COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA APRIL 3, :00 PM COMMISSION CHAMBERS 2401 SE MONTEREY ROAD, STUART, FL PDF Free Download

COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA APRIL 3, 2017 3:00 PM COMMISSION CHAMBERS 2401 SE MONTEREY ROAD, STUART, FL 34996 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 27, 2017 3. COMMENTS A. Public B. Members C. Staff 4. PRESENTATIONS A. None 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Staff follow up from February 27, 2017 CRA Meeting 6. NEW BUSINESS A. CRA Wide: Traditional Neighborhood Street Design Amendments Action requested: Review and Recommendation of Approval to LPA/BOCC B. Special Parking Alternative for Redevelopment Centers (SPARC) Base Cost Action requested: Recommend proportionate share cost to the BOCC C. Jensen Beach CRA: Implementation of SPARC/Off-site Parking Opportunity Action requested: Review/take action on the recommendation of the Jensen Beach NAC D. Golden Gate CRA: Golden Gate Historic Building Site Development Action requested: Review request and provide staff direction. E. Port Salerno CRA: Update on Agreement Concerning Submerged Land Lease and Public Use Boat Slips and Dinghy Dock Action requested: Hear the update, make recommendations as necessary F. FY18 Capital Improvement Planning Action requested: Hear the presentation

COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA APRIL 3, 2017 G. Legislative Update Action requested: Hear the update and consider the proposed resolution H. Staff Update/Permission to Seek Grants 7. COMMENTS A. Public B. Members C. Staff 8. ADJOURN Members & Term Expiration Richard Zurich, Rio NAC December 31, 2020 Saadia Tsaftarides, Golden Gate NAC December 31, 2020 Michael Banas, Hobe Sound NAC December 31, 2018 Craig Bauzenberger, Indiantown NAC December 31, 2017 Cindy Hall, Jensen Beach NAC December 31, 2020 Mark Palazzo, Old Palm City NAC December 31, 2020 Catherine Winters, Port Salerno NAC December 31, 2019 Staff Kate Parmelee, Manager, Office of Community Development Susan Kores, Project Manager, Office of Community Development Domenica Labbate, Project Manager, Office of Community Development Page 2 of 2

FEBRUARY 27, 2017 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES 3:00 PM COMMISSION CHAMBERS 2401 SE MONTEREY ROAD, STUART, FL 34996 PRESENT Chairperson... Richard Zurich Vice Chairperson... Saadia Tsaftarides Members... Michael Banas... Craig Bauzenberger... Cindy Hall... Mark Palazzo... Catherine Winters STAFF PRESENT Manager, Office of Community Development... Kate Parmelee Project Manager, Office of Community Development... Susan Kores Project Manager, Office of Community Development... Domenica Labbate Assistant County Attorney, Legal... Elizabeth Lenihan 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:00 pm 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 30, 2017 Motion was made to approve the draft minutes. * Motion C. Bauzenberger ** Seconded S. Tsaftarides Carried 7-0 3. COMMENTS A. Public B. Members C. Staff 4. PRESENTATIONS A. FEC Railroad Grade Crossing Feasibility Study Beth Beltran, Metropolitan Planning Organization Administrator 5. OLD BUSINESS Chair Zurich welcomed Commissioner Jenkins A. Staff follow-up from January 30, 2017 CRA Meeting. Balloon payment for Indiantown CRA TIF projections do not support a balloon payment. Chair Zurich requested revisiting the issue next year. Member Bauzenberger requested that the CRA investigate a way to supplement Commissioner Jenkins Carter Park lighting donation. B. Strategic Planning Workshop Scheduled for March 30, 2017. The workshop will be facilitated by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council.

Community Redevelopment Agency February 27, 2017 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Proposed FY17 Budget Amendment/ Resolution Motion was made to accept the proposed budget amendment and pass the resolution. Resolution 17-2 * Motion C. Bauzenberger ** Seconded M. Banas Carried 7-0 B. Review and Approval of FY16 Annual Report of the Martin County Community Redevelopment Agency Motion was made to accept the annual report and submit to the Board of County Commissioners for review. * Motion M. Banas ** Seconded C. Bauzenberger Carried 7-0 C. Staff Update and CRA Event Calendar D. Community Redevelopment Agency Member Education 7. COMMENTS A. Public B. Members C. Staff 8. ADJOURN Motion was made to adjourn the meeting at 5:00 pm * Motion C. Hall ** Seconded C. Bauzenberger Carried 7-0 Recorded and Prepared by: Domenica Labbate, Project Manager Date Richard Zurich, Chairperson Date Page 2 of 2

ITEM 6A COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM April 3, 2017 PREPARED BY: TITLE: Kate Parmelee, Community Development Manager CRA Wide: Traditional Neighborhood Street Design Amendments EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Estimated time: 10 minutes. The CRA is requested to review and recommend to the Board of County Commissioners amendments to the Martin County Land Development Regulations, Article 4, Division 19, Roadway Design, to update the standards that apply to traditional neighborhood streets. APPROVAL ACA CA BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: Article 3, Division 6 of the LDRs, Redevelopment Overlay Districts, provides that all roadways within each CRA shall comply with the standards of Section 4.847, Traditional Neighborhood Street Design. See, Sections 3.261.B. for Jensen Beach, 3.262.B. for Port Salerno, 3.263.C. for Hobe Sound, 3.264.B. for Rio, 3.265.B. for Old Palm City, 3.266.B. for Indiantown, and 3.267.B. for Golden Gate. The proposed Ordinance amends Section 4.847, traditional neighborhood streets and other sections of Article 4, Division 19, to the extent the other amendments are necessary for consistency with those proposed to Section 4.847. Section 4.847 of the LDRs has three flaws that make implementation difficult or impossible and contrary to the purpose of the standards for traditional neighborhood streets, especially within the CRAs: 1) The standards presume generous rights-of-way are available, as would be the case when a new TND project was being proposed. This is not the case for the existing principal roadways within the community redevelopment areas ITEM 6A page 1

and contrary to the intent of the standards to address constrained rights-ofways in the community redevelopment areas. 2) The current standards provide little to no flexibility to allow roadways to be designed to meet individualized goals for a particular roadway segment or in response to a constrained right-of-way. 3) The dimensions for various elements, such as sidewalks, buffers, and lane widths do not equal the numerical standard for pavement width or right-of-way width. These problems are resolved by the proposed amendments. The item was brought to the seven Neighborhood Advisory Committees for comment and six neighborhood advisory committees formally supported the amendments, with additional changes proposed by the Old Palm City Neighborhood Advisory Committee. The Hobe Sound Neighborhood Advisory Committee was not able to make a formal recommendation due to a lack of quorum. ISSUES: These amendments are needed to provide standards for proposed private development in the community redevelopment areas currently under review by the County s Development Review Team. The amendments are also needed to provide the flexibility needed to accomplish the desired redevelopment of Mapp Road and Bridge Road. The Old Palm City Neighborhood Advisory Committee provided comments related to the need for more flexibility in street design, clarifying that medians are not required, parking requirements, the furnishing zone, driveway placement and the minimum street standards table. Old Palm City Neighborhood Advisory Committee member Ken Natoli advised he would provide additional comments on the changes, which were recently provided. An additional draft of the ordinance has been provided that reflects many of the changes recommended by Mr. Natoli and the Old Palm City Neighborhood Advisory Committee, in order to obtain consensus from the CRA on the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW: This is a legislative matter. Legislative decisions are those in which the local government formulates policy rather than applying specific rules to a particular situation. A local government s approval or denial of an issue in its legislative capacity is typically subject to a fairly debatable standard of review. Fairly debatable means that the government s action must be upheld if reasonable ITEM 6A page 2

minds could differ as to the propriety of the decision reached. Decisions subject to the fairly debatable standard of review need only be rationally related to a legitimate public purpose, such as the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to be valid. Given this broad discretion, only decisions that are arbitrary and capricious or illegal are subject to serious legal challenges. RECOMMENDED ACTION Move that the Community Redevelopment Agency recommend that the Board approve the amendments to Article 4, Division 19 presented in the draft ordinance. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDED ACTION (a) Move that Community Redevelopment Agency recommend the Board approve the amendments to Article 4, Division 19 presented in the draft ordinance, as modified by the Board during deliberations at the public hearing. (b) Move that the Community Redevelopment Agency recommend the Board continue the public hearing to a future date certain and direct staff to return to the Board with a revised proposal consistent with the direction provided by the Board during deliberations ITEM 6A page 3

BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY ORDINANCE NUMBER AN ORDINANCE OF MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE 4, DIVISION 19, ROADWAY DESIGN, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, MARTIN COUNTY CODE, REGARDING STANDARDS FOR TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY, CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, SEVERABILITY, FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, CODIFICATION, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) has adopted the Martin County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan within which are included goals, objectives, and policies related to zoning and land development; and WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, requires the implementation of these goals, objectives and policies through the adoption of consistent land development regulations; and WHEREAS, Ordinance 561 was adopted on December 7, 1999, incorporating and establishing roadway design standards into Article 4, Division 19 of the Martin County Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code; and WHEREAS, revisions to the standards for the development of traditional neighborhood streets would serve a valid public purpose; and WHEREAS, these proposed amendments to Article 4, Division 19 of the Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code, have received public hearings before the Local Planning Agency and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds the proposed amendments consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT:

