Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ.1-SUBSubstitute to P11 May 8, 2008 CITY COMMISSION MEETING THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. rr•D og-Q2 t-PZ•t-SuC) PLANNING FACT SHEET LEGISTAR FILE ID: 08-00223ct APPLICANT REQUEST/LOCATION COMMISSION DISTRICT PETITION PLANNING RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD CITY COMMISSION PZ.1 FIRST READING Item #1 Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, on behalf of the City of Miami Amendment to Ordinance No. 10544, as amended, The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. (See attachment.) City Wide Consideration of an Ordinance of the Miami City Commission amending Ordinance No. 10544, as amended, The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan of the City of Miami, by updating, adding, and deleting Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan as required by Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, to incorporate the recommendations contained in the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the City's Comprehensive Plan; containing a repealer provision and a severability clause; providing for transmittals to affected agencies; and providing for an effective date. Approval with modifications. Per Florida Statutes, all local governments shall adopt Comprehensive Plan Amendments based on a state required and adopted Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of its Comprehensive Plan. The City adopted its EAR document December 2005, and is required to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan based on EAR recommendations by August 2008. Continued on March 31, 2008 and April 16, 2008. Recommended approval with modifications of the text amendment on April 30, 2008 by a vote of 8-0. Also recommended denial of the proposed Miami River Sub -Element as presented by the Planning Department. Deferred on April 24, 2008. CITY OF MIAMI • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR • MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 Date Printed: 5/1/2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 1 Notice: This document is the Planning Department's Analysis and Recommendations of Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) as proposed by the Planning Advisory Board (PAB) for the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. May 2, 2008 Planning Department's Analysis and Recommendations of Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) as proposed by the Planning Advisory Board (PAB) for the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) • The column entitled "PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs" reflects modifications required by the EAR and text added by PAB. • Amendments identified by an X in the "EAR" column are part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) as required by F.S. 163.3191 and adopted by the Miami City Commission on December 1, 2005; Resolution 05-0707. • Amendments identified by an X in the "PAB" column are those proposed by PAB; not adopted in the EAR. Existing Text in the MCNP New Text Proposed for the MCNP • Amendment identified by an X in both the "EAR" and "PAB" column are required by the EAR, but contain modifications by PAB. • The column entitled "City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments" reflects recommendations on the item and identifies those items that are policy decisions that require consideration by the City Commission. Differences Between PAB/EAR and Planning Recommendations # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Timel$ Expense ! Recommended by: 1 City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 1 LU-1.1.3 (Page 1) The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or natural or man-made amenities; and (3) transportation policies that divide or fragment established neighborhoods; and (4) degradation of public open space, X X Added "that do not diminish the amount of area ncome passsing the adjacent/abut- ing residential neighbor- Hood The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or natural or man-made amenities; add (3) transportation policies that divide or fragment established neighborhoods; and (4) degradation of public open space, environment, and ecology. Strategies to further protect environment, and ecology. Strategies to further protect existing neighborhoods through the development of existing neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the that will be incorporated into the City's land development adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood will be regulations. incorporated into the City's land development regulations. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 1 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 2 LU-1.1.5 (Page 2) The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City Time Expenses/ In-house I X The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City departments and agencies, shall annually monitor steps departments and agencies, shall annually monitor steps taken to fulfill the Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) of taken to fulfill the Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) of the MCNP and biennially report the status of the GOPs to the the MCNP and biennially report the status of the GOPs to the Planning Advisory Board and City Commission, including, but Planning Advisory Board and City Commission. not limited to, improving measurability of objectives. 3 LU-1.1.11 (Page 3) The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification Conservation, "Attachmcnt A," Urban X The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification Conservation, "Attachmcnt A," Urban of as shown on as an Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Areas of as shown on as an Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Within this area, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person Trip Methodology as set forth in designated Single -Family and Duplex —Residential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from changes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density residential character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be encouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors. Within this area, Outside of these residential areas, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 2 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 4 LU-1.1.13 (Page 3) The City shall review and evaluate the areas designated Time/ Money Expenses I X No additional Recommendations Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) within two years of the adoption of this policy to determine, but not limited to, the following: the appropriateness of the areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA; the benefits and/or disadvantages resulting from the inclusion (or exclusion) of these areas within the UTA and/or the TCEA; the strategies to support mobility and alternative modes of transportation within those areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA; and the strategies to address urban desiqn and network connectivity to improve mobility within those areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA. 5 LU-1.3.3 (Page 5) = X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element —" Exhibit B" The City shall encouraqe development and redevelopment of water dependent and water related uses on the Miami River within existing districts designated Industrial on the Future Land Use Map. 6 LU-1.3.8 (Page 7) The City will develop and implement lob traininq and Time/ Money Expenses p X No additional Recommendations educational programs to assist the City's existing and future residents in achieving economic self-sufficiency utilizing government resources as necessary, and will continue to work with appropriate State and County agencies to direct training programs and other technical assistance, to support minority and semi -skilled residents of the city. 7 LU-1.3.10 (Page 6) The City will increase code enforcement efforts by 10% each Time/ Money Expenses = = = X X = Added the last = sentence As per Code Enforcement's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City will increase code enforcement efforts by 10% each year and will continue to aggressively address code violations in its neighborhoods through the implementation of ongoing and new neighborhood improvements, and code year and will continue to aggressively address code enforcement strateqies and initiatives; and will adopt and enforce consider the adoption and enforcement of violations in its neighborhoods throuqh the implementation of performance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance the physical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial areas in the city by July 2009. The City will report ongoing and new neiqhborhood improvements, and code enforcement strategies and initiatives; and will consider the adoption and enforcement of performance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance the physical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial areas in the city. The City will report what has been accomplished to fulfill on an annual basis what has been accomplished to fulfill the requirements of this policy. the requirements of this policy as requested. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 3 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 8 LU-1.4.10 (Page 8) The City will continue to develop modifications to existing regulations with the intent of providing greater flexibility in the design and implementation of mixed -use developments within the general Downtown area and particularly along the Miami River Downtown in accordance with neighborhood X , X Added "Downtown" The City will continue to develop modifications to existing regulations with the intent of providing greater flexibility in the design and implementation of mixed -use developments within the general Downtown area and particularly along the Miami River in accordance with neighborhood design and design and development standards adopted as a result of the development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives. other initiatives. Note: This is what is stated in the EAR Recommendations. 9 LU-1.5.3 (Page 8) Notice of application for special permits shall be provided to X This issue is addressed in the Land Development Regulations any NET registered homeowners associations fifteen days prior to issuance of the special permit and after issuance of the decision. 10 LU-1.5.4 (Page 8) Notice of applications requiring public hearings shall be = X This issue is addressed in the Land Development Regulations provided to any NET registered homeowner and neighborhood associations and to owners within 500 feet of the subject property. 11 LU-1.6.9 (Page 9) The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the potentially adverse impacts of future development new development on existing = X X Added last sentence The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the potentially adverse impacts of future development new development on existing neighborhoods through the development of appropriate neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements that do not transition standards and buffering requirements. diminish the amount of area encompassing the adiacent/abuttinq residential neighborhood and through adequate notice to affected parties. 12 LU-2.2.4 (Page 11) The City will consider the need for adopting shall adopt an Time Expenses/ In-house X = This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion ordinance levying civil penalties for failure to report the discovery of an archaeological site during construction. 13 LU-2.3 (Pagel 1) Encourage the preservation of all historic, andarchitectural. and archaeological resources that have major significance to Time Expenses/ In-house X Added X i "and archaeolo- gical" No additional Recommendations the city by increasing continuing to increase the number of locally designated by fivc nationally and sites perccnt coact r year for the period 1996 2001 2008-2013. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBS TIlU LION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 4 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 14 LU-2.3.2 a 11 (Page ) The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, the City will designate a minimum of Time Expenses/ In-house X X EAR states 2015 The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, the City will increase locally 10 individual sites and two districts by 2-004 -2010. (See designated historic resources by two percent by 2010 Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.3.) designate 10 individual two districts by 2001. (See sites and Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.3.) 15 LU-4 (Page 13) PROPOSED ECONOMIC ELEMENT Time/ Money Expenses Approx. $150,000 to $200,000 = X This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion Goal LU-4: The City will acknowledge the inter -relationship between economic growth and the reduction of economic disparity within the City; issues of land use, affordable housinq,the adequacy of infrastructure including the ability of public transit to provide acceptable commutation to and from all areas of the city, education and training, the environment and the Port of the Miami River. Objective LU-4-1: The City shall within, and no later than, two years of the adoption of this goal add an Economic Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Planthat lays out goals, objectives and policies to provide an environment for sustained economic growth within the City, particularly with respect to those areas of economic activity characterized by higher -paying jobs, while reducing the economic disparitythat currently exists among City residents. This Element shall be prepared through thecollaboration of the appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders including, but not limited to, representatives of neighborhood groups, business and environmental groups, organizations involved in manpower development and training and the Miami River Commission. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 5 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 16 LU-5 (Page 14) PROPOSED HISTORIC AND CULTURAL ELEMENT Time/ Money Expenses Approx. $500,000 X This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion Goal LU-5: The City will acknowledge that: a) Historical resources offer an important tool for education, help to provide a distinctive "sense of place" to various neighborhoods in the City, and are a significant resource in promoting tourism; and b) Cultural resources are important reminders and remnants of the history of the area. These resources offer physical evidence of the prehistoric and historic occupation of the land. Objective LU-5.1: The City shall within, and no later than, two years of the adoption ofthis goal add a Historic and Cultural Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan that lays out goals, objectives and policies for those areas with significant historical, archaeological and cultural identities. The preparation of this Element will consider establishing notification procedures for land use changes that may impact historic resources. The Element shall include a list of definitions of terms used including, but not limited to, neighborhoods, adaptive reuse, mixed use, redevelopment and revitalization; with clarity of meaning in the associated context. This Element should be prepared through the collaboration of appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders including, but not limited to, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups and citizens. Protection of historical and archaeological resources is mandated by Federal law and by the State of Florida through the Division of Historical Resources. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 6 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 17 LU-6 PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLANS Time/ Money Expenses Amur. $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 X These are policy decisions up to the City Commission's Discretion If these policies are desired, it is recommended that the dates change to allow for a more realistic timeframe. These tasks can be performed by a consultant or it can be performed in-house, though a much greater amount of time would be necessary due to staff constraints. Note: While the level of detail that would be required as a result of these policies is greater, many aspects would be completed as a result of Miami21. Goal LU-6: The City will acknowledge a) the importance of neighborhood planning and implementation as a tool for maintaining and enhancing the unique character of neighborhoods; and b) the significance of fostering a collaborative relationship between the community and City. Objective LU-6.1: The City shall, no later than 2012, create Neiqhborhood Master Plans for the City's neighborhoods. Policy LU-6.1.1: Within two years of the adoption of this policy, the City shall prepare maps delineating the geographic boundaries of each neighborhood, which will serve as a tool for creatinq Neiqhborhood Master Plans. Policy LU-6.1.2: The appropriate City department(s) shall, through the collaboration of stakeholders, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups, and community members, create Neighborhood Master Plans detailing each neiqhborhood's unique needs, values, and visions. 18 HO-1 HO-1.1 HO-1.2 HO-1.2.1 HO-1.2.2 HO-1.2.3 HO-1.2.4 HO-1.2.8 HO-2.1 (Pages 33- 38) (as those terms are defined by HUD) = = = , X As per Community Development's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the phrase in each of the nine listed GOPs to: (in accordance with the current standards and regulations of HUD and the State of Florida) PHIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 7 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 19 HO-1.1.5 (Page 33) The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the City's X X Added that do not diminish the amount of area encom- passsing the adjacent/abut- ing residential neighbor- hood" The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the City's neighborhoods and to buffer such neighborhoods from neighborhoods and to buffer such neighborhoods from incompatible uses through the implementation and incompatible uses through the implementation and enforcement of transition and buffering standards that do not enforcement of transition and buffering standards. diminish the amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood. 20 HO-1.1.7 (Page 34) The City will continue to control, through restrictions in the City's land development regulations, large scale and/or intensive commercial and industrial land development which may negatively impact any residential neighborhood and will = = X X = Added the last = sentence The City will continue to control, through restrictions in the City's land development regulations, large scale and/or intensive commercial and industrial land development which may negatively impact any residential neighborhood and will provide appropriate transitions between high --rise and low-- provide appropriate transitions between high—rise and low -- rise residential developments that do not diminish the amount rise residential developments. of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 8 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 21 HO-1.1.10 (Pages 34- 35) The City shall report annually the extent to which the housing Time/ Money Expenses X As per Community Development's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City shall report annually the extent to which the housing recommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to time) are being realized including those relating to: 1) the preservation of affordable rental housing throuqh the recommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to rehabilitation of existinq rental stock and the time) are beinq realized including those relating to: encouragement of new rental housinq construction, with a 1) the preservation of affordable rental housing through focus on serving the needs of small families and single person households, such as the elderly and person with the rehabilitation of existing rental stock and the HIV/AIDS; encouragement of new rental housing construction, with 2) the preservation of existing affordable housing — a focus on serving the needs of small families and single person households, such as the elderly and person with homeowner retention by assisting very low-, low- and HIV/AIDS; moderate -income households to obtain repair financing 2) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by from private lenders, with preference given to the elderly, disabled and persons with HIV/AIDS; seeking to increase the inventory of affordably priced 3) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by units through new construction, and by providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cost assistance seeking to increase the inventory of affordably priced to first-time homebuyers; and units through new construction and the creation of a 3) stimulation of affordable housing development through Purchase Rehab program by providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time the implementation of policy with respect to: homebuyers, and the creation of a Lease to Purchase a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Infill Program; and 4) stimulation of affordable housing development through b. identification of additional funding for affordable housing the implementation of policy with respect to: c. the continued provision of Affordable Housing a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Infill incentives d. the provision of training/workshops to developers on b. identification of additional funding for affordable City programs and regulations housing e. streamlining of the RFP process and the provision of c. expediting of the Tax Credit Process multi -year fundinq d. creation of special districts for mixed -use projects f. Increasing the capacity of non-profit housing e. the continued provision of Affordable Housing providers. incentives f. the provision of training/workshops to developers on City programs and regulations g. streamlining of the RFP process and the provision of multi -year funding h. Increasing the capacity of non-profit housing providers. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 9 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 22 HO-1.4.6 (Page 37) The City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, homeless shelters within its land development regulations and take appropriate measures to prevent a net loss of shelter capacity. The City will develop a ten-year plan Time/ Mone Expenses eS p X As per NET's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, homeless shelters within its land development regulations and take appropriate measures to prevent an inequitable designed to end chronic homelessness by working toward a more equitable distribution of facilities throughout Miami- Dade County. concentration of facilities within the City a net lose of shelter capaci The City will develop a ten-year plan designed to . end chronic homelessness by working toward a more equitable distribution of facilities throughout Miami -Dade County. 23 HO-1.5.1 (Page 37) The City's housing program will continue to provide for assistance to occupants displaced by public redevelopment projects so that suitable relocation housing in proximity to employment and necessary public services is available prior to the demolition or replacement of existing housing serving very -low, low _and moderate -income occupants. Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations 24 HO-1.6 (Page 37) Provide and/or encourage a local regulatory, investment, and Time/ Money Expenses X This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion Note: Regulations for supportive housing units are stated in Article 9, Sections 934-936 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance. neighborhood environment that will assist the private sector in increasing the supply of supportive housing units that provide services such as child day care to single parent households and counseling to rehabilitated or rehabilitating substance abusers of very -low, low and moderate income households. 25 HO-1.6.1 (Page 38) Supportive housing developed in accordance with this policy Time/ Money Expenses X This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion should be designed to primarily serve the needs of the community in which they are located by offering units to residents of the surrounding community on a priority basis. 26 HO-2.1.4 (Page 38) The City will continue to promote development of new, high quality, dense urban neighborhoods -along the Miami River (in accordance with the 1992 Miami River Master Plan), in X The City will continue to promote development of new, high quality, dense urban neighborhoods -along the Miami River, in Ccntral Brickcll in Southeast Ovcrtown/Park Wost. and Note: This is what is stated in the EAR Recommendations. Central Brickell and in Southeast Overtown/Park West. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 10 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 27 SS-2.1.1 (Page 42) The City will adhere to its 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates as the long-range policy guideline for improving its storm drainage management system, and will update the estimated cost of implementing that plan Plan Time/ MoneyX Expenses 1 No additional Recommendations through the annual updates to the City's Capital Improvements Program included in the Capital Improvements element of the MCNP. The City will rank the projects specified in that plan the 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan, with priority given to addressing the most critical problem areas within the sCity, and implement those projects supported by a financing plan according to the provisions of Chapter 18, Article VII l of the City Code, entitled "Storm Water Utility System." The 1986 Plan will be updated by 2010 with measurable goals and objectives. The Plan will be reported and reviewed annually and at time of EAR. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 11 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 28 TR-1.1.1 (Page 50) The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami- Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Areas designated Single -Family and X The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami - Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Within this area, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person -Trip Duplex —Residential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from changes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density residential character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be encouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors. Within this area, Outside of these residential areas, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person -Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) 29 TR-1.5.2 (Page 58) The City shall conduct appropriate land use and zoning analysis of the areas surrounding each existing and future Time Expenses/ In-house X The City shall conduct appropriate land use and zoning analysis of the areas surrounding each existing and future Metroraitpremium transit station as such station sites are Metrorailpremium transit station as such station sites are approved by Miami -Dade County or the City of Miami for approved by Miami -Dade County or the City of Miami for development in order to determine whether appropriate land use and zoning changes should be implemented that foster the development and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development (examining height, density and intensity, use and scale). development in order to determine whether appropriate land use and zoning changes should be implemented that foster the development and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development Such land use and zoning changes shall include minimum and maximum density and intensity standards at the time of implementation. Such land use and zoning changes shall include minimum and maximum density and intensity standards at the time of implementation. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 12 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs p e Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 30 TR-1.5.11 (Page 60) Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14- 182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City to large-scale development to Time Expenses/ In-house X No additional Recommendations will seek require new adopt and enforce measures that will reduce the generation of new single -occupant passenger car trips in areas of high - density development, and encourage the use of multiple- occupant vehicles, including public transit, for home -based trips. The City the Downtown TMI work will coordinate with a+South Florida Commuter Services to provide support for transportation demand initiatives undertaken by new developments. Within one year of the adoption of this policy, the City shall modify Article 17 of the City Zoning Code to incorporate Transportation Control Measures into the Major Use Special Permit application process. 31 PA-3 (Page 66- 67) Miami River See Exhibit "B" 32 PR-1.1 (Page 72) The City shall work to achieve a medium -term objective of Money Expenses = = = X = As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City shall work to achieve a medium -term objective of providing a park within one-half mile of every resident by 2015 and to achieve a long-term objective of a park within one -quarter mile of every resident by 2020. providing a park within one-half mile of every resident and to achieve a long-term objective of a park within one -quarter mile of every resident. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 33 PR-1.1.4 (Page 73) The City will conduct a study to support a revised Level of Time/ Money Expenses = = = = = = _ X = As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will conduct a study to support a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes and adopt a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes by January 2009 that will assist in achieving the access and per Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency capita funding objectives of PR-1.1. Until that time, the Level purposes and adopt a revised Level of Service for parks, of Service for concurrency purposes shall be 1.3 acres of recreation and open space for concurrency purposes that will public park space per 1000 residents. assist in achieving the access and per capita funding objectives of PR-1.1. Until that time, the Level of Service for concurrency purposes shall be 1.3 acres of public park space per 1000 residents. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 13 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 34 PR-1.2 (Page 73) Provide sufficient per capita funds for the parks system to Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. support the parks, recreation and open space standards expected by the public, as indicated in surveys and other responses to public outreach, for resources and programs that benefit the community. The City will strive to meet and exceed a benchmark level of spending annually of $100 per capita in 2007 dollars, within fiscal limits and based on identified needs. 35 PR-1.4 e 74 (Page ) The City will continue to work with transportation aqencies to Time Expenses/ In-house X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. implement the Commodore Trail improvements and the Flagler Trail (FEC Corridor Greenwav). 36 PR-1.4.3 e 74 (Page ) The City will continue to work to implement the Overtown Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. Greenway plan to link the Miami River through Overtown to Downtown. 37 PR-2.1.1 (Page 75) The City has a no -net -loss policy for public park land and will Time/ Money Expenses = = = = = X = = As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City has a no -net -loss policy for public park land and will adopt procedures to this effect for park land in the City Zoning Ordinances, as described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan, by 2010. These will allow only recreation and cultural facilities to be built on park land, will adopt procedures to this effect for park land in the City limit building footprint on any such land, will require that Zoning Ordinances, as described in the 2007 Parks and conversion of park land for any other purposes be subject to Public Spaces Master Plan. These will allow only recreation public procedures, and replace the converted park land with and cultural facilities to be built on park land, will limit building land similar in park, recreation or conservation value in terms footprint on any such land, will require that conversion of park of usefulness and location. land for any other purposes be subject to public procedures, and replace the converted park land with land similar in park, recreation or conservation value in terms of usefulness and location. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 14 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 38 PR-2 2 2 (Page ) The City will maintain and staff nine public swimming pools to Time/ Money75 Money Expenses X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will strive to maintain and staff nine public swimming be open all year round by 2009, with the remainder to be open year-round by 2012. pools to be open all year round by 2009, with the remainder to be open year-round by 2012. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 39 PR-2.2.3 (Page 75) The City, throuqh the Parks and Recreation Department, will Time Expenses/ In-house X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. continue to develop and implement maintenance level of service standards, identify associated costs, and address funding those costs, including replacement programs for equipment and vehicles, before adding more assignments. 40 PR-3.1.2 (Page 76) The City will work with the Parks and Recreation Department Time/ Money Expenses X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will work with the Parks and Recreation Department and with neighborhood groups to identify pedestrian routes within a half -mile radius of parks that are appropriate for improvements to sidewalks, lighting, street trees, crosswalks and pedestrian count -down signals, and signaqe to support a and with neighborhood groups to identify pedestrian routes ParkWalks program, as described in the 2007 Parks and within a half -mile radius of parks that are appropriate for Public Spaces Plan. The ParkWalks improvement plans will improvements to sidewalks, lighting, street trees, crosswalks be included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. One and pedestrian count -down signals, and signaqe, as ParkWalks planning process will be completed in each described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Plan. Commission district annually beginning in 2009, with Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. implementation to follow in the following year. 41 PR-4.1.1 (Page 78) The City will use participant evaluation surveys, at the Time/ Money Expenses p X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. completion of recreational programs to evaluate program success, and online public opinion surveys,- at least once every three years, and scientific surveys at least once every seven years to identify needed and desired programs. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 15 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 42 PR-5.2.1 (Page 79) The City will establish a permanent Parks and Recreation Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. Advisory Board made up of residents who are; park users, program participants, and representatives of groups with special relevant expertise. The Board's responsibilities will include advising elected officials and staff on implementation of the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan and any adopted subsequent updates to that Plan. The Board will be supported by staff from the Parks and Recreation Department, and will report annually to the Mayor and City Commission on progress in implementing the Master Plan, including financial reports, holding at least one public hearing on the draft report before submitting it to the Mayor and Commission. The Board will also review and advise on capital plans and designs based on the Master Plan and advise the Commission on any proposals to expend more than $50,000 to acquire new park land, to diminish or convert existing park land, to accept donated land for parks, or to sell City land that may be suitable for parks. The City will periodically review and refine the mission and charge of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board in order to ensure maximum opportunities for public involvement and effectiveness in addressing parks and recreation needs. Proposed changes to the mission and charge of the Board will not be implemented until after a public hearing by the appropriate public board. 43 PR-5.2.2 (Page 79) The City will survey City residents to monitor preferences, Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. needs and satisfaction with the park system on a regular basis, at a minimum throuqh evaluations of all programs by program participants to evaluate program success, online surveys every three years, and scientific surveys every seven years (starting from the Parks Master Plan survey of 2006). 44 PR-5.2.3 (Page 80) The City will develop and implement regular procedures by Time/ Money Expenses X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will develop regular procedures to provide 2010 to provide opportunities for park user and neighborhood consultation in the planning and design of park and recreation facilities improvements and new parks and programs. opportunities for park user and neighborhood consultation in the planning and design of park and recreation facilities improvements and new parks and programs. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 16 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 45 PR-5.3.1 (Page 80)efficient All parks will be equipped with adequate energy efficient Time/ Money Expenses X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will strive to equip all parks with adequate energy night lighting by 2012. night lighting by 2012. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 46 PR-6.1.1 (Page 80) The City will annually review implementation sections of the Time Expenses/ In-house X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan to include implementation actions in developing an annual work plan and capital improvements plan for parks and recreation facilities and programs. 47 CM-3 (Page 90) Provide an adequate supply of land for water dependent X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" uses. 48Pa CM-3.1 a 90 ( g ) Allow no net loss of acreage devoted to water dependent X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" uses in the coastal area of the City of Miami. 49 CM-3.1.1 (Page 90) Future land use and development regulations will encourage X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" water dependent uses along the shorelines. 50 NR-1.1.6 (Page 95) Through land development regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the coastal Coastal = = X Through land development regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the coastal Coastal zone Zone will not adversely affect the natural environment zone Zone will not adversely affect the natural environment or lead to a net loss of public access and public use or lead to a net loss of public access to the city's natural resources. (consistent with protection of natural systems) to the city's natural resources. 51 NR-1.4.2 (Page 97) The City will work with public and private partners to achieve Time/ Money Expenses X EAR X language is more generic No additional Recommendations the 2007 Tree Master Plan goal of 30% tree canopy coverage citywide by 2020. 52 NR-1.4.3 (Page 97) The City will develop an ordinance describing criteria for Time Expenses/ In-house X EAR X language is 1 more generic No additional Recommendations designation of City of Miami Historic Trees, procedures for nomination of a Miami Historic Tree, and procedures for official designation and signage identifying Miami Historic Trees. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 17 of 17 To: Mayor and City Commissioners From: Arva Moore Parks -McCabe, Chairperson City of Miami Planning Advisory Board Re: Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Amendments to Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan - 2008 Date: April 30, 2008 On behalf of your Planning Advisory Board (PAB), I am proud to forward to you our recommended EAR -based Amendments to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP). The PAB approved these Ear -based Amendments by a unanimous vote at our April 30, 2008 meeting. We strongly urge the City Commission to similarly approve these EAR -based Amendments at the upcoming May 8, 2008 transmittal hearing. Our final vote followed months of public meetings where citizens were invited to participate in different geographic locations within the City. We also had a number of expanded public hearings before the PAB. Specifically, rather than one single hearing before the PAB, we conducted a total of five (5) public hearings where we heard from City Staff, our excellent outside consultants and members of the public. Attached is a schedule of meetings conducted as a part of this process. At the PAB public meetings, rather than a one-sided affair where we unilaterally informed the public of what would be included in the EAR -based amendments, we had an interactive process where we heard from many diverse community voices, received their comments and input, and, as appropriate, provided policy direction to both the Staff and outside consultants on the changes and additions we believed to be appropriate. The Staff and outside consultants then translated these policy directives from the PAB into the amendments you now see. From City Staff, outside consultants and the public, we received and took into consideration reams of data and analysis in support of our recommendations that are now a part of the record of our work. In providing policy direction to the City Staff and outside consultants, we were mindful of our functions, powers and duties under both section163.3174(4), Fla. Stat., and Article III, Section 62-62 of the City of Miami Code. We looked at past trends and historical events, present conditions and likely future occurrences with the purpose of establishing principles and policies for guiding action affecting future development and positive evolution within. the City of Miami. We were mindful of our ability and duty to instigate special studies and further planning initiatives, as appropriate to the circumstances, as set out in Section 62-62 (a). In this process, with the able guidance of staff and our outside consultants, we identified certain critically important tasks that our allocated timeline and the deadline to complete and transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the EAR -based THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Amendments to the MCNP did not allow us to complete. These important tasks include the development and adoption of new elements in the MCNP such as : (1) Economic Element, (2) Historic and Cultural Element, (3) Neighborhood Element which documents the unique characteristics, needs and aspirations of Miami's many neighborhoods and (4) a study of the urban infill classification. Included within the EAR -based Amendments we are advancing are references to each of these new elements with time deadlines for completion of the important ongoing planning work. We hope that you will understand, embrace and support the additional hard work and resources necessary to accomplish the formulation and adoption of these new elements. We regard planning for the future of our City as an ongoing, interactive process that must continue with the same vigor and commitment as that of the recent past months. We wish to bring to your attention the extraordinary, expanded work required of both City Staff and the outside consultants to bring us to this point. They have worked above -and -beyond the call of duty and we are profoundly grateful to each member of the collective team for their professional work. We note that it is likely that this process will exceed the budgeted allocations for the work, We assure you that the extra investment in this process will serve the public good for many years to come. Over the many years of my civic engagement in our community, I have been privileged to serve on a number of public boards as the appointee of elected official(s). No service on any public board, in my view, exceeds the importance of serving as a member of the City of Miami's PAB at this time in the City's transformation. I am very grateful to Commission Chair Joe Sanchez for the privilege of serving on the PAB as his appointee. Likewise I have never served on a Board where members have been as thoughtful, deliberate and dedicated to the tasks at hand. As dedicated and informed volunteers, they have put in an extraordinary number of hours to complete this responsibility. On behalf of my fellow PAB members, I am certain that they are equally grateful for their opportunity for service on the PAB. Respectfully submitted, Arva More Parks-McCa THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The City and consultants began the public participation process by meeting with a small group of community representatives who were appointed by our City Commissioners. Each representative was given the opportunity to comment on proposed outreach programs, proposed draft MCNP amendments, and effective methods of public outreach in his or her community. Along with these committee group meetings, 10 neighborhood meetings were held (2 per commission district) to collect public input on the EAR -Based Amendments. # Date Meeting Location 1 Thursday, November 01, 2007 Appointed Committee Group Meeting 1 Miami City Hall 2 Tuesday, January 08, 2008 Appointed Committee Group Meeting 2 Miami City Hall 3 Tuesday, January 29, 2008 District 1, Flagami Antonio Maceo Park 4 Wednesday, January 30, 2008 District 4, Flagami Kinloch Park 5 Thursday, January 31, 2008 District 2, Upper Eastside Legion Park 6 Friday, February 01, 2008 Appointed Committee Group Meeting 3 Miami Riverside Center 7 Monday, February 04, 2008 District 3, Coral Way St. Sophia 8 Tuesday, February 05, 2008 District 4, West Flagler St. Michael Meeting Hall 9 Wednesday, February 06, 2008 District 2, S/W Coconut Grove Frankie S. Rolle Center 10 Thursday, February 07, 2008 District 3, Little Havana Citrus Grove Elementary School 11 Monday, February 11, 2008 District 5, Overtown Culmer Center 12 Tuesday, February 12, 2008 District 5, Model City Hadley Park 13 Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Parks Meeting with Miami Neighborhoods United Miami Riverside Center 14 Wednesday, February 13, 2008 District 1, Allapattah Curtis Park 15 Friday, February 29, 2008 Meeting with Ms. Arva Parks, PAB Chairperson Miami Riverside Center 16 Wednesday, March 05, 2008 PAB Discussion Miami City Hall 17 Wednesday, March 19, 2008 PAB Workshop Miami City Hall 18 Monday, March 31, 2008 PAB Recommendation Miami City Hall 19 Friday, April 11, 2008 Meeting with Ms. Arva Parks, PAB Chairperson Miami Riverside Center 20 Wednesday, April 16, 2008 PAB Recommendation (cont.) Miami City Hall 21 Wednesday, April 30, 2008 PAB Recommendation (cont.) Miami City Hall 22 Thursday, May 08, 2008 City Commission - DCA Transmittal Hearing Miami City Hall 23 Thursday, July 24, 2008 Adoption Hearing (tentative) TBA THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 1 Prior to the meetings listed on the previous page, the City actually initiated its EAR process with an extensive community involvement effort that occurred between April 2004 and July 2004. During this time, the Project Team conducted 30 meetings that entailed a series of one-on-one meetings with key City staff and elected officials, an interagency scoping meeting held with adjacent local governments, and County, regional, and State agencies, five public workshops (one per Commission district), and a workshop with the City's Planning Advisory Board. # Date Meeting 1 Tuesday, April 27, 2004 Commissioner Gonzales Meeting (District 1) 2 Wednesday, April 28, 2004 Commissioner Regaldo Meeting (District 4) 3 Thursday, April 29, 2004 Commissioner Winton Meeting (District 2) 4 Friday, April 30, 2004 Commissioner Sanchez Meeting (District 3) 5 Friday, April 30, 2004 Mayor Diaz Meeting 6 Wednesday, May 05, 2004 Commissioner Teele Meeting (District 5) 7 Thursday, May 13, 2004 Historic Preservation Meeting 8 Friday, May 14, 2004 EAR/Transportation Element Update 9 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 4) 10 Thursday, May 20, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 2) 11 Friday, May 21, 2004 Capital Improvements Element Meeting 12 Monday, May 24, 2004 EAR Interagency Scoping Meeting Issues at Miami City Hall 13 Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 5) 14 Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Brownfields Meeting 15 Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Transportation Element Meeting 16 Wednesday, May 26, 2004 Parks Meeting 17 Friday, May 28, 2004 Economic Development Meeting 18 Tuesday, June 01, 2004 Summary of Issues — Housing 19 Tuesday, June 01, 2004 Summary of Issues — Public Works 20 Thursday, June 03, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 1) 21 Monday, June 07, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 3) 22 Wednesday, June 09, 2004 Summary of Issues — Land Use 23 Thursday, June 10, 2004 Summary of Issues — Solid Waste 24 Thursday, June 17, 2004 Planning Staff Issues and Ideas 25 Friday, June 25, 2004 Transportation Element — Person Trip Methodology 26 Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Transportation Element — Person Trip Methodology 27 Thursday, July 15, 2004 Miami River Corridor— Urban lnfill Plan Meeting 28 Tuesday, July 20, 2004 Transportation Element — Person Trip Methodology 29 Wednesday, July 28, 2004 Miami River Corridor — Urban Infill Plan Meeting Via Teleconference 30 Wednesday, July 28, 2004 Planning Advisory Board Workshop THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 2 PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING, ADDING, AND DELETING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 163, PART II, FLORIDA STATUTES. TO INCORPORATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE 2005 EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PABffi08-014a A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED MIAMI RIVER SUB -ELEMENT AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.; P.1 VOTE: 6-2 AIIEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O8-014b A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: GOAL PA-3: "THE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER WHICH ENCOMPASSES THE WATER DEPENDENT MARINE ACTIVITY ON THE RIVER, INCLUDING SHIPPING AND THE ASSOCIATED SUPPORTING MARINE INDUSTRIES ZONED SD-4 ON THE MIAMI RIVER, SHALL BE ENCOURAGED TO CONTINUE OPERATION AS A VALUED AND ECONOMICALLY VIABLE COMPONENT OF THE CITY'S MARITIME INDUSTRIAL BASE"; POLICY PA-3.1.1 : "THE CITY MAY ENCOURAGE THE ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF WATER -DEPENDANT AND WATER -RELATED USES ALONG THE BANKS OF THE MIAMI RIVER ALONG WITH WATER TAXI AND WATER PLEASURE CRAFT USES ALONG THE ENTIRE RIVER AND TO DISCOURAGE ENCROACHMENT BY INCOMPATIBLE USES. THE CITY SHALL, THROUGH ITS LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE MIAMI RIVER IN APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS, PROVIDED THE RESIDENTIAL USES ARE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT LAND USES WHILE PROTECTING THE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER'S ECONOMIC FUNCTION, OPERATIONS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS"; AND POLICY PA-3.1.3: "THE CITY SHALL ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER TO AVOID FURTHER DEPLETION OF LAND ZONED FOR MARINE INDUSTRIAL USE AND TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS ARISING FROM THE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER UPON ADJACENT NATURAL RESOURCES AND LAND USES". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST:", .41, Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, [director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014c A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: POLICY LU- 1.4.10: "THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO DEVELOP MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING REGULATIONS WITH THE INTENT OF PROVIDING GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE GENERAL DOWNTOWN AREA AND PARTICULARLY ALONG THE MIAMI RIVER DOWNTOWN AREA AND PARTICULARLY ALONG THE MIAMI RIVER DOWNTOWN IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ADOPTED AS A RESULT OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND OTHER INITIATIVES POLICY LU- 1.3.3: "THE CITY SHALL ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF WATER DEPENDENT AND WATER RELATED USES ON THE MIAMI RIVER WITHIN EXISTING DISTRICTS DESIGNATED INDUSTRIAL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP"; AND POLICY HO 2.1.4: "THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW, HIGH QUALITY, DENSE URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS ALONG THE MIAMI RIVER (IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 1992 MIAMI RIVER MASTER PLAN), IN CENTRAL BRICKELL AND IN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN / PARK WEST". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanche , Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014d A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: GOAL CM-3: "PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF LAND FOR WATER DEPENDENT USES"; OBJECTIVE CM-3.1: "ALLOW NO NET LOSS OF ACREAGE DEVOTED TO WATER DEPENDENT USES IN THE COASTAL AREA OF THE CITY OF MIAMI"; POLICY CM-3.1.1: "FUTURE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WILL ENCOURAGE WATER DEPENDENT USES ALONG THE SHORELINE". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A I I EST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchezi, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014e A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: POLICY LU- 2.2.3: "THE CITY WILL REQUIRE, AS PART OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, PURSUANT TO STATE LAW, THAT THE CITY OF MIAMI ARCHAEOLOGIST BE NOTIFIED OF CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES IN SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL ZONES AND WHERE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL OR ARCHAEOLOGICAL ARTIFACTS ARE UNCOVERED DURING CONSTRUCTION, PERMIT STATE AND LOCAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL OFFICIALS THE OPPORTUNITY OF SURVEYING AND EXCAVATING THE SITE". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A I I EST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-48M14f A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: POLICY SS- 2.1.1: "THE CITY WILL ADHERE TO ITS 1986 STORM DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN AND SUBSEQUENT UPDATES AS THE LONG-RANGE POLICY GUIDELINE FOR IMPROVING ITS STORM DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AND WILL UPDATE THE ESTIMATED COST OF IMPLEMENTING THAT PLAN THROUGH THE ANNUAL UPDATES TO THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM INCLUDED 1N THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT OF THE MCNP, THE CITY WILL RANK THE PROJECTS SPECIFIED IN THE 1986 STORM DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN, WITH PRIORITY GIVEN TO ADDRESSING THE MOST CRITICAL PROBLEM AREAS WITHIN THE CITY, AND IMPLEMENT THOSE PROJECTS SUPPORTED BY A FINANCING PLAN ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE VIII OF THE CITY CODE, ENTITLED "STORM WATER UTILITY SYSTEM, THE 1986 PLAN WILL BE UPDATED BY 2010 WITH MEASURABLE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. THE PLAN WILL BE REPORTED AND REVIEWED ANNUALLY AND AT TIME OF EAR". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO,: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, irector Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014g A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: m Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014h A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "POTABLE WATER'' AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez,HJirector Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "SOLID WASTE COLLECTION" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A I I EST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O8®O14j A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "PORTS, AVIATION AND RELATED FACILITIES". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST:'` -)1, Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014k A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE' AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A I LEST: -. Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O8.O14I A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO,: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: f i Aria Gelabert-Sanchez, irector Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014m A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.11 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O8 O14n A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A I I EST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez,-Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O8®O14© A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "HOUSING HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez,tirectar Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014p A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "SANITARY STORM SEWERS". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert.-Sanchez, khirectar Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014q A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "COASTAL MANAGEMENT". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014r A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES: "AREAS DESIGNATED AS MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" ALLOW FACILITIES FOR FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES, MAJOR PUBLIC OR PRIVATE HEALTH, RECREATIONAL, CULTURAL, RELIGIOUS OR EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES, AND MAJOR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES. RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES ANCILLARY TO THESE USES ARE ALLOWED UP TO A MAXIMUM DENSITY EQUIVALENT TO THE LEAST INTENSE ABUTTING/ADJACENT ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE SAME LIMITING CONDITIONS". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A 1 EST: -- ;..6 Ana Geiabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB.08-014s A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: POLICY LU- 1.3.10: "THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO AGGRESSIVELY ADDRESS CODE VIOLATIONS IN ITS NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ONGOING AND NEW NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT STRATEGIES AND INITIATIVES; AND WILL ADOPT AND ENFORCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS APPROPRIATE TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE THE PHYSICAL CONDITION AND APPEARANCE OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS IN THE CITY BY JULY 2009. THE CITY WILL REPORT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, AS OF CALENDAR YEAR END, WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS POLICY" HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A l I EST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Dit`ector Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014t A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: POLICY LU- 1.5.3: "NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMITS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO ANY NET REGISTERED HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS FIFTEEN DAYS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT AND AFTER ISSUANCE OF THE DECISION" AND POLICY LU-1.5.4: "NOTICE OF APPLICATIONS REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO ANY NET REGISTERED HOMEOWNER AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND TO OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: 1, Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Ditector Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O$-014u A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "FUTURE LAND USE HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. City of lami Legislation Ordinance City 3500 Pan ArnEffican LThve rulami: FL 33133 www. aza icov corn NunDer: 08-00223ct Action Date: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE MIAt‘,41 COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING, ADDING, AND DELETING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 163, PART U, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO INCORPORATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE 2005 EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 163, Part 1, Florida Statutes (F.S.), the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) was adopted by the City Commission of the City of Miami by Ordinance No. 10544 on February 9, 1989; and WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) require that each local government periodically update its comprehensive plan through the preparation and adoption of an evaluation and appraisal report assessing the success or failure of the adopted comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission adopted the Evaluation and Appraisal Report on December lst, 2005; and WHEREAS, R-05-0707, adopting the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), indicated that the City of Miami shall consider amendment of the MCNP based on recommendations in the EAR and shall consider updating the comprehensive plan in accordance with Sections 163.3184, 163.3187, and 163.3191, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part li, F.S., requires that each local government incorporate recommendations contained in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report as amendments to the MCNP; and WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Board; at its meeting of April 30, 2008, Item No.1, following an advertised public hearing, adopted by Resolution No. PAB 08-014, by a vote of eight to zero (8-0) recommending APPROVAL with modifications of text amendments to the MCNP, as attached in "Exhibit A" {1}; and WHEREAS, the Panning Advisory Board, at its meeting of April 30, 2008, Item No.1, following an advertised public hearing, adopted by Resolution No. PAB 08-014a, by a vote of six to two (6-2) recommending DENIAL of the proposed Miami River Sub -Element as presented by the Planning Department, as attached in ''Exhibit B"; and City opliami Page 1 of 2 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Printed On: 5/2/2008 Number: 08-0022.3ct WHEREAS; on May 8, 2008 the City Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time it voted to transmit the amendments attached as "'Exhibit A" {1} for review by state, regional and local agencies as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of !his matter deems it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to amend the MCNP as hereinafter set forTh. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1 The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Ordinance are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Section. Section 2. Ordinance No. 10544T as amended, the IVICNP, is hereby, amended by amending the text of the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of said Ordinance as attached in "Exhibit A. {1} Section 3. The City Manager is directed to instruct the Director of the Planning Department to immediately transmit certified copies of this Ordinance and the amended MCNP to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Tallahassee, Florida; South Florida Regional Planning Council, Hollywood, Florida; and any other public official or government agency requesting a copy for statutorily mandated review. Section 4. If any section, part of section, paragraph, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is declared invalid, the remaining provisions cf this Ordinance shall not be affected. Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty-one (31) days after second reading and adoption thereof pursuant and subject to 4'163.3184, 163,3187; and 163.3189, F.S. (2007). {2} APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS JULIE 0 BRU CITY ATTORNEY Footnotes: {1} Words and/or figures stricken through shall be deleted. Underscored words and/or figures shall be added. The remaining provisions are now in effect and remain unchanged. {2} This Ordinance shall become effective as specified herein unless vetoed by the Mayor within ten days from the date it was passed and adopted. If the Mayor vetoes this Ordinance, it shall become effective date stated herein, whichever is later. City of Miami Page 2 of 2 Printed On: 5/2/2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF TIHS DOCUMENT. ase en eats File ID: 08®00223et Exhibit A THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Notice: This document is the Planning Advisory Board recommended EAR -Based Amendment document of April 30, 2008. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Volume 1 of -the MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN GOALS OBJECTIVES POLICIES City of Miami Planning Department 444 SW 2nd Avenue • Miami, FL 33130 June 2006EAR Revision April 30, 2008 The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan was adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989 and has been amended by the City Commission through March 23, 2006. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Volume 1 of the MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN GOALS OBJECTIVES POLICIES TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF AMENDING ORDINANCES IV FUTURE LAND USE 1 URBAN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 15 The Downtown Miami Master Plan 17 REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS 18 Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center 19 INTERPRETATION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MAP 22 CONSERVATION 22 RESTRICTED PARKS AND RECREATION 22 RECREATION 23 MARINE FACILITIES 23 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 23 DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL 24 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 24 HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 25 Little Havana Target Area 25 Southeast Overtown/Park West 25 Brickell, Omni, and River Quadrant 25 OFFICE 25 MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES 26 MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES 26 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL 28 MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES 28 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) 28 Residential Density Increase Areas 29 GENERAL COMMERCIAL 30 INDUSTRIAL 30 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI) 30 Live/Work District 31 Work/Live District 31 CORRESPONDENCE TABLE — ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 32 HOUSING 33 SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS 40 NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE 45 POTABLE WATER 46 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION 47 TRANSPORTATION 50 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PORTS, AVIATION AND RELATED FACILITIES 64 PORT OF MIAMI 64 MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 65 PORT OF MIAMI RIVER 66 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE 68 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE 68 COASTAL MANAGEMENT 86 NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION 95 EDUCATION 100 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 112 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION 120 1 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 iii LIST OF AMENDING ORDINANCES The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan was adopted in 1989 and substantially amended in 1991 in response to Florida Department of Community Affairs review comments. The ordinance adopting the Comprehensive Plan, including subsequent text amendments (only), are as follows: Ordinance Date of Adoption Description of Ordinance 10544 February 9, 1989 Adopted the MCNP 1989-2000 with modifications that supersedes the MCNP (September 1985) and Addendum, provided support documents are not adopted with the plan. 10700 January 11, 1990 Amended the definition of the Land Use Element to refine the definitions of Residential, Office and Industrial; amended the Housing Element Objective 1.3 and Policy 1.3.4 and deleted Policy 1.3.5 pertaining to community - based residential facilities, adult congregate living facilities, family homes and family group and group homes; and corrected a scrivener's error. 10701 January 11, 1990 Amended the Drainage Sub -Element, Policy No. 2.1.3, specifying which storm sewers in the city will be designed for a 1-in-5 year event and establishing a specific LOS standard for the remainder of the storm sewers; Coastal Management Sub -Element, Policy 4.1.2, defining and designating the Coastal High -Hazard Area within the city; and adopted consistent LOS standards in both the Drainage Sub -Element and Policy No. 1.2.3 (d) of the CIP Element. 10832 January 24, 1991 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use; Interpretation of Future Land Use Maps; Housing; Sanitary and Storm Sewers; Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge; Potable Water; Solid Waste Collection; Transportation; Ports, Aviation & Related Facilities; Parks, Recreation & Open Space; Coastal Management; Natural Resource Conservation; and Capital Improvements and Intergovernmental Coordination elements. 10833 January 24, 1991 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use Map Plan by changing land use designations that affect approximately 5-percent of the total land area of the City. 11207 December 1, 1994 Allowed professional offices, tourist & guest homes, and museums within historic districts/structures within single family, duplex and medium density multi -family residential areas. 11242 March 27, 1995 Allowed small-scale, limited commercial uses as accessory uses within medium, density multi -family areas. 11496 May 22, 1997 Allowed professional offices, tourist & guest homes, museums, and private clubs or lodges within historic districts/structures within single family, duplex and medium density multi -family residential areas; density and intensity restricted to the structure(s). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 iv THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Ordinance Date of Adoption Description of Ordinance 11779 March 23, 1999 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use; Housing; Sanitary and Storm Sewers; Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge; Potable Water; Solid Waste Collection; and Parks, Recreation & Open Space elements according to 1995 EAR -based recommendations. 11781 March 23, 1999 Amended the Interpretation of Future Land Use Map to conditionally include residential uses to the general commercial land use designation. 11782 March 23, 1999 Amended the MCNP Interpretation of the Future Land Use Map to add "Restricted Parks and Recreation" and "Marine Facilities" land use classifications. 11864 November 16, 1999 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use Element to adopt the designation of an "urban infill" area to meet State requirements regarding school siting and co -location. 11961 September 14, 2000 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use Element, Policy LU-1.1.11, to exclude Virginia Key, Watson Island, and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay having a "conservation" land use and zoning classification from the Urban Infill Area. 12332 February 27, 2003 Amended the Transportation Element of the MCNP in accordance with recommendations of the 1995 Evaluation and Appraisal Report; revisions to the "Report of Sufficiency Issues with Responses by the City of Miami" in response to the Florida Department of Community Affairs; affirmation of the designation of an "urban infill" area adopted by Ordinance 11864; and in accordance with the designation of an "urban streets" category of public thoroughfares. 12333 February 27, 2003 Amended the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element of the MCNP to include specific goals associated with a new park in Little Haiti. 12346 March 27, 2003 Amended the MCNP Interpretation of the Future Land Use Map to add a "Light Industrial" land use classification. 12442 November 25, 2003 Rescinded Ordinance Nos. 12332, 12333 and 12346; updated the Transportation Element, added policies associated with a new park in Little Haiti, and added the "Light Industrial" land use classification. 12445 November 25, 2003 Amended the Future Land Use Element of the MCNP to include the designation of "Regional Activity Centers" within the City of Miami. 12446 November 25, 2003 Amended the Future Land Use Element of the MCNP to designate the Buena Vista Regional Activity Center, and amended the Future Land Use Map to designate the Florida East Coast (FEC) Buena Vista Yard as a Regional Activity Center. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Ordinance Date of Adoption Description of Ordinance 12536 May 6, 2004 Amended the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the MCNP in accordance to recommendations from the 1995 Evaluation and Appraisal Report; amended the Future Land Use Element by deleting an objective and policies related to Intergovernmental Coordination by transferring them into the Intergovernmental Coordination Element. 12635 December 4, 2004 Amended the Coastal Management, Natural Resource Conservation and Capital Improvements elements of the MCNP in accordance to recommendations from the 1995 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. 12741 November 3, 2005 Amended the Future Land Use Element of the MCNP and the Future Land Use Map to designate the Downtown Miami Master Plan an Urban Central Business District. 12786 March 23, 2006 Amends certain policies of the Future Land Use, Housing, Parks Recreation & Open Space, Coastal Management and Capital Improvements elements of the MCNP to incorporate language necessary to implement the Miami 21 project. 12966 January 24, 2008 Adding a new Educational Element and amending and adding certain policies to the Capital Improvement and Intergovernmental element of the MCNP to incorporate language necessary to implement Public School Concurrency. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 vi THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. FUTURE LAND USE Goal LU-1: Maintain a land use pattern that (1) protects and enhances the quality of life in the City's city's rcsidcntial neighborhoods; (2) fosters redevelopment and revitalization of blighted or declining areas; (3) promotes and facilitates economic development and the growth of job opportunities in the city; (4) fosters the growth and development of downtown as a regional center of domestic and international commerce, culture and entertainment; (5) promotes the efficient use of land and minimizes land use conflicts while protecting and preserving residential sections within neighborhoods; and (6) protects and conserves the city's significant natural and coastal resources; and (7) protects the integrity and quality of the City's existing neighborhoods. Objective LU-1.1: Ensure that land and development regulations are consistent with fostering a high quality of life in all areas, including the timely provision of public facilities that meet or exceed the minimum level of service (LOS) standards adopted in the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Policy LU-1.1.1: Development orders authorizing new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the density or intensity of land use shall be contingent upon the availability of public facilities and serviccc that meet or exceed the minimum LOS standards adopted in the CIE, specifically sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater, potable water, parks and recreation, and transportation facilities. The public services and facilities provided to meet concurrency requirements shall be consistent with the Capital Improvements Element, or guaranteed in an enforceable agreement. The public services and facilities will include public schools when the Miami -Dade County School Board and local governments in the county implement school concurrency pursuant to paragraph 163.3177(12)(i), F.S.- Policy LU-1.1.2: The City's Planning Department, with the assistance of various City departments and agencies, shall be responsible for monitoring will -(1) continuously monitor land development activities to ensure compliance with the Future Land Use Plan Map and the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use element of the MCNP; (2) monitor all proposed amendments to land development regulations to ensure consistency with the MCNP and will forward its recommendation on such amendments to the Planning Advisory Board and to the City Commission; (3) continuously monitor the current and projected LOS standards provided by public facilities; and. The Planning Department shall will perform the required concurrency review of proposed development for submittal to the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA), as required by Florida statutes and administrative rules Policy LU-1.1.3: The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 1 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. natural or man-made amenities; and (3) transportation policies that divide or fragment established neighborhoods; and (4) degradation of public open space, environment, and ecology. Strategies to further protect existing neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood will be incorporated into the City's land development regulations. Policy LU-1.1.4: The City will increase its code enforcement efforts by 10% each year and continue the enforcement of performance standards The City will continue to aggressively address code violations in its neighborhoods through the implementation of code enforcement strategies and initiatives with the intent of preserving and enhancing neighborhood environmental conditions. Policy LU-1.1.5: The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City departments and agencies, shall annually monitor steps taken to fulfill the Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) of the MCNP and biennially report the status of the GOPs to the Planning Advisory Board and City Commission, including, but not limited to, improving measurability of objectives. Policy LU-1.1.6: The City's street and storm sewer improvement projects will provide curb and gutter, and street landscaping, unless deemed to be physically or economically infeasible. Policy LU-1.1.7: Land development regulations and policies will allow for the development and redevelopment of well -designed mixed -use neighborhoods that provide for the full range of residential, office, live/work spaces, neighborhood retail, and community facilities in a walkable area and that are amenable to a variety of transportation modes, including pedestrianism, bicycles, automobiles, and mass transit provision, of,Qadequaterh neighborhood shopping, recreation, day care, entePta'„ Policy LU-1.1.8: The City's Planning Department will be responsible for coordinating the City's land development regulations and policies with those of Miami -Dade County and adjacent municipalities, and in particular: with respect to impacts to infrastructure, contiguous development with regard to physical height and mass transitions, and public open space. Policy LU-1.1.9: The City will maintain low to moderate density uses in the West Flagami area of the city (as shown on Figure 111.1 of Volume 11 — Data and Analysis of the MCNP) as necessary to protect the secondary aquifer recharge area. (See Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Policy AR-1.2.1.) Policy LU-1.1.10: The City's land development regulations will encourage high density residential development and redevelopment in close proximity to Metrorail and Metromover stations_, consistent with the Station Area Design and Development Plan for each station. (See Transportation Policy TR-1.5.2 and Housing Policy HO-1.1.9.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 2 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-1.1.11: The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as shown on "Attachment A," as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Areas designated Single -Family and Duplex —Residential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from changes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density residential character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be encouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors. Within this area, Outside of these residential areas, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of tip Transportation Element of the MCNP. Policy LU-1.1.12: In order to encourage the development and maintenance of educational facilities in the City of Miami, the City's Land Use policies permit schools in all land use classifications except Conservation, Restricted Public Parks and Recreation, and Industrial. During pre -development program planning and site selection activities, the City shall coordinate with Miami -Dade Public Schools and continue to seek, where feasible and mutually acceptable, to co -locate schools with other facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers to the extent possible. Policy LU-1.1.13: The City shall review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) within two years of the adoption of this policy to determine, but not limited to, the following: the appropriateness of the areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA; the benefits and/or disadvantages resulting from the inclusion (or exclusion) of these areas within the UTA and/or the TCEA; the strategies to support mobility and alternative modes of transportation within those areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA; and the strategies to address urban design and network connectivity to improve mobility within those areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA. Policy LU-1.1.14: Improve facility and program accessibility through implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 3 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective LU-1.2: Promote, facilitate, and catalyze the redevelopment and revitalization of blighted, declining or threatened residential, commercial and industrial areas through a variety of public, private, and public -private redevelopment initiatives and revitalization programs including, where appropriate, historic designations. Policy LU-1.2.1: The City defines blighted neighborhoods as areas characterized by the prevalence of older structures with major deficiencies and deterioration, high residential vacancies, widespread abandonment of property, litter and poor maintenance of real property. Declining neighborhoods are defined as areas characterized by the prevalence of structures having minor deficiencies, a general need for improvements in real property, significant declines in real property values, high vacancy rates in commercial structures and increasing difficulty in obtaining insurance. Neighborhoods threatened with decline are defined as areas characterized by significant but infrequent property maintenance neglect, an aging housing stock, declining property values, general exodus of traditional residents and influx of lower income households. Policy LU-1.2.2: The City's land development policies will be consistent with affordable housing objectives and policies adopted in the Housing element Element of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood PIanMCNP. Policy LU-1.2.3: The City's residential, commercial and industrial revitalization programs will continue to place highest priority on protecting neighborhoods areas, and third priority to removing blighted conditions, and the City will continue its efforts to secure federal and state aid in developing comprehensive redevelopment programs. priorities in implementing, facilitation, and encouraqinq redevelopment and revitalization proiects shall be determined on an area specific basis in accordance with the adopted Consolidated Plan, Fiscal Years 2004-2009, adopted redevelopment plans, specific neiqhborhood and area plans, the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan, and the land development regulations, as appropriate and as incorporated in the MCNP by reference in accordance with F.A.C. 9J-5.005(2)(q). Policy LU-1.2.4: The City will continue to adhere to its established policies regarding Community Redevelopment Districts and will continue to implement plans for the Omni and Southeast Overtown/Park West as Community Redevelopment Districts. Policy LU-1.2.5: The City will continue to develop information programs on the availability of redevelopment opportunities within the city. Objective LU-1.3: The City will continue to encourage commercial, office and industrial development within existing commercial, office and industrial areas; increase the utilization and enhance the physical character and appearance of existing buildings; encourage the development of well -designed, mixed -use neighborhoods that provide for a variety of uses within a walkable area in accordance Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 4 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. with neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives; and concentrate new commercial and industrial activity in areas where the capacity of existing public facilities can meet or exceed the minimum standards for Level of Service (LOS) adopted in the Capital Improvement Element (CIE). Policy LU-1.3.1: The City will continue to provide incentives for commercial redevelopment and new construction where such redevelopment will contribute to the improvement in the built environment in desiqnated Neighborhood Development Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Brownfield Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted areas. Such commercial redevelopment and new construction shall be conducted in accordance with neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives. Such incentives may be offered through the building facade treatment program, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, and other redevelopment assistance programs. Policy LU-1.3.2: The City will continue to encourage the expansion of existing buildings and new construction through the private sector by assisting in making available commercial loan funds for rehabilitation and small business loans and seed moneys, particularly to local minority businesses and encouraging the maximum participation, especially through public/private partnerships, of financial institutions, chambers of commerce, the Beacon Council, other business organizations, property owners and residents of the areas. Priority areas include, but are not limited to, Edison Center, Southeast Overtown/Park West, the Garment District, Little River Industrial District, Little Haiti, and the Omni Area Redevelopment District. designated Neiqhborhood Development Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Brownfield Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted areas. Policy LU-1.3.3: {Reserved] The City shall encourage development and redevelopment of water dependent and water related uses on the Miami River within existing districts designated Industrial on the Future Land Use Map. Policy LU-1.3.4: The City will continue to work with the Miami -Dade County School Board to ensure the expansion of educational facilities in areas that are easily accessible by public transit and facilitate the expansion of job training/job placement programs offered to youths (full time and summer terms) and low-income persons. Policy LU-1.3.5: The City will continue to promote through its land development regulations, the creation of high intensity activity centers which may be characterized by mixed -use and specialty center development. Such activity centers will be in accordance with the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 5 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 1 Policy LU-1.3.6: The City will continue to encourage a diversification in the mix of industrial and commercial activities and tenants through strategic and comprehensive marketing and promotion efforts so that the local economy_ designated Neighborhood Development Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Brownfield Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted areas is -are buffered from national and international cycles. Policy LU-1.3.7: The City will continue to use the City's Enterprise Zone. and Tax Increment Financing district, Empowerment Zone, Commercial Business Corridors, and Brownfield Redevelopment Area strategies to stimulate economic revitalization, and encourage employment opportunities. Policy LU-1.3.8: The City will develop and implement lob training and educational programs to assist the City's existing and future residents in achieving economic self-sufficiency utilizing government resources as necessary, and will continue to work with appropriate State and County agencies to direct training programs and other technical assistance, to support minority and semi -skilled residents of the city. Policy LU-1.3.9: The City will continue to concentrate Community Development efforts in small geographic areas that have special opportunities and/or potential for redevelopment such as the Little Haiti commercial district, Latin Quarter, Little River Industrial District, Southeast Overtown/Park West, the Garment District, Allapattah Industrial District and Downtown Flagler Street, consistent with implementation of small -area action plans that have the support of neighborhood residents and business owners. Policy LU-1.3.10: The City will increase code enforcement efforts by 10% each year and will continue to aggressively address code violations in its neiqhborhoods through the implementation of ongoing and new neighborhood improvements, and code enforcement strategies and initiatives; and will adopt and enforce consider the adoption and enforcement of performance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance the physical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial areas in the city by July 2009. The City will report on an annual basis, as of calendar year end, what has been accomplished to fulfill the requirements of this policy. Policy LU-1.3.11: The City's land use regulations will provide incentives for the inclusion of day care facilities near major employment centers. Policy LU-1.3.12: The City's land use regulations will permit neighborhood -based health care facilities. Policy LU-1.3.13: [Reserved] Policy LU-1.3.14: The City will continue to enforce urban design guidelines for public and private projects which shall be consistent with neighborhood character, history, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 6 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. and function, and shall be in accordance with the neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives. Policy LU-1.3.15: The City will continue to encourage a development pattern that enhances existinq neighborhoods by developing a balanced mix of uses including areas for employment, shopping, housing, and recreation in close proximity to each other. Objective LU-1.4: Continue the growth of Downtown Miami, expand its role as a center of domestic and international commerce, further its development as a regional center for the performing arts and other cultural and entertainment activities and develop an urban residential base. Policy LU-1.4.1: [Reserved]. Policy LU-1.4.2: The City will continue to investigate and, where appropriate, create management districts, funded by special assessments to provide extra services and special events needed to attract visitors and residents to the Flagler Street retail core, and other special retail shopping areas in downtown. Policy LU-1.4.3: The City will continue to promote an active pedestrian sidewalk environment along the ground floor frontage of buildings on "pedestrian streets" through land development regulations. Policy LU-1.4.4: The City will continue to support Miami Dade County in construction of a regional performing arts center in downtown. [Reserved] - Policy LU-1.4.5: Reserved] Policy LU-1.4.6: [Reserved] Policy LU-1.4.7: The City will continue to enforce regulations within downtown to ensure that retail signage is of high quality and consistent with the design and development objectives for downtown. Policy LU-1.4.8: The City will continue to enforce land development regulations as necessary in order to encourage rehabilitation and sensitive, adaptive reuse of historic properties and older structures in downtown, and to exempt rehabilitation projects from Development of Regional Impact (DRI) mitigation fees. Policy LU-1.4.9: The City will continue to promote rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of vacant and underutilized spaces and provide incentives for rehabilitation of older buildings in downtown. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 7 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-1.4.10: The City will continue to develop modifications to existing regulations with the intent of providing greater flexibility in the design and implementation of mixed -use developments within the general Downtown area and particularly along the Miami River Downtown in accordance with neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives. Policy LU-1.4.11: The City will continue to streamline the development application for development approvals to simplify and standardize the process, while ensuring that the regulatory intent of the approvals is maintained. Policy LU-1.4.12: The City will continue to implement the Downtown DRI development orders for downtown and Southeast Overtown/Park West, and seek approval for future increments of development in a timely manner. Objective LU-1.5: Land development regulations will protect the city's unique natural and coastal resources, its neighborhoods, and its historic and cultural heritage. Policy LU-1.5.1: Development orders in the city will be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies contained in the Natural Resource Conservation and Coastal Management elements of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan MCNP. Policy LU-1.5.2: Land use regulations and development policies will be consistent with the intent and purpose of Miami -Dade County's Waterfront Charter Amendment, Shoreline Development Review Ordinance, and the_ rules of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Management Area, and other appropriate requirements regarding waterfront access and management. Policy LU-1.5.3: Notice of application for special permits shall be provided to any NET registered homeowners associations fifteen days prior to issuance of the special permit and after issuance of the decision. Policy LU-1.5.4: Notice of application requiring public hearinqs shall be provided to any NET registered homeowner and neiqhborhood associations and to owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Objective LU-1.6: Regulate the development or redevelopment of real property within the city to insure consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy LU-1.6.1: The "Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map" section of this element, which follows these land use goals, objectives and policies, establishes the activities and facilities allowed within each land use category appearing on the Future Land Use Plan Map, and the City's land development regulations shall be consistent with this section of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood PIanMCNP. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 8 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-1.6.2: [Reserved] Policy LU-1.6.3: The City's Planning Department shall review all proposals to amend the City's zoning Zoning ordinance Ordinance and any other land development regulations, and shall report as to the consistency between any proposed amendment and the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood PIanMCNP, to the Planning Advisory Board, the City's "local planning agency," which will then forward its recommendation to the City Commission for approval and adoption. Policy LU-1.6.4: Any proposal to amend the City's zoning Zoning ordinance Atlas that has been deemed to require an amendment to the Future Land Use Plan Map by the Planning Department, shall require a concurrency level of service (LOS) review and a finding from the Planning Department that the proposed amendment will not result in a LOS that falls below the adopted minimum standards described in Policy CI-1.2.3, and will not be in conflict with any element of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood MCNP. Based on its evaluation, and on other relevant planning considerations, the Planning Department will forward a recommended action on said amendment to the Planning Advisory Board, which will then forward its recommendation to the City Commission. Policy LU-1.6.5: The City may continue to use special district designations as a land development regulation instrument for the purpose of accomplishing specific development objectives in particular areas of the city. Policy LU-1.6.6: The City will continue to enforce signage regulations to ensure the quality of life in the city's neighborhoods. Policy LU-1.6.7: [Reserved} The City will provide adequate opportunity for public comment regarding zoning changes and variances within neighborhoods. Policy LU-1.6 The City's land development regulations and policies will allow encourage and/or require, as set forth in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space element of this plan; #ei the provision of open space in development projects in both residential and commercial areas. Policy LU-1.6.9: The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms tomitigate the potentially adverse impacts of future development new development on existing neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood and through adequate notice to affected parties. Policy LU-1.6.10: The City's land development regulations and policies will allow for the provision of safe and convenient on -site traffic flow and vehicle parking and will provide access by a variety of transportation modes, including pedestrianism, bicycles, automobiles, and transit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 9 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-1.6.11: The City's land development regulations and policies will insure that areas designated conservation are protected from development other than that which promotes its passive appreciation. Policy LU-1.6.12 4: The City's land development regulations will direct recreational activities to areas of the city where facilities and services are available. Objective LU 1.7: Encourage recreational dcvclopmcnt within designated recreation use areas, concentrating activities where the capacity of existing public facilities can ccrvc dcvclopmcnt meeting adopted LOS standards. Policy LU 1.7.1: The City's land development regulations will direct recreational activities to areas of the city where facilities and services are available. Objective LU-1.7: Ensure that the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan is updated as needed to meet changing conditions and, improve its effectiveness and success. Policy LU-1.7.1: Update the MCNP by January 2009, to include a detailed list of definition of terms used by the MCNP with an effective time line showing coordination and consultation with various City departments and stakeholders. Goal LU-2: Preserve and protect the heritage of the City of Miami through the identification, evaluation, rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, restoration and public awareness of Miami's historic, architectural and archaeological resources. (See Coastal Management Goal CM-5.) Objective LU-2.1: Maintain, update, and amplify the City of Miami portion of the Miami -Dade County Historic Survey, which identifies and evaluates the city's City's historic, architectural, and archaeological resources, and continue to increase the number of eligible properties included in the Miami -Dade County Historical Survey (See Coastal Management Objective CM-5.1.). Policy LU-2.1.1: The City will continue to identify potential historic districts and conduct further additional historic surveys of contributing and noncontributing buildings to identify eligible historic resources. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.1.) Policy LU-2.1.2: The City will continue to develop and implement a maintain and update the computerized database of all relevant information for all 3T-3-5g sites in the Miami -Dade County Historic Survey. This listing will show, in three categories, all properties of historic, architectural or archaeological significance; together with their priority ranking for presentation. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.2.) Objective LU-2.2: Protect archaeological resources within the city from destruction and loss. Policy LU-2.2.1: The City will pursue the designation of significant archaeological zones under the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 10 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-2.2.2: The City will continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Archaeologist in monitoring building activity near sites known to bc, or having a ssignificGant Ii'4-i ^^dof bei aT s of aT^geological ifiic-anse, activities near archeological sites. Policy LU-2.2.3: The City will require, as part of the building permit application, pursuant to state law, that the Miami Dade CountyCity of Miami archaeologist be notified of construction schedules in significant historical of archaeological zones and where potentially significant historical or archaeological artifacts are uncovered during construction, permit state and local archaeological officials the opportunity of surveying and excavating the site. Policy LU-2.2.4: The City will consider the need for adopting shall adopt an ordinance levying civil penalties for failure to report the discovery of an archaeological site duringconstruction. Objective LU-2.3: Encourage the preservation of all historic architectural, and archaeological resources that have major significance to the city by increasing continuing to increase the number of nationally and locally designated sites by -five percent each year for the period 1996-2001 -2008-2013. Policy LU-2.3.1: The City will continue to review nominations to the National Register of Historic Places through the Certified Local Government Program. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.4.) Policy LU-2.3.2: The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, the City will designate a minimum of 10 individual sites and two districts by 2441- 2010. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.3.) Objective LU-2.4 1 crease the number of historic structures that have been preserved, rehabilitated or restored, according to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. (See Coastal Management Objective CM-5.2.) Policy LU-2.4.1: The City will encourage the conservation, rehabilitation, restoration and adaptive reuse of historic and architecturally significant housing resources through low interest housing rehabilitation loans that may be offered by City agencies. Policy LU-2.4.2: The City will continue to utilize the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation as the minimum standards for the preservation treatment of historic properties. To receive public financial support from the City, designated privately owned structures must meet these standards. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.2.1.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 11 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-2.4.3: The City currently owns ninenine historic sites and other potential archaeological sites. If it is deemed in the public interest benefit for the City to transfer title of City properties of historic, architectural or archaeological significance, such transfers will include restrictive covenants to ensure the protection and preservation of such properties. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.2.2.) Policy LU-2.4.4: The City will continue to work with other local governments that have title to properties of major historic or architectural significance to ensure the conservation, preservation and adaptive and sensitive reuse of such properties. Objective LU-2.5: Increase public awareness of the historical, architectural, archaeological resources and cultural heritage of the city, and public policy and programs to protect and preserve this heritage, through public information and education programs. Policy LU-2.5.1: The City will continue to develop a series of publications relating to historic preservation in general and the city's historic resources in particular. Policy LU-2.5.2: The City will maintain an historic marker program for designated properties and other key areas, and will publish same. Policy LU-2.5.3: [Reserved] Policy LU-2.5.4: The City will continue to provide information on the e#yE Citv's historic, architectural and cultural heritage for inclusion in public information, economic development promotion and tourism materials. (See Coastal Management Policy CM- 5.1.5.) Goal LU-3: Encourage urban redevelopment in identified Urban Infill Areas and Urban Redevelopment Areas. Objective 3-1: Promptly review and act on petitions for land use plan amendments and rezoning of property in Urban Infill Areas or Urban Redevelopment Areas to facilitate redevelopment. Policy LU-3.1.1: Review existing Continue review of existing zoning regulations to determine if they provide adequate flexibility to promote redevelopment with a mix of uses in Urban Infill Areas or Urban Redevelopment Areas and, if not, revise said existing zoning regulations or adopt new zoning regulations to promote redevelopment. Policy LU-3.1.2: Create Regional Activity Centers if appropriate in Urban Infill Areas and Urban Redevelopment Areas to facilitate mixed -use development, encourage mass transit, reduce the need for automobile travel, provide public open space and parks as required in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space element of this plan, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 12 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. provide incentives for quality development, and give definition to the urban form. The permitted uses and density and intensity of uses within a RAC shall be governed by the underlying future land use map designations of the subject property, except as otherwise limited by the designation of the RAC in the comprehensive plan. A designated RAC shall routinely provide service to, or be regularly used by, a significant number of citizens of more than one county; contain adequate existing public facilities as defined in Rule 9J-5, F.A.C., or committed public facilities, as identified in the capital improvements element of the City's comprehensive plan; and shall be proximate and accessible to interstate or major arterial roadways. Policy LU-3.1.3: Designate the Downtown Miami Master Plan area an Urban Central Business District en in order to increase the Development of Regional Impact threshold for development within those portions of downtown Miami that are not already in the DRI area. Objective 3-2: [Reserved] Policy LU-3.2.1: [Reserved] Policy LU-3.2.2: [Reserved] PROPOSED ECONOMIC ELEMENT Goal LU-4: The City will acknowledge the inter -relationship between economic growth and the reduction of economic disparity within the City; issues of land use, affordable housing,the adequacy of infrastructure including the ability of public transit to provide acceptable commutation to and from all areas of the city, education and training, the environment and the Port of the Miami River. Objective LU-4-1: The City shall within, and no later than, two years of the adoption of this goal add an Economic Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan that lays out goals, objectives and policies to provide an environment for sustained economic growth within the City, particularly with respect to those areas of economic activity characterized by higher -paying jobs, while reducing the economic disparity that currently exists among City residents. This Element shall be prepared through the collaboration of the appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders including, but not limited to, representatives of neighborhood groups, business andenvironmental groups, organizations involved in manpower development and training and the Miami River Commission. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 13 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PROPOSED HISTORIC AND CULTURAL ELEMENT Goal LU-5: The City will acknowledge that: a) Historical resources offer an important tool for education, help to provide a distinctive "sense of place" to various neighborhoods in the City, and are a significant resource in promoting tourism; and b) Cultural resources are important reminders and remnants of the history of the area. These resources offer physical evidence of the prehistoric and historic occupation of the land. Objective LU-5.1: The City shall within, and no later than, two years of the adoption ofthis goal add a Historic and Cultural Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan that lays out goals, objectives and policies for those areas with significant historical, archaeological and cultural identities. The preparation of this Element will consider establishing notification procedures for land use changes that may impact historic resources. The Element shall include a list of definitions of terms used including, but not limited to, neighborhoods, adaptive reuse, mixed use, redevelopment and revitalization; with clarity of meaning in the associated context. This Element should be prepared through the collaboration of appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders including, but not limited to, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups and citizens. Protection of historical and archaeological resources is mandated by Federal law and by the State of Florida through the Division of Historical Resources. PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLANS Goal LU-6: The City will acknowledge a) the importance of neighborhood planning and implementation as a tool for maintaining and enhancing the unique character of neighborhoods; and b) the significance of fostering a collaborative relationship between the community and City. Objective LU-6.1: The City shall, no later than 2012, create Neighborhood Master Plans for the City's neighborhoods. Policy LU-6.1.1: Within two years of the adoption of this policy, the City shall prepare maps delineating the geographic boundaries of each neighborhood, which will serve as a tool for creating Neighborhood Master Plans. Policy LU-6.1.2: The appropriate City department(s) shall, through the collaboration of stakeholders, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups, and community members, create Neighborhood Master Plans detailing each neighborhood's unique needs, values, and visions. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 14 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Urban Central Business District An Urban Central Business District (UCBD) identifies the single urban core area within the City of Miami. The UCBD shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, shall contain mass transit service as defined in Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., and shall contain high intensity, high density multi -use development to include: retail; professional and governmental office uses; cultural, recreational and entertainment facilities; high density residential; hotels and motels; and appropriate industrial activities. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 15 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. NW STH ST NW 4TH ST URBAN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT MAP Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 16 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. In accordance with Chapter 28-24.014(10)(a), F.A.C., the guidelines and standards of development, a designated Urban Central Business District within the City of Miami shall: 1. Increase the threshold for residential, hotel, motel, office, or retail development by fifty -percent (50%); 2. Increase the threshold for applicable multi -use guidelines and standards by one - hundred percent (100%), provided that one land use of the multi -use development is residential and the residential development amounts to not less than thirty-five percent (35%) of the City of Miami's applicable residential threshold; and 3. Increase the threshold for resort or convention hotel development by one hundred - fifty percent (150%). The following area has been designated an Urban Central Business District (UCBD) on the City of Miami Future Land Use Map (FLUM): The Downtown Miami Master PIan The Downtown Miami Master Plan was adopted by the Miami City Commission by Resolution Number 89-990 on October 26, 1989. The Downtown Miami Master Plan contains approximately 1, 354 acres and is bounded on the north by: Northwest 20t" Street on the north; Biscayne Bay, including Brickell Key (Claughton Island), on the east; Southwest 15th Road on the south; and Interstate 95, the Miami River, Northwest 5t" Street, Interstate 395 and the Florida East Coast Railroad right-of-way on the west (see the Future Land Use Map for exact boundaries). Permitted Uses: Permitted uses within the Urban Central Business District shall be those of the underlying land use classification within the current Downtown Miami Master Plan, which includes: Central Business District; Major Institutional Public Facilities, Transportation & Utilities; Office; Restricted Commercial; General Commercial; Industrial; Recreation; High -Density Multifamily Residential; and Medium -Density Multifamily Residential (see descriptions in Interpretation of the Future Land Use Map). The following minimum and maximum development thresholds shall apply: The following numerical guidelines and standards shall be applied within the City of Miami's Urban Central Business District according to Chapter 28-24.014(11), F.S.: 1. A development that is at or below eighty -percent (80%) of all numerical thresholds shall not be required to undergo development -of -regional -impact review. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 17 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 2. A development that is between eighty -percent (80%) and one -hundred (100%) percent of a numerical threshold shall be presumed to not require development of regional impact review. 3. A development that is at one -hundred percent (100%) or between one -hundred percent (100%) and one -hundred twenty percent (120%) of a numerical threshold shall be presumed to require development -of -regional -impact review. 4. A development that is at or above one -hundred twenty percent (120%) of any numerical threshold shall be required to undergo development -of -regional -impact review. Regional Activity Centers Regional Activity Center (RAC). A Regional Activity Center designation is intended to encourage and promote large-scale development and redevelopment as well as small parcel infill development and redevelopment that facilitates a balanced mix of land uses by providing maximum flexibility for development and redevelopment activities. In accordance with Chapter 28-24.014(10)(b)2, F.A.C., a Regional Activity Center in the City of Miami shall be a compact, high intensity, high density multi -use area designated as appropriate for intensive growth as an urban infill or urban redevelopment area by the City and may include: residential use; commercial; office; cultural and community facilities; recreational and entertainment facilities; hotels or motels; transportation facilities; utilities; and appropriate industrial activities. The major purposes of this designation are to facilitate mixed -use development, encourage mass transit, reduce the need for automobile travel, provide incentives for quality development and give definition to the urban form. For an area to qualify as a Regional Activity Center, the following criteria must be met: 1. The type of land uses permitted within each Regional Activity Center and the density of residential uses shall be specified herein and within the City of Miami Land Use Plan. 2. Regional Activity Centers shall include mixed land uses of regional significance. 3. Regional Activity Centers shall consist of active pedestrian environments through high quality design of public spaces and buildings that create an appropriate human scale at street level and provide for connectivity of places through the creation of a system of pedestrian linkages. 4. Each Regional Activity Center shall be a defined geographical area of no less than 20 acres and shall be delineated on the City of Miami Future Land Use Plan Map. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 18 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 5. Regional Activity Centers shall be proximate and accessible to interstate or major arterial roadways. The following area has been designated Regional Activity Center within the City of Miami Land Use Plan: Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center The Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center is designated to be a Chapter 380 Regional Activity Center and, subject to amendment of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida by the South Florida Regional Planning Council, as a regional development district (a geographic area specifically designated as highly suitable for increased threshold intensity) for the purpose of increasing DRI thresholds. General Location: South of Northeast 36th Street, North of Northeast 29th Street, East of North Miami Avenue and West of the Florida East Coast Railroad (FEC) right-of-way; excluding certain properties located along Northeast 29th Street. (See Future Land Use Map for exact boundaries). Permitted Uses: Permitted uses shall be as for the underlying land use classification; however, the following minimum and maximum development thresholds shall apply: Residential: 2,000 units minimum / 4,500 units maximum Commercial: 500,000 s.f. minimum / 1,200,000 s.f. maximum Office: 80,000 s.f. minimum / 100,000 s.f. maximum Compatibility: The City shall develop and implement design standards to address compatibility of development within the Buena Vista Regional Activity Center with the surrounding area, which design standards should further the following concepts: ■ New streets and avenues should connect to the existing street grid. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 19 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER MAP BUENA VISTA YARDS Liiii LL1_H� NW 40TH ST NW 37TH ST ' 27 NW 35TH ST NW 1_ I NE 40TH ST I1II li NE 39TH-ST u I .4. S NE38TH-ST TH 5TIF■■■■■c ■■■R • ■■f■■ LI NW 34TH ST NW 33RD ST -NW-1211 ST NW 31ST ST NW 3OTH ST • • i • ■ ■ • ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1■ ■ • ✓ • 1■ I■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I. ■ ■ I■ NW 29TH-ST NE 34TH ST NE 32ND ST N r NNW MINN a ,741 .11 °awar ler • ry • F 4 u a n a =' a a I NE 30Ty, ST •aIf NE 29T11 TER a C a: ■ C ■ a T NE 31ST ST NE 39TH'Sf NE 37TH ST NNE 37TH ST NE'35TH TER NE 35TH ST NE 34TH ST J W NE 33RD' ST !to HE 32ND NE 1ST ST E 30T -NE, 1. 11I F-1" II w NE 29TH ST Iv, NW 2$TH ST 1111 NE 28711 ST II NW 27TH ST II 1 111 III -NE-29T•H-ST NE 28TH ST 1 1 V NE 8TH _NE 29TH TER 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Mika I i i I fi 1 l 1 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 20 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Sidewalks, as principal pedestrian throughways, should be designed to create a comfortable outdoor public space to accommodate a range of active and passive pedestrian activities. ■ Buildings should have ground floor uses that activate the street and relate new development to surrounding areas. • The context and scale of new development should be reflected in new building design, including the setting back of upper floors in order to accommodate height while maintaining human scale at the pedestrian level. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 21 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map The Future Land Use Plan Map is a planning instrument designed to guide the future development and distribution of land uses within the city in a manner that is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP). The Future Land Use Plan Map is a generalized map that does not depict areas of less than 2 acres. The Planning Director is responsible for making all determinations of concurrency as defined in state statutes, and will also interpret the map based on all applicable state laws and administrative regulations and on the consistency between the proposed change or changes and the goals, objectives and policies expressed in the MCNP. The Planning Director will also determine whether or not proposed zoning changes require an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Land development regulations and policies are to be consistent with the Future Land Use Plan Map. The land development regulations further define and describe all requirements applicable to zoning categories contained under each land use designation, permitting the treatment of new development according to the particular conditions existing in different areas, and always consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the MCNP, and specifically with the Land Use Element and its Future Land Use Plan Map. The land use designations are general designations that may include more than one zoning category. All activities and uses within each designation are compatible with each other by virtue of their scale, intensity and character, or by additional conditions required by the land development regulations, more specifically by the City Zoning Ordinance, which describes sped -al and regulates development within zoning districts in order to achieve more definite goals and objectives. The land use designations that appear in the Future Land Use Plan Map are arranged following the "pyramid concept" of cumulative inclusion, whereby subsequent categories are inclusive of those listed previously except as otherwise noted. These designations, and the uses allowed1 in them, are defined as follows: Conservation: This land use designation is restricted to environmentally sensitive areas that are to be left in an essentially natural state. Only activities that reinforce this character are allowed. Public access to these areas, including off-street parking, may be limited when unregulated access may present a threat to wildlife and plant life within such areas. Restricted Pic Parks and Recreation: The primary intent of this land use classification is to conserve the grccn spacc open space and green spaces of -a park while allowing access and uses which will not interfere with the preservation of any significant environmental features which may exist within the park. in question. This land use designation allows only open space and park uses with Limited recreational uses up to a maximum Floor Area Ratio ("FAR") of 0.65 recreational and cultural uses where the total building footprints may cover no more than 25% of the park land area. Such limited recreational uses shall be permiccible when deemed to be an intcgral part of a park's conserve the openness or green space of the park. Some of the recreational uses deemed to be appropriate include naturc trails, intcrprctivc ccntcrs, picnic ar as, playgrounds, canoc 1 "Allowed" or "permitted" uses are allowed by right; "permissible" or "limited uses" are candidates for inclusion, subject to an interpretation of consistency by the Planning Director and a grant of special exception by the Zoning Board. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 22 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. trails and launches, small concession stands, restrooms, and other passive recreational uses whose scale and manner of operation are similar in nature to those described herein. Both passive and active recreational uses shall be permitted including but not limited to -nature trails, interpretive centers, picnic areas, playgrounds, canoe trails and launches, small concession stands, restrooms, gyms, swimming pools, athletic fields, cultural facilities, marine and marina facilities and other facilities supporting passive and active recreational and cultural uses. Lands under this designation with specific qualities that make them desirable for commercial photography shall be allowed to be used in this manner conditionally, and only when it is determined that conducting such commercial photography will not endanger significant environmental features within the area. [Added 3/23/99 by Ordinance 11782.] Commercial Recreation: This land use designation only allows public parks and recreation museums, art galleries and exhibition space, and marine and marina facilitiesSupporting social and entertainment services (restaurants, cafes, retailing), public health (clinics and day care centers) and public safcty (policc facilitics) and cntcrtainmcnt facilitics may also be permiscible provided that such activities and facilities are an integral part of the parks design or of the recreational function privately -owned recreation uses open to the public or to private groups. Marine Facilities: This land use designation is intended to apply to waterfront properties which are primarily public properties and intended to be developed and utilized in a manner which will facilitate public access to waterfront activities. Permissible uses within this designation include marine and marina facilities, marine stadiums, waterfront specialty centers (including restaurants, cafes and retailing), recreational activities including water theme parks, cultural, educational and entertainment facilities and accessory hotel accommodations with maximum FAR limitations between the range of 0.65 to 1.72 and a maximum density of 130 hotel units per acre; the higher FAR may be approved only upon demonstration and finding that the application of the higher limitations will not adversely affect access. Permanent living facilities are not permitted within this classification. [Added 3/23/99 by Ordinance 11782.] Nonresidential floor area is the sum of areas for nonresidential use on all floors of buildings, measured from the outside faces of the exterior walls, including interior and exterior halls, lobbies, enclosed porches and balconies used for nonresidential uses. Not countable as nonresidential floor area are: (a) Parking and loading areas within buildings; (b) Open terraces, patios, atriums or balconies; or (c) Stairways, elevator shafts, mechanical rooms. Single Family Residential: Areas designated as "Single Family Residential" allow single family structures of one dwelling unit each to a maximum density of 9 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 23 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Supporting services such as foster homes and family day care homes for children and/or adults; and community based residential facilities2 (6 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities also will be allowed pursuant to applicable state law. Places of worship, primary and secondary schools, child day care centers and adult day care centers are permissible in suitable locations within single family residential areas. Professional offices, tourist and guest homes, museums, and private clubs or lodges are allowed only in contributing structures within historic sites or historic districts that have been designated by the Historical and Environmental Preservation Board and are in suitable locations within single family residential areas, pursuant to applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for such uses. Density and intensity limitations for said uses shall be restricted to those of the contributing structure(s). Duplex Residential: Areas designated as "Duplex Residential" allow residential structures of up to two dwelling units each to a maximum density of 18 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Community based residential facilities (14 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) also will be allowed pursuant to applicable state law. Places of worship, primary and secondary schools, child day care centers and adult day care centers are permissible in suitable locations within duplex residential areas. Professional offices, tourist and guest homes, museums, and private clubs or lodges are allowed only in contributing structures within historic sites or historic districts that have been designated by the Historical and Environmental Preservation Board and are in suitable locations within duplex residential areas, pursuant to applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for such uses. Density and intensity limitations for said uses shall be restricted to those of the contributing structure(s). Medium Density Multifamily Residential: Areas designated as "Medium Density Multifamily Residential" allow residential structures to a maximum density of 65 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Supporting services such as community -based residential facilities (14 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) will be allowed pursuant to applicable state law; community -based residential facilities (15-50 clients) and day care centers for children and adults may be permissible in suitable locations. Permissible uses within medium density multifamily areas also include commercial activities that are intended to serve the retailing and personal services needs of the building or building complex, small scale limited commercial uses as accessory uses, subject to the detailed provisions of applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of 2 A "Community based residential facility" provides room (with or without board), resident services, and twenty-four hour supervision. Such a facility functions as a single housekeeping unity. This category includes adult congregate living facilities, facilities for physically disabled and handicapped persons, for developmentally disabled persons, for non dangerous mentally ill persons and for dependent children, as licensed by the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (FHRS)., and juvenile and adult residential correctional facilities, including halfway houses, as licensed or approved by an authorized regulatory agency. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 24 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. required levels of service for such uses, places of worship, primary and secondary schools, and accessory post -secondary educational facilities. Professional offices, tourist and guest homes, museums, and private clubs or lodges are allowed only in contributing structures within historic sites or historic districts that have been designated by the Historical and Environmental Preservation Board and are in suitable locations within medium density multifamily residential areas, pursuant to applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for such uses. Density and intensity limitations for said uses shall be restricted to those of the contributing structure(s). High Density Multifamily Residential: Areas designated as "High Density Multifamily Residential" allow residential structures to a maximum density of 150 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Higher densities may be allowed as shown for these specially -designated areas: Little Havana Target Area 200 units per acre Southeast Overtown/Park West 300 units per acre Brickell, Omni, and River Quadrant 500 units per acre Supporting services such as offices and commercial services and other accessory activities that are clearly incidental to principal uses are permitted; community -based residential facilities (14 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) will be allowed pursuant to applicable state law; community -based residential facilities (15+ clients), places of worship, primary and secondary schools, and day care centers for children and adults may be permissible in suitable locations. Office: Areas designated as "Office" allow residential uses to a maximum density equivalent to "High Density Multifamily Residential" subject to the same limiting conditions and a finding by the Planning Director that the proposed site's proximity to other residentially zoned property makes it a logical extension or continuation of existing residential development and that adequate services and amenities exist in the adjacent area to accommodate the needs of potential residents; transitory residential facilities such as hotels and motels; general office use; clinics and laboratories; and limited commercial activities incidental to principal activities in designated areas. Supporting facilities such as auditoriums, libraries, convention facilities, places of worship, and primary and secondary schools may be allowed with the "Office" designation. The nonresidential portions of developments within areas designated as "Office" allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot area of the subject property. Properties within a Regional Activity Center that are designated as "Office" are exempt from this FAR requirement; however, they are subject to their specific limitations within the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. All such uses and mixes of uses shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 25 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Areas designated as "Office" in the Urban Central Business District are exempt from this FAR limitation and are allowed unlimited FAR. Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities: Areas designated as "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" allow facilities for federal,state and local government activities, major public or private health, recreational, cultural,religious or educational activities, and major transportation facilities and public utilities.Residential facilities ancillary to these uses are allowed up to a maximum density equivalent to "High Density Multifamily Residential" the least intense abutting/adjacent zoning district, subject to the same limiting conditions. Areas designated as "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot area of the subject property, except within the Health / Civic Center District where it may not exceed a total FAR of 3.2 times the gross lot area of the subject property. All such uses and mixes of uses shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 26 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 11. II 1111l Ip, I I 'I 1L J I A I ❑ Lililll Health / Civic Center District u IL_ —I I I I-11 I- M6 111I1111 .1111111c f1I 11 ■ ■�- IIIII Lo lllll I ■=1® c k _ I IIII■• 11 11IL II r=MI1[I_ 111111111: IZI I SIG III MI Emilie M111119 l.11 ; —gyp M11111_1111II6-1�I \>141 IIIIIII 1I I�IIIIIII� ''IIIIIII 111111011112 NW�43313T 0 0.05 0 1 I I I 1 I 0.2 Miles I I i I kl_ST N_ Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Restricted Commercial: Areas designated as "Restricted Commercial" allow residential uses (excepti- rescue missions) to a maximum density equivalent to "High Density Multifamily Residential" subject to the same limiting conditions and a finding by the Planning Director that the proposed site's proximity to other residentially zoned property makes it a logical extension or continuation of existing residential development and that adequate services and amenities exist in the adjacent area to accommodate the needs of potential residents; any activity included in the "Office" designation as well as commercial activities that generally serve the daily retailing and service needs of the public, typically requiring easy access by personal auto, and often located along arterial or collector roadways, which include: general retailing, personal and professional services, real estate, banking and other financial services, restaurants, saloons and cafes, general entertainment facilities, private clubs and recreation facilities, major sports and exhibition or entertainment facilities and other commercial activities whose scale and land use impacts are similar in nature to those uses described above, places of worship, and primary and secondary schools. This category also includes commercial marinas and living quarters on vessels as permissible. The nonresidential portions of developments within areas designated as "Restricted Commercial" allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot area of the subject property. Properties designated as "Restricted Commercial" in the Urban Central Business District are exempt from this FAR limitation and are allowed unlimited FAR. Properties within a Regional Activity Center that are designated as "Restricted Commercial" are exempt from this FAR requirement; however, they are subject to their specific limitations within the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. All such uses and mixes of u es shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Central Business District (CBD): The area designated as "Central Business District (CBD) is intended to apply to the central commercial, financial and office core of the metropolitan region, and allows all activities included in the "Office," "Restricted Commercial," and "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" designations. Residential facilities (except for rescue missions) alone or in combination with other uses are allowable to a maximum density of 1,000 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Also permitted is a mix of uses ranging from high density multifamily residential to high intensity office uses with retail uses on the lower floors of structures. Intensity of uses within the CBD land use designation are generally higher than those allowed in other areas of the city. Areas designated as CBD are exempt from other FAR limitations and are allowed unlimited FAR. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 28 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Residential Density Increase Areas 1) Omni - 500 Units/Ac 2) Southeast Overtown-Park West 3) River Quadrant - 500 Units/Ac 4) Brickell - 500 Units/Ac 5) Little Havana - 200 Units/Ac - 300 Units/Ac —Lail �► —1J ..... • 14=JIl�,l� ■ 5 TH — m —imq wal "1141 • •71.■ ■ ■ ■ ■ N III!"ft:f ri=I, IM11 ■■ i--,-,.-,.----.-_-giLlumillaurim O.,'Vliin IN 11■, ��11L :■►'UI i= ■ ■lal 1" ■■'.�� aOLP ...1•ML. .[ -C ■ ■i •• i�r • • rum� ...I•=\ �.■ I i11� • �..�.�.. '�■i/A ■■P{ ... • • lil► ■■III■■■S12®..... 111 Ur& �.=■lilli ■■■■■■■I■■:�.�■i • 7 A1Nom t= ..Ei.Ml�■■■I... -- 111 ,. s.vv 1 O iliiiiiiiiii KAMIIMIMMIMI ■—MII. IN .N■■ .... l r1IMI MI • • -� 1 ■ ■ a • ■ Si • —WEN • 836 11.00, —lama l.r_==_ imitt��� 46_4 r • s t 4 ICKENBACKER CSWY Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 C 25 6.5 I I . 1 Miles THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. General Commercial: Areas designated as "General Commercial" allow all activities included in the "Office" and the "Restricted Commercial" designations, as well as wholesaling and distribution activities that generally serve the needs of other businesses; generally require on and off loading facilities; and benefit from close proximity to industrial areas. These commercial activities include retailing of second hand items, automotive repair services, new and used vehicle sales, parking lots and garages, heavy equipment sales and service, building material sales and storage, wholesaling, warehousing, distribution and transport related services, light manufacturing and assembly and other activities whose scale of operation and land use impacts are similar to those uses described above. Multifamily residential structures of a density equal to R-3 or higher, but not to exceed a maximum of 150 units per acre, are allowed by Special Exception only, upon finding that the proposed site's proximity to other residentially zoned property makes it a logical extension or continuation of existing residential development and that adequate services and amenities exist in the adjacent area to accommodate the needs of potential residents. This category also allows commercial marinas and living quarters on vessels for transients. The nonresidential portions of developments within areas designated as "General Commercial" allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot area of the subject property. Properties designated as "General Commercial" in the Urban Central Business District are exempt from this FAR limitation and are allowed unlimited FAR. Properties within a Regional Activity Center that are designated as "Restricted Commercial" are exempt from this FAR requirement; however, they are subject to their specific limitations within the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. All such uses and mixes of uses shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Industrial: The areas designated as "Industrial" allow manufacturing, assembly and storage activities. The "Industrial" designation generally includes activities that would otherwise generate excessive amounts of noise, smoke, fumes, illumination, traffic, hazardous wastes, or negative visual impact unless properly controlled. Stockyards, rendering works, smelting and refining plants and similar activities are excluded. Residential uses are not permitted in the "Industrial" designation, except for rescue missions, and live-aboards in commercial marinas. Areas designated as "Industrial" allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 2.5 times the gross lot area of the subject property. Furthermore, all such uses shall be subject to the the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Light Industrial (LI): The primary intent of this land use classification is to mandate mixed use development within this land use classification, and further, to facilitate the ability of developing a mixed occupancy within a unit in which more than one type of use is provided under Live/Work or Work/Live Districts. The Light Industrial category shall be designated on the Future Land Use Plan map as either LI-LW (live/work) or LI-WL (work/live). Areas designated as "Light Industrial" allow all activities included in the "Office" and the "Restricted Commercial" designations, as well as wholesaling and distribution activities that Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 30 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. generally serve the needs of other businesses; generally require on and off loading facilities; and benefit from close proximity to general commercial areas. These commercial activities (beyond those permitted in the "Office" and the "Restricted Commercial" designations) include retailing of second hand items, new and used vehicle sales, parking lots and garages, wholesaling, warehousing, light manufacturing and assembly and other activities whole scale of operation and land use impacts are similar to those uses described above. This category also allows commercial marinas and living quarters on vessels for transients. This land use category shall not permit storing, packaging, handling, processing or distribution of explosive, flammable or otherwise hazardous materials; scrap yards; wholesale trade -marts; drive -through facilities; flea markets; health clinics; and auto care service centers and related activities. The hazard level of an activity shall be one of the determining factors as to whether that activity shall be permissible within a Light Industrial district; the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations shall prohibit high-level hazard activities within live/work developments. Live/Work District: Within a live/work development, residential uses shall occupy between fifty percent (50%) and ninety-eight percent (98%) of the area of the development and commercial uses shall be developed as a secondary use; employees and walk-in trade are not usually permitted; however, may be allowed upon compliance with specified criteria as defined in the governing land development regulations; such criteria may include requirements that clients visit by appointment, and/or limitations on number of employees. Work/Live District: Within a work/live development, commercial uses shall occupy between fifty percent (50%) and ninety-eight percent (98%) of the area of the development and residential uses shall be developed as a secondary use. Work/live space requires access according to the American Disabilities Act. Areas designated as "Light Industrial" allow residential uses to a maximum density of 65 dwelling units per acre, and both residential and nonresidential uses to a maximum height of six stories (with "story" defined as height between 8 and 14 feet per story) and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 4.0 times the gross lot area of the subject property. All such uses and mixes of uses shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. The Light Industrial category is not intended to be subject to the restrictions and limitations of home occupations as defined in Zoning Ordinance No. 11000 (as amended). