REGIONAL FUTURE LAND USE IN THE
FLORIDA HEARTLAND
Regional Generalized Future Land Use Map
Prepared by the Central Florida Regional Planning Council
As part of a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Sustainable Communities Grant
For the Florida Heartland
Consisting of DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, and
Okeechobee Counties
February 13, 2014
555 E Church St,
Bartow, FL 33827
www.cfrpc.org
“The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under an award with the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the
public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations
contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government."
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
This page intentionally left blank
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................... 1
Abstract
.................................................................................................................................... 2
Background .................................................................................................................................... 3
Purpose and Methods..................................................................................................................... 7
Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 7
Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Accuracy and Scale...................................................................................................................... 7
Generalized Future Land Use Categories.................................................................................... 8
GIS Methods................................................................................................................................ 8
Results and Table Interpretation ................................................................................................ 9
Results
.................................................................................................................................. 10
Regional Overview .................................................................................................................... 10
DeSoto County .......................................................................................................................... 13
Glades County ........................................................................................................................... 17
Hardee County .......................................................................................................................... 21
Hendry County .......................................................................................................................... 25
Highlands County ...................................................................................................................... 29
Okeechobee County.................................................................................................................. 34
Analysis
.................................................................................................................................. 39
Future Land Use Designation Comparison between Counties ................................................. 39
Agriculture Future Land Use ................................................................................................. 39
Commercial/Office Future Land Use .................................................................................... 40
Industrial Future Land Use .................................................................................................... 41
Institutional/Public Future Land Use .................................................................................... 42
Mixed Use Future Land Use .................................................................................................. 43
Recreation/Open Space Future Land Use ............................................................................. 44
Residential Future Land Use ................................................................................................. 45
Table of Contents
i
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Combined Residential and Mixed-Use Future Land Uses..................................................... 46
Transportation Future Land Use ........................................................................................... 47
Comparisons Using Measures of Future Level-of-Service (FLOS) ............................................. 48
Combined Residential and Mixed Use FLOS ......................................................................... 49
Recreation/Open Space FLOS ............................................................................................... 50
Urban Land Use FLOS ............................................................................................................ 51
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 52
Appendix A: South Florida Water Management District Generalized Future Land Use
Methodology.............................................................................................................. 1
Appendix B: Key To Understanding The FLUM Atlas Tables........................................................... 1
Appendix C: Summary of Future Land Use Category Crosswalk .................................................... 1
List of Tables
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Acreage and 2010 Population (U.S. Census) ......................................................................... 5
County Population Projections................................................................................................... 6
Explanation of fields present in the first table in each county, used to analyze
FLUM data in each compiled county. ....................................................................................... 9
Table 4: Aggregate County Generalized FLUM Acreages in the Heartland Region .............. 11
Table 5: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of DeSoto County. ........................... 14
Table 6: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Glades County. ............................ 18
Table 7: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Hardee County. .......................... 22
Table 8: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Hendry County. .......................... 26
Table 9: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Highlands County. ..................... 31
Table 10: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Okeechobee County. ................ 36
Table 11: Future-Level-of-Service for Heartland counties (including the cities therein) .... 48
Table A-1. SFWMD Generalized Future Land Use Categories............................................................. 3
Table B-1. Explanation of Fields Present in the “Atlas of FLUM Data” for Each County .......... 1
Table C-1. Crosswalk of local government to Generalized Future Land Use categories .......... 1
Table of Contents
ii
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
List of Figures
Figure 1: DeSoto County Generalized FLUM Acreage........................................................................ 15
Figure 2: DeSoto County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage ................................................ 16
Figure 3: Glades County Generalized FLUM Acreage......................................................................... 19
Figure 4: Glades County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage ................................................. 20
Figure 5: Hardee County Generalized FLUM Acreage ....................................................................... 23
Figure 6: Hardee County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage ............................................... 24
Figure 7: Hendry County Generalized FLUM Acreage ....................................................................... 27
Figure 8: Hendry County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage ............................................... 28
Figure 9: Highlands County Generalized FLUM Acreage.................................................................. 32
Figure 10: Highlands County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage ......................................... 33
Figure 11: Okeechobee County Generalized FLUM Acreage ............................................................. 37
Figure 12: Okeechobee County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage ..................................... 38
Figure 13: Comparison of Agriculture FLUs between Counties....................................................... 39
Figure 14: Comparison of Commercial / Office FLUs between Counties ..................................... 40
Figure 15: Comparison of Industrial FLUs between Counties.......................................................... 41
Figure 16: Comparison of Institutional / Public FLUs between Counties ................................... 42
Figure 17: Comparison of Mixed Use FLUs between Counties ......................................................... 43
Figure 18: Comparison of Recreation / Open Space FLUs between Counties............................ 44
Figure 19: Comparison of All Residential FLUs between Counties ................................................ 45
Figure 20: Comparison of All Residential and Mixed Use FLUs between Counties.................. 46
Figure 21: Comparison of Transportation FLUs between Counties............................................... 47
Figure 22: Future-Level-of-Service: Residential and Mixed Use ..................................................... 49
Figure 23: Future-Level-of-Service: Recreation / Open Space......................................................... 50
Figure 24: Future-Level-of-Service: All Urban FLUs ............................................................................ 51
List of Maps
Map 1:
Map 2:
Map 3:
Map 4:
Map 5:
Map 6:
Map 7:
Map 8:
Location of the Heartland Counties .......................................................................................... 3
Heartland Regional Generalized FLUM ................................................................................ 12
DeSoto County Generalized FLUM ......................................................................................... 13
Glades County Generalized FLUM .......................................................................................... 17
Hardee County Generalized FLUM ......................................................................................... 21
Hendry County Generalized FLUM ........................................................................................ 25
Highlands County Generalized FLUM ................................................................................... 30
Okeechobee County Generalized FLUM ............................................................................... 35
Table of Contents
iii
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
List of Abbreviations
CFRPC
Central Florida Regional Planning Council
ESRI
Environmental Systems Research Institute
FLOS
Future level-of-service
CLOS
FAC
FLU
FLUE
FLUM
Current level-of-service
Florida Administrative Codes
Future Land Use
Future Land Use Element
Future Land Use Map
FY
Fiscal Year
HUD
US Department of Housing and Urban Development
GIS
SFWMD
SWFWMD
TBRPC
UF
List of Abbreviations
Geographic Information System
South Florida Water Management District
Southwest Florida Water Management District
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
University of Florida
1
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Abstract
Future Land Use Maps (FLUMs) are a manifestation of a community’s vision for the future
development of an area, and are mandated by Florida Statutes, Chapter 163.3177. The
FLUMs for the Heartland Region, including the 6 central Florida counties (DeSoto, Glades,
Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, and Okeechobee) and the 11 jurisdictions (Arcadia, Avon Park,
Bowling Green, Clewiston, LaBelle, Lake Placid, Moore Haven, Okeechobee, Sebring,
Wauchula, and Zolfo Spring) within those counties, were assembled and compiled to better
understand cumulative regional vision and to better facilitate the Central Florida Regional
Planning Council (CFRPC) coordination with local governments and the University of
Florida (UF) to integrate local land use planning into future alternative scenario modeling
efforts associated with a FY2010 Sustainable Communities grant from the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Sustainable Communities grant is part of a
larger effort to develop a regional vision called Heartland 2060.
Standardization of the FLUMs to the SFWMD Generalized Future Land Use Categories
methodology occurred, resulting in a facilitation of comparisons across political
boundaries. The project’s goal is to analyze this information to identify large-scale trends
in future land use that span municipal boundaries. This dataset is part of an effort to
explore potential alternative future development scenarios for the region. These areas may
benefit from future policy and planning assistance and this project can help focus the
utilization of limited resources.
The study results show that throughout the Heartland Region, the majority of land has an
Agricultural FLU designation while other FLUS differ. Conclusions are difficult to draw
across such a large region with so many differences, as has been observed in the analysis of
future level of services. Further analysis and perhaps comparison with current land use
level-of-service may provide insight into not only current trends, but also future
predilections. In addition, consideration of the amount of residential density actually
associated with each FLUM may provide insight into land use planning in the region.
