Res. No. 039-98-10306RESOLUTION NO.39-98-10306
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA,RELATING TO LANGUAGE TO
SATISFY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,REGARDING
THE CITY'S 16 EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN WHICH WERE ADOPTED VIA ORDINANCE NO.20-97-1641 ON
AUGUST 19,1997;PROVIDING FOR A SCHEDULE FOR REMEDIAL
AMENDMENTS;AND,PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,on August 19,1997,the City Commission voted to
adoptOrdinance No.20-97-1641,regardingCity'sAmendment96-2ER
(a.k.a.DCANo.97-1ER)totheadoptedComprehensive Plan,which
implements recommendations contained inthe City's adopted 1995
Evaluation and Appraisal Report [EAR];and,
WHEREAS,on October 7,1997,the City received a letter from
theFloridaDepartmentofCommunity Affairs [DCA]regardingtheir
Statement of Intent and Notice of Intent to find the City's
amendment package not in compliance withState standards;and,
WHEREAS,DCA'sfindingsare based onthe following three
issues:(1)the analyses anddatainthe Transportation Element,
(2)thresholdsforconstructionof retail,officeandresidential
uses in the Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential areas,and (3)a
target date for construction of affordable housing units inthe
Housing Element;and,
WHEREAS,inconjunctionwiththeCity Attorney's Office,the
staff of DCA has consented to terms that may be utilized ina
future stipulated settlement andina remedial amendment,in
order for DCA to find the City's amendments in compliance;and,
WHEREAS,theCityCommissionfindsthatitisinthepublic
interest to resolve the aforementioned outstanding issues.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVEDBYTHE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,FLORIDA:
Section 1.The attached language,contained in "Exhibit A"
and attached hereto,is hereby adopted asthe future stipulated
settlement language tobe used ina remedial amendment.
ResponsetoDCAResolution:February 17,1998
Section 2.TheCity Administration isinstructedtotransmit
this resolution tothe Florida Department of Community Affairs on
February 18,1998,in order to continue the approval process.
Remedial amendmentsasindicatedinExhibitAaretobescheduled
pursuant to the terms of the final stipulated settlement.
Section 3.Thisresolutionshalltakeeffectimmediately
upon approval.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this17thdayofFebruary,1998.
ATTEST:
6~^u/Z^>
CITY CLERK
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM
<*,/<£.^<//<*7
'CITY ATTORNEY
i:\...\EAR-Amends \DCA-NOI-Res.doc
APPROVED:
MAYOR
COMMISSION VOTE:5-0
Mayor Robaina:
Vice-Mayor Oliveros:
Commissioner Feliu:
Commissioner Russell:
Commissioner Bethel:
Response to DCA Resolution:February 17,1998
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
Exhibit A
1I.AMENDMENT TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
2
3 The following remedial amendment language is proposed asan addition tothe existing goals,
4 policies and objectives of the City's adopted and amended Transportation Element as follows:
5
6 Policy1.6,6 Interim Policy:TheCitv of SouthMiamishallcompletethefollowing
7 taskswithinthreemonths of insert date here,inordertobefoundin
8 compliance bvtheFlorida Department of Community Affairs:
9
10 Ananalysis of theexistingtransportation system,levels-of-service and
11 service needs,based upon existing design andoperating capacity,most
12 recentlyavailable estimates foraverageanddailypeakhourvehicletrips.
13 existing modal split and vehicle occupancy rates,existing public transit
14 facilities,including ridership bv route,peakhourcapacitiesand headways.
15 population characteristics including transportation disadvantaged,and the
16 existing characteristics oftrip generators and attractors.TheCitvwill
17 coordinate with FDOT and Dade County MPO to complete the analysis.
18 Said analysis must show thatthe system is functioning andwill identify
19 needs which will correct existing deficiencies ofthe transportation system.
20
21 Policy 1.6.7 Interim Policy:The Citv of South Miami shall complete the following
22 tasks within six months of insert date here,inordertobe found in
23 compliance bv the Florida Department of Community Affairs:
24
25 •An analysis ofthe availability of transportation facilities and services to
26 serve existing landuses:and.
27
28 •An analysis ofthe availability of transportation system to evacuate the
29 coastal population prior toan impending natural disaster:and.
30
31 •An analysis of the growth trends and travel patterns and interactions
32 between land use and transportation,and the comparability between the
33 futurelanduseand transportation elements:and.
34
35 •An analysis of the projected transportation system level-of-service and
36 system needs based upon the future land use categories,including the
37 intensities or densities,and the projected integrated transportation system.
38
39 •The analysis shall consider the projects planned for in FDOT's work
40 program,the long range transportation plan and traffic improvement
41 program (TIP^of the Dade County MPO.and the Metro Dade Transit
42 Authority:and.
43
44 .The analysis shall demonstrate how the Citv will maintain its adopted
45 level-of-service standard for roads and transit facilities;and.
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
i
2 •Theanalysisshalladdressinternalconsistency of the plan,especiallyits
3 provisions addressing transportation,land use,and the availability of
4 facilities:and.
5
6 •An analysis which identifies landusesand transportation management
7 programs necessary to promote and support public transportation systems
8 in designated transportation corridors.
9
10
11
12
13 II AMENDMENTTOTHEFUTURELANDUSEELEMENT
1415 The following remedial amendment language is proposed as an addition to the existing goals,
16 policies and objectives of the City's adopted and amended Future Land Use Element as follows:
17
18 Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential (Four-Story)
19 The mixed-use commercial/residential land use category is intended to provide for different
20 levels of retail uses,office uses,retail and office services,and residential dwelling units with an
21 emphasis on mixed-use development that is characteristic of traditional downtowns.Permitted
22 heights,densities and intensities shall be set forth in the Land Development Code.Regulations
23 regarding the permitted height,density and intensity in zoning districts for areas designated as
24 mixed-use commercial/residential shall provide incentives for transit-oriented development and
25 mixed-use development.Zoning regulations shall reinforce the_"no widenings"policy set forth
26 in the Traffic Circulation Element by encouraging use of Metrorail system.Pursuant to the
27 recommendation by the Department of Community Affairs to include Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.)
