium Density Residential 8-20 dwelling units per acreHigh Density Residential 21-60 dwelling units per acre

Source: City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Population change per planning district

Planning District 1985 Po p u l a t i o n 2000 Po p u l a t i o n Percent ChangeUrban CoreArlingtonSoutheastSouthwestNorthwestNorthAtlantic, J a c k s o n v i l l e ,and Neptune BeachBaldwinTotal

Source: City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department

Agricultural, parkland, or undeveloped land

Residential development

Industrial, commercial, or military development

-22.7%+51.0

+65.6%+16.1%-11.5%

+28.7%

+29.0%

+6.9%+23.9%

55,125123,214118,177115,323145,58637,660

32,268

1,528628,881

42,635186,072195,721133,867128,84848,474

41,628

1,634778,879

10. Traditionally, private property rights have been granted great weight in the growth-management process. Growth management requires balancing private property rights with the public interest and goals established by the community. The right to own property is not a right to taxpayer-financed assistance in developing that property.

1 1 . Successful growth management in Northeast Florida requires regional cooperation. Northeast Florida has insufficiently integrated growth-management efforts across county lines. The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida similarly found that growth-management efforts in the First Coast cannot succeedunless they are coordinated at the regional level.

12. Citizen involvement, while increasing since the late 1990s, has been primarily reactive to unwanted land uses adjacent to existing neighborhoods. While individuals have learned how to participate in the difficult growth-management process, the general public has not been sufficiently involved proactively in the planning and permitting processes.The growth-management process would benefit fromincreasing public awareness and eliminating impedimentsto citizen involvement.

13. Nationally, few communities have successfully managed their growth. While many communities have implemented innovative growth-management strategies, the results of those efforts are mixed. The combined experiences from these communities suggest that growth-management approaches are more effective when tailored to the needs and goals of the community. Jacksonville can continue to learn from the mistakes and successes of other communities.


• Impact analysis: Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology for determining the full costs and benefits to the community of proposed development, including its fis-cal impact on taxpayers as well as its impact on the nat-ural environment.

7. Northeast Florida has had a number of gatherings of citizens under public and private auspices to articulate their community goals for growth management. These ongoing activities of reviewing progress and setting community goals have benefited Duval County by increasing attention to issues related to growth management. However, implemen-tation of these community goals remains incomplete because of private values and behaviors that vary from community goals, as well as insufficient commitment of resources.

8. Anticipated population, housing, and employment growth in Duval County will continue to pressure natural resources and public infrastructure. Duval County lacks sufficient knowledge about the size of the population that its natural resources and water supply can sustain. Managing continuedgrowth is a complex task that will require Duval County to maintain all of these resources effectively.

9. The success of growth-management efforts is in the imple-mentation, not just the planning. Growth-management efforts require the following to be successful:

• sufficient funding;• strong executive leadership;• involvement and commitment of private sector leaders;• public awareness, participation, and support;• interagency coordinated use of multiple strategies and

multiple public objectives;• sufficient information and the tools to analyze that information;• focused goals; and• continuity of effort, plans, and implementation.

Development Patterns in Duval County, 2000

1. Growth-management efforts of the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have not kept pace with local initiatives. The DCA has focused on "checklist" bureaucracy instead of taking a visionary or leadership role. As a result, cumbersome growth-management regulations have increased the cost of development while creating unintendednegative consequences for local communities.

2. Natural-resource regulatory efforts of the State, along with federal regulations, have influenced growth-management efforts by providing tools to protect the natural-environment in Duval County, especially water resources, wetlands, and air quality. The results of these natural resources protection efforts have been mixed, as the natural environment t r a d itionally has been given insufficient consideration in p e r m i t t i n g and development decisions.

3. The Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review process is an important tool for growth management. The DRI process in Northeast Florida is most effective in:

• fostering interagency and intergovernmental coordination; and• providing a comprehensive review of proposed development

impacts, including economic, transportation, public-school, and public-safety impacts.

However, the complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of the process encourage developers to modify the size of developments to avoid it.

4. The State of Florida has historically regulated growth through Areas of Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact, Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency. The 2000 Growth Management Study Commission recommendedsubstantial revisions to state growth-management policy,transferring much of current state oversight of growth management to local governments. Such recommendations, if enacted by the Florida Legislature, will require local government responses that encourage a balanced and effectiveapproach to growth management.

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

These steps include:

• the Mayor taking a strong community-leadership role in growth management;

• the City of Jacksonville preserving natural resources and guiding development patterns through land acquisition;

• the Jacksonville Economic Development Commissionencouraging the location of development in specific sites through targeted economic incentives;

• t h e City Council and the Department of Planning andDevelopment implementing policies to encourage alternative development patterns such as multi-use development, traditional neighborhood design, and allowing housingdowntown;

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


• the Department of Planning and Development using newprocesses for managing growth and encouraging citizeninvolvement;

• public authorities (such as the JEA) and the City of Jack-sonville improving coordination of growth-managementefforts; and

• citizens increasing their involvement in growth-manage-ment, including self-imposing a half-cent sales tax in 2000to support the Better Jacksonville Plan.

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

These include:

• Older neighborhoods: H i s t o r i c a l l y, growth-management efforts in Duval County have focused more on new growth than on redevelopment of existing neighborhoods. While some public and private interests have promoted creative reuse of historical neighborhoods through use of several tools (including overlay zoning), other tools for historic preservation, such as interagency coordination and state and federal tax incentives, are underutilized in Duval C o u n t y. In addition, Duval County lacks sufficient incentives to encourage infill development in core city neighborhoods and redevelopment of environmentally contaminated brownfields. Building infrastructure for new development when vacant homes, underutilized commercialproperties, and under-capacity schools exist in older neighborhoods creates natural and social costs to the community and to the neighborhoods passed over by growth.

• Transportation: The City of Jacksonville has fostered and permitted disconnected subdivisions, residential and commercial developments, and communities. Disconnecteddevelopments create a negative impact on the road system by increasing the number of auto trips and the length of auto trips citizens have to take to meet their daily needs. Lack of coordination between land-use planning and transportation planning in Northeast Florida has exacerbatedtraffic congestion by not accommodating higher residential densities which promote and support alternative travel options such as mass transit, walking, or bicycling.


Development has spread southward into Clay and St. JohnsCounties as well. Building permits for single-family homes inDuval County have remained relatively constant from 1998 to2000; during the same three years, building permits in St. Johnsand Clay Counties have grown by 17.6 and 13.8 percent,respectively.

Development patterns have favored low-density, single-familyresidential development. The Jacksonville Planning andDevelopment Department projects that, between 1990 and2010, more than 88 percent of the City’s new housing will bedeveloped at an average density of less than four units per acre.As development has increased, infrastructure requirements forroads, schools, and parks have increased as well. Building infra-structure to meet development needs spurs additional develop-ment, which quickly exceeds the capacity of available infra-structure.

Resulting community impacts

Increased population and economic growth and the corre-sponding development to accommodate that growth haveimpacted the quality of life in Northeast Florida in severalways. Growth has increased pressures on transportationsystems, the environment, and the financial resources oflocal government. The locations and kinds of developmenthave impacted some older urban neighborhoods and havespread across county lines to create interjurisdictional issues.

As Northeast Florida has grown, the impact to the residents’quality of life has correspondingly increased. Growth affectsthe community, particularly its transportation system, naturalenvironment, and social environment. Growth also creates pressureson Duval County’s financial resources and requires improvedintergovernmental coordination with the surrounding counties.

Transportation

Traffic on Duval County roadways has increased. Existingcommercial and residential development patterns rely on a fewcollector roads and major arterial roads. Many residential andcommercial developments have only limited direct access toanother development, in part because previous regulations discouraged connector roads. This funnels traffic onto a fewmajor roads and increases trip lengths and trip times, leading totraffic delay and increased maintenance needs of existing r o a d-ways. Subsequent road-widening projects on major thor-oughfares have provided some relief, but growth continues toexpand.

The spread of bedroom communities in Clay and St. JohnsCounties has created cross-county commuting backups, as U.S.17 and Blanding Boulevard in Clay County and State Road 13,A1A, Philips Highway, and Interstate 95 in St. Johns Countycarry increasing numbers of cars. Duval County’s mass-transitsystem has not attracted sufficient ridership to effectively relievetraffic congestion.

Increasing population is only part of the traffic issue, as the existingpopulation continues to take more trips and longer trips, and hasdecreased its use of mass transit, carpooling, or biking/walking ascommuting methods. Past development patterns have notalways been pedestrian friendly, either by providing sidewalks orby locating residential development within walking distance ofretail or employment. These patterns also discourage the use ofbicycles and mass transit. The City of Jacksonville in 1999 significantly strengthened its policy for provision of sidewalks toaddress this issue.

Environmental impacts

A growing population has placed greater pressure on potablewater resources. From 1980 to 1999, demand for water suppliedby public sources in Duval County increased from 73.25 to112.47 million gallons per day. Of the nearly 40 million gallonincrease, approximately 10 million gallons a day resulted frompeople shifting from personal wells to public water supply.Commercial and industrial withdrawal of groundwaterdecreased by 20 million gallons per day during the same period.Some of that decrease came from shifting water use to the publicwater supply, and some came from actual decreases in waterusage due to conservation efforts. In all, net water use in DuvalCounty increased between 1980 to 1999 by 10 million gallonsper day.

Stormwater runoff, which carries fertilizer and pesticides into theSt. Johns River, threatens the health of the river by increasingalgae and bacteria growth, which can lead to fish kills, contami-nated shellfish, and habitat degradation. Leakage from faultyseptic tanks can also pollute the river. Although residentialdevelopment has increased, the number of new septic-tank per-mits issued annually by the City of Jacksonville decreased by 80percent between 1987 and 1999. The Better Jacksonville Planalso set aside $75 million for septic-tank remediation.

The loss of trees to development can increase stormwater runoff,as a moderate-sized tree can absorb up to 400 gallons ofstormwater per day. The St. Johns River Water ManagementDistrict (WMD) regulates new development to require that thefirst inch of stormwater is retained on site. Watering restric-tions, limiting the time of day that Duval County residents canw a t e r their lawn, were adopted by the WMD in 1991and are currently enforced. In addition, the WMDissued water shortage warnings in 1999 and 2000.

Increased development, more vehicles, and increased trafficcongestion contribute to air pollution. The EnvironmentalProtection Agency estimates that the pollution from increaseddriving will offset all of its air pollution-reduction efforts by2 0 1 0 .

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


Growth distribution

The locations and kinds of development have created disparateimpacts within Duval County and in adjoining counties. Theextensive development of office-park and commercial develop-ment in southeastern Duval County, especially aroundSouthpoint and Baymeadows, has also attracted widespread res-idential development to this area. The rest of Duval County haslagged behind, particularly the urban core and some neighbor-hoods north and west of the St. Johns River.

Between 1989 and 1999, over half of all commercial developmentand three-fourths of all residential development in Duval Countyoccurred south and east of the St. Johns River. In the North andNorthwest Planning Districts, however, development is increasing;commercial development in 1999 exceeded the average annualadjusted value of new building permits from the previous tenyears by 89 percent, and residential development similarly grew by114 percent.

Development in Duval County has impacted other areas inNortheast Florida. St. Johns and Clay Counties have becomebedroom communities for Jacksonville workers. While thosetwo counties are exporting employees, they lack adequatetransportation infrastructure for their own commuters andthe commercial tax base needed to provide adequate servicesto their residents. At the same time, Duval County is requiredto provide roads and public services to commuters from othercounties. Current efforts to attract growth to northern DuvalCounty have the potential to create growth pressures in NassauCounty as well.

As development has spread across county lines, local governmentshave responded within their jurisdictions to manage growth.However, Northeast Florida lacks a formal political structure tointegrate growth-management efforts across county lines. TheNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council works on an informalbasis to encourage local governments to coordinate growth-management efforts.

The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation inNortheast Florida concluded that growth-management efforts inNortheast Florida "cannot succeed unless they are coordinatedat the regional level."

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TOOLSAND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS

Duval County’s efforts to manage growth have been bothstrengthened and limited by the state’s growth-managementprocess, which was under statewide debate at the time of thiss t u d y. Local efforts to manage growth have intensified inrecent years, with a variety of programs beginning to demon-strate their effectiveness. Growth-management efforts in cer-tain other communities may reveal approaches to improvelocal efforts.

State regulation

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

After actively encouraging growth for many years, the State ofFlorida began responding in the 1970s to the increasingly negativeimpacts of unregulated growth through a process of top-downgrowth management. The Legislature strengthened these effortsin the 1985 Growth Management Act, including a requirementthat local governments not issue building permits unless theinfrastructure necessary to support the development was inplace concurrently with the development. In 2000, after leg-islative debate on significant amendments to the growth-man-agement process, the Governor established a GrowthManagement Study Commission to review growth-managementregulation and recommend improvements. The StudyCommission reported to the Governor and Legislature onFebruary 15, 2001 and recommended that the Legislature adoptsignificant changes to the process. The current process, estab-lished in 1985, has relied on four major regulatory tools: Areasof Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact,Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency.

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

Areas of Critical State Concern

The State limits development in certain large geographical areasthat are of major, unique environmental value through the Areasof Critical State Concern (ACSC) program. To date, the State hasidentified only four such areas—Apalachicola Bay, GreenSwamp, Big Cypress Swamp, and the Keys—none of which is inNortheast Florida. Despite initial local litigation and conflict, theprogram has been effective in managing growth and preservingthese areas. Because no proposal has been made to designatean Area of Critical State Concern in Northeast Florida, thisprogram has had no effect in Duval County.