PART 1: Division 19. Roadway Design, Article 4. Site Development Standards, Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code is hereby amended as indicated. Struck-out text is deleted. Underscored text is added. The... ellipses (...) indicate text in the ordinance that is unaffected by the proposed amendments is not presented here. Section 4.841. General.... 4.841.B. Applicability. 1. Except as specifically provided elsewhere in this division, this division shall apply to all roadways which are under the jurisdiction of Martin County whether located within the unincorporated or incorporated areas of Martin County. 2. This division shall not be interpreted to require roadways existing on the effective date of this division to comply with the requirements of this division except as provided for in sections 4.843.G and 4.845.H. Any modifications to roadways existing on the effective date of this division shall be required to comply with this division to the extent possible. Unopened or unpaved platted streets shall comply with the requirements of this division. 3. This division shall apply to all roadways which have not been constructed as of the effective date of this division except: a. When a development project within which a roadway is located has received final site plan approval prior to the effective date of this division; or when the final site for a development project within which a roadway is located has received a recommendation of approval from the Development Review Committee or the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to the effective date of this division; or when staff has issued a written staff report regarding the proposed final site plan finding compliance with roadway requirements; and no modifications are made to the final site plan. b. If a project within which a roadway is located has received master plan approval prior to the effective date of this division and the approval is still valid and clearly establishes compliance with roadway design requirements existing at the time of master plan approval, the project may proceed forward consistent with the approved master plan so long as there is no modification to the master plan. c. For Martin County road projects included within the Capital Improvement Plan which have been designed and permitted prior to the effective date of this division. Page 2 of 13

4. The Board of County Commissioners may establish alternate design standards and requirements for roadways located within a designated community redevelopment area. 4. 5. The access classification system and associated standards of the Florida Department of Transportation shall apply to all roadways on the State highway system. 4.841.C. Glossary... Furnishings Zone means the area that serves as a buffer between the pedestrian zone and the travelway and that provides space for appurtenances including but not limited to, landscaping, utility and transportation infrastructure, and street furniture.... On-street Parking means the space in which to park vehicles within a public right-ofway or access easement that is divided into stalls that are either parallel or angled to the adjacent travel/bicycle lane or parallel or angled to a service road.... Pedestrian Zone means the area between the furnishings zone and the edge of the right-of-way or the face of the building, which may include landscaping, utility and transportation infrastructure, and street furniture, but must include an unobstructed sidewalk.... Sidewalk café means an outdoor portion of a restaurant, coffeehouse or café.... Street furniture means benches, sidewalk cafes, trash receptacles, and similar objects. Streetside means the area that is between the face of curb and the edge of the right-of-way or the face of the building and includes the pedestrian zone and the furnishings zone.... TND Boulevard means a road intended to provide high vehicle mobility, which may be multi-lane, without on-street parking, and limited access designed to carry longer vehicular trips, and possibly include a service road along one or both sides designed for land access, parking, bicycles, and pedestrians. TND Main Street means a street with collection of destinations within close proximity. On-street parking may be provided and driveway access is minimized. Buildings are close to street with direct connection to the pedestrian zone. The adjacent properties are served by alternative access such as local streets, alleys or cross access.... Page 3 of 13

Transportation and utility infrastructure means utility poles, sign poles, signal and electrical cabinets, fire hydrants, bicycle racks, bus shelters and other similar items. Travelway means the area between the faces of the curb.... 4.843.B. Right-of-way requirements. 1. Minimum right-of-way (ROW) widths for each roadway classification are provided in table 4.19.1. Additional width may be necessary as determined by the County Engineer depending upon the approved roadway cross section, design elements within the right-of-way, and drainage requirements for the area. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate traditional neighborhood street design in redevelopment and new development projects. Variances from the The minimum ROW widths for the purposes of developing a traditional neighborhood street design or within community redevelopment areas (CRA) may be granted pursuant to are found in section 4.847. 2. Variances may be granted by the Board of County Commissioners for rights-of-way within plats that were recorded prior to 1972 where the previously acquired right-ofway is less than the required minimum right-of-way. 3. Right-of-way requirements may be adjusted by the County Engineer for specific roadways involving intersection right-of-way improvements or restrictions of Martin County or the FDOT. 4. Intersection fillets shall provide a minimum 25-foot radius or an equivalent chord connecting the rights-of-way of the intersecting roads. [Remainder of page is blank] Page 4 of 13

TABLE 4.19.1. MINIMUM MID-BLOCK RIGHT-OF-WAY Minimum ROW Requirement Roadway Swale Drainage Curb and Gutter Parkway (1) 4-lane divided 190 feet 150 feet 6-lane divided 215 feet 175 feet Major arterial (1) 4-lane divided 180 feet 130 feet 6-lane divided 200 feet 160 feet Minor arterial (1) 130 feet 115 feet Major collector (1) 100 feet 80 feet Minor collector 100 feet 80 feet Local 60 feet 50 feet Alley 30 feet 20 feet, no curb and gutter Cul-de-sac 70-foot radius circle 60-foot radius circle Scenic corridor (2) N/A N/A (1) (2) An additional 12 feet is required where a right-turn lane is to be provided at an access connection, including roadway intersections. Right-of-way as required to maintain the character of the roadway based on a scenic corridor resolution. 4.843.C. Lane and buffer widths. Minimum lane and buffer widths for each roadway classification are established in table 4.19.2. Minimum lane and buffer widths for streets within Aareas designated as traditional neighborhood developments (TND) or community redevelopment areas (CRA) may vary these standards with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. Recommended guidelines for TND streets appear in are established in table 4.19.11. [remainder of page is blank] Page 5 of 13

Roadway TABLE 4.19.2. MINIMUM LANE AND BUFFER WIDTH Lane Width (feet) Buffer (1) (feet) Parkway (2), (3) 12 25 Major arterial (2), (3) 12 15 Minor arterial (3) 11 10 Major collector (3) 11 10 Minor collector 11 10 Local 10 4.5 Alley N/A N/A Cul-de-sac Scenic corridor (4) N/A (5) (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)... Landscaped strip between edge of pavement and sidewalk. The swale shall serve as the minimum buffer on roadways where the swale is greater than the minimum buffer. However, for curb and gutter sections FDOT standards shall apply. Median width is 30 feet. Provide five-foot bike lanes on the outer side of roadway. The cul-de-sac may include a center island with a 30-foot radius and a outside radius of 50 feet as feet approved by the Public Services Director. Lane width and buffer as required to maintain the character of the roadway based on a scenic corridor resolution. 4.843.E. Radius at street intersections. At street intersections, the intersection of paved surfaces shall be rounded with a radius sufficient to allow vehicles to complete a 90-degree turn without encroaching on the opposing traffic lane. The minimum required intersection radii are set forth in table 4.19.5. Where two roadways of differing classification intersect, the required radius shall be that of the roadway serving the higher traffic volume. (For example, where a major arterial and a major collector intersect, the minimum radius shall be that of the major arterial.) Longer radii may be required by the County Engineer under the following circumstances: 1. Where streets intersect at less than right angles. 2. Frequent use by large vehicles such as motor homes and large trucks. Page 6 of 13

3. Bus routes. 4. Industrial parks with a recommended minimum radius of 45 feet. TABLE 4.19.5. MINIMUM INTERSECTION RADII Roadway Minimum Radii (feet) Parkway 30 Major arterial 30 Minor arterial 25 Major collector 25 (1) Minor collector 20 (1) Local 15 (1) Scenic corridor (2)... (1) (2) Radius may be reduced by five feet if parking is provided on the intersecting street. Intersection radii as required to maintain the character of the roadway based on a scenic corridor resolution. 4.847.A. Applicability Traditional neighborhood street design encouraged. 1. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate traditional neighborhood street design into redevelopment and new development projects for the purpose of developing a traditional neighborhood development (TND) pattern outside of the community redevelopment areas. Applicants are required to utilize traditional neighborhood street design in the community redevelopment areas. TND street design reduces traffic congestion and expands options for vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access through an integrated network of narrow roadways. It results in a reduction in linear streets, incorporates traffic calming resources and allows on-street parking. 4.847.B. Applicability. 2. The standards contained in the following sub-sections of this division do not apply to TND streets designed in conformity with Section 4.847.: a. sub-section 4.843.B (Right-of-way requirements), b. sub-section 4.843.C. (Lane and buffer widths), and c. sub-section 4.843.E. (Radius at street intersections). Page 7 of 13

3. The standards contained in sub-section 4.627 of Article 4, Division 14, Parking and Loading, do not apply to TND streets designed in conformity with Section 4.847.: 4. The decision-maker may allow deviations from the minimum standards contained in this sub-section when necessary due to the location of existing buildings, constrained right-of-way, or to meet other needs of the particular street segment. 4.847.B. Procedure for TND street design. Applicants seeking a variance from the requirements of the standards of this division for the purpose of developing a TND street design shall submit such a request in conjunction with the submittal of a development application pursuant to the provisions of article 10 of the Land Development Regulations. In addition to the requirements of article 10, the application shall include a brief description of the proposed development and surrounding area, connections to surrounding streets, environmental amenities, proposed transportation system, and proposed land uses (including square footage and acreage). The plan shall also include regulatory and design standards for transportation and land development and an explanation of any variations from Martin County standards. 4.847.B. C. TND street design and layout. 1. Traditional neighborhood developments, and developments within community redevelopment areas (CRA ), and mixed use developments seeking a variance from the requirements of this division shall incorporate the following street layout principles: a. Street layout should exhibit a high degree of overall connectivity, with some allowances for topographic or wetlands conditions. b. Cul-de-sacs are generally discouraged, but may be used in moderation. c. Maximum block length in the TND should not exceed 1,320 linear feet. d. Trees should be planted within the street rights-of-way between the sidewalk and the street curb. e. Provision should be made for on-street parking. 2. General guidelines The minimum standards for TND street designs are provided in table 4.19.11. Page 8 of 13

