Background.

Florida's current system of managing growth was adopted in1985 to create a framework for developing communities that flourish economically, change the sprawling pattern of land development, and protect the environment. It continues to be viewed as a national model for a compliance-based statewide growth management process.

But the results of this process have many around Florida questioning whether it is effective in meeting its goals. Concerns include:

• It has resulted in basic compliance with minimum standards, but little or no vision for the future of Florida and its communities.
• Sprawl has not been contained, resulting in additional strains on overburdened roads, schools, parks, and other infrastructure; loss of too much open space and environmental lands; and endangerment of our natural resources.
• "On-the-ground" results are not meeting expectations of citizens, creating sterile subdivisions and strip shopping centers rather than rich vibrant communities, and existing neighborhoods that are threatened by the impacts of new growth.
• Planning decisions are primarily developer-driven, not citizen-driven.
• Planning decisions often penalize developer initiatives - both good and bad .
• The planning, land use, and zoning processes are too difficult, time consuming, and expensive for citizens to participate in a meaningful way.
• Existing state investment policies and practices can be at odds with effective growth management.

In short, while the current system has promoted basic community planning, the state needs to be more proactive in encouraging and leading local governments, citizens, and developers to build better communities.

1000 Friends of Florida has developed a series of recommendations, outlined in this position paper, to refine Florida's growth management process to deal with these concerns. We intend to take a leadership role, partner with other stakeholders to reach consensus, and begin advocating for workable reform during the 2005 legislative session and beyond. Recommendations include:

Providing adequate state funding and resources for growth management, and directing their investment to limit sprawl and promote better communities.

Unless adequate and secure funding is provided and properly directed, no system of growth management will be truly effective in Florida.

State investments - in transportation, schools, water and sewer systems and other infrastructure -- have a significant impact on the location and form of new development and of preservation of important resources. The existing State Comprehensive Plan includes a goal of centralizing "commercial, governmental, retail, residential and cultural activities within downtown areas" and, in order to protect natural resources and enhance the quality of life of the state, directs development "to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner."

But state policy has had a difficult time meeting these goals to the satisfaction of many Floridians. Myriad state and local regulations and funding sources are often counterproductive, promoting sprawl instead of quality development. In addition, the state has often failed to provide adequate funding for the infrastructure that is needed to encourage redevelopment and otherwise direct growth.

Revenue and investment policies of the state must be revised in order to have an effective growth management system. 1000 Friends advocates the following:

• Direct state funds to the right projects in the right locations. State funding should further state and local growth management goals and vision plans, and not encourage sprawl or community disruption.
• Provide additional, thoughtful state investment in transportation facilities, schools, state office buildings, and other infrastructure that build better communities and discourage sprawl.
• In addition to purchasing environmental lands, acquire the development rights on open space and agricultural lands for the purpose of managing growth.
• Develop a process to allow limited development on portions of agricultural lands when other portions are conserved as perpetual open space, when such development is consistent with local comprehensive plans.
• Provide a sustainable state tax system with an expanded tax base to continue to meet growing infrastructure funding needs over time.
• Provide local government with tools to raise additional funds locally in order to implement their comprehensive plans.

Encouraging vision-based planning, starting at the neighborhood level.

Adequate, directed funding is crucial for effective growth management. Equally important is determining how a community wants to grow. Citizen-based neighborhood planning should be the foundation of a community's comprehensive planning process. Neighbors (citizens representing a mix of residential, school, civic, office and commercial areas in geographic proximity) gathering together with local planning staff can evaluate current development policies and recommend alternative growth scenarios.

Local governments should build on this neighborhood process when creating community-wide visioning strategies. The collaborative process of visioning should be consensus-driven and articulate the desired future of the community. Policy statements on the quality of life and graphic representation of the community's physical form and land use patterns should have the support of the public and politicians.

To ensure accountability, the vision document recommendations should be incorporated into the comprehensive plan, land development regulations and capital expenditures. It also should clearly define the steps for implementation. Additionally, the document should explain why, how, and when amendments to the community's plans are sought. Above all, it must provide for accountability so that measurable implementation is achieved.

To promote vision-based planning, it is essential to:

• Support and fund local governments to create vision plans at the neighborhood and community levels.
• Provide additional funds, and additional funding alternatives and incentives, for local governments to use in implementing their plans.

Empowering citizens to participate more meaningfully in community planning.