In 1993, the State required Regional Planning Councils to identifynatural resources of regional significance in a Strategic RegionalPolicy Plan. This has been used in Northeast Florida to coordinatepreservation of environmental areas on a regional basis.

A recommendation by the Growth Management StudyCommission to create a new regulatory category of "naturalresources of statewide significance" has the potential to affectDuval County in one of two ways:


and envisions that successful downtown revitalization would bean effective growth-management tool. The report recommend-ed that Indianapolis use infrastructure placement as its poten-tially most effective growth-management strategy to influencethe rate, location, and density of development.

The report concluded that successful growth-managementefforts would require regional cooperation. Land acquisitionand transfers of development rights were recommended as waysto preserve open space; impact fees, unless assessed regionally,were not recommended, as they would only encouragedevelopment to continue to spread outside of the county.

Portland, Oregon

Portland’s primary growth-management tool is a strong urbangrowth boundary. In Oregon, local governments must designatean urban growth boundary according to state criteria and canamend the boundary only if the proposed amendment complieswith state regulations for an exception.

The urban growth boundary has been successful in controllingdevelopment patterns within Portland’s jurisdictional limits andin increasing urban density. The goal for Portland is a minimumdensity of 10 housing units per net acre; the maximum lot sizeis 3,850 square feet. Mass transit, including light rail, has beenone success stemming from increased density and concentrationof housing and retail near bus and light-rail stations.

However, these growth-management efforts have increased thecost of housing significantly within the urban growth boundaries.They also have not stopped spreading development patterns, aslow-density, single-family residential development has jumpedrural areas and gone outside of Portland’s jurisdiction and acrossthe state line. Vancouver, Washington, for example, now sends50,000 commuters daily to Portland.

Charlotte, North Carolina

North Carolina lacks strong growth-management regulation atthe state level, though it does have some specific programs, suchas its Coastal Area Management Act, which have had successes.Instead, local governments are given authority to implement arange of growth-management policies. By the late 1990s,observed development patterns and environmental impactssuggested that the current growth-management system wasineffective.

In 1999, the State Legislature established a North Carolina SmartGrowth Commission to recommend improvements in the statesystem; the same year, Charlotte/Mecklenburg Countycommissioned a Smart Growth Audit to examine its growth-management programs in the light of nationally recognizedgrowth-management principles.

In 2001, the Smart Growth Commission recommended thefollowing:

• increasing the authority of local governments to manage growth;•providing state funds for land-acquisition programs; and • using state transportation funding allocations to encourage

communities to manage growth.

Charlotte/Mecklenburg County has been most successful in itsresidential downtown development initiatives: in 2000,approximately 7,000 people were living downtown. The Bankof America, headquartered in Charlotte, has led the way byfinancing downtown residential development; in addition, manyof the bank’s executives, including its CEO, live downtown.

Rhode Island

Grow Smart Rhode Island is a community-interest group ofplanners, environmentalists, government agencies and officials,developers, and others concerned about development in RhodeIsland. Their mission is to bring together diverse interests topreserve the quality of life in Rhode Island. To do so, they arepromoting business and residential growth in town centers andpreserving agricultural land and open spaces in order to maintainthe character of the state. The coalition is chaired by aleading corporate figure in Rhode Island.

As a result of Grow Smart’s efforts, Rhode Island:

• passed a $34 million bond issue for open space land acquisition;• created a new building code for rehabilitation projects because

existing codes prevented rehabilitation of older buildings;• began work on brownfields programs to encourage infill

redevelopment; and• strengthened staff support for the statewide planning system.

The Sierra Club recognized Rhode Island in 1999 as one of thenation’s leaders in managing growth. Particularly noted were theefforts to build new train stations, ferry lines and a 50-milenetwork of bike paths.

Maryland

In 1997, the State of Maryland created a Priority Funding Area(PFA) designation for specific areas targeted for growth. Localgovernments identify these areas, which must meet certain statecriteria. State funds for infrastructure assistance and economicdevelopment assistance can be spent only within the certifiedPFA. This has resulted in elimination of $360 million in highwayfunds for projects outside the PFAs. It has also led to a sharpincrease in school-construction funds allocated to rehabilitationof schools in older communities rather than for new constructionin the suburbs—84 percent of these funds in 2000 comparedto 43 percent in 1995.

Maryland also has an aggressive rural-lands protection program,with the goal of preserving 200,000 acres by 2011. Its RuralLegacy Program is purchasing development rights on this land.By 2000, it had already acquired 47,000 acres.


Historic-preservation and urban-revitalization efforts have severaladvantages, including:

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

The City of Jacksonville’s Comprehensive Plan has a HistoricPreservation Element. The seven-member Historic PreservationCommission, appointed by the Mayor and staffed by theDepartment of Planning and Development, administers h i s t o r i c -preservation efforts. Rehabilitation and reuse of historic propertiesare encouraged by federal tax credits, local property-taxabatements, and state preservation grants. In various combinations, these incentives are available to private,commercial, and government property owners.

Riverside Avondale is one successful example of historicpreservation in Jacksonville. Efforts to preserve the historiccharacter and nature of the neighborhood began in 1974 whena group of citizens founded Riverside Avondale Preservation(RAP). The residents voted to designate the neighborhood anhistoric district and in February 1998, city ordinance createdthe Riverside Avondale Historic District.

Springfield is another example of Jacksonville’s historic-preservation efforts. Its revitalization efforts have included publicand private investment, a zoning overlay, a neighborhood plan,and participation in the State’s Mainstreet program to improvedesign, promote the area, build public-private partnerships, andrecruit economic development. From 1998 to 2001, theappraised value of property in Springfield has increased from$30 per square foot to $70.

Affordable housing

Neighborhood revitalization, urban renewal, and historic-preservation efforts risk increasing the cost of housing or dis-placing current residents. JCCI’s 2000 study on AffordableHousing found that 71,000 households in Duval County neededaffordable housing or housing assistance programs, of which19,000 were receiving some form of federal, state, or localhousing assistance.

The City of Jacksonville has addressed displacement andh o u s i n g affordability in its revitalization programs. For example,in Springfield, both a program to encourage infill constructionand a repair and rehabilitation program for existing propertiesare available for both new and existing owners, encouraging ren-ovation while keeping costs down.

Regional coordination

As development occurs within Northeast Florida, it not onlycreates interjurisdictional impacts, it also necessitates coopera-tive efforts among involved counties and municipalities to plan

for and implement complementary growth-management strate-gies and infrastructure development.

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

• The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council has been reviewing comprehensive plans for consistency with its regional growth-management plan and is seeking to resolvedisputes between local governments, primarily through the DRI process but also by serving as a neutral convener.

• The St. Johns River Water Management District reviews comprehensive-plan amendments and regulates water issues on a regional basis.

• The First Coast Metropolitan Planning Organization plans transportation improvements in Duval and parts of Clay and St. Johns Counties.

Informal cooperative efforts were just beginning, such ascoordinating land-acquisition programs in adjoining countieswith the Jacksonville Preservation Project or joint planningbetween Clay and Duval Counties for the Cecil CommerceCenter redevelopment effort.

Approaches from other communities

Across the country, state and local governments areimplementing policies to manage growth. While most ofthese efforts originate at the state level, some cities andcounties have taken the lead to manage growth.Indianapolis, Indiana; Portland, Oregon; and Charlotte,North Carolina are examples of concerted local efforts tomanage growth. Rhode Island and Maryland are two stateswith recent growth-management initiatives.

Indianapolis, Indiana

Indianapolis/Marion County, like Jacksonville/Duval County, is aconsolidated city-county government. In 1999, the City formeda Marion County Growth Advisory Committee to recommendimprovements to its growth-management system. The report,released in February 2000, examined the impacts of sustainedregional growth, which had resulted in "leapfrogged" residentialdevelopment patterns that passed over undeveloped land inMarion County to formerly agricultural land in the surroundingcounties.

Indianapolis relies on comprehensive planning and zoning as itsprimary growth-management tools. It has introduced flexibilityinto the zoning ordinances to better manage growth, includingzero-lot-line options, cluster subdivisions, and planned unitdevelopments. Its most effective zoning tool is a requirement foradequate sewer and water facilities, which inhibits residentialdevelopment outside of designated areas.

Indianapolis has also begun to encourage downtown redevelopment


• by enhancing local preservation efforts if local natural resources are classified as having statewide significance; or

• by diminishing local efforts if the designation "natural resources of regional significance" is eliminated.

Developments of Regional Impact

The State regulates large regional developments with substantialoff-site impacts through a Developments of Regional Impact(DRI) review and approval process. Proposed developmentsthat meet certain threshold levels must go through DRI reviewbefore seeking building permits. The Northeast Florida RegionalPlanning Council (RPC) coordinates the DRI process in this partof the state, determines the extent of regional impact ofproposed developments, and recommends how developers can mitigate negative offsite impacts. Local governments with juris-diction over DRIs review the RPC recommendations andinclude in their final development orders the steps the devel-oper must take to receive building permits. After local govern-ments issue development orders, the RPC reviews the DRIagain and recommends to the Florida Department ofCommunity Affairs (DCA) whether to approve or appeal thedevelopment orders.

The DRI process manages growth in several ways, by:

• ensuring that development is responsive to community standards;• resolving disputes among different jurisdictions; and• reducing or resolving the impacts of large-scale development.

However, because the DRI process adds significant upfronttime and costs to the development process (resource peopleestimated as long as two years and a minimum of $1 million inconsulting and legal fees), it has had unintended negativeeffects on growth management. The number of developmentsjust under DRI size thresholds, some of them adjacent to onea n o t h e r, has increased, thus avoiding DRI review but increasingoffsite impacts and encouraging piecemeal development.

Comprehensive planning

In 1985, the State refined its top-down comprehensive land-useplanning process. The State Comprehensive Plan is intended toguide regional plans that in turn provide a framework for localcomprehensive plans consistent with each other, the regionalplans, and the state plan. Jacksonville adopted its comprehen-sive plan for 2010 in 1990. It has been in force since then andis amended periodically, in accordance with the state process.DCA reviews and approves local comprehensive plans and planamendments for consistency and compliance with state lawand administrative rules. Amending the comprehensive planhas intentionally been made time consuming and complicated,involving reviews, hearings, and comments from the RegionalPlanning Council, Water Management District, Department ofTransportation, and Department of Environmental Protection,before DCA review. Every seven years, each local governmentmust do an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of its

comprehensive plan to assess actual development against planobjectives. Jacksonville completed its most recent EAR in 1997and is scheduled for another in 2004.

The comprehensive planning process had some immediate benefits.Across the state, local communities placed a higher emphasis ongrowth management. Creating comprehensive plans requiredassessing development patterns and establishing community priori-ties, as well as creating ordinances and revising zoning to fit thelocal Comprehensive Plan. However, by 2000, most observersagreed that the State’s intent to provide guidance and oversightfor land-use regulation and growth management through acomprehensive planning process had several shortcomings:

• Success of the process at the local level requires guidancefrom a strong, clear State Comprehensive Plan. Two attempts by the state to create this plan have failed to provide a clearguiding document for regional and local planning efforts.

• The process mandates DCA review of every plan, plan update, and sizable plan amendment throughout the state—467 coun-ty and municipal plans through the late 1980s to 1990 andover 30,000 plan amendments through the 1990s. In response to this volume, the process evolved into assuring compliancewith a state checklist instead of coordinating growth-manage-ment efforts.

• Funding for local governments to complete the mandatedcomprehensive-planning process was not provided.

• Implementation requires local political will to deny exceptions tothe comprehensive plan that are detrimental to growth mana g e-ment. This has proven problematic in many areas in the state.

Concurrency

The provisions in comprehensive plans gained additionalstrength when the State began to require that sufficientinfrastructure be in place concurrently with the new development.Required infrastructure includes water, sewer, roads and masstransit, solid waste, parks and recreation, and drainage. Becauseschool districts are autonomous in Florida, schools are notincluded in concurrency requirements. If the necessary infra-structure will not be in place in time to accommodate a newdevelopment when it is completed, local government is notallowed to issue building permits. New developments hadtraditionally incorporated most of these infrastructure demands;however, until 1985 no one had been measuring the trans-portation demands of new development, including how manytrips the development would generate and the capacity of theroads to handle the traffic.

In practice, Concurrency created significant problems for localgrowth-management efforts. Concurrency regulations wereintended to be supported with additional state funding for infra-structure improvements, so that existing development wouldmeet the new concurrency standards. However, the fundingwas not provided. This severely constrained efforts by localgovernments to guide the siting of new developments for growth-management purposes.

11Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

As a result, concurrency has been a major factor in pushingdevelopment away from established cities into suburbs and hin-terlands where excess road capacity exists, exactly the oppositeof what was intended.

Growth Management Study Commission

In 2000, the Governor created a Growth Management StudyCommission to assess the effectiveness of the growth-management system and to recommend changes to theLegislature. The Study Commission was specifically charged toconsider the proper roles of the State, regional organizations,and local governments in growth management, as well as therole and responsibilities of citizens in developing and enforcingcomprehensive plans.

In February 2001, the Study Commission presented its report to theGovernor and the Legislature. Among its recommendations werethe following:• Replace the State Comprehensive Plan with a vision state-

ment placing a healthy, vibrant, and sustainable economy asFlorida’s priority.

• Develop a uniform method to review the costs and benefitsof local land-use decisions.

• Empower citizens to understand and participate in the growth- management process.

• Restrict state review of local comprehensive-plan amendmentsto those affecting compelling state interests.

• Replace the DRI process with regional cooperation agreements.• Include public-school facilities in local comprehensive plans.• Authorize incentives for urban revitalization and infill devel-

opment, including infrastructure needs.• Develop an incentive-based rural policy that includes public

purchase of conservation and agricultural easements and trans-fer of density allocations.

