Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 - The Community's Vision for the RiverfrontThe Community's Vision For The Riverfront by the Riverfront Study Committee City of Sebastian Florida May 1991 RIVERFRONT STUDY COMMITTEE int url • . Peter Jones, Chairman Allison Tripp, Vice -Chairman M. Ross Calvin Ken Chapin Thomas H. Collins Warren W. Dill Ann Foster ALTERNATE MEMBERS: Damien Gilliams Steven Lulich Stan Krulikowsid, Ex -Officio Member FORMER MEMBERS /'1 Robert Brodie Randy Mosby, Alternate ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL Will Conyers, Mayor Frank Oberbeck, Vice -Mayor George Reid Peter Holyk Lonnie Powell Robert McCollum (Former Council Member) Lloyd Rondeau (Former Council Member) SEBASTIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Stanley E. Krulikowski, Chairman Jim Wadsworth, Vice -Chairman Robert Fullerton Mayme O'Connor William Mahoney Shirley Kilkelly J.W. Thompson Earl Shroyer. Alternate John Lindsey, Alternate Robert S. McClary - Sebastian City Manager Doug Scurlock - Indian River County Commissioner Diane Barile - Marine Resources Council Bruce Cooper - Community Development Director Catherine Hihon - City Planner Sebastian Elementary School Pelican Island Elementary School Sebastian River Middle -Junior High School Sebastian River Area Chamber of Commerce Sebastian Sun Newspaper The Vero Beach Press Journal Newspaper Jim Milner of WSCF Radio Andrew Hungerford - Artist Special thanks to Linda Kinchen, Riverfront Committee Secretary, and to those members of the public who contributed their time and input. ,/-k TABLE OF CONTENTS rn PAGE I. Purpose and Background 1 A. Introduction I B. Boundaries of the Riverfront Study Area 1 11. Existing Conditions 3 A. Physical Factors 3 B. Circulation and Parking 3 C. Parks and Open Space 4 D. Riverfront History 4 E. Economic Factors 5 III. Recommendations 6 A. Overall Theme (Architectural Character) 6 B. Protect Natural Resources 7 C. Public Parks and Open Space 7 D. Transportation 10 E. Parking 10 F. Uniformity of Signage 11 ^ G. Public Relations 11 H. Uniformity In lighting 12 I. Marine Facilities 12 J. Land Use 13 K. Development Guidelines 13 L Funding Public Improvements 14 IV. Conclusions 16 Appendix 17 A 1' `li�� AAdLit Al I,nl r. ARTICLE I PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND A. Introduction. For manyyears now, members of the Sebastian Community (both in and out of government) have called for the need to protea the City's riverfront from the impacts of development and growth that have beleaguered so many other cities. The common thread running through everyone's concern has been to protect the natural resources and unique beauty of the Indian River Lagoon for present and future generations. The City's Comprehensive Plan formally addressed the riverfront protection issue in March of 1969 in a policy statement that cited the need to propose a plan that would enhance the identity and vitality of the riverfront while also maintaining its environmental quality and historical character. In November of 1990, the City Council in a joint meeting with the City Planning and Zoning Commission established the Riverfront Study Committee, whose task was to develop recommendations regarding the future development of this most important resource. The Committee was given the latitude to establish its own guidelines and criteria to be used in preparing this Report. The Committee chose to emphasize public participation in conjunction with its efforts, as the basis upon which to formulate the recommendations herein. The Committee, itself, is comprised of a cross section of individuals reflecting many points of view, interests and backgrounds. This diversity of the Committee, and its encouragement of public input during Committee meetings and throughout the process, has resulted in the recommendations of this Report containing an overall collective public consensus rather than the views of any particular individual or group. The Committee took great care to ensure public participation by sending out over 3,000 questionnaires as well as continuously encouraging public input at its meetings and generally asking for public comments at all times. This Report represents only the beginning. The Planning and Zoning Commission and Mayor and City Council must now join this public process and debate, they must establish the future course of development of the riverfront as outlined by the Committee in this Report. B. Boundaries of the Riverfront Studv Area. To begin the process of making recommendations regarding development of the riverfront. the Committee established geographic boundaries for the Riverfront District. These boundaries are not intended to be finite. Future planning for development may dictate modifying these boundaries for zoning, land use, special districts, or any other number of purposes. 11 The accompanying riverfront study area map delineates the Riverfront District boundaries used by the Committee. They are the Indian River Lagoon on the east, the City Limits on the south and north and the Florida East Coast Railway right-of-way on the west. The unincorporated riverfront areas lying along Indian River Drive to the north and south of the City limits were looked at by the Committee. While this area is not specifically addressed in this Report, because it is outside of the City limits, its future development should be regulated consistent with relevant provisions of this Report. As the City begins to focus on the specifics of development within its limits, it will then have the opportunity to more closely coordinate, with the County, the future development of the riverfront area to the north and south. The Board of County Commissioners is encouraged to consider the public opinions expressed in this Report when future land development decisions are being made for this area. 00ft, ARTICLE II EXISTING CONDITIONS As with any land use study, it was important for this Committee to review, assess and analyze the many factors that comprise the riverfront area. Physical factors, environmental constraints, pedestrian and traffic circulation, parking, historical interest. existing land uses and economic information were a few of the issues studied prior to developing recommendations for this Report. Individual members of the Committee researched much of this background data. The entire Committee, alongwith the news media, conducted an on-site "tour" of the riverfront and held a discussion session as part of this fact finding process. A. Phvsical Factors. Along the approximately 1.7 miles of the City's riverfront, there