EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Strategically located in the heart of Florida's fast growing Treasure Coast, the Port of Fort Pierce has an unprecedented opportunity to expand its services to this promising region. With the opening of the 30 mile "missing link" of I 95, between Fort Pierce and Palm Beach Gardens, the pace of development in St. Lucie County and areas to the north is expected to soar. This anticipated growth, coupled with a continuing positive outlook for both cargo and cruise activities in Florida, provides a dynamic setting for this State mandated updating of the Port of Fort Pierce.

At present, the approximately 163 acre Port, all of which is privately owned, but mostly undeveloped, specializes in the export of fresh citrus to markets in the Far East. These exports are handled by the Indian River Terminal Company, the primary operator at the Port. According to Indian River Terminal representatives, the Port shipped a record 2.6 million cartons of grapefruit in 1988, and expected to better that record during the forthcoming citrus season. Other cargo shipped through the Port includes small volumes of Caribbean fruit and other produce, aragonite, and building materials. The existing Port area activities are shown in Figure 1.

Early in this decade, a study of Fort Pierce Harbor was conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District (the Corps), at the request of local interests who believed that deeper harbor depths would enable the Port to be more competitive with other Florida ports. The study, completed in March 1986 by the Jacksonville District, recommended that the existing entrance channel, interior channel, and turning basin be deepened and widened. It also recommended that an access channel be provided immediately north of the existing terminal area.

In August 1988, U.S. Senate Bill 2100, the Water Resources Development Act of 1988, authorized implementation of the approximately $6.7 million Fort Pierce Harbor Project. The Federal share of the project is about $4.3 million; the non Federal share is $2.4 million.

Now that the Fort Pierce Harbor Project has cleared the U.S. Congress, public officials and many private interests believe that the time is opportune to expand Port activities by acquiring the undeveloped Port land, about 87.6 acres. In so doing, they hope to capitalize on the revenue generating potential of the Port and to expand the regional economic base. This Master Plan for the Port should thus be viewed as the vehicle for achieving these long term economic goals.



SCOPE OF THIS MASTER PLAN

In preparing this 1989 Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County officials, staff and their consultants, Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J), have expanded previous Port planning efforts to include deepwater port information required by the 1985 State of Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, as specifically defined in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J 5, Florida Administrative Code (FAC). Thus this Plan contains extensive information about existing conditions at and adjacent to the Port. Further, it discusses the effects that the proposed Port improvements would have on the on site and adjacent infrastructure and on the community at large. It also addresses in detail the possible environmental effects of the proposed Port development which are a serious concern to community residents as well as public officials.

This Master Plan is predicated on the assumption that the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority will acquire the 87.6 acres of privately owned undeveloped land in the Port area, using the powers at its disposal to do so. The recommendations contained in this Master Plan reflect the diverse marine related activities of a public purpose that the acquired land can be used for, and are intended to be sufficiently flexible to allow the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority to take advantage of the private marketplace in fulfilling its public mandate. As Plan implementation proceeds, the expansion schedule provided in this Master Plan can easily be refined to reflect the actual pace of operational growth at the Port.

The key to the successful implementation of this plan for the Port of Fort Pierce is a concerted, coordinated effort on the part of the diverse public agencies and private groups with an interest in operations at the Port. If the land under private ownership is not acquired by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority, it is impossible to predict what specific activities would occur within the identified Port boundaries. Individual private land use decisions would be subject only to zoning and permitting restraints, and the Port of Fort Pierce would continue as a privately owned port. Under this scenario, the Port Master Plan would serve only as a conceptual guide for the use of the area because the private operations would not be subject to control by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority.

GOAL STATEMENT

Preparation of this 1989 Master Plan included an examination of existing State, regional and local comprehensive plans. Statements of regional and local intent with regard to the port facilities of the area, and to the Port of Fort Pierce in particular, are well reflected in the following goal that the Port has developed to guide its day to day operations and 15 year expansion program, through the horizon year of 2015: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall seek to broaden and strengthen the economic base of the regional community by implementing a master development plan for the Port of Fort Pierce that will allow it to expand cargo operations, initiate cruise operations and seek other Port related recreational, commercial and industrial opportunities; and shall pursue these activities in a manner consistent with all applicable regulatory, planning and environmental requirements.

The objectives and policies identified as means of implementing this goal are included at the end of this executive summary.

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS

To determine the most feasible opportunities for the Port of Fort Pierce, PBS&J examined the regional socioeconomic factors relevant to Port activities, and considered cruise and cargo trends, both industry wide and specific to the area. Based on these factors and trends, PBS&J then developed cruise and cargo projections for the Port over the planning period. PBS&J also examined potential recreational and industrial uses of the Port area that would be of public benefit.

In 2015, the horizon year for St. Lucie County's Comprehensive Plan, approximately 2.0 million people or about 10 percent of the projected 19.3 million residents of the State are expected to live in the Treasure Coast. In 1980, the region represented only 8 percent of the statewide population.

Of the four counties in the Treasure Coast region of the State (Indian River, Martin, Palm Beach, and St. Lucie), St. Lucie has had the greatest percentage growth in this decade , increasing by 47 percent between 1980 and 1987, and projected to increase by another 110 percent between 1990 and 2015. During the 25 year planning period (1990 2015), St. Lucie County is expected to accommodate about 6,700 new residents yearly. By then, the City of Fort Pierce, which is the economic center of St. Lucie County, is projected to have a resident population of about 55,500, and a seasonal population of about 4,000. This total will represent about one fifth of St. Lucie County's projected population.

Growth is also occurring to the north of the Treasure Coast and in Central Florida. This growth is relevant to the future of the Port of Fort Pierce. For example, Central Florida represents a strong potential source for cruises from the Port of Fort Pierce. Today people interested in such cruises are bused to Port Canaveral, about an hour away, or drive in rental cars provided as part of land sea packages. Fort Pierce is further; but could also become a cruise option for these travelers, particularly if the proposed High Speed Rail includes a St. Lucie County stop.

One of the most attractive aspects of any development that has been proposed for the Port of Fort Pierce over the years is the job potential it would create. Unemployment in the Treasure Coast region, particularly in Indian River and St. Lucie Counties, has greatly exceeded the statewide average in the last three years. In all three years, the unemployment rate in St. Lucie County has been double the statewide average, dramatic confirmation of the need for jobs in the area. Jobs in the fields of trade, manufacturing, and transportation are particularly appropriate for the Fort Pierce area, with its available labor, land and highway rail seaport network.

