12CITY • SOUTH MIAMI
V OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 2001
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject:
An Ordinance of the Mayor and the City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida, adopting the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments to the South Miami Comprehensive Plan;
the amendments are to the goals, objectives, and policies for the following Comprehensive Plan Elements:
Future Land Use; Transportationi Housing; Infrastructure; Conservation; Recreation and Open Space;
Intergovernmental Coordination; and Capital Improvements; providing for severability, ordinances in
conflict, and prov1din2 an effective date.
At the request of Commissioner Beasley a modified ordinance to adopt the revised Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendment Document is now scheduled for first reading on March
2, 2010. The ordinance is different from the ordinance considered in January in that the new Future Land
Use Map category entitled "Residential/Limited Commercial District (Two Story)" has been modified to
reduce the residential townhouse density to five (5) units per acre versus six (6) units per acre,
BACKGROU11D
The final adoption of Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments has
been pending since August 23, 2007 when the document was approved and sent to DCA. The document
adopted in 2007 was approved by the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) in January 2008.
The approval by DCA contained a directive (ORC Report) that the City must make only one technical
amendment; adopt the EAR Based Text Amendments by ordinance (two readings); and then send it back
to DCA within 120 days (May, 2008) as required by State Statute. This has not been completed. During
the period April, 2008—August, 2009 the Planning Board and City Commission conducted several
hearings and workshops.
The last attempt to adopt the EAR Based Text Amendments occurred at the City Commission meeting on
August 4, 2009 at which time a vote was taken on the entire EAR Based Text Amendments Document
I
(the new Future Land Use Category "Neighborhood Center /Mixed Use District" had been removed). The vote
was 3 ayes and 2 nays, however, a 4/5 vote was required, thus the ordinance failed. The minutes (excerpt)
of that Commission meeting are attached. (Exh ibit "A ")
AMENDMENTS TO THE EAR BASED TEXT AMENDMENT DOCUMENT (approved on August
23 2007
Revision No. 1
"the City has not included a full Five -Year Schedule of Capital Improvements "
The Florida DCA single objection after its review of the City's (2007) EAR Based Text Amendment
document was that the most recent adopted capital improvement plan was not correctly listed. The
Comprehensive Plan contains a policy that requires the annual adoption of a five year capital
improvement plan. At the time of the EAR approval the Capital Improvements Plan was listed as "2006-
2011". The City Commission's most recent adoption of the Capital Improvements Plan was on March 17,
2009 when the "Capital Improvement Plan for 2008/09 - 2012/13" was approved. A simple insertion of the
name of the most recently adopted capital improvements plan on p.52, will satisfy the DCA objection.
Revision No. 2
The City Commission at its July 28, 2009 meeting adopted Ordinance No. 13 -09 -2005 which removed the
wording of the proposed Future Land Use Map category entitled "Neighborhood Center /Mixed Use
District (Four Story)" on pp. 16 and 17 of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based
Text Amendments Document dated August 23, 2007. (see Ordinance 13 -09 -2005 attached, Exhibit "B ")
Revision No. 3
The City Commission at its October 20, 2009 meeting adopted Ordinance No. 24 -09 -2016 which also
modified p. 17A of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments
Document dated August 23, 2007 by incorporating a new Future Land Use Map category entitled
"Residential /Limited Commercial District (Two Story) ". (see Ordinance 24 -09 -2016 attached, Exhibit "C")
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
Beginning at its March 11, 2008 meeting the Planning Board (Local Planning Agency) did conduct a
number of public hearings and made recommendations on different versions of the EAR Based Text
Amendment ordinance sent to them by the City Commission. The Planning Board's approval of the
original EAR Based Text Amendments occurred on March 11, 2008 and on April 21, 2008 after a public
hearing (see attached Exhibit "D" and Exhibit "E") The Board's decision at that time included approval of
all of the proposed amendments in the August 23, 2007 document (including the "Neighborhood
Center /Mixed Use District (Four Story)" future land use category) and also included approval of the one
change requested by DCA that being a technical update to the Capital Improvement Element.
It is important to note that at its July 14, 2009 meeting the Planning Board did provide a recommendation
on the specific proposal to remove the proposed future land use category "Neighborhood Center /Mixed
Use District (Four Story)" from the EAR Based Text Amendment Document. The Board's
recommendation adopted by 3 ayes 2 nays vote was that the existing wording for the proposed
"Neighborhood Center /Mixed Use District (Four Story)" future land use category in the EAR Based Text
Amendment Document should remain at the original height and density as approved in 2007.
3
The Planning Board at its September 29, 2009 meeting adopted by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays a
recommendation that a new future land use category entitled "Residential /Limited Commercial District
(Two Story)" should be included in the EAR Based Text Amendment Document.
IMPORTANCE OF APPROVING EAR BASED TEXT AMENDMENTS
(1) Florida State Statutes Section 163.3191(10)(11) mandates that local governments must adopt the
amendments recommended in the EAR -Based Text Amendment Report. Failure to so within a certain
period of time will result in sanctions against the local government. These include not being eligible to
receive revenue sharing funds, grants for water and sewer system, road construction funds, and
Community Development Block Grant funds. In addition the local government is prohibited from
processing any changes to the Comprehensive Plan until the final EAR Amendments are approved and
transmitted to the Florida DCA. (see Fla. Statutes Sec. 163.3191 and Sec. 163.3184 attached, Exhibit
(2) There are several changes to the Comprehensive Plan mandated by the State which can not be initiated
because the EAR process is not complete. These include the final adoption of the Public Education
Facilities Element, the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan, Strategies for Reduction of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, and a number of Future Land Use Map changes recommended in the City's EAR Program
adopted in 2006.
(3) The concerns over the height limit and density of the Madison Square project will not be solved by
delaying the final approval of the EAR Based Text Amendments. In fact the adoption of the current EAR
Based Text Amendments will allow the City to immediately consider the subject as a standard
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan (allowed twice a year). The Administration has made a
commitment to make this issue a priority as evident by recent efforts to secure Affordable Housing
funding from the County and to investigate the use of CRA funds to move forward with Madison Square
Project. It can be anticipated that subsidies obtained from these funding sources will allow for affordable
housing units to be built at a reduced density and within acceptable height limits. It is further important
that CRA funds be committed or we run the risk of recapture by Miami -Dade County as was discussed at
the November 23, 2009 CRA Board meeting.
(4) The City Commission has recently taken action (in some cases by a unanimous vote) to adjust the
future land use map in several locations as part of the next Comprehensive Plan. Evaluation and Appraisal
process which begins in 2010. These changes are essentially reductions in density and height of permitted
development. These same concerns will be applied to the future development of the Madison Square
project. In fact, it will be possible to complete this project with affordable rental rates if we move forward
quickly with the EAR Based Text Amendments approval and determine the amount of subsidy necessary
and its source in accordance with the report verbally presented by consultant Larue Planning and
Management Services, Inc. to the CRA Board at the November 23, 2009 CRA Board meeting.
CITY COMMISSION ACTION
City Commission action on the revised EAR Based Text Amendment Document will require a 4/5 vote.
This issue has been of concern due to the 2008 Charter amendments which provided that certain types of
amendments to Land Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan will require five affirmative votes.
The city's Planning and Zoning Director in an e -mail to the City attorney dated November 10, 2009
provides an explanation of why the vote on this item will require a 4/5 majority. The City Attorney has
advised that he concurs with conclusion set forth in the Director's e-mail. (see attached Exhibit "G'
in
RECOMMENDATION
The Administration strongly encourages the Commission to approve the EAR Based Text Amendments.
The City's ability to regulate and control future development is dependent upon having the current EAR
recommendations adopted and found sufficient by the Florida Department of Community Affairs. It is
important to note that State government regulations require local governments in 2010 to begin a new
Evaluation and Appraisal process which could lead to additional changes to the Comprehensive Plan and
the Future Land Use Map. This process can not begin until current EAR recommendations are completed.
In addition, recent resolutions adopted by the City Commission to modify Comprehensive Plan density
and height regulations in certain areas of the City can not be started until the current EAR is adopted.
It is recommended that the City Commission approve on first reading the attached ordinance which adopts
and modifies the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Attachments
Draft Ordinance
City Commission Minutes Excerpt 1- 14- 10,Eexhibit A
City Commission Minutes 8 -4 -09 pp 3 -5 Exhibit "A -1 "
Ord. No. 13 -09 -2005 Exhibit "B"
Ord. No. 24 -09 -2016 Exhibit "C"
Planning Board Minutes Excerpt 3 -11 -08 Exhibit "D"
Planning Board Minutes Excerpt 4 -21 -08 Exhibit "E"
Fla. Statutes Sec. 163.3191 and Sec. 163.3184 Exhibit "F"
Planning and Zoning Director's E -mail 11 -10 -09 Exhibit "G"
EAR Based Text Amendments Document 8- 27 -07, as tnodifzed pp. 16, 17, 17A, 52 Exhibit "H"
Public Notices
TJV /SAY
X: \Comm Items\2010\3 -2 -10 \EAR Amend CM Report.doe
I Ordinance No.
2
3 An Ordinance of the Mayor and the City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida,
4 adopting the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments to the South
5 Miami Comprehensive Plan; the amendments are to the goals, objectives, and policies for the
6 following Comprehensive Plan Elements: Future Land Use; Transportation; Housing;
7 Infrastructure; Conservation; Recreation and Open Space; Intergovernmental Coordination;
8 and Capital Improvements; providing for severability, ordinances in conflict, and providing an
9 effective date.
10
11 WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature intends that local planning be a continuous and
12 ongoing process; and
13
14 WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to
15 periodically assess the success or failure of the adopted plan to adequately address changing
16 conditions and state policies.and rules; and
17
18 WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to adopt
19 needed amendments to ensure that the plan provides appropriate policy guidance for growth
20 and development; and
21
22 WHEREAS, the City completed its proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Report -
23 Based Textural Amendments consistent with the requirements of Chapter 163, Part II, F.S.,
24 and Rule 9J -5 and 9J -11, F.A.C.; and
25
26 WHEREAS, the City Commission at a special meeting on August 23, 2007
27 reviewed and revised the final Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text amendments to
28 the Comprehensive Plan, and adopted on first reading an ordinance approving the Report and
29 authorized its transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review and
30 comment; and
31
32 WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs in a communication
33 dated January 18, 2008 transmitted an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC)
34 Report which report found that the EAR Comprehensive Plan amendments to be consistent
35 with Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes; and
36
37 WHEREAS, the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report set
38 forth one objection which required a minor adjustment to Policy No.1.1.6 of Chapter 8,
39 Capital Improvement Element; and
40
41 WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency (Planning Board) at its March 11, 2008
42 meeting, after public hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 5 ayes 0 nays recommending
43 that the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendment report be approved; and
44
45 WHEREAS, the City Commission at its July 28, 2009 meeting adopted Ordinance
46 No. 13 -09 -2005, modifying on pp.16 and 17 of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and
47 Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments Document dated August 23, 2007 by removing
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
2
the wording of the proposed Future Land Use Map category entitled "Neighborhood
Center/Mixed Use District (Four Story) "; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission at its October 20, 2009 meeting adopted
Ordinance No. 24 -09 -2016 modifying pp. 16 and 17 the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and
Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments Document dated August 23, 2007 by
incorporating a new Future Land Use Map category entitled "Residential /Limited
Commercial District (Two Story) ".
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED -BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1. The City Commission hereby approves the City of South Miami
Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments
Document dated August 23, 2007 with the following modifications:
In accordance with the Department of Community Affairs ORC Report dated January 18,
2008, Policy No. 1.1.6 of Chapter 8, Capital Improvement Element on p. 52 is revised to read
as follows:
"The City of South Miami 2406=4044 2008/09 - 2012/13 Capital
Improvements Plan, and the Capital Improvements Schedule included
therein, contains a schedule of proiects that the City shall implement in
order to maintain its adopted Level of Service standards or otherwise
achieve the goals, objectives and policies and /or ensure the financial
feasibility of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2-0-0-6- 20-11- 2008/09 - 2012/13
Capital Improvements Plan is hereby adopted by reference as part of the
Capital Improvements Element. ";
Removal of the wording of the proposed Future Land Use Map Category entitled
"Neighborhood Center /Mixed Use District (Four Story)" on pp.16 and 17 of the
Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments Document
dated August 23, 2007;.
n Add a new Future Land Use Map Category entitled "Residential /Limited Commercial
District (Two Story) on p. 17A of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Based Text Amendments Document dated August 23, 2007, to read as follows:
"Residential / Limited Commercial District (Two Story)
The Residential/Limited Commercial District (Two Story) future land use
map category is intended to allow for low - density residential development
and limited commercial development in a transition area abutting single
family homes. The maximum height of all new construction shall be two
stories. Residential development shall be limited to townhouse
development at a maximum of five (5) units per acre. Commercial
I development shall be limited to a maximum floor -area -ratio of 0.80 and
2 shall include only those retail and personal service (office) needs for the
3 local neighborhood residential areas. The specific type of retail and office
4 uses shall be set forth in the appropriate zoning use district in the Land
5 Development Code. The Land Development Code shall provide for a
6 mandatory no- construction buffer / landscape area and a required wall
7 or fence at the rear of all properties facing or abutting single family
8 residential.
