Loading...
RESOLUTION 92-20652 RESOLUTION NO. 92-20652 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TRANSMITTING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHANGING THE USE OF A PARCEL OF LAND KNOWN AS "SUNSET HARBOUR" AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "1" FROM THE CURRENT LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RM-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY, HIGH INTENSITY, TO EITHER RM- 2, MULTIPLE FAMILY, MEDIUM INTENSITY, RM-1, MULTIPLE FAMILY, LOW INTENSITY OR TH, TOWNHOME, OR TO A COMBINATION THEREOF. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA: WHEREAS, the City' s Planning, Design and Historic Preservation Division has recommended an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the City' s Comprehensive Plan, changing the use of a parcel of land known as "Sunset Harbour" and more particularly described in attached Exhibit "1" from the current land use designation of RM-3 , Multiple Family, High Intensity, to RM-1, Multiple Family, Low Intensity for the bayfront properties and to either TH, Townnome or RM-1 with a height limitation for the canalfront properties; and WHEREAS, on October 20, 1992 the City' s Planning Board which is the City' s Local Planning Agency, held a public hearing to consider the aforesaid recommended amendment and also considered changing the land use of said properties to RM-2 , Multiple Family, Medium Intensity, and failed to obtain a majority vote recommending a change in land use designation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163 . 3184 , Florida Statutes the City Commission must hold a public hearing to consider transmittal of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan to the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA that a public hearing to consider transmitting the aforestated amendment to the Future Land Use Map 1 of the City' s Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs is hereby called to be held before the City Commission in its chambers on the Third floor of City Hall, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida on December 9, 1992 beginning at 2 : 00 P.M. ; and the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish appropriate Public Notice of the said Public Hearing in a newspaper of general paid circulation in the jurisdiction of the City of Miami Beach and of general interest and readership in the community, at which time and place all interested parties will be heard. PASSED and ADOPTED this 4th day of N vember 4( 92. 1111/441111 ATTEST: AOR LCJACLACA CITY CLERK SWS:scf:\diskl\flumap.res FORM APPROVED LEGAL DEPT. By Date 1, 2 • LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE CONSIDERED FOR CHANGE OF LAND USE AND ZONING: Lots 27-40, Block 15-A, Island View Addition as recorded in Plat Book 9 , page 144 of the Dade County Public Records. (1816-1940 Purdy Avenue) . Lots 10-11, Block 15, Island View Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 6, page 115 of the Dade County Public Records. (1301-1425 20th Street) . EXHIBIT "1" CITY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH FLORIDA 33139 • OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER TELEPHONE: (305) 673-7010 FAX: (305) 673-7782 COMMISSION MEMORANDUM NO. (469-92- DATE: 469-9i-DATE: Nov. 4, 1992 TO: Mayor Seymour Gelber and Members of the City Commission FROM: Roger M. Canto City Manager F. SUBJECT: SETTING OF PUBLIC HEARINGS: AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY AMENDING THAT PARCEL OF LAND OWNED BY YACHT CLUB SOUTHEASTERN, INC., (A/K/A SUNSET HARBOR) FROM RM-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY, HIGH INTENSITY, TO RM-2, MULTI- FAMILY MEDIUM INTENSITY,OR RM-1,MULTI-FAMILY LOW INTENSITY, OR TH, TOWNHOME RESIDENTIAL OR A COMBINATION THEREOF. AMENDMENT TO THE MAP OF ZONING ORDINANCE 89-2665 BY DOWN- ZONING THAT PARCEL OF LAND OWNED BY YACHT CLUB SOUTHEASTERN,INC.,(A/K/A SUNSET HARBOR)FROM RM-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY,HIGH INTENSITY DISTRICT,TO RM-2,MULTI-FAMILY MEDIUM INTENSITY DISTRICT, OR RM-1, MULTI-FAMILY LOW INTENSITY DISTRICT, OR TH, TOWNHOME RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT OR A COMBINATION THEREOF. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION The Administration recommends that the City Commission proceed to set a date and times certain for hearings to consider amendments to the Future Land Use Map of the City of Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan and the Map of the Zoning Ordinance as they relate to those parcels on Purdy Avenue and 20th Street,as described above. In order to meet minimum public notice and advertising requirements, it is recommended that the first reading of these hearings be set for 2:00 p.m. and 2:01 p.m., respectively, at a special meeting of the City Commission on December 9, 1992. BACKGROUND The Request The Administration is requesting the City Commission to consider an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan by amending that parcel of land owned by Yacht Club Southeastern, Inc., (a/k/a Sunset Harbor) from RM-3 (Multiple Family, High Intensity), to RM-2 (Multiple Family, Medium Intensity) or to RM-1 (Multiple Family, Low Intensity) or to TH (Townhome