STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN RE: RESOLUTION 89-821-339 ) ISSUED BY THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE )

APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL ) CASE NO. 90-0549DRI IMPACT KNOWN AS GRAN PARK AT BAYARD. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, William F. Quattlebaum, held a formal hearing in the above-styled case on July 16-20, 1990, in Jacksonville, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Gran Central

Corporation: William L. Hyde, Esq.

Roberts, Baggett, LaFace & Richard

101 East College Avenue

P. O. Drawer 1838 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

For Department of

Community Affairs: David L. Jordan, Esq.

Julia L. Johnson, Esq. Office of General Counsel Dept. of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100

For City Of

Jacksonville: Daniel D. Richardson, Esq.

Robyn A. Deen, Esq. Office of General Counsel City of Jacksonville

421 West Church Street, Suite 715

Jacksonville, Florida 32202 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

This case was referred for hearing by the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission (FLAWAC) based upon an appeal, filed by the Department of Community Affairs, of a development order (City of Jacksonville Resolution #89-821-339) adopted by the City, authorizing a development of regional impact identified as "Gran Park at Bayard". The DCA's Petition for review contained allegations related to the DRI's failure to adequately mitigate any unfavorable impact on the environment and natural resources (specifically the endangered species identified as Bartram's Ixia), the DRI's failure to adequately mitigate an undue burden on public transportation, and the failure to include certain

documents with the development order when submitted to DCA for review. These three issues were resolved by the parties prior to hearing. Findings of Fact related to the settlement agreements are provided herein.

The DCA's Petition further alleged that the proposed Gran Park at Bayard DRI is inconsistent with the State Comprehensive Plan and State Land Development Plan 1/ provisions primarily related to housing and urban sprawl, and that the DRI fails to mitigate an adverse impact on the ability of people to find adequate housing reasonable accessible to their places of employment.

Accordingly, these issues are addressed in this Recommended Order. The ultimate issue is whether the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission should approve, deny, or approve with conditions or restrictions, the application for the Gran Park at Bayard DRI.

PROCEDURAL STATEMENT

At hearing, Gran Central Corporation (GCC) presented the testimony of David Tillis (expert in urban and regional planning), Kenneth Creveling (expert in city planning and industrial development), Jeffrey Crammond (expert in civil engineering with an emphasis on traffic engineering), Jeannie Fewell (expert in affordable housing), Howard Landers (expert in urban and regional planning), Henry Fishkind (expert in economics and fiscal impact analysis), and William E. Durham, Jr., (expert in real estate development). GCC exhibits numbered 1-15, 22, 33, 36-39, 42-47, 49-50, 53, 62-67, 71-72, and 74-77 were offered and

admitted into evidence.

The City of Jacksonville presented no witnesses and offered no exhibits. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) presented the testimony of David

Sawicki (expert in urban planning and affordable housing), Charles Connerly

(expert in urban and regional planning, and affordable and accessible housing), Robert Groce (expert in LANDSAT photo imaging), John Thomas Beck (expert in review of regional planning and developments of regional impact), and Arthur Christian Nelson (expert in urban and regional planning). DCA exhibits numbered 1-24 were offered and admitted into evidence. Hearing Officer exhibits 1-4 were admitted into evidence.

A transcript of the hearing was filed on August 30, 1990. The DCA (on September 19, 1990) and GCC (on September 20, 1990) filed proposed recommended orders which were utilized in the preparation of this Recommended Order. The proposed findings of fact are ruled upon either directly or indirectly as reflected in this Recommended Order, and in the Appendix which is attached to and hereby made a part of this Recommended Order. The City of Jacksonville did not file a proposed order.

For the purposes of this Order, Gran Central Corporation exhibits are cited as GCC#, Department of Community Affairs exhibits are cited as DCA#, and Hearing Officer exhibits are cited as HO#. References to testimony are cited by name of witness and volume of transcript. The hearing transcript is cited as follows: July 16, 1990 cited as TR.1; July 17 cited as TR.2; July 18 cited as TR.3; July

19 cited as TR.4; July 20 cited as TR.5.

Two Stipulations of Partial Settlement (dispositive of Counts II, III, and VI of the DCA Petition) were executed and filed by the parties. The parties, as reflected in the stipulations, agreed to certain amendments to the development order. Findings of Fact numbered 88-93 set forth the agreed amendments.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) is the state land planning agency which has the power and the duty to enforce and administer Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and to appeal development orders to the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission pursuant to Section 380.07, Florida Statutes. The DCA was not a party to or a formal participant in any proceeding conducted by the City of Jacksonville in regard to issuance of the Gran Park DRI development order. The DCA did not attend or participate in the Gran Park at Bayard DRI preapplication conference conducted by the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council. (HO #2; Tillis, TR.1; GCC #5 and 6)

   
   

2. The City of Jacksonville is not an agency as defined by Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, and is not required to conduct hearings in the manner prescribed by the Administrative Procedures Act. (HO #2)

   
   

3. Gran Central Corporation (GCC) is the owner and developer of the Gran Park DRI located in the City of Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida. (HO #2)

   
   

4. The Gran Park DRI development order, City of Jacksonville Resolution 89-821-339, was adopted by the City of Jacksonville on September 29, 1989. The development order was submitted to the DCA on October 18, 1989. (HO #2)

   
   

5. The Gran Park DRI is located in southeastern Duval County. To the south of the DRI site is relatively rural and undeveloped land extending to the St. Johns County line. The site is bordered on the west by I-95, on the east by

   U.S. 1, and on the north by Old St. Augustine road. The Florida East Coast railroad line runs along the east side of the property, with a rail spur exiting into the northern portion of the site. (HO #2; Tillis, TR.1; GCC #22)

   
   

6. The Gran Park DRI is proposed as a multi-use (industrial/business/commercial) development on 934 acres. The project is perceived by GCC to be a high quality industrial distribution park with related office facilities. The development order provides that the total amount of development shall not "exceed that equal to 558 acres of Light Industrial Development, 500,000 square feet of Office development, and 80,000 square feet of Commercial development." The project contains no land designated for residential use. (HO #2; GCC #1; GCC #11)

   
   

7. In terms of highway access and the aforementioned rail line, the DRI site is well suited for business/industrial use. The site is accessible from

   U.S. 1 and from Old St. Augustine Road. Future development of an interchange at the junction of Old St. Augustine Road and I-95, and for the future extension of State Road 9-A through the DRI site, is accommodated by GCC's agreement to reserve potential right of way for highway use. (Tillis, TR.1; GCC #11, #22, and #49)

   
   

8. An on-site day care center will be available to permit Gran Park employees to locate their children nearby the workplace. Upon the request of ten Gran Park employees, a shuttle bus will operate between the DRI and the southernmost terminus of the City of Jacksonville's public transportation system, a trip of approximately 15 minutes. Although the development order requires that GCC inform employers of the shuttle option, each employer will be responsible for notifying their employees of the shuttle service. GCC does not expect there will be much demand for the shuttle, because GCC anticipates most employees will utilize private transportation. (Tillis, TR.1; GCC #11 and 22)

9. The DRI site is level and well-drained. Existing important wetlands, relatively limited in size, are preserved and buffered. Some wetland function, on-site and off-site, will actually be improved by development of the project. Upland areas are likewise protected. There is little natural upland habitat of environmental value. A small gopher tortoise population will be protected through an off-site mitigation. 2/ (Tillis, TR.1; GCC #22)

   
   

10. There are no significant environmental issues remaining for consideration. No septic tanks are permitted at the site. Stormwater retention facilities will provide all water for irrigation. The Gran Park DRI will participate in a solid waste reduction program, and has committed to utilization of an on-site air pollutant reduction program. Hazardous waste will be contained on-site. The entire DRI project is contingent on adequate landfill space availability, which is currently not available. (Tillis, TR.1; GCC #11)

    
    

11. Assuming that there is need for the development of the property, Gran Park at Bayard, developed as proposed by GCC, could result in a positive fiscal impact for the City of Jacksonville. 3/ According to one projection, the cumulative net direct and indirect positive impact to the City of Jacksonville could be as much as $34 million. 4/ There would be further benefits to the school district, as well as additional gas tax revenue related to the project. 5/ (Fishkind, TR.3; GCC #42)

    
    

12. The Gran Park DRI development order permits GCC to exchange certain land uses for other land uses based upon exchange ratios specified in the development order. According to the provisions of the development order, the exchange option is available on property which is designated for multiple uses as identified in the master site plan (Map H) attached to the development order. Although the map indicates that a major portion of the property is designated for light industrial use, an unquantified but substantial amount of the available acreage is designated as "RETAIL/LI/OFFICE", or "LI/OFFICE". In those multiple use areas, the development order permits land uses to be exchanged based upon ratios set forth in the order. For example, one acre of light industrial space may be exchanged for 6,100 square feet of office space or 795 square feet of commercial space. One thousand square feet of commercial space may be exchanged for 7,673 square feet of office space or 1.25 acres of light industrial space. One thousand square feet of office space for 130 square feet of commercial space or .164 acres of light industrial space. (GCC #11)

    
    

13. The land use exchange provisions of the development order provide GCC with sufficient flexibility to somewhat alter the project according to market demand. Such provisions also permit GCC to alter the proposed nature of the Gran Park DRI without the necessity of complying with the substantial deviation procedures set forth at Subsection 380.06(19), Florida Statutes. (Tillis, TR.1; Durham, TR.5)

    
    

14. Although GCC has developed similar properties located elsewhere, there has been no formal market study completed which supports the development of the Gran Park at Bayard project as proposed. GCC has neither compiled an inventory of available facilities, projected future needs, nor analyzed the existing or projected market for industrial land uses. Although GCC witnesses anecdotally identified several large businesses who allegedly considered locating in Jacksonville, and then chose to locate elsewhere, the evidence fails to establish that the failure to locate in Jacksonville was due to a lack of available or appropriate acreage within the city. (Tillis, TR.1; Creveling, TR.1; Landers, TR.2; Fishkind, TR.3)

15. Given the flexibility of the development order and the vagaries of the market, it is difficult to predict with accuracy the final land use mix which will constitute the fully developed Gran Park at Bayard DRI. (Nelson, TR.4)

    
    

