HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-09304ORDINANCE NO.► `
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY MAKING AMENDMENTS
TO COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE 6871 PER-
TAINING TO COMMUNITY 13ASED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES BY RAKING THE 14ECESSARY CHANGES
IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF
SAID ORDINANCE N0. 6871 BY REFERENCE AND
DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2,
THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE
SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT AND
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board at its meeting
of May 20, 1981, Item #2, following an advertised hearing,
adopted Resolution No. PAB 28-81 by a 6 to 0 vote (2 members
absent) RECOMMENDING amendments to Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
6871, as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration
of this matter, deems it advisable and in the best interest of
the general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants
to grant this change of zoning classification, as hereinafter
set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 6871, as amended, the Compre-
hensive Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami, is hereby
amended pertaining to Community -Based Residential Facilities,
as follows: 1/
A. ARTICLE II "DEFINITIONS" Section 2 "Terms Defined" is
amended by:
1. Deletion of entire Subsection (26-6) "Facilities for
Developmental Disabilities";
Deletion of Subsection (58-A) "Residential Group
Homes for Developmental Disabilities";
Deletion of Subsection (88-B) "Substance Abuse
Facilities - Residential";
2, Re -numbering Subsection (88-C) of said Section 2
to read (88-B);
1/ Words and/or figures stricken through shall be deleted,
underscored words and/or figures constitute the amendment,
0 4
3. A new Subsection (18-B) of said Section 2 is hereby
added to read as follows:
"(18-B) COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITY
A facility that provides room with or without
board, resident services, and 24-hour supervision.
Such a facility functions as a single housekeeping
unity and is licensed or approved by an authorized
regulatory agency. This category includes adult
congregate living facilities; residential facilities
for alcohol and drug rehabilitation, for develop-
mentally disable persons, for persons with mental
healty problems, and for dependent children; and
juvenile and adult residential correctional facil-
ities, including halfway houses. The defined terms
FAMILY, HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, ROOMING HOUSE,
TOURIST HOME, APARTMENT HOTEL, APARTMENT BUILDING,
HOTEL AND MOTEL, and the term "homes for foster
children" shall not be construed to mean community -
based residential facility."
B.#, ARTICLE IV "GENERAL PROVISIONS" is amended by:
1. Deletion of. entire Section 43 "Substance Abuse
facilities" and substituting in lieu thereof a
new Section 43 to read as follows:
Section 43 COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
(1) All proposed community -based residential
facilities must receive conditional use _
approval and shall comply with the follow-
ing provisions: -
(a) Prior to consideration of Conditional
Use Approval, all proposed community -
based residential facilities shall
be inspected by Miami Building and
Fire Inspectors. A total floor plan
of the proposed facility shall be
submitted as a supporting document
prior to the Conditional Use hearing.
The Miami Building and Fire Inspec-
tions Divisions shall submit to the
Zoning Board their evaluation and recom-
mendations as to conformance of the
proposed facility with the Miami
Building and Fire Codes. These re-
commendations shall include the max-
imum number of occupants (capacity)
allowed in the proposed facility by
the Building Code. The resolution
authorizing the Conditional Use Ap-
proval shall include the maximum
number of occupants allowed.
(b) Conditional Use Approval may be granted
contingent upon governmental authori-
zation of the proposed facility.
(c) The certificate of use or occupancy
shall not be transferable if the
facility changes use or ownership.
(2) Registration
All existing and proposed facilities shall
register with the Miami Department of Building
and Zoning Inspections.
9 Q. 0 1.
2
VA 44
Information supplied during registration shall
—
include:
(a) the name of the sponsoring organization, if
any.
(b) the name of the facility operator.
(c) the street address of the facility.
(d) the type of program to be offered by the
facility.
(e) the maximum number of persons who will live
at the facility.
_
(f) the governmental authorization to operate
the facility.
(3) Location Standards
The Miami Department of Building and Zoning
Inspections shall maintain an official map
showing the location of all community -based
residential facilities in the City of Miami.
Community -based residential facilities shall
=
be subject to the facility location standards:
(a) No proposed community -based residential
facility shall be located in any census
tract where residents of existing com-
munity -based residential facilities com-
prise 3% or more of that census tract's
total population as estimated by the
City of Miami Planning Department.
(b) No proposed community -based residen-
tial facility shall be located within
a radius of 1825 feet of an existing
community -based residential facility.
Measurement shall be made on the official
map from the nearest point of the site
of the existing facility to the nearest
point of the site of the proposed facility.
(4) Usable Open Space
Usable open space shall be provided to facility
occupants based upon the following schedule:
(a) 200 square feet for each occupant under
18 years of age.
(b) 150 square feet for each occupant 18
years of age or older.
The rear and interior side yards of facilities
with more than 50 residents must be screened
with a solid fence, wall or compact hedge
with a minimum height of five feet.
(5) Parking
A facility shall provide one space for each
staff mernber and one space for each four
occupants, Waiver of occupant parking may
be permitted based upon the following factors:
proximity to mass transit, employment area,
community facilities; auto ownership; and
visitation policy.
1A
4
(6) Signs
Signs permitted shall be 111ited to a nameplate not exceeding
2 sctuare .feet in area for each street frontage,
2, Section 45 "Residential Group Homes for Developmental
Disabilities", is hereby deleted in its entirety.
s
C. Amending ARTICLE V ONE FAMILY DWELLING °- R-1, R-lA, R-IB
DISTRICT, Section 1, Use Regulations, Subsection (6)
by adding a new paragraph (n) as a "Conditional Use"
-
to read as follows:
(n) Community -based residential facilities
with not more than 6 occupants, in-
cluding resident staff, in accord with
_�-
the provisions of ARTICLE IV, Section
43.
D. Amending ARTICLE VI TWO-FAMILY DWELLING R-2 DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (4-A) by:
Deleting paragraph (d) "Substance Abuse Facilities";
Deleting paragraph (f) "Residential Group Homes for
Developmental Disabilities".
E. Amending ARTICLE VII LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE R-3 DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (6-B) by:
Adding a new paragraph (d) as a "Conditional Use" to
.read as follows:
(d) Community -based residential facili-
ties with not more than 16 residents,
including resident staff, in accord
with the provisions of ARTICLE IV,
Section 43.
E. Amending ARTICLE VIII MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE R-4 DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (11) by:
Deleting from paragraph (c) only the phrase
it . and RESIDENTIAL GROUP HOMES FOR THE
.
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (subject to
the provisions of Article IV, Section 45)";
Adding anew paragraph (h) as a "Conditional Use";
to read as follows':
(h) Community -based residential facil-
ities with nor more than 50 residents,
including resident staff, in accord
with the provisions of ARTICLE IV,
Section 43.
G. Amending ARTICLE X - HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE R-5 DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (6) by:
Adding a new paragraph (f) as a "Conditional Use" to
read as follows:
(f) Community -based residential facil-
ities, in accord with the provisions
of ARTICLE IV, Section 43,
if. Amending ARTICLE X*-1 HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE R-SA DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (2-4) by;
9,3 0 '1 A
Adding a new paragraph (c) as a "Conditional Use"
to read as follows:
(e) Community -based residential facil-
ities in accord with the provisions
of ARTICLE; .IV, Section 43.
I. Amending ARTICLE XI RESIDENTIAL -OFFICE R-C DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (5) by:
Adding a new paragraph (f) as a "Conditional Use" to
read as follows:
(f) Community -based residential facil-
ities, in accord with the provisions
of ARTICLE IV, Section 43.
13. Amending ARTICLE: XI-3 RESIDENTIAL -OFFICE -COMMERCIAL,
R-C-1 DISTRICT, Section 1 "Use Regulations",
Subsection (7) by:
Adding a new paragraph (k) as a "Conditional Use" to
read as follows:
(k) Community -based residential
facilities, in accord with the
provisions of ARTICLE IV,
Section 43.
K. Amending ARTICLE XII LOCAL COMMERCIAL C-1 DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (33) by:
Adding a new paragraph (i) as a "Conditional Use"
to read as follows:
(i) Community -based residential facil-
ities in accord with the provisions
of ARITICLE IV, Section 43.
L. Amending ARTICLE XIV COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL C-2 DISTRICT,
Section 1 "Use Regulations", Subsection (21) by:
Adding a new paragraph (i) as a "Conditional Use"
to read as follows:
(i) Community -based residential facil-
ities in accord with the provisions
of ARTICLE IV, Section 43.
Section2. The Zoning District Map made a part of said
Ordinance No. 6871 by reference and description in Article III,
Section 2 of said Ordinance is hereby amended to reflect the
changes made necessary by the amendments.
Section 3. Should any part or provision of this Ordinance
be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
the sane shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance as a
Whole,
Section 4. That all laws or harts of laws in conflict
herewith be and the same are hereby repealed insofar as they
5 t1j 04 Od
are in conflict.
PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 25 day of
June 1981,
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING BY TITLE
ONLY this 23 day of July , 1981.
ES :
RAL14i G. ONGIE
MAURICE A,, FERRE
MAURICE A. FERRE
H A Y 0 R
CITY CLERK
PREPAREfP AND APPROVED BY:
AIK A. VALENTINE
S ISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
E GEORGE F. KNOX, JR. �
CITY ATTORNEY 3
t' + €! 4 +
6
1i
MIAMI 115VIF-W
AND DAILY RECORD
Published Daily except Saturday. Sunday and
Legal Holidays
Miami, Dade County, Florida.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
Octelma V. Ferbeyre, who on oath says that she Is the Supervisor,
Legal Advertising of the Miami Review and Daily Record, a
daily (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) newspaper,
published at Miami in Dade County, Florida; that that the
attached copy of advertisement, being a Legal Advertisement
of Notice In the matter of
CITY OF MIAMI
LZY Opp'
DItY 6P MIAMI,
a oe r bAbE CI 11.110 V, F111.6fift
���ECQFLD���p UOAL NitSi`let
All interested persons will take notice that on the 23rd day of July,
1981, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, adopted the following
titled ordinances:
ORDINANCE NO. 9295
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE HOLDING OF A BOND
ELECTION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ON NOVEMBER
3, 1981 WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF $21,000,000 FIRE
FIGHTING, FIRE PREVENTION AND RESCUE FACILITIES BONDS;
PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL GO INTO EFFECT
IMMEDIATELY UPON ITS PASSAGE; AND DISPENSING WITH
THE READING OF THIS ORDINANCE ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS
BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE
COMMISSION,
ORDINANCE NO. 9296
Re t Ordinance 9304 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SUBJECT TO
THE ELECTION HEREIN PROVIDED FOR, OF $21,000,000 BONDS
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING THE
COST OF FIRE FIGHTING, FIRE PREVENTION AND RESCUE
In the X X X Court, FACILITIES, INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION AND
RECONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVING OF FIRE STATIONS FOR
was published in said newspaper In the issues of THE CITY OF MIAMI, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, OTHER
July 29, 1981 STRUCTURES, EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES AND COMMUNICATION
SYSTEMS RELATED TO THE TRAINING, ADMINISTRATION AND
OPERATIONS OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY OF
MIAMI AND THE ACQUISITION OF ANY NECESSARY LAND
Affiant further says that the said Miami Review and Daily AND EQUIPMENT RELATED THERETO; DECLARING THIS
Record is a newspaper published at Miami in said Dade County, ORDINANCE TO BE AN EMERGENCY MEASURE, AND PROVIDING
Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL GO INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY
continuously
publisedey said and Dade
LegelCounty,ysloaind'hes been UPON ITS PASSAGE, AND DISPENSING WITH THE READING
(excepentered as second class mail matter at the post office in OF THIS ORDINANCE ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE
Miami in said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE COMMISSION.
next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that she has neither
paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, ORDINANCE NO. 9297
rebate. commission or relund for th urpose of securing this
advertisement for publicalloft: e s d newspaper. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 56.55 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING
THEREIN FOR AN INCREASE IN THE FARE CHARGED BY ALL
HOLDERS OF CERTIFICATES OPERATING FOR -HIRE CARS
�. (JITNEY BUSES) FROM 6013; to 75e; CONTAINING A REPEALER
w��Tand'kbbs ibed Tore me this PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
29th day o ;1 Jul _ ._ ! `j, a D. 19 .81
ORDINANCE NO. 9298
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NO.
yV. B oks 9267, ADOPTED MAY 15, 1981, WHICH ESTABLISHED ATRUST
N �ry`Puub to Florida at Large AND AGENCY FUND ENTITLED: "CABLE TELEVISION'; BY
i INCREASING THE APPROPRIATION FOR SAID FUND IN THE
(SEAL) AMOUNT OF $25,000, FROM REVENUE RECEIVED FROM CABLE
My Commission expires June T;"t983, TELEVISION COMPANIES IN THE FORM OF A NONREFUNDABLE
BIDDING FEE: CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE: AND DISPENSING WITH THE
REQUIREMENT OF READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS
BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMISSION,
ORDINANCE NO. 9299
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NO,
9199, ADOPTED NOVEMBER 6, 1980, THE CITY'S CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE FOR' FISCAL
YEAR 1980.81; AS AMENDED; BY APPROPRIATING $212,000 IN
ANTICIPATED FY 1980-81 ACCRUED INTEREST FROM THE 1976
FIREFIGHTING, FIRE PREVENTION AND RESCUE FACILITIES
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND AND $2,000 FROM FIRE
DEPARTMENT UNDERGROUND FUEL STORAGE (ITEM IX.B (1)
8.) TO COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH SYSTEM (ITEM III.B, 11.);
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF
ro ai READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NO
t LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE
C COMMISSION.
W ORDINANCE No. 9300
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1,OF ORDINANCE No.
9199, ADOPTED NOVEMBER 6,1980,THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
o APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 1981, AS AMENDED, BY INCREASING THE
+,r
U APPROPRIATION FOR PROJECT IX.C.11.11, DAY CARE CENTERS '
EXPANSION, FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETING SAILI
PROJECT, CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND DISPENSING WITH THE
REQUIREMENT OF READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE RAYS
BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS QF THE M9MOFF10,
OF THE COMMISSION.
MR 111
bRDINANCE NO, 0301
�� �' AN ORDINANCE AMENDING Si OTION51 AND 5 OF ORDINANCE
No. 9119, ADOPTED OCTOBER 3, 1980, THE ANNUAL
APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 1981, AS AMENDED, BY INCREASING THE
nn w I' APPROPRIATION FOR THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS 1N THE
UI`� I U FOLLOWING AMOUNTS: MELREESE GOLF COURSE $30,000
AND MIAMI SPRINGS GOLF COURSE $22,500, BY INCREASING
ANTICIPATED REVENUES IN THE SAME AMOUNT FROM FY 80
RETAINED EARNINGS; FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING
IRRIGATION FOR MELREESE AND A CASH REGISTER AND
IRRIGATION FUNDS TO COVER A SHORTFALL OF BUDGETED
C,I C i clu I IS FUNDS FOR ACCEPTANCE OF A BID FOR PUMPING SYSTEM;
City of MI> mi. Fla. CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF
READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NOT
LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE
COMMISSION.
ORDINANCE NO.9302
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.53, SUBSECTION (A)
(2) AND SECTION 30-55, SUBSECTION (a) OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, FOR THE PURPOSE
OF REVISING THE AMOUNT CHARGED FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI GOLF COURSE WINTER GREEN FEES AND THE SPECIAL
PACKAGE OFFERED DURING THE SUMMER SEASON,
RESPECTIVELY, CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND DISPENSING WITH THE
REQUIREMENT OF READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS
BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMISSION.
ORDINANCE NO. 9303
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NEW TRUST AND AGENCY
ACCOUNT ENTITLED "MARKETING AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE —REVOLVING LOAN FUND PROGRAM", AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF THE SAME
IN AN AMOUNT OF $100,000; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE: AND DISPENSING
WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF READING SAME ON TWO
SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS
OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
ORDINANCE NO. 9304
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY MAKING AMENDMENTS TO
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE 6871 PERTAINING TO
COMMUNITY BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES BY MAKING
THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE
AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2, THEREOF; BY
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS
THEREOF IN CONFLICT AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
ORDINANCE NO.9305
AN ORDINANCE, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY ADDING ANEW ARTICLE XV-1, CREATING
A NEW CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - CBD-2; MODIFYING
SECTION 1 OF ARTICLE 111, ZONING DISTRICTS, TO ADD CBD-
2; MODIFYING SUBSECTION (1), PARAGRAPH (6) OF SECTION
21, ARTICLE IV, PERTAINING TO HEIGHT LIMITATION; MODIFYING
SECTION 27, ARTICLE IV, PERTAINING TO COMBINATION
RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS; MODIFYING
SUBSECTION (1) OF SECTION 1, ARTICLE XXIII, PERTAINING
TO MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING; MODIFYING
SUBSECTION (1) OF SECTION 2, ARTICLE XXIII, PERTAINING
TO LOCATION OF OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING;
MODIFYING ARTICLE XXIV BY ADDING A NEW SECTION
CONCERNING SIGNS IN CBD-2 DISTRICT; AND BY MAKING
THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE
AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2, THEREOF; BY
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS
THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
ORDINANCE NO. 9306
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NO.
9199, ADOPTED NOVEMBER 6, 1980, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 1981, AS AMENDED BY INCREASING THE
APPROPRIATION FOR SUBSECTION XV, PARKING CAPITAL
PROJECTS FUND TO ESTABLISH FUNDING IN THE :AMOUNT
OF $30,000 FROM A LOAN FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FUND, FY 1981 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT FRANCHISE
EARNINGS FOR A FEASIBILITY AND DESIGN STUDY FOR A
PARKING STRUCTURE IN THE MIAMI DESIGN PLAZA;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND DISPENSING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF
READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY A VOTE QF.NOT
LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE
COMMIS510N.
RALPH G. ONGIE
CITY CLERK
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
Publication of this Notice on the 29 day of July 1981.
7129 M81 072929
�nntmrrmmrm�nniinimmmnnimmnm�
I 6-et4l
(6) Suns n4,-gen4n= -
cli_si ruts. Si.g;ns permitted shall be i_imitod to a na.mepla.te
not oxceedin� 9 square feet in area for eac11 streot frontage,
r Section 45 "Residential ('croup Homes for Developmental Disabilities,"
is he>>�ehy delE�ted in i.ts entirety.
C. A iding; ARTICLE V ONE FAMILY DWELL ING - R-1. , R-1A, R-1B nISTi�GT
Sec ion 1, Use Reg�u Ia.t ions , St bsect ion (6) by adding a .ii.ewparag ap
(n "'Rs a "Coed it i.on i l Us`" t o - r,ead as f o1.1.ows
_._. _—
(n) 'facilities Witt tyyfit
more th-an�� g occupants, including residen- ll
staff, in accord with the provisions of ARTICLE
IV, Section 43.
r
D. Amending; mi-i-CL71_VI Ti O-FAMILY DWELLING R-? DISTRICT,,..*eecti.on 1
"Use Regu1at ions , ".Sub.,sect ion (4-A) by:
Deleting; par"a.graph (d) "Subst: 7mc-p._-.Abuse Facilities",;
Deleting; paragraph (f) "Resi.denti.al. Groupl Ifor Developmental.
Disabilities.'
Adding a new par i ;'raph (f) as a "Conditional Use" to read as follows:
( f) C(Nnmunity-based residential facilities with not
more than 10 occupants, including residential staff,
in accord with the provisions of ARTICLE IV, Section 43.
E. Amending- ARTICLE VII LOtt' DENSITY MULTIPLE R-3 DISTRICT, Section 1,
„Use Regulations," Sub6ect i on (6-Ii) by
Adding a new paragraph �,d) as a "Conditional. Use" to read as follows:
(d) Cominun i.ty`.l�ased residential facilities with not
more than 1.6 residents, including resident staff,
in accord with the provisions of ARTICLE IV, Section 43.
F. Amending ARTICLE VIII DIEDIU\I ''DENSITY MULTIPLE R-4 DISTRICT, Section 1
"Use Regulations", subjection 4,(11) by
Deleting; from paragraph (c) onl\ the phrase
"...and RESIDENTIAL, GROUP H0ME�S FOR THE DEVELOPMENTAL
DISABILITIES (subject tothe pro of ARTICLE IV,
Section 45)";
Adding; a now paragraph (h) as a "Conkitional Use"; to read as follows: '
(h) Community -based residential. facilities with
not more than 50 residents, including resident
staff , in accord with thQ provisions of ARTICLE
IV, Section 43,
G. Amending; ARTICLE -X - IiIGII DENSITY MULTIPLE 5 DISTRICT, Section 1
"Use Re-ulation5", Subsection (6) by:\
Adding; a new ,paragraph (f) as a "Conditional Vse" to road as follows:
(f) Community -based residential fac'lities,in accord
' with the provisions of ARTICLE I , Section 43.
f
II. Amending,` AIITICLE X-1. HIGH DI?NSI`I'Y MUUE'IPLE R-SA D TRICT, Section
1, "Usq' Ilegu l at ions" , Stibse ct i on (2-A) by,
-4-
�,�
1 4!�
RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES
STUDY
DEPARTMENT
NOVEMBER
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Miami City Commission
Maurice A. Perre Mayor
J. L. Plummer 'Vice Mayor
Rev.Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner
Joe Carollo Commissioner
Armando Lacasa Commissioner
Joseph R. Grassie City Manager
Richard L. Fosmoen Assistant City Manager
The Community -Based Residential Facilities Study was
prepared by
the City of Miami Planning Department
Jim Reid
Joseph W. McManus
Peirce Eichelberger
Carol Fox
Jack Corbett
Wally Chandley
Leah Diamond
Bonnie Dearborn
Richard Butler
Mary Babacheff
Director
Assistant Director
Chief, Special Studies Division
Project Coordinator
Planning Technician
Planning Intern
Planning? Intern
Planning Intern
Illustrator
Secretary
the Miami Planning Advisory Board
Cyril Smith Chairperson
Selma Alexander
Mary Lichtenstein
Lorenzo L. Luaces
Aaron J. Manes
Louis Martinez
Grace Rockafellar
Richard H. Rosichan alternate
the City Interdepartmental Technical Committee
Richard Whipple
T. J+ Keene
Donnie Horne
Frank Williams
Tom Haggard
Laura Butler
Aurelio Perez
Sgt. Robert Ingram
Planning Department
Fire Department
Citizen Services Department
Building and Zoning Inspections
Department
Building and zoning Inspections
Department
Building and Zoning Inspections
Department
Planning and Zoning Boards
Administration
Police Department
and the Ad Hoc Committee of. Service Providers
Liane Palacin
Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services
Mary Duffy
Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services
H. Vann Rhodes
Metropolitan Dade County Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban
Development
Cheryl Lowell
Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services
Richard Harrington
Metropolitan Dade County Depart-
ment of Human Resources
Marshall I. Farkas
Metropolitan Dade County Depart-
ment of Human Resources
Dr. Benjamin Sheppard
Martin A. Waas
Miguel Gonzalez-Pando
Dr. Robert A. Ladner
Behavioral Science Research
Company
Sally Hart
Behavioral Science Research
Company
Tony O'Rourke
Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services
Joe Aniello
United Cerebral Palsy Association
of Miami
James Mooney
Metropolitan Dade County
Department of Youth and Family
Development
Ellen Kellom
Fellowship House
Barbara Llopiz
Fellowship House
Gracie Miller
Jackson Memorial Hospital
Karlene Peyton
Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services
Karen Shershmiov
Florida Department of Health
and Rehabilitative Services
Mardella Nottebaum
Florida Department of Health
and Rehabilitative services
Frank Rabitto
Metropolitan Dade County
Welfare Department
Hillis Holman
Florida Department of Health
and Rehabilitative Services
Virginia Fssex
Transition, Inc.
Ray Greenlaw
Health Systems Agency of South
Florida
Jeffrey N. Silbert
Dade -Miami Criminal Justice
Council
A.B.Mumford
Dade -Miami Criminal Justice
Council
Arlene Brummer
Dade -Miami Criminal Justice
Council
Larry Forman
Dade County Association for
Retarded Citizens
Israel Milton
Metropolitan Dade County
Department of Human Resources
Lucius Campbell
Metropolitan Dade County
Department of Human Resources
Sara Heatherly
Florida Department of
Corrections
Antonio Fernandez
Dade -Monroe Mental Health
Board
Table of Contents Page
I.
II
IV.
V.
Exe c u t ive S umma ry . . . . . . . . . . . • i . . . . . . . ♦ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
Introduction ..+...+..........................: 9
Purpose of the Study I ... ..... .......... ....•.•
9
Study Methodology 46 - 4 •.•...•••..••.••.••...•
9
organization of this Report ...............1 —
10
Background ....................................
11
i
Purpose of Community -Based
Residential Facilities ............ I.........
11
Issues Pertaining to Community -
Based Residential Facilities ................
14
Legislation for Community -
Based Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Federal Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
State Legislation ...........................
18
Community -Based Residential Facil-
ities in Miami ....................... I......
23
—
Typology...................................... 23
Sponsoring and Regulatory Agencies ............ 33
Number and Location of Facilities ............. 36
Size of Facilities ............................ 40
Need for Facilities ........................... 40
Summary...................................... 56
Impact of Community -Based Residen-
tial Facilities on Miami Neigh-
borhoods ................................... 60
Process of Neighborhood Change ................ 60
Density of Facilities in Miami
Neighborhoods ..............................
64 _
Neighborhood Compatibility of
-
Miami's Facilities .........................
70
Neighborhood Compatibility
-
Survey ....................................
70 -
Literature Review ..........................
73
Field Survey ....., ....... ..... ........
75
Fiscal Impact of Facilities ..................
89
Impact on Property Values ..................
89
Impact on the City Tax Base ................
91
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact ................
93
Summary.......................................
100
The Regulatory System for Community -
Based Residential Facilities in Miami ....... 105
Page
Zoning ...+ .........:................:...:..:..:...: 105
Zoning Classification of Facilities
in Miami........66:6..4.4.4................:.. 106
Existing Zoning Regulations .................... 108
Zoning Certification Process 109
Building Code Requirements .....................:.` 111
South Florida Building Code
Requirements . : . . . . . . .
Process for Codes Compliance
Certification ............. 114
Occupational Licensing ............................ 115
Fire Code Requirements ............................ 115
Fire Code Regulations .......................... 116
Fire Inspection Process ........................ 119
Summary ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
VI. Recommendations ................................... 122
VII. Appendices
A. Neighborhood Compatibility
Survey Results ............................ 133
B. Existing City of Miami
Zoning Regulations for
Community -Based Residen-
tial Facilities ......................... 138
VIII. Bibliography ..................................... 141
List of Tables page
Table 1 Position of Community -Based Residential
Facilities in the Health and Correctional Systems .,..,
12
2
Typology of Community -Based Residential
Facilities in Miami and Dade County ..................
24
3
Distribution of Community -Based Residential
Facilities by Type; Number of Facilities in
the City of Miami vs. Remainder of Dade
County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
4
Distribution of. Community -Based Residential
Facilities by Type; Capacity of Facilities in
the City of Miami vs. Remainder of Dade County ••••••
39
5
Distribution of Community -Based Residential
Facilities by Size of Facility in the City
of Miami ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
50
6
Comparison of City and County Housing Units
and Population with City and County Distribu-
tion of Community -Based Residential Facilities .•.•..
51
7
Ranking of Catchment Areas by Selected Mental
Health Related Variables for Dade County, Florida •.
56
8
Density of Community -Based Res idential'Facilities
in the City of Miami in Terms of Proximity
(Nearest Neighbor Analysis) ........................•
65
9
Miami Census Tracts with 1% or more Residents
of Community -Based Residential Facilities ..•••......
67
10
Density of Community -Based Residential Facilities
in the City of Miami in Terms of Number of Resi-
dents (Location Quotient Analysis) ..•••.•.•...•......
68
11.
Capacity of Surveyed Community -Based
Residential Facilities ••••.•••••.•.•.•••..•.••.......
76
12
Type of Structures in which Surveyed Community -
Based Residential Facilities are Located ............
77
13
Age of Structures Surveyed ....••....•...•............
78
14
Condition of Structures Surveyed ....................
79
15
Number of Facilities with Paved Parking
Spaces on the Site ...................................
80
16
Site Amenities of Surveyed Facilities ................
81
Page
Table 17
Numberof Residents Visible From Street .........,.,
82
18
presence of Signs at Surveyed Facilities ....,..,+.
S2
19
Residential Character of Surveyed Facilities .,.,.
83
20
Degree of Noise and Air Pollution from Street ......
84
21
Type of Neighborhood in which Surveyed Facil-
ities a r e Located .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
86
22
Condition of the Structure Compared to Other
Structures on the Block Face .............6........
87
23
Condition of the Yard Compared to Other Yards
on the Block Face .................................
88
24
Degree to Which the Facility Blends into the
Surrounding Neighborhood ............I .............
88
25
Tax Status of Community -Based Residential
Facilities in Miami ................................
92
26
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact; Community -Based
Residential Facility with Three Residents .........
95
27
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact; Community -Based
Residential Facility with 25 Residents ...........