exists a distinct diversity of existing land uses, sizes, types and designs. Intermingled with the existing mixture are structures that have historical significance with regard to the City's growth as a regional riverfront community. Restaurants, retail shops, fishing -related businesses, residential dwellings of all types, offices and public buildings all make up this mixture. Current zoning and land use codes regulate placement of these uses. However, the writers of the existing codes could not foresee, at the time, the potential complexities of growth along the riverfront. The Indian River Lagoon itself carries with it a rich and unique ecosystem. In a presentation to the Committee, a representative of the Marine Resources Council described the /'\ Lagoon as one of the most significant aquatic preserves on the East Coast of the United States. One-half of all the fish landings (caught) on the Florida East Coast come from the Indian River Lagoon. Issues of concern ranged from stormwater runoff into the Lagoon, to the importance of shoreline and aquatic vegetation which provides food and harbor for countless waterborne species. Visual quality of the Lagoon, manatee protection, maintenance of commercial fishing where possible and the local, state and regional policies affecting the future of the Lagoon are all competing for their place in the Lagoon's future. The completion of the County's first phase of the sewer system for the north county has everyone thinking about the development of the riverfront. Although there will be much further debate and analysis regarding the ultimate supplier, and the means and methods for connection to the sewer system line, it has brought development of the riverfront a substantial step closer. B. Circulation and Parkine. Indian River Drive is the main artery of the riverfront. The proximity of the road provides views with spectacular vistas across the Lagoon to the barrier island and beyond. The road right-of-- way is currently owned by the County. Indian River Drive is a two-lane road, with its right-of-way varying in width and character. Adding to the uniqueness of the riverfront is U.S. #1, a federal highway, stretching from Key West to Maine, paralleling Indian River Drive (only a block apart in the southern portion of the riverfront) as it cuts through the eastern part of the City. Several existing residential and commercial developments front on both U.S. #1 and Indian River Drive. n ^ Paralleling U.S. #1 on the west is the Florida East Coast Railroad. The proximity of the railroad (in many cases within 100 feet of U.S. #1) creates a unique set of physical and circulation issues that must be taken into consideration for future development. County Road 512 (Fellsmere Road), Main Street and Davis Street provide three significant "Cross Streets" within the Riverfront District. CR 512 provides the riverfront, as well as the City with an important link to Interstate 95. Just as travelers on U.S. #1 enter the Riverfront District so will travelers heading east along CR 512. Main Street, situated at the "center" of the riverfront and where U.S.#1 is closest to Indian River Drive, is addressed in the City's Comprehensive Plan as providing an important connection to the riverfront. As undeveloped lands surrounding City Hall and Main Street are developed they will immediately become "connected" to the riverfront because of their proximity to the riverfront and the eased travel along Main Street. Davis Street provides the northernmost link between U.S. #1 and Indian River Drive within the City limits. The parking situation within the riverfront is currently regulated through the City's Land Development Code. Land and development costs will continue to rise, and with that, the need to address now how future parking will be handled. The current mixture of parking lot types, character and quality is very diverse. The physical constraints of the riverfront itself, such as availability of developable land environmental concerns, access and aesthetics, must all be addressed when seeking a solution to the parking issue, in terms of the riverfront, itself. C. Parks and Ooen Soace. The existing parks and public facilities within the riverfront provide an excellent point of beginning for a comprehensive look. The Committee recognized the importance of the narrow (in many cases undevelopable) strip of land between the water and the eastern edge of Indian River Drive. In much of this area, along with a pedestrian walkway, the opportunity exists for a linear park or open space system to be implemented. The existing situation seems to be one of a variety of City -owned properties (boat ramps, docks, yacht club, community center and parks) that need only upgrading and integration into a comprehensive linear park system for the riverfront. The majority of this land east of Indian River Drive should be available to the City at no cost or very little cost. D. Riverfront Historv. - The historic significance of the riverfront provides the City with a unique blend of existing structures and interesting tales. Certainly the regional historic character can still be seen in many of the structures that have survived the impacts of weather and growth. Although the riverfront is not meant to be a "redevelopment project", when talking about the riverfront the character that best describes it has been referred to as "Old Florida" and "Fishing Village". Both of these images carry a certain historical/aesthetic value that still exists. The City has an opportunity to fold this historical character into the future development of the riverfront. .. E. Economic and Fiscal Factors. There are no specific funding sources within the Riverfront District at this time. The public revenue raised from this area is through ad valorem taxes and business occupational license taxes. The Committee recognizes that specific public improvement projects (parks, pedestrian/bike paths, public facilities, etc.) must go hand-in-hand with private sector development. Those who do not immediately benefit from certain public improvements cannot be expected to pay for their entire cost. The Committee recommendations seek to address this issue while at the same time acknowledge the complexities of public funding. Ce Riverfront District History (Includes River&ont Planning, Riverfront Water Project and CDBG) City Council Meetjpg Action Taken 12/13/89 City Council approval to proceed with Waterfront (Riverfront) District Study 7/25/90 City Manager requested approval to schedule joint workshop with P & Z re: Riverfront for September 11/7/90 