TND Street Types TABLE 4.19.11. TND Street Minimum Standards (all measurements in feet as measured perpendicular to center line of street) Pedestrian Zone Furnishings Zone Travel Lane Street Elements Median Boulevard 6 5 11 10 On-street Parking Bicycle Lane (1) Maximum Posted Speed (2) (3) On service (4) 7 35 road only Main Street 8 5 10 6 (3) 45ᵒ - 18 0ᵒ (parallel) 8 90ᵒ - 18.5 5 30 Local Street (Nonresidential) 6 5 10 n/a (5) 45ᵒ - 18 0ᵒ (parallel) 8 90ᵒ - 18.5 4 25 Local Street (Residential) 6 5 9 n/a (5) 5 (6) 4 25 Alley (Two-Way) n/a (5) n/a (5) 8 n/a (5) n/a (5) n/a (5) n/a (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Bicycle lanes are required if the roadway segment is included among the Top 20 Priorities of the Martin County Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan or identified in the latest Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan. On local streets, bicycles and motor vehicles share the travel lane. Any change in a posted speed limit requires the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. The minimum standards for medians apply only if medians are proposed. The standards for on-street parking on the service road shall be the same as those for a Main Street or a Non-Residential Local Street. n/a means not applicable. It does not mean such a feature is prohibited if the design is appropriate to the context and approved by the County Engineer. On local residential streets, on-street parking may be provided by increasing the width of the pavement by 5 feet. Page 9 of 13

TABLE 4.19.11. GUIDELINES FOR TND STREETS Street Type Traffic Lanes Number Width (feet) Village center: 2 11 boulevard (4) Major street, 2-way Major street, 1-way Minor street, 2-way Minor street, 1-way Local street, 2-way Local street, 1-way 1 11 2 11 1 11 2 10 1 10 2 10 1 10 Sidewalk (1) 10 both sides 10 both sides 8 both sides 8 both sides 6 both sides 6 both sides 6 both sides 6 both sides Buffer (feet) Bike Lane (feet) Parking (2) (feet) Paved Section (3) (feet) ROW (feet) 10 5 7 38 118 10 5 7 27 96 10 10 10 10 5 both sides 5 one side 5 both sides 5 one side 8 No 8 No 7 both sides 7 one side 7 both sides 7 one side 7 both sides 7 one side 50 88 27 65 48 82 26 60 48 78 26 56 Alley, 2-way N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20 25 Alley, 1-way N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 20 Residential: boulevard (4) 2 11 Major street, 2-way Minor street or local street 1 11 2 11 6 both sides 6 both sides 6 both sides 6 both sides (5) 6 both sides 10 5 7 38 72 10 5 7 27 61 10 5 both sides 8 No 8 No 7 both sides 7 both sides 7 one side 50 84 29 (6) 59 21 (7) 51 Page 10 of 13

(1) Edge of sidewalk located one foot from right-of-way line. (2) Parallel parking. (3) Paved section back-to-back of curbs; two-foot curb and gutter section. (4) Divided roadways separated by a raised median at least 18 ft wide. (5) Traffic lanes are not designated by striping or lane lines. (6) Only during periods where vehicles are parked on both sides. One vehicle at a time may pass. (7) Only during periods where vehicles are parked on one side. Figure 4.19.1. Illustration of TND Street... [remainder of page is blank] Page 11 of 13

PART 2: APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This Ordinance shall be applicable throughout the unincorporated area of Martin County. PART 3: CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of Martin County, Martin County ordinances, County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. PART 4: SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void by a court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property or circumstances by a court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. PART 5: FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The clerk shall be and is hereby directed forthwith to scan this ordinance in accordance with Rule 1B-26.003, Florida Administrative Code, and file same with the Florida Department of state via electronic transmission. PART 6: CODIFICATION. Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the Martin County Land Development Regulations. The word "ordinance" may be changed to "article," "section," or other word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered. PART 7: EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Office of Secretary of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED THIS 11 th DAY OF APRIL, 2017. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA CAROLYN TIMMANN, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER DOUG SMITH, CHAIRMAN Page 12 of 13

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: KRISTA A. STOREY SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY Page 13 of 13

ALTERNATE VERSION BASED ON COMMENTS OF THE OLD PALM CITY NAC AND OLD PALM CITY NAC MEMBER BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY ORDINANCE NUMBER AN ORDINANCE OF MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE 4, DIVISION 19, ROADWAY DESIGN, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, MARTIN COUNTY CODE, REGARDING STANDARDS FOR TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY, CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, SEVERABILITY, FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, CODIFICATION, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) has adopted the Martin County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan within which are included goals, objectives, and policies related to zoning and land development; and WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, requires the implementation of these goals, objectives and policies through the adoption of consistent land development regulations; and WHEREAS, Ordinance 561 was adopted on December 7, 1999, incorporating and establishing roadway design standards into Article 4, Division 19 of the Martin County Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code; WHEREAS, Article 4, Division 19 contains standards for the development of traditional neighborhood streets; WHEREAS, these proposed amendments to Article 4, Division 19 of the Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code, have received public hearings before the Local Planning Agency and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds the proposed amendments consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT:

PART 1: Section 4.841.-General-- is hereby amended as indicated. Struck-out text... is deleted. Underscored text is added. The ellipses (...) indicate text in the ordinance that is unaffected by the proposed amendments is not presented here. 4.841.B. Applicability. 1. Except as specifically provided elsewhere in this division, this division shall apply to all roadways which are under the jurisdiction of Martin County whether located within the unincorporated or incorporated areas of Martin County. 2. This division shall not be interpreted to require roadways existing on the effective date of this division to comply with the requirements of this division except as provided for in sections 4.843.G and 4.845.H. Any modifications to roadways existing on the effective date of this division shall be required to comply with this division to the extent possible. Unopened or unpaved platted streets shall comply with the requirements of this division. 3. This division shall apply to all roadways which have not been constructed as of the effective date of this division except: a. When a development project within which a roadway is located has received final site plan approval prior to the effective date of this division; or when the final site for a development project within which a roadway is located has received a recommendation of approval from the Development Review Committee or the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to the effective date of this division; or when staff has issued a written staff report regarding the proposed final site plan finding compliance with roadway requirements; and no modifications are made to the final site plan. b. If a project within which a roadway is located has received master plan approval prior to the effective date of this division and the approval is still valid and clearly establishes compliance with roadway design requirements existing at the time of master plan approval, the project may proceed forward consistent with the approved master plan so long as there is no modification to the master plan. c. For Martin County road projects included within the Capital Improvement Plan which have been designed and permitted prior to the effective date of this division. 4. The Board of County Commissioners may establish alternate design standards and requirements for roadways located within a designated community redevelopment area. 4. 5. The access classification system and associated standards of the Florida Department of Transportation shall apply to all roadways on the State highway system. Page 2 of 14

4.841.C. Glossary... Furnishings Zone means the area that serves as a buffer between the pedestrian zone and the travelway and that provides space for appurtenances including but not limited to, landscaping, utility and transportation infrastructure, and street furniture.... On-street Parking means the space in which to park vehicles within a public right-ofway or access easement that is divided into stalls that are either parallel or angled to the adjacent travel/bicycle lane or parallel or angled to a service road.... Pedestrian Zone means the area between the furnishings zone and the edge of the right-of-way or the face of the building, which may include landscaping, utility and transportation infrastructure, and street furniture, but must include an unobstructed sidewalk.... Sidewalk café means an outdoor portion of a restaurant, coffeehouse or café.... Street furniture means benches, sidewalk cafes, trash receptacles, and similar objects. Streetside means the area that is between the face of curb and the edge of the right-of-way or the face of the building and includes the pedestrian zone and the furnishings zone.... TND Boulevard means a road intended to provide high vehicle mobility, which may be multi-lane, without on-street parking, and limited access designed to carry longer vehicular trips, and possibly include a service road along one or both sides designed for land access, parking, bicycles, and pedestrians. TND Main Street means a street with collection of destinations within close proximity. Buildings are close to street with direct connection to the pedestrian zone. On-street parking may be provided and driveway access is minimized. Buildings are close to street with direct connection to the pedestrian zone. Driveway access is minimized and the adjacent properties are primarily served by alternative access such as local streets, alleys or cross access.... Transportation and utility infrastructure means utility poles, sign poles, signal and electrical cabinets, fire hydrants, bicycle racks, bus shelters and other similar items. Travelway means the area between the faces of the curb.... Page 3 of 14