28 in the Comprehensive Plan,the City adopts a F.A.R.of 1.6 for this land use category which is
29 the existing F.A.R.in the Land Development Code for the corresponding zoning district.In
30 addition,the Citv adopts a maximum residential density of 24 units per acre.In order to ensure
31a mix of uses,the Citv requires that a minimum of two of the above uses must be developed
32 within this category.For residential projects,at a minimum,the first floor must allow retail.
33 For retail projects,at a minimum,at least one floor must contain residential of office.For office
34 projects,at a minimum,at least one floor must contain residential or retail.
35
36
37
38
39 III FUTURELANDUSEMAP AMENDMENTS
4041 No language changes or map changes are proposed,as it is understood that the amendment
42 which is proposed in the previous section,ifaccepted,will satisfy DCA,regarding this section.
43
44
45
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
1 IV AMENDMENT TOTHE HOUSING ELEMENT
2
3 The following remedial amendment language is proposed as an addition to the existing goals,
4 policies and objectives of the City's adopted and amended Transportation Element as follows:
5
6 Policy 1.3.6 Interim Policy:The Citv of South Miami shall complete the following
7 tasks within three months of insert date here,in order to be found in
8 compliance bv the Florida Department of Community Affairs:
910 Housing Data and analysis,and associated policies and objectives,based
11 upon the Affordable Housing Needs Assessment bv the Shimberg Center
12 for Affordable Housing.University of Florida.
13
14
15
16
17 V CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
1819 No language is proposed,as it is understood that the aforementioned amendments together,if
20 accepted,will satisfy DCA,regarding consistency issues.
21
22
23
24 VI CONSISTENCY WITH THE STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN FOR SO FLA
25
26 No language is proposed,as it is understood that the aforementioned amendments together,if
27 accepted,will satisfy DCA,regarding consistency issues.
28
29
30
31 *
32
Exhibit A
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To:MayorandCityCommission Date:February 11,1998
>3AgendaItem#
Comm.Mtg.02/17/98
Response to DCA Resolution
From:Diana Moftis
InterimCity Manager
Re:
REQUEST:
ARESOLUTIONOFTHEMAYORANDCITYCOMMISSIONOF HIE CITYOFSOUTHMIAMI.FLORIDA,
RELATINGTOLANGUAGETOSATISFYTHE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS.REGARDING THE
CITY'S 16 EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS TOTHE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH WERE ADOPTED VIA
ORDINANCENO.20-97-1641 ONAUGUST19.1997;PROVIDINGFORASCHEDULEFORREMEDIAL
AMENDMENTS:AND.PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BACKGROUND &ANALYSIS:
On August 19,1997,the City Commission adopted a package of 16-EAR Based Amendments to
the City's Comprehensive Plan,in order to implement recommendations contained in the 1995
Evaluation and Appraisal Report [EAR].On October 7,1997,theCity received aletter from the
Florida Department of Community Affairs [DCA]regarding their Statement ofIntentand Notice
ofIntentto find theCity's amendment package notin compliance withState standards.
In conjunction with the City Attorney's Office,thestaffof DCA has consented to terms that may
be utilized ina future stipulated settlement andina remedial amendment,inorderfor DCA to
find the City's amendments /'//compliance.The attached resolution adopts proposed language to
betransmittedtoDCA,inordertoproceedwiththestipulatedsettlementprocess.
RECOMMENDATION:Approval.
Attachments:
ProposedResolutionforAdoption
Letter from DCA,dated February 5.1998
Staff Memorandum,dated October 16,1997
SummarytoDate(easyreferenceoutline)
City Manager's Report:Response toDCA Resolution
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
"Helping Floridians create safe,vibrant,sustainable communities"
LAWTON CHILES
Governor
Bill Mackey
City of SouthMiami Planning Department
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami,FL 33143
February 5,1998
*
JAMES F.MURLEY
Secretary
SBfe-rc-93
RE:NotIn Compliance Determination for City of South Miami
Amendment No.97-1ER
DearMr.Mackey:
Pursuant to our conversations,the Department agrees to resolving the not in compliance
determination based on the discussions that you and I have had over a period of time.Your help
inthis process hasbeen greatly appreciated.
With regard to the Mixed Use Commercial/Residential (Four Story)land use designation
issue,we agree that theCity can modify the Mixed Use category as follows:
"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
emphasison mixed-use development thatis characteristic oftraditionaldowntowns.Permitted
heights,intensities,and densities 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 the "no widenings"policy set forth in
the Traffic Circulation Element by encouraging use of the Metrorail system.Pursuant toa
recommendation bythe Department of Community Affairs to include Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.),
the City adopts a F.A.R.of 1.6 for this land use category which isthe existing F.A.R.inthe Land
Development Code for the corresponding zoning district.In addition,theCitv adopts a
residential density of x Tor vou may want to establish a minimum and maximum density which
supports mass transif).
2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD •TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 32399-2100
Phone:850.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX:850.92 1 .0781/Suncom 291.0781
Internet address:http://www.state.fl.us/comaff/dca.html
FLORIDA KEYS
Areaof Critical StateConcern FieldOffice
2796 Overseas Highway,Suite 212
Marathon.Florida33050-2227
GREEN SWAMP
Areaof Critical StateConcernFieldOffice
155 East Summerlin
Bartow,Florida 33830-4641
SOUTH FLORIDA RECOVERY OFFICE
P.O.Box4022
8600N.W.36thStreet
Miami.Florida 33159-4022 /*
Mr.Bill Mackey
February5,1998
Page Two
Inordertoensurea mix of uses,theCitvrequiresthata minimum of two of theabove
usesmustbedevelopedwithinthiscategory.For residential projects,ata minimum,thefirst
floor mustallow retail.For retail projects,ata minimum,atleastone floor must contain
residential or office.For office projects,ata minimum,at least one floor must contain residential
or retail."