Mayor calls Special Joint Meeting with P & Z re: Riverfront 11/15/90 Special Meeting with P & Z - formation of Riverfront Study Committee - 7 members - 2 alternates - Ross Calvin, Tom Collins, Alison Tripp, Peter Jones, Stanley Krulikowski, Ann Foster, alternates Ken Chapin and Robert Brodie 11/28/90 Stanley Krulikowski withdrawn as member (he is member of P & Z) Riverfront Committee walkthrough announced for 12/8/90 12/12/90 Krulikowski named ex -officio member 1/23/91 Riverfront Study Committee members and alternates formally appointed - Randy Mosby, Steven Lulich, Damian Gilliams - Jones Chairman, Tripp Vice Chairman 2/13/91 Brodie resigns - Ken Chain appointed regular member 2/27/91 Riverfront Committee request for funding - Stephenson Tract adjacent to Riverview Park staff authorized to take Mosby conceptual plan to Riverfront Study Committee 3/13/91 Mosby resigned OON AON r� 3/27/91 Study Committee request for funding - artistic renderings - $1200 approved 4/3/91 Discuss design competition for interested architects re: Riverfront and surrounding areas Lulich reports that committee report should be ready at end of month 5/1/91 Jones report to Council - property acquisition for linear park system 5/8/91 Joint meeting with Council, P & Z and committee scheduled for 5/30/91 5/30/91 Joint meeting held with P & Z, Riverfront Study Committee and City Council - "Visions for River&ont" presented 6/5/91 Holyk matters - Riverfront discussion 6/26/91 P & Z recommendation on Committee report - workshop scheduled for 7/17/91 7/17/91 Special Workshop - motion to direct City Manager to appoint staff member as overseer of Riverfront Program City Attorney received direction to draft ordinance to amend LDC re: design 9/4/91 Discuss Riverfront properties for sale - proposal from Realtyline, ERA, Florida Lifestyle, Philipson and Holder - no action taken 9/25/91 Riverfront Study Committee formally disbanded 10/2/91 Properties for sale once again discussed - no action 12/11/91 Damian Gilliams - Riverfront Property - no action 1/8/92 Community Development Director report - Riverfront Study may be presented at 1/22/92 6/3/92 Riverfront District Status Report - deferred to 7/1/92 workshop .� 7/1/92 Workshop on Riverfront - five motions made relating to staff recommendation on page nine of the report - 1) City Attorney to prepare district preservation and zoning ordinance; 2) identify achievable development activities within parks along riverfront; bikepaths, sidewalks and theme lighting; agreement w/ IRC Utilities for IR Drive right-of-way; direct staff to economics study 1/6/93 Special Meeting Riverfront Action Plan FPL representative discussed underground lighting Staff directed to proceed with plan of action but bring back further information 1/27/93 Riverfront Survey proposal - Rod Reed - $8,230.00 - approved 3/29/93 Reed survey received 9/1/93 Proposed Land Use and Zoning Amendments re: Riverfront Zoning - sent back to P & Z for recommendation 12/1/93 Review Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation re: Riverfront District Rezoning - staff directed to contact property owners between Main and Davis and east of U.S. 1 to river to schedule meeting to determine what they want 4/6/94 Comm matters - Riverfront discussion 6/22/94 City Manager directed to negotiate with IRC to provide water service to Riverfront 7/6/94 Indian River Drive Riverfront Area - Council concurred with concept of establishing Community Development District from south, north, east city limits and west of rr row - attorney to prepare brief and copy 190.005 to Council - City Manager directed to pursue piggybacking with IRC contractor for water service along Indian River Drive 8/10/94 City Manager discussed Riverfront Water Project 9/14/94 Resolution No. R-94-47 and R-94-48 adopted - Special Assessment for Riverfront Water Project - hearing scheduled for 9/28/94 1� 9/28/94 170 FS Hearing conducted - R-94-53 adopted - assessment roll 10/12/94 Firtion matters - Riverfront discussion 11/2/94 Riverfront District Design Standards - City Council consensus to schedule special workshop January 1995 (scheduled for 1/18/95) 1/4/95 Riverfront Parking - consensus to look into off-street parking for Riverfront 1/11/95 Interlocal Agreement with Indian River County - Riverfront Water Project approved 1/18/95 Workshop - Riverfront Water Project review 1/19/95 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) administration - Clark Roumelis and Associates 1/25/95 Resolution No. R-95-04 Riverfront Planning Project funding not to exceed $5,000 0-� 2/8/95 Change order #3 - Speegle Construction - Riverfront Water Project 2/27/95 0-95-07 Fair Housing Ist reading - CDBG 1st PH conducted 3/8/95 - 0-95-08 Community Redevelopment Trust Fund 1st reading - R-95-15 Citizen Participation Plan - CATF (Citizen Advisory Task Force) appointed - George Reid, Anthony Donini, Ruth Sullivan, Dave Dabrowski, Stanley Krulikowski 3/22/95 R-95-14 - CDBG plans and policies adopted - R-95-17 Community Redevelopment Plan adopted - 0-95-08 Community Redevelopment Trust Fund adopted - Fair Housing workshop conducted - 0-95-07 Fair Housing finally adopted - R-95-13 City Manager to apply for CDBG 8/9/95 Corum recommended formation of River&ont Task Force re: architectural standards 111 10/11/95 Riverfront Task Force - P & Z Recommendation - consensus to schedule workshop for 1/17/96 11/29/95 Business Workshop - Riverfront Discussion - discussion of planning consultant - Manager to work with Attorney to develop scope of services - task force can be put in place at this time 12/6/95 Change order #6 - Speegle Construction - Riverfrom Water Project Consensus of City Council to use CRA for CDBG engineering City Manager said he would accept names for task force 12/20/95 Resolution No. R-95-68 and R-95-69 adopted - Riverfront Water Project Assessment - public hearing scheduled for 1/10/96 Coram appointed herself to task force - Cartwright objected - Firtion placed on next agenda 1/10/96 Riverfront Water Project assessment hearing and resolutions - R-96-04 and R-96-05, grant of easement, grant of license, amended interlocal agreement - adopted 1/17/96 Riverfront workshop - John Hill presentation on proposed Riverfrom Master Plan - Peter Jones represented AIA who have offered to work with City on plan 1/24/96 R-96-14 - Acknowledge Completion of Riverfront Water Project and Final Assessment adopted - R-96-16 Riverfront Water Project bond adopted as amended - R-96-17 - Bill of Sale of Riverfront Water Project to IRC City Manager submitted list of 5 members of Riverfront Committee chosen by