Ultimately, the future use of this dataset is for use in the scenario-modeling portion of the
HUD Sustainability Grant as it relates to the Heartland 2060 project. There, it will help
guide the allocation of projected future population to areas deemed suitable for each land
use. This regional land use snapshot may help guide visioning and planning efforts the
Heartland Region, and it may be useful for border areas where joint planning would be
beneficial in a regional sense.
Abstract
2
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Background
All governmental agencies need to be concerned with growth management as the
population of the United States is expected to increase by 50% above year 2000 in the next
20 to 40 years (US Census Bureau, 2000, US GAO, 2000). Additionally, over 75% of people
in the United States now live in cities of 100,000 people or more (Carreiro 2008). Humans
are converting rural land uses to urban areas at an incredible pace (Carreiro 2008, Wu
2008). A sound understanding of the impacts of different growth scenarios is a prime goal
of government whenever there are scarce resources in conflict with public health, safety
and welfare.
Each governmental entity – state, county, and city – has a comprehensive plan: a document
that directs future development out to a specific temporal planning horizon. For the
purposes of data collected for this project, the planning horizon is usually 2030, plus or
minus five years.
This project assembled, standardized, and analyzed the FLUMs for the 6 counties (DeSoto,
Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, and Okeechobee) and the 11 jurisdictions (Arcadia,
Avon Park, Bowling Green, Clewiston, LaBelle, Lake Placid, Moore Haven, Okeechobee,
Sebring, Wauchula, and Zolfo Spring) in the Heartland Region were to determine the
general condition of future land use planning in the rural Heartland region. The inclusion
of these jurisdictions reflects their role in the Heartland 2060 regional visioning effort.
Map 1 shows the location of the counties used in this study. Map 2 shows the locations of
the 11 jurisdictions, the Avon Park Air Force Range, the Brighton Seminole Indian
Reservation, and the Big Cypress Seminole Indian Reservation.
Map 1: Location of the Heartland Counties
Background
3
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Map 2: Location of Heartland Jurisdictions, Avon Park Air Force Range, Brighton
Seminole Indian Reservation, and Big Cypress Seminole Indian Reservation
Background
4
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 1: Acreage and 2010 Population (U.S. Census)
Jurisdiction
DeSoto County
Arcadia
Unincorporated County
Glades County
Moore Haven
Unincorporated County
Hardee County
Bowling Green
Wauchula
Zolfo Springs
Unincorporated County
Hendry County
Clewiston
LaBelle
Unincorporated County
Highlands County
Avon Park
Lake Placid
Sebring
Unincorporated County
Okeechobee County
Okeechobee
Unincorporated County
Total Heartland Region
Incorporated
Unincorporated
Background
Acreage
408,134
2,742
405,392
496,739
673
496,066
408,109
800
2,050
1,125
404,134
746,216
2,937
9,134
734,145
660,720
4,385
2,232
6,459
647,644
468,339
2,406
465,933
3,188,257
34,943
3,153,314
2010 Population
34,862
7,637
27,225
12,884
1,680
11,204
27,731
2,930
5,001
1,827
17,973
39,140
7,155
4,640
27,345
98,786
8,836
2,223
10,491
77,236
39,996
5,621
34,375
253,399
58,041
195,358
5
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 2: County Population Projections
Population
Estimate
Jurisdiction
DeSoto
Glades
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
Total
Background
4-1-2011
34,708
12,812
27,653
38,908
98,712
39,870
252,663
2011 BEBR Medium Population Projections
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
35,500
13,300
27,900
38,500
101,500
40,900
257,600
36,700
14,100
28,200
39,600
106,800
42,500
267,900
37,900
15,000
28,500
40,700
111,800
44,100
278,000
39,100
15,700
28,800
41,600
116,500
45,600
287,300
40,200
16,400
29,100
42,500
120,700
46,900
295,800
41,300
17,100
29,400
43,300
124,700
48,200
304,000
6
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Purpose and Methods
Overview
The Future Land Use Maps (FLUMs) for the 6 counties (DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry,
Highlands, and Okeechobee) and the 11 cities (Arcadia, Avon Park, Bowling Green,
Clewiston, LaBelle, Lake Placid, Moore Haven, Okeechobee, Sebring, Wauchula, and Zolfo
Spring) located within their boundaries were combined in ArcGIS 10 and standardized to
generalized Future Land Use (FLU) categories. A separate future alternative development
scenario-modeling project utilized this dataset to inform different potential future
development patterns for the region.
Purpose
The purpose of this project is to examine future land use planning from a regional
perspective. Comprehensive plans and FLUMs are necessarily local in nature, and tailored
to local needs. This means that neighboring municipalities may have different future land
use designations and different future land use objectives. To better anticipate, plan for, and
evaluate regional future planning issues, it is necessary to evaluate large-scale trends in
future land use planning. The models developed during this project are essentially “living”
models. The data in this report is potentially as current as the FLUMs that were in effect in
the fall and winter of 2011. Future runs of the models developed during this project may
occur, with updated information, whenever new FLUMs become available. This enables
comparison of the regional FLUM against previous regional planning efforts.
Accuracy and Scale
Due to the semi-regional focus of this project, it should not be relied upon as completely
accurate at all scales. In fact, when analyzing trends and areas using the SFWMD
Generalized Future Land Use Categories (Appendix A), the data is more accurate and
relevant over a larger scale than a smaller scale. However, when examining local future
land use maps using local future land use categories, the data is as accurate as the time of
data collection, at all scales. All diligence has been taken to maintain the original data from
each local government FLUM. The resultant maps are useful for showing regional,
generalized, spatial trends in future land use.
When analyzed using the SFWMD Generalized FLU Categories, the FLU comparisons
derived from this data represent coarse-scale estimates. At best, this data may be 90%
accurate for the area over which it is summarized; that is assuming that the GIS files
received from local municipalities were accurate. The FLU data from this data are intended
for some summary evaluation and guidance in identifying potential areas of further
Purpose and Methods
7
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
research and examination. The data and maps presented here are more useful in the largescale exploration of general trends in future land use planning in the Heartland.
Please note there is a potential five (5) percent margin of error with regard to acreage as
GIS data and measurement of water bodies and right-of-way may vary based on best
available data.
Generalized Future Land Use Categories
The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) generalized future land use
categories methodology (Appendix A) facilitates continuity in the comparison of FLUMs
from different local governments. This study utilizes the same methodology because of its
applicability statewide as a measure of FLUMs across political boundaries.
The SFWMD adapted these categories from the Southwest Florida Water Management
District (SWFWMD) (which originated from a statewide-proposed methodology). These
categories allow for comparisons across political boundaries: between municipalities, and
between Water Management Districts. However, the SFWMD categories also incorporate
an additional category, “Very High Density Residential”, which fits within the SWFWMD
framework, yet also provides recognition for areas in the region of extremely high density.
In all cases, review of each local government’s comprehensive plan occurred before
assigning a Generalized Future Land Use Category. In cases where there was some
uncertainty, consultation with the local government or a CFRPC planning expert ensued.
Essentially, the study preserved all local government FLUM data while re-categorizing it
according to the SFWMD Generalized Future Land Use Categories methodology.
GIS Methods
All Future Land Use Maps were received in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) format
(usually in shapefiles or feature classes) and combined and standardized to the SFWMD
Generalized Future Land Use Categories methodology (Appendix A). This methodology
allows comparisons across political boundaries by standardizing the data to common
categories. The GIS data was manipulated, summarized, and analyzed using ESRI software
ArcGIS 10 and ModelBuilder. A comparison of the SFWMD Generalized FLU Categories to
the local government’s comprehensive plan FLUE allowed for the re-categorization of the
local government FLUMs. Additionally, the density limits for each local government future
land use category were recorded in the GIS geodatabase.
It is not always possible to determine the planning horizon for a comprehensive plan
because its format is not specifically defined. In general, the local governments planning
horizons examined in this project are between 2020 and 2030.
Purpose and Methods
8
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Results and Table Interpretation
Each county is initially summarized in one table accompanied with a map of the county.
