STATE OF FLORIDA DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, )
)
Petitioner, )
) and 1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA and ) BOB WHITE, )
)
Intervenors, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 91-1080GM
)
WALTON COUNTY, )
)
Respondent, )
) and ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY, SUSAN )
MYERS and RUSSELL D. ALDRICH, )
)
Intervenors. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, Don W. Davis, held a formal hearing in the above- styled case on October 1-4, 1991, in DeFuniak Springs, Florida and October 8-9, 1991, in Seagrove Beach, Florida.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner, David J. Russ, Esquire Department of Assistant General Counsel Community Affairs: Kenneth D. Goldberg, Esquire
Assistant General Counsel Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
For Intervenors, Richard Grosso, Esquire 1000 Friends of Legal Director
Florida and Bob 1000 Friends of Florida White: Post Office Box 5948
Tallahassee, Florida 32314-5948
For Respondent, George Ralph Miller, Esquire Walton County: County Attorney
Post Office Box 687
DeFuniak Springs, Florida 32433
For Intervenor, Fred H. Kent, Jr., Esquire St. Joe Paper Post Office Box 53075
Company: Jacksonville, Florida 32201-3075
For Intervenors,
Susan S Myers Chris Cadenhead, Esquire and Russell D. Post Office Box 5354 Aldrich: Destin, Florida 32540
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
The issue in this case is whether the Walton County Comprehensive Plan (Plan) is in compliance with Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (the Act), the State Comprehensive Plan (Section 187.201, F.S.), the West Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.).
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
On April 2, 1990, Walton County (County) transmitted a proposed comprehensive plan to DCA. On July 10, 1990, DCA transmitted its Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report (ORC Report) to the County with respect to the proposed comprehensive plan. Walton County concluded its review of the objections, recommendations, and comments and, as documented byOrdinance 90-15, adopted its comprehensive plan on December 14, 1990.
On February 7, 1991, DCA issued a Notice of Intent to Find the Plan Not in Compliance and, on February 19, 1991, filed its petition, and accompanying Statement of Intent to Find Comprehensive Plan Not in Compliance, with the Division of Administrative Hearings. The Statement of Intent incorporates the ORC Report.
By order dated June 25, 1991, the Petition to Intervene filed by 1000 Friends of Florida (1000 Friends) and Bob White (White) was granted. Also, by order dated June 25, 1991, the Petition to Intervene filed by Walton County Coalition for Sensible Growth Petition to Intervene was denied.
By order of July 12, 1991, the Amended Petition to Intervene of Susan S. Myers and Russell D. Aldrich (Myers) was granted and the Walton County Coalition for Sensible Growth directed to provide a more definite statement as to its entitlement to intervene. The Coalition never submitted the additional information required by the Hearing Officer and therefore was not made a party to this proceeding.
By Order dated August 29, 1991, the Petition of St. Joe Paper Company and St. Joseph Land Development Company (St. Joe), seeking intervenor status, was granted.
At the hearing, DCA presented six witnesses and offered into evidence 18 exhibits, including two joint exhibits. 1000 Friends and White presented seven witnesses and offered into evidence eight exhibits. The County presented three witnesses and offered into evidence two joint exhibits. St. Joe presented one witness and offered into evidence two exhibits.
The transcript of the final hearing was filed on January 7, 1992. The Parties were granted until February 24, 1992, to file proposed recommended
orders. Proposed findings of fact submitted by the parties have been addressed in the appendix to this recommended order.
FINDINGS OF FACT
PARTIES
Walton County is a local government charged with the responsibility of adopting and enforcing a comprehensive plan as provided in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes.
DCA is the state land planning agency charged with the responsibility of reviewing plans under Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes.
Intervenors White and Myers reside and own property within the jurisdictional boundaries of Walton County. White was a member of the County's Citizens Advisory Committee and submitted oral and written objections to the County during the plan's review and adoption proceedings.
1000 Friends is a non-profit Florida Corporation which has as its corporate purpose to secure reasonable implementation of Florida's growth management rules, policies and plans at all levels of government. 1000 Friends conducts its business operations within Walton County on behalf of its members, including those that reside, own property or operate businesses there.
1000 Friends reviewed Walton County's draft plan and twice submitted written comments on the plan to the County, once prior to the issuance of DCA's ORC Report, and once prior to final adoption of the plan.
LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
Policy 1.1.1 in the drainage sub-element, Objective A-1 and Policies A- 1-1 and B-2-3 in the Coastal Management Element, and Policy 1.3.3 in the Capital Improvements Element, exempts existing single family lots of record; previously permitted development; or development exempt from permitting requirements by the Department of Environmental Regulation under Chapter 17-25, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), from having to meet any LOS standard for drainage facilities.
Since the overall cumulative impacts of such exempt developments cannot be measured, the County cannot achieve concurrency management objectives or adequately protect affected natural resources.
FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY
The existing financial condition of Walton County is stable due to a growing population and tax base which can offset increasing service and facility needs. Current millage rates for property taxes are below the maximum allowable rate. There are a variety of revenue sources which the County does not currently collect. The County's General Fund Reserves are sufficient to address the County's capital improvement needs through fiscal year 1994/1995. In addition, data and analysis reflects that the County recognizes that user or impact fees could be utilized to support any capital improvements which may be identified in the future.
In order for a plan to be financially feasible, a local government has to list revenue sources to pay for the capital improvements listed in the five-
year capital improvements schedule, and specify the extent to which future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements necessitated by development.
By not specifying the extent of contribution expected from new development for future infrastructure needed to serve that new development, the cost of the new facilities is effectively shifted to existing residents and taxpayers.
Populations in unincorporated areas now typically demand facilities and services traditionally provided only in incorporated municipalities, such as emergency response, enhanced law enforcement, urban level infrastructure and libraries.
The County's plan states that future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility capital improvements where necessary to maintain adopted LOS standards. The plan does not, however, specify the proportion of costs future development will pay and does not allocate costs on the basis of benefits received by future residents. Such specification is a critical part of designing an impact fee program.
By assessing new development a pro rata share of the costs of extending public facilities and services, a plan can more accurately impose the actual costs of development.
Plan objectives that address the extent to which future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements, as well as policies that assess new development a pro rata share of the costs necessary to maintain adopted level of service (LOS) standards, ensure that a mechanism exists to determine the true costs of development and to determine whether future development envisioned in the plan can actually be served by the required public facilities.
Capital Improvements Element (CIE) Objective 1.4 does not specify the extent to which future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements needed by development and may result in County citizens subsidizing the cost of new development.
CIE Objective 1.4 does not require development to pay a fair share because it only requires that new development pay for construction or improvement of new facilities rather than the costs of utilizing existing capacity.
CIE Policy 1.4.1 indicates that Walton County will "utilize fees and special assessments to fund future capital needs or debt service," but does not explain how Walton County will "utilize" these potential revenue sources or identify specific fees or assessments. This policy does not commit Walton County to adopt or assess impact fees or to levy special assessments. Although these financing mechanisms are reasonable, this plan does not commit to their use and does not reference them in the five-year schedule of capital improvements.
The plan does not include an objective which coordinates future land uses with the availability of facilities and services. Future Land Use Objective 1.2 (p. I-62) addresses the coordination of development permits and orders with available public facilities, but does not coordinate future land uses on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) with the availability of facilities and
services. Land uses on the FLUM should reflect realistic assumptions about what development can actually occur on a given piece of property.
Such a provision is important in a plan so developers know, prior to applying for development orders, whether required facilities and services are likely to be available. The result would be decision-making through comprehensive planning as opposed to planning on a permit by permit basis.
The data and analysis indicate many current or future problems in providing infrastructure for the development of the southern part of the county, including indication of a need for a regional potable water system. None of these current or future infrastructure needs were addressed in the Capital Improvements Element. The plan commits funding only for recreational projects.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Data in support of the plan's Housing Element (HE) includes 1980 United States Census information which indicates that 3.7% of the County's dwelling units lack complete plumbing, 2.5% lack complete kitchen facilities and 2.9% are overcrowded, but no inventory of substandard housing is included.
There is no analysis within the data or the plan of the structural condition of housing within the County's jurisdiction, which present the number and generalized location of dwelling units in standard and substandard condition.
Further, there is no analysis of the need for redevelopment.
Table 21 on page 51 of the Housing Element support data is not adequate to allow the County to project the affordable housing needs of the anticipated population. In order to make this determination, the County would need to relate the information in this table to the cost of housing and the ability of residents to pay that cost.
The data and analysis do project an increase in the number of very low and low to moderate income households of 33% by the year 2000, but Objective 1.1 in the Housing Element commits the County to increase the number of available sites to serve these households by only 10% and does not set forth the means by which the County will achieve even this increase in available sites.
Housing Objective 1.2 requires only a "survey" of available sites without any commitment of subsequent action. As such, the plan does not include specific and measurable objectives based on data analysis which meet the requirements of Rule 9J-5.010(3)(b)1., F.A.C., because the plan does not identify the means by which the County will achieve the objective of providing adequate and affordable housing sites for existing and anticipated future population.
The plan does not have an objective which meets the requirements of Rule 9J-5.010(3)(b)2., F.A.C., to eliminate substandard housing. Although Housing Element Objective 1.4 directs a 5% decrease in the number of substandard housing units in Walton County by the year 2000, this objective does not seek to eliminate substandard housing in the County.
Housing Element Objective 1.3 provides that the County will inventory 25% of the housing stock by 1994 to identify substandard units. Each year thereafter, an additional 10% of the County's housing stock will be inventoried to identify substandard units. This objective defers action when information is available currently which could be used to complete such an inventory. For
instance, the 1990 Census data could be used as an interim measure pending the completion of a countywide survey.
Objective 1.4 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) in the plan provides for reduction of blight by 20 per cent through adoption of land use regulations (LDRs) and solicitation of grant funds. But this objective is not supported by data and analysis with regard to the need for redevelopment of blighted areas and the elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with the County's character and proposed future land uses as required by Rule 9J- 5.006(2)(d), F.A.C.
Policy 1.4.1 of the FLUE, and Objective 1.3 of the Housing Element, delay until 2002 the completion of an inventory of substandard housing units. The plan does not include specific and measurable objectives or any implementation programs or activities that the County will use to reduce instances of blight, other than to actively solicit grants for the redevelopment of blighted areas. The active solicitation of grants does not implement the policy of reducing blight. The plan does not say what happens in the event such grants are not secured.
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
Rule 9J-5.007, F.A.C., requires that the Traffic Circulation Element (TCE) contain goals, objectives and policies and be depicted on a future traffic circulation map within the element. Walton County submitted a Future Traffic Circulation Map (FTCM) within the data and analysis submitted with its adopted plan, but the FTCM was not adopted by the County as part of the TCE.
Even if considered as part of the TCE, the FTCM does not designate the future date it is intended to depict as required by Rule 9J-5.005(1)(e), F.A.C., and is inconsistent with other data and analysis which indicate that a portion of the roadway segment along US 98 from Sandestin to the Bay County line is planned as a four-lane freeway. The FTCM depicts this segment as a six-lane freeway.
Policies B-1 and B-3 in the TCE state that the County will cooperate with the preparation of the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Cost Feasibility Plan and "coordinate" with the plans and programs of the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Planning and Management Plan, but the TCE does not describe any implementation programs or activities the County will use to "cooperate" and "coordinate".
Policy C-1 in the Traffic Circulation Element states that the County will adopt right-of-way standards and minimum building setbacks "substantially similar to those recommended by the MPO in the Implementation Section of this Element." There is no Implementation Section within the TCE.
Policy D-1 of the TCE provides that the County shall manage roadway access by controlling the connection and access points of driveways and roads to roadways, the use of cross-access assessments of adjacent properties, and the use of front roads, "where feasible." The plan defers creation of standards which guide and implement these management techniques to Land Develoment Regulations (LDRs).
LAND USES AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
General
Local governments conduct land use planning in Florida, while permitting agencies of state government, like DER, regulate the impacts of land uses which have been established in local comprehensive plans and codes. Consequently, planning is the initial stage in the development process. Permitting is the secondary stage which implements the decisions made at the planning stage. Permitting programs have site specific utility only; they do not constitute proper ecosystem planning.
Moreover, many state permitting programs, such as those applicable to wetlands alteration and coastal construction, apply only to certain threshold size activities in delineated areas. They do not apply, for instance, to all construction in all wetlands or dunes.
Population Projections
Rule 9J-5.005(2)(e), F.A.C., requires that each comprehensive plan be based on resident and seasonal population estimates and projections. Accurate population projections are a critical part of the planning process. Population projections provide the basis for determining the extent to which public facilities and services will be required to meet the future needs of the County's seasonal and permanent residents, as well as providing the basis for determining the financial feasibility of the plan itself.
Table 12 in the data and analysis for the FLUE provides permanent resident population projections for Walton County through the year 2000, based on high, medium and low projections. The projected permanent population for the year 2000, the time frame of the plan, projects a low population of 26,900, a medium population of 34,700, and a population high of 42,600. Table 20 in the data and analysis for the Housing Element projects expected permanent population of Walton County through, the year 2000 to be 37,712. Table 4 in the Recreation and Open Space Element data projects that the County's population in 2000 will be 37,876.
The projection of permanent population in Table 12 does not indicate which trend (high, medium or low) the County will be using in projecting future need. The medium projection for the FLUE (Table 12) conflicts with the projections in the Housing Element data (Table 20) and the Recreation and Open Space Element data (Table 4) for the year 2000. Further, the projections in Table 20 and Table 4 conflict with each other. The plan does not clarify which projected population the County used to project its future needs.
Table 13 in the data and analysis supporting the FLUE provides the County's seasonal population projections for southern Walton County, based upon a low and high permanent population projection for the area. Neither Table 13 or the plan states whether the high or low projections are used in the plan. In data and analysis supporting the Recreation and Open Space Element, table 4 does not consider seasonal population in projecting future population of the County. Nor does Table 20 in the Housing Element consider a seasonal population projection in its determination of future housing needs.
Data and Analysis
Neither the FLUE or data and analysis include an analysis of the character and magnitude of existing vacant or undeveloped land, or an analysis of the amount of land the County will need to accommodate its projected population as required by Rule 9J-5.006(2)(c), F.A.C.
The data and analysis of the Conservation Element states that there are eight conservation areas within the County. At least two of these sites, unless included within the wilderness areas, are not depicted on the FLUM. The map legend has no label or designation for any of them.
The FLUM Series does not depict cones of influence for existing and planned water wells, floodplains, and wetlands. Floodplains and wetlands are depicted on unadopted maps in data and analysis.
The FLUM does not depict all of the Neighborhood Conservation Subdivisions that are listed in the legend. Further, residential areas depicted on the Existing Land Use Maps in data and analysis are not reflected on the FLUM.
The FLUM does not depict commercial, agriculture, recreation, education, or public facilities land uses, or provided land use designation for Eglin Air Force Base.
Goals, Objectives and Policies
The FLUE contains three objectives. FLUE Objective 1.1 requires that land development regulations must be consistent with "density and intensity performance standards" set forth in FLUE Policy 1.1.1. FLUE Objective 1.2 limits issuance of development permits to instances where public facilities are available to meet impacts of development and defers determination of suitable available land for development to LDRs. Objective 1.3 defers actions to protect historically significant sites until completion of a survey in 1995, after which procedures to protect such sites will be developed.
None of these FLUE Objectives adequately address land use planning issues such as coordinating future land use with the appropriate topography, soil conditions, and the availability of facilities and services; encouraging elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with the county's character and future land uses; ensuring protection of natural and historical resources; or coordinating coastal population densities with the local and regional hurricane evacuation plan. Further, none of these objectives are satisfied or addressed elsewhere in the plan.
The FLUE should, but does not, contain policies which address implementation activities for the regulation of land use categories included on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM); for the regulation of signage, subdivisions, and areas subject to seasonal or periodic flooding; for provision of compatibility of adjacent land uses; for provision of drainage and stormwater management, open space, and safe and convenient on-site traffic flow; for provision of mixed land use designation policies; and for the protection of potable water wellfields and environmentally sensitive land.
Although Policy 1.1.1 in the FLUE establishes performance standards for the Estate, Urban Core, Holding, and Planned Unit Development districts,
these districts are not depicted on the FLUM. Therefore, Policy 1.1.1 is inconsistent with the FLUM.
Policy 1.1.1 of the FLUE does not specify the uses permitted within each of the categories that are depicted on the FLUM, including the mixed uses. For example, in the Rural District, authorized uses include agriculture, nursery, institutional, conventional subdivisions, performance subdivisions, and "other". The term "other" is not defined within the plan. The term "other" also appears as an undefined but permitted land use in residential/neighborhood conservation, development, and resort districts.
While the FLUM depicts a category called "planned unit development", this category does not appear as a land use category under Policy 1.1.1.
The FLUM and the FLUE depict a category called wilderness, in which Policy 1.1.1 authorizes "all uses." The term "all uses" is not defined in the plan. In terms of performance standards, the wilderness district requires a minimum 95% open space ratio, but authorizes a 10% impervious surface ratio.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl is scattered, untimely development, poorly managed or unmanaged, which occurs in urban or suburban fringe areas and converts important resource lands to urban uses which are not functionally related to the land being converted.
Urban sprawl generally takes three forms-leapfrog, where development occurs away from existing development; linear, which occurs along major highways; and scattered low density sprawl.
Urban sprawl uses land inefficiently, by making more land available for development than is needed, which in turn results in the inefficient use of infrastructure funding.
Urban sprawl discourages investment in previously developed areas and generally results in longer travel times between homes and workplaces.
Urban sprawl, particularly inefficient, low density sprawl, creates adverse impacts an natural resources, wildlife habitats, soils and water quality.
The discouragement of urban sprawl furthers many provisions of the state comprehensive plan such as those provisions relating to affordable housing, water resources, natural systems, air quality, land use, downtown revitalization, public facilities, energy, transportation, governmental efficiency the economy, agriculture, employment, and plan implementation.
The discouragement of urban sprawl is consistent with the allocation of land uses based on projected requirements, the coordination of proposed development with the planned roadway
network and other infrastructure, the conservation of natural resources and agricultural lands, and the efficient provision of services.
The existing land use patterns in Walton County may be considered to be representative of urban sprawl.
Most of the northern and central sections of the County are designated as rural, which permits agricultural uses as well as residential subdivisions at four to eight dwelling units per acre. Scattered throughout these rural areas are districts designated as neighborhood conservation, which allow an undefined density.
Urban sprawl is not discouraged when a plan designates for development an amount of land that exceeds the amount that data and analysis shows is needed by more than 25%. Generally, a 25% surplus should foreclose the opportunity for unfair concentration of land resources in a few hands.
The plan in this instance fails to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl because the densities and intensities of uses assigned in rural and agricultural areas allow development in these areas without meaningful controls, or regulations, and far in excess of the future needs of the County for the time frame of the plan.
The plan allocates at least 44 times more land for residential uses than is needed for the population projected in the county for the time frame of the plan. Generally, the more a plan exceeds an allocation of 1 to 1.5 of the amount of land projected to be needed, the more likely it is that it is encouraging urban sprawl.
The plan's gross over-allocation of land results in a complete lack of direction of development towards and away from any particular areas and impedes the County from extending its infrastructure in a manner that discourages urban sprawl. The plan simply does not discourage urban sprawl.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
The data and analysis in the plan identify numerous federal, state, regional, and local agencies, and independent special districts which directly or indirectly affect development and growth in the County. The data and analysis acknowledge the County's need for clear coordination and cooperation between the County and these various entities, and identify specific mechanisms the County could utilize to achieve better coordination with such entities.
However, the plan does not contain any objectives that will ensure coordination with the agencies and special taxing districts having operational and maintenance responsibility for establishing LOS standards for public facilities.
The County has many public facilities and services that are provided by private agencies, notably potable water and sanitary sewer service.
The plan does not contain any policies to resolve annexation issues or to coordinate the management of bays, estuaries and harbors that fall within the jurisdiction of more than one local government.
On page 10-23B, Objective F of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element directs the County to coordinate planning and the provision of service with the County's municipalities and the adjacent counties and other agencies and districts within the County. The objective is not supported by any implementing policies.
PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES General
The purpose of a plan's conservation element is to conserve, appropriately use, and protect natural resources. Protection means to preserve their function, viability and place in the ecosystem.
A resource cannot be protected or appropriately used by deferring to the adoption of Land Development Regulations the measures necessary to conserve and protect the resource. The plan must set the standards and provide guidance against which the LDRs can be judged for consistency with the plan.
While the data and analysis identify many natural resources in the County which require conservation, the plan does not include required objectives to conserve, appropriately use, and protect water resources, minerals, soils, native vegetative communities, fisheries, wildlife habitats or marine habitats. For instance, Objective 1-1 on page 6-14E of the plan's Drainage sublimate is directed toward protecting natural drainage features and groundwater recharge areas, but defers specific action to the county's Land Development Code (LDC). Similarly, Objective A-1 of the combined Coastal Management-Conservation Element on page 7/8-1 of the plan defers protection from developmental stormwater run- off to LDRs and LOS standards that, in turn, exempt single family lots and agriculture from those standards. Objective A-2, likewise, would protect water quality from pollutants through land use regulation and other nonspecific and unmeasureable action.
The plan does not include required policies which adequately protect water quality or restrict activities known to effect cones of influence, water recharge areas, and waterwells; which protect native vegetative communities, endangered and threatened species; which conserve water resources; which protect and conserve the natural functions of existing soils, floodplains, rivers, bays, lakes and wetlands; which protect natural reservations identified in the Recreation and Open Space Element; to designate environmentally sensitive lands for protection of the management of hazardous wastes to protect natural resources.
Wildlife Habitats
There are 47 species of rare or endangered plants; six species of rare or endangered fishes; four species of rare or endangered amphibians; thirteen species of rare or endangered reptiles, including loggerhead, green Atlantic Ridley and leatherback sea turtles; 33 species of rare or endangered birds, and five species of rare or endangered mammals reported or confirmed within the County.
The wildlife values of much of northern Walton County have been adversely impacted by silviculture, which drastically changes natural communities into pine plantations. Generally, these natural communities provide habitat for deer, turkey, quail, bobcat and other wildlife.
The floodplains of the Choctawhatchee River, Alaqua Creek and the Shoal River are extremely important to wildlife.
The northern part of the County is habitat for gopher tortoises, a species of special concern; the red-cockaded woodpecker, an endangered species, the indigo snake, a threatened species; and numerous other listed species.
The beaches of Walton County are utilized by a variety of shore birds for nesting and feeding. Colonies of the threatened Least tern have been observed to nest in the vicinity of Deer Lake. The threatened Southeastern snowy plover has been reported to nest in the vicinity of the Grayton Beach State Recreation Area.
The gopher tortoise (designated a species of special concern) has also been noted in the vicinity of the Grayton Beach Recreation Area. This species inhabits the sand/scrub vegetative community which is often present immediately landward of the primary dune.
In 1985, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife designated the Choctawhatchee beach mouse as an "endangered species", and designated certain areas in Walton and Bay Counties as "Critical Habitat". The areas of critical habitat are located in the Topsail Hill and Grayton Beach State Park areas in the County.
Previously, the Choctawhatchee beach mouse was widespread and abundant along the barrier beach between Choctawhatchee Bay and St. Andrew Bay, although the animal existed nowhere else in the U.S. Since 1950, more than two-thirds of the habitat of the beach mouse has been lost as a result of the coastal real estate boom. Alterations and destruction of the beaches continue to be the greatest threats to survival of the beach mouse.
The County's coastal area also provides habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker.
Topsail Hill and Deer Lake
The area known as Topsail Hill is a four square mile area (1,500 acres) which lies along the west central coast of the Gulf Mexico. It is the County's premier natural area and includes two coastal dune lakes surrounded by unique sand pine forests.
Topsail Hill represents an undeveloped and intact individual ecosystem and is perhaps the most outstanding assemblage of diverse natural communities on the panhandle coast.
The maximum appropriate level of development for the Topsail Hill area that is arguably consistent with protecting its natural resources is very low density (a maximum of one unit per five acres and less) with clustering.
