Resolution 2019-30863 RESOLUTION NO. 2019-30863
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,
FLORIDA, ACCEPTING AND ENDORSING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MATRIX GROUP
DEVELOPMENT AND PERMITTING STUDY.
WHEREAS, On April 10, 2019, at the request of Commissioner John Elizabeth
Aleman, the City Commission referred a discussion item to the Land Use and
Development Committee (LUDC) regarding the Matrix Group development and
permitting process recommendations (Item C4W); and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 2019, the Matrix Group presented its findings and
recommendations to the LUDC; and
WHEREAS, the LUDC recommended that the City Commission accept the
recommendations of the Administration; and
WHEREAS, the LUDC requested that the Administration provide a timeline for
the recommendations moving forward, including oversight by a City Commission
Committee; and
WHEREAS, the LUDC recommended that the City Commission refer the
necessary amendments to the Land Development Regulations to address the
recommendations to the Planning Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City
Commission, accept and endorse the recommendations of the Matrix Group
development and permitting process study.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 5th day of June, 2019.
ATTEST:
Dan Gelber, Mayor
tct Zv i
I
Rafael E. ranado, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO
T:Wgenda\2019\06 June\Planning\Reso-Matrix Recommendations-RESO.docx FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
City At1n(f1F,r Date
t .INCOAP ORATED^
Resolutions - R7 I
MIAMI BEACH
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE: June 5, 2019
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ENDORSING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF
THE MATRIX GROUP AND REFERRING THE APPROPRIATE LDR
AMENDMENTS TO THE PLANNING BOARD.
RECOMMENDATION
The administration recommends that the City Commission adopt the attached Resolution,
endorsing the recommendations of the Matrix Group and refer the appropriate LDR
amendments to the Planning Board.
ANALYSIS
HISTORY:
On April 10, 2019, at the request of Commissioner John Elizabeth Aleman, the City
Commission referred a discussion item to the Land Use and Development Committee
regarding the Matrix Group development and permitting process recommendations (Item
C4W). On May 22, 2019, the Matrix Group presented its findings and recommendations to the
LUDC. The discussed the item and made the following recommendations:
1. Recommend that the City Commission accept the recommendations of the administration.
2. Provide a timeline for the recommendations moving forward, including oversight by a City
Commission Committee.
3. Recommend that the City Commission refer the necessary amendments to the LDR's to
address the recommendations to the Planning Board.
BACKGROUND:
In order to ensure that the City's regulations and processes relating to private development
projects are fair, balanced and efficient, the city solicited proposals from qualified firms to
provide data-driven regulatory and process reviews, peer and best practice recommendations
and recommendations for process improvement (both administrative and legislative). The goal
of this comprehensive effort is to ensure that the regulations and processes affecting private
development are efficient and streamlined. Specifically, the goals are to:
Page 744 of 868
•Attract sustainable and resilient development;
• Safeguard quality of life within neighborhoods;
• Promote historic preservation;
• Improve both the customer experience and staff process.
On January 19, 2018 RFQ 2018-074-KB for consulting services for a review of the city's
regulations and processes relating to private development projects was issued. The
Procurement Department issued solicitation notices to 441 firms utilizing
www.publicpurchase.com. 76 prospective proposers accessed the advertised solicitation.
A voluntary pre-proposal conference to provide information to the proposers submitting a
response was held on February 6, 2018. RFQ responses were due and received on March 19,
2018. The City received a total of four proposals.
The City Manager's recommendation after reviewing all of the submissions and the Evaluation
Committee's rankings and commentary, concurred with the Evaluation Committee and found
Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd to be the best qualified firm for the project.
ANALYSIS
The Matrix Group project team took a phased approach to completing this project that included
the following activities:
• Interviews with staff from all review disciplines, including department directors, intake staff,
managers, and reviewers.
• Personal observation in the City's permit center.
• Mapping each development review and permitting process for the Building and Planning
Departments.
• An analysis of planning and building permit data from the past year.
• A review of operational documents, including public educational materials, standard operating
procedures, the city's charter and land use code, and examples of staff memos and comments.