96
28
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact; Community -Based
Residential Facility with 18 Residents - Tax Exempt
97
29
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact; Community -Based
Residential Facility with 75 Residents - Tax Exempt.
98
30
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact; Community -Based
Residential Facility with 150 Residents ...........
99
31
Zoning Classification of Community -Based
Residential Facilities in the City of Miami ........
107
32
Results of Fire Inspections of Community -Based
Residential Facilities ........I ...................
118
LIST OR MAPS
Page
Map
1
Location of All Community -Based
Residential Facilities in the City of Miami
41
2
Location of Adult Congregate Living
Facilities in the City of Miami .,..... 6... 6..... 1.
42
3
Location of Alcohol Rehabilitation
Facilities in the City of Miami ....................
43
4
Location of Residential Facilities for
Drug Dependents in the City of Miami .....1.6......
44
5
Location of Residential Facilities for
Developmentally Disabled Persons in
th e City of Miami ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45
6
Location of Residential Facilities for
Persons with Mental Health Problems
in the City of Miami ...............................
46
7
Location of Residential Child -caring
Facilities in the City of Miami ...................
47
8
Location of Boarding Homes in the
Cityof Miami ......................................
48
9
Location of Adult Community -Based
Correctional Facilities in the City of Miami .......
49
10
Mental Health Catchment Areas in the
Cityof Miami ......................................
50
11
Density of Community -Based Residential
Facilities in the City of Miami in Terms
of Proximity (Nearest Neighbor Analysis) ...........
66
12
Density of Community -Based Residential
Facilities in the City of Miami in Terms
of Number of Residents (Location Quotient ... ... ...
69
Analysis)
-1-
EXECUTIVE SUMRAPY
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to identify the problems and issues
associated with community -based residential facilities in the City
of Miami and to suggest guidelines for the provision of such facil-
ities in the City. The types of community -based residential
facilities included in this study are adult congregate living
facilities, alcohol rehabilitation facilities, residential treat-
ment facilities for drug dependents, residential facilities for
developmentally disabled persons, residential facilities for
persons with mental health problems, residential child -caring
facilities, boarding homes, juvenile community -based corrections,
and adult community -based corrections.
The study focuses on three questions:
(1) What are the characteristics of community -
based residential facilities in the City of Miami?
(2) What is the impact of community -based residen-
tial facilities on City of Miami neighborhoods?
(3) How can the City's regulatory systems insure
the provision of effective and adequate community -
based residential facilities?
Purpose of Community -Based Residential Facilities
Community -based residential facilities are residences designed to serve
as alternatives to institutions in the health care and correctional sys-
tems. Community -based residential facilities provide a homelike at-
mosphere for their residents within a neighborhood, enabling the
residents to experience life as part of a community. These facilities
may serve the elderly who are unable to live alone, the mentally ill
or retarded, former drug or alcohol users, children who cannot live
with their natural parents, and former prisoners who may need to be
reintroduced to community living or who may have committed minor
crimes. Community -based residential facilities range in size from
homes with three residents to facilities with more than one hundred
inhabitants. They may be called foster homes, group homes, halfway
houses or congregate living facilities.
The increase in community -based residential facilities is due to
the movement from the use of institutions in the health care and
correctional systems. There is a growing belief in the United States
that large institutions have not served all clients well; that in
some cases they have not enabled the retarded to function better
nor have they taught criminal offenders to lead non -criminal lives.
-i-
In fact, there is some evidence that longtime residents of in-
stitutions may become so dependent upon life within the institution
that they are unable to function effectively when returned to life
in the community, Thus, community -based residences can serve
as the bridge between institutionalization and completely independent
living in society.
Issues Pertaining to Community -Based Residential facilities
The conflict and controversy that frequently surrounds the creation
of community -based residential facilities is found at several geog-
raphical levels and involves a number of participants at both levels.
The neighborhood is often the focus of debate over the rights of two
sets of individuals:
(1) the rights of those who cannot live independently
to live in a homelike atmosphere in a community,
and
(2) the rights of the residents of a community to
maintain and preserve the quality and character
of the neighborhoods in which they live.
The metropolitan region is another setting for debate about the
location of community -based residential facilities. At this geogra-
phical level, the issue involves the concentration of community -
based facilities in certain areas of the region, usually in the
central city.
The concentration of community -based residences in the central city
often alarms public officials who may feel that the municipal budget
is supporting a disproportionate share of residential facilities and
public services for the region's handicapped citizens. These
officials also may fear the institutionalization of certain neigh-
borhoods where facilities tend to be located. These fears and the
resulting attempts to distribute the burden more equitably through-
out the region may frustrate social services providers and their
clients who cannot find suitable locations or services outside
the central city.
Community -Based Residential Facilities in Miami
The following is a summary of findings pertaining to the basic char-
acteristics of community -based residential facilities in Miami:
1. There are nine types of community -based residential
facilities in the City of Miami as follows:
(1) adult congregate living facilities
(2) alcohol rehabilitation facilities
(3) residential facilities for drug dependents
(4) residences for developmentally disabled
persons
(5) residential facilities for persons with
mental health problems
(6) child -caring facilities
(7) boarding homes
(8) residential facilities for juvenile
delinquents
(9) residences for adult offenders
2. Community -based residential facilities are sponsored by organ-
izations and individuals in the private and public sectors.
3. Five types of facilities are licensed by the State of
Florida; the remaining four types of facilities are not
covered by licensing procedures.
4. The City of Miami regulates community residences
through enforcement of its zoning, building, and
fire codes.
In February, 1979, the City of Miami conducted an inventory of the type,
location, and capacity of community -based residential facilities in
Dade County and the City of Miami. An analysis of data collected
during this inventory showed that
1. There are approximately 216 community -based residential
facilities in Dade County. Of these, 95 facilities or 44%
are located in the City of Miami.
2. Some types of facilities are found predominantly in the
City of Miami:
(1) boarding homes 83%
(2) residential facilities for drug dependents 78%
(3) alcohol rehabilitation facilities 75%
(4) adult community -based corrections 62%
3. The capacity of Dade County's community -based residential facil.-
ities is more than 6,916 beds. Miami has 48% of the total
County capacity.
4. Some types of facilities in Miami provide a large share of
the total County capacity:
-111-
-YI
(1) boarding homes 87%
(2) facilities for drug dependents 83%
(3) alcohol rehabilitation facilities 81%
5. More than 40% of the community -based residential
facilities have 17 to 50 residents. Facilities with
7-16 residents account for 20% of all facilities, while
facilities with 1 to 6 residents and those with 50
to 100 residents account for a slightly smaller por-
tion of the total. Only 9% of the facilities have
more than 100 residents.
6. Miami has 44% of all community -based residential facil-
ities but only 25% of the total County housing units.
Similarly, Miami has 48% of the bed capacity in the
County but only 23% of the population.
7. The need for community -based residential facilities
and Miami's share must be determined individually for
each type of facility. The need for some types of
facilities corresponds directly to a certain proportion
of a jurisdiction's total population. The need for
other types of facilities, however, is related to the
socioeconomic levels of a given population.
8. Although a complete analysis of the need for community -
based residential facilities in Miami is beyond the scope
of this study, simple projections of the need for several
types show that Miami may be providing more than its
share of adult congregate living facilities for the elderly
and facilities for the developmentally disabled. Miami's
need for facilities for the mentally ill, which is related
to the socioeconomic levels of its population, may be a re-
latively high proportion of the total county need.
Impact of Community -Based Residential
Facilities on Miami Neighborhoods
One of the greatest barriers to the establishment of community -
based residential facilities is the fear on the part of community
residents that these facilities will have a negative impact on
their neighborhoods. These feared negative impacts include the
concentration of facilities in certain areas, increased crime, the
introduction of social deviants into the neighborhood, lower pro-
perty values, and a decline in the neighborhood and municipal tax
base. Community residents often believe that the introduction
of a community -based facility into their neighborhood will initiate
a process of change that will alter the character of the neigh-
borhood.
-iv-
The possible impacts of community -based residential facilities
on Miami's neighborhoods were examined during this study.
Two statistical techniques were used to determine the density of
facilities in Miami in terms of the clustering of residences and
the number of facility residents in City census tracts. The
types of neighborhoods and sites best suited for community
facilities as well as the compatibility of Miami's existing
facilities with their neighborhoods were analyzed through two
surveys. Finally, the possible fiscal impact of community -
based residences was studied.
Process of Neighborhood Change
The occupants of a community -based residential facility may be con-
sidered "different" by the residents of the surrounding neighbor-
hood, creating fear on the part of the residents that the neigh-
borhood is changing. These fears may increase if a number of —
community facilities are established in the same neighborhood.
It is possible that such a neighborhood could reach an "insti-
tutional tipping point" when the neighborhood's tolerance for ad-
ditional facilities is exceeded. Although no research has es-
tablished a neighborhood's limit of tolerance for community -
based facilities, such research for other types of households has
shown that an influx of 5% or fewer "different" households could -
initiate the process of neighborhood change. The implication for
agencies that sponsor and regulate community -based residential
facilities is clear: these facilities should not be allowed to
concentrate in neighborhoods at levels that might bring about neigh-
borhood change.
Density of Facilities in Miami Neighborhoods
Density has two meanings in relation to community -based residen-
tial facilities. Degree of density can be measured by the proximity
of one residential care facility to another facility or group of
facilities. Density also can be gauged by the number of facility
residents in an area. Analysis of the density of community -based
residential facilities in Miami revealed the following:
1. Community -based residential facilities in Miami as a
whole tend to be clustered rather than dispersed
throughout the City. The community facilities within
census tracts 22.01, 22.02, 25, 27.01, and 64 are clustered.
2. Residents of community -based residential facilities ac-
count for lob' or more of the population of eight census
tracts. Four tracts have 4% or more as follows:
�1�
(a)
13
4%
(b)
30.01
5%
(c)
36.02
7%
(d)
27.01
10%
3. Twelve of the City's census tracts have a concentration
of community -facility residents/population that is
greater than the City average.
4. Four census tracts, 22.02, 26, 64 and 27.01, have a
concentration of facilities in terms of both proximity
of facilities and number of residents.
Neighborhood Compatibility of Miami's Facilities
Citizen complaints about proposed or existing community -based
residential facilities often center on the compatibility of the
facility with their neighborhood. on the other hand, individuals
and organizations trying to find a suitable location for a pro-
posed facility often find that the only locations available are
those not considered appropriate for a community -based residence.
Questionnnaires were distributed to thirty-two individuals
representing State and County public agencies and local private
or non-profit organizations that sponsor or license community -
based residential facilities in Dade County. The purpose of the
questionnaire was to obtain the opinion of these service pro-
viders about the compatibility of residential care facilities
with various types of neighborhoods, the kinds of site and neigh-
borhood amenities that should be available for residents of these
facilities, and the number of residential care facilities that
should be located in a neighborhood.
The findings of the neighborhood compatibility survey are listed
below:
1. Respondents to the neighborhood compatibility survey
indicated that 7 to 16 residents is the optimum size
for a community -based residential facility. The least
suitable are facilities with 50 to 100 residents and
those with more than 100 residents.
2. The most suitable neighborhoods for community facilities
are single-family or duplex neighborhoods and those
composed of apartment buildings with 3 to 50 apartments.
Commercial and industrial neighborhoods are rated least
suitable.
-V1
- V 1 1 -
3. Neighborhood amenities are rated most important as follows:
1. Access to public transportation (91%)
2. Access to medical facilities (83%)
3. Access to active recreational facilities
(sportfields,play grounds, etc.) (78%)
4. Access to educational facilities (77%)
5. Access to passive recreational facilities
(neighborhood parks) (69%)
6. Access to social service agencies and social
services required for the residents (66%)
7. Access to employment (55%)
8. Access to shopping (43%)
4. Site amenities are rated most important as follows:
1. outdoor space for recreation (65%)
2. outdoor space for relaxing and gathering (58%)
3. landscaping (40%)
4. space for gardening (21%)
5. space for observing neighborhood and street
activities (19%)
6. parking (5%)
5. Responses to a question about the proximity of community -
based residential facilities indicated that only one or
two facilities should be located on a block face.
The Planning Department selected randomly approximately half the
City's community -based residential facilities identified in the
February inventory for a field survey. The purpose of the survey
was to identify the type and condition of the structures in which
the facilities are located, the amenities located at the site,
the type of neighborhoods in which the facilities are located,
and the degree to which the facility blends into the surrounding
neighborhood. The results of the field survey follow:
1. Most of the facilities surveyed are located in single-
family structures or in apartment buildings containing
3 to 50 units.
2. Community -based residential facilities tend to be located
in older buildings. Thirty-one of forty residences sur-
veyed are located in structures built before 1949.
3. Most surveyed facilities are in good condition. only
seven of forty structures need repairs. The boarding
homes and adult correctional facilities are more likely
to need repairs than other types of facilities.
-V71-
4, Most facilities have fewer parking spaces on site than
number of residents. No facilities appeared to have
an inadequate amount of parking during the survey.
5. Most facilities have the two site amenities rated most
important in the neighborhood compatibility survey:
outdoor space for recreation and for relaxing and
gathering. More than half the facilities have landscaping
and significant trees on the site,
6. During the survey, over half the forty facilities had
no residents visible from the street: One to five
residents were visible at fifteen facilities.
7. Thirteen facilities had signs with the name of the
residence. The alcohol and drug rehabilitation facil-
ities, boarding homes, and adult congregate living facil-
ities were more likely to have signs than the other types
of facilities.
8. Thirty-three of forty sites surveyed were judged to be
residential in character. Adult congregate living facil-
ities and alcohol and drug rehabilitation facilities
were less likely to have a residential character.
9. Over half of the facilities are located on sites with
low levels of pollution from the street. There are a
significant number of adult congregate living facilities
and mental health facilities on sites with moderate
or high levels of pollution.
10. Twenty of the forty facilities are located in neighbor-
hoods with a mixture of land uses, fourteen are located
in single-family neighborhoods, three are located in
neighborhoods predominently composed of apartment build-
ings with 3 to 50 units, and three are located in
predominently commercial neighborhoods.
11. The structural and yard conditions of most community
facilities was the same as or better than other struc-
tures on the block face. Thirty-one of thirty-nine
facilities appeared to blend into the surrounding neigh-
borhood. The only type of facility that had a significant
number of residences different from the surrounding
neighborhood was the alcohol and drug rehabilitation
facilities.
-V111-
-Yl
Fiscal Impact of Coft nunityy-Based Residential Facilities
Three components of the fiscal impact of community -based residential
facilities on a neighborhood or jurisdiction were examined in
this study: (1) the impact of the facilities on surrounding pro-
perty values, (2) the extent to which the facilities contribute to
the local tax base by paying property taxes, and (3) the net
fiscal impact of the facilities, i.e., the difference between
the average cost of public services provided for the facilities
and the average revenues received from the facilities by local
government. The following is a summary of the findings of the
study regarding the fiscal impact of community -based residential
facilities.
1. Studies of the effects of a community -based residential
facility on neighboring property values show that
a. property values in communities with facilities
have the same increase or decrease in market
prices as in matched control areas,
b, proximity of neighboring properties to a facility
does not significantly affect their market value.
2. No studies have investigated the impact of a concentra-
tion of facilities on property values in a neighborhood
It was not possible to conduct such a study in Miami.
3. Twenty-five percent of Miami's community based residen-
tial facilities are exempt from property taxes. Child -
caring facilities and drug rehabilitation facilities
are predominently tax-exempt.
4. Community -based residential facilities provide a neg-
ligible positive fiscal impact or a negative fiscal
impact on the City.
The Regulatory System for Community-BasedResidential
Facilities in Miami
Miami's community -based residential facilities are regulated by
four City codes: (1) the Miami Zoning Ordinance; (2) the South
Florida Building Code, which is the building code adopted and
enforced by the City; (3) the City's occupational licensing
requirements; and (4) the Miami Fire Code. The following statements
summarize the relationship of each code to community -based residen-
tial facilities in Miami.
-1X-
- V i ,
Miami zoning Ordinance
1. Community -based residential facilities are found in
residential, commercial, and industrial zoning districts
in Miami. as follows!
a, residential districts 75 facilities
b6 commercial districts 17 facilities
C. industrial districts 1 facility
2. The zoning district containing the greatest number of
facilities is the medium-density,multiple-dwelling R-4 dis-
trict. Only one quarter of the facilities located in
residential districts are found in the single-family R-1
zone or the two-family R-2 zone.
3. Community -based residential facilities for alcohol and
drug rehabilitation, persons with mental health problems,
and adult corrections are found primarily in higher
density residential zones and commercial districts. Adult
congregate living facilities, facilities for developmentally
disabled persons, and boarding homes are located primarily
in residential districts.
4. The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance contains no uniform
set of regulations that covers all types of community -based
residential facilities.
5. The Zoning Ordinance contains detailed regulations for
substance abuse facilities and for group homes for develop-
mentally disabled persons. The regulations for these types of
facilities are not consistent, requiring different minimum
lot sizes, different distances from other community -based
facilities and different open space areas.
6. Community -based residential facilities not covered by the
regulations for substance abuse facilities and for group
homes for the developmentally disabled may be classified
variously as non-profit institutions; rooming houses; in-
stitutions for the aged, indigent, or infirm,; sanitariums,
convalescent homes, or nursing homes; or hotels and motels.
Under these definitions, community -based residential facilities
(other than facilities for substance abusers or the devel-
opmentally disabled) may be located in every residential
district and in most commercial districts.
7. The Miami Zoning Ordinance contains no uniform regulations
or definitions that recognize the semi-independent living
arrangement of community -based residential facilities or
-X-
-xv-
the potential concentration of facilities in certain areas
of the City.
South Florida Building Code
1. The South Florida Building Code contains no special defini-
tions or regulations for community -based residential
facilities.
2. For the purposes of the Building Code, community -based
facilities usually are classified as rooming houses when
the residents are capable of independent living and insti-
tutions when the residents have mental or physical limita-
tions.
3. The Change of Occupancy regulation of the South Florida
Building Code can prevent the conversion of older structures
to community -based residential facilities by requiring that
the structure conform to regulations for new multiple -
residential buildings or institutions.
Miami Occupational Licensing
1. All community -based residential facilities, except those that
are operated as non-profit organizations, must obtain City
occupational licenses.
Miami Fire Regulations
1. Fire protection regulations for community -based residential
facilities in Miami are found in the City of Miami Fire
Code, the National Fire Protection Association's Life Safety
Code, and the South Florida Building Code.
2. For the purposes of the fire regulations, community -based
residential facilities are classified according to the
Group Occupancy categories of the South Florida Building
Code, which categorize the facilities as institutions
or multiple unit residences.
3. Fire inspections of three types of community -based residen-
tial facilities found the following kinds of violations;
problems with fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, and
exit doors; a lack of community kitchen separation and
horizontal separation, and the presence of combustible
materials. A number of facilities had exceeded the occupancy
limits required by the South Florida Building Code.
-Yi
^X11i
-xv-
Recommendations of the Study
This section presents a summary of recommendations for the es-
tablishment, location, planning, and regulation of community-
based residential facilities in the City of Miami,
Locating Community -Based Residential Facilities
and Minimizing Neighborhood Impacts
1. Encourage the establishment of small community -based
residential facilities with fewer than 17 residents
and no more than 50 residents,
2. Residents of community -based residential facilities
should have adequate support services and adequate
supervision.
3. Encourage the location of community -based residential
facilities in low -density, single-family, duplex, and -
multi -family residential neighborhoods, Avoid locating
facilities in commercial neighborhoods. Prohibit the
location of community -based residential facilities
in industrial, neighborhoods.
4. Locate community -based residential facilities in
neighborhoods that have access to public transpor-
tation, recreational and educational facilities, social
services, and employment.
5. Encourage the establishment of community -based residen-
tial facilities on sites that have adequate open space
and landscaping.
6. Prohibit signs designating the name of the community -
based residential. facility in residential neighborhoods.
The City of Miami sign ordinance should be amended to
provide regulations to enforce this recommendation.
7. Encourage sponsors and operators of community -based
residential facilities to maintain their buildings and
yards in good condition. The City of Miami Zonin^, Ordinance
should be amended to provide for annual inspection of
facilities and enforcement of proper structural and site
maintenance.
B. Prohibit the concentration of community -based residen-
tial Facilities in neighborhoods and in specific areas
of Dade County. The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance should
be amended to include regulations that will prohibit the
concentration of facilities in Miami neighborhoods.
-X117-
9. Encourage the dispersal of community -based residential facil-
ities to appropriate sites and neighborhoods throughout Dade
county.
Planning for Community=Based Residential Facilities
1. The City of Miami Commission should request that the Governor
of Florida take steps to establish State licensing require-
ments for every type of community -based residential facility
in the health care and correctional systems. A central State
registry of community -based residential facilities should
be established.
2. The City of Miami Commission should request that Dade County
prepare and adopt a Countywide plan for community -based
residential facilities. A plan for community -based residen-
tial facilities in Dade County would serve the following
purposes:
(1) to determine the need for all types
of community -based residential
facilities in Dade County
(2) to provide guidelines for the proper
location of the various types of
facilities
(3) to match the need for facilities with
suitable locations for community -
based residential facilities
(4) to assure the equitable distribution of
community -based residential facilities
throughout Dade County and to prevent
the concentration of facilities in
certain neighborhoods
Regulating Community -Based Residential Facilities
1. The City of Miami Commission should amend the City of Miami
Zoning Ordinance to include one group of definitions and
regulations for all types of community -based residential
facilities.
2. The following elements should be included in the zoning
regulations for community -based residential facilities
in Miami:
a. Definitions: Define community -based residential
facilities by size of facility rather than by type
of facility. The following is a suggested definition
and suggested sites!
Community. -Based Residential Facility - A facility that
provides room and board, resident services, and 24
hour supervision. Such a facility functions as a
single housekeeping unit and is licensed or approved
by an authorized governmental agency. This category
includes adult congregate living facilities; residen-
tial facilities for alcohol and drug rehabilitation,
developmentally disabled persons, persons with men-
tal health problems, and dependent children; and
juvenile and adult residential correctional facilities,
including halfway houses. This category excludes
homes for foster children that are regulated elsewhere in
the zoning ordinance.
Facility Sizes - 1. Six or fewer persons
2. Seven to sixteen persons
3. Seventeen to fifty persons
4. More than fifty persons
b. Registration and Licensing: Require that all community -
based residential facilities located in the City of
Miami and all proposed facilities register with the
Miami Planning Department.
c. Building, Fire, and Safety Standards: Require that
the proposed facility conform with appropriate City
of Miami Building and Fire Codes.
d. Density Controls: Limit the number of residents of
community -based residential facilities in each census
tract to three percent of the census tract's total pop-
ulation. Prohibit the establishment of any community -
based residential facility within 1200 feet of another
facility.
e. Open Space: Establish recreational open space re-
quirements for community -based residential facilities
based on the age of the facility residents. Require
that the property of facilities with more than 50
residents be buffered by a hedge or fence. The
following are suggested recreational open space stan-
dards for community -based residential facilities:
For each resident under 18 years of
age 200 square feet.
-X1V-
-xv-
For each resident 18 years of
age or older 150 square feet
f. Parking, Require adequate on -site parking depending on
the type of community -based residential facility. include
a waiver of the parking requirements for facilities that
have access to public transportation and other neighbor-
hood amenities necessary for facility residents. A
suggested standard for on -site parking, taken from the
City's current zoning regulations for drug rehabilitation
facilities, is one space for each staff member and one
space for each four residents.
g. Zoning Districts: Permit community -based residential
facilities in all residential districts and in the C-1
and C-2 commercial districts. Prohibit community -based
residential facilities in all other zoning districts.
The following are suggested zoning districts for each
of the facility sizes defined above:
Community -Based Residential Facility
1-6 residents - permitted in all
residential districts.
Community -Based Residential Facility
7-16 residents - permitted in R-3 and all
more intense residential districts as well
as C-1 and C-2 commercial districts.
Community -Based Residential Facility
17-50 residents - permitted in R-4 and all
more intense residential districts as well
as C-1 and C-2 commercial districts.
Community -Based Residential Facility
50+ residents - permitted in R-5 as well as
C-1 and C-2 commercial districts.
h. Zoning Approach: Require a conditional use permit prior
to the establishment of any community -based residential
facility in any zoning district. Supporting documents
for the conditional use hearing should include certi-
fication that the building complies with Fire and Build-
ing Codes and a statement of maximum residents permitted
by these codes.
3. The Miami Building and Zoning Inspections Department should in-
clude an occupancy limit for each proposed community -based residen-
tial facility as one condition of receiving a Certificate of Use
or Occupancy. An annual re -application for the Certificate of
Use and Occupancy should be required to ensure that facilities
have not exceeded the permitted capacity.
-xv-
4, The Miami City Commission should request.that the bade County
Board of Rules and Appeals amend the South Florida Building
Code to include regulations pertaining to the special. require-
ments of community -based residential facilities,
5. The Miami City Commission should request that the State
Fire Marshal's office develop fire safety regulations for
all types of community based residential facilities,
6. The City of Miami should develop a manual containing in-
formation about City of Miami regulations and procedures
governing community=based residential facilities.
f
E-
-XV1-
w
I. Introduction
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to identify the problems and
issues associated with community -based residential facili-
ties in the City of Miami and to suggest guidelines for
the provision of such facilities in the City. Community -
based residential facilities are residences designed to
serve as alternatives to institutions in the health care
and correctional systems. The types of community -based -
residential facilities included in this study are adult
congregate living facilities, alcohol rehabilitation
facilities, residential treatment facilities for drug
dependents, residential facilities for developmentally -
disabled persons, residential facilities for persons with
mental health problems, residential child -caring facilities,
boarding homes, juvenile community -based corrections, and
adult community -based corrections.
Study Methodology
This study was conducted by the City of Miami Planning
Department. Two advisory groups were formed to represent
those who are involved in the provision and regulation of
community -based residential facilities. These advisory
groups helped the Planning Department identify problems
and issues associated with the facilities, supplied needed
information during the course of the study, and reviewed
the findings and recommendations of the study. One of
these groups, the City Interdepartmental Technical
Committee, included representatives from the Miami Depart-
ments of Planning, Building and Zoning, Zoning Board
Administration, Fire, Police and Citizen Services. The
other committee, the Ad Hoc Committee of Service Providers,
included representatives from public and private agencies
at the County and State levels providing community -based
residential facilities for the correctional and health
treatment systems. In addition, the Miami Planning
Advisory Board reviewed the findings and recommendations
of the study.
The study focused on three questions:
(1.) What are the characteristics of community -based
residential facilities in the Cite of Miami?
(2) What is the impact of community -based residential
facilities on City of Miami. neighborhoods?
(.i) Iiow can the City's regulatory systems insure the
provision of effective and adequate community -
based residential facilities?
During the study, an inventory of community -based residen-
tial facilities was conducted to determine the number,
capacity and .location of facilities in Dade County and the
City of Miami. In addition, the Ad Hoc Committee of Service
I>rovi_ders was surveyed about the compatibility of residen-
tial care facilities with various types of neighborhoods,
the kinds of site and neighborhood amenities that should
be available for residents of residential care facilities,
and the density of facilities within neighborhoods. The
Planning Department made a field inspection of approximately
half the City's facilities to identify the type and condition
of the structures in which the facilities are located, the
amenities located at the site, the type of neighborhoods ir.
in which the facilities are located, and the decree to which
the facilities blend into the surrounding neighborhood.
organization of This Report
The chapters in this report present background materials
about community -based residential facilities in general
and deal with each of the three study questions listed
above. Chapter II discusses the purpose and issues per-
taining to community -based residential facilities as well
as the Federal and State legislation that promotes the
establishment of these facilities. The characteristics
of community -based residential facilities in Miami and
Dade County are presented in Chapter III. Chapter IV
deals with the impact of community -based residential
facilities on Miami neighborhoods. This chapter des-
cribes the process of neighborhood change, identifies
the density of facilities in Miami, discusses the com-
patibility of Miami's facilities with their surrounding
neighborhoods, and determines the potential fiscal
impact of community -based residential facilities. The
regulatory system for community -based residential
facilities in Miami. is discussed in Chapter V. Chapters
TIT, TV and V conclude with a summary of findings
related to each chapter's topic. The recommendations of
this study are presented in Chapter VI. -
-10-
-L1-
It,' Background
This chapter contains a description of community -based
residential facilities and their function in the health
care and correctional systems, The issues surrounding
the creation of community residences and the participants
in the resulting controversy are described, as well. The
chapter concludes with a discussion of the major Federal
and Florida legislation that supports the deinstitu-
tionalization movement and the system of community -based
residential facilities and services.
Purpose of Community -Based Residential Facilities
Community -based residential facilities are residences de-
signed to serve as alternatives to institutions in the
health care and correctional systems. Community -based
residential facilities provide a homelike atmosphere
for their residents within a neighborhood, enabling the
residents to experience life as part of a community.