PART 2: Section 4.843. - Roadway design and right-of-way--is hereby amended as indicated. Struck-out text is deleted. Underscored text is added.... The ellipses (...) indicate text in the ordinance that is unaffected by the proposed amendments is not presented here. 4.843.B. Right-of-way requirements. 1. Minimum right-of-way (ROW) widths for each roadway classification are provided in table 4.19.1. Additional width may be necessary as determined by the County Engineer depending upon the approved roadway cross section, design elements within the right-of-way, and drainage requirements for the area. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate traditional neighborhood street design in redevelopment and new development projects. Variances from the The minimum ROW widths for the purposes of developing a traditional neighborhood street design or within community redevelopment areas (CRA) may be granted pursuant to are found in section 4.847. 2. Variances may be granted by the Board of County Commissioners for rights-of-way within plats that were recorded prior to 1972 where the previously acquired right-ofway is less than the required minimum right-of-way. 3. Right-of-way requirements may be adjusted by the County Engineer for specific roadways involving intersection right-of-way improvements or restrictions of Martin County or the FDOT. 4. Intersection fillets shall provide a minimum 25-foot radius or an equivalent chord connecting the rights-of-way of the intersecting roads. [Remainder of page is blank] Page 4 of 14

3. Bus routes. 4. Industrial parks with a recommended minimum radius of 45 feet. TABLE 4.19.5. MINIMUM INTERSECTION RADII Roadway Minimum Radii (feet) Parkway 30 Major arterial 30 Minor arterial 25 Major collector 25 (1) Minor collector 20 (1) Local 15 (1) Scenic corridor (2)... (1) (2) Radius may be reduced by five feet if parking is provided on the intersecting street. Intersection radii as required to maintain the character of the roadway based on a scenic corridor resolution. PART 3: Section 4.847. Traditional neighborhood street design-- is hereby amended as indicated. Struck-out text is deleted. Underscored text is added. The ellipses (...) indicate text in the ordinance that is unaffected by the proposed amendments is not presented here. 4.847.A. Applicability Traditional neighborhood street design encouraged. 1. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate traditional neighborhood street design into redevelopment and new development projects for the purpose of developing a traditional neighborhood development (TND) pattern outside of the community redevelopment areas. Applicants are required to utilize traditional neighborhood street design in the community redevelopment areas. TND street design reduces traffic congestion and expands options for vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access through an integrated network of narrow roadways. It results in a reduction in linear streets, incorporates traffic calming resources and allows on-street parking. 4.847.B. Applicability. Page 7 of 14

2. The standards contained in the following sub-sections of this division do not apply to TND streets designed in conformity with Section 4.847.: a. sub-section 4.843.B (Right-of-way requirements), b. sub-section 4.843.C. (Lane and buffer widths), and c. subsection 4.843.E. (Radius at street intersections). 3. The standards contained in sub-section 4.627 of Article 4, Division 14, Parking and Loading, are inapplicable to TND streets designed in conformity with Section 4.847. 4. The intent of this section is to provide flexibility for the design of Traditional Neighborhood Streets to facilitate achievement of the environmental, aesthetic, economic, safety, transportation, and maintenance objectives for each roadway segment. The decision-maker may allow deviations from the minimum standards contained in Table 4.19.11 this sub-section when necessary due to the location of existing buildings, constrained right-of-way, or to meet other needs or goals of the particular street segment. Such deviations may include widths of a furnishings zone, pedestrian zone, median or bicycle lane that is greater or lesser than that provided in Table 4.19.11. 4.847.B. Procedure for TND street design. Applicants seeking a variance from the requirements of the standards of this division for the purpose of developing a TND street design shall submit such a request in conjunction with the submittal of a development application pursuant to the provisions of article 10 of the Land Development Regulations. In addition to the requirements of article 10, the application shall include a brief description of the proposed development and surrounding area, connections to surrounding streets, environmental amenities, proposed transportation system, and proposed land uses (including square footage and acreage). The plan shall also include regulatory and design standards for transportation and land development and an explanation of any variations from Martin County standards. 4.847.B. C. TND street design and layout. 1. Traditional neighborhood developments, and developments within community redevelopment areas (CRA ), and mixed use developments seeking a variance from the requirements of this division shall incorporate the following street layout principles: a. Street layout should exhibit a high degree of overall connectivity, with some allowances for topographic or wetlands conditions. b. Cul-de-sacs are generally discouraged, but may be used in moderation. c. Maximum block length in the TND should not exceed 1,320 linear feet. d. Trees should be planted within the street rights-of-way between the sidewalk and the street curb. e. Provision should be made for on-street parking. Page 8 of 14

2. General guidelines The minimum standards for TND street designs are provided in table 4.19.11. TND Street Types TABLE 4.19.11. TND Street Minimum Standards (all measurements in feet as measured perpendicular to center line of street) Pedestrian Zone Furnishings Zone (8) Travel Lane Street Elements Median On-street Parking Bicycle Lane (1) Maximum Posted Speed (2) (3) On service Boulevard 6 5 11 10 (4) 7 35 road only Main Street 8 5 10 6 0ᵒ (parallel) 8 45ᵒ - 18 90ᵒ - 18.5 5 30 Local Street (Nonresidential) 6 5 10 n/a (5) 45ᵒ - 18 0ᵒ (parallel) 8 90ᵒ - 18.5 4 25 Local Street (Residential) 6 5 9 n/a (5) 5 (6) 4 25 Alley (Two-Way) n/a (5) n/a (5) 8 (7) n/a (5) n/a (5) n/a (5) n/a (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Bicycle lanes are required if the roadway segment is included among the Top 20 Priorities of the Martin County Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan or identified in the latest Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan. On local streets, bicycles and motor vehicles share the travel lane. Any change in a posted speed limit requires the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. The maximum posted speed limit of 35 mph for a TND Boulevard is for the purpose of allowing incremental transition of existing roadways to Traditional Neighborhood Street types. The goal for TND Boulevards is that the posted speed limit shall not exceed 30 mph. The minimum standards for medians apply only if medians are proposed. If on-street parking for a Boulevard is provided on a parallel service road, the standards for on-street parking on the a service road shall be the same as those for a Main Street or a Non-Residential Local Street. n/a means not applicable. It does not mean such a feature is prohibited if the design is appropriate to the context and approved by the County Engineer. Page 9 of 14

(6) (7) (8) On local residential streets, on-street parallel parking may be provided by increasing the width of the pavement by 5 feet. An alley may be one-way or two-way. A one-way alley shall have a pavement width of no less than 10 feet. The furnishings zone may also accommodate expanded sidewalk width. Page 10 of 14

PART 7: APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This Ordinance shall be applicable throughout the unincorporated area of Martin County. PART 8: CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of Martin County, Martin County ordinances, County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. PART 9: SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void by a court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property or circumstances by a court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstances. PART 10: FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The clerk shall be and is hereby directed forthwith to scan this ordinance in accordance with Rule 1B-26.003, Florida Administrative Code, and file same with the Florida Department of state via electronic transmission. PART 11: CODIFICATION. Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the Martin County Land Development Regulations. The word "ordinance" may be changed to "article," "section," or other word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered. PART 12: EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Office of Secretary of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED THIS 11 th DAY OF APRIL, 2017. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA CAROLYN TIMMANN, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER DOUG SMITH, CHAIRMAN Page 13 of 14

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: KRISTA A. STOREY SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY Page 14 of 14

ITEM 6B COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM April 3, 2017 PREPARED BY: TITLE: Kate Parmelee, Community Development Manager Special Parking Alternative for Redevelopment Centers (SPARC) Base Cost for the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Estimated time: 10 minutes. The Special Parking Alternative for Redevelopment Centers (SPARC) program established in 2007 as Section 3.260.G., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code (LDRs), is intended to provide a mechanism for allowing landowners to satisfy all or part of their onsite parking requirement by paying for a proportionate share of the cost of providing public or other off-site parking. The Community Redevelopment Agency is requested to recommend a base fee to the Board of County Commissioners which is necessary to initiate the program. APPROVAL CA LEG BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: The SPARC program was developed in recognition that although the compact and integrated form of development which is encouraged in the designated Community Redevelopment Areas is often better accomplished with off-site parking, such as onstreet parking and public parking lots, than with on-site parking, such common areas are challenging to develop due to the initially high cost of development. The SPARC program is intended to help finance on-street and other public parking. Use of the SPARC program within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area was authorized in 2007 as Section 3.261.C.2.b., LDRs. The Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area is the only Community Redevelopment Area currently authorized to participate in the SPARC program. Since adoption of the program in 2007, the program has never been fully implemented and a base fee has not been set. Pursuant to Section 3.260.G.5., LDRs, the base fee is adopted by Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners. The base cost is used ITEM 6B page 1

with the following table, set forth in Section 3.261.C.2.b., LDRs, to establish the cost to the developer for each required on-site parking space that a developer proposes to satisfy by way of participation in the SPARC program. The base cost is the estimated cost of constructing a typical off-street parking space within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area, including both the land and costs of construction. OPTION DESCRIPTION COST 1 2 3 4 5 6 Developer constructs on-street parking to County standards within existing County-owned Right-of-Way. Landowner dedicates land to the County and constructs onstreet parking spaces to County standards. Developer reimburses the County for on-street parking constructed by the County prior to June 1, 2007, including parking constructed within the right-of-way of the FEC Railway. Developer constructs on-street parking to County standards within the right-of-way of the FEC Railway. Developer contributes toward or reimburses the County or other public entity for parking spaces developed or planned in a surface parking arrangement. Developer contributes toward or reimburses the County or other public entity for parking spaces developed or planned in a structured parking arrangement. 50% of base cost None 100% of base cost 100% of base cost plus proportionate cost of lease 200% of base cost 400% of base cost The Martin County Engineering Department provided estimated costs of off-street parking and actual costs of on-street parking within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area. The method designated in the LDRs to develop the base cost is the estimated cost of constructing a typical off-street parking space within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area, the average of which is $7,900. ITEM 6B page 2