In the 2001 regular session, the Legislature debated growth man-agement but, outside of passing a farmland protection bill, didnot make any major changes to the state growth-manage-ment system.

Local efforts

Since the 1980s, local growth-management efforts primarilyresponded to state regulatory requirements. Beginning inthe mid-1990s, the City of Jacksonville initiated severalefforts, that go beyond state requirements, to manage growthwithin Duval County. These efforts show promise for man-aging growth.

Growth has generally been encouraged in Jacksonville. Formany years the prevailing sentiment among local politicalleaders was that plenty of room for development existed inDuval County’s 840 square miles. As the county and regionexperienced rapid population growth and the State began pass-ing legislation to regulate growth, the City began placing greater

emphasis on growth-management efforts. In 1980, it estab-lished a Department of Planning and Development andapproved by resolution a 2005 Comprehensive Plan. However,JCCI’s Growth Management Study in 1984 found thatJacksonville’s growth-management system at that time lacked"policy direction, commitment, and coordination." After the1985 Growth Management Act was passed, Jacksonville adoptedby ordinance the 2010 Comprehensive Plan in 1990 and in1991 revised its Zoning Code to align with the plan.

In 1996, the Mayor and City Council President established aGrowth Management Task Force to examine the City’s land-usepolicies, the implementation of those policies, and the infra-structure needs that must accompany them in order to preserveand improve the quality of life for all Jacksonville’s citizens. Thetask force’s report, released in 1997, has provided both policyguidance and the basis for several new growth-managementinitiatives, including the Downtown Master Plan, BrownfieldsProgram, Transportation Master Plan, NeighborhoodsDepartment, and the Better Jacksonville Plan. In 1997, the Cityalso completed its first Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) ofthe 2010 Comprehensive Plan, concluding that a great deal hadbeen accomplished and that efforts were ongoing to meetadditional community needs. By 2001, this increased localemphasis on growth management was beginning to yield tan-gible results. However, because these initiatives were still rel-atively new, their long-term effectiveness could not yet bed e t e r m i n e d .


The 2010 Comprehensive Plan provides the framework forgrowth-management activities by identifying 17 categories ofallowable uses for all land parcels in Duval County. The plancontains over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives to providepolicy guidance for land-use decisions.

If a property owner proposes development that is incompatiblewith the designated land-use category for the property, a c o m p r e h e n s i v e-plan amendment is required. Amendments involving property of less than ten acres can be filed at severaltimes during the year and then undergo three public hearings.Amendments involving ten or more acres require a longerprocess, that usually takes about nine months. These applica-tions can be filed at only two times during a year, and multiplepublic hearings are required, as they are reviewed by theRegional Planning Council, Water Management District,Department of Transportation, Department of EnvironmentalProtection, and Department of Community Affairs.

In May 2000, to increase effectiveness of its comprehensiveplanning, the City of Jacksonville:

• created a new land-use category to allow multi-use develop-ment —places where people can live, work, and/or shopin one location—to encourage higher density d e v e l o pment and decrease trip lengths; and


Downtown redevelopment

A vibrant downtown is a strong growth-management toolbecause it encourages centralized, higher density developmentand provides alternatives to spread out development into thesuburbs. The City of Jacksonville has invested heavily in down-town-redevelopment efforts. For example, its 1993 River CityRenaissance program spent $230 million, including a newperforming arts center, city hall, and football stadiumdowntown. In 2000, the Better Jacksonville Plan provides$435 million for a new coliseum, children’s park, county co u r t-house, baseball stadium, and library, all located downtown.

Additional City efforts to revitalize downtown use a range ofapproaches:

• The Downtown Master Plan, approved in 2000, is designed to coordinate urban design, transportation, commercial, and residential-development efforts.

• The Zoning Code was amended in 1997 to allow housing downtown.

• Residential development has been encouraged through economic incentives. At the time of this study, approximately 500 downtown housing units, ranging from riverfront condo-miniums to loft apartments, were proposed, approved, or under construction.

• Additional commercial development has been encouraged through economic incentives, such as a new hotel.

• Synergistic efforts with the School Board created a new LaVilla performing-arts middle school and a renovated Ritz Theatre downtown to encourage and showcase the arts.

• Transportation improvements, including completion of the Automated Skyway Express and introduction of a trolley service, are designed to encourage mobility within the downtown area.

• Completed and planned improvements to aesthetics, streetscaping, greenspaces, and parks are intended to make the downtown experience more appealing.

The effectiveness of these efforts to revitalize downtown forgrowth-management purposes depends in part on the influx ofprivate investment to sustain a vibrant downtown.

Neighborhood and sector plans

A sector plan creates a detailed design for future land use withina specific area. A neighborhood plan does the same thing in astill smaller area. Such plans, which usually have benefitedfrom direct community input and buy-in, can provide strongguidance for growth management. They can also address issuesof historic preservation and maintaining the "sense of place"in a neighborhood.

The City has begun developing neighborhood and sector plansin areas targeted for redevelopment efforts. The Cecil Fieldredevelopment plan, for example, was designed to anticipateand coordinate growth with the transition of Cecil Field from amilitary base to a commercial/residential development. On a

smaller scale, the Kings Road/Beaver Street NeighborhoodAction Plan discusses redevelopment in a context of crimereduction, infrastructure improvements, and neighborhoodbeautification efforts. Two larger plans addressing developmenton the Northside and the Westside are expected to be devel-oped in 2001.

Brownfields

Growth-management efforts can more effectively discouragespreading development patterns if they successfully encourageinfill and reuse of urban properties. Some urban properties,called "brownfields," are expensive to redevelop because previousland uses have contaminated the property, creating clean-upand potential liability costs. In 1998, the City began a pilotBrownfields Redevelopment Program, in partnership with theState of Florida and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agencyto develop a process to identify and determine the extent ofthe pollution problems, clean them up, and redevelopbrownfield properties.

The effectiveness of this program in redirecting development toinfill sites cannot yet be determined, since no brownfield site hasyet been redeveloped in Duval County.

Visual environment

A key community goal in managing growth involves aesthetics,or protection of the visual environment. The City of Jacksonvilleuses several tools to manage the visual environment, including:

• a sign ordinance to regulate the appearance and size of on-site commercial signs and the number of off-site signs;

• a tree ordinance to preserve or replace trees of a certain type and size from development;

• a Landscape Commission to encourage aesthetic standards for public areas;

• landscaping site-development requirements in the Zoning Code;• a downtown architectural review process;• strengthen cell-tower ordinances;• a tree-planting initiative, which distributed one million trees

through 2001; and• an aggressive anti-litter campaign.

Many of these efforts had not been effective through the1 9 9 0 s , according to resource people, due in part to lack of enforce-ment stemming from insufficient funding and staffing.Frustration with the lack of enforcement led to a citizen-ledcharter amendment in 2000 to preserve trees, when many feltthat the City Council had insufficiently addressed the issue.

Historic preservation

Growth-management efforts often have as their objectives theencouragement of higher density, multi-use, pedestrian friendlyland uses with a distinctive sense of place. Historic-preservationefforts can accomplish these objectives.


Land acquisition

Another growth-management strategy is for government topurchase undeveloped land to remove it from future development.Environmentally sensitive land can be protected through landacquisition, and targeted land acquisition can direct growthaccording to community priorities. Purchase or transfer ofdevelopment rights and conservation easements are similarstrategies that do not require the government to purchase landbut which preserve lands from development.

In 1999, the City expanded its land-acquisition efforts with thePreservation Project, designed to remove land from developmentand to improve air and water quality. Funding for the effortcomes from federal, state, and local sources, private founda-tions, and mitigation agreements. The initial goal of purchasing20 square miles of land was met in 2000; by 2001, the City hadacquired 19,360 acres, or over 30 square miles of land, for con-servation. The Project continues to acquire land, as the Mayor ‘sstated goal for Jacksonville is to have the largest urban parksystem in the country.

Land acquisition can have economic benefits as well. The CedarSwamp Report, issued in February 2000, estimated that devel-opment of the Cedar Swamp area would have cost the government$2.45 to provide services for every $1.00 of new tax revenuesgenerated by the development. According to this estimate, theCity saved over $200 million by purchasing the property andtaking it out of development.

Infrastructure

The location, capacity, and condition of existing infrastructureare key components in decision making for new development.Local government guides the location and kinds of growth byproviding necessary infrastructure in certain areas and not inothers. The addition of concurrency requirements has madeinfrastructure availability even more important to developmentdecisions.

The City of Jacksonville has taken the following steps to make itslocation of new infrastructure more effective in managinggrowth:

• In September 2000, Duval County voters approved the Better Jacksonville Plan, a half-cent, local-option sales tax increase to fund capital improvements and transportation infrastructure in the county. The City promoted the measure as a growth-man-agement initiative because it seeks to accommodate the infra-structure requirements of existing growth and to makei n f r as t r u c t u r e improvements in areas targeted as desirable forfuture growth.

• A new working relationship between the City and JEA has been formalized in the comprehensive plan to coordinate placement of water/sewer lines with land-use planning.

• The Jacksonville Transportation Authority has begun reviewing development plans to ensure that they can accommodatefuture mass-transit needs.

• Increased coordination between the Department of Planningand Development and the Duval County Public Schools isseeking to better coordinate the siting of schools, r e c r e a t i o n alf a c i l i t i e s , and residential development.

The effectiveness of these approaches can be evaluated only afterthe policies have had a chance to influence several years of sit-ing and development decisions.

Targeted economic incentives

Local governments offer financial incentives to certain businesses toencourage economic development. In 1997, the Mayor ofJacksonville set a goal to use incentives to attract businessestoward the area north and west of the St. Johns River and down-town, away from the crowded southeastern quadrant. In 1998,this goal became City policy, as the Jacksonville EconomicDevelopment Commission discontinued approving incentivesfor developments in the southeastern area of the county. Thispolicy was designed to encourage development in locationswhere development supports growth-management goals.

Between 1997 and 2000, 45 new economic-development projectspromising 3,740 jobs and approximately $550 million in capitalinvestment were approved for the targeted areas north and westof the St. Johns River. The total value of City incentives providedfor these projects was $58.6 million.

Fair-share agreements

Since its implementation in 1991, the concurrency requirement haslimited local government’s ability to determine where develop-ment should occur. In response, Jacksonville has developed a"fair-share agreement" process, through which developers canobtain permission to build if they pay for infrastructureimprovements in proportion to the additional impacts the devel-opment will generate.

Fa i r -share agreements are s imilar to another growth-management strategy other Florida counties use called "impactfees." Impact fees are typically imposed on all new develop-ments, based on their size alone, to pay for infrastructure improve-ments. Fair-share agreements, in contrast, are assessed based ona calculation of the specific impacts of the development that willexceed available road capacity within a two mile radius, andf a i r-share payments are now spent on roadway improvementsin the same sector from which are collected.

Through December 2000, 63 fair-share agreements totaling over$13 million had been approved in Duval County. Several need-ed projects had been funded with "fair-share" funds, includingwidening of Kernan Boulevard and intersection improvementsalong Old St. Augustine Road and Hodges Boulevard.


• added an emphasis on more roadway connections betweendevelopments and between residential and commercial devel-opments to decrease reliance on major arterial roads.

The effectiveness of comprehensive planning to significantlyalter development patterns or manage growth has been limitedbecause:

• implementation of land-use planning has not always beencoordinated with school siting, placement of water and sewer infrastructure, transportation, and economic-d e v e l o p m e n tplanning;

• the Comprehensive Plan does not address planning for public safety; and

• while the City Council generally has followed the recommendationsof the Department of Planning and Development, some devel-opments have been approved that are inconsistent with theC o mprehensive Plan.

To improve effectiveness of growth-management efforts, the Cityof Jacksonville began in the mid-1990s to increase reliance onother growth-management tools.

Zoning

The Zoning Code provides another tool for managing land use.Thirty-five zoning classifications, arrayed among the 17 generalland-use categories, provide more specific provisions for allowableland uses.

Changing a property’s zoning is very different from amendingthe Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning is "quasi-judicial" ratherthan legislative. Decisions are designed to be made based onfacts and evidence, not political judgment. City Council members,when deciding on rezoning requests, are expected to act asimpartial judges of the evidence presented to determine if theproposed land-use change is consistent with the Compreh e n s i v ePlan and meets all other criteria outlined in the Zoning Code.

The zoning process was changed in several ways during the 1990s:

• Increased citizen involvement: A dramatic increase in citizeninvolvement has occurred, especially on the part of citizenorganizations. Some increased involvement has resulted from more effective use of written notices to affected individuals

and organizations. The City sends a notice to property ownerswithin 350 feet of a proposed zoning change, as well as toall Citizen Planning Advisory Committees—citizen organizationsworking with the Neighborhoods Department in each planningdistrict—and to any other organization that registers to receive them. Citizen involvement in some cases has supported devel-opment that fosters growth management; in other cases,citizen involvement has discouraged efforts to build higherdensity development or site locally unwanted land uses.

• Planning Commission: The Planning Commission is a nine-member body, appointed by the Mayor, that reviews proposed site plans and reviews and decides whether to approve zoning variances and exceptions. Their decisions can now beappealed to the City Council. The Planning Commission canbe authorized to act as a coordinating agency for programs and activities of executive agencies and independent agenciesinvolved in land-use planning .

• Planned Unit Developments (PUDs): Under a PUD zoningclassification, applicants create their own unique zoningcategory for a particular development. They provide a detailedwritten description of the development planned for a particularland parcel. The use of PUDs is increasing as developers andcitizen groups work to identify mutually acceptable landuses; from 1997 to 2000, the City approved 166 new PUDs. Administration and interpretation of a PUD is a complex andsometimes problematic task, and changes to a PUD can bedifficult to track.

