David Powell Large landholders are volunteering for long-term planning due to growth pressure from urban centers or generational changes in ownership. Tools are available under Florida law to address conservation, development, and agricultural planning on these tracts. Planning issues differ based on the location of the landholding, its characteristics, and other uses in the vicinity. This session imparts lessons learned from experiences with these type plans, including best practices, where they work, and where their use is more challenging. Emphasis is placed on sector planning as authorized under Florida law, and hybrids of sector plans prepared and submitted as large-scale amendments.

1. Sector Plans:The story so far … TITLE SLIDE David L. Powell APA Florida 2011 Conference: Large-Area Planning for Florida’s Varied Landscapes Palm Beach, Florida September 9, 2011

2. Search for new planning tools Horizons West large-area plan adopted by Orange County in 1995 Legislature in 1998 authorized optional sector plans for more than 5,000 acres Dearth of landscape-scale planning tools Emphasis on urban form and long-term planning for facilities, resource protection Desire for plan-based substitute for DRIs Pilot program for up to 5 sector plans 2

3. Basics of the pilot program Each sector plan required advance authorization by DCA Two layers of planning Long-term buildout overlay didn’t change underlying land use in the planning area Detailed specific area plan (DSAP) needed for development approval in smaller area Both layers were plan amendments Use of DRI standards was required DSAP was exempt from DRI review 3

4. Pilot project experience 4

5. Other attempts Clay County 22,000-acre Branan Field sector plan Authorized in 2000, abandoned in 2008 Palm Beach County 57,000-acre Central Western Communities Adopted in 2005, rescinded in 2007 Washington and Bay counties 55,000-acre Knight Trust property Scoping in 2008, DCA rejected in 2009 5

6. Other large-area plans 6

7. DCA recommendations in 2007 7

8. DCA recommendation #1 “Revise Section 163.3245, F.S., so that the Optional Sector Plan process is not considered a pilot program that is limited to ‘up to five local governments,’ but is instead open to all local governments that can meet the statutory requirements[.]” 8

9. DCA recommendation #2 “Revise Section 163.3245, F.S., to create an expedited review process for the second phase (the detailed sector plan), thereby eliminating the current disincentive created by the existing requirement to go through the full comprehensive plan amendment process[.]” 9

10. DCA recommendation #3 “Identify key technical changes in the statutory process to improve optional sector plans and ensure the most successful possible outcomes.” 10

11. Other issues that arose Minimum size of 5,000 acres Length of planning period Demonstration of “need” Mandatory scoping by RPC Number of uses in a DSAP Commitments for land preservation Linkage to water, transportation plans Down-planning protection 11

12. The 2011 legislation Major emphasis of policy-makers and various stakeholders Many large landscapes in single ownership Generational changes in family ownerships Lack of funds to buy environmental lands Dissatisfaction with 20-year plans Policy shifts which will promote and facilitate large-area planning Changing “need” from a ceiling to a floor Allowing “additional planning periods” 12

13. Key changes to § 163.3245, F.S. Prior DCA approval no longer required Scoping optional, not required Planning period may be buildout or less Demonstration of “need” not required DSAP may have only 1 use Links to water, transportation plans Methods for down-planning protection New mandates on land preservation 13

14. Thank you! 14