ISSUES: At the March 30, 2017 meeting of the Jensen Beach Neighborhood Advisory Committee the NAC recommended the base cost to be set at $7,900. The proposed Board resolution has been included for the CRA s review and recommendation. There is a pending project that plans to utilize the SPARC program. LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW: This item has been reviewed for legal sufficiency to determine whether it is consistent with applicable law, has identified legal risks, and has developed strategies for legal defensibility. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move that the Community Redevelopment Agency: Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution determining that the proportionate share cost of providing public or other off-site parking within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area (base cost) is $7,900. ITEM 6B page 3

BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA RESOLUTION NO. 17- WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) adopted a Special Parking Alternative for Redevelopment Centers (SPARC) Program on July 10, 2007 in Section 3.260.G., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code; and WHEREAS, the Board authorized use of the SPARC Program within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area on July 10, 2007 in Section 3.261.C.2.b., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code; and WHEREAS, Section 2.361.C.2.b.(1), Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code, states that the base cost shall be the estimated cost of constructing a typical off-street parking space within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area, including both the land and costs of construction pursuant to the methods as more particularly set forth in section 3.260.G. WHEREAS, Section 2.360.G.5., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code, requires that the County use professionally accepted methods to determine the proportionate share cost of providing public or other off-site parking within the participating Community Redevelopment Area; and WHEREAS, the professionally accepted method of determination used by the County Engineering Department identified multiple potential sites within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area and used current property values, county land development regulations, current construction costs, and professional costs to acquire, design, permit and construct off-site parking to determine the average unit cost per stall for off-site parking; and WHEREAS, Section 2.360.G.5., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code requires that the Board adopt such fees by Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THAT: The proportionate share cost of providing public or other off-site parking within the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area (base cost) is determined to be $7,900. DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF, 2017. ATTEST: CAROLYN TIMMANN, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: DOUG SMITH, CHAIRMAN APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:

SARAH W. WOODS, COUNTY ATTORNEY

ITEM 6C COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM April 3, 2017 PREPARED BY: TITLE: Kate Parmelee, Community Development Manager Jensen Beach CRA: Implementation of SPARC or Off Site Parking Opportunity EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Estimated time: 10 minutes. Successful implementation of the Special Parking Alternative for Redevelopment Centers (SPARC) program outlined in the Land Development Regulations and the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Plan provides for the acquisition of land for parking purposes. The CRA is requested to review a request from the Jensen Beach Neighborhood Advisory Committee regarding the program and further implementation of the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Plan. APPROVAL CA LEG BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: The Special Parking Alternative for Redevelopment Centers (SPARC) program outlined in Section 3.260.G., Land Development Regulations, Martin County Code and authorized for use in the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area in Section 3.261.C.2.b., Land Development Regulations, is intended to provide a mechanism for allowing landowners to satisfy all or part of their on-site parking requirement by paying for a proportionate share of the cost of providing public or other off-site parking. Since adoption of the ordinance in 2007 the program has never been fully implemented and a base fee was not set by resolution. The base fee is scheduled to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners on April 11, 2017. Payments deposited into the Jensen Beach SPARC account shall be used by the Martin County Board of County Commissioners, or their assigns, for the exclusive purpose of developing public parking with the Community Redevelopment Area. Appropriate uses of SPARC funds includes, but is not limited to, land acquisition, lease payments, construction, reconstruction and signage. ITEM 6C page 1

Successful implementation of the program requires a carefully considered strategy to ensure that the parking demand generated by new development or redevelopment will eventually be satisfied by the provision of other, off-site parking. The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council prepared A Parking Strategy for Jensen Beach several years ago, a copy of which has been provided for the CRA s reference. Staff and the Jensen Beach NAC recommends that this strategy be updated to reflect current conditions. Parking access at the Wells Fargo Building located at 3241 NE Pineapple Way was recently restricted and the property owners are preparing the site for sale. The SPARC program and the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Plan contemplate the acquisition of land for parking purposes and recommend various funding options. In addition, the parcel was identified in the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area Plan as critically important in order to extend Maple Avenue north from Jensen Beach Blvd. through Ricou. Staff requests direction from the NAC and CRA in their approach to addressing such opportunities. ISSUES: The Jensen Beach Neighborhood Advisory Committee considered the item on March 30, 2017 and noted the critical importance of the property to the redevelopment of Jensen Beach, addressing parking needs and the proposed Maple Avenue extension and specifically recommended that the CRA/Board of County Commissioners: 1. Update the Parking strategy and update conceptual options for the potential use of the property incorporating the Maple Avenue Extension. 2. Pursue acquisition of the property. 3. Allocate funding. The Jensen Beach NAC recommended pursuing partnerships with the private sector and Martin County Board of County Commissioners and allocating 75% of the Jensen Beach CRA TIF currently allocated to infill sewer, as a project has not yet been identified. If the acquisition were to be financed the Jensen Beach NAC recommended 50% of future TIF revenues be allocated to repayment of any financing for the property, reserving the remaining 50% of available project expenditures for infill sewer projects. The NAC recommended 100% of future SPARC revenue, pending implementation by the BOCC, be allocated. LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW: To the extent this item contains legal issues; it has been reviewed for legal sufficiency, although this is primarily a matter of CRA policy. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move that the Community Redevelopment Agency provide direction to staff concerning the recommendation by the Jensen Beach NAC. ITEM 6C page 2

Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Plan Prepared For Martin County Community Redevelopment Agency And Jensen Beach Neighborhood Advisory committee Prepared By: SEPTEMBER, 2002 Revised October 2009

D. Vision Plan Projects with Strategies 2. Maple Avenue [A] First Union Plan [B] Jensen Beach Blvd. To Church Street [C] North from Church Street [D] Jensen Beach Blvd. South to Palmetto West End D A B C III. Vision Plan Potential Funding Sources: Impact Fees, Gas Tax/ Transportation Fund, User Fee/ Special Assessment, Private Development, TIF, FDOT-Enhancement Grant Key Plan Photo by J. Priest Photo by J. Priest Photo by D. Smith 28

D. Vision Plan Projects with Strategies 2. Maple Avenue A. First Union Plan III. Vision Plan Cost: $5,000-$10,000 Potential Funding Source: Staff Time, District Funds Time Frame: Planning: 1 Year Implementation: Through Maple Avenue construction 2-5 years Project Description: Planning study and negotiations with First Union Bank to determine best route and plan of action to extend Maple Avenue north from Jensen Beach Blvd. through Ricou. Actions: Contact and negotiate with First Union Bank representatives. Determine road alignment and bank facility changes needed. Key Plan A Existing First Union Drive Through (looking north from Ricou Terrace) Existing First Union Bank/ Future Maple Avenue (looking north from Jensen Beach Blvd.) 29

D. Vision Plan Projects with Strategies 2. Maple Avenue B III. Vision Plan B. Jensen Beach Blvd. To Church Street Cost: $450,000-900,000 Potential Funding Sources: Impact Fees, Bonding, Transportation Fund, TIF, FDOT-Enhancement Grant, Private Development Time Frame: Planning: 1-2 years Implementation: 2-5 years Project Description: This section of Maple Avenue is envisioned to contain a town center green to be utilized as a community focal point. Since Maple Avenue R-O-W will be a pedestrian oriented street serving the redevelopment area, (which does not exist at the present time), planning, R-O-W acquisition, as well as construction is needed. Key Plan Actions: Right-of-way acquisition, design, and construction. Work with existing church for appropriate alignment. Coordinate with utility plans including stormwater exfiltration. Proposed Cross-Section * Sidewalk one side of road, contiguous by block. Plan Detail 30

D. Vision Plan Projects with Strategies 2. Maple Avenue III. Vision Plan Sketch by Seth Harry & Associates 31

III. Vision Plan 9. Municipal Parking Cost: A. Parking Structure $1,800,000-2,500,000 B. On Grade Public Parking $350,000-1,000,000 (70 at grade to 210 structured parking spaces) Potential Funding Sources: TIF, Public-Private Venture Time Frame: Planning: 3-5 years Land Acquisition: As available A. Parking Structure Implementation: 15-20 years B. On Grade Public Parking Implementation: 10-15 years Project Description: If the redevelopment efforts are extremely successful, some public parking may be needed to supplement individual parcel and on-street parking in the predominately commercial northern and southern ends of the district. An initial study should be undertaken to access the potential need for, and locations of land for at grade parking which potentially could be converted into a parking deck, if needed. An alternative option would be to pursue a public-private joint venture with prospective parcel developers to provide some public and private shared parking arrangements. Municipal Parking Actions: Feasibility study. Property acquisition/leasing. Construction of at grade parking, or parking structure. Public-private joint venture for structure or shared parking. Parking Deck 42

PARKING & COMMUNITY CHARACTER A Parking Strategy for Downtown Jensen Beach T R E A S U R E C O A S T R E G I O N A L P L A N N I N G C O U N C I L

Index Table of Contents The Situation Today: Parking in Jensen Beach Eight Downtown Districts: A Distinct Identity for Each District CRA District Plan Downtown District Figure Ground: On- Site parking Requirements Current Parking Requirements Proposed Modifications to Parking Requirements Off-Site parking Allowances: Provision for Off-Site Parking Proposed Off-Site parking Allowances On-Street Parking Fulfilling Parking Requirements Establishing Parking on a District-Wide Level Parking and Building Height Shared Parking and the Mixed Use Formula Implementation Parking, A & B Network of Streets Parking Availability for a PILOP Program Potential Garage Sites Supply and Demand and Off-Site Calculations Page 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 17 19 21 i

