2007-26625 ResoRESOLUTION NO. 2007-26625
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE EVALUATION
AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF THE MIAMI BEACH
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY ADMINISTRATION TO TRANSMIT THE REPORT TO THE STATE
OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND TO ALL
OTHER REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
AGENCIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 163.3191, F.S.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.3191(1), Florida Statutes, local
governments are required to prepare and adopt an Evaluation and Appraisal Report
(EAR) as one component of the local planning process; and,
WHEREAS, an Evaluation and Appraisal Report has been prepared as required
by State Law and has recommended EAR-based text amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan as a result of this EAR; and
WHEREAS, at its November 23, 2004 meeting, the Planning Board of the City of
Miami Beach considered the draft EAR and adopted a resolution recommending the
transmittal of the document to the South Florida Regional Planning Council for review;
and
WHEREAS, at its December 8, 2004 meeting, the City Commission approved
the transmittal of the EAR for review; and
WHEREAS, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, as well as the Florida
Department of Community Affairs reviewed the EAR and provided an Advisory Report
and Preliminary Sufficient Review respectively, finding the EAR not sufficient for
adoption; and
WHEREAS, the City Administration has addressed the comments and objections
in both reports and recommends that the Evaluation and Appraisal Report be adopted by
the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, at its July 24, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board recommended that
the Evaluation and Appraisal Report be adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City of Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted;
2. The City Administration is authorized and directed to transmit the adopted
Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan as
approved by the City Commission to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs, the South Florida Regional Planning Council and to all
other required State and local governmental agencies in accordance with
Section 163.3191, F.S.
3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 5th day of September , 2007.
P Matti Herrera Bower ~
A EST: Vice-Mayor
(~v~-
C TY CLERK Robert Parcher
APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
Q' ~
ity Attorney Date
F:\PLAN\$PLB\Comp Plan Amendments\2005 EAR\Reso adopting EAR.doc
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Reolution adopting the Evaluation And Appraisal Report (EAR) Of The Miami Beach Comprehensive
Plan in Accordance W ith Section 163.3191, F.S.
Key Intended Outcome Supported:
Regulatory. Required by State Statutes
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A
Issue:
Should the City Commission adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan
Item Summa /Recommendation:
FIRST READING
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is astate-mandated evaluation and update of the Plan
(Section 163.3191, F.S). Required every seven years, the EAR is intended to be an assessment of how
well the Plan is working, and to provide an opportunity to revise the Plan to address changing issues and
conditions. In order to be effective, the Plan must be a living document, one with the flexibility to adapt to
changing conditions and needs. Although there are other opportunities to periodically revise the Plan,
these revisions often occur as the result of outside development applications.
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed resolution on first reading
and set a second readin ado tion hearin for the Se tember 26, 2007 meetin .
F1UVI~VIy OVAIU RCGVIIIIIICIIUAU VII.
At the July 24, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
On May 29, 2007, the Administration wrote a Letter to Commission providing preliminary information on
the process for this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a tentative schedule for the adoption of this
element.
Financial Information:
Source of Amount Account
Funds: ~
2
3
OBPI Total
Financial Impact Summary:
The ro osed Ordinance is not ex ected to have an fiscal im act.
Cit Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Jorge Gomez or Mercy Lamazares
~ Department erector ~ ~ssist~y(t City Manager ~ City Manager ~
.doc
~,~ ~ ~ AGENDA ITEM ~1 ~
DAT q-s-o
m MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beath, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, vrww.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: September 5, 2007 FIRST READING
SUBJECT: Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL
REPORT (EAR) OF THE MIAMI BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO TRANSMIT
THE REPORT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS AND TO ALL OTHER REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTAL REVIEW AGENCIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION
163.3191, F.S.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed resolution
on first reading and set a second reading and adoption public hearing forthe September26,
2007 meeting.
BACKGROUND
The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is astate-mandated evaluation and update of
the Plan (Section 163.3191, F.S). Required every seven years, the EAR is intended to be
an assessment of how well the Plan is working, and to provide an opportunity to revise the
Plan to address changing issues and conditions. In order to be effective, the Plan must be a
living document, one with the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions and needs.
Although there are other opportunities to periodically revise the Plan, these revisions often
occur as the result of outside development applications.
The City initiated its EAR process with an extensive community involvement effort that
occurred between March and May 2004. During this time the Project Team conducted
numerous meetings that included a series of one-on-one meetings with key City staff and
elected officials; an interagency scoping meeting with adjacent local governments, and
County, regional and state agencies; several advertised public workshops with City
residents, and workshops with the Planning Board and the City Commission. The process is
also detailed in the Public Participation Summary section of the report.
