Stakeholder Workshop: June 18, 2020 2 Outlin line Introductions - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 Stakeholder Workshop: June 18, 2020

2 Outlin line • Introductions • Why Are We Here? • What We’ve Heard? • How Did We Address Your Concerns? • What are the Recommendations? • Q&A • Where do we go from here?

Focus A us Area 3 Includes 865 housing units RP-2 South Sub- Plan Area in the Balm RP-2 North Sub-Plan Area Community Plan

4 Study O Over erview ew • Understand the vision for future development and obtain input from the community • Evaluate and recommend changes to current RP-2 policies and regulations • Review infrastructure needs in Balm

5 Sched edule e (Subject t to Change) Develop Initial Recommendations March – April 2020 - Infrastructure Needs (Transportation, Public Utilities, Environmental) Public Outreach March – July 2020 - Community Open House #1 March 11, 2020 - Online Survey March 11 – April 2, 2020 - Community Work Session April 7, 2020 - Stakeholder Work Session TODAY! - Community Open House #2 July 22 or 23, 2020 Policy Recommendations & Updates Summer/Fall - Policy updates Summer - PC Hearing and BOCC Transmittal Summer - Moratorium Deadline Fall

Environmentally P Protected Land 6 14% of Focus area 8% of the Focus area + Other RP-2 Outside USA ELAPP (defined): • Acquired ELAPP: Land acquired for preservation • Approved ELAPP: Land meets the ELAPP program requirements. The property hasn’t been volunteered for preservation by landowner

Approved Approved Planned D ed D Dev evel elopmen Developments ents 7 19% of Focus area 19% of the Focus area 30% Focus area + Other 31% of the Focus area + Other RP-2 Outside USA RP-2 Outside USA

8 Land A Analysis S Summary DRAFT Focus Area + Category Study Area % of Total Other RP-2 % of Total Outside USA Parks and Protected Land* 869 14% 909 8% Non-Vacant Land 1,211 20% 2,983 27% Approved Planned Developments 1,146 19% 3,375 31% Vacant Developable Lands (Not in Approved/Pending) 2,912 47% 3,699 34% Total Acreage 6,138 100% 10,966 100% *Inlcudes ELAPP Acquired Lands

9 What We’v ’ve H Heard rd? – Commu munity O Outreac ach

10 What We’v ’ve H Heard rd – • Community Open House # 1 – March 11 th , 2020 • Online Survey #1 – March 11 th through April 2 nd , 2020 • Community Work Session - April 7 th , 2020 • Online Survey # 2 – April 7 th – April 17th, 2020 • Stakeholder Interviews – March – May, 2020

11 What We’v ’ve H Heard rd

12 80% 72% What we’v ’ve h heard rd 71% 70% 64% – Online S e Survey eys 60% 56% What could be improved in the 50% community? (Select all that apply) 40% 32% 30% 20% 15% 9% 7% 10% 0% Protection of Discourage Infrastructure to Encourage Add grocery Other (please Add more Add affordable wildlife habitats suburban support new farming stores, local retail, specify) suburban housing development in a developments restaurants, etc. development in a rural area (roads, utilities rural area etc.)

13 What We’v ’ve H Heard rd What do you like most about your community? What are examples of other communities you like? Main Themes: Not ranked, main themes listed Main Themes: Not ranked, main themes listed • • Rural feeling FishHawk • • Green space/trails Rural • • Large yards Westchase • • Peace and Quiet Balm as is • • Lots of choices for retail Lakewood Ranch • • Mix of residential and agriculture Brooksville • • Minimal crowding, density Wesley Chapel • • Country setting but Close to Tampa Sun City Center • • Chain restaurants/shopping centers Sundance on Highway 301 • Fort Lonesome • Ruskin

14 Stakeh eholder er I Inter erview ews Development community • Current commercial requirements don’t work • Little developable land left in the RP-2 areas • Would like to see design guidelines • Not in favor of planned villages, make it more about mobility

15 Stakeh eholder er I Inter erview ews Community • Supporting infrastructure before development • Density – no greater than 2 dwelling units per acre (not in favor of clustering, TDR, would like to see ½ acre lots) • Preserve green and natural spaces • 250’ setbacks • Minimize light pollution • Include local commercial opportunities