Ibelieve that this language is acceptable because it ensures amix of uses and establishes
an intensity and density for each land use.Ofcourse,feel free to change the wording as long as
the substantive content isnot altered.Upon finding the Mixed Use Commercial/Residential
(Four Story)category in compliance,Future Land Use Map amendment Nos.1,2,5,and 6 will
be found in compliance.Please provide me with draft language for this category by February 18
1998.
Regarding the Transportation Element,the Department agrees that the City can add a
policy whereby theCitywill complete the attached Short Term Guidelines within three months
subsequent to the date in which the Department finds the remedial amendments in compliance.
As we discussed earlier,you do not have to complete Short Term Guideline No.3,Paragraph 2,
which is the initial land use modeling exercise,because the City has a Transit Oriented
Development District which contains a Mixed Use category.This category supports alternative
forms of transportation.Please provide me with a draft policy by February 18,1998.
As for the attached Long Term Guidelines,the Department is still working with Miami-
Dade County to resolve their not in compliance determination for the Transportation Element.
As soon as we resolve their scheduling issues,we will work with you on your schedule.I expect
that we should resolve Miami-Dade's scheduling issues within a couple of weeks.I will contact
you so wecan work outascheduleassoonasweresolvethe Miami-Dade issue.
Once the Long Term Guidelines are found in compliance,our issue regarding the
Transportation Concurrency Exception Area should be addressed.Our issue was that the City
had not included policies to address the transportation needs of the TCEA.In our Statement of
Intent,we noted that if you completed the Transportation Element,our issue wouldbe addressed.
That is still our position.However,if you would like,you could provide me with draft policies
to address the TCEA and include them with the Stipulated Settlement Agreement.The policies
should discuss ihe shuttle system and couid also include other strategies such as,but not limited
to,timing and staging plans,parking controls and pricing,or transportation demand management
and transportation system management.The benefit of doing this is that theTCEA issue could
be addressed now rather than later.If you choose to add these policies,please provide them to
me by February 18,1998.
/*
Mr.Bill Mackey
February 5,1998
Page Three
Finally,as for the Housing issue,the City should be receiving a copy of the updated
Shimberg Center housing data for Miami-Dade County.The new data should provide a more
accurate reflection of affordable housing in the City because it is more sensitive to population
increases or decreases than the previous study.If me study still shows that there are deficits,the
City should provide an analysis of vacant land and redevelopment potential to determine first,
how much residential development exists in the City.In addition,we should discuss the study
and analyze the findings and assumptions.The City must set a target for affordable housing
based on the new study or come up with alternatives which address meeting the affordable
housing need.Please provide a policy whereby the City commits to completing the Housing data
and analysis and associated objective and policies within4monthsafterthe remedial
amendments are found in compliance.Please provide me with a draft policy by February 18
1998.
Please submit a draft response as outlined by February 18,1998.Iwill examine the
responses and make a recommendation to enter into a stipulated settlement agreement Once we
agree onthe draft,wewilltitlethedraft"ExhibitB"andwillincludethe"ExhibitB"inthe
Stipulated Settlement Agreement.After we enter into the stipulated settlement agreement,the
Cityneedsto adopt the remedial amendments andsubmitthemtous.Wewillthenreviewthe
amendments and issue a cumulative finding ofin compliance.Finally,when you have drafts
available for the short and long term transportation analysis and housing analysis,I would
appreciate a draft copy so that we can provide a courtesy review.
Thanks for being cooperative and providing good recommendations.If you have any
questions,pleasecallmeat(850)922-1805.
Sincerely,
Paul DiGiuseppe
PlanningManager
Enclosure
cc:Dave Dahlstrom,South Florida Regional Planning Council
f»
Potential Short Term Guidelines
1)Rule 9J-5.019(3)(a)states that an amendment must contain an analysis of the existing
transportation system,levels of service,and system needs.The Department recommends that the
City provide an analysis of the existing transportation system levels of service and system needs,
based upon existing design and operating capacity;most recently available estimates for average
daily and peak hour vehicle trips;existing modal spilt and vehicle occupancy rates;existing
public transit facilities,including ridership by route,peak hour capacities,and headways;
population characteristics including transportation disadvantaged;and the existing characteristics
of trip generators and attractors.The City should coordinate with FDOT and the Dade County
MPO to complete the analysis.The analysis must show how the transportation system is
functioning and identify needs which will correct existing deficiencies ofthe transportation
system.
2)The Department recommends that the City adopt interim policies with specific commitments
to complete the required analysis by a date certain,concurrent with the completion ofthe Dade
County MPO long range transportation plan model update.The policies should specify how
coordination will occur with the MPO,Dade County,and FDOT regarding consistency between
the land use element and the transportation element and regarding technical support for
completingthetransportationelement.
The City should compare the existing FLUM designations within the transit corridor to a
professionally accepted source,which has analyzed densities and intensities which support
transit.Once such document is the Dade County MPO document "Transit/Land Use
Relationship Report".Where incompatible uses occur,an analysis should be conducted that
assesses FLUM alternatives that would be compatible,and consistent with the City's plan.This
analysis must be completed prior to the Dade County MPO Long Range Transportation Model
Update,so that,alternative land uses can be submitted to the MPO to resolve incompatibilities
between the transportation system and land use.The City should coordinate with Dade County
regarding the submittal of land use data to the MPO.As the City has identified redevelopment
areas,the analysis should examine the potential opportunities for redevelopment on the
transportation system and the impact ofredevelopment on the transportation system.
Potential Long Term Guidelines
1)The following analysis requirements are dependent upon the Dade County MPO completing
the long range transportation plan model update.
•An analysis of the availability of transportation facilities and services to serve existing
land uses.[9J-5.019(3)(b),F.A.C.]
•An analysis of the availability of transportation system to evacuate the coastal population
Yh
prior to an impending natural disaster.[9J-5.019(3)(c),F.A.C.]
An analysis of thegrowth trends and travel patterns and interactions between land use
and transportation,and the compatibility between the future land use and transportation
elements.[9J-5.019(3)(d),F.A.C.]