On December 8, 2004, the City Commission approved the transmittal of the EAR to the
South Florida Regional Planning Council (SFRPC). On February 22, 2005, the Department
of Community Affairs (DCA) issued its Preliminary Sufficiency Review, finding the EAR not
sufficient and provided comments on those areas that needed further information. The
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 5, 2007 Page 2
South Florida Regional Planning Council provided its Advisory Report on March 5, 2005,
advising that the City's EAR was not sufficient for adoption and recommended that the City
address issues detailed in its report.
This revised report addresses the comments from DCA and the SFRPC. The EAR was
presented for a second time to the City's Planning Board on July 24, 2007, which
unanimously recommended adoption.
ANALYSIS
Through a public participation process, where several workshops were geographically
dispersed within the City, five major issues were selected from the many issues raised by
staff and residents. At the conclusion of the public workshops, the Planning Board and City
Commission held a joint meeting to hear a presentation and to discuss the input from all of
the previous meetings. This was followed by the Scoping Meeting with State, Regional and
local agencies and municipalities to discuss with them the major issues facing Miami Beach.
CMB EAR Public Meeting Schedule
Date 2004 Location Meetin Sub'ect
March 26 Plannin De t. Ma~or issue in ut from Plannin Staff
March 31 Planning Dept. Major Issue input from City Dept.
Re resentatives
A ril 15 Tem le Menorah, North Beach Ma~or Issue in ut from residents
A ril 16 Nautilus Middle School, Mid Beach Major Issue in ut from residents
April 19 Police Community Room, MBPD
head uarters, South Beach Major Issue input from residents
April 30 CMB City Hall Scoping meeting, major issue input
from a encies
Ma 4 Nautilus Middle School, Mid Beach Major Issue in ut from residents
Ma 10 Normand Shores, North Beach Major Issue in ut from residents
May 12 CMB Commission Chambers Joint City Commission/Planning Board
Major Issues discussion
Based on the input received, five major issues were identified for inclusion in the EAR. On
July 13, 2004, the Department of Community of Community Affairs (DCA) provided a Letter
of Understanding for the review of the Major Issues outlined in the letter. These are as
follows:
Traffic Congestion
Traffic congestion is an increasingly common problem in Miami Beach, as it is across the
county, and indeed the country. Although the City was down-zoned in 1997-1998, there are
several issues that cause traffic congestion, one of which is the popularity of the
entertainment destinations in South Beach. Road construction and the new construction
generated by a heated real estate market has also played a part in the traffic congestion,
including a limited number of convenient connection points between the barrier islands and
the I-95/US 1 corridor.
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 5, 2007 Page 3
Housing
One of the concerns expressed during the citywide public workshops is that there is a lack of
low, moderate and middle-class housing being built, and service workers and white collar
employees are being priced out of the housing market. The latest trend all over South
Florida is for the development of privately-owned properties into high-rise, high-density
condominium structures. This trend unfortunately has had a detrimental impact on the
affordability of moderately-price housing for the workforce. Incentives must be addressed
for the development of housing for service workers and white collar employees -the general
workforce -are desirable in order to accommodate this need.
Pedestrian/Bicycle Amenities
The general perception of residents of the City is that there are insufficient facilities for
pedestrians and bicyclists to navigate throughout the City in a safe or efficient manner, and
that more shaded and protected sidewalks, paths and lanes are necessary.
Although there are many fragments of pleasant bicycle/pedestrian paths and greenways
spread throughout the City, there is no existing system that connects them all into a coherent
system. Some sidewalks are narrow and poles, signs, newspaper boxes, poorly tended
overhanging landscaping and sometimes street trees are obstructions that do not make for a
pleasant walk or bide ride. Strategies to create a citywide plan for a network of bicycle paths
should be reviewed and addressed.
Overdevelopment
Inasmuch as the City carried out a series of amendments to the Land Development
Regulations of the City Code and the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Map
down-zoning commercial and multi-family residential areas between 1997-1999, the
perception is still that the City is permitting large development projects to go forward,
exacerbating traffic congestion, and adversely impacting the quality of life of its residents.
The construction of several high rise towers that were in the planning stages and retained
vested rights, between 1989 and 1994, have caused the public to express disapproval of
them.
The City adopted new development regulations for projects that exceed 50,000 gross square
feet (determined by measuring all horizontal levels of usable space, including parking areas
and recreation facilities in open spaces). In addition to this recent amendment to the
development regulations, the City is conducting a Growth Management study that when
completed, may recommend policies that would strengthen current regulations and new
policies that would ensure that development in the City proceeds at a pace that is
manageable.