Present land use designations and densities (22 or 35 units per acre) assigned to the Topsail Hill site are entirely incompatible with the protection of its natural resources.
The area known as Deer Lake is located just south of the Point Washington Wildlife Management Area. The area represents an intact individual ecosystem; it includes coastal dunes and coastal strand habitat but is primarily a sand pine scrub forest with flatwoods; and constitutes a Coastal Barrier Resource Area. Presently, it is unplatted and undeveloped.
Choctawhatchee River
The Choctawhatchee River drains into Choctawhatchee Bay. The floodplain of the river is virtually intact. Its floodplain stores and attenuates floodwaters, preventing the flooding of other land areas, many of which have been converted to urban uses.
The river and its floodplain provide some of the richest habitats in the County in terms of species diversity. Inconsistent with the protection of those habitats is the maximum allowable densities in the land use category which applies to the northern floodplain of the river (four to eight units per acre). This area is predominantly hardwood swamp wetlands and that level of development would alter the flow of water, add contaminants to the water, decrease floodwater retention abilities, and remove tree canopy, thus increasing the rate of water flow into the bay.
The land use category which applies to roughly the southern one-half of the river's floodplain allows a maximum gross density of one unit per five acres which, through clustering, permits houses on one-half acre lots. That density of development is not consistent with the protection of the floodplain and the river. Even at this relatively low density, the existence of residences and all attendant uses, including roads, septic tanks and utilities, damages the floodplain and fragments its habitat value.
The river is separated from Choctawhatchee bay by a hardwood swamp. A residential density of one unit per five acres in the swamp, where the river's floodplain joins with that of the bay, is not consistent with the protection of the functions and natural resources of that area.
The river floodplain is used extensively by the Black Bear. This floodplain is the single most important area for the bear, a wide-ranging animal and that requires tens of square miles to roam without encroachment from humans. The residential density allowed in the "conservation" category (one unit per five acres) is mutually exclusive with the continued use of the river floodplain by the Black Bear.
Choctawhatchee Bay
The Choctawhatchee Bay lies in the south central part of the County and is in relatively good health. The Bay is important to the County's economy, particularly with regard to the provision of fisheries and the promotion of tourism.
The Bay is essentially an estuary which receives nutrients and detritus from the river which form habitats for the base of the aquatic foodchain in the region. The Bay has numerous oyster beds which are harvested commercially. Water quality problems associated with rapid development along the coast have already resulted in fish kills.
The 22 unit per acre designation on the area north of and adjacent to the bay is incompatible with the protection of the bay. Performance standards, such as vegetative buffers or setbacks, could not make that level of development appropriate for the impacted area.
Freshwater Lakes
Coastal freshwater lakes along the County's coastline, just behind the dunes offer unique habitat areas for wildlife, but are threatened by future development. Many of the lakes have already been adversely impacted by golf courses and residential and resort development.
On pages 7-17(a) and 17(b) of the Plan's data and analysis, recommendations to protect coastal lakes is set forth, including designation of a 300 foot lake protection zone with the following features:
Septic tanks: Septic tanks must be located at least 100 feet from the ordinary or mean high water line, whichever applies;
Stormwater management: Within the zone, new lots must be graded to ensure untreated stormwater runoff from lawn fertilizers, pesticides, or patios, driveways, etc., does not enter the lake. If regional stormwater facilities will not provide this standard, the lot shall utilize a vegetated berm between the developed area and the lake to hold and treat runoff.
Erosion control: Specific erosion control measures should be utilized during construction activity, such as staked and staggered hay bales, siltation barriers, floating silt and filter berms. Further, erosion and sedimentation
controls shall be left in place until the disturbed areas are stabilized with permanent vegetation that will prevent the transport of sediment off site.
In addition to erosion control during construction, stabilization of the shoreline should be provided through standards which limit clearing of natural vegetation within 50 feet of the mean or ordinary high water line of the shoreline to 25 percent of the site.
Since native vegetation serves to filter pollution and provide for erosion control, any deviation from the 25 percent limitation shall be required to provide a permanent grassed berm to prevent runoff from entering the lake.
Boat ramps: To protect water quality, construction of new boat ramps, or any improvement to existing boat ramps should be of such design that runoff is diverted from entering the water body.
Hazardous wastes: No land use shall be allowed within the zone which stores, handles or generates hazardous wastes.
Seawalls: No vertical seawalls shall be allowed within the zone.
Endangered species: During the site plan review of new development (platted subdivisions in existence at the time of adoption are exempt) areas within the zone shall complete an inventory of endangered plant and animal
species and provide a habitat management plan, in accordance with all requirements of the "Habitat Conservation Overlay Zone" described later in this document.
Native vegetation: Clearing of native
vegetation within the zone shall be limited to 55 percent of the site.
None of these recommendations are carried over to the plan's goals, objectives or implementing policies.
The Beach and Dune System
An extensive dune system which runs virtually along the entire coast of Walton County is unique to the County. The dunes are an important recreational resource, protect inland property from erosion, and protect the beaches and landward property from storm damage.
None of the recommendations contained in the data and analysis on ways to protect the dune system are included in the plan's goals, objectives or policies. This is so although Walton County currently has narrow storm surge zones due to the existence of its beach dune system. If these dunes are destroyed, erosion will increase and the surge zones will widen, resulting in additional costs to County taxpayers and residents.
Wetlands
There are isolated wetlands throughout the County which protect the quality of the County's surface waters. According to the data and analysis, clearing of wetlands for construction should generally be limited to a maximum of 10 percent of the wetland. However, the plan's goals, objectives, and policies do not include this limitation.
The protection of the County's native vegetative communities is essential to preserving wildlife, endangered and threatened species, the "coastal village" character of south Walton County, the rural character of north Walton County, and to minimize erosion and hurricane impacts.
Floodplains
With regard to land use planning, there is both a ten year floodplain and a 100 year floodplain. Lands within the 10 year floodplain are more susceptible to flooding (a 10 percent probability in any year), and should be designated for different types and densities of land uses as a result of this factor.
The county's plan does not limit the types or densities of development within the 10 year floodplain and does not include a floodplain map adopted as part of the FLUM series. Although the FLUE provides that development in floodplains of most of the rivers and creeks in Walton County will be restricted by designating these areas as conservation areas on the FLUM, the FLUM does not depict either a conservation land use category, or floodplains as conservation.
The plan authorizes development in the floodplains in the County but fails to include an analysis, performance standards, or other measures which ensure that floodplain functions are protected. Consequently, the land use designations and densities on the FLUM are not consistent with the protection of floodplains and flood prone areas.
Stormwater/Drainage
Inadequately treated stormwater can cause and contribute to violations of state water quality standards and loss of the beneficial uses of the receiving waters through the introduction of contaminants and sediments which create turbidity and prevent photosynthesis by aquatic vegetation.
Stormwater pollution increases with the density of urban land uses, via the increase in man-caused pollutants and the decrease in the amount of pervious surfaces which hold down the volume and rate of runoff.
A natural drainage feature varys from a low area to a major river which conveys water and manages the quality and quantity of runoff following rainfall by slowing down, retaining, treating and controlling the capacity of runoff.
The County's plan does not include data and analysis, on a watershed basis, of the location, and operating characteristics for all of the County's stormwater management facilities. This is so even though numerous surface waters in the County are already impaired by runoff.
Proper land use planning provides the most effective stormwater management. The plan's data and analysis even recommends, on page 6-5C, that the County take a comprehensive regional approach to stormwater management.
But, the plan does not propose a comprehensive stormwater management program and does not include an objective or policies which address implementation activities for regulating land use and development to protect the functions of natural drainage features.
The plan's reliance on state permitting requirements to provide drainage protections is misplaced. Regulations administered by the Department of Environmental Regulation, Water Management District and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.) are not adequate to protect floodplains since none of these agencies make fundamental land use decisions that allow stormwater problems to be avoided; schedule capital improvements to correct existing drainage deficiencies; or regulate development which fall below their regulatory thresholds.
The County need not establish a separate stormwater permitting process to properly manage the stormwater impacts of development. Instead the County can incorporate stormwater management measures into existing programs, for instance, its development review process.
Although the plan does not establish a drainage level of service standard for single-family lots of record (which are exempt from state permitting requirements), impacts from that type of development could be minimized by use of a regional stormwater facility and by site specific measures such as limitations on clearing of native vegetation and requirements to preserve natural drainage features and pervious surfaces.
The plan schedules no capital improvements to remedy drainage deficiencies.
Water Resources
As reflected in the plan's data, southern Walton County has limited potable water resources. In order to reduce the demand on these limited potable
water resources, the data and analysis call for significantly reduced allowable density on the FLUM from the density authorized under the County's existing zoning map. Notwithstanding this commitment to reducing density, the County adopted its existing zoning map as its FLUM, without any decrease in density.
Sanitary Sewer
Septic tanks are the predominant form of sewage disposal in Walton County. Most of the areas that do not use septic tanks employ package plants for sewage treatment. Due to chronic operational and maintenance problems, reliance on package plants is less preferable than use of a regional sewage system.
Septic tanks fail when placed in soils which are unsuitable for their use. In this regard, there are no perfect soils in Walton County for septic tank usage. For instance, virtually all of the land adjacent to the Choctawhatchee Bay has soils with a "poor" suitability rating for septic tanks.
The gravel and sand aquifer beneath the County, from which most residents get their drinking water, is extremely susceptible to contamination from septic tanks.
The plan's data and analysis reflect that the maximum acceptable density level for septic tanks is one unit per five acres. This is consistent with professionally accepted standards.
Sanitary Sewer Sub-element Policy 1.1.3 includes several prohibitions and requirements which apply to areas with "severely rated soils," however the plan's adopted maps do not delineate the specific areas of the County which have "severely rated" soils. Instead, the relevant legends identify "poor," "moderate," and "suitable" areas.
The plan does not prohibit septic tanks within the 100-year floodplain and allows intensive development to occur on septic tanks in areas with severe soil limitations. The plan does not encourage development in those areas with more suitable soils.
The data and analysis in the Sanitary Sewer Sub-element indicates that the County does not currently, and will not in the future, provide central sewer facilities within the County. All existing sanitary sewer facilities in the County are owned or operated by private individuals or entities, federal or municipal governments, or the local school board.
The plan does not contain any objectives to address correcting existing sanitary sewer facility deficiencies, to coordinate sanitary sewer facility improvements with the future needs of the County, or to maximize the use of existing sanitary sewer facilities.
If the FLUM had been coordinated with available facilities, services, topographical features and soils, permitted densities would be lower in areas served by septic tanks, particularly in view of the county's soil conditions. Relatively higher densities in areas adjacent to centralized sewer facilities would be permitted.
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
Among purposes served by the Coastal Management Element (CME) of a plan should be the restriction of activities that would damage or destroy coastal resources, the protection of human life and the limitation of public expenditures in areas subject to destruction by natural disaster.
Walton County contains approximately 40 square miles of coastal area. At the time the County was preparing its plan, there was an abundance of existing data concerning its coastal resources. Nevertheless, the plan does not include a policy defining the coastal high-hazard area.
While data and analysis provide that the County will implement measures to maintain or reduce hurricane evacuation times by decreasing allowable densities in the evacuation zones, this has not occurred in the plan. Prior to the plan's adoption, the majority of land in Walton County south of Choctawhatchee Bay allowed a density up to 22 units per acre. The plan will still allow a density of 22 units per acre in the coastal area south of the bay and up to 35 units per acre in the resort area, which will increase the burdens on the County's evacuation systems.
Pursuant to Rule 9J-5.012(3)(b), F.A.C., the plan's coastal management element is required to contain one or more specific objectives that protect, conserve, or enhance coastal natural resources; prioritize shoreline uses; protect beaches and dunes; limit public expenditures that subsidize development in coastal high hazard areas; direct population concentrations away from coastal high hazard areas; maintain or reduce hurricane evacuation times; prepare post-disaster redevelopment plans; increase the amount of public access to the beach or shoreline; and provide for the protection, preservation and sensitive reuse of historic resources. The plan does not include objectives addressing these requirements.
Pursuant to Rule 9J-5.012(3)(c), F.A.C., the coastal management element is required to contain policies for each required objective which identify regulatory or management techniques for limiting the impacts of development and redevelopment on natural resources; restoration and enhancement of disturbed or degraded natural resources; general hazard mitigation; post- disaster redevelopment planning; identifying areas needing redevelopment; designating the coastal high-hazard area, limiting development in these areas and relocating or replacing infrastructure away from these areas; establishing priorities for shoreline uses and establishing criteria for marina siting; public access to beaches and shorelines; historic resource protection; protecting estuaries which are within the jurisdiction of more than one local government; and coordinating with existing resource protection plans. The plan does not include policies addressing these requirements.
Rule 9J-5.012(2)(a)(d) and (e), F.A.C., requires that the CME contain data and analysis to assess the need for water-dependent and water-related development sites so as not to over-allocate this scarce resource for development; contain an assessment of the impact of proposed development and redevelopment on estuarine pollution; and contain an assessment of hurricane evacuation planning on the anticipated population density proposed in the FLUE and on any special needs of the existing and anticipated population. The plan does not include such data and analysis.
Objective 1.2 in the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) authorizes public expenditures in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) to maintain existing
service capacity and to provide for recreation facilities. Policy 1.2.1 of the CIE authorizes the use of capital improvement funds in the CHHA to maintain level of service standards consistent with the FLUE and FLUM. This is so even though Rule 9J-5.012(3)(b)5., F.A.C., directs that the local government limit public expenditures that subsidize development in coastal high-hazard areas except for restoration or enhancement of natural resources.
The allowance of a maximum density of 22 or 35 residential units per acre in the areas between Choctawhatchee Bay and the Gulf of Mexico is not consistent with the protection of dunes, coastal lakes and other coastal resources in the area.
Although there may be small specific areas which could accommodate that level of clustered development through appropriate performance standards, the entire area is not suitable for such high density development.
The densities and intensities proposed in the plan are too high to avoid adversely impacting the coastal resources since the FLUM does not assign land use designations and densities in a manner which reflects the suitability of the coastal area for development.
For the majority of land within the coastal area a residential density of approximately one-unit per five acres, which is the threshold level of development in federal C.O.B.R.A. areas, is consistent with the protection of the County's coastal resources.
STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY
For the reasons set forth below, the plan is inconsistent with the State Comprehensive Plan (state plan), construed as a whole. Goal 5, Policy 3 of the state plan provides:
Increase the supply of safe, affordable, and sanitary housing for low-income and
moderate-income persons and elderly persons by alleviating housing shortages, recycling older houses and redeveloping residential neighborhoods, identifying housing needs, providing incentives to the private sector to build affordable housing, encouraging
public-private partnerships to maximize the creation of affordable housing, and encouraging research into low-cost housing construction techniques, considering life cycle operating costs.
The plan's failure to identify how adequate and affordable housing sites will be provided or to set forth an objective which adequately addresses the elimination of substandard housing does not further this goal of the state plan.
The plan's failure to discourage development in Coastal High Hazard Areas and adequately protect water resources does not ensure that development and beach access improvements in coastal areas will not endanger public safety and valuable natural resources. Consequently, the plan does not further Goal 9 of the state plan.
The lack of an adopted wetland map and the impermissible high densities and intensities of use in ecologically fragile areas, coupled with a lack of adequate provisions for drainage and sewerage infrastructure, prevent the plan from furthering Goal 10 of the state plan which seeks to protect natural habitats and ecological systems.
Goal 16 of the State Comprehensive Plan asserts that development shall be directed to those areas which have the capacity to accommodate growth in "an environmentally acceptable" manner. The plan's failure to encourage a separation of urban and rural uses or the protection of fish and wildlife habitats does not further this goal of the state plan.
Goal 18 of the State Comprehensive Plan and its policies which promote the allocation of costs of new public facilities on the basis of the benefits received by existing and future residents is not furthered by the county plan's failure to adequately address the impact of development or detail the provision of future sewerage capacity.
The county plan fails to set forth implementation programs or activities which will be used to "cooperate" or "coordinate" with programs of the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Planning and Management Plan. The plan also defers to LDRs those standards that manage roadway access. These are deficiencies that prevent the furtherance of Goal 20 of the state plan. That goal promotes transportation improvements which aid in the management of growth. In addition to Goal 20, the plan specifically fails to further Policies 3, 9, 12, and 13 of that goal. Those policies read as follows:
3. Promote a comprehensive transportation planning process which coordinates state, regional, and local transportation plans.
9. Ensure that the transportation system provides Florida's citizens and visitors with timely and efficient access to services, jobs markets, and attractions.
Avoid transportation improvements which encourage or subsidize increased development in coastal high-hazard areas or in identified environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, floodways, or productive marine areas.
Coordinate transportation improve-ments with state, local, and regional plans.
Because the plan does not contain objectives ensuring coordination with agencies and special taxing districts having operational and maintenance responsibility for level of service standards for public facilities, the plan does not further Goal 26 of the state plan. Policy 7 of that goal relates to ensuring the development of regional and local plans which implement state goals and policies and address problems of concern in the region. Policy 8 of the goal relates to the encouragement of continued cooperation among communities sharing a unique natural area. Since the county's plan does not contain policies to coordinate management of water bodies that fall under the jurisdiction of more than one local government, or objectives that seek to ensure such coordination, the plan does not further policies 7 and 8 of Goal 26.
CONSISTENCY WITH WEST FLORIDA COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL
POLICY PLAN
For the reasons set forth below, the plan is inconsistent with the West Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan (WFCRPP), construed as a whole.
The failure of the plan to provide a reasonable time for completion of an inventory regarding substandard housing units, and the resultant delay in compilation of useful inventory information, does not further policy 1 of Goal 1 of WFCRPP Issue 19 which provides:
The WFCRPP should initiate the creation of a regional task force to collect and analyze data provided by local governments concerning existing housing units and conditions.
Policies 1 and 3 of Goal 1 of Regional Issue 40 (Coastal and Marine Resources), of the WFCRPP relate to site design standards to preserve the integrity and stability of beach and dune systems and regulation of development in unique coastal areas to buffer environmentally sensitive estuarine systems. The county's plan fails to direct population growth away from the coastal high hazard areas and fails to further this portion of the WFCRPP.
Policy 2 of Goal 2 of Regional Issue 42 (Public Safety, and Access in Coastal Areas) of the WFCRPP provides:
Local government comprehensive plans shall designate coastal high hazard areas and include provisions for the safe evacuation of residents of these areas and for the
protection of lives and property from natural disasters.
The county plan's failure to designate the coastal high hazard area and discourage development in sensitive coastal areas subject to flooding and storm damage does not further this policy.
Policy 1 of Goal 1 of Regional Issue 43 (Protection of Natural Systems), of the WFCRPP relates to protection of surface water quality, as well as hydrologic and ecologic function of regional estuarine systems, by restricting development in such natural system areas to compatible land uses. Permitted densities and intensities of use of the local plan, as well as a lack of provision in the plan for future sewerage needs, fails to further this goal.
Policy 1 implementing Goal 1 of Regional Issue 44 (Protection of Endangered and Threatened Species), of the WFCRPP relates to identification of "habitats of unique, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species throughout the Region". This policy is not furthered by the county's plan. The plan contains no specific provisions in regard to this subject.
Policy 1 implementing Goal 1 of Regional Issue 45 (Land Management and Use), of the WFCRPP relating to identification and preservation of "scenic vistas, areas, and natural corridors" through purchase or regulation is not furthered by the county plan's lack of provisions in this regard.
Policy 2 implementing Goal 2 of Regional Issue 58 (Natural Resources Preservation), of the WFCRPP provides:
2. Local jurisdictions containing rural, sparsely developed areas, should develop review procedures to consider unique qualities or limitations of the area and impacts created by proposed development.
The plan does not establish or provide for such review procedures and thereby fails to further the WFCRPP.
Policy 1 implementing Goal 1 of Regional Issue 60 (Planning for Public Facilities), of the WFCRPP relates to the monitoring of implementation actions of the Okaloosa-Walton and Escambia-Santa Rosa Coast Resource Planning and Management Committees to permit regional recommendations with regard to water and wastewater facilities planning. This policy is not furthered by the omission of specific implementation activities or programs in this regard from the plan.
Policies 1 and 2 implementing Goal 1 of Regional Issue 64 (Transportation to Aid Growth Management), of the WFCRPP provide:
Regional and local transportation plans will be based upon state and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) transportation plans to protect the function of the state and regional transportation system and to ensure regional mobility.
Assure local land use regulations minimize strip commercial development along regional traffic corridors and where commercial and/or residential development is permitted on major roads and thoroughfares, provide consolidated access routes.
The failure of the plan to describe implementation programs or activities by which the County will cooperate with the MPO's Cost Feasibility Plan or the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Planning and Management Plan fails to further Policy 1. The failure of the plan to contain an implementation section in the Traffic Circulation Element or include standards to guide the County's management of access routes prevents the plan from furthering Policy 2.
Policies 1 and 2 implementing Goal 1 of Regional Issue 69 (Agricultural Industry), of the WFCRPP relate to properly providing for planning needs of the rural, agricultural and forestry segments of the community. The plan's failure to discourage urban sprawl does not further these policies of the WFCRPP.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter. Sections 120.57(1) and 163.3184(10), F.S.
Parties and Standing
In order to participate in this proceeding, an intervenor must meet the definition of "affected person" set forth in Section 163.3184(1)(a), Florida Statutes, which, in relevant part, reads as follows:
"Affected person" includes the affected local government; persons owning property, residing, or owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government whose plan is the subject of the review; and adjoining local governments that can demonstrate that adoption of the plan as proposed would produce substantial impacts on the increased need for publicly funded infrastructure or substantial impacts on areas designated for protection or special treatment within their jurisdiction.
The period in which an affected person must submit oral or written objections commences with the issuance of DCA's ORC report and ends with the adoption of the plan. In this case, that period ran from July 10, 1990 until December 14, 1990.
Section 163.3181(1), Florida Statutes, evidences the legislative intent "that the public participate in the comprehensive planning process to the fullest extent possible."
Section 1.01, Florida Statutes, defines the word "person" to include associations, joint adventures, partnerships, trusts, business trusts, syndicates, fiduciaries, corporations, and all other groups or combinations. It appears that a not-for-profit organization may be afforded status as an affected person within the meaning of Section 163.3184(1)(a), Florida Statutes.
1000 Friends is such a not-for-profit organization. The organization has members residing in the county and their representatives submitted oral and written comments regarding the plan during the required time period.
Intervenors White and St. Joe are affected persons with standing to participate in this action. Sections 163.3184(1)(a) and 163.3184(10)(a), F.S. By stipulation of the parties, there are no objections to the standing and participation of Intervenor Myers.
General Compliance Requirements
In a noncompliance proceeding under Section 163.3184(10), the burden of proof is on DCA to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the Plan is not in compliance; provided, however, that the County's determination of internal consistency shall be sustained if the determination is fairly debatable. Section 163.3184(10)(a), Florida Statutes.
In the planning process under the Act, DCA, not the local government, determines initially whether the plan is in compliance. Section 163.3184(8)(a), Florida Statutes.
Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, was adopted by DCA pursuant to Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, in order to provide guidance as to minimum requirements which plans must meet to be "in compliance". That term is defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes, and reads as follows:
In compliance means consistent with the requirements of ss. 163.3177, 163.3178 and
163.3191, the State Comprehensive Plan, the appropriate regional policy plan, and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C., where such rule is not inconsistent with Chapter 163, Part II.
Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., includes minimum requirements for all mandatory elements including data and analysis; maps; and goals, objectives and policies. All goals, objectives and policies must be based upon "relevant and appropriate data." Rule 9J-5.005(2), F.A.C. The data and analysis are not required to be adopted. It is, however, the responsibility of the local government to provide all of the data and analysis to DCA in order to evaluate the plan.
Section 163.3177(6)(a), Florida Statutes, requires that a future land use plan "be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, including the amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth; the projected population of the area; the character of undeveloped land; the availability of public services; and the need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of non-conforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community." See also, Rule 9J-5.006, F.A.C.
