89-000072 Thomas J. White Development Corporation vs. St. Lucie West Services District Status: Closed Recommended Order on Tuesday, September 5, 1989.

Summary: Application for establishment of a community development district for surface water management unopposed and approved.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN RE: PETITION of THOMAS J. )

WHITE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY , )

INC., TO ESTABLISH A UNIFORM )

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT )

DISTRICT PURSUANT TO )

SECTION 190.005(1), FLORIDA ) CASE NO. 89-0072

STATUTES, AND CHAPTER 42-1, )

FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, )

TO BE KNOWN AS THE ST. LUCIE )

WEST SERVICES DISTRICT )

__________________________________)

REPORT AND CONCLUSIONS

This matter was heard by William R. Dorsey, Jr. the Hearing Officer

designated by the Division of Administrative Hearings, in Port St. Lucie,

Florida, on April 18, 1989. At the request of the Petitioner, the hearing was

reconvened by telephone conference call to take additional testimony on July 10,

1989.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: E. Lee Worsham, Esquire

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn

1655 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 600

West Palm Beach, Florida 33410

For Respondent: No appearances for any other party

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

The issue is whether the application of Thomas J. White Development Company

for the establishment of a uniform community development district under Chapter

190, Florida Statutes, and Rule Chapter 42-1, Florida Administrative Code,

should be granted.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

This proceeding began when the Thomas J. White Development Company filed a

petition with the Secretary of the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory

Commission (Commission) on December 21, 1988, seeking authorization to establish

a uniform community development district within a portion of the City of Port

St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida. After certifying that all elements of the

petition were complete, the Commission's Secretary forwarded the petition to the

Division of Administrative Hearings on January 4, 1989. On February 27, 1989,

the matter was set for hearing at the city council chambers in Port St. Lucie,

Florida. Notice of the date and location of the public hearing was published in

a newspaper of general circulation in the Port St. Lucie area on March 22, 29,

April 5, and April 12, 1989. Proof of publication was entered in evidence as

composite Exhibit 10. In addition, as required by Rule 42- 1.011, Florida

Administrative Code (1987), copies of the notice were served on all persons

named in the petition, all affected units of local government (the City of Port

St. Lucie, and St. Lucie County), and the Secretary of the Department of

Community Affairs. Notice of the hearing was published by the Commission's

Secretary in the Florida Administrative Weekly on February 17, 1989 as required

by Rule 42-1.010(1)(b), Florida Administrative Code (1987). A copy of that

notice also is found in Petitioner's composite Exhibit 10.

The Petitioner filed a copy of the petition with the City of Port St. Lucie

on December 16, 1988 and paid the required $15,000 filing fee. A public hearing

was held before the city commission on January 23, 1989, at which the city

commission adopted Resolution 89-R6 expressing support for the petition. A copy

of the resolution has been received in evidence Petitioner's Exhibit 8.

The Petitioner filed a copy of the petition with the Board of County

Commissioners for St. Lucie County on December 16, 1988, and paid the required

$15,000 filing fee to that body. A public hearing before the county commission

was held on February 7, 1989. At that meeting the county commission adopted

resolution 89-41 expressing support for the petition. The resolution also

expressed consent to the inclusion of a county- owned sports complex within the

boundaries of the proposed district. (Exhibit 9).

The hearing in this matter was conducted in accordance with the provisions

of Section 190.005(1) (d), Florida Statutes, and Rule 42-1.012, Florida

Administrative Code. Ample, adequate, and legally sufficient notice of receipt

of the petition, as well as the notice of the local public hearing was given,

but no other persons sought to participate in this proceeding. The transcripts

of the two hearings and all exhibits are forwarded to the commission with this

Report and Conclusions. A proposed Report was filed by the Petitioner. Lists

of the witnesses and of the exhibits offered in evidence are attached to this

Report.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The facilities and services that will be provided by the St. Lucie West

Services District are the financing, constriction, ownership, operation, and

maintenance of the surface water management and control system for the area, and

necessary bridges and culverts.

2. The land encompassed by the proposed development district is a

development of regional impact. The final revised development order for the

area was issued on February 27, 1989, by the City of Port St. Lucie. Exhibit 4.