Despite new jobs in the manufacturing sector in the past few years, that sector of the St. Lucie County employment lags behind the other counties in the region. St. Lucie County's top ten employers include primarily government, services, utilities and educational institutions, suggesting the need for a stimulus to the manufacturing sector by creating better opportunities for sea shipments of materials and parts.

Personal income is also an important factor in the economic health of an area. This income was considered in the evaluation of the revenue generating potential of the Port.

Not only is the per capita income for St. Lucie County significantly lower than that of the neighboring counties and the State; but the 22 percent per capita income increase experienced in St. Lucie County from 1980 to 1986 was less than half that in the other Treasure Coast counties and statewide.

St. Lucie County, in particular, also has considerably lower median household, average household, and per capita effective buying incomes than the region, the State and the nation. These low figures reflect the comparatively high rate of unemployment in the county. Projections for 1992 show a continuation of this relative pattern among the Treasure Coast counties and the State.

PROPOSED PORT ACTIVITIES

From its analysis of the socioeconomic and other factors relevant to Port operations, PBS&J concluded the following:


o A one day cruise operation, similar to those successfully run at other Florida ports, has a potential for generating about 218,000 passengers by the late 1990s.

o Expanded cargo operations, focusing initially on the Port's prime location for citrus exports and then diversifying to other types of cargo, have a potential for generating about 950,000 tons of waterborne imports and exports, about one percent of the projected total cargo at Florida ports in the early years of the next century. More than half of this tonnage would cross Port berths; the remainder would be carried through the existing privately owned or leased facilities.

o Complementary marine related recreational and industrial activities, such as a fishing pier, a boat ramp, and boat building or similar manufacturing operations, would provide public benefit, and would convert now undeveloped land into a diversified center to be used by all segments of the population.

The recommended uses are all consistent with regional and local goals for the Port area, and with the provisions of the City of Fort Pierce's Zoning Code.

FACILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PORT EXPANSION AND MAINTENANCE

The goal of this physical master plan for Port expansion and maintenance is to develop facilities that will accommodate activities of community wide benefit. The means of attaining this goal are:

o Generate Port revenues that will permit self sustaining operations

o Provide opportunities for increased local employment

o Create a public purpose resource for marine related recreational activities.

To implement these objectives, the master plan focuses on several categories of Port activities, which generally classified as follows:

o Cargo operations

o Marine related recreation

o Marine related industry

These general uses are illustrated in Figure 2.

Further analysis led to the identification of six specific potential uses on the 87.6 acres studied. These specific uses are presented in Table 1 and summarized below.

Cargo Operations

o Breakbulk Cargo To provide the facilities needed for expanded citrus exports, 11.9 acres on the southern portion of the Port land, across from the existing Indian River Terminal Company berth and warehouse, is planned to accommodate a refrigerated warehouse and an adjacent packing house. When not in use for seasonal citrus exports, these facilities could be used for other general cargo operations.

o Dry Bulk Cargo The 10.2 acres of the Port now being used by a private operator for the import of aragonite remains as the area designated for dry bulk. This prime waterfront property would eventually be better suited for general cargo use. Since existing land leases for the area extend past the year 2000, it is anticipated that this area would be the last area of the port to be developed.

o Open Yard Storage An open storage area is provided for neo bulk cargos such as lumber or steel. This area could be leased to other Port tenants or operated by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority in conjunction with marshalling of exports or storage of imports for operators who utilize the multi purpose berths.

o Roll On/Roll Off Facility An area contiguous to approximately 700 linear feet of multi purpose berth has been designed for roll on/roll off container operations. The area is designed to move and store containers on chassis for import or export, generally in the Caribbean trade.

o Warehouse Facility An area centrally located on the port has been designated for warehousing. Approximately 200,000 square feet of standard or refrigerated warehousing could be provided in this area. Large warehousing facilities are a beneficial use of upland port area as they act as a cargo generator.

Marine Related Recreation

o Cruise Facility The area recommended for developing a cruise terminal features easy vehicular access and berthing at a point that would be least disruptive to cargo ships. The berth itself could be used for cargo movement when the cruise ship is not there.

A 14,000 square foot terminal building is provided, which would be designed for multi purpose use, to accommodate cruise operations as well as other public functions. The building could also contain Port offices as well as public meeting rooms. General warehouse space required by a cruise operator would be available at the proposed warehouse facility.

o Public Boat Ramp and Parking A location on the north side of the property is selected for this ramp. The site has been planned to include parking for approximately 150 car boat carriers, general public parking, park areas and a boardwalk which runs the perimeter of the site. A new Port entrance road, located at the northwest corner of the Port, would connect to Old Dixie Highway, relieving congestion from the existing single Port entrance.

o Public Fishing Pier An area at the northeast tip of the Port has been designated for a fishing pier. Bounded on the north by Taylor Creek and on the east by the intracoastal Waterway, this point of land is adjacent to the boat park and cruise terminal facilities, giving easy access to both of these areas by users of the fishing pier. It is intended that amenities such as restrooms and a snack bar be part of the cruise terminal building.

Table 1

POTENTIAL CATEGORIES OF LAND USE ON
THE UNDEVELOPED PORT ACREAGE

Percentage
Approximate of Total
Use Area in Acres Area

CARGO OPERATIONS

Category 1 (Breakbulk Cargo)
Packing Facility 3.9
Refrigerated Warehouse 8.0

Category 2 (Bulk Cargo)
Dry Bulk (existing) 10.2
Open Yard Storage 4.9

Category 3 (General Cargo)
Roll on Roll off Container Facility 4.0
Warehouse Facility 7.0
______
Subtotal Cargo 38.0 43.4

MARINE RELATED RECREATION

Category 4
Cruise Facility 7.4
Public Boat Ramp, Parking, and Fishing Pier 8.0
______
Subtotal Recreation 15.4 17.6

MARINE RELATED INDUSTRY

Category 5
Industrial Center (light manufacturing) 15.3
Cargo Consolidation Facility 9.3
______
Subtotal Industry 24.6 28.0

PORT INFRASTRUCTURE

Category 6
2,000 Linear Feet of Bulkhead and 80 Foot Wide
Apron 3.7

1,380 Linear Feet of Bulkhead and 40 Foot Wide
Apron 1.9

5,600 Linear Feet of Roads 4.0
______
Subtotal Infrastructure 9.6 11.0 ______
TOTAL AREA 87.6 100.0
m:H100 y

Marine Related Industry

o Industrial Centers An area in the north section of the Port has been designated for this use. With easy access to berths, warehouses, open storage and roads, this location would add to the Port's value while not impeding Port cargo operations.

o Cargo Consolidation Facility A facility of this type is considered to have potential as a generation source of new cargo for the Port. The center would provide service to shippers and consignees of cargos in Central Florida. Located centrally on the Port, with easy access to roads, berths and the existing railroad tracks, a facility of this size could handle approximately 300,000 tons of cargo per year and could employ between 10 to 30 workers.