Council members - asked that he be directed to name 2 at - large members - Council concurred 3/13/96 Council selected JW Thompson and Stanley Krulikowski as 2 at large members 3/27/96 Mayor Cartwright requested 2 additional names from new Council members for Riverfront Committee r� 4/24/96 Discussion - committee composition - City Attorney stated minutes approved reflect action of Council - 3/27/96 minutes Mayor requested two additional members - only one objection - minutes approved 4/10/96 5/1/96 Organizational Riverfront Committee Meeting - Chairman Tom Collins, Vice Chairman Don Smith - meet each Monday 7 pm except Ist Monday at 7:30 p.m. - staff liaison City Planner, Bob Massarelli M . et 9' �- y � U'NK� 5!5A� IPS -SON9�11 1K 0 Sembler n; �� :�WAqt-' u� %�jh • #40 • �C 0 Street L/ �O D \Sebas Marker 6 Pyr � _. C47Y � �,en P r_ _, s F Furore Potice ,a ion \ ire 7y �. Y\ North i �•�• � p 1/4 Mile `✓ i Riverfront Opportunities Map ARTICLE III RECOMMENDATIONS From its very inception, the Riverfront Committee's task, or goal, has been to arrive at a body of recommendations regarding the future development of Sebastian's riverfront, Having done so, it must be noted that these recommendations reflect a great amount of study, discussion, analysis, public input (in the form of public meetings, surveys, etc.) and debate. These recommendations are meant to encourage a continued course of study for Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council debate. These recommendations alone, can not ensure or guarantee excellence in design and quality in the riverfront environment. It will take the full support of the Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council, design/engineering professionals, land owners, developers and most importantly, the general public, in developing these recommendations into meaningful, cohesive guidelines and policies for our riverfront. The Committee's recommendations are az follows: A. Overall Theme (Architectural Character). The basic notion that a municipality may regulate the exterior design of buildings and structures is nothing new. Beginning in the late Eighteen Hundreds, the courts recognized the ability of local government to enact height limits for buildings in order to protect the beauty and attractions (aesthetics) of an area. This simple concept of regulating the height of a building has evolved into the adoption of architectural land use regulations to achieve aesthetic results of residential and commercial value. These regulations have been used to protect the quaint and/or distinctive character of an area. Florida's Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulations Act of 1975 (as Amended in 1985, 1986) provides a legal basis to adopt design regulations for a specific land use district. This authority would be carried through the City's Comprehensive Plan and its Land Development Regulations. While design regulations will protect the character of an area, they have also been proven to preserve and enhance property values. There are numerous examples of successful design theme regulations throughout the country from New Orleans' French Quarter to Nantucket's Cottages. There are a number of areas in Florida developed around a central theme. These areas include, Ybor City in Tampa, the old part of St. Augustine, Coral Gables and Coconut Grove in Miami, Key West, Old Town of Melbourne and the entire city of Seaside located in the Panhandle. The city of Delray Beach is currently developing design standards for an area of town it plans to call Pineapple Grove. AM% A -k The architectural design theme for the Riverfront District should be that of an "Old Florida - Style Fishing Village", emphasizing our historical background, similar to what has been called the "Key West Style". The following architectural design themes were presented to the public in a questionnaire (see appendix) and are listed in their order of preference. 1) Old Florida Style 2) Fishing Village 3) Promotion of Historical Sites 4) Key West Style B. Protect Natural Resources. The Riverfront District consists of wetland and upland ecological communities. These areas represent indispensable and fragile natural resources. These areas are under constant threat of invasion and destruction through indiscriminate and often intentional development activities. Piecemeal destruction over time will result in a breakdown in one ecological area that will trickle through the environment, until eventually we will have lost those things that so many of us live in the Sebastian area to enjoy - healthy water, wildlife and fishing. While many of the development activities that threaten our natural resources are regulated by State and Federal Agencies, the City is in a position to provide long-term protection by directing growth away from sensitive areas, particularly east of Indian River Drive, through a combination of land use regulations and incentives. It is difficult, if not impossible, to place a monetary or psychological value on the tranquility and peacefulness of the views offered to all of those who see the Indian River Lagoon. The Lagoon is the focal point of the City and must be protected from environmental and visual degradation. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt standards to protect the natural resources within the Riverfront District. To accomplish this protection the following measures were supported by over 90% of those responding to the questionnaire and in attendance at the Committee meetings. 1) Maintain and expand open views of the Indian River Lagoon 2) Shoreline protection 3) Maintain and expand native vegetation In addition to the above ideas, it was felt by some members of the public that the Riverfront District could serve to promote environmental awareness of the Indian River Lagoon and the wildlife and plant life that exists in and around the Lagoon. C. Public Parks and Ooen Soace. Public parks and open spaces are important elements of the Riverfront District. As the area develops, there becomes less land available for parks and less open space; however, as the population increases, the need for leisure time pursuits and open space for passive enjoyment becomes more important. .. The creation of park and open space areas can protect and enhance natural resources, channel growth by establishing greenbelt or buffer areas, and provide the community with active and passive recreational opportunities. The Indian River Lagoon provides a unique opportunity as a resource base and focal point for a linear park east of Indian River Drive and views through open space areas. Having park and open space areas within the Riverfront District ranked extremely high in importance with the public, as evidenced by the results of the questionnaire which showed strong support for the following. 