3. The land within the proposed district is composed of approximately

4,600 contiguous acres located in the city. The proposed district is bounded on

the north and south by the city. The western and eastern boundaries are

Interstate 95 and the Florida Turnpike, respectively. A map showing the

location of the area to be serviced by the proposed district is found in Exhibit

2; a metes and bounds legal description of the proposed district is attached to

the petition as Exhibit 1. The overall development to be serviced by the

district will include a variety of single family and multifamily housing units,

as well as commercial, industrial, and educational uses. A portion of the

future land use map for the City of Port St. Lucie was received in evidence as

Exhibit 3, and shows approved land uses for the St. Lucie West area.

4. In the proceedings leading to the issuance of the development order,

the city determined that the St. Lucie West development would be consistent with

all applicable state, regional, and local comprehensive plans and policies. The

proposed development of the district is consistent with the City of Port St.

Lucie Comprehensive Plan: 1985, as amended. Exhibit 12.

5. Ernest R. Dike, Jr. is the director of development of Thomas J. White

Development Company. He is an expert engineer experienced in the planning,

construction and management of large scale communities. Mr. Dike has

substantial experience as a civil engineer, and holds an advanced academic

degree in planning. He served as director of public works and as city engineer

for the City of Port St. Lucie for the three years preceding his employment by

White. As White's director of development over the last three and a half years,

Mr. Dike assisted in the preparation of the petition; he also identified and

explained the exhibits which were admitted into evidence. He assisted in

crafting the development order for St. Lucie West which was adopted by the City

of Port St. Lucie in February, 1987 and amended on February 27, 1989. Dike has

been personally involved with the sales of land from White to other developers

of property within the proposed district. All the owners of the real property

to be included in the district have given their written consent to the

establishment of the proposed district.

6. Since the Thomas J. White Development Company purchased the

approximately 4,600 acres which became St. Lucie West, Dike has directed the

permitting and approval for all aspects of the project. In the design, White

Development Company has accommodated the desires of St. Lucie County to obtain a

spring training facility for a professional baseball team. White Development

Company agreed to give the county 100 acres of land to build a training facility

for the New York Mets. A predevelopment order for the stadium was obtained,

which permitted the development of certain roads, a bridge over the Florida

Turnpike, and an interchange with Interstate 95 which will all provide access to

St. Lucie West These transportation facilities were completed without the use

of any state or federal funds. None of these expenses will be born by the

proposed district. The establishment of the district would not be inconsistent

with any of the elements or provisions of the state comprehensive plan, the

regional plan, or the local comprehensive plan. Creation of the district would

be the best alternative available for providing water management and control

facilities for the land encompassed by the proposed district. The South Florida

Water Management District (SFWMD) and the City of Port St. Lucie have concluded

that when fully developed, the land would discharge no additional water into the

city's stormwater system as compared to the contribution of stormwater by the

land made before it was developed by White.

7. Mr. Dike also testified about the debt service required to amortize the

debt on any benefit bonds issued by the proposed district, and the cost of

operation and maintenance of the surface water control facilities to be

constructed by the proposed district. Mr. Dike prepared a spread sheet entitled

"Projected Statement of Cash Flow for the Years 1990-2000". (Exhibit 18). The

estimated construction costs for water management facilities in the projection

are reasonable. Based on White's plans for the district, and utilizing the

assumptions for absorption of the residential and commercial space to be

constructed, the benefit and maintenance taxes are projected to begin at $114

per taxable unit per year. These benefit and maintenance taxes will rise to no

more than $170 per taxable unit per year in 1996. These projections are

consistent with the testimony of Mr. Dike and of Dr. Henry Fishkind, an

economist. All assumptions made in projecting future benefit taxes are

reasonable. While these projections do not bind the district, which is not yet

formed, and the district's electors could ultimately decide to assume additional

responsibilities, the evidence shows that the benefit and maintenance taxes

projected are adequate to pay the debt to be incurred by the proposed

construction of surface water management facilities.

8. Lester L. Solin, Jr., testified as an expert in land use planning. He

was a planning consultant with the City of Port St. Lucie when the development

of St. Lucie West by White Development Company was first under consideration,

and worked with the city to formulate the overall development plan. St. Lucie

West has been integrated into the future land use map for the City of Port St.