Port Infrastructure

Beneficial use of the Port land is dependent upon development of the infrastructure that would support Port operations. In general, the infrastructure would include:

o Construction of new roads

o Upgrading of existing roads

o Extension of utilities such as power supply, lighting, sanitary sewer, fire protection and potable water

o Provision of landscaping

o Dredging to meet channel depths

o Construction of bulkheads and aprons, including bollards, cleats and fenders

o Shore protection and stabilization in areas not bulkheaded.

It is estimated that 9.6 acres of land would be used for this infrastructure.

The proposed master plan for the Port, incorporating the above uses, is illustrated in Figure 3.

DEVELOPMENT PHASING

Development of the 87.6 acres of Port land would be phased over a 15 year period, to generate maximum revenue with reasonable outlay for capital improvements. Other than the cruise terminal, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority would not be engaged in the construction of buildings, only in land and infrastructure development.

Table 2 shows a construction schedule for the first two phases of development. The identified schedule is flexible in terms of implementation dates, and is dependent on factors such as financing ability, changes in the conditions that drive specific requirements and terms of leases. It assumes that land acquisition is completed by mid 1992. If the acquisition were completed sooner, the construction schedule could be modified accordingly.

Phase 3, while designated to start in 2003, could start (or be eliminated) at any time after that year, depending on the patterns of cargo movement or cruise industry demands at that time.


INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PORT DEVELOPMENT

Converting the Port of Fort Pierce from its existing condition of minimal use to its future condition of diversified full use, as proposed in this Master Plan, would inevitably create physical impacts on the infrastructure of the local community and on the environmental resources of the area. Most of these impacts would be well within the parameters of the existing system; others, such as impacts to the local transportation network and impacts on certain environmentally sensitive resources in the harbor, would require close intergovernmental coordination, mitigation and monitoring for success.

It is estimated that there would be approximately 2,800 daily trips attributable to Port operations by 2003, if the Master Plan were implemented according to the proposed schedule, and if the operational projections were to materialize. Of these, only three fourths (2,150) would occur between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on a weekday. Fewer than one fourth would occur during the peak hours on the local roadway network. The unique peaking patterns, the seasonality of some operations, the anticipated multi directional origins and destinations of the Port related traffic, and the planned dispersion through two access points rather than the existing single point should mitigate the most severe impacts of these vehicular trips.

The anticipated environmental impacts of Port development, primarily as a result of dredging the Fort Pierce Harbor, include the following:

o Quality of material removed and potential for resuspension of pollutants

o Turbidity and siltation (predominantly short term)

o Direct removal or modification of important habitats
o Potential for collisions of boats and barges with manatees.



Increased Port operations would attract more and larger ships, different commodity movements, new industry and greater developments, which could result in other impacts such as an increased potential for spills of petroleum products or chemicals and accidental pollutant releases into the lagoon from terminal runoff, transfer operations, or ship discharges.

A complete set of policies is included in the Master Plan to provide the detailed data collection, mitigation actions, and monitoring program required in conjunction with plan implementation.


INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION

The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority is the governmental agency empowered to operate the Port of Fort Pierce. All intergovernmental coordination required during the implementation of this Port expansion and maintenance program, and during subsequent Port operations, would occur through this agency.

Of particular concern as the Port implements the improvement program presented in this Master Plan is intergovernmental coordination concerning the following activities:

o Dredging of Fort Pierce Harbor: the Corps, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS), Department of Environmental Regulation (DER), and Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

o Dredging for and development of proposed berths: the Corps, EPA, USFWS, DER, DNR, and City agencies.

o Development of roadway improvements: the Florida Department of Transportation, St. Lucie County Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the City of Fort Pierce.

The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority has developed objectives and policies addressing the areas of desirable coordination.

PROBABLE COSTS AND FINANCING

The probable cost of the land and infrastructure development to be implemented over the fifteen year period is estimated at $13.8 million. to finance the first ten years of development, which is estimated to cost about $10.8 million, approximately $12.1 million to revenue bonds would be required. This amount reflects capitalized interest for the construction period as well as the bond issuance cost. The estimated debt service on the bonds, $1.3 million, is based on a 30 year payback period, at a 10 percent rate of interest.

The projected revenues and expenses for the first ten years of Port operations are summarized in Table 3. This summary reflects the projections of revenue that the Port would derive from cruise and cargo operations as well as from land leases. The net revenue (total operating revenue minus total operating expenses) calculated in Table 3 represents the funds available for debt service. Net revenue should normally be 1.25 times the debt service for good debt coverage. The projections presented in Table 3 show at least this ratio throughout the ten year period. The identified surplus funds can be used by the Port to pay land acquisition costs, or for other Port development costs. Land acquisition costs had not been determined by appraisal at the time this plan was prepared.

All of the financial data presented in this analysis are calculated on the basis of 1989 dollars and represent order-of-magnitude projections to determine the feasibility of financing Port development through revenue bonds. The actual amount of funding required would be dependent on a complete financial analysis to be performed by the eventual bonding agents.

To avoid the heavy build up of interest that land acquisition funded by a traditional loan would incur, it is recommended that other methods of funding the land acquisition should be explored. These include using other County revenue sources, seeking an arrangement with the present land owners to assist in financing the land purchases over the initial years until the surplus has built up or exploring other types of owner assisted financing.