These facilities may serve the elderly who are unable to
live alone, the mentally ill or retarded, former drug or
alcohol users, children who cannot live with their natu-
ral parents, and former prisoners who may need to be
reintroduced to community living or who may have committed
minor crimes. Community -based residential facilities
range in size from homes with three residents to facilities
with more than one hundred inhabitants. They may be
called foster homes, group homes, halfway houses or con-
gregate living facilities.
The increase in community -based residential facilities is
due to the movement from the use of institutions in the
health care and correctional systems. There is a growing
belief in the United States that large institutions have
not served all clients well; that in some cases they have
not enabled the retarded to function better nor have they
taught criminal offenders to lead non -criminal lives. In
fact, there is some evidence that longtime residents of
institutions may become so dependent upon life within the
institution that they are unable to function effectively
when returned to life in the community. Thus, community -
based residences can serve as the bridge between institu-
tionalization and completely independent living in
society.
-11-
t'. k ... A
.. ;. . • , I , I '! A , 4 t A
IF
of life of society, Normalization
means sharing a normal thythm of the
day, with privacy, activities and
mutual responsibilities; a normal
rhythm of the week, with a home to
live in, a school or work to go to,
and leisure time with the changing
modes and ways of life and of
family and community customs as ex-
perienced in2the different seasons
of the year.
This description of the normalization principle pertains
to all forms of community -based care, as well.
National statistics illustrate the movement toward normal-
ization for those for whom institutions were once the only
residential alternative. In 1955, the number of resi-
dents in state mental hospitals was 600,000 patients. With
the advent of new drug therapies and community -based fac-
ilities, the population of state mental hospitals had
dropped to 300,000 in 1972 and to 213,000 in 1974.3 In-
stitutions for mentally retarded people have experienced
a similar decline in population since the 1950's. There
were only two-thirds as many retarded residents in public
institutions in 1971 as there were in 1950. The popula-
tion of private institutions for the retarded decreased
fourteen percent between 1969 and 1970.4
Florida's institutions have experienced a similar de-
crease in residents. The population of the State's hos-
pitals for the mentally ill declined forty percent between
1963 and 1977. The average daily population in these
institutions decreased from 9,821 patients in 1963 to
5,872 patients in 1977.
Another factor in the trend toward deinstitutionalization
is the lower cost of providing residential facilities in
the community. For example, social workers at the South
Florida State Hospital estimate that it costs more than
$800 per month for each resident in the State Hospital,
while the cost for each resident in a group home is
$310 per month.6 According to a 1965 report of the Pres-
ident's Task Force on Corrections, the average cost
per adult felon per year in the U.S, was $1,966 in an
institution compared to $198 in the community.7 Con-
gregate living facilities providing meals and effective
supportive services can offer a less costly alternative
-13-
-21-
to nursing home care for the elderly. The costs for such
a congregate living facility range from $12 to $16 a
day as compared to $30 to $60 a day for skilled nursing
care.$
issues Pertaining to Community -Based Residential Facilities
The conflict and controversy that frequently surrounds
the creation of community -based residential facilities is
found at several geographical levels and involves a number
Of participants at both levels. The neighborhood is often
the focus of debate over the rights of two sets of in-
dividuals;
(1) the rights of those who cannot live independ-
ently to live in a homelike atmosphere in
a community, and —
(2) the rights of the residents of a community to
maintain and preserve the quality and char-
acter of the neighborhoods in which they live.
The characteristics that make community -based residences
desirable for the individuals who need them may be seen by
neighborhood residents as a threat to the stability of the
neighborhood. For example, community -based facilities
offer their residents the opportunity to become part of
a home and a community with access to education, employ-
ment and recreation. Neighborhood residents, however,
view the introduction of a different type of individual,
such as the retarded, former alcoholics, or ex -offenders,
into neighborhood life as harmful.
Any attempt to deal with the conflict inherent in the
creation of community -based residential facilities must
consider the concerns of both sets of participants.
The concerns of the potential residents of community -based
facilities include the following:
(1) Treatment in a community -based residence may
be more effective than that in an institution
(2) Treatment in a community residence may be
less costly than that in an institution.
(3) A residential neighborhood may be the most
effective location for a community -based
-14-
-
-2'! -
residence, but the most difficult location to
achieve.
(4) There is a growing demand for community -bated
residential facilities that is difficult
to meet, often because of community resistance. -
On the other hand, the concerns of community residents in- —
clude the following:
(1) The residents of community -based residential
facilities might exhibit behavior that vio-
lates the neighborhood norm and life style.
(2) Concentrations of persons classified as
social deviants might attract other deviants
into the neighborhood.
(3) The number of residents and the condition
of the facility and yard might be different
from other residences in the neighborhood.
(4) The conversion of residences into community -
based residential facilities might erode
the community's tax base and might result
in the lower desirability of the neighbor- _
hood and thus in lower property values.
(5) Concentration of community -based residential
facilities might create, in effect, a social
service district or institutional ghetto
that will lead to the decline of the residen-
tial neighborhood.
Conflict at the neighborhood level usually involves other
actors, as well. The potential residents of community -
based residential facilities are represented in the
attempt to create new facilities by the operators of
facilities and social services providers who believe in
deinstitutionalization and who fund, inspect, or license
the facilities. Community residents, however, are
represented by the public officials who enact and en-
force local regulations designed to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of the neighborhood residents. Fre-
quently, social services providers attempting to open
additional facilities are thwarted by their inability
to find buildings that can fulfill the requirements of
local building and fire codes in neighborhoods with
zoning regulations that allow such facilities.
-15-
I
The metropolitan region is another setting for debate
about the location of community -based residential facili_
ties. At this geographical level, the issue involves
the concentration of community -based facilities in cer-
tain areas of the region, usually in the central city.
According to one expert, "housing and access to medical
and other services, rather than employment sites, are
the locational anchors which determine where the elderly
and handicapped must live."g Housing in the central
city usually costs less than that of the suburbs and
services generally are concentrated in the central city.
In fact, human service hubs evolve to serve the con-
centrations of handicapped groups and their presence
attracts more clients. The expert cited above believes
that this trend is very difficult to reverse and
that
....handicapped populations will con-
tinue generally to be concentrated
where housing costs are least and
where the service facilities are con-
centrated. They will live in areas
of capital disinventment, where land
use markets are soft and where ser-
vice facilities can find sites in
the shrinking retail and commercial
structures.10
The concentration of community -based residences in the
central city often alarms public officials who may feel
that the municipal budget is supporting a dispropor-
tionate share of residential facilities and public
services for the region's handicapped citizens. These
officials also may fear the institutionalization of
certain neighborhoods where facilities tend to be located.
These fears and the resulting attempts to distribute
the burden more equitably throughout the region may
frustrate social services providers and their clients
who cannot find suitable locations or services outside
the central city.
Legislation For Community -Based Facilities
Federal Legislation
The deinstitutionalization movement is supported by a
growing body of federal and state legislation. Various
laws encourage the development of community -based
-16-
M
e
residential facilities for the elderly, for persons who
are developmentally disabled and for persons with mental
health problems, including alcoholics and drug abusers.
The current federal policy and funding for social ser-
vices for lower -income individuals is found in Title
XX of the Social Security Act, Public Law 93-647.
Title XX provides federal grants to the states for social
services. Each state's social services must be linked
to one of five national goals established by the Act.
The fourth goal promotes deinstitutiotalization by
directing each state to furnish services for "preventing
or reducing inappropriate institutional care by provid-
ing for community -based care, home -based care, or other
forms of less intensive care".
The Keys Amendment to the Unemployment Compensation Amend-
ments of 1976, Public Law 94-566, requires the establishment
and enforcement of standards for community -based residen-
tial facilities where recipients of Supplemental Security
Income payments reside. One of the purposes of the regula-
tions that implement the Keys Amendment is "to encourage
the development of safe and appropriate residential set-
tings as an alternative to institutional living for
appropriate elderly individuals and handicapped children
and adults".11
Section 7 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 encourages
public housing agencies to develop congregate housing
for low-income, elderly families. Section 202 of the U.S.
Housing Act of 1959 provides construction loans for con-
gregate living facilities for the elderly and the handi-
capped.
The Developmental Disabilities Services and Facilities Con-
struction Amendments of 1970, Public Law 91-517, amended
the Mental Retardation and Community Mental Health Centers
Construction Act of 1963 to assist states in developing
plans for the provision of comprehensive services to per-
sons affected by mental retardation and other developmental
disabilities orginating in childhood. A later amendment,
the Developmentally Disabled Assistance and Bill of Rights
Act, requires that the State plan "support the estab-
lishment of community programs as alternatives to institu-
tionalization." Federal legislation promoting mental
health care for people in their own neighborhood and com-
munities has existed since 1963 when Congress passed the
Community Mental Health Centers Act. This comprehensive
-17-
approach to community care for the mentally ill was
strengthened in 1915 by public Law 94-63, the Special
Health revenue Sharing Act of 1975. This law reaffirmed
the nation's commitment to community mental health centers
and provided standards for services to be offered by these
centers. The twelve essential services mandated by the
law include inpatient, outpatient, emergency, partial
hospitalization, consultation, education, specialized
services for children, the elderly, drug addicts and
alcoholics as well as three services concerned with al-
ternatives to institutionalization& aftercare, screen-
ing and community living programs.
Section 102 (2) (b) of Title I of the 1975 Act requires
the state mental health authority to "establish and carry
out a plan which is designed to eliminate imappropriate
placement in institutions of persons with mental health
problems., to insure the availability of appropriate
noninstitutional services for such persons, and to im-
prove the quality of care for those with mental health
problems for whom institutional care is appropriate." Sec-
tion 201 (b) (1) (G) of Title II of the same Act requires
that community mental health centers provide "a program of
transitional half -way house services for the mentally
ill who are residents of its catchment area and who have
been discharged from a mental health facility or would
without such services require inpatient care in such a
facility."
State Legislation
Florida law clearly promotes community -based residential
facilities as alternatives to institutionalization in
both the health care and correctional systems. The in-
tent of the Florida legislature to provide community -based
care for Florida citizens is set forth in eight State
statutes dealing with the elderly, alcoholics, drug
abusers, developmentally disabled persons, the mentally
ill, and juvenile delinquents and adult offenders. Each
of these laws is described in the paragraphs that follow:
Comprehensive Alcoholism Prevention, Control and Treatment
Act. Chapter 396, Florida Statutes. This law establishes
a comprehensive program for the prevention and treatment
of alcoholism. According to the Act, "alcoholism pre-
vention, treatment, and control programs should, when-
ever possible, be community based ..... and be integrated
with, and involve, the active participation of a wide
- 18 --
range of public and nongovernmental agencies, especially
community mental health programs." The Act further
specifies that treatment facilities should include in-
termediate care services such as community mental health
centers, foster home placement, hostels and halfway
houses.
Rehabilitation of Drug Dependents. Chapter 397, Florida
Statutes. The intent of the Legislature in passing this
law is to "provide an alternative to criminal imprison-
ment for individuals capable of rehabilitation as use-
ful citizens through techniques not generally available
in state or local prison systems." This law establishes
the development of a rehabilitation program for drug
dependents including residential rehabilitation centers.
Retardation Prevention and Community Services Act. Chapter
393, Florida Statutes. The law provides for the estab-
lishment of programs and services for developmentally
disabled persons. A developmental disability is defined
as a disorder attributable to retardation, cerebral palsy,
autism or epilepsy, which originated prior to the age of
18 years. Under this Act, "greatest priority shall be
given to the development and implementation of community -
based residential placements, services, and treatment prog-
rams for the retarded and other developmentally disabled
individuals which will enable such individuals to achieve
their greatest potential for independent and productive
living and which will enable them to live in their own
homes or in facilities located in their own communities,
and which will permit clients to be diverted or removed
from unnecessary institutional placement."
Florida Mental Health Act. Chapter 394, Part I, Florida
Statutes. Community Mental Health Act. Chapter 394, Part
IV, Florida Statutes. The Florida Mental Health Act, also
known as the Baker Act, signaled a major change in the
State's treatment of individuals with mental health prob-
lems. This law sets forth the rights of patients admitted
to mental institutions in Florida, providing that patients
must be admitted to these institutions on a voluntary
basis and that involuntary hospitalization is permitted
only when expert evaluation determines that it is necessary.
The Community Mental Health Act emphasizes Florida's com-
mitment to providing mental health services at the com-
munity level. The act establishes a program for providing and
coordinating community mental health services, Mental health
boards are established in each Plotida Department of Vealth
and Rehabilitative Services district. Each board trust prepare
a district mental health plan that may include Community
precare and aftercare services, such as foster home
placement and halfway houses.
Youth Services. Chapter 959, Florida Statutes. Chapter
959 creates a comprehensive program for the prevention,
control and treatment of juvenile delinquency. This
program may include community -based residential programs,
such as foster homes and halfway houses.
Florida Corrections Code of 1957. Chapter 944, Florida
Statutes. The Florida Corrections Code establishes a
system of community -based correctional facilities and
programs. The intent of the Legislature is clearly stated
in Section 944.012 (2) of the Statute:
"It is clear that major changes in correctional
methods are required. It is essential to abate
the use of large institutions and continue the
development of community -based corrections ....
and to provide alternatives to institutionalization,
including the availability of probationers'
residences and community correctional centers".
Section 944.012 (6) (c) further states the intent of the
Legislature:
"When possible, to divert from expensive insti-
tutional commitment those individuals who, by
virtue of professional diagnosis and evalua-
tion, can be placed in less costly and more
effective environments and programs better
suited for their rehabilitation and the pro-
tection of society."
-20-
-21-
References
1
Adapted from Daniel Lauber and Frank S. Bangs, Zoning
for Family and Group Care Facilities. Planning Advisory
Service Report No. 300 (Chicago American Society of
Planning officials, 1974), p.2.
2
Bengt Nirge, "The Normalization Principle" in Changing
Patterns in Residential Services for the Mentally Re-
tarded, edited by Robert B. Kugel and Ann Shearer (Wash-
ington, D.C.: President's Committee on Mental Re-
tardation, 1976), p. 231.
3
Bertram S. Brown, "Critical Issues for Community Mental
Health" (Rockville: U.S. Department of Health, Educa-
tion and Welfare, 1977), p.5.
4
Earl Butterfield, "Some Basic Changes in Residential
Facilities" in Changing Patterns in Residential Services
for the Mentally Retarded, edited by Robert B. Kugel
and Ann Shearer (Washington, D.C.: President's Committee
on Mental Retardation, 1976), p. 16.
5 Peter B.C. B. Ivory, "Deinstitutionalization Concept
Paper" (Tallahassee: Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services, 1978), p. 4.
6 "Hospital to Release Mentally Retarded
sec. B, p.l.
The Miami Herald
7
Richard P. Seiter, et al., Halfway Houses (Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1977), p.3.
8
D. Richard Neill, "Working Paper on optional Living En-
vironments for Less Independent Senior Citizens" (Con-
cord: New England Non -Profit Housing Development Corpo-
ration, 1976), p.2.
9
Julian Wolpert: "Social Planning and the Mentally and
Physically Handicapped; The Growing "Special Service"
Populations"in Planning Theory in the 1980's; a Search
for Future Directions (New Brunswick: Center for Urban
Policy Research, 1978), p.99.
10 (bid., p. 98.
11
office of the Assistant Secretary for Program
Planning and Development, "Proposed Comprehensive
Annual Services Program Plan for Title XX =- Social
Security Act; July 1, 1979 - June 50, 1980"
(Tallahassee: Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services, 1919), p, 216,
-22-
111,Community-Based Residential Facilities in
Miami
This chapter describes the basic characteristics of
community -based residential facilities in Miami and
surrounding Dade County. A description of the nine
types of facilities found in the County is followed by
a discussion of the organizations that sponsor and reg-
ulate the facilities. Also included are the number and capacity of the residences as well as the dis-
tribution of each type in Miami as compared to Dade
County. The size of community -based residential _
facilities in the City of Miami is analyzed by type of
facility. The last part of this chapter compares the
number and capacity of facilities in Miami and Dade
County with each jurisdiction's share of total County
housing units and population. The chapter concludes -_
with a basic projection of the need for several types _
of facilities in Miami. —
Typology
There are seven types of community -based residential
facilities in Dade County's health treatment system and
two types of facilities in the correctional system.
Defined in Table 2, these facilities include adult con-
gregate living facilities, alcohol rehabilitation facili-
ties, residential facilities for drug dependents, resi-
dences for developmentally disabled persons, residential
facilities for persons with mental health problems, child -
caring facilities, boarding homes, residential facilities
for juvenile delinquents and residences for adult offen-
ders. As shown in the table, there is a variety of
sizes and services offered within these nine basic cate-
gories of facilities. The type of client served by each
category of facility is not exclusive to that category,
For example, the mentally ill may reside in adult con-
gregate living facilities and boarding homes as well as
in the facilities described in category 5 of the table.
-23-
TABLE 2
TYPOLOGY OF COM MUNITY-BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES IN MiAMI AND DADS COUNTY
Health Treatment
System
State
sponsoring/Licensing
public A encies
Legislation/Regulations
Definition
Florida Department of
Type
facility that Chapter 400, Flor-
Health and RehabA�inga`
Congre-
ex- ida statutes
A residential
a
tive Services*
-
1. Adult
period
provides, for p
or Flor-
and Adult Program
gate Living
ter 10A-5,.
needing Chap 24 hours, one
for
Facilities
i.da Administrative
more personal services
Dade County Depart -
four or more adults, not code
to the owner or ad-
me of Housing and
related
Personal ser- licensed
Urban Development
ministrator.
copid include food
_
vices assistance
service, personal
with bathing, dressing, am-
bulation, housekeeping,
supervision, and emotional
N
security. (Ch.400,F•S-)
to y
i
(a) Level I. A facility
usually comprised of
individual living units,
offering housing, food
service and minimal
personal care services
such as emotional sec-
and
urity, housekeeping
companionship.
(b) Level II, A facility
food
offeringhousing,
service and personal
'which include
services
not limited to:
but are
Type
2. Alcohol Reha-
bilitation Facil-
ities.
Definition
(b) continued
personal assistance with
dressing, ambulation, eat-
ing, securing necessary
health care from appropri-
ate sources, and supervi-
sion of self-administered
medications and personal
supervision. (Sec.10A-5
F.A.C.)
A facility that offers 24
hour service and provides
residence to clients. Care
or treatment is rendered to
a client in a theraupeutic
setting where the individ-
ual is provided with a bed,
and housed overnight. (S,ec.
10E-3, F.A.C.)
State Legislation/
Requlations
3. Residential A live-in facility staffed
Treatment Facil- by professional and para-
ities for Drug professional persons offer -
Dependents ing therapeutic programs for
drug dependent persons.
(Ch. 397, F.S.)
Chapter 396, Flor-
ida Statutes
Chapter 10E-3, Flor-
ida Administrative
Code
not licensed
Chapter 397, Flor-
ida Statutes
Chapter 10E-7, Flor-
ida Administrative
Code
licensed
Sponsoring/Licensing
Public Agencies
Florida Department of
Health and Rehabilitative
Services, Mental Health
Program
Dade County Depart-
ment of Human Resources,
Comprehensive Alcohol
Program
Florida Department
of Health and Rehabi-
litative Services,
Mental Health Program
Dade County Department
of Human Resources,.
Comprehensive Drug
Program
Sponsoring/Licensing
Type
Definition
State Legislation /
Public Agencies
Regulations
4. Residential
A facility provid-
Chapter 393, Flor-
Florida Department
Facilities for
ing room and board and
ida Statutes
of Health and Re-
Developmental-
personal care for per-
habilitative Services,
ly Disabled
sons with a developmen-
Chapter 1OF-6,
Retardation Program
Persons
tal disability. Devel-
Florida Administra-
opmental disability
tive Code
means a disorder or
syndrome that is at-
licensed
tributable to retar-
dation, cerebral pal-
sy, autism or epilepsy
(a) Foster care facil-
ity that provides
a family living
environment in-
cluding super-
vision and care
necessary to meet
the physical, emo-
tional, and social
needs of clients.
The capacity of
a foster care facil-
ity does not exceed
three clients
(b) Group home facility:
• a residential facil-
ity that provides a
family living environ-
ment including super-
vision and care nec-
essary to meet the
physical, emotional
and social needs of
clients.
Type
Sponsoring/Licensing
Definition State Legislation/ Public Agencies
Regulations
(b) (continued)
The capacity is at
least four clients,
but not more than
sixteen clients
(c)Residential habilitation
center: a community re-
sidential facility oper-
ated primarily for the
diagnosis, treatment,
or rehabilitation of
clients. This facility
provides, in a struc-
tured residential setting,
individualized continuing
evaluation, planning, 24
hour supervision, and
coordination and integ-
ration of health or re-
habilitative services to
help each client reach his
maximum functioning capa-
bilities. The capacity
of these facilities is
not less than seventeen
clients.
(d) Intermediate care facil-
ity of the mentally re-
tarded: a residential
facility that provides
medicaid services to per-
sons who are mentally re-
tarded or who have related
conditions. The capacity
Type
Definition
(d) (continued)
of these facil-
ities does not
exceed 120
clients. (Ch. 393,
F.S.)
5. Residential
A transitional residential
Facilities
facility for persons who
for Persons
have been discharged from
with Mental
public mental institutions
Health
and who, in the absence of
Problems
such facilities would have
required continued inpatient
care. Such living arrange-
ments are designed to
n�
foster a gradual phased
CO
return to community living
to the maximum extent pos-
sible for each person.
(Ch. 10E-4.11, F.A.C.)
(a) Group homes: residences
for chronic patients who
require assistance in
basic living functions.
The group homes are
staffed by nonprofes-
signals who provide assist-
ance to residents in meal
preparation, personal
hygiene, transportation
and recreation. These
facilities should house
no more than fifteen
residents.
�n
State Legislation/
Regulations
Chapter 394, Florida
Statutes
Chapter 10E-4.11
Florida Administra-
tive Code
not licensed
Sponsoring/Licensing
Public Agencies
Florida Departmen-t
of Health and Re-
habilitative
Services, Mental
Health Program
Dade County De-
partment of Youth
and Family Devel-
opment, Psycholo-
gical Services
Division -
Jackson Memorial
Hospital, Community,
mental Health
Program
Type Definition
(b) Supervised apartments:
apartments rented by
the service provider and
sublet by the client,
generally.•housing four
clients per unit. These
facilities are designed
for clients who have
achieved a limited capac-
ity for independent living
but who require frequent
assistance and support! -
and some supervision
and staff intervention
in order to survive in
the community.
(c) Satellite apartment:
rented apartments hous-
ing usually three or
four clients who pos-
sess most of the basic
living skills necessary
for survival but who
require support and en-
couragement to carry
out these functions.
(Proposed HRS 79-80
Budg.qt)
6. Residential A facility in which four or
Child -Caring more unrelated children
Facilities receive full-time care
away from their own parents,
relatives or guardians.
Sponsoring/Licensing
State Legislation/ Public Agencies
Reaulations
Chapter 409, Flor- Florida Depart
ida Statutes ment of Health
and Rehabilitative
Chapter IOC-15, Services, Social
Part II, Florida and Economic
Administrative Code Services.
Sponsoring/Licensing
Type
Definition
State Legislation/
Public Agencies
Regulations
6- (continued)
(a) Group home: a
licensed
Dade County Depart -
facility that pro-
ment of Youth and
vides care for no
Family Development,
more than fifteen
Alternative Home
boys and/or girls
Care Division
in a residence usu-
ally not on the cam-
pus of a child -car-
ing facility. (Ch.
1OC-15, Pt. II,
F.A.C.)
t
~ 7. Boarding Homes
A residential facility
Chapter 509, Flor-
Dade County Wel-
that provides a partially
ida Statutes
fare Department
structured living envi-
ronment and room and board
Chapter 7-C, Flor-
Florida Depart-
0
for persons who are medi-
ida Administrative
meat of Business
cally unable to work and
Code
Regulation, Hotel
are without resources.
and Restaurant
Sponsored by the Dade Coun-
licensed
Division
ty Welfare Department, the
program also offers a
variety of casework ser-
vices directed toward re-
habilitation and self-suf-
ficiency. (Dade County
Welfare Department)
Correctional System
8. Juvenile
(a) Halfway house: a short-
Chapter 959, Flor-
Florida Depart -
Community
term residential facil-
ida Statutes
ment of Health and
Based Cor-
ity for either twenty-
Rehabilitative
rections
five boys or twenty
Chapter 1OH-9,
Services,. Youth
girls, ages 14-18, ad-
Florida Admin-
Services Program
judicated delinquent
istrative Code
by the circuit court
not licensed
Sponsoring/Licensing
State Legislation/
Public Agencies
fiype
Definition
Regulations(b)
Group treatment home:
a small residential
facility designed to
provide a group of
seven children with a
treatment -oriented
homelike atmosphere.
The residents usually
range in age from 10
to 13 and have been
adjudicated delin-
quent by the circuit
court.
(c) Family group home
w
a private family
residence that pro-
vides basic care and
a therapeutic environ-
ment for one to a max-
imum of eight youth-
ful offenders. (HRS
Manual: community -
Based Treatment Centers)
(a) Community correctional
Chapter 944.026,
.Florida Depart-
Floc of Offender
ment
9. Adult Com-
munity Based
center and women's ad-
Florida Statutes
Rehabilitation
Corrections
justment center: while
still maintaining cus-
Chapter u44.033, Flor-
_
tody, these centers
ida Statutes
allow selected inmates
the last
Chapter 33-10 Flor-
who are within
18 months of the end of
ida Administrative
their sentence to work in
Code
the community and grad-
q
ually adjust to life
not licensed
Sponsoring/Licens.i.ng
Type Definition State Legislation/ Public Agencies
Regulations
9. (continued)
outside of prison.
(Florida Depart-
ment of offender
Rehabilitation)
(b) Probation/resti-
tution center: a
structured residential
program for probationers
who are non-violent
felons convicted of
property crimes. The
main thrust of the facil-
ity is toward pavment
of restitution to vic-
tims of crimes by
offenders. (Florida
Department of Correc-
tions)
(c) Halfway house: a
residential facility
designed to facilitate
the transition of
paroled adult ex -offen-
ders into community
living. (Florida
Department of Correctios)
Florida Depart-
ment of Corrections,,
Probation and Parole
Services Program
' i � � I �I� i AIVIIIIII}IIIII�IIIAI, EIT!,�i r�i��'ll iApgill _
Sponsoring and Regulatory organizations
Community -based residential facilities are sponsored by many organizations and individuals in the private
and public sectors. Some types, such as adult con-
gregate living facilities, boarding homes, and residences
for the developmentally disabled, are most often owned
by individuals and operated as for -profit businesses.
Other types, such as drug rehabilitation facilities
are usually sponsored and operated by non-profit organi-
zations.
State and City agencies are responsible for the regula-
tion of Miami's community -based facilities. Five types
of community -based residential facilities are licensed
by the State of Florida: (1) adult congregate living
facilities, (2) facilities for drug dependents, (3)
facilities for the developmentally disabled, (4) facilities
for dependent children, and (5) boarding homes. The
first four types of facilities are licensed by the Flor-
ida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services,
while boarding homes are licensed by the Hotel and Res-
taurant Division of the Florida Department of Business
Regulation. The licensing requirements provide State
standards for the operation of the facilities. Four —
types of facilities are not covered by State or other
licensing procedures: (1) alcohol rehabilitation facil-
ities, (2) residential facilities for persons with men-
tal health problems, (3) juvenile community -based correc-
tions, and (4) adult community -based corrections.
The City of Miami regulates community residences through
enforcement of its zoning, building, and fire codes. The
public agencies involved in sponsoring and regulating
facilities are described in the paragraphs below.
State Agencies
Aging and Adult Services Program Office, Florida
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
The Aging and Adult Services Program Office is responsible
for program planning, standard setting and policy formu-
lation to assure the delivery of quality services to
aged individuals or disabled adults who have special con-
ditions which impair or potentially impair their well-
being. This office licenses adult congregate living
facilities.
-33-
th Program of
Health an
s
e
The Mental Health Program Office is responsible for
planning, developing, setting standards and formu-
lating policies for programs for prevention and treat-
ment of mental, emotional and behavioral disorders
for all age groups, including programs for alcoholism
and drug abuse: This office participates in the devel-
opment of community -based residential facilities for
alcoholics and persons with mental health problems
and licenses residential treatment facilities for drug
dependents.
Developmental Services Pro ra am office,_Florida Department
of Health and Rehabilitative Services
The Developmental Services Program Office is responsible for
program planning, policy formulation and standard setting
to assure quality services for retarded and otherwise
developmentally disabled citizens who have conditions
which impair or potentially impair their normal growth
and development. This office licenses residential facil-
ities for developmentally disabled persons.
Social and Economic Services Program Office, Florida
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
The Social and Economic Services Program office is res-
ponsible for program planning, policy formulation, stan-
dard setting to assure comprehensive statewide delivery
of quality treatment alternatives in both community
and institutional settings for youth alleged to be or
adjudicated delinquent. This office sponsors residential
facilities for juvenile community -based corrections.