9
10 Mixed use development is encouraged. Existing buildings and uses which
11 are not consistent with the standards for this land use category or with
12 standards for the zoning use district applied to this area may continue to
13 exist and function but shall be subject to the non - conforming regulations
14 set forth in Land Development Code Section 20 -4.8."
15
16
17
18 Section 2. The amendments set forth in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
19 Based Text Amendments approved by the City on August 23, 2007 and as modified by
20 Ordinance No.13 -09 -2005 adopted on July 28, 2009 and Ordinance No.24 -09 -2016
21 adopted on October 20, 2009 are hereby incorporated into the City of South Miami
22 Comprehensive Plan.
23
24
25 Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of
26 this ordinance are hereby repealed.
27
28
29 Section 4. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any
30 reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding
31 shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
32
33
34 Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof
35
36 PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 2010
37
38 ATTEST: APPROVED:
39
40
41
42 CITY CLERK MAYOR
43 1 st Reading:
44 2nd Reading
45
46
M
2
3 READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
4 AND SUFFICIENCY:
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
CITYATTORNEY
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Stoddard:
Vice Mayor Newman:
Commissioner: Palmer:
Commissioner: Beasley:
Commissioner Harris:
Attachment "A" Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments
X: \Comm Items\2010 \3 -2 -10 \EAR Amend Rev 3 -2 -10 Ord.doc
EXHIBIT "A" 6�@W° p
City of South Miami
Regular City Commission Minutes
January 14, 2010
The City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida met
in regular session on Thursday, January 14, 2010, beginning at
7:24 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers, 6130 Sunset Drive.
A. Roll Call:
The following members of the City Commission were present:
Mayor Horace G. Feliu, Vice Mayor Brian D. Beasley, and,
Commissioners Velma Palmer, Valerie Newman and Lew Sellars.
Also in attendance were: City Attorney Laurence Feingold and
Assistant City Attorney Mark A. Goldstein, City Clerk Maria M.
Menendez and Acting City Manager Roger Carlton.
B. Invocation: The invocation was delivered by Mayor Feliu.
C. Pledge of Allegiance:
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
D. Presentations (s)
Green Corridors - Mayor Paul Vrooman, Town of Cutler Ba
Mayor Vrooman addressed the Commission about a solar
program. He was accompanied by Mayor Flinn from the Village of
Palmetto Bay and Vice Mayor Joe Corradino from the Village of
Pinecrest. Mayor Vrooman referred to the successful solar
programs in California, particularly the City of Berkley that has
developed a solar initiative that has spread into other cities.
He explained that they have developed a way to get around one of
the barriers which is the actual cost of installing a solar ray
on a typical home. He then spoke about a voluntary special taxing
district that Berkley has laid down over the entire city. Mayor
Vrooman continued expanding on this concept developed in
California.
Mayor Feliu asked the visiting Mayors to attend one of the
League's monthly meetings so that they could spread the word.
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 1
January 14, 2010
s o0 @WA
With no further comments, the motion to approve this item
passed by a 4 -1 vote:
Commissioner Palmer: Nay
Vice Mayor Beasley: Yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Yea
At this time the Mayor announced a five - minute break.
Moved by Vice Mayor Beasley, seconded by Commissioner
Newman, the motion to take item no. 32 out of order passed by a
5 -0 vote:
Commissioner Palmer: Yea
Vice Mayor Beasley: Yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Yea
30. AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, ADOPTING A REVISED
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED TEXT
AMENDMENTS TO THE SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; THE
AMENDMENTS ARE TO THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
FOR THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS: FUTURE
LAND USE; TRANSPORTATION; HOUSING; INFRASTRUCTURE;
CONSERVATION; RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE;
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION; AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 4/5
(Vice Mayor Beasley)
Moved by Vice Mayor Beasley, seconded by Commissioner Newman
to approve this item.
Mr. Youkilis presented this item with an overview of the EAR
process. He then said that the Administration strongly encourages
the Commission to approve the EAR document as presented so that
we may get the EAR behind us and begin making map changes and
other technical changes that are required by State law. At this
time we are unable to amend our Comprehensive Plan and we are not
in compliance; in addition, he explained that the 2010 -12 EAR
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 18
January 14, 2010
�@W°o
process is supposed to begin this year but that will not be
possible until the present one is finally adopted.
At this time the public hearing was opened.
Levy Kelly addressed the Commission saying that this
document was approved in 2006 and now is being changed against
the will of the people. He said that the people have spoken loud
and clear and that there was no need to remove the Madison Square
project from the EAR.
Dr. Zakharia addressed the Commission in opposition of this
ordinance on behalf of the owners of 62nd Avenue. He said that
this ordinance should require a five -fifth vote because the
document as presented makes it more liberal. He said that the
document is not clear and that the public have not had a chance
to review it because it has not been distributed to them. He said
that the reliance of the owners of 62nd Avenue was based on the
1997 comprehensive land use plan; the zoning has to follow the
comprehensive land use plan and this has not been done since
1997; we have paid taxes close to a million dollars for the past
15 years in reliance of the comprehensive land use plan. He said
that the passage of this ordinance will result in the City being
engaged in compensation to the owners in millions of dollars
should the owners win in court.
Sharon McCain addressed the Commission against increase in
density and regarding the existing traffic congestions in the
City. She said that the residents do not want the City to be
taken by developers and have further increase in density.
Don O'Donniley addressed the Commission representing Dr.
Zakharia. He distributed copy of summary of objections to the
Commission, saying that he is raising those objections again.
At this time Mr. Goldstein advised Mr. O'Donniley that the
summary of objections he distributed among the Commission will be
entered into the record as an Exhibit.
Mr. O'Donniley, among other things, also commented on a
motion from the minutes of January 5, 2006 relating to the
creation of a new zoning district.
At this time a motion was made to extend the meeting
Moved by Vice Mayor Beasley, seconded by Mayor Feliu, the
motion to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. passed by a 5 -0
vote:
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 19
January 14, 2010
rx�
Commissioner Palmer: Yea
Vice Mayor Beasley: Yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Yea
Mr. O'Donniley concluded his presentation by saying that the
City should be implementing a plan that was heard in public,
approved by the majority of the Commission and that has been in
place for 9 years. He then requested not to send this EAR forward
with these amendments, referring to the only two objections by
DCA.
With no further speakers the public hearing was closed.
Mayor Feliu referred to the Burt Harris Act, then asking Mr.
Feingold for clarification about issues with down zoning Dr.
Zakharia's property.
Mr. Feingold said that each of the property owners would
have to be considered on a case -by -case basis. The Burt Harris
Act exists and it speaks for itself.
Commissioner Newman asked whether there is a difference
between a zoning change and the change on a Future Land Use Map.
Mr. Youkilis said that the Future Land Use Map is above
zoning.
At this juncture Mr. Goldstein cautioned regarding further
comments because of pending litigation.
Mayor Feliu said that he read the report of the CRA
consultant and that the analysis indicates a density that is more
in tune with reality which would include affordable housing.
Removing Madison Square is to disfranchise the folks that came in
time and time again to discuss what they want to see in their
neighborhood. He said that he believes that the property owners
were willing to sit down and compromise by having three floors in
the front and two in the back where it abuts the residential
area. He said that he will not support this ordinance on second
reading because he wants to do some homework and get the facts.
Vice Mayor Beasley said that as far as the Madison Square
project, the study that was done said that it should be 26.5, it
does not say 60 units per acre; the land use is still four
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 2 0
January 14, 2010
s o0 0 °o
stories. He asked as to why we are holding our City hostage, with
the potential for sanctions and suits.
Commissioner Palmer said that she does not see what they are
trying to achieve by removing Madison Square; she said that her
position remains the same; she said that she always thought that
60 units were too much and urged the Commission to compromise and
get it midway. She said that she is willing to work with any
member of this Commission regarding the density and to put
Madison Square back in the document. She said that they have to
think about the people and think about the land owner and that
the right to do is to compromise on both projects and get it over
with. She said that she will not approve a document that excludes
Madison Square.
Commissioner Newman said that she has been involved in this
for ten years, and for ten years the people have spoken; the
residents of this community have made their wishes loud and clear
and that she would not sell out this community for a campaign
contribution and that her vote stays where it is.
Commissioner Sellars said that he needed some clarification
and asked as to whether they violated Florida law by the action
that they took in October. About 62nd Avenue, he asked as to
whether what they did by making it two -story mix -use commercial
development, if they created spot zoning. Staff answered no on
both questions by Commissioner Sellars.
Vice Mayor Beasley asked Mr. Feingold as to how many cases
were won on the Burt Harris Act. Mr. Feingold said that there has
been no actual money judgment against a city in the State of
Florida in 14 years. Vice Mayor Beasley said that he really wants
to build Madison Square and that he is tired of having that
project used as a tool for whatever agenda that other people may
have. In order to build Madison Square we must change the zoning
which is now two stories, and it needs to be changed to 3 -4
stories; and in order to change the zoning we need to pass the
EAR. In other words, he said, in order to build Madison Square we
need to change the zoning.
With some further comments, the motion to approve this item
failed by a 3 -2 vote:
Commissioner Palmer: Nay
Vice Mayor Beasley: Yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Nay
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 21
January 14, 2010
EXHIBIT "A-19'
City of South Miami
Regular City Commission Minutes
August 4, 2009
The City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida met
in regular session on Tuesday, August 4, 2009, beginning at 7:35
p.m., in the City Commission Chambers, 6130 Sunset Drive.
e ,
A. Roll Call:
The following members of the City Commission were present:
Mayor Horace G. Feliu, Vice Mayor Brian D. Beasley, and,
Commissioners Velma Palmer, Valerie Newman and Lew Sellars.
Also in attendance were: City Attorney Luis Figueredo, City
Clerk Maria M. Menendez and City Manager Ajibola Balogun.
B. Invocation: The invocation was delivered by Commissioner
Sellars.
C. Pledge of Allegiance:
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison..
D. Presentations(s)
County Commissioner Carlos Gimenez addressed the Commission
saying, among other things, that his intention is not to raise
the millage. He also reassured the Commission that he will work
at restoring the seniors' meals program.
ITEM (S) FOR THE COMMISSIONgS CONSIDERATION:
1. Approval of Minutes
Minutes of July 21, 2009
Moved by Commissioner Palmer, seconded by Vice Mayor
Beasley, the motion to approve the minutes of July 21, 2009
passed by a 4 ®0 vote:
Commissioner Palmer: Yea
Vice Mayor Beasley: yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 1
August 4, 2009
° ° vmoo
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Abstained
2. City Manager's Report (25 minutes)
• USDOJ JAG Grant Application Funding Update; (Red folder
info)
• Status Report on Cambridge Lawns Historic Markers: (Red
folder info)
• Requested to look into the "cash for clunkers" program;
(Newman /Balogun) `
With no further comments the City Manager's Report ended.
3. City Attorney's Report (15-- minutes)
Counselor Figueredo addressed the charter school issue,
stating that as per Florida Statutes all ch - after schools are
public schools; after reviewing the section dealing with local
governments he said that typically what a local government will
assess the location of the school to make sure that it is
consistent with its comprehensive plan. In the event that it is
not consistent with the comprehensive plan, then even though we
cannot deny it, we can impose a condition if needed; this is a
permitted use, he said, adding that he has asked for
documentation and will be reporting to this Commission about
compliance.
With no further comments the City Attorney's Report ended.
RESOLUTION (S)
4. A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, DIRECTING THE PLANNING,
AND ZONING DEPARTMENT AND THE PLANNING BOARD TO PREPARE
AND INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR A NEW FUTURE LAND USE MAP
CATEGORY ENTITLED "NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER /MIXED USE
DISTRICT" WHICH AMENDMENT MOULD ALLOW FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANS FOR THE MADISON SQUARE PROJECT
AND WHICH DISTRICT WOULD FURTHER BE LIMITED IN ITS
APPLICATION TO THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES OF THE
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 2
August 4, 2009
PROPOSED MADISON SQUARE PROJECT AREA; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. 3/5
(Vice Mayor Beasley)
Moved by Mayor Feliu, seconded by Vice Mayor Beasley to
approve this item.
Vice Mayor Beasley said that he has problems with the
language of the resolution and his real intent which is moving
Madison Square forward, but that we need to create a plan for the
area; the second thing is to look into the land use; then, we
need to create a design according to the land' that we own. He
said that creating a new land use right now is premature, and the
resolution really does not address any of those issues. He said
that he cannot vote on his own sponsored resolution for the
reasons stated, so he proposed to direct staff to create a master
plan for the area around Madison Square.