All goals, objectives, policies, standards, findings and conclusions within the comprehensive plan and its support documents must be based upon relevant and appropriate data. A designation on a Future Land Use Map also falls within this requirement. Rules 9J-5.005(2)(a), 9J-5.006(2), F.A.C.
The data used by the local government to support the comprehensive plan or plan amendments must be the best available existing data, unless the local government desires original data or special studies. Where data augmentation, updates or special studies or surveys are deemed necessary by the local government, appropriate methodologies must be clearly described or referenced and shall meet professionally accepted standards for such methodologies. Rule 9J-5.005(2)(c), F.A.C.
The plan must be supported by the data and analysis, and DCA may evaluate whether a particular methodology used in data collection is professionally accepted. Section 163.3177(10)(e), Florida Statutes.
Comprehensive plans must be internally consistent. The elements must be consistent with each other and each map depicting future conditions must be contained within the plan and reflect the goals, objectives and policies within all elements of the plan. Rule 9J-5.005(5), F.A.C.
A "goal" is a long term end toward which programs or activities are ultimately directed. Rule 9J-5.003(36), F.A.C.
An "objective" is more tangible than a goal and must indicate a specific, measurable, intermediate end that is achievable and marks progress toward a goal. Rule 9J-5.003(61), F.A.C.
A "policy" specifies the way in which specific programs or activities will be conducted to achieve an identified goal. Rule 9J-5.03(68), F.A.C.
Rule 9J-5.005(6) requires specificity in the language of plan provisions. Relevant case law indicates that all legislation adopted by local governments must contain reasonable standards that control the discretion of local government officials in order that those ordinances and other types of
legislation not violate due process standards. Drexel vs. City of Miami Beach, 64 So.2d 317 (Fla. 1953).
Land development regulations (LDRs) may not substitute for Chapter 9J-5 minimum requirements. If Chapter 9J-5 requires an element to include a certain type of policy or objective, then the required policy or objective itself must meet the minimum requirements without deferring identification of the measurable intermediate end or program until adoption of LDRs regulation. Equally important, relegation to LDRs of programs required by the Act and Chapter 9J-5 defeats the purpose of the law.
The stated intent of the legislature when it enacted the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act was, among other things, to encourage the most appropriate use of land, water and resources; to preserve, promote, protect, and improve law enforcement and fire prevention; and to "facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, and other requirements and services". Section 163.3161(3), Florida Statutes.
Coordination of a local comprehensive plan with the comprehensive plan of the applicable region is "a major objective of the local comprehensive planning process." Section 163.3177(4)(a), Florida Statutes.
In this regard, a local plan or plan amendment is consistent with the regional and state plans if it "is 'compatible with' and 'furthers' such plans." Section 163.3177(10)(a), Florida Statutes.
Specific Deficiencies
The plan's Future Land Use Element is not based upon the available data regarding the character of the undeveloped land. The County's agricultural lands are part of the finite and scarce amount of suitable productive agricultural lands located in the most rural areas of Walton County. The character of these lands clearly does not support a residential designation to the extent provided in the plan. Additionally, the land use designations and densities established for the coastal area, including those lands adjacent to Choctawhatchee River, Choctawhatchee Bay, those lands within their floodplains, and those lands with lakes, dunes, coastal vegetation, important wildlife habitat and other coastal resources, are not based on the data regarding the character of the County's undeveloped land. Section 163.3177(6)(a), Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-5.006(2), F.A.C.
Because of the over-allocation of residential densities, the FLUE is not based upon surveys, studies and data regarding the amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth, and the projected population of the area. Section 163.3177(6)(a), Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5.006(2), F.A.C.
The FLUM is not supplemented by objectives and measurable policies as those terms have been defined in Rules 9J-5.003(61) and (68). Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S.
The Infrastructure Element is not connected to principles and guidelines for future land use and does not indicate ways to provide for future potable water, drainage and sanitary sewer requirements. Section 163.3177(6)(c), F.S.
The Plan's Conservation Element does not provide for the conservation, use, and protection of the County's natural resources. Section 163.3177(6)(d), F.S.
The Plan's Housing Element does not consist of standards, plans, and principles to be followed in the provision of housing for existing and future residents, the elimination of substandard dwelling conditions, the structural and aesthetic improvement of existing housing, the provision of adequate sites for future "special needs" housing or the formulation of housing implementation programs. Section 163.3177(6)(F), F.S.
The plan's Coastal Management Element (CME) does not set forth policies that will guide decisions and program implementation with respect to protection of the coastal zone, its habitats, resources and existing and future residents. Section 163.3177(6)(g), F.S.
The CME does not restrict development activities where such activities would damage or destroy coastal resources or identify the regulatory and management techniques that will control proposed development and redevelopment in order to protect the coastal environment, giving consideration to cumulative impacts. Section 163.3178(1) and (2)(j), F.S.
The CME does not outline principles for hazard mitigation and protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, or contain principles for protecting existing beach and dune systems from man-induced erosion and for restoring altered beach and dune systems. Section 163.3178(2)(d) and (e), F.S.
The County's plan places great reliance on state permitting requirements to provide drainage protections. Unfortunately, regulations administered by the Department of Environmental Regulation, Water Management District and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.) are not adequate to protect floodplains. None of these agencies make fundamental land use decisions that allow stormwater problems to be avoided, nor do they schedule capital improvements to correct existing drainage deficiencies, or regulate development which fall below their regulatory thresholds.
The conflict in population estimates and projections in the plan's data and analysis, as well as the lack of the analysis of character and magnitude of existing vacant land, are inconsistent with requirements of Rule 9J-5.005(2), F.A.C., as well as Rule 9J-5.006(1)(g), F.A.C. and Rule 9J- 5.006(2)(b), F.A.C.
The failure of the plan to establish drainage level of service standards for existing single family lots of record or already permitted development which is exempt from Regulation by the Department of Environmental Regulation is inconsistent with requirements of Rule 9J-5.005(3), F.A.C. for establishment of level of service standards to ensure adequate capacity of facilities at time of future development. Further, such failure is not compliant with requirements of Rule 9J-5.0055(1)(a)4., F.A.C.
Rule 9J-5.005(5)(b), F.A.C. requiring that maps of future conditions must reflect goals, objectives and policies in all elements and must be contained in the plan, has not been adhered to by the county in this plan. Certain maps depicting future conditions were not adopted, other maps fail to reflect goals, objectives and policies, i.e. Estate, Urban Core, Holding, and
Planned Unit Development districts established by FLUE Policy 1.1.1 are not reflected on the FLUM.
Rule 9J-5.006(3)(b)4., F.A.C. requires that the FLUE contain an objective to ensure protection of natural and historical resources. This cannot be accomplished by deferral of action until completion of a survey in 1995, as proposed by FLUE objective 1.3.
Rule 9J-5.006(3)(b)5., F.A.C., requires the FLUE contain an objective coordinating population densities with a hurricane evacuation plan or map. No such objective has been established.
Rule 9J-5.006(3)(b)7., F.A.C. requires that the plan contain an objective which discourages the proliferation of urban sprawl. No such objective exists. In fact, the over-allocation of land by the plan prevents the accomplishment of this requirement.
The FLUM fails to depict residential, commercial, agriculture, recreation, education, or public facilities land uses, or provide a land use designation for Eglin Air Force Base, contrary to requirements of Rule 9J- 5.006(4)(a), F.A.C.
The FLUM also fails to depict floodplains or wetlands, as required by Rule 9J-5.006(4)(b), F.A.C.
The absence of an adopted traffic circulation map, deferral to LDRs of standards to guide and implement management of roadway access, and lack of an implementation section to the Traffic Circulation Element prevent a finding of compliance with requirements of Rule 9J-5.007, F.A.C.
Among the deficiencies of the plan's Housing Element are the lack of adequate support data to project future housing needs, the lack of an objective that eliminates substandard housing and delay of an inventory of substandard housing until the year 2002. These shortcomings of the plan prevent a finding of compliance with applicable requirements of Rule 9J-5.010, F.A.C.
The lack of adequate drainage level of service standards, reliance on septic tanks in improper soils, and lack of objectives to address correcting existing sanitary sewer facility deficiencies in regard to future needs of the county prevents compliance of the sanitary sewer element with requirements of Rule 9J-5.011, F.A.C.
The failure of the plan to define the coastal high hazard area, the burdens of increased densities in coastal areas on evacuation systems, the lack of objectives to protect, conserve or protect coastal natural resources, and the absence of policies in the plan which identify regulatory or management techniques for limiting impacts of development on natural resources are among the deficiencies which prevent the plan's compliance with requirements of Rule 9J-5.012, F.A.C.
The plan fails to comply with requirements of Rule 9J-5.013(2)(b)2., F.A.C., that the Conservation Element contain objectives to protect water quality. Again, specific action is deferred to LDRs in this regard.
The plan also fails to set forth required objectives and policies to conserve, appropriately use, and protect water resources, minerals, soils,
native vegetative communities, fisheries, wildlife habitats or marine habitats, as required by applicable portions of Rule 9J-5.013, F.A.C.
There is no compliance with applicable portions of Rule 9J-5.015,
F.A.C. because of the plan's lack of objectives that ensure coordination with the agencies and special taxing districts with operational and maintenance responsibility for LOS standards for public facilities; or policies to resolve annexation issues or coordinate management of bays, estuaries and harbors subject to jurisdiction of more than one local governmental entity; as well as the lack of implementing policies for Objective F of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element.
The plan fails to comply with requirements of Rule 9J-5.016(3)(b)2., F.A.C., through objectives that address limitation of public expenditures subsidizing development in coastal high hazard areas. The plan also fails to comply with Rule 9J-5.016(3)(b)4., F.A.C. through establishment of objectives that address the extent to which future development will bear a proportionate share of the cost of facility developments required to meet LOS standards.
Future Land Use Map
The FLUM is the mechanism for establishing the distribution, location and extent of the various proposed land uses. The land use determinations on the map are to be "supplemented" by goals, objectives and policies in the plan. Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S. The FLUM determines the type and intensity of development that will occur on a given parcel of land.
Protections afforded a given resource in a plan's goals, objectives and policies cannot make up for a land use designation applicable to the resource which runs counter to the goals, objectives or policies.
Any protection which may be given to natural resources in the Plan's goals, objectives and policies is contradicted by the treatment of those natural resources by the adoption of the FLUM. The map is a critical component of the Plan. The map governs all future land use decisions made by the County in response to requests for development orders.
Rule 9J-5.005(5)(b), F.A.C., requires that the FLUM "reflect" the goals, objectives and policies within all elements of the plan. The County's FLUM does not reflect the goals, objectives and policies of the plan, when those policies are considered as a whole.
The plan is not "in compliance" because the Future Land Use Map frustrates the narrative provisions of the plan, the regional plan and the state plan and violates Section 163.3177, F.S. and Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., as well.
Efficient Use of Land and Urban Sprawl
Clearly, Walton County's comprehensive plan does not discourage urban sprawl and, in point of fact, promotes urban sprawl as evidenced by land use designations which result in an excessive amount of land for projected residential needs. This encourages urban sprawl, contrary to the provisions of 9J-5.006(3)(b)7., F.A.C.
Consistency with the State Comprehensive Plan And Regional Policy Plan
The Plan is not consistent with, is not compatible with and does not further the State Comprehensive Plan or the Regional Plan. Sections 163.3177(10)(a), 163.3184(1)(b), F.S.; Rule 9J-5.021, F.A.C.
Based on the foregoing, it is hereby recommended that the Administration Commission for enter a final order determining that the Walton County Comprehensive Plan is not in compliance.
RECOMMENDED this 13th day of April, 1992, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
DON W. DAVIS
Hearing Officer
Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550
(904) 488-9675
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 13th day of April, 1992.
APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 91-1080GM
The following constitutes my specific rulings in accordance with Section 120.59, Florida Statutes, on Findings of Fact submitted by the parties.
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT OF PETITIONER AND INTERVENORS ALIGNED WITH PETITIONER
1-4. Adopted, although not verbatim. 5-6. Rejected, unnecessary.
7-8. Adopted, although not verbatim. 9-10. Rejected, unnecessary.
11-13. Adopted, although not verbatim.
Rejected, unnecessary.
Adopted.
16-17. Rejected, unnecessary.
18-19. Adopted.
20. Rejected, unnecessary. 21-34. Adopted, not verbatim.
35. Rejected, unnecessary.
36-40. Adopted, although not verbatim. 41-44. Rejected, cummulative.
45-50. Accepted, although not verbatim.
51. Rejected, conclusion of law.
52-53. Adopted, although not verbatim.
Rejected, unnecessary.
Adopted.
Rejected, cummulative.
57-70. Adopted, although not verbatim. 71-72. Rejected, unnecessary.
73-76. Adopted, although not verbatim. 77-82. Rejected, conclusion of law.
83-85. Adopted, although not verbatim.
86. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence. 87-88. Adopted.
89. Rejected, cummulative.
90-92. Adopted.
93-95. Rejected, cummulative.
96-97. Adopted.
98-101. Rejected, cummulative.
102-103. Adopted.
104-105. Rejected, cummulative.
106-110. Adopted.
Rejected, unnecessary.
Adopted.
113-114. Rejected, cummulative.
115. Adopted.
116-117. Rejected, cummulative.
118-122. Adopted, although not verbatim.
123. Rejected, unnecessary.
124-130. Adopted, although not verbatim.
131. Rejected, unnecessary.
132-136. Adopted, although not verbatim. 137-146. Rejected, cummulative.
147-153. Adopted, although not verbatim.
Adopted.
Rejected, cummulative. 156-158. Adopted.
159-160. Rejected, cummulative.
161-171. Adopted.
172. Rejected, unnecessary. 173-178. Adopted.
179-182. Rejected, cummulative.
183-185. Adopted.
186-187. Rejected, cummulative.
188-189. Adopted.
Rejected, unnecessary.
Adopted.
192-195. Rejected, cummulative.
196-200. Adopted.
201. Rejected, unnecessary. 202-205. Adopted.
206-207. Rejected, unnecessary.
208-209. Adopted.
210-211. Rejected, unnecessary.
212-213. Adopted.
Rejected, unnecessary.
Adopted.
216-217. Rejected, unnecessary.
218. Adopted.
219-221. Rejected, unnecessary and cummulative. 222-223. Adopted.
224. Rejected, cummulative.
225. | Adopted. | |
226. | Rejected, | cummulative. |
227. | Adopted. | |
228-231. | Rejected, | subordinate to Hearing Officer's findings. |
232. | Adopted. | |
233-235. | Rejected, | cummulative. |
236-240. | Adopted. | |
241. | Rejected, | unnecessary. |
242. | Adopted. | |
243. | Rejected, | cummulative. |
244-245. | Adopted. | |
246. | Rejected, | relevance. |
247-249. | Adopted. | |
250-251. | Rejected, | unnecessary. |
252-254. | Adopted, although not verbatim. | |
255. | Rejected, unnecessary. | |
256. | Adopted in substance. | |
257. | Rejected, unnecessary. | |
258. | Adopted. | |
259-262. | Rejected, unnecessary. | |
263. 264. | Adopted with exception of first sentence which is rejected as cummulative. Rejected, conclusion of law. | |
265-266. | Rejected, conclusion of law. | |
267-269. | Adopted in substance. | |
270. | Rejected, cummulative. | |
271. | Adopted. | |
272-274. | Rejected, cummulative. | |
275. | Adopted. | |
276. 277. | Adopted as to first sentence, remainder rejected as cummulative. Adopted. | |
278-284. 285. | Rejected as mere recitation of documents. Many of these proposed findings have been addressed with factual findings of the Hearing Officer. Therefore, these proposed findings may also be considered to rejected as subordinate to Hearing Officer's findings. Adopted in substance. | |
286-299. 300. | Rejected as subordinate to Hearing Officer's findings. Further these proposed findings are merely recitations of document contents. Adopted, although not verbatim. | |
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACTS SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS AND INTERVENORS ALIGNED WITH RESPONDENT
1. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence. 2-4. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
5. Rejected, argumentative.
6-7. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
8. Rejected, argumentative and legal conclusion.
9-12. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
13. Rejected, legal conclusion.
14-17. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence and much of these proposed findings are argumentative legal conclusions.
18-21. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
Also many of these proposed findings are merely arguments of law.
22-36. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
Again, many of these proposed findings are argumentative and mere conclusions of law as opposed to statements of factual findings supported by the record of evidence admitted at hearing.
Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
Accepted.
Rejected, argumentative.
40-42. Rejected, subordinate to Hearing Officer's findings.
43. Adopted by reference.
44-48. Rejected, argumentative, mere recitation of testimony.
49. Rejected, not supported by weight of evidence. 50-62. Rejected, not supported by weight of evidence,
argumentative, and, again, counsel argues law as opposed to presenting facts.
Rejected, argumentative.
Rejected, argumentative.
Rejected, the failure of the county to adopt a traffic circulation map simply renders moot any need for discussion of adequacy of maps in data and analysis.
66-67. Rejected, see statement for finding number 65 above. 68-69. Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence. 70-71. Rejected, argumentative.
Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence.
Rejected, conclusion of law.
Rejected, conclusion of law.
Rejected, conclusion of law.
Rejected, not supported by the weight of the evidence. Counsel continues also to engage in legal argument as opposed to presenting findings of fact.
77-79. Rejected, subordinate to Hearing Officer's findings.
Rejected, subordinate to Hearing Officer's finding of fact.
Rejected, generally this finding consist of an argumentative conclusion of law.
82-83. Rejected, the weight of the evidence does not support findings that these policies comply with requirements of 9J5.
84-96. Rejected, the greater weight of the evidence does not support any finding that these objectives comply with requirements of 9J5.
97-118. Rejected, not supported by the greater weight of the evidence.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Douglas M. Cook, Director
Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission
311 Carlton Building Tallahassee, FL 32301
George Ralph Miller, Esquire County Attorney
Post Office Box 687 DeFuniak Springs, FL 32433
Secretary
Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
David J. Russ, Esq. Kenneth D. Goldberg, Esq.
Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
Fred H. Kent, Jr., Esquire Post Office Box 53075 Jacksonville, FL 32201-3075
Chris Cadenhead, Esquire Post Office Box 5354 Destin, FL 32540
Richard Grosso, Esquire 1000 Friends of Florida Post Office Box 5948 Tallahassee, FL 32314-5948
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to this recommended order. All agencies allow each party at least 10 days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should consult with the agency that will issue the final order in this case concerning agency rules on the deadline for filing exceptions to this recommended order. Any exceptions to this recommended order should be filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.
=================================================================
AGENCY FINAL ORDER
=================================================================
STATE OF FLORIDA ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,
Petitioner,
and
1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA and
BOB WHITE, AC CASE NO. ACC-92-026 DOAH CASE NO. 91-1080GM
Intervenors,
vs.
WALTON COUNTY,
Respondent,
and
ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY, SUSAN S. MYERS, and RUSSELL D. ALDRICH,
Intervenors.
/
FINAL ORDER
This cause came before the Governor and Cabinet of the State of Florida, sitting as the Administration Commission ("Commission"), on November 4, 1992 in Tallahassee, Florida, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes The cause came before the Commission for consideration of a Recommended Order from the Division of Administrative Hearings filed with the Clerk of the Commission on April 15, 1992. This cause also came before the Commission for ruling on Exceptions to the Recommended Order.
BACKGROUND
On April 2, 1990, Walton County (County) transmitted a proposed comprehensive plan to the Department of Community Affairs ("DCA"). On July 10, 1990 DCA transmitted its Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report ("ORC Report") to the County with respect to the proposed comprehensive plan. The County concluded its review of the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments, and adopted by Ordinance 90-15, its comprehensive plan on December 14, 1990.
DCA issued its Notice of Intent to Find the Plan Not in Compliance on February 7, 1991 and on February 19, 1991 filed its Petition and Statement of Intent to Find Comprehensive Plan Not in Compliance (which included its ORC Report), with the Division of Administrative Hearings ("DOAH"). DCA asserted that the County's plan was not in compliance with Sections 163.3188 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes, Chapter 187, Florida Statutes (State Comprehensive
Plan), the West Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, and Chapter 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The County denied these allegations and a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Don W. Davis on October 1-4, 1991 in DeFuniak Springs, Florida and October 8-9, 1991 in Seagrove Beach, Florida.
DOAH granted Petitions to Intervene which were filed by 1000 Friends of Florida ("1000 Friends"), Bob White ("White"), Susan S. Myers and Russell D. Aldrich ("Myers") and St. Joseph Land Development Company ("St. Joe"). The petition to intervene filed by Walton County Coalition for Sensible Growth was denied.
The issue for determination by the Hearing Officer was whether the County's comprehensive plan is "in compliance" as that term is defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes. After consideration of the evidence and arguments of the parties the Hearing Officer recommended as a matter of fact and law that a Final Order be entered finding the County's plan not in compliance.
The Hearing Officer submitted his Recommended Over to the Commission for final agency action.
INTERVENOR'S EXCEPTIONS
Intervenor, St. Joe, filed exceptions to the Hearing Officer's recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The Commission's ruling on the exceptions is as follows:
1(a) and (b). Exceptions 1(a) and 1(b) are denied. St. Joe asserts that due to the purchase by the state of a tract of land on Topsail Hill that the value of the land owned by St. Joe which is adjacent to the state purchase has diminished in value. The fact of the state having purchased land adjacent to that which is currently owned by St. Joe is not a properly stated exception to the Recommended Order and so is denied. The exception must be drawn to a finding of fact or conclusion of law stated by the Hearing Officer, as this is not, it is out of order.
Exception 2 is denied. St. Joe states that 1000 Friends is not a proper intervenor to this action since the record does not show that 1000 Friends has members or that it does business in Walton County. Further St. Joe states that the Hearing Officer erred in denying St. Joe's motion to strike the testimony and evidence of 1000 Friends. The Hearing Officer's denial of St. Joe's motion to strike was proper. The evidence presented by 1000 Friends was also supported on behalf of White, a party whose presence as an intervenor is not challenged here. DCA also joined in the evidence presented by 1000 Friends as well as jointly filed pleadings.
Section 163.3184, Florida Statues, defines "affected person" as including
... persons owning property, residing, or owning or operating a business..." in the county. The use of the word "includes" indicates that the Legislature did not intend this to be an exclusive list of all those who may constitute affected persons. Further, it is the intent "that the public participate in the comprehensive planning process to the fullest extent possible." Section 163.3181(1), Florida Statutes. See the final order in Poke v. City of Cocoa Beach and Department of Community Affairs, 13 FALR 2867 (1991), incorporating the findings of the hearing officer in his recommended order in Pope v. City of Cocoa Beach and Department of Community Affairs, 13 FALR 2871 (1991). In this case, the Commission adopted the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Recommended Order which allowed the Petitioner, Pope, to remain in the case as the statutory definition of affected person is meant to be construed broadly.
There, the definition of "include" was not limiting, but meant to be expansive. Further, the Commission relied on the rationale that the growth management laws should allow for the fullest possible participation by the public. The clear bias in the law is to interpret public participation statutes generously
1000 Friends participated in the County's comprehensive planning process by extensively commenting on the County's plan, as well as attending and participating in public hearings during its adoption. This is in the record, (see Transcript, Vol VI, pp. 1207-1259), and confirmed by the Hearing Officer in the Recommended Order. (See paragraph 6 of the Recommended Order, Conclusions of Law.) While the Commission finds that 1000 Friends met its burden in this case through its presence and participation in Walton County and the comprehensive planning process, the best practice is clearly to detail the organization's membership on the record if that organization is seeking to intervene.
and 4. Exceptions 3 and 4 are denied. In exception 3, St. Joe argues that it was wrong for the Hearing Officer to have concluded in the findings of fact, and inferred from the testimony of Steven Gatewood, that certain natural areas in South Walton County were adversely impacted by silviculture. The context of Mr. Gatewood's cited testimony describes how human activity has impacted the natural areas, including certain negative impacts. This context clearly allows for such an adverse inference to be drawn. In exception 4, St. Joe argues that the Hearing Officer had no basis for his finding in paragraph "18" that the least tern was observed in the affected areas. Assuming that St. Joe is referring to paragraph 78 of the findings of fact which discusses the least tern, we also find that there is evidence to support this finding.