An analysis ofthe projected transportation system level of service and system needs
based upon the future land use categories,including their intensities or densities,and the
projected integrated transportation system.[9J-5.019(3)(f),F.A.C.]
The analysis shall consider the projects planned for in FDOT's work program,the long
range transportation plan and traffic improvement program(TIP)ofthe Dade County
MPO,and the Metro Dade Transit Authority.[9J-5.019(3)(g),F.A.C.]
The analysis shall demonstrate how the City will maintain its adopted level of service
standard for roads and transit facilities.[9J-5.019(3)(h),F.A.C.]
The analysis shall address internal consistency of the plan,especially its provisions
addressing transportation,land use,and the availability of facilities.[9J-5.019(3)(i)
F.A.C.]
An analysis which identifies land uses and transportation management programs
necessary to promote and support public transportation systems in designated public
transportation corridors.[9J-5.019(3)0),F.A.C.]
Upon completing these analyses,the City will have to include the required goals,objectives,and
policies pursuant to 9J-5.019(4).The Department recommends that the City submit the goals,
objectives,and policies upon the completion ofthe data and analysis as discussed inthe short
termandlongtermanalysis.
»
c:
To:L.Dennis Whitt
City Manager
From:Bill Mackey,AICP
Director ofPlanning&Zoning
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Date:October 16,1997
Re:DCA's Notice of Intent
DCA's NOTICE OF INTENT
Please find attached correspondence from the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA),
regarding theEAR-based amendments adopted onAugust 19,1997.DCAhaschosentomakea
finding of Not In Compliance for some of the proposed changes inthe EAR-based amendments.
DCA's finding is based onthe following three issues.The first issue isthe analyses and data in
the Transportation Element (this element is a new requirement bythe State and,consequently,at
the present time,few communities have been found tobein compliance on this issue)The
second issue is related tothe State's desire for thresholds to require construction of retail,office
and residential usesonevery parcel inthe proposed Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential areas.
Thethirdissueis related to insertion of a completion date intheHousingElement,which could
potentially require the financing and construction of new,affordable housing units by the City.
Per my conversations withtheSouth Florida Regional Planning Council staff onthis matter,itis
advisable that the City request that the issues set forth in the Notice be considered separately as
follows:(1)the Transportation Element and (2)the Mixed-Use and Housing Element issues.It
isunlikelythataquick solution can be attained forthe Transportation Element issue,as few
communities in Florida havebeen successful in satisfying DCA regarding this issue.SFRPC
staff has beenextremelyhelpfulandwill continue toworkwithboththeCity and DCA.
At this point inthe process,SFRPC staff advises that itmaybetimely for the City Attorney to
contact counsel at DCA,as this issue is now a legal matter,due tothe Notice of Intent finding.
Please be aware thatthiswilldelaythe adoption of anyzoning regulations related tothese issues.
Thank you.
EarlG.Gallop,City Attorney
Ronetta Taylor,CMC,City Clerk
Carolyn Dekle,Executive Director,SFRPC
C3TS,TransportationElement consultants
c:\...\EAR-Amcnds ;DCA-NOA-mcm.doc
r>
LAWTON CHILES
Governor
JAMES F.MURLEY
Secretary
FLORIDA KEYS
Area ofCritical State Coram
Field Office
796 Overseas Highway,Suite 212
Mj/athoa Florida 33050-2227
CREEN SWAMP
Area ofCritical State Coram
FieldOffice
155EastSummeriin
Bartow.Florida 338JMMI
SOUTH FLORIDA
RECOVERY OFFICE
P.O.Box4022
8600N.W.36th Street
Miami,Florida 3315W022
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
"Helping Floridians create safe,vibrant,sustainable communities"
The Honorable Anna Price,Mayor
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami,Florida 33143
Dear Mayor Price:
October 7,1997 IDlPP'R1 "•*
OCT 14 ',997
PLANi&NIG DIVISION
The Department has reviewed the City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan
Amendment 97-1ER,as adopted by Ordinance No.20-90-1641 on August 19,1997 and
determined that it does not meet the requirements of Chapter 163,Part II,Florida
Statutes,for compliance.The Department is issuing a Statement of Intent and Notice of
Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 97-1ER Not In Compliance for
Ordinance No.20-90-1641.The Notice of Intent hasbeensenttothe Miami Herald for
publication onOctober 1-6,1997.
This finding of Not In Compliance is based upon text changes to the Future Land
Use Element,Transportation Element,and Housing Element.Please see the enclosed
Statement of Intent for a more detailed analysis regarding the Department's concerns.I
would like to emphasize that my staff and I are available to assist you or your designee
for the purpose of negotiating an agreement that will bring the amendment into
compliance.
Please note that a copy of the adopted City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan
Amendment,the Statement of Intent and Notice of Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Not in Compliance must be available for public inspection Monday through
Friday,except for legal holidays,during normal business hours,at the South Miami City
Hall,6130SunsetDrive,SouthMiami,FL 33143.
By law,the Department must forward theNotice of IntentandStatement of Intent
to the Division of Administrative Hearings of the Florida Department of Management
Services for scheduling of an administrative hearing pursuant to Section 120.57,Florida
Statutes.Another letter willbesenttoyou that includes additional information about the
administrative hearing process and compliance agreements.Again,however,I would like
to emphasize the Department's interest in resolving this issue through the remedial
amendment process.
2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD •TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 32399-2100
Phone:904.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX:904.92 1.0781/Suncom 291.0781
Internet address:http://www.state.fl.us/comaff/dca.html n
The Honorable Anna Price
October 7,1997
Page Two
If you haveanyquestions,orareinterestedin discussing themediationprocess,
pleasecontactKenMetcalf,CommunityProgram Administrator,or Paul DiGiuseppe,
PlanningManager,at(850)487-4545.