The Commission discussed this issue, each of them providing
suggestions. Also CRA Director David provided further information
about the property for the proposed project.
Commissioner Palmer concurred with the Vice Mayor for the
need to develop a plan.
Mr. Balogun recommended for staff to meet with the Vice
Mayor to get proper direction as to the scope for the plan.
Moved by Vice Mayor Beasley to table this item. Seconded by
Mayor Feliu, the motion passed by a 5 -0 vote:
Commissioner Palmer: Yea
Vice Mayor Beasley: Yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Yea
5. AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED TEXT
AMENDMENTS TO THE SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLANT; THE
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 3
August 4, 2009
rppzd
AMENDMENTS ARE TO THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
FOR THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS: FUTURE
LAND USE; TRANSPORTATION; HOUSING; INFRASTRUCTURE;
CONSERVATION; RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE;
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION; AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 4/5
(Vice Mayor Beasley)
Moved by Mayor Feliu,
approve this item.
1
Vice Mayor Beasley said
move the EAR process forward.
seconded by Vice Mayor Beasley to
4
that the purpose of this item is'to
Mayor Feliu said that the reason for which the EAR process
has not moved forward is because the land use definition for the
Madison Square project has been removed from the document. He
said that the community in that area has spoken many times about
how much they want to see the project going. He said that he
understands that sixty units per acre is too much and twenty -four
is too little, but that they need to come to a consensus so that
they can move the process forward.
Commissioner Palmer said that she has always been in favor
of what the recommendations were from everybody, including the
Commission and the community. She said that she agrees that sixty
units per acre is too high, however, we need a compromise; she
said that she is willing to work with every member of this
Commission.
Commissioner Newman said that she is not happy with this
either because the will of the people is not reflected on this
document; she said that the will of the people was not for four
stories but for two stories; not for sixty units per acre but
twenty -four units per acre. She said that therefore it might be a
good idea to go into the new`EAR process and hear what the people'
have to say.
Commissioner Sellars said that he does not agree with the
sixty unit density, and neither with the four stories. He then
asked staff what would be the consequences for the City by not
sending the document now.
Counselor Figueredo said that the consequences could be that
the City can always be sanctioned, and DCA would have to make a
finding for non - compliance. Meantime, the effects would be that
the City needs to make changes to the Comprehensive Plan.
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 4
August 4, 2009
Vice Mayor Beasley said as a manner of clarification that
this land use category is for the entire City of South Miami, it
is not site specific.
At this time the public hearing was opened.
Levy Kelly said that the people have spoken and that they
want to develop Madison Square,
At this time Commissioner Newman asked for a point of order,
requesting that the Commission adheres to Roberts Rules of Qrder
by speaking only about the subject matter of the item being
discussed. Also, that each member of the Commission is allowed to
speak on the item. In this case, the purpose of the ordinance is
to send the EAR document to DCA as previously amended.
Dick Ward said that what is interfering with the EAR process
is the sixty units.
Walter Harris urged the Commission to approve this ordinance
to allow the process to continue its course.
David Tucker Sr. urged the Commission to allow for the
Madison Square project to move on.
With no further speakers the public hearing was closed.
With some further comments, the motion to approve this item
failed by a 3 -2 vote:
Commissioner Palmer: Nay
Vice Mayor Beasley: Yea
Commissioner Newman: Yea
Commissioner Sellars: Yea
Mayor Feliu: Nay
6. AN ORDINANCE OF THE
MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI,
FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE POSITION
OF THE
CITY MANAGER;
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
CHAPTER
21 "ADMINISTRATION AND
CITY GOVERNMENT,"
SECTION
2 -4.4, ENTITLED "RESERVED,"
PROVIDING FOR AN
ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION;
PROVIDING FOR
CITY COMMISSION MINUTES 5
August 4, 2009
t
ORDINANCE NO. 13 -09 -2005
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE 2007 SOUTH MIAMI
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED TEXT
AMENDMENT DOCUMENT ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON
AUGUST 23, 2007 AND FOUND CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW BY THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ON JANUARY 18, 2008,
IN ORDER TO REMOVE FROM THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT A
PROPOSED NEW, FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY ENTITLED
"NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER / MIXED USE DISTRICT "; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature intends that local planning be a continuous
and ongoing process; and
WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to
periodically assess the success or failure of the adopted plan to adequately address
changing conditions and State policies and rules; and
WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to
adopt needed amendments to ensure that the plan provides appropriate policy guidance
for growth and development; and
WHEREAS, the City completed its proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Based Textural Amendments consistent with the requirements of Chapter 163, Part II,
F.S., and Rule 9J -5 and 9J -11, F.A.C,; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission at a special meeting on August 23, 2007
reviewed and revised the final Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text amendments
to the Comprehensive Plan, and adopted on first reading an ordinance approving the
Report and authorized its transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for
review and comment; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs in a communication
dated January 18, 2008 transmitted an Objections, Reconunendations, and Comments
(ORC) Report which report found that the EAR Comprehensive Plan amendments to be
consistent with Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City of South Miami was required by Florida State Statute
Section 163.3191 to adopt by ordinance the final Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based
Text Amendments by May 18, 2008; and
Ord. no. 13- 09-2005
2
WHEREAS, the City Commission at meetings on April 1, 2008, May 20, 2008,
and April 21, 2009 failed to adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text
Amendments; and
WHEREAS, it is proposed that in order to finalize and transmit the Evaluation
and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments a revision to the original Evaluation and
Appraisal Report would be appropriate; and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency (Planning Board) at its July 14, 2009
meeting, after public hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 3 ayes 2 nays recommending
continuing support for the existing wording for the proposed Future Land Use Map
category entitled Neighborhood Center/Mixed Use District (Four Story) on pp. 16 and 17
of the. Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments
Document dated August 23, 2007.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1. The City Commission hereby approves that the City of South Miami
Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments
Document dated August 23, 2007 be adopted with the following change:
(1) Removal of the wording of the proposed ,Future Land Use Map category entitled
Neighborhood Center /Mixed Use District (Four Story) on pp.I6 and 17 of the
Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments
Document dated August 23, 2007 (see Exhibit A attached)
Section 2. The. City Commission hereby directs the City Manager to transmit this
ordinance to the Florida Department of Community Affairs and to formally request
consideration of the subject change to the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal
Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments Document approved on August 23, 2007.
Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 4. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
hereof.
Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2 8 day of July , 2009
Ord. No. 13 -09 -2005
ATTEST:
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FO
CITY
APPROVED:
A OR
1't Reading: 7 / 21 / 019
2nd Reading 7/28/09
COMMISSION VOTE: 3-1
Mayor Feliu:
absent
Vice Mayor Beasley:
Yea
Commissioner Palmer:
Nay
Commissioner Newman:
Yea
Commissioner Sellars:
yea
EXHIBIT "A"
Proposed Amendment
.TEAR Based Text Amendments
Chapter I Future Land Use Element
(pp.16 -17)
FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY
(as adopted on first reading 8- 23 -07; submitted to DCA)
X:1PBTS Agendas Staff Reports12009 Agendas Staff Reportsl7.14- 091Exhibit A EAR Remove FLUM.doc
1. W-15ii
MV
'
• .
- a
- - - -_�
°. ____
-.. ...
X:1PBTS Agendas Staff Reports12009 Agendas Staff Reportsl7.14- 091Exhibit A EAR Remove FLUM.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 24-09-2016
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE 2007 SOUTH
MIAMI EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED TEXT
AMENDMENT DOCUMENT ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON
AUGUST 23, 2007, BY AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIYE PLAN
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IN ORDER TO ADOPT A NEW FUTURE
LAND USE MAP CATEGORY FOR THE SW 62nd AVENUE CORRIDOR
WHICH AMENDMENT WOULD BE BASED UPON THE
RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE 2006 SOUTH MIAMI EAR
REPORT, AND WOULD BE APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE SW 62nd AVENUE
CORRIDOR; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature intends that local planning be a continuous
and ongoing process; and-
WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to
periodically assess the success or failure of the adopted plan to adequately address
changing conditions and state policies and rules; and
WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to
adopt needed amendments to ensure that the plan provides appropriate policy guidance
for growth and development; and
WHEREAS, the City completed its proposed 'Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Based Textural Amendments consistent with the requirements of Chapter 163, Part II,
F.S., and Rule 9J -5 and 9J -11, F.A.C.; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission at a special meeting on August 23, 2007
reviewed and revised the final Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text amendments
to the Comprehensive Plan, and adopted on first reading an ordinance approving the
Report and authorized its transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for
review and comment; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Connrnunity Affairs in a communication
dated January 18, 2008 transmitted an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments
(ORC) Report which report found that the EAR Comprehensive flan amendments to be
consistent with Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City of South Miami was required by Florida State Statute
Section 163.3191 to adopt by ordinance the final Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based
Text Amendments by May 18, 2008; and
Page 1 of 3
Ord. no. 24 -09 -2016
WHEREAS, the City Commission to date has not adopted the Evaluation and
Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments; and
WHEREAS, in order to expedite development activity it is proposed that a
revision to the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Text Amendments be made to
include a Future Land Use Map Category specifically for the SW 62 Avenue Corridor;
and
WHEREAS, the revised Future Land Use Map category for the SW 62 Avenue
Corridor entitled "Residential/Limited Commercial District (Two Story)" incorporates
the same recommendations and standards for this area as set forth in the City's
Evaluation and, Appraisal Report (p.12, Sub -Area 1) which was adopted by the City
Commission on January 5, 2006; and
V IHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency (Planning Board) at its meeting oil
September 29, 2009-after public hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 5 ayes and 0
nays recommending that the Future Land Use Map category entitled "Residential/Limited
Commercial District (Two Story)" should be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to accept the recommendation of the
Local Planning Agency (Planning Board) and enact the aforesaid amendment.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TI-1E CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAME, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1. The City Commission hereby approves a Future Land Use Map
category entitled " "Residential /Limited Commercial District (Two Story) "" as set forth
below to be incorporated into the City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan Evaluation
and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments Document approved on first
reading on August 23, 2007.
Section 2. The City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Text Amendments Document approved on first reading
on August 23, 2007 is hereby amended to incorporate on p.17 the following:
" Residential /Limited Commercial District (Two Story)
The ResideniiaULimited Commercial District (Two Stor j future land use map category
is intended to allow for low - density residential development and limited commercial
development in a transition area abutting single family homes. The maximum height of
all new construction shall be two stories. ,Residential development shall he limited to
townhouse development at a maximarm of 6 units per acre. Commercial development
shall he limited to a maximum floor-area-ratio of 0.80 and shall include only those
retail and personal service (office) needs for the local neighborhood residential ur °eas.
The specific type of retail and office uses shall be set forth in the appropriate zoning
use district in the Land Development Code. The Land Development Code shall provide
Page 2 of 3
0i'd. No. 24 -09 -2016
for a rnandatory no- construction buffer / landscape area and a required wall or Lance
at the rear of all properties facing or abutting single family residential
JVJb ed use development is encouraffed Existing buildings and uses which are not
consistent with the standards for this land use category or with standards for the
zoning use district applied to this area rnay continue to exist and function but shall be
subiect to the non - conforming regulations set forth in Land Development Code Section
20 -4.8.
Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 4. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance Js for any
reason held 'invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent Jurisdiction, this holding
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective immediately aver the adoption
hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this Z0th day of October, 2009
ATTEST: APPROVED:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
I" Reading: 10/06/09
?,d Readina: 10/20/09
READ i APPROVED TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
XAComm Items12009M- 6- 09\EAR Add New SW 62 Ave FL,UNi Ord.doc
Page 3 of 3
COMMISSION VOTE: 3 -2
Mayor Feliu:
Nay
Vice Mayor Beasley:
Yea
Commissioner Palmer:
Nay
Commissioner Newman:
Yea
Commissioner Sellars:
Yea
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Regular Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
EXCERPT
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:41 P.M.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call.
Action: Chairman Morton requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Ms. Young, Mr. Farfan, Mr. Davis, and
Ms. Chael. Absent: Ms. Yates
City staff present: Sanford A. Youkilis (Acting Planning Director) and Lluvia Resendiz
(Administrative Assistant).
IV. Planning Board Applications/Public Hearing
PB -08 -010
Applicant: City of South Miami
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE
EVAULATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO
THE SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; THE AMENDMENTS ARE TO THE
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES FOR THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE; TRANSPORTATION; HOUSING;
INFRASTRUCTURE; CONSERVATION; RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE;
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION; AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS;
RESPONSE TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT (ORC);
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Farfan read the item into the record.