• Revisions to the Zoning Code: In 1995, the City created the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) classification to allow higher density, multi-use, traditional neighborhoods. The firstTND project was approved in 2001. The City also created aHistoric Overlay for Springfield, an older neighborhood withhistoric homes, to encourage renewal and preservation of thesehomes; another Historic Overlay was being developed forthe Riverside/Avondale area at the time of this study. In 2001,the Department of Planning and Development was preparing revisions to the Zoning Code designed to increase flexibilityand to respond to changing land-use patterns and new typesof development not covered by the existing code (such as e-businesses.) By providing greater specificity in zoning classifi-cations, the planned changes are intended to decrease t h e need for PUDs.

Rezoning ordinances: IntroducedPassedStill pendingWithdrawnDenied

Source: Jacksonville City Council

1997 1998 1999 2000

187156

122

8

154129

1168

184150

5227

1701322693

Comprehensive Plan amendments:IntroducedPassedStill pendingWithdrawnDeniedSource: Jacksonville City Council

1997 1998 1999 2000

80641150

7263162

5144043

5646190

11Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

As a result, concurrency has been a major factor in pushingdevelopment away from established cities into suburbs and hin-terlands where excess road capacity exists, exactly the oppositeof what was intended.

Growth Management Study Commission

In 2000, the Governor created a Growth Management StudyCommission to assess the effectiveness of the growth-management system and to recommend changes to theLegislature. The Study Commission was specifically charged toconsider the proper roles of the State, regional organizations,and local governments in growth management, as well as therole and responsibilities of citizens in developing and enforcingcomprehensive plans.

In February 2001, the Study Commission presented its report to theGovernor and the Legislature. Among its recommendations werethe following:• Replace the State Comprehensive Plan with a vision state-

ment placing a healthy, vibrant, and sustainable economy asFlorida’s priority.

• Develop a uniform method to review the costs and benefitsof local land-use decisions.

• Empower citizens to understand and participate in the growth- management process.

• Restrict state review of local comprehensive-plan amendmentsto those affecting compelling state interests.

• Replace the DRI process with regional cooperation agreements.• Include public-school facilities in local comprehensive plans.• Authorize incentives for urban revitalization and infill devel-

opment, including infrastructure needs.• Develop an incentive-based rural policy that includes public

purchase of conservation and agricultural easements and trans-fer of density allocations.

In the 2001 regular session, the Legislature debated growth man-agement but, outside of passing a farmland protection bill, didnot make any major changes to the state growth-manage-ment system.

Local efforts

Since the 1980s, local growth-management efforts primarilyresponded to state regulatory requirements. Beginning inthe mid-1990s, the City of Jacksonville initiated severalefforts, that go beyond state requirements, to manage growthwithin Duval County. These efforts show promise for man-aging growth.

Growth has generally been encouraged in Jacksonville. Formany years the prevailing sentiment among local politicalleaders was that plenty of room for development existed inDuval County’s 840 square miles. As the county and regionexperienced rapid population growth and the State began pass-ing legislation to regulate growth, the City began placing greater

emphasis on growth-management efforts. In 1980, it estab-lished a Department of Planning and Development andapproved by resolution a 2005 Comprehensive Plan. However,JCCI’s Growth Management Study in 1984 found thatJacksonville’s growth-management system at that time lacked"policy direction, commitment, and coordination." After the1985 Growth Management Act was passed, Jacksonville adoptedby ordinance the 2010 Comprehensive Plan in 1990 and in1991 revised its Zoning Code to align with the plan.

In 1996, the Mayor and City Council President established aGrowth Management Task Force to examine the City’s land-usepolicies, the implementation of those policies, and the infra-structure needs that must accompany them in order to preserveand improve the quality of life for all Jacksonville’s citizens. Thetask force’s report, released in 1997, has provided both policyguidance and the basis for several new growth-managementinitiatives, including the Downtown Master Plan, BrownfieldsProgram, Transportation Master Plan, NeighborhoodsDepartment, and the Better Jacksonville Plan. In 1997, the Cityalso completed its first Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) ofthe 2010 Comprehensive Plan, concluding that a great deal hadbeen accomplished and that efforts were ongoing to meetadditional community needs. By 2001, this increased localemphasis on growth management was beginning to yield tan-gible results. However, because these initiatives were still rel-atively new, their long-term effectiveness could not yet bed e t e r m i n e d .


The 2010 Comprehensive Plan provides the framework forgrowth-management activities by identifying 17 categories ofallowable uses for all land parcels in Duval County. The plancontains over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives to providepolicy guidance for land-use decisions.

If a property owner proposes development that is incompatiblewith the designated land-use category for the property, a c o m p r e h e n s i v e-plan amendment is required. Amendments involving property of less than ten acres can be filed at severaltimes during the year and then undergo three public hearings.Amendments involving ten or more acres require a longerprocess, that usually takes about nine months. These applica-tions can be filed at only two times during a year, and multiplepublic hearings are required, as they are reviewed by theRegional Planning Council, Water Management District,Department of Transportation, Department of EnvironmentalProtection, and Department of Community Affairs.

In May 2000, to increase effectiveness of its comprehensiveplanning, the City of Jacksonville:

• created a new land-use category to allow multi-use develop-ment —places where people can live, work, and/or shopin one location—to encourage higher density d e v e l o pment and decrease trip lengths; and


Downtown redevelopment

A vibrant downtown is a strong growth-management toolbecause it encourages centralized, higher density developmentand provides alternatives to spread out development into thesuburbs. The City of Jacksonville has invested heavily in down-town-redevelopment efforts. For example, its 1993 River CityRenaissance program spent $230 million, including a newperforming arts center, city hall, and football stadiumdowntown. In 2000, the Better Jacksonville Plan provides$435 million for a new coliseum, children’s park, county co u r t-house, baseball stadium, and library, all located downtown.

Additional City efforts to revitalize downtown use a range ofapproaches:

• The Downtown Master Plan, approved in 2000, is designed to coordinate urban design, transportation, commercial, and residential-development efforts.

• The Zoning Code was amended in 1997 to allow housing downtown.

• Residential development has been encouraged through economic incentives. At the time of this study, approximately 500 downtown housing units, ranging from riverfront condo-miniums to loft apartments, were proposed, approved, or under construction.

• Additional commercial development has been encouraged through economic incentives, such as a new hotel.

• Synergistic efforts with the School Board created a new LaVilla performing-arts middle school and a renovated Ritz Theatre downtown to encourage and showcase the arts.

• Transportation improvements, including completion of the Automated Skyway Express and introduction of a trolley service, are designed to encourage mobility within the downtown area.

• Completed and planned improvements to aesthetics, streetscaping, greenspaces, and parks are intended to make the downtown experience more appealing.

The effectiveness of these efforts to revitalize downtown forgrowth-management purposes depends in part on the influx ofprivate investment to sustain a vibrant downtown.

Neighborhood and sector plans

A sector plan creates a detailed design for future land use withina specific area. A neighborhood plan does the same thing in astill smaller area. Such plans, which usually have benefitedfrom direct community input and buy-in, can provide strongguidance for growth management. They can also address issuesof historic preservation and maintaining the "sense of place"in a neighborhood.

The City has begun developing neighborhood and sector plansin areas targeted for redevelopment efforts. The Cecil Fieldredevelopment plan, for example, was designed to anticipateand coordinate growth with the transition of Cecil Field from amilitary base to a commercial/residential development. On a

smaller scale, the Kings Road/Beaver Street NeighborhoodAction Plan discusses redevelopment in a context of crimereduction, infrastructure improvements, and neighborhoodbeautification efforts. Two larger plans addressing developmenton the Northside and the Westside are expected to be devel-oped in 2001.

Brownfields

Growth-management efforts can more effectively discouragespreading development patterns if they successfully encourageinfill and reuse of urban properties. Some urban properties,called "brownfields," are expensive to redevelop because previousland uses have contaminated the property, creating clean-upand potential liability costs. In 1998, the City began a pilotBrownfields Redevelopment Program, in partnership with theState of Florida and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agencyto develop a process to identify and determine the extent ofthe pollution problems, clean them up, and redevelopbrownfield properties.

The effectiveness of this program in redirecting development toinfill sites cannot yet be determined, since no brownfield site hasyet been redeveloped in Duval County.

Visual environment

A key community goal in managing growth involves aesthetics,or protection of the visual environment. The City of Jacksonvilleuses several tools to manage the visual environment, including:

• a sign ordinance to regulate the appearance and size of on-site commercial signs and the number of off-site signs;

• a tree ordinance to preserve or replace trees of a certain type and size from development;

• a Landscape Commission to encourage aesthetic standards for public areas;

• landscaping site-development requirements in the Zoning Code;• a downtown architectural review process;• strengthen cell-tower ordinances;• a tree-planting initiative, which distributed one million trees

through 2001; and• an aggressive anti-litter campaign.

Many of these efforts had not been effective through the1 9 9 0 s , according to resource people, due in part to lack of enforce-ment stemming from insufficient funding and staffing.Frustration with the lack of enforcement led to a citizen-ledcharter amendment in 2000 to preserve trees, when many feltthat the City Council had insufficiently addressed the issue.

Historic preservation

Growth-management efforts often have as their objectives theencouragement of higher density, multi-use, pedestrian friendlyland uses with a distinctive sense of place. Historic-preservationefforts can accomplish these objectives.


Historic-preservation and urban-revitalization efforts have severaladvantages, including:

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

The City of Jacksonville’s Comprehensive Plan has a HistoricPreservation Element. The seven-member Historic PreservationCommission, appointed by the Mayor and staffed by theDepartment of Planning and Development, administers h i s t o r i c -preservation efforts. Rehabilitation and reuse of historic propertiesare encouraged by federal tax credits, local property-taxabatements, and state preservation grants. In various combinations, these incentives are available to private,commercial, and government property owners.

Riverside Avondale is one successful example of historicpreservation in Jacksonville. Efforts to preserve the historiccharacter and nature of the neighborhood began in 1974 whena group of citizens founded Riverside Avondale Preservation(RAP). The residents voted to designate the neighborhood anhistoric district and in February 1998, city ordinance createdthe Riverside Avondale Historic District.

Springfield is another example of Jacksonville’s historic-preservation efforts. Its revitalization efforts have included publicand private investment, a zoning overlay, a neighborhood plan,and participation in the State’s Mainstreet program to improvedesign, promote the area, build public-private partnerships, andrecruit economic development. From 1998 to 2001, theappraised value of property in Springfield has increased from$30 per square foot to $70.

Affordable housing

Neighborhood revitalization, urban renewal, and historic-preservation efforts risk increasing the cost of housing or dis-placing current residents. JCCI’s 2000 study on AffordableHousing found that 71,000 households in Duval County neededaffordable housing or housing assistance programs, of which19,000 were receiving some form of federal, state, or localhousing assistance.

The City of Jacksonville has addressed displacement andh o u s i n g affordability in its revitalization programs. For example,in Springfield, both a program to encourage infill constructionand a repair and rehabilitation program for existing propertiesare available for both new and existing owners, encouraging ren-ovation while keeping costs down.

Regional coordination

As development occurs within Northeast Florida, it not onlycreates interjurisdictional impacts, it also necessitates coopera-tive efforts among involved counties and municipalities to plan

for and implement complementary growth-management strate-gies and infrastructure development.

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

• The Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council has been reviewing comprehensive plans for consistency with its regional growth-management plan and is seeking to resolvedisputes between local governments, primarily through the DRI process but also by serving as a neutral convener.

• The St. Johns River Water Management District reviews comprehensive-plan amendments and regulates water issues on a regional basis.

• The First Coast Metropolitan Planning Organization plans transportation improvements in Duval and parts of Clay and St. Johns Counties.

Informal cooperative efforts were just beginning, such ascoordinating land-acquisition programs in adjoining countieswith the Jacksonville Preservation Project or joint planningbetween Clay and Duval Counties for the Cecil CommerceCenter redevelopment effort.

Approaches from other communities

Across the country, state and local governments areimplementing policies to manage growth. While most ofthese efforts originate at the state level, some cities andcounties have taken the lead to manage growth.Indianapolis, Indiana; Portland, Oregon; and Charlotte,North Carolina are examples of concerted local efforts tomanage growth. Rhode Island and Maryland are two stateswith recent growth-management initiatives.

Indianapolis, Indiana

Indianapolis/Marion County, like Jacksonville/Duval County, is aconsolidated city-county government. In 1999, the City formeda Marion County Growth Advisory Committee to recommendimprovements to its growth-management system. The report,released in February 2000, examined the impacts of sustainedregional growth, which had resulted in "leapfrogged" residentialdevelopment patterns that passed over undeveloped land inMarion County to formerly agricultural land in the surroundingcounties.

Indianapolis relies on comprehensive planning and zoning as itsprimary growth-management tools. It has introduced flexibilityinto the zoning ordinances to better manage growth, includingzero-lot-line options, cluster subdivisions, and planned unitdevelopments. Its most effective zoning tool is a requirement foradequate sewer and water facilities, which inhibits residentialdevelopment outside of designated areas.

Indianapolis has also begun to encourage downtown redevelopment


• by enhancing local preservation efforts if local natural resources are classified as having statewide significance; or

• by diminishing local efforts if the designation "natural resources of regional significance" is eliminated.

Developments of Regional Impact

The State regulates large regional developments with substantialoff-site impacts through a Developments of Regional Impact(DRI) review and approval process. Proposed developmentsthat meet certain threshold levels must go through DRI reviewbefore seeking building permits. The Northeast Florida RegionalPlanning Council (RPC) coordinates the DRI process in this partof the state, determines the extent of regional impact ofproposed developments, and recommends how developers can mitigate negative offsite impacts. Local governments with juris-diction over DRIs review the RPC recommendations andinclude in their final development orders the steps the devel-oper must take to receive building permits. After local govern-ments issue development orders, the RPC reviews the DRIagain and recommends to the Florida Department ofCommunity Affairs (DCA) whether to approve or appeal thedevelopment orders.