Hotel and Restaurant Division, Florida Department of
Business Regulation
The Hotel and Restaurant Division sets standards for
the operation of hotels, rooming houses, and restaurants.
This division licenses boarding homes.
Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation
The Department of Offender Rehabilitation is responsible
for integrating the delivery of all offender rehabili-
tation and incarceration services deemed necessary for
�r
-34-
J J
the rehabilitation of offenders and protection of society.
This Department operates adult community -based correc-
tional facilities.
County Aapncies
Metropolitan Dade County Department of Housing and
Urban Development
The bade county Department of Housing and Urban Devel-
opment is responsible for planning and developing housing
programs for the County's lower -income residents. This —
Department developed the County's only public housing
development for adult congregate living. -
Comprehensive Alcohol Program, Metropolitan Dade Count
Department of Human Resotirces
The Comprehensive Alcohol Program Office sponsors and
manages alcoholism treatment programs, including residen-
tial facilities.
Comprehensive Drug Program, Metropolitan Dade County
Department of Human Resources
The Comprehensive Drug Program Office sponsors drug
abuse treatment and rehabilitation facilities, includ-
ing residential facilities.
Psychological Services Division, Metropolitan Dade County
Department of Youth and Family Development
The Psychological Services Division sponsors mental
health programs for dependent and delinquent children,
including residential facilities.
Alternative Home Care Division, Metropolitan Dade County
Department of Youth and Family Development
The Alternative Home Care Division sponsors group homes for
dependent and delinquent children.
Boarding Home Program, Metropolitan Dade County Welfare
Department
The Boarding Home Program offers a partially structured
living environment and room and board for adults who
are medically unable to work and who are without resources.
-35-
City A5endies
City „of Miami Building and Zoning inspections Department
The Building and Zoning Inspections Department enforces
the South Florida building Code in Miami and the City's
Zoning Ordinance.
Fire Prevention Bureau, City of _Miami Fire Department
The Fire Prevention Bureau enforces the life safety re-
quirements of the Miami Fire Code.
Tax and Licenses Division, City of Miami Finance Depart-
ment
The Tax and Licenses Division is responsible for collect-
ing fees from City occupational licenses.
City of Miami Planning Department
The Planning Department reviews the applications for
zoning approval of most types of community -based residen-
tial facilities.
City of Miami Planning and Zoning Boards Administration
Department
The Planning and Zoning Boards Administration Department re-
ceives applications for zoning approval of community -based
residential facilities and schedules public hearings for such
approval.
The City of Miami process and codes for regulating community -
based residential facilities are explained in detail in
Chapter V of this report.
Number and Location of Facilities
In February 1979, the City of Miami Planning Department con-
ducted an inventory of community -based residential facilities
in Dade County. The inventory was compiled from lists of
facilities licensed by the State of Florida and lists of
facilities sponsored or used by Metropolitan Dade County. In
addition, non-profit and religious organizations were contacted
for the names of any facilities sponsored by them. Each
facility in the inventory was telephoned to get bed or
resident capacity information.
-36-
-37-
This inventory identified more than 216 community -based
residential facilities in Dade County, Table 3 shows
that nearly half of those facilities are adult congregate
living facilities and facilities for the developmentally
disabled, with 60 and 68 residents respectively. The
smallest number of residences, 8 and 9, are found in
the correctional system and facilities for drug depend-
ents. Eighteen boarding homes were identified during
the survey, as were 17 child -caring facilities, 15 facil-
ities for persons with mental health problems and 12
residences for alcohol rehabilitation.
An analysis of the location of these community -based
residential facilities discloses that 95 or 44% of the
facilities are located in the City of Miami. The remaining —
residences are located outside City boundaries in other =
municipalities or in unincorporated Dade County. The
statistics in Table 3 reveal that some types of facilities —
predominate in the City of Miami. These include residen-
tial facilities for drug dependents (78% of the County —
total), boarding homes (839.), alcohol rehabilitation facil-
ities (75%), and adult community -based corrections (62%).
Other types are found in greater numbers outside the City.
Only 17% of the child -caring facilities and 22% of the
residences for the developmentally disabled are found in
Miami. Miami has approximately half of the adult con-
gregate living facilities (49%) and slightly fewer mental
health residential facilities (46%).
The resident capacity statistics, displayed in Table 4,
show that Miami's share of beds is slightly larger than
its share of facilities. Of the total County capacity of
more that 6,916 beds, 48% are located in the City and 52%
are located outside City limits. The large share of beds
for certain types of residences is similar to the large
shares of facilities identified in Table 3. Boarding
homes, facilities for drug dependents, and alcohol re-
habilitation facilities account for 87%, 83%, and 81% of
the total capacity in each category. Each of these per-
centages is slightly larger than the percent of facilities
located in the City of Miami, indicating that Miami's
facilities in these categories are slightly larger than
those outside the City. The City's adult community -based
correctional facilities, however, are smaller. Miami
has 62 of the facilities in this category, but only 34%
of the capacity. The capacity of adult congregate living
facilities and facilities for the developmentally disabled,
53% and 36% respectively, also indicate slightly larger
residences. The capacity of mental health facilities and
juvenile community -based correctional facilities in Miami
is 17% each. The City's share of residential child -
caring beds accounts for only 8% of the total.
-37-
TABLE
3
DISTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY -BASED
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
BY TYPE
NUMBER OF FACILITIES IN
CITY
OF MIAMI
VS. REMAINDER
OF -_
BADE
COUNTY
—
Facilities
Facilities
_
in
Miami Outside
Miami
Health Treatment System
No,.
No.
Total
Adult Congregate Living
34
49%
35
51%
69
Facilities
Alcohol Rehabilitation
9
75%
3
25%
12 —
Facilities
Residential Facilities
7
78%
2
22%
9
for Drug Dependents
Residential Facilities
15
22%
53
78%
68
for Developmentally
Disabled Persons
Mental Health Residential
7
46%
8
54%
15
Facilities
—
Residential Child-
3
17%
14
83%
17
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes
15
23%
3
17%
18
Correctional System
_
Juvenile Community-
*
-
*
-
-
Based Corrections
Adult Community-
5
62%
3
38%
8
Based Corrections
Total All Residential
Facilities
95+
44%
121+
56%
216+
* Information not available.
-38-
-39-
TABLE 4
bISTRIBO TION OF COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES BY TYPE:
CAPACITY OF FACILITIES IN CITY OF MIAMI VS. REMAINDER
OF DADE COUNTY
Capacity
in Miami
Health Treatment System
No. %
Adult Congregate Living
1302 53%
Facilities
Alcohol Rehabilitation
368 81%
Facilities
Residential Facilities
310 83%
for Drug Dependents
Residential Facilities
499+ 36%
for Developmentally
Disabled Persons
Mental Health Residential
84 17%
Facilities
Residential Child-
62 8%
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes
531+ 87%
Correctional System
Juvenile Community -
Based Corrections
Adult Community -
Based Corrections
Total All Residential
Facilities
+ Capacity not availab
C!'
Capacity out-
side Miami
No. $ Total
1158 47% 2460
86 19% 454
64 17% 374
891+ 64% 1390+
The location at community -based residential facilities
within City of Miami boundaries is shown on Maps 1 through
9. Map 1 shows the location of all facilities in Miami.
Maps 2 through 9 show the location of each type of
facility. The February, 1979 inventory conducted by the
Planning bepa'rtment is the source of the information dis-•
played on the maps,
Size of Facilities
Miami's community -based residential facilities are
classified according to size in Table S. Slightly more
than 40% of the facilities have 17 to 50 residents. Fa-
cilities with 7 to 16 residents account for 20% of all
facilities, while facilities with 1 to 6 residents and
those with 50 to 100 residents account for a slightly
smaller portion of the total. only 9% of the facilities
have more than 100 residents. of the nine types of
facilities shown in Table 5, adult congregate living
facilities, facilities for drug dependents, residences for
the developmentally disabled, and boarding homes have
a significant number of facilities with more than
50 residents.
Need for Facilities
A comprehensive study of community -based residential '
facilities includes an analysis of the demand for such
facilities as well as an inventory of the supply. The
need for community residences can be compared with the
supply in a geographical area to determine whether that area has a need for more facilities or an overabundance of
them.
The need for community -based residential facilities in
the City of Miami and the City's supply of facilities is
compared with the supply and demand in the rest of Dade
County in the following paragraphs. Because an analysis of
need for every type of facility is beyond the scope of this
study, this section will provide several examples of the
supply -demand relationship in the City of Miami and Dade County.
In Table 6, the distribution of community -based facilities
in the City of Miami and outside the City is compared with
Miami's percentage of total County housing units and popu-
lation. Miami has 44% of all community -based residential
facilities, but only 25% of the total County housing units.
The number of beds supplied in the City of Miami compared
with its share of the County's population is even greater.
Miami has 48% of the bed capacity in the County, but only
23% of the population. —
-40-
CITE/ OF MIAMI r�-�+•���• '- -
Community -Based Residential
Facilities Study
MAP 1 LOCATION OF ALL COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE is79 -41-
31
Community -Based Residential
facilities Study
MAP 2 LOCATION OF ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITIES
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1975 . -4.2-
_ _. _....... _._ . .jLiIV - 4 3
1
1
Community -Based Residential
Facilities' Study
MAP 3 LOCATION OF ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FACILITIES
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1979 -43-
REM
Community -Based Residential
� Facilities Study
MAP 4 LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES F.OR DRUG
DEPENDENTS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE '1979 -44-
CITY OF
.;c30? ;r580i
1004
1502
n0' t(
�+802 �7u02
1e T
1807 rr Tr, Ti 2 2 Q 1
11 23
l7 0t 1702 18 W
50
—
n
25 1 i29 1 `j`
Y{ 5501 �5401 52.t-•
+�5G r 55.02 5402
t �J ��_�1 e• a Tr _.�_____._ _1 � ��/-.--''
63 0i �64 G6 L10,2( + '
63 02.._ 65
,aE
? Tool 69 r "'
o J'
1
7002
68
71
i AVE Ac,
GRAND
73
P �
r{ovtcr DRIPS
Community m Based Residential
'Facilities Study
MAP 5 LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES FOR DEVELOPMENTALLY
DISABLED PERSONS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
o'rMENT JUNE 1979 -45
Community -Based Residential
Facilities' Study
MAP 6 LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES FOR PERSONS WITH
MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI
(FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1979
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT .JUNE 1979
-46-
0
Community -Based Residential
Facilities Study
MAP 7 LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL CHILD -CARING FACILITIES
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1979 -47-
s
Community -Based Residential
Facilities Study
MAP 8 LOCATION OF BOARDING HOMES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI
(FEBRUARY, 1979)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1979 -48-
Community -Based Residential
Facilities Study
MAP 9 LOCATION OF ADULT COMMUNITY -BASED CORRECTIONAL
FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI (FEBRUARY, 1979)
J4 CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1979 -49-
TABLE 5
018TA18UTION OF COMMUNITY-BASEO RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
BY SIZE OF FACILITY IN THE CITY OF MIAMI
Number
of Facilities
1 - 6
7 -16
17-50
50--100
100+
Resi-
Resin-
Resi-
Resi-
Resi-
Type pg Facility
dents
dents
dents
dents
dents
Adult Congregate Liv-
7
ing Facilities*
10
9
3
5
Alcohol Rehabilitation
0
0
6
0
1
Facilities*
Residential -Facilities
0
0
3
2
0
for Drug Dependents*
Residential Facilities
2
2
3
3
2
for Developmentally
Disabled Persons*
Residential Facilities
4
1
2
0
0
for Persons with
Mental Health Problems
Residential Child-
0
0
3
0
0
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes*
0
3
7
4
0
Juvenile Community-
0
0
0
0
0
Based Corrections **
Adult Community -Based
0
1
3
0
0
Corrections
Total 13 17 36 12 8
* Does not include facilities for which capacity is unknown
** Information not available
--50-
TABLE 6
COMPARISON OF CITY AND COUNTY HOUSING UNITS AND POPULATION
WITH CITY AND COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY -BASED RES-
IDENTIAL FACILITIES
Comparative Distribution of Housing Units
and Facilities
Miami Dade County
No. of Housing Units (1978) 140,795 572,340
Percent 25% 75%
Percent of Community -Based
Facilities - Total
Adult Congregate Living
Facilities
Alcohol Rehabilitation
Facilities
Residential Facilities for
Drug Dependents
Residential Facilities for
Developmentally Disabled
Persons
Mental Health Residential
Facilities
Residential Child -Caring
Facilities
Boarding Homes
Adult Community -Based
Corrections
44%
49%
75%
78%
22%
46%
17%
83%
62%
56%
51%
25%
22%
78%
54%
83%
17%
38%
Comparative Distribution of Population and Capacity of Facilities
Miami Dade County
Population (1978) 348,721 1,496,009
Percent 23% 77%
Percent Capacity (Residents)
of Community -Based Facilities
Total
Adult Congregate Living
Facilities
Alcohol Rehabilitation
Facilities
Residential Facilities for
Drug Dependents
Residential Facilities for
Developmentally Disabled
Persons
(continued)
Miami
Dade County
Population (1918) percent
349,721
1,M,0
23%
77%
Mental Health Residential
Facilities
17%
83%
Residential Child -Caring
Facilities
8%
91%
Boarding Homes
87%
13%
Juvenile Community -Based
Corrections
17%
82%
Adult Community -Based
Corrections
34%
66%
-52-
■
'these statistics, however, should not lead to the con-
clusion that Miami's share of population and dwelling
units determines the City's need for community -based
facilities. Although the number of persons in need of
residential facilities in some categories relates
directly to population, the need for other types of
facilities may be related to other factors: Some
examples of indicators of need for several types of
facilities will illustrate this point. Nevertheless, as
mentioned earlier, determination of the need for each
type of facility is beyond the scope of this study.
The need for congregate living facilities for the el-
derly relates to a percentage of the population that is
over 60 years of age. According to national statistics,
5% of this population require "institutionalization or
skilled nursing care and 12-14% require some assistance
in daily living but do not require 24 hours skilled
nursing care".1 The Dade County Planning Department
estimates that the County's elderly population 65 years
of age and over totaled 223,450 persons in 1975. Miami's
elderly population in 1975 was 58,080, according to the
same estimates-2 The need for semi-independent living
quarters in Dade County and Miami can be projected by
multiplying these population figures by 14%. Thus, Dade
County as a whole has 31,283 persons who might need
congregate living facilities and Miami has 8,131 persons
or 25% of the total County need.
Two conclusions may be drawn from these figures: (1)
the capacity of licensed congregate living facilities
in Dade County (2,460 beds) and Miami (1,302 beds)
is far below the projected need, and (2) Miami, which
currently has 53% of the County beds, is supplying more
than twice its share of the total County need.
The need for residential facilities for developmentally
disabled persons also corresponds to a jurisdiction's
population. The incidence of mental retardation has
been estimated to be between 2.5% and 3% of the total
population.4 Estimates of the need for residential
placement for mentally retarded individuals, those with
behavioral disturbances, and those with sensory and/or 5
physical disorders are 1% each of the total population.
Multiplying the total County population and Miami's popu-
lation by 3% yields a County population of 4,488 per-
sons and a City population of 1,046 persons in need of
residential facilities. Again, the need for residential
facilities is not met in the City of the County, Miami,
with 23% of the County's need for residential facilities
for the developmentally disabled supplies 35% of the beds.
The need for mental health services, unlike the need for
adult congregate living facilities and facilities for
the developmentally disabled, is related to certain
socioeconomic variables. The National Institute of
Mental Health identified ten Variables associated with
Population groups considered of a high risk for mental
illness. These ten variables are families in poverty,
teenagers not in school, working mothers with pre-school
children, aged persons living alone, aged persons in
poverty, large households with low incomes, disabled
populations, disabled populations unable to work, and
children in poverty.
The Dade -Monroe Mental Health Board used these variables
in conjunction with three locally generated variables
(state hospital admission rates, state hospital read-
mission rates, and suicide rates) to score and rank
eight geographical areas of Dade County in terms of the
need for mental health services. The City of Miami
lies within three of these areas, called catchment areas.
Map 10 shows the boundaries of Miami's catchment areas, —
Areas IV, VI and VII. The average score and rank of each
catchment area is displayed in Table 7. A rank of 8 in-
dicates the highest need for mental health services and a
rank of one indicates the lowest. Miami lies within the
two catchment areas with the highest ranks as well as the
catchment area with the lowest rank. Although the need
for residential facilities is not determined here nor
is the proportion of Miami's need for residential facilities
in relation to the County need calculated, the table in-
dicates that large portions of the City of Miami have a
high risk population. Thus the proportionate need for
community -based residential facilities for the mentally
ill might be greater in Miami than in the rest of Dade
County. The deinstitutionalized mentally ill can be found
in boarding homes, adult congregate living facilities, and
in residences specifically serving the mentally ill. Miami's
large share of these facilities may correspond to a
greater need in the City.
-54-
TABLE 7
RANKING OE CATCHMENT AREAS BY SELECTED MENTAL HEALTH
RELATED VARIABLES FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA6
Catchment Areas
I II III IV V V1 VII VIII
Average Score 3.62 3.46 5.23 7.69 4,54 6.08 2.27 3.12
Rank 4 3 6 8 5 7 1 2
In summary, the need or demand for community -based resi-
dential facilities exceeds the supply in Dade,County.
Miami, however, appears to supply a greater proportion of
Dade County's communitymbased residential facilities than
the City's population and number of housing units warrant.
Although it is impossible to determine the need for each
type of facility in this study, such a projection must be —
completed before Miami's share of the needed facilities
can be calculated. Simple projections of the need for
adult congregate living facilities and facilities for
the developmentally disabled show that Miamiprovides a
relatively higher proportion of these facilities than does
the rest of Dade County. Analysis of the variables that
indicate the need for mental health services reveals that
significant portions of Miami's population are considered
high risk groups in terms of mental health. Miami's
share of facilities for the mentally ill may be a rela-
tively high proportion of the County total.
Summary
1. There are nine types of community -based residen-
tial facilities in the City of Miami as follows:
(1) adult congregate living facilities
(2) alcohol rehabilitation facilities
(3) residential facilities for drug dependents
(4) residences for developmentally disabled
persons
(5) residential facilities for persons with
mental health problems
(6) child -caring facilities
-56-
(7) boarding homes
(8) residential facilities for juvenile
delinquents
(9) residences for adult offenders
2. Community -based residential facilities are sponsored
bu organizations and individuals in the private and
public sectors.
3, Five types of facilities are licensed by the State
of Florida; the remaining four types of facilities
are not covered by licensing procedures.
4. The City of Miami regulates community residences
through enforcement of its zoning, building, and
fire codes.
5. There are approximately 216 community -based res-
idential facilities in Dade County. Of these, 95
facilities or 44% are located in the City of Miami.
6. Some types of facilities are found predominantly
in the City of Miami:
(1) boarding homes 83%
(2) residential facilities for drug dependents 78%
(3) alcohol rehabilitation facilities 75%
(4) adult community -based corrections 62%
7, The capacity of Dade County's community -based
residential facilities is more than 6,916 beds.
Miami has 48% of the total County capacity,
8. Some types of facilities in Miami provide a large
share of the total County capacity:
(1) boarding homes 87%
(2) facilities for drug dependents 83%
(3) alcohol rehabilitation facilities 81%
9. More than 40% of the community -based residential
facilities have 17 to 50 residents. Facilities with
7 to 16 residents account for 20% of all facilities,
while facilities with 1 to 6 residents and those
with 50 to 100 residents account for a slightly
smaller portion of the total. Only 9% of the
facilities have more than 100 residents.
- 57-
10. Miami has 44% of all community -based residential
facilities but only 25% of the total County housing
units. Similarly, Miami has 48% of the bed capa-
city in the County but only 23% of the population.
11. The need for community -based residential facilities
and Miami's share must be determined individually
for each type of facility. The need for some types
of facilities corresponds directly to a certain
proportion of a jurisdiction's total population. —_
The need for other types of facilities, however,
is related to the socioeconomic levels of a given
population.
12. Although a complete analysis of the need for com-
munity -based residential facilities in Miami is
beyond the scope of this study, simple projections
of the need for several types show that Miami may
be providing more than its share of adult congregate
living facilities for the elderly and facilities
for the developmentally disabled. Miami's need
for facilities for the mentally ill, which is re-
lated to the socioeconomic levels of its population,
may be a relatively high proportion of the total
county need.
-58-
References
1
D, Richard Neill, "Working Paper on 'Optional Living
Environments' for Less Independent Senior Citizens"
(Concord: New England Non -Profit Housing Develop-
ment Corporation, 1976), p. 7. These figures con-
firmed by Liane Palacin, Director of Aging and Adult
Services, Florida Department of Health and Rehabili-
tative Services, District XI, May 3, 1979.
2
Metropolitan Dade County Planning Department, "Es-
timate of the Elderly Resident Population of Dade
County, 65 Years of Age and Over, as of June 30,
1975, by Census Tract" (Miami: Metropolitan Dade
County Planning Department, 1976).
3 The higher percentage is used because these population
estimates are for persons over 65 rather than those over
60. It is assumed that this older segment of the el-
derly population would have a greater need for con-
gregate living facilities.
4
5
A
Burton Blatt, "The Executive" in Changing Patterns in
Residential Services for the Mentally Retarded, edited
by Robert B. Kugel and Ann Shearer (Washington, D.C.:
President's Committee on Mental Retardation, 1976),
p. 141. The Retardation Program Office, Florida
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Dis-
trict XI, uses the figure of 2.5%. Telephone conver-
sation with Jim Wood of the Retardation Program Office
May 3, 1979.
Ibid., pp. 144-145.
Dade -Monroe Mental Health Board, Mental Health Plan
for Dade County, 1976 (Miami: Dade -Monroe Mental
Health Board, 1976), p.32.
-59-
IV. Impact of Community -Based Residential
Facilities on Miami Neighborhoods
one of the greatest barriers to the establishment of
community -based residential facilities is the fear on
the part of community residents that these facilities
will have a negative impact on their neighborhoods.
These feared negative impacts include the concentration
of facilities in certain areas, increased crime, the
introduction of social deviants into the neighborhood,
lower property values, and a decline in the neighbor-
hood and municipal tax base. Community residents often
believe that the introduction of a community -based
facility into their neighborhood will initiate a pro-
cess of change that will alter the character of the
neighborhood.
The possible impacts of community -based residential
facilities on Miami's neighborhoods were examined during
this study. Two statistical techniques were used to
determine the density of facilities in Miami in terms
of the clustering of residences and the number of
facility residents in City census tracts. The types of
neighborhoods and sites best suited for community facil-
ities as well as the compatibility of Miami's existing
facilities with their neighborhoods were analyzed through
two surveys. Finally, the possible fiscal impact of
community -based residences was studied.
The neighborhood impact of community -based residential
facilities must be examined with attention to the dynamics
of neighborhood change. Consequently, the first part
of this section describes what the elements of a healthy
neighborhood are and how neighborhoods remain healthy
or decline.
Process of Neighborhood Chance
The following paragraphs describe what a neighborhood is
and the various stages in its life cycle. The reasons
for neighborhood decline are also discussed. This sec-
tion concludes with a discussion of the possible rela-
tionship between community -based residential facilities and
the process of neighborhood change.
There is no single and exact definition of a neighborhood.
It is possible, however, to list some of the elements of
a neighborhood that may define it as a separate entity
in the city;
it can be a geographic area, rec-
ognized by boundaries like a street,
freeway or railroad tracks. It can
be distinguished by a conspicuous
physical feature -like a park or a
hill or a building (a school, a
church, a library, a factory). It
can be defined by a certain type of
housing, (perhaps row houses, perhaps
all built at the same time or by the =_
same developer) that is different
enough from the surrounding housing
types to stand out clearly. The
neighborhood can also be defined
socially- by political groups,
religious affiliations or ethnic
similarities. In addition, since _
most areas do not have widely vary-
ing prices for housing, and since —
income largely (but not exclusively)
determines buying power, neighborhoods
can be defined by income groupings,
or as "housing sub -markets".
Neighborhoods change constantly. The change may make the
neighborhood better by improving the housing or adding
desirable features or it may be bad for the neighborhood,
causing it to decline in desirability. Every neighbor-
hood has a life cycle composed of various stages from
healthy to declining to abandoned. Neighborhoods may
move through this life cycle slowly or quickly; they
may stay at one stage for a long time. The most im-
portant aspect of the neighborhood life cycle is that
neighborhoods can be regenerated. Trends toward decline
can be reversed and neighborhoods can be revitalized.2
The residents of a healthy neighborhood usually perceive
their neighborhood to be homogeneous; i.e. composed of
people similar to one another in terms of income, status,
race, education and job. The residents of a healthy
neighborhood usually have pride in their homes and their
neighborhood's future. They show this pride and confi-
dence in their neighborhood by maintaining and investing
in their homes. Healthy neighborhoods usually are
socially cohesive. Well -organized neighborhood groups
are often present. The number of residents leaving the
neighborhood is low and usually they are replaced by per-
sons of the same social status and income? At any time
-61-
a neighborhood may be in one of three states, rising,
declining, or stable. A neighborhood declines when a
number of its residents decide to move because there is —
a lower demand for the homes they are leaving. There are
various possible reasons for the change of attitudes _
toward the neighborhood. The housing may have reached
the end of its "reasonable" life or other neighborhoods
nearby may be declining rapidly. Another possible
reason is that the residents may believe that a different =_
type of household is moving into the neighborhood. when
the number of "different" households reaches a certain �
point, the existing residents may feel that the values
of their own group can no longer dominate the neighbor-
hood environment. There residents then choose to move
to a neighborhood where their values prevail.
This concept has been called the tipping point; that is,
the point at which the residents of a neighborhood reach
their limits of tolerance for "different" households
and decide to move. At what point a neighborhood reaches
its limit of tolerance for a different group of residents
or tipping point is difficult to ascertain. A survey in
Dayton, Ohio attempted
-62-
to determine the impact of different low and moderate
income groups on four healthy neighborhoods. Respondents
in each community were asked to rate these groups as hav-
ing a positive, neutral, or negative influence on the
community. Additionally, respondents were asked to rate
the influence of each household type as being introduced
into the neighborhood at a 5 percent, 10 percent, and 20
percent level. The survey responses, similar in all
four suburbs, revealed that reactions to additional num-
bers of low and moderate -income households ranged from
neutral to negative. The study concluded that
When the new group was postulated
as making up 20 percent of the
neighborhood's population, all
but the moderate -income white
households with husbands were
regarded as being very harmful
to the neighborhood. When the
new group was only to make up
10 percent of the neighborhood,
the group of moderate -income
white households with no hus-
bands falls out of the negative
into the neutral response cate-
gory.
When it was postulated that the
low -and moderate -income groups
would constitute only 5 percent
of the neighborhood population,
the following groups were also
considered to have a neutral ef-
fect: low-income white house-
holds with husbands, moderate -
income black households with hus-
bands, and moderate -income black
households with no husbands. The
low-income white family without
a husband and all low-income black
families were believed to be poten-
tially harmful, even if they were to
constitute only 5 percent of the
neighborhood's resident population 5
Except for two categories of households, the surveyed
neighborhoods' tolerance for "different" households
fell below 10% of the neighborhood. Certain types of
-63-
households were not tolerable even at 5% of the population.
The occupants of a community -based residential facility
may be considered "different" by the residents of the
surrounding neighborhood, creating fear on the part
of the residents that the neighborhood is changing.
These fears may increase if a number of community facilities
are established in the same neighborhood, It is possible
that such a neighborhood could reach an "institutional
tipping point" when the neighborhood's tolerance for ad-
ditional facilities is exceeded. Although no research
has established a neighborhood's limit of tolerance for
community -based facilities, such research for other types
of households has shown that an influx of 5% or fewer6
"different" households could initiate the process of neigh-
borhood change. The implication for agencies that spon-
sor and regulate community -based residential facilities is
clear: these facilities should not be allowed to concen-
trate in neighborhoods at levels that might bring about
neighborhood change.
Density of Facilities in Miami Neighborhoods
Density has two meanings in relation to community -based
residential facilities. Degree of density can be measured
by the proximity of one residential care facility to an-
other facility or group of facilities. Density also can
be gauged by the number of facility residents in an area.
The density of community -based residential facilities
in Miami's neighborhoods was measured by two statistical
techniques called nearest neighbor analysis and location
quotient analysis. The geographical units of analysis
were the City's 1970 census tracts.
Nearest neighbor analysis was used to measure the degree
of proximity of community -based residential facilities
in each census tract. This method quantitatively deter-
mines a scale that measures the degree of departure from
a random distribution. There are three benchmarks on
this scale: (1) absolute clustering (all points falling
in the same place), (2) absolute randomness, and (3)
absolute dispersal (all points falling equidistant from
the other.)? The diagram below shows a random pattern,
a dispersed pattern, and a clustered pattern.