16. The Application for Development Approval (ADA) filed by GCC with the City of Jacksonville in this case projected the total number of Gran Park at Bayard employees at project build out to be 14,133. The original projection included 200 commercial employees, 2,500 office employees, and 11,433 light industrial employees. 6/ (GCC #1)

    
    

17. Subsequent to the City's approval of the development order (and to DCA's objections to the DRI as to the alleged lack of accessible and affordable housing), GCC reduced the estimated total number of Gran Park at Bayard employees to 7,021. The projected 7,021 employees include 160 commercial employees, 2,000 office employees, and 4,861 industrial employees. (Creveling, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

18. GCC's revised commercial employment projection was based upon a space utilization factor of one employee per every 500 square feet of commercial space. The 80,000 square feet of commercial space yields a projected 160 employees. (Creveling, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

19. GCC's revised office employment projection was based upon a space utilization factor of one employee per every 250 square feet of office space. The 500,000 square feet of office space yields a projected 2,000 employees. (Creveling, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

20. GCC's revised industrial employment projection of 4,861 was based upon a series of local market-based assumptions made by GCC's expert witness. The witness took the 558 acres proposed for industrial use and deducted 20 percent of the acreage, assuming their use for local streets, retention facilities, and other land supposedly not available for development. 7/ He then assumed that 25% of the remaining acreage would be utilized for actual industrial space. He calculated that the reduced acreage would accommodate approximately 4,861,000 square feet of industrial space. Projected employment was calculated by estimating space utilization of one employee per 1,000 square feet, assuming a land use mix of 70% manufacturing and 30% distribution. (Creveling, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

21. Reducing the original 558 acres by 20% results in approximately 446.4 acres. Twenty-five percent of 446.6 acres is 111.6 acres. The GCC industrial employment estimate of 4,861 is the equivalent of 8.71 employees per the gross

    558 light industrial acres, or 43.5 employees per the 111.6 acres which GCC projects will actually be utilized. (Creveling, TR.1; Nelson, TR.4)

    
    

22. The National Association of Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP) reports a national average of 22.47 employees per gross light industrial acre. Application of the NAIOP figure to the DRI gross light industrial acreage yields an estimated employment of approximately 12,538. (Sawicki, TR.2)

    
    

23. The Institute of Transportation Engineers, as stated in the Trip Generation Manual (4th edition) estimates an average of 17.4 employees per gross light industrial acre. Application of the ITE figure to the DRI gross light industrial acreage yields an estimated employment of 9,709. (Sawicki, TR.2)

24. The evidence does not support the assumptions made by GCC in calculating a level of projected industrial employment (4,861) substantially lower that the level identified in the original ADA. Although the NAIOP and ITE projections are national averages which do not specifically account for local Jacksonville conditions and development patterns, the evidence of such local conditions and patterns is insufficient to establish that GCC's substantially lower projection of light industrial park employment is more reasonable than the national averages, especially given the original projection of 11,433 industrial employees set forth in the ADA. The assertion of GCC that the DCA estimate of approximately 14,000 employees is unreasonable and excessive, is rejected. The ADA projection related to total employment is accepted.

    
    

    IS THE PROPOSED DRI INCONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND STATE LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN RELATED TO URBAN SPRAWL?

    
    

25. Included in consideration of whether a development of regional impact should be approved, is whether the development unreasonably interferes with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted state land development plan, Section 380.06(14)(a), Florida Statutes, and whether the development is consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan, Section 380.06(14)(d), Florida Statutes. In consistency determinations the State Comprehensive Plan shall be construed and applied in accordance with Section 187.101(3), Florida Statutes. The goals and policies contained in the State Comprehensive Plan shall be reasonably applied where they are economically and environmentally feasible, not contrary to the public interest, and consistent with the protection of private property rights. The plan shall be construed and applied as a whole, and no specific goal or policy in the plan shall be construed or applied in isolation from the other goals and policies in the plan. Section 187.101(3), Florida Statutes.

    
    

26. The goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan, and the operating policies of the State Land Development Plan discourage urban sprawl. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 10; GCC #33)

    
    

27. Urban sprawl is the premature extension of urban development into agricultural, rural, or other undeveloped or sparsely developed land. Urban sprawl is often characterized by uncontrolled initial development of scattered and isolated properties located on the fringe of suburban land uses, followed by subsequent urbanization of the bypassed parcels of land. Urban sprawl is indicative of a lack of or ineffective land use planning, and results in land uses not functionally or proximately related to adjacent development. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 9, 10, 11.)

    
    

28. Effective land use planning seeks to promote the efficient use of land, promote the efficient provision of public facilities and services, protect natural resources, and protect agricultural land. Urban sprawl conflicts with and discourages effective land use planning. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8)

    
    

29. Urban sprawl often interferes with the promotion of efficient use of land and the development of viable, mixed-use communities. Urban sprawl generally causes land to be utilized for low density development. It can thereafter become difficult to redevelop the land at higher density when such use becomes appropriate, because the land is unavailable, or because the cost in assembling the individual parcels is prohibitive. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 18)

30. Urban sprawl interferes with the efficient provision of public facilities and services, including roads, schools, police and fire protection, water, sewer, drainage, and other infrastructure, whether such facilities and services are provided by public or private entities. It is generally more costly to provide capital facilities for sprawling development than to provide the same facilities for areas of compact growth, because although central facility costs are not increased, cost of providing services to outlying areas are greater than the cost of providing said services closer to the central facility. In other words, the extension of utility services and the construction of roadways to sprawled development simply generate higher costs. Further, system capacity, which could be used to accommodate existing or planned development lying nearer the urban area, becomes unavailable when utilized to accommodate sprawled development. Public facilities costs can be even greater where an area develops at a low density and subsequently requires additional capital facilities to support higher density development. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 15, 16, 17, 18.)

    
    

31. Urban sprawl often results in the degradation of natural resources and encourages the premature loss of agricultural land in rural, agricultural, developed, or sparsely developed areas. Clearly, farmland is lost as it is converted to other nonagricultural uses. Farmland is also lost as farming areas are invaded by or becomes less productive due to incompatible adjacent urban land uses. Investment in agricultural productivity decreases as farmland becomes more valuable for nonagricultural use and farm operators become less inclined to continue the agricultural investment. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 18)

    
    

32. Several forms of urban sprawl have been identified by land use planners. These forms include "strip" or "ribbon" development, "low density/single dimensional" development, and "leapfrog" development. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 10; GCC #33)

    
    

33. "Strip" or "ribbon" development is that which occurs linearly along arterial highways, and which is not functionally or proximately related to adjacent development. Strip development is typically high amounts of commercial, retail, office, and multifamily residential uses, which is dependent on direct access to arterial highways. Such direct access requires excessive curb and median cuts and multiple access points, thus reducing the efficiency of the roadway systems. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 10; GCC #33)

    
    

34. Although the Gran Park DRI is not functionally or proximately related to adjacent development (such development being relatively sparse), the Gran Park DRI does not constitute strip or ribbon development. The DRI is not linearly located along an arterial highway. It is a contiguous development of 934 acres. The DRI does not rely on excessive curb and median cuts or multiple access points. There are only four access point proposed for the DRI, three off of Old St. Augustine Road and one off of U.S. 1. (Tillis, TR.1; Landers, TR.2; GCC #22)

    
    

35. "Low density/single dimensional" development occurs where a significant quantity of housing and housing-related development, not functionally or proximately related to existing or planned adjacent development, is constructed on previously undeveloped or sparsely developed land. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 9, 10, 11.)

    
    

36. In that there is no residential use proposed for the Gran Park DRI, the project does not constitute low density/single dimensional development. (GCC #1, 22, and 33)

37. "Leapfrog" development occurs where new development is located away from existing urban land, bypassing adjacent vacant rural, agricultural, undeveloped, or sparsely developed land. "Leapfrog" development is encourages by the lower cost of land parcels located away from existing development. "Leapfrog" development typically uses excessive amounts of land, requires additional and costly extension of utilities and services, and often results in scattered, discontinuous growth in areas frequently not appropriate for urban development. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8, 9, 10, 11.)

    
    

38. The Gran Park at Bayard DRI, located in the southeast section of Duval County, a few miles from the border between Duval and St. Johns counties, lies outside the urban core area of Jacksonville. The DRI site is surrounded primarily by open space, some of which is wetlands. There is an existing heavy industrial operation, a boat building operation, and a small unidentified office building located on outparcels adjacent to the DRI site. The area to the east of the DRI site, across U.S. 1, is primarily undeveloped rural land. The small town of Bayard is located further to the east, and includes minor industrial and commercial facilities, and an undetermined but apparently insignificant quantity of residential property. Parallel to, and west of U.S. 1, the Florida East Coast railroad line runs along the east side of the site. An existing rail spur into DRI site will be joined by two additional spurs to be constructed as part of the Gran Park development. The eastern portion of the proposed I-295 loop road (connecting to I-95) is planned to cross the southeastern portion of the DRI site. The area south of the DRI site to the St. Johns county line is primarily undeveloped, rural land. The area to the west of the DRI site, across I-95, is open rural land. Immediately north of the DRI site and Old St. Augustine Road, lies the Durban Creek/Julington Creek wetland area. Further to the north, across the wetlands and towards the more developed city area, is sparsely developed industrial property. (Tillis, TR.1; Landers, TR.2; Nelson, TR.4; Durham, TR.5; GCC #1; GCC #22; DCA #5, 6)

    
    

39. There is currently inadequate solid waste capacity to accommodate the needs of the Gran Park DRI. The development order is contingent upon solid waste disposal availability. At completion, the Gran Park DRI will generate approximately .98 million gallons daily (mgd) 8/ of wastewater, which will be received at the District 5 Southwood Sewage Treatment Plant. The Southwood Plant has a current wastewater treatment capacity of 4.0 mgd. Current and committed future capacity is estimated at 4.5 mgd, exclusive of the Gran Park DRI's needs. The city is planning to expand the capacity to 10 mgd, but the expansion has reportedly not yet been granted required permits. There is no water or sewer service available to the DRI site. Water service is approximately 1.5 miles from the DRI site. GCC will fund extension of the service approximately 7,500 feet southward along U.S. 1. Sewer service is approximately five miles from the site. The sewer line will be extended, by GCC, down Old St. Augustine Road to the DRI site. (Tillis, TR.1; Landers, TR.2; Nelson, TR.4; Durham, TR.5; GCC #1, 2, 22; DCA #5, 6, 12)

    
    

40. The State Comprehensive Plan requires consideration of availability of land to meet demand. Adequate land use planning seeks to balance projected need for various land use categories with actual acreage available for use.