Mr. Youkilis advised that the text changes went before the City Commission and were
Planning Board Meeting
March 11, 2008 Excerpt
Page 2 of 2
adopted on first reading. Thereafter the documents were sent to Department of
Community Affairs (DCA). After review of the City's submittal DCA issues Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) report which found that the City's report was
excellent and made only one recommendation. It was determined that the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) was one year behind and they recommended that the City update
the years from 2007 -2012 to 2008 -2013 to show five year update. The City Commission
recently adopted a Capital Improvements Plan and the state mandates that the new dates
shall be included in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the ordinance adopting the
EAR with the one change must go before the City Commission as part of the text
amendments final hearing.
Action: Ms. Young moved to approve the ordinance as presented. Mr. Davis seconded
Vote: 5 Ayes 0 Nays
XAComm Items\ 2009 \12- 1- 09 \03- 11- 08- PBMinutes Excerpt.doe
,ovr EXHIBIT G6 'g
C1 �'
INCORPORATED
1927
L p RXo
A
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Special Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Monday, April 21, 2008
City Commission Chambers
7 :30 P.M.
EXCERPT
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:36 P.M.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call.
Action: Chairman Morton requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Morton, Ms. Young, Ms, Yates, Mr.
Farfan, Mr. Cruz, and Ms. Chael.
City staff present: Eve Boutsis (City Attorney), Sanford A. Youkilis (Acting Planning
Director), and Lluvia Resendiz (Administrative Assistant).
III. Reason for Special Meeting: Mr. Youkilis advised that the EAR -Based Text Amendment
document which includes over 100 revisions to the City's Comprehensive Plan was before the
Planning Board for final review at its March 11, 2008 meeting. The document dated August 23,
2007 contained a minor technical revision updating the time period of the City's most recently
adopted Capital Improvement Plan. This was the only change suggested by the Florida DCA in
their official analysis (Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report) which was
sent to the City on January 18, 2008. A simple insertion of the name of the new capital
improvement plan on p.52 was inserted into the document. The Planning Board at the March 11
meeting unanimously approved the revision to EAR -Based Text Amendment document, and
forwarded on to the City Commission,
The City Commission at its April 1, 2008 meeting considered the EAR -Based Text Amendment
document on second reading (first reading was in August, 2007 prior to transmittal to Florida
DCA). At that time one Commissioner moved to remove the section of the report which contained
a new land use category which would be applicable to the Madison Square project. There was no
second to the motion. After a public hearing the City Commission voted 3 ayes and 1 nay to
approve the ordinance adopting the EAR o Based Text Amendments as part of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The ordinance failed to be adopted because by Code a 4/5 approval vote is
required.
Planning Board Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 2 of 4
III. Planning Board Applications/Public Dearing
PB -08 -019
Applicant: City of South Miami
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE
EVAULATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) BASED TEXT AMENDMENTS TO
THE SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; THE AMENDMENTS ARE TO THE
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES FOR THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE; TRANSPORTATION; HOUSING;
INFRASTRUCTURE; CONSERVATION; RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE;
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION; AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS;
RESPONSE TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT (ORC);
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Morton read the item into the record.
Mr. Youkilis advised that Florida State Statutes mandate that the local government must submit
their EAR Based Text amendments. If the city does not turn in the EAR document the State will
sanction the local government including the loss revenue sharing funds, grants for sewer and water,
road construction funds, community development block grant, and in addition lose the ability to
process amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore it was decided to reinitiate the process
at the Planning Board level by developing a different EAR document than that previously voted on
in March. The difference is the removal of the "Madison Square." Revision No.2 suggests that we
re -insert the Neighborhood Center district "Madison Square" back into the original document.
Three alternatives have been developed. Alternative I is exactly as the originally approved EAR
document. Alternative 11 was submitted by Commissioner Beckman which suggests adjustments in
density and height of buildings near single - family. Alternative 111, prepared by staff and the City
Attorney, suggests the same as Alternative No.1 however the residential density was reduced to 45
units per acre where the original suggested 60 units per acre. Staff recommended that the EAR
document dated April 21, 2008 be readopted and include either Alternative No.I or No.3 shall be
approved as an amendment to be reinserted into the EAR document dated April 21, 2007.
Mr. Morton stated that he prefers Alternative No.3 but would like to amend it to include 60 units
per acre. He questioned if Alternative No3 is a more simplified version and whether or not it
would be the same in concept as previously approved. Ms. Boutsis replied with an affirmative
advising that the Alternative No.3 will be different language but in a more simplified manner
however, all of the standards will remain the same as Alternative No. 1.
Mr. Cruz questioned the City's submittal deadline date to DCA. He also expressed concerns that
the City could be under the same predicament if the EAR document does not get approved by the
City Commission and whether or not the City will have enough time undergo the process again in
the event that the EAR document does not get approved on second reading. Ms. Boutsis advised
that if the City Commission does not approve the EAR document the City will be required to
request an extension from the Department of Community Affairs. Mr. Youkilis advised that the
municipalities are given 120 days, from the date that DCA issues the ORC report, to update the
EAR.
Ms. Young expressed concerns related to the EAR document being approved on first reading but
Planning Board Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 3 of 4
disapproved on second reading.
Ms. Chael advised that if the number of units remain the same than, although the number of units
are reduced that you can have larger and more luxurious units. She believed it would be nice to
have a mixture of units thus making it more affordable. Ms. Chael found no adverse affect in
making a revision to the text with regards to the number of units.
Mr. Farfan advised he would prefer Alternative No.3 with the amendment to include 60 units per
acre.
Ms. Yates advised she was fine with the original approval of 60 units per acre.
Ms. Young advised to be in favor of originally written EAR document. She noted that staff and the
Board spent plenty of time on the original document and provided significant reasons as to what
was said and the way it was said. She found no significant reason for malting any changes.
Mr. Cruz stated he was in favor Alternative No.3 with 60 units per acre simply because by limiting
to 45 units per acre essentially automatically reduces the amount of units. Therefore by keeping it
at 60 units there is always the option of reducing the size. Sixty units is really the maximum and
not minimum. Also with 60 units there is the option to doing in between 55 or 50 and by limiting
to 45 you are automatically limiting the number or units.
Mr. Morton indicated he prefers Alternative No.3 but would also recommend modifying the
number of units to 60. He is in favor of Alternative No.3 because it has different verbiage and in
changing the language the Board is submitting a different EAR document to the City Commission.
Chairman Morton opened the Public Hearing.
Name Address Position
Levy Kelly 6250 SW 60 Avenue Favors
Mr. Kelly thanked the Board for their continuous good work, efforts, and understanding of the
community's needs.
Claudia Hauri 5752 SW 77 'Terrace Neutral
Ms. Hauri expressed concerns regarding area nine of the future land use map. She requested that
staff clarify the area nine recommendation of denial of the amendment is still enforced. Mr.
Youkilis replied that the applicant was referring to the draft of the next step which deals with
making changes to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) which is scheduled for public hearings. in
June 2008. Area nine is one area not being recommended by the consultants for a map change.
Simon Codrington, Jr. 6620 SW 63 Avenue Favors
Mr. Codrington thanked the Board for their efforts into the long EAR process. He acknowledged
that the Board made the correct recommendation for the four -story height limit as well as the 60
units in density and floor area ratio. He advised that one of the Commissioners has decided to
impose his personal view and weigh heavily on the communities input rather than to do what the
state statue mandates. This is not a normal process but rather a complicated process and therefore
commended the City Staff and Consultants for their hard work and dedication to the process. The
fact that DCA made only one comment to the City's EAR document states that staff, the
consultants, and the Planning Board did a suburb job. If a change must be made to the EAR
document aside from what was recommended by DCA in the Objections, Recommendation, and
Comments report (ORC), as a community that is considered to be unfair and a complete
Planning Board Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 4 of 4
undermining of the integrity of the process. As a community many objectives are trying to be met.
These objectives included a mixed -use project that incorporates bringing back business, which
have dissipated, into a district which has died from where it once was and making an effort to
incorporate affordable housing. In order for this project to succeed all goals must be reached and
the project must be given the maximum opportunity to be built out to its highest and best use.
Oliver GuneIlas 6755 SW 74 Street Neutral
Mr. Cunellas expressed concerns that the approval of a four -story height building will set
precedence -for other future land use zoning districts. Mr. Youkilis replied that the land use
category was designed strictly for the "Madison Square" area. It is not anticipated that this would
be used in any other location. Ms. Boutsis responded that this is a land use category for the
specific area in question and not for other areas within the city. If the text amendment is approved
tonight and by the City Commission it will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. Ms.
Boutsis added that an individual would have to initiate the process for a change to the future land
use map for a specific area.
Chairman Morton closed the Public Hearing.
Mr. Morton questioned, for clarification, purposes, if Alternative No.3, if amended, will be
inconsistent with what was originally approved by the Planning Board. Ms. Boutsis replied that if
Alternative No.3 were amended to reflect the 60 units per acre the answer would be "yes." She
reiterated that Alternative No.3 just simplifies the language. Mr. Alex David, Consultant for Bell -
David Planning Group, advised that Alternative No.3 is less wordy than Alternative No.1 but the
content is exactly the same as previously provided even after Alternative No.3 is amended to have
60 units per acre.
Motion: Ms. Young moved to approve Alternative No.3 with the condition to amend Alternative
No.3 to include 60 units per acre. Mr. Cruz seconded.
Vote: 6 Ayes 0 Nays
Motion: Ms. Young moved to approve the Evaluation and Appraisal Report with the revision
recommended by staff related to the date of the Capital Improvement Plan as well as the Evaluation
and Appraisal Report document as amended to include 60 unites per acre under Alternative No.3.
Ms. Yates seconded.
Vote: 6 Ayes 0 Nays
XAComm Items\2009 \12- 1- 09 \PB- Min- 04 -21 -08 Excerpt.doc
E IBIT 66F"
FLORIDA STATUTES PERTAINING TO EVALUATION AND
APPRAISAL REPORTS
Section 163.3191
10) The governing body shall amend its comprehensive plan based on the recommendations in the
report and shalt update the comprehensive plan based on the components of subsection (2), pursuant
to the provisions of ss. 163.3184, 163.3187, and 163.3189. Amendments to update a comprehensive
plan based on the evaluation and appraisal report shall be adopted during a single amendment cycle
within 18 months after the report is determined to be sufficient by the state land planning agency,
except the state land planning agency may grant an extension for adoption of a portion of such
amendments. The state land planning agency may grant a 6 -month extension for the adoption of such
amendments if .the request is justified by good and sufficient cause as determined by the agency. An
additional extension may also be granted if the request will result in greater coordination between
transportation and land use, for the purposes of improving Florida's transportation system, as
determined by the agency in coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization program.
Beginning July 1, 2006, failure to timely adopt and transmit update amendments to the comprehensive
plan based. on the evaluation and appraisal report shall result in a local government being prohibited
from adopting amendments to the comprehensive plan until the evaluation and appraisal report update
amendments have been adopted and transmitted to the state land planning agency. The prohibition on
plan amendments shall commence when the update amendments to the comprehensive plan are past
due. The comprehensive plan as amended shall be in compliance as defined in s. 163.3184(1)(b).
Within 6 months after the effective date of the update amendments to the comprehensive plan, the
local government shall provide to the state land planning agency and to all agencies designated by rule
a complete copy of the updated comprehensive plan.
(11) The Administration Commission may impose the sanctions provided by s. 163.3184(11) against any
local government that faits to adopt and submit a report, or that fails to implement its report through
timely and sufficient amendments to its local plan, except for reasons of excusable delay or valid
planning reasons agreed to by the state land planning agency or found present by the Administration
Commission. Sanctions for untimely or insufficient plan amendments shall be prospective only and shalt
begin after a final order has been issued by the Administration Commission and a reasonable period of
time has been allowed for the local government to comply with an adverse determination by the
Administration Commission through adoption of plan amendments that are in compliance. The state
land planning agency may initiate, and an affected person may intervene in, such a proceeding by filing
a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings, which shall appoint an administrative law judge
and conduct a hearing pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57(1) and shall submit a recommended order to
the Administration Commission. The affected local government shall be a party to any such proceeding.
The commission may implement this subsection by rule.
Section 163.3184
(11) ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION.—
(a) If the Administration Commission, upon a hearing pursuant to subsection (9)' or subsection (10),
finds that the comprehensive plan or plan amendment is not in compliance with this act, the
commission shall specify remedial actions which would bring the comprehensive plan or plan
amendment into compliance. The commission may direct state agencies not to provide funds to
increase the capacity of roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems within the boundaries of those
local governmental entities which have comprehensive plans or plan elements that are determined not
to be in compliance. The commission order may also specify that the local government shall not be
eligible for grants administered under the following programs:
1. The Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program, as authorized by ss.
290.0401 - 290.049.
2. The Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program, as authorized by chapter 375.
3. Revenue sharing pursuant to ss. 206.60, 210.20, and 218.61 and chapter 212, to the extent not
pledged to pay back bonds.