• M,
Randbrn Pattern bitomed Pattern Clustered Pattern
i
i
♦ ♦
ii
♦
i
i
i
♦
♦
a
♦
•
i
i
♦
♦
i
♦
Through this statistical technique, a score was cal-
culated for each census tract with two or more com-
munity -based facilities as well as for the City as a
whole. Those scores falling below 1.0 indicate clus-
tering with a score of 0 representing all points in
the same spot. Scores of 1 or above indicate a ran-
dom distribution, while scores above two indicate a
dispersed pattern. The scores for each census tract
measured are displayed in Table 8 below and on Map 11.
TABLE 8
DENSITY OF COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI IN TERtiS OF PROXIMITY
(NEAREST NEIGHBOR ANALYSIS)
Census Tract Score
64 .577
20.02 .639
27.01 .709
25 .716
22.01 .81
City of Miami
.88 clustered
55.01
1.242 random
13
1.256
36.02
1.261
14
1.338
69
1.489
53
1.495
67.02
1.603
19.02
1.8
27.02
1.953
30.01
1.99
50
2.786 dispersed
70.01 2.91 1
-65-
CENSUS TRACT WITH ONE OR NO FACILITIES
bw �,
e s •
gl•
1.0-1.99
2.0-2.99
CENSUS TRACT WITH CLUS- 15.b2
TEREO DISTRIBUTION
CENSUS TRACT WITH
RANDOM DISTRIBUTION
CENSUS TRACT
WITH DISPERSED
DISTRIBUTION
11.02 18.0.1 «4
Community -Based Residential
Facilities Study
MAP 11 DENSITY OF COMMUNITY —BASED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI IN
TERMS OF PROXIMITY (NEAREST NEIGHBOR
ANALYSIS)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1978 -FAG-
Community -based facilities in the City of Miami are
clustered as shown by the City's score of .88. within
the City, five census tracts show a distribution of
community -based residential facilities that is clustered.
These census tracts, 22.01, 22,02, 25, 21.01, and 64
are shown on the map.
Location quotient analysis measured the relative den-
sity of community -based residential facilities in each
census tract in terms of number of residents. The num-
ber of beds or capacity in each census tract was compared
to the tract's total population. (Table 9 shows the
census tracts where the residents of community -based
facilities account for 1% or more of the total population.)
The location quotient statistic then determined how far
above or below average for the entire City a particular
census tract falls in concentration of beds. A value of
one is average. A value of less than one indicates
the census tract's ratio of beds to total population is
smaller than the City average. Values greater than one
indicate that the ratio is greater than the City average.
TABLE 9
MIAMI CENSUS TRACTS WITH to OR MORE RESIDENTS
OF CO14MUNITY-BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
Census Tract Total Population Number of Residents Percent
24
10,771
196
1%
27.02
2,974
110
1%
20.02
5,973
152
2%
64
10,888
233
2%
13
9,023
397
4%
30.01
3,432
203
5%
36.02
6,891
457
7%
27.01
6,044
580
10%
The location quotient statistics for each census tract that has
community -based residential facilities are listed in Table
10 and displayed on Map 12. Thirty-one of the City's 63
census tracts contain community -based residential facilities.
Of these, 18 census tracts have a smaller ratio of beds than
the City average. The remaining tracts have a greater ratio,
ranging from a location quotient of 1.0333 to one of 10.6667.
As shown on the map, the densest census tracts in terms of
facility residents are 13, 27.02, 30.01, 36.02 and 27.01.
-67-
when the results of the nearest neighbor analysis and
the location quotient analysis are compared, several
census tracts appear to have a concentration of community -
based residential facilities both in proximity of facilities
and number of residents. These tracts are 22.02, 25, 64,
and 21.01. Census tract 27.01's community -based residen-
tial facilities are extremely dense. It ranks near the
clustered end of the scale in the nearest neighbor ana-
lysis and has the highest location quotient of all cen-
sus tracts.
TABLE 10
DENSITY OF COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES IN THE
CITY OF MIAMI IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF RESIDENTS
(LOCATION QUOTIENT ANALYSIS)
Census Tract Location Quotient
28
.1111
54.01
•1222
15.01
.1889
30.02
.2333
55.01
•2667
68
.3333
52
.3444
22.01
.3667
21
.4000
49
.4111
53
.4333
14
.4889
26
.4889
69
.5000
70.01
.5556
34
.5556
19.02
.6333
18.02
.9444
50
1.0333
67.02
1.0444
25
1.3556
20.01
1.4111
22.02
1.5667
24
2.0222
64
2.3778
20.02
2,8222
27.02
4.1111
13
4.8889
30.01
6.5667
36.02
7.3667
27.01
10.6667
0.0-0,99 SMALLER RATIO THAN AVERAGE 1-61,
CITY CAPACITY 1000
1.0-2.99 GREATER RATIO THAN l,
i
AVERAGE CITY CAPACITY :lsQt r�l9ol "fir
3.0-4.99 t ;.
2a q'
5 .0 6. 9 9 Ieorit
23,
7.0 8.9 9:
17 01 I7.oz 18.03
910-10.99
17.03
/ 57
A! fifiGUR Sf
sao2 ^ sect
\\+� 20 fT
:ee='sees
`i► •.cu r
� �. cif• Sff+
MN
63 01 66
.10 02 I65
.......
7002
r 66; = l
{ 71 aun t'
73++
a
11011W calve
Community -Based Residential
Facilities Study
MAP 12 DENSITY OF COMMUNITY —BASED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI IN TERMS
OF NUMBER OF RESIDENTS (LOCATION QUOTIENT
ANALYSIS)
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUNE 1979 _69—
Neighborhood Compatibility, of_..MiamiIs Facilities
Citizen complaints about proposed or existing community -
based residential facilities often center on the compat-
ibility of the facility with their neighborhood. On
the other hand, individuals and organizations trying to
find a suitable location for a proposed facility often
find that the only locations available are those not consid-
er'ed appropriate for a community -based residence. The
factors associated with neighborhood compatibility in-
clude the size of the facility in relation to the sur-
rounding buildings, the character of the surrounding
neighborhood, the neighborhood amenities available
to the residents of the facility, the amenities avail-
able at the site of the facility itself, and the num-
ber of facilities in a neighborhood.
A survey of individuals and organizations that provide
community -based residential facilities, a review of
the literature regarding the location of such facilities, and a Planning Department field survey of facilities in
the City were used to determine the compatability of
Miami's existing community -based residential facil-
ities with their neighborhoods and to provide guidelines
for the location of proposed facilities. The following
paragraphs describe the results of the surveys and the
literature review.
Neighborhood Compatibility Survey
Questionnaires were distributed to thirty-two individuals
representing State and County public agencies and local
private or non-profit organizations that sponsor or
license community -based residential facilities in Dade
County. The purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain
the opinion of these service providers about the compat-
ibility of residential care facilities with various types
of neighborhoods, the kinds of site and neighborhood
amenities that should be available for residents of these
facilities, and the number of residential care facilities
that should be located in a neighborhood.
Each of the twenty-three respondents completed the ques-
tionnaire in terms of the type of facility with which he
or she is most familiar. The number of responses for
each type of facility follows:
-70-
Type of Facility Responses
Adult Congregate Living Facilities 4
Alcohol Rehabilitation Facilities 1
Residential Treatment Facilities
for Drug Dependents 1
Residential Facilities for Devel-
opmentally Disabled Persons 2
Residential Facilities for Persons
with Mental Health Problems 6
Residential Child -Caring Facilities 3
Boarding Homes 2
Juvenile Community -Based Corrections 1
Adult Community -Based Corrections 3
Total 23
Respondents rated the suitability or importance of items
on a five -point scale ranging from least important to
most suitable or most important. Appendix A presents the
results of the survey.
The first question pertained to the optimum size of a
residential care facility that is considered a community -
based facility rather than an institution. The respondents
clearly preferred the smaller facilities. A facility with
7 to 16 residents was ranked on the fourth or fifth point
of the scale by 73% of the respondents. Rating 60% of
the scores in the fourth and fifth points, the facility
with 1 to 6 residents was the second most suitable. The
facility with 50 to 100 residents was ranked least suitable
by 86% (first and second points) of the respondents, while
facilities with more than 100 residents were considered least
suitable by 95% (first and second points) of the respondents.
When asked to rate the suitability of different types of
neighborhoods, respondents selected the less dense neighbor-
hoods as the most suitable for community -based residential
facilities. A single-family or duplex neighborhood was
preferred by 73% (fourth and fifth points) of the respon-
dents. Sixty-five percent (fourth and fifth points) felt
that a neighborhood composed of apartment buildings with
3 to 50 apartments was most suitable. A commercial neigh-
borhood composed of offices, retail shops, restaurants and
service -oriented businesses was considered least suitable
by 77% (first and second points) of the respondents. Eighty
two percent (first and second points) felt that a warehousing
and manufacturing district was least suitable for these
facilities.
-71-
Respondents also rated the importance of neighborhood
and site amenities: The neighborhood amenities are
listed below in order of importance on the basis of
the ratings they received on the fourth and fifth
points of the scale:
1. access to public transportation (91%)
2. access to medical facilities (83%)
3. access to active recreational facilities
(sports fields, play grounds, etc.) (78%)
4. access to educational facilities (77$)
5. access to passive recreational facilities
(neighborhood parks) (69%)
6. access to social service agencies and social
services required for the residents (66%)
7. access to employment (55%)
B. access to shopping (43%)
The prioriti.e-sset for the site amenities, based on the
responses on the fourth and fifth points of the scale,
follow:
1. outdoor space for recreation (65%)
2. outdoor space for relaxing and gathering (58%)
3. landscaping (40%)
4. space for gardening (21%)
5. space for observing neighborhood and street
activities (19%)
6. parking (5%)
The relative importance of access to public transportation
and parking is especially interesting. Parking was con-
sidered least important to the site by 78$ of the res-
pondents (first and second points), while access to pub-
lic transportation was considered most important by 91%.
Most residents of community -based residential facilities
apparently do not own or have access to automobiles.
-72-
Outdoor space for active and passive recreation rank near
the top of both lists. No respondents to the question
about site amenities considered outdoor space for
recreation least important and only 5% considered outdoor
space for relaxing and gathering least important.
Two survey questions dealt with the proximity of com-
munity -based residential facilities. The first asked
respondents to rate the suitability of the location of
two residential facilities in terms of the number of
blocks between them. Responses to this questions showed
no definite pattern. Respondents probably were not
able to differentiate the suitability of the hypothetical
distances. Respondents did select a preferable number
of facilities to be located on a block face, however. (A
diagram of a block face is shown in Appendix A.) Res-
ponses clearly show that service providers feel that
only one or two community -based residential facilities
should be located on a block face.
Literature Review
Standards pertaining to the proper size, location, and
available amenities for community -based residential facil-
ities are not available for every type of facility examined
in this study. It is possible, however, to find some
standards for adult congregate living facilities and cor-
rectional facilities. These standards are summarized below:
Adult Congregate Living Facilities
1. Size
- small developments of 20 to 30 units to provide 9
a homey, uncomplicated, and personal atmosphere.
2. Location and Amenities
- to encourage community participation, the facility
should be located in an active area with easy
orientation to various age groups who reside,
work, shop, and play in the arealo
- the facility should not be located near environ-
mental generators of crime and potential vandalism,
such as bars and taverns, high school play yards,
and transitional housing areas11
- the facility should be accessible to public
transportation 12
- the facility should be located near the following
services: the distances are critical distances
as perceived by urban older persons13
-73-
grocery store 2-3 blocks
bus stop 1-2 blocks
church 1/4 1/2 mile
drug store 3 blocks
clinic or hospital 1/4 1/2 mile
bank 1/4 mile
social center 3 blocks
library 1 mile
- the facility should be located near parks, par-
ticularly those thatle4mphasize passive rec-
reational activities
- the facility should not be located near environ-
mental generators l noise, such as major truck
routes or industry
- provision should be made for outsidg sitting
and watching in both sun and shade
- though only perhaps 20% of the elderly have
cars, consideration should be given to poten-
tial parking expansion as this number is ex-
pected to increase in coming years. Provision17
should be made for significant visitor parking
Juvenile Community -Based Corrections
1. Size
- a community-basedlgrogram should not exceed 25
clients in number
2. Location and Amenities
- community -based treatment centers should be located
in areas that are reasonably close to employment, 19
educational, vocational and recreational facilities
Adult Community -Based Corrections
1. Size
- the resident capacity of a community treatment
center should not exceed twenty clients
2. Location and Amenities
- the community treatment center should be located
in an area reasonably close to public transpor-
tation, employment, and vocational opportunities;
medical, psychiatric, recreational and other
community resources; and agencies to be utilized 21
by the community treatment center for its clients
-74-
Field Survey
The Planning Department selected randomly approximately
half the City's community -based residential facilities
identified in the February inventory for a field survey.
The purpose of the survey was to identify the type and
condition of the structures in which the facilities are
located, the amenities located at the site, the type
of neighborhoods in which the facilities are located,
and the degree to which the facility blends into the
surrounding neighborhood.
Forty residences scattered throughout the City of Miami
were included in the survey. The number of facilities
surveyed in each category follows:
1.
adult congregate living facilities
16
2.
alcohol and drug rehabilitation
facilities
6
3.
residential facilities for devel-
opmentally disabled persons
6
4.
residential facilities for persons
with mental health problems
2
5.
residential child -caring facilities
2
6.
boarding homes
6
7.
adult community -based corrections
2
Total
40
The surveyed facilities represented a range of sizes as
shown in Table 11. This table includes the capacity of
only 38 residences because the capacity of three is un-
known. The distribution of sizes of the randomly selected
facilities is similar to that of the entire inventory
of facilities shown in Table 5. It can be assumed, there-
fore, that the findings of this survey pertain to the
entire inventory of facilities.
-75-
TABLE 11
CAPACITY OF SURVEYED COMMUNITY -EASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
Type of Facility
1-6
Number
7-16
of Residents
17-50 50-100_.
100+
Adult Congregate Living
2
6
5
2
1
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabili-
0
0
3
1
1
tation Facilities
Residential Facilities
2
0
0
0
2
for Developmentally Dis-
abled Persons
Residential Facilities for
2
0
0
0
0
Persons with Mental
Health Problems
Residential Child -Caring
0
0
2
0
0
Facilities
Boarding Homes
0
1
3
2
0
Adult Community -Based
0
1
1
0
0
Corrections
Total
6
8
14
5
4
Most of the facilities surveyed were located in single-family
structures or in apartment buildings containing 3 to 50
units. There were no residences located in duplexes or
apartment buildings with more than 50 units. Seven facil-
ities were located in other types of structures: two were
located in former motels, one in an office building,
and four were in institutional structures. The type of
structure for each category of facility is shown in Table
14. The adult congregate living facilities were located
in the greatest variety of structural types. Most of
the residences for the developmentally disabled were single-
family homes.
TABLE 12
TYPE OF STRUCTURE IN WHICH SURVEYED COMMUNITY-BASEFD
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES ARE LOCATED
Type of Structure
Single
Apart-
Apart -
Family
ment
ment
and Dup-
3 -50
50+
Type of Facility
lex
units
units
Other
Adult Congregate
6
5
0
5*
Living Facilities
-
Alcohol and Drug
3
3
0
0
Rehabilitation
Facilities
Residential Facil-
4
1
0
1**
ities for Devel-
opmentally Dis-
abled Persons
Residential Facil-
0
2
0
0 _
ities for Per-
sons with Mental
Health Problems
Residential Child-
0
1
D
1**
Caring Facil-
ities
Boarding Homes
3
3
0
0
Adult Community-
1
1
0
0
Based Correc-
tions
Total
17
16
0
7
* Facilities include 2 former motels, 1 office building,
and 2 institutional structures.
** Institutional structure
The surveyed community -based residential facilities tend
to be located in older buildings. Thirty-one of the
residences are located in structures built before 1949.
Only two facilities are in buildings contructed since 1970
and seven are in structures built between 1950 and 1969.
Table 13 shows the age of the surveyed facilities by type
of facility.
-77-
TABLE 13
ACE OF STRUCTURES SURVEYED
Age of Structure
1970 to 1949 or
Type of Facility Present 1950-1969 Earlier
Adult Congregate Living
0
4
12
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabi-
1
1
4
litation Facilities
-
Residential Facilities
1
1
5
for the Development-
ally Disabled
Residential Facilities
0
1
1
for Persons with
Mental Health Prob-
lems
Residential Child-
0
0
1 -_
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes
0
0
6
Adult Community-
0
0
2 _
Based Corrections
Total 2 7 31
Although most of the structures surveyed are old, most
of them are in good condition. An inspection of the ex-
terior of these buildings revealed that only seven of
the forty structures needed minor repairs. According to
the U.S. Census definition, a structure needing minor re-
pairs is sound structurally, but trim, cornices, eaves,
gutters, windows, doors and other non -critical elements
may need to be replaced. None of the surveyed facilities
needed major repairs or was dilapidated. No interior
inspection of structural conditions was made. The data
displayed in Table 14 show that half of the boarding homes
and the adult correctional facilities needed minor re-
pairs.
TABLE 14
CONDITION OF STRUCTURES SURVEYED
Condition of Structure
Type of Facility
Good
Needs Minor Repairs
Adult Congregate Living
14
2
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabi-
6
0
litation Facilities
Residential Facilities
5
1
for the Developmentally
Disabled
Residential Facilities for
2
0
Persons with Mental
Health Problems
Residential Child -Caring
2
0
Facilities
Boarding Homes
3
3
Adult Community -Based
1
1
Corrections
Total 33
7
The characteristics of the site of each facility were
noted in the survey. These site characteristics in-
cluded the number of paved parking spaces on the site,
the amenities available, the presence of signs, the
residential character of the site, the number of resi-
dents visible from the street and the degree of noise
or air pollution from the street. Tables 15 through 20
present the results of the site characteristics survey.
-79-
TABLE 15
NdMBER OF FACILITIES WITH PAVED PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE
Number of Facilities
0 1-4 5-10 10+
Type of Facility Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces
Adult Congregate 4 7 1 4
Living Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabi-
litation Facilities
Residential Facilities
for the Development-
ally Disabled
Residential Facilities
for Persons with
Mental Health Prob-
lems
Residential Child -
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes
Adult Community -
Based Corrections
Total
1 2
2 1
2 3
0 1
1 0
0 1
0
1
0 1
3
2
1 0
0
2
0 1
11
17
4 8
In general, the facilities surveyed had fewer parking spaces
on the site than number of residents. Eleven facilities
had no on -site parking at all. The survey team found no
residences where there seemed to be an inadequate amount
of parking space.
Each community -based residential facility was evaluated
in terms of the amenities present on the site. Table 16
shows the number of facilities that had outdoor space for
active recreation, outdoor space for passive recreation,
space for gardening, landscaping, space for observing
neighborhood and street activities, and significant trees.
The survey of service providers found that outdoor space
for recreation and for relaxing and gathering were con-
sidered the two most important site amenities. Most
facilities surveyed had these two amenities on site.
Slightly more than half the facilities had landscaping
and significant trees and fewer than one half had space
for gardening.
TABLE 16
SITE AMENITIES OF SURVEYED FACILITIES
Number of Facilities with Amenity
Total
Active
Passive
Land
Observ-
Signi-
Type of Facilities
ROcrea-
Recrea-
Gary
Scap-
ina
ficant
Facility Surveyed
tion
Lion
dening
inq
Street
"Trees
Adult Con- 16
6
15
4
10
14
8
gregate
Living
Facilities
Alcohol and 6
4
6
3
5
5
6
Drug Reha-
bilitation
Facilities
Residential 6
4
6
4
4
6
4
Facilities
for Develop-
mentally
Disabled Persons
Residential Fa- 2
2
2
1
1
2
2
cilities for Per-
sons with Men-
tal Health
Problems
Residential Child- 2
2
2
1
2
1
2
Caring Facil-
ities
Boarding Homes 6
2
6
1
4
6
4
Adult Commun- 2
1
2
1
0
1
0
ity-Based
Corrections
Total 40 21 39 15 26 35 26
The presence of a community -based residential facility in a
neighborhood can be signaled by a significant number of resi-
dents visible from the street or by signs with the name of
the residence. Tables 17 and 18 display data about the num-
ber of residents visible from the street at each of the fa-
cilities and whether any signs were present.
-81-
TABLE 11
NUMBER OF RESIDENTS VIS18tE FROM STREET
Number of Facilities
Type of Facility
0
Residents
1-5
Residents
6-10
Residents
10+
Residents
Adult Congregate Living
9
7
0
0
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Re-
2
2
1
1
habilitation Facilities
Residential Facilities for
2
3
1
0
Developmentally Dis-
abled Persons
Residential Facilities
2
0
0
0
for Persons with Men-
tal Health Problems
Residential Child- Car-
2
0
0
0
ing Facilities
Boarding Homes
3
2
1
0
Adult Community-
1
1
0
0
Based Corrections
Total 21 15 3 1
TABLE 18
PRESENCE OF SIGNS AT SURVEYED FACILITIES
Number of Facilities
Type of Facility Sign No Sign
Adult Congregate Living
5
11
Facilities
Alcohol. and Drug Re-
4
2
habilitation Facilities
Residential Facilities for
1
5
Developmentally Dis-
abled Persons
-
Residential Facilities
1
1
for Persons with Men-
tal Health Problems
Residential Child -caring
0
2
Facilities
Boarding Homes
2
4
Adult Community -Based
0
2
Corrections
Total
13
27
4
- 8 2 —
s<:.—
Over half the facilities surveyed had no residents visible
from the street. One to five residents were visible at
fifteen facilities. Only four facilities had more than
five residents visible from the street. The facilities
were surveyed during the week in the daytime. Thirteen
of the forty facilities surveyed had signs with the name
of the residence. The alcohol and drug rehabilitation
facilities, boarding homes, and adult congregate facilities
were more likely to have signs than the other types of
facilities.
The residential character of each site was evaluated.
As shown in Table 19, thirty-three of the forty sites sur-
veyed were judged to be residential in character. Residen-
tial character was defined as housed in a structure de-
signed to be.used as a residence, located on a site with
the setbacks similar to those found in residential neigh-
borhoods, and located on a block with a predominance of
residential land uses. The adult congregate living facil-
ities and alcohol and drug rehabilitation facilities were
less likely to have a residential character.
TABLE 19
RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF SURVEYED FACILITIES
Type of Facility
Number of Facilities
Residential Not Residential
Adult Congregate Living
13 3
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabilitation
4 2
Facilities
Residential Facilities for
5 1
Developmentally Disabled
Persons
Residential Facilities for
2 0
Persons with Mental Health
Problems
Residential Child -Caring
1 1
Facilities
Boarding Homes
6 0
Adult Community -Based
2 0
Corrections
Total
33 7
CM
Each site was rated as receiving low, moderate, or high
amounts of noise or air pollution from the street.
Table 29 shows that more than half the facilities were
located on sites with low levels of pollution. of
the various types of facilities, the adult congregate
living facilities had a significant number of sites
with high levels of pollution from the street. The
mental health facilities were located on sites with
moderate or high levels of pollution.
TABLE 20
DEGREE OF NOISE AND AIR POLLUTION FROM STREET
Number of Facilities
Low Moderate High
Type of Facility Pollution Pollution Pollution
Adult Congregate
9
1 6
Living Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Re-
4
1 1
habilitation
Facilities
Residential Facil-
6
0 0
ities for Develop-
mentally Disabled
Persons
Residential Faci1r,
0
1 1
ities for Persons
with Mental Health
Problems
Residential Child-
1
0 1
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes
5
1 0
Adult Community-
1
1 0
Based Corrections
Total 26 5 9
The type of neighborhood in which the facility is located
also was noted. The categories of neighborhoods were
predominantly single family and duplex, predominantly
apartment buildings with 3 to 50 units, predominantly
apartment buildings with more than 50 units, predomi-
nantly commercial, predominantly industrial, or a
-84-
neighborhood with a mixture of building types and uses.
Table 21 shows that twenty of the facilities are located
in mixed neighborhoods, fourteen are located in single-
family neighborhoods, three are located in neighbor-
hoods predominantly composed of apartment buildings
with 3 to 50 units, and three are located in predom-
inantly commercial neighborhoods.
The mixed neighborhoods in which the adult congregate
living facilities were located included neighborhoods
with single family homes and apartment buildings, those
with apartment buildings and offices, and those with
single family homes and commercial uses; such as
shopping centers. The alcohol and drug rehabilitation
facilities located in mixed neighborhoods included one
neighborhood with a mixture of single family homes
and apartment buildings; another with residences,
warehouses, and a church; and a third with apartment
buildings, commercial uses, a fire station and a school.
Both mental health facilities were located in neigh-
borhoods with a mixture of apartment and parking lots
and commercial uses. The child -caring facilities were
located in neighborhoods with a mixture of residen-
tial, commercial, and institutional uses. One
correctional residence was located in a neighborhood
of commercial and residential uses and the boarding
homes in mixed neighborhoods were in neighborhoods with
residential and commercial or industrial uses.
-85-
FABLE 21
TYPE OF NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH SURVEYED FACILITIES ARE
LOCAT9D
Number of Facilities
Apts,
Apts.
Com-
In -
Single
3-50
50+
mer-
dus-
Family
units
units
cial
trial
Mixed
Adult Congregate
5
1
0
3
0
7
Living Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Re-
2
1
0
0
0
3
habilitation Facilities
Residential Facilities
4
1
0
0
0
1
for Developmentally
Disabled Persons
Residential Facilities
0
0
0
0
0
2
for Persons with
Mental Health
Problems
Residential Child-
0
0
0
0�
0
2
Caring Facilities
Boarding Homes
2
0
0
0
0
4
Adult Community-
1
0
0
0
0
1
Based Corrections
—
Total
14
3
0
3
0
20
Finally, each community -based residential facility was evaluated
against other structures and sites on the block face to com-
pare the condi'tion of the structures and the yards, and the
degree to which the facility blends into the neighborhood. Tables
22 through 24 display the results of this evaluation.
The structural condition of most of the facilities was the same
as or better than other structures on the block face. The same
was true of the yards. Thirty-one of thirty-nine facilities
surveyed appeared to blend into the surrounding neighborhood.
The only type of facility that had a significant number of
residences different from the surrounding neighborhood was the
alcohol and drug rehabilitation facilties.
TABLE 22
CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE COMPARED TO OTHER STRUCTURES
ON THE BLOCX FACE
Number of Facilities
Much
Much
Type of Facility
Worse
Worse
Same
Better
Better
Adult Congregate Living
0
3
11
1
1
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabi-
0
1
4
0
1
litation Facilities
Residential Facilities for
0
1
4
0
1
Developmentally Dis-
abled Persons
Residential Facilities for
0
0
2
0
0
Persons with Mental
Health Problems
Residential Child -Caring
0
0
1
0
0
Facilities
Boarding Homes
0
0
4
1
0
Adult Community -Based
0
0
2
0
0
Corrections
Total*
* Several facilities
were no other stru
to compare them.
n S 1 ❑ - -5
FABLE 23
CONDITION OF THE YARD COMPARED
TO OTHER
YARDS
ON THE
BLOCK FACE
number of
Facilities
Much
Much
Type of Facility
Worse
Worse
Saline
Better
Better
Adult Congregate Living
0
3
8
4
0
Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Rehabi-
0
0
4
1
1
litation Facilities
Residential Facilities for
1
1
3
0
1
Developmentally Dis-
abled Persons
Residential Facitilies
0
0
2
0
0
for Persons with Mental
Health Problems
Residential Child -Caring
0
0
0
1
0
Facilities
Boarding Homes
0
0
5
0
0
Adult Community -Based
0
0
2
0
0
Corrections
Total*
1
4
24
6
2
* It was not possible to
evalute several
facilities.
TABLE 24
DEGREE TO WHICH THE FACILITY BLENDS INTO THE SURROUNDING
NEIGHBORHOOD
Number of Facilities
Type of Facility
1
2
3
4
5Same
Very Different
Adult Congregate Liv-
14
1
0
1
0
ing Facilities
Alcohol and Drug Re-
3
0
2
1
0
habilitation Facil-
ities
Residential Facilities
4
0
1
1
0
for Developmentally
Disabled Persons
Residential Facilities
2
0
0
0
0
for Persons with
Mental Health Problems
Residential Child -Caring
1
0
0
0
0
Facilities
Boarding Homes
5
1
0
0
0
Adult Community -Based
2
0
0
0
0
Corrections
Total 31 2 3 3 0
Fiscal impact of Community -Based Residential
Facilities
Three components of the fiscal impact of community -
based residential facilities on a neighborhood or
jurisdiction were examined in this study; (1) the
impact of the facilities on surrounding property
values, (2) the extent to which the facilities con-
tribute to the local tax base by paying property taxes,
and (3) the net fiscal impact of the facilities, i.e.,
the difference between the average cost of public
services provided for the facilities and the average
revenues received from the facilities by local govern-
ment. The following section provides an analysis of
the fiscal impact of community -based residential
facilities in Miami in terms of these components.
Impact on Property Values
The impact of a community -based residential facility on
neighboring property values can be determined by com-
paring property sales data in the neighborhood around
the facility with sales data in a similar neighborhood
that has no facility. This data must be collected for
a period of time before the facility is established
as well as after the facility opens. Because such an
investigation is beyond the scope of this study, no
attempt has been made to determine the impact of com-
munity -based residential facilities on property values
in Miami. Nonetheless, an indication of the potential
impact of these facilities on property values can be
gained from studies done in other cities.
