LTC 022-2007 Planning Board Action on Parking Impact Fee Ordinance
lD tv\IA/v\IBEACH
""'55""
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NO. 022-2007
LETTI;R TO COMMISSION
C~ ~
-t =:\ ::0
-< c... m
52 ~
, (")
{'1""! N m.
;to \D '
SUBJECT: Planning Board Action on Parking Impact Fee Ordinance ~ <
U'l ~
On December 6, 2006 the City Commission passed, on second reading, an e,di~C~
Amendment increasing the parking impact fee from $15,000 per space to $35,000 par saace.
The City Commission also directed the Administration to explore ways to reduce potelit!alllRlse
of the impact fee and to develop specific criteria for the utilization of the parking impact fee
program. In particular, members of the Land Use Committee expressed concern with the
manner in which some development projects have paid a parking impact fee in lieu of providing
parking, even when parking can be provided on site. In some instances, this has allowed for a
larger level of development on a building site than would otherwise be permitted if the parking
were required to be provided on site or within 1200 feet of the property.
DATE:
Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission
Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager (~O
January 29, 2007 ()
TO:
FROM:
Pursuant to the direction of the Land Use and Development Committee and the City
Commission, the Planning Department drafted two (2) separate Ordinance Amendments
pertaining to the applicability of the parking impact fee. On December 19, 2006, the Planning
Board considered the two (2) Ordinances.
The Ordinance Amendments considered by the Planning Board proposed specific criteria and
limitations for the utilization of parking impact fees, and were structured to reduce the negative
impact of projects within historic districts that choose to pay the parking impact fee. The
following is a summary of each Ordinance:
I. Limitations and Review Criteria:
Under this version of the Ordinance, a parking impact fee can only be utilized in historic districts
if physical site or city code constraints prevent the accommodation of required parking.
Additionally, limitations are imposed on new construction; specifically, the total amount of
existing and new construction that does not provide required parking on site, or within 1,500 feet
of the subject site, shall not exceed 75% of the available FAR on the subject site.
In order to address certain types of uses that have low impacts, serve a legitimate public
purpose or further establish pOliCy goals of the City, exemptions from these limitations are
proposed, as follows:
. New construction and or additions composed of affordable housing or elderly housing.
. Residential apartment additions, whether attached or detached, to contributing buildings,
including roof-top additions where applicable and permitted, provided such additions are
limited to one (1) story, not to exceed twelve (12) feet above the height of the main roof
of the existing structure, and not to exceed a total of three (3) stories and 35 feet.
. New construction of hotels and hotel additions, whether attached or detached, within the
architectural district, including roof-top additions where applicable and permitted; this
shall not include Suites Hotel units.
. Non-residential roof-top additions, where applicable and permitted, not to exceed one
story and 12 feet in height, and 3,000 square feet in size.
We are committed to providing excellent public service to all who live, work and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community,
Page: 2 of 4
Date: January 29, 2007
LTC - Planning Board Action on Parking Impact Fee Ordinance
This version of the Ordinance also specifies that the Historic Preservation Board and/or
Planning Department Staff shall use the following criteria when reviewing development projects
that propose to utilize parking impact fees:
1. Whether the property has direct access from an alley or a side street and can
accommodate some or all required parking on site.
2. That any new construction on a development site has accommodated, to the greatest
extent possible, all required parking within the site.
3. That at least one parking space per unit is provided on site for residential construction
and additions, to the greatest extent possible.
II. Review Criteria:
Under this version of the Ordinance, the parking impact fee would still be available for all new
construction projects and additions to existing buildings within a local historic district. However,
the following mandatory conditions would have to be satisfied:
1. The property has no direct access from an alley or a side street, or cannot accommodate
some or all required parking on site due to physical site or city code restraints.
2. The new construction proposed has accommodated, to the greatest extent possible, all
required parking within the site.
3. If parking is provided on site, at least one parking space per unit is provided on site for
residential construction and additions.