1) linear Park east side of Indian River Drive a. This park would extend the entire length of the City Limits, utilizing road and utility rights-of-way and private property, by easement or purchase. b. Where parcels of property east of Indian River Drive are too small for development, property owners could be encouraged to give an easement or even deed land to the City for use as a linear park. In exchange they would receive a reduction in property taxes and/or a charitable contribution deduction from their income taxes for an outright gift of land to the City. C. Where parcels of private property are large enough for development and the owner is unwilling to grant an easement or otherwise provide land for the linear park through a deed or development incentives, the walkway/bike path portion of the linear park could be constructed in the water adjacent to the ,^ shore, thus providing not only a continuous travel way but one with very interesting visual appeal. d. Within the linear park there would be a pedestrian way and bike path. The bike path could go along the edge of the east side of Indian River Drive. subject to available right-of-way. e. Indian River County may have funds available to assist in constructing a bike path. I. The linear park area could also provide benches and gazebos for pedestrians to sit and enjoy the water views or to picnic. 2) User -Friendly Area Provide an atmosphere where people enjoy spending time and relaxing. 3) Provide public parks and open space a. In addition to the linear park, the District should have centralized parking areas. These parking areas could provide picnic areas for visitors to the area along with restroom facilities. /f 1 r :r �I�) fir. •,C 1//�oi� Jy .. •,Y�', .ill4W 1 14 Im ev c`1 `� �.. ♦11.,. a i l .l j. ilJl'!•, J- "t_�i ' • ��;:L. , ' 11'..9 ►'�� ?�v ~url� � �f •..». �r� • y n��. �%/ ' _.r a I'\�•'��11r1,�L'�,��"�`�.t�Yi71'" "+' :rr .�9_'%'Jfi!i fT.., �,Y!�'�:+'e — i::!�..' 1 � r"s b. The design regulations for the District should provide not only for restrictions on developments east of Indian River Drive that would block the view of the Lagoon, but such regulations should also provide for visual corridors so that the Lagoon is visible from other areas within the District, such as along U.S. #1. 4) Pedestrian walk/bike path east side of Indian River Drive This could be installed in conjunction with the linear park. as discussed above, or independently. 5) Public restroom facilities - a. Restroom facilities are essential to the visiting public and locals alike. b. Their location could be combined with the parking area or in other areas of more public activity. 6) Hand Shell This would serve a variety of community needs and services, by providing a place for civic and cultural events. 7) Combination park and parking areas /0% This has been discussed above and will also be discussed in the traffic section of this Report. 8) Main Street Center - Cultural Center - Tourist Information Center The City owns the land from U.S. #1 to Indian River Drive on the south side of Main Street. The Chamber of Commerce is across the street. This is an ideal location for cultural and tourist related activities. 9) Fishing areas a. There are few public fishing areas along Indian River Drive. The Fishing pier at Main Street is used extensively. b. Additional fishing areas/piers and fish cleaning facilities would encourage greater public utilization of the area and help develop its theme, with people fishing and relaxing along the waterfront. In addition to the strong support for the uses listed above, the public had other ideas for recreational uses and open space within the Riverfront District, such as: 1) Maintain the open areas in as natural a setting as possible 2) A ferry boat that could carry passengers back and forth to the Sebastian Inlet /'%k 3) Enlarge the size of the Riverview park 4) Add boat ramp facilities, with adequate parking for vehicles and trailers D. Transportation. Transportation recommendations may be broken into categories dealing with: 1) Roadways serving the riverfront (Indian River Drive, Main Street, Davis Street, etc.) 2) Types of transportation using those roadways (cars, trucks, bicycles, pedestrians, etc.) 3) Water -related transportation (boat traffic and accompanying public boat ramps and marina facilities). The Sebastian riverfront is served primarily by Indian River Drive, whose right-of-way is currently under the jurisdiction of Indian River County. It is recommended that the City begin immediately negotiating with the County for the acquisition of the road fight -of -way lying within the City's boundaries. Secondly, that upon completing the formal acquisition process, the City should review the speed limits and types of vehicular traffic to be allowed on Indian River Drive in order to protect the welfare and safety of the general public, particularly since this area will become more pedestrian -oriented. As to the future types of transportation to use Indian River Drive, it is recommended that special emphasis be given to a trolley system and horse-drawn carriages. This would allow the general public a means of travel along the riverfront corridor without having to resort to the ,ON automobile. Because of the proximity of the Indian River Lagoon, waterborne traffic must be better accommodated. This would require a look at an existing boat ramps, boat docking and marina facilities. It should be noted that the consensus of the public, based on the response from the questionnaire with regard to a transit system, is listed below by order of preference: 1) Trolley Service 2) Horse -Drawn Buggies Also, there was an overwhelming amount of people who felt lower speeds on Indian River Drive were top priority followed by control of the road by the City, increased boat ramp facilities and limited vehicular access to Indian River Drive. E. Parking. The Committee, in order to better deal with automobile parking and access recommends that general parking facilities be developed at three locations within the riverfront: one in each of the north and south sections, and one centrally located. The parking areas should be readily accessible to U.S. #1, and along with extensive landscaping and lighting, should contain restroom facilities for public use. A-%. 