Data that has been gathered for each county is initially presented and analyzed in a
standardized fashion:
1. table(s) summarizing acreages for each Generalized FLU Category for the entire
area in the county;
2. one map spatially depicting the Generalized FLU Categories for each county;
The first table summarizes land area by generalized FLU category, combining all reporting
municipalities (Table 3). To facilitate comparisons between counties, the SFWMD
Generalized FLU Categories have been standardized to display percentage of the land area
of that county.
Table 3: Explanation of fields present in the first table in each county,
used to analyze FLUM data in each compiled county.
Field name
Generalized FLU Category
Acreage
Description/Information
Organized by SFWMD Generalized Future Land Use Categories
to allow county-wide comparisons across all local governments
Combined acreage for that future land use category across the
whole county
Percentage of FLUMcompiled land area
The percentage of the total county land area (i.e.-water bodies
excluded).
Comment
The Comment section provides relevant information related to
the Generalized FLU category and the specific County, Future
Land Use designations, or calculations.
Purpose and Methods
9
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Results
The results of this study are presented below, first by regional overview, and then by
county. While there are several similarities throughout the region, as anticipated,
differences exist by county. The Analysis Section of this report provides further analysis of
the results generated.
Regional Overview
Table 4 details the acreage for each Generalized FLU Category in summary form, while Map
3 represents the Generalized Future Land Use (FLU) categories map for the entire
Heartland region. Overall, most of the region is Agricultural. A scattering of Conservation
lands is present, but this mostly represents areas currently under conservation and/or
managed by the state or federal government. In general, the Heartland counties do no
designate future conservation areas on their FLUMs. The large Conservation area in the
northeast of Highlands County is land associated with the Avon Park Air Force Range and
the large Conservation area in the northwest of Okeechobee County is land associated with
the Kissimmee Prairie Preserve State Park.
Some large areas of Mixed Use are also noticeable. These are generally Developments of
Regional Impact (DRIs), although this is not always the case. The large Mixed Use area in
central Glades County is the Brighton Seminole Indian Reservation (Brighton Reservation).
The Brighton Reservation was contacted and solicited for data, but did not respond. Due to
the perceived nature of development regulation and sovereignty in the Brighton
Reservation and based on the limited understanding of FLU planning in that area, the study
codes the Brighton Reservation as Mixed Use. For purposes of analysis of proportional FLU
coverage, this designated Mixed-Use acreage is not included to avoid skewing analysis
results. Tables and Charts throughout the study note whether the acreage associated in the
Brighton Reservation is included or not. The Big Cypress Seminole Indian Reservation (Big
Cypress Reservation) includes a total of 52,462 acres, most of which are located in
southeastern Hendry County. The Big Cypress Reservation includes tourist attractions and
some residential units. The study respects the Future Land Use depicted on the Hendry
County Future Land Use Maps for the area including the Big Cypress Reservation.
Appendix A contains a summary of the SFWMD Generalized FLU Categories, including
Table A-1, which presents the Categories and their equivalent local government
designations. Appendix B describes the key to understanding the information in the FLUM
Atlases in Appendix C. A summary of all data collected in this study is presented in
Appendix C for the purposes of providing an archived data source for future research. This
Results
10
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Appendix records the FLU designations of the local government in the tables, as well as the
Generalized FLU Category for each.
The remainder of this chapter includes an in depth examination of each county. Unless
otherwise specified, references to a specific county include the aggregated results for the
county, including cities therein.
Table 4: Aggregate County Generalized FLUM Acreages in the Heartland Region
Acreage
Generalized
FLU Category
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/Open
Space
Residential, High
Density
Residential, Low
Density
Residential,
Medium Density
Residential, Very
High Density
Residential, Very
Low Density
Transportation
Unknown
Acreage
(land only)
Water Body
Total Acreage
Results
DeSoto Glades Hardee Hendry Highlands Okeechobee Heartland
321,371 362,807
741
1,063
40,450 57,780
3,382
1,810
8,724
702
11,378 47,544
369,218
317
527
4,551
4,176
14,934
568,489
1,479
105,979
3,689
7,861
10,816
488,135
3,272
91,984
3,376
4,857
8,925
307,182
878
64,119
10,493
4,035
48,069
2,417,202
7,750
360,839
27,301
30,355
141,666
66
510
1,833
773
368
-
3,550
472
60
4,794
179
5,590
-
11,095
15,131
1,206
1,264
15,444
27,899
950
61,894
908
16,074
950
2,390
3,121
153
23,596
16
-
-
-
186
-
202
-
-
-
18,416
-
29,485
47,901
5,419
74
7,182
35
5,530
17
9,661
1,040
22,841
164
2,974
-
53,607
1,330
408,132 496,773
408,111
746,216
660,718
468,338
3,188,288
1,176 134,588
409,308 631,361
386
408,497
18,142
764,358
48,565
709,283
109,861
578,199
312,718
3,501,006
11
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Map 3: Heartland Regional Generalized FLUM
Results
12
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
DeSoto County
Overall, the majority of DeSoto County has a designation of Agricultural (see Map 4). Some
large Conservation Areas exist, as well as several large Mixed Use and Low Density
Residential areas. The urban FLUs in the center of the county reflect the City of Arcadia and
its surrounding development while the urban FLUs in the southwest primarily serve a
portion of the population that work in the neighboring county.
The acreages of each Generalized FLU Category for the entire county are included in Table
5 and Figure 1. As shown in Figure 2, the majority of the residential-type FLUs in DeSoto
County are Low Density Residential followed by Mixed-Use. A small percentage of the
residential-type FLUs are Medium or High Density Residential.
Map 4: DeSoto County Generalized FLUM
Results
13
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 5: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of DeSoto County.
Generalized FLU
Acreage
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/Open Space
Residential, High Density
321,371
741
40,450
3,382
8,724
11,378
66
472
Residential, Low Density
15,131
Residential, Medium
Density
Residential, Very High
Density
Transportation
Unknown
Water Body
Results
908
Percentage of
Land Area
78.7%
0.2%
9.9%
0.8%
2.1%
2.8%
0.02%
0.1% in wetlands, only 0.2 du/acre.
Higher densities allowed near Urban
3.7%
Centers.
0.2% in wetlands, only 0.2 du/acre.
16
0.004%
5,419
1.3%
74
0.02%
1,176
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
14
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
DeSoto County Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Commercial/
Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/
Public
Agriculture
Mixed Use
Residential
Recreation/
Open Space
Transportation
Unknown
(land acreage only)
Figure 1: DeSoto County Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
15
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
DeSoto County Residential Generalized
Future Land Use Acreage
Medium
Density
Residential
Low Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Mixed Use
Very High
Density
Residential
(Residential-related only)
Figure 2: DeSoto County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
16
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Glades County
Overall, the majority of Glades County has a designation of Agricultural (see Map 5). The
more urbanized FLUs are associated with the jurisdictions of Moore Haven in the County
and LaBelle in Hendry County. Some large Conservation Areas exist, as well as one
particularly large Mixed Use area. This large Mixed Use area in the central northwest
portion of the County is the Brighton Seminole Indian Reservation. The Brighton
Reservation was contacted requesting information regarding FLUMs for the Brighton
Reservation, but to date no data has been forthcoming. Since the Reservation is a sovereign
entity with respect to future land use, and collection of data did not occur, the study codes
the Brighton Reservation as Mixed Use based on the limited understanding of FLU planning
in that area. For purposes of analysis of proportional FLU coverage, this designated MixedUse acreage is not included to avoid skewing analysis results.
The acreages of each Generalized FLU Category for the entire county are included in Table
6 and Figure 3. As shown in Figure 4, the majority of the residential-type FLUs in DeSoto
County are Medium Density Residential followed by Mixed-Use (without the Brighton
Reservation). A small percentage of the residential-type FLUs are Low Density Residential.
Map 5: Glades County Generalized FLUM
Results
17
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 6: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Glades County.