Incompatible Uses
As the City of Miami Beach is a dense urban community where zoning districts and
permitted, land uses are close to each other with little buffering areas separating them. In
addition, the City's Land Development Regulations permit a mix of uses in the high intensity
residential areas and commercial districts, where although not incompatible, entertainment
uses are a source of localized complaints. The collateral effects of some of the
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 5, 2007 Page 4
entertainment venues, such as trash, public drunkenness and loud crowds filtering into the
residential neighborhoods have been identified as a problem. In addition, residential uses
encroaching into non-residential areas where the likelihood of conflict is magnified with
respect to incompatible uses is another concern.
The perception of incompatible uses is addressed in the report and measures to address the
desires of the residents are also discussed.
The attached Evaluation and Appraisal Report is composed of five chapters and three
appendices. Chapter I describes the five identified major issues with analyses, impacts and
recommendations; Chapter II is an objective achievement analysis of all the Plan elements,
goals, objectives and polices; Chapter III is a community-wide assessment that includes
population changes, vacant land, and location of development in relation to the Plan, as well
as a level of service analysis, coordination of land use and public school planning and
whether the Plan is consistent with changes in Statutes, Administrative rules and regional
plan. Chapter IV includes recommendations to amend the Comprehensive Plan where
necessary, including bringing objectives and policies up to date. Chapter V includes a
summary of the comments from the community meetings; and finally, included in the three
appendices is a map series that shows the future land use, the current land use, existing
public schools in the City, vacant land distribution and existing historic districts among
others.
It should be noted that the recommendations included in the EAR are based only on the
evaluation of existing policies, and additional amendments may be necessary in order to
conform to Section 163.3177, F.S., which requires that each local government
comprehensive plan include at least two planning periods, one covering at least the first 5-
yearperiod occurring after the plan's adoption and one covering at least a 10-year period.
On May 29, 2007, the Administration wrote a Letter to Commission providing preliminary
information on the process for this EAR process and a tentative schedule for its adoption.
PLANNING BOARD
At its July 24, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board by unanimous vote recommended adoption
to the City Commission.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the proposed resolution
on first reading and set a second reading and adoption public hearing for the September 26,
2007 meeting.
The evaluation and appraisal report shall be adopted by resolution at a public hearing with
public notice. The City Commission shall adopt the report in conformity with the public
participation procedures as required by s. 163.3181, which refers to s. 166.041, "Procedures
for adoption of ordinances and resolutions," which requires that the proposed resolution be
read by title or in full, on at least 2 separate days and shall, at least 10 days prior to
adoption, be noticed in a newspaper of general circulation. Although this section of the
City Commission Memorandum
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)
September 5, 2007 Page 5
Statute is silent on the size requirement for the ad, in an abundance of caution it is
suggested that the ad be no less than 2 columns wide by 10 inches long in a standard size
newspaper, and the headline in the advertisement shall be in a type no smaller than 18
point.
JMG/TH/JGG/ML
Attachments: LTC #122-2007
Evaluation & Appraisal Report of the CMB Comprehensive Plan -Available at the City
Clerk's Office
T:\AGENDA\2007\sep0507\Regular\1838 - Publci School Facilities Element memo.doc
'~
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NO. LTC # 122-2007 LETTER TD COMMISSION
~ ~
r-
r- w
TO: Mayor David Demler and Members of the City Commission _ °
,~ . 3
FROM: City Manager Jorge M. Gonzalez .~- ~ ~~ ~ T; ~,
DATE: May 29, 2007 v ~-.'. ~
SUBJECT: Public Schools Facilities Element and Updated Public Schools Interlocal
Agreement and Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the City's Comprehensive
Plan
According to the schedule published by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), Miami-
Dade County and all its municipalities must have an adopted School Facilities Element and
updated Public School Facility Planning Interlocal Agreement no laterthan January 1, 2008.
This Comprehensive Plan Amendment is exempt from the provisions of 163.3187 (no more
than 2 times per year). These two documents can be adopted concurrently and it has been
recommended that the legwork start sooner than later. Following are summaries and
highlights of the School Element and Updated Interlocal Agreement. The County already
had the Planning Advisory Board hearing in April. See its schedule directly below.