10 r. These parking facilities could be shared by private development as a means of meeting a portion of their parking requirements, as well as for the general public. Fees paid by private development for this use would go towards covering the cost of the parking facility itself. The following list completes the issues regarding parking and reflects an order of general public preference. 1) Provide extensive landscaping using native plants 2) Additional public parking with access from U.S. #1 3) Provide restrooms 4) Three (3) parking areas - north, south and center, possibly in the vicinity of the community center/cemetery, Main Street and CR 512 F. Unifortnity of Signage. The Committee believes, in order to move forward with specific recommendations, that there are four (4) concerns that need to be addressed at this time regarding uniformity of signage on the riverfront. 1) The Committee recommends that directional signage be the same color, size and shape for all areas along the riverfront. 2) The informational signs (picnic areas, restroom facilities, etc.) should be constructed according to the international code. A 3) The Committee recommends that the City, through the use of ordinances. define criteria for all signs (public and private) so they are consistent and conform to the overall theme of the riverfront area. 4) Marketing and business signage should also reflect the style and character established for the riverfront. All marketing and business signage should be regulated with a maximum size limit for everyone. Signage should be lighted for night use. Proper distances should be maintained between all signs and from pedestrian and automobile travel areas so as not to obstruct the view of the riverfront in any way. Uniformity in informational signage was the top vote getter with the public, followed very closely by uniform directional signage. G. Public Relations. The riverfront will continue to grow as a focus of development, along with the related activities that have become part of the riverfront- such as the City's Independence Day celebrations and the various festivities taking place in Riverview Park throughout the year. Through the use of public relations and general promotion, community awareness of the riverfront can be generated. The following reflects four avenues of approach regarding public relations for the riverfront. in order of public preference: 1) Newsletter 2) Chamber of Commerce Interface 3) Special Events The idea of having special events to maintain the riverfront area and enthuse and educate the community should be promoted; those special events might include fund raisers, art shows and musical entertainment. 4) Information Center It is recommended that an informational center or display be set up immediately under the canopy of the wishing well where community events and happenings can be posted daily and weekly. The display should be lighted and accessible at all times. Promoting special events and providing an informational display were rated highly on the questionnaire. The public also liked the idea of a newsletter to keep them informed of activities planned in the Riverfront District. H. Uniformitv in I-fehtine. The Committee recommends that there be a uniform lighting program for both public and private facilities. Old-style "gas" street lights (or something similar) should be installed along Indian River Drive. There should also be low-level landscape and park lighting to enable citizens to safely walk in the parks, and use riverfront facilities during the evening hours. Uniformity in park lighting was the first choice of the public by an overwhelming margin. They also were in favor of old-style "gas" street lights and low-level landscape lighting for the entire area. Marine Facilities. The Committee encourages boating access to the Riverfront District. There should be adequate dock facilities to accommodate boaters. Additional fishing piers should be considered for recreational fishing. An additional boat ramp would be needed with permitted parking for boat trailers. The Riverfront Committee recommends the aforementioned items because the promotion of the fishing industry would help keep alive our heritage as a fishing village. The following, in order of preference, are the public's recommendations: 1) Promote recreational fishing activities - fishing pier 2) Boat ramps with permitted trailer parking 3) Encourage boating access - transient docks 4) Promote the fishing industry 12 10 I 'I �� '.ISS � � ��•h:'TJI3"Oiit'i 0 I J. ]and Use. The issue of how the land within the riverfront should be developed carries with it physical, environmental, fiscal and political implications. The Committee recommends that study be given to land uses that will fit the above described character of the riverfront. Real estate market analysis may provide fiscal insight, along with the City's desired list of land uses. The Indian River Lagoon is the focal point of the City of Sebastian. A major planning concern of the Committee has been to preserve, protect and enhance the ability of the public to see and enjoy this magnificent body of water and the wildlife that it supports. The most dramatic views of the Lagoon are found along Indian River Drive. The development of what is now vacant land on the east side of Indian River Drive will intrude on everyone's ability to enjoy the Lagoon and potentially harm the economic heart of the City. It is the location of Sebastian along the Indian River Lagoon that gives the City the charm it possesses and provides a uniqueness that visitors will come here to see and enjoy and thus contribute to the local economy. Therefore, it is important to protect the view of the Lagoon. The public's response to the Committee's questionnaire was overwhelmingly in favor of having parks and open space areas along the east side of Indian River Drive. In order to achieve the public's desire, as well as that of the Committee, for an open waterfront, it may be necessary for the City to buy land or regulate construction to maintain the open view. Additional specifics regarding land use were as follows: 1) Commercial, public and historical land uses should be clustered around centralized parking areas 2) That there be specific residential land uses within the Riverfront District 3) Focus public and cultural land uses around Main Street and CR 512 (Fellsmere Road) locations 4) That Indian River Drive be a mixture of public, residential. commercial and historical land uses and not a commercial strip K. Develonment Guidelines. Daniel Burnham, the "City Beautiful" planner of Chicago. San Francisco, Cleveland and the Washington Mall has said "Make no little