16 How D w Did W We A Address Y Your C Concerns?

17 Stre rengthen R Rura ral C Chara racter • Buffering requirements • Improve/include design standards • Include housing styles/sizes

18 Pre reserv rve O Open S Space ce • Encouragement of open space • Protect and encourage farming in available areas and related businesses

19 Develop p plan fo for i infr frastructure i improvements • Develop a mobility plan • Identify water and sewer improvements • Continue to identify sites for schools, libraries, parks, etc. • Allow developer credits for providing external infrastructure or other community uses

20 Revise C Comme mmercial al R Requireme ments • Revise commercial requirements • Include community benefits

21 What are the Recommendations?

Amend t the Comprehensive P Plan Timing Defined: • Immediate (Immediate action prior or upon adoption) • Short-term (Within 4 years) (Deliverables as part of this study) • Mid/Long-term (4+ years) Timing DRAFT Action Responsible Party Mid/ Immediate Short-term Long-term Amend the Comprehensive Plan Consolidate and reorganize policies County, Planning Commission Add clear references/linkages (to Comp Plan and LDC) County, Planning Commission Recategorize Planned Villages (2 areas - south/north) County, Planning Commission Update clustering: Add different lot sizes, home types, etc., clearly define density/intensity County, Planning Commission and what counts as open space Update/replace commercial standards with community benefits County, Planning Commission Include/update design rules County, Planning Commission County, Development Community, Develop a mobility and commercial node map Market professionals TDRs: Coordinate TDR efforts (consider Balm as "sending area" and others as County, Planning Commission "receiving area") 22

Amend the Comprehensive Plan Update L Land Development C Code Timing Defined: • Immediate (Immediate action prior or upon adoption) • Short-term (Within 4 years) (Deliverables as part of this study) • Mid/Long-term (4+ years) Timing DRAFT Action Responsible Party Mid/ Immediate Short-term Long-term Update Land Development Code Add corresponding regulations from Comprehensive Plan updates County Allow certain community benefits to replace commercial component County Add design standards - include neighborhood centers, walkability, buffering, conservation, County, Planning Commission drainage, etc. Landscape/buffering standards, menu of options for 250' setback County, Planning Commission Create checklist with required/optional design standards County, Planning Commission Remove planned village graphic County 23

Other P Potentia ial F l Follo llow-up A Actions Timing Defined: • Immediate (Immediate action prior or upon adoption) (Outside of this study) • Short-term (Within 4 years) • Mid/Long-term (4+ years) Timing DRAFT Action Responsible Party Mid/ Immediate Short-term Long-term Schools/Civic uses: Site in neighborhoods, design for biking/walking and provide connections Development community, County, (on-going) School Board Further discuss public safety concerns with borrow pits County, Planning Commission Water/Sewer Infrastructure: Coordinate with future development County Clarify Planned Development Process for the area for new regulations County, Planning Commission TDRs: further discuss and explore TDR framework County, Planning Commission TDRs: Stakeholder Coordination: Convene residents/farmers, development community to County, Planning Commission discuss TDR process further. County, Planning Commission, ELAPP: Coordinate possibility of connecting ELAPP north/south of focus area Development Community 24

Other P Potentia ial F l Follo llow-up A Actions Timing Defined: • Immediate (Immediate action prior or upon adoption) (Outside of this study) • Short-term (Within 4 years) • Mid/Long-term (4+ years) Timing DRAFT Action Responsible Party Mid/ Immediate Short-term Long-term Mobility: Develop a mobility master plan (local connectivity, substandard roads, multimodal) County, MPO, Planning Commission Mobility: Explore using TECO easements for trail network County, MPO, Planning Commission Mobility: Construct roadway improvements in CIP and LRTP (Big Bend, CR 672, etc.) County, MPO, Planning Commission Mobility: Construct improvements on substandard roadways, intersection improvements, County, MPO, Planning Commission sidewalks Revenue: Explore additional revenue sources (i.e. TIF, MSTU/MSBU) County County, Community & Stakeholders, Affordable Housing: Continue to discuss affordable housing and transit options Planning Commission Coordinate additional rural architectural standards/overlay County, Planning Commission 25

26 Establish d diffe fferent d development a areas • Recategorize Planned Villages • Encourage different levels of development • South Sub-Planning Area/Village • North Sub-Planning Area/Village