Educational Element -Miami Dade County Comprehensive Ptan Amendment
Schedule:
April 23, 2007 Planning Advisory Board hearing for recommendations
July 12, 2007 Board of County Commissioners hearing for transmittal to DCA (this
date was changed from May 21, due to technicalities in finalizing this
amendment with the Miami Dade School Board)
July, 2007 Transmittal to DCA for comments
September, 2007* Tentative date to receive ORC from DCA
September, 2007* PAB public hearing and final recommendation
October 3, 2007* Public hearing and final adoption by Board of County Commissioners
"` Tentative dates depending on response from DCA
* * *
Our tentative schedule for adoption should be as follows:
July 24, 2007: Planning Board public hearing for recommendation
:U
'1't
'-~
'T!
September 5, 2007: City Commission hearing for transmission of comp. plan amendment
Letter to the Commission
Re: School Facilities Element and Updated
Public Schools Interlocal Agreement
May 28, 2007 Page 2
September/October 2007: DCA sends Objections, Recommendations and Comments
(ORC) (60 days +/-)
October 27, 2007: Set City Commission public hearing
December 12, 2007: City Commission public hearing for adoption of School Facilities
Element and Interlocal. Agreement- This can be done by resolution,
and adoption of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the
City's Comprehensive Plan, which can also be done by resolution.
The following is a brief summary of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
EDUCATIONAL ELEMENT
Establishes school concurrency (Mandated by the 2005 Growth Management
Act)
o LOS standards - 100% Permanent Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH)
capacity without relocatables (portables) by 2018.
o Schools not meeting 100% FISH by 1/1/08 will have 10 years to achieve.
o Once 100%-FISH is achieved, cannot exceed LOS
o Interim standards between 1/1/08 and 1/1/18:"`
Between 1/1/08 to 9/1/10
^ 100% of FISH (with relocatables) for those schools that cannot meet the
adopted LOS and are operating at less than or up to 100% FISH capacity
with relocatables. These schools cannot exceed 100% FISH capacity
with relocatables.
Between 9!2/10 to 12/31/17
• 100% FISH with relocatables is the interim LOS. By 1/1/13 the School
system cannot use relocatables to provide additional capacity at any
school.
Beginning 1/1/13, the School system will implement a schedule to
eliminate relocatables by 1/1/18.
** The timeline for achieving these standards may be revised slightly in order to meet
the requirements of the 2005 Growth Management Act for a financially feasible plan.
Letter to the Commission
Re: School Facilities Element and Updated
Public Schools Interlocal Agreement
May 28, 2007 Page 3
• Development Impact
o LOS cannot be met in a Concurrency Service Area (CSA) because of
development impact, development may proceed if meeting one or more of the
following conditions:
• Impact can be shifted to one or more contiguous CSA if there is available
capacity;
• Impact is mitigated through a combination of one or more proportionate
share mitigation options: contribution of land; construction, expansion or
payment for land acquisition; construction of a permanent public school
facility.
• Developments are phased to occur when sufficient capacity will be
available.
If none of the above can happen, development cannot be approved.
Magnet schools, schools of choice and other educational facilities with districtwide
attendance boundaries must meet 100% FISH capacity with relocatables by January
1, 2013.
Miami Dade County and Miami Dade County Public Schools (MDCPS) will review
annually the Educational Element and update the county's comprehensive plan if
necessary in accordance with the interlocal agreement.
Monitoring and evaluation will be measured through annual review of the adopted
MDCPS Facility Work Program to determine if concurrency LOS is being achieved.
As a note to the monitoring and evaluation, the School System will implement a Concurrency
Management System that will track the changes in schools' capacity and LOS standards.
UPDATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY PLANNING
The updates to the Interlocal Agreement are mostly to incorporate either by reference or
stated the new statutory mandate to implement public schools concurrency. The agreement
incorporates certain dates which are key annual deadlines by the School Board, LOS
Standards for school concurrency and dates in the future to achieve the adopted LOS
standards. The agreement also clarifies that it does not limit the authority of any city or the
country to deny site plan, or functional equivalent, for reasons other than failure to achieve
and maintain the adopted LOS.
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
Planning staff is currently working on finalizing the EAR and it is anticipated that the report
and adoption will travel concurrent and subject to the same deadlines previously stated.
Letter to the Commission
Re: School Facilities Element and Updated
Public Schools Interlocal Agreement
May 29, 2007 Page 4
Planning Staff will be available to any Commissioner on a one-to-one basis should it be
necessary.
,`~ S6~
JMG/ /JG L '~
c: Jorge M. Gomez, Planning Director
Timothy Hemstreet, Assistant City Manager
Robert Parcher, City Clerk
F:IPLAN\$PLB\Comp Plan Amendments\School Concurrency\Educational Element 8 ILA LTC2.doc