Lucie Comprehensive Plan: 1985. Mr. Solin is also familiar with the state

comprehensive plan. He has reviewed the application for development approval

for the St. Lucie West development of regional impact. The proposed district

would be consistent with the state comprehensive plan, Chapter 187 Florida

Statutes.

9. Mr. Solin is also familiar with the City of Port St. Lucie

Comprehensive Plan: 1985 (Exhibit 12). The creation of the St. Lucie West

Services District would not be inconsistent with any of the goals, objectives or

policies in that plan.

10. Peter L. Pimentel is the current executive director of the Northern

Palm Beach County Water Control District (NPBWD). Mr. Pimentel testified as an

expert in special district management, planning, staffing, reporting, and

coordination with local governments. As the director of the Northern Palm Beach

County Water Control District, he oversees a staff which works with other

regulatory agencies on permitting, implementation, planning, construction and

operation of water management systems. He coordinates construction with

contractors, and engineers, and works with lawyers in carrying out the policies

established by the district board of directors. The land encompassed by the

NPBWD is approximately 200,000 acres. Mr. Pimentel has substantial experience,

having worked as the executive director for two large independent special taxing

districts, which are similar in structure and have similar powers as the

community development district which White Development Company wishes to

establish. Mr. Pimentel's testimony was especially persuasive due to his

experience with water control entities. The proposed district is the best

alternative available for financing, constructing, owning, operating and

maintaining the surface water management and control facility for the area

encompassed by the proposed district. It provides a more efficient use of

resources, and provides the opportunity for new growth in the district to pay

for its own surface water management, rather than imposing that cost on general

government. The proposed district would not be incompatible with the capacity

or uses of existing local and regional community services and facilities. The

area to be served by the proposed district is amenable to separate special-

district government.

11. Henry H. Fishkind, Ph.D. testified as an expert economist about the

economic consequences of establishing a community development district under

Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, the economic consequences of financing the

surface water management and control system through the use of tax exempt bonds,

and the cost of operating and maintaining those structures by a community

development district. Dr. Fishkind prepared the economic impact statement for

the proposed district required by Section 120.54, Florida Statutes. The costs to

the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission, and to state and local

agencies in reviewing the petition are minimal. The costs to the City of Port

St. Lucie and to St. Lucie County have been covered by the $15,000 filing fee

which White paid to each of those governments. The cost to the City of Port St.

Lucie once the district is operating would be negligible. The potential debt of

the proposed district will not become general obligations or debts of the city

or county governments. The cost of the surface water improvements will be paid

by those who benefit from them. The economic impact statement is adequate, and

meets the requirements of Section 124.54(2)(b), Florida Statutes.

12. During the first six years, the proposed district would be controlled

by Thomas J. White Development Company since White still would be the largest

landowner. Tax exempt benefit bonds would be issued to construct the surface

water management facilities. Both White and residents of the proposed district

would share the burden of amortizing these bonds through benefit taxes.

According to Dr. Fishkind, whose opinion is credited, from an economic

perspective:

(1) The creation of the St. Lucie West District is not

inconsistent with the state and local comprehensive

plan;

(2) The land to be served by the proposed district is

of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact and is

sufficiently contiguous to be developed as a functional

interrelated community;

(3) The proposed district is the best alternative for

providing surface water management for the community,

since other alternatives such as municiple service

taking units or homeowners' associations are more

expensive or more cumbersome;

(4) The area to be served by the proposed district is

amenable to separate special-district government.

13. All factors which are required to be considered in establishing a

community development district under Section 190.005(1)(e), Florida Statutes,

were analyzed by the witnesses presented by the Thomas White Development

Company. Their testimony was persuasive, and the application meets all

requirements of Chapter 190.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the record made, it is concluded:

14. That all statements contained in the petition are true and correct;

15. The creation of the proposed district is not inconsistent with any

applicable element of the state comprehensive plan, or the City of Port St.

Lucie Comprehensive Plan;

16. The area in the proposed district is of sufficient size, is

sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developed as one

functional, interrelated community;

17. The district is the best alternative for delivering water management

services to the area to be serviced by the district, and would be superior to

the creation of a municipal service taxing unit, a homeowner's association, or

to providing water management by the general county government of St. Lucie

County;

18. The community development services provided by the proposed district

will not be incompatible with the capacity or uses of existing local and

regional community development services and facilities;

19. The area to be served by the proposed district is amenable to separate

special district government.