Additionally, with regard to 'fee calculation', relief from the more expensive requirement of a one
time payment of $35,000 per space is afforded for the following development projects, which
would be eligible for a yearly payment:
1. Hotel additions, whether attached or detached, to contributing buildings, including roof-
top additions where applicable and permitted, provided such additions are limited to one
(1) story, not to exceed twelve (12) feet, above the height ofthe main roof ofthe existing
structure, and not to exceed a total of three (3) stories and 35 feet in height, and 10 units
or 4,000 square feet. For purposes of this subsection, hotel additions shall not include
Suites Hotel units.
2. Residential apartment additions, whether attached or detached, to contributing buildings,
including roof-top additions where applicable and permitted, provided such additions are
limited to one (1) story, not to exceed twelve (12) feet, above the height ofthe main roof
of the existing structure, and not to exceed a total of three (3) stories and 35 feet in
height, and 5 units or 5,000 square feet.
3. New construction and additions that contain affordable housing and/or elderly housing.
4. Non-residential roof-top additions, where applicable and permitted, not to exceed one
story and 12 feet in height, and 3,000 square feet in size.
Page: 3 of 4
Date: January 29, 2007
LTC - Planning Board Action on Parking Impact Fee Ordinance
While not eliminating the parking impact fee for new construction and additions, the proposed
ordinances do incorporate certain mandatory criteria to ensure that as much parking as
physically possible is provided on site.
After hearing public comments, the Planning Board had a lengthy and objective discussion
regarding the proposed ordinances and the overall intent and affect of the Parking Impact Fee
program. During the course of discussion, the following key issues were raised:
1. The practicality of eliminating the Parking Impact Fee program within historic districts
and the impact on the expansion of existing districts and the creation of new districts.
2. A number of historic districts were created and expanded under the auspice of property
owners being able to use the parking impact fee program.
3. Certain projects that have provided all or most of the required parking on site are not
successful in terms of contextual compatibility.
4. A threshold for the total number of required spaces for new construction that can be
satisfied by paying an impact fee needs to be established.
5. Greater flexibility for the utilization of the yearly fee in lieu of a one-time fee should be
explored.
6. Certain areas of the City generate more parking due to specific types of uses permitted;
the discrepancies in uses allowed to participate in the parking impact fee program
should be considered.
7. Hotel projects converted to residential condominiums, or residential uses masquerading
as hotels.
8. Revised parking requirements for hotels, elderly housing, affordable housing and other
types of uses that do not generate a high parking requirement.
9. The feasibility and practicality of alternative transit options such as buses, cabs and
bicycles.
After much discussion, the Planning Board determined that these issues, as well as those raised
by the public, need further study in order to avoid any unintended consequences that may arise
due to the proposed legislation. In order to ensure that all of the relevant issues and concerns
are fully aired and discussed, and that definitive direction is given in terms of a single, revised
Ordinance, the Board instructed the Planning Department to schedule a workshop for this
particular issue.
The administration believes that the decision of the Planning Board to hold a workshOp on this
issue is a prudent course of action as the parking impact fee is a very useful tool for
redevelopment projects, as well as new construction, within local historic districts. The
administration shares the concerns of the Planning Board with regard to the elimination of the
parking impact fee as property owners and developers do not have the same flexibility to
aggregate development sites within historic districts as they do outside of historic districts, due to
restrictions on the alteration and demolition of existing buildings in historic districts.
Consequently, the development of small lots or interior lots would be far more challenging in
historic districts if some relief from the minimum parking requirements was not available.
Page: 4 of 4
Date: January 29, 2007
LTC - Planning Board Action on Parking Impact Fee Ordinance
Additionally, there are certain types of uses that serve a very legitimate public purpose and
further established policy goals, such as small hotels, elderly housing and affordable housing,
which may otherwise not be feasible to construct if a parking impact fee is not available in some
form.
It is anticipated that the Planning Board will hold a workshop on this issue on or before their
meeting of February 27, 2007. Subsequent to this workshop, a single, comprehensive
or~' ce ill be drafted, which addresses the specific concerns of all interested parties.
JM.. RM
F:\P M_RESPlplanning board action - PIF.ltc.doc
c: Jose Smith, City Attorney
Gary Held, First Assistant City Attorney
Bob Parcher, City Clerk
Jorge G. Gomez, Planning Director
William Cary, Assistant Planning Director
Thomas R. Mooney, Design and Preservation Manager
Richard G. Lorber, Planning and Zoning Manager