The DRI process manages growth in several ways, by:

• ensuring that development is responsive to community standards;• resolving disputes among different jurisdictions; and• reducing or resolving the impacts of large-scale development.

However, because the DRI process adds significant upfronttime and costs to the development process (resource peopleestimated as long as two years and a minimum of $1 million inconsulting and legal fees), it has had unintended negativeeffects on growth management. The number of developmentsjust under DRI size thresholds, some of them adjacent to onea n o t h e r, has increased, thus avoiding DRI review but increasingoffsite impacts and encouraging piecemeal development.


In 1985, the State refined its top-down comprehensive land-useplanning process. The State Comprehensive Plan is intended toguide regional plans that in turn provide a framework for localcomprehensive plans consistent with each other, the regionalplans, and the state plan. Jacksonville adopted its comprehen-sive plan for 2010 in 1990. It has been in force since then andis amended periodically, in accordance with the state process.DCA reviews and approves local comprehensive plans and planamendments for consistency and compliance with state lawand administrative rules. Amending the comprehensive planhas intentionally been made time consuming and complicated,involving reviews, hearings, and comments from the RegionalPlanning Council, Water Management District, Department ofTransportation, and Department of Environmental Protection,before DCA review. Every seven years, each local governmentmust do an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of its

comprehensive plan to assess actual development against planobjectives. Jacksonville completed its most recent EAR in 1997and is scheduled for another in 2004.

The comprehensive planning process had some immediate benefits.Across the state, local communities placed a higher emphasis ongrowth management. Creating comprehensive plans requiredassessing development patterns and establishing community priori-ties, as well as creating ordinances and revising zoning to fit thelocal Comprehensive Plan. However, by 2000, most observersagreed that the State’s intent to provide guidance and oversightfor land-use regulation and growth management through acomprehensive planning process had several shortcomings:

• Success of the process at the local level requires guidancefrom a strong, clear State Comprehensive Plan. Two attempts by the state to create this plan have failed to provide a clearguiding document for regional and local planning efforts.

• The process mandates DCA review of every plan, plan update, and sizable plan amendment throughout the state—467 coun-ty and municipal plans through the late 1980s to 1990 andover 30,000 plan amendments through the 1990s. In response to this volume, the process evolved into assuring compliancewith a state checklist instead of coordinating growth-manage-ment efforts.

• Funding for local governments to complete the mandatedcomprehensive-planning process was not provided.

• Implementation requires local political will to deny exceptions tothe comprehensive plan that are detrimental to growth mana g e-ment. This has proven problematic in many areas in the state.

Concurrency

The provisions in comprehensive plans gained additionalstrength when the State began to require that sufficientinfrastructure be in place concurrently with the new development.Required infrastructure includes water, sewer, roads and masstransit, solid waste, parks and recreation, and drainage. Becauseschool districts are autonomous in Florida, schools are notincluded in concurrency requirements. If the necessary infra-structure will not be in place in time to accommodate a newdevelopment when it is completed, local government is notallowed to issue building permits. New developments hadtraditionally incorporated most of these infrastructure demands;however, until 1985 no one had been measuring the trans-portation demands of new development, including how manytrips the development would generate and the capacity of theroads to handle the traffic.

In practice, Concurrency created significant problems for localgrowth-management efforts. Concurrency regulations wereintended to be supported with additional state funding for infra-structure improvements, so that existing development wouldmeet the new concurrency standards. However, the fundingwas not provided. This severely constrained efforts by localgovernments to guide the siting of new developments for growth-management purposes.


Growth distribution

The locations and kinds of development have created disparateimpacts within Duval County and in adjoining counties. Theextensive development of office-park and commercial develop-ment in southeastern Duval County, especially aroundSouthpoint and Baymeadows, has also attracted widespread res-idential development to this area. The rest of Duval County haslagged behind, particularly the urban core and some neighbor-hoods north and west of the St. Johns River.

Between 1989 and 1999, over half of all commercial developmentand three-fourths of all residential development in Duval Countyoccurred south and east of the St. Johns River. In the North andNorthwest Planning Districts, however, development is increasing;commercial development in 1999 exceeded the average annualadjusted value of new building permits from the previous tenyears by 89 percent, and residential development similarly grew by114 percent.

Development in Duval County has impacted other areas inNortheast Florida. St. Johns and Clay Counties have becomebedroom communities for Jacksonville workers. While thosetwo counties are exporting employees, they lack adequatetransportation infrastructure for their own commuters andthe commercial tax base needed to provide adequate servicesto their residents. At the same time, Duval County is requiredto provide roads and public services to commuters from othercounties. Current efforts to attract growth to northern DuvalCounty have the potential to create growth pressures in NassauCounty as well.

As development has spread across county lines, local governmentshave responded within their jurisdictions to manage growth.However, Northeast Florida lacks a formal political structure tointegrate growth-management efforts across county lines. TheNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council works on an informalbasis to encourage local governments to coordinate growth-management efforts.

The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation inNortheast Florida concluded that growth-management efforts inNortheast Florida "cannot succeed unless they are coordinatedat the regional level."

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TOOLSAND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS

Duval County’s efforts to manage growth have been bothstrengthened and limited by the state’s growth-managementprocess, which was under statewide debate at the time of thiss t u d y. Local efforts to manage growth have intensified inrecent years, with a variety of programs beginning to demon-strate their effectiveness. Growth-management efforts in cer-tain other communities may reveal approaches to improvelocal efforts.

State regulation

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

After actively encouraging growth for many years, the State ofFlorida began responding in the 1970s to the increasingly negativeimpacts of unregulated growth through a process of top-downgrowth management. The Legislature strengthened these effortsin the 1985 Growth Management Act, including a requirementthat local governments not issue building permits unless theinfrastructure necessary to support the development was inplace concurrently with the development. In 2000, after leg-islative debate on significant amendments to the growth-man-agement process, the Governor established a GrowthManagement Study Commission to review growth-managementregulation and recommend improvements. The StudyCommission reported to the Governor and Legislature onFebruary 15, 2001 and recommended that the Legislature adoptsignificant changes to the process. The current process, estab-lished in 1985, has relied on four major regulatory tools: Areasof Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact,Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency.

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

Areas of Critical State Concern

The State limits development in certain large geographical areasthat are of major, unique environmental value through the Areasof Critical State Concern (ACSC) program. To date, the State hasidentified only four such areas—Apalachicola Bay, GreenSwamp, Big Cypress Swamp, and the Keys—none of which is inNortheast Florida. Despite initial local litigation and conflict, theprogram has been effective in managing growth and preservingthese areas. Because no proposal has been made to designatean Area of Critical State Concern in Northeast Florida, thisprogram has had no effect in Duval County.

In 1993, the State required Regional Planning Councils to identifynatural resources of regional significance in a Strategic RegionalPolicy Plan. This has been used in Northeast Florida to coordinatepreservation of environmental areas on a regional basis.

A recommendation by the Growth Management StudyCommission to create a new regulatory category of "naturalresources of statewide significance" has the potential to affectDuval County in one of two ways:


and envisions that successful downtown revitalization would bean effective growth-management tool. The report recommend-ed that Indianapolis use infrastructure placement as its poten-tially most effective growth-management strategy to influencethe rate, location, and density of development.

The report concluded that successful growth-managementefforts would require regional cooperation. Land acquisitionand transfers of development rights were recommended as waysto preserve open space; impact fees, unless assessed regionally,were not recommended, as they would only encouragedevelopment to continue to spread outside of the county.

Portland, Oregon

Portland’s primary growth-management tool is a strong urbangrowth boundary. In Oregon, local governments must designatean urban growth boundary according to state criteria and canamend the boundary only if the proposed amendment complieswith state regulations for an exception.

The urban growth boundary has been successful in controllingdevelopment patterns within Portland’s jurisdictional limits andin increasing urban density. The goal for Portland is a minimumdensity of 10 housing units per net acre; the maximum lot sizeis 3,850 square feet. Mass transit, including light rail, has beenone success stemming from increased density and concentrationof housing and retail near bus and light-rail stations.

However, these growth-management efforts have increased thecost of housing significantly within the urban growth boundaries.They also have not stopped spreading development patterns, aslow-density, single-family residential development has jumpedrural areas and gone outside of Portland’s jurisdiction and acrossthe state line. Vancouver, Washington, for example, now sends50,000 commuters daily to Portland.

Charlotte, North Carolina

North Carolina lacks strong growth-management regulation atthe state level, though it does have some specific programs, suchas its Coastal Area Management Act, which have had successes.Instead, local governments are given authority to implement arange of growth-management policies. By the late 1990s,observed development patterns and environmental impactssuggested that the current growth-management system wasineffective.

In 1999, the State Legislature established a North Carolina SmartGrowth Commission to recommend improvements in the statesystem; the same year, Charlotte/Mecklenburg Countycommissioned a Smart Growth Audit to examine its growth-management programs in the light of nationally recognizedgrowth-management principles.

In 2001, the Smart Growth Commission recommended thefollowing:

• increasing the authority of local governments to manage growth;•providing state funds for land-acquisition programs; and • using state transportation funding allocations to encourage

communities to manage growth.

Charlotte/Mecklenburg County has been most successful in itsresidential downtown development initiatives: in 2000,approximately 7,000 people were living downtown. The Bankof America, headquartered in Charlotte, has led the way byfinancing downtown residential development; in addition, manyof the bank’s executives, including its CEO, live downtown.

Rhode Island

Grow Smart Rhode Island is a community-interest group ofplanners, environmentalists, government agencies and officials,developers, and others concerned about development in RhodeIsland. Their mission is to bring together diverse interests topreserve the quality of life in Rhode Island. To do so, they arepromoting business and residential growth in town centers andpreserving agricultural land and open spaces in order to maintainthe character of the state. The coalition is chaired by aleading corporate figure in Rhode Island.

As a result of Grow Smart’s efforts, Rhode Island:

• passed a $34 million bond issue for open space land acquisition;• created a new building code for rehabilitation projects because

existing codes prevented rehabilitation of older buildings;• began work on brownfields programs to encourage infill

redevelopment; and• strengthened staff support for the statewide planning system.

The Sierra Club recognized Rhode Island in 1999 as one of thenation’s leaders in managing growth. Particularly noted were theefforts to build new train stations, ferry lines and a 50-milenetwork of bike paths.

Maryland

In 1997, the State of Maryland created a Priority Funding Area(PFA) designation for specific areas targeted for growth. Localgovernments identify these areas, which must meet certain statecriteria. State funds for infrastructure assistance and economicdevelopment assistance can be spent only within the certifiedPFA. This has resulted in elimination of $360 million in highwayfunds for projects outside the PFAs. It has also led to a sharpincrease in school-construction funds allocated to rehabilitationof schools in older communities rather than for new constructionin the suburbs—84 percent of these funds in 2000 comparedto 43 percent in 1995.

Maryland also has an aggressive rural-lands protection program,with the goal of preserving 200,000 acres by 2011. Its RuralLegacy Program is purchasing development rights on this land.By 2000, it had already acquired 47,000 acres.

1. Growth-management efforts of the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have not kept pace with local initiatives. The DCA has focused on "checklist" bureaucracy instead of taking a visionary or leadership role. As a result, cumbersome growth-management regulations have increased the cost of development while creating unintendednegative consequences for local communities.

2. Natural-resource regulatory efforts of the State, along with federal regulations, have influenced growth-management efforts by providing tools to protect the natural-environment in Duval County, especially water resources, wetlands, and air quality. The results of these natural resources protection efforts have been mixed, as the natural environment t r a d itionally has been given insufficient consideration in p e r m i t t i n g and development decisions.

3. The Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review process is an important tool for growth management. The DRI process in Northeast Florida is most effective in:

• fostering interagency and intergovernmental coordination; and• providing a comprehensive review of proposed development

impacts, including economic, transportation, public-school, and public-safety impacts.

However, the complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of the process encourage developers to modify the size of developments to avoid it.

4. The State of Florida has historically regulated growth through Areas of Critical State Concern, Developments of Regional Impact, Comprehensive Planning, and Concurrency. The 2000 Growth Management Study Commission recommendedsubstantial revisions to state growth-management policy,transferring much of current state oversight of growth management to local governments. Such recommendations, if enacted by the Florida Legislature, will require local government responses that encourage a balanced and effectiveapproach to growth management.

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

These steps include:

• the Mayor taking a strong community-leadership role in growth management;

• the City of Jacksonville preserving natural resources and guiding development patterns through land acquisition;

• the Jacksonville Economic Development Commissionencouraging the location of development in specific sites through targeted economic incentives;

• t h e City Council and the Department of Planning andDevelopment implementing policies to encourage alternative development patterns such as multi-use development, traditional neighborhood design, and allowing housingdowntown;

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


• the Department of Planning and Development using newprocesses for managing growth and encouraging citizeninvolvement;

• public authorities (such as the JEA) and the City of Jack-sonville improving coordination of growth-managementefforts; and

• citizens increasing their involvement in growth-manage-ment, including self-imposing a half-cent sales tax in 2000to support the Better Jacksonville Plan.