20. Accordingly it is recommended that the Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission grant the petition of the Thomas J. White Development

Company and adopt a rule pursuant to Section 190.005(f), Florida Statutes

(1987), establishing the St. Lucie West Services District.

DONE AND ENTERED this 5th day of September, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon

County, Florida.

_________________________

William R. Dorsey,

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

[phone]

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of

Administrative Hearings this 5th day

of September, 1989

APPENDIX A

Case No. 89-0072

Witnesses

1. Earnest R. Dike, Jr., 590 NW Peacock Loop, Port St. Lucie,

Florida.

2. Lester L. Solin, Solin and Associates, 901 Douglas Avenue,

Suite 207, Altamonte Springs, Florida.

3. Peter Pimentel, 5725 Corporate Way, Suite 203, West Palm

Beach Florida.

4. Dr. Henry H. Fishkind, 201 North New York Avenue, Suite 300

Winter Park, Florida.

APPENDIX B

Case No. 89-0072

List of Documentary Evidence

Exhibit 1. Petition for Rulemaking filed by Thomas J. White Development

Company, Inc., including seven exhibits.

Exhibit 2. Location Map for the proposed St. Lucie West Services District.

Exhibit 3. Future Land Use Map for the area

Exhibit 4. Resolution 89-R7 of the city council of Port St. Lucie,

Florida, which is the development order for the St. Lucie West Development of

Regional Impact.

Exhibit ansmittal letter for the Petition for the establishment of

the Services District to the City of Port St. Lucie and filing fee, and

transmittal letter for the St. Lucie West Development District to the St. Lucie

County Board of County Commissioners, and filing fee.

Exhibit ansmittal letter for the Petition for the establishment of

St. Lucie West Services District to the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory

Commission.

Exhibit 7. Letter from the staff of the Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission determining that the Petition appears to satisfy the

requirements of Section 190.005, Florida Statutes, and Rule 42-1.009 Florida

Administrative Code.

Exhibit 8. Resolution 89-R6 from the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida

supporting the petition of the Thomas J. White Development Company, Inc. for the

establishment of the St. Lucie West Services District.

Exhibit 9. Resolution 89-41 of the Board of County Commissioners of St.

Lucie County supporting the petition of Thomas J. White Development Company,

Inc. for the establishment of the St. Lucie West Services District.

Exhibit 10. Proof of publication in the local newspapers and in the

Florida Administrative Weekly of the Notice of the Hearing on the petition for

the establishment of the community development district and notices to other

interested persons.

Exhibit 11. Copy of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida

Statutes (1987)

Exhibit 12. Copy of the Comprehensive Plan: 1985 of the City of Port St.

Lucie, Ordinance 85-102.

Exhibit 13. Resume of Ernest R. Dike, Jr., P.E.

APPENDIX B CONT.

Case No. 89-0072

Exhibit 14. Permit granted to Thomas J. White Development Company, Inc. by

the South Florida Water Management District for the construction and operation

of a water management system.

Exhibit 15. The prepared testimony Lester L. Solin, Jr.

Exhibit 16. The resume of Peter L. Pimentel.

Exhibit 17. The prepared testimony of Henry H. Fishkind, Ph.D.

Exhibit 18. The additional prepared testimony of Mr. Dike including the

computer generated spread sheet.

COPIES FURNISHED:

E. Lee Worsham, Esquire

HONIGAMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ and COHN

1655 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

Suite 600

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

James C. Vaughn

Florida Land and Water

Adjudicatory Commission

Office of the Governor

The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001

William Buezett

The Governor, Legal and

Legislative Office

The Capitol, Room 209

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001

Carla Stanford, Esquire

Department of Community Affairs

2740 Centerville Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100

David McIntyre, Esquire

County Attorney

2300 Virginia Avenue

Fort Pierce, Florida 34982

Roger Orr, Esquire

City Attorney

220 South Second Street

Fort Pierce, Florida 33450

Patty Woodworth, Director

Land and Water Adjudicatory

Commission

Planning & Budgeting

Executive Office of the Governor

The Capitol, PL-05

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001