The most rigorous study of property impacts was done 22
by Dr. Julian Wolpert of Princeton University in 1978.
Dr Wolpert compared property transactions in 42 neigh-
borhoods in ten New York cities where group homes
for the mentally retarded had been located with prop-
erty transactions in 42 similar control neighborhoods.
The sample neighborhoods differed in terms of the life
cycle characteristics of the residents, socio-economic
status, and ethnic or racial composition, but many were
suburban in nature with predominantly single-family
housing and were in communities with at least two or
three group homes.
To determine the community residence's impact on prop-
erty values, each property within a one block radius
of the facility or control site was traced to find all
-89-
sales in the area from Canuary of the year preceding
in the facility's opening, For properties experiencing
sales, all sales were traced back to 1967 for comparison.
If sales occurred both before and after the establish-
ment of the group home, the change in market price was
divided by the number of months between successive
transactions to find the increase or decrease in pur-
chase price of the property per month. This informa-
tion was compared with the distance of the property
from the group home or its control to estimate the
"effects of proximity to the group hgTe on the change
of value of neighboring properties".
An analysis of 754 property transactions near group
homes and 826 in control areas revealed that:
1. property values in communities with group
homes had the same increase or decrease in
market prices as in matched control areas,
2. proximity of neighboring properties to
a group home did not significantly affect
their market value,
3. the immediately adjacent properties did not
experience property value declines, and
4. establishment of the group homes did not
generate a higher degree of neighboring
property2 urnover than in the matched
control.
A similar study was conducted in Lansing, Michigan. The
Lansing Planning Department selected five neighborhoods
with community -based residential facilities of varied -
types, number of residents, and type of location. These
five neighborhoods were matched with five control
neighborhoods without facilities. The impact of the
facilities on property values was measured by averaging
the ratio of sales price to the City Assessor's ap-
praised value for property transactions in the neigh-
borhood before and after each facility was established.
When the average sales price ratio in these neighborhoods
was compared with the average sales price ratio in the
control neighborhoods, the ratio after the establish-
ment of the facilities in four of five neighborhoods was
equal to or higher than the ratio in the control neigh-
borhood. In one instance, the control area had a higher
average sales price ratio, but the difference was
not significant statistically, This study concluded
that there is no relationship between community based
residential facilities and property values, regardless
of the age of the neighborhood, relationship to d? n�
town, number of residents, and type of residents,
Although the impact of a single community -based resi-
dential facility on property values in the surrounding
neighborhood has been studied, no investigation of
the impact of a concentration of facilities in a neigh-
borhood has been attempted. Such a study would have
to measure the increase or decrease in property values
over a period of time as each facility was established
in the neighborhood. It was not possible to conduct
such a study in the City of Miami for several rea-
sons: (1) most of the Miami neighborhoods with a high
concentration of facilities are predominantly rental
apartment districts, making it difficult to relate the
establishment of a facility to a decision to sell
property; (2) where a number of facilities are located
in a neighborhood of predominantly owner -occupied
housing, the facilities have been established for so
long that it is impossible to find property sales data
for the years immediately before and after the opening
of the facility; and (3) because of the relatively
small size of Miami, it is difficult to find matching
control neighborhoods.
If a neighborhood with a concentration of facilities
reaches the institutional tipping point mentioned ear-
lier, it is possible that a number of neighborhood resi-
dents will decide that the neighborhood is not desirable
and will decide to move. Potential buyers in the
neighborhood may see the area as undesirable, as well.
In such a situation, if the number of houses for sale
exceeds the demand for residences in the area, their value
may drop or not rise as fast as similar homes in other
neighborhoods.
Impact on the City Tax Base
The contribution of a community -based residential facility
to the municipal tax base depends on whether the owners
of the facility pay property taxes on the land and
buildings where it is located. A facility's owners may
be exempted from paying property taxes if they are
classified as a charitable or religious organization or
-91-
if the facility is located on public land. On the
other hand, the owners of property with a facility
operated as a private business trust pay property taxes.
Table 25 shows the tax status of Miami's community -
based residential facilities. Twenty --three of the
ninety-one facilities, or approximately 25%, are tax
exempt. The rest are taxable and have a total assessed
value of $6,174,195 representing $89,445 in revenue for
the City. Of the various types of facilities, only
the child -caring facilities and the drug rehabilitation
facilities are predominately tax-exempt. Only one of
eight drug rehabilitation facilities pays property taxes.
TABLE 25
TAX STATUS OF COMMUNITY -BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
Number of Facilities
Total Assessed
Total Assessed
Tax
Value of Tax-
Value of Taxable
Type of Facility
Exempt
Exempt Facil.
Taxable
Facilities
hilt Congregate Living
5
$6,079,563
29
$3,110,168
Facilities
cohol Rehabilitation
3
1,236,075
7
748,065
Facilities
-sidential Treatment
7
515,922
1
52,191
Facilities for Drug
Dependents
sidential Facilities for
3
1,329,223
10
641,585
Developmentally Dis-
abled Persons
�sidential Facilities
0
--
4
608,316
for Persons with Mental
Health Problems
-sidential Child -Caring
2
107,393
1
24,495
Facilities
-iaading Homes
2
122,733
13
902,533'
iult Community- Based
1
26,964
3
173,410
CorrectionG
Total
23
$ 9,417,873
68
$ 6,174,195
-92-
estimated Net Fiscal Impact
Net fiscal impact analysis is a method of projecting the
average public costs and revenues associated with certain
types of development or alternative land use plans. to
this type of analysis; the estimated revenues received
by a local government from development are compared
with the estimated cost of services that must be provided
to the development by that local government. The re-
sulting impact on the local government's budget will be
either positive or negative depending on whether the
revenues received are greater or less than the cost of
the public services provided.
Certain characteristics of fiscal impact analysis must
be understood. First, fiscal impact analysis concerns
only the direct impacts of development. It projects only
the primary costs, such as Salaries for policemen or
sanitation workers, and the primary revenues, such as
property taxes or revenue sharing funds. Possible secon-
dary costs and revenues, such as an increase or decrease
of nearby property values, are not included.
Secondly, fiscal impact analysis deals with public costs
and revenues. The private costs of development, i.e.,
the private costs of complying with local zoning, build-
ing and fire codes are not considered.
Finally, the costs are projected to only the local juris-
diction in which the development occurs. Costs to county,
regional, or special districts are not included in the
analysis. This analysis does not include the costs of pro-
viding supporting services for community -based facilities
nor the costs of institutionalization as an alternative.
Tables 26 through 30 show the estimated net fiscal impact
of five existing community -based residential facilities
in the City of Miami. The five facilities vary in size,
type of structure, number of employees, and property tax
status. One facility is a small group home in a single-
family dwelling. Two facilities are medium-sized with
16 and 25 residents respectively. One,of these is exempt
from property taxes; the other is not. The remaining two
facilities are large. One, an apartment -like structure
with 75 residents, is tax exempt. The other facility,
which pays property taxes, is a converted motel with
150 residents.
For the purposes of the fiscal impact analysis, these
community -based residential facilities are considered
to have the characteristics of a residential building and
-93-
a hotels Although the facilities are residences, they also
have a significant number of employees. For this reason,
the analysis includes costs and revenues associated with
both residents and employees. The only exception is the
small group home, which is treated as a residence. The
unit costs for the City of Miami are based on 1979 planning
Department estimates.
The estimated net fiscal impact of these facilities ranges
from a positive impact of $154 to a negative impact of
$8,440. The tax exempt facilities have the greatest nega-
tive impact on the City's fiscal condition. The two
facilities with a positive impact do not contribute greatly
to the City's coffers.
It should be remembered that community -based residential
facilities provide a valuable service for citizens who
are unable to live independently. However, since these
facilities will provide a negligible positive fiscal
impact or a negative one, it is important that the City
of Miami not provide more facilities than are needed by
its residents.
-94-
urm
TABLE 26
ESTIMATED NET FISCAL IMPACT
Community -Based Residential Facility with Three Residents
Estimated Revenues
Assessed Value $19,000
Tax Rate (City) 14,487 mils
City Real Estate Tax
Other Revenues: 2 Per Residentl
Personal Property
Utilities Tax 22.48
Service Charge 7.10
Court Fines 6.22
State Revenue Sharing 19.77
Federal Revenue Sharing 30.61
Total, All Revenues
Estimated Costs
General Government3
Fire4 5
Sanitation
Police and Legal
Parks
Other6
Per Resident
$ 40.86
8.81
Total, All Costs
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact
Positive
Total
$ 275
55
67
21
18
59
91
$ 586
41
59
34
122
26
150
$ 432
+$154
1 Facility has 3 residents.
2 20% of real estate tax .
3
@ expenditure of .0022/$1.00 assessed value. Includes adminis-
trative and legislative costs, economic development, community
affairs, legal, planning and budget, and building operations
4 and maintenance.
5 @ $59.64 per unit. Facility has 1 unit.
6 @ $34.66 per unit. Facility has 1 unit.
@ .0079/$1.00 assessed value. Includes service enterprises,
pensions, debt service and special projects.
-95-
TAEtt 21
ESTIMATED NET FISCAL IMPACT
Community=Based' Residential Facility with 25 Residents
Estimated Revenues Total
Assessed Value $30,852
Tax Rate (City) 14.487 mils
City Real Estate Tax $446
Other Revenues: Per Residentl Per Employee2
Personal Property3 89
Utilities Tax $22.48 $22.48 674
Service Charge 7.10 177
Court Fines 6.22 155
State Revenue Sharing 19.77 19.77 593
Federal Revenue It30.61 765
Total All Revenues $2,899
Estimated Costs per Resident
General Government
Fire5 6
Sanitation
Police and Legal $40.86
Parks 8.81
Other?
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact
Negative
Per Employee
$ 40.86
Total, All Costs
67
750
736
1,225
220
243
$3,241
-$342
1 Facility has 25 residents.
2
3 Facility has 5 employees.
4 @ 20% of real estate tax.
@ expenditure of $.0022/$1.00 assessed value. Includes admin-
istrative and legislative costs, economic development, community
affairs, legal, planning and budget, and building operations
5 and maintenance.
6 @ $75.03 per unit. Facility has 10 units.
7 @ $73.64 per unit. Facility has 10 units.
@ .0079/$1,00 assessed value. Includes service enterprises,
pensions, debt service, and special projects.
TABLE 28
E5TIMATtD NET FISCAL IMPACT
Community-8ased Residential facility with 18 Residents
Tax Exempt
Estimated Revenges Total_
Assessed Value $107,393
Tax Rate (City) exempt
City Real Estate Tax _0- -0-
Other Revenues:
Per Residentl Per
Employee
Personal Property
-0-
Utilities Tax
$ 22.48
$22.48 584
Service Charge
7.10
127
Court Charge
6.22
ill
State Revenue Sharing
19.77
19.77 514
Federal Revenue Sharing 30.61
550
Total, All Revenues
$1,886
Estimated Costs
Per Resident Per
Employee
Gene�al Government
236
Fire
1,050
sanitation6
1,030
Police and Legal
$40.86 $40.86 1,062
Parks?
8.81
158
Other
848
Total, All Costs
$4,384
Estimated Net Fiscal impact
Negative
-$2,496
Facility has 18 residents.
2 Facility employees.
has 8 em to ees.
9 @ 20% of real estate tax.
@ expenditure of $.0022/$1.00 assessed value. Includes admin-
istrative and legislative costs, economic development, community
affairs, legal, planning and budgeting, and building operations
5 and maintenance.
6 @ $75.03 per unit. Facility has 14 units.
7 @ $73.64 per unit. Facility has 14 units.
@.007S/$1.00 assessed value. Includes service enterprises,
pensions, debt service and special projects.
-9 7-
TABLE 29
ESTIMATEb NET FISCAL IMPACT
Community -Based Residential Facility with 75 Residents
Tax Exempt
Estimated Revenues
Assessed Value $351,014
Tax Rate (City)
City Real Estate Tax -0-
Other Revenues: Per Resident
Personal Property
Utilities Tax
Service Charge
Court Fines
State Revenue Sharing
Federal Revenue Sharing
Estimated Costs
GeneEal Government
Fire
6
Sanitation
Police and Legal
Parks?
Other
Total
Qi10
Per Employee 2
$22,48 $22.48
$2,180
7.10
532
6.22
466
19.77 19.77
1,917
30.61
2,295
Per Resident
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact
Negative
$40.86
8.81
Total, All Revenues$7,390
Per Employee 772
4,051
3,976
$40.86 3,963
475
2,773
Total, All Costs $15,630
- $8,440
1 Facility has 75 residents.
2
3 Facility has 22 employees.
4 @ 20% of real estate tax.
expenditure of $.0022/$1.00 assessed value. Includes adminis-
trative and legislative costs, economic development, community
affairs, planning and budgeting, and building operations and
5 maintenance.
6 @ $75.03 per unit. Facility has 54 units.
7 @ $73.64 per unit. Facility has 54 units.
@ .0079/$1.00 assessed value. Includes service enterprises,
pensions, debt service, and special projects.
CD=
TABLE 30
ESTIMATEb NET FISCAL IMPACT
Community -Based Residential Facility with 150 Residents
Estimated Revenues Total
Assessed Value $5470863
Tax Rate (City) 14.467 mils
City Real Estate Tax $8,328
Other Revenues: Per Resident Per Employee
Personal Property
Utilities Tax
Service Charge
Court Fines
State Revenue Sharing
Federal Revenue Sharing
Estimated Costs
Gene�al Government
Fire
6
Sanitation
Police and Legal
Parks 7
Other
$22.48 $22.48
7.10
6.22
19.77 19.77
30.61
Total, All Revenues
Per Resident
Estimated Net Fiscal Impact
Positive
$40,86
8.81
Per Employee
Total, All Costs
40. 86
1,665
3,664
1,065
933
3,222
4,591
$23,468
1,264
4,876
4,786
6,660
1,321
4,541
$23,448
+ $20
1
2 Facility has 150 residents.
3 Facility has 13 employees.
4 @ 20% of real estate tax.
@ expenditure of $.0022/$1.00 assessed value. Includes administra-
tive and legislative costs, economic development, community affairs,
legal, planning and budgeting, and building operations and main-
5 tenance.
6 @ $75.03 per unit. Facility has 65 units.
7 @ $73.64 per unit. Facility has 65 units.
@ .0079/$1.00 assessed value. Includes service enterprise, pen-
sions, debt service, and special projects.
Summary
1, Community -based residential facilities in Miami as a whole
tend to be clustered rather than dispersed throughout
the City. The community facilities within census tracts
22.01, 22.02, 25, 27.01, and 64 are clustered.
2. Residents of community -based residential facilities ac-
count for 1% or more of the population of eight census
tracts. Four tracts have 4% or more as follows:
(a) 13 4%
(b) 30.01 5%
(c) 36.02 7%
(d) 27.01 10%
3. Twelve of the City's census tracts have a concentration of
community -facility residents/population that is greater
than the City average.
4. Four census tracts, 22.02, 25, 64 and 27.01 have a con-
centration of facilities in terms of both proximity of
facilities and number of residents.
5. Respondents to the neighborhood compatibility survey
indicated that 7 to 16 residents is the optimum size for
a community -based residential facility. The least suitable
are facilities with 50 to 100 residents and those with
more than 100 residents.
6. The most suitable neighborhoods for community facilities
are single-family or duplex neighborhoods and those com-
posed of apartment buildings with 3 to 50 apartments.
Commercial and industrial neighborhoods are rated least
suitable.
7. Neighborhood amenities are rated most important as follows:
—_ 1.
Access
to
public transportation (91%)
2.
Access
to
medical facilities (83%)
3.
Access
to
active recreational facilities
sportsfields,
play grounds, etc.) (78%)
4.
Access
to
educational facilities (77%)
5.
Access
to
passive recreational facilities
(neighborhood parks) (69%)
6.
Access
to
social service agencies and social
services
required for the residents (66%)
7.
Access
to
employment (55%)
8.
Access
to
shopping (43%)
--I
Summary
1: Community -based residential facilities in Miami as a whole
tend to be clustered rather than dispersed throughout
the City. The community facilities within census tracts
22.01, 22.02, 25, 27.01, and 64 are clustered.
2. Residents of community -based residential facilities ac-
count for 1% or more of the population of eight census
tracts. Four tracts have 4% or more as follows:
(a) 13 4%
(b) 30.01 5%
(c) 36.02 7%
(d) 27.01 10%
3. Twelve of the City's census tracts have a concentration of
community -facility residents/population that is greater
than the City average.
4. Four census tracts, 22.02, 25, 64 and 27.01 have a con-
centration of facilities in terms of both proximity of
facilities and number of residents.
5. Respondents to the neighborhood compatibility survey
indicated that 7 to 16 residents is the optimum size for
a community -based residential facility. The least suitable
are facilities with 50 to 100 residents and those with
more than 100 residents.
6. The most suitable neighborhoods for community facilities
are single-family or duplex neighborhoods and those com-
posed of apartment buildings with 3 to 50 apartments.
Commercial and industrial neighborhoods are rated least
suitable.
7. Neighborhood amenities are rated most important as follows:
1. Access to public transportation (91%)
2. Access to medical facilities (83%)
3. Access to active recreational facilities
sportsfields, play grounds, etc.) (78%)
_ 4. Access to educational facilities (77%)
5. Access to passive recreational facilities
(neighborhood parks) (69%)
6. Access to social service agencies and social
services required for the residents (66%)
7. Access to employment (55%)
8. Access to shopping (43%)
i
i
-100-
B. Site amenities are rated most important as follows:
I. outdoor space for recreation (65%)
2. outdoor space for relaxing and gathering (58%)
3. landscaping (40%)
4. space for gardening (21%)
5. space for observing neighborhood and street activities (19%)
6. parking (5%)
9. Responses to a question about the proximity of community -based
residential facilities indicated that only one or two facilities
should be located on a block face.
10. A field survey was conducted of approximately half of Miami's
community -based residential facilities. Most of the facilities
surveyed are located in single-family structures or in apart-
ment buildings containing 3 to 50 units.
11. Community -based residential facilities tend to be located in older
buildings. Thirty-one of forty residences surveyed are located
in structures built before 1949.
12. Most surveyed facilities are in good condition. only seven of forty struc-
tures need repairs. The boarding homes and adult correctional
facilities are more likely to need repairs than other types of
facilities.
13. Most facilities have fewer parking spaces on site than number of
residents. No facilities appeared to have an inadequate amount
of parking during the survey.
14. Most facilities have the two site amenities rated most important
in the neighborhood compatibility survey: outdoor space for rec-
reation and for relaxing and gathering. More than half the facilities
have landscaping and significant trees on the site.
15. During the survey, over half the forty facilities had no residents
visible from the street. One to five residents were visible
at fifteen facilities.
16. Thirteen facilities had signs with the name of the residence. The
alcohol and drug rehabilitation facilities, boarding homes, and
adult congregate living facilities were more likely to have signs
than the other types of facilities.
-101-
17. Thirty-three of forty sites surveyed were judged to be
residential in character. Adult congregate living facil-
ities and alcohol and drug rehabilitation facilities
were less likely to have a residential character.
18. over half of the facilities are located on sites with
low levels of pollution from the street. There are
a significant number of adult congregate living facilities
and mental health facilities on sites with moderate or
high levels of pollution.
19. Twenty of the forty facilities are located in neighbor-
hoods with a mixture of land uses, fourteen are located
in single=family neighborhoods, three are located in
neighborhoods predominentLy composed of apartment build-
ings with 3 to 50 units, and three are located in pre-
dominently commercial neighborhoods.
20. The structural and yard conditions of most community
facilities was the same as or better than other struc-
tures on the block face. Thirty-one of thirty-nine
facilities appeared to blend into the surrounding neigh-
borhood. The only type of facility that had a signi-
ficant number of residences different from the surround-
ing neighborhood was the alcohol and drug rehabilitation
facilities.
21. Studies of the effects of a community -based residential
facility on neighboring property values show that
a. property values in communities with facilities
have the same increase or decrease in market
prices as in matched control areas,
b. proximity of neighboring properties to a
facility does not significantly affect their
market value.
22. No studies have investigated the impact of a concentra-
tion of facilities on property values in a neighbor-
hood. It was not possible to conduct such a study in
Miami.
23. Twenty-five percent of Miami's community -based residential
facilities are exempt from property taxes. Child -caring
facilities and drug rehabilitation facilities are pre-
dominently tax-exempt.
24. Community -based residential facilities provide a neg-
ligible positive fiscal impact or a negative fiscal impact
on the City.
-102-
J ..
References
1 Public Affairs Counseling, The Dynamics of Neighbor-
hood Change (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 1975), p, 7.
2 Ibid, p.8.
3 Ibid, p.23.
4 The Metropolitan Area as a Racial Problem, quoted in
in Alan 5. Friedlob and Thomas L. Anding, Community
Based Residential Facilities in the Twin Cities Met-
ropolitan Area (St. Paul: University of Minnesota,
1975), p.25.
5 Nina Jaffee Gruen and Claude Gruen, Low and Moderate
Income Housing in the Suburbs; an Analysis for the
Dayton, Ohio Region (New York; Praeger Publishers,
1972), pp. 54-55.
6 Daniel Lauber and Frank S. Bangs, Jr., Zoning for
Family and Group Care Facilities. Planning Advisory
Service Report No. 300 (Chicago: American Society
of Planning Officials, 1974), p.24.
7 Maurice Yeates, An Introduction to Quantitative
Analysis in Human Geography (New York: McGraw Hill
Book Company, 1974), pp. 33-34.
8 Location quotients are computed by
Xi/E Xi 100
N/ EN
where Xi equals the resident capacity in a census
tract E Xi equals the total population in the census
tract; N equals the total resident capacity in the
City, and E N equals the total population of the City.
9 Special Committee on Aging,
p g g, U.S. Senate, Congregate
Housing for Older Adults; Assisted Residential Living
Combining Shelter and Services (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1975) pp. 23-24.
10 Ibid, p.22
11 Robert G. Obenland, Behavioral Factors for Elderl
Housing Design (Concord: New England Non -Profit
Housing Development Corporation, n.d.) p. 17.
-103-
12 Ibid
► p. 22
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid
15
Ibid
16
Ibid, p. 19•
17
Ibid, P. 20 .
18
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services, Youth Services; Community -based Treatment
Centers (Tallahassee; Florida Department of Health
and Rehabilitative Services, 1978), p.1-1
19
Ibid,
20 John M. McCartt and Thomas J. Mangogna, Guidelines
and Standards for Halfway Houses and Community
Treatment Centers (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Depart-
ment of Justice, 1973), p. 81.
21
Ibid,
22
Julian Wolpert, Group Homes for the Mentally Retarded:
An Investigation of Neighborhood Property Impacts
(Princeton: Princeton University, 1978).
23 Ibid, p.13.
24 Ibid, p. 2.
25
City of Lansing Planning Department, The Influence
of Halfway Houses and Foster Care Facilities upon
Property Values (Lansing: City of Lansing Planning
Department, 1976).
-104-
V. The Regulatory System for Community' -Based Residential Facilities
in Miami
Miami's community -based residential facilities are regulated by
four City codes; (1) the Miami Zoning ordinance; (2) the South
Florida Building Code, which is the building code adopted and en-
forced by the City; (3) the City's occupational licensing require-
ments; and (4) the Miami Fire Code: This chapter explains the basic
requirements pertaining to community -based residential facilities
of each code and the City process for enforcing the regulations.
Zonin
Zoning is a legal device for dividing a municipality into dis-
tricts and regulating the uses of land within those districts.
The power to zone has been delegated to local governments in
Florida by the State in Chapter 163.205 of the Florida Statutes.
According to this Act, the purpose of zoning is to guide devel-
opment in accordance with existing and future needs and to protect,
promote, and improve public health, safety, comfort, order, ap-
pearance, convenience, morals and general welfare. The law specifies
that the zoning ordinance can regulate (1) height, bulk, size, loca-
tion, and use of buildings for residential, commercial, and in-
dustrial purposes, (2) the use of land for residential, commercial
and industrial purposes, (3) the size of yards, courts, and other
open spaces, (4) the percentage of the lot that may be occupied
and (5) the density of population.
Because the movement toward deinstitutionalization is a fairly
recent trend, the zoning ordinances of many local governments do
not specifically define or provide for community -based residential
facilities. Often these facilities are classified as uses that they
resemble in the zoning ordinance, such as boarding or rooming
homes, nursing homes, or institutions. This practice does not
take into account the nature of community -based facilities. By
nature, these facilities provide neither the independent living
arrangement found in a boarding home nor the completely dependent
life of an institution. The residents of community -based
facilities are a "family" unit with the type of semi-independent
living arrangement that might be provided by a nuclear family.
As such, the facilities should be located in low density residential
neighborhoods, but are allowed more often in commercial districts
than in single-family neighborhoods. Research hall shown that they
are allowed most often in multi -family districts.
-105-
The treatment of community -based residential facilities in the City
of Miami Zoning ordinance is similar to that discussed above. A
few types of community -based facilities are defined and regulated
very specifically, while others are not defined at all and must be
placed in boarding homes or institutional classifications. Most of
Miami's community -based residential facilities are found in multi-
ple -dwelling districts, with more facilities located in commercial
districts than in the single-family zones. A detailed descrip-
tion of the City's current zoning regulations that pertain to these
facilities is given below.
Zoning Classification of Facilities in Miami
Table3l,which displays the zoning classification of the block on which
each residential facility is located, shows that most community -based
residential facilities are located in residential districts of the City.
Over 80% of the facilities are located in one of the strictly residential
districts. One quarter of these are located in single-family and
duplex zones; the rest are located in multiple -family districts. The
district containing the greatest number of facilities is R-4, the
medium -density, multiple -dwelling district.
Fourteen percent of all community -based residential facilities are located
in light commercial districts; i.e., the R-C zone, which contains a
mixture of low density multiple -dwelling units and offices; and the
C-1 zone, a commercial district that has small neighborhood stores. Five
percent of the facilities are located in heavier commercial districts
and a light industrial district.
Several types of residential care facilities are located primarily
in higher density residential zones and commercial districts: (1)
alcohol rehabilitation facilities, (2) facilities for drug dependents,
(3) facilities for persons with mental health problems, and (4) adult
community -based corrections. Although three types of facilities -
adult congregate living facilities, facilities for developmentally
disabled persons, and boarding homes - are located primarily in residen-
tial districts, none of these is found predominantly in single-family
or duplex zones.
-106-
TAbtt 31
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OP COMMUNITY-tA5tn Rt8lb8NT1AL FAC1 1T F5
IN THt CITY OF MIAMt
Type of Facility R- l _R -2 R-_3, R-4 R-5 R-C C`l C-2 C-4 W.1
Adult Congregate 4 7 12 1 I 4 1
Living Facilities
Alcohol Rehabilita- 1 1 5 1 1 1
tfon Facilities
Residential Facili-
ties for Drug Depen-
dents
Residential Facili- 4
2 2 3 1
ties for Develop-
mentally Disabled
Persons
Residential Facili-
4 2
ties for Persons with
Mental Health
Problems
Residential Child-
1 2
caring Facilities
Boarding Homes 1
1 1 6 5 1
Adult Community-
2 1 1
based Corrections
TOTAL 9
10 14 30 12 5 8 1 3 1
R-1: District composed of one -family dwellings
R-2: District composed of two-family dwellings
R-3: Low density multiple -dwelling district
R-4: Medium density multiple -dwelling district
R-5: High density multiple -dwelling district
R-C: District composed of medium density multiple dwellings
and offices
C-1: Neighborhood commercial and residential district
C-2: Community commercial and residential district
C-4: A general commercial district
I-1: A district composed of light industrial uses
-107-
pcs@y.: y%rStkF�+ji`F ��i N';k—i rt+'? h'.ty,:.�'rrz14; mrve�Yw ,
Existing Zoning Regulations
Three sections of the Miami Zoning Ordinance contain standards for
community -based residential facilities. Two of these sections pertain
to specific types of facilities; the third deals with nonprofit facil-
ities in general. Each of these sections is found in Appendix B of
this report.
Section 36 of. Article IV, entitled Public or Semi -Public Buildings
or Uses, requires that public hearings be held with the Miami Planning
Advisory Board and the Miami City Commission prior to the authorization
of hospitals, clinics, and institutions of an educational, religious,
philanthropic, or eleemosynary character. This section also contains
minimum requirements for setbacks from the yard lines.
Detailed regulations governing substance abuse facilities are found
in Section 43 of Article IV. Residential facilities for substance abuse
are defined in the ordinance as residential treatment centers provid- _
ind a 24-hour therapeutic program for the treatment of substance —
abusers. Substance abuse is the excessive or illegal use of drugs,
narcotics, and other hallucinatory substances (not including alcohol)
which have created personal dependency on such substances. All pro-
posed residential facilities must be reviewed by the Advisory Com-
mittee on Substance Abuse and approved by the Miami Zoning Board.