Generalized FLU
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/Open Space
Residential, High Density
Residential, Low Density
Residential, Medium
Density
Transportation
Unknown
Water Body
Results
Acreage
Percentage
of Land Area
362,807
1,063
57,780
1,810
702
73.0%
0.2%
11.6%
0.4%
0.1%
47,544
9.6%
510
60
1,206
0.1%
0.01%
0.2%
16,074
3.2%
7,182
35
134,588
Comment
Includes xx,xxx acres of the Brighton
Reservation
This category is not depicted in the GIS
FLU data.
0.01% This FLU not present in Comp Plan.
This category is not depicted in the GIS
FLU data.
1.4%
18
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Glades County Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Commercial/
Office
Institutional/
Public
Industrial
Mixed Use
(without
Brighton
Reservation)
Conservation
Agriculture
Residential
Recreation/
Open Space
Transportation
Unknown
(land acreage only, without Brighton Reservation)
Figure 3: Glades County Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
19
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Glades County Residential Generalized
Future Land Use Acreage
Low Density
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
Mixed Use
(without
Brighton)
High Density
Residential
(Residential-related only, without Brighton Reservation)
Figure 4: Glades County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
20
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Hardee County
Hardee County primarily shows up as Agricultural in the Generalized FLUM, with more
urban FLUs clustered around existing development, proposed future development, and
jurisdictions (see Map 6). Large Mixed Use, Industrial, and Institutional/Public areas are
also present. Compared to the other counties, Conservation has a very small amount of
designated land. It should be noted that Hardee County has a fairly innovative FLU system
that involves balancing uses by a certain percentage within each native land use
designation.
The acreages of each Generalized FLU Category for the entire county are included in Table
7 and Figure 5. As shown in Figure 6, the majority of the residential-type FLUs in Hardee
County are Mixed-Use followed by High Density, Low Density, and Medium Density
Residential.
Map 6: Hardee County Generalized FLUM
Results
21
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 7: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Hardee County.
Generalized FLU
Acreage
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/Open
Space
Residential, High
Density
Residential, Low
Density
Residential, Medium
Density
369,218
317
527
4,551
4,176
14,934
Transportation
Unknown
Water Body
Results
Percentage of
Land Area
Comment
90.5%
0.1%
0.1%
1.1%
1.0%
3.7% 15 DU/acre allowed in RV parks.
1,833
0.4%
4,794
1.2% 15 DU/acre allowed in RV parks.
1,264
0.3%
950
5,530
17
386
Not present in current Hardee County
Comp Plan; newly added.
This category is not depicted in the GIS
1.4%
FLU data.
0.004%
This category is not depicted in the GIS
FLU data.
0.2%
22
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Hardee County Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Conservation
Commercial/
Office
Agriculture
Industrial
Institutional/
Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/
Open Space
Residential
Transportation
Unknown
(land acreage only)
Figure 5: Hardee County Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
23
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Hardee County Residential
Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Low Density
Residential
Mixed Use
Medium
Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
(Residential-related only)
Figure 6: Hardee County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
24
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Hendry County
Hendry County is also primarily Agricultural, with some major tracts designated in the
south and central southeast as Conservation (see Map 6). The Big Cypress Seminole Indian
Reservation (Big Cypress Reservation) includes a total of 52,462 acres, most of which are
located in southeastern Hendry County, the remainder of which are located in Broward
County. The Big Cypress Reservation includes tourist attractions and some residential
units. The study respects the Future Land Use depicted on the Hendry County Future Land
Use Maps for the area including the Big Cypress Reservation. Clustering of more urban
FLUs primarily occurs around the areas surrounding LaBelle in the northeast and
Clewiston in the northwest. The Mixed Use development on the eastern side of the County
relates to the Lehigh Acres area in adjacent Lee County.
The acreages of each Generalized FLU Category for the entire county are included in Table
7 and Figure 5. As shown in Figure 6, the majority of the residential-type FLUs in Hendry
County are Mixed-Use followed by High Density, Low Density, and Medium Density
Residential.
Map 7: Hendry County Generalized FLUM
Results
25
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 8: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Hendry County.
Acreage
Percentage
of Land Area
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
568,489
1,479
76.2%
0.2%
Conservation
105,979
14.2%
3,689
7,861
0.5%
1.1%
10,816
1.4%
773
0.1%
179
0.02%
15,444
2.1%
2,390
0.3%
18,416
2.5%
Transportation
9,661
1.3%
Unknown
1,040
Generalized FLU
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/Open
Space
Residential, High
Density
Residential, Low
Density
Residential, Medium
Density
Residential, Very
Low Density
Water Body
Results
18,142
Comment
This is derived from a GIS file separate
from Hendry FLUM, but associated.
15 DU/acre allowed with more dense
development.
Assumed to be Leisure Recreation based
on acronym.
Densities assumed based on "Urban
Residential".
3 du/acre in Port LaBelle DRI. And 6
du/acre in Pinehurst Park DRI.
Densities assumed based on "Suburban
Residential".
This category is not depicted in the GIS
FLU data.
0.1% County FLU substituted.
This category is not depicted in the GIS
FLU data.
26
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Hendry County Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Commercial/
Office
Industrial
Conservation
Agriculture
Institutional/
Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/
Open Space
Residential
Transportation
Unknown
(land acreage only)
Figure 7: Hendry County Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
27
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Hendry County Residential
Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Low Density
Residential
Medium
Density
Residential
Very Low
Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Mixed Use
(Residential-related only)
Figure 8: Hendry County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
28
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Highlands County
Highlands County has the highest population of the six counties studied, and most of the
urban FLUs correspond with the more populated areas of the county and the three
jurisdictions situated along US 27 (see Map 8). The rest of the county is mostly
Agricultural, with a large Conservation area in the northeast adjacent to the border with
Okeechobee County and Polk County that is attributable to the Avon Park Air Force Range
that is located in both Highlands and Polk Counties.
The acreages of each Generalized FLU Category for the entire county are included in Table
9 and Figure 9. As shown in Figure 10, the majority of the residential-type FLUs in
Highlands County are Low Density followed by Mixed Use, High Density, Medium Density,
and a small portion of Very High Density Residential.
Results
29
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Map 8: Highlands County Generalized FLUM
Results
30
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 9: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Highlands County.
Generalized FLU Acreage
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
488,135
3,272
91,984
3,376
4,857
8,925
Recreation/Open
Space
Residential, High
Density
Residential, Low
Density
Residential,
Medium Density
Residential, Very
High Density
27,899
Transportation
22,841
Unknown
Water Body
Results
Percentage
of Land Area
73.9% 1 DU/acre with TDR.
0.5%
13.9% Higher density for vested subdivisions.
0.5%
0.7%
Density/intensity (Est. at 12 du/acre) as
1.4%
approved in PD or TND with County.
368
0.1%
5,590
0.8%
30 DU/acre possible for assisted living
facilities.
Not specified in Comp Plan or GIS file.
4.2%
Designated as RL for the meantime
3,121
0.5%
186
0.03%
164
48,565
Comment
This category is not depicted in the GIS FLU
data.
Mostly this is Avon Park, and is resolved
0.02%
using their Comp Plan FLUE.
This category is may or may not be depicted
in the GIS FLU data.
3.5%
31
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Highlands County
Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Commercial/
Office
Industrial
Conservation
Agriculture
Institutional/
Public
Mixed Use
Recreation/
Open Space
Residential
Transportation
Unknown
(land acreage only)
Figure 9: Highlands County Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
32
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Highlands County
Residential Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Medium
Density
Residential
Low Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Mixed Use
Very High
Density
Residential
(Residential-related only)
Figure 10: Highlands County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
33
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Okeechobee County
Okeechobee County is primarily Agricultural, although sizeable acreages are also
designated as Mixed Use and Conservation (see Map 8). The large Mixed Use area in the
northwest is due to a DRI, and the large Conservation area in the northwest is attributable
to the Kissimmee Prairie Preserve State Park. Some large acreages of Industrial are also
present.
The acreages of each Generalized FLU Category for the entire county are included in Table
10 and Figure 11. As shown in Figure 12, the majority of the residential-type FLUs in
Okeechobee County are Mixed-Use followed by Very Low Density, and a small portion of
Low Density and Medium Density Residential.