The Situation Today PARKING IN JENSEN BEACH The character and scale Jensen Beach's downtown is such that one experiences a unique sense of place immediately upon arrival. This, together with it's unparalleled location, scenic views, and feeling of local importance, are all contributing factors that attract, and will continue to attract new visitors, residents, and investors to the area. The downtown Jensen Beach Master Plan (also referred to as the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area Master Plan) is an important tool that prepares the community to ensure that as growth and change happen, they do so in the community's terms. Parking is an integral component of the downtown Jensen Beach Master Plan. It plays a fundamental role in the walkability, scale (massing), and desirability of any community. Parking can attract or detract residents, visitors and investors alike. lots, or surrounding buildings by a sea of asphalt. This strategy, characteristic of suburban communities, has generally resulted in an excessive overall amount of parking and paved surfaces, and a severe impact to the limited fabric that constitutes the downtown. And although so much land is being dedicated to parking (see Figure 1: A Figure Ground of downtown Jensen Beach, page 10), the general perception is that there is still a lack of it. The purpose of this parking study for the Jensen Beach Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) is to 1) determine the appropriate amount of on and off-site parking required in each of the eight downtown districts, and 2) define district wide parking strategies that will ensure a balance of development, open space, vistas and preservation of the downtown character as it develops overtime. Up until today, Jensen Beach has dealt with parking on an individual, parcel by parcel basis. This means that each building or development provides for its own parking. All this parking provided by development is private. And this is accomplished in many, cases by knocking down buildings, paving empty 1

Eight Downtown Districts A VISION FOR THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN JENSEN BEACH The downtown Jensen Beach Master Plan is based on a Regulating Plan that defines the character of each street within the Jensen Beach CRA. The Regulating Plan divides the CRA into eight distinct districts. The downtown Jensen Beach Development Standards serve as a tool to implement the Regulating Plan and define the following elements: building types, building placement, building height, parking quantity and placement, and appropriate mix of uses. These elements, also know as the elements of healthy neighborhoods and districts, are the key to achieving the desired character of the public realm in the downtown area. While the Jensen Beach Development Standards and the CRA Master Plan clearly define building type, height, placement, architectural style and appropriate mix of uses in a manner that is specific to each of the eight districts, it does not contemplate parking in as much detail. Parking requirements are defined, and although these requirements should not change from district to district, parking programs and incentives need to be customized to achieve the goals particular to each district. Parking is such an important component of a community s infrastructure, that it can single-handedly attract or detract visitors and investors alike. Parking also plays a fundamental role in defining the scale and massing of buildings. If parking requirements are too high, and all parking is required on-site, then the net developable area of a parcel is greatly reduced, and large voids appear in the fabric, generally creating a hardship for development and an exclusively auto-oriented environment despite any pedestrian facilities. If parking requirements are too low, new construction with buildings out of scale and character, and a shortage of parking will rapidly become evident and will drive business away. Achieving the right amount of 2 parking is a delicate balance, and one that has to be closely monitored and often reviewed. The parking quantities currently required for development in the Jensen Beach CRA (page 6) are appropriate and should remain consistent throughout all districts. But, in order to achieve the the identity specific to each of the eight districts within the CRA, it is necessary to refine the parking requirements and ensure that they address the needs of each district. Currently, all parking for development within the Jensen Beach CRA is required to be provided onsite, and in the Jensen Beach Development Standards there are no provisions for off-site or on-street parking to count towards those requirements. While the current requirement may be a good strategy for the less intense and more residential districts, it is not necessarily appropriate for the more intense mixed-use districts. Additionally, because the Development Standards are stringent regarding parking placement (all on-site), all changes proposed in this report are to be viewed as incentives to development, and under no circumstance constitute a taking of development rights. The citizens vision for each district described in the Jensen Beach CRA Master Plan was used as the basis for this report. With the understanding of the vision for the future of each of the eight districts, off-site parking was tested, and percentages for each district were proposed. A summary of the vision for each district is described with the purpose of clarifying the proposed off-site parking percentages and parking strategies proposed in this report.

Eight Downtown Districts A DISTINCT IDENTITY FOR EACH DISTRICT: public realm. Retail, general commercial, and residential uses are proposed for this district. Districts I and II are envisioned as the southern anchor of the Jensen Beach CRA, which, at build-out, will also have central and northern anchor destinations that will generate a pedestrian environment, walkability, and connectivity throughout the entire CRA. DISTRICT III: PINEAPPLE AVENUE NORTH Seth Harry & Associates/Martin County DISTRICT I: JENSEN BEACH BOULEVARD The heart of the downtown: Proposed as the most dense and intense district, it is planned to develop as a traditional main street that serves both the north county and Hutchinson Island, and is a regional destination, with retail on the ground floor, and residential and office uses above stores. TCRPC The northern anchor: Proposed as the mixeduse, northern destination of the CRA, the district will house residential, commercial and entertainment uses, as well as a future train station along the F.E.C. right of way. Seth Harry & Associates/Martin County DISTRICT II: RICOU TERRACE An extension of downtown: Proposed equally as the dense and intense as district I, it is planned to develop as a mixed use district that supports the activities along Jensen Beach Boulevard as a main street, while allowing for special events within the 3 DISTRICT IV: PINEAPPLE AVENUE The edge of the CRA: This district generally par-

Eight Downtown Districts allels the FEC right-of way. Resilient buildings to buffer the CRA from noises and other impacts generated by the train and traffic along Pineapple Road are envisioned. Commercial and residential uses will be developed in this district. privatized as in conventional developments, this district is designed around a public civic space. Medium density residential uses in the form of town houses or apartment houses, and lower intensity commercial uses are proposed along the a central town common. Seth Harry & Associates/Martin County DISTRICT V: INDIAN RIVER DRIVE The scenic district: Buildings along this drive are intended to reflect the character and scale of this waterfront town. As such, the plan proposes, detached, less intense buildings that, in the town's tradition, house commercial and residential uses in a less urban way. DISTRICT VII: MAPLE STREET The Jewel of the downtown: Proposed as the main north south connector through the CRA, this road changes character as it traverses the different districts. District VII, envisioned as the single family residential district, is to evoke the relaxed, quaint, small scaled beach character that is the signature of Jensen Beach's waterfront village. Seth Harry & Associates/Martin County DISTRICT VI: MAPLE STREET TOWN COMMONS The civic center: By requiring that open space be provided as part of the public realm, as opposed to 4 Seth Harry & Associates/TCRPC DISTRICT VIII: SPECIAL DISTRICT Initially intended to house a public library, this cen-

Jensen Beach CRA District Plan tral district has the purpose of generating an intermediate destination that will encourage pedestrian traffic and activity linking the northern districts and future transit station, with the life of main street to the south. As a special district, the uses that occupy it in the future should be consistent with the original intent and compatible in scale and character with the residential uses that surround it. JENSEN BEACH CRA DISTRICT PLAN Martin County/Houston Couzzo 5

Figure 1: Downtown District Figure Ground PARKING ERODING THE FABRIC The image on the left is a "figure ground" of districts I and II along Jensen Beach Boulevard and Ricou Terrace. In it, existing buildings are represented in black, while surface parking lots and driveways are represented in red. This image makes the following evident: o There is a good continuous alignment of buildings along Jensen Beach Boulevard through most of the Downtown District. Nevertheless, this physical continuity resulting from the alignment of buildings is deceiving since several structures house uses that are not conducive to pedestrian destination or a main street environment. o Parking has completely eroded the fabric along Ricou Terrace, there is no building mass. As a result, this entire district is an enormous sea of asphalt. Even though the parking provided in this area appears to be beneficial for downtown businesses, the way in which it is being provided has four major consequences: Ricou Terrace Jensen Beach Boulevard Figure ground image of districts I & II along Jensen Beach Boulevard and Ricou Terrace. o Above all, this is the image of a fabric that is being consumed by parking. This limits the possibilities that the CRA has to offer to tourism, residents and development, creating an uncertain future for businesses and residents alike. a) It is a waste of developable land and revenue for the County and the CRA; b) It is detrimental for all retail in the district, since the transition to Jensen Beach Boulevard is unattractive, creating a less-than-desirable environment for pedestrians once they have parked their cars; c) It makes the transition between parking and the Boulevard boring, thus limiting the distance that pedestrians are willing to cover, and; d) It is detrimental for the natural environment. o The possibility of growth of the Downtown Districts ( Districts I & II) as a complete and unified destination that becomes a southern anchor to the entire CRA area is truncated, limiting the destination to the length of Jensen Beach Boulevard and creating a physical barrier between the downtown and remaining six districts. 6