Standards are provided for lot size, housing and livability, location, _
yard areas, parking, open space, landscaping, proximity to support
services, and ingress and egress.
Residential group homes for developmental disabilities are regulated
by Section 45 of Article IV. Such a facility is defined as a residen-
tial facility for more than five persons with developmental disabilities
such as mental retardation or cerebral palsy. This section contains
standards for location, access, lot size, location of buildings,open
space, housing, and landscaping.
Under the Zoning Ordinance, the City is divided into a number of
residential, commercial, and industrial districts. Certain types
of land uses are permitted in each district; others are permitted by
approval of the Zoning Board or City Commission; i.e. as a conditional
use; and some are not allowed at all. The following paragraphs ex-
plain the regulations for community -based residential facilities in each
district. This explanation includes the interpretation given to these
regulations by the City of Miami Building and Zoning Inspections
Department, which is the department that enforces the zoning ordinance. -
One -Family Dwelling - R-1, R-lA, R-1B Districts:
A single-family home is the only residential use permitted in this
district. Community -based residential facilities are not allowed in
-108-
14�WtflM9N•"--
based residential facilities may be permitted as conditional uses
under three other classifications: (1) residential group homes
for developmental disabilities, subject to the provisions of Article
IV, Section 45; (2) institutions for the aged, indigent, or infirm;
or (3) institutions of an educational, philanthropic, or eleemosynary
character not operated for profit, other than penal or correctional
institutions or vocational trade schools, subject to the provisions
of Article IV, Section 36. Since the zoning ordinance does not include
a definition of institution, the Building and Zoning Inspections
Department requests a letter of intent from the applicant. The
information in this letter is used to determine whether the facil-
ity will be classified as an institution.
High Density Multiple - R-5 Districts:
Any community -based residential facility permitted under the reg-
ulations of the R-3 districts is allowed in the R-5 districts, subject to
the use regulations of the R-3 district.
D.ical Commercial - C-1 Districts:
Two uses that can include community -based residential facilities are
permitted in the C-1 districts. Any use permitted in the R-C dis-
tricts is permitted in this district. Community -based residential
facilities may be classified as sanitariums, convalescent homes,
or nursing homes, which are permitted uses in the C-1 districts.
Community Commercial - C-2 Districts:
Any use permitted in the C -1 districts is permitted in these districts.
Central Commercial - C-3 Districts:
Community -based residential facilities if classified by the Building
and Zoning Inspections Department as a hotel or motel may be allowed
in these districts.
General Commercial - C-4 Districts:
Although the Zoning ordinance does not specifically list rooming
houses as a permitted use here, the Building and Zoning Inspections
Department interprets the hotels and motels use permitted in C-4
to include rooming houses. Given this interpretation, community -
based residential facilities are subject to the R-4 regulations.
Liberal Commercial - C-5 Districts:
Any use permitted in the C-4 districts is permitted in the C-5
districts.
-110-
TABLt 31
ZONING CtASStVtCATION OF COMMUNITY=-HASSb RRStOtNTIAL FACILITttS
IN THE CITY OF MIAMt
Type of Facility R-1 R-2 , R 3 R-.4 R-5 R-C C-1 C 2 c-4
Adult Congregate 4
7 5
12 1
1 4 1
Lving Facilities
Alcohol Rehabi.l.ita--
1
1 5
1 1
t1:0h Facilities
Residential Facili-
5
1
1 1
ties for Drug Depen-
dents
Residential Facili- 4
2 2
3 l
ties for Develop-
mentally Disabled
Persons
Residential Facili-
4
2
ties for Persons with
Mental Health
Problems
Residential Child-
1
2
taring Facilities
Boarding Homes 1
1 1
6 5
1
Adult Community-
2
1 1
based Corrections
TOTAL 9 10 14 30 12 5 8 1 3
R-1: District composed of one -family dwellings
R-2: District composed of two-family dwellings
R-3: Low density multiple -dwelling district
R-4: Medium density multiple -dwelling district
R-5: High density multiple -dwelling district
R-C: District composed of medium density multiple dwellings
and offices
C-1: Neighborhood commercial and residential district
C-2: Community commercial and residential district
C-4: A general commercial district
I-1: A district composed of light industrial uses
-107-
xrY
based residential facilities may be permitted as conditional uses
under three other classifications: (1.) residential group homes
for developmental disabilities, subject to the provisions of Article
IV, section 45; (2) institutions for the aged, indigent, or infirm;
or (3) institutions of an educational, philanthropic, or eleemosynary
character not operated for profit, other than penal or correctional
institutions or vocational trade schools, subject to the provisions
of Article IV, Section 36. Since the zoning ordinance does not include
a definition of institution, the Building and Zoning Inspections
Department requests a letter of intent from the applicant. The
information in this letter is used to determine whether the facil-
ity will be classified as an institution.
High Density Multiple - R-5 Districts:
Any community -based residential facility permitted under the reg-
ulations of the R-3 districts is allowed in the R-5 districts, subject to
the use regulations of the R-3 district.
Local Commercial - C-1 Districts:
Two uses that can include community -based residential facilities are
permitted in the C-1 districts. Any use permitted in the R-C dis-
tricts is permitted in this district. Community -based residential
facilities may be classified as sanitariums, convalescent homes,
or nursing homes, which are permitted uses in the C-1 districts.
Community Commercial - C-2 Districts:
Any use permitted in the C-1 districts is permitted in these districts.
Central Commercial - C-3 Districts:
Community -based residential facilities if classified by the Building
and Zoning Inspections Department as a hotel or motel may be allowed
in these districts.
General Commercial - C-4 Districts:
Although the Zoning Ordinance does not specifically list rooming
houses as a permitted use here, the Building and Zoning Inspections
Department interprets the hotels and motels use permitted in C -4
to include rooming houses. Given this interpretation, community -
based residential facilities are subject to the R-4 regulations.
Liberal Commercial - C-5 Districts:
Any use permitted in the C-4 districts is permitted in the C-5
districts.
-110-
these districts if they offer any type of treatment program, such as
counseling.
A community -based residential facility operated for profit is per-
mitted if the residents fit the definition of family. A family is
defined in the zoning ordinance as an individual or two or more
persons related by blood or marriage, or a group of not more than
five persons (including servants) who need not be related by
blood or marriage, living together in a dwelling unit. A family
also may include a group of not more than six children, in addition
to foster parents, residing in a home caring for foster children
(including natural children of foster parents), provided that any
such home is approved by the Florida State Welfare Department.
Thus, a married couple that wishes to operate a community -based
residential facility in their home (other than a home for foster
children) is permitted to have three additional residents in their
home.
In these districts, a foster home for six to eight children is
permitted as a conditional use, i.e. after a public hearing. A non-
profit community -based residential facility may be approved after the
public hearings required by Section 36 of Article IV.
Two -Family Dwelling - R-2 Districts:
The R-2 district permits all R-1 uses in addition to allowing dup-
lexes. This means that each of the units of a two-family dwelling
may be operated as a for -profit community facility if the number of
residents in each unit does not exceed the number allowed under the
definition of a family provided that no treatment is given in the
facility. In addition, substance abuse facilities and group homes
for developmental disabilities are allowed if approved as conditional
uses under the regulations for each in Article IV.
Low Density Multiple - R-3 District:
The uses permitted in the R-2 districts are permitted in the R-3
districts. Another permitted use is the rooming house, which is
defined in the ordinance as a dwelling containing one dwelling
unit and not more than ten rental sleeping units or suites of rooms
where lodging is provided with or without meals, for compensation.
Community -based residential facilities operated for profit may be
permitted as rooming houses if they do not provide the level of
care associated with a nursing home as determined by a letter of
intent submitted by the applicant.
Medium Density Multiple - R-4 Districts:
Any uses permitted in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 districts, subject to
the use regulations of those districts, are allowed in R-4. Community
-109-
Industrial Districts:
No residential uses except hotels and motels are allowed in the
City's industrial districts.
Zoning Certification Process
Every individual or organization that wishes to open a community -
based residential facility in every zone except R-1 and R-2 must
submit a letter of intent to the Building and Zoning Inspections
Department. This letter states the location of the proposed
facility, the number of residents, the number of staff persons, the
type of treatment to be offered, how the facility will be operated,
where the referrals come from, and whether the residence will be
operated for profit or as a non-profit facility. The Building and
Zoning Department uses this letter of intent to determine whether
the proposed facility fulfills the requirements of the zoning code.
Once zoning approval has been granted, the Building and Zoning
Department files a request for inspection for a certificate of use
and occupancy. The building to be used for the proposed facility
is then inspected to ensure that it meets the South Florida Build-
ing Code. The facility may not begin operation until the structure
receives a certificate of use and occupancy.
Building Code Requirements
Adopted by Dade County and the municipalities within Dade County, the
South Florida Building Code sets minimum standards for the safe
design, construction, or alteration of buildings in Dade County.
The Building Code also regulates the equipment, materials, use, and
occupancy of all structures.
Like the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, the South Florida Building
Code contains no special definitions or regulations for community -
based residential facilities. Community -based facilities usually are
classified as rooming houses or institutions for the purposes of
the Building Code.
South Florida Building Code Regulations
Building code requirements are set forth for different classes of
structural uses or occupancies. The requirements for each class of
occupancy include type of building,allowable height and floor area,
location on property, light and ventilation, enclosure of vertical
-111-
,+tiff;. �µ3NC.1✓4� f�;. } {P
openings, and plumbing and sanitation regulations. Each
of the building types is described briefly below:
1. Type I: This building is constructed of
structural steel and concrete with a
four-hour resistance to fire. Most high-
rises like omni and Plaza Venetia are
Type I structures.
2. Type II: The construction of Type II
buildings is similar to that of Type I
except that the floors are not as thick.
Type II structures can resist fire for
three hours. Heavy commercial buildings,
manufacturing plants, four to five
story highrises, small hospitals, and
small nursing homes are usually of Type
II construction.
3. Type III: Type III buildings, which have
exterior walls with two-hour resistance to
fire, are constructed of masonry. Type III
buildings are further classified according
to the fire resistance of their interior
walls as protected or unprotected. In
Type III (protected) buildings, all interior
walls and floors are of one -hour fire-resistant
construction. Most apartment buildings,
shopping centers, and CBS mouses are Type
III structures.
4. Type IV: These buildings are incombustible
constructions. This classification includes
parking garages, auditoriums and schools.
5. Type V: Type V structures are wood frame
buildings, which have a two-hour fire resistance.
Each of the different classes of occupancies is called
a group occupancy. There are ten group occupancies,
called A through J, in the South Florida Building Code.
Community -based residential facilities usually are
classified as a Group D Occupancy or a Group H Occupancy.
Group D Occupancies are institutional uses that include
facilities where inmates' liberties are restricted, such
as jails, prisons, reformatories and asylums (Division 1),
-112-
and facilities where inmates are under physical limita-
tions, such as hospitals, sanatariums, homes for the
aged and orphanages and where accommodations are pro-
vided for four or more inmates (Division 2). The Miami
Building and Zoning Inspections Department, which en-
forces the South Florida Building Code in the City;
places community -based residential facilities with
residents that have mental or physical limitations in
this Group.
Buildings classed in Group D because of use or occupancy
are limited in height and area as follows:
Division Bldg. Type Allowable Height Basic Area
1 I
not
limited
not limited
1 II
30
feet (2 stories)
11,300
2 I
not
limited
not limited
2 II
45
feet (3 stories)
11,300
2 III (pro-
20
feet (1 story)
5,100
tected)
In addition, each facility in Group D Occupancy must have
120 square feet of sleeping area per occupant and 240
square feet of institutional area per occupant. There
must be two means of egress when there are more than five
occupants in a Group D facility.
Group H Occupancies include multiple -residential uses such
as hotels, motels, apartment -hotels, apartment houses, bunga-
low courts, rooming houses, dormitories, fraternity
houses, monasteries and similar uses that provide accommoda-
tions for more than six persons. The Building and Zoning
Department uses this Group for community -based residential
facilities that have residents capable of independent living.
Height and area limitations for Group H Occupancies are
listed below:
Buildinq Tvpe
Allowable Heiqht Basic Area
I not limited not limited
II 75 feet (5 stories) 22,500
III (Protected) 60 feet (4 stories) 10,100
III (Unprotected) 20 feet ( 1 story) 9,000
III
Each facility in a Group H Occupancy must have 200 square
feet of space per occupant. When there are more than 15
occupants, the building must have two means of egress.
One regulation in the South Florida building Code that
can have a great impact on community --based residential
facilites is the Change of Occupancy regulation. This
regulation requires that an existing building for which
the Group of Occupancy is changed must comply with all
the requirements of a new building of the new Group of Oc-
cupancy and Type of Construction. An example of such a
Change of Occupancy is a large, old single-family home
that becomes a community -based residential facility for
25 adults. If the building inspector determines that the
building is now used as an institution or a rooming -house,
he may conclude that a change of occupancy has occurred
and require that the structure comply with the building
code requirements for a similar new building. It may be
extremely difficult and costly to bring an old structure
like this into compliance with the code.
Process for Codes Compliance Certification
Each structure proposed for use as a community -based resi-
dential facility must receive a certificate of use and
occupancy from the Miami Building and Zoning Inspections
Department before operation can begin. After zoning
approval has been granted, the building inspectors receive
a copy of the request for inspection. The building is
then inspected for violations of the South Florida Building
Code. A citation is issued for any violations found. The
facility is reinspected within seven days to determine
whether the violations are being corrected. A certificate
of use and occupancy is issued when all violations have
been corrected. Every building that has received a certi-
ficate of use and occupancy is reinspected annually.
Occupational Licensing
Community -based residential facilities operated for profit must ob-
tain an occupational license from the Tax and Licenses Division
of the City of Miami Finance Department. These facilities are
licensed under Chapter 30--28 of the City code, which requires an
occupational license for "every business, occupation, profession
or exhibition, substantial, fixed or temporary, engaged in by
any person whether in a building or tent, or upon the street, vacant
lot or anywhere in the open air in the City...." The charge
for the license is forty seven dollars.
A non-profit community --based residential facility is exempted from
City occupational licensing by Chapter 205.192 of the Florida Sta-
tutes. This law states that no occupational license shall be re-
quired of charitable, religious, fraternal, youth, civic or
service organizations.
Operators of community -based residential facilities are notified
of the occupational licensing requirements through the certificate
of use and occupancy process. When a certificate of use and oc-
cupancy is issued by the Building and Zoning Inspections Depart-
ment, a letter stating that an occupational license is required
is mailed to the applicant. A copy of this letter is sent to
the Tax and Licenses Division. The occupational license must
be renewed yearly. If the community -based residential facility
changes location, the license may be transferred only with the ap-
proval of the Building and Zoning Department.
Fire Code Requirements
The regulatory system for fire prevention is especially important to
the residents of community -based residential facilities who may be
mentally or physically handicapped. In 1973, the National Commission
on Fire Prevention and Control estimated that 3,500 to 4,000 fires
break out annually in nursing homes and homes for the elderly. This
commission also found that "during the 20 years from 1951 to 1970,
496 residents of facilities for the aged died in multiple -death
fires (those killing three or more).2
Several recent fires in community -based residential facilities have prompted
hearings in the U.S. House of Representatives. in April 1979, twenty-
five residents were killed in a Missouri boarding home for the men-
tally ill and alcohol and drug abusers.3 During the same month, nine
persons were killed in a blaze that swept a Washington, D.C. halfway
house for mental patients.4 Rep. Claude Pepper, chairman of the House
Committee, concluded that the national policy of deinstitutionalization
has fo ced thousands of elderly people into unsafe private boarding
homes.
Fires have occurred in community -based residential facilities in the
City of Miami during the past year, although none resulted in mul-
tiple deaths. One of these fires happened in a wood frame house
that was used as a community residence for twenty former drug
abusers. Many of the residents escaped the fire, started by an ar-
sonist, by 'jumping from second -floor windows. There was one
fatality: Another person died recently in an adult congregate
living facility located in a converted motel. This 72 year -old resident
fell asleep while smoking in bed. The fire did not spread beyond
his room.
These two examples illustrate the importance of the fire and life
safety codes. The wood frame house, which could not be certified
by fire inspectors because of its construction, was completely gutted
by fire. The fire in the adult congregate living facility, however,
did not spread throughout the building because the structure was
built with a type of fire-resistant construction required by the fire
code for motels.
Fire Code Regulations
Three separate but interwoven codes contain regulations for fire pro-
tection in the City of Miami. The major source of fire regulations
is the Miami Fire Code, Chapter 17 of the City Code. The Fire Code
adopts the 1967 Life Safety Code recommended by the National Fire
Protection Association. The Life Safety Code contains guidelines for
exits and other safety features for protecting lives from fire. In
addition, the Miami Fire Code adopts the Group Occupancy classifi-
cations, square footage requirements, and other regulations of the
South Florida Building Code.
Because the definitions for types of uses are from the South Florida
Building Code, the fire inspectors experience the same problems with
classifying community -based residential facilities as the building
inspectors do. The community residences are placed either in the
Group D Occupancy (institutional) or the Group H Occupancy (multiple
unit residences) classifications.
The Group Occupancy in which the facility is placed determines the
specific fire regulations that pertain to it. Some of the most com-
mon and most -often violated regulations are described below:
1. Fire Extinguishers: All fire extinguishers must be
in working condition at all times. They must be
inspected and taqqed annually by a State -licensed
fire equipment company,
2. Community kitchen separation: Kitchens used for the pre-
paration of community meals must be enclosed with walls and
self -closing doors having at least a one -hour fire resistance
rating.
.3 Smoke detectors: Smoke detectors are required in the common
corridors of buildings with walls and doors that are not con-
structed of one -hour fire resistive materials.
4. Exit doors: Exit doors must remain unobstructed and unlocked
from the inside whenever the floor is occupied, Exit doors
must never be locked with anything but a manual hand -locking
device that does not require the use of a key for operation
from inside the building. Exit doors must by marked with
signs. Stairway doors must be kept closed.
5. horizontal separation: Public corridors must be separated
from adjoining rooms by walls and doors having a one -hour
fire resistive rating. Doors must be self -closing.
6. Combustible materials: Combustible, explosive, or other-
wise hazardous materials or equipment may not be stored
in the building.
7. Building construction: The occupation of any wood frame
buildings that do not have fire-resistant construction by
community -based residential facilities is prohibited. All
residential facilities must adhere to the construction
type requirements of the South Florida Building Code.
In March and April 1979, Miami fire inspectors inspected all licensed
adult congregate living facilities, residential facilities for drug
dependents, and residences for the developmentally disabled. The
type of fire code violations found during these inspections are listed
in Table 32. In addition, the number of occupants in some facilities
exceeded the number permitted according to the square footage per
occupant requirements of the South Florida Building Code.
-] 17
TABLE 32
RESULTS of FIRE
INSPECTIONS
OF COM:3UNITY-BASED RESIDENTIAL
FACILITIES
Number of
Facilities with Violation
Number
of Facil- No
Fire
14o Community
Smoke
Exit No Com-
ities Viola-
Extinguisher
Kitchen
Detector
Doors Horizontal bustible
°;y,ne of Inspect_ Lions
Problem
Separation
Problem
Problem Separation Materials
Facility ed
Adult Congregate 34 7 7 8 12 7 1 0
Living Facilities
Residential Treat- 8 3 6 1 8 1 0 2
ment Facilities
for Drug Depen-
dents
Residential Facil- 12 2 7 5 6 3 0 0
ities for Develop-
mentally Disabled
Persons
Fire Inspection Process
Fire inspections of new community -based residential
facilities in Miami are initiated by requests from the
licensing offices of the Florida Department of Health
and Rehabilitative Services, or by the Certificate of
Use and occupancy process of the Miami Building and
zoning Inspections Department. Existing facilities are
inspected annually when the State licenses are renewed
or as a result of the periodic inspections made in
every City neighborhood by the Miami Firefighting and
Fire Prevention Division.
During an inspection, the fire code violations are noted
in an inspection report. The operators of the facility
receive a copy of this report with deadlines for correc-
tions. These deadlines range from immediate correction
for life -threatening violations to thirty days for major
construction deficiencies. If the problems are not
corrected within the deadline, the operators are notified
by an order letter that the violations must be corrected
or the facility will be closed.
Summary
1. Community -based residential facilities are found in
residential, commercial, and industrial zoning
districts in Miami as follows:
a. residential districts 75 facilities
b. commercial districts 17 facilities
C. industrial districts 1 facility
2. The zoning district containing the greatest number of
facilities is the medium -density, multiple -dwelling
R-4 district. only one quarter of the facilities
located in residential districts are found in the single-
family R-1 zone or the two-family R-2 zone.
3. Community -based residential facilities for alcohol
and drug rehabilitation, persons with mental health
problems, and adult corrections are found primarily
in higher density residential zones and commercial
districts. Adult congregate living facilities,
facilities for developmentally disabled persons, and
boarding homes are located primarily in residential
districts.
4, The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance contains no uniform
set of regulations that covers all types of community -based
residential facilities.
5. The Zoning Ordinance contains detailed regulations for sub-
stance abuse facilities and for group homes for developmentally
disabled persons. The regulations for these types of facilities
are not consistent, requiring different minimum lot sizes,
different distances from other community -based facilities
and different open space areas.
G. Community -based residential facilities not covered by the
regulations for substance abuse facilities and for group homes
for the developmentally disabled may be classified variously
as non-profit institutions; rooming houses; institutions for
the aged, indigent, or infirm,sanitariums, convalescent homes,
or nursing homes; or hotels and motels. Under these definitions,
community -based residential facilities (other than facilities
for substance abusers or the developmentally disabled) may be
located in every residential district and in most commercial
districts.
7. The Miami Zoning Ordinance contains no uniform regulations or
definitions that recognize the semi-independent living arrange-
ment of community -based residential facilities or the potential
concentration of facilities in certain areas of the City.
8. The South Florida Building Code contains no special definitions
or regulations for community -based residential facilities.
9. For the purposes of the Building Code, community -based facilities
usually are classified as rooming houses when the residents
are capable of independent living and institutions when the
residents have mental or physical limitations.
10. The Change of Occupancy regulation of the South Florida Building
Code can prevent the conversion of older structures to community -
based residential facilities by requiring that the structure
conform to regulations for new multiple -residential buildings
or institutions.
11. All community -based residential facilities, except those that
are operated as non-profit organizations, must obtain City
occupational licenses.
12. Fire protection regulations for community -based residential
facilities in Miami are found in the City of Miami Fire Code,
the National Fire Protection Association's Life Safety Code,
and the South Florida Building Code.
-120-
13. For the purposes of the fire regulations, community -based residdntial
facilities are classified according to the Group Occupancy
categories of the South Florida Building Code, which categorize
the facilities as institutions or multiple unit residences.
14. Fire inspections of three types of community -based residen-
tial facilities found the following kinds of violations: prob-
lems with fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, and exit doors; a
lack of community kitchen separation and horizontal separation,
and the presence of combustible materials. A number of facilities
had exceeded the occupancy limits required by the South Florida
Building Code.
eferences
1 Daniel Lauber and Frank S. Bangs, Jr., Zoning for Famil
and Group Care Facilities ( Chicago: American Society
of Planning Officials, 1974), p.13.
2
National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control,
America Burning (Washington, D.C.: National Commission
on Fire Prevention and Control, 1973), p.127.
3 1125 Killed in Blaze; Roof Falls" The Miami Herald, 3
April 1979, Sec. 2-A.
4
"Nine Die in D.C. Fire; Pepper Panel Probes 'A National
Scandal,'" The Miami Herald, 12 April 1979, Sec. 26-A.
5 "Pepper: Policy Puts Mental Patients in Peril," The
Miami Herald, 26 April 1979, Sec. 17-A.
VI, Recommendations
This chapter presents recommendations for the establishment,
location, planning, and regulation of community -based
residential facilities in the City of Miami.
Locating Community -Based Residential FaciL-
ities and Minimizing Neighborhood Impacts
1. Encourage the establishment of small community -based
residential facilities with fewer than 17 residents
and no more than 50 residents.
According to the neighborhood compatibility survey,
7 to 16 residents is the optimum size for a community -
based residential facility. Facilities with more
than 50 residents are considered least suitable.
The encouragement of small facilities by sponsoring
and licensing agencies will help provide a homelike
atmosphere for facility residents and prevent in-
compatibility with surrounding residential neighbor-
hoods.
2. Residents of community -based residential facilities should
have adequate support services and adequate supervision.
Licensing and sponsoring agencies should ensure thzt:
facilities have adequate supervi:,iun for their resi-
dents. in addition, supporting services for resi-
dents should be increased by the appropriate State,
County and sponsoring organizations. Increased super-
vision and services will minimize the likelihood of
behavior that deviates from neighborhood norms creat-
ing negative impacts on the surrounding area.
3. Encourage the location of community -based residential
facilities in low -density, single-family, duple~, and multi-
family residential neighborhoods. Avoid locating facil-
ities in commercial neighborhoods. Prohibit
the location of community -based residential facilities
in industrial neighborhoods.
According to the neighborhood compatibility survey,
the most suitable neighborhoods for community facilities
are low -density residential neighborhoods. Commercial and
industrial neighborhoods are considered least suitable.
The location of community -based residential facilities
in low -density residential areas will help provide a
-122-
the blending of the facility into the surrounding
neighborhood. Not only should licensing and spon-
soring agencies encourage and practice good main-
tenance, but licensing agencies should refuse to
license facilities that are not in good condition.
The City of Miami zoning code should be amended to
provide for annual inspection of facilities
and enforcement of proper structural and site
maintenance:
8. Prohibit the concentration of community -based
residential facilities in neighborhoods and in spe-
cific areas of Dade County.
Certain types of community -based residential facil-
ities tend to be concentrated within the City of Miami.
In addition, some Miami neighborhoods have a concen-
tration of community -based facilities. Such con-
centrations should be avoided for three reasons:
(1) to minimize the fears of neighborhood
residents that the neighborhood is re-
ceiving an influx of "different" house-
holds, and thus, to avoid reaching an
"institutional tipping point" that will
initiate the process of neighborhood change,
(2) to avoid the creation of de facto
social service or institutional ghettos
that will restrict the ability of the
community -based residential facilities
to provide a normal living environment
in a normal neiqhborhood,
(3) to distribute equitably throughout
Dade County the burden of community -
based facilities' potential negative
fiscal impact on the local tax base.
The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance should be amended
to include regulations that will prohibit the concentra-
tion of facilities in Miami neighborhoods.
-124-
homey atmosphere for facility residents and allow
them to participate in normal community life.
4. Locate community -based residential facilities in
neighborhoods that have access to public transpor-
tation, recreational and educational facilities,
social services, and employment.
Since the mobility of the residents of community --
based residential facilities is often restricted by
physical handicaps or lack of private transportation,
it is important that they live where there is access
to the elements of normal community life. The neigh-
borhood amenities listed above were rated most im-
portant to community -based residential facilities
in the neighborhood compatibility survey.
5. Encourage the establishment of community -based
residential facilities on sites that have adequate
open space and landscaping.
The site amenities rated most important in the neigh-
borhood compatibility survey were outdoor space for
recreation, outdoor space for relaxing and gathering,
and landscaping.
6. 'Prohibit signs designating the name of the community -
based residential facility in residential neighbor-
hoods.
Community -based residential facilities located in
residential neighborhoods should blend into the
surrounding area to minimize fears on the part of
the neighborhood residents that the character of
the neighborhood will change. Prohibiting signs on
the facilities in residential neighborhoods will
facilitate the merger of the facility with the neigh-
borhood. The City of Miami sign ordinance should be
amended to provide regulations to enforce this
recommendation.
7. Encourage sponsors and operators of community -based
residential facilities to maintain their buildings
and yards in good condition.
Proper maintenance of community facilities and their
yards will minimize negative impacts and facilitate
-12:-
gi Encourage the dispersal of community -based
residential facilities to appropriate sites
and neighborhoods throughout bade County,
To avoid the concentration of community -
based residential facilities in certain areas
and neighborhoods, State and County licensing
and sponsoring agencies should pursue an ac-
tive policy of locating facilities throughout
Dade County.
Planning for Community -Based Residential Facilities
1. The City of Miami Commission should request that
the Governor of Florida take steps to establish
State licensing requirements for every type of
community -based residential facility in the
health care and correctional systems. A central
State registry of community -based residential
facilities should be established.
Bringing all community -based residential facilities
under State licensing requirements would ensure
that all types of facilities meet minimum standards
for operation. Such licensing requirements also
would make a central State registry of facilities
possible. A registry would supply the data re-
quired to avoid the continued State licensing of
facilities in geographical areas with concentrations
of them. In addition, data from such a registry
could facilitate planning for new facilities.
2. The City of Miami Commission should request that
Dade County prepare and adopt a Countywide plan
for community -based residential facilities.