    Excessive land available for development encourages urban sprawl, while insufficient availability results in excessive land costs, monopolistic land pricing, and impedes development designed to accommodate actual growth. (Fishkind, TR.3; Nelson, TR.4; DCA #21)

41. A series of urban studies in non-regulated urban land use environments indicate that upwards of 35% of urban land is available for development at a given time. In order to provide for market operation, yet not provide excessive availability, a "market factor" of 25% is reasonable. Allowing for a "market factor" in excess of projected need provides for continued operation of the economic marketplace, and provides adequate, but not excessive, quantities of land available for development. The 25% market factor reflects the expected surplus land remaining at the end of a planning timeframe. At the beginning of the planning period, the surplusage of land available for development is in fact upwards of 250% of immediate need. (Fishkind, TR.3; Nelson, TR.4; DCA #21)

    
    

42. To ascertain whether an expansion into undeveloped land is premature, it is necessary to correlate the anticipated need with the land currently available to meet the projected needs. In this case, it is necessary to determine need for industrial 9/ land and identify the acreage available to accommodate the projected growth. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #21)

    
    

43. The City of Jacksonville Planning Department projects a total of 91,094 industrial 10/ jobs by the year 2010, 20,191 of which will be located in the southeastern portion of the city, where the Gran Park DRI is sited.

    (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

44. Although the City of Jacksonville forecasts industrial employment at a level which exceeds the projections utilized by other planning or reporting agencies, there is no evidence to suggest that the City's projection is not reasonable, although it likely identifies the maximum industrial employment growth which may occur during the planning period. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

45. For planning purposes, the City of Jacksonville utilizes an employment density figure of 17.5 industrial employees per acre. This employment density figure is somewhat lower than national employment densities reported by like developments, but there is no evidence that would suggest that the city's density figure is not reasonable, although it likely results in a projection of maximum industrial acreage required to accommodate projected growth during the planning period. Application of the 17.5 employment density figure to the projected 91,094 industrial employment, indicates a city-wide need for a total of 5,205 acres of industrial land by the year 2010. Application of the employment density figure to the projected 20,191 southeast city industrial employees, indicates a need for a total of 1,154 acres of southeast city industrial land by the year 2010. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

46. There are 3,783 existing industrial acres in 12 approved DRI's within the boundaries of the City of Jacksonville. Adjusting the figure to account for developed acreage and for DRI's not required to file annual development status reports with the DCA, there are 1,875.5 acres currently unoccupied and available for industrial use in approved and developing DRI's. 11/ Of those acres, 482.5 12/ are in the southeast part of the city, including the Southpointe, Interstate Business Center, Windsor Park, Deerwood Park, and Freedom Commerce Center DRIs. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

47. To accommodate the need for industrial acreage through the year 2005 will require utilization of 1,799 additional acres. To accommodate need through the year 2010 will require 2009 additional acres. Therefore the need for industrial acreage through the year 2005 can be accommodated by the 1875.5 acres available in existing DRI's alone. Accommodation of need through the year 2010 requires only 133.5 acres beyond that which is already available in existing DRI's. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

48. There is additional land available for industrial utilization which is not contained within DRI's. A substantial amount of land in the City of Jacksonville, beyond that contained in DRI's, is committed to industrial uses. According to statistics provided by the City's Planning Department, and the City's Draft 2010 Comprehensive Plan, 6,706 acres of land is currently appropriately zoned and available for industrial use. This figure includes undeveloped land which is committed for industrial use, and existing and developing industrial land capable of accommodating additional development. 13/ The existing 6,706 acres is approximately 129% of the 5,205 acres projected to be needed. 14/ Even if no new industrial land were made available, the existing industrial land capacity, DRI and non-DRI, will easily accommodate the 5,205 acres needed through the year 2010. With no additional land designated for industrial use, there would be a projected 29% citywide industrial land surplus. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

49. In terms of employment capacity, the southeast city area will need sufficient space to accommodate 120,829 workers by 2010. The city's draft 2010 plan provides capacity to accommodate 163,205 employees, exceeding projected need remaining at the end of the planning period by approximately 35%. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

50. A substantial quantity of land available for industrial use within the City of Jacksonville, perhaps as much as 3,000 acres or more, has highway and rail access similar to that available at the DRI site, and does not require the extension of water and sewer utilities as does Gran Park. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #20B)

    
    

51. GCC provided testimony from one witness, Howard Landers, who disputed DCA's figures of available industrial land. Mr. Landers noted the specific land parcels identified by DCA's witness as available, and identified occupants on the properties, the implication being that no space remained for additional development. The testimony was not persuasive. The fact that some parcels are occupied does not establish that no available space remains. The GCC has undertaken no market analysis which would suggest that the projected industrial land needs cited by DCA are insufficient to accommodate the city's projected need for industrial acreage, or that the DCA's identification of remaining property does not provide a sufficient supply of available land.

    
    

52. Development of the Gran Park DRI will require the extension of water and sewer service from the nearest existing service areas to the DRI site. The development order provides that costs of such extension will be borne by GCC. The extension of such service will bring sewer service lines through a portion of southeast Jacksonville that currently has no city sewer services. Although the City of Jacksonville water and sewer capacity is adequate to accommodate Gran Park needs, utilization of the existing capacity for the DRI will result in reduced capacity to accommodate areas closer to the city which are without central water and sewer service. Although the city is attempting to increase the sewer capacity, there is no evidence to indicate when such expansion will be completed. The entire DRI project is contingent on adequate landfill space availability, which is currently not available. (Tillis, TR.1; GCC #11; Landers, TR.2; GCC #22; Nelson, TR.4; DCA #23)

53. The Gran Park site is located more than nine minutes from the closest existing fire station. Jacksonville Public Safety officials cite four minutes as the acceptable response time. Gran Park has agreed to provide at no cost to the city an acre of land appropriate for construction, at city expense, of a fire/emergency medical station. (Tillis, TR.1; GCC #1 and 11; Nelson, TR.4)

    
    

54. The DRI site has been owned by GCC for many years and has been consistently utilized to grow pine timber. The land has been taxed as agricultural land until the land was reassessed due to the City's adoption of the development order. The timber has been previously harvested by clearcutting and then replanted with pine. The current timber crop, approximately 680 acres of slash pine, is seven years old. The pine timber constitutes approximately

    .24% of the forested land in Duval County. Although the land would be more valuable to GCC were development be permitted as proposed, there is no reason which would prevent the continued use of the land for timber forestry and harvesting. (Tillis, TR.1; Landers, TR.2; Durham, TR.5; GCC #22)

    
    

55. Development of the Gran Park DRI would result in urban sprawl and is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan and operating policies of the State Land Development Plan. The project utilizes excessive land, is premature, and is inappropriately located in a largely rural area. The development of Gran Park at Bayard will result in scattered, discontinuous growth in a rural area which is not presently appropriate for urban development. Although some nearby property is developed to a very limited extent, such limited development is clearly not of an urban nature. There is land available closer to the urban area which is appropriately zoned and available for uses such as are proposed for the Gran Park DRI. The quantity of land which is proposed for development as part of the Gran Park DRI is excessive and is not necessary to meet the projected need for such acreage according to the city's 2010 planning timeframe. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8)

    
    

56. The project discourages the efficient provision of public services in that substantial extension of central water and sewer service is required for development. Although the costs of water and sewer service line extension will be paid by the GCC, system capacity (which is insufficient at this time and would require expansion to accommodate the DRI) would be utilized by Gran Park and be unavailable for use in development closer to the urban area. (Nelson, TR.4; DCA #8)

    
    

57. In 1985, the Jacksonville Planning Department Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for the 2005 Comprehensive Plan found that urban sprawl/leapfrog development, uncoordinated strip commercial development, lack of protection for environmentally sensitive areas, declining older neighborhoods, inadequate community facilities, and haphazard growth patterns, were among the city's major existing land use problems. According to the EAR, such problems result in increased cost of public services and facilities, high transportation costs, costly and declining public transportation system, gradual loss of valuable environmental resources, lowering of the quality of life in the city, and a decline in the overall image of the city as a dynamic and progressive urban area. The EAR states that the 2005 Comprehensive Plan has not been a guiding factor in land use implementation, although, apparently due to the generalized nature of the plan, most development activity has conformed to plan requirements. (Landers, TR.2; Nelson, TR.4; DCA #19)

    
    

58. As demonstrated in the City of Jacksonville 1990 Comprehensive Plan, prepared in 1974, the city has permitted the intensive use of the southeast city along the parallel U.S. 1/I-95 highways as for industrial and business

    operations. The city's 2005 plan, prepared in 1980, continued and expanded the business/industrial use southward, further towards, but not into, the Gran Park DRI site. In 1986, the city prepared the "Southeast District Plan", which further expands industrial development southward towards the Gran Park DRI site. (Landers, TR.2; GCC #22)

    
    

59. Extensive testimony indicates that Jacksonville's history of land development has resulted in a "polynucleated" urban area. The city's development pattern reflects the proximity to major bodies of water, wetlands, patterns of private land ownership, and location of government activities and public facilities. The resulting area contains some neighborhoods containing mixtures of residential, commercial and industrial activities. However, the evidence clearly establishes that the Gran Park DRI, a planned development of 934 acres, will contain no residential use and does little to encourage the development of a viable mixed use neighborhood. (Landers, TR.2; GCC #22)

    
    

60. The historical testimony is insufficient to overcome the evidence that the development of the Gran Park DRI fails to discourage urban sprawl. The fact that the city's land use planning has permitted continued expansion southward does not establish that such expansion does not result in urban sprawl. The issue in this case as to urban sprawl is not whether the DRI is consistent with the City of Jacksonville's planning efforts, but whether the DRI is consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan and State Land Development Plan. The evidence establishes that the development of the Gran Park at Bayard DRI is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan and the operating policies of the State Land Use Plan which discourage urban sprawl.

    
    

    DOES THE PROPOSED DRI ADEQUATELY MITIGATE ANY ADVERSE AFFECT UPON THE ABILITY OF PEOPLE TO FIND ADEQUATE HOUSING REASONABLY ACCESSIBLE TO THEIR PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT?