Section 120.57(b)10, Florida Statues, states that unless the finding of fact is not based upon competent substantial evidence, it may not be disturbed. The Hearing Officer's findings described by St. Joe in paragraphs 3 and 4 were based on such evidence.
5. and 6. Exceptions 5 and 6 are denied. St. Joe argues that paragraphs
34 and 35 are examples of DCA exceeding its authority. Also, St.Joe raises concerns that certain errors by the County were "blown out of proportion" by DCA. St. Joe does not state which, if any, aspects of these findings of fact contravene Section 120.57, Florida Statutes, and thus would allow for them to be rejected or modified by the Commission. Therefore, these improperly articulated exceptions are denied.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
After a comprehensive review of the record, including, but not limited to, the Hearing Officer's proposed Recommended Order, the proposed Recommended Order of DCA, the comments of the County and intervenors thereon, and relevant legal authorities, the Commission concludes that Walton County's Comprehensive Plan, adopted December 14, 1990, is not in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code and the plan is inconsistent with the State Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 187, Florida Statutes.
The Commission adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of law rendered by the Hearing Officer, except as they may conflict with the terms and condition of the remedial amendments below, in which case, the terms and condition of the remedial amendments shall control.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS
The following remedial amendments shall be made.
LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
Policy 1-1-1 in the Drainage Sub-Element, Objective A-1 and Policies A- 1-1 and B-2-3 in the Conservation/Coastal Management Element, and Policy 1.3.3 in the Capital Improvements Element shall be revised to be consistent with the following level of service standard for drainage and stormwater management:
"1. (a) All new residential subdivisions; (b) infill residential development within improved residential areas or subdivisions existing prior to the adoption of this comprehensive plan; (c) all multi-family residential development (including duplex, triplex and quadraplex); (d) all new nonresidential development (other than agricultural); and any existing use meeting the criteria of (a), (b), (c), or (d) above that proposes alterations or activities resulting in an increase in runoff shall meet the following standards:
Water Quality and Quantity:
Each development shall be responsible for storing and treating all post- development runoff which exceed pre-development runoff. All storage facilities shall be designed with sufficient capacity to accommodate all runoff in excess of the runoff which would have resulted from the site if left in its natural, undeveloped condition, provided, however, that as a minimum, the first inch of rainfall will be retained.
The storage capacity of all storage facilities must be at least as strict as DER Chapter 17-25, F.A.C., and FDOT Chapter 14-86, F.A.C., Rules for Drainage Connections (provided at end of this section). Post-development runoff shall be released at pre-development natural runoff conditions.
New Agricultural Land Uses, and existing agricultural uses that propose activities resulting in an increase in runoff:
Any new agricultural use exempt from DER rule 17-25, F.A.C., and which drains into a surface water, canal, or stream, or where drainage enters a ditch which empties into a sinkhole, surface water or stream, shall first allow the runoff to enter a grassed swale designed to percolate 80 percent of the runoff from a three year, one-hour design storm within 72 hours after a storm event.
Ongoing and New Agricultural Land Uses:
Agricultural and Silvicultural Practices shall be consistent with Best Management Practices recommended by the USDA Soil Conservation Service and US Forestry Service. All roads created under these land uses shall use culverts to assure natural drainage features are not destroyed.
For all new road construction, or improvements to existing roadways:
All drainage swales and ditches shall be designed to convey the runoff generated from a 10-year,
24-hour storm event.
For local (not classified as County roads) roadways, culverts and cross drains shall convey the runoff from a 10-year, 24 hour storm event; for county roadways, culverts and cross drains shall convey the runoff from a 25-year, 24-hour storm event.
Where Florida Department of Transportation standards are stricter for a particular roadway, they shall be the standard
Drainage design for all new state and county road construction shall be in accordance with county
and state stormwater management requirements and shall ensure compatibility with Mosquito District structures.
All stormwater discharge facilities shall be designed so as to not degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions necessary to assure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification as established in Chapter 17-3, F.A.C.
To ensure state water quality standards are not violated, all new development or redevelopment activities shall provide proof of DER permit under Chapter 17-25, F.A.C., or proof of exemption. All stormwater discharge facilities shall be designed so as to not degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions necessary to assure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification as established in Chapter 17-3, F.A.C."
FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY
Revise Objective 1.4 and Policy 1.4.1 in the Capital Improvements Element as follows:
"Objective 1.4: New development and redevelopment shall be required to bear at least 90 percent of its full proportionate cost of facility capital improvements necessary to maintain the adopted level of service standards consistent with the impact of the specific development or redevelopment.
Proportionate cost shall be based on the benefits derived by the users of the capital facilities."
"Policy 1.4.1: The County shall utilize connection fees and special assessments, as necessary, to provide funding for future capital projects and debt service. The County shall by July 1, 1993 adopt the use of transportation impact fees, municipal service benefit units (MSBU), and stormwater utilities as future funding sources for capital projects to address existing deficiencies and future needs. The County shall ensure that all new development is assessed its pro rata share of the costs of all capital improvements needed to serve the development."
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Revise the data and analysis in the Future Land Use and Housing Elements to include demand projections for each of the Future Land Use Map categories which permit residential development. The revised data and analysis must be submitted with the revised Future Land Use Map by January 1, 1993.
These projections should establish the need for each residential land use category and should establish the amount of land needed to satisfy the projected
need. The amount of land allocated to each residential category on the Future Land Use Map should be related to the projected need.
Revise the plan to include a projection of the affordable housing needs of projected population. The projection must be submitted with the revised Future Land Use Map by January 1, 1993.
At the end of the section titled "Provision of Housing with Supporting Infrastructure" (Pg. 5-54, Adopted Plan) add the following analysis to address how the county will provide sites for low and moderate income housing:
"Recommendations for providing methods to better supply affordable housing and dwellings for very low, low and moderate income residents are as follows:
Affordable Housing
An Affordable Housing Task Force shall be appointed to examine and recommend program designed to provide affordable housing for the county's existing and future populations. The task force should be commissioned to look at ways to encourage developers to produce lower cost housing by providing such incentives as impact fee waivers, or changes in the building codes.
The task force should ensure that creative development methods and incentives are available for all new developments and home builders. Small square foot homes and manufactured housing should be allowed to play a vital role in providing affordable dwelling units to Walton County citizens.
Incentives, such as density bonuses, can encourage developers to provide affordable housing. (NOTE: Because of the income levels of many Walton County residents, a large percentage of new homes are small or manufactured at the present time. The housing market will continue to supply such housing needs to match the financial capability of local citizens).
Special Housing Needs
Very Low - and Low - Income Housing
In 1980, some 45% of the citizens of Walton County fell into the category of "Very Low" and "Low" income ranges, as shown in Table 6. Most public housing is through the Walton County Housing Authority and the Section 8 rental assistance program.
The county has adequate acreage for very low- and low-income housing.
There are significant acres of uplands to accommodate special housing for these income groups. Since local funding for many projects is so limited, reliance upon private, state, or federal housing assistance will be necessary. In addition, redevelopment in some locations could provide such housing.
Housing for the Elderly
Table 17 shows the number of HRS licensed group home facilities in Walton County. Because urban services (public water, sewer) and proximity to health care facilities is important to residents of group homes, most are located in municipalities or close to municipalities.
Group and foster care facilities, housing up to 14 residents, are required to be classified as single family residential units under Florida Statutes.
With the implementation of land use regulations in Walton County, it is
important to classify such housing correctly. Group and foster care housing should be allowed in all land use categories, as permitted by the statutes, where single family residences can locate. These facilities should not be located closer than 1000 feet from one another. The comprehensive plan should ensure that such homes can be established in proper land use designations.
Adequate Sites for Manufactured Housing
As mentioned above, manufactured housing (which includes homes called "mobile" homes and modular homes) are essential housing to many citizens in Walton County. This is due to the low per capita income of area residents and the manufacturing home's ability to be quickly placed on a parcel of land.
Following the guidelines set forth in the plan for development and densities, manufactured housing should continue to be permitted in the county. All land use designations should allow the placement of manufactured homes as long as private property covenants do not restrict such placement."
Revise Table 4 in the Housing Element to state:
"TABLE 4 HOUSING CONDITIONS
Unincorporated Walton County, 1980 - 2000
1980 | 1990 | 2000 | |
Total Year Round Housing Units | 8,083 | 12,035 | 15,648 |
Lacking Complete Plumbing | 300 | 300 | 240* |
Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities | 203 | 203 | 162* |
Lacking Any Heating** | 81 | 81 | 65* |
Having Greater Than 1.01 Persons/Room | 231 | 231 | 185* |
SUM OF SUBSTANDARD UNITS | 815 | 815 | 652* |
Base Source: 1980 Census of Population and Housing; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Book HC80-1-bll, Tables 98 and 100.
*Reductions shown reflect a 20% decrease in substandard dwelling units from 1990
- 2000.
**Includes 1.1% of total homes lacking any heating source in 1980."
Revise the following objectives and policies to state:
"Objective 1.2 - By July 1, 1993, Walton County shall inventory vacant land and identify sites suitable for housing for low and moderate income persons.
Provide options to developers and property owners to allow for greater densities, mobile home placement, and accessory apartments as affordable housing."
"Policy 1.2.2. - The vacant land inventory shall identify land-use categories, availability of services, natural limitations and recommended uses for identified parcels. Land use designations shall be revised, as needed, through the plan amendment process to allow for greater densities in areas identified in the inventory as satisfactory for affordable housing units."
"Policy 1.2.4 - Adopt county-wide land development regulations that provide an adequate supply of residential land to accommodate the low and moderate income populations. Estimates of this population and their unmet need should be updated annually based on U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development standards and analyses. Adequate sites will be provided by allowing density bonuses for developments providing affordable housing, permitting the siting of
mobile homes in residential districts, and accessory apartments, or other appropriate affordable housing techniques. However, in no case shall a density bonus result in an increase in the number of permitted dwelling units that is more than fifty percent higher than the underlying density permitted by the Future Land Use map within that residential district. In addition, no density bonus shall have the effect of increasing development within any environmentally sensitive area."
"Policy 1.6.1 - Siting criteria for manufactured or modular housing will be used to meet the future demand for such housing types. General types of provisions of criteria will include minimum construction standards as stated by Florida law and U.S. DOT regulations. Manufactured housing, including mobile homes and modular units, will be allowed in any land use designation permitting residential development under the same siting, density, and locational standards as conventionally-built housing."
"Objective 1.4: Implement conservation, rehabilitation or demolition programs to extend the useful life of the existing housing stock and stabilize or improve residential neighborhoods. The number of substandard units estimated to exist in unincorporated areas shall be reduced by 15% by the year 2000, as compared to 1990 estimates. By 1996, eliminate 20% of vacant dilapidated structures identified by the County's Substandard Housing Inventory Program."
"Policy 1.4.1: Apply for and utilize Federal, State and/or local funds for conservation, demolition, and rehabilitation activities."
LAND USES AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Submit with the revised Future Land Use Map by February 9, 1993 a revised Table 12 in the Future Land Use Element to state:
"Table 12 POPULATION PROJECTIONS
WALTON COUNTY (TOTAL COUNTY)
Census Census Projections
Permanent | 1980 | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 |
Population | 21,300 | 27,760 | 30,800 | 33,300 |
Seasonal | ||||
Population | 58,494 | 68,009 | ||
Total | ||||
Population | 89,294 | 101,309 |
Source: Projections of Florida Population by County, 1990-2000, BEBR, July 1991; Regional Water Supply Development Plan for Coastal Areas of Northwest Florida Water Management District, 1982, and WFRPC calculations."
Add a new Table 12a into the Future Land Use Element to state:
"Table 12a
POPULATION PROJECTIONS (TOTAL COUNTY) NORTH AND SOUTH WALTON COUNTY
1990 | 1995 | 2000 | |
South Walton County Permanent | 10,549 | 11,704 | 12,654 |
Seasonal | 48,890 | 58,494 | 68,009 |
Total | 59,439 | 70,198 | 80,663 | |
North Walton County | Permanent | 17,211 | 19,096 | 20,646 |
Seasonal | -- | -- | -- | |
Total | 17,211 | 19,096 | 20,646 |
Source: Projections of Florida Population by County, 1990-2000, BEBR, July 1991; "Regional Water Supply Development Plan for Coastal Areas of Northwest Florida Water Management District, 1982, and WFRPC calculations.
Note: The distribution of population between North and South Walton County is based on the low-range population estimates for South Walton County published in the NWFWMD report "Regional Water Supply Development Plan for Coastal Areas of Northwest Florida".
Add tables similar to Tables 12 and 12A (above) showing existing and projected population of the unincorporated portion of the county. Revise Table
20 in the Housing Element and Table 13 in the Future Land Use Element to be consistent with the revised population projections for the unincorporated county. Ensure that all projections throughout the plan are based on total functional population (permanent and seasonal) consistent with revised Tables 12 and 12A.
Include revised data and analysis to be submitted with the revised Future Land Use Map by February 9, 1993 which estimates the hurricane clearance times for existing development in the south Walton County area and for the development permitted on the Future Land Use Nap at buildout conditions. The data and analysis must demonstrate that adequate clearance times will achieved under buildout conditions.
Add the following to the section entitled "Blighted Areas" on page 1-52 in the Future Land Use Element: "Over the past ten years, the number of homes lacking complete kitchen facilities and/or complete plumbing and those that are overcrowded is presumed to have remained stable."
Revise Objective 1.4 and Policy 1.4.2 in the Future Land Use Element to state:
"Objective 1.4: The County shall reduce instances of blight by 20 percent by the year 2000. Landscaped buffers shall be required between all future developments to ensure compatibility of adjacent land uses. Nonconforming land uses shall not be expanded."
"Policy 1.4.2: Non-conforming land uses shall be governed by the following principles: a) a non-conforming use cannot be expanded; b) a non-conforming use which is discontinued for more than six months may not be re-established; c) a non-conforming use which suffers damage of 50 percent or more of its assessed value may not be re-established; d) a non-conforming use which suffers damage of
50 percent or less of its assessed value may rebuild to its pre-damage footprint and conditions; e) single-family homes existing as of the date of adoption of this ordinance are considered to be conforming uses not subject to be provisions of this policy; however, any redevelopment must meet all plan requirements. In addition, ordinary repair and maintenance of non-conforming uses is permitted."
Revise Objective 1.3 to protect historic resources, including the evaluation of site plans to identify historic resources based on professionally acceptable methodology.
Add the following to the Future Land Use Element:
"Objective 1.5: Consistent with the recommendations of the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Management Plan and with the policies of this Comprehensive Plan for Walton County, specific site development shall be consistent with the Future Land Use Map and shall be coordinated with the topographic and soil conditions of the site, with the availability of facilities and services and with the protection of natural resources on and adjacent to the site."
In addition, include implementing policies to support this objective which incorporate the specific guidelines and standards recommended in the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Management Plan.
"Objective 1.6: Proposed developments, including proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Map, shall be coordinated with the recommendations of the Tri- State Hurricane Evacuation Study."
"Policy 1.6.1: Proposed plan amendments which would increase densities within hurricane evacuation zones 1-7 as designated in the Tri-State Hurricane Evacuation Study shall be subject to review and transportation impact analysis to determine their impact upon hurricane evacuation times and routes.
Developments that will increase hurricane evacuation times shall be required to provide mitigation measures, such as transportation improvements, emergency vanpools, and/or on-site emergency shelters. These measures must be designed to ensure no increase in evacuation times as a result of the proposed development."
"Policy 1.6.2: The Walton County Emergency Management Department shall be included as a technical advisor in the development review process."
In addition, include a policy which specifies the appropriate recommendations from the Tri-State Study.
"Objective 1.7: The concentration of development into mixed use areas and the preservation of the working landscape surrounding these areas is encouraged through the use of innovative land development procedures."
Replace existing Objective 1.1 with new Objective 1.1 to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl:
"Objective 1.1: The County shall discourage urban sprawl and promote compact development and the conservation of working landscapes through such techniques as the designation of appropriate agricultural densities, cluster development, mixed use areas that allow residents to work, shop, live and recreate within one compact area, and the establishment of rural hamlets that promote infill development in existing rural communities while preserving the surrounding rural land uses, including agricultural and silvicultural uses."
Add policies which establish the general guidelines and principles used by the County to regulate the creation of new subdivisions. These policies shall prevent the creation of subdivision lots which lie entirely within environmentally sensitive areas. The County shall only permit the creation of lots intended for development which include a sufficient buildable area including required buffers that lies outside any environmentally sensitive portion of the new parcel.
Add policies which establish the general guidelines and principles used by the County to regulate signage.
Revise Policies 1.3.1 and 1.3.3 in the Future Land Use Element to state:
"Policy 1.3.1: By March 1, 1993, submit a grant application to the State Division of Historic Resources for funding of a matching archaeological site survey grant and a matching historic building survey grant to evaluate County sites on the Florida Master Site File, identify new sites, both structural and archaeological, and establish areas of historical site potential.
"Policy 1.3.3: Significant historical and archaeological sites, including but not limited to, sites on the Florida Master Site File, shall be protected by implementing the following:
After the identification and evaluation of the County's historic resources following the grant surveys, the County shall determine which structures or archaeological sites are deemed significant as judged in part by the criteria used during the surveys and adopt by resolution a local historic register and a map of designated sites.
As part of all site plan evaluations, County staff shall identify whether or not the proposed construction activity and/or final development would disturb a site listed on the Florida Master Site File and/or on the County Register. If so, the developer shall be notified and shall, in turn, notify the Florida Division of Historical Resources, Bureau of Historic Preservation, Compliance Review Section and shall enter a binding agreement with the County in which the developer agrees to comply with the recommended course of action or mitigation requested by the Division prior to the development order being issued.
All developers shall affirm that they have notified the construction manager of the potential for artifact discoveries within the County. In the event of the discovery of artifacts of potential historical or archaeological significance during construction, the construction manager shall immediately suspend all disruptive activity within a twenty-five foot radius of the site of discovery and report the suspected finding(s) to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, Bureau of Historic Preservation, Compliance Review Section and to the developer. From the date of notification, construction shall be suspended for a period of up to one-hundred- twenty days to allow evaluation of the site and mitigation if necessary. The developer shall comply with the recommended course of action or mitigation requested by the Division and notify in writing the County Building Official of the action or mitigation requested.
Add the following goals, objective and policies Into the Future Land Use Element:
"Policy 1.4.3: The County shall require landscaped buffers between adjacent land uses of differing intensities to control the impact of the higher intensity use on the surrounding area. The buffer width requirements will vary depending on the difference in intensity of the adjacent uses and the type and configuration of trees, shrubs, or other materials used in the buffer, but will be no less than ten feet. Trees and shrubs will be required to be planted within the buffer. All developments shall be required to conform with the
creek, river, lakes, including coastal dune lakefront, bay and wetland buffer standards established in this plan."
"Policy 1.4.4: Buffers shall be required between development, and environmentally sensitive areas, as specified in Coastal/ Conservation Policy C- 2-1, including wetlands. The purpose of the buffer is to protect natural resources from the activities and impacts of development. The buffer shall function to:
Provide protection to the natural resources from intrusive activities and impacts of development such as trespass, pets, vehicles, noise, lights and stormwater;
The negative impacts of the uses upon each other must be minimized or, preferably, eliminated by the buffer such that the long-term existence and viability of the natural resources, including wildlife populations are not threatened by such impacts and activities. In other words, incompatibility between the uses is eliminated or minimized and the uses may be considered compatible (which means a condition in which land uses or other conditions can co-exist in relative proximity to each other in a stable fashion over time such that no use or condition is unduly negatively impacted directly or indirectly by another use or condition); and
The buffer area may be (1) a landscaped natural area, (2) a natural barrier or (3) a landscaped or natural barrier supplemented with fencing or other manmade barriers, so long as the function of the buffer and intent of this policy is fulfilled."
"Policy 1.1.5: The County shall require development to provide adequate parking based on professionally accepted standards. The LDRs, adopted by the statutory deadline, shall include standards for parking lot design and access management, including shared driveways, in order to promote safe traffic flow consistent with the access management policies in the Traffic Element."
"Policy 1.5.7: All development must conform to the level of service standards for drainage adopted in this plan (Drainage Policy 1.1.1.). By the statutory deadline for the adoption of land development regulations, the stormwater provisions of the Walton County Land Development Code shall be reviewed and revised (if necessary) to ensure consistency with the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Management Plan and the Drainage Element of the Comprehensive Plan."
"Policy 1.7.1: The land development regulations shall include one or more of the following techniques to ensure adequate open space and well-designed development: clustering of development (as described in Land Use Policies 1.1.1 and 1.1.2); open space requirements (as described in Land Use Policies 1.1.1 and 1.1.2); calculation of density and intensity for the gross site (as described in Land Use Policies 1.1.1 and 1.1.2); landscaped buffer requirements (as described in Land Use Policy 1.4.4), view preservation (as described in Land Use Policy 1.7.2), and preservation of coastal vegetation and dune lakes (as described in Coastal Management Policies C-2-7 and C-2-8)."
"Policy 1.7.2: The County shall establish scenic corridor criteria for Rte. 30A in order to preserve visual access from transportation corridors to the Gulf of Mexico by March 1, 1993. The criteria will establish a 20 foot setback from the right of way, building placement standards and building height limitations to ensure that views are not blocked, and more stringent sign and landscaping
requirements along Route 30A. The County or the public may nominate additional roads for designation as scenic corridors. The Board of County Commissioners must approve the nomination in order for the designation to go into effect."
"Policy 1.7.3: In mixed use areas, business uses shall be prohibited on interior subdivision streets in order to protect the character of residential development. Within any residential area a home occupation shall be allowed in a bona fide dwelling unit provided that the home occupation is clearly incidental and subordinate to the use of the property for residential purposes, does not change the outside appearance of the residential unit, does not occupy more than twenty-five percent of the total floor area of the residence, does not result in an increase in expected traffic, and does not create interference to neighboring properties.
"Policy 1.1.9: All existing and any new potable water wellfields permitted as community water systems, where recharge potential exists, shall have a minimum 400 foot zone designated around the perimeter of each such well within which landfills, mines, the storage, handling or processing of materials on the Florida Substance List or other restricted substances, agricultural chemicals, petroleum products, hazardous or toxic materials or waste, medical waste, pesticides, feedlots or other commercial animal facilities, wastewater treatment plants, percolation ponds and similar facilities, excavation of waterways or drainage facilities which intersect the water table and other noxious uses or activities which might impact the quality and quantity of potable water resources are prohibited (see Policy 1.1.1 in the Aquifer Recharge sub-element for additional well field protection standards)."
"Policy 1.1.10: The County shall enlist the cooperation of the NWFWMD to identify hydrologic cones of influence. Upon identification, maps of these areas shall be adopted as an amendment to the comprehensive plan. The wellfield protection measures set out in Policy 1.1.1 in the Aquifer Recharge sub-element will then be applied to the area within the cone of influence."
"Goal 2: Protect people and property by limiting public expenditures in areas subject to destruction by natural disasters and by restricting development activities that would damage or destroy coastal or natural resources."
"Objective 2.1: The County shall protect, conserve or enhance coastal wetlands, coastal dune lakes, living marine resources, remaining coastal barriers and wildlife habitats."
"Policy 2.1.1: Limit the specific impacts and cumulative impacts of development or redevelopment upon wetlands, coastal dune lakes, water quality, water quantity, wildlife habitats of listed species, living marine resources or other natural resources through the use of site design techniques, such as clustering, elevation on pilings, setbacks and buffering. The intent of this policy is to avoid such impact and to permit mitigation of impacts only as a last resort."
"Policy 2.1.2: The channeling of untreated run-off which does not meet the drainage level of service standard established in this plan directly into water bodies or other environmentally sensitive areas by new development or redevelopment, new roads or road-building shall be prohibited."