In addition to the costs of land acquisition and development, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority would incur the costs associated with project permitting and mitigation. An order of magnitude estimate of the probable cost of the testing, permitting (including preparation of an Application for Development of Regional Impact if required), and mitigation actions required to implement the Port Master Plan is approximately $1.0 million. This amount could be increased substantially by the terms of the mitigation agreement. Funding for this cost is not included in the revenue bonds recommended for Port development.

There are public and private funding sources available for environmental protection in Florida. Such sources should be explored by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority to see if grant money can be obtained to help fund all or part of the mitigation program once the scope of the program is known.

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PORT OPERATIONS
Port development is being pursued not as an end in itself, but as a means of broadening and strengthening the economy of St. Lucie County and the entire Treasure Coast region. These economic benefits must be considered as part of the total picture in evaluating the total impacts of the expansion and maintenance program proposed for the Port of Fort Pierce.

Table 3

PORT OF FORT PIERCE
REVENUE AND EXPENSE PROJECTIONS
FISCAL YEARS 1995 96/2003 04
(1989 Dollars)



Operating Revenues 1995 96 1996 97 1997 98

Cargo Fees $ 110,000 $ 220,000 $ 319,000
Cruise Ship Fees 357,000 374,000 483,000
Land Leases 680,300 680,300 680,300
Othera 36,000 39,000 51,000
__________ __________ __________
Total Revenue $1,183,300 $1,313,300 $1,533,300

Operating Expensesb $ 200,000 $ 250,000 $ 300,000
__________ __________ __________

Net Revenue $ 983,300 $1,063,300 $1,233,300
Debt Service 770,000 770,000 770,000
__________ __________ __________
Surplus $ 213,300 $ 293,300 $ 463,300

Bond Coverage 1.28 1.38 1.60



_________________________________________________________________


Operating Revenues 1998 99 1999 2000 2000 01

Cargo Fees $ 484,000 $ 594,000 $ 704,000
Cruise Ship Fees 502,000 548,000 548,000
Land Leases 680,300 1,225,300 1,225,300
Othera 53,000 55,000 56,000
__________ __________ __________
Total Revenue $1,719,300 $2,422,300 $2.533.300

Operating Expensesb $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000
__________ __________ __________

Net Revenue $1,369,300 $2,072,300 $2,183,300
Debt Service 770,000 1,281,000 1,281,000
__________ __________ __________ Surplus $ 599,300 $ 791,300 $ 902,300

Bond Coverage 1.77 1.62 1.76




Table 3 (Continued)

Operating Revenues 2001 02 2002 03 2003 04

Cargo Fees $ 836,000 $ 968,000 $1,076,000
Cruise Ship Fees 584,000 548,000 548,000
Land Leases 1,225,300 1,225,300 1,225,300
Othera 58,000 59,000 60,000
__________ __________ __________
Total Revenue $2,609,300 $2,800,300 $2,909.300

Operating Expensesb $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000
__________ __________ __________

Net Revenue $2,209,300 $2,400,300 $2,509,300
Debt Service 1,281,000 1,281,000 1,281,000
__________ __________ __________
Surplus $ 928,300 $1,119,300 $1,228,300

Bond Coverage 1.72 1.87 1.96


___________________

aIncludes water, sales, income from concessions and an average harbor charge of about $200 per arriving ship

bIncludes salaries and benefits, maintenance and repairs, utilities, general administration, and marketing expenses

m:H100 v






Implementation of the proposed Port development program presented in this Master Plan would generate substantial economic benefits for the local and regional community. As it develops, the Port of Fort Pierce would be creating jobs, business income, tax revenue, investment opportunities, and tourism promotions. This type of economic opportunity is available to relatively few cities or counties in the United States.

The total direct impact of the projected cargo operations at the Port of Fort Pierce in 2003 would be approximately $60.9 million. Included in this calculation are both the cargo projected to cross Port owned berths (500,000 tons) and the cargo handled by private operators (450,000 tons). Approximately $12.2 million of this direct impact would represent payroll.

In addition to these direct economic impacts from the cargo operations, it is projected that the cruise operations, at their peak, would represent an additional $7.6 million in direct economic impact, based on an extremely conservative multiplier of $35 per passenger. The payroll portion of this impact would be almost $1.5 million.

It is estimated that about 550 jobs would be created by implementing the proposed cargo and cruise operations. The cargo operations would generate about 490 of these jobs, and the cruise operations would generate the remaining 60. These jobs would include stevedores, line handlers, truck drivers, office employees, ship's chandlers, warehouse workers, pilots, insurance agents, ticketing agents and the like. In addition, it is estimated that the industrial activities at the Port would generate about 100 jobs, but this number could be significantly higher, depending on the size of the manufacturing operation.

The direct economic impacts of Port operations, excluding the industrial activities, are summarized in Table 4, and the total economic impacts are summarized in Table 5.

In addition to the projected total economic impact of Port activities shown in Table 5, several other areas of impact should be considered. First, a one day cruise ship homeporting at the Port of Fort Pierce would purchase food and other goods. These purchases could represent as much as $10,000 per one day sailing, with a ripple effect through the community.

Also, over the phased development period, about 50 percent of the approximately $10 million in development costs would be paid out to those involved in the actual construction work. At a 2.5 multiplier, the economic impact of this payroll would be about $12.5 million. About 225 jobs would be provided during the construction period.

OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES

In compliance with the requirements of Chapter 9J 5, Florida Administrative Code, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority has developed the following objectives, and policies to implement the previously stated goal (see page xvi).

Objective 1: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall, by mid 1992 acquire the land needed to generate self sustaining, diversified port operations, specifically, the approximately 87 acres of privately owned land designated in this Master Plan as part of the Port of Fort Pierce, if a feasible financing plan can be developed which is acceptable to the Authority.

Policy 1.1: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall negotiate with the private owners of the parcels designated for port use to obtain financially sound purchase or lease agreements.

Policy 1.2: If the required land cannot be obtained through negotiation, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport shall pursue acquisition through other means at its disposal.

Objective 2: Upon acquisition of the land designated for port use, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall develop the Port's cargo handling capabilities and shall continue to expand those capabilities, commensurate with demand over the planning period.

Policy 2.1: Within five years of acquiring the land designated for port use, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall implement the Phase 1 site improvements defined in the Port Master Plan. These improvements shall include dredging; bulkhead, apron, and road construction; and provision of the other infrastructure components required to prepare the land for leasing for uses such as breakbulk operations (primarily citrus), and water dependent light industry.