    
    

61. Count I of the DCA's Petition filed with FLAWAC alleges that the City of Jacksonville has and will continue to have a shortage of affordable housing for low and very low income persons. Count IV of DCA's Petition, in relevant part, alleges noncompliance of the DRI with the housing provisions of the State Comprehensive Plan and State Land Development Plan. These provisions essentially provide that review of an application for approval of a Development of Regional Impact must include consideration as to whether, and the extent to which, the development will favorably or unfavorably affect the ability of people to find adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of employment.

    
    

62. Given the type of housing generally available in southeast Jacksonville, there is little doubt that middle and upper income employees working at the Gran Park DRI will be able to locate reasonably accessible housing. In fact, the access to such housing, located in relatively affluent neighborhoods, may be viewed as one of the benefits to the DRI site. The housing issue in the case is whether low income workers will be able to locate adequate housing reasonably accessible to the DRI site. (Sawicki, TR.2; Landers, TR.2; Connerly, TR.3)

    
    

63. The evidence establishes that the persons who will accept low-income employment at Gran Park already reside in Duval County, and are either unemployed or underemployed. The evidence fails to establish that there will be an increased need for low-cost housing as a result of the Gran Park DRI. Given that low-wage employment will be held by unemployed or underemployed persons currently residing in the area, the evidence establishes that such persons will

    be better able to locate and occupy adequate housing. However, the evidence also establishes that the Gran Park DRI is not necessary in order accommodate projected employment growth in Jacksonville through the year 2010. The evidence fails to establish that projected employment at the Gran Park DRI will consist of new jobs that otherwise not have been available through employment at existing or approved industrial sites in Jacksonville.

    
    

64. As to the accessibility of such housing to the DRI site, the evidence is insufficient to establish that housing existing within the city is not reasonably accessible to the DRI site. Neither the State Comprehensive Plan nor the State Land Development Plan provide definitions of "adequate" or "reasonably accessible" housing. For the purposes of this Recommended Order, and in accordance with the evidence presented by the parties, "adequate" housing is found to be that which is habitable and affordable. 15/ "Reasonably accessible" housing is that which is located within a specified distance from the site of employment.

    
    

65. Given the flexibility of the development order, and the unpredictability of the market demand over the DRI's seventeen year development period, it is difficult to project either the actual number of employees or the related wage structure. Yet, there is little doubt that some persons working for employers based at Gran Park will receive wage levels considered low or very low. The "affordability" of housing is obviously related to such income levels.

    
    

66. For purposes of determining housing affordability, GCC asserts that Chapter 420, Part VI, Florida Statutes, the Florida Affordable Housing Act of 1986, provides relevant definitions of "affordable" housing. The Act establishes the Florida Affordable Housing Trust Fund, administered by the DCA and created "for the provision of affordable housing to very low-income, low- income, and moderate-income persons...." Section 420.603, Florida Statutes. Section 420.602(3), Florida Statutes, provides as follows:

    
    

    (3) "Affordable" means:

    1. With respect to a housing unit to be occupied by very low-income persons, that monthly rents, or monthly mortgage payments including property taxes and insurance do not exceed 30 percent of that amount which repre- sents 50 percent of the median adjusted gross annual income for the households within the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or, if not within an MSA, within the county in which the housing unit is located, divided by 12.

    2. With respect to a housing unit to be occupied by low-income persons, that monthly rents, or monthly mortgage payments including property taxes and insurance do not exceed 30 percent of that amount which represents 80 percent of the median adjusted gross annual income for the households within the metro- politan statistical area (MSA) or, if not within an MSA, within the county in which the housing unit is located, divided by 12.

    3. With respect to a housing unit to be occupied by moderate-income persons, that monthly rents, or monthly mortgage payments including property taxes and insurance do not

    exceed 30 percent of that amount which repre- sents 120 percent of the median adjusted gross annual income for the households within the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or, if not within an MSA, within the county in which the housing unit is located, divided by 12.

    
    

67. At hearing, DCA utilized definitions of housing "affordability" other than as set forth in the Affordable Housing Act. According to the testimony offered by the DCA, affordable owner-occupied housing is that which requires not more than 28% of household gross income for payment of principal, interest, taxes and insurance. Affordable rental housing is that which requires not more than 30% of household gross income for the payment of rent and utilities. The DCA definition for affordable owner-occupied housing comports with fiscal guidelines utilized by lending institutions in determining whether persons are financially qualified to assume mortgage obligations. The DCA definition for affordable rental housing is based upon standards utilized by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The DCA's definition results in a greater need for low income housing or housing assistance related to the Gran Park DRI, than does utilization of the definition set forth by statute. (Connerly, TR.3; DCA #4)

    
    

68. The evidence fails to establish that the statutory definitions related to "affordability" are inappropriate or inapplicable to this case. However, there is little need to accept either definition. The evidence does not establish a shortage of affordable housing in Duval County. To the contrary, DCA's own witnesses testified that there is no shortage of affordable housing in Duval County. (Connerly, TR.3; Sawicki, TR.2)

    
    

69. Further, the evidence fails to establish that the Gran Park DRI will generate an increased need for additional affordable housing beyond that which is available in Jacksonville. The uncontroverted evidence establishes that such lower wage jobs will be taken by persons already residing in Duval County. 16/ Indeed, GCC is committed to cooperate with Duval County's Private Industry Council in providing assistance to such persons seeking employment. (Tillis, TR.1; Sawicki, TR.2)

    
    

70. Even DCA's experts on urban planning and affordable housing admitted that the Gran Park DRI would create no need for affordable housing. As stated in the report, "Accessibility of Workers and Affordable Housing", the DRI "...is aiding those who previously were not in the labor force, were unemployed , or were underemployed. It is undoubtedly helping them afford better housing than they had before they had their Gran Park job, and perhaps even allowing them to start new households by leaving their parents homes and the like. The developer is providing a societal good by creating lower-paying jobs (presuming he is paying fair wages). And this may be a greater good than that provided by a developer who creates high-paying jobs that would likely be filled by new migrants to Jacksonville." The witness' objection to the DRI was that the city's low-income housing was more than 20 minutes from the DRI site, and that he believed it unreasonable to travel in excess of 20 minutes to get from home to work. (Sawicki, TR.2; DCA #2)

    
    

71. Another expert in urban and regional planning and affordable and accessible housing, relying on the previous witness' opinion that 20 minutes was a reasonable commute, testified that "[b]y and large, Jacksonville has a good supply of affordable housing. I'm not disputing that, but it's not available within 20 minutes of the site." (Connerly, TR.3)

72. The majority of Jacksonville's existing low-income housing is located in the northeast part of the city, about 20 miles from the DRI site. Major transportation facilities may be utilized in the commute. Public transportation is available in the city, but such transportation does not extend as far to the south as the DRI site (the GCC shuttle bus is designed to complete the linkage) and could entail a complete commute time of one hour or more. According to the DCA, reasonably accessible housing is that which is located within a 10 mile/20 minute commute from the DRI site. (Sawicki, TR.2; DCA #2; GCC #9, 10, 11, 12)

    
    

73. In 1983-84, the national 1983-84 average work trip took approximately

    20 minutes, a trip of approximately 9.9 miles. During that same period, 54% of all vehicle trips to work were 5 miles or less, 74% were 10 miles or less, and 92% were 20 miles or less. As of 1985, 74.4% of the nation's population resided less than 20 minutes from work, with 85% of the population residing less than 30 minutes from work. In Jacksonville, 2.7% of the population resides within 20 minutes of work, 21.5% of the population residing within 30 minutes, and 77.1% of the population reside within 40 minutes of work. Jacksonville 1980 census data indicates that the mean local work trip took approximately 21.6 minutes. The length of commute increases in larger metropolitan areas. Commute times are also longer for higher income levels. (Sawicki, TR.2; DCA #2)

    
    

74. The DCA's expert witness on accessibility concluded that housing located in excess of 10 miles or 20 minutes from the DRI site was not reasonably accessible for low income workers. 17/ Beyond the witness' opinion, there is little support for identifying a 20 minute commute as "reasonable". Further, his rationale is unsupported by or contrary to facts in this case. He testified that when commutes become very long, businesses are unable to locate employees and employees are unable to find work. There is no evidence that employers locating in the Gran Park DRI will be unable to locate employees. It is logical to expect that employers consider employee availability in identifying potential business locations. There is no evidence that workers will be unable to locate employment with Gran Park employers. The GCC is committed to working with local agencies to assist persons in finding employment. There is no evidence which suggests that persons will have no choice but to accept employment at Gran Park. The GCC will supplement the city's public transportation network with a private shuttle, as required by the development order, if employees express the desire to utilize the public transportation system. He testified that single parent households are burdened by long commutes due to day care and shopping distances. However, day care and retail facilities will be available on-site. (Sawicki, TR.2; DCA #2; Tillis, TR.1; GCC #11)

    
    

75. The DCA utilized a transportation analysis zone (TAZ) model, including centroid-to-centroid analysis of travel time to predict travel time from the Gran Park DRI site. Although the DCA did not generate the data upon which the projection was based (instead relying upon data provided by the Florida Department of Transportation and the Jacksonville Planning Department) the travel times were supported by one witness' personal verification. (Sawicki, TR.2; DCA #2)

    
    

76. The TAZ model divided Jacksonville into more than 600 zones, each with a "centroid" identifying the population center of the TAZ. A centroid-to- centroid analysis provides a projection of travel time between the population development center of one zone and the population development center of a second zone, by way of a specified arterial route, such as I-95, U.S. 1, or I-295.

    Each time projection includes time from the centroid of the Gran Park DRI TAZ to the closest arterial highway, time on the arterial, and time from the arterial

    to the centroid of each specified TAZ. The travel times utilize "off-peak" travel time projections and reflect the minimum time required to travel the stated distance. (Sawicki, TR.2; DCA #2)

    
    

77. The data upon which the TAZ, centroid-to-centroid model was based was collected in 1985. GCC criticized the use of the 1985 data, in that is does not reflect subsequently completed transportation improvements, including road widening and the elimination of certain bridge tollgates, which could result in improved traffic flow. However, GCC introduced no credible evidence which would establish that the speed of traffic flow was increased by such improvements to such an extent that the 1985 data was invalid.