Residential) or a combination thereof. As a related item, the Administration is requesting the City Commission to consider an amendment to the official Zoning Map of Zoning Ordinance 89-2665 by down-zoning that parcel of land owned by Yacht Club Southeastern, Inc., (a/k/a Sunset Harbor) from RM-3 (Multiple Family, High Intensity District), to RM-2 (Multiple Family, Medium Intensity District)or to RM-1 (Multiple Family,Low Intensity District)or to TH(Townhome Residential District) or a combination thereof. Staff has prepared this analysis which examines the history of the subject property and the surrounding area, the actions taken by various City entities, an analysis of the existing conditions and the alternatives for future development patterns based on different land use classifications. Please note that, due to the fact that the City's development intensities as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance are parallel in this case, the 35 Administration has prepared one overall staff report. Two separate hearings are required, however. AGENDA ITEM _ 1 / I _L4 _ 9z DATE • • The underlying basis for conducting this analysis is the request by the City Commission for the Administration and staff to review the City's land use classification of the entire property in question and particularly that area adjacent to the canal. The Homeowner's Association of the Sunset Islands is challenging, in the courts, the validity of the Building Permit issued for the three-tower, 800-unit development. Comprehensive Plan History The below table illustrates the different Comprehensive Plan land use classifications on the subject property from 1966 to the present. Year Sunset Harbour Site Sunset Island #4 Area East of Sunset (area adjacent to canal) Harbour Site 1966 General Commercial One and Two Family Heavy Commercial Low Density 1980 C-4: Business District; Single Family Light Industrial Commercial and Multi-family 1989 RM-3: Multi-family RS: Single Family CD-2/I-1: High Intensity Commercial Medium Intensity/Light Industrial Zoning History The below table illustrates the different zoning classifications on the subject property from 1934 to the present. It is interesting to note that that portion of Sunset Island #4 adjacent to the canal was originally zoned as a business district. It was zoned for small apartment buildings from 1939 to 1945 at which time it was zoned as a single family district. Year Sunset Harbour Site Sunset Island #4 Area East of Sunset (area adjacent to canal) Harbour Site 1934 B-D: Business B-D: Business District; B-B: Business District; Commercial Commercial and Multi- District; Commercial and Multi-family family and Multi-family 1939 B-D: Business R-DE: Restricted B-B/RE: Business District; Commercial Multi-family District District/ Multi- and Multi-family family District 1945 B-D: Business R-D: Single Family B-B/RE: Business District; Commercial District District/ Multi- and Multi-family family District 1947 B-D: Business R-D: Single Family B-B/BC: Business District; Commercial District Districts and Multi-family 1958 B-D: Business R-D: Single Family BC: Business District; Commercial District Districts and Multi-family 1971 C-4: Business District; RS-4: Single Family C-6: Intensive Commercial and District Commercial; light Multi-family industrial uses 1989 RM-3: Multi-family RS-4: Single Family CD-2/I-1: High Intensity District Commercial Medium District Intensity/Light Industrial District 1928 Purdy Avenue -- Chronology of Events May 10, 1985 City Attorney issues opinion that the docks remain a valid Non-conforming Use. June 10, 1985 Dade County exempts the Yacht Club project from the County's Shoreline Development Ordinance. 2 36 • • Sept 24, 1985 Applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Marina; deferred to October 24, 1985. Oct 24, 1985 Planning Board approves request for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Marina with dockmaster,with 10 conditions,one requiring Design Review Board approval for upland building if different from the Yacht Club plans. Assistant City Attorney gives opinion that Planning Board cannot regulate upland development. Nevertheless, the applicant agrees to submit upland development for approval by the Design Review Board if the project is different from the Yacht Club Development. Nov 20, 1985 City Commission approves Marina (Memo 675-85) as recommended by the Planning Board. May 5, 1986 Building Permit issued for new seawall. May 27, 1986 Planning Board grants a six (6) month Extension of Time in order to obtain a Building Permit for the Marina and the dockmaster. June 26, 1986 Two minor amendments to Marina Conditional Use Permit approved by the Planning Board. Amendments related to the applicant placing (in escrow account) the balance of the play equipment costs and installing it by August 15, 1986 and the submittal of a landscape plan for entire property, including the residential buildings when constructed. Aug 5, 1986 "Stipulation" (Marina Conditional Use Permit) recorded in Circuit Court, as required by the Planning Board's conditions; twelve (12) conditions listed (10 from October 24, 1985 and two more from June 26, 1986.) Aug 14, 1986 Building Permit issued for construction of Marina with 152 slips