"Policy 2.1.3: The County shall assist in the application of and compliance with all state and federal regulations which pertain to endangered or threatened species, and guidelines which pertain to species of special concern listed by
the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission and will provide for protection of areas known to provide habitats for these species by not issuing any development order or development permit until proof is provided by an applicant that all necessary state and federal requirements relating to such species have been met."
"Policy 2.1.4: New developments with the potential to impact the quantity of quality of natural resources will be required to obtain the necessary permits from all applicable state and/or federal agencies (Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Northwest Florida Water Management District and/or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) prior to the authorization of a development permit by the County."
"Policy 1.5.1: The Northwest Florida Coast Resource Management Plan recommends the establishment of a coastal protection overlay zone. The County hereby adopts such a coastal protection overlay zone which extends seaward of the landward toe of the primary dune ridge or, where the toe cannot be determined, fifty feet landward of the crest of the primary dune or twenty-five feet landward of the top of the higher bluff regions where no primary dune exists. No motor-driven vehicles are permitted to be driven on dunes with the exception of emergency vehicles responding to an emergency. In addition, no activities shall be permitted which create erosion of dune or the dune system. Development within the coastal protection zone shall be limited to elevated boardwalks and other approved fences or structures that will enhance and protect the dune system. Natural dune vegetation within the overlay zone shall be disturbed only to the extent necessary to construct these boardwalks and related structures; however, in no case may more than 10 percent of the existing vegetation or dune be disturbed. The County's land development regulations shall include detailed design standards for all construction within the zone to ensure minimal disruption of the dune system. If these regulations render a property owner unable to build a single-family dwelling unit on an existing lot of record as of the date of plan adoption (December 14, 1990) that lies wholly within the zone, then the owner shall be allowed to construct a single-family residential dwelling unit, providing that the owner complies with all permit requirements of the FDNR and limits the extent of disturbance to the minimum area necessary to accommodate the dwelling unit and access driveway."
"Policy 1.5.2: The County shall not approve any construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line, including construction of coastal or shore protection structures, until an applicant as received all necessary permits for such construction from the Florida Department of Natural Resources and from any other state or federal agency with permitting authority over such construction. The County shall issue no development order or permit for construction on a new parcel (that is, a parcel created after December 14, 1990) if such new parcel lies entirely seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line. All such development shall be consistent with policies for development in the CHHA: Coastal Element Policies C.1.2; C.2.7; C.3.1; E.1.4; E.2.1 through E.2.7; E.3.2; and Capital Improvement Policy 1.2.1."
"Policy 1.5.3: By March 1, 1993, the County shall review the implementation schedule of the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Management Plan and the data and analysis of the comprehensive plan, and prepare a revised schedule for any tasks that remain to be completed The revised schedule shall be incorporated into this plan as an amendment to this policy."
"Policy 1.5.4: By March 1, 1993, the County's land development regulations shall be revised to be consistent with the resource protection standards in the Comprehensive Plan and shall address the protection of:
beaches and dunes (Future Land Use Element Policies 1.5.1 & 1.5.2; Coastal Management/Conservation Policies E-2-1 -- E-2-7);
floodplains (Future Land Use Element Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.2; Drainage sub-element Policy 1.4.1, Coastal Management/Conservation Policy C-2- 3);
wetlands (Coastal Management/Conservation Policies C-2-1, C-2-2; FLU Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.3 and FLU Objective 1.11 and its supporting policies);
shorelines (CM/CON Policies C-2-1, C-2-8);
soil erosion and sedimentation control (CM/CON Policies C-2-7, E-2- 5, F-2-1, F-2-2, F-2-3); and
coastal dune lakefronts (CM/CON Policy C-2-8."
"Policy 1.5.5: The County will limit the disturbance of the natural topography by requiring that development be clustered on the portion of the site with least slope and by requiring that structures and roads be designed to maintain the natural topography to the maximum extent feasible."
"Policy 1.56: Applications for development approval for sites to be served by an on-site wastewater treatment system and located in areas identified in the soils map included in the Future Land Use Map series as belonging to a soils series that poses moderate to severe limitations to development shall provide a detailed soils analysis that indicates soils suitability for construction and use of septic tanks and absorption fields. Development shall be clustered on the portion of site posing the fewest restrictions, based on the characteristics of the soils of the site. The site soils analysis shall be done in coordination with the Soil Conservation Service and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. If the Board of County Commissioners, in coordination with SCS and HRS, finds that the soils are unsuitable for septic tanks, an aerobic system or other suitable alternative on-site wastewater treatment system shall be required."
"Policy 1.3.4: The criteria for evaluating historic resources as significant shall include but not be limited to the following adapted from the "Criteria for Listing" of the National Register of Historical Places:
That the resource be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history; or
That the resource be associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
That the resource embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (e.g., historic district); or
That the resource yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Guidelines for evaluation and assessment of historical resources shall be based on but not limited to National Register Bulletin 15 (Guidelines for Applying National Register Criteria for Evaluation), the Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering Documentation, and the Historic Preservation Compliance Review Program of the Florida Department of State, Division of Historic Resources, in particular Chapter 4, Standards for Conducting, Reporting, and Reviewing Archaeological and Historic Site Assessment Survey Activities."
Revise Policy 1.4.1 in the Future Land Use Element to state: "Policy 1.4.1: By March 1, 1993, the County will inventory 40 percent of
the housing stock to identify substandard units that are blighted. For each of the next three years, an additional 20 percent of the County's housing stock will be inventoried to identify substandard units. By March 1, 1993, the County will develop criteria and a numerical scoring system to determine the housing stock in need of conservation, rehabilitation, or demolition. The County will reduce instances of blight through a demolition program that will eliminate the number of vacant, dilapidated structures by 20 percent by 1995 and through the use of County funds and state or federal grants for the rehabilitation and redevelopment of blighted areas."
Revise the data and analysis to be submitted with the revised Future Land Use Nap by January 1, 1993 to include an analysis of the character and magnitude of existing vacant or undeveloped land in order to determine its suitability for use. Include maps and tables of existing subdivisions showing number of existing dwelling units and number of vacant, buildable lots. Discuss vested status of each subdivision. Identify approved DRIs and include data of number of existing dwelling units and number of vacant, buildable lots for each DRI. Identify platted areas that are not being actively developed and discuss the vested status of each such area.
Revise the data and analysis to be submitted with the revised Future Land Use Map by January 1, 1993 to include an analysis of the amount of land needed to accommodate the projected population for each of the categories depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Ensure that the amount of land allocated to each land use category on the Future Land Use Map is consistent with the projection of need in the data and analysis for up to 125 percent of the need stated.
Adopt as a part of the Future Land Use Map series the FEMA 100-year floodplain maps. Ensure that the Future Land Use Map depicts as part of the Conservation category the sites designated as conservation in the data and analysis of the Conservation Element.
Indicate on the Future Land Use Map the date that it is intended to depict (2000).
Ensure that the Future Land Use Map depicts the following land use categories: commercial, agricultural, recreational, and public lands (including government facilities, educational facilities and Eglin Air Force Base).
Include as part of the Future Land Use Map series maps depicting cones of influence for public potable water well fields (if hydrogeologic data are not
available to map cones of influence, then the County may map an interim wellfield protection zone with a radius of 400 feet until cones of influence data are available, consistent with proposed Policy 1.1.9 and 1.1.10 in the Future Land Use Element, (see item 3, above) and consistent with Objective 1.1 and its supporting policies in the Aquifer Recharge sub-element (see item 17, below).
Include as part of the Future Land Use Map series the National Wetland Inventory Map at a scale of 1:24,000 to depict wetlands. Include as part of the Future Land Use Map series the most current edition of the National Flood Insurance Maps to depict floodplains.
Include as part of the Future Land Use Map series maps depicting the location of existing and future recreational facilities and, for each facility, indicate the generalized area (market area) that facility is intended to service.
Ensure that the Future Land Use Map series accurately depicts: 1) each land use category and all existing land uses if these uses are expected to still exist in the year 2000; 2) all state lands, including those recently purchased (e.g., Topsail Hill and Point Washington) at zero dwelling units per acre; 3) the following C.O.B.R.A. systems within the County: FL-94, which includes Deer Lake and a portion of Camp Creek Lake; and P-31A, extending from Campbell Lake and Morris Lake to Fuller Lake and the FNAI area in the eastern end of the County at one dwelling unit per five acres; 4) all public beach access areas; and 5) all lakes, including coastal lakes, and other naturally-occurring waterbodies to ensure that the appropriate conservation policies are applied to these areas.
Guidelines for Preparing an Existing and Future Land Use Map Series Although a draft Future Land Use Map has been prepared by the County and
discussed with the Department, data and analysis needed to support the appropriateness of the Map has not been provided by the County. The Department cannot evaluate the draft maps absent appropriate data and analysis. Therefore, the following guidelines shall be used by the County to prepare an acceptable existing and future land use map series:
Existing Land Use Map Series
An existing land use map for south Walton County shall be completed at a scale of 1:24,000. An existing land use map for north Walton County shall be completed at a scale of 1" 1 mile. These maps should depict the current extent of developed residential, commercial, industrial, recreation, public facilities and conservation (private and public). The maps shall be supported by information about the densities and intensities of uses and acreage of actual development areas which include areas where dwelling units and other improvements to the land exist.
The extent of vacant vested properties shall be depicted as overlays to the existing land uses maps. Vesting criteria consistent with s.163.3167(8), F.S., and, for each vested parcel, information about the type of use that is vested and the density and number of unbuilt residential units that are vested must be provided.
The maps shall be prepared depicting vacant non-vested buildable properties. The County may include overlays which would exclude public lands and wetlands from the vacant non-vested buildable properties map.
The County shall prepare data and analysis regarding the amount of acreage for each existing land use category (item 1a, above), the amount and density of vacant vested development (item 1b, above) and the amount and character of vacant non-vested buildable areas (item 1c, above).
Future Land Use Map Series
A Future Land Use Map for the year 2000 for south Walton County shall be completed at a scale of 1:24,000 and for north Walton County at a scale of 1" 1 mile. Existing development (item 1a, above), vacant vested development (item 1b, above) and vacant non-vested buildable areas (item 1c, above) should be allocated to the appropriate Future Land Use Policy 1.1.1 category.
The Future Land Use Map shall depict COBRA resource areas designated FL-94 (Deer Lake and a portion of Camp Creek Lake) and P-31A (Topsail Hill) and the FNAI survey area located in the eastern portion of the County at a density of one dwelling unit per five acres.
The Future Land Use Maps must assign development densities to vacant non-vested land consistent with the needs of the projected population for new residential, commercial and industrial development. The County shall prepare tables showing the number of acres of each category depicted on the Future Land Use Map. On the Future Land Use Maps the allocation of development densities shall be consistent with the needs of the projected population.
The Future Land Use Map for south Walton County shall depict a nodal pattern of Coastal Centers concentrated around existing developed communities. The Residential Estates category shall be limited to existing subdivisions platted up to a density of two dwelling units per acre. Other vacant areas shall be designated Rural Residential and Large-Scale Agriculture.
The Future Land Use Map for north Walton County shall depict Neighborhood Residential only in existing subdivisions. The Rural Village category shall be used to depict a compact pattern of development in existing identifiable communities. The Town Center category shall be used only to identify areas currently served by central water and sewer facilities.
The Future Land Use Map categories must be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies as well as the data and analysis requirements of this Final Order and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C.
25. Replace existing Objective 1.1 and Policy 1.1.1 in the Future Land Use Element with the following to establish the permitted uses and the density and intensity of use for each the Future Land Use Map categories:
"Objective 1.1: Development in Walton County shall occur in a manner which ensures an efficient and compact land use pattern that does not promote urban sprawl, that provides for the efficient use of facilities and services, that promotes the potential for economic development, and that ensures the protection of the County's rich and varied environmental resources.
"Policy 1.1.1: Development within the various land use categories depicted on the Future Land Use Map shall be governed by the following permitted uses and densities and intensities of use:
Large-Scale Agriculture: Areas now used and appropriate for continued use primarily in large-scale agricultural activities, including timber production.
Uses allowed: Agriculture and silviculture activities; farm dwellings, including farmworker housing, and associated accessory structures that are related to and supportive of agriculture and silviculture.
Density allowed: 1 unit per 20 acres
Creation of new parcels: The subdivision of parcels within the Large-scale Agriculture land use category shall not result in the creation of more than 50 new building lots during any calendar year.
General Agriculture: Rural areas characterized by smaller-scale agricultural activities, including timber production, and varied parcel sizes.
Uses allowed: Agriculture and silviculture activities; farm dwellings, including farmworker housing, and associated accessory structures that are related to and supportative of agriculture and silviculture.
Density allowed: the density of development shall be determined according to parcel size proposed for development as follows:
For parcels of 20 acres or less, gross density for residential use shall not exceed 1 unit per acre. Residential units may be clustered so long as the gross density is not exceeded.
Seventy percent of the development site must be retained in open space. Open space is the amount of the site that is devoted to passive recreation, resource protection, amenity and/or landscaped buffers. Open space shall include unpaved areas only, including: lawns, storm-water retention ponds, passive recreation areas and parks, wooded areas, and water courses. Open space does not include driveways, parking lots, or other surfaces designed or intended for vehicular travel.
For parcel size of over 20 acres, subdividing for residential development shall be approved through
a rural planned unit development review process. This process is designed to ensure that development within the rural areas of the County is compatible with the protection of agricultural lands and that higher density residential areas are developed as new rural communities. New rural communities are self-sufficient rural clusters that are compatible with the County's traditional development pattern and protect she working landscape.
Rural Planned Unit Development Standards:
The maximum density within the rural PUD is related to the extent of clustering within
the development. The base density is one unit per 10 acres. The maximum density increases for each 25% of the total land area of the development that is left undisturbed or in agricultural use. The maximum density is as follows:
% of Land Maximum EXAMPLE Developed Gross Density Total # of Units
for 100 Acre Parcel
76 | - | 100% | 1 Unit/10 Acres | 10 |
51 | - | 75% | 1 Unit/5 Acres | 20 |
26 | - | 50% | 1 Unit/Acre | 100 |
1 | - | 25% | 2 Units/Acre | 200 |
Upon final approval of the rural PUD, a notice of the approval and designation of the undeveloped portion of the site as a permanent agriculture/reserve area shall be placed on record to advise potential future purchasers of the rural PUD requirements applicable to the property. The notice shall inform potential purchasers of where to obtain information concerning the requirements for changing the agriculture/reserve status of the property through plan amendment.
Development shall be prohibited on the undeveloped portions of the site that are designated as agriculture/reserve areas, unless the property owner obtain an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the comprehensive plan.
Locational criteria for rural PUDs with a maximum gross density of 1 unit per acre or greater, or more than 50 dwelling units are as follows:
Rural PUDs must be at least 5 miles from the nearest Rural PUD with a density of over 1 unit per acre.
The percentage of developed land may include neighborhood or ancillary commercial development that is designed to serve the residents of the rural cluster.
Creation of new parcels: The subdivision of parcels within the General Agriculture land use category shall not result in the creation of more than 250 new building lots during any calendar year.
Plan amendment: An application for approval of a Rural PUD shall not be approved until this comprehensive plan has been amended to include the specific location of such proposed PUD. The applicant requesting such PUD approval and plan amendment shall be required to produce and provide the County adequate data and analysis demonstrating the need for such PUD and the consistency of the proposed PUD with the rural character of the County. The applicant shall be required to compensate the County for expenses related to the comprehensive plan amendment process for the subject property.
3a. Private Conservation Overlay: Areas with extremely limited development potential due to environmental sensitivity, including floodplains, wetlands, and privately owned natural reservations. Wetlands and floodplains shall be depicted as overlays on the Future Land Use Map series. The boundaries of the floodplains designated for conservation shall coincide with the 100-year floodplain designated by FEMA and wetlands shall be depicted consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.11.2. Land uses are limited to activities compatible with the conservation and protection of natural resources and wildlife habitats.
Uses allowed: residential, passive recreation, and silvilculture.
Density allowed: The density allocated to conservation lands is one unit per 20 acres within wetlands and two units per acre within floodplains. However, no development shall be permitted within the 10-year and 25-year floodplains.
Ninety percent of the development site must be retained in open space and a maximum of 10 percent of the site may be cleared of natural vegetation. Open space shall include unpaved areas only, including:
stormwater retention ponds, passive recreation areas and water courses. Open space does not include driveways, parking lots, or other surfaces designed or intended for vehicular travel.
Septic tank drain fields shall not be permitted within wetlands and within wetlands buffer areas or within
100 feet of the shoreline of the rivers and creeks and within the coastal dune lake front protection zone within the private conservation district. As an alternative, aerobic systems may be permitted in the buffer areas if a conventional septic tank cannot be sited on the property, where consistent with Chapter 10D-6, F.A.C.
3b. Public Conservation: Publicly owned land utilized for the protection of natural resources and passive recreational activities. There shall be zero density associated with this category except for conservation uses limited to public access and residential and non-residential uses necessary to manage such conservation lands (e.g., ranger stations, research stations and park amenities).
Neighborhood Residential: Areas consisting of platted sub-divisions and established residential areas partially developed for residential areas and expected to continue to develop according to the subdivision plat.
Uses allowed: Residential and limited neighborhood commercial
Density allowed: Gross density shall not exceed four units per acre, although clustering may be allowed. Neighborhood commercial development shall ensure compatibility and harmony of scale and character. No more than 5 percent of the total area shall be in limited neighborhood commercial.
Public Facilities: Publicly owned land intended for public facilities and services including, but not limited to government offices, service centers, public utilities and transportation facilities, schools, libraries, police and fire stations. There is no residential density associated with this category. Intensity of development, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed 75 percent, with a maximum building height of 36 feet (excluding towers).
Recreation: Land devoted to public (federal, state, county and municipal) parks and recreation facilities. There is no residential density associated with this category.
Industrial: Areas devoted exclusively to industrial development, allowing a mix of heavy and light industry, storage, distribution, and other industrial activities, Intensity of development, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed 60%.
Commercial: The commercial land use classification is intended to provide for business uses that serve the community and the traveling public through the development of integrated commercial centers. Business uses allowed in the commercial classification include offices, retail, lodging, restaurants, shopping centers, commerce parks or other similar business activities. The land development regulations shall include standards for landscaping, access, circulation, signage and building and parking lot orientation for these areas. The intensity of commercial uses, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed
70 percent.
Mixed Use Area: There are three types of mixed use areas depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Development within these areas must ensure protection of natural resources, adherence to concurrency requirements, and harmonious site design. The land development regulations will include standards for access, circulation, parking, landscaping, tree protection, and building placement.
Rural Village: Permits predominantly residential at a variety of densities, ranging from 1 unit per 5 acres
up to 2 units per acre.
Uses allowed: Residential and neighborhood scale businesses and public uses, such as churches or schools, provided that the non-residential uses
are compatible in scale and intensity with the character of the residential areas.
Density allowed: maximum of 2 units per acre.
Intensity allowed: The intensity of non-residential uses, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed 50 percent.
Mixture of uses: Residential uses shall account for approximately 75 percent of the total land area. To ensure a compatible mix of uses, landscaped buffers shall be required between
residential uses and intensive non-residential uses. The land development regulations will also have standards for land coverage and building placement.
Town Center:
Uses allowed: Residential and a variety of business types, including offices, retail, lodging, restaurants, shopping centers, light industry, medical facilities and similar business activities, as well as public and semi-public uses, including, schools, churches, parks, and other similar uses.
Density allowed: In areas that are served by central water and sewer, the maximum density shall be eight units per acre. Where only central water is provided, the maximum density shall be four dwelling units per acre.
Intensity allowed: The intensity of
non-residential development, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed 80 percent.
Mixture of uses: Residential land uses shall not account for mare than fifty percent of the land
use for the entire area.
Coastal Center: Predominantly residential with a variety of housing types and densities.
Uses allowed: Residential and neighborhood scale businesses and public uses, such as churches or schools, are allowed provided that the
non-residential uses are compatible in scale and intensity with the character of the residential areas.
Density allowed:
with central water: maximum of two units per acre.
with central water and sewer: maximum of four units per acre.
with central water and sewer, PUD approval, and design pattern of town center, traditional neighborhood or related neighborhood concept: maximum of eight units per acre.
The PUD process requires:
the development must have a recognizable town or village center consisting of public and
commercial uses and a public green or open space;
thirty percent of the entire site must be devoted to common open space, such as public green, nature trails, and passive recreation areas; and
the design pattern must ensure a balance of residential and non-residential development that provides residents with the necessary infrastructure and services without adding fiscal impacts to the County. The
development must be organized so the highest density residential areas are in closest proximity to the town or village center, with the densities declining as the distance from the center increases. Residential neighborhoods shall be centered around and have pedestrian and/or bicycle access to other neighborhoods, schools, neighborhood commercial areas, recreation facilities and employment opportunities in order to reduce the number and length of automobile trips and traffic impacts. Natural features, such as lakes, wetlands, dunes and upland vegetation communities shall be incorporated as amenities of the site as passive recreation, open space, parks, entrance ways or buffers to protect environmentally sensitive areas and may provide focal points for unifying the image of a residential neighborhood.
Intensity allowed: The intensity of nonresidential uses, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed
60 percent. The land development regulations will also have standards for signage, landscaping, placement of parking to the rear of non-residential uses, and building placement.
Mixture of uses: Non-residential uses shall not exceed 20 percent of the total land area. Thirty percent of the land area of the site must be retained as common open space.
The land development regulations shall establish criteria for the location and trip generation characteristics of commercial establishments to ensure that they are compatible with the scale and intensity of the surrounding residential development.
Resort: Areas consisting of high density residential development and approved developments of regional impacts.
Uses allowed: residential and non-residential.
Density allowed: maximum of 12 units per acre.
Intensity allowed: The intensity of non-residential uses; as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed
70 percent.
Mixture of uses: For DRIs, the mix of land uses shall be governed by the DRI development order. In other areas, very limited neighborhood commercial may be allowed if compatibility and harmony of scale and character. No more than 5 percent of the total area should be in neighborhood commercial is ensured.
Residential Estate: Areas consisting of existing exclusively residential subdivisions that have been platted at an average density of one or two units per acre. The portions of the Residential Estate category located along Choctawhatchee Bay consist mostly of existing residential platted lands. The other areas consist of a mix of large-lot residential subdivisions and vacant lots with an average size of approximately 10 acres.
Uses allowed: residential
Densitv allowed: maximum density of two units per acre
Rural Residential: Areas where soil characteristics pose limitations for development.
Uses allowed: passive recreational uses, silviculture, residential development, and neighborhood commercial Neighborhood commercial uses shall not exceed 5
percent of the total land area allocated to this land use category.
Density allowed: maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per 3 acres. Residential units must be clustered away from environmentally sensitive portions of the site. The intensity of non-residential uses, as measured by land coverage, shall not exceed 40 percent."
"Policy 1.1.1a: Residential density, as established in Policies 1.1.1,
1.1.2 and 1.1.3, is the relationship between the number of dwelling units on a site and the gross acreage.
"Policy 1.1.2: Notwithstanding any of the density values established in Policy 1.1.1, lands that are designated by FEMA as within the 100-year floodplain shall have a gross density of not more than two dwelling units per acre, or the underlying density, whichever is less."
"Policy 1.1.3: Notwithstanding any of the density values established in Policy 1.1.1, lands that are within wetlands shall have a gross density of not more than one unit per 20 acres."
"Policy 1.1.4: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this comprehensive plan, no development higher than four stories, or 50 feet, whichever is less, shall be permitted south of a line formed by SR 30 from the Okaloosa County line to the intersection of SR 30 and CR 30A and from CR 30A to the Bay County line."
"Policy 1.1.5: Developments with a final development order issued on or before the adoption date of this comprehensive plan (December 14, 1990), where development has commenced and is continuing in good faith, or development authorized as a development of regional impact pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., are vested. Pursuant to the doctrine of equitable estoppel, development may be deemed vested if a property owner has relied in good faith on an act or omission of the local government and on the basis of such reliance has made a substantial change of position such that it would be highly inequitable and unjust to deny the continued development of this property."