Citizen-based visioning is a powerful tool to identify and promote the values of a community, and lays the foundation for more meaningful citizen participation. If citizens are successfully engaged at the neighborhood level, they are more likely to participate throughout the process. They are also more likely to hold their policy makers accountable in enforcing and funding comprehensive plans and land use regulations.

At the same time, steps need to be taken to increase the ability of citizens to participate, including:

• Improving the notification process to provide notice to citizens of all types of meetings and hearings that involve land use issues.
• Noticing residents who will be affected by planning proposals of adjacent local governments.
• Developing local web sites with the local comprehensive plan, land development regulations, and upcoming hearings.
• Streamlining the growth management process to make it more citizen-friendly, including consideration of a statewide land use board of appeals.
• Expanding the standing of citizens and groups to enforce the local comprehensive plan and land development regulations, and provide protection from SLAPP suits.
• Granting citizen groups standing to challenge comprehensive plan amendments.
• Expanding educational opportunities for citizens and local officials. Growth management will only be effective if the decision-makers understand the growth management process and are familiar with effective strategies to promote smarter growth.
• Assisting local community-based organizations such as neighborhood associations to become more active players in the growth management process.
• Encouraging the establishment of Neighborhood Planning Councils to play a formal role in the review and approval of comprehensive plan amendments. Local governments could institutionalize citizen participation through the introduction of neighborhood planning councils which would allow for a cadre of individuals familiar with the development review process. They would act as a liaison between the planning department, developer and neighborhood.
• Enhancing and utilizing the Land Use Dispute Resolution process.

As an aside, 1000 Friends understands the frustration that has fueled a proposed constitutional amendment to require voter approval of every amendment to a local comprehensive plan. However, after much careful review and consideration, 1000 Friends believes this approach will result in piecemeal planning, favor well-funded developers who can launch high-priced media campaigns to support their projects, promote NIMBYism, and reduce local government accountability. For these reasons and others, 1000 Friends does not support the proposal.

Upgrading local comprehensive plans to exceed minimum state standards.

Florida's current system of managing growth is based on setting out minimum standards for local government to follow, and establishing a process and schedule for review, modifying, and approving comprehensive plans and amendments. It is not surprising that the primary result of this system has been simple compliance with these minimum standards rather than the creation and implementation of community visions.

Meeting minimum standards was a good first step in establishing a statewide growth management system. It is now time that we demand more of the system. To reach the goals identified through the community visioning process, local comprehensive plans must be upgraded.

As community visions and plans are developed, they should address the physical design of development and redevelopment. Emphasis should be placed on strategies to contain urban sprawl and build better communities through mixed uses, urban infill, appropriate densities, open space, affordable housing, historic preservation, protection of sensitive natural lands, and other techniques.

Additionally, as Florida continues to grow, environmentally sensitive and agricultural lands continue to be gobbled up at an alarming rate. It is increasingly important to promote the strategic acquisition of land for growth management purposes, clearly those areas too sensitive to be developed and the funding needed to acquire or otherwise protect these lands.

Change needs to take place at the regional and state levels too. Local governments within a region should be encouraged to work together to create regional plans that, among other things, define the ultimate geographic limits of urban development. Furthermore, Florida's state plan has never been effectively updated. This should be a priority, with the new state plan being a vision-based document that focuses more clearly on planning, growth management, and physical design.

In short, at a minimum, the following should be undertaken:

• Encourage communities to address the physical design of development and redevelopment - with attention to its impact on lifestyle, health, and livability.
• Identify sensitive natural lands that must be acquired or otherwise protected, and identify funding.
• Create regional plans that, among other things, define the ultimate geographic limits of urban development.
• Develop a meaningful state plan.
  
  Summary.

Reform to Florida's growth management policy should emphasize: directing state and local investment to existing and established urban and developed areas; promoting community visioning; enhancing citizen participation, starting at the neighborhood level; and exceeding minimum state planning standards, particularly in the area of improving the form of development and redevelopment and the strategic acquisition of land for growth management purposes.

Implementation.

1000 Friends continues to believe that while Florida's current growth management system has its flaws, it still provides a workable foundation to promote more sustainable growth. 1000 Friends intends to partner with other players in the growth management process (citizens, developers, environmentalists, business leaders, affordable housing advocates, and others) to refine these recommendations into a workable program of reform. Initial legislation will be introduced in the 2005 session, with additional legislation to be introduced in 2006 and beyond.