Results
34
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Map 9: Okeechobee County Generalized FLUM
Results
35
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table 10: Generalized Future Land Use categories for all of Okeechobee County.
Generalized FLU Acreage
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
Residential, Low
Density
Residential,
Medium Density
Residential, Very
Low Density
Transportation
Water Body
Results
307,182
878
64,119
10,493
4,035
48,069
950
153
Percentage
of Land Area
65.6% Inferred from GIS data.
0.2% Residential not to exceed 50% of area.
13.7%
2.2%
0.9%
Various location-specific densities allow
10.3%
for different densities.
Max 6 DU/acre for mobile home park; 5
0.2% DU/acre for affordable housing allowed
under Policy 1.6 .
11 DU/acre for affordable housing allowed
0.03%
under Policy 1.6
29,485
6.3%
2,974
0.6%
109,861
Comment
This category is not depicted in the GIS FLU
data.
This category is not depicted in the GIS FLU
data.
36
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Okeechobee County
Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Commercial/
Office
Conservation
Mixed Use
Industrial
Institutional/
Public
Agriculture
Residential
Transportation
(land acreage only)
Figure 11: Okeechobee County Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
37
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Okeechobee County
Residential Generalized Future Land Use Acreage
Very Low
Density
Residential
Mixed Use
Low Density
Residential
Medium
Density
Residential
(Residential-related only)
Figure 12: Okeechobee County Residential Generalized FLUM Acreage
Results
38
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Analysis
Future Land Use Designation Comparison between Counties
Although current population or perceived future population largely influence the
designation of some FLU types, some comparisons can be made between the counties.
When comparing counties, each FLU is treated as a percentage of total land area, excluding
Conservation areas. The exclusion of Conservation FLUs removes decisions beyond the
local scale to prevent bias in the analysis. For instance, the federal government maintains
the Avon Park Air Force Range, designated as Conservation in Highlands County. Decisions
of use on this land are beyond the influence of the local governments, and do not
necessarily accurately represent local land use decisions. In addition, the lands associated
with the Brighton Seminole Indian Reservation, coded as Mixed Use, are not included in
this analysis since the decisions of what will occur on that property is not a local decision
and because of the limited understanding of FLU planning in that area.
Agriculture Future Land Use
Since Agriculture is a major industry in the Heartland Region, and has been for many years,
it is not surprising that the majority of land in each county has a designation of Agricultural
FLU (see Figure 13). All six counties have more than 75% of their land designated as some
type of agricultural FLU. In addition, Agriculture often serves as a type of default land use
in most regions of Florida.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water
and Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Agriculture FLUs
95%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 13: Comparison of Agriculture FLUs between Counties
Analysis
39
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Commercial/Office Future Land Use
Highlands County has the most Commercial/Office FLU designated (see Figure 14). This
probably corresponds closely with their population size, which is the largest of the six
counties. However, all of the counties in the region have less than 1 percent of their
acreage in Commercial/Office FLU.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Commercial / Office FLUs
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 14: Comparison of Commercial / Office FLUs between Counties
Analysis
40
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Industrial Future Land Use
Okeechobee County has the most Industrial land designated in their FLUMs (see Figure 15).
It is beyond the scope of this project to know whether much of this land is, or will be, in
industrial use, but there are several large tracts designated for such use. The counties in
the region have a higher percentage of land designated as Industrial FLU than
Commercial/Office FLU, but overall, it is still less than three percent of each county’s land
acreage.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Industrial FLUs
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 15: Comparison of Industrial FLUs between Counties
Analysis
41
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Institutional/Public Future Land Use
DeSoto County has the most land designated as Institutional/Public (as a percentage of
land area) of the six counties and Glades County has the least (see Figure 16). Similar to
Industrial FLU, the Institutional/Public FLU encompasses less than three percent of the
land acreage for each county. While the Avon Park Air Force Range is located in Highlands
County, Highlands County has the second lowest percentage of land allocated to
Institutional/Public of the six counties. This is in part because the Air Force Range’s
designation is Conservation, not Public/Institutional.
Comparison of Institutional / Public FLUs
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 16: Comparison of Institutional / Public FLUs between Counties
Analysis
42
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Mixed Use Future Land Use
Okeechobee County has the highest percentage of land designated as Mixed Use. Compared
to their neighbors, they have roughly three- to seven-times more land designated Mixed
Use, as a percentage of their total, non-Conservation land area (see Figure 17). This may be
due to the DRIs located within the county.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Mixed Use FLUs
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* BrightonReservation not included.
Figure 17: Comparison of Mixed Use FLUs between Counties
Analysis
43
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Recreation/Open Space Future Land Use
By far, Hardee County has the most land designated for Recreation/Open Space FLU (see
Figure 18). But all of the counties with acreage designated Recreation/Open Space FLU
have less than 0.5 percent of their total land acreage. Okeechobee County has no land in
current FLUMs that would qualify as Recreation/Open Space under the criteria used in this
study to determine these areas.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Recreation / Open Space FLUs
0.50%
0.45%
0.40%
0.35%
0.30%
0.25%
0.20%
0.15%
none
0.10%
0.05%
0.00%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 18: Comparison of Recreation / Open Space FLUs between Counties
Analysis
44
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Residential Future Land Use
Most of the counties have a similar amount of land designated for all Residential FLUs –
between 4% and 8% - except for Hardee County, which has less than 2% (see Figure 19).
This may be due to the unique nature of the FLU for unincorporated Hardee County, which
often balances many different uses in each FLU category.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Residential FLUs
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 19: Comparison of All Residential FLUs between Counties
Analysis
45
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Combined Residential and Mixed-Use Future Land Uses
When all Residential FLUs and Mixed Use FLUs are examined together, most of the counties
fall within the same range – between 5 percent and 8 percent (see Figure 20). Okeechobee
County, however, has much more land allocated to Mixed Use than the other counties, and
so its combined total is closer to 20 percent.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of All Residential and Mixed Use FLUs
20%
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 20: Comparison of All Residential and Mixed Use FLUs between Counties
Analysis
46
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Transportation Future Land Use
The SFWMD Generalized Land Use Categories methodology defines Transportation FLUs as
including right-of-ways, airports, transportation utilities, etc. While the GIS FLU data do
not depict this category, a comparison of the Transportation FLUs shows that Highlands
County has the highest percentage of land acreage categorized as Transportation FLUs.
Highlands County, which has more than twice as much land designated Transportation
FLUs than the other counties, may have so much do to all the rights-of-way associates with
its three jurisdictions and their surrounding development.
Percent of Total Area (excluding Water and
Conservation FLUs)
Comparison of Transportation FLUs
4.5%
4.0%
3.5%
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
DeSoto
Glades*
Hardee
Hendry
Highlands
Okeechobee
* Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 21: Comparison of Transportation FLUs between Counties
Analysis
47
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Comparisons Using Measures of Future Level-of-Service (FLOS)
In analyzing differences between counties and jurisdictions within counties, an analogy can
be made between current level-of-service (CLOS) and future level-of-service (FLOS). CLOS
refers to the ratio of certain types of land uses to either population or the ratio with respect
to other land uses. Many comprehensive plans will include a goal, objective, or
requirement that states that a certain amount of some type of land use must be provided
per capita, or per another amount of land use. For instance, a comprehensive plan might
require that the city provide and maintain 1 acre of recreational area or open space per
1,000 residents. An examination of the FLUMs of these counties along these same lines
may help determine the intended (or unintended, but still currently legislated) FLOS for
these same areas (see Table 11). This comparison is even more valid because none of these
counties approach full build out, and so land scarcity is not an issue at play in the Heartland
Region.
Table 11: Future-Level-of-Service for Heartland counties (including the cities therein)
FLU Acreage :
Projected Population*
Future Level of Service (FLOS) Ratio
(ordered according to 2030 population projection)
Highlands Okeechobee Hendry DeSoto Hardee Glades**
Residential
0.31
Residential and Mixed Use
0.38
Commercial/Office
0.027
Industrial
0.028
Institutional/ Public
0.041
Agriculture
4.07
Conservation
0.77
Recreation/ Open Space
0.003
All "urban" FLUs
(Residential, Mixed Use,
Commercial/Office,
0.48
Industrial,
Institutional/Public, and
Recreation/Open Space)
*2030 population (2010 BEBR Medium).