    
    

78. The use of TAZ, centroid-to-centroid analysis permits the aggregation of travel zones into census tracts, thus permitting correlation between travel times and census housing data. Such analysis provides reliable information and is credible evidence related to housing accessibility. (Sawicki, TR.2; Connerly, TR.3; DCA #2)

    
    

79. GCC asserted that a Jacksonville work commute of at least thirty and as much as forty-five minutes was reasonably accessible to the place of work. Consultants for GCC gathered data through a survey related to local Jacksonville home-to-work commuting time. The consultant identified 21 industrial, office and commercial employers located in southeast Duval County, the location of the proposed Gran Park DRI. The consultants provided questionnaires to 971 employees of the 21 employers. Of the 971 employees, 558 responded, a response rate of 57 percent. (Fewell, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

80. According to the results of the survey, 90.3% drive alone to and from work, .7% utilize the city's public transportation system, and the remainder walk or ride with others. (Fewell, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

81. The consultants gathered data on the amount of time spent by the surveyed employees in each one-way commute. Of those responding to the survey, 5% commute five minutes or less, 9.5% commute 5-10 minutes, 16.3% commute 10 to

    15 minutes, 15.4% commute fifteen to 20 minutes, 31.5% commute 20 to thirty minutes, 21.5% commute thirty to forty-five minutes, and .8% commute forty-five minutes or more each way to work. (Fewell, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

82. The evidence offered by GCC is not persuasive. There are several problems inherent in the survey which potentially affect reliability of the data generated. For example, the increment of time measurement is not comparable across the range of potential responses. In preparing the questionnaire, the consultants utilized a five-minute increment (0-5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, 10-15 minutes, and 15-20 minutes) a ten minute increment (20-30 minutes) and a fifteen minute increment (30-45 minutes). The use of a standard five minute increment would have yielded comparable data. Further, the survey response categories include overlapping time increments. For example, a survey respondent with a 20 minute commute may be included in two categories. It is not possible to determine from the survey whether persons commuting 20 minutes are included in the 15-20 category or the 20-30 category. It is not possible to determine whether persons commuting 30 minutes are included in the 20-30 category or the 30-45 category.

    
    

83. GCC asserts that because almost all persons responding to the survey traveled 45 minutes or less in a one-way commute, that 45 minutes is reasonably accessible. In the alternative, GCC asserts that, if 45 minutes is unreasonable, that 30 minutes is reasonable because 77.7% of persons responding

    to the survey commuted 30 minutes or less. However, due to the form in which the data was gathered, the results are not sufficiently reliable to permit such a determination and the survey is not credited.

    
    

84. In projecting travel time, GCC utilized a series of projected estimated average travel speeds based upon the type of road and location of travel. GCC projected time of travel from the Gran Park site outward on major transportation routes, and then created "isopleths", consisting of lines on a map displaying the projected major highway travel distances by five-minute increments extending outward from the Gran Park DRI site. The areas between the major highways are included within the "isopleths", indicating that the interior areas may be accessed during the same period of travel time. The travel times were allegedly verified by actual drive time experience. The resulting isopleths indicate that within a thirty minute drive from the Gran Park site is all of Duval County south and east of the St. Johns River (except for the Mayport area), downtown Jacksonville, and portions of north Duval and northwest Clay Counties. 18/ (Crammond, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

85. The projected estimated average travel speeds set forth on page 3-3 of GCC Exhibit #13 and upon which GCC travel time isopleths are based, were apparently developed by an out-of-state consulting company utilizing Florida Department of Transportation data. Although the evidence is insufficient to find that the average travel speeds are excessive, the projections strain credibility. For example, the projected average speed of travel on a one way street through a residential area is 32 miles per hour, through an outlying business district is 34 miles per hour, and through a rural area is 30 miles per hour. (Crammond, TR.1; GCC #13)

    
    

86. Notwithstanding the rejection of the suggested 20 minute maximum reasonable commute time, the greater weight of evidence indicates that the methodology utilized by DCA in determining accessibility of housing to employment, which permits correlation of TAZ and census housing data, is appropriate.

    
    

87. The evidence establishes that the employment available at the Gran Park DRI will consist of employment which can be accommodated at existing or approved industrial sites in Jacksonville, and that the Gran Park DRI is unnecessary to accommodate the city's projected employment growth thorough the year 2010. Employment available at Gran Park will be employment that would have been available elsewhere in Jacksonville's existing or approved developments. The evidence fails to establish that low-income housing available in Jacksonville is not reasonably accessible to the Gran Park site. Accordingly, the evidence is insufficient to establish that the development of the Gran Park at Bayard DRI will affect the ability of people to locate adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of employment.

    
    

    FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO SETTLEMENT STIPULATIONS--

    
    

88. Pursuant to the Stipulation of Partial Settlement, including the attachment identified as "Exhibit A", (HO #3) filed at formal administrative hearing, the parties have agreed to the following amendments to the development order in settlement of the issues raised by the DCA as Count II in its petition for hearing.

89. Paragraph 3. of the Vegetation and Wildlife section on pages 9 through

    11 of Exhibit B. of the Gran Park DRI development order shall be amended to read:

    
    

    3. The upland conservation areas designated on Map A shall be maintained in a manner that will promote the preservation and reproduc- tion of Salpingostylis coelstina (Bartram's Ixia) on the project site, by maintaining the existing hydrology and drainage patterns, and no application of fertilizers. The areas des- ignated on Map A as "upland conservation area to be managed as potential Bartram's Ixia hab- itat by periodic mowing" shall be mown every six months.

    
    

90. Pursuant to the Stipulation of Partial Settlement filed on July 2, 1990, (HO #1) the parties have agreed to the following amendments to the development order in settlement of the issues raised by the DCA as Counts III and VI in its petition for hearing.

    
    

91. Paragraph I.A. of the General Conditions section on page 1 of Exhibit

    1. of the Gran Park DRI development order shall be amended to read as follows:

       
       

       1. The Gran Park at Bayard Application for Development Approval (ADA) submitted September 6, 1988, as well as the Gran Park at Bayard Sufficiency Response Documents sub- mitted January 10, 1989, and March 1, 1989, and the commitments wherein, shall be made a part of this Development Order.

    
    

92. The following paragraph shall be added to the end of the Land Use portion of the Specific Conditions section on pages 6 and 7 of Exhibit B. of the Gran Park DRI development order:

    
    

    The project shall be completed in two phases. Phase I of the project will consist of 428 acres of Light Industrial development (or its equivalent pursuant to the conversion ratios specified above). Phase I of the project shall run from September 26, 1990 through December 31, 1996. Phase II of the project will consist of 130 acres of Light Industrial development, 500,000 square feet of Office development and 80,000 square feet of Commer- cial development (or its equivalent pursuant to the conversion ratios specified above).

    Phase II of the project will run from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 2006.

    
    

93. Paragraph 2. of the Transportation section on page 20 of Exhibit B. of the Gran Park DRI development order shall be amended to read:

    
    

    1. The applicant shall mitigate for the im- pacts of the project to the regional roadway network by pipelining pursuant to Rule

       9J-2.0255, F.A.C. The project's required transportation improvements are as follows:

       1. Prior to occupancy of any portion of Phase II, the applicant will construct a three lane rural cross section on Old St. Augustine Road from Gran park Boulevard to U.S. 1 (approxi- mate distance is 0.9 mile)

       2. Prior to issuance of any building permit of more than 25 acres of light industrial de- velopment in Phase II of the project, or an equivalent amount of development based upon the conversion table approved herein, the Ap- plicant will cause a five lane urban section of Old St. Augustine Road from Gran Park Boulevard to U.S. 1 to be constructed. The total cost of the improvement on Old

          St. Augustine Road is estimated to be

          $1,546,000.

          If the Applicant does not cause the scheduled pipelined improvements to be constructed at the times specified in Conditions 2.1. and 2.b., then all development activities, as de- fined in Section 380.04, Florida Statutes, shall immediately cease, and no further building permits will be issued until such time as the scheduled improvements are con- structed and operational. Delays in the buildout date or phasing of the project caused by delays in the completion of the required transportation improvements shall not be exempt from the requirements of Subsection 380.06(19), Florida Statutes.

          
          

          CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

          
          

94. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this proceeding. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

    
    

95. The issue in this case is whether the proposed DRI is consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan, Section 380.06(14)(d), Florida Statutes, whether the development unreasonably interferes with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted state land development plan, Section 380.06(14)(a), Florida Statutes, and whether the development favorably or adversely affects the ability of people to find adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The ultimate issue is whether the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission should approve, deny, or approve with conditions or restrictions, the application for the Gran Park at Bayard DRI.

    
    

96. Section 380.06(14)(d), Florida Statutes, mandates consideration as to whether the development is consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. Section 380.06(14)(a), Florida Statutes, requires consideration of whether the development unreasonably interferes with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted State Land Development Plan. The State Land Development Plan presents the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan, organized into "policy clusters".

97. In consistency determinations, as stated at Section 380.06(14)(d), Florida Statutes, the State Comprehensive Plan must be construed and applied in accordance with Section 187.101(3), Florida Statutes, which mandates that "the goals and policies contained in the State Comprehensive Plan shall be reasonably applied where they are economically and environmentally feasible, not contrary to the public interest, and consistent with the protection of private property rights. The plan shall be construed and applied as a whole, and no specific goal or policy in the plan shall be construed or applied in isolation from the other goals and policies in the plan."

    
    

98. The goals, policies and operating policies of the State Comprehensive and State Land Development Plans discourage urban sprawl. As set forth in the preceding Findings of Fact, urban sprawl results in inefficient use of land and inefficient provision of public facilities and services. Urban sprawl ultimately conflicts with effective land use planning.

    
    

99. In the DCA's Petition appealing the Gran Park at Bayard development order to the Florida Land And Water Adjudicatory Commission, the DCA cited the project as inconsistent with goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan and related operating policy clusters of the State Land Development Plan, 19/ primarily directed towards urban sprawl and housing.

    
    

100. The State Comprehensive Plan, Section 187.201, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part, as follows:

     
     

     (10) NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL LANDS.--

     1. Goal.-- Florida shall protect and acquire unique natural habitats and ecological systems, such as wetlands, tropical hardwood hammocks, palm hammocks, and virgin longleaf pine forests, and restore degraded natural systems to a func- tional condition.