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 31 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Correspondence Table — Zoning and Comprehensive Plan ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 MCNP JULY 1999 2008 CS CONSERVATION CONSERVATION -- RESTRICTED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMERCIAL RECREATION PR PARKS AND RECREATION RECREATION PUBLIC PARKS AND RECREATION -- MARINE FACILITIES R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL R-3 MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-4 MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 0 OFFICE OFFICE G/I GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION, AND UTILITIES C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL CBD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT I INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL RT FIXED -GUIDEWAY RAPID TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 32 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. HOUSING Goal HO-1: Increase the supply of safe, affordable and sanitary housing for very low-, low- moderate-, and middle -income households (as those terms are defined by HUD) and the elderly by alleviating shortages of very-low:Jow- , moderate- and middle -income housing, rehabilitating older homes, maintaining, and revitalizing residential neighborhoods in order to meet the needs of all income groups. Objective HO-1.1: Provide and/or encourage a local regulatory, investment, and neighborhood environment that will assist the private sector in increasing the stock of affordable housing for all income levels, including very low-, low-, moderate-, and middle —income (as those terms are defined by HUD), within the City by at least 10 percent by 2005 2010. Policy HO-1.1.1: The City defines affordable (moderate -income) housing in accordance with the current standards and regulations of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City continues to promote equal access to housing opportunities. With other governmental agencies, it cnforccs monitors fair housing ordinances and regulations.The City, with other governmental agencies and non-profit organizations, will educate appropriate parties regarding fair housing and refer fair housing concerns to the appropriate enforcement agency. Policy HO-1.1.2: Continue and expand the City's current affordable housing programs and continue its participation in federal housing programs and the ounty Documentary Stamp Surtax Program. Policy HO-1.1.3: The City will continue to develop comprehensive neighborhood redevelopment plans and programs that encourage private developers to build new, or rehabilitate old, residential structures and ensure that public investments are coordinated with private sector developments to increase the overall attractiveness of redeveloping neighborhoods. Policy HO-1.1.4: Tax Increment Financing districts, which are designated by Miami - Dade County, as a mechanism for financing public improvements in residential areas and stimulating neighborhood revitalization, will continue to be used. Policy HO-1.1.5: The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the Citv's neighborhoods and to buffer such neighborhoods from incompatible uses through the implementation and enforcement of transition and buffering standards that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood. Policy HO-1.1.6: The City will continue to encourage the designation. restoration, and adaptive and sensitive reuse of historic or architecturally significant housing through Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 33 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. the appropriate and equitable use of zoning incentives zoning and other incentives deemed appropriate. Policy HO-1.1.7: The City will continue to control, through restrictions in the City's land development regulations, large scale and/or intensive commercial and industrial land development which may negatively impact any residential neighborhood and will provide appropriate transitions between hiqh--rise and low --rise residential developments that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood. Policy HO-1.1.8: Through the land development regulations, the City will protect and cnhancc cxisting viable neighborhoods in those areas suitable for housing and, where appropriate, enhance them in a manner compatible with their existing character. Policy HO-1.1.9: The City's land development regulations will encourage high -density residential development and redevelopment in close proximity to Metrorail and Metromover stations, consistent with the Station Area Design and Development Plan for each station. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.10 and Transportation Policy TR-1.5.2.) Policy HO-1.1.10: Reserved. The City shall report annually the extent to which the housinq recommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to time) are being realized including those relating to: j 1) the preservation of affordable rental housing through the rehabilitation of existing rental stock and the encouragement of new rental housing construction, with a focus on serving the needs of small families and single person households, such as the elderly and person with HIV/AIDS; 2) the preservation o ' existing affordable housinq — homeowner retention by assisting very low-, low- and moderate -income households to obtain repair financing from private lenders, with preference given to the elderly, disabled and persons with HIV/AIDS. 3) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by seeking to increase the inventory of affordably priced units throuqh new construction and the creation of a Purchase Rehab program; by providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers, and the creation of a Lease to Purchase Program; and 4) stimulation of affordable housinq development throuqh the implementation of policy with respect to: a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Infill b. identification of additional funding for affordable housing c. expediting of the Tax Credit Process d. creation of special districts for mixed -use protects Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 34 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. e. the continued provision of Affordable Housinq incentives f. the provision of training/workshops to developers on City programs and regulations g. streamlining of the RFP process and the provision of multi -year funding h. Increasing the capacity of non-profit housing providers. Policy HO-1.1.11: [Reserved] Objective HO-1.2: Conserve the present stock of very low-, Iowa ai4 -moderate-, and middle -income housing (as those terms are defined by HUD) within the City and reduce the number of substandard units through rehabilitation, reduce the number of unsafe structures through demolition or rehabilitation, and insure the preservation of historically significant housing through identification and designation. Policy HO-1.2.1: The City defines very low-, low-, and moderate-, and middle -income housing (as those terms are defined by HUD) in accordance with the current standards and regulations of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the State of Florida. Policy HO-1.2.2: The City will continue, and when necessary expand; very- low-, low - and moderate -income housing programs with the intent of preventing a net loss of very- low-, lowi and moderate -income housing (as those terms are defined by HUD) units within the si4 - . Policy HO-1.2.3: The City's housing programs will provide for low and moderatc income, low density housing scattered site locations in a diverse range of housing types in -all areas of the City, including housing that is affordable to very- low-, low-, moderate-, and middle --income households (as those terms are defined by HUD) as an alternative to the geographic concentration of low-income housing. Policy HO-1.2.4: The City will continue to assist non-profit, community -based organizations in the development and provision of very low-, lowland moderate - income housing (as those terms are defined by HUD) projects as an alternative to the public sector provision of very low-, low-, and moderate -income housing. This assistance will include, but not be limited to, technical assistance, marketing and financial planning assistance, and the provision of public improvements, such as street improvements, curbing, landscaping and public open spaces, proper drainage and street lighting. Policy HO-1.2.5: The City defines substandard housing as any residential unit that lacks either complete kitchen or plumbing facilities or does facilities, does not satisfy health and safety codes, or detracts from the physical appearance of neighborhoods in the City's definition of substandard housing as compliant with the State's definition of substandard housing in s.420.0004(12), F.S. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 35 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy HO-1.2.6: With the intent of preserving and enhancing neighborhood character, the City will utilize code enforcement to prevent the illegal conversion of single-family residences into multifamily units. Policy HO-1.2.7: The City will continue to enforce where necessary, and implement neighborhood specific design and development standards that may be developed as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives to strengthen those sections of the zoning ordinance Zoning Ordinance that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the cy-s City's neighborhoods. Policy HO-1.2.8: The City will increase code enforcement efforts in areas where significant concentrations of substandard units are likely to exist. The City will implement programs to assist very low-, low-, and moderate -income households (as those terms are defined by HUD) in rehabilitating their units. Owners of substandard units will be required to make needed repairs in a timely manner and vacant or abandoned property will be required to be secured so as not to represent a public health or safety hazard. Policy HO-1.2.9: The City will monitor conditions and if necessary formally request that Miami -Dade County maintain an acceptable quality of public housing within the G+ty-CC. Policy HO-1.2.10: The City will, through its building code enforcement, demolish all structures determined to be structurally unsafe. Policy HO-1.2.11: Historically significant housing in they City will be identified and subjecte8 to the Heritage Conscrvation Articic Chapter 23 and other appropriate sections of the City's Code and Zoning Ordinance. Objective HO-1.3: Facilitate the private and public sector provision of housing in non - isolated residential areas for community -based residential facilities and foster care facilities (including those funded by the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services). Policy HO-1.3.1: The City will permit the operation of group homes, foster care facilities and Adult Congregate Living Facilities (ACLFs), subject to restrictions reflected in the City Zoning Ordinance, in all residential areas at the residential densities for which those areas are zoned. Policy HO-1.3.2: The City's land development regulations will be reviewed and amended where warranted, to prevent concentrations of group homes, foster care facilities, and Adult Congregate Living Facilities (ACLFs) in any area of the. Policy HO-1.3.3: [Reserved] Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 36 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy HO-1.3.4: [Reserved] Objective HO-1.4: The City will continue to participate in a regional effort to provide adequate shelter for the homeless. Policy HO-1.4.1: The City, along with Miami -Dade County, Broward County, the major municipalities of the region, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and the State Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services will participate in the development of a coordinated plan to address the problem of homelessness in South Florida. Policy HO-1.4.2: [Reserved] Policy HO-1.4.3: The City will assist in providing, when necessary, temporary emergency shelter facilities to serve homeless families and children. Policy HO-1.4.4: The City's land development regulations will permit temporary crisis intervention facilities and short-term transitional facilities (aimed at assisting the homeless to become self-supporting members of society) to be located proximate to areas where social assistance and economic opportunities are available. Policy HO-1.4.5: The City will continue and expand its efforts to acquire and administer federal and state financial aid for homeless assistance. Policy HO-1.4.6: The City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, homeless shelters within its land development regulations and take appropriate measures to prevent a net loss of shelter capacity. The City will develop a ten-year plan designed to end chronic homelessness by working toward a more equitable distribution of facilities throughout Miami -Dade County. Objective HO-1.5: Provide fei-assistance to displaced occupants where public redevelopment programs require relocation. Policy HO-1.5.1: The City's housing program will continue to provide for assistance to occupants displaced by public redevelopment projects so that suitable relocation housing in proximity to employment and necessary public services is available prior to the demolition or replacement of existing housing serving very -low. low- and moderate - income occupants. Objective HO-1.6: {Reserved] Provide and/or encourage a local regulatory, investment, and neighborhood environment that will assist the private sector in increasing the supply of supportive housing units that provide services such as child day care to single parent households and counseling to rehabilitated or rehabilitating substance abusers of very -low, low and moderate income households. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 37 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy HO-1.6.1: {Reserved] Supportive housinq developed in accordance with this policy should be designed to primarily serve the needs of the community in which they are located by offering units to residents of the surrounding community on a priority basis. Goal HO-2: Achieve a livable city center with a variety of urban housing types for persons of all income levels in a walkable, mixed -use, urban environment. Objective HO-2.1: Achicvc a 1iyabIc ' owntown Design and create pedestrian friendly environments and neighborhoods with varied housing prototypes and amenities catering to persons of diverse social, economic and cultural backgrounds, with a variety of urban housing types for persons of all income levels including those of very low-, low-, and moderate -income households (as those terms are defined by HUD) provided in a walkable, mixed -use, urban environment. Policy HO-2.1.1: Through the land development regulations, the City will continue to protect and enhance existing neighborhoods in downtown. Policy HO-2.1.2: The City will continue to revise residential zoning district regulations to provide greater flexibility for the design and development of a variety of contemporary housing types and mixed -use developments with the application of new higher density zoning in accordance with neighborhood specific design and development standards that miqht be adopted as a result of amendments to the Citv's land development regulations and other neighborhood planning initiatives. Policy HO-2.1.3: The City will continue to assure that necessary support services, institutions and amenities are available to existing neighborhoods. Policy HO-2.1.4: The City will continue to promote development of new, high quality, dense urban neighborhoods along the Miami River (in accordance with the 1992 Miami River Master Plan), in Central Brickell and in Southeast Overtown/Park West. Policy HO-2.1.5: The City will continue to encourage adaptive reuse of commercial space for residential use by working to eliminate unnecessary residential requirements in the Zoning Ordinance that inhibit reasonable adaptive reuse. Policy HO-2.1.6: The City will continue to target available governmental housing assistance programs and funds to assist with development of affordable housing in existing viable neighborhoods and publicly designated redevelopment districts while avoiding undue concentrations of assisted housing. Policy HO-2.1.7: Working together with private developers, the City will continue to apply for Urban Development Action Grants (UDAG's), and Housing Development Action Grants (HoDAG's)—, and other potential grant programs in the Southeast Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 38 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Overtown/Park West, Lummus Park, River Quadrant and West Brickell areas, where housing can be developed as a part of mixed -use projects. Policy HO-2.1.8: Through changes in the City's land development regulations, the City will continue to expand the areas in which new commercial development may receive incentives for Housing Trust Fund contributions. Policy HO-2.1.9: [Reserved] Q P� Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 39 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS Goal SS-1: Ensure a clean, healthy urban environment through the proper maintenance, timely provision and efficient operation of a centralized wastewater treatment and ancillary sewerage system. Objective SS-1.1: All residences and businesses within the City that have been approved are served by sanitary sewers, and the City will continue to replace and repair aging segments of the system as required, and will coordinate with Miami -Dade County on the extension of, or increase in the capacity of, treatment facilities to meet future needs. Policy SS-1.1.1: The City will continue to implement existing plans to extend the sewerage system to all approved areas of the City. Policy SS-1.1.2: The City will complete those sanitary sewer projects described in the City's Capital Improvement Program as scheduled. Policy SS-1.1.3: The City will monitor progress on all sanitary sewer related capital improvement projects on an annual basis as part of its capital improvement implementation procedures. Policy SS-1.1.4: Although the City has no authority with respect to Miami -Dade County's wastewater treatment programs, the City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, continue to support, and cooperate with, Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Authority Department (WASA M DWASD) actions to expand the capacities of its wastewater treatment facilities as expressed in that Department's Plan, as may be amended from time to time. Objective SS-1.2: Ensure that the practice of wastewater management is consistent with the protection and preservation of natural resources. Policy SS-1.2.1: Although the City has no authority with respect to Miami -Dade County's wastewater treatment programs, the City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, support and encourage Miami Dade County WASA Department M-DWASD -to continue to adhere to its current policies of: no discharge of wastewater to surface fresh waters; advanced waste treatment at all "package" treatment plants that are granted variances from "no discharge" requirements; secondary treatment prior to discharge from ocean outfalls; secondary treatment, proven design, local operating experience and compliance with all regulatory agency requirements prior to discharge from injection wells; and secondary or higher levels of treatment, as required by regulations, prior to discharge to shallow groundwater to ensure no negative impact on the ability of the receiving waters to meet Federal Drinking Water Standards. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 40 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy SS-1.2.2: In the design and construction of new sewers, and in the repair and replacement of old sewers, the City will use appropriate design and construction techniques to eliminate infiltration of storm waters into the sanitary sewer system, or the overflow of wastewater into the storm sewer system. Policy SS-1.2.3: The City will use its authority under local codes and ordinances to cooperate with Miami -Dade County DERM to identify and eliminate any sites where there may be illegal connections of sanitary sewers to the storm sewer system. Policy SS-1.2.4: The City will, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, negotiate with Miami Dade County WASA Department M DWASD to seek cooperative agreements to ensure that the operation of the Central District wastewater treatment facility on Virginia Key does not degrade the natural environment or limit the public's access to recreational opportunities on the island. Objective SS-1.3: The City's land development regulations will ensure that approval of development or redevelopment will not occur until there exists adequate wastewater transmission capacity to serve that development. Policy SS-1.3.1: The level of service standard to determine adequate transmission capacity is 100 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). Policy SS-1.3.2: All improvements for replacement, expansion or increase in capacity of the sanitary sewer transmission network shall be compatible with the level of service standard adopted in Policy 1.3.1. Policy SS-1.3.3: Since the sanitary sewer network is an interconnected, :::ountywide system, the departments of Public Works and Planning will cooperate with Miami -Dade County WASA Department to jointly develop methodologies and procedures for biannually updating estimates of system demand and capacity. Policy SS-1.3.4: The City will enforce its policy that requires City permits for monitor any development or redevelopment occurring outside of the City's boundaries which by gravity connects to the City's sewer transmission network. Objective SS-1.4: The City's of Mom,— mi's sanitary sewer collection system is a valuable and costly element of the urban infrastructure, and its use is to be maximized in the most efficient manner. Policy SS-1.4.1: The City of Miami will use its land development regulations to ensurc that development and redevelopment is consistent with the capacity of the sanitary sewer collection system will —ensure, through its concurrence management system, that sanitary sewer and storm sewers shall be in place to serve new development or redevelopment no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. development and redevelopment is consistcnt with thc capacity of thc sanitary sewer collection system. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.5.1.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 41 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Goal SS-2: Provide adequate stormwater drainage to reasonably protect against flooding in areas of intensive use and occupation, while preventing degradation of quality in receiving waters. Objective SS-2.1: In accordance with the 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates, the City will address the most critical drainage problems. The City's goals for retrofitting subcatchment areas within the will meet or exceed the Sfive-year frequency, 24-hour duration standard while utilizing water quality design criteria. The City will confer with local agencies, namely the Miami -Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) when retrofitting City projects to incorporate design criteria and best management practices (BMPs). Policy SS-2.1.1: The City will adhere to its 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates as the long-range policy guideline for improving its storm drainage management system, and will periodically update the estimated cost of implementing that plan Plan throuqh the annual upates to the City's Capital Improvements Proqram included in the Capital Improvements element of the MCNP. The City will rank the projects specified in that plan the 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan, with priority given to addressing the most critical problem areas within the GCity, and implement those projects supported by a financing plan according to the provisions of Chapter 18, Article VIII of the City Code, entitled "Storm Water Utility System." The 1986 plan will be updated by 2010 with measurable Goals and Obiectives. The plan will be reported and reviewed annually and at time of EAR. Policy SS-2.1.2: The City will continue to monitor progress on all storm sewer related capital improvement projects on an annual basis as part of its capital improvement implementation procedures. Policy SS-2.1.3: The City will ensure, through its concurrency management system, that sanitary sewer and storm sewers shall be in place to serve new development or redevelopment no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. Issuance of any development permit shall require compliance with a drainage level of service standard of a one -in -five-year storm event while incorporating water quality considerations. Objective SS-2.2: The practice of stormwater management within the City will be designed to reduce pollutant -loading rates to surface waters. Policy SS-2.2.1: The City will retrofit the number of storm water outfalls that discharge into the Miami River and its tributaries, the Little River and directly into Biscayne Bay. If positive drainage systems to these water bodies are deemed to be the only feasible method of maintaining adequate storm drainage, then these storm sewers will be designed and constructed to retain grease and oil and minimize pollutant discharges. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 42 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-1.1.2 and Coastal Management Policy CM-1.1.2.) Policy SS-2.2.2: In order to reduce the level of contaminants carried into Biscayne Bay via the Miami and Little rivers, the Solid Waste Department should be encouraged to increase the frequency and extent of street sweeping. (See Solid Waste Policy SW- 1.3.3.) Policy SS-2.2.3: The City will continue to seek cooperative agreements and funding support from Miami -Dade County DERM, the South Florida Water Management District, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and any other appropriate state and federal agencies in order to protect the quality of its surface waters and reduce pollutant loadings into the Miami River, its tributaries, the Little River, and directly into Biscayne Bay. 'U Policy SS-2.2.4: The City shall require that "best management practices" shall be used in the design and construction of stormwater management systems to minimize pollutant load eventually discharged to natural drainage systems, as well as to regulate the volume and timing of storm water delivered to natural systems. Policy SS-2.2.5: The City will continue to enforce Saut14 Florida Building Code requirements for the on -site retention of the first inch of storm water runoff. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.2.) Policy SS-2.2.6: The City will consider the inclusion of stormwater quality control structures in any new projects for major road improvements and commercial parking areas. Objective SS-2.3: As the City implements the storm water management improvements specified in the 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan, it will ensure that stormwater management contributes to the conservation of ground water as a future potable water supply. Policy SS-2.3.1: In its stormwater management practices, the City will promote infiltration of storm water to surficial or artesian aquifers to prevent further saltwater intrusion, where such infiltration is deemed to be feasible and cost efficient, and is not likely to represent an environmental hazard. Objective SS-2.4: All areas of the City are now served by storm drainage facilities, and the City will continue to coordinate the replacement, repair, extension, and capacity increases of the system consistent with development and redevelopment needs. Policy SS-2.4.1: Through enforcement of its Storm Water Utility System as provided in Chapter 53.5 of the City Code, the City will use its authority "to construct, reconstruct, improve, and extend stormwater utility system and to issue revenue bonds and other debts if needed to finance in whole or part the cost of such system and to Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 43 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. establish just and equitable rates, fees, and charges for the services and facilities provided by the system." Objective SS-2.5: The City's of-MiamiIs storm drainage system is a valuable and costly element of the urban infrastructure, and its use is to be maximized in the most efficient manner to serve this fully developed community. Policy SS-2.5.1: The City of Miami will use its land development regulations to ensure that development and redevelopment is consistent with the capacity of the storm drainage system. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-1.4.1.) Objective SS-2.6: The City's of Miami's Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System discharges to the surface waters of the United States. These discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The City shall meet the requirements of the permit when operating its drainage facilities. Policy SS-2.6.1: The City will comply with the conditions in its NPDES permit. Policy SS-2.6.2: The operation of the City's drainage system to meet NPDES requirements shall meet the following criteria: • The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) shall be consistent with Sstormwater management program elements as defined in the NPDES permit shall be consistent with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP). • Stormwater projects and activities shall be consistent with the current local, state and federal regulations at the time of implementation. • Stormwater capital improvement and operation and maintenance projects shall be implementable. Policy SS-2.6.3: The City will, through its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, enforce and educate all construction sites and operators of such construction sites, for compliance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) requirements and the Municipal Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 44 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE Goal AR-1: Protect the functions of the natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas within the City. Objective AR-1.1: Ensure that stormwater management practices contribute to conservation of groundwater as a future potable water supply. Policy AR-1.1.1: As the City implements the projects identified in its 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates, it will promote the infiltration of storm water to surficial or artesian aquifers to prevent further saltwater intrusion, where such infiltration is deemed to be feasible, not to represent an environmental hazard, and to be cost efficient. ^, Policy AR-1.1.2: The City will coordinate with and support local, state and federal agencies to achieve regional aquifer recharge protection objectives, including those pertaining to the quality and quantity of groundwater resources. Policy AR-1.1.3: The City will continue to support the South Florida Water Management District efforts to monitor the water levels at the salinity control structures within the City to prevent against further saltwater intrusion and protect the aquifer recharge areas and cones of influence of wellfields from contamination. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.3.) Objective AR-1.2: The City will use its land use and development regulations to ensure that land uses for areas within the City deemed to be aquifer recharge areas by the South Florida Water Management District, maintain adequate recharge for the aquifer. Policy AR-1.2.1: The City will maintain low to moderate density uses in the West Flagami area of the City (as shown on Figure 111.1 of the Data and Analysis) as necessary to protect the secondary aquifer recharge area. (See Land Use Policy LU- 1.1.9.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 45 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. POTABLE WATER Goal PW-1: Ensure that all residents and workers within the City have adequate access to safe drinking water through the efficient operation of centralized, County operated potable water treatment facilities and ancillary potable water transmission system. Objective PW-1.1: Land development regulations will ensure that approval of development or redevelopment will not be granted unless and until there exists adequate potable water transmission capacity to serve that development. Policy PW-1.1.1: Since the potable water network is an interconnected, Ceountywide system, the City departments of Public Works and Planning will cooperate with Miami - Dade County WASA Water and Sewer Department to jointly develop methodologies and procedures for biannually updating estimates of system demand and capacity, and ensure that sufficient capacity to serve development exists. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.4.) Objective PW-1.2: Ensure adequate levels of safe potable water are available to meet the needs of the City. (See Natural Resource Conservation Objective NR-2.1.) Policy PW-1.2.1: The City will ensure, though its concurrence management system, that potable water facilities shall be in place to serve new development or redevelopment no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent in compliance with Ensure potable water supplies meet the established level of service standards for transmission capacity of 200 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.5 and Capital Improvements Policy CI-1.2.3.) Policy PW-1.2.2: The City will cooperate and participate to the fullest extent possible with Miami -Dade County and other county municipalities receiving potable water from WASAD in developing and implementing an acceptable countywide water conservation plan as well as the Water Supply Facilities Workplan as required by Florida Statutes. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.7.) Policy PW-1.2.3: [Reserved] Policy PW-1.2.4: [Reserved] Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 46 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. SOLID WASTE COLLECTION Goal SW-1: Ensure a clean, healthy urban environment through the proper maintenance, timely provision and efficient operation of an integrated solid waste disposal and ancillary solid waste collection system. Objective SW-1.1: The City will continue to provide solid waste collection services to sity City residents and businesses in a manner that ensures public health and safety, and a clean urban environment. Policy SW-1.1.1: The City's solid waste collection services shall maintain City will ensure, through its concurrency management system, that solid waste capacity shall be in place to serve new development and/or redevelopment no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent in compliance with a level of service standard of seven (7) lbs. per person per day, which is equivalent to 1.28 tons per person per year. Policy SW-1.1.2: Commercial structures and high density residential areas will continue to be served by either the City's Solid Waste Department or by private sector providers of solid waste collection services. The City will require levels of service to be complied with by private haulers operating within the City's boundaries, and will enforce all City regulations regarding the disposal and collection of solid waste. Policy SW-1.1.3: The City shall maintain solid waste collection equipment as required to serve the public needs according to the service standard adopted in Policy SW- 1.1.1. Policy SW-1.1.4: The City will take appropriate measures to ensure compliance with its "Garbage and Trash Ordinance," Chapter 22 of the Municipal Code. Policy SW-1.1.5: Land development regulations will be consistent with the provision of solid waste collection services in accordance with the adopted level of service. Policy SW-1.1.6: In the allocation of funds for the provision of solid waste services, first priority will be given to those improvements and programs that are necessary to protect the health, safety and the integrity of the environment, and meet federal, state and local legal and regulatory requirements. Second priority in the allocation of funds will be assigned to improvements that are necessary to meet existing deficiencies in capacity or service, or required to replace or repair needed equipment, while third priority will be assigned to those projects that increase the extent of services. Policy SW-1.1.7: The City shall, through enforcement of its powers to regulate solid waste collection services, require promoters of major public events to reimburse the City for extraordinary trash and garbage collection services required as a result of such events. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 47 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective SW-1.2: Although the City has no authority governing solid waste transfer and disposal, it will continue to support Miami- Dade County efforts intended to ensure that transfer stations and disposal sites are sufficient to meet the needs of City residents according to the service standards adopted in Policy 1.1.1. Policy SW-1.2.1: The City's departments of Solid Waste and Planning, through the City's Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, shall request the Miami Dade County Public Works Department, Division of Solid Waste Miami -Dade County Department of Solid Waste to jointly develop methodologies and procedures to biannually biennially update estimates of system demand and capacity. Policy SW-1.2.2: The City shall support Miami -Dade County's policy to implement the County's Solid Waste Disposal and Resources Recovery Management Plan and thosc County projects identified in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Fund Bond Series A and B. Policy SW-1.2.3: The City will continue to explore the development of resource recovery and cogeneration activities and, subject to concurrence by Miami -Dade County, consider the implementation of programs and procedures that decentralize solid waste disposal and reduce the volume of solid waste that is disposed of at County landfills. Policy SW-1.2.4: The City will work with, and support, the County's efforts to identify generators of hazardous waste, and to develop and enforce procedures for the proper collection and disposal of hazardous waste. Its departments will support the County's program to enforce all non -household producers of hazardous waste in identifying waste and disposing of it according to EPA, State, and local standards. The City will support Miami -Dade County's development of a hazardous waste temporary storage and transfer facility in a non -populated area. In coordination with Miami -Dade County, the City will work to meet the Region's objective to reduce the incidence of improper hazardous materials and waste handling and disposal. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-1.1.8.) Policy SW-1.2.5: The City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, encourage the County to utilize "amnesty days" to encourage small volume, non- commercial producers of hazardous waste to safely dispose of such waste, and to develop a permanent system for households, small business and other low volume generators to safely dispose of hazardous wastes. Objective SW-1.3: It shall be the City's policy that solid waste collection procedures shall be conducted in a manner that will reduce the quantity of litter, trash and abandoned personal property on city streets. Policy SW-1.3.1: The City will continue its "Clean Neighborhood" campaigns and support the County's "Keep Dade Beautiful" program to actively support and Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 48 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. implement neighborhood clean-up and beautification efforts through public awareness and information programs. Policy SW-1.3.2: The City shall, through enforcement of those provisions of the City Codc codc Code that protect and enhance the appearance of neighborhoods, ensure that streets and yards remain clean and attractive. Where the City Code falls short of the provisions necessary to accomplish this, revisions shall be proposed to the City Commission. Policy SW-1.3.3: The Solid Waste Department should be encouraged to increase street sweeping frequencies in order to reduce pollution to surface waters via storm water runoff and to reduce or eliminate litter in areas where significant problems may exist. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.2.2.) Objective SW-1.4: Although the City has no authority governing solid waste transfer and disposal, it will continue to support and cooperate with Miami -Dade County efforts to encourage the recycling of solid waste materials and reduce the volume of waste set aside for collection and disposal. Policy SW-1.4.1: The City shall, through its publicity programs and mechanisms, encourage the use of recyclable packaging materials. Policy SW-1.4.2: The City shall evaluate the development of reuse and/or recycling programs for used tires, waste oils and similar recyclable materials and make recommendations for applicable additions or amendment to City procedures governing the disposal of these materials. Policy SW-1.4.3: The City shall, through its publicity programs and mechanisms, encourage residents to reduce the volume of yard and tree trimmings set aside for disposal by promoting the use of composting. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 49 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. TRANSPORTATION Goal TR-1: Maintain an effective and cost efficient traffic circulation network within the City of Miami that provides transportation for all persons and facilitates commercial activity, and which is consistent with, and furthers, neighborhood plans, supports economic development, conserves energy, and protects and enhances the natural environment. Objective TR-1.1: All arterial and collector roadways under County and State jurisdiction that lie within the City's boundaries will operate at levels of service established by the respective agency. All other City streets will operate at levels of service that are based upon the multi -modal capacity of the transportation system which recognizes the frequency of existing and programmed public transit service operating within consistent with an urban center possessing an extensive urban public transit system and characterized by a mixture of compact development and moderate -to -high residential densities and land use intensities, along with single- family residential and mixed -use neighborhoods, located a within a transportation concurrency exception area (TCEA). The City will monitor the levels of service of all arterial and collector roadways to continue to develop and enhance transportation strategies that promote public transit and minimize the impacts of the TCEA. r Policy TR-1.1.1: The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami - Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Areas designated Single -Family and Duplex —Residential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from changes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density residential character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be encouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors. Within this area, Outside of these residential areas, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards the City of Miami Person -Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR- 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 50 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy TR-1.1.2: The City of Miami originated and continues to utilize a person -trip methodology for measurement of local level of service (LOS) on a transportation facility, which may be a roadway, mass transit service, pedestrian way, bikeway, or any other transportation mode alone or in combination with others. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the capacity of all transportation modes will be used in the measurement of future, peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into the Transportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was separately published as a report entitled "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami", September 1990. The City of Miami Person -Trip MethodologyThis technique calculates the total person -trip capacity of all transportation modes utilizing a transportation facility against the total person -trip demand for travel on that facility expressing the resulting ratio in letter grades LOS A through LOS F in the same manner as used by the conventional vehicle& volume -over- capacity (V/C) methodology. The measurement of LOS is made for the peak period (the average of the two highest consecutive hours of trip volume during a weekday), where a-R€1. an overall minimum peak -period LOS standard ` E (100 percent utilization of person -trip capacity) will be maintained. Issuance of development orders for new development or significant expansion of existing development shall be contingent upon compliance with these LOS standards, subject to the modifications described in subparagraphs 1.1.2.1 through 1.1.2.3 below, and any applicable provisions of the Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area. 1.1.2.1: Where no public mass transit exists, and private passenger vehicles are the only vehicular mode available for travel on the facility: minimum LOS E (100 percent of capacity) shall apply using 1.6 persons per vchicic as the practical capacity of a private passenger vehicic. 1.1.2.2: Where local bus mass transit service on minimum 20-minute headways is available parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the facility, the facility shall operate at no greater than 120 percent of capacity. 1.1.2.3: Where express bus transit and/or rapid rail premium transit service on minimum 20-minute headways is available parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the facility, the facility shall operate at no greater than 150 percent of capacity. Policy TR 1.1.3: [Reserved] Policy TR-1.1.3: Notwithstanding the foregoing, as required by s. 163.3180(10) F.S., the following standards established by rule by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) are adopted by the City of Miami as its minimum LOS standards for Florida Intrastate Highway System (FINS) roadways within the City Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 51 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. subject to any applicable provisions governing requirements of the Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (see Policy TR-1.1.1): 1.1.3.1: Limited access FIRS highways shall operate at LOS D or better, except that where exclusive through lanes exist, such roadways may operate at LOS E. 1.1.3.2: Controlled access FIRS highways shall operate at LOS D or better, except that where such roadways are parallel to exclusive transit facilities or are located within a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), roadways may operate at LOS E. 1.1.3.3: Where FDOT has determined that a FIRS roadway is constrained or backlogged, such roadways operating below the foregoing minimums must be managed so as not to cause significant deterioration, which is defined as an average annual daily traffic increase in two-way traffic volume of 10 percent or more, or a 10 percent or greater reduction in operating speed for the peak direction in the 100th highest hour. Policy TR-1.1.4: As part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) on the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCND\ sched led for completion in 700E and e the subsequent comprehensive revision by amendment of the MCNP, the Transportation Element of the MCNP will be revised to introduce the Miami Intermodal Transportation (MIT) plan, replacing the former Transportation Corridors plan. The MBAs needed, the City will continue to prepare transportation plans that will identify, describe, measure, and evaluate the multimodal transportation corridors, facilities and terminals in the City of Miami and recommend measures to enhance vehicular and mass transit operations, provide for greater pedestrian access and amenity, and offer incentives for use of alternative transportation modes. The MIT plan; will pay particular attention to the differing characteristics of Miami's neighborhoods such as land use, population density, economic activity, housing,. and business type and quality, and neighborhood plans, and will develop detailed standards for transportation facilities and services that will complement neighborhood development, redevelopment, and conservation. These transportation plans Miami's downtown will be the subject of special attention, to will promote cnsurc that its new residential development will en oy the benefits of an improved multimodal transportation system that will improve transit access within neiqhborhoods, while improving their connectivity system wide.as described in the Miami Downtown Transportation Master Waa- As a component of this effort, the City will o✓aluate the person trip methodology and assess how the methodology could be enhanced to add identify projected transit needs and programming on a route -by -route basis in coordination with the MPO and Miami -Dade Transit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 52 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy TR-1.1.5: The City, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council (TPC), and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will support the County's efforts to increase the efficiency and enhance the safety of the existing thoroughfare network by such methods as improved signal timing, better intersection and street design, car pooling, and encouraging staggered work schedules. The City will continue to enforce the Transportation Control Measures Ordinance pursuant to Section 14-182 of the City Code, to improve the efficiency of the existing transportation infrastructure. Policy TR-1.1.6: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will annually coordinate with Miami -Dade County on improving the efficiency pansion of its public bus transit system, including new service and the expansion of neighborhood -based local circulator services. The City will work with Miami -Dade County, as required, in the formulation of bus system policies, and continually cncouragc Miami Dadc County to adopt Icvcl of ccrvicc standards or land usc pattcrns that are compatible with the operation of a public transit system to promote the transit oriented development policies found in the Miami -Dade County's CDMP. Policy TR-1.1.7: The City shall seek, where appropriate, based on operational analysis, cost effectiveness, land development regulations, and the concurrence of Miami -Dade County or FDOT, to restore existing one-way streets to two-way operation to improve access and reduce trip length and vehicular speeds, particularly in the very high density areas of the City such as Little Havana and Downtown/Brickell/Omni, where access to existing buildings and garages will not be diminished or impeded. Policy TR-1.1.8: Through enforcement, amendment, and interpretation of its land development regulations, the City shall require the provision of adequate vehicular parking facilities with energy efficiency lighting consistent with parking demand at locations that are not disruptive to nearby residential communities. Policy TR-1.1.9: Require new development in downtown to implement transportation control measure provisions in accordance with Section 14-182, "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, to promote a general reduction in vehicular traffic by increasing auto occupancy and transit ridership. Prior to the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report submittal, tThe City shall enforce existing revise the "Transportation Control Measures" and shall promote compliance usingto includc current additional transportation demand management strategies requirements for all future and existing developments (as applicable pursuant to Section 14-182), such as parking management and ridesharinq programs to promote carpooling, vanpooling, car sharing and use of hybrid vehicles, transit discount and fare subsidy programs, transit fare tax incentive programs, astaggered work schedules, flexible work hours, compressed work weeks, telecommutinq programs, the construction of on -site transit shelters, transit amenities, transit stops, transit drop-off locations or pull-out bays, bicycle storage facilities and additional based upon transportation demand management strategies and criteria established between the City and the business community. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 53 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy TR-1.1.10: Upon completion of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) in 2005, and in conjunction with subsequent revision to thc Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, tThe City will annually update the location of amend thc Transportation Element of its comprehensive plan to facilitate implementation of thc EAR recommendations and depict existing and planned future major parking facilities on appropriate maps. Policy TR-1.1.11: The City will continue to relocate and/or extend streets that do not fit the developed street grid system of downtown, and have contributed to the disruption of circulation. Policy TR-1.1.12: The City will, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, encourage Miami -Dade County to improve downtown connections to the expressway system by providing a means of access to and from 1-95 at Northwest 20th Street, redesigning the existing 1-395 to improve its capacity and aesthetics in Overtown, Park West and Omni, the vicinity of Biscayne Boulevard and facilitate access to OvertownNortheact 1st and 2nd Avenues, and construct a -truck tunnel connecting the seapor t1-395. Policy TR-1.1.13: New development in downtown shall be required to contribute to established transportation impact mitigation fees pursuant to applicable provisions in the City Code. its fair share toward the mitigation of regional roadway impacts as provided for by the Development Order implementing the downtown and Southeast Overtown/Park West Developments of Regional Impact. Policy TR-1.1.14: The City will, through its membership on the MPO's Transportation Planning Council (TPC) continue to participate in Miami -Dade County's formulation of transportationtraffic circulation policies, and will, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, support the County's efforts to increase reliance on remote intercept parking at outlying Metrorail stations and express bus stops. Policy TR-1.1.15: Through enforcement of minimum and maximum on -site parking limitations, as provided for in Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City will manage the downtown parking supply to maintain an appropriate balance among the need to promote economic growth, to facilitate local traffic circulation, and to encourage public transportation use. Policy TR-1.1.16: Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, regarding downtown parking requirements, together with the powers of the City's Off -Street Parking Authority Department, the City will actively pursue the development of public and private peripheral parking garages near the expressway and arterial entrances to downtown in order to reduce congestion in the core area. In addition, the City will continue to enforce the maximum parking provisions mandated in Section 14-182. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 54 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy TR-1.1.17: The City of Miami will coordinate with South Florida Commuter Services and the Florida Department of Transportation to support and encourage City employee participation in the Downtown Miami Transportation Management Initiativc (TMI), established to increase the use of alternative modes of transportation by offering Downtown employers and their employee's alternatives to driving to work alone. The City will also work with the South Florida Commuter Services -Downtown to ensure consistent implementation of the City's Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" and provide assistance to employers and businesses required to implement the measures. In addition, the City will utilize the South Florida Commuter ServicesDowntown TMI to establish the transportation demand management (TDMID) requirements for all future and existing employers with more than 50 employees in the City. The City of Miami will lead by example in developing TDMD strategies for City employees_ prior to the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). Policy TR-1.1.18: The City will work with representatives of the Miami -Dade Transit Agency to increase the number of MDT bus routes operating within the City that participate in the Agency's Bike and Ride Program. Policy TR-1.1.19: Prior to submittal of the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), tThe City will promote multi -modal transportation initiatives and the amend the Transportation Element to incorporate recommendations of the adopted Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan_., particularly those relating to the Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center. Policy TR-1.1.20: Prior to submittal of the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report {EAR), tThe City will utilize funds provided through the People's Transportation Plan and funds collected from traffic impact mitigation fees as specified in the Capital Improvement Element of the MCNP, identify funding mechanisms for the cost of studies, plans and programs contained herein as well as targeted physical improvements to serve the residents, employees and visitors of and to the RAC. Objective TR-1.2: At the time of all development reviews, the City will determine rights -of -way and corridors needed for existing transportation networks and ensure those rights -of -way will be designated and reserved prior to development. Policy TR-1.2.1: The City will maintain and enforce, and where necessary revise, the minimum right-of-way requirements established in its City Code to ensure the continuity and effectiveness of the thoroughfare network. Policy TR-1.2.2: The City will continue to maintain a comprehensive public rights -of - way improvements program for those major commercial streets that are under the City's jurisdiction and have high levels of pedestrian activity. Objective TR-1.3: The City's transportation system will enhance safe person -trip and vehicular movements and minimize collision potential for all modes of transportation through design. Beginning January 1, 2004, the City will implement the prioritized Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 55 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Capital Improvements Program including sidewalk and curb replacements, and street resurfacing and reconstruction. Policy TR-1.3.1: The City will continue to provide an adequate, a properly designed and safe system for controlling vehicular traffic by adhering to adopted design standards and procedures and recognizing those relevant standards and procedures applicable to the agency with jurisdiction over the roadway or transportation facility. Policy TR-1.3.2: The City, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will annually coordinate with Miami -Dade County to support the monitoring of locations of high accident -frequency on the city's streets and its identification of design improvements that may alleviate hazardous conditions, especially to pedestrians. The City shall utilize safety as an evaluation criteria when will incorporate such improvements are incorporated into the City's Capital Improvement Element. Policy TR-1.3.3: The City will continue to provide a properly designed and safe system for pedestrian access by adhering to design standards and procedures which comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and which are required by the Engineering Standards for Design and Construction published by the Department of Public Works in December 2005. Objective TR-1.4: The City's street network will be utilized to protect and enhance the character of the city's residential neighborhoods and neighborhood commercial centers through coordination with the Land Use Plan, Zoning Code, and adopted Neighborhood plans and recommendations. Prior to the 2005 EAR, the Transportation Element will be amended to reflect pProposed measures for neighborhood protection and enhancement will include such as neighborhood traffic management and traffic calming plans. Policy TR-1.4.1: The City will seek cooperative agreements, as necessary, with Miami -Dade County and with FDOT to ensure that the County and State's transportation improvements are designed to minimize the intrusion of commuter traffic on City residential streets, do not sever or fragment well-defined neighborhoods, and do not result in major disruption to pedestrian traffic. Policy TR-1.4.2:T The City will coordinate with Miami -Dade County and with FDOT to and encourage local traffic to use alternatives to the Florida Intrastate Highway System roadways, where practicable, to protect its interregional and intrastate functions. Policy TR-1.4.32: The City will develop a streetscape design program that will guide landscaping, lighting and construction of sidewalks and bicycle paths along city streets, and such improvements will be coordinated with major repairs and renovation of city streets. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 56 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy TR-1.4.43: As streets undergo major repairs or renovation, the City will seek to eliminate dirt shoulders and provide curbing, gutters and sidewalks in order to improve the physical appearance and quality of the City's neighborhoods and districts. Policy TR-1.4.54: A new category of public thoroughfares is created entitled "Urban Streets," defining the Urban Street as a pedestrian and vehicular way whose primary function is to serve adjoining residential neighborhoods and the businesses that serve them in the City of Miami. Characteristics and standards for such streets will be defined and specifications created on a case -by -case basis in cooperation with the governmental entity having ownership of the street, local residents and homeowner associations. Principles that will guide the design process will include, as appropriate: lower design speeds and control of traffic volumes utilizing traffic calming devices including but not limited to modification of lane widths consistent with lower design speeds; wide sidewalks; medians; roundabouts; landscaping; attractive lighting; creative and informative signage; on -street parking; and other design features and amenities as appropriate. Urban Streets shall be subject to the level of service standards described in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3. The first such Urban Streets to be designated shall be: Biscayne Boulevard Grand Avenue Calle Ocho from Brickell Avenue to S.W. 27 Avenue Coral Way from Brickell Avenue to S.W. 37 Avenue N.E. 2 Avenue from N.E. 36 Street to the North City Limit. Additional streets may be designated from time to time by Resolution of the City Commission upon recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Department, based upon criteria developed in connection with the neighborhood planning studies conducted as part of the comprehensive update and revision of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan in 2005. (Resolution No. 01-1126, adopted by the City Commission October 24, 2001). Policy TR-1.4.6: Develop and encourage bicycle paths and bicycle lanes throughout the City of Miami in coordination with FDOT, Miami -Dade County and the MPO. Objective TR-1.5: The City of Miami's continued development requires the provision of effective public transit and paratransit services that serve existing and future land uses, the provision of safe and convenient public transit passenger transfer terminal facilities, the appropriate coordination of public transit with existing and future land uses, and the accommodation of the special needs of the City of Miami's population, many of whom are transportation disadvantaged. Therefore, the City of Miami will support Miami -Dade County, which is the sole authorized operator of public transit in in the provision of these essential public transit services. Rr+er to the 2005 EAR, the City will amend the Transportation Element to include Miami Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 57 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Dade Transit's updated Transportation Development Plan as it relates to the City. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-3.2.2.) Policy TR-1.5.1: The City will, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, continually encourage Miami -Dade County to facilitate exchanges improve connections between transit modes using, but not limited to, local circulator transit services of transit by interconnecting transit lines at intermodal terminals. Policy TR-1.5.2: The City shall conduct appropriate land use and zoning analysis of the areas surrounding each existing and future Metrorailpremium transit station as such station sites are approved by Miami -Dade County or the City of Miami for development in order to determine whether appropriate land use and zoning changes should be implemented that foster the development and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development (examining height, density and intensity, use and scale). Such land use and zoning changes shall include minimum and maximum density and intensity standards at the time of implementation. Policy TR-1.5.3: The City shall encourage use its land development regulations to assist the University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital to participate in transportation management initiatives and strategies to assist in meeting the demands of the Health District/Civic Center expansion and helping to solve the consequent accessibility, traffic circulation and parking problems_ and, through its membership on the Board of Directors of the Civic Center Transportation Management Organization (CCTMO), The City shall encourage the Health District/Civic Center stakeholders and facility operators to work together to increase Metrorail ridership and utilization of the transit station to help decrease the need for excessive surface parking demand_ in Civic Center. Policy TR-1.5.4: The City will, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, encourage Miami -Dade County to provide a Metrorail premium transit station to serve the River Quadrant area of downtown. Policy TR-1.5.5: [Reserved]. Policy TR-1.5.6: The City of Miami will, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, assist Miami -Dade County as necessary, in the completion of the planning and construction of Metrorail Phase II developing the premium transit protects identified in the MPO's Lonq Range Transportation Plan.by ,s The CityLs will utilize land development regulations to help direct development where it will support the densities required for premium urban rail transit systems. Policy TR-1.5.7: The City shall, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 58 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THL ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, request that Miami -Dade County include appropriate public transit systems in its Transportation Plan to connect the following: Bayside to Flagler Street, the seaport to Metromover, the Miami International Airport to downtownDowntown, Southeast Bayshore Drive to Metromover, Metrorail Phase II in the west Omni area to Metromover, Stadium to Health District/Civic Center, and Miami Beach to 4Downtown and the FEC Corridor to Downtown. Policy TR-1.5.8: Prior to the submittal of the 2005 EAR, tThe City will amend its land development regulations and public facility improvements to ensure a stronger interface between the development or redevelopment of neighborhood activity centers and the public transportation system by establishing design guidelines for connectivity and transit infrastructure to be incorporated into the development/redevelopment program. The City shall require all new development and redevelopment in existing and planned transit corridors to be planned and designed to promote pedestrianism and transit usage through the following: n® A. The City shall encouraqe development of a wide variety of residential and non- residential land -uses and activities in nodes around rapid transit stations to produce short trips, minimize transfers, attract transit ridership, and promote transit operational and financial efficiencies. Land uses that may be approved around transit stations shall include housing, shopping, and offices in moderate to hiqh density and intensity, complemented by compatible entertainment, cultural uses and human services in varying mixes. The particular uses that are approved in a given station area should respect the character of the nearby neighborhood, strive to serve the needs of the neighborhood, and promote balance in the range of existing and planned land uses along the subject transit line. B. It is the policy of the City of Miami to accommodate new development around rapid transit stations that is well desiqned, conducive to both pedestrian and transit use, and architecturally attractive. In recoqnition that many transit riders begin and end their trips as pedestrians, pedestrian accommodations shall include, as appropriate, continuous sidewalks to the transit station, small blocks and closely intersectinq streets, buildings oriented to the street or other pedestrian paths, parking lots predominantly to the rear and sides of buildings, primary building entrances as close to the street or transit stop as to the parking lot, shade trees, awnings and other weather protection for pedestrians. C. On all arterial and collector streets served by public transit new non-residential buildings and substantial alterations to existing non-residential buildings, and residential buildings wherever practical shall provide at least one full-time building entrance that is recognizable and accessible from the street and is comparably as close to the street and/or transit stop as it is to the primary parking lot. D. New residential and non-residential developments, subdivisions and replats shall provide for buildings that front the transit street, or provide streets or pedestrian Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 59 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. connections that intersect with the transit street in close proximity to transit stops not more than 700 feet apart. E. Redevelopment of property within one-half mile of existing and planned transit stations and bus routes shall not cause an increase in walking distance from nearby areas to the transit services and shall, wherever practical, be done in a manner that reduces walking distances and is comfortable and attractive to pedestrians. F. Land uses that are not conducive to public transit ridership such as car dealerships, car -oriented food franchises, and uses that require transporting large objects should not be permitted to locate or expand within'/4 mile of a rapid transit station. G. The City of Miami seeks to increase the density of development within walking distance of rapid transit stations in a manner appropriate to the particular setting of each transit station and consistent with the policies of the MCNP that specify that existing abuttinq residential neiqhborhoods are to be protected and preserved. Policy TR-1.5.9A: The City will, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its through it& Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, encourage Miami -Dade County to approve the use of private jitneys where it is determined that there exists public need for such services and wherethat conventional bus transit services not satisfactorily meet the need. Policy TR-1.5.9B: The City will promote water borne transportation as a commuter transit service and through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies will encourage Miami -Dade County to approve the use of water borne transportation as a commuter transit service. Policy TR-1.5.10: Through application of the provisions of its land development regulations, the City shall encourage residential development near large employment centers in order to minimize Commutes within the City and near the large employment centers. The City shall continue to update the land development regulations, as necessary, to ensure the regulations promote residential development near large employment centers and investigate opportunities for mixed -use developments. Policy TR-1.5.11: Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City will peek to require new large-scale development to adopt and enforce measures that will reduce the generation of new single -occupant passenger car trips in areas of high -density development, and encourage the use of multiple -occupant vehicles, including public transit, for home -based work trips. The City will coordinate with the Downtown TMI Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 60 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. and South Florida Commuter Services to provide support for transportation demand initiatives undertaken by new developments. Within one year of the adoption of this policy, the City shall modify Article 17 of the City Zoning Code to incorporate Transportation Control Measures into the Major Use Special Permit application process. Policy TR-1.5.12: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will continue to support Miami -Dade Transit County in its efforts to increase transit ridership. implementation of individual projects in order to achieve the Regional objective to increase the average daily share of transit ridership by 30 percent of total person trips In addition, by the 2005 EAR submittal, tThe City will coordinate with Miami -Dade Transit to develop weekday peak hour transit ridership data the appropriate data collection needs of transit ridership to ensure that a baseline can be established to support the City's person -trip methodoloqvcapacity level of service measurements and to support Miami -Dade Transit's efforts to improve transit services. Policy TR-1.5.13: The City shall annually coordinate with Miami -Dade County and its update of the Five Year Transit Development Program (TDP) to address transit needs consistent with the adopted level of service standard and transit planning guidelines, established by Miami -Dade County and population growth trends within the City of Miami. Policy TR-1.5.14: Prior to submittal of the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report {EAR), tThe City will publish an annual listing of amend the Transportation Element to incorporate the updated MDT Transit Development (TDP) and its programmed improvements within the City of Miami. Policy TR-1.5.15: Prior to submittal of the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report {EAR), tThe City will publish an annual listing of amend the Transportation Element to incorporate the updated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and its programmed improvements within the City of Miami. Objective TR-1.6: The City shall through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, annually coordinate and communicate its transportation plans and its public transit planning for transportation disadvantaged people, with those of Miami -Dade County. The City will annually monitor programs sponsored by the State of Florida and seek opportunities for coordination with other local municipalities. Policy TR-1.6.1: The City shall coordinate its transportation planning activities with annually review the annual update to the Metropolitan Planning Organization and subsequent Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Five -Year Transportation Improvement Program Plant and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan Update and coordinate the City's transportation planning with these plans. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 61 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective TR-1.7: The City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, annually meet with Miami -Dade County to coordinate the protection of existing and designation of future public transit corridors within Miami, to ensure that public transit expansion and improvement may be facilitated. Policy TR-1.7.1: The City shall use its land development regulations to ensure that adequate public rights -of -way are preserved for transportation purposes, which includes the need for mass transit services. Policy TR-1.7.2: The City shall develop a transit corridor right-of-way map to use when evaluatinq new protects and their proximity to existinq and future planned transit service. Objective TR-1.8: Prior to the 2005 EAR, The City shall regularly coordinate the transportation system and the information provided in the Transportation Element with the goals, objectives and policies of the Land Use element, including coordination with the land use, map, population densities, housing, employment patterns, projected development and redevelopment, urban infill, and other similar characteristics of land use that have an impact on transportation. Policy TR-1.8.1: The City shall continue to assure provision of an adequate, a properly designed and safe system for controlling vehicular accessibility to major thoroughfares through adopted design standards and procedures as contained in the City Public Works Manual as adopted for use in the review process, which at a minimum address: 1. Adequate storage and turning bays; 2. Spacing and design of median openings and curb cuts; 3. Provision of service roads along major thoroughfares, where applicable; 4. Driveway access and spacing; and 5. Traffic operations, including the provision of turning bays and bus bans for bus transit. Policy TR-1.8.2: The Transportation Element will be amended to reflect changes to the Land Use Element every five years, or as necessary, after thc adoption of thc 2005 EAR and include updated information based upon changes to the land use map, population densities, housing, employment patterns, projected development and redevelopment, urban infill, and other similar characteristics of land use impacting the transportation system. Policy TR-1.8.3: The Transportation Element updates provided as part of Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) will utilize a long range planning horizon of a minimum of 20 years in order to achieve the maximum consistency with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 62 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective TR-1.9: The City shall seek to achieve consistency and coordination between the Port of Miami and the Miami International Airport plans and the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Policy TR-1.9.1: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will annually coordinate with the Port of Miami and Miami International Airport to ensure consistency between the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and the port and airport master plans, and to improve access to and compatibility with port and airport facilities. Q P� Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 63 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PORTS, AVIATION AND RELATED FACILITIES Port of Miami Goal PA-1: Ensure that the development and expansion of Miami -Dade County's Port of Miami is compatible with and furthers the physical development of Miami's greater downtown area while mitigating negative impacts to neighborhoods, yet protecting the Port's economic function, operation, and potential improvements. Objective PA-1.1: The City of Miami, through its land development regulations, shall coordinate land use in areas of the city adjacent to the Port of Miami with the transportation related activity which occurs within the port to ensure compatibility and complementary land uses and activities while mitigating negative impacts to neighborhoods, yet protecting the Port's economic function, operation, and potential improvements. Policy PA-1.1.1: The City of Miami shall, through its land development regulations, encourage facility improvement which will further both the land development, coastal management and conservation goals and objectives of the City of Miami and the port development goals of Miami -Dade County and the Port of Miami. Policy PA-1.1.2: The City shall, through its land development regulations, ence encourage the availability of an adequate amount of commercial and industrial land will be availablc_ to complement planned expansions of port activity, and will establish a "free trade zone" within adequate proximity to the Port of Miami. Policy PA-1.1.3: Through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, the City of Miami will seek concurrence from Miami Dade County to agree that all parking, roads and ancillary transportation facilitics required to accommodate new terminals will be constructed within the Port of Miami. Policy PA 1.1.4: Through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, the City of Miami will seek concurrence from Miami Dade County to agree that all non transportation related land uses, including but not limited to retail, general office, and hotel uses, will not be permitted within the Port of Miami, but instead such uses will be made available in areas adjacent to the Port. Policy PA-1.1.3S: All surface transportation improvements providing access to the Port must be compatible with the needs, goals and objectives of the City of Miami as related to the development of the greater downtown area, and such improvements will be financed with an appropriate share of County, state and federal funds. Policy PA-1.1.46The Port shall prepare guidelines that will serve as design criteria for the construction, renovation and landscaping of its facilities and such guidelines must comply with all City of Miami Code requirements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 64 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PA-1.1.57: The City shall, through its land development regulations, cooperate with Miami -Dade County and its Port of Miami operation to mitigate adverse structural and non-structural impacts from the Port of Miami upon adjacent natural resources and land uses. Policy PA-1.1.68: The City shall, through its land development regulations, cooperate with Miami -Dade County and its Port of Miami operation to protect and conserve natural resources. Miami International Airport Goal PA-2: Ensure that the development and expansion of Miami -Dade County's Miami International Airport is compatible with and furthers the physical development of the City of Miami. Objective PA-2.1: The City of Miami, through its land development regulations, shall coordinate land use in areas of the city adjacent to Miami International Airport with the transportation related activity which occurs within that facility to ensure compatible and complimentary land uses and activities. Through such land development regulations, the City will mitigate negative impacts to neighborhoods that might result from airport activities, while protecting the airport's economic function, operation, and potential improvements. Policy PA-2.1.1: The City of Miami shall, through its land development regulations, encourage facility improvement which will further both the land development, coastal management and conservation goals and objectives of the City of Miami and the development goals of Miami -Dade County and Miami International Airport. Policy PA-2.1.2: All surface transportation improvements providing access to Miami International Airport and impacting upon transportation within the City of Miami must be compatible with the needs, goals and objectives of the City and such improvements will be financed with the appropriate share of County, state and federal funds. Policy PA-2.1.3: The City shall, through its land development regulations, ensure that zoning within the city protects existing aviation flight paths. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 65 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Port of Miami River 1 Goal PA-3: The Port of Miami River, a group of privately owned and operated commercial shipping-c-ompaFdes-le-c-ateel-at-spec-ific--sites-aleng-the-Miami-Riverr which encompasses the water dependent marine activity on the river, including shipping and the associated supporting marine industries zoned SD-4 on the Miami River, shall be encouraged to continue operation as a valued and economically viable component of the city's maritime industrial base. Objective PA-3.1: The City of Miami, through its land development regulations, shall help protect the Port of Miami River from encroachment by non water -dependent or water -related land uses, and shall regulate its expansion and redevelopment in coordination with the City's applicable coastal management and conservation plans and policies. Policy PA-3.1.1: The City shaB-mavuse its land development regulations to encourage the establishment and maintenance of water -dependent and water -related uses along the banks of the Miami River along with water taxi and water pleasure craft uses along the entire river, and to discourage encroachment by incompatible uses. The City shall, through its land development regulations, allow for residential development along the Miami River in appropriate locations, provided the residential uses are compatible with adjacent land uses while protecting the Port of Miami River's economic function, operations and potential improvements. Policy PA-3.1.2: The City shall, through its land development regulations, encourage the development and expansion of the Port of Miami River consistent with the coastal management and conservation elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Policy PA-3.1.3: The City shall, through its land development regulations, cncourage development of compatible land uses in the vicinity of the Port of Miami River so as to address the avoid further depletion of land zoned for marine industrial use and so as to mitigate potential adverse impacts arising from the Port of Miami River upon adjacent natural resources and land uses. Objective PA-3.2: The City of Miami shall coordinate the surface transportation access to the Port of Miami River with the traffic and mass transit system shown on the traffic circulation map series. Policy PA-3.2.1: The City of Miami shall, through the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, coordinate intermodal surface and water transportation access serving the Port of Miami River. 1- The "Port of Miami River" is simply a legal name used to identify some 11 independent, privately owned small shipping companies located along the Miami Rivcr, and is not a "Port Facility" within the usual meaning of the term. The identification of these shipping conccrns as the "Port of MiamF River" was madc in 1986 for the solo purpose of satisfying a U.S. Coast Guard regulation governing bilge pump outs. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 66 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective PA-3.3: The City of Miami shall coordinate its Port of Miami River planning activities with those of ports facilities providers and regulators including the U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, the Miami River Commission, and Miami Dade County's Port of Miami. Policy PA-3.3.1: The City of Miami, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, shall support and coordinate with other jurisdictions and agencies having jurisdiction over the Miami River in order to support and enhance the Port of Miami River's economic importance and viability as a port facility, the functions of the Port of Miami River consistent with the future goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly with respect to the unique characteristics of the Port of Miami River's location and its economic position and functioning within the local maritime industry, and the necessity for coordination of these characteristics and needs with the maritime industry that complements, and often competes with, the Port of Miami River. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 67 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Goal PR-1: Provide sufficientaflectuate opportunities for active and passive recreation to all city City residents based on access to parks, recreation and open space, per capita park funding, and regular surveys of residents on park and recreation needs. Objective PR-1.1: Increase public access to all identified recreation sites, facilitics and open spaces including the Miami River and beaches and enhance the quality of persons within the city's neighborhoods. Policy PR-1.1.1: The City will continue to develop detailed management plans for any neighborhoods where there is a critical shortage of access to public recreational services, with the intent of identifying measures to address current deficiencies, determining the projected cost of implementing such measures and identifying funding sources to finance their implementation. Policy PR-1.1.2: The City will continue to improve the quality and diversity of reational programs offered at comma snit„ parks increasing staff anal hours of e operation where deemed necessary and fiscally practicablc, and encouragc recreational staff to be certified by the Florida Recreation and Parks Association. Policy PR-1.1.3: The City's land developmcnt rcgulation policics will considcr thc impact of future development that significantly increases residential densities on the �crvise:-ccc regulation) will establish mechanisms, including, but not limited to, special development fees, that will be used to mitigate the adverse impacts of such development. Policy PR-1.1.4: The City will increase recreational opportunities on Virginia Key through the island's redevelopment, and as provided for in the Virginia Key Master Policy DD-4 4 5: The City ,mill retain a maiorit„ of its land i ise as recreational land i ise on Watson Island as designated in the Watson Island Master Development Plan. Policy PR-1.1.6: All park renovation and expansion, or new park plans will contain a provision for providing a program to ensure that in the development of new and thc renovation of existing parks, the special recreation, education, and safety needs of preschool age children and the elderly within thc service radius of park facilitics arc addressed. Policy PR-1.1.7: The City will establish a program to coordinate actions with nonprofit providers of social services to the elderly and the youth, so as to permit such providers cldcrly and the youth. Policy PR-1.1.8: Features that increase access for handicapped persons will be included in the designs for all renovations, expansions, and developments of park facilities. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 68 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-1.1.9: The City will establish a program to coordinate actions with nonprofit social service agencies to permit the development of special recreation and education programs for the handicapped to be offered by such agencies at City facilities. Policy PR-1.1.10: In the transfer of ownership of City park facilities or public open spaces, or if the conversion of City owned park or public open space to non recreational use occurs in areas of crucial shortages, a formal justification for such action will be prepared in order to assure that the City will take appropriate actions to to affected residents occurs as a result of such title transfers or conversions. Policy PR-1.1.11: Where appropriate and in the interest of public safety and promotion of outdoor recreation opportunities on environmentally sensitive areas, future land development regulations will require non water dependent or related development or redevelopment to maintain public access to the goostal and Miami River shorelines. (See Coastal Management Policy CM 2.1.1) Policy PR 1.1.12: All City owned, waterfront property, including the Miami River shorelines, will providc for public opcn spaccs that providc accost; to the shorclinc Policy PR 1.1.13: The City will incorporate provisions for public physical and/or visual accesc to the shoreline in its waterfront zoning regulations. (See Coastal Management Policy CM 2.1.7.) Policy PR-1.1.14: Interpretative displays, educational programs, wildlife observation recreation activities by 2005. Objective PR-1.2: Increase public safety and security within the City's parks, reducing crime and accident rates by at least fivc percent each fivc years 1995-2015. Policy PR 1.2.1: All community parks will be equipped with adequate energy efficient night lighting. Policy PR-1.2.2: Community and neighborhood parks will increase their hours of operation and enhance their programs, whenever feasible, so as to encourage a greater public presence in the parks. Policy PR 1.2.3: The City's Police Department will establish a program to work with neighborhood residents to create and support community crime watch groups to assist in park safety and crime prevention. Policy PR 1.2.4: The City will establish a system of regular, uniformcd policc patrols and presence in and around community and neighborhood parks. Policy PR 1.2.5: In all active parks the City will maintain an adequate number of trained staff based on professionally recognized standards, and on a regular basis will conduct safety inspections of equipment and structural facilities. Policy PR 1.2.6: The City will disseminate information to the public on proper safety procedures that are to be followed while using park facilities. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 69 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective PR-1.3: Incr asc the efficiency of park operations, while improving the quality of recreation services and strengthening the financial support of the parks and recreation service system. Policy PR-1.3.1: The City's operating budget and the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) will give priority to the quality of programs in, and the physical condition of, facilities for parks and recreation. Policy PR-1.3.2: The City will establish a "parks of excellence" program for selected community parks where staff support and operations are focused on high quality programs leading to the development of nationally competitive athletes. Policy PR-1.3.3: A projection and analysis of operational and maintenance costs associated with all park and recreation related capital projects which exceed $50,000, with their anticipated funding sources, will be required and made publicly available prior to the decision to appropriate public funds for capital improvements. Policy PR 1.3.4: The City will implcmcnt innovativc managcmcnt and maintcnancc alternatives designed to minimize operating and maintenance costs, while not reducing the extent and quality of programs or adversely affecting the physical condition of park facilities. Policy PR-1.3.5: The City will implement public/private partnerships with CBO's and Merchant Associations to provide for the maintenance and enhancement of public spaces. OL) Policy PR-1.3.6: [Reserved] Policy PR 1.3.7: [Reserved] Policy PR 1.3.8: The City will establish a permanent parks advisory board that is the delivery of recreation services. This board, togcthcr with staff support from the City's administration, will prepare a biannual rcport, which will includc, but not be limited to: an analysis of physical conditions within the City's parks; a prioritized lc� list off capital repairs and replacement needs, estimated costs of those capital projects; a of the progress made toward achieving Goal 1 of this element. Objective PR-1,4: Ensure that future development and redevelopment pay an equitable, proportional share of the cost of public open space and recreational Policy PR-1.4.11 —Thhe City will continue to i developer confributionc including development impact fees, facilities needed to serve new development or redevelopment. Policy PR 1.4.2: The City will periodically revise all fees related to the impact of new development and redevelopment to reflect increases in the cost of providing public open space and recreational facilities. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 70 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-1.4.3: The City will consider the use of special assessment districts to help fund open space and recreational facilities projects whose public benefits tend to be localized to specific geographic sub areas of the city. Policy PR-1.4.4: The acceptable Level of Service Standards for the City of Miami with regards to Recreation and Open Space will be a minimum of 1.3 acres of public park space per 1000 residents. Objective PR-1.5: Develop and enhance the quality of parks and open spaces within the city's downtown and other neighborhoods in a manner that addre;,ses the needs of city residents, workers and visitors, and strengthens the city's economic development. Policy PR-1.5.1: [Reserved] Policy PR-1.5.2: The City will complete the renovation of Bicentennial Park and development of the FEC Tract, in accordance with the goals and recommendations given in the City's Downtown Waterfront Master Plan, by 2002. Policy PR-1.5.3: The City will work to restore the utity of Southside Park as a downtown neighborhood center and recreational resource. Policy PR 1.5.4: The City will redevelop Lummus Park in the Riverside District to provide an activity/program center for history, riverfront activities and recreational facilities for visitors and city residents. Policy PR-1.5.5: Creatc a spccialty "Fishcrmcn's Wharf" cafc district and marinc services center in the Riverside District along N.W. North River Drive on the Miami River. Policy PR 1.5.6: As dcpictcd in thc Waterfront Mastcr Plan and programmcd in thc CIE, the City will provide a continuous network of public parks and major attractions along the downtown waterfront. Pelicy PR-c :lA—specified in the ( ji of Mi�Ghar-ter and elatoccrcrred Laaws annd more specifically the Waterfront Charter flmendment all n d pm and rrrvr �p�, crrrvrr�vrtc�-cc�crrari�cTrr-rnr�-r�iA ae��ebpn�ei=}�-ca-rcr redevelopment along the downtown waterfront is required to provide a waterfront will design them in conformancc with thc "Baywalk/Rivcrwalk Dcsign Standards." (Scc Coastal Management Policy CM 2.1.8.) Policy PR-1.5.8: [Reserved] Policy PR-1.5.8: Expand the existing Jose Marti Park to provide additional recreational opportunities for the area's residents, workers, and visitors. Policy PR-1.5.9: [Reserved] Policy PR 1.5.10: The City will continue to encourage development of urban street promenade linkages with widened sidewalks, high quality materials, landscaping, lighting, graphics and furnishings. Policy PR 1.5.11: The City will continuc to work toward improvcmcnt of thc Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 71 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Biscayne Boulevard, Brickell Avenue, and North 1 Avenue, to create distinctive images and unifying elements between downtown districts. Policy PR-1.5.12: The City will continue to work toward enhancement of public spaces (entrances, Azas lobbies co irtyards and atriums) and gateways into downtown through artwork. The City will use, whenever appropriate, the "Art in Public Places" allocation in public facility construction budgets as well as the assistance of the County at gateway locations. Objective PR-1.6: Plan and implement new park districts in designed areas of the city where additional parks may be necessary to ensure sufficient active and passive recreation opportunities are made available to city residents within such designated Policy PR-1.6.1: The City will commencc a planning procca710 dctcrminc the necessary expansion of recreation and open space needs within the Little Haiti area; more specifically, within the area depicted below; said plan shall include an implementation plan and schedule for the designation of a new park district. Objective PR-1.1: The City shall work to achieve a medium -term objective of providing a park within one-half mile of every resident by 2015 and to achieve a long- term objective of a park within one -quarter mile of every resident by 2020. Policy PR-1.1.1: The City will establish a new hierarchy for the City park system to reflect Miami's urban condition, as described in the Miami Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan dated May 2007 and adopted by the City Commission. The hierarchy will have the following elements: ■ Citywide parks: o Destination parks — four types: conservation, waterfront over 3 C acres, sports complex and aquatic, specialty (unique programs) (o Community parks - parks over 3 acres that include active recreation facilities o Linear parks — greenways and trails Neighborhood parks — all remaining parks under 3 acres that do not fit in other categories Policy PR-1.1.2: The City will focus on park land acquisition according to the following priorities that emerged from community preferences during the 2007 Parks Master Plan process: land with water views and/or water access; land for "walk -to" parks, including neighborhood parks, in underserved areas of the City identified in Citywide and NET -area maps in the 2007 Parks Master Plan and any subsequent updates to these maps; land to expand destination and community parks; land for expansion or creation of linear park segments. Information on target priorities and tarqet areas for new parks will be disseminated to all relevant City departments to enhance the potential for parkland acquisition in conjunction with infrastructure and Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 72 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. other projects. Ideally, new parks should be at least one acre in size, but smaller areas may be suitable, depending on the surroundings and proposed uses. Policy PR-1.1.3: The City will provide areas for safe, passive use in all parks, including those in active recreational use parks. The passive areas will include usable green space with plantings, shade and seating. Policy PR-1.1.4: The City will conduct a study to support a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes and adopt a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes by January 2009 that will assist in achieving the access and per capita funding objectives of PR-1.1. Until that time, the Level of Service for concurrency purposes shall be 1.3 acres of public park space per 1000 residents. Objective PR-1.2: Provide sufficient per capita funds for the par'ks\ystem to support the parks, recreation and open space standards expected by the public, as indicated in surveys and other responses to public outreach, for resources and programs that benefit the community. The City will strive to meet and exceed a benchmark level of spending annually of $100 per capita in 2007 dollars, within fiscal limits and based on identified needs. Policy PR-1.2.1: The City will establish he cost of providing park and recreation programs and services, identify which core park and recreation services are to be offered according to criteria related to level of benefits to individuals and the community as a whole, identify which services and programs should be free, and formulate how a fee structure should be set for other services and programs. Policy PR-1.2.2: The City will develop annual parks and recreation budgets that explain the rationale behind the program, operational and maintenance standards that the City intends to meet; the costs of meeting those standards; and the per capita budget in comparison with similar cities, including cities in Florida. Q— Po�y PR--1.2.3: The City will allocate program revenues generated by the Parks and Recreation Department to the department's budget. Policy PR--1.2.4: The City will work to identify and create a dedicated funding source for the park system. Policy PR-1.2.5: The City will seek grants and other funding for new resources, including land, activities, and programs. Some of these funds may come from nonprofit partnership groups that may be formed, such as a potential Miami Parks Foundation. Objective PR-1.3: Pursue expanded and new opportunities identified in the 2007 Parks Master Plan (and any subsequent updates) to share park, recreation and open Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 73 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. space resources with the school district, the housing authority, churches, nonprofit organizations, transportation agencies and other groups that may be able to share land and programs with the City Parks and Recreation Department. Policy PR-1.3.1: The City will establish communication with and liaisons to agencies and groups that have existing and potential recreation and open space resources in order to pursue access to these resources by City residents. Policy PR-1.3.2: The City will evaluate current costs, benefits and procedures for sharing resources and programming and will develop policies and procedures that will maximize benefits for City residents. Objective PR-1.4: Expand existing and create new greenways and trails to meet resident needs. Policy PR-1.4.1: The City will continue to work with transit agencies to coordinate the park system and pedestrian connections with opportunities to improve and expand the Metro -Path Trail. Policy PR-1.4.2: The City will continue to work with transportation agencies to implement the Commodore Trail improvements and the Flagler Trail (FEC Corridor Greenway). Policy PR-1.4.3: The City willnue to work to implement the Overtown Greenway plan to link the Miami River through Overtown to Downtown. Policy PR-1.4.4: The City will work with Miami -Dade County and other groups to ensure that greenwav, trail and park systems within the City are effectively linked to proposed regional trails such as the Venetian Connector, the Unity Trail, the Perimeter Trail, the Ludlum Trail, and the East-West Trail. The City will continue to advocate for funding of trails identified in the Miami -Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization 2030 Long -Range Transportation Plan. Policy PR-1.4.5: The City will designate as scenic transportation corridors those segments of roadways that have significant vegetative features, and will encourage the development of bicycle and pedestrian paths along such corridors, where appropriate. Future land development regulations will encourage the provision of sufficient land areas for uses that are compatible with and encourage the flow of bicycle and pedestrian traffic along these corridors. Objective PR-1.5: Ensure that future development and redevelopment pay an equitable, proportional share of the cost of public open space and recreational facilities required to maintain adopted LOS standards. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 74 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-1.5.1: The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to meet expanded demand for Citywide parks, neighborhood parks, and recreational programs resulting from new residential development, including, but not limited to, impact fees, density bonuses and contributions in lieu of land that will be used to provide new park and recreation resources to serve new development. The City will review these fees annually in accordance with recreation and open space needs and revise them as necessary to reflect increases in the cost of providing public open space and recreational facilities to meet its adopted Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space. Policy PR-1.5.2: The City will continue to work with developers of mixed use and nonresidential projects to ensure the creation of appropriate public spaces. Policy PR-1.5.3: The City will consider the use of special assessment districts to help fund open space and recreational facilities projects whose public benefits tend to be localized to specific geographic sub areas of the City. Goal PR-2: Preserve and enhance existing parks and recreation facilities. Objective PR-2.1: Protect existing park land. Policy PR-2.1.1: The City has a no -net -loss policy for public park land and will adopt procedures to this effect for park land in the City Zoning Ordinances, as described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan, by 2010. These will allow only recreation and cultural facilities to be built on park land, will limit building footprint on any such land, will require that conversion of park land for any other purposes be subject to public procedures, and replace the converted park land with land similar in park, recreation or conservation value in terms of usefulness and location. Policy PR-2.1.2: The City will continue to define and protect conservation areas in the zoninq code, as well as other parks and recreation areas. Objective PR-2.2: Maintain and enhance existing parks and recreation facilities. Policy PR-2.2.1: The City will provide appropriate staffing, services, equipment, and maintenance at all parks. Criteria for appropriateness will include park category (Citywide or neighborhood), recreation programs, demand for passive and active spaces and activities, sizes, and facilities. Policy PR-2.2.2: The City will maintain and staff nine public swimming pools to be open all year round by 2009, with the remainder to be open year-round by 2012. Policy PR-2.2.3: The City, through the Parks and Recreation Department, will continue to develop and implement maintenance level of service standards, identify Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 75 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. associated costs, and address funding those costs, including replacement programs for equipment and vehicles, before adding more assignments. Goal PR-3: Increase public access to all parks, recreation, facilities and open spaces including waterfront areas and the Picnic Islands in Biscayne Bay. Objective PR-3.1: Enhance public access by pedestrians and bicyclists to parks and recreation sites Policy PR-3.1.1: The City will continue to implement sidewalk and shade tree planting programs along public roadways that connect to parks and other community destinations. Tree planting programs will be implemented in accordance with the 2007 City of Miami Tree Master Plan. Policy PR-3.1.2: The City will work with the Parks and Recreation Department and with neighborhood groups to identify pedestrian routes within a half -mile radius of parks that are appropriate for improvements to sidewalks, lighting, street trees, crosswalks and pedestrian count -down signals, and signage to support a ParkWalks program, as described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Plan. The ParkWalks improvement plans will be included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. One ParkWalks planning process will be completed in each Commission district annually beginning in 2009, with implementation to follow in the following year. Policy PR-3.1.3: Bicycle parking facilities such as bike racks shall be provided in existing and future park projects. Objective PR-3.2: Enhance the public's visual and physical access to waterfront areas. Policy PR-3.2.1: Thee'C° v will continue to work to complete the Bavwalk, encompassing as much of the Biscayne Bay waterfront as possible, and to complete the Riverwalk and the Miami River Greenway. Policy PR-3.2.2: All City -owned waterfront property, including the Miami River shorelines, will provide for public open spaces that provide access to the shoreline. Policy PR-3.2.3: The City will incorporate provisions for public physical and/or visual access to the shoreline in its waterfront zoning regulations. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-2.1.7.) Policy PR-3.2.4: Where appropriate and in the interest of public safety and promotion of outdoor recreation opportunities on environmentally sensitive areas, future land development regulations will require non -water dependent or related development and/or redevelopment to maintain public access to the coastal and Miami River shorelines. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-2.1.1.) Policy PR-3.2.5: The City will continue to expand launch areas for personal kayaks/canoes, kayak/canoe rentals and other boating programs at parks on Biscayne Bay, the Miami River and the South Fork of the Miami River. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 76 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-3.2.6: The City will pursue creation of water shuttles or water taxis that will expand public access to the Picnic Islands in Biscayne Bay off the Upper Eastside and the Dinner Key islands off Coconut Grove. Policy PR-3.2.7: The City will work with other organizations and agencies to identify recreational opportunities, including boating, on the smaller waterways in the City, such as Wagner Creek, the Little River, and the canals. Policy PR-3.2.8: All renovations and improvements to City parks and recreational facilities will be designed to enhance rather than obstruct waterfront views. Policy PR-3.2.9 44: The City will increase public recreational opportunities on Virginia Key through the island's redevelopment, and as provided.fpr in- the Virginia Key Master Plan and its implementation. ''�� r��� Policy PR-3.2.10: The City shall continue to ensure that park and recreational lands open to the public are included in redevelopment projects for Watson Island and will monitor the project after construction to ensure continued public access without any requirements for the public to make purchases or any other barriers to open public use. Policy PR-3.2.11: As specified in the City dVami Charter and Related Laws, and more specifically the Waterfront Charter Amendment, all new development and redevelopment along the downtown waterfront is required to provide a waterfront setback, and those developments that require publicly accessible shoreline walkways, will design them in conformance with the "Baywalk/Riverwalk Design Standards." (See Coastal Management Policy CM-2.1.8.) The City will monitor these areas to ensure continued public access, as required. Objective PR-3.3: Park and recreational facilities will be accessible to handicapped persons and provide opportunities for special needs groups. Policy PR-3.3.1: All renovations, expansions, and development of park and recreation facilities will be designed in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements, including handicapped parking spaces, ramps, handrails, pathways and other accessibility improvements to be appropriately located with respect to recreational facilities. Nolrcy NK-3.3.z: uesigns tor renovations, expansions, ana aevelopments of parK ana recreation facilities will be evaluated to ensure that there are sufficient facilities within the service area to provide for the recreation, education, and safety needs of preschool age children, the elderly, persons with disabilities and other special needs groups. Goal PR-4: Enhance the quality of recreational and educational opportunities for all age groups, persons with disabilities, and other special needs groups. Objective PR-4.1: Continue to improve the quality and diversity of recreational programs offered at destination and community parks- and neighborhood parks where such programs may be offered. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 77 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-4.1.1: The City will use participant evaluation surveys, at the completion of recreational programs to evaluate program success, and online public opinion surveys; at least once every three years, and scientific surveys at least once every seven years to identify needed and desired programs. Policy PR-4.1.2: The City will increase staff and hours of operation where necessary and fiscally feasible, provide professional development opportunities for park and recreation staff, and encourage staff to be certified by the Florida Recreation and Parks Association. Policy PR-4.1.3: The City will continue to provide interpretive displays, educational programs, wildlife observation locations, and picnic areas in parks and open spaces for outdoor recreation activities. Policy PR-4.1.4: The City will continue to coordinate with nonprofit providers of social services to the elderly, youth, and other special needs groups, so as to permit such providers to use public park facilities for meeting the recreational and educational needs of these groups. Goal PR-5: Improve management and operations in the park and recreation system. Objective PR-5.1 44: Increase the efficiency of park operations, while improving the quality of recreation services and strengthening the financial support of the parks and recreation service system. Policy PR-5.1.1: The vision and mission of the Parks and Recreation Department will be revised to include the protection of green spaces and natural areas in addition to the existing focus on recreational and cultural activities. Policy PR-5.1.2 4: The City's operating budget and the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) will give priority to the quality of programs in, and the physical condition of, existing park facilities and to meeting existing deficiencies, before constructing new facilities for parks and recreation. This policy does not preclude the use of impact fees or other funds to purchase additional land to be held in inventory for new parks in underserved neighborhoods. Policy PR 1.3.2: The City will establish a "parks of excellence" program for selected community parks where staff support and operations are focused on high quality programs leading to the development of nationally competitive athletes. Policy PR-5.1.31.3.3: A projection and analysis of operational and maintenance costs associated with all park and recreation related capital projects which exceed $50,000, with their anticipated funding sources, will be required and made publicly available prior to the decision to appropriate public funds for capital improvements. Policy PR-5.1.:4: The City will continue to implement innovative management and maintenance alternatives designed to minimize operating and maintenance costs while not reducing the extent and quality of programs or adversely affecting the physical condition of park facilities through establishment of core services according to level of Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 78 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. benefit to the community, identifying costs and potential revenues, improving management accountability, establishing preventive maintenance and replacement programs, establishing formal policies and systems for working with groups that sponsor programs that use City facilities, and strengthening support services. Policy PR-5.1.15: The City will implement public/private partnerships with CBO's and Merchant Associations to provide for the maintenance and enhancement of public spaces assign staff time to develop and manage a network of volunteer "friends" groups for individual parks. implement public/private partnerships with CBO's and Merchant Associations to provide for the maintenance and enhancement of public spaces. Policy PR-5.1.6 1- 6: {Reserved] The City will continue to develop and implement public/private partnerships to contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of parks, recreational facilities, and public spaces, while ensuring tt public spaces remain freely open to the public. Policy PR-5.1.1477: [Reserved} The City will create a Citywide Miami Parks Foundation by 2010 to serve as a nonprofit partner to focus attention on the park system, raise money to help support maintenance, enhance and expand parks and recreational programs, attract volunteers, and broaden the constituency for the park system. Objective PR-5.2: Create institutions and procedures to ensure resident and community consultation in the development of system wide policies and planning for park and recreation program improvements. Policy PR-5.2.1: The City will establish a permanent Parks and Recreation Advisory Board made up of residents who are; park users, program participants, and representatives of groups with special relevant expertise. The Board's responsibilities will include advising elected officials and staff on implementation of the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan and any adopted subsequent updates to that Plan. The Board will be supported by staff from the Parks and Recreation Department, and will report annually to the Mayor and City Commission on progress in implementing the Master Plan, including financial reports, holding at least one public hearing on the draft report before submitting it to the Mayor and Commission. The Board will also review and advise on capital plans and designs based on the Master Plan and advise the Commission on any proposals to expend more than $50,000 to acquire new park land, to diminish or convert existing park land, to accept donated land for parks, or to sell City land that may be suitable for parks. The City will periodically review and refine the mission and charge of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board in order to ensure maximum opportunities for public involvement and effectiveness in addressing parks and recreation needs. Proposed changes to the mission and charge of the Board will not be implemented until after a public hearing by the appropriate public board. Policy PR-5.2.2: The City will survey City residents to monitor preferences, needs and satisfaction with the park system on a regular basis, at a minimum through evaluations of all programs by program participants to evaluate program success, online surveys every three years, and scientific surveys every seven years (starting from the Parks Master Plan survey of 2006). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 79 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-5.2.3: The City will develop and implement regular procedures by 2010 to provide opportunities for park user and neighborhood consultation in the planning and design of park and recreation facilities improvements and new parks and programs. Policy PR-5.2.4: The City will develop a full update on the Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan at least once every ten years, to coincide with a scientific survey of residents' park and recreation needs and to precede and contribute to the EAR process. Objective PR-5.3: Continue to increase public safety and security within City parks. Policy PR-5.3.1: All parks will be equipped with adequate energy efficient night lighting by 2012. Policy PR-5.3.2: Citywide and neighborhood parks will increases their hours of operation and enhance their programs, whenever feasible, so as to encourage a greater public presence in the parks. Policy PR-5.3.3: The City's Police Department will continbe to work with neighborhood residents to create and support community crime watch groups to assist in park safety and crime prevention. Policy PR-5.3.4: The City will continue regular,uuniformed police patrols and presence in and around Citywide and neighborhood parks. Policy PR-5.3.5: In all parks with active recreation the City will maintain an adequate number of trained staff based on standards recognized by professional organizations such as the Florida Recreation and Park Association or the National Recreation and Park Association, and on a regular basis will conduct safety inspections of equipment and structural facilities. Policy PR-5.3.6: The City will disseminate information to the public on proper safety procedures that are to be followed while using park facilities. Policy PR-5.3.7: When parks are being renovated or designed, the City will evaluate the park's safety, consulting with park users and the police whether high fences or other obtrusive security measures remain necessary. Goal PR-6: Develop and enhance the quality of parks and open spaces within the City's downtown and other neighborhoods in a manner that addresses the needs of City residents, workers and visitors, and strengthens the City's economic development. Objective PR-6.1: Implement the NET Area Visions in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan, using the NET Area Implementation Tasks and Park Opportunities section of the Plan as a guide to enhancing and expanding Citywide and neighborhood parks, recreational facilities and programs. Policy PR-6.1.1: The City will annually review implementation sections of the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan to include implementation actions in developing an annual work plan and capital improvements plan for parks and recreation facilities and programs. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 80 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-6.1.2: The City will work to implement the specific master plans that include parks and recreation facilities, such as the Coconut Grove Waterfront Master Plan, the Museum Park Master Plan, and the Virginia Key Master Plan, and create pedestrian and water linkages among Fern Isle Park, Sewell Park, the recently acquired Police Benevolent Association property, and Curtis Park to create a Miami "Central Park." As depicted in the Waterfront Master Plan and programmed in the CIE, the City will provide a continuous network of public parks and major attractions along the downtown waterfront. Policy PR-6.1.3: The City will continue to redevelop Lummus Park in the Riverside District to provide an activity/program center for history, riverfront activities and recreational facilities for visitors and City residents, including creation of a speciality "Fisherman's Wharf" cafe district and marine services center. Policy PR-6.1.4: The City will create a specialty "Fishermen's Wharf" cafe district and marine services center in the Riverside District along N.W. North River Drive on the Miami River. Objective PR-6.2: Improve and enhance public spaces and linkages in the City. Policy PR-6.2.1: The City will continue to encourage development of urban street promenade linkages with widened sidewalks, high quality materials, shade trees, landscaping, lighting, graphics and furnishings. Policy PR-6.2.2: The City will continue to work toward improving landscaping and pedestrian -oriented amenities along major boulevards, including Biscayne Boulevard, Brickell Avenue, and North 1st Avenue, and other major transportation corridors, to create distinctive images and unifying elements between downtown districts. Policy PR-6.2.3: The City will continue to work towards enhancement of public spaces (entrances, plazas, lobbies, courtyards and atriums) and gateways through artwork. The City will use, whenever appropriate, the "Art in Public Places" allocation in public facility construction budgets as well as the assistance of the County Arts Council staff, and encourage private organizations to construct civic monuments at gateway locations. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 81 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. w Little Haiti Park Planning Arcs NEm"''64`TER w c7 w NE 62 ST w CAI NC UV aI NE 60 $T NE 59 TER w w z NE 59—ST Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 U w IL damx dl lhai pr kp la na r daf o r mcn p8,01 82 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Goal PR-72: Develop public parks and open spaces that are aesthetically appealing and enhance the character and image of the ity. Objective PR-7 2. 1: Improve the aesthetic qualities of parks and recreation facilities Policy PR-7.1.1: The City will use the design principles in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan as a basic framework for the design and redesign of parks and park improvements, and prepare more specific design guidelines as needed. Policy PR-7.1.2: The City will ensure that its staff includes a landscape architect with knowledge of best practices in park and recreation facility design and that this staff person will be employed to design park improvements, when designers are retained on contract, to review and monitor park design projects. Goal PR-8 3: Encourage the development of high quality cultural arts facilities and programs within the .c:ity. Objective PR-8 3. 1: The city will continue to develop and support cultural districts, facilities and programs. cicarly d„fincd and functioning cultural arts district within Policy PR-3.1.1: Land development regulations within downtown permit and cncouragc thc dcvclopmcnt of a cultural arts district within downtown as specified in such a district. Policy PR 3.1.2: The City supports Miami Dade County in construction of the new downtown Performing Arts Ccntcr, which is bcing built in conformity with thc Downtown Master Plan, and with appropriate shares of state, county and private sector funding. Objective PR-3.2: Promotc an increase in the numbcr of small performing arts theaters within scicctcd residcntiallcommcrcial arras of the city. Policy PR 3.2.1: The City will cncouragc through land dcvclopmcnt regulations thc mixed use of structures to include small capacity th atcrs for scicctcd ar as within thc city. Policy PR-8.1.1: The City will continue to support development of a downtown cultural arts district as described in the proposed Downtown Master Plan, through land development regulations and other strategies. Policy PR-8.1.2: The City will support cultural and heritage programs and facilities in selected areas of the City such as, but not restricted to, Overtown, the Design District, and Little Havana, including small performing arts venues, heritage trails, street fairs, and similar programs, through land development regulations and other strategies. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 83 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. but not limited to boardwalk, riverwalk, and waterway trails, interpretative displays, Objective PR-4.1: Public accessibility to existing park and recreational facilities will bo improved by 2005. Policy PR-4.1.1: Handicapped parking spaces, ramps, handrails, and other accessibility improvements shall be provided and appropriately located with respect to recreational facilities. Policy PR-4.1.2: Bicycle parking facilities such as bike racks shall be provided to isting and future park projects. Policy PR-4.1.3: Interpretative displays, educational programs, wild observation areas, and picnic areas will be encouraged for outdoor recreation purposes at parks. c'V Goal PR-9: Establish sustainable and green practices in park design, maintenance, building, planting and energy efficiency. Objective PR-9.1: Protect and restore native plant communities, where feasible and appropriate, and provide educational programs and interpretive signage about South Florida environments. Policy PR-9.1.1: The City will continue its program of native plant protection and restoration and elimination of exotic plants at Simpson Park and the Virginia Key nature area; expand this program to the conservation area at Wainwright Park; restore native vegetation in woodland, shoreline and streamfront edges of parks, where appropriate; establish, where appropriate, native plantings that require limited water and fertilizer in parks; and establish native plantings in public road, rail, drainage and utility corridors that are not suitable for pedestrian and recreation access. Policy PR-9.1.2: The City will seek partnerships to establish coastal hammock exhibit plantings as part of environmental education programs and exhibits in community parks. Policy PR-9.1.3: The City will continue to promote the planting and preservation of native species by property owners in the City through educational materials and programs. Objective PR-9.2: Introduce sustainable and energy -efficient materials and methods in park maintenance and operations. Policy PR-9.2.1: The City will employ life -cycle costing to evaluate costs of new park structures and make efforts to incorporate energy- and water -efficient methods and materials, in new and renovated park structures including the use of green roofs, solar panels, and other innovative approaches. Policy PR-9.2.2: The City will implement best management practices such as water conservation, integrated pest management, water conservation, elimination of toxic chemicals, and similar sustainable practices. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 84 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PR-9.2.3: The City will implement to all pesticide and herbicide methods of application for all sodded areas compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 85 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. COASTAL MANAGEMENT Goal CM-1: Maintain, protect, and enhance the quality of life and appearance of Miami's oastal zZone including the preservation of natural resources as well as the enhancement of the built environment. Objective CM-1.1: Preserve and protect the existing natural systems including wetlands and beach/dune systems within Virginia Key and those portions of Biscayne Bay that lie within the City's boundaries; and improve water quality within the Miami River, its tributaries, and the Little River. Policy CM-1.1.1: As a precondition to the development or redevelopment of Virginia Key, a comprehensive assessment will be made of environmental hazards that are the result of past disposal activities at the Virginia Key landfill and other relevant environmental concerns. Such assessment will be made in cooperation with appropriate County, State and Federal environmental agencies, and an action plan to reduce or eliminate any hazards will be formulated. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-1.1.1.) Policy CM-1.1.2: The City will retrofit the number of storm water outfalls that discharge into the Miami River and its tributaries, the Little River and directly into Biscayne Bay. If positive drainage systems to these water bodies are deemed to be the only feasible method of maintaining adequate storm drainage, then these storm sewers will be designed and constructed to retain grease and oil and minimize pollutant discharges. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-1.1.2 and Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.2.1.) Policy CM-1.1.3: [Reserved] Policy CM-1.1.4: The City will continue to work cooperatively encourage the reduction in point and non -point sources of pollution into Biscayne Bay through coordination with the Miami River Commission, Miami -Dade County DERM, the South Florida Water Management District, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and any other appropriate state and federal agencies in order to reduce point and non -point sources of pollution into Biscayne Bay. Policy CM-1.1.5: Within the oastal one, or along the Miami and Little Rivers, no land uses which represent a likely and significant source of pollution to surface waters will be permitted, unless measures which substantially eliminate the threat of contamination are implemented as conditions for approval of development or redevelopment. Policy CM-1.1.6: The City will adhere to Miami -Dade County DERM standards and require DERM approvals in its permitting procedures to ensure that all fuel storage Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 86 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. facilities in the oastal one or near major canals do not pose a significant threat to water quality. Policy CM-1.1.7: The City will regulate development on Virginia Key and the intermittent wetland areas of the coast of Coconut Grove to ensure that there will be no net loss of functional wetlands; that beaches and dune systems on the island will not be degraded or disrupted; that when non-native vegetation is removed, it will be replaced with native species; and that wildlife habitats and native species of fauna and flora will be protected. Priority will be given to water dependent land uses, and to development that enhances the natural environment and ensures adequate physical public access to Virginia Key. Policy CM-1.1.8: Because of its unique character and environmental significance, all development on Virginia Key will be in conformance with the 1987 Virginia Key Master Plan 1987 and/or any subsequent plans for Virginia Key that have been or might be adopted by the City and, if necessary, the preparation of an updated plan. Policy CM-1.1.9: Site development criteria will ensure that development or redevelopment within the GCoastal zZone will not adversely affect the natural environment or lead to a net loss of public access to the cit '-s-Citv's natural resources. Policy CM-1.1.10: [Reserved] Policy CM-1.1.11: All City owned property within the 6Coastal one that may be identified as areas of significant or unique natural resources will be designated as Environmental Preservation Districts, and the City will also consider designating private properties within the coastal with significant or unique natural resources as Environmental Preservation Districts. Policy CM-1.1.12: The City will continue to requirc implement and enforce that all new and renovated marinas meet marina siting requirements and receive appropriate county, state, and federal approvals during the development permitting proceso in the land development regulations. Policy CM-1.1.13: The City will continue to work with the Biscayne Bay Management Plan Committcc appropriate agencies to support provisions of the committee that prevent new development and redevelopment along the shorelines from directly discharging storm water runoff into surface waters and to get support for state and county funding for any infrastructure improvements deemed necessary to support development of Virginia Key and Watson Island. Policy CM-1.1.14: The City will cooperate with Miami -Dade County in fostering the protection of coastal wildlife and wildlife habitat through the protection of nesting areas, the establishment of wildlife corridors, the protection of travel corridors, and the promotion of public awareness of wildlife resources. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 87 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy CM-1.1.15: The City will cooperate with Miami -Dade County in the implementation of any antidegradation targets developed to protect Outstanding Florida Waters and Outstanding National Resources Waters of Biscayne Bay. Objective CM-1.2: The City will continue to follow and enforce the Florida Building Code, which establishes construction standards that minimize the impacts of man-made structures on beach and dune systems. Policy CM-1.2.1: The City will increase inspection and code enforcement efforts for coastal area construction to ensure the proper standards are met. Objective CM-1.3: In order to enhance the built environment of the coastal area, redevelop and revitalize; blighted, declining or threatened coastal areas. Policy CM-1.3.1: The City will continue to adhere to its established policies regarding the designation of Community Redevelopment Districts in appropriate coastal areas of the city. Policy CM-1.3.2: Through increased citywide code enforcement of coastal areas with deteriorated conditions the City will report any structures in severe condition to the unsafe structures board to either force improvements or facilitate the demolition of the structure. Objective CM-1.4: Ensure that land development regulations and policies for the oastal one are consistent with the City's ability to provide the capital facilities required to maintain adopted LOS standards and those needed to maintain or enhance the quality of life within the Coastal zone —Zone of the city. (See Capital Improvements Objective CJ 12.) Policy CM-1.4.1: The <:'.oastal zZone of the GCity will adhere to the level of service standards as adopted and amended in the Capital Improvements Element, and more specifically Policy CI-1.2.3 of that element. Goal CM-2: Improve public awareness, appreciation, and use of Miami's coastal resources by preserving traditional water -dependent and water -related uses, ensuring adequate public access to such uses, and minimizing user conflicts. Objective CM-2.1: Where feasible, increase, physical and visual public access to Biscayne Bay and ,_the city-G-City's shoreline and publicly -owned islands. Policy CM-2.1.1: Where appropriate and in the interest of public safety and promotion of outdoor recreation opportunities on environmentally sensitive areas, future land development regulations will require non -water dependent or related development or redevelopment to maintain public access to the coastal and Miami River shorelines. (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR 1.1.11 3.2.41.1.11.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 88 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 1 Policy CM-2.1.2: All City owned, waterfront property, including the Miami River shorelines, will provide for public open spaces that provide access to the shoreline. (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR-1.1.12.) Policy CM-2.1.3: By 2000, amend Amend the Downtown Waterfront Master Plan to reflect changing conditions and needs_, and, by 2002,_prepare an implementation and continue to implement projects in accordance with the Downtown Waterfront Master Plan or other adopted plans that impact the downtown waterfront as appropriate plan identifying funding sources and recommending an appropriate mix of public and private sector financing. (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR-1.5.2.), Policy CM-2.1.4: The City will continue development of the river walk and bay walk along City owned property as funds become available and will continue to require development of the bay walk and river walk along private property through its land development regulations. Policy CM-2.1.5: [Reserved} The City shall continue to implement design guidelines along the baywalk and riverwalk in accordance with the Miami River Greenway Action Plan and other adopted plans as appropriate. Policy CM-2.1.6: [Reserved] Policy CM-2.1.7: The City will incorporate provisions for public physical and/or visual access to the shoreline in its waterfront zoning regulations (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR 1.1.13 3.2.31.1.13.) Policy CM-2.1.8: As specified in the City of Miami Charter and related laws, and more specifically the Waterfront Charter Amendment and Ordinance 11000 (Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami) all new development and redevelopment along the downtown waterfront is required to provide a waterfront setback, and those developments within Special Districts (SDs) that require publicly accessible shoreline walkways, will design them in conformance with the "Baywalk/Riverwalk Design Standards." (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR 1.5.7 3.2.11.) Policy CM-2.1.9: The City will continue to work toward increased physical public access to Virginia Key and Watson Island by pursuing appropriate development and redevelopment as directed by the Virginia Key and Watson Island master plans. Policy CM-2.1.10: The City will ensure that development regulations are not altered so as to prohibit water dependent uses such as swimming, boating, and fishing and will encourage and support such uses. Objective CM-2.2: [Reserved] Policy CM-2.2.1: [Reserved] Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 89 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy CM-2.2.2: [Reserved] Goal CM 3: {Reserved] Provide an adequate supply of land for water dependent uses. Objective CM-3.1: [Reserved]Allow no net loss of acreage devoted to water dependent uses in the coastal area of the City of Miami. Policy CM-3.1.1: {Reserved]Future land use and development regulations will encourage water dependent uses along the shorelines. Goal CM-4: Ensure public safety and the protection of property within the GCoastal zZone from the threat of hurricanes. Objective CM-4.1: Minimize the potential for loss of human life and the destruction of property from hurricanes. Policy CM-4.1.1: Enforce building code standards that protect against the destruction of structures by hurricane winds and tidal swells. Policy CM-4.1.2: Continue to ensure that all development and redevelopment conforms to proper elevation requirements in the Coastal High Hazard Area, which is defined as the areas below the elevation of the category 1 storm surge line, as established by a Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) computerized storm surge model as depicted on the Future Land Use Plan Mapt#at area identified as a "V" zone by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA} on its Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) except that on Virginia Key, where a Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) has been cstablishcd, cithcr thc "V" zonc or thc area seaward of the CCCL, whichever is more landward, shall define the Coastal High Hazard /\FSa. (See map following pagc.) Policy CM-4.1.3: Measures providing The City shall continue to implement measures for the protection of City owned historic properties from destruction in the event of a major storm, and plans for each site's restoration in the event of destruction or major damage will remain in effect. Policy CM-4.1.4: Immediately subsequent to the event of a major storm, the adequacy of existing building standards and the appropriateness of land uses and development regulations in the Coastal High Hazard Area will be reviewed, and all modifications to standards, zoning or land use policies required to reduce future risk of loss of life and property damage will be adopted prior to the approval of long term, post disaster redevelopment plans. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 90 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy CM-4.1.5: Each proposed future land use map change within the Coastal High Hazard area of the city will require an analysis of its potential impact on evacuation times and shelter needs in the event of a hurricane. Policy CM-4.1.6: [Reserved] Policy CM-4.1.7: The City will incorporate into its Comprehensive Plan any relevant recommendations of interagency hazard mitigation reports as they become available. Policy CM-4.1.8: The City will work in cooperation with regional and state agencies to adopt plans and policies that protect public and private property and human lives from the effects of natural disasters. Policy CM-4.1.9: The City will work in cooperation with regional and state agencies in the preparation of advance plans for the safe evacuation of coastal residents. Policy CM-4.1.10: The City will adhere to its "Emergency Operations Plan for Civil Defense in War and Natural Emergencies" and "The Emergency Procedures Manual" for immediate repair and cleanup actions needed to protect public health and safety. The City will update these manuals on an annual basis. Objective CM-4.2: The City will adhere to and cooperate with the County in executing evacuation procedures as well as annually update information and procedural brochures for the public; these brochures will contain information on evacuation procedures and routes, and will be distributed to city residents at local businesses and government agencies. Policy CM-4.2.1: The City's fire and police departments will continue to work with Miami -Dade County and regional emergency agencies to update and revise, as needed coordinated peacetime emergency and evacuation plans. Policy CM-4.2.2: The City will annually update and distribute an informational brochure to establish public awareness and information programs that educate as to the need for evacuation, and indicate evacuation routes and procedures. Policy CM-4.2.3: The City will follow the County in providing appropriate evacuation route markers within City boundaries as part of a Countywide coordinated program. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 91 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Areas Subject to Coastal Flooding and High Hazard Flood Areas *FEMA is in the process of publishinq new FIRM maps that will redefine the Coastal Hiqh Hazard area. The map below will be updated subsequently. City OP47.471flF. Areas Subject to Coastal Flooding and High Hazard Flood Areas Zones Areas Inundated by 100 Year Flood ggii Areas Inundated by 100 Year Flood with Velocity Hazard Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 92 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective CM-4.3: Ensure that public capital expenditures within the coastal zone do not encourage private development that is subject to significant risk of storm damage. (See Capital Improvements Objective CI-1.4.) Policy CM-4.3.1: Public expenditures for capital facilities in the coastal high hazard area will be limited to those required to eliminate existing LOS deficiencies, maintain adopted LOS standards in non -high hazard areas, improve hurricane evacuation time, or reduce the threat to public health and safety from storm events. (See Capital Improvements Policy CI-1.4.1.) Policy CM-4.3.2: Public expenditures for capital facilities in the coastal zone intended to further the goals and objectives of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan will be limited to those projects that do not measurably increase the risk to public health and safety from storm damage. (See Capital Improvements Policy CI-1.4.2.) Goal CM-5: Preserve and protect the heritage of the City of Miami through the identification, evaluation, rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, restoration and public awareness of Miami's historic, architectural and archaeological resources. (See Land Use Goal LU-2.) Objective CM-5.1: Maintain, update and amplify the City of Miami portion of the increase the number of eligible properties contained in the Miami -Dade County Historic Survey, which identifies and evaluates the City's historic, architectural and archaeological resources. (See Land Use Objective LU-2.1.) Policy CM-5.1.1: The City will continue to identify potential historic districts and conduct further surveys of contributing and noncontributing buildings. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.1.1.) Policy CM-5.1.2r'he City will continue to develop and implement maintain a computerized database of all relevant information for all 37-3.-5.g sites in the Miami -Dade County Historic Survey. This listing will show, in three categories, all properties of for presentation. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.1.2.) Policy CM-5.1.3: The City has designated 47 numerous historic sites and #+ve -historic districts pursuant to the Historic Prcscrvation Articic Chapter 23 of the Miami City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation"". Of these, the City will designate 10 individual sites and two districts by 2001 The City will continue to designate sites and districts as appropriate and warranted. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.3.2.) Policy CM-5.1.4: The City will continue to review nominations to the National Register of Historic Places through the Certified Local Government Program. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.3.1.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 93 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy CM-5.1.5: The City will continue to e include information on the Gi-tyls Citv's historic, architectural and cultural heritage for inclusion in public information, economic development promotion and tourism materials. (See Land Use Policy LU- 2.5.4.) Objective CM-5.2: Increase the number of historic structures that have been preserved, rehabilitated or restored, according to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. (See Land Use Objective LU-2.4.) Policy CM-5.2.1: The City will continue to utilize the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation as the minimum standards for preservation of historic properties. To receive public financial support from the City, designated privately owned structures must meet these standards. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.4.2.) Policy CM-5.2.2: The City currently owns historic sites and other potential archaeological sites. If it is deemed in the public interest for the City to transfer title of City properties of historic, architectural, or archaeological significance, such transfer will include restrictive covenants to ensure the protection and preservation of such properties. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.4.3.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 94 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION Goal NR-1: Maintain, preserve, enhance and restore the quality of natural resources within the context of the city's urban environment. Objective NR-1.1: Preserve and protect the existing natural systems within Virginia Key, the Dinner Key spoil islands, and those portions of Biscayne Bay that lie within the City's boundaries. Policy NR-1.1.1: As a precondition to the development or redevelopment of Virginia Key landfill, a comprehensive assessment will be made of environmental hazards that are the result of past disposal activities and other relevant environmental concerns. Such asscscmcnt will be madc The City shall continue to take actions to protect and restore the natural environment of Virginia Key in cooperation with appropriate County, State and Federal environmental agencies, any hazards will be formulated. LSee Coastal Management Policy CM-1.1.1.) Policy NR-1.1.2: The City will continue retrofitting the number of storm water outfalls that discharges discharge into the Miami River and its tributaries, the Little River and directly into Biscayne Bay in accordance with water quality improvement programs and adopted plans. If positive drainage systems to these water bodies are deemed to be the only feasible method of maintaining adequate storm drainage, then these storm sewers will be designed and constructed to retain grease and oil and minimize pollutant discharges. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy 2.2.1 and Coastal Management Policy CM-1.1.2.) Policy NR-1.1.3: [Reserved] Policy NR-1.1.4: The City will continue to participate in the State funded SWIM program for funding support in order to reduce point and non -point sources of pollution into Biscayne Bay. Policy NR-1.1.5: Regulate development on Virginia Key to ensure that there will be no net loss of functional wetlands; that beaches and dune systems on the island will not be degraded or disrupted; and that wildlife habitats and native species of fauna and flora will be protected. Policy NR-1.1.6: Through land development regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the coastal Coastal zone Zone will not adversely affect the natural environment or lead to a net loss of public access and public use (consistent with protection of natural systems) to the city's natural resources. Policy NR-1.1.7: The City will increase code enforcement to prevent illegal disposal of hazardous waste into the city's natural resources such as the Miami River and Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 95 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Biscayne Bay, and will encourage Miami -Dade County to approve and post signs warning against illegal disposal. Policy NR-1.1.8: The City will work with, and support the County's efforts to identify generators of hazardous waste, and to develop and enforce procedures for the proper collection and disposal of hazardous waste. The City will support Miami -Dade County's development of a hazardous waste temporary storage facility in a non -populated area. (See Solid Waste Collection Policy SW-1.2.4.) Objective NR-1.2: Improve the water quality of, and ensure health safety within, the Miami River, its tributaries and the Little River. Policy NR-1.2.1: The City will continue to work with the Biscayne Bay Management Plan Committee and with the appropriate agencies in order to encourage and support Miami -Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management in the monitoring of contaminants within these water bodies and to ensure that the City is kept adequately informed of environmental conditions. Policy NR-1.2.2: Continue to implement the Biscayne Bay Management Plan other relevant plans in order to reduce the level of contaminants in these water bodies and improve the water quality within them. Policy NR-1.2.3: Participate in state and federally funded programs to remove abandoned and repair leaking underground fuel storage tanks on City owned properties. Policy NR-1.2.4: The City of Miami will continue to cooperate with the Miami River Commission, which has been granted broad powers over environmental and other issues related to the Miami River by state statute. Among the issues to be addressed by the commission are those related to acceptable water quality standards for the Miami River and its tributaries. The City of Miami will cooperate with the Miami River Commissioi,u establishing such standards and, to the extent feasible, achieving them. (. Objective NR-1.3: Maintain and enhance the status of native species of fauna and flora. Policy NR-1.3.1: Continue and, where necessary, expand the use of scenic corridor and Environmental Preservation District designation. Policy NR-1.3.2: Identify City City -owned land with significant native vegetative features or wildlife habitats, and designate those areas as Environmental Preservation Districts. Policy NR-1.3.3: Continue designating private properties with significant or unique resources as Environmental Preservation Districts. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 96 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy NR-1.3.4: Review development and redevelopment to determine any adverse impacts on adjacent areas with significant native vegetative features, wildlife or marine life, and establish regulations that reduce or mitigate such impacts. Policy NR-1.3.5: Through the development review and approval process, ensure that off -site mitigation for disruption or degradation of significant natural resources occurs in an orderly and sound manner, so as to maximize benefits to the overall natural system. Policy NR-1.3.6: Through the development review process, deny the use of intrusive exotic plant species, encourage the use of native plant species, and those species that do not require the excessive use of fertilizers, excessive watering, are not prone to insect infestation or disease, and do not have invasive root systems. Policy NR-1.3.7: Permit applications for all boating facilities located on city shorelines shall be evaluated in the context of their cumulative impact on manatees and marine resources. Policy NR-1.3.8: Slow or idle speed zones shall be adopted in areas frequented by manatees and enforcement of speed zones will bbee improved. Policy NR-1.3.9: To the extent that there are wetlands on the Resources of Regional Significance, State Save Our Rivers, or Dade County Environmentally Endangered Lands acquisition lists within the City of Miami, consideration will be given to public acquisition and management of such properties when such actions are feasible. Objective NR-1.4: Maintain, protect and enhance the City's tree canopy and significant trees. Policy NR-1.4.1: The City will continue to protect the tree canopy and significant trees through the Tree Protection Ordinance. Policy NR-1.4.2: The City will work with public and private partners to achieve the 2007 Tree Master Plan goal of 30% tree canopy coverage citywide by 2020. Policy NR-1.4.3: The City will develop an ordinance describing criteria for designation of City of Miami Historic Trees, procedures for nomination of a Miami Historic Tree, and procedures for official designation and siqnaqe identifying Miami Historic Trees. Goal NR-2: Maintain an adequate and safe supply of water for the city residents. Objective NR-2.1: Ensure adequate levels of safe potable water are available to meet the needs of the city. (See Potable Water Objective PW-1.2.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 97 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy NR-2.1.1: In periods of regional water shortage, the City will support the South Florida Water Management District's policies and regulations regarding water conservation. Policy NR-2.1.2: The City will continue to enforce Florida Building Code requirements for the on -site retention of the first inch of storm water runoff. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.2.5.) Policy NR-2.1.3: The City will continue to support the South Florida Water Management District efforts to monitor the water levels at the salinity control structures within the city to prevent against further saltwater intrusion and protect the aquifer recharge areas and cones of influence of wellfields from contamination. (See Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Policy AR-1.1.3.) Policy NR-2.1.4: Since the potable water network is an interconnected, countywide system, the City departments of Public Works and Planning will cooperate with Miami - Dade County WASA Water and Sewer Department (WASD) to jointly develop methodologies and procedures for biannually updating estimates of system demand and capacity, and ensure that sufficient capacity to serve development exists. (See Potable Water Policy PW-1.1.1.) Policy NR-2.1.5: Ensure potable water supplies meet the established level of service standards for transmission capacity as set in the Capital Improvements Element. (See Potable Water Policy PW-1.2.1 and Capital Improvements Policy CI-1.2.3.) Policy NR-2.1.6: [Reserved] Policy NR-2.1.7: The City will cooperate and participate to the fullest extent possible with Miami -Dade County and other county municipalities receiving potable water from WASAD WASD in developing an acceptable countywide water conservation plan. (See Potable Water Policy PW-1.2.2.) N, Policy NR-2.1.8: [Reserved] Goal NR-3: Attain and maintain a degree of air quality that is safe and to meet all attainment standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the city as a whole. Objective NR-3.1: Improve the monitoring of air quality within areas perceived to have the highest potential for air quality problems. Policy NR-3.1.1: the City shall Gcontinue working with : ounty, tate and federal environmental agencies to ensure that the number of air quality monitoring stations maintained by these agencies are+s sufficient to ensure accurate monitoring of air quality standards.in areas most likely to have problems. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 98 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective NR-3.2: Prevent the degradation of ambient air quality within the city. Policy NR-3.2.1: Establish vehicular transportation patterns that reduce the concentration of pollutants in areas known to have ambient air quality problems. Policy NR-3.2.2: Although mass transit can be operated within the City of Miami only under the absolute authority of Metropolitan Miami Dade County, tThe City of MiamiLs continues4 to supportclevelopment requires the provision of efficient 2 transit and paratransit services that serve existing and future trip generators and attractors, the provision of safe and convenient mass transit passenger transfer terminal facilities, and the accommodation of the special needs of the City of Miami's population. Therefore, the City of Miami will support Metropolitan Miami -Dade County in the provision of these essential mass transit services. (See Transportation Objective 1.5) Policy NR-3.2.3: The City will Wwork with the Miami -Dade County transportation planning agencies to continue to increase the quality of mass transit services within the city. Policy NR-3.2.4: The City will work with the appropriate federal, state, regional, and county agencies to ensure that owners of buildings and facilities with unacceptable levels of asbestos (according to EPA and State Standards) in ambient air test remove, treat and seal asbestos -containing materials as long as this action will not cause further degradation to the air quality. Policy NR-3.2.5: The City will monitor developers to ensure that they appropriately treat exposed construction areas by means such as mulching, spraying or grass coverings, to minimize air pollution. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 99 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EDUCATION GOAL EDU-1: DEVELOP, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN A SYSTEM OF PUBLIC EDUCATION BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, IN COOPERATION WITH THE CITY AND OTHER APPROPRIATE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, WHICH WILL STRIVE TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AVAILABLE TO THE CITIZENRY OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Objective EDU-1.1: Work towards the reduction of the overcrowding which currently exists in the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, while striving to attain an optimum level of service pursuant to Objective EDU-1.2. Provide additional solutions to overcrowding so that citywide enrollment in Miami -Dade County's public schools will meet state requirements for class size by September 1, 2010. Policy EDU-1.1.1: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to continue to provide new student stations through the Capital Outlay program, in so far as funding is available. Policy EDU-1.1.2: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to develop and implement alternative educational facilities, such as primary learning centers, which can be constructed on small parcels of land and relieve overcrowding at elementary schools, in so far as funding and rules permit. Policy EDU-1.1.3: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to provide public school facilities to the students in the City, which operate at optimum capacity, in so far as funding available. Operational alternatives may be developed and implemented, where appropriate, which mitigate the impacts of overcrowding while maintaining the instructional integrity of the educational program. Policy EDU-1.1.4: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to maintain and/or improve the established level of service (LOS), for Public Educational Facilities, as established for the purposes of school concurrency. Policy EDU-1.1.5: The Miami -Dade County School Board (School Board) comments shall be sought and considered on comprehensive plan amendments and other land use and zoning decisions which could impact the school district, in order to be consistent with the terms of the state mandated Interlocal Agreement pursuant to Sections 1013.33 and 163.31777, Florida Statutes. Policy EDU-1.1.6: Capital improvement programming by the Miami -Dade Public Schools should be based on future enrollment projections and demographic shifts and targeted to enhance the effectiveness of the learning environment. The future enrollment projections should utilize student population projections based on information produced by the demographic, revenue, and education estimating conferences pursuant to Section 216.136, Florida Statutes, where available, as Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 100 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. modified by the School Board based on development data and agreement with the City of Miami, the State Office of Educational Facilities and the State SMART Schools Clearinghouse. The School Board may request adjustment to the estimating conferences' projections to reflect actual enrollment and development trends. In formulating such a request, the School Board will coordinate with the City regarding development trends and future population projections. Policy EDU-1.1.7: The City will through the Staff Working Group of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility coordinate with Miami -Dade County Public Schools, and applicable Cities to review annually the Education Element and school enrollment projections. Objective EDU-1.2: The City of Miami shall coordinate new residential development with the future availability of public school facilities2 consistent with the adopted level of service standards for public school concurrency, to ensure the inclusion of those projects necessary to address existing deficiencies in the 5-year schedule of capital improvements, and meet future needs based upon achieving and maintaining the adopted level of service standards throughout the planning period. Policy EDU-1.2.1: Beginning January 1, 2008, the adopted level of service (LOS) standard for all Miami -Dade County public school facilities is 100% utilization of Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Capacity (With Relocatable Classrooms).This LOS Standard, shall be applicable in each public school concurrency service area (CSA), defined as the public school attendance boundary established by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools. Policy EDU-1.2.2: It is the goal of Miami -Dade County Public Schools and The City of Miami for all public school facilities to achieve 100% utilization of Permanent FISH (No Relocatable Classrooms) capacity by January 1, 2018. To help achieve the desired 100% utilization of Permanent FISH by 2018, Miami -Dade County Public Schools should continue to decrease the number of relocatable classrooms over time. Public school facilities that achieve 100% utilization of Permanent FISH capacity should, to the extent possible, no longer utilize relocatable classrooms, except as an operational solution2. By December 2010, the City and County in cooperation with Miami -Dade County Public Schools will assess the viability of modifying the adopted LOS standard to 100% utilization of Permanent FISH (No Relocatable Classrooms) for all CSAs. 2 Level of Service standards for public school facilities to those traditional educational facilities, owned and operated by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, that are required to serve the residential development within their established Concurrency Service Area. Level of Service standards do not apply to charter schools. However, the capacity of both charter and magnet schools will be credited against the impact of development. No credit against the impact of development shall be given for either magnet or charter schools if their districtwide enrollment is at, or above, 100% FISH Capacity Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 101 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy EDU-1.2.3: In the event the adopted LOS standard of a CSA cannot be met as a result of a proposed development's impact, the development may proceed provided at least one of the following conditions is met: 1.2.3.1: The development's impact can be shifted to one or more adjacent CSAs that have available capacity located, either in whole or in part, within the same Geographic Areas (Northwest, Northeast, Southwest, or Southeast, see Figures 1A, 2A and 3C shown in "Exhibit A") as the proposed development; or 1.2.3.2: The development's impact is mitigated, proportionate to the demand for public schools it created, through a combination of one or more proportionate share mitigation options as defined in Section 163.3180 (13)(e)1, Florida Statutes. The intent of these options is to provide for the mitigation of residential development impacts on public school facilities, guaranteed by a legal binding agreement, through mechanisms that include, one or more of the following: contribution of land; the construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition or construction of a permanent public school facility; or, the creation of a mitigation bank based on the construction of a permanent public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits. The proportionate share mitigation agreement is subject to approval by Miami -Dade County School Board and Miami -Dade County Board of County Commission and must be identified in the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Program. 1.2.3.3: The development's impacts are phased to occur when sufficient capacity will be available. If none of the above conditions is met, the development shall not be approved. Policy EDU-1.2.4: Concurrency Service Areas (CSA) shall be delineated to: 1) maximize capacity utilization of the facility, 2) limit maximum travel times and reduce transportation costs, 3) acknowledge the effects of court -approved desegregation plans, 4) achieve socio-economic, racial, cultural and diversity objectives, and 5) achieve other relevant objectives as determined by the School Board's policy on maximization of capacity. Periodic adjustments to the boundary or area of a CSA may be made by the School Board to achieve the above stated factors. Other potential amendments to the CSAs shall be considered annually at the Staff Working Group meeting to take place each year no later than April 30 or October 31, consistent with Section 9 of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning. Policy EDU-1.2.5: The City through the implementation of the concurrency management system and Miami -Dade County Public School Facilities Work Program for educational facilities, shall ensure that existing deficiencies are addressed and the capacity of schools is sufficient to support residential development at the adopted level of service (LOS) standards throughout the planning period in the 5-year schedule of capital improvements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 102 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy EDU-1.2.6: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Program will be evaluated on an annual basis to ensure that the level of service standards will continue to be achieved and maintained throughout the planning period. Objective EDU-1.3: Obtain suitable sites for the development and expansion of public education facilities Policy EDU-1.3.1: In the selection of sites for future educational facility development, the City encourages the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to consider whether a school is in close proximity to residential areas and is in a location that would provide a logical focal point for community activities. Policy EDU-1.3.2: Where possible, the Miami -Dade County Public Schools should seek sites which are adjacent to existing or planned public recreation areas, community centers, libraries, or other compatible civic uses for the purpose of encouraging joint use facilities or the creation of logical focal points for community activity. Policy EDU-1.3.3: The City acknowledges and concurs that, when selecting a site, the Miami -Dade County Public Schools will consider if the site meets the minimum size criteria as recommended by the State Department of Education or as determined to be necessary for an effective educational environment. Policy EDU-1.3.4: When considering a site for possible use as an educational facility, the Miami -Dade County Public Schools should review the adequacy and proximity of other public facilities and services necessary to the site such as roadway access, transportation, fire flow and portable water, sanitary sewers, drainage, solid waste, police and fire services, and means by which to assure safe access to schools, including sidewalks, bicycle paths, turn lanes, and signalization.- Policy EDU-1.3.5: When considering a site for possible use as an educational facility the Miami Dade County Public Schools should consider whether the present and projected surrounding land uses are compatible with the operation of an educational facility. Policy EDU-1.3.6: The City shall encourage and cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their effort for public school siting reviews to help accomplish the objectives and policies of this element and other elements of the MCNP. The City shall cooperate with the Public Schools to establish provisions for a scoping or pre - application meeting as part of the educational facilities review process, if determined to be warranted. Policy EDU-1.3.7: The City will continue to cooperate with Miami -Dade County Public Schools in utilizing Miami -Dade County Public Schools as emergency shelters during county emergencies. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 103 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Objective EDU-1.4: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools, in conjunction with the City of Miami and other appropriate agencies, will strive to improve security and safety for students and staff. Policy EDU-1.4.1: Continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to develop and/or implement programs and policies designed to reduce the incidence of violence, weapons and vandalism on school campuses. Encourage the design of facilities, which do not encourage criminal behavior and provide clear sight lines from the street. Policy EDU-1.4.2: Continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to develop and/or implement programs and policies designed to reduce the number of incidents related to hazardous conditions as reported by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the fire marshal, the State Department of Education (DOE), and other appropriate sources. Policy EDU-1.4.3: Continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to provide for the availability of alternative programs for at -risk students at appropriate public educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.4.4: Coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools and municipalities to provide for pedestrian and traffic safety in the area of schools, and signalization for educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.4.5: Coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Division of School Police and other law enforcement agencies, where appropriate, to improve and provide for a secure learning environment in the public schools and their vicinity. Objective EDU-1.5: Continue to develop programs and opportunities to bring the schools and community closer together. Policy EDU-1.5.1: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to provide "full service" schools, parent resource centers, adult and community schools and programs as appropriate. Policy EDU-1.5.2: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to continue to provide opportunities for community and business leaders to serve on committees and task forces, which relate to the development of improved provision of public educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.5.3: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to continue to work with the development industry to encourage partnerships in the provision of sites and educational facilities including early childhood centers. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 104 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy EDU-1.5.4: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools through agreement with appropriate agencies to increase medical, psychological, and social services for children and their families as appropriate. Objective EDU-1.6: Miami -Dade County Public Schools will continue to enhance effectiveness of the learning environment. Policy EDU-1.6.1: Miami -Dade County Public Schools is encouraged to continue the design and construction of educational facilities which create the perception of feeling welcome, secure and positive about the students' school environment and experiences. Policy EDU-1.6.2: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools is encouraged to continue to design and construct facilities which better provide student access to technology designed to improve learning, such as updated media centers and science laboratories. Policy EDU-1.6.3: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools is encourage to continue to improve existing educational facilities, in so far as funding is available, through renovation and expansion to better accommodate increasing enrollment, new educational programs and other activities, both curricular and extra -curricular. Objective EDU-1.7: The School Board, the City, and other appropriate jurisdictions shall establish and implement mechanism for on going coordination and communication, to ensure the adequate provision of public educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.7.1: The City shall coordinate and cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, the State, municipalities and other appropriate agencies to develop or modify rules and regulations in order to simplify and expedite proposed new educational facility developments and renovations. Policy EDU-1.7.2: The location of future educational facilities should occur where capacity of other public facilities and services is available to accommodate the infrastructure needs of the educational facility. Policy EDU-1.7.3: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools should coordinate school capital improvement plans with the planned capital improvement projects of other County and municipal agencies. Policy EDU-1.7.4: The City shall cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to ensure that they are not obligated to pay for off -site infrastructure in excess of their fair share of the costs. Policy EDU-1.7.5: City of Miami and the Miami -Dade County Public Schools will annually review the Educational Element and the City will make amendments, if necessary. Policy EDU-1.7.6: The City shall seek to coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in formalizing criteria for appropriate sharing of responsibility for required off -site Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 105 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. facility improvements attributable to construction of new public schools or expansion of existing ones. Policy EDU-1.7.7: The City shall coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools and Miami -Dade County to eliminate infrastructure deficiencies surrounding existing school sites. Policy EDU-1.7.8: The City and the Miami -Dade County Public Schools shall coordinate efforts to ensure the availability of adequate sites for the required educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.7.9: The City and the Miami -Dade County Public Schools shall coordinate the appropriate roles and responsibilities of affected governmental jurisdictions in ensuring the timely, orderly and efficient provision of adequate educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.7.10: The City will work with Miami -Dade County will account for the infrastructure needs of new, planned or expanded educational facilities when formulation and implementing its own capital improvement plans. MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM In order to enable the preparation of the periodic Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) as required by Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 9J-5.0053, F.A.C., this section will outline the procedures for the monitoring and evaluating of the Element and its implementation. Monitoring Requirements The primary mechanism to monitor progress in achieving the objectives and policies in this Element is the collection and update of appropriate baseline data. Further, as required by the State Requirements for Educational Facilities, at least once every five (5) years the School Board shall arrange for an educational plant survey to be conducted. This plant survey will include data regarding existing facilities and a five (5) year projection of student population. The written report from this survey shall include the following: Inventory Student Population An inventory of existing ancillary and educational plants and auxiliary facilities. An analysis of past and projected student population. Capital Outlay An analysis of expenditures and projected capital outlay funds. Facilities Statements of proposed types of facilities, grade structure, and list student capacity. Funding A proposed funding plan. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 106 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The information obtained from the educational plant survey will be used to generally monitor the progress of the objectives and policies contained in the Educational Element and will provide specific indicators for Objective EDU-1.1 and Objective EDU-1.4. The enforcement or adoption of interlocal agreements shall be explored as a means to help implement components of the Educational Element, and to coordinate the efficient provision of public educational facilities. The performance of any agreements related to objectives of this element will be monitored as they are set in place. Objective EDU-1.1 policies relating to the maintenance and improvement of specific level of service for public educational facilities, as specified in the Educational Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance, shall be reviewed annually. Each year, the Miami -Dade County Public Schools will compare the official enrollment of the school system with the number of student stations available to determine the current operating LOS. Objective EDU-1.2 will be measured through an annual review of the latest adopted Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facility Work Program in order to determine if the adopted concurrency level of service standard (including the Interim LOS standards) is being achieved. The number of development orders approved, those disapproved and those that have achieved LOS standards through mitigation options will also be reviewed. Objective EDU-1.3 will be monitored through the annual inventory and assessment by the Miami - Dade County Public Schools of School Board owned property. The number of new sites shall be reported annually and in the full review period reported in the EAR. Objective EDU-1.4 will be monitored through the review and analysis of the statistics relating to school safety, as compiled annually, by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Division of Police. A review and analysis of new and existing reactive and proactive safety and crime prevention programs will also be conducted on an annual basis. Objective EDU-1.5 shall be monitored by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools by reporting and reviewing the progress and number of new and existing community oriented programs, including an enrollment analysis, by age and ethnicity, of adult, community and vocational programs. Objective EDU-1.6 shall be monitored by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools by reporting the number of educational facility enhancements such as media centers, art/music suite, and science laboratories. Objective EDU-1.7 will be addressed by implementing and tracking the development of appropriate mechanisms, including interlocal agreements and coordination efforts, which serve to expedite the provision or enhancement of public educational facilities. Monitoring methods may be added or deleted as circumstances and criteria evolve. Any significant modifications to the monitoring process will be dealt with, as appropriate, through the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan amendment process. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 107 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Evaluation Available data regarding the various public educational facilities will be used to assess progress on specific objectives. In order to evaluate the level of service being provided, student capacity totals will be reviewed in comparison to student enrollment to determine the status of the current level of service being provided. Similarly, performance in terms of achieving other objectives can also be analyzed by tracking the number of completed capital projects, as well as the development and implementation of other programs associated with each objective. Results of these calculations and measures will be analyzed and changing circumstances and opportunities will be considered. Any actions, changes or modifications to the Goal, Objectives, and Policies will be explained in accordance with the results of this process of continued monitoring and evaluation. Any necessary changes will be made through the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan amendment process. Future Conditions Maps Consistent with Section 163.3177(12) (g), Florida Statutes, maps showing existing and future conditions are included in the element. A map series (Figures 1A, 2B and 3C shown in "ExhibitA") indicate the public school and ancillary facility locations as December 31, 2007. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 108 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THL ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Figure 1A City of Miami Public Educational and Ancillary Facilities September 2007 :urc*: Clly at' Mari 'r.e rLnre D a79I9g Ifdnow. cm). axtrnerts.L0 P I T1'S :o E 8-2 f JIB ® 1:11.25 D. 1 1.5 Win Legend eeeerme ,wotter somber t Pubic Berreriery Z Pub lake SPubic Hun • fiaalnn Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 109 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Figure 2B City of Miami Public Educational and Ancillary Facilities September 2007 Source: My of P..lari Corrnray D &now. Cl! acurnertvx345 Mart&Imo 8-27 rxi 0 01.25 115 1 1.5 Legend Edronadiam Feat Miles .1110ther Fac S Mita Ekmenterl Pulgt &Mile SPublic High g f I 13.01{Eil T 1-ISIGTOk j121: R. DOUGLASS al r== AEA SE414TT /' Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 110 • •• THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Figure 3C City of Miami Public Educational and Ancillary Facilities September 2007 Source: clay of Marl CcnTlr: nl'.IRq 4eoaa' C:'lrfj' DixtrlertVGLS Marl.'. wu.m. $2 i .rr 1 0 0.25 0.5 1.5 Miles Legend Edursilun Fadllbea hl Other=s_Illlkf Fuhlc Eemenlarf Fuhlc Mahe Fuhlc Hg7 Mtlttcn Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 111 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Goal CI-1: Adhere to sound fiscal management policies that ensure the timely provision of public capital facilities required to maintain existing public infrastructure, that meet the need for public facilities resulting from future development and redevelopment, and that enable the provision of public capital facilities that enhance the quality of life within the city. Objective CI-1.1: The Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan will provide for the sound fiscal planning of capital facility needs and assess the financial capacity of the City to undertake capital improvement projects. Policy CI-1.1.1: The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) represent the means by which the capital facilities needs of the city will be addressed, and both the CIE and CIP will be revised on an annual basis to reflect changes in the economic, social and public fiscal environment. Policy CI-1.1.2: All capital expenditures in excess of $5,000 per distinct project must appear within the CIE and CIP, with the exception of expenditures required to meet public emergencies or unforeseeable contractual obligations. Policy CI-1.1.3: The City will adopt a Capital Budget that corresponds to the first year of the CIE and CIP. Policy CI-1.1.4: As capital projects are incorporated into the CIE and CIP, consideration will be given to the elimination of public hazards, the elimination of shortfalls between the adopted level of service (LOS) standards and the existing capacity of public facilities; the impact of proposed capital projects on the capital and operating budgets of the City; the fiscal capacity of the City to meet future capital spending needs; the economic and social benefits to be generated by proposed projects; the environmental impacts of proposed projects; the public facility requirements of new development or redevelopment; consistency between proposed capital projects and the goals and objectives set forth in the various elements of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan; and the coordination between proposed City projects and those projects and programs of federal, state, and county agencies and the South Florida Water Management District and Miami -Dade County Public Schools. Policy CI-1.1.5: In the appropriation of capital funds priority will be given to the maintenance, repair and replacement of existing public capital facilities. Policy CI-1.1.6: All bond authorizations must be in conformance with the capital facilities needs, programs and expenditure requirements as expressed within the City's Capital Improvement Element. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 112 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy CI-1.1.7: The City will continue to seek the advice of qualified counsel to ensure the proper timing of debt issuance and efficient management of its capital financing resources. Policy CI-1.1.8: Debt issuance timing, size, and amortization schedules will be planned and executed to maintain a level repayment and minimize fluctuations in the ad valorem tax rate. Policy CI-1.1.9: Competitive sale will be utilized whenever possible to assure that the City obtains the most competitive interest rate in the municipal markets. Policy CI-1.1.10: The City will maintain its long standing policy of avoiding the issuance of short term financing in the form of Bond Anticipation Notes, and Revenue Anticipation Notes, unless there is a compelling need or extraordinary circumstance for such interim financing. Policy CI-1.1.11: The ratio of net direct general obligation debt as a percentage of the assessed valuation of taxable property will not exceed 25% of the Charter -mandated limit of 15% of the assessed valuation, or 3.75% of assessed valuation. Policy CI-1.1.12: Total debt service payments as a percentage of the Combined General Fund, Enterprise Fund, and Debt Service Fund expenditures shall not exceed 1 5%. Policy CI-1.1.13: To the greatest extent possible, capital projects financed through the issuance of general obligation bonds shall have an expected useful life commensurate with the period of the financing. t Policy CI-1.1.14: Direct net general obligation and special obligation debt shall be maintained at below $1,000 per capita. Policy CI-1.1.15: The City will seek to attain a bond rating of investment grade to ensure that its citizens benefit from the lowest possible interest rates on its bonds. Policy CI-1.1.16: The City will assist where possible Miami -Dade County Public Schools and Miami Dade County in providing school concurrency related capital improvements and seeking to expand the funding sources available to meet those requirements. Objective CI-1.2: Ensure that through the City's land development regulations —an -el policies arc consistent with the City's ability to provide the capital facilities required to of life within the city that development orders authorizing new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the density or intensity of land use shall be contingent upon the availability of public facilities and services that meet or Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 113 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 1 1 exceed the minimum LOS standards for sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater, potable water, adequate water supply, parks and recreation, and transportation facilities, and that land use map changes maintain the financial feasibility of the MCNP. (See Coastal Management Objective CM-1.4 or Educational Objective EDU- 1.2.) Policy CI-1.2.1: The impact of proposed future land use map changes on meeting adopted LOST standards and public capital facility needs_, and the City's financial ability to provide rcquircd facilitics will be assessed for their effect on the financial feasibility of the MCNP before such proposals are adopted and no land use map change will be approved if the change causes the MCNP not to be financially feasible. Policy CI-1.2.2: All development orders authorizing changes in permitted land uses for new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the density or intensity of land use will be contingent upon the ability of existing or programmed public facilities to continue to provide service at or above the adopted LOS standard for the public facilities listed in Policy CI-1.2.3. Such development orders may be granted, however, if capital improvements which would eliminate any resulting service deficiency are programmed to begin within one year and are included in the current Capital Budget. The public facilities to serve the new development or redevelopment shall be in place and available to serve new development as follows: a) Sanitary sewer, solid waste, potable water facilities and adequate water supply shall be in place and available to serve new development or redevelopment no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. The concurrency requirement for sanitary sewer may be met through the use of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems approved by the Department of Health. Prior to approval of a building permit or its functional equivalent, the city shall consult with the Miami -Dade County Water and Sewer Department to determine whether the adequate water supplies to serve the new development will be available no later than the anticipated date of issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. b) Park and recreation facilities shall be in place or under construction to serve new development or redevelopment no later than one (1) year after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. The acreage for such facilities shall be dedicated or acquired by the city prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent, or funds in the amount of the developer's fair share shall be committed no later than approval to commence construction. c) Transportation facilities shall be in place and available to serve new development or redevelopment no later than three (3) years after the issuance of a building permit or its functional equivalent that results in traffic generation, consistent with the provisions of Policy TR-1.1.1, TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3. If the funds in the CIE are insufficient to fully fund the transportation facility Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 114 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. improvement required, the City may enter into a binding proportionate -share agreement sufficient to mitigate the impacts by paying for one or more improvements which will significantly benefit the impacted transportation system, which improvements shall be adopted into the 5 year capital improvements schedule at the next annual CIE update. d) Storm -sewer. Issuance of any development permit shall require compliance with the stormwater level of service standard. Policy CI-1.2.3: Acceptable Level of Service Standards for public facilities in the City of Miami are: a) Recreation and Open Space — 1.3 acres of public park space per 1000 residents. (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space y-PR 1.1.1. Policy PR-1.1.4.). b) Potable Water Transmission Capacity — 200 gallons/ resident/day. (See Potable Water Policy PW-1.2.1 and Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.5.). c) Sanitary Sewer Transmission Capacity — 100 gallons/ resident/day. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-1.3.1.) d) Storm Sewer Capacity Issuance of any developmcnt permit shall rcquirc compliance with a drainage level of service standard of a One -in -five-year storm event. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.1.3.) e) Solid Waste Collection Capacity — 1.28 tons/resident/year. (See Solid Waste Collection Policy SW-1.1.1.) f) Traffic Circulation — The minimum level of service standard on limited access, arterial, and collector roadways that are not within designated Transportation Corridors is the peak period LOS E, with allowable exceptions and justifications therefore, with LOS measured by conventional methodology pursuant to Objective TR-1.1, Policy TR-1.1.1, Policy TR-1.1.2 and Policy TR- 1.1.3. The measurement of LOS is made for the peak period (which is the average of the two hiqhest consecutive hours of trip volume during a weekday). Within designated Transportation Corridors, which include approximately 95% of the roadway mileage within the City of Miami, a minimum peak period LOS E is also maintained, but the measurement methodology is based on the peak hour period person -trips wherein the capacities of all modes, including mass transit, are used in calculating the LOS. An overall minimum peak -period LOS standard of E (100 percent utilization of person -trip capacity) will be maintained on Transportation Corridors. Specific levels of service by location and mode are set out in Policies TR-1.1.2 (addressing transportation corridors) and TR-1.1.3 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 115 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. g) (addressing FIRS facilities) from of the Transportation lement of theMiami Comprehensive Neighborhood PlarnMCNP. Miami -Dade Public Schools - Beginning January 1, 2008, the adopted level of service (LOS) standard for all Miami -Dade County public school facilities is 100% utilization of Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Capacity (With Relocatable Classrooms). This LOS standard shall be applicable in each public school concurrency service area (CSA), defined as the public school attendance boundary established by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools. h) Adequate Water Supply -- As determined by the Miami -Dade County Water and Sewer Department. Policy CI-1.2.4: The latest point in the application process for determination of concurrency shall be prior to the approval of an application for development order or permit that contains a specific plan for development, including the densities and intensities of development. Concurrence will be determined by the Planning Department durinq the review of a Malor Use Special Permit, rezoninq, and special permits and exceptions pursuant to the City's land development regulations. Policy CI-1.2.5: The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City departments and agencies, shall be responsible for monitoring and ensuring adherence of the issuance of development orders to the adopted level of service standards, the schedule of capital improvements and the availability of public facility capacity. Objective CI-1.3: Ensure that future development and redevelopment pay an equitable, proportional share of the cost of public facilities required to maintain adopted LOS standards. Policy CI-1.3.1: The City will continue to use developer contributions, including development impact fees, to help fund the cost of public facilities needed to serve new development or redevelopment. Policy CI-1.3.2: The City will periodically revise all fees related to the impact of new development and redevelopment to reflect increases in the cost of providing public capital facilities. Policy CI-1.3.3: The City will consider the use of special assessment districts to help fund capital projects whose public benefits tend to be localized to specific geographic sub areas of the city. Policy CI-1.3.4: The City will take appropriate measures to ensure that increased property values resulting from new development and redevelopment are accurately reflected on the County Tax Assessor's property tax rolls in a timely manner. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 116 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 1 Policy CI-1.3.5: The City will work with the Miami Dade County and the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to identify appropriate funding mechanisms in order to assure the fiscal resources to maintain acceptable levels of service. Policy CI-1.3.6: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Program will be evaluated on an annual basis to ensure that the level of service standards will continue to be achieved and maintained throughout the planning period. Objective CI-1.4: Ensure that public capital expenditure within the coastal Coastal zene-Zone does not encourage private development that is subject to significant risk of storm damage. (See Coastal Management Objective CM-4.3.) Policy CI-1.4.1: Public expenditures for capital facilities in the coastal high hazard area will be limited to those required to eliminate existing LOS deficiencies, maintain adopted LOS standards in non -high hazard areas, improve hurricane evacuation time, or reduce the threat to public health and safety from storm events. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-4.3.1.) Policy CI-1.4.2: Public expenditures for capital facilities in the coastal zone intended to further the goals and objectives of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan will be limited to those projects that do not measurably increase the risk to public health and safety from storm damage. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-4.3.2.) Objective CI-1.5: The City's Capital Improvements Program and Schedule is adopted as follows in Appendix CI-1 of the MCNP. CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Concurrency refers to a provision of Florida law that requires certain public facilities and services to be available when the impact of land development occurs. They must be available "current with" the impact of development. Paraphrasing Section 163.3202, Florida Statutes, each county and municipality must incorporate specific and detailed provisions which shall provide that public facilities and services meet or exceed the Levels of Service (LOS) standards established in the Plan's Capital Improvements Element and are available when needed for the development, or that the development orders or permits are conditioned on the availability of these public facilities and services necessary to serve the proposed development. Levels of Service (LOS) are measures that determine the capacity of the pubic facility per unit of demand. Local governments are required to adopt LOS standards for the following services: Recreation and Open Space Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 117 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Potable Water Sanitary Sewer Storm Drainage Solid Waste Traffic Circulation Educational/ Public School Facilities The Levels of Service for each element are adopted by the local government in its Comprehensive Plan and approved by the state. Consequently, if any of the facilities or services are not available, or are deficient in their LOS, development cannot take place until they are provided at the required level, and "concurrent with" the impact of the development. Because the City of Miami is a fully developed city , its adopted Land Use Plan Map is designed so that the land use densities and intensities shown on it are supported by appropriate infrastructure that will meet the cities adopted LOS standards. Moreover, Miami's zoning regulations have been made consistent with its adopted Land Use Plan Maps required by Florida's Growth Management Laws. Therefore, development or redevelopment that does not exceed allowable zoned uses and intensities will not require concurrency review as a condition of issuance, because it is generally supported by adequate infrastructure. If a development permit being requested requires a Land Use/ Zoning change, or a Major Use Special Permit or similar consideration, a concurrency review will be required. Impacts of the proposed development on the required LOS standards will be calculated, and a determination made as to whether the required infrastructure capacity will be available concurrent with the impact of development. Planning Department will consult departments of PW, SW, Parks & Recreation. , and others as appropriate for input to the LOS impact evaluation. An affirmative principal concurrency determination will be required before a prospective developer can obtain a subsequent development order. Public School Facilities: Necessary public school facilities must be in place or under actual construction within three years after of final issuances of final subdivision of site plan approval, or the functional equivalent. The City in coordination with the Miami -Dade County Public School shall by ordinance, include proportionate share mitigation methodologies and options for public school facilities in its concurrency management program and Interlocal Local Agreement for Public Facility Planning between Miami -Dade County Public Schools, Miami -Dade County and the Cities in Miami -Dade County, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 118 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The intent of these options is to provide for the mitigation of residential development impacts on public school facilities, guaranteed by a legal binding agreement, through mechanisms that include, one or more of the following: contribution of land; the construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition or construction of a permanent public school facility; or, the creation of a mitigation bank based on the construction of a permanent public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits. Capital improvements associated with the construction of educational facilities are the responsibility of the Miami -Dade County Public School. To address financial feasibility associated with school concurrency, the Miami -Dade County Public School Facilities Work Program dated September 2007 for educational facilities will be incorporated by reference in the CIE. The City shall coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, to annually update its Facilities Work Program to include existing and anticipated facilities for both the 5-year and long-term planning periods, and to ensure that the adopted level of service standard, including interim standards, will continue to be achieved and maintained. The City, through its annual update to the Capital Improvements Schedule, will incorporate by reference the latest adopted Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Program for educational facilities. The City and the Miami -Dade County Public School will coordinate their planning efforts prior to and during the MCNP Amendment process and during updates to the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Program. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 119 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Goal IC-1: Increase effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of government services through the appropriate coordination of local government actions. Objective IC-1.1: To establish formal procedures for coordinating City planning and operating functions that are directly related to the City's comprehensive plan with the Miami -Dade County School Board, Miami -Dade County Water and Sewer Authority Department, Miami -Dade County Public Works Department, Solid Waste Division, Miami -Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management (DERM), the Seaport Department (Port of Miami), Aviation Department (Miami International Airport), the Miami -Dade County Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Miami -Dade County Shoreline Development Review Committee, Miami -Dade Transit, the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, the South Florida Water Management District, the Florida Department of Transportation, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, the Division of Historical Resources, Department of State, adjacent local governments, and any other state, local or federal agency whose cooperation is required to accomplish the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. Policy IC-1.1.1: By 2005, establish by interlocal or other formal agreement with appropriate jurisdictions joint processes for collaborative decision making on issues including, but not limited to, the location and extension of public facilities subject to concurrency and the siting of facilities with countywide significance, including locally unwanted land uses. Policy IC-1.1.2: The City will continue implementation activities associated with the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning in Miami -Dade County, effective February 27, 2003, including, but not limited to, coordinating City, County, and School Board plans based upon consistent projections of the amount, type, and distribution of population growth and student enrollment; participating in decision - making, through floating membership on the School Board's School Site Planning and Construction Committee, regarding potential sites for new schools and proposals for significant renovation, the location of relocatables or additions to existing buildings, and potential closure of existing schools; and collaborating to identify options aimed to provide the capacity to accommodate anticipated student enrollment demand associated with increases in residential development potential. Policy IC-1.1.3: [Reserved] Policy IC-1.1. ` The City will continue to seek membership on the Biscayne Bay Management Committee, the principal coordinating body for Biscayne Bay, as a means of expressing its policies pertaining to Biscayne Bay. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 120 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy IC-1.1.45: The City cncouragcs Miami Dadc County to review, evaluate and recommend County Charter changes (a) to standardize information and (b) to allow the Board of County Commissioners to waive a separate affirmative vote of resident property owners, so that small cnclavcs lying bctwccn municipalitics can be rationalized through annexation shall maintain its membership and involvement with committees and groups addressing the environmental healthy and water quality of Biscayne Bay. Policy IC-1.1.6: The city will coordinate with county, state and local governments, districts and agencies to create partnerships to share open spaces and recreational facilities and promote enhancement and expansion of parks, recreational facilities and programs, greenways, trails and similar resources for use by Miami residents. Policy IC-1.1.7: The City will continue to implement the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), National Pollutant Elimination System (NPDES) Permit addressing the requirements for compliance with the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for pollutants entering city bound water bodies and ultimate Biscayne Bay. Goal IC-2: Promote orderly and appropriate regional land development and transportation policies through consultations with Miami -Dade County, adjacent counties, the region, and locally impacted municipalities. Objective IC-2.1: To further and strengthen existing and potential planning coordination mechanisms to ensure that consideration is given to both the impacts of land development and transportation policies within Miami on areas outside the City's jurisdiction and the impacts of land development outside the City's boundaries on the City of Miami. Policy IC-2.1.1: The City will continue its active participation in the Miami -Dade Planners' Technical Committee (PTC) for the purpose of addressing common concerns and sharing resources toward solving planning problems, with particular emphasis on examining State of Florida planning requirements in the context of Miami - Dade County's unique governmental structure to more effectively coordinate local planning efforts. Policy IC-2.1.2: Working through the Planners' Technical Committee, the City will share copies of its comprehensive plan and plan amendments as well as information regarding scheduled comprehensive planning -related public hearings for the benefit of adjacent and other interested jurisdictions, and will encourage other participating jurisdictions to provide this information as well. Policy IC-2.1.3: The City will support the South Florida Regional Planning Council in developing informal coordination mechanisms such as regional issue study groups that coordinate land development and transportation policies among local governments; Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 121 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. and to establish mediation mechanisms to resolve potential regional conflicts. (See Intergovernmental Coordination Policy IC-3.1.1.) Policy IC-2.1.4: [Reserved] Objective IC-2.2: [Reserved] Policy IC-2.2.1: [Reserved] Goal IC-3: Contribute to an atmosphere of cooperation among local governments within Miami -Dade County. Objective IC-3.1: Maximize the use of informal, cooperative agreements as mechanisms for intergovernmental conflict resolution within Miami -Dade County and minimize the use of litigation. Policy IC-3.1.1: The City will exhaust all efforts to solve intergovernmental conflicts arising from adoption and implementation of comprehensive plans through informal mechanisms, including but not limited to working through the Miami -Dade Planners' Technical Committee or utilizing the Miami -Dade County League of Cities and the South Florida Regional Planning Council's mediation process, before seeking remedies through the judicial system, provided that efforts at informal resolution do not prevent the City from seeking legal remedies, or jeopardize the City's ability to prevail in any legal action. (See Intergovernmental Coordination Policy IC-2.1.3.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 122 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Exhibit B Port of Miami Rivcr 4 Miami River Goal PA-3: The Port of Miami River, a group of privately owned and operated commercial industrial base. Development along the Miami River shall encourage residential and mixed use development and continue to provide for water -dependent and water -related commercial, industrial, and recreational uses along the Miami River. Objective PA-3.1: The City of Miami, through its Land dDevelopment Regulations, shall help protect the Port of Miami Rivcr from encroachment by non water -dependent and policies. promote the co -existence of water -dependent and water -related commercial, industrial, and recreational uses with residential and mixed use development along the Miami River. Policy PA-3.1.1: The City shall use through its Land 4Development -FRegulations to encourage the establishment and maintenance of water -dependent and water -related uses along the banks of the Miami River, and to discourage encroachment by incompatible uses. including the use of water taxi and water pleasure craft, while not excluding residential uses without such activities. The City shall, through its Land Development Regulations, allow for residential and mixed use development along the Miami River, provided the residential uses are compatible with adjacent land uses. Policy PA-3.1.2: The City shall, through its !And Ddevelopment Rfegulations, encourage the development and expansion of the Port of Miami River consistent with the coastal management and conservation elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Policy PA-3.1.3: The City shall, through its Land dDevelopment (Regulations, encourage development of compatible land uses in the vicinity of the Port of Miami River so as to mitigate potential adverse impacts arising from the Port of Miami River upon adjacent natural resources and land uses. promote the co- existence of water dependent and water related commercial, industrial, and recreational uses with residential and mixed use development. Objective PA-3.2: The City of Miami shall coordinate the surface transportation access to the Miami River with the traffic and mass transit system shown on the traffic circulation map series. } The "Port f Miami Rivcr" is simply a legal name used to idcntify some 11 independent, privately owned small shipping companies located along the Miami Rivcr, and is not a "Port Facility" within the usual m aning of the term. The identification of these shipping concerns as the "Port of Miami Rivcr" was made in 1986 for the sole purpose of satisfying a U.S. Coast Guard regulation governing bilge pump outs. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy PA-3.2.1: The City of Miami shall, through the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, coordinate intermodal surface and water transportation access serving the Port of Miami River. Objective PA-3.3: The City of Miami shall coordinate its Miami River planning activities with those of deep water ports facilities_ providers and regulators including the U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, The Miami River Commission, and Miami -Dade County's Port of Miami, as applicable. Policy PA-3.3.1: The City of Miami, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, shall support and coordinate with other governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Miami River to support and enhance the Miami River's economic importance and viability. tThe functions of the_ Port of Miami River shall be consistent with the future goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly with respect to the unique characteristics of the Port of Miami River's location and its economic position and functioning within the local maritime industry, and the necessity for coordination of these characteristics and needs with the maritime industry that complements, and often competes with, the Port of Miami River. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Additional Comments on the Draft EAR Public Comment Consultant / City Response March 5, 2008 Letter from Fran Bohnsack to Ms. Arva Parks 1 Goal CM-3: Provide an adequate supply of land for water I The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element dependent uses. pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. 2 Objective CM-3.1: Allow no net loss of acreage devoted to The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element water dependent uses in the coastal area of the City of Miami, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were including along the banks of the Miami River. precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. Policy CM-3.1.1: Future land use and development regulations The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element will encourage water dependent uses along the shoreline, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were including the banks of the Miami River. precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. March 5, 2008 Letter from Eric Buermann to the PAB 4 Not Deleting Comp Plan "Policy PR-1.5.8: Expand the existing This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-2.2 and its related policies, Jose Marti Park to provide additional recreational opportunities and has been broadened to include all existing parks and recreational facilities. for the area's residents, workers, and visitors." Concurring with City Commissioner Sanchez' recommendation made during a public hearing regarding the EAR recommended amendments to the Comp Plan, to insert City support for citywide Water Taxi / Water Bus services within the Transportation element of the Comp Plan. Waterborne transportation has been addressed in Policy TR-1.5.9B. Not deleting PR-1.4.1 and PR-1.4.2 regarding development impact fees for parks and insert the EAR based amendment for the sections. As directed by the PAB and City Commission when considering the EAR in December 2004, inserting "Fisherman's Wharf' in PR-6.1.3 to become consistent with PR-6.1.4. 