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

These include:

• Older neighborhoods: H i s t o r i c a l l y, growth-management efforts in Duval County have focused more on new growth than on redevelopment of existing neighborhoods. While some public and private interests have promoted creative reuse of historical neighborhoods through use of several tools (including overlay zoning), other tools for historic preservation, such as interagency coordination and state and federal tax incentives, are underutilized in Duval C o u n t y. In addition, Duval County lacks sufficient incentives to encourage infill development in core city neighborhoods and redevelopment of environmentally contaminated brownfields. Building infrastructure for new development when vacant homes, underutilized commercialproperties, and under-capacity schools exist in older neighborhoods creates natural and social costs to the community and to the neighborhoods passed over by growth.

• Transportation: The City of Jacksonville has fostered and permitted disconnected subdivisions, residential and commercial developments, and communities. Disconnecteddevelopments create a negative impact on the road system by increasing the number of auto trips and the length of auto trips citizens have to take to meet their daily needs. Lack of coordination between land-use planning and transportation planning in Northeast Florida has exacerbatedtraffic congestion by not accommodating higher residential densities which promote and support alternative travel options such as mass transit, walking, or bicycling.


Development has spread southward into Clay and St. JohnsCounties as well. Building permits for single-family homes inDuval County have remained relatively constant from 1998 to2000; during the same three years, building permits in St. Johnsand Clay Counties have grown by 17.6 and 13.8 percent,respectively.

Development patterns have favored low-density, single-familyresidential development. The Jacksonville Planning andDevelopment Department projects that, between 1990 and2010, more than 88 percent of the City’s new housing will bedeveloped at an average density of less than four units per acre.As development has increased, infrastructure requirements forroads, schools, and parks have increased as well. Building infra-structure to meet development needs spurs additional develop-ment, which quickly exceeds the capacity of available infra-structure.

Resulting community impacts

Increased population and economic growth and the corre-sponding development to accommodate that growth haveimpacted the quality of life in Northeast Florida in severalways. Growth has increased pressures on transportationsystems, the environment, and the financial resources oflocal government. The locations and kinds of developmenthave impacted some older urban neighborhoods and havespread across county lines to create interjurisdictional issues.

As Northeast Florida has grown, the impact to the residents’quality of life has correspondingly increased. Growth affectsthe community, particularly its transportation system, naturalenvironment, and social environment. Growth also creates pressureson Duval County’s financial resources and requires improvedintergovernmental coordination with the surrounding counties.

Transportation

Traffic on Duval County roadways has increased. Existingcommercial and residential development patterns rely on a fewcollector roads and major arterial roads. Many residential andcommercial developments have only limited direct access toanother development, in part because previous regulations discouraged connector roads. This funnels traffic onto a fewmajor roads and increases trip lengths and trip times, leading totraffic delay and increased maintenance needs of existing r o a d-ways. Subsequent road-widening projects on major thor-oughfares have provided some relief, but growth continues toexpand.

The spread of bedroom communities in Clay and St. JohnsCounties has created cross-county commuting backups, as U.S.17 and Blanding Boulevard in Clay County and State Road 13,A1A, Philips Highway, and Interstate 95 in St. Johns Countycarry increasing numbers of cars. Duval County’s mass-transitsystem has not attracted sufficient ridership to effectively relievetraffic congestion.

Increasing population is only part of the traffic issue, as the existingpopulation continues to take more trips and longer trips, and hasdecreased its use of mass transit, carpooling, or biking/walking ascommuting methods. Past development patterns have notalways been pedestrian friendly, either by providing sidewalks orby locating residential development within walking distance ofretail or employment. These patterns also discourage the use ofbicycles and mass transit. The City of Jacksonville in 1999 significantly strengthened its policy for provision of sidewalks toaddress this issue.

Environmental impacts

A growing population has placed greater pressure on potablewater resources. From 1980 to 1999, demand for water suppliedby public sources in Duval County increased from 73.25 to112.47 million gallons per day. Of the nearly 40 million gallonincrease, approximately 10 million gallons a day resulted frompeople shifting from personal wells to public water supply.Commercial and industrial withdrawal of groundwaterdecreased by 20 million gallons per day during the same period.Some of that decrease came from shifting water use to the publicwater supply, and some came from actual decreases in waterusage due to conservation efforts. In all, net water use in DuvalCounty increased between 1980 to 1999 by 10 million gallonsper day.

Stormwater runoff, which carries fertilizer and pesticides into theSt. Johns River, threatens the health of the river by increasingalgae and bacteria growth, which can lead to fish kills, contami-nated shellfish, and habitat degradation. Leakage from faultyseptic tanks can also pollute the river. Although residentialdevelopment has increased, the number of new septic-tank per-mits issued annually by the City of Jacksonville decreased by 80percent between 1987 and 1999. The Better Jacksonville Planalso set aside $75 million for septic-tank remediation.

The loss of trees to development can increase stormwater runoff,as a moderate-sized tree can absorb up to 400 gallons ofstormwater per day. The St. Johns River Water ManagementDistrict (WMD) regulates new development to require that thefirst inch of stormwater is retained on site. Watering restric-tions, limiting the time of day that Duval County residents canw a t e r their lawn, were adopted by the WMD in 1991and are currently enforced. In addition, the WMDissued water shortage warnings in 1999 and 2000.

Increased development, more vehicles, and increased trafficcongestion contribute to air pollution. The EnvironmentalProtection Agency estimates that the pollution from increaseddriving will offset all of its air pollution-reduction efforts by2 0 1 0 .

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


served by these roadways, as did the Acosta and MatthewsBridges in earlier times; as of the time of this study, theDames Point Bridge is attracting the same strong growth.Highway construction has made commuting feasible betweendowntown and the suburbs.

• R e c r u i t m e n t : The pattern of development has also respondedto the efforts of private developers and the City to recruitbusinesses to certain areas, such as the office parks in south-eastern Duval County. Residential development has followedcommercial development into these areas. The City ofJacksonville in 1997 began targeting its use of economicincentives to recruit business to downtown and north andwest of the St. Johns River (see p. 13).

• Housing demand: The market demand for housing hasfocused on a typical house with a yard on a cul-d e-sac, in aneighborhood with similar homes. This type of residentialdevelopment is termed low-d e n s i t y, single-family development,disconnected from the larger traffic network. Residents havebeen willing to commute longer distances to work in orderto have the type of housing they want, even if the house islocated in another county from their employment. Buildershave responded to this demand in their choices of what kinds of residential developments to construct.

Resulting development patterns

Duval County’s rapid population growth over the past twodecades has occurred primarily in the southeastern quadrant.Development has spread southward beyond Duval into St.Johns and Clay Counties. The pattern of development hasbeen characterized by low-density, single-family residentialdevelopment, served by strip commercial development, withcommercial/residential development clusters around officeparks and shopping malls. At the time of this study, devel-opment patterns were beginning to change in response toCity policies and programs.

Duval County covers 480,043 acres, excluding Baldwin and theBeaches municipalities. By 2000, 214,987 acres, or 45 percentof the total land area, had been developed. Of the remainingland area, 21,338 acres were federal or state parks or otherwisedesignated conservation land.

Between 1985 and 2000, the majority of residential andcommercial development in Duval County occurred in its south-east quadrant. The population south and east of the St. JohnsRiver (Arlington and Southeast Planning Districts as well asAtlantic Beach, Jacksonville Beach, and Neptune Beach) grew byapproximately 150,000 during this time period, which accountsfor nearly all of the population growth of the county. Other out-lying areas, especially in northern and western Duval County,have not been as intensively developed; population dropped by11.5 and 22.7 percent in the Northwest and Urban Core planning districts, respectively. The clustering of office parks insoutheastern Duval County has contributed to the differences indevelopment patterns.

Definitions of Density

Rural Residential 0-2 dwelling units per acreLow Density Residential 3-7 dwelling units per acreMedium Density Residential 8-20 dwelling units per acreHigh Density Residential 21-60 dwelling units per acre

Source: City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Population change per planning district

Planning District 1985 Po p u l a t i o n 2000 Po p u l a t i o n Percent ChangeUrban CoreArlingtonSoutheastSouthwestNorthwestNorthAtlantic, J a c k s o n v i l l e ,and Neptune BeachBaldwinTotal

Source: City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department

Agricultural, parkland, or undeveloped land

Residential development

Industrial, commercial, or military development

-22.7%+51.0

+65.6%+16.1%-11.5%

+28.7%

+29.0%

+6.9%+23.9%

55,125123,214118,177115,323145,58637,660

32,268

1,528628,881

42,635186,072195,721133,867128,84848,474

41,628

1,634778,879

10. Traditionally, private property rights have been granted great weight in the growth-management process. Growth management requires balancing private property rights with the public interest and goals established by the community. The right to own property is not a right to taxpayer-financed assistance in developing that property.

1 1 . Successful growth management in Northeast Florida requires regional cooperation. Northeast Florida has insufficiently integrated growth-management efforts across county lines. The 2000 JCCI study on Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida similarly found that growth-management efforts in the First Coast cannot succeedunless they are coordinated at the regional level.

12. Citizen involvement, while increasing since the late 1990s, has been primarily reactive to unwanted land uses adjacent to existing neighborhoods. While individuals have learned how to participate in the difficult growth-management process, the general public has not been sufficiently involved proactively in the planning and permitting processes.The growth-management process would benefit fromincreasing public awareness and eliminating impedimentsto citizen involvement.

13. Nationally, few communities have successfully managed their growth. While many communities have implemented innovative growth-management strategies, the results of those efforts are mixed. The combined experiences from these communities suggest that growth-management approaches are more effective when tailored to the needs and goals of the community. Jacksonville can continue to learn from the mistakes and successes of other communities.


• Impact analysis: Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology for determining the full costs and benefits to the community of proposed development, including its fis-cal impact on taxpayers as well as its impact on the nat-ural environment.

7. Northeast Florida has had a number of gatherings of citizens under public and private auspices to articulate their community goals for growth management. These ongoing activities of reviewing progress and setting community goals have benefited Duval County by increasing attention to issues related to growth management. However, implemen-tation of these community goals remains incomplete because of private values and behaviors that vary from community goals, as well as insufficient commitment of resources.

8. Anticipated population, housing, and employment growth in Duval County will continue to pressure natural resources and public infrastructure. Duval County lacks sufficient knowledge about the size of the population that its natural resources and water supply can sustain. Managing continuedgrowth is a complex task that will require Duval County to maintain all of these resources effectively.

9. The success of growth-management efforts is in the imple-mentation, not just the planning. Growth-management efforts require the following to be successful:

• sufficient funding;• strong executive leadership;• involvement and commitment of private sector leaders;• public awareness, participation, and support;• interagency coordinated use of multiple strategies and

multiple public objectives;• sufficient information and the tools to analyze that information;• focused goals; and• continuity of effort, plans, and implementation.

Development Patterns in Duval County, 2000


1. The Florida growth-management process needs to be revised, restructured, and streamlined. The Florida Legislature should redistribute growth-management respon-sibilities and authority to appropriate levels of government. This restructuring should not create additional regulatory burdens or redundant levels of review and should ensure continuation of natural-environment protections.

2. Aspects of growth management that have statewide impacts should continue to be conducted at the state level. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) should retain regulatory oversight of:

• comprehensive-planning elements that directly impact natural resources of statewide significance;

•transportation facilities and infrastructure of statewides i g n i f i c a n c e ;

•natural-disaster responses and emergency-preparation issues of statewide significance; and

•other specific items of statewide significance, as determinedby the Florida Legislature.

The State budget should provide sufficient funding for DCA to perform these functions adequately.

3. The Florida Legislature should delegate all remaining state regulatory oversight of local comprehensive planning to Regional Planning Councils, because growth management has regional impacts beyond the scope of local-government a u t h o r i t y. The Legislature should authorize Regional Planning Councils to obtain sufficient, broad-based resources, including funding and staffing, to perform these additional functions effectively.

In addition, the Florida Legislature should expand the authority of each Regional Planning Council to:

• take the lead in coordinating growth management among local, regional, and state interests;

• coordinate the development of a regional growth-management vision;

• implement its Strategic Regional Policy Plan; and• ensure the integration of local/regional transportation and

land-use planning.

4. The Florida Legislature should add public safety and public schools as mandatory elements in local-government comprehensive plans. The Legislature should authorize appropriate, broad-based funding mechanisms for local governments to implement these elements.

5. The Florida Legislature should maintain the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process, with some modifications. Modifications should include:

• streamlining and simplifying the process, while maintaining its comprehensive nature; and

• delegating review authority to the Regional Planning Councils, with appeal of their decisions to the courts.

6. The Florida Legislature should ensure that enforcement of all natural-environment protections under the current system are retained and appropriately assigned. The Legislature should further improve protection of the natural environmentin Florida by:

• ensuring that Regional Planning Councils identify and map natural resources of regional significance to ensure their accurate identification and protection;

• including assessment of the impacts of development on the natural environment in the regional-development review process;

• encouraging the use of incentives to developers for protection of the natural environment;

•creating a system to transfer development rights for protection of environmentally sensitive areas; and

• limiting the use of exceptions in the growth-management process that negatively impact natural resources.

7. Because transportation in Northeast Florida has become a regional and not solely a local matter, the Florida Legislature should amend the charter of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, expanding its jurisdiction to regional as well as local transportation concerns, renaming it accordingly, and authorizing appropriate, broad-based regional fundingmechanisms. In addition to coordinating transportation planning and implementation in the region, the First Coast Transportation Authority should:

• improve the process used to secure land for future right-of-way needs by allowing land owners to retain reasonable and appropriate access and use rights until construction begins; and

•identify transportation corridors within the region in which land-use densities may be increased to support effective public transportation.

8. To provide needed information for local growth-management decision making, the St. Johns River Water Management District should determine the total population that can be supported in Northeast Florida with currently used water

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


The rate of growth in Duval County is expected to continue toslow, as growth spreads into other counties in the region.