Sincerely,
CGP/pd
Enclosures:Notice of Intent
Statement of Intent
-{^Charles G.Pattison,Director
Division of Resource Planning
and Management
cc:Bill Mackey,City of South Miami
CarolynDekle,Executive Director,SouthFloridaRegionalPlanningCouncil
n
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FIND THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLAN AMENDMENTS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO.20-90-1641 ON AUGUST 19,1997
IN COMPLIANCE EXCEPT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT,THE MDCED USE
COMMERCUL/RESroENTIAL (FOUR STORY)DESIGNATION WITHIN THEFUTURE LAND
USE ELEMENT,HOUSING OBJECTIVE 1.3,AND FLUM AMENDMENT NOS.1,2,5 AND 6
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO.20-90-1641
NOT IN COMPLIANCE
DOCKETNO.97-lER-NOM323-(A)-(I)(N)
The Department givesnotice ofitsintentto find theCity of South Miami plan amendments
adopted by Ordinance No.20-90-1641 onAugust 19,1997 IN COMPLIANCE exceptforthe
Transportation Element,The Mixed Use Commercial/Residential (Four Story)Designation within
theFutureLandUseElement,HousingObjective1.3,andFLUMAmendmentNos.1,2,5and6
adopted pursuant to Ordinance No.20-90-1641 onAugust 19,1997 NOTINCOMPLIANCE,
pursuanttoSections163.3184,163.3187and163.3189,F.S.
The adopted City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan Amendments,the Department's
Objections,Recommendations,and Comments Report (if any),and the Department's Statement of
Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan Amendment(s)NotIn Compliance willbe available for
public inspection Monday through Friday,exceptfor legal holidays,during normal business hours,
attheCity of SouthMiamiCity Hall,6130SunsetDrive,South Miami,Florida 33143.
Any affected person,as defined in Section 163.3184,F.S.,has a right to petition for an-
administrative hearing to challenge the proposed agencydetermination thattheabove referenced
amendments totheCity of South Miami Comprehensive Plan are In Compliance,as defined in
Subsection 163.3184(1),F.S.The petition mustbe filed within twenty-one (21)days after
publication ofthis notice;acopymustbe mailed or delivered tothe local government andmust
include all ofthe information and contents described inRule 9J-11.012(7),F.A.C.The petition
mustbe filed withtheAgencyClerk,Department ofCommunity Affairs,2555 Shumard Oak
Boulevard,Tallahassee,Florida 32399-2100.Failure totimely file a petition shall constitutea
waiver ofanyright to request an administrative proceeding asa petitioner under Section 120.57,
F.S.Ifa petition is filed,the purpose ofthe administrative hearing will beto present evidence and
testimony and forward a recommended order tothe Department.Ifno petition is filed,this
Notice of Intent shall become final agency action.
ThisNotice of Intent and the Statement ofIntentforthose amendment(s)found NotIn
Compliance will be forwarded by petition tothe Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH)of
the Department ofManagement Services forthe scheduling of an Administrative Hearing
pursuant to Section 120.57,F.S.The purpose ofthe administrative hearing will beto present
evidence and testimony onthe noncompliance issues alleged bythe Department inits Objections,
Recommendations,andCommentsReportandStatement ofIntentinordertosecurea
recommendedorderfor forwarding totheAdministrationCommission.
Affected persons may petition to intervene in either proceeding referenced above.A petition for
intervention mustbe filed at least five(5)days beforethe final hearing and must include all ofthe
information and contents described inRule 60Q-2.010,F.A.C.Nonew issues maybe alleged asa
reason to find a plan amendment notin compliance ina petition to intervene filed morethan
twentyone (21)daysafter publication ofthisnotice unless the petitioner establishes goodcause
for not alleging suchnew issues withinthetwentyone(21)daytime period.The petition for
intervention shall be filed at DOAH,1230ApalacheeParkway,Tallahassee,Florida 32399-1550,
and acopy mailed or delivered tothe local government andthe Department.Failure to petition to
intervene withinthe allowed time frame constitutesawaiver of any right sucha person hasto
request a hearing pursuant toSection 120.57,F.S.,orto participate inthe administrative hearing.
Afteran administrative hearing petition istimely filed,mediation is available pursuant to
Subsection 163.3189(3)(a),F.S.,toanyaffected person whoismadea party tothe proceeding by
filing thatrequestwiththe administrative lawjudge assigned bytheDivision of Administrative
Hearings.Thechoice of mediation shall notaffecta party's righttoan administrative hearing.
Charles G.Pattison,Director
Department ofCommunity Affairs
Division ofResource Planning
and Management
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee,Florida 32399-2100
Oij!
v
ft
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
IN RE:SOUTH MIAMI)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN)
AMENDMENT ADOPTED BY)DOCKETNO.97-lER-NOI-1323-(A)-(I)(N)
ORDINANCE NO.20-90-1641)
ON AUGUST 19,1997)
)
STATEMENT OF INTENT TO FIND
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
NOT IN COMPLIANCE
The Florida Department of CommunityAffairsherebyissuesitsStatement of Intentto
find theCity of South Miami Comprehensive Plan Amendment 97-1ER,adopted by Ordinance
No.20-90-1641 onAugust 19,1997 NotIn Compliance.The Department finds thatthe plan
amendment isnot"in compliance,"as defined in Section 163.3184(1 )(b),Florida Statu-es (F.S.),
because itisnot consistent with Chapter 163,Part II,F.S.,the State Comprehensive Plan,the
South Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan,and Chapter 9J-5,Florida Administrative
Code(F.A.C.),forthefollowing reasons:
I.AMENDMENT TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
A.Inconsistent provisions.The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under
this subject heading areas follows:
1)Theamendmentis inconsistent because the amendment didnotincludean adequate
analysis of the projected intermodal deficiencies and needs suchas terminals,connections,high
occupancy vehicle lanes,park-and-ride lots and other facilities.TheCity's reply was not
responsive totheORC objection orthe rule requirement.Describing theCity's proposed shuttle
A
system is not an analysis of projected intermodal deficiencies and needs.Without providing an
analysis ofthe intermodal deficiencies,the City cannot adequately address the needs component
ofthe analysis.[Section 163.3177(6)0)5.,F.S.;Rule 9J-5.005(2)(a);Rule 9J-5.019(3)(e),
F.A.C.]