A plan for community -based residential facilities
in Dade County would serve the following purposes:
(1) to determine the need for all types
of community -based residential facil-
ities in Dade County
(2) to provide guidelines for the proper
location of the various types of
facilities
(3) to match the need for facilities with
suitable locations for community -
based residential facilities
-125-
----------------------
(4) to assure the equitable distribution of
community -based residential facilities
throughout Dade County and to prevent
the concentration of facilities in cer-
tain neighborhoods.
The plan should be prepared by the Metropolitan Dade
County Department of Human Resources and the Metropoli-
tan Dade County Planning Department. Participants in
the plan preparation should include representatives
of State of Florida agencies that license and sponsor
facilities, County and other sponsoring organizations,
Dade County municipalities, facility operators, and
residents of communities or neighborhoods in which
facilities are located.
ReGulatinq Communitv-Based Residential Facilities
1. The City of Miami Commission should amend the City
of Miami Zoning Ordinance to include one group
of definitions and regulations for all types of
community -based residential facilities.
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance contains detailed
regulations,which are not consistent with each
other, for two types of community -based residen-
tial facilities. Other types of facilities may
be classified in the Zoning Ordinance under various
definitions ranging from rooming houses to motels
and hotels. A single set of zoning regulations for
all facilities will ensure (1) that all types of
facilities are treated consistently, (2) that
facilities within the City of Miami are located in
the proper neighborhoods, and (3) that concentra-
tions of facilities in certain neighborhoods are
avoided. Because community -based residential
facilities fulfill a demonstrated public need,
Miami's zoning regulations for these facilities
should be permissive in nature, while containing
restrictions that will protect the safety and
welfare of facility residents and community residents.
2. The following elements should be included in the
zoning regulations for community -based residential
facilities in Miami:
a. Definitions: Define community -based residen-
tial facilities by size of facility rather
-126-
than by type of facility. The following is
a suggested definition and suggested sizes:
Community -Based Residential Facility- A
facility that provides room and board, resident
services, and 24 hour supervision. Such a
facility functions as a single housekeeping
unit and is licensed or approved by an author-
ized governmental agency. This category in-
cludes adult congregate living facilities;
residential facilities for alcohol and drug
rehabilitation, developmentally disabled
persons, persons with mental health problems,
and dependent children; and juvenile and
adult residential correctional facilities,
including halfway houses. This category
excludes homes for foster children ,that are reg-
ulated elsewhere in the zoning ordinance.
Facility Sizes - 1. Six or fewer persons
2. Seven to sixteen persons
3. Seventeen to fifty persons
4. More than fifty persons
b. Registration and Licensing: Require that all
community -based residential facilities located
in the City of Miami and all proposed facil-
ities register with the Miami Planning Department.
Information supplied at the time of registration
should include (1) the name of the sponsoring
agency, if any,(2) the name of the facility
operators, (3) the street address of the facil-
ity, (4) the type of program to be offered by
the facility, (5) the maximum number of persons
who will live at the facility, and (6) the
governmental authorization to operate the
facility.
Registration of community -based residential
facilities will enable the City of Miami to
maintain an inventory and map of all such facil-
ities in the City. This information will help
the City enforce the zoning regulations. Re-
quiring proof that the facility will be licensed
or approved by an appropriate governmental
agency will ensure that facilities in the City
-127-
meet good standards of operation. if licens-
ing requirements for certain types of facil-
ities require local zoning approval prior
to licensing, zoning approval can be granted
contingent upon licensing of the proposed
facility.
C. Building, Fire, and Safety Standards: Require
that the proposed facility conform with ap-
propriate City of Miami Building and Fire
Codes.
Before zoning approval is granted, City build-
ing and fire inspectors should make recommenda-
tions as to the conformance of the proposed
facility with the building and fire codes.
The recommendations should include the maximum
number of occupants allowed under these codes.
d. Density Controls: Limit the number of resi-
dents of community -based residential facilities
in each census tract to three percent of the
census tract's total population. Prohibit
the establishment of any community -based
residential facility within 1200 feet of another
facility.
These density requirements will avoid concentra-
tions of community based residential facilities
on the neighborhood level and at the block level.
Several studies have shown that a neighborhood
will tolerate an influx of 3% - 5% "different"
households. Because greater increases of "dif-
ferent" households could have a negative impact on
the neighborhood's social structure and stability,
the density of community -based residential facil-
ities should be limited to 3% of a particular
neighborhood. Census tracts, whose boundaries
were drawn to delineate neighborhoods, are a
feasible unit of measurement for implementation
of this density control because population
estimates are readily available for them.
At the block level, density of facilities can
be regulated by establishing minimum distance
requirements between facilities. These minimum
distance requirements will cover additionalstructures
purchased by the operator of an existing facility,
but not the expansion of a structure used for an
-128-
existing facility: The 1200 foot distance
recommended in this study corresponds to
the length of three average city blocks.
This distance was selected on the basis of
the findings of a Green Bay, Wisconsin
study that showed that positive feelings
about neighborhood group homes were related
to distance from them and that by the third
block, all neighbors who knew of the homes
had positive feelings about them. This den-
sity control can be implemented by using
a map of all existing facilities. Circles
with radii of 600 feet can be drawn around
each existing facility. A similar circle
can be drawn around the site of a proposed
facility. If the proposed facility's cir-
cle overlaps any circles of the existing
facilities, the facility will be prohibited
from locating on that site. See the dia-
gram below.
600'
EXISTING
FACILITY r
PROPOSED FACILITY
T
MEETS MINIMUM
DISTANCE
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED FACILITY
60d 600'
EXISTING
FACILITY
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM
DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS
e. Open Space: Establish recreational open space
requirements for community -based residential
facilities based on the age of the facility
residents. Require that the property of facil-
ities with more than 50 residents be buffered
by a hedge or fence.
Open space, considered the most important
site amenity in the neighborhood compatibility
survey, can serve two functions: (1) provide for
the recreational needs of facility residents, and
(2) provide a buffer between the facility and
neighboring properties. The following are sug-
gested recreational open space standards for com-
munity -based residential facilities:
For each resident
age
For each resident
or older
under 18 years of
200 square feet
18 years of age
150 square feet
These standards were recommended in a studv of
zoning for community -based residential facilities
prepared by the Westchester County, New York
Department of Planning and are similar to Miami's
current zoning requirements for substance abuse facilities.
f. Parking: Require adequate on -site parking
depending on the type of community -based residen-
tial facility. Include a waiver of the parking
requirements for facilities that have access to
public transportation and other neighborhood
amenities necessary for facility residents.
According to the neighborhood compatibility
survey, parking is the least important site
amenity for community -based residential facil-
ities. Some on -site parking must be provided,
however, to protect neighboring properties.
A suggested standard for on -site parking, taken
from the City's current zoning regulations for
drug rehabilitation facilities, is one space
for each staff member and one space for each
four residents. A waiver of this requirement
should be permitted for facilities whose residents
do not own cars and facilities that have access to
public transportation and other neighborhood amenities.
- 1 30-
g. ZOnin_q Districts: permit community -based residen-
tial facilities in all residential districts and
in the C-1 and C-2 commercial districts. Prohibit
community -based residential facilities in all other
zoning districts,
it is recommended that community -based residential
facilities be restricted to City residential and
light commercial districts, The following are sug-
gested zoning districts for each of the facility
sizes defined above:
Community -Based Residential Facility
1-6 residents - permitted in all
residential districts.
Community -Based Residential Facility
7-16 residents - permitted in R-3
and all more intense residential dis-
tricts as well as C-1 and C-2 commer-
cial districts.
Community -Based Residential Facility
17-50 residents - permitted in R-4
and all more intense residential dis-
tricts as well as C-1 and C-2 com-
mercial districts.
Community -Based Residential Facility
50+ residents - permitted in R-5 as
well as C-1 and C-2 commercial dis-
tricts.
h. Zoning Approach: Require a conditional use per-
mit prior to the establishment of any community -
based residential facility in any zoning district.
The conditional use permitting process will give
the City of Miami a zoning mechanism to ensure
the facility's compliance with the zoning regu-
lations. This process is especially necessary
for enforcement of the density controls. The
conditional use permit should not be transferable
if ownership or use of the facility changes. Sup-
porting•documents for the conditional use hearing
should include certification that the building
complies with Fire and Building Codes and a state-
ment of maximum residents permitted by these Codes.
3. The Miami Building and Zoning Inspections Department
should include an occupancy limit for each proposed com-
munity -based residential facility as one condition of
receiving a Certificate of Use or Occupancy.
Setting occupancy limits for proposed community -based
residential facilities will ensure that the facil-
ities comply with the occupancy requirements of the
South Florida wilding Code. An annual re -application
for the Certificate of Use and occupancy should be
required to ensure that facilities have not exceeded
the permitted capacity.
4. The Miami City Commission should request that the
Dade County Board of Rules and Appeals amend the
South Florida Building Code to include regulations
pertaining to the special requirements of community -
based residential facilities.
The South Florida Building Code should be amended to
include definitions and regulations for community -
based residential facilities.
S. The Miami City Commission should request that the State
Fire Marshal 's office develop fire safety regulations
for all types of community -based residential facilities.
State fire regulations for community -based residen-
tial facilities incorporated into State licensing
procedures and enforced by State and local fire in-
spectors would ensure that facilities meet proper
standards for fire safety without being unduly res-
trictive.
6. The City of Miami should develop a manual containing
information about City of Miami regulations and pro-
cedures governing community -based residential facil-
ities.
A manual providing information about the City's
zoning, building, and fire regulations and procedures
for community -based residential facilities in an
easily understandable format should be distributed to
operators of proposed facilities and sponsoring and
licensing organizations. Such a manual can save time
for both the operator and the City in developing and
reviewing proposals and help prevent misunderstandings
between them.
V11. ,Appendices
A. Neighborhood Compatibility Survey Results
1, The purpose of this question is to determine your
opinion about the optimum size or sizes of the residen-
tial care facility that is considered community -based
rather than institutional. Rate the suitability of
the following sizes or capacities of the residential
care facility, assuming that the structure itself is
appropriate for use as a residential care facility.
Number of Responses (Percent)
Least Suitable Most Suitable
1 to 6 residents
4(17%)
3(13%)
2(10%)
5(21%)
9(39%)
7 to 16 residents
3(14%)
1(4%)
2(9%)
11(50%)
5(23%)
17 to 50 residents
6(26%)
1(4%)
8(36%)
4(17%)
4(17%)
50 to 100 residents
11(50%)
8(36%)
1(5%)
0(0%)
2(9%)
more than 100
residents 21(95%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 1(5%) 0(0%)
The purpose of this question is to determine your opinion
about the character of neighborhoods with which the
residential care facility is most compatible. Rate the
suitability of the following types of neighborhoods for the
residential care facility.
Number of Responses (Percent)
Least Suitable Most Suitable
a neighborhood pri-
marily composed of
single-family homes
and duplexes 0(0%) 2(90) 4(18%) 4(18%) 12(55%)
a neighborhood pri-
marily composed of
apartment build-
ings with 3 to 50
apartment units 3(13%) 3(13%) 2(9%) 10(43%) 5(22%)
-133-
3.
Number of Responses(Percent)
Least Suitable Mpst Suitable
a neighborhood pri-
marily composed of
apartment buildings
with more than 50
apartment units 5(23%) 8(36%) 6(28%) 3(13%) 0(0%)
a neighborhood pri-
marily composed of
offices, retail
shops, restaurants
and service -ori-
ented businesses 8(36%) 9(41%) 4(18%) 1(5%) 0(04,)
a neighborhood pri-
marily composed
of warehouses and
manufacturing
plants 18 (82%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%)
The purpose of this question is to determine your opinion
about the neighborhood amenities that should be available
to the residential care facility. Rate the importance of
the following neighborhood amenities to the residential
care facility. Access means 1/4 to 1/2 mile walking
distance or 20 minutes elapsed time by public transpor-
tation or automobile.
Number of Responses (Percent)
Least Important Most Important
access to public
transportation
access to edu-
cational facil-
ities
access to active
recreational
facilities (sports
fields, play-
grounds, etc.)
0 (0%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%) 6 (26%) 15 (65%)
1 (5%) 0 (0%) 4 (18%) 7 (32%) 10 (45%)
1 (4%) 1 (4%) 3 (14%) 9 (39%)
9 (39%)
EN
Number of Responses(Percent)
Least Important Most important
access to pas-
sive recrea-
tional facil-
ities (neighbor-
hood parks)
1(4%)
1(4%) 5(23%)
9(39%) 7(30%)
access to shopping
1(4%)
2(9%) 10(44%)
4(17%) 6(26%)
access to em-
ployment
4 (18%)
1 (5%) 5 (22%)
4 (18%) 8 (37 0)
access to social
service agencies
0(0%)
4(17%) 4(17%)
7(31%) 8(35%)
access to medi-
cal services
0(0%)
0(0%) 4(17%)
9(39%) 10(44%)
The purpose of this
question
is to determine your
opinion
about the amenities
that should
be available at
the residen-
tial care facility.
Rate the
importance of the
following
site amenities to the residential
care facility.
parking
outdoor space for
recreation
outdoor space
for relaxing and
gathering
space for gar-
dening
landscaping
space for observ-
ing neighborhood
and street ac-
tivities
Number of Responses (Percent)
Least Important Most Important
9(39%) 9(39%) 4(17%) 1(5%) 0(0%)
0(0%) .0(0%) 8(35%) 8(35%) 7(30%)
0(0%)
1(5%)
8(37%)
5(21%)
8(37%)
3 (13%)
10 (43%)
5 (23%)
4 (17%)
1 (4%)
2 (9%)
4 (18%)
7 (33%)
8 (36%)
1 (4%)
5(24%) 5(24%) 7(33%) 4(19%) 0(0%)
5,
Rate the suitability of the following locations of two
residential care facilities in a neighborhood,
Number of
Responses
(Percent)
Least Suitable
Most Suitable
one residential
facility located
one block from
another residen-
tial facility
8 (38%)
1 (5%)
4 (19%)
2 (10%)
6 (29%)
one residential
facility located
two blocks from
another residen-
tial facility
4 (19%)
4 (19%)
5 (24%)
4 (19%)
4 (19%)
one residential
facility located
three blocks from
another residen-
tial facility
4 (19%)
1 (5%)
10(47%)
4 (19%)
2 (10%)
one residential
facility located
four blocks from
another residen-
tial facility
6 (29%)
2 (10%)
5 (24%)
7 (32%)
1 (5%)
one residential
facility located
five blocks from
another residen-
tial facility
6 (29%)
2 (10%)
4 (19%)
4 (19%)
5 (23%)
-136-
14 �_ -
6. Mate the suitability of the following numbers of facil-
ities located on a block face. A block face is defined
in the diagram below.
The area contained within the hold lines represent a "block face"
as used in the 1970 U.S. Census,
Street
r:-,r1.1r�7✓i;'j'.ftl; t. �:� 'j?�1'r Y'P •�.;j art-�tv;�it',,•.
Street
' ;•>-777777757777.:,^•i''';'':`:�:•,.�..¢•� ...
�'t;: ��:':��, ��fJ."^.�:iti: �a �(�� �4y1'N.: `1 •i.:\j�f r�'t..'
Street
ti�:f� 3 v �� •'� � .if
one residential facil-
ity on a block face
two residential facil-
ities on a block face
three residential facil-
ities on a block face
four residential facil-
ities on a block face
five residential facil-
ities on a block face
Number of Responses(Percent)
Least Suitable Most Suitable
2(10%) 1(5%) 5(24%) 5(24%) 8(37%)
5(25%) 2(10%) 5(25%) 6(30%) 2(10%)
8(40%) 3(15%) 6(30%) 3(15%) 0 (0%)
13(65%) 4(20%) 1(5%) 1(5%) 1(5%)
17(85%) 0(0%) 2(10%) 0(0%) 1(5%)
1 Z7
B. Existing City of Miami Zoning Regulations for Community -
Based Residential Facilities.
Section 35•- MUNICIPAL USES
The provisions of this ORDINANCE are not Intended, and shall not be construed, to pre-
clude the use of any property owned by the City of Miami in any municipal government
capacity, function or purpose, provided, however, that said use is established upon recom-
mendation of the Board and approval of the City Commission.
Section 36.- PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC BUILDINGS OR USES
The City Commission of the City of Miami may, upon recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Board of Miami, after Public Hearing, authorize the location of any of the
following buildings or uses in any District from which they are prohibited by this
Ordinance: (ORD, 8225)
(1) Any public building erected and used by any Department of the County, State,
or Federal Government.
(2) Hospitals and clinics and institutions of an educational, religious, philanthropic
or eleemosynary character, provided such use is confined within a building and
provided that the building shall be set back from all yard lines a distance of
not less than two (2) feet for each foot of building height, and provided further
that this regulation shall not require a yard having a depth or width of more thar.
fifty (50) feet, unless a yard of greater depth or width is otherwise required in
the District where such building is located.
(3) EXCEPTIONS:
(a) This ORDINANCE shall not be construed to prohibit or limit the operation,
maintenance or expansion of schools on any property used for school purposes
on or before the date that this Ordinance becomes effective, provided, how-
ever, that any expansion of school facilities on property used for school
purposes shall comply with the yard requirements and setback distances as
provided for in Paragraph (2) of this Section.
Section 37.- AIRPORT HEIGHT LIMITATIONS (ORD. 7944)
In any area within the City of Miami, height limitations of buildings, structures and
natural growth shall be regulated by Ordinance No. 69-39 of Metropolitan Dade County,
Florida, except where the height limitations of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Miami are more restrictive.
Section 38.- NUISANCES
Nothing shall be allowable on the premises in any District, provided for in this
Ordinance, that shall in any way be offensive or noxious by reason of the emission
of odors, gases, dust, smoke, light, vibration or noise (including the crowing of
cocks, barking of dogs, or any noises emanating from any animal, fish or fowl). Nor
shall anything be constructed or maintained that would in any way constitute an eye-
sore or nuisance to adjacent property owners or residents or to the community.
Section 39.- INTERIM ZONING DISTRICTS (ORD. 8131)
(1) INTENT - Interim zoning districts are intended to provide temporary regulations
in designated areas of the City, notwithstanding the existing zoning applied to
the area, where public development policy has been established by the City Com-
mission during the period of time when comprehensive plans have been or are being
prepared for the area, and either before or during the zoning process. The pur-
pose is to insure that any development in a designated area is in accord with
established public policy and that the development of a particular project or
projects will not have an adverse effect on public plans or the general welfare
of the public.
(2) APPLICABILITY - An Interim Zoning District may be applied to any area in the city.
(3) PROCEDURES - Interim districts shall be established in the following manner:
(a) A determination based on findings shall be made setting forth the need for
such interim zoning by the City Commission.
(b) After notice to all property owners within the proposed interim zoning dis-
trict, the Interim Zoning District regulations shall be submitted to the
Planning Advisory Board and City Commission for public hearing. The Interim
Zoning District requires adoption and approval of the City Commission by
Ordinance
25 REV. 1-26-77
-138-
z 1
��xr;.�m. r'k 'hv�R!s'FPF�7nT#�me
Section 43,- SUASTANCE ABUSE FACILITIES
(ORD. 8386)
All proposed residential facilities, shall, prior to consideration of Conditional Use
Approval, be reviewed by the Advisory Committee on Substance Abuse. The Com-
mittee, upon concluding its findings, shall submit its recommendation to the Zoning
Board. prior to the granting of a certificate of use or occupancy by the Building
'Department, non-residential facilities shall be first reviewed by the Advisory Corn-
mittee on Substance Abuse.
(1) Minimum Lot Size
Twenty Thousand (20,000) square feet.
(2) Housing Standards
All .Facilities shall meet minimum housing and livability standards established
by the City of Miami Housing Code. The facilities shall be adequate to support
each program's objectives, consideration for convenience, free circulation, privacy,
ventilation, light and air and crowding.
(3) Location Standards
The location of programs of a similar nature in close proximity to those in
existence shall be evaluated in accordance with the following objectives:
(a) To distribute according to catchment area; that is, the area in which abusers
are caught.
(b) To discourage massing in transitional neighborhoods.
(c) To balance geographically the location of facilities with drug abuse intensity.
(d) To maximize existing facility use through recommended operational or
modal changes.
(e) To strengthen operational arrangements between facilities to meet changing
demands.
In no instance, however, shall programs of a similar nature be located a distance
of less than one -quarter (1/4) mile from each other. Measurement shall be from the
main entrance of each facility along the route of ordinary pedestrian traffic.
(4) Yard Areas
Rear — 20 feet)
Side — 10 feet)
Front — 20 feet)
Or the minimum yard areas
required in the zoning district
in which the facility is located,
whichever is greater.
(5) Parking
One (l) space for each staff member and one (1) space for each four (4)
occupants. Waiver of occupant parking may be permitted based upon the fol-
lowing factors:
Proximity to mass transit, employment area or community facilities, auto owner-
ship, and visitation policy.
(6) Open Space
Open space shall be provided to facility occupants based upon the following
schedule: First 10 occupants — 150 sq. feet per occupant, 10-15 occupants
—additional 100 sq. ft. per occupant, 15-20 occupants — additional 75 sq. ft.
per occupant, 25 occupants and over — additional 50 square feet per occupant.
At least fifty percent (50io) of the required open space area shall be at ground
level.
(7) Landscaping
One (1) shade tree for each one thousand (1,000) square feet of yard area
shall be provided. Where this provision is not met at the incepiton of the facility's
establishment, other provisions for attaining shade in open space areas where
site occupants may be afforded satisfactory outdoor spaces to pursue leisure
time activities m_ay. be considered.
(8) Proximity to Support Services
Proximity to or the availability of public or private transport to satisfy occupant
service needs shall be evaluated to minimize travel and encourage the establish-
ment of facilities at locations where they may best accord the occupant a wide
range of services essential to his physical, social and economic well-being.
(9) Ingress and Egress
Drives for ingress and egress shall be restricted to no more than one (1) drive
for each fifty (50) feet of frontage.
25.5 REV, 1-1.76
—139—
Section 44.- REGULATED USES (ORD, 8618) (ORD, 8695)
The following uses shall be termed "Regulated Uses":
Adult Book Store, Adult Massage Parlor, Adult Motion Picture Theotre, Adult Private Dancing and
Escort Service.
Regulated Uses shall comply with the following provisions-
(1) No regulated use shall be established within a distance of 1000 feet from any other regulated use.
This distance shall be measured from the front door of the proposed regulated use to the front
door of the nearest existing regulated use along the route of ordinary pedestrian travel.
(2) No regulated use shall be located within 500 feet of a residentially -zoned district. This distance
shall be measured by the distance along the straight line drown from the closest exterior door of
the proposed regulated use to the closest portion of the residentially -zoned property.
(3) For the purpose of this Section residentially -zoned districts shall be those designated in
Article 111, Section I. Where property in the City of Miami borders upon property of another City
or Dade County, the term "residentially -zoned districts" shall be those districts designated as
residentially zoned by the terms of the Zoning Ordinance in the affected jurisdiction.
(4) No application for a Certificate of Use and Occupancy shall be accepted unless it is accompanied
by a survey certified by a land surveyor registered in the State of Florida showing that it meets
the requirements of Paragraphs I and 2 of this Section.
(5) Notwithstanding other provisions of this ordinance, no regulated use shall resume operation once
it has been discontinued or abandoned unless and until it meets all the provisions of this section.
(ORD. 8640)
Section 45 RESIDENTIAL GROUP HOMES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (ORD. 8861)
Residential group homes for more than five persons with developmental disabilities including, but not
limited to mental retardation programs, if approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies, shall be
subject to the following zoning requirements and limitations:
(1) Area Location Standards
The group home shall be geographically located and constructed to meet City and program ob-
jectives including:
(a) To encourage county -wide distribution and to discourage massing in neighborhoods not less
than 2500 feet shall separate the facility from other similar facilities or other programs
such as substance abuse or alcohol rehabilitation.
(b) Proximity to support services like transportation, employment facilities, religious and
educational programs, health and recreational facilities, and shopping.
(2) Access
Vehicular entrances to the grounds shall not be more than 150 feet from a major street. Not
more than one ingress and egress drive shall be provided for each 50 feet of frontage.
(3) Minimum Lot Dimensions
The lots shall have a minimum width of 100 feet and a minimum area of 10,000 square feet.
(4) Location of Buildings
Buildings shall provide a twenty foot front and rear yard and a tAn foot side yard.
(5) Outdoor Recreation Area
To meet social and recreational needs, the group home shall provide a minimum of 75 square feet
per person or 400 square feet per dwelling unit, whichever is greater, of outdoor ground level
area. This area shall be located in side or rear yards and suitably landscaped with grass and
shade trees; when adjoining another residential lot, at least 5'0" high solid textured wall or hedge
shall be provided as a buffer amenity.
(6) Housing Standards
The group home shall be adequate to meet the program objectives for privacy, light, air, circu-
lation, dining, and sleeping.
(7) Landscaping
To provide an attractive living environment, one shade tree shall be provided for each 1000
square feet of yard area along with other suitable shrubs, ground cover, grass, and patio areas.
25.6 REV.1-1-79
—140—
VIII. Bibliography
Blatt, Burton. "The Executive". In Changing Patterns in
Residential Services for the Mentally Retarded.
Edited by Robert B. Kugel and Ann Shearer. Washing-
ton, D.C.: President's Committee on Mental Retarda-
tion, 1976,
Brown, Bertram S. "Critical Issues for Community Mental
Health." Rockville: U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, 1977.
Butterfield, Earl. "Some Basic Changes in Residential
Facilities." In Changing Patterns in Residential
Services for the Mentally Retarded. Edited by
Robert B. Kugel and Ann Shearer. Washington, D.C.:
President's Committee on Mental Retardation, 1976.
City of Lansing Planning Department. The Influence of
Halfway Houses and Foster Care Facilities Upon
Property Values. Lansing: City of Lansing Plan-
ning Department, 1976.
Dade -Monroe Mental Health Board. Mental Health Plan for
Dade County, 1976. Miami: Dade -Monroe Mental
Health Board, 1976.
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services.
Youth Services; Community -Based Treatment Centers.
Tallahassee: Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services, 1978.
Gruen, Nina Jaffee and Gruen, Claude. Low and Moderate
Income Housing in the Suburbs; an Analysis for the
Dayton, Ohio Region. New York: Praeger Publishers,
1972 .
"Hospital to Release Mentally Retarded." The Miami Herald.
Ivory, Peter B,C.B. "Deinstitutionalization Concept Paper."
Tallahassee: Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services, 1978.
Lauber, Daniel and Bangs, Frank S., Jr. Zoning for
Family and Group Care Facilities. Chicago: Ameri-
can Society of Planning Officials, 1974.
McCartt, John M. and Mangogna, Thomas J. Guidelines and
Standards for Halfway Houses and Community Treatment
Centers. Washington, D.C.t U.S. Department of
Justice, 1973,
The Metropolitan Area as a Racial Problem. Quoted in Alan
S. Friedlob and Thomas L. Anding, Community -based
Residential Facilities in the Twin Cities Metro-
politan Area. St, Paul: University of Minnesota,
1975.
Metropolitan Dade County Planning Department. "Estimate
of the Elderly Resident Population of Dade County,
65 Years of Age and Over, as of June 30, 1975,
by Census Tract." Miami: Metropolitan Dade
County Planning Department, 1976.
National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control.
America Burning. Washington, D.C.: National
Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, 1973.
Neill, D. Richard. "Working Paper on 'Optional Living
Environments' for Less Independent Senior Citizens."
Concord: New England Non -Profit Housing Develop-
ment Corporation, 1976.
"Nine Die in D.C. Fire; Pepper Panel Probes 'A National
Scandal.'" The Miami Herald. 12 April 1979.
Nirge, Bengt. "The Normalization Principle." In Chang-
ing Patterns in Residential Services for the Men-
tally Retarded. Edited by Robert B. Kugel and
Ann Shearer. Washington, D.C.: President's
Committee on Mental Retardation, 1976.
Obenland, Robert G. Behavioral Factors for Elderly
Housing Design Concord: New England Non -Profit
Housing Development Corporation, n.d.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Program Planning
and Development. "Proposed Comprehensive Annual
Services Program Plan for Title XX-Social Security
Act: July 1, 1979 - June 30, 1980." Tallahassee:
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services, 1979.
"Pepper: Policy Puts Mental Patients in Peril." The
Miami Herald. 26 April 1979.
-142-
Public Affairs Counseling, The Dynamics of Neighborhood
Change. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 1975.
Seiter, Richard P., et al. Halfway Houses. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1977,
Special Committee on Aging. U.S. Senate. Congregate
Housing for Older Adults; Assisted Residential
Living Combining Shelter and Services. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975,
"25 Killed in Blaze; Roof Falls." The Miami Herald.
3 April 1979.
Wolpert, Julian, Group Homes for the Mentally Retarded:
an Investigation of Neighborhood Property Impacts.
Princeton: Princeton University, 1978.
"Social Planning and the Mentally and
Physically Handicapped; The Growing 'Special
Service' Populations." In Planning Theory in the
1980's; a Search for Future Directions. New Bruns-
wick: Center for Urban Policy Research, 1978.
Yeates, Maurice. An Introduction to Quantitative
Analysis in Human Georgraphy. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1974.