Although the rate of growth is slowing, the numbers of peoplebeing added to the existing population base continue to behigh, and the land area and natural resources to accommodatethe growth remain finite. Duval County contains 840 squaremiles, of which 774 square miles are land; wetlands comprise25 percent of the total land area in Duval County.

Population growth in Duval County comes from a combinationof net immigration and natural population increase. Naturalincrease occurs when the number of births in a year exceedsthe number of deaths; of the population growth between 1999and 2000, 55 percent was due to natural increase. Net immi-gration occurs when more people move into a community thanmove out; net immigration accounted for 45 percent of the pop-ulation increase from 1999 to 2000.

The age composition of the population is also changing, as thecurrent population ages and increased numbers of retireesmove to the Jacksonville MSA. Throughout Florida, retireestypically live one county away from large cities, close to theservices they require but away from the urban center. The samepattern is developing throughout Northeast Florida. In 2000,only seven percent of Duval County’s population were over 65,while 28 percent in St. Johns County were 65 or older. By2015, Duval County’s retirement-age population is expected togrow to 13 percent of the total, with St. Johns County reaching36 percent age 65 or older.

The region has experienced substantial economic growth aswell. Between 1984 and 1999, Duval County added 137,000new jobs and 94,000 housing units. By 2010, Duval County isexpecting a net gain of 104,000 jobs and 57,000 housing units,while the other counties in the region add 30,000 more jobsand 40,000 housing units.

Factors affecting development patterns

State regulation has created increasingly detailed requirementsto manage growth that have been implemented throughlocal-government policy. Development patterns have been

affected by a combination of state regulation, city programsand policies, and other factors such as the availability of l e s sexpensive land, geographic considerations, infrastructure avail-ability, active recruitment efforts, and housing demand.

State legislative mandates, especially the Growth ManagementAct of 1985, have established certain growth-managementrequirements for Florida’s counties, including comprehensivep l a n n i n g, requiring that infrastructure is available upon completionof development, and review of large developments that have aregional impact. While many of the effects of these state regulations have been positive, they have not always achievedtheir desired outcomes, and in some cases have had unintendednegative results; many consider state regulation to be primarilya burdensome regulatory checklist that adds to the costs ofdevelopment.

State mandates have structured Duval County’s growth-management processes and strengthened local efforts to managegrowth. These efforts include local comprehensive planningand zoning, as well as other policies and programs not mandatedby the State.

Other factors that have influenced development in DuvalCounty have been:

• Geography: The locations of rivers, marshes, and other landfeatures have been an important determinant of development.Wetlands, for example, have shaped patterns of developmentand prevented contiguous development. The location oflocally-unwanted land uses and industry, from landfills topaper mills, has influenced the development patterns inneighboring areas.

• Availability and cost of land: The availability of less expensive land has encouraged growth into previously undevelopedareas. Environmentally contaminated, abandoned landshave discouraged reuse or urban infill in some areas becauseof the liability and cost of cleaning up the property. However,more expensive land in southeastern Duval and northern St.Johns County has continued to be a focus for developmenteven as the price of land has increased.

• Infrastructure: Infrastructure refers to the physical facilitiesneeded to serve a community, including roads, schools, firestations, solid-waste management, drainage, parks, and water,s e w e r, and electric utilities. The availability of existinginfrastructure, including utilities and roadways, has drawngrowth toward certain areas; for example, extension of electric,s e w e r, and water infrastructure into certain geographic areashas effectively subsidized the cost of development andencouraged development of property accessible to the utilities.Perceptions of the quality of public facilities, such as schools, also have affected development patterns.

Because the St. Johns River divides Duval County, thel o c ations and addition of bridges have influenced patterns of growth. Construction of J. Turner Butler Boulevard and of the Buckman Bridge influenced development into areas

Population growth rates in the JacksonvilleMetropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)

County BakerClayDuvalNassauSt. Johns

Total

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

1980-1990

2 0 . 9 %

5 8 . 1 %

1 7 . 9 %

3 3 . 6 %

6 3 . 4 %

2 5 . 4 %

1990-2000

2 0 . 4 %

3 2 . 9 %

1 5 . 7 %

3 1 . 2 %

4 6 . 9 %

2 1 . 4 %

2000-2010

1 5 . 0 %

2 3 . 4 %

1 2 . 2 %

2 3 . 0 %

3 0 . 6 %

1 6 . 3 %

2020-2030

1 1 . 0 %

1 5 . 8 %

9 . 5 %

1 5 . 5 %

1 9 . 1 %

1 2 . 0 %

2010-2020

1 3 . 3 %

1 9 . 9 %

1 1 . 3 %

1 9 . 7 %

2 4 . 8 %

1 4 . 6 %


1991) established community goals for indicators of wellbeingin relation to the economy, natural environment, mobility,and other aspects of the community’s quality of life.

• The Jacksonville Insight visioning process (in 1992) developedcitizen-based goals for effective transportation, a healthyenvironment, planned economic development, and thrivingneighborhoods and downtown.

• The Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan of theNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council (1997) focusedon five strategic subject areas: affordable housing, economicdevelopment, emergency preparedness, natural resources ofregional significance, and regional transportation.

• The River Agenda Summit convened by the Mayor ofJacksonville in 1997 outlined environmental strategies forprotection of the St. Johns River.

• The Vision for Downtown Jacksonville (1997) articulatedcommunity goals for downtown revitalization.

• The Jacksonville Growth Management Task Force convenedby the Mayor (1997) identified community issues andrecommended specific steps Jacksonville could take toimprove the type of growth and effectiveness of its growth-management efforts.

• Economic Summits convened by the Mayor of Jacksonvillein 1995 and 1998 focused on neighborhood and regionaleconomic development, tourism, and the transportationelement of growth management in Jacksonville.

• JCCI F o rw a r d ’ s Forum for the Fu t u r e (1999) called forimproved protection of natural resources, enhanced designquality of the built environment, and regional integration ofgrowth-management efforts.

• Growth management meetings with Northeast Floridas t a k e h o l d e r s conducted in 1999 by the Northeast FloridaRegional Planning Council outlined areas of communityconsensus on goals for growth management, includingenvironmental-protection initiatives.

• The Better Jacksonville Plan (2000) laid out a communitygrowth-management vision that included environmentalpreservation, downtown revitalization, and infrastructureimprovements (see page 13).

• The 2001 Mayor and City Council priorities for the fiscalyear beginning October 1, 2001 highlight growth-manage-ment goals including improving the city’s transportation system,encouraging downtown housing, redeveloping older neigh-borhoods, and encouraging mixed-use development intargeted areas of the county.

These public and private statements combined speak of desiresfor a vibrant community with a healthy environment, viabletransportation choices, and shared economic prosperity. Thesedesires are not unique to Northeast Florida. They have also pro-vided the political impetus for extensive efforts by the State ofFlorida, especially since 1985, to regulate development through-out the state.

H o w e v e r, private behavior does not always match publicconsensus. While the community may agree that a viable mass-transit system would provide some traffic relief, individual citizensstill choose to drive a personal automobile rather than ride the

bus. Average weekday bus ridership as a percentage of thepopulation has declined by 35 percent between 1984 and1999. Similarly, growth-management efforts to promote higherdensity and multi-use development often run into oppositionfrom citizens who may agree that such efforts benefit thec o m m u n i t y but do not want such development located near theirown homes.

IMPACTS OF GROWTH ON DUVAL COUNTYOver the last two decades, Duval County has experiencedsubstantial population and economic growth. State regulation,city programs and policies, and other factors have influencedthe kinds and locations of development. The resulting land-use patterns have had a significant impact on the quality oflife in Duval County and have prompted renewed concern formanaging future growth.

Population and economic growth

The population of Duval County and Northeast Florida hasincreased steadily in the last few decades and will continue toincrease in the foreseeable future. The region has alsoexperienced substantial economic growth.

In 1940, the total population of Florida was less than 2 million;by 2000, it had grown to nearly 16 million, with further growthto 23 million expected by 2030. As the State of Florida seeks toaccommodate its population growth, the density of developmentin South Florida is encouraging growth to move northward.

In 1940, Duval County was home to just over 200,000 people;in 2000, the population was nearly four times that. Between1980 and 2000, Duval County grew by 36 percent, adding over200,000 people in 20 years. By 2030, Duval County is expectedto have a population of over one million, with 1.6 million livingthroughout the Jacksonville Metropolitan Statistical Area(MSA)—Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns Counties.

Population growth in the JacksonvilleMetropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)

County 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Baker

Clay

Duval

Nassau

St. Johns

TotalSource: U.S. Census, University of Florida Bureau of Economic

and Business Research. Data for 2010-2030 are projected.

3 2 , 2 0 0

2 4 1 , 0 0 0

1 , 0 6 4 , 9 0 0

9 8 , 1 0 0

2 3 9 , 0 0 0

1 , 6 7 5 , 2 0 0

2 9 , 0 0 0

2 0 8 , 2 0 0

9 7 2 , 7 0 0

8 4 , 9 0 0

2 0 0 , 6 0 0

1,495,400

18,486

1 0 5 , 9 8 6

6 7 2 , 9 7 1

4 3 , 9 4 1

8 3 , 8 2 9

9 2 5 , 2 1 3

25,600

1 7 3 , 7 0 0

8 7 4 , 2 0 0

7 0 , 9 0 0

1 6 0 , 8 0 0

1 , 3 0 5 , 2 0 0

22,259

1 4 0 , 8 1 4

778,879

5 7 , 6 6 3

1 2 3 , 1 3 5

1,122,750

resources and currently available water-s u p p l y processesand technologies. The District also should examine technically and financially realistic new potable water processes and technologies to determine their potentialeffect on capacity and their fiscal impacts.

9. Independent of state and regional action, the Mayor of Jacksonville should take the lead to continue to improve the City of Jacksonville’s growth-management processes on matters of local impact by:

• encouraging roadway patterns in new developments that include connections to adjacent developments and land uses;

• retrofitting existing developments to include more road-way connections to adjacent developments and land uses;

• encouraging City departments and independent authoritiesto coordinate their efforts for growth-management purposes;

• providing funding, through various entities and sources, for the Downtown Master Plan to restore and revitalizeJacksonville’s downtown area;

• improving and enforcing City codes regarding neighbor-hood appearance and upkeep;

• encouraging and funding efforts to revitalize older neigh-borhoods, including those designated Historic, by using

the following kinds of tools, as needed: revisions to the Zoning Code, targeted economic incentives, coordinated condemnation and code enforcement efforts, affordable-housing assistance, infrastructure repair and replacement, and development and implementation of a brownfields cleanup and redevelopment program;

• encouraging and funding infill development by u s i n gsimilar tools; and

• developing and using a comprehensive m e t h o d o l o g yto determine the full costs and benefits of each p r o p o s e ddevelopment, including its impacts on taxpayers (schools, roads, utilities, public safety, and other infrastructure, as well as tax revenues) and the natural environment. This analysis also should include consideration and support for targeted community goals, such as affordable housing, for which public incentives are important.

1 0 . The City of Jacksonville should improve its public-involvementprocess related to growth management by providing citizens with information and assistance to participate fully and effectively in its growth-management processes, including land-use and zoning regulation.



Resource PeopleThe JCCI study process relies on information supplied by knowledgeableresource people, in addition to published reference materials. We wish to thankthe following for their contributions to this study.

Bill BrintonAllen, Brinton, & McCarthy

Joan CarverJacksonville University

Alex ColeyHallmark Partners

Joe DebsReynolds, Smith & Hills

John DeGroveemeritus professor, Florida Atlantic University

John DelaneyMayor, City of Jacksonville

Jeff ElledgeSt. Johns River Water Management District

Jeannie FewellJacksonville Department

of Planning and Development

Susan GrandinTrust for Public Lands

T.R. HainlineRogers Towers Bailey Jones & Gay

Lee HarrisCommunity Alliance

Alberta HippsPresident, Jacksonville City Council

Ed LehmanNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council

Greg MatovinaMatovina & Company

Tim McLendonUniversity of Florida

Lynn PappasPappas, Metcalf, Jenks, & Miller

Shannon SchefferNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council

Aage SchroderFlorida Department of Transportation

Darrell SmithJacksonville Transportation Authority

Lance DeHaven SmithFlorida State University

Brian TeepleNortheast Florida Regional Planning Council

Lane WelchGreenscape

Walter WilliamsColdwell Banker Walter Williams Realty Inc.


Findings

INTRODUCTIONThe goal of growth management is to accommodate populationand economic growth while also maintaining or enhancing thecommunity’s quality of life, all without jeopardizing individualrights. Successful growth-management efforts result in a vibrantcommunity with a healthy environment, viable transportationchoices, and shared economic prosperity, without undue stresson taxpayers. Accomplishing these goals was already difficultbefore the release of JCCI’s 1984 Growth Management Study,and it will continue to be complex and difficult in the future.

Growth management is a balancing act—balancing the right ofproperty owners to develop their properties as they wish withthe right of the community to influence the consequences ofdevelopment for overall community benefit. Growth manage-ment is often debated in terms of what others should do—ridethe bus, live in downtown apartments, or leave the land in itspristine natural condition—so that I can continue to enjoy useof my personal car and my house in the suburbs. Growthmanagement also concerns the rights of those who already livein a community to enjoy its quality of life, versus the rights ofothers to move in and join them.

Balancing competing needs is an active process involvingtradeoffs, as this description demonstrates:

Growth management is active and dynamic …; it seeks tomaintain an ongoing equilibrium between developmentand conservation, between various forms of developmentand concurrent provisions for infrastructure, between thedemands for public services generated by growth and thesupply of revenues to finance those demands, and between progress and equity.