"Policy 1.1.6: The County shall adopt by December 1, 1992 an ordinance establishing a procedure for determining the vested status of development within the County. The ordinance shall include the following requirements: criteria for determining vesting that are consistent with Policy 1.1.5; procedures for an applicant to apply for a determination of vested rights and for the processing of such applications; and a deadline for all interested parties to apply for such a determination.
"Policy 1.1.7: Single-lots of record which were established on or before the adopted date of this comprehensive plan (December 14, 1990) are entitled to have constructed thereon at least one single-family dwelling unit. "Lot of record" shall mean an individual parcel of property owned on or before December 14, 1990, by the party seeking to construct a single family dwelling unit thereon, or under contract for deed according to which the purchasing party is seeking to construct a single family dwelling unit thereon, which parcel has been documented by a subdivision plat, deed, agreement, map survey or other drawing recorded in the official public records of Walton County on or before December 14, 1990; provided however that if the individual parcel owned is contiguous to other parcels owned by the same owner, then such owner shall only be entitled to construct one single family dwelling unit on the individual parcel and all contiguous parcels owned by the same owner. This policy applies as an exception to the density provisions contained in Policy 1.1.1 only and all development must be consistent with the other provisions of this plan, including concurrency requirements."
"Policy 1.1.8: Property developed and/or subdivided for the use of an immediate family member (grandparent, parent, stepparent, adopted parent, sibling, child, stepchild, adopted child, or grandchild of the person who conveyed the parcel to said individual) for their primary residence may be permitted as an exception to the density provisions contained in Policy 1.1.1 and such family member may be permitted to develop a single-family residence on a smaller lot provided that any such development must be consistent with the other provisions of this plan, including concurrency requirements. This exception shall apply only once to any individual."
Revise the Future Land Use Element to include data and analysis (maps, tables and text) to support the Resort, Neighborhood Residential and Residential Estates land use categories. Since these categories are largely based on existing land use patterns and existing platted areas, the data and analysis shall include large scale maps locating each such development, and data concerning the name, location, character, size, existing and buildout data for number of units and population, including projected buildout date.
Add the following objectives and policies to the Future Land Use Element:
"Objective 1.5: The compatibility of adjacent land uses will be ensured through the use of natural and manmade buffers."
"Policy 1.5.1: Ensure compatibility of adjacent land uses and protection of the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the County by requiring buffers between agricultural and non-agricultural land uses. A buffer must be established between any new subdivision and active agricultural lands adjacent to such subdivision. The purpose of the buffer is to protect the agricultural land use from the more intensive residential and/or commercial land uses associated with the subdivision. The buffer must function to:
screen each land use, one from the other;
provide protection to the non-residential land uses from normal agricultural operations that may create nuisances and other adverse impacts, such as odors, noise, smoke, vibration, chemical spray, glare, or dust;
provide protection to the agricultural land from intrusive activities of residential land uses, such as trespass, pets, vehicles, and noise; and
minimize or eliminate any incompatibility between the uses so that the uses may be considered compatible and so that the long term continuance of both uses is not threatened by the negative impacts of adjacent land
uses upon each other.
Buffers shall be a landscaped strip along parcel boundaries and shall serve as an attractive boundary of the parcel or land use and shall include landscaping and site barriers. Buffers shall be at least 50 feet in width; however, during the site plan approval process the County may require buffers larger than the minimum established in this policy, if deemed necessary to ensure the compatibility of adjacent land uses."
"Policy 1.5.2: Buffers will be created between development and environmentally sensitive areas, as specified in Coastal/Conservation Policy C- 2-1, including wetlands, water bodies such as lakes and streams, dunes, and wildlife habitat areas. The purpose of the buffer is to protect natural resources from the activities and impacts of development. The buffer should function to:
provide protection to the natural resources from intrusive activities and impacts of development such as trespass, pets, vehicles, noise, lights, and stormwater runoff; and
the negative impacts of the uses upon each other must be minimized or, preferably, eliminated by the buffer such that the long-term existence and viability of the natural resources including wildlife populations are
not threatened by such impacts and activities. In other words, any incompatibility between the uses is eliminated and the uses may be considered compatible.
The buffer may be a landscaped natural barrier, a natural barrier or a landscaped or natural barrier supplemented with fencing or other manmade barriers, so long as the function of the buffer and intent of this policy is fulfilled. Buffers shall be at least 50 feet In width; however, during the site plan approval process the County may require buffers larger than the minimum established in this policy, if deemed necessary to ensure the compatibility of adjacent land uses."
"Policy 1.5.3: Buffers shall be established between land uses, including land uses within a mixed use development, to ensure compatibility of adjacent land uses. The buffers shall function to prevent nuisances and other adverse impacts, such as odors, noise, smoke, vibration or aesthetic value, on adjacent and nearby properties and adjacent roadways. Buffers shall be a landscaped strip along parcel and land use boundaries and shall serve as an attractive boundary of the parcel or land use and shall include landscaping and site barriers. Between residential land uses, the buffer shall be at least 10 feet in width. Between residential and commercial land uses, the buffer shall be at least 20 feet in width. Between a mixed use development and any other land use, the buffer shall be at least 20 feet in width. Between industrial and any other land use, the buffer shall be at least 25 feet in width. Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted to preclude the County from requiring buffers larger than the minimums established within this policy, if such requirement is deemed necessary and appropriate to ensure the compatibility of adjacent land uses."
"Objective 1.6: Silviculture activities are to be conducted in a manner compatible with the need to protect, conserve and appropriately use natural resources associated with wetlands and surface waters."
"Policy 1.6.1: Silviculture activities shall follow the best management practices outlined in the publications titled "Silviculture Best Management Practices Manual" (Revised May 1990, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry) and "Management Guidelines For Forested Wetlands in Florida," (December 1988, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry and Florida Forestry Association), and the requirements of Chapters 373 and 403, F.S."
"Policy 1.6.2: In forested wetlands the Primary Streamside Management Zone criteria shall be applied within 75 feet of perennial streams greater than 30 feet in width." 38
"Policy 1.63: In order to maintain the overall ecological integrity of the wetlands community, select cuts, small clear cuts or other irregularly shaped harvesting techniques will be allowed provided:
viable populations of the endangered, threatened and species of special concern found onsite can be maintained onsite;
harvests are planned to provide for varying age and height diversity, supporting a variety of vegetation successional stages within the overall wetland ecosystem;
the natural hydrology and hydroperiod of wetlands are maintained and state water quality standards are not violated;
there is no conversion of wetland systems to upland systems; and
there is no conversion to other wetland systems except for the beneficial alteration of degraded wetlands to wetlands compatible with the type, form, and function of adjacent wetlands."
"Policy 1.6.4: The silviculture policies of this plan will be re-evaluated when the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services prepare new guidelines and best management practices and this plan will be amended consistent with these new provisions within 180 days of their promulgation."
Add the following objective and policies to the Future Land Use Element:
"Objective 1.11: Protection of Wetlands
Walton County shall protect and conserve wetlands. Alteration shall not result in an overall net loss of wetlands within the County. The measure of achievement for this objective shall be the amount of remaining wetland acres and the amount of restored and created wetlands of the same ecological type, productivity and function as compared to the number of acres existing as of the date of plan adoption."
Policy 1.11.1: "Wetlands" has the meaning contained in Rule 17-40.210(26), F.A.C.
Policy 1.11.2: The Future Land Use Map series shall depict as an overlay those areas delineated as wetlands by the National Wetlands Inventory and those areas determined to be jurisdictional by appropriate regulatory agencies having authority to designate areas as wetlands and which exercise jurisdiction over the wetlands so designated (e.g., the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). The wetlands overlay shall be amended as necessary to include or exclude any areas added or removed from the National Wetlands Inventory or determined to be jurisdictional by the above agencies.
Policy 1.11.3: The specific boundaries of wetlands shall be determined through site-specific field inspections conducted by an applicant for a development order or development permit and shall be subject to review and approval by the County before the issuance of a development order or development permit. It shall be the responsibility of an applicant to submit documentation, exhibits, studies, etc., for the purpose of establishing the boundaries of wetland areas.
Policy 1.11.4: Development within a wetland shall be conform to the following criteria:
all permits from an agency with jurisdiction shall be approved prior to the issuance of a final development order;
all new development or redevelopment shall be designed to avoid, to the maximum extent possible, impacts on wetlands. Where impacts cannot be avoided, impacts
shall be minimized and shall be mitigated by wet land
compensation or wetland enhancement. Wetland impact, where unavoidable and where properly mitigated, as determined by agencies having jurisdiction, shall be permitted for:
pile supported access to the site;
internal traffic circulation, where other alternatives do not exist, or for purposed of public safety;
utility transmission and collection lines;
pre-treated stormwater management; and
preventing all beneficial use of the property from being precluded. If a site is such that all beneficial use of the property is precluded due to wetland restrictions, then the parcel shall be
allowed to develop at a gross density of one residential dwelling unit per twenty acres. No parcel shall be created after December 14, 1990 which consists entirely of wetlands, unless accompanied by a deed restriction which prohibits future development on the parcel.
commercial and industrial development shall not be located within wetlands;
development shall locate on the non-wetland portions of a development site and residential densities shall
be transferred on-site from wet land areas to contiguous non-wetland areas within the same development subject to the following:
residential densities shall be transferred on-site from the wet land areas to non-wet land areas based
on the wet land density of one dwelling unit per ten acres, or
residential densities shall be transferred on-site from the wetland areas to non-wetland areas at a density of one dwelling unit per acre or at the underlying land use density if the underlying
density is less than one dwelling unit per acre. This provision shall apply only when no disturbance of the wet land will occur through the proposed development or redevelopment. For the purposes of this on-site density transfer provision, platting of lots partially within a wetland shall not be construed as having disturbed the wetland so long as that portion of the lot within the wetland does not include any fill, construction, improvement, or other development, and a restriction is placed upon the plat to prohibit such future actions within the wetland; and
all such on-site density transfers shall:
be to contiguous property under the same ownership or control;
only be permitted within a subdivision platted and developed in accordance with the County's land development code;
not result in lot sizes, or areas per dwelling unit, that are less than 65 percent of that required by the County's land development code. The minimum lot or area size shall not include the wetland area; and
be noted on the face of the final plat as a restrictive covenant enforceable by the Board
of County Commissioners."
Revise the data and analysis to be submitted with the revised Future Land Use Map by January 1, 1993 in the Coastal Management Element concerning hurricane evacuation times to be consistent with the revised population projections, the Future Land Use Map and the permitted densities and intensities for each land use category. Include a policy in the Coastal Management Element to require the periodic re-evaluation and revision, as necessary, of the Future Land Use Map in order to maintain clearance times.
Add the following objective into the Sanitary Sewer Sub-element: "Objective 1.1: Maximize the use of existing facilities and discourage
urban sprawl by eliminating the use of septic tanks and package plants within existing and planned service areas and prohibiting the extension of sanitary sewer facilities outside of existing and planned service areas as depicted on Map 1 in the Sanitary Sewer sub-element (note: before adopted of this objective this map must be revised as necessary to depict all existing areas served and planned service areas). Where central facilities are available, the installation of septic tanks and package plants is not permitted. Within three months from the time central sewers become available, the County shall notify land owners of such availability and require within one year connection of existing development to such central facilities, consistent with the requirement of Chapter 381.272, F.S. Within existing and planned service areas where central sewers are not currently available, all new development must, where permitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, install a dry line at the time of construction and connect to the central facility when available."
Add the following objective into the Potable Water sub-element: "Objective 1.1: Maximize the use of existing facilities and discourage
urban sprawl by eliminating the use of individual potable water wells and package plants within existing and planned service areas and prohibiting the extension of potable water facilities outside of existing and planned service areas as depicted on Map 4 in the Potable Water sub-element (note: before adopted of this objective this map may be revised as necessary to depict all existing and planned service areas). Where central facilities are available, the installation of individual wells and package plants is not permitted.
Within three months from the time central facilities become available, the County shall notify land owners of such availability and require within one year connection of existing development to such central facilities. In addition, the County shall ensure that unused capacity is committed prior to approval of new facilities."
Add the following objective and policy to the Drainage sub-element: "Objective 1.4: Future land uses shall not adversely impact the natural
functions of drainage features."
"Policy 1.4.1: To protect the natural functions of floodplains and flood prone areas, dredge and fill and clearing of natural vegetation will be permitted only to that needed to accommodate the immediate development site, consistent with the type of uses permitted in such areas by this plan. All such activities will conducted in a manner which maintains the natural topography and hydrological functions of floodplains. Residential, commercial and industrial structures, as defined in Policy 1.1.1, shall be clustered on the non-floodplain portions of a parcel or, where the entire parcel lies in the floodplain, structures shall be elevated on pilings. Compensatory storage shall be required for all development located in floodplains. Septic tanks and package plants are prohibited in floodplains. No hazardous or toxic materials may be stored within the 100-year floodplain, as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency."
Policies 1.2.4 and 1.2.6 in the Potable Water sub-element shall be revised to state:
"Policy 1.2.4: Future water demand for non-potable water uses shall be met through the use of water of the lowest acceptable quality for the purpose intended. To this end, developers requiring large amounts of water for use other than drinking water shall utilize reclaimed water from stormwater systems and treated wastewater."
"Policy 1.2.6: The County shall coordinate with the Northwest Florida Water Management District to ensure that the provision of potable water facilities is consistent with the District's designation of south Walton County as an Area of Water Resources Concern. Public water supply systems shall be required to develop, adopt and implement water conservation plans and measures to promote water conservation and efficiency. The plans shall specifically provide for a reduction of landscape irrigation water uses. The County shall solicit the participation of the District in the siting of new potable water facilities based on standards which include, but are not limited to, the suitability of the aquifer, impact on salt water intrusion, and distance from hazardous wastes, landfills, and other incompatible land uses."
In the Aquifer Recharge sub-element, delete Objective 1-1 and add the following:
"Objective 1.1: All new development and redevelopment shall ensure that aquifer water quality and quantity is not degraded by requiring that post- development flow conditions shall not be less than pre-development conditions."
"Policy 111: The County establishes a interim 400 foot radius wellfield protection zone around all public drinking water wells, as defined in Chapter 10D-6, F.A.C, so as to ensure protection of the well fields and associated cones of influence from potential contamination. The first 200 foot radius is established as a zone of exclusion where no development or redevelopment will be
permitted. Within the remainder of the zone of protection, land uses will be regulated to prohibit the use, sale, storage or generation of hazardous material, hazardous waste or materials on the Florida Substance List and other polluting materials as well as wastewater treatment plants, percolation ponds, mines and the excavation of waterways or drainage facilities which inter sect the water table. The County will prohibit development or redevelopment that would not maintain the quality and quantity of the supply of groundwater and surface water inflow to cones of influence that serve as recharge areas. Upon completion of detailed modelling study that identifies the cone of influence of a potable water wellfield, this plan will be amended to incorporate the results of such study.
"Policy 1.1.2: Industries and other businesses which use, sell or trade hazardous materials or generate hazardous waste shall be sited, designed, operated and monitored to ensure that releases of hazardous materials or waste do not degrade groundwater or surface waters. In addition, a spill containment, clean-up and reporting plan must be prepared. Reporting must be undertaken immediately to appropriate County and state officials. Furthermore, such industries and businesses shall not be located in floodprone areas, areas with severe or moderate limitations to the use of septic tanks, in areas of high or moderate aquifer recharge potential or within 400 feet of an existing or planned potable waterwell."
"Policy 1.1.3: No development shall be approved unless the quality and quantity of the supply of groundwater and surface water inflow to recharge areas are maintained. The level of treatment for stormwater (especially herbicides, pesticides, heavy metals and petroleum hydrocarbons), and waste water, including sanitary sewer effluent as well as other onsite activities, must ensure that the water quality of the recharge areas are not degraded. Septic tanks shall not be permitted within these areas."
"Policy 1.1.4: The County shall actively seek funds, in coordination with the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, for an annual Amnesty Day residential and small quantity generator hazardous waste collection programs."
"Policy 1.1.5: The County shall designate used oil and battery drop-off collection points for residential users.
"Policy 1.1.6: The County shall coordinate with the Department of Environmental Regulation in the Small Quantity Hazardous Waste Generator Program which surveys monitors and inspects non-residential small quantity generating businesses."
"Policy 1.1.7: Prior to issuance of a development permit for an activity or structure which involves the use or storage of hazardous materials, the County shall require the applicant to provide evidence of permitting by all regulatory agencies having jurisdiction."
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
Revise Ordinance No. 90-15 to specify that the Future Traffic Circulation Maps (Figures 4 and 7, Traffic Circulation Element) is adopted as part of the comprehensive plan.
Revise the Future Traffic Circulation Maps to indicate that the map is intended to depict conditions for the year 2000.
Revise the Future Traffic Circulation Maps to indicate the functional classification of roadways depicted on the map.
Revise Figure 4 to depict US 98 from the Okaloosa County line to US 331 as a four lane principal arterial and from US 331 to the Bay County line as a two lane principal arterial.
Since the Traffic Circulation Element is based on an outdated needs assessment (the MPO's Ft. Walton Beach Urban Area Transportation Study adopted in 1988), as an interim measure until the adopted of a completely new element, the data and analysis should be revised to delete those portions which are no longer valid because of changing conditions (for example, Table 7, all of the text on page 2-12, the first paragraph on page 2-13, and Figure 7). Also as an interim measure, add as the fifth paragraph on page 2-10:
"It should be noted that south Walton County was included in the MPO's Ft.
Walton Beach Urban Area Transportation Study adopted in 1988. Analyses and conclusions drawn in the MPO study are not included in this element because of the many changes that have occurred since the study was completed. An update of the 1988 study is underway by the MPO. When completed, this element will be revised to be consistent with the revised study."
The methodology used in the adopted plan to project traffic circulation levels of service and system needs (linear projection of historic traffic counts) is not consistent with the Rule 9J-5 requirements. When the County amends its plan to incorporate the results of the new MPO study (see new Policy B-5, above), the County must ensure that the analysis and projections are based upon the future land uses depicted on the revised Future Land Use Map and account for expected growth during the planning period of vested property.
Add the following policy to the Traffic Circulation Element:
"Policy B-5: Within six months of completion of a revised study for south Walton County by the MPO, this element shall be amended to incorporate the findings and conclusions of the study. The revised element will be consistent with and satisfy all Rule 9J-5 requirement, including the methodology used to project traffic circulation levels of service and systems needs. The Future Traffic Circulation Map and the objectives and policies will be amended to be consistent with the revised data and analysis."
Revise Policies B-1 and B-3 in the Traffic Circulation Element to state:
"Policy B-1: The County shall actively participate during all phases of the preparation and adopted of the MPO's updated Cost Feasible Plan through a representative involved in the process."
"Policy B-3: The County shall coordinate with the plans and programs of the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Planning and Management Plan through representation and active participation in the programs."
Revise Objective C and Policy C-1 in the Traffic Circulation Element to state:
"Objective C: The County shall protect existing and future rights-of-way from encroachment by new buildings in order to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the traffic circulation network."
"Policy C-1: The County shall adopt and implement rights-of-way standards and minimum building setbacks as recommended by the MPO and, for roadways on the State Highway System, by FDOT."
Revise Policy D-1 in the Traffic Circulation Element to state: "Policy D-1: The County shall regulate the provision of roadway access to
the State Highway System for new residential subdivisions and new commercial
development through the following management techniques:
Limiting access to roads by controlling the number and location of site access driveways and other
intersecting roads;
Requiring shared driveways or cross-access easements for adjacent properties where the minimum driveway spacing requirements cannot be met; and
Promoting the use of frontage/service roads to minimize the number of site access driveways and intersecting roads, where necessary to maintain the safe and efficient operation of the traffic circulation system."
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
Revise the Policy D-1 and Objective F in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to state:
"Policy D-1: The County will establish the following general procedures whereby the affected municipalities, affected counties, and DER, DNR and the USFWS will be afforded the opportunity to review development proposals that affect the Choctawhatchee Bay, the estuaries and harbors within the County and development proposed in their Comprehensive Plan:
The Walton County Planning Department shall identify these types of planning issues and provide a
structural framework for discussion of these issues with affected parties.
The issues will be developed by the Walton County Planning Department from reviews of development proposals and the Comprehensive Plan of each affected municipality, district or agency.
Each affected municipality, district or agency will be given the opportunity to address issues identified by
the Walton County Planning Department and/or to identify their own issues to be addressed by the Planning Department."
"Objective F: Walton County shall coordinate the planning and provision of services with its three (3) municipalities and adjacent counties and various agencies and districts within the County. Walton County shall also coordinate the establishment or revision of level of service standards for public
facilities with any state, regional, or local entity having responsibility for such facilities."
2. Add the following policies to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element:
"Policy F-1: Notify and request written comments from the cities of Freeport, DeFuniak Springs and Paxton concerning all applications for land use amendments that are contiguous to their borders or within an area of planned annexation."
"Policy F-2: The comprehensive planning forum established in Objective E will coordinate programs of infrastructure development and Improvement between the County, the municipalities, and local service providers so that adopted levels of service can be maintained throughout the entire County."
"Policy F-3: The County will request written comments from the state Department of Transportation, Department of Natural Resources, or the Department of Environmental Regulation and the Northwest Florida Water Management District, as appropriate, concerning any proposed revision to the adopted level of service standards for roads, water, sewer, solid waste, recreation and open space and drainage."
PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Add the following objective and policies in the Conservation/Coastal Management Element:
"Objective F-2: The County shall protect and conserve native vegetative communities and the natural functions of soils and shall regulate mining by cosponsorship of the Soil Conservation Service erosion control projects and land development regulations adopted by the statutory deadline."
"Policy A.2.3: The County shall enforce a minimum 400-foot radius protection zone around all public potable water wellfields. Within this zone the storage or handling of hazardous materials and wastes, landfills and sewage treatment plants shall be prohibited.
"Policy A.2.4: The County shall enlist the cooperation of the NWFWMD to identify existing cones of influence and areas of the County that provide groundwater recharge. Upon identification, maps of these areas shall be adopted as an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Land uses that discharge substances that could infiltrate and degrade the groundwater in these areas shall be prohibited."
"Policy F-2-1: Mining operations shall prevent off-site erosion of soils and shall maintain a 50 foot buffer zone of existing vegetation around the perimeter of the site. Mining which will have an adverse impact on environmentally sensitive areas that cannot be restored shall be prohibited."
"Policy F-2-2: Mine operators shall submit to the County a mine reclamation plan which shall be implemented within one year of the closure of the site.
This reclamation plan shall include provision of revegetation of disturbed areas using native species
"Policy F-2-3: The County shall continue to co-sponsor SCS erosion and sedimentation control programs."
"Policy A-2-5: The County shall adopt procedures for emergency water conservation in accordance with the plans of the Northwest Florida Water Management District."
"Policy A-2-6: The County shall coordinate with the all community water systems and utilities to implement a public education program regarding various methods of water conservation at the household and small business level. This program shall focus on the south Walton County area and shall include the distribution of material to seasonal and permanent residents, as well as business and commercial operations, identifying specific water conservation measures that they should undertake."
"Policy C-2-10: Establish interlocal agreements with adjacent local governments that address the conservation, use, and protection of unique vegetative communities and water bodies that cross local jurisdictional boundaries."
"Policy F-1-8: The County shall coordinate with the Department of Environmental Regulation and the West Florida Regional Planning Council to develop guidelines for the transfer, storage, and treatment of hazardous wastes and the verification of disposal practices of small quantity generators."
"Policy F-1-9: The County shall develop and implement a program to educate the public concerning the proper storage and disposal of household hazardous waste."