     2. Policies.--

     1. Conserve forests, wetlands, fish, marine life, and wildlife, to maintain their environ- mental, economic, aesthetic, and recreational values.

     
     

101. The related operating policies of the State Land Development Plan, are as follows:

     
     

     Goal 10, NATURAL SYSTEMS AND RECREATIONAL

     LANDS, Cluster 43, Protection of Natural Resources (Operating Policy 7)

     
     

     Operating Policy 7. Land development review procedures and approvals should provide for the protection of high quality upland plant communities and viable habitats, including suitable buffers and management programs adequate to ensure the continued survival of such systems.

     
     

102. The evidence establishes that the Gran Park DRI is consistent with the foregoing plan provisions related to protection of natural resources. The evidence establishes that development of the Gran Park DRI will result in preserved and buffered wetlands, with some wetland function, on-site and off-

     site, improved by development of the project. There is little natural upland habitat of environmental value, but the existing habitat will be protected. The forest that exists is not a natural system, but is a farmed pine forestry operation.

     
     

103. The State Comprehensive Plan, Section 187.201, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part, as follows:

     
     

     (16) LAND USE.--

     
     

     1. Goal.-- In recognition of the impor- tance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate

        growth in an environmentally acceptable manner.

        
        

     2. Policies.--

     * * *

     1. Develop a system of incentives and disin- centives which encourages a separation of urban and rural land uses while protecting water supplies, resource development, and fish and wildlife habitats.

     2. Enhance the livability and character of urban areas through the encouragement of an attractive functional mix of living, working, shopping, and recreational activities.

        
        

104. The related operating policies of the State Land Development Plan, are as follows:

     
     

     Goal 16, LAND USE, Cluster 57, Balanced and Planned Development (Operating Policies 8, 15 and 16)

     
     

     Operating Policy 8. Utilize land development review procedures that (a) encourage mixed land uses; (b) encourage the appropriate use of rural land; and (c) ensure that necessary public facilities and public utilities are equitably provided concurrent with the impacts of development.

     
     

     Operating Policy 15. Limit development re- quiring public services to areas which have available adequate or programmed public facil- ities needed to concurrently serve existing and proposed development.

     
     

     Operating Policy 16. Discourage development from areas where major new transportation facilities will be needed to be constructed to accommodate new development.

     * * *

     Goal 16, LAND USE, Cluster 58, Natural Resources Preservation (Operating Policies 7,8,9)

     
     

     Operating Policy 7. Require that land use reviews and decisions adequately consider the cumulative impacts of development upon the availability of public facilities and regional natural resources.

     
     

     Operating Policy 8. Restrict development from resource limited areas, such as barrier is- lands, where carrying capacity analyses clearly indicate that additional development would overburden or threaten adequate potable water supplies, sewage treatment capabilities, disaster preparedness, or unique natural re- sources.

     
     

     Operating Policy 9. The extension of roads and other utilities should promote compact, contiguous patterns of development.

     
     

105. The evidence establishes that the Gran Park DRI is inconsistent with foregoing plan provisions related to land use. The evidence establishes that the Gran Park DRI is located outside the urban core area of Jacksonville, and is surrounded primarily by open spaces, essentially of rural character, notwithstanding the minor and relatively insignificant existing uses located on outparcels contiguous to the DRI site. The DRI includes only industrial and commercial acreage, and allows for no residential uses, therefore the DRI does not encourage a functional mix of living, working, shopping and recreational activities. There is insufficient landfill capacity to accommodate the solid waste generated by the DRI. There is insufficient sewage treatment capacity to accommodate the wastewater generated by the DRI. Although such capacities are planned by the city, the evidence does not establish that such capacity will be available at the time it is required by the development. There is no central water or sewer service to the site, which requires extension of such service from as far as five miles away. The DRI site is located more than nine minutes from the closest existing fire station, resulting in an unacceptable emergency response time and requiring construction of an emergency station to remedy the deficiency. A number of substantial roadway improvements are required for development of the site. The GCC expects additional improvements will be necessary, hence the need to reserve land as potential right-of-way.

     
     

106. The State Comprehensive Plan, Section 187.201, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part, as follows:

     
     

     (18) PUBLIC FACILITIES.--

     
     

     1. Goal.-- Florida shall protect the sub- stantial investments in public facilities that already exist and shall plan for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner.

     2. Policies.--

     1. Provide incentives for developing land in a way that maximizes the uses of existing public facilities.

        
        

     2. Promote rehabilitation and reuse of exis- ting facilities, structures, and buildings as an alternative to new construction.

     
     

107. The related operating policies of the State Land Development Plan, are as follows:

     
     

     Goal 18, PUBLIC FACILITIES, Cluster 59,

     Maximizing Use of Existing Public Facilities (Operating Policy 14)

     
     

     Operating Policy 14. Direct growth to cur- rently services areas to protect the invest- ment that already exists in transportation infrastructure, and decrease the need for new facilities.

     * * *

     Goal 18, PUBLIC FACILITIES, Cluster 60,

     Planning for Public Facilities (Operating Policy 13)

     
     

     Operating Policy 13. In planning efforts, support infilling where adequate wastewater treatment and transmission capacity exists.

     
     

108. The evidence establishes that the Gran Park DRI is inconsistent with the foregoing plan provisions related to public facilities. As previously noted, there is insufficient sewer, water and solid waste capacity existing to accommodate the needs of the development. Central sewer and water service are not available at the site, without lengthy extension of service lines. There is acreage, existing and available for industrial land use, which share the transportation advantages of the Gran Park site, but which do not require extension of utility services or expansion of system capacity.

     
     

109. It is asserted by GCC that the project is consistent with and advances numerous goals of the State Comprehensive Plan. It is suggested that the DRI would advance the goals related to education, as stated at Section 187.201(1), Florida Statutes, based upon the positive fiscal impact of the project. However, the fiscal impact analysis assumes the DRI will offer employment which would not otherwise be available within the City of Jacksonville. The evidence does not support the assumption.

     
     

110. It is asserted that the DRI would, in the provision of on-site day care, advance goals related to families, as stated at Section 187.201(3), Florida Statutes. The assertion is correct. The DRI would likewise advance the goals set forth related to water resources, Section 187.201(8), Florida Statutes, by protecting wetlands and natural water systems, would advance the goals related to air quality, Section 187.201(11), Florida Statutes, through the air pollution reduction plan, and would advance goals related to hazardous waste, Section 187.201(13), Florida Statutes, through the plan to contain such wastes on-site for proper disposal.

111. However, contrary to assertion, the DRI would not advance goals related to the economy, Section 187.201(22), Florida Statutes, or those related to employment, Section 187.201(25), Florida Statutes. Because adequate land is available to accommodate projected growth, the development would do little more than siphon such employment growth from existing or approved development closer to the urban area and to available public facilities and services, to a site further away from the city.

     
     

112. The goals related to preservation of agricultural land, Section 187.201(23), Florida Statutes, contrary to GCC's suggestion, are not "furthered" simply because the agricultural land to be lost consists of relatively insignificant pine timber farm land.

     
     

113. Gran Park at Bayard will utilize excessive land, is premature, is not necessary to meet the projected need for such acreage according to the city's 20 year planning timeframe, and is inappropriately located in a largely rural area. The development of Gran Park at Bayard will result in scattered, discontinuous growth in a rural area which is not presently appropriate for urban development. There is land available closer to the urban area which is appropriately zoned and available for uses such as those proposed for the Gran Park DRI.

     
     

114. The project discourages the efficient provision of public services in that substantial extension of central water and sewer service is required for development. System capacity, which does not even exist at this time, would be utilized by Gran Park and become unavailable for use in development closer to the urban area. Similarly, existing solid waste capacity is insufficient to provide service for Gran Park. Although the city apparently plans to increase capacities, the system expansions have not been authorized by applicable agencies.

     
     

115. Development of the Gran Park DRI would result in urban sprawl. Approval of the DRI application is inconsistent with those goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan and operating policies of the State Land Development Plan related to urban sprawl.

     
     

116. The State Comprehensive Plan, Section 187.201, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part, as follows:

     
     

     (5) HOUSING.--

     
     

     (a) Goal.-- The public and private sectors shall increase the affordability and availa- bility of housing for low-income and moderate-income persons, including citizens in rural areas, while at the same time en- couraging self-sufficiency of the individual and assuring environmental and structural quality and cost-effective operations.

     
     

117. The related operating policies of the State Land Development Plan, are as follows:

     
     

     Goal 5, HOUSING, Cluster 19, Availability and Affordability of Housing (Operating Policies 2, 3 and 5)

     Operating Policy 2. Consider the impact on the availability and need for low and moderate income housing units in all land development decisions. New or significantly modified development should mitigate its impact on the availability or need for affordable housing.

     
     

     Operating Policy 3. Develop and add incen- tives to state regulatory programs to promote the production of low and moderate income housing units, recognizing that the private sector should be the primary delivery vehicle in the development of affordable housing.

     Provide state assistance to local governments providing private sector incentives for the development of affordable housing.

     
     

     Operating Policy 5. Ensure that all local governments adequately address the provision of sites for low and moderate income housing in their local comprehensive plans and land development regulations and in major land use decisions such as DRIs, Areawide and Downtown DRIs, and FQDs. Such sites should be located proximate to where the need for low and moderate housing exists.

     
     

118. In addition to the housing policies set forth in the State Comprehensive and State Land Development Plans, review of an application for approval of a Development of Regional Impact must include consideration as to whether, and the extent to which, the development will favorably or unfavorably affect the ability of people to find adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Section 380.06(12)(a)5, Florida Statutes.

     
     

119. The statute does not define the phrase "adequate housing reasonably accessible" to employment. Neither the State Comprehensive Plan nor the State Land Development Plan provide definitions of "affordable" housing or "reasonable access".

     
     

120. There was substantial disagreement between DCA and GCC as to how the word "affordable" should be defined for purposes of determining compliance with the State Comprehensive and State Land Development Plans. DCA's experts utilized a definition which allegedly demonstrated a greater need for housing assistance to low income persons employed at Gran Park than did the definition utilized by GCC's witnesses.