Douglas R. Porter, Managing Growth in America’s Communities, 1997

Finding the right balance and maintaining the quality of life,under the pressures of population and economic growth currently being experienced in Duval County and NortheastFlorida, requires revisiting JCCI’s 1984 study and efforts sincethen to discover solutions for tomorrow’s growth based on 17years of experience. The Florida legislative debate in 2000-2001 about the proper roles of state and local governments ingrowth management provided an even more urgent context f o rdetermining how Duval County can best improve implementationof its own growth-management efforts. While this s t u d yconcentrates on Duval County and the c o n s o l i d a t e dJacksonville-Duval County government, growth and its impacts

are occurring throughout the metropolitan region. Thereforethis study examines Duval County’s growth-management effortsin a regional context.

This study defines growth management as programs and policiesintended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencingthe rate, location, design, and quality of development, includingnew development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymous with stopping growth.

COMMUNITY GOALSConcerns about the impacts of growth have spurred efforts overthe years to articulate community goals for growth managementin Duval County and Northeast Florida. These goals are remark-ably consistent in their visions of desired growth-managementoutcomes.

Over the past quarter-c e n t u r y, a number of gatherings of citizensunder public and private auspices have articulated goals andexpectations about the quality of life in Duval County andNortheast Florida. These statements have served as guidingprinciples to define desired outcomes of growth-managementefforts.

• The Amelia Island Conference of business and civic leadersin 1974 listed as a priority the adoption of a comprehensive land-use plan with emphasis on recreation areas, conservation,and preservation, and establishment of standards for water-front development to ensure public access to the river andocean.

• JCCI’s Growth Management Study (1984) outlined communitygoals for growth management, including natural-resourceprotection and citizen involvement.

• T h e First Coast Planning Conference convened by theJacksonville Chamber of Commerce (1987) created a regionalvision for 2005, calling for development approaches that wouldpreserve the environment and enhance the quality of life.

• The City of Jacksonville 2010 Comprehensive Plan ( d e v e l o p e din 1990) included over 1,200 goals, policies, and objectives tomanage growth. Its 1997 Evaluation and Appraisal Reportconfirmed the same goals, policies, and objectives, andnoted the City’s progress in accomplishing them.

• JCCI’s Quality of Life Indicators Targets for 2000 (set in

Findings represent the information received by the committee. They are derived from publishedmaterials, from facts reported by resource people, and from a consensus of the committee’sunderstanding of the opinions of resource people.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.

Table Of Contents

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

FINDINGS 4

Introduction 4

Community goals 4

Impacts of growth on Duval County 5Population and economic growth 5Factors affecting development patterns 6Resulting development patterns 7Resulting community impacts 8

Transportation 8Environmental impacts 8Growth distribution 9

Growth management tools and their effectiveness 9

State regulation 9Areas of Critical State Concern 9Developments of Regional Impact 10Comprehensive Planning 10Concurrency 10Growth Management Study Commission 11

Local efforts 11Comprehensive Planning 11Zoning 12Land acquisition 13

Cover design and layout by Angela Edwards

On the cover: Map of Duval County, Florida. See page 7 for legend.

Infrastructure 13Targeted economic incentives 13Fair-share agreements 13Downtown redevelopment 14Neighborhood and sector plans 14Brownfields 14Visual environment 14Historic preservation 14Affordable housing 15Regional coordination 15

Approaches from other communities 15Indianapolis, Indiana 15Portland, Oregon 16Charlotte, North Carolina 16Rhode Island 16Maryland 16

CONCLUSIONS 17

RECOMMENDATIONS 19

RESOURCE PEOPLE 21

REFERENCES 22

COMMITTEE MEMBERS 23

3

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

Barnett, Cynthia, and Mary Ellen Klas, Managing Growth: 10 Steps Toward a More Livable Florida (Florida Trend), December 2000.

City of Jacksonville, Jacksonville Into the 21st Century: Growth Management Task Force Recommendations, 1997.

Duany, Andres, The Science of Smart Growth (Scientific American), December 2000.

Florida Department of Community Affairs, Growth Management Survey Report, February 2000.

Florida Growth Management Study Commission, A Liveable Florida for Today and Tomorrow: Growth Management StudyCommission Final Report, 2001.

Hollis, Linda; Porter, Douglas; and Holly Stallworth, Assessing the Impacts of Development Choices: Prepared for the Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South Florida and its Full-Cost Accounting Committee, 1997.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Growth Management: A Report to the Citizens of Jacksonville, 1984.

Jacksonville Community Council Inc., Improving Regional Cooperation in Northeast Florida: A Study Report to the Citizensof the First Coast, 2000.

Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, 2010 Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report, 1997.

Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, The Citizen’s Guide to Zoning (draft), 2001.

The National Neighborhood Coalition, Smart Growth, Better Neighborhoods: Communities Leading the Way, 2000.

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

Nicholas, James C., and Ruth L. Steiner, Growth Management and Smart Growth in Florida (Wake Forest Law Review), 2000.

Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Growth Management Meetings with Northeast Florida Stakeholders, 1999.

Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council, Strategic Directions: Northeast Florida Strategic Regional Policy Plan, 1997.

The Reubin O’D. Askew Institute, Jacksonville and the 21st Century: Building a Stronger Community, Fall 1999.


CommitteeMembership and Work

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

Board of DirectorsSue Butts, President**

Edgar Mathis, President-Elect** Pat Brzozowski, Secretary**Edward Hearle, Treasurer**

Edythe AbdullahJohn Anderson

Oliver Barakat**William Bishop

Lizanne BomhardVirginia BorrokVanessa BoyerMichael BoylanSherry Burns**

Charles A. ClarksonJohn R. Cobb**John Daigle Jr.Edward EngDavid Foster

Charles GriggsDave HemphillHoward Kelley

William Mason IIIJohn Rutherford

Mary Ellen Smith**Paula WeatherbyGerald Weedon

Susie Wiles

**Executive Committee

Executive DirectorLois Chepenik

Past PresidentsJ.J. Daniel

Jack H. ChambersYank D. Coble Jr.Robert D. Davis

George W. CorrickHoward R. Greenstein

Jacquelyn D. BatesDavid M. Hicks

James C. RinamanKenneth W. Eilermann

J. Shepard Bryan Jr.Juliette Woodruff Mason

Lucy D. HadiCharles P. Hayes Jr.

Steve PajcicTracey I. Arpen Jr

Guy Marvin IIILuther Quarles IIIW.O. BirchfieldMichael J. Korn

William E. ScheuAfesa Adams

William D. BrintonSherry Burns

JCCI StaffLois Chepenik

Executive Director

David Swain Associate Director

Planning StaffLaura Lane Cheryl MurphyJennifer ParsonsBen Warner *

Support StaffEarlene HostutlerMichelle Simkulet Lashun Stephens *Wanda Tivey

* Staff for this study


CHAIRAllan T. Geiger

Judy ArandaLynda AycockTony BatesRichard BerryBill BishopFlossie BrunsonJohn CannonJeane ChappellCarmen ChronisterBucky Clarkson

Jeff ClementsRichard DarbyGary DavenportDaniel DavisDan DonaldsonMary EavesGeorge FisherHolly KartsonisKirk LewisDavid Lipp

William MahoneyHugh O'MalleyBob OttesenMarvin ReeseSylvia SimmonsRichard Skinner Jr.Lindner SmithJim VarianDenise Wallace

MANAGEMENT TEAMJames Argrett, Jr.J. Shepherd BryanJohn CroftsPat GreasonHawley SmithJerry SpinksTrip StanlyHenry ThomasQuinton White

COMMITTEE


Summary

Highlights

Duval County is growing. Residents have children, and people and businesses arrive daily. Growth management is the effortof the local and regional community to preserve the quality of life while accommodating population and economic growth.

JCCI released its first Growth Management Study in 1984. That study looked at the mechanisms necessary to maintainand enhance the quality of life in Jacksonville in the face of predicted growth. Among other recommendations, it calledfor the adoption and enforcement of a Comprehensive Plan, increased media coverage of growth management, andincreased citizen awareness and involvement in the growth-management process.

In 1985, Florida passed a Growth Management Act, creating a statewide system for enforcing growth management. In1990, Jacksonville adopted its own Comprehensive Plan. In 2000, the State of Florida began review of its growth-man-agement regulations, and the 2001 Growth Management Study Commission report called for increasing local responsi-bility for growth management.

In this study, JCCI examines the outcomes of Duval County’s growth-management efforts over the last fifteen years andidentifies steps to improve implementation of growth management in Duval County.

The study committee explored how legislative mandates, community goals, and other factors have influenced growthmanagement; examined the effectiveness of past and current strategies; reviewed the regional implications of growth-management efforts; and discussed how growth-management approaches from across the country might be adapted tolocal efforts.

This study accepts current projections that growth will continue in Duval County. For the purposes of this study, growthmanagement refers to programs and policies intended to improve or maintain the quality of life by influencing the rate,location, design, and quality of development, including new development and reuse of current assets. It is not synonymouswith stopping growth.

Major ConcernsState growth-management efforts have increased the c o s tof development while creating unintended negativeconsequences for local communities.

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

The complexity, cost, and time-consuming nature of theDevelopments of Regional Impact (DRI) process dis-couraged its use.

Historically, growth-management efforts in Duval Countyhave focused more on new growth than on redevelopmentof existing neighborhoods.

Duval County lacks a comprehensive methodology fordetermining the full costs and benefits to the community ofproposed development.

Recommended SolutionsRestructure the Florida growth-management process bydelegating responsibilities and authority to appropriate levelsof government.

Protect the natural environment by including assessment ofdevelopment impacts on the natural environment indecision making.

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

Encourage and fund coordinated efforts to revitalize oldern e i g h b o r h o o d s .

Develop and use a process to determine the full costs andbenefits of proposed developments, including tax- p a y e rimpacts and impacts on the natural environment.

Previous JCCI StudiesJCCI studies are available free to interested individuals. Most studies maybe downloaded from our website at www. j c c i . o r g. Those marked witha star are out of print; copies available at $7.00 each.

STUDY CHAIR1977 Local Government Finance* Robert Davis1977 Housing* Thomas Carpenter1977 Public Education (K-12)* Robert W. Schellenberg1978 Public Authorities* Howard Greenstein1978 Strengthening the Family* Jacquelyn Bates1979 Citizen Participation in the Schools* Susan Black 1979 Youth Unemployment* Roy G. Green 1979 Theatre Jacksonville* Richard Bizot1979 Civil Service* Max K. Morris1979 Planning in Local Government* I. M. Sulzbacher1980 Capital Improvements for Recreation* Ted Pappas1980 But Not In My Neighborhood Pamela Y. Paul1980 The Energy Efficient City* Roderick M. Nicol1981 Coordination of Human Services* Pat Hannan1981 Higher Education* R. P. T. Young1982 Disaster Preparedness* Walter Williams Jr.1982 Teenage Pregnancy* Mari Terbrueggen1982 Downtown Derelicts* Earle Traynham 1983 Mass Transit* David Hastings1983 Indigent Health Care* Linda McClintock1984 Jacksonville’s Jail Eleanor Gay1984 Growth Management* Curtis L. McCray1985 Visual Pollution Doug Milne1985 Minority Business* Jack Gaillard 1986 Private Delivery of Public Services George Fisher1986 Mental Health and Drug Abuse

Services for Children and Youth* Flo Nell Ozell1987 Child Day-Care Services George W. Corrick1987 Infrastructure* Joan Carver 1988 Local Election Process* Jim Rinaman1988 School Dropout Prevention* Gene Parks1989 Reducing the Garbage Burden* Jack F. Milne &

James L. White III1989 Independent Living for the Elderly Roseanne Hartwell1990 Future Workforce Needs Yank D. Coble Jr.

STUDY CHAIR1990 Philanthropy in Jacksonville* Juliette Mason1991 Adequate Water Supply* Russell B. Newton Jr.1991 Positive Development of Jacksonville’s

Children* Henry H. “Tip” Graham1992 Long-Term Financial Health of the

City of Jacksonville Mary Alice Phelan 1992 Young Black Males* Chester A. Aikens &

William E. Scheu1993 Planning for Northeast Florida’s

Uncertain Military Future David L. Williams1993 Public Education: The Cost of Quality* Royce Lyles1994 Reducing Violence in Jacksonville

Schools* Dale Clifford1994 Jacksonville Public Services: Meeting

Neighborhood Needs* Michael Korn1995 Teenage Single Parents and Their Families* Afesa Adams1995 JAXPORT: Improvement and Expansion Jim Ade1996 Creating a Community Agenda: Indicators

For Health and Human Services* Bruce Demps1996 Leadership: Meeting Community Needs* Bill Brinton1997 Improving Public Dialogue Jim Crooks1997 Transportation for the Disadvantaged Cathy Winterfield1997 Children with Special Needs* Virginia Borrok1998 The Role of Nonprofit Organizations Sherry Magill1998 Incentives for Economic Development* Henry Thomas1999 Improving Adult Literacy Edythe Abdullah1999 Arts, Recreation and Culture

in Jacksonville Ed Hearle2000 Affordable Housing Bill Bishop2000 Improving Regional Cooperation Jim Rinaman2001 Services for Ex-Offenders Dana Ferrell Birchfield

Jacksonville Community Council Inc.2434 Atlantic Boulevard, Suite 100Jacksonville, Florida 32207E-mail address: [email protected] address: http://www.jcci.org

JCCI is a United Way Agency

Nonprofit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPermit No. 1999Jacksonville, FL

STUDY

JacksonvilleCommunityCouncil, Inc.

GROWTHMANAGEMENTREVISITEDA Report to the Citizens of Northeast Florida • Summer 2001

2001 study: growth management revisited

Documents

jacksonville schools

theatre jacksonville

williams1993 public

drug abuse services

meeting community needs

meetingneighborhood

special needs

indicatorsfor health