**excluding Brighton Indian Reservation
Analysis
0.65
1.67
0.019
0.22
0.086
6.52
1.36
0.83
1.07
0.034
0.084
0.18
12.89
2.40
0.018
0.41
0.69
0.018
0.08
0.22
7.95
1.00
0.0016
0.24
0.76
0.011
0.16
0.14
12.78
0.018
0.063
1.05
1.79
0.064
0.11
0.04
21.99
3.502
0.031
2.00
1.41
1.01
1.14
2.04
48
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Combined Residential and Mixed Use FLOS
Residential FLOS differs between counties, and when combined with Mixed Use, the FLOS
differs even more (see Figure 22). Glades County has the most land designated per capita
for Residential alone and when combined with Mixed Use. Highlands County has the least
additional FLOS when Mixed Use is added, indicating that the intention at this time is that
most future residents will inhabit strictly Residential areas. The variety between these
counties seems to indicate one or more of several realizations:
1)
There is no across-the-board standard for residential land that a future
resident might use.
2)
There is little connection between Residential and Mixed Use FLU and the
number of projected future residents that those lands are intended to
accommodate.
3)
FLOS, as currently envisioned, can be a tricky measure of real level-of-service
because there is no accounting for residential densities in this comparison,
and each residential type has different density allowances.
FLU Acreage allocated per capita
(Projected 2030 Population)
Future Level of Service for Heartland Regina Counties:
Residential and Mixed Use
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
Residential
Residential and
Mixed Use
** Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 22: Future-Level-of-Service: Residential and Mixed Use
Analysis
49
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Recreation/Open Space FLOS
Similar to the examination of Residential and Mixed Use FLOS, there is little consistency
among the counties when comparing Recreation/Open Space FLOS (see Figure 23). From a
low in Okeechobee County, where no land is designated as Recreation/Open Space FLU, to
a high in Hardee County, where over 0.06 acres are allocated for each 2030 resident. Since
Recreation/Open Space is not tied to any type of population density measure, it is
interesting that there is no consistency among the counties. It is also possible that some
Conservation lands serve for outdoor recreation, which the Recreation/Open Space FLOS
does not take into account. However, due to the varied restrictions associated with public
use of different conserved lands, it was difficult to measure FLOS in this sense. For
instance, the Avon Park Air Force Range is designated as Conservation, yet much of that
area is restricted to the public due to the nature of operations on the air force base.
FLU Acreage allocated per capita
(Projected 2030 Population)
Future Level of Service for Heartland Regiona Counties:
Recreation/Open Space
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
*
* Okeechobee does not designate Recreation/Open Space.
** Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 23: Future-Level-of-Service: Recreation / Open Space
Analysis
50
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Urban Land Use FLOS
When examining FLOS for all urban land uses, there is also little agreement between the
counties on the amount of urban land required for each future resident (see Figure 24).
From a low of about 0.5 urban acres per capita in Highlands County (the projected most
populous) to a high of over 2.0 urban acres per capita in Glades County (the projected least
populous), there is no trend observed linking the six counties. The inconsistency may lie in
the amount of residential land and its inherent density restrictions, but most likely, this
does not explain the trend observed, at least not entirely.
FLU Acreage allocated per capita
(Projected 2030 Population)
Future Level of Service for Heartland counties: "urban" areas
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
All "urban" FLUs
(Residential, Mixed
Use,
Commercial/Office,
Industrial,
Institutional/Public,
and
Recreation/Open
Space)
0.0
** Brighton Reservation not included.
Figure 24: Future-Level-of-Service: All Urban FLUs
Analysis
51
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Conclusion
Conclusions are difficult to draw across such a large region with so many differences, as has
been observed in the analysis of FLOS. Further analysis and perhaps comparison with
current land use level-of-service may provide insight into not only current trends, but also
future predilections. In addition, consideration of the amount of residential density
actually associated with each FLUM may provide insight into land use planning in the
region.
Ultimately, the future use of this dataset is for use in the scenario-modeling portion of the
HUD Sustainability Grant as it relates to the Heartland 2060 project. There, it will help
guide the allocation of projected future population to areas deemed suitable for each land
use. This regional land use snapshot may help guide visioning and planning efforts the
Heartland Region, and it may be useful for border areas where joint planning would be
beneficial in a regional sense.
Conclusion
52
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Appendix A: South Florida Water Management District
Generalized Future Land Use Methodology
(Originally taken from an internal document of the SFWMD, Intergovernmental Policy
and Planning Division, 2010)
Obtain Future Land Use maps and the FLU Goals, Objectives, and Policies for each
jurisdiction. Regional planning councils should have generally up-to-date information here,
as should FDOT districts – if there are organizational restrictions that prevent loaning
hard-copy maps to be taken from the office, additional time will need to be allocated to
ensure that the most current maps can be obtained.
The Goals, Objectives, and Policies in each Future Land Use element should be reviewed to
determine which original FLU categories are used for each jurisdiction. Concurrently, a
crosswalk table (spreadsheet) should be developed showing to which generalized FLU
category each original FLU category corresponds – we strongly recommend this
spreadsheet also include a field where text from or a brief summary of the original Future
Land Use category can be documented (for example, Low Density Residential in
Jurisdiction X is 1 to 3 dwelling units per acre).
(Optional: Also, early in the process the organization developing the files should obtain
digital parcel data where available. This is important in that it allows for data from the
various jurisdictions to be aligned to the same base, so that major gaps and overlaps are
eliminated early in the process.)
For jurisdictions where digital Future Land Use data cannot be obtained, we recommend
creating individual shapefiles for each such jurisdiction. As these jurisdictions are typically
small municipalities, such files average approximately several hours when created over a
parcel base. Larger jurisdictions without GIS could take much longer.
Create standardized tables based upon the fields delivered by the Tampa Bay Regional
Planning Council (TBRPC). Once table standardization is complete, the generalized FLU
categories need to be applied.
The Statewide Generalized Categories and Definitions are listed below (Table A-1). The
categories within each generalized land use are to be used when classifying the land uses.
It is imperative that the jurisdictional DEFINITION be reviewed to determine the correct
Generalized Land Use as some jurisdictions may have the same name for a land use but the
types of uses included may vary, thus determining which general land use it will fall under.
Appendix A
A-1
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Using the crosswalk table, each modified FLU category receives a generalized FLU. In some
cases, a Future Land Use category not found in a municipal comprehensive plan will
actually be a county FLU category for a recently annexed area – in these cases, a
generalized FLU can be obtained from the rows of the spreadsheet pertaining to the county.
* Residential classifications should be determined individually for each local government to
ensure the best fit with the generalized categories. For example, if City X has categories for
1 – 3 units per acre, 3+ - 9 units per acre, and 9+ - 22 units per acre, these would be
classified as Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and High Density
Residential. If City Y has categories for 1 – 4 units per acre, 4.0+ - 7 units per acre, and 7+ –
12 units per acre, these would be classified as Low Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, and Medium Density Residential – there would be no High Density Residential
for this city.
Please note that each jurisdiction may include various land uses in one category. For
example, one may have Central Business District in which the land uses are professional
and commercial, thus to be classified as Commercial. Another may include residential in the
Central Business District, therefore causing this jurisdictions CBD to be classified as Mixed
Use.
A review of boundaries is necessary to be performed. The process involves pulling all
shapefiles for a county together and evaluating gaps and overlaps. A final general
review/quality control check of sample areas is performed.
Appendix A
A-2
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Table A-12. SFWMD Generalized Future Land Use Categories
Category
Very High Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
Low Density
Residential
Very Low Density
Residential
Unknown Density
Residential
Agricultural
Recreation / Open
Space
Conservation
Appendix A
Additional Information
Residential development where the maximum allowable density
exceeds approximately 25 units per acre *
Residential development up to approximately 25 units per acre, but
generally greater than that allowed in the Medium Density Residential
category *
Residential development up to approximately 12 units per acre, but
generally greater than that allowed in the Low Density Residential
category *
Residential development up to approximately 5 units per acre, but
greater than that allowed in the Very Low Density Residential
category *
Residential development of less than one unit per acre*
Residential development of which the density is unknown.