     
     

121. According to the DCA, for purposes of determining compliance with the State Comprehensive Plan and with Section 380.06(12)(a)5, Florida Statutes, affordable owner-occupied housing is that which requires not more than 28% of household gross income for payment of principal, interest, taxes and insurance. DCA suggests that affordable rental housing is that which requires not more than 30% of household gross income for the payment of rent and utilities.

122. GCC utilized the definition of "affordable" set forth in Chapter 420, Part VI, Florida Statutes, the Florida Affordable Housing Act of 1986. The Affordable Housing Act establishes the Florida Affordable Housing Trust Fund, administered by the DCA and created "for the provision of affordable housing to very low-income, low-income, and moderate-income persons...." Section 420.603, Florida Statutes. Section 420.602(3), Florida Statutes, provides as follows:

     
     

     (3) "Affordable" means:

     1. With respect to a housing unit to be occupied by very low-income persons, that monthly rents, or monthly mortgage payments including property taxes and insurance do not exceed 30 percent of that amount which repre- sents 50 percent of the median adjusted gross annual income for the households within the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or, if not within an MSA, within the county in which the housing unit is located, divided by 12.

     2. With respect to a housing unit to be occupied by low-income persons, that monthly rents, or monthly mortgage payments including property taxes and insurance do not exceed 30 percent of that amount which represents 80 percent of the median adjusted gross annual income for the households within the metro- politan statistical area (MSA) or, if not within an MSA, within the county in which the housing unit is located, divided by 12.

     3. With respect to a housing unit to be occupied by moderate-income persons, that monthly rents, or monthly mortgage payments including property taxes and insurance do not exceed 30 percent of that amount which repre- sents 120 percent of the median adjusted gross annual income for the households within the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or, if not within an MSA, within the county in which the housing unit is located, divided by 12.

     
     

123. DCA asserts that, because the Affordable Housing Act is administered by a division of the agency other than the division responsible for determining compliance with the State Comprehensive Plan or reviewing the acceptability of applications for DRIs, that such statutory definitions need not be utilized.

     DCA notes that it administers other housing programs where, through promulgation of administrative rule, the DCA has established definitions different than those set forth in Chapter 420, Florida Statutes. However, in this case, neither the FLAWAC nor the DCA have defined the terms by adoption of rule.

     
     

124. Clearly the housing goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan and the operating policies of the State Land Development Plan include the provision of affordable housing to very low-income, low-income, and moderate- income persons, which is the stated intent of the Affordable Housing Act. The evidence does not support a finding that the statutory definition of affordability should be rejected in favor of that offered by DCA. The statutory definitions would have been applied in this case if such application had been required. However, even DCA's witnesses admitted that no shortage of affordable housing exists in the City of Jacksonville.

125. As to whether the Gran Park DRI would favorably or adversely affect the ability of people to obtain adequate housing, the evidence could suggest that the proposed DRI would favorably affect the ability of low-income people to locate adequate housing, assuming that the industrial acreage included within the Gran Park DRI would be required to accommodate the city's projected need for such land. The new jobs which would be available at the DRI would permit persons, unemployed or underemployed, to afford housing likely to be at least somewhat more acceptable than that which such persons would have previously enjoyed. (It is illogical to presume that people would take a low-wage job in order to reduce their standard of living, or that employed persons would leave existing jobs to accept lower-income employment absent the existance of more important personal considerations.)

     
     

126. However, the greater weight of the evidence establishes that adequate land is available to accommodate industrial growth in Jacksonville through the year 2010, excluding the acreage at the Gran Park DRI. Given that projections indicate that employment growth can be accommodated within existing or approved development, a successful Gran Park development would attract no new job growth, but would siphon such projected employment from existing or approved development located closer to the urban center than the Gran Park DRI, to a location further south. Accordingly, notwithstanding the question of accessibility, the DRI will not affect the ability of persons to locate adequate housing.

     
     

127. As to the accessibility of such housing, DCA suggests that 20 minutes should be the maximum commute which is deemed reasonable. The witness upon whose testimony the suggested standard is based stated that only 2.7% of Jacksonville's population commuted less than 20 minutes to work. Conversely, 97.3% of the city's residents would apparently be faced with an unreasonable daily commute. Utilizing the evidence offered by the DCA in support of the 20 minute standard could as easily support a determination that a commute of 30 or

     40 minutes was reasonable. The evidence is insufficient to permit such an arbitrary determination. On the other hand, the survey data offered by GCC in support of the suggested 30-45 minute commute time is rejected as stated in the Findings of Fact contained herein.

     
     

128. At hearing, the DCA's expert witness on urban sprawl issues identified additional provisions of the State Comprehensive Plan and the State Land Development Plan which the DRI allegedly failed to adequately address, beyond those specified in the DCA petition filed with the FLAWAC. Counsel for GCC sought to exclude the testimony as inadmissible given the failure of the DCA to cite such objections in the petition, and the subsequent inability of GCC to produce evidence related to such additional allegations. The DCA asserted that because the Petition alleged general noncompliance with the plans, that such specific provisions were appropriately addressed in the hearing. Although the testimony, which was not extensive, was permitted to proceed, such allegations have been disregarded in the preparation of this Recommended Order.

     
     

129. The State Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 187, Florida Statutes, consists of twelve pages of law, and includes goals and policies related to 26 separate issues. The State Land Development Plan, which organizes the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan into "Policy Clusters", consists of a bound volume of 169 pages. Merely asserting noncompliance with the State Comprehensive Plan or State Land Development Plan fails to specifically identify the issues upon which an appeal is based and is inappropriate. Pleadings must be characterized with certainty, clarity, and conciseness, not based upon vague and general allegations. Slaughter v. Barnett, 154 So. 134 (Fla. 1934); Foley

     v. Hialeah Race Course, 53 So.2d 771 (Fla. 1951). In the instant case, DCA alleged that the DRI was inconsistent with certain specific sections of the state plans. GCC was reasonably prepared to offer evidence related to those specific plan provisions. It is unreasonable to expect a litigant to defend against allegations unstated prior to hearing.

     
     

130. GCC has asserted that, pursuant to case law, the FLAWAC may not deny an application for a development order, but must either approve the application or indicate the conditions under which an unacceptable application could receive approval. However, a "development order" is defined as "any order granting, denying, or granting with conditions, an application for a development permit." Section 380.031(3), Florida Statutes. The case law indicates that where there are conditions under which the application for development approval could be made acceptable, such conditions must be set forth so as to provide the applicant with the opportunity to correct the deficiencies. The FLAWAC may deny an application for a development permit if there are no conditions under which the permit would be acceptable.

     
     

131. In the instant case, the proposed DRI is inconsistent with State Comprehensive Plan and State Land Development Plan provisions directed towards limiting premature and inappropriate land development. Application of the provisions of the state plans to prohibit development inconsistent with the plans is not unreasonable, contrary to the public interest, or inconsistent with protection of private property rights. There are no conditions under which the application for approval of the Gran Park at Bayard DRI would be acceptable.

     
     

132. GCC argues that denial of the application for the Gran Park development order results in an unconstitutional taking of GCC's property. The uncontroverted evidence establishes that the property may continue to be used as pine timber plantation property. However, determination of whether denial of the application constitutes a taking of private property is outside the jurisdiction of this forum.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing, it is hereby recommended that the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission enter a Final Order DENYING the application filed by Gran Central Corporation for the Gran Park at Bayard development of regional impact.

RECOMMENDED this 1st day of February, 1991, in Tallahassee, Florida.

WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 1st day of February, 1991.

ENDNOTES

1/ The State Land Development Plan sets forth the functional objectives related to implementation of the State Comprehensive Plan by the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The DCA issued the State Land Development Plan on March 27, 1989. The Land Development Plan organizes the goals of the State Comprehensive Plan into operating policies which guide state land use regulation. The plan was adopted under the provisions of Section 186.022, Florida Statutes.

2/ An endangered species existing on-site, Bartram's Ixia, was the subject of a settlement stipulation between the parties and is addressed elsewhere in this Recommended Order.

3/ The fiscal analysis sets forth a projection of revenues based upon the assumption that the Gran Park DRI is required to accommodate projected growth in Jacksonville. If the Gran Park DRI is unneccesary, and serves to accommodate development which may have occurred elsewhere in the city, the fiscal impact would likely be reduced. The greater weight of evidence establishes that, based on the anticipated employment projections provided by city planners, the Gran Park DRI is not required to accommodate projected employment growth.

4/ Direct impact is that which is directly attributable to employees of Gran Park. Indirect inpact is that which is related to employee households.

5/ The witness did not include commercial and retail employees in calculating the school district impact. GCC exhibit #42, Table 9, indicates that, based upon an employment projection of 4,861 industrial employees, the school district's cumulative positive impact, would be approximately $7.6 million.

Table 19 indicates that, based upon an employment projection of 11,433 industrial employees, the school district's cumulative positive impact, would be almost $57 million. Given the increase in the number of employees, it is not clear how the projections are calculated. In either case, the project results in a positive net cumulative impact.

6/ The Findings of Fact related to employment projections assume that the DRI is needed to accommodate projected growth in the City of Jacksonville. Assuming that there is need for the DRI's acreage, the Findings establish a reasonable level of employment which could be anticipated.

7/ The assumption would suggest that no land had previously been provided for roadways, etc. However, the application for development approval, at page 12-5, clearly states that land for "open space, landscaping, buffer zones between adjacent land uses, and internal roadways" was accounted for outside of the parcels identified for use as light-industrial, office and commercial acreage.

8/ The .98 mgd figure is reported in GCC Ex. 2, correcting an incorrect figure cited in the ADA.

9/ The land use analysis presented at hearing and reflected in this Recommended Order was directed to industrial (including warehouse) acreage, rather than to the relatively insignificant office or commercial uses proposed for the DRI.

The office and commercial land proposed is intended to provide appropriate facilities for industrial operations locating at the DRI.

10/ The City's industrial employment projections include warehouse operations and is relevant given Gran Park's projected utilization for warehouse/light industrial operations.

11/ Three of the existing DRI's, New Duval, Belfort Station, and Northside West, containing a total of 1,850 approved acres, file no reports with the DCA and are not included in these calculations. The actual amount of land available in DRI's is likely in excess of the 1,875 figure.