• Reviewing the analysis of the stakeholder and focus groups conducted by Public Participation
Partners.
These project components provided an in-depth understanding of the City's development
review and permitting operations.
Focus groups were conducted as part of this study to analyze the customer's understanding of
the development review process. The project team interviewed permit expeditors, local
developers, architects, and engineers and found that they all had a general understanding of the
different roles that both departments had in the process. However, two architects the project
team spoke with indicated they occasionally struggled to know which land use board their
application needed to go before. The architects did indicate that when they spoke with staff and
explained their project, they were directed to the proper board. Development professionals have
an understanding of what applications must go to the Building and Planning departments.
Matrix provided 33 recommendations:
Page 745 of 868
• 12 for the Building Department
• 19 for the Planning Department
• Two for other departments
19 recommendations are administrative in nature and can be implemented by the Administration:
• 11 for the Building Department
• 7 for the Planning Department
• Two for other departments
Finally, 14 recommendations require policy changes and legislative action, for Commission
consideration. Attached is a chart summarizing all of the recommendations of the Matrix Group,
and the corresponding staff recommendations.
CONCLUSION
The administration recommends that the City Commission:
1. Adopt the attached Resolution accepting and endorsing the attached recommendations of
the Matrix Group that have been agreed to by the administration.
2. Refer a discussion item to the Land Use and Development Committee to oversee a
workplan, with timelines, for all of the recommendations agreed to by staff.
3. Refer the applicable amendments to the Land Development Regulations that are required to
implement the changes specified in the recommendations, to the Planning Board.
Legislative Tracking
Planning
Sponsor
Office of the City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
o Matrix Summary Chart
Page 746 of 868
Action
# Recommendation Department Status Re• uired Staff Recommendation
Cross-train reviewers to review similar but
multiple disciplines. Reducing the number of All In-Progress Administrative Where Feasible
individual departments reviewing permit
applications.
a
Cross-train administrative staff responsible for
;the intake and routing of applications and
plans so that they have an understanding of . 101111.
'the disciplines involved. Expand their Building Continuous Administrative Agreed
li
'responsibilities to include conducing tiot
completeness checks at the intake of both ti
initial applications and resubmittals.
millibmimigindill
Cross-train reviewers to review similar but
3 multiple disciplines. Reducing the number of Building Continuous Administrative Agreed
individual departments reviewing building
permit applications.
Transition to digital application and plan set 111
mi 11pir. ._
submission for the Drop-off Building Permit Building ''In-Progress Administrative Agreed
Process.
Transition the current walk-thru permitting
5 process to an electronic application Building In-Progress Administrative Agreed
submission that is reviewed the next business
day.
111111 Examine ways to reduce the number ofir
6 temporary certificate of occupancies Building In-Progress illAdministrativ111
Agreed
SIM applied issued.
Update policies and procedures to require all
7 comments to be readdressed at the time of Building Implemented Administrative Agreed
resubmittal.
Page 747 of 868
.. iiii i
Require the applicant to resubmit a
complete plan set upon each resubmission Building In Progress Administrative Agreed
Permit Clerks should be allowed to process
9 credit card payments at their terminal after Building In-Progress Administrative Agreed
receiving proper training.
d
ei
Ensure proper policies are in place related t
the determination of fees, especially for
1 0 Agreed
private provider permits for smaller scale Building Continuous ; Administrative ' A
project where minimum fees are assessed..
The Building webpage should be streamlined
to provide relevant information through less
1 1 searching. An overview of the application Building Continuous Administrative Agreed
and review process should be provided
through a graphic.
Require all reviewers to sign off or indicate" BuildingLead, All Implemented Administrativ Agreed
12 not applicable on all plan sheets. (as of 6/6/2019) g
Reviewers should sign each plan sheet versus
completing the approval cover letter for
Implemented
13 walk through permits. Maintaining integrity Building - Lead, All (as of 6/6/2019) Administrative Agreed
throughout the review and construction
process.