plans, for thee have not the power to stir men's minds." In order to ensure the quality of development of the riverfront, guidelines must reach beyond the typical codes that have given us the recipe for automobile -choked, incoherent, commercialized and anti -social agglomeration of building with little sense of community. To borrow from the current approach to planning, guidelines should be developed that will encourage creation of places within the riverfront where one can live, work and shop without the need of a car, encourage enhancement of public spaces defined by buildings: create pleasant and interesting itineraries along sidewalks and/or bike paths; conceal parking lots when possible; and /ok. 13 encourage the harmonization of architecture. There are numerous examples of well designed codes that may be used in the development of guidelines for the riverfront. The Committee recommends that architectural design regulations be developed for the riverfront. Some specifics discussed included redefining the determination of height restrictions in order to facilitate and encourage better roof lines, the encouragement of clustered development to maximize views of the Lagoon and open space, and allow for some specific incentives to encourage quality development within the Riverfront District. L. Fundine Public Improvements. Various sources of funding would be available to finance improvements that serve the public in the Riverfront District. Privately owned projects should not be funded through these sources and therefore are not addressed in this Report. Specific methods of funding can be more clearly defined as soon as the preliminary costs for any proposed improvements are available. The City should pursue any and all sources for funding public improvements in the Riverfront District. Municipal bonding, grants, donations, land exchanges and special taxes or assessments are all avenues that need to be pursued. The City should designate a staff member as the funding agent for this project through whom all funding efforts would be coordinated. In reviewing the options available, it appears a special tax district should be established, which would include the geographical areas in the Riverfront District. This vehicle would provide for the individual properties within the District to carry the major responsibility for funding the improvements within the District. An incremental tax district should be considered as this provides for freezing the taxes within the District as they then exist, with any increase in tax revenue partially paying for a bond issue. The City should consider using other sources of revenue including the local sales tax option, local option tax gas, or the occupational license fees to subsidize the District, as clearly, the general public will also benefit from the improvements made to the Riverfront District. Items that could be funded using these methods include recreational facilities, road improvements, restrooms, street lighting, landscaping, parks, fishing piers, bike paths, and other City -owned property and facilities. In addition to the tax district, the City should pursue grants and/or assistance from the County, State and Federal Governments. The County periodically participates in funding recreational facilities and parks and the State has numerous grant funding programs available. Some of these include the Waterways Assistance Program, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, Florida Inland Navigation District, Coastal Zone Management Funds, and the Florida Boating Improvement Program Funds. Grants and cooperative funding could greatly reduce the capital expense associated with any improvements to the Riverfront District. 'lite City should be encouraged to hire consultants and/or lobbyists to aid the effort in soliciting and processing any applications for funding. There are several publications available through the Florida Funding Publications, Inc., which describe where and how to obtain these grants. 14 /% n The Committee encourages the City to recegnizc that funding of public improvements in the Riverfront District is readily available through the methods outlined in this section. We encourage the Mayor and City Council to designate a "Funding and Grant" employee to oversee the funding of the project. Additional supplemental information is available upon request from a respected bonding company and the Committee. Grants were the number one choice of the public to fund public improvements. Other popular means included land donations and a tourist tax, as was evident from the questionnaire. 15 ARTICLE IV CONCLUSION Land use decisions can be the single most significant legacy left by an elected official during his or her term in office. Land use decisions made today will determine the future character and quality of life in Sebastian. The City Council is to be commended for the foresight they have shown by listening to the concerns of the community and establishing the Riverfront Study Committee. This leadership role demonstrated by the City Council represents the first step towards protecting a unique -natural amenity for the economic well-being of Sebastian. The recommendations for the future of Sebastian's riverfront, contained in this Report, represent the unanimous opinion of the Committee. These recommendations also received overwhelming support from a significant cross-section of individuals participating in the Committee's public forum process. The time is now for the City Council to act on establishing regulations to protect the natural beauty of the Indian River Lagoon, to preserve the ability of the public to see and enjoy the Lagoon and to establish architectural design regulations for all development (public and private) within the ^ Riverfront District. The City Council is strongly encouraged to immediately take the following steps in order to continue their leadership roll in the future of Sebastian's riverfront. 1. Following the presentation of this Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, review and approve the Committee's recommendations contained herein. 2. Set tasks and priorities for the preparation of a Riverfront Master Plan and Development Regulations. 3. Establish criteria and prepare a Request For Qualifications (RFQ) and Request For Proposals (RFP) in regard to hiring the most qualified land planning firm. - 4. Hire a professional land planning firm to work in conjunction with the City staff to prepare the Riverfront Master Plan and Development Regulations. 