(b) If the local government is one which is required to include a coastal management element in its
comprehensive plan pursuant to s. 163.3177(6)(g), the commission order may also specify that the local
government is not eligible for funding pursuant to s. 161.091. The commission order may also specify
that the fact that the coastal management element has been determined to be not in compliance shall
be a consideration when the department considers permits under s. 161.053 and when the Board of
Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund considers whether to sell, convey any interest in, or
lease any sovereignty Lands or submerged lands until the element is brought into compliance.
(c) The sanctions provided by paragraphs (a) and (b) shall not apply to a local government regarding
any plan amendment, except for plan amendments that amend plans that have not been finally
determined to be in compliance with this part, and except as provided in s. 163.3189(2) or S.
163.3191(11).
Youkiiis, Sanford
From: Vageline, Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 9:11 AM
To: Feingold, Laurence
Cc: Youkilis, Sanford
Subject: RE: EAR Based Text Amendments 2005 -2006
Page 1 of 2
Pursuant to the Land Development Code Section 20- 6.1(A)(3)(a)(ii) "Four (4) affirmative votes of the city
commission shall be required to approve a change to the adopted Comprehensive Plan,...
Pursuant to the City Charter "_five affirmative votes of the city commission shall be required to approve the
actions indicated below: To amend the land use and development regulations in any manner to make them
less restrictive..."
The EAR Based Text Amendment package contains many changes to the goals, objectives and policies of the
adopted Comprehensive Plan. These changes to the goals, objectives and policies of the adopted
Comprehensive Plan are the result of removing obsolete language, bringing the Comprehensive Plan into
conformity with changes in State law and the State Comprehensive Plan, calls for additional planning activity
(such as a Comprehensive Long Range Transportation Study and a Comprehensive Recreation and Open
Space Master Plan), proposing the investigation of additional impact fees, removes interim policies no longer in
effect; adds new City committees, adds strategies for accomplishment of affordable housing strategies, add a
future land use category named: Residential / Limited Commercial District (Two Story):
These changes to the adopted Comprehensive Plan do not make the Comprehensive Plan less restrictive.
Therefore, Land Development Code Section 20- 6.1(A)(3)(a)ii applies: 4 affirmative votes needed to approve.
Thank you.
Thomas J. Vageline, Director
Planning and Zoning Department
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, FL 33143
Telephone: 305 -663 -6327
Fax: 305 -668 -7356
E -mail: tvaaeIine0_cityofsouth miami.net
3
ca °�
G m
w
O�
U
U.
O Q
0
d
U �
C
O
C N
C
L � �
O ill O
Z C CL
O 'C
N > O N
U Q c/) 0
CD
co to LO
r r
� O
r r
O
Do co N fn
L
a)
-0
C
7
a Z
!Z
E O H
L
Z 0 o
p W N p
S
•
•
D
R
O
C
tT
CL
C
W
m
d
9
A
E
d
H
C
68.1 SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 21,2010 Bt._ - -_ BROWARD PLUS Mam Herald ,corn/Broward L THE MIAMI HERALD
THEATER REVIEW
`Bat Boy: The Musical'
a gleefully silly spoof
BY CHRISTI HE DOLEN
co.k Ti 1J om
»t
A Miami -Dade busi- November 2001 and
A new company called
it y
Slow B h ved in
-
South Florida with the
ing money to bribe tole- pay off officials of Haiti's
intention of heating up the
, ;+•
region's musical theater
?^
scene.
Founders Patrick F tz-
h
wa e, and Matthew
Miami, former president known as Haiti Teleco.
Korinko have decided to
_
go their companys
$
and begin th C'
in with
Cmbetter
o nflagration But Boy:
Annual International
The Musical — rather than
k
anything more subtle, their
stated purpose being to
"provocative,
61 of Miami and Hairy
incendiary and nellg n ` - - - - -•
—stow
works of musical theater."
wxxrxuree
Their next musical, Ste-
ph en Sondheim's Assas-HITS, MISSES:'Bat Boy' is the first production from
sins, is far more likely to tit the Slow Burn Theatre Company in Boca Raton.
that descri ption Bat Boy,
about and for multicul- appear in'Melt' at the Actors' Playhouse.
rural Miami. It gently
which was inspired by a
1 Fun! Fun! ';
Weekly World News story
stream musicals that
half human, half-
about a If
attract large audiences —
you go
bat found living in a cave
but neither Bat Boy nor
(or so the wildly creative
•What:'Bat BoYlhe
Assassins is the kind of
tabloid said), isn't provoca- Far -
by
ley
show that draws ri huge
tive, incendiary or ntelli- eariv
le/, &Tan F>enanst9 and
Sri
din South Fonda.
Laurence OKeefe
gent. Idly
T1nsBar has anum-
musical theater
futlysillymusicaltheater Wbere: SOw own Tt�
sesand at least as
heromans
spoof about a pointy-eared ahe -
teenwhoprogresses from
many minuses. .
Its major roles —Bat
A %yesny a per
lion a[lyert &xa Per-
noise -making wild child to tormug Arts Theatre,
Bay (Rick Pefia),veadmix,
articulate (if misunder- 12811 W Glade, Rd, Boca
ian Thomas Parker (Slow
stood) young man with Ratmi, through March 7
Burn founder K.rinko),
B ming speed. ■Whop; 730p.m Thas-
the doe's wife Meredith
Bat Boy has flown into day, 8 pm Friday- Salur-
(Stephanie Simon) and
thesepans before, getting day 2pm Sundry
their daughter Shelley
its first South Florida pro- . Cost:$25 ISM seniors,
(Anne Chamberlain) — are
duction in 2003 at the old 415 students)
played by talented actor -
Shores Performing Arts
Theatre (now the Play- ■Into :954- 323-7884or
singers who can really belt
it out. Ian T. set,
_
Ground Theatre) in Miami
ida's so
Traci Almeida's sound
aue.can�n�
Shores. E.L. Losada, who
design and Lance Blank's
Shaved his head, donned
lighting serve the show
the Speck ears and tangs,
well, though the sound
and sang the heck out of bowing in the vast audit.-
level on opening night was
the title role, won the Car- r m on the campus of
way, way too high. It's a
bench Award as best actor West Bea Raton Commis-
musical,notaneardrum-
musical. So even in a Wry High School, the same
bursting concert, folks.
tongue -in -cheek (or fangs- space that the now- defunct
The supporting players
-neck) musical, there's New Vista Theatre used
are less assured, particu-
ample opportunity to for its final few shows. No
larly when executing
shine curse there — it's a p
director- choreographer
Slow Burn's Bat Boy is fitly fine space for main
F tzwatei s dance moves,
-
and some (especially Lis -
s n Ellington as Mayor
Maggie, Eric Jaffe as Sher-
iff Reynolds and Sean Mal-
-
doon as Rev. Billy High-
-
tower) give the sort of
performance you'll find in
_
a community
not -so -hot c
theater. Technical glitches
n --
.•,• f 1r (- ��'.
'abounded on opening
i night: blackouts that lasted
' (! !li ;• �.-
{ too long a nonfunctioning
1- '-- •,.,:`
imicrophone for Pena at
Si, Week yes ion: -EdJ—
first, actors not always in
March 5th - April 9th • 5pm io 6pm
:sync with the recorded
Aye, 5 a..a.
: music track
$So.- pr .wdwnr p.dvde..116 seasienal
It's a beginning, one that
To REGISTER CALL 305.254.031 O
everyone from the youth -
Ins[rvcfor: Mike F`
fill to seasoned audience
S-1, D.d F.mdy YMCA
members at that first per -
9355 SW 134 Bh t •Miami, FL 33176
formanee seem d to enjoy.
- _..... __. _. _.....
But if Slow Born Is t0 set
the South Florida theater
world on fire. its founders
oix-
will have to also their
i game n a right led space
with better funding, more
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
qualitatively uniform cast-
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
inganageateranen on to
the little details that add up
NOTICE IS HMEBY gtrtn Cat Ne Cry C,leriz n d Ne Car d SaM
� to a strong production.
Christine Dolen Ls The
stexx, Hxna xA emavn p mrc Hazdgs at is regxlar Oty e«rvnssso,
Miumi Herald's theater
mortar sznea,ma tw Tves4ay, iota, L rota tegnti,q a<7:3o o m
N the cry C i%xin Cnamten (A30 Suset Dms to muiv Ne
. oitic.
mmxing rsrWsY
An Orffeerce d Ne IhW and Yce Cry C -n 0Ne cryof
SouM Memi. fl r laWa'S tieE.Watb, aM APP .Nepon
VA) aase1 TotPme z m to, Sm,h Allyn' EOngrsvxoe
Man. the vri,vxseur cc m are gods c8t3tr aM rofris
iormzfoSar3 COrr�ralz Hzn 0.'+nert Fn, tart USA
a,l arc, S ; W, mtr•stnctwe [arsretimr Recreates:
1 Ore use- M'xyorem r, alit", acr ao 1�`r4
Imyeremfiv y.rdcg tar searzG33y ac nmi h t'MRtI,
aM wa�a> -9 r an«we ate.
All. ill—lad Ponies or imYM m acaM aM win re Wda
Fm `x Mxaci'iom pkue mitxt Ne try ck"7s 014 at
kGLp6340.
rraeA
W
THEATERREVIEW
Award- winning `Melt'
of, about, for Miami
BYCHRISTINEDOLEN
ry.eaysrcn:amiBr'✓i<cm received funds between
Cuter; =M V= -, Mcr•N Cam
A Miami -Dade busi- November 2001 and
When a play wins the
it y
Carbonell Award as best
-
new work which
ing money to bribe tole- pay off officials of Haiti's
Michael McKeever's Afelt
, ;+•
did in 2008 — that's usu-
?^
ally the job well -d ne
Jean Fourcand, 62, of cations D'Haiti. It is
capstone ofits presence n
Miami, former president known as Haiti Teleco.
South Florida. The script;,
of Fourcand Enterprises Fourcand said the
goes on to a life in the
--
larger theater world or
. , but it seldom resur-
Annual International
faces in the region that
fast brought it acclaim
Afelt, however, proves
a e ception
welcom ex
61 of Miami and Hairy
McKeever's play,
which premiered at Coral
Gables' New Theatre in
is
2007, is a piece that is of, MIAMI STORY: Teresa Maria Rojas and John Felix
about and for multicul- appear in'Melt' at the Actors' Playhouse.
rural Miami. It gently
examines both tensions
1 Fun! Fun! ';
.ad connections within
this distinctive city, art
If go sociopolitical study,
Cully serving as a history
you
McKeever's graceful,
lesson and an example of
funny, insightful writing
the healing power of
■WhaC'NZIt'by Michael. makes his moving chazac-
empathy.
McNeeter tors live and breathe. That
Several members of
0 Whem18acooy Theatre Melt won the Carbonell,
Leadership Miami felt so
al Actors, PlayltcOSe, the region's highest the -
strongly about the play's
2E0 N,.razle Mde, Ccxffi ater honor, is no surprise.
Gabes, ttaough Feb. 28
power [o spur discussion
thattheyinvitednearly
The simple new pro -
• When:Bpm Friday- duction, staged by Stuart
900 high school students
Salurday,2pm Sunday Meltzer, features two
to see it in a one -time -only
-Cost 430 (425 sellers, actors reprising their roles
performance last year.
4205tadeot05liaell from the original (Felix
Now, thanks to their
roc Owse73to22=- and Sim), one who joined
efforts and their passion
alXe+naC Roe Shoe { r the Gusman show
Far the play, it has
(Richberg)andthreewha
returned yet again, this
�I.f.:305- 444 -9293, are new to be piece
time for a two - weekend
wsvw.adors[)ay (Rojas Gaspard and
run in the upstairs Bal-
houseor9wwww.ml Elam). All are terrific
cony Theatre at Actors'
me.h.da iamiram Rojas and Siut with their
Playbouse. funny momi- and -son
Melt ha been interplay, Felix with his
described as s intri- thatturnedmanyofthose heartbreaking decline,
Gately woven tapestry of buildings into half -fin- Richberg and Gaspard as
family, history and hope; ished monuments to loving partners with
aspot- onsummationofits "progress "andbcom -time is. And then there's
style and range. optimism) FJ-
McKeever introduces us Isaac (John Felix), a Elam is really new to
to the members of three prickly but likable Jewish the play: Replacing Tara
diverse families, then man whose mind is too Vodiha, who had to leave
es the players around quickly eroding, is at odds the cast because of a med.
to makenewconnections, with his gay son, Leo ical issue, Elam had
much as life in Miami (Nicholas Richberg), a 48 hours before Friday's
inevitably does. high school teacher who opening night to learn the
There's Marta (Teresa ants to adopt a baby roleofAdelle, And though
Maria Rojas), a seamstress from Guatemala. Leo's the Carbonell - winning
from Havana who finds partner, Jackson (Reiss actress consulted a "note-
herselflockedinabattle Gaspard), a black nurse book ^(really the script) in
with cancer, and her son named for the hospital a few scenes, she 11 -
Luis (Javier Siut), a where he was bom, tells it lessly delivered several
Mr. Fix -it for developers as he sees it to his sister key speeches from mem-
who want to sweep his- Adelle (Lela Elam), an ory.
tory and people out of the attorney who fights for Amazing.
way of gleaming new those whom Luis' clients
condo towers. (Melt, obvi- would displace. Christine Dolen is The
ously, was written before While that may sound Miami Herald's theater
the financial meltdown more like a formula for a critic.