Land specifically designated as Agricultural in the comprehensive plan.
May include silvicultural uses.
Public or privately owned/operated recreational sites or facilities to
include both active and passive recreational opportunities {All
Recreation, Open Space, Parks, Public Active, Water Dependent uses
(beach), Institutional/Recreational, recreational/public mixed use,
Golf course, corridor open space, Multi-purpose open space,
greenbelt, commercial recreation (low intensity outdoor rec usescampgrounds, fish camps, etc), natural resources/rec/open space,
rural recreation and other recreational or open space categories.}
Areas known to require environmental protection from development,
areas being preserved which contain wetlands and/or habitats which
serve to protect valuable threatened species and natural
resources{Private and public conservation lands, wetlands categories,
passive recreation, institutional/conservation, marsh, conservation
open space, public resource, wetland conservation, natural resource,
conservation/floodplains, resource management/recreation, resource
protection, passive park/buffer area, potential environmentally
significant, preserve, environmentally sensitive lands, environmental
systems corridor, conservation/protected, and
conservation/restricted, }
A-3
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Institutional
Mining / Extractive
Industrial
Commercial/Office
Mixed Use
Transportation
Water Body
Unknown
Appendix A
Property designated as City, county, state, federal or other gov’t,
private or institutional entities {Institutional, governmental,
public/semipublic, public facilities, public land (except parks), Federal,
Military, church use/religious, educational/schools, private wellfield,
public grounds (except park), hospitals, utilities (treatment plants,
water wells, quasi-public}
Mining and mineral extraction
Indoor manufacturing, assembling, fabricating, and warehouse
activities conducted indoors, mini-storage {heavy, light and medium
industrial, planned industrial, industrial, industrial park, planned
industrial park, general industrial, industrial employment center,
wholesale commercial, commercial/industrial, airport industrial}
Property designated as stores, offices or other establishments used to
serve the needs of the public {General Commercial, Commercial,
Neighborhood Commercial, commercial/manufacturing, low intensity
commercial, general commercial development, limited commercial
development, downtown business, marine commercial, high intensity
commercial, commercial and services (including lodging), historical
resources, marina, tourist commercial, local convenience center,
mixed commercial industrial, central business district,
office/commercial, office, wholesale, community commercial,
highway commercial, mixed use commercial, water oriented
commercial, business, retail services, historic commercial, lakefront
commercial, business district overlay, regional commercial, integrated
office commercial, limited interchange, commercial village, Lodging,
hotel/resort, RV Park, tourist accommodations.}
PUDs (except where it is locally known the PUD is strictly residential or
commercial or another land use), Mixed Use, regional activity center,
Commercial/Residential, commercial/industrial, shoreline mixed use,
residential/recreation, regional mixed use, residential/professional,
downtown mixed use, mixed use planning district,
residential/business, community mixed development, mixed use
neighborhood, urban village, town center, redevelopment area, DRIS,
Coordinated Development District, Planned Community
ROWs, Airports, Transportation Utilities, Etc.
Not all Future Land Use Maps include water as a category. In these
cases, water bodies include a land use for an adjacent use.
Information not available
A-4
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Appendix B: Key To Understanding The FLUM Atlas Tables
This appendix contains all the data that was collected for each FLUM in this study. It is
intended to be used as a reference for the condition of each FLUM at the time it was
collected (June-August 2010, effective fall and winter 2011). The table contains a legend
for understanding the atlas tables.
Table B-13. Explanation of Fields Present in the “Atlas of FLUM Data” for Each County
Field name
Description/Information
Source
Local Govt Name
Local government name
Local Govt FLU
Designation
FLUM designation
SFWMD Gen FLU
SFWMD Generalized Future Land Use
Category
Total Acreage
Acreage for that Future Land Use
category
Calculated in ArcGIS
Additional information relevant to the
local FLUM category
Local government FLUM GIS
file or local government
Comprehensive Plan (often
from the Future Land Use
Element).
Comment From
Govt FLUM
Appendix B
Local government
Local government
comprehensive plan
SFWMD Generalized Future
Land Use Categories (See
Appendix A)
B-1
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Appendix C: Summary of Future Land Use Category Crosswalk
This appendix contains a detailed summary of how each local government’s FLU was
crosswalked to each generalized FLU category.
Table C-14. Crosswalk of local government to Generalized Future Land Use categories
DESOTO COUNTY (unincorporated)
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unspecified>
City of Arcadia
Commercial
Electrical Generating Facility
Employment Center
Unknown
Unknown
Commercial/Office
Institutional/Public
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Residential, Low Density
Neighborhood (Live/Work)
Mixed Use
Preservation
Public Land and Institutions
Rural/Agricultural
Urban Center Mixed Use
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Higher densities allowed near Urban
Centers.
Mixed Use
Conservation
Institutional/Public
Agriculture
Density increases possible with
bonus criteria.
Mixed Use
ARCADIA
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unspecified>
Unknown
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
C-1
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Business
Conservation
High Density Residential
High Density Residential,
Overlay District
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential,
Overlay District
Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential,
Overlay District
Mixed Use Business
Public Building and Grounds
Recreation and Open Space
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Residential, Very High Density
Residential, Very High Density
Industrial
Residential, Medium Density
in wetlands, only 0.2 du/acre.
Residential, Medium Density
Residential, High Density
in wetlands, only 0.2 du/acre.
Residential, High Density
Mixed Use
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
GLADES COUNTY (unincorporated)
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Agriculture
Agriculture/Residential
Agriculture
Agriculture
American Prime Community
Mixed Use
Brighton Indian Reservation
Mixed Use
City of Moore Haven
Commercial
Unknown
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Conservation
Industrial
Industrial
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Maximum of 624 dwelling units.
(Previously interpreted at 1.58
DU/acre.)
Not within Glades County
Jurisdiction. Densities approximated
based on current condition.
This FLU not present in Comp Plan.
This FLU not present in Comp Plan.
Densities inferred from Conservation
Overlay.
No residential density, mostly
includes sand mines at this time.
C-2
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Institution
Lake Okeechobee
Landfill
Muse Airpark
Institutional/Public
Water Body
Institutional/Public
Transportation
Muse Village
Residential, Low Density
Park
Residential
Transitional
Recreation/Open Space
Residential, Medium Density
Mixed Use
34 dwelling units
2.76 du/acre, but limited to 324 total
DU due to the level of service on SR
29.
MOORE HAVEN
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Commercial
Conservation
Educational
High Density Residential
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Marina Area/Commercial
Marina Area/High Density
Residential
Marina Area/Historic Main
Street
Marina Area/Medium
Density Residential
Marina Area/Recreation
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Institutional/Public
Residential, High Density
Industrial
Residential, Low Density
Mixed Use
Medium Density Residential
Residential, Medium Density
Public Buildings and Other
Facilities
Institutional/Public
Recreational
Recreation/Open Space
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Residential, High Density
Mixed Use
Residential, Medium Density
Recreation/Open Space
C-3
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
HARDEE COUNTY (unincorporated)
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Agriculture
Bowling Green
Agriculture
Unknown
Commerce Park
Mixed Use
Conservation
Highway Mixed Use
Industrial
Public Institutional
Recreation
Conservation
Mixed Use
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
Residential High
Residential, Medium Density
Residential Low
Residential Mixed Use
Rural Center
Residential, Low Density
Residential, High Density
Mixed Use
Rural Village
Mixed Use
Town Center
Wauchula
Zolfo Springs
Mixed Use
Unknown
Unknown
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Residential may not exceed 10% of
Commerce Park area.
15 DU/acre allowed in RV parks.
Not present in current Hardee
County Comp Planànewly added.
15 DU/acre allowed in RV parks.
15 DU/acre allowed in RV parks.
500 acres min., 15% 6+DU/acre, RVs
15% max., etc.