In addition, add information regarding unique vegetative communities on page 7-13 to support revised Policies C-2-7 and C-2-10, which provide for protection of these communities. As required by Rule 9J-5.012(2)(b), the support document should include an inventory and analysis, as well as maps, of vegetative communities and wildlife habitats in the coastal area of the County. To support Policy C-2-7, the data and analysis should identify and map unique vegetative communities and the policy should specify how these communities will be protected by the County. Consistent with the requirements of Rule 9J- 5.013(1)(a)5., the support document should identify, throughout the County, wildlife habitats and vegetative communities and should indicate for these areas the presence of listed species The County should consult with local, state and federal sources, including the Florida Natural Areas Inventory, to compile and analyze these data.
Revise Policy C-1-4 in the Conservation/Coastal Management Element to state:
"Policy C-1-4: The County shall cooperate with all appropriate agencies, such as the Department of Natural Resources, the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, and the Northwest Florida Water Management District, to provide the fullest protection to County, State and federally-owned resource-based recreation sites and natural reservations identified in the Conservation or Recreation and Open Space Elements that have been set aside for the protection of natural resources and public recreation. Protection will be provided by prohibiting incompatible land uses adjacent to these areas. Development orders will ensure that activities that are inconsistent with the protection of adjacent natural resources are not permitted."
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
Revise Goal C and add Objective C-2 into the Conservation/ Coastal Management as follows:
"Goal C: TO COOPERATE WITH AREA GOVERNMENTS IN EFFORTS TO REDUCE POLLUTION OF THE CHOCTAWHATCHEE BAY AND TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES."
"Objective C-2: The County will regulate development within and surrounding wetlands, dune systems, lake systems, river and bay systems, wildlife habitat, fisheries, living marine resources and habitat, floodprone areas and the 100- year floodplain in order to conserve, appropriately use, and protect these resources.
Add the following goals and objectives into the Conservation/Coastal Management Element:
"Goal E: TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY AND USE OF THE COASTAL AREAS FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF WALTON COUNTY CITIZENS"
"Objective E-1: During the development review process for all new development and redevelopment along shoreline areas, a shoreline use will not be approved unless it does not decrease the amount of legal public access to beaches, lakes, bay and rivers, open waters and shorelines while providing protection of wetlands, lakes, rivers and bay, endangered species and their associated habitat, grassbeds, oysterbeds, recreational and commercial fisheries, and, improving or maintaining estuarine, surface and groundwater quality.
"Goal F: TO RESTRICT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD DAMAGE OR DESTROY THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE COUNTY."
"Objective F-1: The County shall ensure protection and restoration to its dune and beach system through:
Locational criteria for siting of manmade beach access structures in the dune system; and promoting the use
of revetments and other shoreline protection structures which serve to dissipate wave energies as an alternative to vertical seawalls;
Dune and revegetation programs, initiated through a survey which identifies dune erosion areas, and encompassing educational programs for private property owners, and cooperational programs from local and
state agencies for publicly owned beachfront property.
Prohibiting development seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) and within the coastal protection zone (CPZ). If the CCCL is landward of the CPZ, then development between the CCCL and the CPZ must be consistent with the Future and Use Map and is subject to the permitting requirement of the Florida Department of Natural Resources.
All new private Gulf-front development and
re-development shall include elevated dune crossovers to provide private access to the beach."
"Objective E-2: It is the County's objective to protect the population from the effects of hurricane storm damage by limiting development within the Coastal High-Hazard Area. Without this limitation, hurricane evacuation times, as well as the health and safety of that population allowed to develop within the Coastal High-Hazard Area would be of concern to the County. Therefore, the County shall limit public expenditures that subsidize new development in the Coastal High-Hazard Area and the County shall direct future populations to areas outside the Coastal High-Hazard Area."
"Objective E-3: In order to reduce or eliminate exposure of human life and public and private property to natural hazards, the County will prepare a post- disaster redevelopment plan, or adopt the Regional Planning Council's plan, by March 1, 1993. The following policies shall become effective upon adoption of this plan (December 14, 1990) as interim measures for short-term recovery and long-term redevelopment-activities prior to adoption of a formal post-disaster plan, consistent with the County's Peacetime Emergency Plan."
"Objective C-3: The County shall protect, preserve or sensitively reuse historical and archaeological resources within the County, by regulating development which may impact such resources."
3. Add the following policies into the Conservation/Coastal Management Element:
"Policy C-2-1: Wetlands; Choctawhatchee Bay; living marine resources; coastal barrier resources; coastal dunes and coastal dune lakes; habitat of endangered, threatened or of species of special concern listed by the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission and the natural vegetative communities consisting of (Note: the following list of unique vegetative communities will be revised to be consistent with the revised data and analysis: xeric oak or sand pine scrub, longleaf pine sandhills and coastal strand), are designated as environmental sensitive lands, and shall be protected through overlay zones, buffers, landscaping, wetlands, marina protection, and stormwater management ordinances, and other land development regulations to protect the resource for future generations. The County shall establish the following buffer standards to protect environmentally sensitive lands:
Inlets, creek, rivers, coastal lakes: No development (other than boardwalks, docks or other shoreline
access structures) shall be located within 50 feet of creeks and 75 feet of rivers and coastal lakes, as measured landward from the ordinary or mean high water line. Within buffer areas, clearing of native vegetation shall be limited to 25 percent of the area.
Choctawhatchee Bay: No development (other than boardwalks, docks or other public access structures) shall be located within 50 feet of the above. Within the 50 foot buffer, clearing of native vegetation shall be limited to 25 percent of the area.
Wetlands: No development (other than boardwalks, public access facilities or docks) shall be located
within 50 feet of the above, as measured landward from the upland edge of the wetland. Within the 50 foot buffer, clearing of native vegetation shall be limited to 10 percent of the area.
Silviculture: Consistent with Objective 1.6 and its supporting policies in the Future Land Use Element.
"Policy C-2-2: All dredge and fill activities in wetlands is prohibited, except where a permit has been issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and where the applicant has demonstrated through professionally accepted and applied methodology that such activity will not negatively impact estuarine water quality, oyster beds, natural functions, or the habitat of any listed species. In such cases where the applicant demonstrates the above, wetlands lost shall be replaced or enhanced, at a minimum, at the ratios required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and DER, but no less than 1:1 for projects where replacement or enhancement is not required by those agencies, and shall provide the natural functions of the destroyed wetland. All such activities shall not be approved prior to permit approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or Department of Environmental Regulation. The County shall do all within its power to ensure the protection, conservation and appropriate use of wetlands not regulated by such agencies."
"Policy C-2-3: Construction that occurs within the 100-year floodplain shall be regulated through the following guidelines:
Prohibition of new development in the FEMA V-Zone. Decisions regarding redevelopment within this zone shall be consistent with Policy E-3-2, and when permitted, shall be in accordance with all provisions of the floodplain ordinance. Standards shall not allow structures to be rebuilt (under the definition of rebuild) more than twice in any 100 year period in the V-Zone;
Limitations on development in the 100-year floodplain to two dwelling unit per acre or to the underlying density, whichever is less , except that no
development Is permitted within the 10-year and 25-year floodplains; and
Development of requirements for construction which protect health, safety and property: requirements shall be at least as strict as those recommended by the Federal Emergency Management Agency for local flooding and Coastal Construction Codes. Requirements shall protect natural functions of floodplains, including:
Structures and septic tanks shall be clustered on the non-floodplain portions of the site unless the property owner would be denied reasonable use of
his property;
All structures in the 100-year floodplain shall be elevated on pilings to reduce the amount of fill;
compensatory storage of filled areas shall be required to maintain flood storage capacity;
Where siting a septic tank in the 100-year floodplain is necessary to allow the owner
reasonable use of the property, design shall be in accordance with the standards of Chapter 10D-6,
F.A.C.; and
Consistency with water quality and quantity standards of the stormwater management level of service standard."
"Policy C-2-4: The County shall protect critical habitat of endangered, threatened and species of special concern identified on the Map of Potential Critical Habitat Areas through the requirements listed under Policy C-2-7."
"Policy C-2-5: The County shall coordinate with the Florida Marine Patrol, Department of Natural Resources, the Marine Fisheries Commission, and other federal and state agencies to ensure protection of seagrass beds, oyster beds, sea turtle nests, fisheries and other living marine resources."
"Policy C-2-6: The County shall request assistance from the Department of Natural Resources, Tourist Development Council and local businesses in setting up displays and programs which increase public awareness of the need to protect coastal resources and other living marine resources, including;
protection of sea turtle nests, through neighborhood watch programs, fencing, waterfront lighting which
does not distract hatchlings away from the ocean, and signage. The County shall initiate contact with the Florida Department of Natural Resources and request assistance in the development of a sea turtle nesting protection ordinance and shall adopt and implement such an ordinance by April 1, 1993;
protection of oyster beds, through maintenance of waterfront septic tanks, management of stormwater, pesticides and herbicide runoff; and
protection of seagrasses, through maintenance of waterfront septic tanks, management of stormwater, pesticides and herbicide runoff, and signage to warn boaters of shallow areas; and
protection of dune vegetation, through development of dune walkovers, signage programs and handouts on
planting of native vegetation."
"Policy C-2-7: In order to protect native vegetative communities determined to be endangered, threatened or of special concern, as determined by the Department of Agriculture or Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, and as identified by FNAI as occurring in Walton County, including habitat of endangered, threatened or special concern designated species, all new development shall be required to comply with the following native vegetation requirements:
Native vegetation shall be identified on a
site-by-site basis using the FNAI inventory, LANDSAT maps, soil surveys of the USDA Soil Conservation Service or other best available data source. The developer shall design and locate improvements to minimize the removal of natural vegetation. Because the clearing of land as an adjunct of construction is defined as development and requires a permit from the County, no land alteration, clearing or grubbing may be carried out prior to issuance of a final development order or development permit, including the issuance of a building permit;
For development in areas characterized by the coastal strand community (dune vegetation) within the CCCL or CPZ, 95 percent of the natural dune vegetation on the site must be retained. Within the coastal strand community but outside the CCCL or SPZ, 100 percent of
the natural dune vegetation outside the building footprint (including parking and access areas) must be retained. One hundred percent of all additional landscaping material used on the primary dune system shall be composed of native plants adapted to soil and climatic conditions onsite. Vegetation for dune protection measures shall be limited to native
salt-resistant species suitable for beach/dune stabilization;
For development on parcels of two acres of more in areas characterized by sand pine scrub, longleaf pine sandhill, or xeric oak scrub communities, 50 percent of the natural scrub vegetation on the site shall be retained. Where the community on one parcel is contiguous with native plant community on one or more adjacent parcels, the developable portion shall be located to minimize disruption of this contiguity to the maximum extent possible.
For development on parcels of two acres of more in the mixed hardwood and pine native upland vegetation community, 25 percent of the natural vegetation on the site shall be retained. Where the community on one
parcel is contiguous with native plant community on one or more adjacent parcels, the developable portion shall be located to minimize disruption of this contiguity to the maximum extent possible.
The land development regulations shall provide standards for determining what species determine each vegetation category, and shall be consistent with the FNAI and LANDSAT inventories.
Habitat for endangered, threatened or species of special concern listed by the Department of Agriculture or the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission. No land alteration activity is allowed
which alters the ecological Integrity, balance or character of land or water areas determined by means of the due process provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act to be critical habitat, or lands documented as utilized any federal or
state-designated species, except in cases where the developer commits to a plan approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission to relocate or recover the species to another parcel of land."
"Policy C-2-8: The coastal dune lakefront protection zone is defined as the zone beginning at the mean or ordinary high water line of the coastal dune lakes and extending 300 feet landward for all coastal dune lakes depicted in Map 3A (note: the plan must include an adopted map at sufficient scale to identify these lakes). Development shall be allowed within this zone, so long as the following standards will be met:
Septic tanks: Septic tank drain fields must be located at least 100 feet from the ordinary or mean high water line, whichever applies;
Stormwater management: New lots shall be graded to ensure untreated stormwater runoff from lawn fertilizers, pesticides, or patios, driveways, etc., do not enter the lake. If regional stormwater facilities will not provide this standard, the lot shall utilize a vegetated swale and berm system, underground seepage system or other stormwater treatment method between
the developed area and the lake to hold and treat runoff, consistent with the level of service standard for drainage facilities adopted in this plan.
Erosion control: Specific erosion control measures shall be utilized during construction activity, such as staked and staggered hay bales, siltation barriers, floating silt and filter berms. Further, erosion and sedimentation controls shall be left in place until the disturbed areas are stabilized with permanent vegetation that will prevent the transport of sediment off site.
In addition to erosion control during construction, stabilization of the shoreline shall be provided by limiting clearing of natural vegetation within 50 feet of the mean or ordinary high water line of the shoreline to 25 percent of the site.
Hazardous wastes: No land use shall be allowed within the zone which stores, handles or generates hazardous wastes
Seawalls, bulkheads, revetments and rip-rap are not permitted
Endangered Species: Native vegetative communities, including habitat for listed species, in this zone shall be protected in accordance with Policy C-2-7.
No new point or non-point sources of pollution shall be discharged into the lakes, such as treated
wastewater effluent or untreated stormwater runoff.
Setback: all new development and redevelopment, including septic tank drain fields shall be setback from the mean high water line at least 100 feet.
Open Space: all new development and redevelopment shall preserve at least 75 percent of the parcel in open space."
"Policy C-2-11: The following standards shall apply to the land that is located within 150 feet landward of the mean of ordinary high water line of the Choctawhatchee Bay:
Septic tanks: Septic tank drain fields must be located at least 75 feet from the ordinary or mean high water line, whichever applies;
Stormwater management: Within the zone, new lots must be graded to ensure untreated stormwater runoff from
lawn fertilizers, pesticides, or patios, driveways, etc. do not enter the lake. If regional stormwater facilities will not provide this standard, the lot shall utilize a vegetated swale and berm system, underground seepage system or other stormwater treatment method between the developed area and the lake to hold and treat runoff, consistent with the level of service standard for drainage facilities adopted in this plan.
Erosion control: Specific erosion control measures shall be utilized during construction activity, such as staked and staggered hay bales, siltation barriers, floating silt and filter berms. Further, erosion and sedimentation controls shall be left in place until the disturbed areas are stabilized with permanent vegetation that will prevent the transport of sediment off site.
In addition to erosion control during construction, stabilization of the shoreline shall be provided by limiting clearing of natural vegetation within 50 feet of the mean or ordinary high water line of the shoreline to 25 percent of the site.
Hazardous wastes: No laid use shall be allowed within the zone which stores, handles or generates hazardous wastes.
Seawalls: New vertical seawalls and bulkheads shall be prohibited along Choctawhatchee Bay, unless the
property is located directly in between two properties that have an existing seawall, provided that she length of the seawall does not exceed 150'. In other areas, alternatives such as revetments, rip-rap, native vegetation and other shoreline protection structures which serve to dissipate wave energies shall be required.
Endangered Species: Native vegetative communities, including habitat for endangered and threatened species in this zone shall be protected in accordance with Policy C-2-7.
No new point or non-point sources of pollution shall be discharged into the lakes, such as treated
wastewater effluent or untreated stormwater runoff, unless permitted by FDER."
"Policy E-2-3: The recommendations of any interagency hazard mitigation report which addresses future flood losses and is prepared in response to a Presidential Disaster Declaration shall be incorporated into the County's Disaster Plan."
"Policy F-1-1: The County shall solicit assistance from the Department of Natural Resources, neighborhood and citizens groups in carrying out a survey of damaged or eroded dune areas."
"Policy F-1-2: Using the results of the survey, the County shall solicit funds to restore degraded dunes and beaches, through implementation of a program for construction of dune walkovers for all public access areas and revegetation with native vegetation."
"Policy F-1-3: The County shall enlist the assistance of the Tourist Development Council, neighborhood groups or citizen committees in developing an awareness program for protection and voluntary revegetation of dunes and beaches by residents and tourists."
"Policy F-1-4: The County shall limit clearing of natural dune vegetation and development on the primary dune in accordance with Policies C-2-7 and E-2- 5."
"Policy F-1-5: The County shall coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources and other applicable agencies and organizations to implement the Walton County Beach Restoration Management Plan (Prepared by FDNR, 1990). The County's dune restoration and protection program shall include provisions for increasing public access to the beach."
"Policy F-1-6: The placement of colored or silty fill material within the coastal barrier resource system, coastal dune lakefront protection zone, coastal protection overlay zone or seaward of the coastal construction control line where thee beaches may become discolored by such materials is prohibited."
"Policy C-1-1: New vertical seawalls and bulkheads shall be prohibited along Choctawhatchee Bay, unless the property is located directly in between two properties that have an existing seawall at time of adoption of this plan (December 14, 1990), provided that the length of the seawall does not exceed 150'. Rip-rap shall be placed at the toe of all new or replaced bulkheads and
seawalls. In other areas, alternatives such as revetments, rip-rap, native vegetation and other shoreline protection structures which serve to dissipate wave energies shall be required."
"Policy C-1-1a: No pier, dock or walkway shall be located over submerged land which is vegetated with seagrasses except as necessary to reach waters at a depth of one foot below the lowest point of the boat, including the motor, at mean low tide. Boring to set pilings is allowed; however, any material removed must be disposed of at an upland site intended for this purpose. Unless vessel access would be prohibited, the docking terminus shall not be located over submerged vegetation areas, such as seagrass beds."
"Policy E-3-1: The following post-disaster actions shall be considered short-term recovery measures:
Damage assessment to meet post-disaster assistance requirements and to aid in post-disaster redevelopment decisions;
Debris removal;
Emergency protection measures including repairs to waters, sewer, electric, and other public utilities to resin-ore service;
Public assistance including temporary housing and provision of food, water, toilets, and clothing.
"Policy E-3-2: The process for making long-term redevelopment decisions specified in the County's post-disaster redevelopment plan and shall be consistent with the following general guidelines and principles for the relocation, removal or modification of damaged structures:
The County adopts the following definitions for making decisions pertaining to redevelopment in the Coastal
High Hazard Area. Based upon the following definitions, all rebuilding activities shall be subject to Coastal Construction Code Standards and Coastal High Hazard Area limitations:
"Repair" means the restoration of a portion of the structure, including the foundation of the
structure, to its original design configuration or an equivalent structural standard. Repair of a structure assumes that a significant portion of the structure, including its foundation, remains intact. If the supported structure or its foundation has collapsed to the point that either the supported structure of the foundation require substantial rebuilding, then such activity shall not constitute repair. If a structure, as a result of damage to either the supported structured or the foundation, is no longer habitable, such structure shall be presumed to require substantial rebuilding.
"Rebuilding" means any construction activity, including alteration of an existing foundation, which would result in increased structural stability such that the survivability of the structure during a coastal storm is increased. Rebuilding shall also include any construction activity which, as noted above, involve the substantial rebuilding of either the supported structure or the foundation of she structure.
Rebuilding (as defined above) activities will be in accordance with DNR's requirements for development seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line, and all structural requirements of the County's Flooding and Coastal Construction Code. Further, prior to approving such redevelopment activities, the County shall require the developer to provide documentation that the structure being built is a landward as possible from the FEMA V-Zone and Coastal Construction Control Line. The applicant shall provide proof that the structure cannot be moved any further landward on the lot without causing harm to public health or safety. The County may vary building setback requirements in order to accomplish the intent of this policy.
The County shall keep a record of all repair and rebuilding activities. Structures may not be rebuilt (under the definition of rebuild) more than twice in any 100-year period in the V-Zone and Coastal Barriers Resource System."
"Policy E-2-1: The Coastal High-Hazard Area is defined as the area encompassed by the Category I storm surge area as depicted in the Tri-State Hurricane Evacuation Study, June 1986."
"Policy E-2-2: No public infrastructure shall be allowed in the Coastal High-Hazard Area, except for that needed to provide public access to the shoreline, to serve public parks that have been approved by the County or by state and federal agencies, and to protect or enhance natural resources.
Provision of water and sewer service at private expense to existing lots of record at the time of adoption of this plan (December 14, 1990) is permitted, as long as such provision does not result in conflict with policies for: DNR permit requirements for the Coastal Construction Control Line; criteria adopted for determining when structures can be rebuilt; coastal protection zone requirements; the land development regulations; and the state policy to limit public expenditures that subsidize development permitted in coastal high-hazard areas, except for enhancement of natural resources."
"Policy E-2-3: New sanitary sewer facilities in the Coastal High- Hazard Area, installed in accordance with the standards of Policy E-2-2, shall be flood-proofed and backflow preventers shall be fitted on new septic tanks."
"Policy E-2-4: Permitting of new development and redevelopment in the Coastal High-Hazard Area shall not result in a increase in hurricane evacuation times, as of the date of adopted of this plan."
"Policy E-2-5: The creation of new lots (through platting, lot splits, or other method) that lie entirely within the Coastal High-Hazard Area is prohibited."
"Policy E-1-1: Priority for depicting shoreline land uses on the Future Land Use Map shall be as follows:
conservation or recreation;
public access;
water-dependent commercial or industrial;
residential;
water-related commercial or industrial."
"Policy E-1-2: All new or redeveloped (using rebuilding definition of Policy E-3-2) shoreline land uses shall:
Locate on existing upland areas;
Be constructed to conform to coastal construction building codes;
Be constructed in accordance with the policies for construction within the Coastal High-Hazard Area;
Demonstrate that existing public utilities, infrastructure and services are in place to support the proposed use;
Not be in conflict with existing, conforming, adjacent land uses;
Provide public access where traditional public access points are directly affected by the development;
Landscape using native plant species;
Provide for the treatment of all discharge, including stormwater runoff, from land uses into bodies of water
to incorporate standards for treatment adequate to meet the County's adopted level of service standard for drainage facilities;
Restrict impervious surface coverage consistent with standards adopted in land development regulations."
"Policy E-1-3: All new, expanded or redeveloped marinas shall comply with the following criteria, based on the recommendations of the report by the Center for Aquatic Research and Resource Management, Florida State University, titled: "Draft Final Report: Choctawhatchee Bay Project", December 7, 1987:
Demonstrate the presence of upland areas which are large enough to accommodate all the required utility and support facilities as well as enough parking
to satisfy the projected demand based upon professionally accepted standards such as those of the Institute of Transportation Engineers;
Provide a hurricane mitigation and evacuation plan;
Be located in proximity to existing channels so that minimum or nor dredging shall be required for provision of docking facilities;
Have available sewage treatment facilities to serve the anticipated volume of waste consistent with County's adopted the level of service standard for sanitary sewer facilities;
Locate in areas having adequate water depth to accommodate the proposed boats use without disturbance of bottom habitats;
Delineate immediate access points with channel markers that indicate speed limits and any other applicable regulations;
Be sited in areas consistent with the land uses in the Future Land Use Map;
Locate in areas away from seagrass beds, oyster reefs and other important fish and shellfish spawning and nursery areas;
Demonstrate that it meets a public need thereby demonstrating economic viability/feasibility;
Dry (stacked) storage, elevator lifts, and other land-based alternatives are preferential to dredged basins wherever feasible alternatives are possible."
"Policy E-1-4: Continued public access to beaches and shorelines, shall be ensured by requiring:
Developments which would preclude access to legally established public accesses shall not be approved unless a comparable alternative accessway that is equally convenient is provided as a condition of development consistent with Chapter 161.55(6), Florida Statutes;
Obtain title, easement, or other ownership interest, in areas where the public has established an accessway consistent with Chapter 161.55, Florida Statutes, and construct dune walkovers at these points;
Shoreline renourished at public expense shall have public access provided in accordance with Chapter 161.161, Florida Statutes and Department of Natural Resources regulations."
"Policy C-3-1: If an archaeological site is located in close proximity to any proposed activity which may be permitted within the Coastal High-Hazard Area (such as recreational, coastal access or other related activity), no work shall be undertaken until the applicant consults with the Division of Historic
Resources in developing a preservation plan for that resource. The map of known resources shall be maintained at the County Building Department, and must be reviewed during development proposals.
"Policy C-3-2: All development (regardless of location) shall maintain a minimum 50 foot buffer from known archaeological sites."
"Policy C-3-3: The County shall coordinate with the Division of Historic Resources to establish historic preserves or parks at sites of known historical or archaeological significance."