and parking areas. Sept 4, 1986 Extension of time approved by Planning Board in order to install playground equipment by September 30, 1986. Dec 5, 1986 Minor amendment approved regarding Marina site plan: moved the center pier north of its permitted location and the southerly pier moved 50 feet north of permitted location. July 29, 1987 "Modification to Stipulation"(Marina Conditional Use Permit)filed with Circuit Court pertaining to dock locations decided on December 5, 1986. Aug 3, 1987 Two (2) amendments to the Marina Conditional Use Permit approved by the Planning Board: Reducing slips from 152 to 125 including 17 parallel dockage along the north side; also relocating dockmaster's building and parking lot. Nov 18, 1987 Building permit issued for dockmaster building and parking area. Jan 27, 1988 Request for extension of time of Conditional Use Marine Permit approved in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. Jan 29, 1988 Building Permit issued for new roof of dockmaster. Apr 5, 1988 Design Review Board reviewed project(3 towers,one facing Sunset Island). Sub- committee created(Giller,Tilden,Rosenberg)by Board with delegated authority for preliminary review. Apr 29, 1988 Design Review Board Sub-Committee granted preliminary approval of project (File #1232) including three (3) buildings. May 3, 1988 Neon sign mounted on east wall of dockmaster building approved as per Building Permit #32280 July 12, 1988 Design Review Board granted final design approval of three (3) buildings (File #1232 & 1232A). Aug 10, 1988 Dade County Shoreline Committee approved the project with three(3)buildings. Their review was required as the project was determined to be substantially different than the Yacht Club Development which was exempted from County review on June 10, 1985. Dec 6, 1988 Building Permit applied for 3 towers, 800 units. 3 37 Dec 14, 1988 Building Permit issued for dock foundation. June 1, 1989 Building Permit issued for three (3) buildings, 800 units. Aug 15, 1989 Building Permit issued for the construction of a sales center. Sept 20, 1989 Design Review Board Chairman and Planning and Zoning Director approve relocation of Building #1 (Facing Sunset Island) further we t the towards thelot Bny and relocation of tennis courts to east of building near the lumberyard property. Sept 21, 1989 Planning and Zoning Department design staff approve plans for project. Sept 22, 1989 Building Permit issued for the construction of a temporary parking lot. Sept 27, 1989 Planning an ng Zoning for Departmentthe entire staff papprove revised plans which now inc Feb 2, 1990 Design Review Board Chairman and Planning and Zoning Director approve additional five levels on north building #1 (4 residential and 1 parking) and other decorative revisions. Feb 7, 1990 Planning and Zoning Director meets with Andy Moriber, Attorney for Sunset Islands Association and homeowner on Sunset #2) and Bill Ingraham (President of Sunset Homeowner Assoc.). Project explained, variances reviewed, Board of Adjustment and Design Review appeal process discussed including the process to the appeal mu trbe filed by DecemberReview 20 indecision. order to be eard on March 1 advised that the app p 1990 meeting. Feb 9, 1990 Zoning Board of Adjustment File No. 2077: applicant requested variances for temporary sales signs and one (1) for parking aisle width, ornamental concrete feature (rear facing Bay) and the other for the width of the porte-cocheres in front of each of the three buildings. Applicant withdraws building related variances and Board approves temporary sales sign requests. Mar 13, 1990 Application submitted to the Design Review Board modifyingth nobuilding Nn toby y adding four levels of units and one level of parking, al number of units. Applicant requests deferral to April 17, 1990, meeting. Mar 20, 1990 Applicant withdraws application to modify building removing te four ur additional residential floors and the one floor of parking. Director's and Chairman's action taken on February 2, 1990 is no longer applicable, no further Design Review Board action is required. Apr 5, 1990 Shoreline Review Committee considers plans that show the relocation of the north building (building No. 1) 152 feet to the west. Action is deferred pending clarification report from the City of Miami Beach. Apr 26, 1990 Shoreline Review Committee approves (5-3) project site plan contingent upon a $150,000 contribution for landscape improvements to Island View Park. Feb 24, 1992 Planning Board considered down-zoning of Sunset Harbour;voted to change area adjacent to canal to RM-1. der the ng f Sunset Apr 24, 1992 City rboror (June 3, 1992). They also directed the�Administration tole proceed Harbor with Planning Board hearings on the land use amendment. Future Land Use ap of the May 26, 1992 pBoarPlanholds hearing and votes 4 3 to ecommendent to echanging that portilon of the Comprehensivefurther, to Sunset Harbour site along the canal to the RM-2 land use category; leave the balance of the site as RM-3. ng d old ts ngs May 29, 1992 Citynthe Zoning Ordinancemakes determinaontMapvandltheiFutuurerLandhUse1Map eofithe on amending Comprehensive Plan in response to legal questions raised relative to application roce and advertisingaring une 3 