Policy 2.2: During the second five years of operation, as warranted by actual demand, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall implement the Phase 2 site improvements defined in the Port Master Plan. These improvements shall include additional aprons, bulkheading, roll on/roll off container facilities, roads and other infrastructure components required to prepare the land for expanded general cargo operations.

Policy 2.3: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall pursue lease agreements with potential tenants, including terminal operators, packers, manufacturers, and other likely lessees, and shall see that the land is leased in such a way that the required staging and storage areas for the projected cargo are provided.

Policy 2.4: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall develop and implement a marketing program designed to create an awareness of the new cargo opportunities available at the Port of Fort Pierce, and shall actively seek to attract waterborne commerce to the Port. Table 4

PORT OF FORT PIERCE
DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
(2003)

Total
Sales Payroll
Activity (millions) (millions) Jobs

Cargo Operationsa $ 60.9 12.2 490

Cruise Operationsb 7.6 1.5 60

Marine Related Industryc N/A N/A N/A
______ _____ ____ TOTAL $ 68.5d $ 13.7d 650

_____________
aBased on 500,000 tons of cargo at Port owned berths and 450,000 tons at private facilities.

bBased on 218,000 passengers per year.

cUnquantifiable at present time; but assumed to represent a significant impact.

m:H100 T
























Table 5

PORT OF FORT PIERCE
TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
(2003)


Impacts
________________________________________
Indirect or
Category Direct Induced Total

Sales ($ million)a $ 68.5 $ 48.6b $ 117.1

Payroll ($ million)a $ 13.7 $ 8.6c $ 22.3

Jobs 650 448d 1,138

____________________

aDoes not include marine related industry, which is unquantifiable at present time; but assumed to represent a significant impact.

bBased on multipler of 0.71.

cBased on multiplier of 0.63.

dBased on multiplier of 0.75.



m:H100 G





















Policy 2.5: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall develop and implement a comprehensive maintenance program to extend the service life of the cargo infrastructure and facilities under its jurisdiction.

Objective 3: As part of the Phase 1 five year development program, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall develop cruise facilities to attract a reasonable share of the local cruise market.

Policy 3.1: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall actively seek out potential operators of cruises from the Port of Fort Pierce, and try to obtain a firm commitment from a reliable line for specific operations over a defined period of time.

Policy 3.2: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall, if warranted by actual commitments, construct a small, multi purpose cruise terminal, with the required bulkhead, apron and parking, as well as a landscaped access road to accommodate the additional traffic generated by new Port activities.

Policy 3.3: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall participate in joint countywide marketing efforts to increase the number of tourists, and potential cruise passengers in the St. Lucie County area.

Objective 4: As part of the Phase 2 development program, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall provide water dependent recreational amenities for public use on portions of the acquired land.

Policy 4.1: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall construct a boat ramp, fishing pier and parking area to serve the public.

Policy 4.2: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall identify potentially profitable commercial opportunities such as a snack bar, fishing supply store, souvenir boutique, newsstand, or the like, and, if economically feasible, take the necessary steps when appropriate to include such amenities adjacent to the cruise and recreational area.

Objective 5: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall coordinate Port operational and expansion activities with all appropriate Federal, State, regional, and local agencies, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Florida Department of Transportation, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the Florida Department of Natural Resources, The Florida Department of Community Affairs, the South Florida Water Management District, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, the City of Fort Pierce, other County departments, and neighboring municipalities, as needed.

Policy 5.1: Upon adoption of the 1989 Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall formally notify the Department of Community Affairs of its intent to develop the Port in accordance with the adopted plan, and shall request a clearance letter from that agency exempting the Port from Development of Regional Impact review under Chapter 380.06, Florida Statutes.

Policy 5.2: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall obtain all required permits and leases needed to implement the 1989 Master Plan, and shall construct and operate Port facilities in cooperation with the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, and in conformance with the St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce Comprehensive Plans.

Policy 5.3: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall ensure that the Port Master Plan is consistent with all relevant portions of the St. Lucie County and Fort Pierce Comprehensive Plans. Of particular significance are the provisions of the land use, conversation, coastal management, and traffic circulation elements.

Policy 5.4: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall coordinate the Port Master Plan, through other County departments, with the appropriate plans of other agencies.

Policy 5.5: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall work with other County agencies and the City of Fort Pierce to ensure that Port transportation requirements are consistent with and reflected in the plans and budgets of their respective Metropolitan Planning Organization. A traffic mitigation program including a coordinated signage and directional system to channel Port traffic along the preferred route shall be planned.

Policy 5.6: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall coordinate its efforts with the City of Fort Pierce departments to ensure that the Port is integrated into City plans for the waterfront and neighboring downtown, and that the services needed to support Port activities are reflected in those plans.

Policy 5.7: After Port development is under way, Port officials shall work with the U.S. Coast Guard to enforce the Inland Rules of the Road and to develop any other operational plan needed to ensure safe navigation in Fort Pierce Harbor.

Objective 6: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall ensure that all day to day operations and long term development are carried out in a manner that will minimize and detrimental effects on the environment.

Policy 6.1: While the land acquisition process is under way, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall coordinate efforts with other County, City, State and Federal agencies to see that the testing, surveys, and analyses required to obtain environmental information and baseline data for the proposed mitigation program are carried out. These include sediment testing in the Taylor Creek area, a wormreef study comprising aerial and diver surveys, water quality testing, sampling and analysis of the material within the Port expansion area which will be used for dredge and fill operations, and review of the latest seagrass mapping of the Fort Pierce Harbor, particularly the areas adjacent to the Port. The Authority shall then coordinate the preparation of a detailed mitigation and monitoring program, based on the results of the preceding data analysis.

Policy 6.2: During the Port expansion program, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall protect the habitat of aquatic life by ensuring that all dredge materials are properly disposed of in an environmentally acceptable manner, in areas away from seagrass beds, mangrove seedlings and other vulnerable vegetated areas in the Indian River Lagoon, and that the recommended mitigation program is carried out once channel and other dredging commences. This program included careful control of turbidity, manatee protection, and turtle conservation.

Policy 6.3: When the mitigation program begins, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall implement a monitoring program to track the success of the recommended mitigation actions, using baseline date where available for comparison with projected conditions.