On-Site Parking Requirements: CURRENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS The Jensen Beach CRA Development Standards require that parking be provided on site, as follows: CURRENT ON-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS 3.261.C. Parking. Parking shall conform with Article 4, Division 14, Parking and Loading, of the Land Development Regulations or as specified in Figures 10 through 14. When the specifications shown in figures 10 through 14 are in conflict with Article 4, Division 14, Parking and Loading, of the Land Development Regulations, then the specifications in figures 10 through 14 shall be applicable. On-site parking will be provided as follows: 1. Residence: One per residential unit. 2. Retail/office: Three per 1,000 square feet of floor area. 3. Medical office: Four per 1,000 square feet of floor area. 4. Restaurant: Five per 1,000 square feet of floor area. 5. There shall be a visual between parking areas and adjacent residential uses. PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS: This analysis proposes the following modifications (underlined) to the Jensen Beach CRA Development Standards PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS: 3.261.C. Parking. Parking shall conform with Article 4, Division 14, Parking and Loading, of the Land Development Regulations or as specified in Figures 10 through 14. When the specifications shown in figures 10 through 14 are in conflict with Article 4, Division 14, Parking and Loading, of the Land Development Regulations, then the specifications in figures 10 through 14 shall be applicable. On-site parking will be provided as follows: 1. Residence: One per residential unit. 2. Retail/office: Three per 1,000 square feet of floor area. 3. Medical office: Four per 1,000 square feet of floor area. 4. Restaurant: Five per 1,000 square feet of floor area. 5. There shall be a visual or physical barrier between parking areas and adjacent residential uses. An alley is considered an optimal element to separate parking areas or commercial uses from residential uses. 6. Exceeding the required number of parking spaces will require the provision of additional open space (public or private) in the amount of 200sf per additional parking space. 7. Off-Site Parking, including on-street parking, shall be permitted. The amount of off-street parking permitted shall vary from district to district. 7

Off-Site Parking Allowances PROVISION FOR OFF-SITE PARKING Off-Site Parking: Parking space provided on-street, or on a public or private parking facility, that fulfills the parking requirement for the specific uses which occur on a developed site. All off-site parking will be provided within the specific district where it is generated, except for Districts I & 2, and in those cases where off-site parking is provided by participation of a Payment in Lieu of Parking (PILOP) or similar program established for the CRA. The current regulations require that all parking be provided on-site, which results in a parking strategy that continues to deal with parking on a parcelby-parcel basis. The analysis conducted recommends a district-wide parking strategy that defines off-site parking allowances according to the specific intensities and densities desired for each district. This analysis proposes an maximum allowance of off-site parking defined per use and per district, but in no way reduces the amount of parking required. It simply allows for a limited, maximum percentage of the required parking to be provided in a location other than the parcel that houses the proposed development. This off-site parking allowance is generally at a cost to the developer, and is only possible if a series of conditions are met and certain district-wide parking programs are established. These conditions and programs are described further in this document. PROPOSED OFF-SITE PARKING ALLOWANCES Off-Site Parking Allowances Per District are Proposed As Follows: DISTRICT I: JENSEN BEACH BOULEVARD 100% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 100% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site 100% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off-site DISTRICT II: RICOU TERRACE 80% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site 80% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off-site DISTRICT III: PINEAPPLE AVENUE NORTH 70% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site 70% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off site DISTRICT IV: PINEAPPLE AVENUE 75% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off-site DISTRICT V: INDIAN RIVER DRIVE 50% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site. 50% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off-site 8

Off-Site Parking DISTRICT VI: MAPLE STREET TOWN COMMONS 50% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site 50% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off-site A 40% overall parking reduction can be applied to parcels within the district contributing land to public open space cosnistent with the CRA master plan. DISTRICT VII: MAPLE STREET 0% of the required commercial parking can be provided off-site 25% of the required residential parking can be provided off-site. 0% of the required parking for other uses can be provided off-site DISTRICT VIII: SPECIAL DISTRICT 100% of the required commercial parking shall be provided within the boundaries of this district 100% of the required residential parking shall be provided within the boundaries of this district 100% of the required parking for other uses shall be provided within the boundaries of this district THIRD FLOOR PARKING PROVISIONS: For Districts IV, V, VI, VII, and VIII, parking generated by residential uses provided on the third floor are not eligible to be provided off-site, and must therefore be provided on-site. Example: Off site parking for a three story building in District V with retail on the ground floor, 5 residential units on the second floor and 5 residential units on the third floor is as follows: Required Parking: 7 spaces retail, 5 spaces residential 2nd floor, 5 spaces residential 3rd floor. Off site parking allowance: 50% of retail and second floor residential: 6 spaces On site parking required 6 spaces + 5 spaces for residential uses on third floor= 11 spaces. ON-STREET PARKING FULFILLING PARKING REQUIREMENTS On-street parking will count towards on-site parking requirements in the percentages listed above provided that: 1. The developer builds the on-street parking spaces. 2. Existing on-street parking spaces previously built on public right-of way by the County shall not be eligible to count towards the fulfillment of parking requirements 3. The on-street parking spaces are built along the length of the lot directly enfronting the parcel generating the parking requirements, and shall not impact the frontage of other parcels. 4. Except in the case where a parcel is paying into the PILOP, all parking shall be contained within the district where it is being generated. Off-site parking will count towards on-site parking requirements in the percentages listed, provided that one or more of the conditions that follow are met. 1. The Jensen Beach Payment in Lieu of Parking Program (PILOP) is established. For districts III through VII, the PILOP program shall allow up to, but not more than the percentages defined for each district of the on-site parking spaces required for residential and non-residential uses, to be purchased by paying into the Jensen Beach Payment in Lieu of Parking Trust Fund a sum of money equal to the number of parking spaces required times the current cost to provide a single parking space in the Jensen Beach CRA. 2. A public parking site, or series of public parking sites, which will function in areas of appropriate 9

District-Wide Parking Strategy dimensions and sufficient capacity to accommodate off-site parking, are identified within the Jensen Beach CRA 3. The development paying into the PILOP or parking on a designated public or private parking lot is within a 3-minute walking distance, or 800' from a designated public parking site, and no further than a 5-minute walking distance or 1,350' from a designated public parking site. 4. A reduction in the amount of parking required, or purchase price while participating in the PILOP is possible, and under certain circumstances recommended, but should remain at the discretion of the Martin County BOCC. ESTABLISHING PARKING ON A DISTRICT- WIDE LEVEL In order to establish parking on a district-wide level for downtown Jensen Beach, a clear strategy that includes the following needs to be developed: 1) Development and adoption of an off-site parking strategy. (Proposed off-site public and private parking lots are identified on Figure 2, page 11 of this report. ) a) Identify underused areas that can be used for peak hour parking demand. All of the existing surface parking lots and on-street parking spaces are quantified in Attachment A: Supply, Demand, and Off-Site Calculations. b) Identify parking areas that are only used during business hours. All of the existing surface parking areas used only during business hours, or within specific timeframes, have been identified in Figure 2. c) Owners and employees of downtown businesses should not compete for prime parking spaces with customers. Nearby church parking lots, or agreements with businesses that have excess parking are great locations for parking for those spending many hours daily in downtown. Employers can offer incentives for their employees to park in designated areas. It is estimated that each on-street parking space along a retail (mixed-use) street generates $200,000 in annual revenues(source Gibbs Planning). The cost of the incentive is minimal compared to the potential loss of business due to lack of parking for customers. d) Once public parking areas have been defined, establish a valet parking program that uses out-of the way parking areas during peak hours. Some restaurants do this on an individual basis. A downtown-wide valet parking program is common, particularly for special events. On-street parking should not be dedicated to valet parking, other than to allow for limited drop-offs. e) Create a parking pool with incentives that will encourage property owners to put their excess parking stalls in this pool. These clearly identified parking spaces can be used as part of an initial PILOP program, or as employee parking. For this to happen, the County needs to release participating owners of private parking lots of liability so that they can make their lots available for parking for the general public when they are not using them. f) While metered or time limited parking might not be a need for Jensen Beach today, it will probably be necessary as the downtown approaches buildout. It is important to evaluate time limited or metered parking. With two or three-hour limits, the on-street spaces become valuable, high turn-over parking spaces. Parking meters do not need to be individual or coin operated structures. Technological advances have made metered parking easy to install, supervise and maintain. See attachment C for metered parking strategies and options. g) On-street parking spaces are shared parking spaces. Even if a particular development built, and is therefore allowed to count on-street parking spaces towards the fulfillment of its parking 10

requirements, on-street parking spaces are not to be designated as private or dedicated parking. The exception to this rule occurs in extreme conditions, and generally limited to overnight residential parking only (i.e. Miami Beach, Florida). h) The proposed study suggests changing the code to maximum, rather than minimum parking requirements. Exceeding the required parking requirement will result in the need to provide additional open space, either public or private. This will not only be more conducive to a pedestrian environment and to the preservation of the Village character envisioned by the residents, but it will also help maintain the demand for a successful PILOP program. 2) Management of off-site parking. The County needs to designate a person/department responsible for identifying, purchasing, or leasing appropriate parking areas; clearly signalize them, and maintain a record of availability, supply and demand. 3) Implementation of a shared parking program. This includes sharing between different uses occurring within the same parcel, which requires reduced parking requirements (Jensen Beach has already implemented this), as well as identifying the different times during which private parking spaces of different parcels are used, and developing a program that allows private individuals to it share off peak usage hours. 5) Development of a Payment-in-lieu-of-parking (PILOP) Ordinance. A PILOP ordinance needs to be developed for off-site parking implementation to be feasible. A basic PILOP ordinance is applicable to all of Martin County s CRA s. Specific incentives should be dealt with by each CRA individually. 6) Funding. A parking manager, working in conjunction with the NAC, BOCC and the community, shall identify other sources of funding which include, but are not limited to: CRA TIF funds, developers contributions, Special Improvement District, Special Taxing Districts, and metered parking (see attachment for list of preferred meter parking methods). i) o Businesses can institute a self taxing district such as a local employment district (LID) or economic improvement district (EID). These districts generally need to be approved by at least 50 % of the property owners. Funds raised can be used for purchase of shared parking lots or structures, for maintenance, cleaning and lighting, and for general improvements to the district such as sidewalk furniture, signs, decorative lighting, security patrols, etc. LIDs can be assessed on any basis chosen by the district, such as amount of frontage or the size of the building. 4) Creation of a Parking Bank. A central listing of available parking spaces, intended to inform long term parking users of available parking in their vicinity so that the most convenient parking areas are left for short-term users including visitors, customers and clients of businesses in the area 11