12/ There are 610 total industrial DRI acres in the southeast city area. Subtracting from the 610 acres the 70 acres at the non-reporting Belfort Station, the 37.5 developed acres at Southpointe, and the 20 developed acres at Interstate Business Center, yields an availability of 482.5 acres.

13/ The figure includes acreage contained within DRI's, planned unit developments (PUD's), and other industrial land which was not required to undergo DRI review.

14/ These calculations exclude the acreage available in the Gran Park DRI.

15/ There was insignificant evidence related to habitability presented at hearing. Although the parties utilized differing sources of housing data, the evidence related to habitability was scant. For purposes of this Recommended Order, it is assumed that the housing cited by all parties meets appropriate habitability standards.

16/ It is reasonable to assume that some Gran Park employees will reside is St. Johns County, given the DRI's location. However, the evidence was primarily related to Duval County housing and residents.

17/ The opinion implies that 97.3% of Jacksonville's population commutes an unreasonable distance from home to work, since only 2.7% of the city's population commute less than 20 minutes. Given that 77.1% of the city's population travels up to 40 minutes from home to work, 40 minutes could as easily be found "reasonable". There is no evidence that any residents in the city identify their commute as unreasonable.

18/ It should be noted that the 30 minute drive time isopleths extend to St. Augustine. Evidence related to available housing did not include housing outside Duval County.

19/ Alleged inconsistencies related to the issues resolved by the two settlement stipulations, transportation and endangered species protection, are omitted.

APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 90-0549DRI

The following constitute rulings on proposed findings of facts submitted by Gran Central Corporation and the Department of Community Affairs. The City of Jacksonville did not file a proposed recommended order.

Gran Central Corporation

5-17. Rejected, unnecessary. It is not necessary to review the history of Jacksonville development to determine whether the DRI results in urban sprawl. The fact that development in the city has been permitted to sprawl does not lead to the conclusion that the sprawl is acceptable or that the DRI is consistent with sprawl-related provision of the State Comprehensive Plan or State Land Development Plan. The greater weight of the evidence establishes that the land

use planning in the City of Jacksonville has resulted in urban sprawl. Further, there is no evidence that the DRI will encourage development of a viable mixed use neighborhood given the lack of any residential use throughout the 934 acre development.

18-25. Rejected, immaterial. The issue in this case as to urban sprawl is not whether the DRI is consistent with the City of Jacksonville's planning efforts, but whether the DRI is consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan and State Land Development Plan. The fact that the DRI may be consistent with the city's comprehensive planning efforts is immaterial.

26-27. Rejected, irrelevant. The "vibrant mixed-use community" and cited residential neighborhoods are to the north of the DRI site and are separated from the DRI site by rural, undeveloped property.

1. Rejected. The evidence does not support a finding that the city's infrastructure improvements are planned to extend to the DRI site. The developer is being required to fund roadway improvements and extension of central water and sewer services which suggests that such improvements were not programmatically included in the city's infrastructure plans.

   
   

2. Rejected. There is no evidence as to a completion date for the extension of State Road 9-A to I-95. The fact that planners have defined the corridor to extend through the DRI site does not establish that such infrastructure improvements are imminent. The existence of a "proposed" Tampa-Jacksonville expressway is irrelevant without further evidence.

32-33. Rejected, irrelevant. Lack of need for extension of electrical service is not at issue. Schools cited, all to the north of the DRI site, do not constitute infill as related to the DRI.

1. Rejected. The greater weight of evidence does not support a finding that "high quality" residential areas are located "immediately" to the north of the DRI site, or that it is not possible to compatibly site residential property and industrial distribution facilities.

   
   

2. Rejected, contrary to the greater weight of evidence.

47-50. Rejected, contrary to the greater weight of evidence. The existence of a developed parcel north of the wetland area does not establish that high intensity development south of the wetlands does not constitute "leapfrog" development. The characterization of properties to the west, south and east of the DRI site as developed fails to account for large parcels of rural undeveloped property between the existing development and the DRI site.

51-52. Rejected, contrary to the greater weight of evidence. If the site were "abundantly well serviced by infrastructure" there would be little need for infrastructure improvement.

1. Rejected as to characterization of the DRI as "compact and efficient utilization of land resources", not supported by greater weight of evidence.

   
   

2. Rejected, contrary to the greater weight of evidence. While the developed portion of the southeast Jacksonville area may be characterized as suburban, the land directly adjacent to the four sides of the site are rural.

3. Rejected as to three existing industrial uses adjacent to DRI site. There are two industrial operations and a small office building. It should also be noted that Bayard is described as "immediately across U.S. 1", however, the greater weight of the evidence is that the more developed portion of Bayard lies further to the east of the site than is implied by use of the word "immediately".

61. Rejected as to "implicit" objective of urban sprawl policy, not supported by greater weight of evidence. The testimony cited in support of finding was delivered by expert in economics and fiscal impact analysis.

65-67. Rejected, economic projections are based upon an employment projection of 7,000, which is rejected as contrary to the greater weight of evidence.

69-75 Rejected, contrary to Findings of Fact related to urban analysis included herein. The 25% "market factor" provides a sufficient amount of land in excess of projected need to account for land which may not be suitable for all development. The fact that, at the start of the planning period, the market factor provides upwards of 250% of immediate need, accordingly the constraint placed upon the marketplace are minimal.

1. Rejected, contrary to Findings of Fact related to urban analysis included herein. DCA's expert in urban and regional planning upon whose testimony the Findings are based appropriately relied upon the information provided to him. The extent of the testimony disputing DCA's analysis failed to establish with any reliability that the information provided to DCA's witness was "grossly inaccurate" as is suggested in the proposed finding of fact. The fact that DCA's witness indicated that a parcel of property was available for development, and the fact that GCC's witness identified existing occupants for some parcels, does not establish that there is such insufficient land remaining for development as to justify development of the DRI.

   
   

2. Rejected, not supported by greater weight of evidence.

78-81. Rejected, unnecessary. The report of the Governor's Task Force on Urban Growth Patterns has not been utilized in the preparation of this Recommended Order.

82-87. Rejected, unnecessary. Although it is clear that the State Comprehensive and State Land Development Plans discourage urban sprawl, it is less clear that the State Comprehensive Plan encourages "compact urban development", other than by discouraging urban sprawl. The Findings of Fact contained herein reflect plan provisions directed against urban sprawl.

88. Rejected, unnecessary. The report of the Governor's Task Force on Urban Growth Patterns has not been utilized in the preparation of this Recommended Order.

89-91. Rejected, unnecessary.

93-95. Rejected, unnecessary. The evidence fails to establish that any additional need for low-cost housing will result in the city due to the development of Gran Park at Bayard.

96. Rejected as to total number of employees of 7,021. Not supported by greater weight of evidence.

98-102. Rejected. Assumptions are not supported by greater weight of evidence. The testimony and estimates of the DCA's expert witnesses, and the original projections of the Application for Development Approval related to employment levels are accepted.

103-106. Rejected, unnecessary. The evidence fails to establish that any additional need for low-cost housing will result in the city due to the development of Gran Park at Bayard.

109-111. Rejected, not supported by greater weight of evidence. Survey results provide little actual information, given the lack of standard increments for commute time reporting.

112-115. Rejected. The Sawicki travel time analysis related to accessibility of housing is accepted and is appropriate given that the methodology permits correlation of travel analysis zones and census housing data.

116. Rejected as to improvements on State Road 9-A which are not completed. Such improvements, to the extent they are not completed or funded through completion, are irrelevant.

117-139. Rejected, unnecessary. The evidence fails to establish that any additional need for low-cost housing will result in the city due to the development of Gran Park at Bayard.

140-144. Rejected, unnecessary. The evidence fails to establish that there will be any affect on the ability of people to locate adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of employment.

Department of Community Affairs

The Department of Community Affairs's proposed findings of fact are accepted as modified in the Recommended Order except as follows:

1. Rejected as to finding that commute time in excess of 20 minutes is unreasonable, not supported by weight of the evidence.

   
   

2. Rejected as to relevance of peak travel times. Given the nature of the proposed industrial DRI, the evidence does not establish that travel to and from the Gran Park DRI will occur during peak times.

13-14. Rejected, irrelevant. Twenty minute travel time is not found to be maximum reasonable accessibility to housing. The rationale underlying the proposed adoption of the 20 minute standard is little more than adopting an average as "reasonable". The evidence establishes that only 2.7% of the Jacksonville's population resides within 20 minutes of work. There is no evidence which supports a finding that 97.3% of Jacksonville's population commutes an unreasonable distance from home to work.

17-32. Rejected, unnecessary. The evidence fails to establish that any additional need for low-cost housing will result in the city due to the development of Gran Park at Bayard. The fact that existing housing is located more than 20 minutes from the DRI site is irrelevant. (See ruling on proposed findings #13-14.)

1. Rejected as to discussion of regressive wealth distribution, irrelevant.

2. Although it is clear that the State Comprehensive and State Land Development Plans discourage urban sprawl, it is less clear that the State Comprehensive Plan encourages "compact urban development", other than by discouraging urban sprawl.

   
   

3. Rejected as to State Comprehensive Plan Goal 8, immaterial, not appropriately raised in DCA Petition for hearing.

44-46. Rejected as to State Comprehensive Plan Goals 17, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 25, immaterial, not appropriately raised in DCA Petition for hearing.

47. Rejected as to State Land Development Plan policy clusters which were not properly raised in DCA Petition for hearing, immaterial.

58. Rejected as to issues not properly raised in DCA Petition for hearing, immaterial.

60-61. Rejected, unnecessary.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Douglas M. Cook, Secretary Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission

421 Carlton Building Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001

David Maloney, Esq. Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission The Capitol, Suite 210 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001

William L. Hyde, Esq. Roberts, Baggett,

LaFace & Richard

101 East College Avenue

P. O. Drawer 1838 Tallahassee, FL 32302

David L. Jordan, Esq. Julia L. Johnson, Esq. Office of General Counsel Dept. of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100

Daniel D. Richardson, Esq. Robyn A. Deen, Esq.

Office of General Counsel City of Jacksonville

421 West Church Street, Suite 715 Jacksonville, FL 32202

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 ten days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should contact 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.

Docket for Case No: 90-000549DRI

Orders for Case No: 90-000549DRI