5. Direct staff to research funding mechanisms for the construction of public improvements necessary to implement the Riverfront Master Plan. 6. Establish a Riverfront District informational display at the wishing well adjacent to Indian River Drive and Main Street. where upcoming events along the riverfront may be advertised. The City Council has the awesome responsibility of deciding how Sebastian's riverfront area will develop. The fate of the Community's vision for the riverfront is now in the hands of the City Council. 16 APPENDIX FUNDING SOURCES: Florida Funding Publications, Inc, 9350 South Old Dixie Highway, Suite 1560, Miami. Florida 33156 3051670-2203. RESOURCES: Questionnaire prepared by the Committee Circulation Design Scheme prepared by Robert T. Brodie Preliminary Report on Tax -Exempt Financing Option prepared by Raymond James & Associates. Inc. 17 City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 ❑ FAX (407) 589-5570 February 6. 1991 TO: THE CITIZENS OF SEBASTIAN FROM: THE RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE This QUESTIONNAIRE developed by "THE RIVERFRONT STUDY COMMITTEE" is for you, members of our community, to give input 'o our deliberations. The committee Was formed and appointed by the City Council. Our study area runs from the Railroad Tracks East to the River and is bounded by the North and South City Limit lines. The intent of the committee is to make recommendations based on the Comprehensive Plan to "enhance and preserve the identity, design and vitality of the waterfront corridor which provides a unique Waterfront activity center within the central core area of the City." Thank you in advance for your partcipation. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. Please return as soon as possible. NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION 1. OVERALL THEME Approve Disapprove a. Old Fla Style b. Key West Style c. Fishing Village d. Promote Historical Sites e. Other 2. PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES a. Shoreline Protection b. Maintain and Expand open views of the Indian River c. Maintain and expand native vegetation. d. Other PUBLIC PARRS AND OPEN SPACE a. Linear Parks East side of Indian River Drive b. User Friendly Areas c. Provide Public Parks and open space d. Pedestrian Walk/Bike Path East side.of Indian River Drive e. Public Restroom Facilities f. Band Shell g. Combination Park and Parking area h. Main Street Center -Cultural Center -Tourist Information Center i. Fishing Areae i. Other 4. TRANSPORTATION a. Trolley Service b. Limited vehicular access to Indian River Drive c. Increased Boat Ramp Facilities d. Control of Indian River Dr.by City e. Horse Drawn Buggies f. Lower Speed on Indian River Drive c. Other PARKING a. Additional Public Parking with access from U.S. Highway #1 b. Three (3) Parking Areas - North. South and Center c. Metered Parking d. Provide Extensive Landscaping using native plants e. Provide Restrooms f. Other UNIFORMITY OF SIGNAGE a. Directional b. Informational c. Marketing and business d. Other 7. PUBLIC RELATIONS a. Newsletter b. Interface with Chamber of Commerce c. Special Events d. Immediate Information Center on Main Street e. Other S. UNIFORMITY IN LIGHTING a. Public - Gas Street Lights b. Private Sector c. Landscape Lightinc d. Park Lighting e. Other 9. MARINE FACILITIES a. EncDurage Boating Access - Transient Docks b. Promote Fishing Industry c. Promote Recreation Fishing activities - fishing pier d. Boat ramps with Permitted trailer parking e. Other 10.FUNDING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS a. Tax District b. Tax increment financing c. Bonding d. Grants e. Sales Tax f. Utility Tax -franchise fees g. Tourist Tax h. Land Donations i. Developer rights transfer - incentives j. General Tax Funds k. Other 11.ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONSIDER PLEASE COMMENT Please return to The Riverfront Committee, C/O Sebastian City Hall, P. 0. Box 780127, Sebastlan.F1 32978 or drop off at the Chamber of Commerce building. Please check if you would like to help THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COMPLETE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. THE RIVERFRONT COMMITTEE �. A*) . i r. so m' 'w i 58 K.., :. Ne^ 9r �d 1-UWtltp �IdorY or tr SO ^lens A .Perk 162 71 9u99Vf Tf pow��l lOf PO oV°f sdEnvY^O^, NM 1-wW 11 ht e. News Cl tY Park t ton B sl Cor ss rl • 1 =-Isr t do'^ N w P ner l' 2 step St;9 / C FPr EI Y c event er 5 noel + aeeA E C0.5126 tHot A 9tre Nt et ]eckso ^t et Nelne 11e 19^.f P."k 1•n9 2^ ISIMe ° p t rSi nt e: 9�ei1"k1Ys Stop"t 19 s 9r Ing h 1 step't tp s sl 0. m 790 tors: S�Oestlenetl nl X�F'I 49f •IPU Sc 1' PerA 1n9 et .1 :9 aellweY City of Sebastian's Riverfront Committee Statement of Principles The City of Sebastian's Riverfront Committee has adopted a set of principles to ensure that all of the citizens of Sebastian are considered in developing the unique and valuable resource of the riverfront for the future. The principles are: 1) Putting out a vision. The committee will establish a theme of the riverfront. All other recommendations from the committee will compliment this theme. 2) A balanced approach. The recommendations of the committee will take a balanced approach. This includes: a. considering the needs of all the citizens of Sebastian — youth, seniors, residents, businessmen, sportsmen, etc.; b. developing a mixture of uses and a variety of opportunities for recreational, residential and commercial uses; C. encouraging progress while protecting property rights, d. protecting the environment and fostering use, 3) Maximizing the use of what we already have. Protect, restore and enhance the existing assets, including historical structures, found in the riverfront area. It is the intention of the committee to preserve those things that brought us to Sebastian. 4) Maximize the use of voluntary Incentives. Limit the use of regulations to what is required in the best interests of the citizens of Sebastian. 5) Use public Investment in support of the vision. Public projects such as transportation, park and recreation improvements, and building construction and renovation should help foster the vision for the riverfront. 6) Preserve riverfront access. River and ocean access is a treasure to be enjoyed by all of the citizens of Sebastian. 7) Flexibility In implementation. Some of the recommendations will be done quickly and at a low cost. Some will be realized slowly over time. 8) Encourage citizen involvement. Opportunities will be provided at all committee meetings for public input and discussion. Public involvement is essential to Implement the other principles.