B-Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthefollowing actions:
1.The assessment must look at areas related to ridership and modal split in order to
determine ifthere are any deficiencies withthe intermodal facilities.This information should be
available through the Metro-Dade County Transit Authority or Dade County.The City must
conduct an analysis of intermodal deficiencies and a needs assessment and consider appropriate
policies,programs,and activities to correct identified problems.
2)The amendment is inconsistent because the City did not provide an adequate
analysis of the projected transportation system levels of service and system needs based upon the
landusecategories,includingtheirdensitiesorintensities of useasshownontheFutureLand
Use Map (FLUM),and the projected integrated transportation system.The analysis did not
demonstrate integration and coordination among the various modes of transportation and did not
address the need for new facilities and expansions of alternative transportation modesto provide
a safe andefficient transportation network and enhance mobility.[Chapter 163.3177(6)(j)8.,
F.S.;Rule 9J-5.005(2)(a)and (5)(a);andRule 9J-5.019(3)(f),F.A.C.].
B.Recommended remedial actions.Thisinconsistencymayberemediedbytaking
the following actions:
/»
2.The City should analyze the FLUM densities,intensities and mixed use patterns
againstthe thresholds requiredtosupporttransit.The City should compare the existing FLUM
designations within the transitcorridortoa professionally accepted source which has analyzed
densitiesand intensities which supporttransit.Onesuch document istheDade County MPO
document "Transit/Land Use Relationship Report."Where incompatible uses occur,an analysis
should be conducted that assesses FLUM alternatives that would be compatible.This analysis
shouldbe completed priortotheDade County MPO Long Range Transportation Plan Model
Updatesothat alternative landusescanbe submitted totheMPO.The City should alsocreatea
policy whereby it commits to completing thisanalysis upon completion of theDade County
Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCMPO)Long Range Transportation Plan Model update.
TheCity should coordinate with Dade County regardingthe submittal of landusedatatothe
MPO.The Department notesthattheCityhasaddedTransportation Element Policy 1.6.4 which
statesthatthe City will continue toupdatethe City's Planas specific information becomes
availablefromthe MPO,Dade County,andtheState of Florida.While the Department believes
thatthegeneral intent of thispolicy is moving intheright direction,thelanguageis vague and
should be revised whereby the City will submit this analysis by adatecertain subsequent tothe
MPO update.
3)The amendment is inconsistent because the amendment does not adequately
analyzethe compatibility of thetransportation system needs with theFlorida Department of
Transportation (FDOT)Adopted Work Program,long range transportation planand plans of the
Dade County MPO,andthe compatibility with the policies and guidelines of these plans.The
responseis inadequate because itdoesnot demonstrate whether the City's system needs are
Yh
consistent with the FDOT Adopted Work Program and the long range transportation plan and
plans of the Dade County MPO.[Section 163.3177(6)0)5.;Rule 9J-5.005(2)(a);and Rule 9J-
5.019(3)(g),F.A.C]
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies maybe remedied by
takingthefollowingactions:
3.Provide an analysis which demonstrates whether theCity's system needs are
consistent with the FDOT Adopted Work Program and the long range transportation plan and
plans of the MPO.Furthermore,the Dade County MPO isnowinthe process of updating their
five-year work plan,andthe Department isworkingwiththeMPO,FDOT-District 6,and Dade
County on ensuring coordinated transportation planning as part of the development of the County
Transportation Element.The Department recommendsthattheCity participate inthis process.
4)Theamendmentis inconsistent because theanalysisdoesnotexplicitly address
anddocument internal consistency of the plan,especiallyitsprovisions addressing
transportation,landuse,andavailability of facilities andservices.While the City's response
speaksingeneralterms of how the transportation elementis consistent with othergrowth
managementgoals ofthe comprehensive plan,itdoesnot explicitly explain how thepoliciesand
programs of thetransportation element supportandfurther objectives and policies of other
comprehensive plan components.[Section 163.3177(6)0)5,F.S.;Rule 9J-5.005(2)(a);and
Rule9J-5.019(3)(i),F.A.C]
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
taking the following actions:
4.The City's analysis must explicitly explain how the policies andprograms of the
4
II
transportation element support and further objectivesandpolicies of other comprehensive plan
components.TheCity's analysis should examine internal consistency such as,butnot limited
to,whethertheFLUM supports the transportation system,whether particular capital
improvements are needed,and whether the transportation system supports infill development.
5)The amendment is inconsistent because theCity did not adequately analyze the
growth trends and travel patterns and interactions between land uses and transportation,and the
compatibility between the future land use and transportation element.The City has provided a
general description of how growth and the transportation system interact based upon general
observations.This overview,however,does notsatisfythe analysis requirements of the rule,nor
would it support specific recommendations for policies and programs to ensure greater
compatibility between the transportation and future land use elements.[Section
163.3177(6)0)5.,F.S.;Rule 9J-5.005(2)(a);and Rule 9J-5.019(3)(d),F.A.C.]
B)Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthefollowing actions:
5.As stated in Item No.2,the City should analyze the FLUM densities,intensities
and mixed use patterns against the thresholds required to support transit.The City should
compare the existing FLUM designations within the transit corridor to aprofessionally accepted
source which has analyzed densities and intensities which support transit.This analysis should be
completed prior to the Dade County MPO Long Range Transportation Plan Model Update so
that alternative land uses can be submitted to the MPO.Upon completion of the Dade County
MPO Long Range Transportation Plan Model update,the City must analyze the compatibility
/*
between the future land use and transportation element.The City should utilize the Dade County
MPO update to project future roadway capacities and mass transit ridership and utilize the Plan
to project where growth will occur.The City could then determine the effects of growth onthe
transportation system and vice versa.As recommended in Item No.2,the City should add a
policy whereby the City will submit this analysis bya date certain subsequent tothe MPO
update.
6)The amendment is inconsistent because theCity did not adequately analyze how
theCitywillmaintainitsadoptedlevel of service standard for roads and transit facilities.The
analysis does notshow projected traffic and transit levels over the next five years and identify
where LOS standards are expected tobe exceeded.[Section 163.3177(6)0)5.,F.S.;Rule 9J-
5.005(2)(a)andRule 9J-5.019(3)(h),F.A.C.]