recommended fore deferral City unt lPlann ng Board re-hears scheduled forrJ matter. iew Oct. 15, 1992 Staff has meeting with planning consultant Robert K art o ut to rev w Community Visions Report. The report is deemed appropriate an4 31- • acceptable basis for reviewing down-planning and down-zoning options for the City as a whole and the Belle Isle and Sunset Harbour sites. Oct. 20, 1992 Planning Board holds public hearing on proposed amendments to Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. As further described below, all motions made by the Board on amending these documents failed due to not achieving a four vote majority. ANALYSIS Professional Planning Consultant Recommendations On July 22, 1992, the City entered into an agreement with Robert K. Swarthout, Inc., a professional planning consultant, to evaluate and update the City of Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan, which was re-adopted by the City Commission on September 16, 1992 (Ord. 92-2804). The first phase of the consultant's contract entailed the preparation of a "Community Visions Goal, Objective and Policy Options Report". This report focuses upon goals, objectives and policies related to residential development in Miami Beach. During the summer of 1992, the consultant interviewed over 40 community leaders to determine their vision of the future for Miami Beach. The reason for this was the objective - to evolve a community consensus on where the City should be headed in the future in terms of physical development. Several frequently mentioned recommendations from the community leaders include the following: 1. City zoning policy should discourage high-rise residential towers, particularly in the following locations: north side of Belle Isle, Indian Creek Drive (26 to 41 Streets); Collins Avenue (55 to 63 Streets); and South Pointe. 2. The new King David Tower at 3411 Indian Creek Drive is a good prototypical design. 3. A general urban design goal should be to have higher density in the central corridor of the island and lower density closer to the water. 4. Consistent, firm zoning administration and policy decisions (map amendments, variances, etc.) are important to investor and citizen confidence. During the course of the consultant's study, a field survey of Miami Beach was conducted, along with surveys of selected sites outside of Miami Beach. This data, along with planning reports,relevant professional literature,and the consensus from the 40 community leaders were then used to develop a series of alternatives for downplanning of areas of Miami Beach. The report also discusses the public purpose basis for downplanning and reductions in residential densities and intensities. The public purposes include the following: to reduce the amount of future traffic, to facilitate hurricane evacuation, to conform with Rule 9J-5, FAC hurricane hazard area mandates, to encourage residential reinvestment in Miami Beach, to spread residential reinvestment over a broad area,to ensure development of an increased access to light, air and views, and to attract more middle and upper income families with children. As part of this report, the consultant provided maps showing areas of potential downplanning which would be further evaluated during the reformulation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Although it is important to look at the Belle Isle and Sunset Harbour sites in the context of an overall view toward downplanning in the City which is consistent with a number of quality of life concerns expressed throughout the community, the Planning, Design, and Historic Preservation Services Division has, for the purposes of the Planning Board and City Commissions hearings, reviewed the consultant's recommendation for both areas. The highest intensity proposed by Mr. Swarthout as a rational approach to downplanning in a Citywide context shows a maximum FAR of 1.0 for both the north and a portion of the south sides of Belle Isle. The highest intensity proposed for Sunset Harbour contains an FAR of .75. Although the consultant's recommended approaches are somewhat more restrictive than those recommended by staff in this report, we believe they are generally consistent and are further justified by the staff analysis presented herein. Land Use Description This "L" shaped parcel of land is for the most part vacant. It is the site of a 125 slip marina and its associated parking lot. On the north-west corner of the site is the dockmaster's building, associated support structures, a sales center and a swimming pool. 5 39 The following is a legal description of the"property: Lots 27 - 40, Block 15-A, Island View Addn. as recorded in Plat Book 9, page 144 and lots 10-11 Block 15, Island View Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 6, page 115. (1816-1940 Purdy Avenue and 1301-1425 20th Street) Level Of Service (LOS) The Levels of Service, and hurricane evacuation issues have all been analyzed by the City, the South Florida Regional Planning Council and the State's Department of Community Affairs by way of approval of the City's Comprehensive Plan. It has already been determined that any development under the development regulations of the RM-3 zoning district would not have an adverse effect on the established Levels of Service; therefore,any reduction in intensity of the property should likewise have no adverse effect on LOS. Infrastructure Impact There is no evidence that any reduction in land use intensity of this property would be detrimental to public facilities and infrastructure. Staff Analysis of Review Criteria Section 14-2,E of the Zoning Ordinance states that in reviewing a request for an amendment, the Planning Board shall consider the following when applicable. These criteria are also generally applicable to future land use amendments. 