Policy 6.4: If the monitoring program reveals that any of the implemented mitigation actions are not achieving the desired results, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall identify remedial measures, or shall seek and pursue alternative mitigation actions.

Policy 6.5: Once Port activities are under way, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall cooperate with the Florida Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Coast Guard in implementing manatee protection measures developed for the adjacent waters.

Policy 6.6: Once Port activities are under way, Port officials shall monitor ships calling at the Port to see that they do not cause undue air, noise, or water pollution, and shall report any violations to the proper authorities.

Policy 6.7: Port officials shall maintain contact with the City of Fort Pierce's Public Works Department to ensure that the level of solid waste pickup services keeps pace with increased cargo operations, thereby preventing the introduction of wind blown or water driven debris into the Fort Pierce Harbor.

Policy 6.8: In implementing the Port expansion program, the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall provide for on site infiltration of stormwater by providing pervious surfaces where possible through cost effective landscaping and paving techniques, and shall operate and maintain other stormwater quality control systems to achieve cost effective detention of stormwater prior to release to the adjacent waters.

Policy 6.9: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall cooperate with Federal, State, and other County agencies, with the City of Fort Pierce, and with other neighboring municipalities in addressing other coastal management concerns that may arise.

Policy 6.10: Once Port development is under way, Port officials, in cooperation with State agencies and the U.S. Coast Guard, shall enforce hazard mitigation procedures, shall be prepared to contain spills of Petroleum products and other toxic materials, and shall require operational containment equipment to be maintained at the Port at all times. Precise procedures to be followed in reporting and cleaning up of oil spills shall be established and disseminated to all Port users.

Policy 6.11: The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall cooperate with the appropriate agencies in developing hurricane evacuation and post disaster recovery plans.

The above objectives and policies serve to further the overall intentions of State, regional, and local agencies with regard to seeking a balance between the economic benefits to be derived from developing the Port of Fort Pierce and the need to protect and preserve the environmental resources of the area.



m:H100 x






















Section 1

INTRODUCTION


Strategically located in the heart of Florida's fast growing Treasure Coast, the Port of Fort Pierce has an unprecedented opportunity to expand its services to this promising region. With the opening of the 30 mile "missing link" of I 95, between Fort Pierce and Palm Beach Gardens, the pace of development in St. Lucie County and areas to the north is expected to soar. This anticipated growth, coupled with a continuing positive outlook for both cargo and cruise activities in the state, provides a dynamic setting for this State mandated updating of the Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce.

At present, the Port, all of which is privately owned and operated, specializes in the export of fresh citrus to markets in the Far East. These exports are handled by the Indian River Terminal Company, the primary operator at the Port. According to Indian River Terminal officials, the Port shipped a record 2.6 million cartons of grapefruit in 1988, and expected to better that record during the forthcoming citrus season. Other cargo shipped through the Port included small volumes of Caribbean fruit and other produce, aragonite, and building materials.

Public officials and many private interests believe that the time is opportune to pursue Port development efforts. In so doing, they hope to capitalize on the revenue generating potential of the Port and to expand the regional economic base. This Master Plan for the Port should thus be viewed as the vehicle for achieving these long term economic goals. Because of the community's concerns about the environmental and other impacts of Port development, the Master Plan addresses these goals in the context of the community's overall resources.

This section of the 1989 Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce summarizes the Port's history and its previous master plan; looks at the other ports in the State of Florida which, like the Port of Fort Pierce, are defining their goals for the foreseeable future; discusses the purpose of the present plan; and fits this plan into the framework of the State's comprehensive planning process.

Subsequent sections examine the following subjects:

o Existing conditions (Section 2)

o Port activities: trends and projections (Section 3)

o Port expansion and maintenance (Section 4)

o Goals, objectives and policies (Section 5)

o Financial planning (Section 6) 1.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Port of Fort Pierce, whose location is shown in Figure 1 1, came into existence when the Fort Pierce Inlet, a manmade opening, was cut through the land barrier between the Atlantic Ocean and the Indian River Lagoon in 1920. As reported in the CH2M Hill Master Development Plan prepared in 1986 for the Port, the Florida Legislature, by a Special Act dated December 9, 1918, established a taxing district to fund this project. This Fort Pierce Inlet District, which included approximately 64 percent of St. Lucie County, was specifically empowered to sell bonds to finance construction of the inlet and to satisfy the bond obligations through real property taxation revenues.

Bond issues totaling about $1.9 million were authorized and sold between 1921 and 1927, with additional funds provided by the City of Fort Pierce. Between 1920 and 1935, the inlet was opened, protective jetties were constructed and the channel and turning basin were excavated. The harbor was authorized as a Federal Project in 1935 and completed to its present dimensions in 1938.

The Fort Pierce Inlet District was abolished by the Florida Legislature on July 1, 1947 and the Fort Pierce Port Authority created in its stead. The Port Authority retained essentially the same power as the District; but was also given the legal right to acquire and lease real estate. The Fort Pierce Port Authority was superseded by the Fort Pierce Port and Airport Authority by a Special Act of the Florida Legislature on May 29, 1961. A copy of this Act, which went into effect July 1, 1961, is contained in Appendix A. The Act has remained in effect to date; but, in January 1989, the name of the Authority was changed to the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority.

There is little documented history of the earliest shipping from the Port of Fort Pierce, although shipping is presumed to have begun shortly after construction of the Fort Pierce Inlet. Private facilities were constructed before World War II; but during that war, the Federal government took over the Port for use as a military amphibious base. Since the war, the ownership and operation of the Port have primarily been in private hands, with the Indian River Terminal Company exporting fresh citrus and Marcona Industries importing aragonite.

Earlier in the 1980s, a study of Fort Pierce Harbor was conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District (the Corps), at the request of local interests. This study, Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement of Fort Pierce Harbor, was prompted by the belief of these interests that deeper harbor depths would enable the Port to be more competitive with other Florida ports. The study, completed in March 1986 by the Jacksonville District, recommended that the existing 27 foot by 350 foot entrance channel be deepened to 30 feet and widened to 400 feet, the 25 foot by 200 foot interior channel be deepened to 28 feet and widened to 250 feet, and the 25 foot by 900 foot by 1,600 foot turning basin be deepened to 28 feet by 1,000 feet square. It also recommended that an access channel 28 feet deep by 1,250 feet long and 250 feet wide be provided immediately north of the existing terminal area.