MIAMI -DADE I HAITI BR IB ERY SCHEME
Exec enters guilty plea
BY JAY WEAVER Inc., admitted that he funds came from an bl
ry.eaysrcn:amiBr'✓i<cm received funds between
mediary company, J.D.
A Miami -Dade busi- November 2001 and
Locator Services Inc. Juan
ness executive pleaded August 2002 from U.S.
Diaz, president of J.D.
guilty Friday to launder- telephone companies to
Locator, pleaded guilty
ing money to bribe tole- pay off officials of Haiti's
last year to conspiring to
mmunications officials state -owned national
commit violations of the
in Haiti, company, Telecoms
Foreign Corrupt Practices
Jean Fourcand, 62, of cations D'Haiti. It is
Act and money launder.
Miami, former president known as Haiti Teleco.
ing.
of Fourcand Enterprises Fourcand said the
In his guilty plea, Finar
cand also said that Robert
--
Antoine, the former die
1e°n
Annual International
e :
na T �
°r=`
txai<
ived he bribes.
I December, Antoine,
61 of Miami and Hairy
e
was indicted along with
four others for their
alleged rates in the foreign
:B. 20th &SUNDAY, FEB. 21st
bribery, wire fraud and
12:00 Noon -`7:00 PM "
oney laundering
scberce.
1 Fun! Fun! ';
The others charged are
Joel Esquenazi, 53, of
Miami, Carlos Rodriguez,
s I Music 1. Lots of Defidous Foods
53, of Davie: Jean Rene
i 43, Miramar
'SION andFREE PARKING
and Marguerite
and Haiti; M
dH
Grandtson, 40, of Mira -
y,t
Daperval's sister.
For more information, Gaff 305.376.3252 in Miami -Dade
or 954.538.7308 In Broward.
the Miami -4-Jerata
�e t 7
'ff �MM I LY:
Introduction ............................. ..............................1
Chapter 1 — Future Land Use Element ........................3
Chapter 2 — Transportation Element ..........................18
Chapter 3 — Housing Element ....... .............................28
Chapter 4 — Infrastructure Element .............................33
Chapter 5 — Conservation Element .............................37
Chapter 6 — Recreation and Open Space Element .......... 40
Chapter 7 — Intergovernmental Coordination Element.....44
Chapter 8 — Capital Improvement Element ...................50
� �
.. .,
,�� v
The Transportation Element was revised to address traffic congestion issues which include
the need to reduce excessive through traffic in certain areas; the need for updated bicycle
and pedestrian plans; the provision of adequate parking; and the need to determine the
ultimate capacity of the transit(rail system.
Chapter 3, Housing Element
The Housing Element was revised to include goals established by the City's Affordable
Housing Advisory Committee and redevelopment issues related to housing were addressed
through amendments that recognize the City's role in expanding housing choices and
options for existing and future residents. Additionally, amendments were included that
reflect the affordable housing and other programs being implemented through the City's
Community Redevelopment Agency.
Chapter 4, Infrastructure Element
The Infrastructure Element was revised to address the current and future public
infrastructure needs of the City to ensure public health, safety and quality of
life. Amendments to the policies to correct inefficiencies were also included.
Chapter 5, Conservation Element
The Conservation Element was revised to implement the latest Best Management Practices
to protect, restore and enhance the natural features of the City.
Chapter 6, Recreation and Open Space Element
The Recreation and Open Space Element was revised to address the park and recreation
issues such as the City's desire to conduct a comprehensive Recreation and Open Space
Master Plan to be used as a mechanism to assist the City in its efforts to meet the
recreational needs of existing and future residents. Other amendments address the need to
evaluate the feasibility of instituting an impact fee and to revise the Level of Service
Standard for recreation and open space.
Chapter 7 Intergovernmental Coordination Element
The Intergovernmental Coordination Element was revised to further the City's coordination
and communication procedures for resolving issues of mutual interest with other local
governmental entities, which may arise from the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.
The city will continue to work with the County in support of the 2003 Interlocal Agreement
for Public School Facility Planning.
Chapter a Capital Improvement Element
The Capital Improvement Element was revised to address the 2005 changes to the Growth
Management legislation pertaining to the annual update of the Capital Improvements
Schedule and financial feasibility requirements. Other amendments were included that
reinforce the relationship and linkage between the Comprehensive Plan and the Capital
Improvements Program and recognizes that South Miami is a diverse, full service
community with both residential and non - residential land uses and
neighborhoods. Additionally, an amendment was included to address impact fees as a
potential mechanism for ensuring the City's ability to provide key infrastructure and services
at adopted Levels of Service through the planning period.
CHAPTER I
FUTURE LAND USE
ELEMENT
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Adopted 8119197 by Ord.No. 20-97-1641; Amended 317100 by Ord.No. 1-00-1703;
Amended
. ...... ..... a
Reason foratnendment. Recommendation to address EAR Issue II. A.,
"Development and Redevelopment". rhe amendment reflects
the current adoption rt h trr the Plan, and provides
framework `or amending the land development regulations to
11
address specific issues raised during public involvement
Vibiective 1.2 Preserve historic buildincis, sites and districts located within Mg E,:i
throggh the aDDrOPriate
All
a r. . <<
Reason for amendment: Recommendation LU-,7. to Issue H.A.,
"Development rr ent' . The amendment broadens
the t to r es s historic resources that may be
designated in the future, and the range of preservation
mechanisms and tools.
Policy 1.2.1 The "4 ~ Board
all new development proposals ... the City's
historic limited .
uauurr for amendment: uu r dat on L11-8. . to address Issue tt...
"Development and Redevelopment". Th rrrendm nt updatess,
and corrects th natne of the referenced Buu $
historic Policy 1.2.2 The of 5 designation
as a historic roadway both to the east and west of the City, should be
continued or de iY
0
Objective 1.3 Assure adequate public facilities to serve new development See policy
for measurability.
Policy 1.3.1 The development code shall include language that continues to require
that the developers shall provide drainage, sewer connections and
other feasible public facilities in conformance with level-of-service,
standards and concurrent with the development. Development permits
shag be conditioned on the provision of such facilities.
MIOALV U., Hg�m
Objective 1.4 Maintain and review a revised development code that inc u es
innovative zoning techniques relative to the transition between
residential and non-residential districts.
Policy 1.4.1 The City shag utilize mixed land use zoning categories to achieve
creative development in the transition areas between commercial and
residential and to achieve the goals set forth in the public charrettes.
Reason for amendment: Recommendation LU-9. to address EAR Issue H.D., "Fiscal Health
and Government Services,". The an7endment reflects- the
r#J
coordination f err public school facility and lead use
planning prescribed in the referenced rr rlo cal Agreement
Policy 1.5.2 During pre-development program planning and site selection activities,
the City shall coordinate with the Dade Public Schools
continue to seek, where feasible ,r mutually acceptable,
other schools with public parks, ,
community centers to - extent possible.
Reason for amendment. nr men rrrmendatio r `f # areas EAR Issue .,
"Development and Redevelopment" The amendment
intended to roan for downtown redevelcopment, in accordance
with redevelopment Irate and goals, and protect residential
areas from ncroachmen nonresidential uses.
N
MR-
-
Reason for amendment. nr men rrrmendatio r `f # areas EAR Issue .,
"Development and Redevelopment" The amendment
intended to roan for downtown redevelcopment, in accordance
with redevelopment Irate and goals, and protect residential
areas from ncroachmen nonresidential uses.
N
Policy 2 1.21 Continue to monitor parking usage to determine when and where
additional uni i t parking areas should be provided.
Reason for amendinent., Existing Policy 21.1 was moved to 1 °ti 1.3 and
renumbered.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation LU-13. to r Issue uu il. .
"Development e 1 m nt" The amendment reflects
the esfablishment of Transit i ri .rat Development i tri ts, and
addresses concems about their potential impacts
surrounding oil t and uses.
Policy 3. 1.1 Zone for new development and redevelopment in accordance with the
Future Land Use Map, including multi-story and mixed-use districts.
Policy 3.1.2 Enforce the City's zoning and other land development codes.
Policy Pursue traffic policies, + e ,: and pedestrian e rm policies
downtown, that enhance and thereby the *,,. base.
NI-
Reason for amendment: Recommendation -1 . to address EAR Issue t
"'Development e l nt ". The amendment reflects
the establishment of Transit Oriented Development Districts, and
addresses concerns n about their potential impacts on
surrounding to r rho and uses.
�.
r - Ull 111 1111:;
jMact fees .,«
f' / f i
Reason for amendment. Recommendation L t . to address EAR Isere 1I .D., "'Fiscal
Health and Government Services". Additional impact fees are
potential tial hanis for ensurirW the City's it , to 1 key
infrastructure arr rvi at adopted Levels of Service through
the planning period
M
.
,X
Reason for amendment: Recommendation -1 . to address EAR Issue t
"'Development e l nt ". The amendment reflects
the establishment of Transit Oriented Development Districts, and
addresses concerns n about their potential impacts on
surrounding to r rho and uses.
�.
r - Ull 111 1111:;
jMact fees .,«
f' / f i
Reason for amendment. Recommendation L t . to address EAR Isere 1I .D., "'Fiscal
Health and Government Services". Additional impact fees are
potential tial hanis for ensurirW the City's it , to 1 key
infrastructure arr rvi at adopted Levels of Service through
the planning period
M
Use Map and in compliance with other relevant development
regulations of the City.
Policy 4. 1.1 Maintain the single- family land use and zoning in west central South
Miami in order to protect the wellfields that abut the City near Ludlam
Road; specifically, Nelson Homesites subdivision, Tranquility Estates
subdivision, Linden Acres subdivision, Sunset circle subdivision, the
unplatted area immediately west of Sunset Circle, South Side Estates
subdivision and the parcel area immediately south of South Side
Estates.
Objective 4.2 Preserve natural resources whenever possible. Natural resources shall
be defined as specific communities of regional ecological significance.
Policy 4.2.1 The Environmental Review and Preservation Board shall review all new
development applications to assure realistic protection and
enhancement of natural features, particularly water bodies and tree
stands.
Policy 4.2.2
The City shall assist the Metropolitan Dade County Department of
Environmental Resource Management in the protection and
preservation of the Girl Scout Park as a "natural forest community," for
as long as the park is designated by DERM as a "natural forest
community.:
Objective 4.3
Assist the County in making land available for sewer facilities as
required; can not be measurable in advance of County plans.
Policy 4.3.1
Reserve land for pump stations if required by the County's extension of
sewer lines, which in turn is a water quality protection program.
Objective 4.4
Preserve floodplain areas via floodplain management and limiting
development within the Special Flood Hazard Area.
Policy 4.4.1
In coordination with the Transit - Oriented Development District, permit
more intense development only in those areas which are located
outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area.
Policy 4.4.2
Building density and intensity may be transferred from areas within the
Special Flood Hazard Area, in order to permit development within the
Transit - Oriented Development District, while reducing the permitted
intensities within the Special Flood Hazard Areas.
Policy 4.4.3
Develop a Transit - Oriented Development District and floodplain overlay
map in conjunction with new regulatory mechanisms to implement the
preservation of the floodplain and encourage development within the
Transit- Oriented Development District.
Note:
1) Objective 9J- 5.006(3)(b)5 is not applicable since this is not a coastal
community.
11
2) Objective 9J-5.006(3)(b)6 is not applicable since this is not an Area of
Critical State Concern.
Goal 5 To achieve revitalization and renewal of areas designated as
redevelopment areas.
Objective 5.1 linplement the -re-Mm—of Continue to utilize the South Miami
Reason for amendment. Recommendation LU-18. to addrosy EAR Issue H.A.,
"'Development and Redevelopment"'. The amendment reflects
the fact that the South Mrant Community Redevelopment Agency
has been established
Policy 5. 1.1 lmeLqment and periodical/K ygdate the P-Fepane- and adWt a South Miami
Community Redevelopment Plan for the area generally bounded by SW
6' 22n d Avenue to the north; Red Road to the east; Sunset Drive to the
south; and SW 62 "d Avenue to the west.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation LU-19. to address CAR Issue II. A.,
"'Development and Redevelopment"'. The amendment reflects
tt e. fact that the South Miami Community Redevelopment Plan
has been adopted
Policy 5.1.2 implement priority smcRP programs and projects, including but not
limited to- "in-fill" housing, construction of multi-family units,
substantial rehabilitation of housing (HUD Complex), and streetscape
and infrastructure improvements.
Objective 5.2 Maximize resources for redevelopment by utilizing applicable federal,
state, local and private incentivelfunding programs.