"Policy C-1-2: Consistent with the Northwest Florida Coast Resource Planning and Management Plan the County shall limit the impacts of development and redevelopment on wildlife habitat, living marine resources, and beach and dune systems, through the following measures:
a marina siting ordinance which minimizes estuarine pollution, as described in Policy E-1-3;
stormwater management requirements for all new development and redevelopment that prohibit onshore construction or lands uses that discharge untreated stormwater into areas containing seagrass beds, oyster reefs, other marine nursery areas, and waters of the state;
wetland buffer requirements, consistent with Policy C-2-1;
Choctawhatchee Bay buffer requirements consistent with Policy C-2-1; and
native vegetation protection requirements consistent with Policy C-2-7."
Add the following paragraph on page 7-10: "SHORELINE ACCESS:
Access to the beach is an issue of interest when considering future land use. Figure 3 depicts the existing public beach access locations within the County. While no definitive studies have been completed at this time which compare existing beach access levels of service with future needs, the Tourist Development Council (TDC) completed an informative survey in September of 1987. The survey of several hundred residents, businesses, and tourists found that beach access was ranked as the top priority in terms of tourist-oriented facility needs to meet this demand, Walton County is attempting to acquire four additional properties totaling 21.4 acres for improving beach access in the next year. An additional site, the five acre DOT park, is already improved and will be deeded to the TDC as well.
The TDC continues to improve beach access by funding construction of parking areas, dune walkovers, and other facilities needed for public access to the beach. Furthermore, the TDC has begun developing a needs analysis that will include an assessment of beach access, which should bring additional information in the near future. The County has recognized the need for promoting public beach access sites through its land development regulations. Developments that
provide unimpeded beach access and a beach parking area dedicated to the County shall be eligible for a ten percent density bonus."
Since the data and analysis in the adopted plan concerning the projected impact on hurricane evacuation planning from the anticipated population density and the special needs of the existing and projected populations is based on the 1986 Tri-State Hurricane Evacuation Study and does not include the projected impact of the anticipated population density of the comprehensive plan as it will be revised, the County shall include specific data for the hurricane evacuation area for each evacuation zone to demonstrate that the number of persons and evacuation times are less under the plan as it will be revised than the number of persons and evacuation times considered in the Tri- State Study.
Revise Objective 1.2 and its implementing policies in the Capital Improvements Element to state:
"Objective 1.2: Public expenditures in the Coastal High-Hazard Area shall be limited to the extent necessary to support development permitted by this plan (including the Future Land Use Map) but shall not subsidize new development in the Coastal High-Hazard Areas"
"Policy 1.2.1: No public infrastructure, other than routine repair and maintenance, shall be allowed in the Coastal High-Hazard Area, except for that needed to provide public access to the shoreline, to serve public parks that have been approved by the County and by state and federal agencies, and to protect or enhance natural resources and promote hurricane evacuation.
Provision of water and sewer service at private expense to existing lots of record at the time of plan adoption (December 14, 1990) is permitted, as long as such provision does not result in conflict with policies for: DNR permit requirements for the Coastal Construction Control Line; criteria adopted for determining when structure can be rebuilt; coastal protection zone policy to limit public expenditures that subsidize development permitted in Coastal High- Hazard Area, except for enhancement of natural resources."
Delete Policy 1.2.2 in the Capital Improvements Element.
SANCTIONS
It is of great concern to the Commission that Walton County has taken more than three years to develop its comprehensive plan, and yet the most basic elements of that plan, namely an existing land use map and a future land use map based on relevant and appropriate data and analysis, do not yet exist. Further, the Commission is also concerned that the coastal areas of south Walton County, which are among the most pristine and beautiful natural areas of the state, be protected. These natural coastal areas provide unique protection for the residents of Walton County during hurricanes and other natural disasters and so should be conserved to provide needed protection. One of the chief means of this protection is through the adoption of a satisfactory comprehensive land use plan. Other means include, but are not limited to, the adoption and enforcement of effective means, such as a moratorium, to hold development in abeyance while the County complies with the terms of this Order and applicable statutes and rules.
The Commission has considered the immediate imposition of full sanctions, pursuant to s. 163.3184(11), F.S. It has noted that the parties have made progress in the several months preceding this Order and have reached agreement
on many aspects of the remedial amendments. It is for this reason, and in the belief that the County will comply with these remedial amendments according to the time period< set forth below, that the Commission does not impose full sanctions on the County at this time.
However, the Commission does consider the following sanction appropriate at this time and, pursuant to Section 163.3184(11)(b), Florida Statutes, hereby requires that the Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") consider the fact that the coastal management element has been determined to be not in compliance when it considers permits under Section 161.053, Florida Statutes, and that the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund ("Board") shall likewise be required to consider the County's noncompliance with the coastal management element a factor when it decides whether to sell, convey any interest in, or lease any sovereignty lands or submerged lands. Both DNR and the Board shall consider this noncompliance until the element is brought into full compliance.
Further, in order to avoid the full imposition of sanctions, the Commission finds that the County must undertake the following, and:
Adopt by ordinance all Remedial Actions contained herein within, including those pertaining to land use densities, 45 days from the date of this Order, and including an existing land use map consistent with the guidelines herein for preparing an existing land use map;
Adopt by February 9, 1993, and transmit to he Department of Community Affairs a Future Land Use Map for Walton County based on relevant data and analysis, including that which is specified in the Remedial Actions. This Map and the complete amended plan must be consistent with the revised data and analysis required by this Order; and
Within 30 days from the final date of this Order, and every 30 days thereafter, submit to the Commission a monthly status report with documentation to show compliance with the terms and conditions of this Order.
All terms of this Order are effective, and must be complied with, as of the date it is entered. The Commission shall retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing this Order. If the Commission determines that the County has complied with the actions specified in this Order, the Commission will conclude its jurisdiction over this action. If the Commission determines that the County has not complied with the terms of the Remedial Actions specified in this Order, or is not proceeding in good faith to comply with it, according to the time periods specified herein, or that the County is failing to enforce its adopted plan and regulations, the Commission shall review the matter for implementation of full sanctions available under Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The Commission may also accelerate the time periods as specified above should it find that the County is not proceeding in a timely fashion toward full compliance with the terms of, and conditions specified in, this Order. In order to assist the Commission with its determinations regarding the County's compliance with the terms of this Order, the County shall supply to the DCA all development orders and building permits within 10 days of issuance, which orders and permits detail the type of development, size, number of units planned and location.
Any party to this Order has the right to seek judicial review of the Order pursuant to Section 120.68, Florida Statutes, by the filing of a Notice of Appeal pursuant to Rule 9.110, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, with the Secretary of the Commission, David K. Coburn, Office of Planning and Budgeting,
Executive Office of the Governor, Room 426, Carlton Building, 501 South Gadsden Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001; and by filing a copy of the Notice of Appeal, accompanied by the applicable filing fees, with the appropriate District Court of Appeal. Notice of Appeal must be filed within 30 days of the day this Order is filed with the Clerk of the Commission.
DONE and ordered this 4th day of November, 1992 in Tallahassee, Florida.
DAVID K. COBURN, Secretary Administration Commission
Filed with the Clerk of the Administration Commission this 5th day of November, 1992.
CLERK, Administration Commission
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U.S. Mail to the parties listed below this 5th day of November 1992.
DAVID K. COBURN, Secretary Administration Commission
Honorable Lawton Chiles Honorable Bob Butterworth Governor Attorney General
The Capitol The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Tallahassee, Florida 32399
Honorable Bob Crawford Honorable Tom Gallagher Commissioner of Agriculture Treasurer
The Capitol The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Tallahassee, Florida 32399
Honorable Jim Smith Honorable Gerald Lewis Secretary of State Comptroller
The Capitol The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Tallahassee, Florida 32399
Honorable Betty Castor Robin Hassler, Esquire Commissioner of Education Counsel to Governor & Cabinet The Capitol The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Tallahassee, Florida 32399
George Ralph Miller, Esquire David J Russ, Esquire
County Attorney Kenneth D. Goldberg, Esquire
Post Office Box 687 Dept. of Community Affairs DeFuniak Springs, FL 32433 2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
Fred HKent, Jr., Esquire Chris Cadenhead, Esquire Post Office Box 53075 Post Office Box 5354 Jacksonville, FL 32201-3075 Destin, FL 32540
Richard Grosso, Esquire Florida Administrative Law 1000 Friends of Florida Report
Post Office Box 5948 Post Office Box 385 Tallahassee, FL 32314-5948 Gainesville, Florida 32602
Don Davis, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings
1230 Apalachee Parkway The DeSoto Building
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550
=================================================================
DISTRICT COURT OPINION
=================================================================
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY and ST. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO JOSEPH LAND AND DEVELOPMENT FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND COMPANY, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
Appellants, CASE NO. 92-4063
DOAH CASE NO. 91-1080GM
v.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, 1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA and BOB WHITE.
Appellees.
/ Opinion filed June 12, 1995.
An appeal from Order of the Administration Commission.
Fred H. Kent, Jr. of Kent, Hayden, Facciolo & McMorrow, Jacksonville, for Appellants.
Kenneth D. Goldberg and David J. Russ of Department of Community Affairs, Tallahassee, for Appellee Department of Community Affairs.
Richard Grosso, Tallahassee, for Appellees 1000 Friends of Florida and Bob White.
ALLEN, J.
The appellants challenge a final order by which the Administration Commission (the Commission) determined that a comprehensive plan adopted by Walton County was not in compliance with the requirements of chapter 163, Florida Statutes. This order was entered after an administrative hearing in which the appellee 1000 Friends of Florida was allowed to intervene. We conclude that 1000 Friends should not have been allowed to participate as an intervenor, and that this was a material error in procedure which may have impaired the fairness of the proceeding.
The administrative hearing was held pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a), Florida Statutes, which identifies the parties to the proceeding as including "any affected person who intervenes." Section 163.3184(1)(a) defines "affected person" to include "persons owning property, residing, or owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government" which adopted the plan. The appellants challenged 1000 Friends' intervention below, arguing that 1000 Friends did not satisfy the statutory definition of an affected person.
In allowing intervention, the hearing officer indicated that 1000 Friends had members residing in Walton County. There was no evidence to support this finding, and the Commission did not rely on this theory. Instead, the Commission construed the statutory definition as a nonexclusive listing, and adopted an expansive interpretation so as to afford broad public participation in the review process. Noting that 1000 Friends had participated in the local planning process by commenting on the proposed plan and attending public hearings, the Commission concluded that this was a sufficient basis upon which to grant 1000 Friends standing to intervene.
The hearing pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a) is a section 120.57, Florida Statutes proceeding. Participation in a section 120.57 proceeding ordinarily requires that one's substantial interests be impacted in a way which produces injury of a type which the proceeding is designed to protect, and in a manner beyond the injury which might be sustained by the general public. See Grove Isle v. Bayshore Homeowners Association, 418 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), rev. denied, 430 So.2d 451 (Fla. 1983); Agrico Chemical v. Department of
Environmental Regulation, 406 So.2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), rev. denied, 415
So.2d 1359 and 415 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 1982). Section 163.3184(1)(a) provides a more expansive definition of an affected person who may participate in the section 120.57 proceeding held pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a). The Commission would further expand the statutory definition in the present case, and would do so without appropriate legislative guidance.
Although the Commission refers to the broad statement of legislative intent to encourage fullest public participation in the comprehensive planning process,
as recited in section 163.3181(1), Florida Statutes, this legislative edict is made in connection with a statutory directive for local governmental units to adopt procedures to ensure such participation. Section 163.3184(7) further requires the local government to review written comments submitted by any person. By contrast, however, section 163.3184(10)(a) specifies that a person must be an "affected person" in order to participate in the section 120.57 proceeding.
By suggesting that 1000 Friends qualified as an affected person because it had participated in the local planning process, the Commission failed to accord proper effect to the requirement in section 163.3184(1)(a) that the described persons (apart from an adjoining government) must have submitted comments or objections during the local process. Such participation is an additional statutory requirement, rather than an independent basis by which one may qualify as an affected person. While an agency's interpretation of a statute which it administers may ordinarily be accorded deference, such an interpretation must comport with the pertinent legislation and may not vitiate a portion of the statute. See Palm Harbor Special Fire Control District v. Kelly, 516 So.2d 249 (Fla. 1987). The Commission's unilateral expansion of section 163.3184(1)(a) does not accord with the statutory catalog of affected persons, which appears to be a comprehensive listing and which should not be altered without clear authorization and direction from the legislature.
1000 Friends asserts that it nevertheless qualified as an affected person operating a business within the boundaries of the local government. The Commission did not predicate 1000 Friends' standing on this theory, but 1000 Friends notes that it did participate in the local planning process and that such involvement is within the declared purpose for its corporate existence. In this context, such participation may constitute a business activity. But the section 163.3184(1)(a) definition is not satisfied merely by conducting some business activity in connection with the comprehensive planning process, as the statute specifies that one must be "owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government" to qualify as an affected person in this regard. Even though representatives of 1000 Friends physically appeared in Walton County during the local planning process, such incidental and transient presence does not suffice under section 163.3184(1)(a). Rather, the statute contemplates a more substantial local nexus, of a type which might make the business potentially subject to the constraints of the local comprehensive plan. 1000 Friends' involvement in the planning process does not meet this standard, and does not qualify as the operation of a business within the county, as contemplated by section 163.3184(1)(a).
1000 Friends also asserts that any error in allowing it to intervene was harmless, based on 1000 Friends' alignment with the Department of Community Affairs on one side of the proceeding, and 1000 Friends' attorney's representation of another similarly aligned party. Although the aligned parties may have shared a community of interest and arguably joined in the presentation of certain evidence, the record does not clearly indicate that the same evidence would necessarily have been received without 1000 Friends' participation. Such participation was a material error in procedure which thus may have impaired the fairness of the proceeding, so as to warrant relief under section 120.68(8)f Florida Statutes.
The order is set aside and the case is remanded.
DAVIS, J., and SMITH, SENIOR JUDGE, CONCUR.
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| Aug. 01, 1994 | Notice of Change of Address filed. (From Richard Grosso) |
| Aug. 10, 1993 | Amended notice of appeal filed. |
| Aug. 06, 1993 | AGENCY APPEAL, ONCE THE RETENTION SCHEDULE OF -KEEP ONE YEAR AFTER CLOSURE- IS MET, CASE FILE IS RETURNED TO AGENCY GENERAL COUNSEL. -ac |
| Aug. 06, 1993 | BY ORDER OF THE COURT filed. |
| Feb. 12, 1993 | BY ORDER OF THE COURT (motion for extension of time to serve initial brief granted) filed. |
| Jan. 19, 1993 | Draft Order filed. |
| Jan. 14, 1993 | CC Notice of Commission Meeting filed. (From David K. Coburn) |
| Dec. 22, 1992 | 1000 Friends of FL and Bob White`s Response in Support of the Department of Community Affairs` Motion to Vacate Automatic Stay and Request for Imposition of Sanctions filed. |
| Dec. 03, 1992 | Letter to DOAH from DCA filed. DCA Case No. 1-92-4063 |
| Nov. 06, 1992 | Final Order filed. |
| Jun. 05, 1992 | 1000 Friends of Florida And Bob White's Response to Motion to Reopen or Rehear filed. |
| Jun. 03, 1992 | Order sent out. (motion of respondent Walton County to reopen and rehear matter is denied) |
| May 29, 1992 | Motion to Reopen or Rehear filed. |
| Apr. 13, 1992 | Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held 10/1-4/91, 10/8-9/91. |
| Feb. 24, 1992 | Proposed Recommended Order w/computer disk filed. (From George R. Miller) |
| Feb. 24, 1992 | Notice of Joinder of Intervenors St. Joe Paper Company and St. Joseph Land and Development Company filed. |
| Feb. 24, 1992 | Notice of Filing Joint Proposed Recommended Order of the Department of Community Affairs, 1000 Friends of Florida, and Bob White w/Joint Proposed Recommended Order of the Department of Community Affairs', 1000Friend of Florida, an d Bob White & computer d |
| Feb. 20, 1992 | Order Granting Motion to Extend Page Limit sent out. |
| Feb. 13, 1992 | (Petitioner) Motion to Extend Page Limit for Proposed Recommended Order filed. |
| Jan. 30, 1992 | Order Granting Motion for Extension of Time sent out. |
| Jan. 27, 1992 | (Intervenor) Consent to Extension of Time filed. |
| Jan. 23, 1992 | (Respondent) Motion for Extension of Time filed. |
| Jan. 21, 1992 | Ltr. to DWD from G. Chandler filed. |
| Jan. 07, 1992 | Transcript (Vols 1-6) filed. |
| Dec. 31, 1991 | Cover Letter to DWD from D. Russ & Att'd CC Letter to D. Russ from D.Hinote (re: tape of special meeting) filed. |
| Nov. 15, 1991 | (1 Poster) Land sat image for Walton county and a copy of the tape of the special meeting held December 13, 1991) w/cover ltr filed. (From David J. Russ) |
| Oct. 24, 1991 | Letter to DWD from Ginny Chandler (re: Transcript) filed. |
| Oct. 08, 1991 | CASE STATUS: Hearing Held. |
| Oct. 04, 1991 | CASE STATUS: Hearing Held. |
| Sep. 30, 1991 | Order Denying Intervenors Motion to Dismiss sent out. |
| Sep. 30, 1991 | (Intervenors) Motion for Continuance filed. |
| Sep. 27, 1991 | Petitioner's Response to Motion to Dismiss or, in The Alternative to Abate filed. |
| Sep. 27, 1991 | Order Denying Second Motion for Continuance sent out. |
| Sep. 27, 1991 | Respondent Walton County's Prehearing Statement filed. (From George Ralph Miller) |
| Sep. 27, 1991 | (Intervenors) Motion to Dismiss or, In The Alternative, To Abate filed. |
| Sep. 26, 1991 | Order Denying Motion to Compel sent out. |
| Sep. 26, 1991 | Order Denying Motion for Stay of Proceedings sent out. |
| Sep. 26, 1991 | Second Motion for Continuance filed. |
| Sep. 26, 1991 | Prehearing Stipulation of Intervenors St. Joe Paper Company and St. Joseph Land and Development Company (Schedule A-B) filed. |
| Sep. 25, 1991 | Petitioner Department of Communtiy Affairs and Intervenors 1000 Friends of Florida and Bob Whites Prehearing Statement; Notice of Filing ofPetitioner Department of Community Affairs and Intervenors 1000 Friends of Florida and Bob Whites Prehearing Statem |
| Sep. 25, 1991 | Petitioner's Response to Walton County's Motion to Compel filed. |
| Sep. 25, 1991 | (Petitioner) Response in Opposition to Motion For Stay of Proceedingsfiled. |
| Sep. 24, 1991 | (Respondent) Motion to Compel filed. (From George Ralph Miller) |
| Sep. 24, 1991 | (Respondent) Motion For Stay of Proceedings w/Petition For Certiorariand Review & Affidavit filed. (From George Ralph Miller) |
| Sep. 23, 1991 | Notice of Service of Answers to Interrogatories w/Respondent, Walton County First Interrogatories to Petitioner filed. (From Stephanie M. Callahan) |
| Sep. 20, 1991 | Department of Community Affairs and Intervenor 1000 Friends of Florida and Bob White's Witness List filed. (From Kenneth Goldberg) |
| Sep. 20, 1991 | Objection of St. Joe Paper Company and St. Joseph Land and Development Company to Response of Department of Community Affairs filed. (From Fred Kent, Jr.) |
| Sep. 18, 1991 | Order Denying Motions for Continuance sent out. |
| Sep. 17, 1991 | (Respondent) Motion for Continuance filed. |
| Sep. 16, 1991 | (Petitioner) Response in Opposition to Motion for Continuance filed. |
| Sep. 13, 1991 | (Intervenors) Motion for Continuance filed. (From Fred H. Kent, Jr.) |
| Sep. 12, 1991 | Notice of Second Propounding Interrogatories filed. (From George R. Miller) |
| Aug. 30, 1991 | Order sent out. (Re: Intervention for St. Joe Paper Company and subsidiary, St. Joseph Land and Development Company). |
| Aug. 22, 1991 | (Respondent) Notice of Propounding Interrogatories filed. |
| Aug. 08, 1991 | Notice of Service of Answers to Interrogatories filed. (From George R. Miller) |
| Jul. 30, 1991 | (Respondent) Response to Request for Admissions filed. (From George Ralph Miller) |
| Jul. 22, 1991 | Petition of St. Joe Paper Company and Joseph Land and Development Company For Leave to Intervene filed. (From Fred H. Kent, Jr.) |
| Jul. 12, 1991 | Order for More Definite Statement and Granting Petition to Intervene of Susan S. Myers and Russell D. Aldrich sent out. |
| Jul. 08, 1991 | Objection to Walton County Coalition For Sensible Growth, Susan S. Myers, and Russell D. Aldrich Amended Petition to Intervene filed. (FromKenneth Goldberg) |
| Jun. 27, 1991 | Second Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for Oct. 1-4, 1991; 10:00am; DeFuniak Springs). |
| Jun. 27, 1991 | Walton County Coalition For Sesible Growth, Susan S. Myers and Russell D. Aldrich Amended Petitioner to Intervene filed. |
| Jun. 27, 1991 | (Respondent) Response to the Department of Community Affairs Objection to the Walton County Coalition For Sensible Growth's Petition to Intervene; Walton County Coalition for Sensible Growth, Susan S. Myers and Russell D. Aldrich Amended Petition to Inter |
| Jun. 26, 1991 | Order Granting Motion for Continuance (Hearing Cancelled) sent out. |
| Jun. 26, 1991 | Response in Opposition to Walton County's Motion For Continuance filed. (From Richard Grosso) |
| Jun. 25, 1991 | Order Granting Petition to Intervene Filed by 1000 Friends of Floridaand Bob White sent out. |
| Jun. 25, 1991 | Amended Response to Motion For Continuance filed. (From David J. Russ) |
| Jun. 25, 1991 | Order Denying Petition to Intervene Filed by Walton County Coalition for Sensible Growth sent out. |
| Jun. 20, 1991 | Objection to Motion for Continuance filed. (From Karen Brodeen) |
| Jun. 18, 1991 | (Respondent) Stipulation for Continuance filed. (From J. E. Dorman, Jr.) |
| Jun. 17, 1991 | (Respondent) Motion for Continuance filed. (From George Ralph Miller) |
| Jun. 14, 1991 | (Petitioner) Response to Walton County Coalition For Sensible Growth Petition to Intervene filed. (From Kenneth D. Goldberg) |
| Jun. 07, 1991 | Petition to Intervene of 1000 Friends of Florida and Bob White filed.(From Richard Grosso) |
| Jun. 06, 1991 | Walton County Coalition For Sensible Growth Petition to Intervene filed. (From J. E. Dorman, Jr.) |
| May 23, 1991 | Amended Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for July 15-19, 1991; 10:00am). |
| Apr. 11, 1991 | (Petitioner) Notice of Service of Request for Admissions; Petitioner's First Request For Admissions filed. (From David J. Russ) |
| Apr. 11, 1991 | Notice of Service of Interrogatories to Walton County; Department of Community Affairs' First Set of Interrogatories to Walton County filed. (From David J. Russ) |
| Mar. 13, 1991 | Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for 7/15-19/91; at 10:00am;in DefuniakSp) |
| Mar. 13, 1991 | Order Establishing Prehearing Procedure (prehearing stipulation due 5days before hearing) sent out. |
| Mar. 07, 1991 | (Petitioner) Response to Hearing Officers Order filed. |
| Feb. 22, 1991 | Initial Order issued. |
| Feb. 21, 1991 | Notification card sent out. |
| Feb. 19, 1991 | Petitioner of the Department of Comunity Affairs; Notice of Intent; Statement of Intent to Find Comprehensive Plan Not in Compliance filed. |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Jun. 12, 1995 | Opinion | |
| Nov. 05, 1992 | Agency Final Order | |
| Apr. 13, 1992 | Recommended Order | County's comprehensive plan was not in compliance with requirements of state statute or provisions of Rule Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. |