Page 748 of 868
lei iimiiiiii.iiiiiiiiiiIMMINMIMMIlli
Create the position of Permit Coordinator to
provide oversight of the entire development
review and permitting process. The Permit : Pending
Coordinator would also serve as a liaison to' City Manager Budget P dministrati Agreed
the development community to resolve i Process
issues. '
IIIIiiiWilrri .,
Conduct public hearings for land
development regulation text amendments to
once per quarter (initially) versus the current To Be
philosophy of conducting hearings at will Implements Policy/
15 throughout the year. Three year goal is to Planning After Code Legislative Agreed
conduct public hearing for land Rewrite
development regulation text amendments to
twice a year.
, SI III
111111111111111111111111
Other review departments should receive 11
notice regarding projects being reviewed byrt
he four Planning Boards and be provided an Planning In Progress Administrative Agreed
opportunity to "opt in" to commenting or
providing recommended conditions of
approval.
Expand participation in pre-application
meetings and use them as an opportunity for
broad input from the City on all issues
1 7 potentially affecting a project. Do not Planning In-Progress Administrative Agreed
require applicants to identify what board
their project is subject to before attending
the preapplication meeting.
Page 749 of 868
Consider requiring staff-issued Planning
` permits for some complex projects that don't No Action At
require Board approval but that do review Planning This Time Legislativ' Not Recommended
7
staff review to ensure that all site issues are
^ review.
addressed prior to architectural ,
Transition to electronic packets for all land No Action At Administrative/
19 use boards. Planning This Time Policy Agreed
Conduct public hearings for land No Action At
2development regulation text amendm nts at Lai
Planningiiimmal Policy } Not Recommended
the first reading of the ordinance.
01Tis Time b
Rewrite the land development regulation
21 portion of the adopted City codes and Planning In-Progress Legislative Agreed
ordinance to incorporate best practices.
Modify the approval authority for single '..
family
tructed
2
in a locals historic district.4and
Staff
located not
ii
should Plannin No Action Le islativ
This Tim g Agreed
have the authority to review and approve
these permit types. g
Conduct a review of project types to identify
more projects that can be approved at the Agreed
No Action At
23 staff level without Board review. Single family Planning Legislative (contingent on
residences in particular should be fast This Time recommendation #22)
tracked with staff review if possible.
Page 750 of 868
;Consider moving the authority for issuing
variances to the city Board of Adjustment so G
No Action At
that the Land Use boards responsible for Planning Legislativ ' Not Recommended
determining compliance with regulations are This Time,
of also responsible for issuing variances
Ensure that all planning staff involved in
development review is included in the Administrative/
25 development and review of proposed land Planning In Progress Policy Agreed
use text amendments.
The Planning webpage should be expanded 1.
',to provide more relevant information on the
webpage versus a link to the municipal P ,
code. Additional information should be Planning In-Progress 4 Administrativ= Agreed
iiii
provided for each land use boards and
review authority and approval. i
r
Create a manual or series of handouts
27 detailing specific historic design standards. Planning In-Progress Administrative Agreed
xE ide interiors from His one reserva ion No Action At11111
Not Recommended
Board review and transition to staff review.!" .Planning This Tim Legisl five (Requires voter referendum)
Reduce the timeline for conducting a public No Action At Generally Agreed, Further
29 hearing for land use boards between 4 and 6 Planning Legislative
weeks after application is received. This Time Research Required
IIIIII
Ensure holistic approach to resiliency l T-
4191 NEP
standards including discordance between Planning Continuous Legislative
elevated and non elevated building in or III
Policy
near historic areas.
Page 751 of 868
In conjunction with streamlining regulations
to reduce the use of variances, HPB's No Action At Not Recommended
11 'jurisdictions should be to determine historic Planning This Time Legislative (Requires voter referendum)
appropriateness only.
l,Include other review agencies in the
Planning review, and where possible identify
land ensure resolution of issues that would Planning - Lead, All In-Progress dministrative Agreed
otherwise potentially delay or derail a projec
ice it reaches the building permit stage. .`
Implement a Development Review
Committee of staff responsible for
transportation, public works, floodplain
33 management, urban forestry to participate in Planning - Lead, All In-Progress Administrative Agreed
pre-application meetings and review
projects before they are seen by the
community's Land Use board.
Page 752 of 868