Policy 5.2.2 Obtain planning and implementation funding for the South Miami
Community Redevelopment Area from grants available through the
Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area grant program, the Community
Development Block grant program and other appropriate grant
programs.
in
Future Land Use Categories
This section contains language which explains the intent of the future land use map. Zoning
regulations which permit uses that are specifically permitted by this section and that also
permit uses that are less intensive than those permitted by this section may be deemed to
be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Zoning regulations that are more restrictive
than the provisions of this section may also be consistent with the comprehensive plan. The
terms "less intensive" and "more restrictive" in this section are not defined in this plan.
Planned unit development zoning regulations which permit buildings to be higher than
stated in this plan may be deemed consistent with this plan, provided such regulations do
not permit the overall floor area on a site to be greater than could occur if the height limits of
this plan were observed.
Nothing in this plan is intended, or has the effect of, limiting or modifying the right of any
person to complete any planned development which has been issued a final planned
development order which is in full force and effect and where development has commenced
and is continuing in good faith, provided that all regulations and conditions as imposed by
the City are met. Any legally granted variances to a development code regulation which
implements this plan shall be deemed to be a legally granted variance to this plan and as
such shall be deemed to be consistent with this plan. This variance provision shall apply to
all elements and sections of this plan.
Vested Rights: Nothing contained herein shall be construed as affecting validly
existing vested rights. It shall be the duty and the responsibility of the applicant alleging
vested rights to affirmatively demonstrate the legal requisites of vested rights. Vested rights
shall require a demonstration to the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami
that the applicant (1) has relied in good faith, (2) upon some act or omission of the
government, and (3) has made such a substantial change in position or incurred such
extensive obligations and expenses to the applicants detriment as to create an undue
hardship. The mere existence of zoning contrary to the South Miami Comprehensive Plan
shall not be determined to vest rights. Development actions where all required approvals
have been received, or orders and permits that preceded the official adoption of this
Comprehensive Plan shall remain in full force and effect but subject to all applicable zoning
laws and regulations of the City. The land development regulations to be adopted shall
provide for specific standards to carry out these concerns.
To reflect repeated public concerns expressed at the charrettes and public hearings
regarding the preponderance of land development regulations, the land use categories are
reduced to reflect the traditional land use designations utilized by the planning profession.
Regulation of specific uses and intensities will be included under provisions in the Land
Development Code.
Single- Family Residential (Two Story)
The single- family land use category is intended to provide for one residential dwelling unit
on each parcel of land. New parcels should have a minimum area of 10,000 square feet. In
areas where existing platting is characterized by parcels larger than 10,000 square feet,
zoning regulations should be consistent with surrounding parcel sizes. Sites large enough
to be subdivided into parcels of 10,000 square feet or larger could be zoned accordingly, but
only if such zoning would be compatible with surrounding development.
FBI
Lot of Record. If the owner of a platted lot in any district does not own a parcel or tract
of land immediately adjacent to such lot, or if the deed or instrument under which such
owner acquired title to such lot was of record prior to application of any zoning regulations
to the premises, or if such lot were created and first recorded in compliance with the zoning
regulations in effect on the lot at the time of recording, and if such lot does not conform to
the requirements of such regulations as to the width of lot and lot area and lot width
regulations shall not prevent the owner of such lot from erecting a single- family dwelling or
making other improvements on the lot, provided such improvements conform in all other
respects to the applicable zoning regulations provided that such platted lot is not less than
fifty feet in width and has a frontage of at least fifty feet. The term "platted lot" as used
herein shall mean a full and complete separate parcel designated as a lot, parcel, or tract as
part of a subdivision plat recorded in the public records of Miami -Dade County, Florida.
Zoning regulations shall not require any special hearing or approval process for lots that
meet the requirements set forth herein.
Duplex Residential (Two Story)
The duplex residential category is intended to provide for two residential dwelling units per
parcel of land. Each dwelling unit should have its own at -grade direct access from the out -
of- doors. Two - family structures should be developed at densities that do not exceed two
dwelling units per 10,000 square feet.
Townhouse Residential (Two Story)
The townhouse residential category is intended to limit development to townhouse type
dwelling units on parcels of land not less than 10,000 square feet in area. Each dwelling unit
should have its own at -grade direct access from the out -of- doors. Townhouse dwelling
units should be developed at densities that do not exceed one dwelling unit per 7,260 square
feet of site area. Individual parcels which meet the minimum site size of 10,000 square feet
in area could be developed for use as single family residential dwelling units. Zoning
regulations which implement the townhouse category shall prohibit two - family structures;
and, one single- family structure may be permitted to secure a vested right to use any legally
created parcel which does not meet the minimum lot size requirements of this plan and /or
the zoning ordinance.
Multi - Family Residential (Four Story)
The multiple- family residential land use category is intended to provide for residential
densities of up to a maximum of 24 dwelling units per net acre. Multiple- family residential
development shall be designed in order to create environmentally -sensitive and well -
landscaped settings with pedestrian and multi- modal, transit oriented amenities. Zoning
regulations shall be implemented to preserve the existing densities of developed properties
within established districts. Designers should be encouraged to produce unique, flexible,
multi -level projects, such as mixed -use developments, including retail and office uses on
ground floor levels. Zoning regulations for the proposed Park View Townhouse area should
include an option whereby townhouse developments could be permitted at densities not to
exceed 24 dwelling units per acre.
Residential Office (Two Story)
The residential office land use category is intended to provide for the development of very -
low intensity office structures that are similar in development characteristics to single- family
M
homes. Development characteristics shall include but not be limited to height, mass,
volume, parking and landscaping. Buildings shall not exceed two stories. In addition, heavy
landscaping and screening shall be provided for parking areas, trash storage and other non-
residential site characteristics.
15
Commercial Retail and Office (Two - Story)
The commercial retail and office land use category is intended to provide for retail and retail
service office use and office services that are characteristic of commercial development.
Adopted zoning regulations shall reinforce the "no widenings" policy as set forth in the Trafft
Gir-Gulatien Transportation Element by encouraging the containment of development along
existing State and County high- design roadway facilities. (97-1ER)
Mixed -Use Commercial /Residential (Four - Story)
The mixed -use commercial /residential land use category is intended to provide for different
levels of retail uses, office uses, retail and office services, and residential dwelling units with an
emphasis on mixed -use development that is characteristic of traditional downtowns. Permitted
heights and intensities shall be set forth in the Land Development Code. Regulations regarding
the permitted height, density and intensity in zoning districts for areas designated as mixed -use
commercial /residential shall provide incentives for transit- oriented development and mixed -use
development. Zoning regulations shall reinforce "no widenings" policy set forth in the #af iE
Gimulatien Transportation Element by encouraging use of MetroRail system. Pursuant to the
recommendation by the Department of Community Affairs to include a Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.)
in the Comprehensive Plan (as opposed to the provisions in the Land Development Code) , the
City adopts a F.A.R. of 1.6 for this land use category which is the existing F.A.R. in the Land
Development Code for the corresponding zoning district. In addition, the City adopts a
maximum residential density of 24 dwelling units per acre. In order to ensure a mix of uses, the
City requires that a minimum of two of the above uses must be developed within this category.
For residential projects, at a minimum, at least one floor must allow retail. For retail projects, at
a minimum, at least one floor must contain residential or retail.
Transit - Oriented Development District [TODD] (Flexible Height up to 8 Stories)
The Transit - Oriented Development District is intended to provide for the development of office
uses, office services, office- related retail, retail, retail services, and residential uses in multi-
story and mixed -use projects that are characteristic of transit - oriented developments.
Permitted heights and intensities shall be set forth in the Land Development Code, including
design standards. Zoning regulations shall encourage development within the TODD in
conjunction with limiting new development within the Special Flood Hazard Area. The City shall
pursue incentive programs for redevelopment including flexible building heights and design
standards to insure that responsible, effective and aesthetically pleasing projects result.
The Neiahborhood use e
office, residentiyf and of t-ra-ditional
Nei nrlinnel
.,.........d: ».. s.. ». aifia 2nd .I..s.,:I...l „12ne_ wh' h 11 ix of ®c -that am agghain"tinth
the Qtv�s »d n....oleip» ent Stich d ! - ats Sh.,llFespeat the a
16
Residential / Limited Commercial District (Two Story)
The Residential /Limited Commercial District (Two Story) future land use map cate-gory is
intended to allow for low - density residential development and limited commercial development
in a transition area abutting single family homes. The maximum height of all new construction
shall be two stories Residential development shall be limited to townhouse development at a
maximum of =6= 5 units per acre Commercial development shall be limited to a maximum floor -
area -ratio of 0.80 and shall include only those retail and personal service (office) needs for the
local neighborhood residential areas The specific type of retail and office uses shall be set
forth in the appropriate zoning use district in the Land Development Code. The Land
Development Code shall provide for a mandatory no- construction buffer/ landscape area and a
required wall or fence at the rear of all properties facing or abutting single family residential.
Mixed use development is encouraged Existing buildings and uses which are not consistent
with the standards for this land use category or with standards for the zoning use district
applied to this area may continue to exist and function but shall be subject to the non-
conforming regulations set forth in Land Development Code Section 20 -4.8.
17A
CHAPTER 2
TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT
18
Policy 1. 1. 1 The CitV o South Miami, in its entiretv, is located within the Miami-Dade
County's Urban Infill Area which is gtg�ign a ed a _Dans Po o
rtatin
&
—
.z
level-of-
Concurrency gaceRtion Area.
service standards for roadways are as follows,
Principal Arterials "F'
Minor Arterials ,py
Miller Drive ,Ff
NOW7,71
2--A4eFDeGengxw-34-,4a9&,4j. he peak hour level-of-servil
X
standard shall be 150 percent of D capacity for US-1.
,X 2. The peak hour level-of-service standard for Bird Roaj
shall be 120 percent of E capacity.
Flu
........... I . . . . . . . . ...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policy 1. 1.2 continue to utilize the development plan review process to control
roadway access points and on-site traffic How.
Polic 1.3 In accordance shall
mr., Owl
M
ON ilia 1,
Jill
........... I . . . . . . . . ...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policy 1. 1.2 continue to utilize the development plan review process to control
roadway access points and on-site traffic How.
Polic 1.3 In accordance shall
mr., Owl
M
Reason for amendment. Recommendation . to r haste ILB.,
"Transportation". The amendment addresses State
requirements for annual review r the impacts of the
Transportation Crr rrrr nqy Exception Area designation.
parking issi s Citywide.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation to address EAR issue 11B.,
""Transportation". The Comprehensive Long Range
Transportation Study is intended to r v r the information
necessary to tter evaluate the City's short- and long-range
transportation meads and alternatives.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation .. to address EAR Issue t
"Tr asp rtnttrrrr"Tire amendment addresses State
requirements r atrrtrr to the Capital Improvements tetra .
Reason for amendment: nt: ommendation T-6. to address EAR teams tr ., "Fiscal Health
and t rr err ment Services". Additional impact tees are a
fenttrrt mechanism for ensuring the it ' s ability to provide
infrastructure and services at adopted Leve, t of service vic trough
the planning period
Objective Achieve coordination . I
See policies for measurability.
M
Policy 1.2.1 Avoid —, Fnafw: aFeet-widenkug-addi t an additional tra lanes,
with the exception of minor non-intrusive intersection im vemen
conformance with the Land Use Plan recommendations that call for
protecting and enhancing both the 4vakkwtial neighborhoods and
Reason for amendment. Recommendation address Issue ., "Development
and Redevelopment". The amendment reinforces the City's
policy against road widening, while ensuring the flexibility
necessary to implement or allow projects to improve traffic
circulation and safety.
Policy 1.2.2 continue to review and refine the land development code to assure
adequate on-site parking and traffic flow through site plan reviews.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation R to address Issue i , "Development
and nt . The amendment a dresses parking
concerns ns raise ur in the rr ii c participadon process.
0
Policy 1.3.3 Work with the MPO to achieve bus service to major emPloyment
concentrations.
Policy 1.3.4
it should be maintained andd1lor pxpanded
.. . . ... ..... .....
MI
Reason for amendment. Recommendationr-12k to address EAR Issue II.A., "Development
and Redevelopment". The amendment reflects concerns about
transportation impacts, on neighborhoods raised during the
pubIt c involvement process.
.. .... ......
M
44A
.. . .... . ... ..... .. .... . ... ...
M
.. ... ....... .. . .. . ...... ...... . . ... ......... .
studies.
m
consistency with the Metro -Dade County CDMP. Please note that these
roadways serve only residential uses in the City of South Miami and
should not be designated by the County for higher capacity and lane
expansion within City limits.
26
for-
average and
da#y
he
most r-eGently
avagable estimates
peak
The City
will GeeFdinate
-4-4-th
FOOT and
imeratGm and
athweters.
is funetioning
and
will identify
ne-ed-a
;Xhinh
show that the
&ystem
26
Reason for amendment. Recommendation T-19. to address EAR Issas II. B.,
Transportation". The amendment re over two interim policies
that are no longer relevant.