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies mayberemediedby
taking the following actions:
6.Provideananalysiswhichshows projected trafficand transit levelsoverthenext
five years andidentifywhereLOS standards are expectedtobe exceeded.The analysis should
also includeothermethods of maintaining LOS standards suchas,butnotlimitedto,Capital
Improvement Element improvements topreventLOS failures,changesinlanduse,ormakingthe
transportation system more efficient.
7)The amendment isinconsistentbecausethefollowingobjectiveandpolicieswere
not included in the plan:
Rule 9J-5.019(4)(b)4.Addresstheprovision of efficient publictransitservicesbasedon
existing and proposed generators/attractors,safeand convenient
public transit terminals,land uses,and accommodation of the
specialneeds of the transportationdisadvantaged;
lb
Rule 9J-5.019(4)(c)3.establish parkingstrategiesto promote transportation
goals/objectives;
Rule 9J-5.019(4)(c)7.establish TSM strategiesto improve system efficiency and enhance
safety;
Rule 9J-5.019 (4)(c)9.establish landuseandsiteand building design guidelines for
development in exclusive public transitcorridorstoassurethe
accessibility of new development topublictransit;
Rule 9J-5.019(4)(c)10.establishnumericalindicatorsagainst which the achievement of
mobility goals of the community canbemeasured,suchasmodal
split,annual transit tripsper capita,automobileoccupancy rates;
Rule9J-5.019(4)(c)11.establishment of strategies,agreements andothermechanismswith
applicable local governments and regional and state agencies that
demonstrate the areawide coordination necessary to implement the
transportation,land use,parking,andother provisions of the
transportationelement.
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthe following actions:
7.Include the objective and policies identified above.The objective and policies
must be based on appropriate analyses as discussed in preceding sections of the Statement of
Intent.
8)The amendment is inconsistent because Transportation Element Objective 1.2,
whichseekstoachieve coordination of the Future LandUsePlanandthe Transportation
Element,does not insure that future land use,population densities,housing and employment
patterns are compatible with the area's transportation modes and services.[Section
163.3177(6)0)5.,F.S.;Rule 9J-5.005(5)(a);and Rule 9J-5.019(4)(b)2.,F.A.C.]
B.Recommended remedial actions.Theseinconsistenciesmayberemediedby
takingthe following actions:
fh
8.TheCityshouldanalyzetheFLUM densities,intensitiesand mixed use patterns
against the thresholds required to support transit.Where incompatible uses occur,an analysis
shouldbe conducted thatassessesFLUMalternativesthat would be compatible.The City should
compare the existing FLUM designations within the transit corridor toa professionally accepted
source whichhas analyzed densities and intensities which support transit.This analysis should be
completed prior tothe Dade County MPO Long Range Transportation Plan Model Update so
that alternative land uses can be submitted to the MPO.As recommended in Item No.2,the City
should add a policy whereby theCitywill revise this objective and add policies,if necessary,by
a date certain subsequent tothe Dade County MPO update.The objectives and policies mustbe
based on appropriate analyses as discussed in preceding sections ofthe Statement of Intent.
9)The amendment is inconsistent because Transportation Element Policy 1.1.1,
which establishes the roadway level of service standard,didnotincludespecific reference tothe
LOSSfortransit facilities.Furthermore,theCitydidnotadoptthe LOSS establishedbyFDOT
for facilities onthe FIHS.[Section 163.3177(6)0)1.,F.S.,andRule 9J-5.019(4)(c)l.,F.A.C.]
B.Recommended remedialactions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthe following actions:
9.Revise the amendment to include the LOSS for mass transit and adopt FDOT's
LOS standard for facilities on the FIHS in the City.
10)Theamendmentis inconsistent because theCity adopted a Transportation
Concurrency ExceptionArea(TCEA)butdidnot adequately address the provision to establish
policies whichspecify programs to address transportation needs of theTCEA.[Section
(h
163.3180(5)(b)and (c),F.S.,and Rule 9J-5.0055(6)(c),F.A.C.]
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthefollowing actions:
10.The Department believes that if the City adds the objective and policies as
identified in Item No.7 as well as establishing objectives and policies based upon the additional
analysis requirements as discussed in preceding sections of the Statement of Intent,the
transportation needs of the TCEA will be met.
11)The amendment is inconsistent because the Future Transportation Map did not
include parking facilities that are required to achieve mobility goals;TCEA;and intermodal
terminals and access tosuch facilities.[Section 163.3177(6)0)1.,2.,and 3.,F.S.;Rule 9J-
5.005(5)(b);and Rule 9J-5.019(5)(a)l.e.;(5)(a)4;and (5)(a)9.,F.A.C.]
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies mayberemediedby
taking the following actions:
11.IncludetheseitemsontheFutureTransportationMap.
II.AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
A.Inconsistent provisions.The inconsistent provisions of theplan amendment under
this subject heading areasfollows:
1)The amendment is inconsistent because it includes a new mixed use FLUM
category,Mixed Use Commercial/Residential (FourStory),butdoesnot include a minimum and
maximum rangepercentage of landusedistributionamongthe mix of uses,andthe density for
residential uses.WhiletheCityhas established a Floor AreaRatio(F.A.R.)appropriate fornon-
ft
residential uses,a F.A.R.cannot adequately measure residential densities because dwelling units
vary insizewhich makes it difficult to determine the number of unitsthat could be allowed.
[Section 163.3177(6)(a),F.S.,and Rule 9J-5.006(l)(c)and (4)(c),F.A.C.]
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthefollowing actions:
1.The Mixed Use Commercial/Residential (Four Story)category must be revised to
include the minimum and maximum range percentage of land use distribution among the mixof
uses and include a residential density based on dwelling units-per acre.