1. Whether the proposed change is consistent and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and any applicable neighborhood or Redevelopment Plans; The State Department of Community Affairs has given a preliminary opinion that a down-zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as long as the density is no greater than that shown on the Future Land Use Map; this Department concurs with this opinion (see attached opinion). At the request of the City Commission on April 24, 1992, however, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the downplanning of the areas is also being considered. 2. Whether the proposed change would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent or nearby districts; The proposed change in future land use and zoning from RM-3 to RM-2, RM-1 or TH would not be unrelated to adjacent districts as this area acts as a transitional zone between the Single Family District to the north and the Commercial and Industrial districts to the east and south, both being low-rise in nature. 3. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the City; The downplanning or down-zoning of the area adjacent to the canal would bring the site more into scale with the adjacent Single Family neighborhood. Furthermore, the maximum FAR for the Industrial District is 1.0 and for the Commercial District the maximum FAR is 2.0;thus a potential FAR between 1.0 and 2.0 would be in scale with these adjacent districts. 4. Whether the proposed change would tax the existing load on public facilities and infrastructure; There is no evidence that any reduction in intensity of this property would be a detriment on public facilities and infrastructure. 5. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change; Due to the proximity of the single family area on the Sunset Islands north of the canal, the reduction in intensity for this area does not create a new boundary which is illogically drawn. 6. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed change necessary; Recent actions of the Planning Board and the City Commission have stressed the importance of the integrity of Single Family districts in Miami Beach as witnessed by amending the Zoning Ordinance with regard to the lot split review process and the down-zoning of certain single family areas. The Administration 6 40 • is re-evaluating all new development and the affect it may have on single family districts. The importance of maintaining the City's Single Family districts is a policy of the Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan. Also, as was noted by the planning consultant, a reduction in intensity of residential development is strongly desired by community leaders and serves several important public purposes. 7. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; The proposed change will not have an adverse effect on the living conditions of the neighborhood. 8. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion beyond the Levels of Service as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan or otherwise affect public safety; Any reduction in intensity of the site will not affect the LOS established for the area. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; The proposed change,whether it be TH,RM-1 or RM-2 (especially if the district regulations are amended to include a height restriction), would improve light and air circulation to the adjoining areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; The resulting site development from a change in zoning should have a beneficial effect on all surrounding districts. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the Improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The proposed change will not have a negative effect on the potential development of the commercial or industrial areas. 12. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; Implied by this review is the analysis of an upzoning request; since this request involves downplanning and down-zoning, this criteria is not applicable. 13. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the City for the proposed use in a district already permitting such use. This review criteria is not applicable to this situation. • Planning Staff Conclusions and Recommendations As viewed by staff, the underlying issue involved in this land use amendment request is the juxtaposition of the High Intensity Multi-Family area in very close proximity to a single family area, separated by only a 100 foot wide canal. It is clear that to minimize the impact of any development on the subject site, an effective low-rise buffer must be created. This would best be achieved by reducing the intensity of development on the canal portion to TH or by placing a height restriction on that portion of the development adjacent to the canal if it is downzoned to RM-1. The second restriction is nota matter for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Instead, it should be addressed in the Zoning Ordinance. The dividing line for two separate land use or zoning districts could be just east of the existing upland improvements already in place (see aerial photograph), including the existing recreational structures and pool. It is our understanding that this area is the designated view corridor as required by the Shoreline Review Committee and thus ensures that low rise development in this area will remain. It is critical to note that if the building permit is found to be valid by the appropriate ruling body, there is nothing in the Comprehensive Plan or the Zoning Ordinance to prevent the applicant from continuing with the existing plans. The staff has previously recommended that the Future Land Use classification of the subject property be amended into two classifications, as follows: 1.) The area fronting the bay, including the existing structures to remain RM-3, Multi-Family High Intensity because this classification is consistent with all of the other multi-family districts fronting Biscayne Bay 7 41 from 6th Street through 20th Streets. 2.) The area adjacent to the canal, east of the existing structures and along 20th Street to be designated RM-1, Multi-Family Low Intensity. As a related issue, staff recommended previously that the subject property be rezoned into two classifications, with the area fronting the bay, including the existing structures to remain RM-3, Multi-Family High Intensity and the area adjacent to the canal, east of the existing structures and along 20th Street to be zoned RM-1, Multi-Family Low Intensity. Additional study conducted by Robert K. Swarthout, Inc., subsequent to the date of staff's earlier recommendation,provides a strong public purpose and community visions rationale for major reductions in intensity along waterfront properties. In recognition that the Sunset Harbour area represents one of a number of areas in the City which can justifiably be reduced in overall intensity, staff has revised its earlier recommendation and now recommends: 1.) reducing the intensity of the bayfront portion of Sunset Harbour from RM-3 to RM-1; 2.) reducing the intensity of the canal portion from RM-3 to RM-I or alternately to TH, Townhome District classification; and, 3.) adopt a height limitation ordinance amendment which would effectively limit the height on the canal portion to 40 feet if classified as RM-1 (TH has a height restriction of 35 feet). Planning Board Recommendations: At its special meeting of October 20, 1992, the Planning Board once again held hearings on the proposed down-planning and down-zoning of the Sunset Harbor site on Purdy Avenue and 20th Street. Mr. Steven Hertz declared a voting conflict prior to the commencement of the hearings and hence did not vote. After considerable testimony, the Board took the following actions: a. On amending the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan, there were three motions: First, to leave the Future Land Use category along the Biscayne Bay at the present RM-3 and amend the area along the canal to RM-2; the motion received no second and failed. Second, to change the Future Land Use Map to show RM-1 along the Bay and TH along the canal; the motion failed by a vote of 2-2. Third, to leave the present RM-3 category along the Bay and change that portion along the canal to RM-1 with a 40' height limitation; the motion in favor failed by a vote of 3-1 (note: 4 favorable votes are necessary to recommend approval. There were no other motions on this item. b. On amending the Zoning Ordinance Map,there was one motion: to maintain the present zoning classification on the Bay at RM-3 and to change the classification on the canal to RM-1, with a companion ordinance to limit the height of buildings to 40'. The vote on this motion was 3-1 and, therefore, it failed. There were no other motions on this item. CONCLUSION As required by Zoning Ordinance 89-2665,the City Commission must set a public hearing date for these two related matters within sixty (60)days of the Planning Board rendering a decision. Accordingly, the Administration has concluded that the Commission should proceed to set public hearings for the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance relating to the Sunset Harbor site, with first reading at a special meeting of the City Commission on December 9, 1992. This is the earliest date possible to meet the minimum public notice and advertising requirements. DJG/SRP:ml Attachment commisn\1 1 12Arec.92 8 42 ORIGINAL RESOLUTION NO. 92-20652 Calling a publichearing to consider transmitting to the Department of Community Affairs an amendment to the future land use map of the City's Comprehensive Plan, changing the use of a parcel of land known as "Sunset Harbour" and more particularly described in Exhibit "1" from the current land use designation of RM-3, multiple family, high intensity, to either RM-2, multiple medium intensity, RM-1, multiple family, low intensity or TH, townhome, or to a combination thereof.