15 DU/acre allowed in RV parks.
BOWLING GREEN
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unspecified>
Commercial
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Unknown
Mixed Use
Industrial
Residential, Medium Density
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
C-4
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Medium Density Residential
Public Building and Grounds
Recreation
Residential, High Density
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
WAUCHULA
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unspecified>
Agriculture
Commercial
Conservation
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Public/Semi-Public
Recreation
Single Family Residential
Unknown
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Residential, Medium Density
Residential, High Density
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
Residential, Low Density
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
RVs allowed at 10 DU/acre.
ZOLFO SPRINGS
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unspecified>
Commercial
Conservation
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Moderate Density
Residential
Public/Institutional
Unknown
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Industrial
Residential, Medium Density
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Residential, High Density
Institutional/Public
C-5
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Recreation
Recreation/Open Space
HENDRY COUNTY (unincorporated)
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Agriculture
Agriculture
Agriculture/Conservation
Conservation
Commercial
Industrial
LaBelle
Commercial/Office
Industrial
Unknown
Leisure Recreation
Recreation/Open Space
Public
Recreation
Residential/High Density
Residential/Low Density
Residential/Medium Density
Residential/Pre-Existing
Rural Estates
Residential/Rural Estate
Residential/Special Density
and Use
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Low Density
Residential, Low Density
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This is derived from a GIS file
separate from Hendry FLUM, but
associated.
Assumed to be Leisure Recreation
based on acronym.
Residential, Very Low Density
Residential, Low Density
Residential, Low Density
State Rd 82 Mixed Use
Development
Mixed Use
Transition
Mixed Use
3 du/acre in Port LaBelle DRI. And 6
du/acre in Pinehurst Park DRI.
This FLU was not determinable based
on existing Comp Plan. It was
deemed "out-of-compliance".
CLEWISTON
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
C-6
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Commercial
Commercial/Office
Industrial
Industrial
Mixed Use- Gateway
Mixed Use
Mobil Home
Residential, Medium Density
Multi-Family ResidentialOther
Residential, Medium Density
Multi-Family ResidentialTwo Family
Residential, Medium Density
Public/Semi-Public
Institutional/Public
Single Family Residential
Residential, Low Density
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate. Densities guesstimated.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
This data was translated from
hardcopy to GIS. It is not 100%
spatially accurate.
LABELLE
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<High Density Residential>
Residential, High Density
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Low Density Residential>
Residential, Medium Density
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Annexed
Commercial
Unknown
Commercial/Office
Appendix C
Comment
Densities assumed based on "Urban
Residential".
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Densities assumed based on
"Suburban Residential".
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
County FLU substituted.
C-7
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Downtown LaBelle Walking
District
Industrial
Mixed Use
15 DU/acre allowed with more dense
development.
Industrial
Old Groves Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Outlying Mixed Use District
Public Facilities
Mixed Use
Institutional/Public
South LaBelle Community
Mixed Use
Kind of like a PD/PUD district. Not to
exceed 1,249 DU total.
Similar to a PD/PUD district. 15,840
DU allowed total.
HIGHLANDS COUNTY (unincorporated)
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Residential>
Residential, Low Density
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Agricultural/Residential
Agriculture
Commercial
Commercial-General
Commercial-Intensive
Commercial/Industrial
Conservation/Management
Lands
Downtown Mixed Use
Redevelopment
Agriculture
Agriculture
Commercial/Office
Mixed Use
Commercial/Office
Commercial/Office
Conservation
Mixed Use
Existing Designation
Category
Mixed Use
High Density Residential
Residential, High Density
Industrial
Low-Medium Density
Residential
Industrial
Appendix C
Comment
This category is may or may not be
depicted in the GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Not specified in Comp Plan or GIS
file. Designated as RL for the
meantimeà
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
1 DU/acre with TDR.
Higher density for vested
subdivisions.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Exempted developments within
current boundaries. Density limits
approximated.
30 DU/acre possible for assisted
living facilities.
Residential, Medium Density
C-8
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Low Density Residential
Low Estate Residential
Medium Density Residential
Residential, Low Density
Residential, Low Density
Residential, High Density
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Density/intensity (Est. at 12 du/acre)
as approved in PD or TND with
County.
Mixed Use (Multifamily
Residential/Commercial)
Mixed Use
Higher density allowed in PUD.
Non-County Municipal Area
Unknown
Mostly this is Avon Park, and is
resolved using their Comp Plan FLUE.
Park, Recreation, and Open
Space
Public Use
Public Water Supply
Public/Quasi-Public Facility
and Institutional Lands
Recreational Use
Residential/Office
Recreation/Open Space
Institutional/Public
Institutional/Public
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
Mixed Use
AVON PARK
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<County Agricultural>
Agriculture
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Pending>
<Public/Institutional>
Unknown
Institutional/Public
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unspecified>
Conservation
Downtown Commercial
Highway Commercial
Industrial
Lake
Unknown
Conservation
Mixed Use
Mixed Use
Industrial
Water Body
Appendix C
Comment
FLU ascertained from local
knowledge. Previously listed as
"Pendi*". Density taken from County
Agricultural FLU.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Inferred from context.
Inferred from context.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
C-9
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
Public Buildings and Grounds
Recreation and Open Space
Residential, Medium Density
Residential, High Density
Mixed Use
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
Mobile homes limited to 8 DU/acre.
LAKE PLACID
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
<Unknown>
<Unspecified>
Agricultural/Residential
Commercial-General
Commercial-Intensive
Low-Medium Density
Residential
Low Density Residential
Low Estate Residential
Medium Density Residential
Park, Recreation, and Open
Space
Public/Semi-Public
Residential/Office
Unknown
Unknown
Agriculture
Mixed Use
Commercial/Office
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Category not specified in Comp Plan.
Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Low Density
Residential, Low Density
Residential, High Density
Recreation/Open Space
Institutional/Public
Mixed Use
SEBRING
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Planned Unit
Development>
Unknown
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data or the Comp Plan.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
C-10
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Commercial
Commercial/Office
Conservation/Management
Lands
Downtown Mixed Use
Redevelopment
High Density Residential
Multifamily allowed on 20% gross
land area.
Conservation
Mixed Use
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Residential, Very High Density
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Industrial
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Mixed Use (Multifamily
Residential/Commercial)
Public Use
Recreational Use
Residential, Low Density
Residential, Medium Density
FLU inferred from context.
Mixed Use
Higher density allowed in PUD.
Institutional/Public
Recreation/Open Space
OKEECHOBEE COUNTY (unincorporated)
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Default Agriculture>
Agriculture
<Lakes rivers and water>
Water Body
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Commercial Activity Centers
Mixed Use
Commercial Corridor Mixed
Use
Conservation
Industrial
Industrial Overlay
Public/Semi-Public Facilities
Resort Activity Centers
Inferred from GIS data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
Residential not to exceed 30% of
area.
Mixed Use
Conservation
Industrial
Industrial
Institutional/Public
Commercial/Office
Resort Corridor
Commercial/Office
Rural Activity Center (Low
Density)
Mixed Use
Appendix C
Comment
Residential not to exceed 50% of
area.
Various location-specific densities
allow for different densities.
C-11
Regional Future Land Use in the Florida Heartland
Rural Activity Center (Rural
Density)
Mixed Use
Rural Activity Centers
Mixed Use
Rural Estate
Urban Residential Mixed Use
Residential, Very Low Density
Mixed Use
Various location-specific densities
allow for different densities.
Various location-specific densities
allow for different densities.
OKEECHOBEE
Local Government FLU
Generalized FLU
<Railroad ROWs>
Transportation
<Rights-of-Way>
Transportation
Commercial
Industrial
Commercial/Office
Industrial
Multi-Family
Residential, Medium Density
Public Facility
Residential Mixed Use
Institutional/Public
Residential, Medium Density
Single - Family
Residential, Low Density
Appendix C
Comment
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
This category is not depicted in the
GIS FLU data.
11 DU/acre for affordable housing
allowed under Policy 1.6
Max 6 DU/acre for mobile home
park; 5 DU/acre for affordable
housing allowed under Policy 1.6 .
C-12