Scale, Character & Sustainability PARKING AND BUILDING HEIGHT Parking should be understood as part of a community s infrastructure. In most Florida communities, parking is as vital as services such as potable water and sanitary sewer: without them communities simply would not function. Because parking is so important, it is probably one of the most effective tools for development: treated as an incentive, it attracts and encourages development; required in excessive amounts, it can be the single most detrimental element to the growth of a community. With parking allowances as proposed in page 8, 12 out of the 20 spaces can be provided off-site (8 commercial, 4 residential). With the third story limited parking condition, only 10 out of the 20 spaces can be provided off-site (8 commercial, 2 residential (50% of the required parking spaces for the units on the second floor), because the four spaces required to park the units on the third floor are removed from the calculation of off-site parking allowances. This report suggests that parking be treated with different degrees of flexibility in each of the eight CRA districts in Jensen Beach, as a tool to achieve the desired character for each. For Jensen Beach, parking can become an effective tool to control building height, which is a request several neighbors have expressed during public meetings. Page 8 of this report recommends proposed offstreet parking allowances. In order to maintain the general two story building height in the less intense, more residential, and waterfront neighborhoods, all parking requirements resulting from development of a third story, in all districts except Districts I, II and IV shall not be provided off-site. For example, if a development proposes four residential units on a third floor in a building in any district other than the three exempt above, the four required parking spaces must be provided on-site parking allowance: Example: 3 story, 12,000sf building proposed on District III Ground floor retail - 4,000sf Second floor, 4 residential units Third floor, 4 residential units Parking required: 12 commercial + 8 residential Total: 20 parking spaces 12

Scale, Character & Sustainability SHARED PARKING AND THE MIXED USE FORMULA A formula to define density, unique to martin County, is applied to all proposed mixed use projects in martin County s CRA s. This Formula, RB/TP x PA x MD = TU (Residential square footage/total building area x acreage of the site x maximum density allowed in the area = total number of residential units) paving yet more land to provide for a parking need that could have easily been satisfied by sharing parking with commercial uses. While this formula might make sense in a community where the building size is based on Floor Area Ratios (FARs), it does not affect building scale or character in the Jensen Beach CRA where an existing form based code ultimately defines building size (scale and mass) regardless of the uses it houses. Additionally, it results in more parking in an environment that strives for walkability. conceived to preserve the character and scale of Martin County s CRA s, results in unintended consequences that are contradictory to a sustainable environment: a) It triggers a reduction of the number of dwelling units every time the commercial square footage (retail) is increased in any given project. Retail studies show that retail and commercial uses need rooftops (residences) to support them. With this formula, the larger the commercial use, the smaller the number of residential units that are available to support it, which in turn results in more people driving and needing parking to support area businesses; b) It aggravates the lack of availability of affordable housing. Developers compensate the reduction in density resulting from incorporating other uses by building larger, more expensive residential units; and c) Impedes the establishment of a balanced shared parking program: the larger the commercial use, the more parking is required. When this results in a reduction of residential units, sharing parking between these uses off peak hours becomes innefecttive and insignificant. To satisfy the residential demand, additional residential units are built in separate parcels, providing their own parking and 13

Implementation The following recommendations are based on The Parking Handbook for Small Communities (Edwards 1994). General steps for developing a parking plan for a village district or downtown area include: Step 1: Get Organized - Understand the relationship between downtown commerce, massing and parking. Step 2: Gather Data and Analyze Demand - Inventory parking, tabulate data, analyze the data and project future parking demands. This information is included in the attachment section of this report. Step 3: Increase the Effectiveness of Existing parking: Asses and maintain existing parking management systems to improve the effectiveness of on-street parking by increasing turnover and encouraging long-term parkers to use off-street parking spaces. Step 4: Plan and Develop New parking Facilities - If maximizing existing parking management systems do not yield enough additional parking, then plan and develop new parking facilities. Step 5: Promote the Parking Program or Programs selected for the Community. Educate the public about the value of on-street parking, the need for consistent enforcement procedures, the plans for additional parking, and the way the parking system operates. Step 6: Manage the Parking System. Provide on-going management strategies for the parking plan s success. Step 7: Put it Together... and Keep it Together. Put all the previous steps together to create a successful parking plan, monitor the plan, and revise it whenever and as soon as necessary. 14

Attachments PARKING, A & B NETWORK OF STREETS 15

A & B Network of Streets PARKING PLACEMENT Although the Jensen Beach CRA Development Standards require that parking be located in the side or rear of buildings, communities that are successful in achieving a pedestrian environment establish a system of A & B streets. parking should never be visible from an A street (shown in red in the image below). B streets (shown in grey) should be more relaxed, allowing parking and other services to be accessible and/or visible from them. A proposed network of A & B streets is defined in the image below. (Note: the location of all new streets and the extension of Maple Street is proposed and mat vary as development occurs) 16

Attachments PARKING AVAILABILITY FOR A PILOP PROGRAM 17

Shared Parking & PILOP Existing surface parking lots that could be used off-peak hours for shared parking are identified in the image below. Existing and future on-street parking spaces and potential parking along the FEC right-of-way are identified in red and could become the first (and immediate) phase of a PILOP program for downtown Jensen Beach 18

Attachments POTENTIAL GARAGE SITES FOR ULTIMATE PILOP PROGRAM 19

PILOP - Consolidated Parking STRUCTURED PARKING LOCATIONS The image below shows potential locations for future structured parking that would enable an effective PILOP program and achieve the ultimate walkability, scale and character desired for the downtown area. Parking garages are strategically proposed so as to act as anchors to the downtown: 1. Potential 550space garage surrounded by a 3-story, 60 deep building 2. Ability to locate 2,000 to 2,500 parking spaces. Since the roundabout over the FEC tracks was built, the pedestrian connections between the east-and west is available by a short and amenable walk. 3. Although not proposed as a future parking garage, waterfront parking should not be encouraged. This parcel, over time, should be dedicated to a use that treats this waterfront location with the dignity it deserves. 4. A structured parking is already under construction in this location. This parking location will not only serve the district, but future parking for mass transit along the FEC railroad. 20

Attachments SUPPLY, DEMAND & OFF-SITE CALCULATIONS 21

District I 22

District II

District III

District IV

District V

District VI 27

District VI 28

District VII 29

District VIII 30

ITEM 6E COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM April 3, 2017 PREPARED BY: TITLE: Kate Parmelee, Community Development Manager Port Salerno CRA: Update on Agreement Concerning Submerged Land Lease and Public Use Boat Slips and Dinghy Dock EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Estimated time: 5 minutes. The CRA is asked to review a presentation. APPROVAL CA BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: Following the Manatee Pocketwalk project the owners of property adjacent to the County's rights-of-way requested that the County enter into a Memorandum of Agreement to allow certain docking configurations at their docks in exchange for a public use dinghy dock and three boat slips designated for use by the public. On June 16, 2010, the Community Redevelopment Agency recommended approval of the Memorandum of Agreement Concerning Submerged Land Lease and Public Use Boat Slips and Dinghy Dock in Port Salerno. The CRA will receive an update on recent progress on the issue. ISSUES: N/A. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move that the Community Redevelopment Agency hear the update. ITEM 6E page 1

ITEM 6F COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM April 3, 2017 PREPARED BY: TITLE: Kate Parmelee, Community Development Manager FY18 Capital Improvement Planning EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Estimated time: 5 minutes. The CRA is asked to review a presentation and discuss the FY18 Capital Improvement Plan. APPROVAL CA BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: ISSUES: N/A. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move that the Community Redevelopment Agency hear the presentation. ITEM 6B page 1

ITEM 6G COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM April 3, 2017 PREPARED BY: TITLE: Kate Parmelee, Community Development Manager Legislative Update EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Estimated time: 5 minutes. The CRA is asked to hear an update on HB 13 and SB 1770 concerning Community Redevelopment Agencies. The CRA is asked to consider approval of a resolution of opposition to the proposed legislation. APPROVAL CA BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL: HB 13 and SB 1770 concerning Community Redevelopment Agencies would: 1. Terminate all CRAs in the state by 2037; 2. Disallow any new CRAs after July 1, 2017; 3. Disallow any new CRA projects or debt after October 2017; 4. Disallow bond refinancing after 2037; 5. Limit all CRA expenditures to what is listed in statute, not in the CRA plan (current law) 6. Limit all CRA expenditures to those budgeted and submitted to the county commission (whether charter or not); 7. All budget amendments must be submitted to the county commission (charter or not); 8. CRA expenditures are limited to what is listed in the statute, not in the CRA plan Due to the impacts of the legislation, the CRA may wish to pass a resolution in opposition to the legislation. ISSUES: N/A. LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW: ITEM 6G page 1

COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA APRIL 3, :00 PM COMMISSION CHAMBERS 2401 SE MONTEREY ROAD, STUART, FL 34996