After approval by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, the recommendations of the District Engineer and reporting officers were forwarded for approval to the Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. The office of the Chief of Engineers then forwarded the reports to the appropriate State and Federal agencies for review and comment, after which they were forwarded to Congress for project authorization and funding. In August 1988, U.S. Senate Bill 2100, the Water Resources Development Act of 1988, authorized implementation of the approximately $6.7 million Fort Pierce Harbor Project. The Federal share of the project is about $4.3 million; the non Federal share is $2.4 million. While this project was being studied, the Governor of Florida expressed his support of it, emphasizing the need for careful planning to ensure that the surrounding economically distressed area would fully benefit from the proposed improvements.

In anticipation of Federal funding, St. Lucie County is committed to budgeting funds to cover its share of the project. Work is expected to begin in 1991, and be completed within 18 months.

1.2 EARLIER MASTER PLAN

In 1986, a Master Development Plan, partially funded by the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs, the Department of Environmental Regulation, and the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, was prepared by CH2M Hill, with the assistance of Continental Shelf, Inc. That plan examined local and regional socioeconomic trends, forecast potential commodity flows through the improved Port, and concluded that the Port could expect to accommodate about 600,000 tons of cargo by the late 1990s if the recommended development plan were implemented. The plan also estimated the economic benefits of Port development as well as the environmental effects of the recommended improvements.

The specific recommendations of the CH2M Hill Master Development Plan included acquisition of the privately owned undeveloped land within the Port area, and implementation of a phased development plan to provide general cargo facilities, namely, marginal wharves, roll on/roll off platforms and backland storage areas. This 1989 Master Plan updates the CH2M Hill plan, with the specific purpose of complying with the provisions of the 1985 State of Florida Local Governmental Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, as they pertain to deepwater ports (see Section 1.5).

1.3 SOUTHEAST PORTS

Today passenger and shipping operations at ports everywhere are undergoing significant changes. With many portsre examining their traditional approaches to these operations, it is appropriate to take a look at the other ports in the region whose activities may affect the Port of Fort Pierce.

Geographically, the Port of Fort Pierce is one of the twenty ports that dot the South Atlantic Coast and the eastern half of the Gulf of Mexico (see Figure 1 2). This group includes major ports such as Wilmington, Charleston, Savannah, Jacksonville, Port Everglades, Miami, and Tampa as well as several smaller, but expanding, ports such as Morehead City, Brunswick, Fernandina, Canaveral, and Manatee, and the comparatively static ports of St. Petersburg, Georgetown and Port Royal. With its present master planning activities, Fort Pierce, which once might have been included among the latter, now should be considered among the smaller, but expanding ports.

Within the last few years, most of the ports in the Southeast have initiated expansion projects. Recent and ongoing projects include:

o A long term expansion program at the Port of Miami, including cruise and cargo facilities

o A major expansion program at Port Everglades, including a container facility and two new cruise terminals

o Improvements at the Port of Palm Beach

o Additional cruise terminals and a deeper turning basin at Port Canaveral

o The addition of a third container crane and port improvements at the Port of Jacksonville

o A new port complex at Fernandina

o An improvement program at the Port of Tampa, including a new cruise terminal

o A container and general cargo improvement program at Port Manatee

o A new cruise terminal at the Port of St. Petersburg

o Diversification to containerized cargo at Panama City

o Diversification of the cargo base at the Port of Pensacola.

o Expansion of container facilities at the Port of Wilmington, and a pier extension

o Facility expansion at the Port of Morehead City

o Improvements at several Port of Charleston terminals

o An improvement program at the Port of Savannah, including a fifth container berth and new container cranes.

These projects are all testimony to the healthy Southeast port climate. According to industry analysts, the success and growth of these ports are attributable to the development oriented attitude of the southeastern states as well as to factors such as:

o Strong support by the public and by state governments for good port facilities

o Comparatively new and modern berths, terminals, and equipment
o Solid inland transportation network

o Good labor conditions

o Dynamic and forward thinking port management

o Sophisticated and aggressive port marketing.1

Cruise passenger and cargo statistics for recent years, which are presented in Section 3, demonstrate the effectiveness of these factors in drawing trade to this region, despite market fluctuations. These positive data suggest the continued strengthening of the Southeast ports, particularly the numerous diversifying Florida ports, in the years to come. They also underscore the need for the Port of Fort Pierce to actively promote itself as an improved and competitive facility, offering attractive opportunities and substantial benefits to potential Port users, once the proposed Master Plan implementation is under way.

1.4 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF 1989 MASTER PLAN

In preparing this 1989 Master Plan for the Port of Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County officials and staff and their consultants, Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J), have expanded previous Port planning efforts to include deepwater port information required by the 1985 State of Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, as specifically defined in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J 5, Florida Administrative Code (FAC) (see Section 1.5). Thus this Plan contains extensive information about existing conditions at and adjacent to the Port. Further, it discusses the effects that the proposed Port improvements will have on the on site and adjacent infrastructure and on the community at large as well as on Port operations. Because the environmental effects of the proposed Port development are a serious concern to community residents as well as public officials, these effects are discussed in detail, based on the extensive environmental material contained in the CH2M Hill ________________

1Worldwide Shipping, 1986 1988

Master Development Plan (1986), which in turn reflects data presented by the Corps in the Environmental Impact Statement for Fort Pierce Harbor.

Like its predecessor, this Master Plan is predicated on the assumption that the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority will acquire the privately owned undeveloped land in the Port area, using the powers at its disposal to do so. The recommendations contained in this Master Plan reflect the diverse marine related activities of a public purpose that the acquired land can be used for, and are intended to be sufficiently flexible to allow the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority to take advantage of the private marketplace in fulfilling its public mandate. As Plan implementation proceeds, the expansion schedule provided in this Master Plan can easily be refined to reflect the actual pace of operational growth at the Port.

If the land under private ownership is not acquired by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority, it is impossible to predict what specific activities would occur within the identified Port boundaries. Individual private land use decisions would be subject only to zoning and permitting restraints, and the Port of Fort Pierce would continue as a privately owned port. Under this scenario, the Port Master Plan would serve only as a conceptual guide for the use of the area because the private operations would not be subject to control by the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority.