♦ -e' s t-' - t M I t I Mvr, r `t
Reason for amendment: c n tin ` 2 � to address s 11B.,
"Transportation ". The amendment addresses State
requirements for annual review of the impacts of the
Transportation Concurrency Exception Area designation.
0
r..
Reason for amendment. Recommendation T-19. to address EAR Issas II. B.,
Transportation". The amendment re over two interim policies
that are no longer relevant.
♦ -e' s t-' - t M I t I Mvr, r `t
Reason for amendment: c n tin ` 2 � to address s 11B.,
"Transportation ". The amendment addresses State
requirements for annual review of the impacts of the
Transportation Concurrency Exception Area designation.
0
CHAPTER 3
HOUSING ELEMENT
28
GOALS, OBJECTIVE AND POLICIES
HOUSING ELEMENT
Adopted 8119197, by Ord.No. 20-97-1641, Amended 31712000, by Ord.No. 3-00-1705
Y
R
Reason for amendment. Recommendation H-3 . to address EAR Issue II.A., "Development
and Redevelopment". The amendment reflects affordable
housing ,are %jrams being implemented throqqh the Citys
Community Redevelopment Agency.
M
.... ....... .
411-JULA
TMM
R
Reason for amendment. Recommendation H-3 . to address EAR Issue II.A., "Development
and Redevelopment". The amendment reflects affordable
housing ,are %jrams being implemented throqqh the Citys
Community Redevelopment Agency.
M
Policy 1.2.1 Enforce •• to achieve correction of substandard housig
Policy 1.2.2 Provide referrals to County HUD for use of County Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for housing rehabilitation
-.la
Policy - - -
Reason for amendmenf. Recommendation H-5. to address EAR lases -., "Development
and Redevelopment". The amendment addresses concerns
out tear downs and redevelopment
and updates the dates and timelines.
Objective 1.3
�. �� _ _ . .
far-
Reason for atriendment. Recommendation -6. to address EAR lases ILA., "Development
and Redevelopment". e amendayent reftects affordable
housing programs being implemented through the Citys
Community Rede. ve ment Agency.
Policy Utilize the Future Land Use Plan and zoning maps, making special use
of mixed-use districts, to provide for areas which promote verY-IOw-
income, low-income, and moderate-income households, while
attempting to avoid the concentration of these household in specific
areas of the City.
RIM
Reason for amendment., s EAR Issue , *
"Development and Redevelopment". The amendment recognizes
that additional buildings may be designated historic.
m
CHAPTER 4
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
33
W-
Goal 1 To provide and maintain the public infrastructure in a manner that will
insure public health, safety and quality of life.
Fnw,
Policy 1.2.3 The City • County shall formalize a 30 Percent recycling
Program-
Reason for amendment: Recommendations . and 1-4. to address Issue 11 D., "Fiscal
Health and Government Services"". The amendment recognizes
the City's Stormwater Drainage Improvement r ra * and °°
.i. ,
ERR"
r t
m
Policy 1.5.1 The county shall provide a level-of-service such that the project flow
plus the maximum day flow (the average of the five highest daily flows)
of preceding • ar year shall not d 98 percent of
rated County treatment system's capacity.
Objective 6 Assist the Co proposed s •
program.
Policy Assist County conservation AF • 1,.
including plumbing inspections and xeriscape park or medil
plantings.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation 1-7. to address requirements of Chapter 163,
Florida Statutes, and reflect the City's support of County ,
ssss°ssss efforts.
M
CHAPTER 5
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
37
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Adopted 10116101, by Ord.No. 26 -01 -1757
Goal 1 To preserve and enhance the significant natural features in South
Miami.
Objective 1.1
In order to help achieve compliance with State Departmental
Environmental Regulations on air quality, include appropriate
landscaping provisions in a revised development code, and include
public landscaping and bikeway improvements in the general fund.
Policy 1.1.1
Continue to both require landscaping as a part of new private
development and landscape public areas in order to minimize air
pollution.
Policy 1. 1.2
The Transportation Element emphasizes use of expressways by
commuters in order to minimize traffic idling on streets within South
Miami; work with the Metropolitan Planning Organization [MPO] in this
regard.
Policy 1. 1.3
Continue to encourage the use of Metrorail, bicycles and other
alternatives to the automobile through capital improvements.
Objective 1.2
Utilize drainage Best Management Practices to minimize water pollution
particularly in the Snapper Creek Canal and Orr wellfield cone of
influence; supplement with improvement projects.
Policy 1.2.1
The City's review of development applications (and any City drainage
projects) shall use retention and, subsurface drains, that are acceptable
to the South Florida Water Management District and the Dade County
DERM.
Policy 1.2.2 The City shall cooperate with State and County agencies in protecting
the wellfield that abuts the City's western boundary; include in revised
development code as necessary, including hazardous waste controls.
(See Land Use Plan and Infrastructure Elements.)
Policy 1.2.3 The City shall cooperate with the Miami -Dade Water and Sewer
Department in the extension of sanitary sewer lines in order to replace
septic tank usage (particularly in the Brewer Canal Corridor).
Policy 1.2.4 Cooperate with the Dade County DERM to eliminate any future leaking
underground tanks or clean -up sites.
Policy 1.2.5 The City shall continue to preserve its natural areas and open space to
ensure the protection and enhancement of groundwater quality and
recharge capacity.
38
Objective 1.3 . continue r protect, r' enhance remaining tree stands,
plant communities, and other significant vegetation i wildlife
Efficiency Water
Reason for amendment. Recommendation C-2. to address requiremonts of Chapter 163;
Florida ram s, and reflect the City's support of County
conservation efforts.
bodies, Note: policies qJ-&0J3(2)(c)5, 6, 8 and 9 are not applicable due to the very
limited amount of natural water ,.
k
CHAPTER 6
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
ELEMENT
R
fix... C�
i lip � r
Reason for amendment: Recommendation -3 to address EAR Issive m, "Parks r r
Recreation". New community recr eatio n facilides have been
provided n Murray Park` and at the YMCA site, thetefore
implementing and fulfilling the intent of this Policy.
�.. WE
m
Reason for men rr r Recommendation PR-4. to address EAR Issas ., "Parks and
Recreation ". The referenced Plea will assist the City in its
efforts meet the recreation needs r and r rw
residents.
and other mechanisms bK which aH private development assessed its
fair share of the costs associaLe�������
Mace • and
Reason for amendment. Recommendation . to address EAR insure H. C., "Parks and
Recreation". Impact fees will enhance the City's ability to ni
the demand for recreation and open space generated by new
developmentand redevelopment that will increase the residential
population.
- x
.t Svstem.
Policy
z. r rw facilities to help meet South
N'
Policy 1.2.2 The city Recreation Department , r to coordinate
programming quasi-public facilities as the
M
Cason for r rr errt: Recommendation to res r ., "Parks and
Recreation". The amendment removes numerical references in
recognition f the fact that the a r of parks is subject to
increase.
Resource Policy 1.3.2 The city shall assist the Metropolitan Dade County Department of
Environmental
preservation of the Girl Scout Park as a "natural fo '' for
as long as the park is designated by I forest
BI
CHAPTER 7
INTERGOVERNMENTAL
COORDINATION
ELEMENT
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Adopted 31712000, by Ord.No. 2 -00 -1704
Goal
To maintain or establish processes to assure coordination and
communication with other governmental entities for the purpose of
addressing and resolving issues of mutual interest that arise from the
local government's Comprehensive Plan and plans of others.
Objective 1.1
The City shall annually review the comprehensive plans of other
jurisdictions which impact the city of South Miami, in order to identify
and resolve conflicts with the City's Comprehensive Plan, including
concurrency related issues.
Policy 1.1.1
The City shall annually review the comprehensive plans of Miami -Dade
County, the City of Coral Gables, the Village of Pinecrest and other
abutting jurisdictions.
Policy 1. 1.2
The City will annually review the plans and reports of special district
service providers, including but not limited to: Miami -Dade Water and
Sewer Department; the South Florida Water Management District; and
the South Florida Regional Planning Council.
Policy 1. 1.3
The City will coordinate with the above listed service providers that
have no regulatory authority over the use of land to develop
recommendations that improve coordination of the City's concurrency
management methodologies, systems, and levels -of- service.
Policy 1. 1.4
The City will coordinate with staff of the independent special district
authorities in order to resolve conflicts and to identify appropriate
amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Objective 1.2 The City will identify and implement procedures to allow for joint
planning areas and the resolution of issues generated in joint planning
areas.
Policy 1.2.1 The City shall confer with Miami -Dade County and other jurisdictions,
as appropriate, to establish a coordinated approach to the
consideration of future annexation efforts and to the delivery of
municipal services to enclaves (unincorporated areas).
Policy 1.2.2 The City will review the appropriateness of submitted annexation
requests specifically to determine the levels of service to be provided,
the cost of annexation to taxpayers, revenue estimates, expenditures,
consistency and compatibility of development patterns, and the
contiguity of proposed boundaries.
Policy 1.2.3 The City shall coordinate with officials from Miami -Dade County, the
City of Coral Gables, and the Village of Pinecrest; the Florida
M
Department of Transportation; the South Florida Water Management
District; and the South Florida Regional Planning Council in order to
establish a planning process to identify, review, and address issues of
mutual interest relating to abutting boundaries and to enter into
agreements with these jurisdictions in regards to appearance,
compatibility, service delivery and mutual aid.
Policy 1.2.4 The City may use the South Florida Regional Planning Council's dispute
resolution process when necessary to mediate the resolution of
conflicts with other local governments and regional agencies as it
pertains to land uses and the goals, objectives, and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 1.2.5 The City will participate as a member of the Miami -Dade Planners
Technical Committee and will encourage implementation of co-
operative policies and procedures as may be developed by the
Committee.
Objective 1.3 The City will identify and establish joint processes with other local
agencies for collaborative planning on population projections, school
siting, facilities subject to concurrency, facilities with countywide
significance, and problematic land uses.
Policy 1.3.1 The City will coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Planning
Department in order to develop countywide population projections that
include expected growth and /or changes; said changes to be shown in
the South Miami Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 1.3.2 The City will advise the Miami -Dade Public School System of population
projections used in its Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the future
needs for school improvements and school expansions in South Miami.
Policy 1.3.3 The City will annually review the Miami -Dade Public Schools' 5, 10, and
15 -year facility plans for siting of new schools and the expansion of
existing schools within the City's jurisdiction for consistency with the
City's Comprehensive Plan. This review will be done at the staff level
and by attendance at public hearings conducted by the Miami -Dade
Public School System for specific site plans.
Policy 1.3.4 The City will notify the School Board of any proposed land use
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan which could impact the
Board's long -range facility plans.
EM
F
IM,
Policy 1.4.3 The City will notify and solicit comments from adjacent jurisdictions
and the school Board of its existing standards or proposed regulations
being considered for !'itematic or incompatible land uses.
Reason for amendment. Recommendation IC-2. to address requirements of Chapter 163,
Florida Statutes, and reflect the City's support of County
conservation a
W
increase the health e2endence,,,,,of all
, safe!y, welfare and economic ingL
residents n ial n ds.
, inclugtEA residents with 22eEL
Ai -1 g
MOME, M,
........... I.-
the
policy 15.5 The Citv shall coordinate with federal State and local in
tv,
grogeocting,.the C sa 0 its resiii,�
fire and Lq!EYq -es traffic S����
MM&qement-
. ....... ..
M
MZ
-.. ...
Reason for amendment. e commendation IC-3. to reflect the goals, objectives an
policies of the State Comprehensive Plan.,
CHAPTER 8
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
ELEMENT
m
Policy
t
t r
0
Plan.
3. Ability to finance.- A third criteria is the budgetary impact,
will it exceed budget projections?
4. New development: Redevelopment and tax base
enhancement projects are next in priority.
6. Quality of life projects.- Lowest priority would be those
projects not in Categories 1-5 above, but would enhance the quality of life.
Reason for amendment: Recommendation CI-3. to address
EAR Issue II. D., "Fiscal Health and Government Services". The amendment
reinforces the relationship and linkage between the Comprehensive Plan and
capital improvements program.
Policv 1.1.5 The City shall annually review the cppita
M
Policy 1.2.1 Adequate level-of-service standards as established in the adopted
objectives and policies contained in this Comprehensive Plan shall
be the measure for the financial analysis required under this
Element
Note: Pursuant to the intent of Amendment Package f No. .97-
1ER, adopted on August 19, 1997, the list of repeated standards
here and under the previous Objective 1.3 (now deleted in its
entirety) is deleted here.
Policy 1.3.1 The development code shall continue to specify that no
development permit shall be issued unless assurance is given that
the public facilities necessitated by the project (in order to meet the
level-of-service) standards established in the FLUE and other
Elements) will be in place concurrent with the impacts of the
development.
MI,