HI.FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS
A.Inconsistent provisions.The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under
thissubjectheadingareasfollows:
1.TheCityhas adopted 4 FLUM amendments whichinvolve converting land usestothe
MixedUse Commercial/Residential (4Story)category.Asthe Department hasdeterminedthat
theMixedUse Commercial/Residential (4 Story)category isnotin compliance,these4FLUM
amendmentsarealsonotincompliancebecause of theproblemsassociatedwiththelanduse
category.Listed below arethesubjectamendments.[Section 163.3177(6)(a),F.S.;Rule9J-
5.005(5)(a);and Rule 9J-5.006(l)(c)and(4)(c),F.A.C.]
Amendment Total Acreage Existing Designation Proposed
Designation
Amendment No.1-
Madison Square
2.41 Single-Family Res,
Neighborhood Retail (2
Story)
Mixed Use
Commercial/Residential
10
to
Amendment No.2-
Charrette Too
14.21 Commercial Office Use,
Commercial Retail,
Public Institutional,
Single FamilyRes,and
Vacant
Mixed Use
Commercial/Residential
Amendment No.5-
Community Center
1.46 Low Intensity Office (2
Story)
Mixed Use
Commercial/Residential
Amendment No.6-
Hometown District
40.6 SpecialtyRetail/Res(4
Story),Neighborhood
Retail(2 Story),
Residential Office (2
Story),and Medium
Density Multiple(4
Story)
Mixed Use
Commercial/Residential
B.Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies maybe remedied
bytakingthe following actions:
1.UponrevisingtheMixedUse Commercial/Residential (FourStory)category
pursuantto the recommendation contained in Amendment to the Future Land Use Element
RecommendationNo.1,theseFLUMamendmentswillbefoundincompliance.
IV.AMENDMENT TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT
A.Inconsistentprovisions.Theinconsistentprovisions of theplanamendmentunder
this subject heading areas follows:
1)The amendment isinconsistentbecauseHousingObjective1.3,whichstatesthat
theCitywillcreateand maintain affordablehousingforallcurrentandanticipatedfutureresident
of theCity,especially providing for households of very-low income,low-income,andmoderate-
income,isnot measurable because itlacksatargetby which the identified deficits in affordable
housing willbe reduced.The associated policies,while establishing programs which could result
inthe construction of affordable housing,donot establish the target by which theCitywill
11
ft
reduce the deficit shown by the Shimberg Study.[Section 163.3177(6)(f)l.d.,F.S.,and Rule 9J-
5.010(3)(b)3.,F.A.C]
B-Recommended remedial actions.These inconsistencies may be remedied by
takingthefollowing actions:
1.Revise Housing Objective 1.3 to include a measurable target such as,but not
limited to,number of affordable housing units to be built yearly.
v-CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
A.Inconsistent provisions.The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under
thissubjectheading are as follows:
1.The comprehensive plan amendment is inconsistent with the State Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies*including the following provisions (Rules 9J-5.021,F.A.C.):
a)Goal5,HousingandPolicy3
b)Goal 16,Land Use and Policies 1and3
d)Goal 18,PublicFacilitiesandPolicies 1,7
e)Goal20,TransportationandPolicies 2,3,9,10,13,and15
B.Recommended remedial action.These inconsistencies maybe remedied by taking
thefollowingaction:
1.Revise the plan amendment.as described above in Section LB.through V.B.
VI.CONSISTENCY WITH THE STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN FOR
SOUTH FLORIDA
A.Inconsistent provisions.The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under
this subject headingareasfollows:
12
/*
1.Thecomprehensiveplanamendmentisinconsistent with theStrategicRegionalPolicy
Plan forSouth Florida Plan goalsand policies,includingthefollowingprovisions(Rule9J-
5.021,F.A.C.):
a)Goal2.1,Land Use andPublicFacilitiesand Policies 2.1.1,2.3.6,2.3.7,2.3.8,2.3.14,
2.3.18,and 2.3.21;
b)Goal4.1,Economic Development andPolicies 4.1.5,4.1.10,4.1.11,4.1.12,and 4.1.16
d)Goal5.1,Regional TransportationandPolicies5.1.1,5.1.3,5.1.5,5.1.6,5.1.8,5.1.10,
5.1.11,5.1.14,5.1.15,5,1.27,
e)Goal6.1,Affordable HousingandPolicies6.1.1and6.1.2
B.Recommended remedialaction.These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the
following action:
1.Revise theplan amendment as described above in Sections LB.through V.B.
13
ft
CONCLUSIONS
1.Theplanamendmentisnotconsistentwiththe Strategic RegionalPolicyPlanfor
South Florida.
2.TheplanamendmentisnotconsistentwiththeStateComprehensive Plan.
3.Theplanamendmentisnot consistent with Chapter 9J-5,Florida Administrative
Code.
4.Theplanamendmentisnotconsistentwiththe requirements of Section 163.3177,
Florida Statutes.
5.Theplanamendmentisnot"incompliance,"asdefinedinSection 163.3184(1)(b),
Florida Statutes.
6.Inordertobringtheplanamendmentintocompliance,theCitymaycompletethe
recommended remedialactions described above oradoptotherremedialactions
that eliminate the inconsistencies.
Executed this "?M day of fi*jtU#A ,1997,at Tallahassee,Florida.
C^Gaarles G.Pattison,Director
"^Division of Resource Planning
and Management
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee,Florida 32399-2100
14
ft
SUMMARY TO DATE
0OnNovember21,1995,theCity Commission
adopted the 1995 EAR which was found tobe
sufficient bythe Department of Community Affairs.
0On January 7,1997,the City Commission voted to
adopt 2nd of two EAR-based amendment packages
fortransmittaltoDCA (1st wasTODDand RID).
0On April 9,1997,the DCA completed its review of
theamendment package andissuedanORC Report
(Objections,RecommendationsandComments).
0 On August 19,1997,the City Commission voted to
adopta revised second amendment packagewhich
includedspecific responses to DCA's ORC Report.
0 On October 7,1997,DCA issued a Notice of Intent
where DCA madeafinding of Not In Compliance
for portions of theproposed amendment package.
0 Three Main Issues:1)the Transportation Element,
2)Affordable Housing and3)Mixed-Use Category.
ft