1.5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL GOAL COORDINATION

Rule 9J 5, FAC, stipulates that each deepwater port in the State should prepare a master plan so as to coordinate port activities with the plans of the "appropriate local government." The master plan is to be incorporated into the coastal management element of the local government's comprehensive plan, and be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of that element. Although the Port of Fort Pierce lies physically within City of Fort Pierce limits, it is owned and operated by St. Lucie County under the auspices of the St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority. It thus falls under the jurisdiction of the County, which is considered the appropriate local government for the purpose of this comprehensive planning document.2

This 1989 Master Plan, which was prepared with the help of a grant from the State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, authorized by Special Category 1525C of the 1986 87 General
________________

2See Chapter 125.015, Florida Statutes: "...Any project owned or operated by such (charter) County and lying within the boundaries of a municipality shall be under the exclusive jurisdiction of this County and shall be without the jurisdiction of said municipality.

Appropriations Act, provides the information required by the 1985 comprehensive planning legislation, as contained in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes. It satisfies the requirements of both 9J 5.009, FAC, Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities, and 9J 5.012, FAC, Coastal Management. For easy reference, the specific requirements to these two sections of this Master Plan in which they are discussed. If a requirement is not applicable to the Port of Fort Pierce, it is so indicated on the table, and in the appropriate section of the text.

Preparation of this 1989 Master Plan included an examination of existing State, regional and local comprehensive plans. Documents reviewed include the State of Florida Comprehensive Plan (1986), the Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan for the Treasure Coast (1987), the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan (1989), the City of Fort Pierce Comprehensive Plan (1989) as well as other relevant documents. The latter include the 1984 study, Deepening of the Port of Fort Pierce, A Tri County Economic Assessment, prepared by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council; and the Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement of Fort Pierce Harbor, completed by the Corps in 1986. Every effort was made to relate the concerns and insights expressed in these documents to the recommendations in this Master Plan.

The Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan, prepared by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council in April,1987, includes the following transportation goal related to the development of the Port of Fort Pierce:

To provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods at a reasonable cost and at minimum detriment to the environment (Goal 19.1.1).

This goal is supplemented by Policy 19.1.1.2, which states that a comprehensive and fully integrated transportation system shall be developed which, as a minimum, includes the following components:

coordination with Water Port System Plan...3

The Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan also includes the following economic goal that support Port development:

To create greater economic stability through diversification of the regional economy (Goal 21.1.1).

This goal is supplemented by Policies 21.1.1.2 and 21.1.1.3, which state that:
________________



3The Water Port System Plan was not available for review.

o Expansion of the Ports of Fort Pierce and Palm Beach shall be encouraged to the extent such expansion provides demonstrated economic benefit to the general public; would result in minimal or minimized environmental costs; and is otherwise consistent with State, regional, and local goals, objectives and policies(Policy 21.1.1.2).

o Expansion of trade with Latin American and the Caribbean shall be encouraged to the extent consistent with regional interests (Policy 21.1.1.3).

In addition to these Port specific goals and policies, other regional goals and policies related to agriculture, tourism, and employment are strongly linked to Port development. For example, the regional agricultural goal is as follows:

To assure the expansion and diversification of agricultural product marketing and export opportunities (Goal 22.2.1).

Again, the relationship between tourism and the Port is clear and reciprocal. If the Port were to offer cruises, even a one day cruise to nowhere, more tourists would be attracted to the area; and, if more tourists were attracted to the area, the viability of cruise operations at the Port would be enhanced.

Finally, the regional employment goal is as follows:

To increase job opportunities for the unemployed, underemployed, and economically disadvantaged (Goal 24.1.1).

In addition to its positive effect on the regional economy as a whole, Port development would create both skilled and unskilled jobs throughout the region. (The specific economic and employment benefits of Port development are discussed in Section 6.)

The above goals and policies provide a solid regional mandate for developing the Port of Fort Pierce in a manner responsive to community needs. This mandate is even more apparent in the goals, objectives, and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plans of St. Lucie County and the City of Fort Pierce.

The County's Coastal Management Element contains the following goal relevant to Port development:

BALANCING GROWTH AND COASTAL RESOURCES. ALL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA SHALL OCCUR IN A MANNER WHICH PROTECTS, CONSERVES, OR ENHANCES THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE COASTAL AREA AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS ATTRIBUTED TO THEM (Goal 7.1).

The goal, while it does not specifically address the Port, clearly identifies the three interrelated aspects of coastal area development social, economic and environmental which are critical in the Port planning process.

Several policies in the Coastal Management Element which address construction in the coastal high hazard area (Policies 7.1.6.3 and 7.1.11.1), and an objective in the Conservation Element which addresses the protection and preservation of natural resources (Objective 8.1.8) should reflect eventual Port development.

The following County policy from the Coastal Management Element, when implemented, will serve to coordinate activities relevant to the Indian River Lagoon, and consequently, to the Port of Fort Pierce:


By August 1, 1990, the County shall enact land development regulations which provide locally determined criteria for the prohibition of shoreline alteration and construction which degrades existing estuarine productivity with exceptions such as necessary access to marine resources, the abatement of serious and significant erosion, and projects which do not significantly impact water quality or habitat value (Policy 7.1.3.8).


The City of Fort Pierce has included an explicitly Port related policy in the Draft Future Land Use Element of its Comprehensive Plan:


The City shall encourage efficient and effective use of the Port of Fort Pierce, which should be developed according to a well thought out master plan (Policy 11.1).


The preceding statements of regional and local intent with regard to the port facilities of the area, and to the Port of Fort Pierce in particular, are well reflected in the following goal that the Port has developed to guide its day to day operations and 15 year expansion program, through the horizon year of 2015:


The St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority shall seek to broaden and strengthen the economic base of the regional community by implementing a master development plan for the Port of Fort Pierce that will allow it to expand cargo operations, initiate cruise operations and seek other Port related recreational, commercial and industrial opportunities; and shall pursue these activities in a manner consistent with all applicable regulatory, planning and environmental requirements.


The objectives and policies identified as means of implementing this goal are presented in Section 5. Specific features of this 1989 Master Plan which further the above discussed regional and local goals and objectives are discussed where relevant in the subsequent sections of this document.


m:H100 U