8 This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-1.5 and its related policies. The requested modification has been made in Policy PR-6.1.3. March 5, 2008 Comments from Index Cards Why is there not at least the skeleton of an Economic Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted Element? With a target date for completion? —Hadley to the City. Williams Future projected build out is where one predicts what a likely density is for a given area. In other words, the number of expected units per acre, for a precise area. This might be 10, 20, or 30 years into the future. Planning claims they cannot yet, when I ask "why" since they did this and used the results to support the streetcar, do they now tell me this cannot be done? 5 months later, Planning has not answered this THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. This comment has been noted. Page 1 10 Public Comment question, I wrote them. Not quantifying projected densities allows vague and too general policies. Quantifying, like "future projected densities", allows the policies to too easily accommodate special interest needs rather than interests of the residents at large. So please ask Planning (1) why were you recently able to create "projected future build outs", but now claim this is "impossible" to do? —Richard Strell When will a draft of the recommended "Historical and Cultural Element" be available for review? —Unknown 11 Consultant / City Response Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. Why is the following not included in the Comp. Plan Policy LU-1.1.5: "An applicant for a change in zoning or land use regulation shall give notice of the application, of the decision or recommendation of the planning staff, and of [illegible] of the planned change subsequent to the decision or recommendation to all property owners within 500 feet of and registered neighborhood associations in the [illegible] adjacent NET areas on the subject property." —Barbara Bisno 12 13 14 This language is appropriate for the City's Zoning Ordinance, not the MCNP EAR -based Amendments. The Central Business District (map on pg. 12) allows "residential facilities...to a maximum density of 1,000 dwelling units per acre..." The "high density multifamily residential" designates "special -designated areas" (top of pg. 21) with 200, 300, and 500 units per acre. See the map on pg. 24. Comparing the two maps, they are the same areas. Which maximum density applies? —Hadley Williams Reference #67 from "Actions Taken to Address Public Input" refers to the Port of Miami River (not "the ports"). The action taken refers to a different text amendment, not the EAR based amendments. —Unknown _ My question was —you did it for the streetcar —why can't you now? —Unknown The "Central Business District" designation permits 1,000 dwelling units per acre regardless of where it is located. The Residential Density Increase Areas apply only to the "High Density Multifamily Residential" designation and other categories where the residential density is stated to be equivalent to this category, which are presently "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation, and Utilities"; "Restricted Commercial" & "Office". This comment has been noted. This comment has been noted. 15 Why is Transportation Policy TR-1.5.8(G) not in the Land Use Element (pg. 53 bottom)? Cross-reference. —Unknown 16 Policy TR-1.5.8(G) reads as follows: G. Residential development around a rapid transit station should have a density of at least 15 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) within'/4 mile walking distance from a station and 20 du/ac or higher within 700 feet of the station and at least 10 du/ac between'/4 and'% mile walking distance from the station. Business and office development intensities around a rapid transit station should produce at least 75 employees per acre within'/4 mile walking distance from the station, 100 employees per acre within 700 feet, and at least 50 employees per acre between'/4 and '% mile walking distance from the station. March 5, 2008 Comments from PAB Members The Housing Element is missing some policies supporting I In response to this comment, the Economic consultant will follow-up with the THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 2 Public Comment special needs housing. 17 What exactly is the minimum LOS in Policy LU-1.1? Consultant / City Response PAB member who made this comment. This comment has been addressed in the Capital Improvements Element. 18 In Policy LU-1.1.3, what is "divide or fragment"? This comment has been noted. 19 March 6, 2008 and March 12, 2008 E-mails Between Brett Bibeau and Larissa Brown BBibeau: Per your request last night, I'm emailing you the following friendly reminder. Miami River Commission respectfully recommends inserting "Fisherman's Wharf" into PR-6.1.3 in order to become consistent with PR-6.1.4. 20 March 19, 2008 [Transcribed] Hand LBrown: I took a look at the two policies you reference below. PR-6.1.4 mentions the Fisherman's Wharf concept for the riverside district, as it is a reinstatement of the earlier PR-1.5.5 as requested by the Commission. However, I interpret PR-6.1.3 as being about the park itself — the recreation activities in the park, enhanced interpretive activities around the historic buildings that have been moved into the park, and the idea of linking park activities to the public spaces that will be part of "Lummus Landing" on the river. I do not see a Fisherman's Wharf as being inside the park, so it doesn't seem appropriate to me to include language on Fisherman's Wharf in that item. Fisherman's Wharf was not included in the original PR-1.5.4 item that you asked to be reinstated and whose language is exactly the same as the current PR-6.1.3. LBrown [second email]: I consulted with the Parks Department and they told me that Lummus Landing will be owned and managed by them, which makes me more comfortable about including the Fisherman's Wharf language in the item as you requested. (The proposed Miami 21 CS zoning can cover both publicly owned and privately owned spaces.) So, I don't see any problem with including the language in PR-6.1.3. Written Comments from PAB Member Nina West LU-1: Line 2 — Residential protection removed. Why? 1 Addressed in LU-1.2.1 Line 3 — Blighted or declining areas — what standards are used to define (a) blighted (b) declining? 21 LU-1.1: Line 3 (LOS) and to the end — where are these standards in the Capital Improvements Element? Please show them to me. 22 LU-1.1.2: Lines 3 & 4 — Comment — please respond. Anything can be consistent with a plan that has neither measurable goals and objectives nor standards. Definition of an established neighborhood. Addressed in CI-1.2.2, CI-1.2.3 This policy includes the provision for monitoring progress as a means of measuring the accomplishment of goals, objectives and policies as set forth. Addressed in new policy LU-1.1.5. 23 LU-1.1.4: Why was this policy measure (10%) removed? THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The policy has been structured to be broadly inclusive, allowing it to effectively address multiple issues at varying scales. Quantitative means to determine the effectiveness and accomplishment of issues at hand vary from problem to problem, and do not necessarily prioritize current or pressing issues. For example, ten percent performance standards for code violations such as weed non -removal may not necessarily equate to the keeping of dilapidated and unsecured structures. Page 3 24 Public Comment LU-1.1.11: Third DCA says no urban infill designation for waterfront — please comment on how this court case affects this policy along the river? 25 Consultant / City Response This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. LU-1.1.11: City of Miami per -person trip methodology is not used in the rest of the U.S. and this method of counting transportation impact has done nothing to improve traffic congestions in the city. You mention bicycle transportation as a way of alleviating some auto traffic — but there is nothing in the CIP concerning bike lanes downtown. The City of Miami originated the person -trip methodology for the measurement of local level of service on a transportation facility to address the multi modal transportation infrastructure that characterizes the City of Miami. The methodology was designed to address existing demand and capacity to move people on the transportation system primarily using the roadway network and the transit system, while other modes such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities were also included to a lesser degree. The methodology was designed to evaluate each transportation mode alone, or in combination with others, as applicable to the particular transportation facility. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the capacity of all transportation modes would be used in the measurement of future, peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into the Transportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was separately published as a report entitled "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami', September 1990. Multi -modal level of service standards which recognize transit service as a function of the capacity of the transportation system) are adopted in many counties throughout the State of Florida (i.e. Miami -Dade, Broward and Polk Counties to name a few), however no other county or city in Florida has a premium transit system similar to the combined effect of Tri-rail, Metro -rail and Metro -mover, which makes the use of the person -trip methodology a viable concurrency management tool for the City of Miami. The CIP is updated annually. Policy TR-1.4.3 addresses the development of a streetscape design program by the City to guide the placement of landscaping, lighting, sidewalks and bicycle paths along City Streets in coordination with major repairs and street renovations. 26 27 LU-1.3.10: This rare measurable goal in the MNCP [sic] is removed. Why? LU-1.3.14: Lines 4 and 5 — where are these "neighborhood" design and development standards found in the code? THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The policy has been structured to be broadly inclusive, allowing it to effectively address multiple issues at varying scales. Quantitative means to determine the effectiveness and accomplishment of issues at hand vary from problem to problem, and do not necessarily prioritize current or pressing issues. Inclusion of new language that requires annual reporting is an effective method to measure policy success. Addressed in the City of Miami Design Standards and Guidelines. Page 4 Public Comment 28 Currently the only standards by "neighborhood" is [sic] the NCD and historic requirements. Where are the standards for Shenandoah and Little Haiti, etc.? LU-1.4.4: Delete — performing arts center is built Consultant / City Response Policy LU-1.4.4 was stricken in lieu of this comment. 29 LU-1.4.8: This is elective enforcement — is this legal? 30 31 32 The policy is not selective, but covers a large number of properties in various categories. LU-1.4.10: Line 4, particularly along the Miami River— how does this fit with recent 3R DCA rulings? _ LU-1.6.4: Line 5 — Where are these adopted minimum standards to be found? Since many of our Trans. Corridors have a standard of F — does this mean that auto traffic impacts will not be [illegible] concerning these changes to the zoning ordinance? LU-1.6.8: This policy need not be here as it does nothing. Please define "appropriate". Encourage vs. require is an arbitrary decision. Fairness? Equal treatment? Please explain. This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. Addressed in CI-1.2.3 The requested modification has been made in Policy LU-1.6.8. 33 LU-1.6.10: Line 4 — bicycles — we have no bicycle lanes downtown — no money set aside in CIP Plan and do not control county and state roads. The CIP is updated annually. Co-ordination issue between City and County has been addressed. 34 LU-2.4.3: Change public interest to public benefit. That is a standard that is easily understood and can be met. The phrase "public interest" was changed to "public benefit" to address this comment. 35 36 37 38 LU-2.4.3: Return the number — do we own 9? How many do we own? LU-3: What is the point if the City defines itself as totally urban infill? Does this mean encourage redevelopment everywhere? LU-3.1.2: RAC is a new designation. These areas will have high density and intensity and will require both green space and open space. Please make this a requirement. Page 12: UCBD Map — cannot read — please replace it with a larger and readable map. The number 9 was reinserted subsequent to the March 19, 2008 PAB Workshop. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. The requested modification has been made in Policy LU-3.1.2. This map was improved to address your comments. 39 40 Page 14: RAC Map — need FLUM with these RA Centers included — need large enough and colored and legible street number boundaries. Page 18: Paragraph 2 — eliminate the decision making of Planning & Zoning Authority as well as the City Commission concentrating all power in the hands of the Planning Director. This map was improved to address your comments. The Planning Director shall make a finding and the finding may be appealed by specifying the grounds thereof and filing the appeal with an officer or agent designated by the city manager. The officer or agent designated by the city manager shall promptly transmit the notice of appeal to the zoning administrator or the director of the department of planning, building and zoning, THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 5 # Public Comment 41 42 43 44 Page 18: Paragraph eliminates up to 25% of all public park spaces by 25% - too much concrete. Page 21: Paragraph 3 — Office — Line 5 — There is no standard for "adequate" and this determination should be made by the Planning Authority with the consent of the adjacent or proximate existing residents who will be required to share their existing services and amenities. Enormous FAR. Page 21: Paragraph 4 — Major Institutional Public...etc. — same comment as paragraph 3 — again enormous FAR Page 22: Paragraph 3 — Restricted Commercial — same comments as pg. 21, paragraphs 3 and 4 45 Page 24: Need legible map with legible boundaries Consultant / City Response as the case may be. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall forthwith transmit to the zoning board all the materials constituting the record upon which the decision appealed from was taken. Revisions to the Future Land Use interpretation language were made that are consistent with language in the parks master plan and clearly distinguish between public park/recreation and commercial recreation areas. Previous language allowed up to 0.65 FAR, which, since most building in parks is one- story, allowed up to 2/3 of the area to be covered with buildings. The new language provides for a 40% reduction while still preserving some flexibility that is needed to encompass a system that includes small, urban parks where 25% for a small support, recreation or cultural structure may be appropriate. The parks master plan contains many recommendations on procedures to ensure public participation in park design and improvements, so that the specifics of each case can be taken into account. A policy document like the MCNP needs to allow for some flexibility in specific implementation. Addressed and also within CI-1.2.3 Addressed in CI-1.2.3 Addressed in CI-1.2.3 This map was improved to address your comments. 46 47 Page 25: Paragraphs 3 and 4 both work live and live work should be allowed in Historic and Conservation neighborhoods to encourage both preservation and adaptive reuse. HO-1: Last line — The [sic] have a greater need for very low income housing and this needs to be defined in some way. This can be addressed in the proposed Historical and Cultural Element. Addressed 48 50 HO-1.1: Due to limited resources the City need not fund high end development amenities and capital improvements. This category should pay impact fees. HO-1.1.10: Please include very low and low income as defined by HUD in each of these paragraphs. HO-1.2.4: As an alternative to the "public sector provision" — what is the current "public sector provision" and why is one superior to the other? Why not use both? HO-1.2.5: Please provide the definition that is referenced. HO-1.5: Why "provide for" instead of "provide"? The City should provide assistance for alternative housing close to The City does not fund, but creates an incentive program for affordable housing. The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1.1.10. The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1.2.4. The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1.2.5. The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1.5. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 6 IMIMPublic Comment Consultant / City Response public transportation. Development projects should be required to include some of the displaced through development regulation and should be required to contribute financially to allow for relocation. Please comment. 53 54 HO-2.2.1: Please add in line 4 after "variety of urban housing types for persons of all incomes, especially those of low low 'sic] income". If you disagree — please explain. SS-1.3.1: According to Miami Dade WASA actual measured consumption of City of Miami residents is 157 gallons per capita per day. Why is the LOS standard for sewage transmission lines only 100 gallons per capita per day? 55 SS-1.3.4: This policy should not be changed. Without City permits — we will not be able to monitor these impacts. If you do not agree — please state how you will acquire this important knowledge. 56 The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-2.2.1. There is more water input for irrigation, pool, and miscellaneous activities requiring higher water levels then sewer output levels. The City does not issue permits, WASA does. The City will monitor the permitting outside of the City boundaries as described in the policy. SS-2: Reasonable protection is not defined — what would any The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. City [illegible] think is reasonable? 57 SS-2.1.1: Please define periodically, i.e. "every 3 to 5 years" or whatever you believe is a reasonable period of time. 58 The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. SS-2.2.2: Last line — Please put in a number to measure what they are doing now and what is the goal. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 59 60 61 SS-2: Line [illegible] — please define "reasonably protect". What is the City's standard for reasonable protection in this goal? SS-2.1.1: Line 3 — periodically has no meaning — please put time frame to fit with CIP budgeting and budget protections. This was a criticism of the EAR by DCA — which was supposed to be remedied by the CIP and CIP budget. SS-2.1.3: Line one "concurrency management system" — please provide a copy of the concurrency management system for review. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. The requested modification has been made in SS-2.1.1. The concurrency management system is laid out in Policy CI-1.2.2 and the associated policies. 62 SS-2.2.1: Systems are deemed to be the only feasible solution. What standard and methodology will be used to make the determination? Are positive drainage systems contemplated in the CIP budget and budget projections? The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 63 SS-2.2.2: Line 2 "should be encouraged" does not constitute a rational policy. Please amend this by deleting should be encouraged and change to "will" plus time frame. Please insert current frequency of cleaning and what the future frequency we wish to attain. There should also be an ordinance to fine business and home owners who sweep their The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 7 Public Comment Consultant / City Response sidewalk debris into the storm drains. 64 SS-2.2.6: Please explain the reason you do not require quality The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. control structures in commercial parking areas. Parking lots and garages produce enormous amounts of water pollutants and should require these structures. 65 SS-2.4.1: What is the current impact fee charged for storm water drainage and what percentage of the system is currently financed by the impact fee? What percentage of the construction, reconstruction improvement, and extension of the storm water utility system will the City deem to be fair and equitable in the future and what standard will be used to compute this? Please insert the ordinance reference that establishes this criteria into this MNCP [sic] policy section. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 66 SS-2.5.1: Please reference land development ordinance / regulation that enforces the standard. Please provide this ordinance / regulation to me. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 67 SS-2.6.2: Line 2 NPDES — please provide this permit Paragraph 3 — please explain what you mean by this paragraph The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 68 AR-1.1.1: Last line — definition and standard for "cost efficient" The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 69 AR-1.2: Line 3 — please define and give standard for adequate The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 70 Page 40 — Potable Water— MNCP [sic] calls for water lines with 200 gallon per person per day capacity, but sanitary sewer capacity of 100 gallons per person per day — please rectify this inconsistency or explain why 150-200 gallons in only requires 100 gallon capacity out There is more water input for irrigation, pool, and miscellaneous activities requiring higher water levels then sewer output levels. 71 PW-1.2.1: Line 1 — please provide reference for Concurrency Management System ordinance and provide same to PAB for review. The City has no "Concurrency Management"ordinance. The authority underlying its concurrency management system is contained in its Comprehensive Plan and land development regulations. The City is incorporating additional concurrency management language through its school concurrency amendments, recently adopted by the City. 72 SW-1.1.1: LOS standard — how was this arrived at and how does this compare with cities of similar size? The requested modification has been made in Policy SW-1.1.1. 73 SW-1.3.3: Please put a measurable frequency — what is done now and what should be expected in the future. This impacts water quality. Currently the City conducts street sweeping seven days a week. The City is broken down into zones. Each zone is swept between 2 to 3 times per week, primarily at night. An additional frequency is to achieve approximately 100 person hours per week. Regular monitoring is conducted. 74 SW-1.4.1: Please put time frame such as "within one year will evaluate, etc...." Language could be incorporated to review on a regular basis. 75 I TR-1.1.1: Please provide a list of these major transportation Major intersections are typically the intersections of the east -west and north - THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 8 Public Comment corridors with a legible map where the streets and cross streets can be read. The existing FLUM shows a major corridor running E& W (and in some areas N & S) every five blocks. Allowing for buffer transactions as described in the land use section — these SF neighborhoods will [illegible] to exist. How do you respond to this comment? Line 10 "major intersections" — please insert a legible map showing these major intersections. Second to last line — Per Person Trip Methodology — this method of measuring traffic impacts is used in no other city of our size in the U.S. This method of measurement should be done away with as no development that has done a traffic study has ever been shown to impact the current traffic — yet most major roadways are impassable for more than 4 hours each day. The City has often promised they would use another method and to respond to the EAR concerns at public meetings this method should be replaced now. Please ask the consultants to respond with alternate methods used elsewhere for review by the PAB. Consultant / City Response south section -line and half section -line roadways. Major transportation corridors are also typically those same section -line and half section -line roadways. The City currently maintains a functional classification map to categorize the local and regional roadway network, identifying State, County, and local jurisdiction of roadways within the City of Miami, and to show classification as an arterial, collector, or local street. We are currently working with the City to update a map depicting the transportation corridors. Maps TR-1 and TR-2 were prepared by the City during the EAR process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to identify the number of travel lanes and functional classification for all highways, major roadways and local streets in the City of Miami. The City of Miami originated the person -trip methodology for the measurement of local level of service on a transportation facility to address the multi modal transportation infrastructure that characterizes the City of Miami. The methodology was designed to address existing demand and capacity to move people on the transportation system primarily using the roadway network and the transit system, while other modes such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities were also included to a lesser degree. The methodology was designed to evaluate each transportation mode alone, or in combination with others, as applicable to the particular transportation facility. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the capacity of all transportation modes would be used in the measurement of future, peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into the Transportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was separately published as a report entitled "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami", September 1990. Multi -modal level of service standards which recognize transit service as a function of the capacity of the transportation system) are adopted in many counties throughout the State of Florida (i.e. Miami -Dade, Broward and Polk Counties to name a few), however no other county or city in Florida has a premium transit system similar to the combined effect of Tri-rail, Metro -rail and Metro -mover, which makes the use of the person -trip methodology a viable concurrency management tool for the City of Miami. Please note that in addition to the Person -Trip Methodology, the City of Miami analyzed the vehicular only traffic conditions for the arterial and collector roadway network (inclusive of the section -line and half section -line roadways) as part of the EAR Process during the preparation of the Transportation THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 9 Public Comment 76 77 78 Consultant / City Response Element Data and Analysis (November 2004). As part of the development review process, the City continues to require applicants to provide vehicular only traffic analyses for portions of the City where transit service is not rovided. Policy TR-1.1.2.1 refers to the adopted level of service standard on roadways where no transit service exists, so this policy does not reflect the PAB member's written concern. TR-1.1.2.1: Who walks % mile in July and August? The elderly and very young cannot without exposing themselves to serious health hazards. Transit must be '/ mile or less to be accessible. TR-1.1.2.2: Who walks % mile in July and August? The elderly and very young cannot without exposing themselves to serious health hazards. Transit must be mile or less to be accessible. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.2 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 120% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within % mile of a transit route which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. _ TR-1.1.2.3: Who walks'/2 mile in July and August? The The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.3 is also elderly and very young cannot without exposing themselves to consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami - serious health hazards. Transit must be mile or less to be Dade County pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 150% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within % mile of Commuter Rail or Express Bus transit service which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. Alternative transportation modes are mobility choices for all modes other than the single occupant vehicle. Policy TR-1.4.3 addresses the development of a streetscape design program by the City to guide the placement of landscaping, lighting, sidewalks and bicycle paths along City Streets in coordination with major repairs and street renovations. Map TR-6 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict existing bicycle facilities citywide. The City is currently engaged in a Bicycle Facilities Study to enhance bicycle connectivity. This comment is noted. accessible. 79 TR-1.1.4: Line 10 — incentives for alternative transportation modes. Question (1) What are these? (2) If bicycles are used as an alternative — where are the provisions planning and funding for bike lands in downtown? 80 81 82 TR-1.1.8: New garages both City owned and [illegible] be required to be built with storm water retention structures for run-off to protect the potable water supply from the bay and keep pollutants out of the rivers. TR-1.1.15: Line 4 — what method / standard will be used to define "appropriate"? Who will make this determination? TR-1.4.1 and TR-1.4.2: [These policies] are inconsistent THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The City is authorized to manage the downtown parking supply pursuant to Section 14-182 (b), (c), (d) and (e) of the City Code. These policies are not inconsistent. TR-1.4.1 addresses the prevention of impacts to city residential streets as the indirect result of County or State roadway improvement projects. TR-1.4.2 reflects the general state policy to protect the interregional and interstate functions of the FIRS roadway system by encouraging local traffic to use alternatives to this system consisting of 1-95, Page 10 # Public Comment 83 TR-1.4.5: Please include in line 6 after the word "street", and local residents and Homeowner Associations. Consultant / City Response I-395/SR 836, I-195/SR 112, and SR 826 within or adjacent to the City of Miami. Use of other state roadways and county roadways would be the alternatives to the FIRS system. The requested modification has been made in Policy TR-1.4.5. 84 85 86 TR-1.5: After the word "service" in line 8, add "and will provide local circulator service to feed Miami -Dade County transit stops." The Objective as proposed gives the City and the County the flexibility to determine the appropriate transit mode needed to service a particular transit demand, and the City has the ability to "support" the County in the provision of transit service through direct participation or planning as they are currently doing with various projects throughout the City (ie. in the development of local circulator service for the Health District and in the development and design of the Miami Streetcar). TR-1.5.1: After modes line 4, add "and will provide circulator service in areas where the population is transit disadvantaged and will encourage and provide [illegible] money for start-up private jitney services in all areas of the City to encourage the use of mass transit and reduce dependence on individual automobile use especially in the downtown core and along existing densely populated corridors." TR-1.5.2: Line 5 on page 52 — after protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development add in height, density, intensity, use, and scale. The policy has been modified to add a portion of the requested changes, while maintaining the flexibility to respond to improved connections between transit modes without dictating the specific type of mode. Policy TR-1.5.9A addresses private jitney transit services. The requested modification has been made in Policy TR-1.5.2. 87 88 TR-1.5.7: Line 6 — Southeast Bayshore Drive to Metromover — since SE Bayshore Drive is already connected through bus service and this is a stable residential area. This upgrade of service will encourage increased density and will [illegible] the surround stable neighborhoods in Coconut Grove. Land use regulations in this area should not be changed to increased densities. Please delete Bayshore Dr. Funds for planning and increased mass transit are scarce and should be used in areas where the residents are transit disadvantaged. This policy also supports increased residential densities in the area of Mercy Hospital and the Catholic High School next door. I am sure the Catholic church will be happy to sell their properties as soon as the density is increased. TR-1.5.8.G.: These densities will obliterate Silver Bluff, Golden Pines, and parts of North and Central Coconut Grove to name a few neighborhoods. What, if any, protections are you offering these property owners? How will this affect their quality of life? THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Based upon a further review of the PAB member's comment, the reference to Southeast Bayshore Drive to Metromover refers to connectivity in the Brickell area of Downtown Miami, between Southeast Bayshore Drive and Metromover, and does not refer to Coconut Grove from Bayshore Drive to Metrorail. While the requested modification was made in Policy TR-1.5.7 in the MCNP document dated 3-24-08, the change should in fact not be made. TR-1.5.8.G identifies residential density and employment standards that are intended to promote pedestrianism and transit usage through the design review of projects located at and around rapid transit stations. These standards are not meant to conflict with other underlying land use policies such as the proposed modifications to LU-1.1.11 or TR-1.1.1 where the protection of single Page 11 Public Comment How many square feet per employee are you [illegible]? How does a City [illegible] figure out how big each office building will be? Consultant / City Response family residential is established as a priority. 89 TR-1.5.11: Line 2 — delete seek (another qualifying word with no standard) The requested modification has been made in Policy TR-1.5.11. 90 TR-1.5.12: Why should the taxpayers money be used to pay for very expensive consultants to develop weekday peak hour transit ridership data to ensure that a baseline can be established to support the City's per person trip methodology when we should be counting vehicles per trip as is done everywhere else. Please comment. This policy has been misunderstood by the PAB member. Miami -Dade Transit collects and maintains the ridership data, and the policy modifications have been drafted to ensure that the City coordinates with MDT to obtain this information so that it can best be used by the City to quantify existing ridership using the transit system during peak travel hours (ie. morning and evening rush I hours). 91 TR-1.7.1: This policy has not been adhered to in the past. Will This comment has been noted. it be in the future? 92 TR-1.8.2: Line 3 — Why 5 years? Could it be a longer period of time? I The five year time frame corresponds to other planning horizons in the region such as the update to the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan which occurs every five years. 93 PA-1.1.2: Line 2 - By changing the language from ensure to encourage the City is once again failing to commit to economic improvement for the Port. The Port competes w/other ports — especially in Ft. Lauderdale and failure to ensure an adequate amount of commercial and industrial land puts the City at an economic disadvantage. This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. 94 PA-1.1.3, PA-1.1.4, and PA-1.1.5: Removal of these policies will detract from the economic viability of the Port. Please have the economic consultant respond. This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. 95 PA-3.1.1: residential uses are incompatible with industrial port uses and will destroy the economic viability of marine port uses. Please have the economic consultant respond. This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. 96 PA-3.3.1: Please delete new language as this weakens the authority of the Miami River Commission which has been constituted by the State of Florida to protect the river and its marine industry. This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. 97 Page 61: Parks Recreation Open Space Please add green space to title. In planning practice, "green space" is not a separate entity from parks, recreation and open space but included within those categories. 98 Goal PR-1: Add green space to objective after open space In planning practice, "green space" is not a separate entity from parks, recreation and open space but included within those categories. 99 PR-1.1.3: Please put this policy back into the MNCP [sic]. Addressed in PR-1.5 and PR-1.5.1 100 PR-1.1.6: Why has this policy been removed? Addressed in PR-3.3. and PR-3.3.2 101 Objective PR-1.1.1: [sic] Why will this objective require 7 years to be met? Assuming that Objective PR-1.1 is the subject of the questions (not Policy 1.1.1) — acquisition of land and establishment of parks in underserved areas of THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 12 # Public Comment 102 103 PR-1.1.1: Why were the words "in principle" not deleted from the Parks Master Plan when the City Commission agreed to and voted to delete these words when they unanimously voted for the Parks Master Plan? Please correct this oversight now. PR-1.1.2: Please distribute copies of these maps — Please have legible copies 104 PR-1.1.4: I strongly object to green and open space being reduced by up to a total of 25% when we have so few acres per person available in the City. This would reduce the LOS of 1.13 acres per person 1000 residents to 0.85 acres per 1000 residents of open recreation and green space. 105 106 PR-2.1.1: Consultant / City Response I an urban area takes coordination, the ability to take advantage of market and other opportunities, and, after land is acquired, time to design and establish the parks. This is not a comprehensive plan issue. J The maps are in Chapter 5 of the Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan and also in a separate, large -format appendix prepared for the final plan document. The PAB received a draft version of the parks master plan which contained these maps and voted to approve it. The final plan has been available online and continues to be online at www.miamiparksplan.org, which can be accessed through the city web site as well. All park systems have some parks that include buildings to support use of the parks and a number of highly -regarded urban park systems include museums and other cultural assets, from San Diego to New York. For the purposes of comprehensive planning, LOS includes all park acreage, including buildings and parking lots, as well as open/green space. This policy does not refer to a 25% lot coverage rule. That reference is from the revisions to the MCNP section on interpretation of the future land use map. A brief discussion of the rationale for those revisions is provided at Comment 54 above. The parks master plan recommends an LOS measure based on access and funding rather than on acreage, an approach that is more appropriate for urban park systems and increasingly used by park planners, but is not easily incorporated in the traditional concurrency systems arising from the suburban development model that underlies the Florida concurrency system. This policy is in the MCNP to provide for a short period (until January 2009) to devise a way to use the new access- and funding -based LOS as a concurrency measure that will provide criteria and a mechanism for private sector developers to show when the LOS requirement for parks has been met.. Cultural facilities bring a net loss of green and open As noted earlier, all park systems include some buildings and impervious space and this policy does not limit their footprint by a surfaces on parks. This policy focuses on eliminating the use of park land for percentage number which might be more than an acceptable municipal or other purposes that are not related to recreation or culture. It number to the residents. establishes the principle that the stock of public park land will not be diminished by non -park uses and that the amount of building will be limited. As a policy matter, specific limitations are not suitable in this section and should be resolved in zoning or other ordinances (e.g., conservation land should have greater use limitations than other types of park land). The procedures referenced in this policy, as described in the parks master plan, provide for an alternatives evaluation process for any proposed PR-2.1.1: Line 6 and 7 - Please change to public referendum as public procedures may not be even include a vote by the THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 13 Public Comment City Commission Consultant / City Response conversion of public park land; public hearings by the PAB, the proposed new Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and the City Commission; a supermajority vote of the Commission; and replacement of park land taken for other uses by land of similar conservation, park or recreation value. This is a more rigorous process than public referendum. 107 PR-2.2.3: Please add and until sundown in the summer at least 2 weekday evenings per week so working parents can bring their children to swim. 108 PR-3.2.4: Please explain? How will this be enforced? 109 110 PR-3.2.9: Please provide the Master Plan for review. With appropriate legible maps. This level of detail is not suitable for a comprehensive plan policy statement. PR-3.2.10: Please add including access to private parking garage at fees that are comparable to those established by the Miami Parking Authority throughout the City. 111 112 PR-3.2.11: Line 4 — change those developments that require to all development and redevelopment will require. This is currently enforced on the downtown stretch of the Miami River by the public setback requirement that is part of the permitting process and would similarly be enforced through zoning and permitting requirements for future development of non -water dependent uses. Enforcement of public access after construction has to be through periodic monitoring of the space to see that it has not been privatized, which can be promoted by requiring signage to notify users that these are public spaces. As noted earlier, the PAB received the draft plan and the final plan is available at www.miamiparksplan.org. This should be addressed through agreements with the developer/parking operator. This language comes from the previous plan and was not recommended for change under the EAR process. The only new language is the last sentence about monitoring for continued public access. PR-3.2.11: Line 6 — after Policy CM 2.1.8 add before a building permit will be issued. The point of this sentence is that monitoring should occur after permitting and construction so that private uses and barriers do not begin to creep into the public space. 113 PR-4.1.2: Line 3 Add and scientific polling surveys every 5 years (since the EAR cycle is 7 years by FL statute) Assuming this is for PR-4.1.1.: Changes made. Policy PR-4.1.1: The City will use participant evaluation surveys at the completion of recreational programs to evaluate program success, and online public opinion surveys at least once every three years and scientific surveys at least once every seven years to identify needed and desired programs. 114 PR-5.1.3: Line 4 after publicly available add and a process for public comments by the residents of the City. Addressed in PR-5.2.1 where a new Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is described with the role of advising on capital plans and designs, which would occur in a public forum with public comment. 115 PR-5.1: After facilities add and City residents and City residents [sic] neighborhood parks Assuming that the comment is on PR-5.1.4: This policy is about making sure that, among other things, "groups that sponsor programs that use City facilities" contribute appropriately (with funds or otherwise) for their use of facilities that are paid for by the city for public use. For example, privately sponsored sports leagues use fields that the city maintains. 116 PR-5.2.2: Line 3 Change five to three. If a program is not working after 3 years, it should be eliminated. Changes made. Policy PR-5.2.2: The City will survey City residents to monitor preferences, needs and satisfaction with the park system on a regular basis, at THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 14 Public Comment Consultant / City Response 117 PR-5.2.3: Line 1 after develop add implement. We have had many plans developed which are settling gathering dust all over this City. Plans w/no implementation in a timely fashion need expensive revisions or are re -done. 118 PR-5.2.4: Line 3 0 delete 'ideally'. minimum through evaluations of all recreational programs by program participants to evaluate program success; online public opinion surveys at least once every three years; and scientific surveys every seven years (starting from the Parks Master Plan survey of 2006). This comment has been noted, and will be addressed in the next draft. The requested modification has been made in Policy PR-5.2.4. 119 PR-6.1.2: Please provide Virginia Key Master Plan for review 120 PR-6.1.4: Please define "Cafe District" and this currently in 1100? Define "marine service center'. 121 PR-6.2.1: Line 2 after materials add shade trees 4" dia [illegible]. 122 The Virginia Key Master Plan is available online at http://www.edsaplan.com/VirginiaKey/home.html City to respond. Changes made. Specific dbh size is not suitable for a policy document. Policy PR-6.2.1: The City will continue to encourage development of urban street promenade linkages with widened sidewalks, high quality materials, shade trees, landscaping, lighting, graphics, and furnishings. Page 75: Purpose of this map? The map has a red line through it — it is deleted in the amended version 123 Goal CM: After of natural resources add especially water quality 124 125 CM-1.1: After Little River add the stormwater outfall of Biscayne Bay The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. CM-1.1.2: Sentence # 2 on line 3. Who determines the need for positive drainage system — What authority and by what criteria? What is budgeted for this now? The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. 126 CM-1.1.3: Line 2 Please describe the "committee" Does this committee have a name — who are the members? Infrastructure improvements funding is not adequately addressed. The City is responsible for all storm water sewers — where is this addressed in the CIP budget? This is not a County function. 127 The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. CM-1.3: Please define 1. blighted, 2. declining, 3. threatened. What are the standards used for each? 128 CM-2.1.1: Line 4 after access should be added with bay walks The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE Page 15 ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Comment and open space Consultant / City Response pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. 129 CM-4.1.2: Add including all current and any future FEMA regulations The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were Lprecipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. 130 CM-4.1.5: Who will perform this analysis? And the review? And who will be responsible for enforcement? Please incorporate ordinance reference. 131 CM-4.1.9: What is the current evacuation plan and where can it be found. Please reference the current plan. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. 132 NR-1.1.2: Line 4 and 5. Please reference by ordinance or regulation. 133 NR-1.1.6: After net loss of public access add and public use This comment has been noted. The requested modification has been made in Policy NR-1.1.6. 134 NR-1.2.4: line 6 "feasible". Please provide a standard for The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. feasible or delete this modifier. 135 March 19, 2008 Recorded Comm Include a 1-2 year time frame for adopting an Economic Element and a Historical and Cultural Element into the MCNP. ents from PAB Chairperson Arva Parks Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. 136 Define "neighborhoods" and create a map showing the neighborhoods. This map should go into a Historical and Cultural Element. 137 138 Please review the Urban Infill designations. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. Not all corridors are the same. Not every corridor needs high This comment has been noted. densities. 139 Please review the intensities in residential neighborhoods. Chapter 9J-5, FAC, identifies the need for establishment of standards for densities or intensities of use for each future land use category. The City's interpretation is to maintain densities measures for residential land uses and intensity measures for non residential land uses. Measures are also identified in the City's Zoning Ordinance. 140 Include definitions, standards, and specific time frames. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City under Goal LU-5. 141 Provide the public with periodic updates of what has been accomplished in Miami. 142 The changes to the Major Institutional, Public Facilities, This comment has been noted. It unclear how the changes to the Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Page 16 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Comment Consultant / City Response Transportation and Utilities section violate the spirit of the so called Grovenor Ordinance that was passed unanimously by the City Commission and the Planning Board. Transportation and Utilities violate the spirit of the Grovenor Ordinance, as the last paragraph in the subject -section clearly establishes a link to the Zoning Ordinance and states that all development shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land regulations. The types of implementing requirements in the "Grovenor Ordinance" are typically detailed in the Zoning Ordinance. The MCNP provides the City's land planning policy framework. The Zoning Ordinance implements the detailed , requirements. March 19, 2008 Comments from Karen McGuire, AICP for Miami Neighborhoods United 143 Objective 1.1: This policy assumes that the City is an entire urban center. How can the City effectively monitor when the person trip methodology is double dipping E+ J20 E+ J50 and additionally ramping up the vic ration. VIC = V * 1.41C*1.6 An additional policy should be in place to evaluate the efficacy of the person trip methodology. The City had said that a study would be done regarding the Vehicle occupancy rate. Kittleson had reported it to be 1.2. Therefore the 1.6for capacity seems arbitrary. The City is currently re-evaluating the vehicle occupancy standards utilized in the Person -Trip Methodology. Alternative standards were utilized by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004), and these standards were subsequently updated by FDOT during their review of the City's Person -Trip Methodology and the EAR. The vehicle occupancy standard developed by FDOT reflects a rate of 1.23 persons per vehicle for existing occupancy developed using travel characteristics from the 2000 census data (compared to 1.4 persons per vehicle resulting from surveys conducted by the City in 1989). The practical capacity of the private vehicle is still under review by the City. Standards for vehicle occupancy are being developed in coordination with FDOT. 144 Policy: 1.1.1. Question: How will Redevelopment of Corridors be encouraged to be located at major intersection of Commercial Corridors. How will this be achieved? A target date for review of single family status should be inserted. Ten years? The underlying land use on the Future Land Use Plan map identifies those locations at major intersections where non-residential development is permitted. Single-family is protected pursuant to the language proposed under TR-1.1.1. 145 146 147 Policy: 1.1.2 This policy is confusing. The methodology should be expressed more clearly. E+ 100% of person trip methodology where no Mass transit exists. (The person trip should be explained within the document and not just reference the other document) Policy: 1,1,2,2 [sic]: The policy should read --Where bus transit exists with transit service with minimum 20 minute headways within 114 of the facility shall operate at no greater than 120 %. (No one walks a half a mile to a bus) The policy is clear. The adopted LOS standard is E (at 100% of capacity) unless other provisions apply pursuant to TR-1.1.2.2, TR-1.1.2.3 and TR-1.1.3. Policy: 1.1.2.3 States that "Where express bus transit and or Premium transit service on minim 20 minute headways is available parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the facility the facility shall operate at no greater than 150%.". An express bus that The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.2 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 120% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within % mile of a transit route which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.3 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County i CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 150% of capacity for THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 17 148 Public Comment sits in the same traffic as other vehicles and does not have designated right-of-way is not premium transit. Beside that the 1/2 mile allowance at E+ 150 should just be around the stations, or express bus stops with designated right of way not along the entire line. Policy: 1.1.3.3 FIRS and SIS within the City limits should be identified. What are the performance measures and strategies for protecting these facilities? Map should be included LOS MAP for entire City should also be included. 149 Policy: 1.1.4 This policy states that the City will continue to do studies regarding multimodal transportation etc. Performance measures and target date need to be are provided, such as the following: A sidewalk inventory will be undertaken by June 2009. Current sidewalks are at 80% of neighborhoods. The City will improve 2% per year. Ridership and bus loadings are at 80% of capacity at peak hour Ridership will be increased within the City by 3% annually, through the promotion of TDM strategies and in cooperation with MDT The City will cooperate with MDT to provide an annual status report. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Consultant / City Response those roadways located parallel to and within % mile of Commuter Rail or Express Bus transit service which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. Map TR-3 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict the limited access facilities citywide inclusive of the FIRS and SIS facilities. Map TR-8.1 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to address vehicular level of service. The comment is noted. The City has already prepared or partnered in the following specific neighborhood studies, each with their own set of recommendations and implementation measures. • Coconut Grove Area Traffic Study • Health District (Civic Center) Implementation Plan • Health District Comprehensive Traffic Study • Orange Bowl Traffic and Parking Assessments • Flagler Street Marketplace/Flagler Street two-way conversion • Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan • Watson Island Traffic Master Plan • Miami River Multimodal Corridor Study (prepared for the MPO and the Miami River Commission with the City of Miami) • Miami River Greenway Plan • Miami Design District -Little Haiti District Planning Study/Master Plan • Miami Design District Design Guidelines • NE 36th Street Traffic Study prepared for the MPO with involvement from the City of Miami • FEC Corridor Master Plan (includes the Buena Vista Yard, now Midtown Miami) • 1-395 Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study (more analysis underway) • NW/NE 79th Street Livability Study (completed) and PD&E Study (not completed) • Flagler Street PD&E Study • DuPont Plaza Traffic Circulation PD&E Study (more analysis underway) • Brickell Avenue PD&E Study (completed) • Overtown (Dover Kohl) Master Plan Page 18 Public Comment 150 TR 1.1. 9 Need performance measures to ensure that transportation Control measures are effectively providing transportation alternative to vehicles and that the needs of business and residents are not being negatively effected. Consultant / City Response Section 14-182 (d) of the City Code already includes a monitoring and compliance procedure and obligation for the Transportation Control Measures Plan. 151 152 TR 1.1.11: Where is the current parking study? This should be in place by the time of the EAR amendments. This baseline report shows how effective TDM policies have been TR 1.1.12: Peak hour Ramp loading should be part of this analysis The comment is noted. The comment is noted. 153 TR 1.1.13 When should new development throughout the City be subject to transportation mitigation fees? Is this proportionate share which only applies to the Downtown DRI or is this a new impact fee? If the whole area is a TCEA aren't the developers exempt from mitigation fees? What about instituting a transit fee on high density transit corridors? 154 All development located within the City of Miami is subject to the payment of transportation impact fees to Miami -Dade County. Development located within the Downtown Miami DRI and the SEOPW DRI are also subject to the payment of Transportation Mitigation Fees as outlined in Article 13 of the City Code and as mandated by each of the two DRI approvals. Developments located within the TCEA are not exempt from the payment of fees. In fact, the City of Miami assesses impact fees for all effected properties pursuant to Section 13-6 of the City Code. TR: 1 1.19 As part of the multimodal initiative the City should do a sidewalk, bike path and connectivity analysis to see where there are existing deficiencies and what the existing connectivity to transit within the buffer parameters may be and how barriers or degraded facilities can be removed or improved. Performance measure should be applied with reporting timeframes. Ex. The City shall conduct a connectivity analysis to gauge the existence of sidewalks and roads that connect with the designated buffer for public transportation. This study will be done by _ and updated biannually. 155 156 Map TR-6 and Map TR-7 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities citywide. Existing bicycle level of service and existing pedestrian level of service also was calculated using the FDOT methodology from the 2002 Quality/LOS Handbook, and was presented in Map TR-9 and Map TR-10. The City is currently engaged in a Bicycle Facilities Study to enhance bicycle connectivity. TR-I.1.20 Are PTP funds and traffic impact mitigation fees only to be provided for the RAC. What about other high density areas that may develop in and along transit Corridors? Will these also be eligible for impact and PTP funds? Objective TR-I.2: Identify transportation development Corridors in Conjunction with MD County to determine where high density growth is anticipated and to determine whether additional right of way requirements should be instituted for provision of multimodal infrastructure such as designated bus lanes, additional sidewalk widths 12', bike or service lanes. PTP funds are not only provided for the RAC, however Policy TR-1.1.20 was specifically drafted to support the Buena Vista Yards RAC and to specifically address the resources to support the infrastructure to serve the RAC. These issues are addressed under TR-1.2.1, TR-1.2.2, TR-1.7.1 and TR-1.7.2. 157 Objective TR. 1.4: Parking analysis should also be included. Parking is addressed under TR-1.1.8, TR-1.1.9, TR-1.1.10, TR-1.1.14, TR- 1.1.15 and TR1.1.16. 158 Policy TR 1.5.3 What about a park and ride facility with Structured Parking. Need to provide info how the effectiveness Structured parking serving Metro -rail already exists in the Health District, and is planned for the Civic Center area. Stakeholders are presently working with the THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 19 Public Comment Consultant / City Response of these strategies will be evaluated. 159 TRI. 5. 6 Please reevaluate the "premium transit" definition. 160 Policy TR-1.5. 7 All public transportation systems are addressed but the most "premium" is omitted, which is the FEC corridor line which should be on top of the city's list. This line will provide premium service From Palm Beach County to Downtown Miami. 161 162 City of Miami and the MPO to evaluate areawide transportation issues, strategies to maximize transit ridership, strategies to improve pedestrian and transit corridors, local circulator transit service, Miami Streetcar connections, streetsca a im rovements and re ional trans ortation access. Premium transit is the terminology used by the MPO in the adopted Miami - Dade County Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan to address a wide range of urban commuter rail, BRT or light rail transit systems. Policy TR-1.5.7 has been modified to include the FEC Corridor connection to Downtown. TR-1.5.8 F. Car servicing businesses should be added such as carwashes and auto repair. Policy TR-1.5.12: Need performance measure and date when baseline report should be achieved. That information should already be available. This comment is noted, however one perspective on car servicing businesses and auto repair is that if these uses are located within '/4 mile of a rapid transit _ station, then patrons can drop off their cars for repair, and take transit to work. _ No performance measure needed. The City will coordinate with MDT immediately to obtain the weekday peak hour transit ridership data. 163 Policy TR-1.5.13 The City needs to coordinate with the County regarding the LU of the downtown. All transportation infrastructure has been centralized there because it was the business hub. LU's and City zoning for mixed use should encourage and promote business development and construction in the downtown area. 164 Summary of recommendations: 1. Clarification of the adopted LOS standards 2. Enforcement of Transportation Demand Management strategies. And ensure that tenant board is responsible after developer no longer manages the facility. 3. Coordination with MDT on the expansion and improvement of headways of the bus transit system 4. Coordination with MDT to improve connections between transit modes 5. Provision of performance measures for achieving mobility in the TCEA. 6. Provide true multimodal options by providing support and investment in pedestrian and bike path amenities. 6. Evaluate long range right -of -way needs for the provision of transit in high density corridors 7. Coordination with FOOT to ensure that Transportation improvement minimize the intrusion of commuter traffic on This comment is noted. Many provisions in the MCNP already promote business development and construction in the downtown area, especially Objective 3.2 addressing the Urban Central Business District (UCBD) Designation. See also the land use density and intensity incentives provided for the CBD and properties located within the UCBD. 1. Clarification of adopted LOS standards are addressed in TR-1.1.2, TR-1.1.3, CI-1.2.2 and CI-1.2.3. 2. Enforcement of TDM strategies are addressed in TR-1.1.5 and TR-1.1.9. 3. Coordination with MDT is addressed in TR-1.1.4 and TR-1.1.6. 4. Coordination with MDT is addressed in TR-1.5.1, TR-1.5.12 and TR-1.5.13. 5. Achieving improved mobility in the TCEA is addressed in TR-1.5.8 and in new policy LU-1.1.13. 6. Support and investment in pedestrian and bicycle amenities is addressed in TR-1.4.3 and TR-1.5.8. 6. Transit right-of-way needs are addressed in TR-1.7.2. 7. Coordination with FDOT is addressed in TR-1.4.1. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 20 Public Comment residential streets Consultant / City Response March 19, 2008 Comments from Grace Garrido for Coral Gate Homeowners' Association 165 Coral Gate is the first Planned Unit Development in the City of Miami. Our homes were built between 1948 and 1950. All but two are still standing. One was lost to fire; one was lost to Ordinance 9500 transitional use zoning and is now used as an office, but it is still zoned R-I. Because this EAR is also preparing the way for Miami 2J, we wish to ensure the preservation of Coral Gate as it stands. 166 167 This comment has been noted. LU-1.1.3 (4) degradation.. transition and buffering requirements that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting single family neighborhoods. Wording in red be added. We would like to be sure that we don't automatically upzone any properties in Coral Gate. The same addition in LU-1.6.9; HO-1.1.5; HO-1.1.17 and TR- 1.1.1. 168 LU-1.1.11 - Refers to Single Family Residential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map but how does this change when we have T3 zoning? Same question in the "Interpretation of the future Land Use Plan Map" Only the present zoning classifications are referred to. 169 The requested modification has been made in Policy LU-1.1.3 The requested modification has been made in Policy LU-1.6.9, Policy HO- 1.1.5, and Policy HO-1.1.17 This is a Zoning amendment request, and outside of the MCNP EAR -based amendments. LU-1.1.2.3 "redevelopment and revitalization.... specific neighborhood and area plans." How is "Neighborhood" defined? (There is no glossary of terms.) and LU-I.3.1 - "in accordance with neighborhood design" What's a neighborhood? Because the five blocks of Coral Gate from 32 Ave. to 37 Ave. along S.W. 2! ST. are very different from the 3 to 4 blocks of S.W. 21 St. from S.W. 27 Ave to S.W. 30 Ave. Addressed in new policy LU-1.1.5. 170 LU-1.3 - "encourage the development of well -designed, mixed use neighborhoods... " How does the City intend to protect established neighborhoods and at the same time accomplish development of well -designed, mixed use neighborhoods? Do they not violate their own intent by professing to do both without including areas that are excepted from the imposition of mixed -used neighborhood rules. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. Addressed in the new policy LU-1.1.5. 171 LU-1.6.5 States that the City will continue to use "Special Districts? Should not the NCO be mentioned here also? Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 21 172 Public Comment HO-1.1.8 - "City will protect and enhance existing viable neighborhoods." to the City. What would be an enhancement? If the neighborhood is viable. does it need to be enhanced? March 19, 2008 Comments from Miami River Marine Group, Inc. Consultant / City Response Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted 173 174 175 176 Not Deleting Comp Plan "Policy PR-I.5.8: Expand the existing This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-2.2 and its related policies, Jose Marti Park to provide additional recreational opportunities and has been broadened to include all existing parks and recreational facilities. for the area's residents, workers, and visitors." Concurring with City Commissioner Sanchez' recommendation Water borne transportation has been addressed in Policy TR-1.5.9B. made during a public hearing regarding the EAR recommended amendments to the Comp Plan, to insert City support for citywide Water Taxi / Water Bus services within the Transportation element of the Comp Plan. Not deleting PR 1.4.1 and PR 1.4.2 regarding development This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-1.5 and its related policies. impact fees for parks and insert the EAR based amendment for the sections. As directed by the PAB and City Commission when This requested modification has been made in Policy PR-6.1.3. considering the EAR in December 2004, inserting "Fisherman's Wharf' in PR 6.1.3 to become consistent with PR 6.1.4. March 19, 2008 MNU Overview on MCNP EAR -based Amendments 177 1. The time -frame scheduled by the City for public input is too short. We have been requesting your Board (the designated Agency) and the City Administration to establish a Project to work on these Amendments for over two years. The very first task undertaken by the City in preparing for the EAR Amendments was to request citizen participation through an Advisory Committee made up of representatives appointed by each District City Commissioner so that feedback on the amendment language (and on public outreach) could be facilitated during the EAR amendment process. The very first task undertaken by the Consultant Team preparing the EAR Amendments was the analysis of MNU comments submitted to the City dated October 6, 2005 (as part of the EAR process) and the drafting of responses to these comments to indicate which of these comments would be incorporated into the amendments to the goals, objectives and policies of the MCNP. This information was submitted to the Advisory Committee (which included key MNU representatives) on December 21, 2007. On January 18, 2008, a first draft of the EAR Amendments was submitted to the Advisory Committee, with a follow-up draft submitted on January 28, 2008 to incorporate the GOP's for the Park and Recreation Element. The Advisory Committee met with City Staff and the Consultant Team to discuss issues of concern, process and timeframe on November 1, 2007, January 8, 2008 and February 1, 2008. At the February 1, 2008 meeting, committee members from the Upper East Side and from Miami River Commission provided specific comments to the draft GOP's, and requested that modifications be made to address their concerns. The MNU THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 22 178 179 Public Comment 2. Notwithstanding the commitment of the City in 2005 that EAR -based Amendments would not be restricted to issues raised in the EAR, the City is now maintaining that those are the only Amendments they will consider at this time. 180 181 Consultant / City Response representative generally discussed issues related to population projections, density and single-family residential, but did not offer specific language modifications to the drafted GOP's. The Consultant Team requested comments from MNU on the drafted GOP's ASAP since a new draft of the EAR Amendments would be provided at the conclusion of the Public Outreach program in order to incorporate comments received from the public. The City Staff and Consultant team had already simultaneously begun a public outreach program consisting of 10 public workshops held on Jan. 29, 30, 31, Feb. 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, at which the MNU representative attended at least four of these workshops. Requests for feedback on the drafted GOP's from MNU went unanswered. None were provided during the March 5, 2008 public workshop held with the Planning Advisory Board. Feedback was finally received 6.5 weeks after the February 1, 2008 Advisory Committee meeting, with comments received at the March 19, 2008 workshop held with the Planning Advisory Board, after which the Consultant Team only had 3 days to turn around revised GOP's to incorporate comments received by the PAB and by the public during the March 19, 2008 workshop. The EAR amendments include numerous changes to GOP's based upon issues raised through the Public Outreach process, and through feedback received at the PAB workshops which address numerous changes not required by the EAR recommendations. The drafting of new optional comprehensive plan elements cannot be accomplished within the timeframe established to complete the EAR amendments. The City has committed to undertaking additional comprehensive plan modifications after the EAR amendments are adopted, through the standard twice per year opportunity afforded by the City to amend their comprehensive plan. Additional informational requests related to land use and transportation were received by the City on February 16, 2008. The Consultant team immediately began responding to the information requested. An initial submittal of _r information was provided to MNU representatives on March 4, 2008. See below the complete responses to information requested. 4. We are generally pleased with the work on the Parks, This comment has been noted. Recreation and Open Space Element, although it needs some more work and Measurable Objectives need to be added. 5. Land Use Element. We have recommended definition of two types of neighborhoods, essentially "Suburban Neighborhoods" and "Urban Neighborhoods", in order to properly differentiate protections for Suburban Neighborhoods from unnecessary density, mixed uses, etc. appropriate for Urban Neighborhoods. The consultants agreed at a Committee Meeting to work on this, but notwithstanding 3. Information requested from the City is not being provided. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. Page 23 Public Comment Consultant / City Response 182 follow-up, nothing has been done. Many additional changes have to be made in various elements to distinguish Policies for Suburban Neighborhoods from Policies appropriate for Urban Neighborhoods. 6. The Transportation Element needs a significant amount of work. Please see our DRAFT "MCNP Transportation Element Issues" and "Excerpts from .... Case Studies". The latter points out many policies and levels of measurement which should be included in the Transportation Element. This comment has been noted. 183 7. MNU has been recommending since 2004 that an optional Economic Element and Historic Preservation Element, among other option Elements be included in the Amendments. No such Elements are included. MNU is working on a draft Economic Element. 184 Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. 8. MNU is continuing to work on the various Elements and will be submitting additional suggestions and requests to the Planning Dept. This comment has been noted. MCNP Transportation Element Issues Draft March 16, 2008 Work In Progress 185 I. Major Issues A. The City's Future Land Use Map (FLUM) is not in coordination with the CIE, the TIP or the Long Term Transportation Plan. FS 163 and related Rules and Best Practices from DCA (Transportation Concurrency Best Practices Guide - TCBPG) assume that the current, approved FLUM is properly supported by a financially feasible capital improvements plan (5 year or 10 year), and therefore all focus on proposed amendments to the FLUM and the impact of corresponding increased density and intensity. In the case of Miami, we believe that the current FLUM is grossly in excess of the current and planned infrastructure capacities. This is not in line with the "current situation" assumed in the statue, nevertheless, the TCBPG on page 102, in the Appendix: Evaluating the Impacts of Comprehensive Plan Amendments and pp 104-109 "Guidelines for Evaluating Comprehensive Plan Amendments" specify use of "existing and proposed future land use map (FLUM) designations using the maximum density/intensity of the existing and proposed land use classification ...". Our calculations using a County property records database of all lots in the City with their current Use designation could result in a population of 2 million or more (current population approximately 360,000). With Miami 21 I The standard methodology to evaluate Comprehensive Plan Amendments which propose a change to the land use designation on the Future Land Use Plan Map (FLUM) does specify a comparison between the maximum allowable use for the underlying (existing) land use designation, compared to the maximum allowable use under the proposed land use designation. This comparison is used to evaluate the impacts of a proposed land use plan map change on the demand for parks, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater, transportation and water supply. This approach is followed both by the City of Miami in their review of land use plan map changes, and by Miami - Dade County in their review of proposed land use plan map changes. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 24 Public Comment heading toward more mixed use and more built -out square footage, intensity will increase substantially. 186 B. Urban Infill Area (UIA) and Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) Designations I. The City claims that the County has declared the whole City is a UIA and a TCEA and the City has no choice. 187 2. Miami -Dade County and the MPO say that the City is free to designate, or not, one or more UTA's or TCEA's. 188 3. The "TCEA Case Studies" document refers to "activity centers" of "high intensity, mixed -use", similar to the definition in: "FS 163.3 1 80(5)(b)5. An urban service area specifically designated as a transportation concurrency exception area which includes lands appropriate for compact, contiguous urban development, which does not exceed the amount of land needed to accommodate the projected population growth at densities consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan within the 10-year planning period, and which is served or is Consultant / City Response The Urban Infi11 Area (UIA) and Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) was established by Miami -Dade County pursuant to Amendment No. 94-2 and includes the UIA and the TCEA for the municipalities of Aventura, Hialeah, Miami, Miami Beach, Miami Gardens, Miami Lakes, Miami Shores, Miami Springs, North Miami Beach, Palmetto Bay, Pinecrest and South Miami. The City of Miami amended the MCNP in the year 1999 pursuant to Ordinance 11864 to designate the City of Miami as an Urban Infill Area consistent with the actions taken by Miami -Dade County to establish the TCEA. The City of Miami then amended the MCNP in the year 2000 pursuant to Ordinance 11961 to exclude (from the UIA) Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay having a "conservation" land use and zoning classification. In the year 2003, the City of Miami amended the MCNP to respond to the recommendations from the 1995 EAR and reaffirmed the UIA. To respond to the concerns raised during the EAR amendment process, Policy LU-1.1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments, an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) to determine at a minimum the following: the appropriateness of the areas included in the UIA and/or the TCEA; the benefits and/or disadvantages resulting from the inclusion or exclusion of these areas within the UIA and/or the TCEA; the strategies to support mobility and alternative modes of transportation within those areas included in the UIA and/or the TCEA; and the strategies to address urban design and network connectivity to improve mobility within those areas included in the UIA and/or the TCEA. The City of Miami can re-evaluate the designation of lands as an UIA and as a TCEA, and therefore, Policy LU-1.1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments as an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). Once again, the City of Miami can re-evaluate the designation of lands as an UIA and as a TCEA, and therefore, Policy LU-1.1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments as an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 25 Public Comment planned to be served with public facilities and services as provided by the capital improvements element." (emphasis added) 189 4. The MCNP must be revised to remove the whole City as a TCEA and designate appropriate "activity centers" as new TCEA's, consistent with the MPO Long Term Transportation Plan and the Long Term Water & Sewer facilities plan. This will require Amendments to the Transportation Element to concur with the requirements of FS I63.3180(5)(d), (e), and (f) as also mentioned in the Transportation Planning "Efficient Transportation Decision Making Process" paper of DCA (attached). 190 5. Transportation Concurrency Management Areas should also be designated as per FS 163.3180(7). This concept was Consultant / City Response The Transportation Concurrency Exception Area was created by the Florida Legislature pursuant to Section 163.3180(5)(a), F.S., where the Legislature recognized that under limited circumstances dealing with transportation facilities, countervailing planning and public policy goals might come into conflict with the requirement that adequate public facilities and services be available concurrent with the impacts of development. The Legislature determined that often the unintended result of the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities resulted in the discouragement of urban infill development and redevelopment. Such unintended results were found to be in direct conflict with the goals and policies of the state comprehensive plan. Therefore, exceptions from the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities were permitted as provided by Section 163.3180(5)(a), F.S. At the present time, the "whole City" is not included in the TCEA as referenced above. Recognizing the concerns expressed during the EAR amendment process, Policy LU-1.1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments as an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). At the present time, compliance with Section 163.3180(5)(d),(e) and (f) is addressed pursuant to Section 163.3180(5)(g). Miami -Dade County, as the recipient of the TCEA, must show compliance with these sections. Miami -Dade County, through the establishment of the People's Transportation Plan, the half -percent sales surtax, the Citizens' Independent Transportation Trust (CITT) and the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) have already taken major steps toward mitigating impacts to the Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) roadways. The LRTP provides for an East-West Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative travel modes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to SR 836. The LRTP provides for the Kendall Link Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative travel modes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to SR 836, SR 821, SR 874 and SR 878. The LRTP provides for the FEC Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative travel modes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to 1-95. The LRTP provides for the South Link Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative travel modes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to SR 821, SR 874 and SR 878. The City of Miami can evaluate the appropriateness of Transportation Concurrency Management Areas as a tool to promote infill development and THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 26 # Public Comment supposed to be incorporated in the Transportation Element as the "Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan (MTI)", which apparently has never been completed. 191 6. We do not understand whether or how FS 163.3 1 80(8) applies in the case of the City of Miami. 192 7. We do not understand how FS 163.3 180(9) applies to the City of Miami. Assuming there are several designated and approved TCEA's there should also be a Tong -term concurrency management system in coordination with the County and MPO, which could enforce limitations on redevelopment if appropriate. 193 C. The TCEA Case Studies have a great many recommendations for the Transportation Element of the MCNP. Why are they being ignored? See attached "Summary of Case Study Recommendations" 194 II. Significant Issues A. The "person -trip" methodology used by the City does not comply with: I.) FS163.3180 (I)(b) "Local governments shall use professionally accepted techniques for measuring level of service for automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and trucks. These techniques may be used to evaluate increased accessibility by multiple modes and reductions in vehicle miles of travel in an area or zone. The Department of transportation shall develop methodologies to assist local governments in implementing this multimodal level -of -service analysis." or 2.) TCBPG p104 Guidelines for Evaluating Comprehensive Plan Amendments). 195 As stated in the "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami" Revision I, September 1990 on page 9: "Finally, it should be stressed that the Transportation Corridor is a new and innovative approach to dealing with the urban transportation policy dilemma - as Consultant / City Response redevelopment, and can incorporate the Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (as applicable) during the evaluation of the Urban Infill Area and the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area pursuant to Policy LU-1.1.13 which has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments. Section 163.3180(8), F.S. provides a transportation concurrency "vesting" to existing development undergoing redevelopment equal to 110 % of the transportation impacts calculated based upon the existing use. Only the increment of new development impacts for redevelopment sites (above the 110%) shall be assessed for transportation concurrency. The adoption of a long term transportation concurrency management system pursuant to Section 163.3180(9), F.S. is not mandatory. At the present time, long term transportation planning is orchestrated through the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) which establishes the long term cost -feasible transportation priorities for the county for the years 2005 through 2030. The LRTP is updated every five years to re-evaluate transportation trends and the need for additional or modified transportation improvements. The comments are noted. In compliance with Section 163.3180(1)(b), vehicular, transit, bicycle and pedestrian levels of service were evaluated by the City of Miami during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004). Vehicular capacity measurements were performed by the City of Miami using the roadway capacities as provided by FDOT in the latest edition of the 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Vehicular capacities and vehicular levels of service were based upon Table 4-4 - FDOT Generalized Peak Hour Two -Way Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Area. Pedestrian and bicycle levels of service were also based upon the criteria provided by FDOT in the 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook, in conjunction with data and level of service measurements provided by the Miami -Dade County MPO. Transit capacities and transit demand applicable to corridors with transit service were calculated using service headway and ridership data from Miami -Dade Transit. Factors used to calculate persons per vehicle were based upon the Southeast Florida Regional Travel Characteristics Study. As previously stated above, vehicular, transit, bicycle and pedestrian levels of service were evaluated by the City of Miami during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004). Vehicular capacity and level of service measurements were based upon Table 4-4 - FDOT Generalized Peak Hour Two -Way Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Area. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 27 Public Comment Consultant / City Response with all new ideas, it lacks refinement and much more research, testing, analysis, and evaluation need to be done with it." Miami is believed to be the only jurisdiction in Florida, and possibly the whole United States, which uses this methodology. The DCA recommends and the MPO/County are using DOT capacity measurement standards and "Mode Split" (TCPBG p 85 and p. 108) modeling. The City should use the same LOS standard and performance measurement as the County. Mode Split methodology should assist with better planning for the various modes of transportation available in each sector. 196 B. We wish to verify whether the County and the MPO have received from the City all small scale MCNP Amendments and information on all redevelopment growth, in order to properly calculate the both vested and cumulative pending trips when assessing necessary growth in capacities. 197 C. Why is there not provision for at least some Proportionate Fair Share Mitigation or Impact Fee funding to support the increases in density in the City? Incentive to increase density in activity centers has considerable merit, but not to the total exclusion of the impact of the growth on scarce infrastructure resources. Pedestrian and bicycle levels of service were also based upon the criteria provided by FDOT in the 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Transit capacities and transit demand applicable to corridors with transit service were calculated using service headway and ridership data from Miami -Dade Transit. Factors used to calculate persons per vehicle were based upon updated standards from the Southeast Florida Regional Travel Characteristics Study. The City of Miami's level of service (LOS) standards are consistent with Miami - Dade County. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.1 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami - Dade County pursuant to page 11-8 and page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is E (at 100% of capacity) unless other provisions apply pursuant to TR-1.1.2.2, TR-1.1.2.3 and TR-1.1.3. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.2 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-9 and page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 120% of capacity for those roadways located within % mile of a transit route which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.3 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-9 and page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 150% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within % mile of 1 extraordinary transit service such as commuter rail or express bus. This comment is noted. All development located within the City of Miami is subject to the payment of transportation impact fees to Miami -Dade County. Development located within the Downtown Miami DRI and the SEOPW DRI are also subject to the payment of Transportation Mitigation Fees as outlined in Article 13 of the City Code and as mandated by each of the two DRI approvals. All other developments located within the City of Miami are subject to the payments of impact fees pursuant to Section 13-6 of the City Code. The intent of Section 13 of the City Code is to impose impact fees, payable at the time of building permit issuance, THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE Page 28 ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Comment Consultant / City Response in order to fund capital improvements, capital facility capacity and capital equipment needed to address demand for public facilities attributable to new development. This article is not intended to authorize imposition of fees related to capital facility or equipment needs attributable to existing development. This article is intended to allow new development in compliance with the comprehensive plan and to provide a mechanism for new development to help address the burdens created by new development. February 16, 2008 Comments from Hadley Williams 198 Policy LU-1.1.3: Please provide references to the sections of the current ordinances which provide specifically for protection from: encroachment, adverse impacts. The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance controls and protects neighborhoods from encroachment and adverse impact through its zoning districts. Article 4 (Zoning Districts) of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance establishes an R-1 (Single -Family Residential) district that intends to protect neighborhoods by limiting density to one unit per typical lot size. This category allows a maximum density of approximately nine units per net acre. Article 8 (NCD Neighborhood Conservation Districts), Section 800.1 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance states that the purpose of the NCD is to "Protect neighborhoods or districts that have significant architectural and historic merit and a distinct character but that do not qualify for historic district status or have lost some of their integrity through incompatible additions and new development." The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance is available online at www.municode.com. 199 Policy LU-1.1.4: Please provide the" code enforcement strategies and initiatives" referred to. 200 201 Policy LU-1.1.9: Figure 111.1 of Volume 11- Data and Analysis of the MCNP) Article 21 (Administration, Enforcement, Violations, and Penalties), Section 2108 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance addresses code enforcement strateg ies. Penalties of code violations are outlined in the succeeding section, Section 2109 (Penalties). Policy LU-1.1.10: Station Area Design and Development Plan for each station A hard copy of the Data and Analysis of the MCNP may be obtained from the City of Miami Planning Department. The Miami -Dade County Code of Ordinances outlines the Station Area Design and Development Plan process in Section 33C-2(d). Such plans are authorized by Miami -Dade County Resolution No. R-829-77. Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Miami -Dade County Code of Ordinances and Resolution No. R-867-76, the County has enacted six THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 29 Public Comment Consultant / City Response 202 ordinances accepting Station Area Design and Development studies: No. 80- 129 (Earlington Heights), No. 81-29 (Martin Luther King, Jr.), No. 81-30 (Dadeland North), No. 81-31 (Brownsville), No. 81-32 (Northside), and No. 82- 12 (Dadeland South). Policy LU-1.1.11: What, specifically, are the "centers of activity"? Maps. Please define "livability" and the specific "goals of enhancing the livability" with references THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Generally, centers of activity are located at the intersection of section and half - section line corridors where lands are currently designated for commercial and/or multi -family use as shown on the City of Miami Future Land Use Map January 2008. Centers of activity also exist along major thoroughfares such as Biscayne Boulevard and US 1 where these corridors intersect section and half - section line corridors on lands currently designated for commercial and/or multi -family use as shown on the City of Miami Future Land Use Map January 2008. "...enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods" means ensuring that neighborhoods are attractive places to live, play, visit, raise a family, retire, and enjoy diversity. MCNP Goals, Objectives, and Policies designed to enhance livability are as follows: Page 30 Public Comment Consultant / City Response Future Land Use Element Goal LU-1 Objective LU-1.1 Policy LU-1.1.3 Policy LU-1.1.7 Objective LU-1.2 Objective LU-1.3 Policy LU-1.3.10 Policy LU-1.3.15 Policy LU-1.4.3 Objective LU-1.5 Policy LU-1.6.10 Policy LU-3.1.2 Various points under the "Regional Activity Centers" heading Various points under the "Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center" heading Various points under the "Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map" heading Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Element Objective PA-2.1 Policy PA-3.1.1 Coastal Management Element Goal CM-1 Policy CM-2.1.7 Goal CM-5 Capital Improvements Element Goal CI-1 Housing Element Policy HO-1.1.3 Policy HO-1.2.6 Policy HO-1.2.7 Goal HO-2 Objective HO-2.1 Transportation Element Goal TR-1 Policy TR-1.1.4 Policy TR-1.1.5 Policy TR-1.1.9 Policy TR-1.1.12 Policy TR-1.1.18 Policy TR-1.2.2 Objective TR-1.4 Policy TR-1.4.1 Policy TR-1.4.4 Page 31 Policy TR-1.4.5 Policy TR-1.5.8 Policy TR-1.5.9 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element Objective PR-1.1 Policy PR-1.1.2 Objective PR-1.4 Policy PR.1.4.1 Policy PR-1.4.2 Policy PR-1.4.3 Policy PR-1.4.4 Policy PR-1.4.5 Goal PR-2 Goal PR-3 Objective PR-3.1 Policy PR-3.1.1 Policy PR-3.1.2 Policy PR-3.1.3 Objective PR-3.2 Policy PR-3.2.1 Policy PR-3.2.2 Policy PR-3.2.5 Policy PR-3.2.6 Policy PR-3.2.8 Policy PR-5.1.6 Policy PR-5.1.7 Goal PR-6 Objective PR-6.1 Policy PR-6.1.2 Policy PR-6.1.3 Objective PR-6.2 Policy PR-6.2.1 Policy PR-6.2.2 Policy PR-6.2.3 Goal PR-7 Objective PR-7.1 Policy PR-7.1.1 Goal PR-8 Objective PR-8.1 Policy PR-8.1.1 Policy PR-8.1.2 Goal PR-9 Objective PR-9.2 Policy PR-9.2.1 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 203 Public Comment Objective LU-1.2: Please identify for us those areas in the City which are "blighted, declining or threatened residential, commercial and industrial areas". We have noted the map of Brownfield areas covering a large portion of the City and do not understand how many neighborhoods designated are Brownfield area included. Please explain. Consultant / City Response Those areas in the City which are "blighted, declining or threatened residential, commercial and industrial areas" are the areas which fit the definitions found in Policy LU-1.2.3, as follows: Policy LU-1.2.1: The City defines blighted neighborhoods as areas characterized by the prevalence of older structures with major deficiencies and deterioration, high residential vacancies, widespread abandonment of property, litter and poor maintenance of real property. Declining neighborhoods are defined as areas characterized by the prevalence of structures having minor deficiencies, a general need for improvements in real property, significant declines in real property values, high vacancy rates in commercial structures and increasing difficulty in obtaining insurance. Neighborhoods threatened with decline are defined as areas characterized by significant but infrequent property maintenance neglect, an aging housing stock, declining property values, general exodus of traditional residents and influx of lower income households. The location of these areas changes over time as the conditions in the neighborhoods change. The neighborhoods within the existing Community Redevelopment Areas have been identified as areas in the City which are "blighted, declining or threatened residential, commercial and industrial areas". 204 Policy LU-1.2.3: Please identify exactly where in the MCNP "the adopted Consolidated Plan, Fiscal Years 2004-2009, adopted redevelopment plans, specific neighborhood and area plans" are incorporated by reference in the MCNP. Please provide a list of all "adopted redevelopment plans" and "specific neighborhood and area plans". 205 Policy LU-1.3.1: Please provide maps and references to each: "designated Neighborhood Development Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Brownfield Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted areas". THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The City of Miami Consolidated Plan for FY 2004-2009 (http://www.miamigov.com/communitydevelopment/ConPlan) designated areas in the City that are most distressed and in need of the most assistance as "Neighborhood Development Zones" (NDZs). The NDZs are as follows: • Allapattah • Coconut Grove • Edison/Little River/Little Haiti • East Little Havana • West Little Havana • Model City • Overtown • Wynwood Smaller, more specific geographic areas (called "Model Blocks") are detailed in the Consolidated Plan. A map of the Neighborhood Development Zones can be found under the "Maps" section of the City of Miami Consolidated Plan at: http://www.miamigov.com/communitvdevelopment/ConPlan/index.htm A map of the Enterprise Zone can be located on the City of Miami website at: Page 32 206 Public Comment Policy LU-1.3.4: Please provide a list of "job training/job placement programs offered to youths (full time and summer terms) and low-income persons". 207 Policy LU-1.3.5: A.) Please define and identify specifically existing and planned "high intensity activity centers". B.) "Such activity centers will be in accordance with the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives" In accordance with what Policy of the MCNP? Why aren't the neighborhood design and development standards set as Policies in the MCNP? 208 Policy LU-1.3.8: What are the specific objectives of training for "support minority and semi -skilled residents"? 209 210 Policy LU-1.3.9: What "small geographic areas that have special opportunities and/or potential for Redevelopment"? Please identify, including on a map. a Policy LU-1.3.10: What "neighborhood improvement and code enforcement strategies and initiatives"? Please provide details including measurable standards in use. 211 Policy LU-1.3.14: Please identify all "urban design guidelines". THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Consultant / City Response http://www.miamigov.com/economicdevelopment/pages/Businesslncentives/En terpriseZone.asp The Brownfield Redevelopment Area map can be found on the City of Miami website at: http://www. miamigov.com/economicdevelopment/pages/Brownfields/Brownfield sMap.asp A map of the Empowerment Zone can be found on the Miami -Dade County GIS Portal website at: http://gisims2.miamidade.gov/CServices/CSMap.asp?Cmd=DUMMY&ShowWh at=702 ACCESS (Assets, Capital, Community, Education, Savings, and Success) Miami (http://www.accessmiamilobs.com/) offers "One Stop Centers" which assists residents with job placement and job guidance (among other services) specifically for low-income persons. Residents may visit these centers in person (which have free computer access) or may dial 311 for guidance. The ACCESS Miami website also provides a searchable database of local job opportunities. This item is being researched with City Staff. The specific objective is to provide job training and educational opportunities for the City's unemployed and underemployed residents so that may be employed in jobs leading to their economic independence. This item is being researched with City Staff. This item is being researched with City Staff. The City of Miami has an Urban Development Review Board (http://www.miamigov.com/planning/pages/Boards/Boards.asp) whose objective is to "evaluate projects and recommend actions to be taken by the Director of Planning based on principles of urban design." The Urban Page 33 212 Public Comment Policy LU•1.4.2: Please identify, including maps, all existing and planned "management districts" Consultant / City Response Development Review Board typically meets the third Wednesday of every month at Miami City Hall. Architecture and Urban Design Guidelines can be found in Article 6, Section 628.9 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the City of Miami Design Standards and Guidelines can be obtained from Edelberto Perez at (305)416.1413. The Miami Downtown Development Authority (DDA) is an existing "management district". The DDA programs and boundaries can be reviewed on their website www.miaimidda.com. 213 214 Policy LU•1.4.7: Please provide the "design and development objectives for downtown". We would also appreciate knowing, if not clear in the objectives themselves, how these objectives are measured for enforcement. Policy LU-1.4.11: What specifically are the objectives to accomplish with the policy to "streamline the development application for development approvals to simplify and standardize"? Design and development objectives for downtown can be found in the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance which is the implementing document. See Article 6 SD Special District General Provisions and other Articles in the Zoning Ordinance. These "objectives" are "measured" by staff ensuring that the project design and development conform to these requirements. Development applications are reviewed by many individuals and departments within the City. Projects with different uses vary in the type of information needed to complete the application. In addition, each department requires different forms of information to complete its review of the application. One of the objectives of this policy is to provide the applicant a clear set of rules and requirements to properly complete the application and ensure that all departments have the data and analysis needed to complete their review. 215 216 217 Policy LU•1.5.2: Can you please provide .pdf files or links to .pdf files of referenced "Miami -Dade County's Waterfront Charter Amendment, Shoreline Development Review Ordinance, and the rules of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Management Area, and other appropriate requirements regarding waterfront access and management". The Shoreline Development Review Ordinance can be found in Article 3, Section 33D-31 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance. Rules of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Management Area can be found online at: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/coastal/downloads/18-18.pdf Goal LU•2: Can you please provide a definition of "adaptive reuse"? Goal 3: (Goal LU 3?): What is the purpose of including "Urban Redevelopment Areas"? Is this a mis-quote of the term "Urban Infill and Redevelopment Areas"? Adaptive reuse is generally defined as a process that adapts old buildings for new uses while retaining their historic features. The phrases "Urban Infill and Urban Redevelopment Areas" and "Urban Infill and Redevelopment Areas" are meant to be interchangeable. 218 219 Policy LU.3.1.2: Are any additional "Regional Activity Centers" planned? If so, please identify specifically. Policy 3.1.3: Please explain this Policy. No additional Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, Regional Activity Centers are currently under review. The Downtown Miami Master Plan is a defined boundary that is co -terminus with the dark areas shown on the Urban Central Business District Map on page 12 of the Draft MCNP dated February 28, 2008. Portions of the area within the THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 34 Public Comment 220 Policy TR•1.1.1: Please provide the "Appendix TR-1 of the MCNP", 221 Policy TR.1.1.2: We would appreciate examples of 1.1.2.1 through 1.1.2.3. Consultant / City Response Downtown Master Plan are included in approved Development of Regional Impacts (DRI). Policy 3.1.3 designates the area of the Downtown Miami Master Plan as an Urban Central Business District to increase the threshold for projects required to through the DRI process which are not within an existing DRI. A description of increased DRI thresholds for the Urban Central Business District can be found on page 13 of the Draft MCNP dated February 28, 2008. The first EAR recommendation (TR-1) suggested that the adopted Person -Trip Methodology be included in a designated Appendix to the Transportation Element. In response to the EAR recommendation, new Appendix TR-1 was suggested. A recent review of the 1990 published version of the Person -Trip Methodology revealed that it was excerpted from the Transportation Element from the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-1990, and therefore it was already a part of the plan. Additional research found that the City of Miami originated the person -trip methodology for the measurement of local level of service on a transportation facility, which could consist of a roadway, transit service, pedestrian corridor, bikeway, or any other transportation mode alone or in combination with others. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the capacity of all transportation modes would be used in the measurement of future, peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into the Transportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was separately published as a report entitled "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami", September 1990. A separate Appendix to the Transportation Element is no longer being pursued since the Person -Trip Methodology is already part of the MCNP and is already utilized by the City as a separately published report. A pdf copy of the 1990 version of the Person - Trip Methodology is attached herein titled Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami. Example of 1.1.2.1: Where no public transit service exists along a roadway undergoing level of service evaluation and review, only the capacity of the roadway will be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where no transit service exists for the roadway, the adopted level of service is E, which equates to a numerical value equal to 100% of the roadway capacity. Pursuant to the City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity", the level of service of the roadway can be expressed in a volume to capacity ratio based upon the vehicular volume of the roadway segment compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment, or the person -trip volume of the roadwa segment compared to the •erson-tri THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 35 Public Comment THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Consultant / City Response capacity of the roadway segment. Pursuant to the 1990 version of "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami', vehicle trips are converted to person -trips using a vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.4 persons per vehicle, and vehicle capacity is converted to person -trip capacity using the vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.6 persons per vehicle. Example of 1.1.2.2: Where bus transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minute headways or better, and transit service is available parallel to and within %/2 mile of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where transit exists with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation facility shall be 120 percent of capacity (or 120% of level of service E). The evaluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person - trip capacity of the transit service. Current data would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak hour period. Current transit ridership information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit route and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The volume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard at 120% of level of service E. Example of 1.1.2.3: Where express bus and/or premium transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minute headways or better, and express bus and/or premium transit service is available parallel to and within '/2 mile of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where express bus and/or premium transit exists with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation facility shall be 150 percent of capacity (or 150% of level of service E). The evaluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the express bus and/or premium transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip capacity of the express bus and/or premium transit service. Current data would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak hour period. Current transit ridership Page 36 Public Comment THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Consultant / City Response information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit route or transit mode and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The volume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard at 150% of level of service E. Example of 1.1.2.1: Where no public transit service exists along a roadway undergoing level of service evaluation and review, only the capacity of the roadway will be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where no transit service exists for the roadway, the adopted level of service is E, which equates to a numerical value equal to 100% of the roadway capacity. Pursuant to the City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity", the level of service of the roadway can be expressed in a volume to capacity ratio based upon the vehicular volume of the roadway segment compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment, or the person -trip volume of the roadway segment compared to the person -trip capacity of the roadway segment. Pursuant to the 1990 version of "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami', vehicle trips are converted to person -trips using a vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.4 persons per vehicle, and vehicle capacity is converted to person -trip capacity using the vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.6 persons per vehicle. Example of 1.1.2.2: Where bus transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minute headways or better, and transit service is available parallel to and within % mile of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where transit exists with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation facility shall be 120 percent of capacity (or 120% of level of service E). The evaluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person - trip capacity of the transit service. Current data would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak hour period. Current transit ridership information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit route and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The volume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard at 120% of level of Page 37 Ilb Public Comment 222 service E. Consultant / City Response Example of 1.1.2.3: Where express bus and/or premium transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minute headways or better, and express bus and/or premium transit service is available parallel to and within % mile of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where express bus and/or premium transit exists with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation facility shall be 150 percent of capacity (or 150% of level of service E). The evaluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the express bus and/or premium transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip capacity of the express bus and/or premium transit service. Current data would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak hour period. Current transit ridership information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit route or transit mode and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The volume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard at 150% of level of service E. Policy TR.1.1.4: A.) What happened to the Miami Intermodal Transportation (MIT) plan? B.) Please provide a list of all "specific neighborhood transportation plans" and five specific plans, C.) Please provide the "detailed standards for transportation facilities and services that will complement neighborhood development, redevelopment, and conservation". D.) Please provide the Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan. Examples of specific neighborhood Plans are listed below. • • • . . . • • . • 1• Coconut Grove Area Traffic Study Health District (Civic Center) Implementation Plan Health District Comprehensive Traffic Study Orange Bowl Traffic and Parking Assessments Flagler Street Marketplace/Flagler Street two-way conversion Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan Watson Island Traffic Master Plan Miami River Multimodal Corridor Study (prepared for the Miami - Dade MPO and the Miami River Commission with the City of Miami) Miami River Greenway Plan Miami Design District -Little Haiti District Planning Study/Master Plan Miami Design District Design Guidelines NE 36th Street Traffic Study prepared for the Miami -Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization with involvement from the City of Miami FEC Corridor Master Plan (includes the Buena Vista Yard, now Midtown THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 38 Public Comment 223 Policy TR-1.1.5: Is the Transportation Control Measures ordinance and the MCNP going to be amended to that the Transportation Control Measures ordinance is applicable outside of downtown? 224 Policy TR-1.1.6: Please provide "the People's Transportation Plan" and the County's "Transit Oriented Development Policies" or links to them. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Consultant / City Response Miami) • 1-395 Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study (more analysis underway) • NW/NE 79th Street Livability Study (completed) and PD&E Study (not completed) • Flagler Street PD&E Study • DuPont Plaza Traffic Circulation PD&E Study (more analysis underway) • Brickell Avenue PD&E Study (completed) • Overtown (Dover Kohl) Master Plan Standards for design and construction of transportation facilities vary in accordance with the functional classification of the facility as well as with ownership. For its municipal streets, the City of Miami uses the "Engineering Standards for Design and Construction" handbook dated December 2005 and published by the Department of Public Works. The Florida Department of Transportation's Roadway Design Office develops and provides policies, procedures, criteria and standards for the design and construction of roadways and bridges under state jurisdiction. Similarly, Miami -Dade County Public Works Department has developed guidelines and standards for design and construction of facilities under County jurisdiction. The above publications can be made available to the public by contacting the respective agency. A link to the Downtown Miami Transportation Master Plan was found on the MPO's website. See below. A pdf copy of the 19 meg file can also be obtained from City Staff. http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/m10-downloads-docs.htm#dtmp A Transportation Control Measures Plan is regularly included in the development impact traffic studies provided as part of the Major Use Special Permit Application Process and as part of some Class II Applications located outside of downtown. The Citizens' Independent Transportation Trust (CITT) is the 15-member body created to oversee the People's Transportation Plan funded with the half - percent sales surtax. See the Zink to the Miami -Dade CITT website: http://www.miamidade.gov/citt/ The Miami -Dade County MPO documents and studies which promote the County's Transit Oriented Development Policies are provided in the attached lin ks: Page 39 Public Comment 225 Policy TR•1.1.7: Please provide "Appendix TR-2 of the MCNP". 226 227 Policy TR-1.1.10: What happened to "depict existing and planned future major parking facilities on appropriate maps"? A Separate TR Objective concerning Parking must be added with Policies. Consultant / City Response http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/docs/MPO newsletter 2007 tod.pdf http://www.miamidade.pov/mpo/mdcfictodd/index.htm There will not be an Appendix TR-2 in the MCNP. The City will instead maintain a current annual listing of the MPO Transportation Improvement Projects located and funded within the City limits, the Long Range Transportation Plan projects located within the City limits and the transit routes, stations and service improvements located within the City limits. This list is currently being updated to reflect TIP 2008, the 2030 LRTP and the 2007 Transit Development Program. The City currently maintains the location of existing major parking facilities (citywide) on their GIS system. In addition, Map TR-3 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict significant parking facilities. Policy TR.1.1.104: What streets have been or are planned to The Downtown Transportation Master Plan identifies a program of phased "relocate"? improvements for Downtown, some of which include proposed changes to local streets. 228 Policy TR-1.1.15: Please provide a reference link to "the powers of the City's Off -Street Parking Authority Department" See Section 23 — Department of Off -Street Parking - found in Subpart A of the City Charter addressing the City of Miami Off -Street Parking Department and Off -Street Parking Board. 229 Policy TR-1.1.16: Please provide a link to Downtown Miami Transportation Management Initiative (TMI). Also, please provide current "TMD strategies for City employees". 230 Policy TR-1.4.5: Please provide "Characteristics and standards for such streets" and "Characteristics and standards for such streets". Please also provide a list of streets being considered for designation of "urban street". 231 Policy TR-1.5.6: Please provide a map and list of "existing and planned transit corridors" and "nodes around rapid transit stations" 232 Policy TR.1.5.8: Please provide identification of all "large employment centers", including on a map. A link is provided to South Florida Commuter Services, the clearinghouse agency in South Florida which specializes in transportation demand management strategies, programs and implementation. The TDM strategiesfor City employees is being researched with City staff. http://www.1800234ride.com/ The list of designated Urban Streets is provided in Policy TR-1.4.5. Map TR-5 and Map TR-11 were prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict the corridors with existing Metrobus Transit Routes and the location of Passenger/Freight rail facilities. "Large employment centers" is a general term used under TR-1.5.10 to refer to areas in the City of Miami which are currently zoned for CBD, office, commercial and industrial uses where greater concentrations of employment can be expected to occur. In addition, Map TR-4 was prepared by the City THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE Page 40 ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Comment Consultant / City Response during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict the location of Major Trip Generators and Attractors inclusive of parks, arenas, stadiums, museums, ports, airports, hospitals and downtown employment. 233 Policy TR.1.5.10: Please provide examples of "transit ridership data". 234 Policy TR.1.5.1 : Please provide a link to the current "Five Year Transit Development Program (TOP)" 235 Policy TR.1.6.1: Please provide links to the "Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) Five -Year Transportation Improvement Program Plans and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan Update" 236 Policy TR-1.8.1: What is the definition of "major thoroughfares"? Please provide a link to the City Public Works Manual. MDT currently publishes daily and monthly Transit Ridership Reports — see attached link to the November 2007 Ridership Technical Report. The policy is being amended to request peak hour transit ridership data from Miami -Dade Transit. http://www.miamidade.gov/transit/library/pdfs/rtr/2007- 11 Ridership Technical Report.pdf The Year 2007 MDT Transit Development Program (FY 2008 — FY 2012) is not available online, nor is it available as a pdf (we have checked with Miami -Dade Transit staff). Hard copies of the 2007 TDP can be obtained from: Miami -Dade Transit located at 701 NW 1st Court, 15th Floor, Miami, FL 33136 Maria C. Batista, Principal Planner, Miami -Dade Transit - 786-469-5245 office John Garcia, Principal Planner, Miami -Dade Transit — 786-469-5252 office The MPO TIP 2008 is a 12.3 meg file which is available for download from the Miami -Dade County MPO Website — see attached links: http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/m10-plans-tip.htm http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/docs/MPO tip 2008 final.pdf The MPO Long Range Transportation Plan to the Year 2030 is a 30 meg file which is available for download from the Miami -Dade County MPO Website — see attached links: http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/docs/MPO Irtp 2030 final 20050107.pdf http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/m10-plans-Irtp.htm "Major thoroughfares" is a general term used under TR-1.8.1 which refers to section -line, half -section line or quarter section -line roadways which may be classified as either arterial or collector roadways in accordance with the FDOT functional classification system. The Public Works Manual refers to the document titled "Engineering Standards for Design and Construction", published by the Department of Public Works and dated December 2005, covering the minimum requirements for the design and construction of subdivision improvements. This document can be reviewed by contacting the THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE Page 41 ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. 237 Public Comment Consultant / City Response Public Works Department. March 19, 2008 Comments from Becky Roper Matkov, Executive Director for Dade Heritage Trust If the time pressures to advance the EAR -based amendments Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and to the State do not allow the formulation and adoption of an to the City. appropriate Historic and Cultural Element, then please consider adding to those amendments a time -certain date by which this will be accomplished. We suggest April 2009 as a deadline by which this important task be accomplished and pledge our assistance and participation in the process. March 19, 2008 Comments Read on Behalf of Barbara Bisno Policies submitted 238 239 240 Goal LU-1 ... and (7) protects the integrity and quality of the City's existing neighborhoods by insuring public notice, input and appellant rights regarding changes in existing zoning regulations. Objective LU-1.5 Land development regulations will protect the city's unique natural and coastal resources, its neighborhoods, and its historic and cultural heritage. Policy LU-1.5.3 Notice of applications to change current zoning regulations generally and on a parcel(s) of land as well as decisions and recommendations on said applications of the zoning or planning administrators and planning/zoning boards and committees mailed by the property owner seeking the change to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and to registered neighborhood/homeowner associations within the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) districts will serve to protect neighborhoods. Failure to give such notice shall negate any changes to the zoning regulations. Notice requirements are appropriately a part of the city code of ordinance, not the MCNP, and are regulated in part by state law. The language proposed in the comment goes beyond what is required by either state law or the existing city code. Therefore, the consultants recommend that this comment not be included. This comment is identical to Objective LU-1.5 in the MCNP. It is unclear what the concern/comment may be. I Notice requirements are appropriately a part of the city code of ordinance, not the MCNP, and are regulated in part by state law. The language proposed in the comment goes beyond what is required by either state law or the existing city code. Therefore, the consultants recommend that this comment not be included. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Page 42 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan EAR -Based Amendments Presented by: The City of Miami Planning Department Presentation Overview .111.J 1��i a al 1 ff C'elllpreh ell Jl \le Erin eat PAT D D E Ei-\FEied r\rn'endrnen , i-\r r 'cull lerl�i�Iric ns!P! Jbiic THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Introduction Comprehensive Planning What do you envision for your City's future? Economic Prosperity Compatible Land -Use Adapt to Change Strong Communities Sufficient Publi r) BenefiEJ THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Introduction Comprehensive Planning..... Comprehensive planning assembles Goals, Objectives and Policies to address the constant change and evolution of a community. Comprehensive plans are prepared to address compatibility issues between various: uses of land management and preservation of natural resources identification and preservation of historically significant areas adequate planning for infrastructure needs. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Introduction Common MJJJE.JPRETATIONS of the Comprehensive Plan • Is the Plan is made up of Land Development Regulations, Building Code, Code Enforcement, etc? • Can the plan only change/updated once every 7-years? • Is the MCNP is a sub -plan to other municipal documents? • Does the MCNP incorporate detailed housing development needs and guide federal grant programs? THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Introduction Outside comprehensive plan issues may be addressed in: Land Development Regulations - Zoning Ordinance - Proposed Miami 21 Design Standards, Development and Preservation Strategies - Master Plans (Parks and Public Space, Coconut Grove Waterfront, Virginia Key, etc.) Detailed Housing Plans and Implementation Programs - Consolidated Plan (Department of Community Development, HUD & State funding) Building Code - Official Florida State Code and National Building Standards Historic Preservation Regulations - Miami City Code Chapter 23 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Introduction Outside issues continued Budgeting Appropriations - Capital Improvements Program (funding appropriated by City Commission) Code Enforcement - Miami Code of Ordinances Transportation Improvements - MPO Transportation Improvement Program (includes funded five year projects for FDOT, Turnpike, County, MDT, MDX, Tri-Rail and Municipalities) - MPO Long Range Transportation Plan to the Year 2030 (includes planned transportation projects prioritized by need for FDOT, Turnpike, County, MDT, MDX, Tri-Rail and Municipalities) THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Introduction 11[1111, :11.114 ;i'4 Comprehensive Plan Organization Diagram: Planning Documents within the City of Miami EAR -Based Amendments DCA Chapter 163 Growth Management Act City Framework: Goals, Objectives, EAR and Policies Building Code Design Standards Detailed Housing Land Development Program Implementation Regulations of Budgeting Appropriation Framework Historic Preservation Transportation Improvements Code Enforcement THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Plan Presentation Overview • i n ro l! 1 r'r]Jll f rr rlement; J AF. rJ*-loJrt-2JJJ • Ei-\F jed r rnend rn en r • Ei-\F r �'Jrrlrrl r1�J�1r1Jr1J/�! JJ�r' THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Miami's Comprehensive Plan Background Required by state law that guides the City's existing and future development. By Florida Statute 163, each city and county in Florida must adopt a comprehensive plan. Adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989 and contains amendments by the City Commission through March, 2006. • The state of Florida allows the plan to be amended twice .: gar a -year, separate from statutory amendments, emergency situations, and minor land use changes. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Miami's Comprehensive Plan What does the plan do? • Indicates how the City will meet the needs of existing and future: — Residents — Visitors — Businesses • Preserve the character and quality of its communities. How does the plan impact You? • As population grows, density and public services will increase to support existing and future communities. • The plan creates a policy framework that has the effect of law, to guide all public and private development decisions in the City. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Presentation Overview Miami -Dade County Pubiit; ScFirsrfls • i n rrrcl ! 1 J'r] Jll 1��ll�llni Gc)ifipreherriive Khali ]ffln.j r • EAF. P*Ip J r r — 0 0 J • Ei-\F)-13-1 ,wd1 Amendment; • Ei-\F r ��'Jlllrn rj�l�lr1c ri 1P I THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Elements Goals, Objectives and Policies THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Each element contains goals, objectives and policies to address how the city will meet existing and future needs for the residential and business communities. The elements in the MCNP are: Future Land Use Housing Sanitary and Storm Sewers Natural Ground Water Potable Water Solid Waste Collection Transportation Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Parks, Recreation and Open Space Coastal Management Natural Resource Conservation Capital Improvements Intergovernmental Coordination Educational Elements Public School Facilities Element M;9m -Dace. Count'? st;rL:;s ` • In 2005, the State Legislature mandated school concurrency to be implemented through the comprehensive master plan (Chapter 163, F.S.). • School Concurrency assures that adequate public school facilities will be available concurrent with the impact of new development. • Local governments must adopt a Public School Facilities Element and an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) between the County, City and School Board as part of the comprehensive development master plan. • The City of Miami adopted its School Concurrency Element and ILA on January 24, 2008. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Presentation Overview f — WUa 1i f i F 6 V1/4 2005 EVALUAI I OM AiTRAIiAI REPORT M1AMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN • i rl rrrcl ! 1 J'r] Jll 1��1l�lllll' c'irrlpreh rl iv Mar) rlementE; � Re•ort ODFj I • Ei-\F j �� r rfl en rn eTl r i-\r r �'crrlrrl rlcl�lricrl 1P! Jbiin THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Report - 2006 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. What is the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)? • The Report will evaluate how successful the MCNP is in addressing major community land use planning issues • State law requires that every 7-years, each city and county complete a report for their comprehensive plans 2005 EVALUATION,1-.APPRAISAL REPORT "'MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN tig exa••••• Mar a. EAR Report - 2006 4 Major issues identified • The need for, and Impacts of, Equitable Redevelopment and Development • Preservation and Enhancement of Natural, Historic, Archeological and Recreational Resources • Neighborhood Integrity • Transportation Recommendations that address the 4 major issues are: • Gathered through public outreach. • Applied to the MCNP through the EAR -Based Amendment Process. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Presentation Overview w J rl rrrd 1,1 J'r] Jrl 1��Jl�lrrlJ' G irrlpreh rl iv Mar) EL\F F c c rrlrrlerlriatiDri /P Jbiir' THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR -Based Amendments What are the EAR -Based Amendments? • Each city and county must amend its comprehensive plan to address the issues identified in its EAR report. — Review original recommendations and modify the goals, objectives, and polices. • The city must seek more public outreach — Identify that changes will be made based on the recommendations and include additional modifications to the MCNP. • State Mandated Amendments — New State statutory requirements that will impact the MCNP will be included along with the recommended amendments. • State law requires this process to be completed by August 2008 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Presentation Overview rPt 116. rirrY fiF 6�k. C i i Y _' ._ F MLA M I NET! IsletaiMP140,10 E MiANCENENT TEAM i nrj L 1J'r]Jll 1���l�llni c'irnnpreh rl iv KKari rlement; EAF. P*Ip J r r — 0 0 J Ei-\F j w-1 r rn en rn �n rArii THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Outreach Appointed Committee Group • The City began the public participation process by meeting with a small group of community representatives. — Community representatives were identified by our City Commissioners • Each representative was given the opportunity to: — Provide review and comment on proposed outreach programs; — Provide review and comment on proposed draft MCNP amendments; and — Identify effective methods for public outreach in their community. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Outreach .aommittee Meeting Highlights Meeting 1 — November 1, 2007 • Introduction • Indicate tasks by City/consultants • EAR process/background • Committee role identified Meeting 2 — January 8, 2008 • Statute Issues -New State Statute updates -DCA August 2008 Deadline • Response to MNU suggestions to MCNP • Outreach Timeline / NET Meetings Meeting 3 — February 1, 2008 • Specific changes to DRAFT discussion • Current Capital Improvement Plan • City Public Hearing schedule THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Outreach • January 2008 — Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) Meetings January 29, 2008 District 1 (Flagami) January 30, 2008 District 4 (Flagami) January 31, 2008 District 2 (Upper Eastside) • February 2008 — Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) Meetings February 4, 2008 District 3 (Coral Way) February 5, 2008 District 4 (West Flagler) February 6, 2008 District 2 (S/W Coconut Grove) February 7, 2008 District 3 (Little Havana) February 11, 2008 District 5 (Overtown) February 12, 2008 District 5 (Model City) February 13, 2008 District 1 (Allapattah) • March 2008 — Planning Advisory Board (PAB) March 5, 2008 PAB Discussion 1 March 19, 2008 PAB Discussion 2 March 31, 2008 PAB Recommendation • April 2008 — City Commission April 24, 2008 DCA Transmittal Hearing • July 2008 (Tentative) — City Commission July 24, 2008 (Tentative) EAR -Based Amendments Adoption Hearing THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations Amended lements of the MCNP • Future Land Use • Housing • Sanitary and Storm Sewer • Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge • Potable Water • Solid Waste Collection • Transportation • Ports, Aviation, and Related Facilities • Parks, Recreation, and Open Space • Coastal Management • Natural Resource Conservation • Capital Improvements • Intergovernmental Coordination THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations T T J • Create well -designed, mixed -use neighborhoods — Consistent with neighborhood character, function and history — Opportunity for multi -modal transportation — Implemented through land development regulations (Miami 21) • Enhance existing strategies — Prevent unacceptable infrastructure levels of service — Prevent encroachment of incompatible uses — Create appropriate height and mass transitions — Prevent degradation of open space, environment and ecology THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Input Land Use • Need better historic and neighborhood preservation • Need height restrictions next to single-family residential • Single-family neighborhoods should be buffered from other uses • Need density and intensity standards in the land use categories • The entire city should not be in the TCEA/Urban Infill area • Cumulative impacts of multiple projects in the Upper Eastside not addressed during individual project approvals • Create a low-rise office land use category • Does not make sense that the Restricted Commercial land use category can be translated into high density residential • The FEC corridor and sidings should be put to better use • Promote green buildings in the City of Miami it ?imp THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Input Urban InfiII Area THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Policy LU-'I.'I .'I'I : The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as shown on "Attachment A," as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area Tying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Areas designated Single -Family — Residential on the I I I`.IP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from changes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the Tow density residential character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be encouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors. Within this area. Outside of these residential areas, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person -Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. Public Input Reporting and Monitoring • Land Use Policy 1.1.2 • Housing Policy 1.1.10 • Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy 1.3.4 • Capital Improvements Policy 1.2.5 • Transportation Policies 1.1.5, 1.5.12, 1.5.14, 1.5.15, and 1.6.1 • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policies 1.5.1, 3.2.10, 3.2.11, 4.1.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, and 7.1.2 THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations arecreation and Open Space Element Completely reworked based on the Miami Parks and Public Spaces Plan adopted May 2007 by the City Commission THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations • More urban • More natural • More connected THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations JJJJ New access -based and funding -based Level of Service measures: — Park within '/2 mile of every resident with future'/4 mile goal — $100 per capita funding THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations Highlights No net loss of park land Enhancement of existing parks, facilities and programs Park land acquisition according to community priorities Increased public access by pedestrians, bicyclists, disabled persons Increased visual and physical access to waterfront areas • Expansion of greenways and trails THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Shared resources with other agencies, groups Improved efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability Additional funding, including impact fees, developer contributions, public benefits for density bonuses, grants, volunteer contributions, philanthropy Enhanced community participation in park and recreation policy and planning Annual reports on implementation of the parks master plan EAR Recommendations -:,�...: Clarify that the Comprehensive Policies address the needs of the very -low and low-income groups Require that the progress being made toward meeting the goals of the Consolidated Plan be publicly reviewed on a periodic basis Consider an economic element that would among other issues address the issue of economic disparity that underlies the need for affordable housing THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. EAR Recommendations' ransportation E emen • Protection of Single -Family Residential in the TCEA/Urban Infill Area • Further clarification of the Adopted LOS Standards • Enforcement of the Transportation Control Measures Ordinance .10 • Coordination with MDT on the expansion of the transit system to serve neighborhoods with increasing population • Coordination with MDT to improve connections between transit modes • Coordination with FDOT to ensure that transportation improvements minimize the intrusion of commuter traffic on residential streets • Provision of design guidelines for development in existing and planned transit corridors to promote pedestrianism and transit usage through improved connectivity and transit infrastructure • Included water taxi commuter service as a transit mode • Updated TDM strategies to include preferential parking for hybrid vehicles • Included the development of a transit corridor right-of-way map to use when evaluating new projects and their proximity to existing and future planned transit service • • THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Public Input � Transportation Transit should be available to serve all neighborhoods rI • .15 fet_L4. Expanded transit services should extend into neighborhoods with population increases resulting from new residential projects • Expand multi -modal transit to serve the east -west commute • Address the City's high automobile dependency '" • Funding increased county -wide for transit, but never applied 11HI1! • Identify the transit improvements funded using PTP dollars fib • Reemphasize the need for a transit hub in Liberty City to provide parking solutions for NW 7th Avenue • Residents do not want reversible lanes on NW 7th Avenue • Ramp metering at entrances to 1-95 will cause queuing onto NW 7th Avenue • Consider water taxis as a commuter travel mode and promote their use along the Miami River • Improve air quality by encouraging green highways and the use of hybrid vehicles EAR Recommendations Capital Improvements Element • Specifies that development orders authorizing new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the density or intensity of land use shall be contingent upon the availability of public facilities and services that meet or exceed the minimum LOS standards for sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater, potable water, parks and recreation and transportation facilities • Specifies that land use map changes must maintain the financial feasibility of the MCNP THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. Web site Links • Miami Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan: htto://www.miamioarksolan.com • Miami 21: http://www.miami2l .org • Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) and EAR -Based Amendments DRAFT document: htto://www. miamiaov.com/Plannina THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. The End l J or �ornrr THIS DOCUMENT IS A SUBSTITUTION TO ORIGINAL BACKUP. THE ORIGINAL CAN BE SEEN AT THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT. May 8, 2008 Exhibit "C" lanning Department's Analysis and Recommendations of Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) • The •lumn entitled "PAB & EAR F'roposed GOPs" reflects . s ifications required by the EAR and text added by PA Amendments identifies an X in the "EAR" column are part of the Eva tion and Appraisal Report (EAR) as required by F. 163.3191 and adopted by the Miami City Commiss'. on December 1, 2005; Resolution 05-0707. • Amendments identified by an X in the "PAB" column are those proposed by PAB; not adopted in the EAR. Existing Text in the MCNP New Text Proposed for the MCNP • Arnenuru_nt identified by an X in both the "EAR" and "PAB" column are required by the EAR, but contain modifications by PAB. • The column entitled "City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments" reflects recommendations on the item and identifies those items that are policy decisions that require consideration by the City Commission. Differences Between PAB/EAR and Planning Recommendations GOP # (Page g _ #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: ity ,T 7 Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments -- — E:._ "" LU-1.1.3 (Page 1) The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or natural or man-made amenities; (3) transportation policies that divide or fragment established neighborhoods .:. Jan space, X Added That do not diminish the X amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood" The City's ning ordinance; provides for protection of all areas of the city from: he encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impac f future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade pub ealth and safety, or natural or man- made amenities; (3) tra ortation policies that divide or fragment established neighborh c e^ nd ecology. 5frate�eS to further prated existing ,IooV. Strategies t0 furth�� _ neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition ---- - protect existing neighborhooas tt'Lrough , -'pment of standards and buffering r uirements that do not diminish the appropriate transition standards and butte: ii. =rnents that amount of area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential wit be incorporated into the Cites land deve.,. egutations neighborhood will be incorporated into the City's land development regulations. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 1 of 14 # GOP # (Page #) PAEf &EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 2 LU=1.1.y (Page) The Pl - - • ink Department, with the assistance of various City x The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City department .nd agencies, shall annually monitor steps taken to departments and agencies. shall annually monitor steps taken to fulfill the Goals, • ectives, and Policies (GOPs) of the MCNP and fulfill the Goals. Objectives, and Policies lGOPs) of the MCNP and biennially report the tus of the GOPs to the Planning Advisory biennially report the status of the GOPs to the Planning Advisory ward and City Commissl• Including, but not limited to, improving Board and City Commission. A-Petir bII j r,r nhlt^rtives LU-1.1.11 (Page 3) The City hereby adopts designation o -- City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited is . ids of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification o onservation, 'Attachment A,'as an Urban Infill Area ant to Miami- X The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, -- shown on "Attachment A," as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Within this area, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted nsportation Corridors level of service standards nd the City of p Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying •: erally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City . Miami. - reas des., .. -. ., _ . • pie MCNP Future Land Use Map within the urban Ihlill Area shall bt: ,rotected from changes that permit higher density residential uses 1rid from commercial office and industrial uses within those areas, f, order to preserve the low density residential character of these tireas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be s ncouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of 7mrly ' ! . "- - _-, _ -. ' ,_ "` -p resi-,-,. - - the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person Trip Methodology as set forth in set forth in Policies TR•1.1.2 and 1.1.3 . the l ransportation Element of the MCNP. Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 2 of 14 # GOP # (Page #) PCB iEAR Proposed GOPs R commended ht City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments E ri., 4 LU-1.1.13 (Page 3) The City shall review and evaluate the areas designated Urban in it X Not Recommended The State allowed for the designation of the TCEA in order to prevent urban sprawl throughout the County and promote Urban Infill east of S.R. 826; pursuant to 163.3180 F.S. The TCEA was established by Miami -Dade County C; . rehensive Neighborhood Plan Amendment 94-2 Area (U1A) and/or Transportation Concurrence Exception Area fTCEA} within two years of the adoption of this policy to determine. -int limited to, the following,: the appropriateness of the areas ' -- +re UTA and/or the TCEA; the benefits and/or s resulting from the inclusion (or exclusion) of these areas w !A and/or the TCEA; the strategies to support mobility aliu di .: ides of transportation within those areas included in the U I: ' - TCEA; and the strategies to address urban design and net nectivity to improve mobility within those areas included in the Ul d/or the TCEA. 5 LU-1.3.3 (Page 5) The City shall encourage development • • • redevelopment of X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element - " Exhibit B" _water dependent and water related uses on the Mi-• i River within existing districts designated Industrial on the Future Lan+ se Map. 6 LU-1.3.10 (Page 6) The City by 10% X X Added the last sentence As per Code Enforcement's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City wi in oe 10%each will-tncrease code enforcement efforts e . , yesr and will continue to aggressively address code violations in its neighborhoods through the implementation of ongoing and new neighborhood improvements, and code enforcement strategies and cnforcement effors-oy year artdd will continue to aggressively address code violations in its initiatives; and will adoo11 and enfnr e tA=tae--a.,4r-f4i p-aad -,.. m nr-renf performance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance the physical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial areas in the city , y July 2U0 . ; r:e Ga ff v+,li report on an neighborhoods through the implementation of ongoing and new neighborhood improvements, and code enforcement strategies and irttiatives; and will consider the adoption and enforcement of ., . :in accomplished to fulfill the requirements performance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance the physical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial reas in the city. The City will report wnat has been accomplished i this policy to : fill the requirements of this policy as requested. 7 LU-1.4.10 (Page 8) The City will continue to develop modifications to existing regulations with the intent of providing greater flexibility in the design and implementation of mixed -use developments within the general Downtown area and particularly along the Miami River . ,,.., ,.n it : arm . i standards X X Added 'Downtown' The City w ontinue to develop modifications to existing regulations wit' •e intent of providing greater flexibility in the design and implem- ' -tion of mixed -use developments within the general Downtown area : •d particularly along the Miami River — standards adopted as a resuit r : ndments to the City s :coved as a result of the amendments to the City s land development regulations and other initiatives. land development regulations a:i.; - ' ?fives. Note: This is what is stated in the EAR Rec. emendations. 8 LU-1.5.3 (Page 8) Notice of application for special permits shall be provided to any X Not Recommended This issue is address,.c :.i the Land Develc,:,:.unt Regulations IET registered homeowners associations fifteen days prior to suance of the special permit and after issuance of the decision. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 3 of 14 # IGOP # (P. • e #) P.': & E `:":Proposed GOPs Reoornrr7er eieu Cif of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR LU-1.5:4 (Page 8) oe of applications requiring public hearings shall be provided to x Not Recommended This issue is addressed in the Land Development Regulations ' 17 registered homeowner and neighborhood associations and .; within 500 feet of the subiec property. 10 LU-1.6.9 (Page 9) The City's lane •evelopment regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the 'ally impacts future development X X Added last sentence The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the potentially adverse impacts of lu+t+.rre pot• adverse of on A nq neicri'L ..,rhoods through the development new development on existing neighborhoods evelopment of appropriate nsition standards and buffering through the development of appropriate transition standards and auirements that do not diminis e amount of area encompassir' fferina requirements. '7e adiacentlabuttinrresidential neiq':.rhood and through adequate notice to affected parties. 11 LU-2.2.4 (Page 11) The City will-£onsider?te . .1 for adep-inc shall a : an x The City will consider the need for adopting an ordinance levying civil penalties for failure to report the discovery of an archaeological site during construction. ordinance levying civil penalties for failure to report the • 1 overy of an archaeological site during construction. 12 LU-2.3.2 (Page 11) The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, the City will designate 10 individual sites and two districts by ' •__. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.3.) x X EA fates 2015 The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, the City will increase locally designated historic resources percent by 2010 designate 10 41€144dual sites and4w d: ct by -. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.3.) SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 4 of 14 GOP # PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: EAR City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments 13 LU-4 (Page 13) ?OPOSED ECONOMIC ELEMENT 4: The City will acknowledge the inter -relationship between 'Oh and the reduction of economic disparity within the Cir(. r land use, affordable housirag,the adequacy of infrastructure + dinq the ability of public transit to provide acceptable comm n to and from all areas of the city, education and training, the enviro nt and the Port of the Miami River. Objective LIU-4-1: The City years of the adoption of this goal within, and no later than, two an Economic Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborho• ' Planthat ays out goals. objectives and policies to provide an enviro ent for sustained economic growth within the City. particularly wi aspect to those areas of economic activity characterized by higher- ing jobs. while reducing the economic disparitythat currently exist. City residents. This Element shall be prepared through thecollaboration of the appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders Including, but not limited to. representatives of neighborhood groups, business and environmental groupsorranizations involved in manpower development and training and the Miami River Commission SUBSTITUTED Not Recommended This element is not required by the Department of Community Affairs as part of the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. "An environment for sustained economic growth within the City" is being addressed in the Economic Component of Miami 21. Analysis and xw1:commendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 5 of 14 # • • P # �R� E. PAB & .: Proposed COPz Recommended by: — City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments — -;-, 14 LU-5 (Page 14) _ ED HISTORIC AND CULTURAL ELEMENT X Not Recommended This element is not required by the Department of Community Affairs as part of the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Historical Resources and the need to create a sense of place are being addressed through Miami21 and other City initiatives. Goal . -5: The City will acknowledge that: a) Historical resources offer an rrn.. ant toot for education, help to provide a distinctive "sense of place . various neighborhoods in the City. and are a significant resource in umotinq tourism; and b) Cultural resources are important reminders an+ 1¢mnants of the history of the area. These resources offer physical e p ence of the prehistoric and historic occupation of the land. Objective LU-5.1: The City shall within and no ; er than, two years of the adoption ofthis goal add a Historic and ► aural Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Pia rat lays not noels, objectives and policies for those areas with significant historical, archaeological and cultural identities. The preparation of this Element will consider establishing notification procedures for land use changes that may impact historic resources The Element shall include a list of definitions of terms used including, but not limited to, neighborhoods, adaptive reuse, mixed use, redevelopment and revitalization; with clarity of meaning in the associated context. This Element should be prepared through the collaboration of appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders including, but not limited to representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups and citizens. Protection of historical and archaeological resources is mandated by Federal law and by the State of Florida through the Division of Historical Resources. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 6 of 14 GOP # (P. - a PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended key:_ City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 15 LU-6 (Page 14) PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLANS X Not Recommended Through Miami21, the issues and concerns for the need for Master Plans will be addressed. Goa -5, The City will acknowledge a) the importance of neighbor . ►d planning and implementation as a tool for maintaining and enhancin• e unique character of neighborhoods: and bi the significance of fos Y :nq a collaborative relationship between the community and City. Obiective LU-6.1: The City s' : no later than 2012. create Neighborhood Master Plans for th- ity's neighborhoods. Policy LU-6.1.1: Within two years of the a• : don of this policy, the City shall prepare reaps delineating geographic boundaries at each neighborhood, whi ' ill serve as a tool for creating Neighborhood Master Plan:: Policy LU-6.1.2. The appropriate City department(s) shall. Ihrough the collaboration of stakeholders, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups, and community members, create Neighborhood Master Plans detailing each neighborhood's unique needs, values, and visions. 16 HO-1 HO-1.1 i-1 2 HO-1.2.1 HO-1.2.2 HO-1.2.3 HO-1.2.4 HO-1.2.8 HO-2.1 (Pages 33- 38) tas those terms are defined by HUD, 1 X . •er Community Development's suggestions, Planning reco •4 ends changing the phrase in each of the nine listed GOPs to: tin accomance wir ant standards and regulations of HUD and the State of F1or.ryvZ SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the l'1,: P — Page 7 of 14 GOP # (age #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments -�---� EAR 17 H(}-1.1,5 (Page 33) The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended • preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the neighborhoods and to :.,u;es such ie:4riDuia`iuods iruir� X Added "that do not diminish the amount of area X encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood" The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the City's neighborhoods aria to curter suer 1 : , . i ,;u„ du , oh the implementation and enforcement of neighborhoods from incompatibsE uses through the transition an' 'ufferingstandards that do not diminish the amount of implementation and enforcement of transition and buffering area encompass , the adiacent/abuttinq residential neighborhood. standards. 18 HO-1.1.7 (Page 34) The City will continue to con through restrictions in the City's land development regulations, large s : - and/or intensive commercial and industrial land development whic 'gay negatively impact any residential neighborhood and willprove .: sropr idiate transitions X X Added the last sentence The City will continue to control, through restrictions in the City's land development regulations, large scale and/or intensive commercial and industrial land development which may negatively impact any residential neighborhood ..; ,d will provide appropriate between high—rise and low—rise residential de = +pments that do not 'transitions between high—nse and tow —rise residential diminish the amount of area encompassing the adj--a/abutting developments. residential neighborhood. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP - Pau- - 8 of 14 11 GOP # to .e PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR --- 19 HO-1.1.10 (Pages 34- 35) The City shall report annually the extent to which the housing X As per Community Development's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City shall report annually the extent to which the housing ecommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Co ,oiidated Plan as they may be amended from time to time) are being r-: zed including those relating to: 1) the preserve c of affordable rental housing through the recommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to time) rehabilitation of e ling rental stock and the encouragement of are being realized including those relating to: new rental housing co truction, with a focus on serving the 1) the preservation of affordable rental housing through the needs of small families an. , ingle person households, such as the elderly andperson with Hi ► • IDS; rehabilitation of existing rental stock and the encouragement 2) the preservation of existing affordable h.. inq - homeowner of new rental housing construction. with a focus on serving the needs of small families and single person households. retention by assisting very low- low- and mo ate -income such as the elderly and person with HIVIAIDS, households to obtain repair financing from privat -riders, with 2) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by .reference given to the elderly, disabled andpersons th HIV/AIDS; i seeking to increase the inventory of affordably priced units 3) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by seeking to through new construction, and by providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cost assistance to increase the inventory of affordably priced units through new first-time homebuyers; and construction and the creation of a Purchase Rehab program by 3) stimulation of affordable housing development through the providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cos' assistance to first-time homebuyers, and the creation of a L implementation of policy with respect to: to Purchase Program: and a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Infill 4) stimulation of affordable housing development through the b. identification of additional funding for affordable housing implementation of policy with respect lo; the continued provision of Affordable Housing incentives a- the creation of a land acquisition program for Infihl d. -._- provision of training/workshops to developers on City pro + . s and regulations b- identification of additional funding for affordable housing e. stream! i , ± of the RFP process and the provision of multi- c- expediting of the Tax Credit Process year funding d creation of spacial districts for mixed -use protects f. Increasing tile ca' , ity of non-profit housing provider- e, the continued provision of Affordable Housing incentives f. the_provision of training/workshops to developers on City programs and regulations g. streamlining of the RFP process and the provision of multi- year funding h- Increasing the capacity of non-profit housing providers. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of propozad GOPs for the MCNP - Page 9 of 14 # • # (Page • PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended bt. City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR = ., 20 HO.1.4.6 , , (Page 3/) e City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, hom ss shelters within its land development regulations and take appropn. - measures to prevent a net loss of shelter capacity. The X As per NET's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, homeless shelters within its land development regulations and take appropriate measures to prevent ai ..•3quitable ,:_, ._-. tration Ciiy will deve+• a ten-year plan designed to end chronic homelessness bar .rkinq toward a more equitable distribution of facilities throughout . • i-Dade County. iraciiitues within the ciy- , The City ill develop a ten-year plan designed to end chronic Homelessness by working toward a more equitable distribution of : cilities throughout Miami -Dade County. 21 HO-1.6 (Page 37) Provide andlor encourage a local regulatory, inve ent,and X Not Recommended. Regulations for supportive housing units are stated in Article 9, Sections 934-936 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance. neighborhood environment that wit assist the private ._ .,.,, -o ,ncreastng the supply of supportive housing units that services such as child day care to single parent househoku counseling to rehabilitated or rehabilitating substance abuser, ai -I .. i.. Fri =... r . r•-..^ , hu-Ids. 22 H O-1.6.1 (Page 38) Supportive housing developed in accordance with this policy shouk. X Not Recommended. be designed to primarily serve the needs of the community_in which they are located by offering units to residents of the surrounding, rnmmunity on a priority basis 23 HO-2.1.4 (Page 38) The City will continue to promote development of new, high quality; dense urban neighborhoods along the Miami River p ,n Central D t.:li E d in Southeast Overtown/Park West. X he City will continue to promote development of new, high qu. , dense urban neighborhoods along the Miami River 'infra Krickelland +n Pa th-Gas" Overtvwn rk--Invest-. F Note: This is - t is stated in the EAR Recommendations. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Pzgz 10 of 14 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 24 i TR-1."i . (Page 50) The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an .n Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban • ill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and includi all of the City of Miami. Areas designated Single- I X j I 1 1 The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Within this area, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to Infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards and_tthe City of Miami Person - lily and Cup ,- Residential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map ,,in the Urban In i ;rrea shall be protected from changes that nit higher density res -ntial uses and from commercial. office Industrial uses within tho r areas, in order to preserve the low isity residential character of t, s. Redevelopment of ridors adjacent to these areas a:.. ,iuraged to be located i ..rnarf�+} at mair�r irrterseci+r�ns of co hie area -Outside of these residential ar the co .-ntration and intensification of development around centers of ac i " shall oe emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of -..dential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priori .11 be given to infll development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards ... " __ set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR- i .1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) 25 TR-1.5.2 (Page 58) The City shall conduct appropriate land use and . oning analysis of the areas surrounding each station as such station sites are approved by Miami -Dade County or the City of Miami for development in order to determine 1 X The shall conduct appropriate land use and zoning analysis of the areas ounding each station a uch station sites are approved by Miami -Dade County or the City o iami for development in order to determine whether appropriate land use and zoning changes should be implemented that foster the development and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development [examining height. density and intensity, use and whether appropriate Ian.. e and zoning changes should be implemented that foster the • = elopment and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighbo •.ods from incompatible development Such land use and zonin. hanges shall include minimum and maximum density and intens' standards at the time of implementation. scatel. Such land use and zoning changes shall include minimum and maximum density and intensity standards at the time of implementation. 26 PA-3 (Page 66- 67) Miami River See Exhibit "B" SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 11 of 14 # G.QP # I (Pa$ p PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended hv: ' Cityof Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 27 PR-1.1 (Page 72) The City shall work to achieve a mediurn-term objective of providing As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City shall work to achieve a medium -term objective of a s . k within one-half mile of every resident by 2015 and to achieve a lane- = objective of a.park within one -quarter mile of_every resident by ''20. providing a park within one-half mile of every resident and to achieve a long-term objective of a park within one -quarter mile r'• every resident. Note: ThiE amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space raster Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 28 PR-1.1.4 (Page 73) The City will conduct a study to support a re ° ed Level of Service X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will conduct a study to support a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes and adopt a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation . , .. ,, I space for concurrency purposes by January 2009 that „ ir< achieving the access andper capita luting obiectives of i for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes til that time the Level of Service for concurrency purposes snai, nd adopt a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and 1.3 acres of public park space per 1000 residents. .ipen space for concurrency purposes that will assist in achieving the access and per capita funding otiectives of PR-1,1. Ural) that time, the Level of Service for concurrency purposes shall be 1.3 ',res ofpubllc park space per 1000 residents. Note: This amendment is based an the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 29 (Page 75) iy has a no -net -loss policy for public park land and will adop! X • 'er Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Plan . • ' recommends changing the statement to: The City h ., •'•loss policy for public park [and and will procedure to this effect for park land fn the City Zonin sOrdinances. described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan, by '0 These will allow only recreation and cultural facilities to be .Il on park land, wilt limit building footprinton any such land. will adopt procedu. . ;s effect for park land in the City Zoning iire that conversion Dt_park land for any other purposes be Ordinances, as Describ :.n the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces !;leaf to public procedures and replace the converted park land Master Plan, These will alio� •nly recreation and cultural facilities `) land similar in park. recreation or conservation value in terms of to be built on park land will limit + . lding fo**Tint on any se' .efulness and location. land, will require that conversion of p. ` land for any other :Jrposes be subject to public procedures, : d replace the inverted nark land with land similar in park, r- eation or wonservation value in terms of usefulness and loca', Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open =;:ace Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP - Page 12 of 14 # GOP # (Page #) PAS & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by. City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments - EAR 30 PR-2 2 2 (Page 75) The City will maintain and staff nine public swimming pools to be X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will strive to maintain and staff nine public swimming open all year round by 2009, with the remainder to be open year- round i 2012. pools to be open all year round by 2009, with the remainder to be open year-round by 2012. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. PR-3.1.2 (Page 76) The City will work with the ".:s and Recreation Department and X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: le City will work with the Parks and Recreation Department and iii neighborhood groups to ide ,:: pedestrian routes within a half- c. radius of parks that are appropri- for improvements to e,walks. lighting. street trees, crosswalk . nd pedestrian count- ,in signals, and signage to support a Park - ;s program, as ith neighborhood groups to identify pedestrian routes within a :scribed in the 2007 Parks and Public Spsnces Pla The aIf-mile radius of parks that are appropriate for improvements to kWalks improvement plans will be included in the Ci ' Capital ;dewalks, lighting, street trees, crosswalks and pedestrian count _.rovernent Program. One ParkWalks planning process wi +e ,down signals, and signage, as described in the 2007 Parks and npleted in each Commission district annually beginning in 201' Public Spaces Plan, wilh implementation to follow in the following year. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 32 PR-5.2.3 (Page 80) 1: .,, ,.:velop and implement regular procedures by 20' -� ' X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: he City will develop regular procedures to provide opportunitit vide opportunities for park user and neighborhood consultai, planning and design of park and recreation facilities uovements and new parks and programs. `,_ark user and neighborhood consultation in the planning and , of park and recreation facilities improvements and new programs. Note: This am dment is based on the Parks and Open pace Master Plan = adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 33 PR-5.3.1 (Page 80) ,tiny by 20 l' . X As per Parks and Recre• on Department's suggestions, Planning recommends cha g the statement to: ne City will strive to equip all parks wdet�uate energy -'ficient nigl f lightina by 2012. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks an. +.en Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0 34 (Page 90) of land l X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" SUBSTITUTED Analyse and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 13 of 14 OP # (Pa #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Recommended by: City of Miami Planning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 35 CM-3.1 (Page 90) Allow no net loss of acreage devoted to water dependent uses in the X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" ' • stal area of the City of Miami. 36 CM-31 1 (Page 90) Future la : se and development regulations will encourage water X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub•Element— " Exhibit B" dependent us- along the shorelines. 37 NR-1.1.6 (Page 95) Through land developm- 't regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the will not adversely affect the natural envir. • ent or lead to a net loss of public access X Through land development regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the eGa€tal-Coastal Zi_ will not adversely affect the natural environment or lead to a net loss of public access to the city's natural resources. to the city's natural fesources. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and P>=_commend :ins . prod ;_red GOPs for the MCNP — Page 14 of 14 L tit '6 44)4 6W Substitut: to � • deb P 1 / ay 8, 2008 CITY ' OMMISSION MEETING SUBSTITUTED PZ FIRST RE PLANNING FACT SHEET LEGISTAR FILE ID: 08-00223ct Item APPLICANT Pedro G. Hernandez, City Manager, • behalf of the City of Miami ING REQUEST/LOCATION COMMISSION DISTRICT PETITION PLANNING RECOMMENDATIO BACKGROUND AND ANA SIS PLANNING ' DVISORY BOARD ITY COMMISSION Amendment to Ordinance No. The Miami Comprehensive Ne. attachment.) City Wide 544, as amended, hborhood Plan. (See Consideration of an •rdinance of the Miami City Commission amen• ng Ordinance No. 10544, as amended, The Mi mi Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan of the City of Miami, by updating, adding, and deleting Goal:, Objectives, and Policies of the elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan as required b Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, to incorpor. - the recommendations contained in the 2005 E aluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the City's Comprehensive Plan; containing a repealer pro 'sion and a severability clause; providing for trsmittals to affected agencies; and providing for an ective date. Approval with modifications. Per Florida Statutes, all local governments shall adopt Comprehensive Plan Amendments based on a state required and adopted Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of its Comprehensive Plan. The City adopted its EAR document December 2005, and is required to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan based on EAR recommendations by August 2008. Continued on March 31, 2008 and April 16, 2008. Recommended approval with modifications of the text amendment on April 30, 2008 by a vote of 8-0. Also recommended denial of the proposed Miami River Sub -Element as presented by the Planning Department. Deferred on April 24, 2008. CITY OF MIAMI • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR • MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 Date Printed: 5/1/2008 Page 1 SUBSTITUTED Notice: This document is the Planning D: •artment's Analysis and Recommendations of Goals, O. jectives, and Policies (GOPs) as proposed by the P anning Advisory Board (PAB) for the Miami Comprehensi Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) SUBSTITUTED May 2, 2008 Planng Department's Analysis and Recommendations of Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) as proposed by the Planning Advisory Board (PAB) for the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) • The c mn entitled "PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs" reflects mfications required by the EAR and text added by PA • Amendments identified • an X in the "EAR" column are part of the Evalu- 'on and Appraisal Report (EAR) as required by F. . 63.3191 and adopted by the Miami City Commissr• • on December 1, 2005; Resolution 05-0707. • Amendments identified by an X in the "PAB" column are those proposed by PAB; not adopted in the EAR. NM Existing Text in the MCNP MIE New Text Proposed for the MCNP • Amendment identified by an X in both the "EAR" and "PAB" column are required by the EAR, but contain modifications by PAB. • The column entitled "City of Miami Ph: „ping Department Recommended GOPs & Comments" reflects recommendations on the item and identifies those items that policy decisions that require. 0 consideration by the City Commission Se_ V Differences Between PAB/EAR end Planning Recommendations GOP # (Page #) PAB EAR Proposed GOPs Tir'ne/$ Expense Recomna: ": ,i' b . City of Miami P.a ,ning Department Recommended GOPs & Comments LU-1.1.3 (Page 1) The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or natural or man-made amenities; (3) transportation policies that divide or fragment established neighborhoods. aila' X Added "that do not diminish the X amount of area encom- passsing the adjacent/abut- ing residential neighbor- hood" The Ci ,' zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the .'t from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) th- .dverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that • upt or degrade public health and safety, or natural or man- '.de amenities; :- _ (3) transportation policies that div • - or fragment established neighborhoodsi and (4) degradatio •f public open space, environment, and ecology. Strategies to further protect environment, and ecolo y. Strategies t• . rther protect istingnei borhoods through the development of existing neighborhoods through the develop . nt of Jroprote transition standards and buffering requirements appropriate transition standards and buffering re :ants _i do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the that will be incorporated into the City's land dev.- adiacent/abuttinq residential neighborhood will be requlations. incorporated into the City's rand development regulations. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 1 of 17 GC' # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs itme!$ Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR -Aci 2 LU-1.1.5 (Page 2) The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City - Time Exp ns :s/ In-house x. The Planning Department, with the assistance of various City - •artments and agencies, shall annually monitor steps departments and agencies shall annually monitor steps take o fulfill the Goals, Obiectives, and Policies (GOPs) of taken to fulfill the Goals, Objectives. and Policies (GOPs) of the MCI . !annially report the status of the GOPs to the the MCNP and biennially report the status of the GOPs to the Plannin , a:aard and City Commission. including but Planning Advisory Board and City Commission. not limited tc, !}g_rneasurabillty of objectives_ 3 LIJ 1.1.11 (Page 3) The City hereby adopts de •nation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island an. e uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use :Id zoning classification of Conservation, as - as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's •: gnation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palm- - • Expressway and including all of the City of Miami, aesignated Single -Fatuity and Duptex—Resioental on the x The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as-Urban 1 -e,'Lhm�° as an Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Within this area, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goats of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation revels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards ...., _.logy as set forth in MCNP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from changes thatQermit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the tow density residential character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be encouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors. Wit -tP6-ate Outside of these residential areas, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infll development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards .: set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. •olicies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the ‘4CNP. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 2 of 17 GOP' # l°:9e #� PAL & EAR Proposed GOPs "rune! Recommended by: �, Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments Expense EAR _ LU-1.1.13 (Page 3) The City shall review and evaluate the areas designated Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations Urban lnfll Area (UTA) and/or Transportation Concurrency . eotion Area i7CEA'1 within two years of the adoption of this • c to determine, but not limited to, the following: the approprla ess of the areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA: the be : ts and/or disadvantages resulting from the Intaiusionjor exclu .) of these areas within the UJA and/or the TCEALthe strategi- o support mobility and alternative modes of transportation wit those areas included in the UTA and/or the TCEA; and the s : ;eg_ies to address urban design and network connectivity tt i ove mobility within those areas included in the UTA andfor th CEA. L.0 -1.3.3 (Page 5) r-. City shall encourage development and redev- . •ment of X The Planning Department Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element —" Exhibit B" .ter dependent and water related uses on the Wain `'vet 'Inin existing districts designated Industrial on the Future 6 LU-1.3.8 (Page 7) The City ,I, develop and implement 'ob training and Time/ Money Expenses ` I No additional Recommendations i ,, iiei rat ➢rograms to assist the City's existing and future .sidenfs in achieving economic self-sufficiency ulilieinn government resources as necessary, and will continue to work with appropriate State and County agencies to direct training programs and other technical assistance, to support minority and semi -skilled residents of the city. Or 7 LU-1.3.10 (Page 6) The City R; ra ' leash Time/ Money Expenses X X Added the last sentence s per Code Enforcement's suggestions, Planning re . i mends changing the Policy to: The City E•° men4 eFt£by—l- eaoh i ,tea :+u will continue to aggressively address code violations in its neighborhoods through the implementation of doing and new neighborhood improvements and code ...se-code-e.> e � will con R !ue to aggressively address °:.sir. r'orcement strategies and initiatives; and will adapt and violations in its neigh _ ,_ ',- through the irnr i . �, V n, (If performance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance the physical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial areas in the city by July zotie. the t ity will report ongoing and new nei. improvements. ,, c de enforcement strategies a ,es; and will consider the adoption and enforcement of perfo '•ance standards appropriate to preserve and enhance t' = •hysical c .:. _.. and appearance of commercial and industrl- .reas in the city. The City will report what has been acL '.11i an amial trus,3 '.gnat has been accomplished to fulfill re - ::uuirernents of this policy, the requirements of this policy as requested. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Pad>_ 3 of 17 # GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR P • .osed GOPs Time!$ Expense Recommended by. Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 8 LU-1.4.10 (Page 8) The City will continue to .- ,clop modifications to existing regulations with the int- of providing greater flexibility in the •: ign and implemen on of mixed -use developments withi e general P ntown area and particularly along the Miami Ri Doti ..�,r i . c.�k;, k u., r„„ L,ilr�viiii,�: , X X Added Downtown" I The City will continue to develop modificationG 4n pr5+.7 regulations with the intent of providing great€ 'I;xibility in the design and implementation of mixed -use dev .;pments within the general Downtown area and pa. rtic , ly along the Miami River ...:zcordancewtitr: , i;,...,..-., L.: Jesig-n and de,'! oprnent standards adopted as a result of the development standards adopted as a result c amendments to th its land development regulations and amendments to the City's land development r: ., other initiatives. other initiatives. Note: This is what is stated in the EAR Recommendations. LU-1.5.3 (Page 8) , title of apQtication for special permits skibe provided to X This issue is addressed in the Land Development Regulations NET registered homeowners associations '+ en days ,r to issuance of the special permit and after iss ..+ce of decision. 10 LU-1.5.4 (Page 8) Notice of applications requiring public hearings shall be X — This issue is addressed in the Land Development Regulations provided to any NET registered homeowner and neighborhood associations and to owners within 50D feet of the subiectproperty, 11 LU-1.6.9 (Page 9} The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the potentially adverse impacts of : de' X X Added last sentence The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the potentially adverse impacts of t new development on existing �,thborhoods lnrough the development of appropriate neighborhoods through the development of appropriate .sition standards and buffering requirements that do not ansition standards and buffering reguirements- Inish the amount of area encompassing the acenL'abutting_residential neighborhood and through .'abate notice to affected ,?artles 12 LU-2.2.4 (Page 11) The City an ordinance levying civil penalties for failure to report the discovery of an archaeological site during construction. Time Expenses/ In-house X This is a policy decision .. to the Citl Commission's Discretion 13 LU-2.3 (Page11) Encourage the preservation of all historic- -, - architectural, resources that have major significance to the city by the number of -_.- locally designated sites five Time Expenses/ In-house X X Added "and archaeolo- gicar No acd:i nal Recommendations nationally and ; percent eact< for the period '-4 - -2U Ub- ti13. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 4 of 17 GOP # P .. #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time/ Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 14 LU-2.3.Z ' (Page 11) The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic stricts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the Cit . ode. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six • ,tricts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. • these, the City will designate _ 10 individual site nd two districts by ,See Coastal Managemen './icy CM-5.1.3.) Time Expenses/ In—house1n-house X X EAR states 2015 The City had designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) and six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, the City will -,crease locally percent by 2010 164:541Xt'. (See Coastal Ivlanagement Policy CM-5.1.3.) 15 .U-4 (Page 13) LIT Goal LU•4: The City will acknowledge the i , -relationship Ti - Money Expenses Approx. $150,000 to $200, 000 X This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion between economic prowth and the reduction of - •• omrc disparity within the City: issues of land use, affordab ; ho uac of infrastructure including the abil , •f blic transit to provi eptable commutation to and from 1 areas of the city. educatio and traipin . the environment a d Port of the Miami Ri 0 ' live L shall within and no later than two yea option of this goal add an Economic Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Ptanlhat lays out goats, obiectives and cies to provide an environment for sustained economic growth within the Q t�articuiar1 with respect to those areas of economic activity characterized by h gher paying Jobs, while reducing the economic disparitythat currently exists among City residents. This Element shalt be prepared through thecollaboration of the appropriate City departments with a variety of stafceholders including, but not limited to, representatives of neighborhood groups, business and environmental groups, organizations involved in manpower development and training and the Miami River Commission. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 5 of 17 # (GOP #, PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time Expense REAR mended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments 16 LU-5 (Page 14) PROPOSED i-gSTORiC AND CULTURAL ELEMEiv Time/ ,4 • ney Expen -s Approx. $500,000 X This its a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion LU-5. The City will acknowledge that: al Historical resou offer an important tool for education, help to provide a di ' dive "sense of,place" to various neighborhoods in City. and are a significant resource in promoting tourism: an Cultural resources are important reminders and remnants of history of the area. These resources offer physical evsdence It e prehistoric and ,historic occupation of the land. Obiective LU-5.1.. The Clty shall within. and no r than, two/ears of the adoption oft is goal add a Historic a Cultural Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan that lays out goals, obiectives and policies for those areas with significant historical, archaeological and cultural identities. The preparation of this Element will consider establishing notification procedures for land use changes that may impact historic resources. The Element shall include a list of definitions of termsused including, but not limited to, neighborhoods, adaptive reuse, mixed use, redevelopment and revitalization, with clariht of meaning in the associated context. This Element should be prepared through the collaboration of appropriate City departments with a variety of stakeholders including, but not limited to, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups and citizens. Protection of historical and archaeological resources is mandated by Federal law and by the State of Florida through the Division of Historical Resources. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 6 of 17 OP # Pam#) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time/$ Expense Recommended by: EAR Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments LU-6 HO-1 HO-1.1 HO-1.2 HO-1.2.1 HO-1.2.2 HO-1.2.3 H O-1.2.4 H O-1.2.8 HO-2.1 (Pages 33- 38) PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLANS Goal . 6: The City will acknowledge a) the importance of neighborn... planning and implementation as a tool for maintaining an -nhancinq the unique character of neighborhoods: anthe significance of fostering a collaborative relationshr+ Between the community and City. Objective LU-6.1: The City sh no later than 2012, create Neighborhood Master Plans wr the City's neighborhoods. Policy LU-6-1.1: Within two years of the adoption �f this policy, the City shallprepare maos delineating the geographic boundaries of each neighborhood, which will serve as a tool for creating Neighborhood Master Plans. PolicyLU-6.1.2: The appropriate City department(s1 shall, through the collaboration of stakeholders. representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups, and community members, create Neighborhood Master Plans detailing -ach neighborhood's unique needs, values, and visions. Pas hose terms are defined by HMI Time/ Money Expenses Approx. $1,000,000 to $2, 1 : 000 These are policy decisions up to the City Commission's Discretion If these policies are desired, it is recommended that the dates change to allow for a more realistic -,fame. These :asks can be performed by a con: •„ it or it can be perf�:•med in-house, though a much gr ;or amount of time would be necessary C. ) staff constraints. Note: While the level of detail that would be required as a esult of these policies is greater, many aspects would be :•mplete : s a result of Mliami21. ,_^- .:ty+ Development's suggestions, Planning re mmends changing the phrase in each of the nine listed s's to: in accordance w<<:.: W cu -nt standards and regulations of HUD and the State of Florida) SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 7 of 17 # # (G Page PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs me/$ Ext p ense +Recommended - Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR 19 HO-1.1.5 (Page 33) he City will continue to enforce, and where necessary str then those sections of the land development regulate s that are intended to preserve and enhance the general app ance and character of the Lily S X Added that do not diminish the X amount of area encom- cethe pasenforcement adjacent/abut- ing residential neighbor- hood" The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the City's neighborhoods . ., i ,i,:r neighborhoods from neighborhoods. ,. i.; u . ,a , , ;ohborhoods from incor patible uses th h the implementation and .uses through the implementation and of transition bufferin standards that do not � - entorcan ient of transition and buffering standards. diminish the amount of area a mpassinq the adiacentlabuttinq residential neigh ood. 20 HO.1.1.7 (Page 34) The City will continue to control, through re ctions in the City's land development regulations, large scale dlor intensive commercial and industrial land developme hich may negatively impact any residential neighborhood an 1 , X ;Added the last sentence The City will continue to control, through restrictions in the City's land development regulations, large scale and/or intensive commercial and industrial land development which may negatively impact any residential neighborhood and will provide appropriate transitions between high—rise and low— provide appropriate transitions between high—rise and low — rise residential developments that do not diminish the amount rise residential developments. of area encompassing the adlacentfabuttinq residential neighborhood. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 8 of 17 21 GOP # (Page #) HO-1.1.10 (Pages 34- 35) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs The City shall report annually the extent to which the recommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to ti are being realized including those relating to: 1) the pre - ation of affordable rental housing_ through the rehabilitatio .f existing rental stock and the encouragement • new rental housing construction. with a focus on serving the -eds of small families and single person households. such the elderly and person with F€IVIAIDS: 2) the preservation of existing affordable sing homeowner retention by assisting very low ..w• and moderate -income households to obtain repair cing from private lenders, with preferenc disabled and persons with HIV/AIDS; given to the e 3) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by seeking to increase the inventory of affordably priced units through new construction and the creation of a Purchase Rehab program by providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers. and the creation of a Lease to Purchase Program: and 4) stimulation of affordable housing development through the implementation of policy with respect to: a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Infill b. identification of additional funding for affordable housing c. expeditinc of the Tax Credit Process d. creation of special districts for mixed -use projects e. the continued provision of Affordable Housing incentives f the provision of training/workshops to developers an City programs and regulations streamlining of the RFP process and the provision of multi -year funding h. Increasing the capacity of non-profit housing providers. g. Tir..: Expense EAR Time Money Expenses Planning Recommended GOPs 7, Comments As per Community Development's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City shall report annually the extent to which the housing recommendations set forth in the adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to time) are being realized includingthose relating to: 1) the preservation of affordable rental housing through the rehabilitation of existing rental stock and the encouragement of new rental housing construction. mil- e focus on serving the needs of small families and single person households. such as the elderly and person with HIV/AIDS: 2) assistance to residents to achieve homeownership by seeking to increase the inventory of affordably priced units through new construction, and by providing second mortgage, down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers; and 3) stimulation of affordable housing development through the implementation of policy with respect to: a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Ira' b. identification of additional funding for affordable housing the continued provision of Affordable blousing ncentives d. th •rovision of training/workshops to developers on City pr. , ams and regulations e. streamlinins •f the RFP process and the provision of multi -year funds f. Increasing the capa providers. of non-profit housing SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Pap 9 of 17 22 23 24 26 HO-1.4.6 (Page 37) HO-1.5.1 (Page 37) HO-1.6 (Page 37) h 0-1.6.1 (Page 38) HO-2.1.4 (Page 38) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs The City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, less shelters within its land development regulations ppropriate measures to prevent a net loss of v. The City will develop a ten-year plan ronic homelessness by working toward a on of f7ilities throughout Miami- .pertive housing_developed in accordance with this policy uId be designed to primarily serve the needs of the nmunity In which they are located by offering units to .idents of the surrounding community an a priority basis. The City will continue to promote development of new, high quality, dense urban neighborhoods -along the Miami River Accordance with the 1992 Miami River Master Plan Centrn! Br'ckell and in Southeast Overtown/Park West, Timei , Recommended by: Expense Time/ Money Expenses Time/ Money Expenses Time/ Money Expenses Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments As per NET's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the Policy to: The City will provide regulations for, and permit the siting of, homeless shelters within its land development regulations and take appropriate measures to prevent:_ cone r-a-Ra{-loss-e#-s4eiter capacity. The Oily will develop a ten-year plan designed to end chronic homelessness by working toward a more equitable distribution of facilities throughout Miami -Dade County No additional Recommendations This is a policy decision up to the City Commission's Discretion Note: Regulations for supportive housing units are s ed in ;Aide 9, Sections 934-936 of the City of Miami Zoni : Ordinance. This is a polic Discretion ecision up to the City Commission's The City will continue to promote . -veloprr quality, dense urban neighborhoods - .ng Note: This is what is stated in the EAR Recommendations. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and "Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 10 of 17 GOP # (P. a #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Timel$ Expense Recommended by: Planning Recorr7.ended GOPs & Comments EAR 27 SS-2.1.1 (Page 42) _ The City will adhere to its 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates as the long-range policy guideline • mproving its storm drainage management system, and will u. •te the estimated cost of implementing that plan Plan Time/ Mone Y Expenses X No additional Recommendations mrouc,h tip annual updates to the Ciiys Capital Improvements ` •cram irr•h.irfed in ihi,.-' (-,Fni!>-1 inrrrovements element of the MC The City will rank the projects specified in that --plan 86 Storm Drainage Master Plan, with priority given to address' ! the most critical problem areas within the sCity, and 'mole -nt those projects supported by a financing plan accor.i + to the provisions of Chapter 18, Article VIII of the City Code, e tied "Storm Water Utility System." The 1986 Plan will be u i, -ted by 2010 with measurable goals and oblectives. The Plan wi reported and reviewed annuatly and at the of EAR. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 11 of 17 28 29 GOP # (Page #) TR-1.1.1 (Page 50) TR-1.5.2 (Page 58) within the Urban PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami- ade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying gen .Ily east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the of Miami. Areas designated Single -Family and Duplex—Resntiai on the MCNP Future Land Use Map II Area shall be protected from changes that permit higher de residential uses and from nommercial office and in trial uses within those areas. in :er to preserve the low dens ` residential character of se area Redevelopment of co 'ors adjacent to thes6 -.as shall be encouraaed to be local marily at maior •rsections of commercial corridors Within Outside of these residential areas the concentra intensification of development around centers of acti be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability o residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards - ;-- Tr set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) iG area; and shall The City shall conduct appropriate land use and zoning analysis of the areas surrounding each :a and future Metrarailpremlum transitstation as such station sites are approved by Miami -Dade County .... for development in order to determine whether appropriate land use and zoning changes should be implemented that foster the development and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development Such land use and zoning changes shall include minimum and maximum density and intensity standards at the time of implementation. Time/$ Expense Recommended byj EAR Time Expenses/ In-house Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments ne city nereoy adopts designation or the city, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conservation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami - Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the City of Miami. Within this area, the concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of commercial areas. Priority will be given to inf ll development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) The Ci hall analysis o approved by Miami - development in order to use and zoning changes sho the development and use of the s adjacent neighborhoods from incompa Such land use and zoning changes shall in and maximum density and intensity standar( implementation. conduct appropriate land use and zoning areas surrounding each existing and future station as such station sites are de County or the ,. ermine whether be impleme for op: • ;and that foster otecting °Iopment minimum e time of I SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 12 of 17 GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time/$ Expense Recommended by: Planning Recommended GOPs & Comments EAR :- ..:. 30 � R-1.5.1 � (Page 60) Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14- 182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City will - -require new large-scale development to adopt and enforce measures that will reduce the generation of new single -occupant passenger car trips in areas of high- • -, ity development, and encourage the use of multiple- occup., vehicles, including public transit, for home -based work trips. e City will coordinate with the _ :_,wrtowp--; -South Flon• - Commuter Services to provide support for pP transportation dema • initiatives undertaken by new developments. ;Vitt- <ar of the adoption of this golicy, Time F::penses/ in-house x No additional Recommendations i fete City snail modify n: ii 7,0 Zoning Code to intoDorate Transportatic; , - --- ires into the Major Use Special Permit application r- 31 '..3 (Page 66- I Miami River See Exhibit "B" 32 PR-1.1 (Page 72) The City shall work sc...: „ . ,.. . -0 Time/ Money Expenses X As per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the state Tne Cm si\ale WON to achieve a medium -tear, itpe,c : . providing a park within one-half mile of every resident by 2015 and to achieve a long-term objective of a park within one -Quarter mile of every resident by 2020. providing a park within one-half mile of every de: i 3 : , achieve a long -terra objective of a nark with _earl r mile of every resident. Note: This amendment is based an the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 33 PR-1.1.4 (Page 73) will conduct a study to suppo _ _ Time/ Mon y Expenses X per Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, Plan ' g recommends changing the statement to: The City will g+duct a study to support a revised Levet of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes and adopt a revised Level of Service for parks. recreation and open space for concurrency purposes by January 2009 that will assist in achieving the access and L Service for parks, .. reation and open space for concurrency capita funding objectives of PR-1.1. Until that time the Lev:. purposes and adopt a - ised Level of Service for parks, of Service for concurrence+ purposes shall be 1.3 acres of recreation and open space concurrency purposes that will n.u!�?i . Dark space per 1000 residents. assist in achieving the access a . •er capita funding objectives of PR-1.1. Until that time, • - Level of Service for concurren ypurposes shall be 1.3 acres ,' : ,ic park space per 1000 residents. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks an • ..en Spac_ Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-02' ►. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 13 of 17 GOP # (P.. - #) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs Time/$ Expense Recommended by: Planning Recomrnended GOPs & Comments EAR 34 PR-1.2 (Page 73) Provide sufficient per capita funds for the parks system to Time/ Money Expenses X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. .port the parks, recreation and open space standards expMed by the public, as indicated in surveys and other respons- to public outreach, for resources and programs that benefit : community. The City will strive to meet and exceed a benchrn: 4evet of spend annually of $100 per capita in 2007 dollars, thin fiscal limits and based on identified needs. 35 PR.-1.4 (Page 74 ) a The City will continue to work with tr... .ortation Time Expenses/ In-house X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. implement the Commodore Trail improve `-nts and the Fiedler Trail (FI.0 Corridor Greenwav). 35 PR-1.4.3 ' (Page 74 ) a The City will continue to work to implement the Overtown Time/ '..ney Expen . X No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks any : ;pen Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-02::"9. Greenwayalan to link the Miami River through Overtown to Downtown. �� Fi-2.1.1 (Page 75) The City has a no -net -loss policy far public park land and &'.l l X As per Parks ane, ;R,acreation Department's suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City has a no -net -loss policy for public park land and will adoprocedures to this effect for park land in the City Zoning Ordinances, as described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan, by 2010. These will allow only Time/ Money Expenses recreation and cultural facilities to be built on Joark land, will adopt procedures to this effect for park land in the CiJ. limit building footprint on any such land, will require that Zoning Ordinances. as described in the 2017 Parksann conversion of park land for any other purposes be subiect to `aces Master Plan- These will allow oniv recreation public procedures, and replace the converted park land with �- 7" facilities to be built on park land moil limit rualdLn4 land similar in park, recreation or conservation value in terms too[ iy such land, will require that C-InvPrrnn of 2arir, .,sefulness and location. land rui anyi loses be subiect to T and replace t...; • - _' park land with lane, �.•,..,W. . recreation or Cor -afue in term,' ,ni .jGafrjInp£F location Note: This amendment is based the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 200 . -es. R-07-0290. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 14 of 17 C # (Pa - #) PR-2.2.2 (Page 75) PR-2.2.3 (Page 75) PR-3.1.2 (rdyt 76) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs City mil maintain aria staff rune public swimming pools to open all year round by 2009. with the remainder to be open ar-round by 2012. The City, through the Parks and R ion Department, will nlinue to develop and implement mal- . nce level of vice standards, identify associated costs, a = address ding those costsincluding ret,iacementrogra for ;i,1ipnment and vehicles, before adding more assignme City will work with the Parks and Recreation Departni and with neighborhood groups to identify pedestrian route. within a half -mile radius of parks that are appropriate for improvements to sidewalks, lighting, street trees, crosswalks and pedestrian count -down signals, and signage to support a kWa ks program, as described in the 2007 Parks and ,ublicSpaces Plan The ParkWalks improvement plans will included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. One kWalks planning rsroCess will be completed in each mission district annually beginning in 2009, with Lamentation to follow In the following year. Time/$ Recommended by: Expense EAR Time/ Mosley Time Expenses/ In-house Time/ Money Expenses PR-4.1.1 (Page 78) The City will use participant evaluation surveys. at the completion of recreational programs to evaluate program success, and online public opinion surveys" at least once every three years. and scientific surveys at least once every seven years to identify needed and desired programs. Time/ Money Expenses Planning Recommended GG s & Comme `s As per Parks and Recreation Department suggestions, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will strive to maintain and staff nine pools to be open allyear round by 2009, witt. to be open year-round by 2012. Note: This amendment is based cn the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adoped in 2007.:'__. R-07-0290. additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Pin as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. As pe- Parks and Recreation Department's suggestions, ?fanning recommends changing the statement to: The City will work with the Parks and Recreation Department and with neighborhood groups to identify pedestrian routes within a half -mile radius of parks that are appropriate for improvements to sidewalks lighting, street trees, crosswalks and pedestrian count -down signals, and signaoe. as describe° .n :he 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Plan. e: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Spac- i aster Plan as adc.-ted in 2007. Res. R-07 0290. No additional - •commendations Note. This amen; :,ent is • ed on the Par,;. and Open Space Master P:r: as adopte. 2007. Res. R-07-0290. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed Gam: ._: the Ci' — Page 15 of 17 GOP # (Page #) PAB & EAR opo GOPs Time)$ Expense Recommended by: EAR Planning Recommended GOPs & Com __--ts 4 (Page 79) 1 5.2.2 43 (Page 79) The City will establish a per: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board made up of residents who are, park users. program participants, and representatives of groups with ecial relevant expertise, The Board's responsibilities will inet i advising elected officials and staff on irnplgmentation of the 2 ► r s and Public Spaces Master Plan and any adopted sr lent iodates to that Plan. The Board will be supported he Parks and Recreation Department. u iu -,nnually to the Mayor and City Commission on pro:. +lamenting the Master Plan, including financial reports, hol+ at least one public hearing on the draft report before submitting to the Mayor and Commission. The Board will also review = d advise on capital pans and designs based on the Mas - Plan and advise the Commission on any proposals to expe more than $50,000 to acquire new park land, to diminish or *, vert existing park [and, to accept donated land for parks, or to s City land that may be suitable for parks. The City will periodically review and refine the mission and charge of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board in order to ensure maximum opportunities for public involvement and effectiveness in addressing parks and recreation needs. Proposed changes to the mission and charge of the Board will not be implemented until after apublic hearing by the appropriate public board. The City will survey City residents to monitor preferences. ds and satisfaction with the park system on a regular -3is. at a minimum through evaluations of all programs by program participants to evaluate program success, online irveys every three years, and scientific surveys every seven -s tstRriing from the Parks Master Plan survey of 2006}. Time/ Money Expenses Time/ Money Expenses No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is based on the ;'arks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. o additional ;7:acommendations Note: This ame , ent is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan a • dopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. 44 (Page 80) l i,e is ity will develop and implement regular procedures by 2010 to provide opportunities for park user and neighborhood consultation in the planning and design of park and recreation facilities improvements and new parks and ,grams. Time/ Money Expenses As per Parks anL =::: Department's suggestions, Planning recommends chang . the state:rent to: The City 'wit[ develop regular procedur. opportunities for park user and neighbor,. the planning and design of park and recrea, .. Improvements and new Darks and programs. Note: This amendment is based on the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R-07-0290. SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations o. -opcnd GOPs for the MCNP — Page 16 of 4 s3 47 48 GOP # •#) PR-5.3.1 (Page 80) PR-6.1.1 (Page 80) C' -3 (Page 90) CM-3.1 (Page 90) PAB & EAR Proposed GOPs I aU•t. I i v equipped with adequate energy efficient night lighting by 2012. The City wilt annually re - implementation sections or tt e 2007 Parks and Public Spec- aster Plan to include implementation actions in develo an annual workplan and capital improvements Dlan for pa and recreation facilities and programs. an adequate supply of land for water depen uses. Allow no net loss of acreage devoted to weer we�c u il: uses in the coastal area of the City of Miami. Time/$ Expense Time/ Money Expenses Time Expenses/ In-house Recommended by: EAR Planning Recommended GOPs &, CC000mmm�ents As per Parks and Recreation Department 'gesttons, Planning recommends changing the statement to: The City will strive to equip all parks with ar. efficient night lightinq by 2012. Note; This amendment is based on t Parks and 0:4n Space Master Plan as adopted in 2007. Res. R:: 290. No additional Recommendations Note: This amendment is bi^=- on the Parks and Open Space Master P'_.: __ _ . d in 2007, R-07-0290, The Planr.. ::epartment Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" The Plar,;i ng Departr:- it Does not support this item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" 49 CM-3.1.1 (Page 90) NR-1.1.6 (Page 95) Future land use and development regulations will encoura., water dependent uses along the shorelines. Through land development regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the _:oastal zone -Zone will not adversely affect the natural environment or lead to a net loss of public access y's1ems to the city's natural resources. The Planning Department Does not support t :is item. See Miami River Sub -Element — " Exhibit B" Through land development regulations, ensure that development or redevelopment within the will not adversely affect the natural environment r lead to a net loss of public access to the city's natural res. rces. 51 52 N R-1.4.2 (Page 97) N R-1.4.3 (Page 97) .:;i ,ilh public and private partners to achieve the 2007 Tree Master Plan coal of 30% tree canopy coverage citiw de by 2020• The City will develop an ordinance describing criteria for designation of City of Miami Historic Trees, procedures for nomination of a Miami Historic Tree. and procedures for official designation and signage identifying Miami Historic Trees. Time/ Money Expenses Time Expenses/ In-house X EAR language is more eneric X EAR language is X more generic No additional Reco endations additional Recommendations SUBSTITUTED Analysis and Recommendations of proposed GOPs for the MCNP — Page 17 of 17 To: Mayor and City Commissioners From: Arva Moore Parks -McCabe, Chairperson City of Miami Planning Advisory Board Re: Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Amendments to Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan - 2008 Date: April 30, 2008 On behalf of your Planning Advisory Board (PAB), I a .roud to forward to you our recommended EAR -based Amendments to the Miami Co.- prehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP). The PAB approved these Ear -based Amend ents by a unanimous vote at our April 30, 2008 meeting. We strongly urge the City C . ission to similarly approve these EAR -based Amendments at the upcoming May 8, 008 transmittal hearing. Our final vote followed months of public m: -tings where citizens were invited to participate in different geographic locations withi t the City. We also had a number of expanded public hearings before the PAB. Spe► fically, rather than one single hearing before the PAB, we conducted a total of five + public hearings where we heard from City Staff, our excellent outside consultants . d members of the public. Attached is a schedule of meetings conducted as a part this process. At the PAB public meetings, r . er than a one-sided affair where we unilaterally informed the public of what would a included in the EAR -based amendments, we had an interactive process where we and from many diverse community voices, received their comments and input, and, . s appropriate, provided policy direction to both the Staff and outside consultants on th changes and additions we believed to be appropriate. The Staff and outside consultan : then translated these policy directives from the PAB into the amendments you now see From City Staff, outside consultants and the public, we received and took into . nsideration reams of data and analysis in support of our recommendations tha are now a part of the record of our work. In providi -g policy direction to the City Staff and outside consultants, we were mindful of our unctions, powers and duties under both section163.3174(4), Fla. Stat., and Article II , Section 62-62 of the City of Miami Code. We looked at past trends and historical e nts, present conditions and likely future occurrences with the purpose of establishi g principles and policies for guiding action affecting future development and positiv volution within the City of Miami. We were mindful of our ability and duty to in gate special studies and further planning initiatives, as appropriate to the cir mstanees, as set out in Section 62-62 (a). In this process, with the able guidance of staff and our outside consultants, we identified certain critically important tasks that our allocated timeline and the deadline to complete and transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the EAR -based SUBSTITUTED Amendments to the MCNP did not allow us to complete. These important tasks include the development and adoption of new elements in the MCNP such as : 1) Economic Element, (2) historic and Cultural Element, (3) Neighborhood El ent which documents the unique characteristics, needs and aspirations of Mia ''s many neighborhoods and (4) a study (lithe urban infill classification. Includ . within the EAR -based Amendments we are advancing are references to each of these ew elements with time deadlines for completion of the important ongoing planning w• k. We hope that you will understand, embrace and support the additional hard wor, and resources necessary to accomplish the formulation and adoption of these new ements. We regard planning for the future of our City as an ongoing, interactive process that must continue with the same vigor and commitment as that of the recent past +n.ths. We wish to bring to your attention the extraordinary, -xpanded work required of both City Staff and the outside consultants to bring us to t s point. They have worked above -and -beyond the call of duty and we are profoundl, grateful to each member of the collective team for their professional work. We note r at it is likely that this process will exceed the budgeted allocations for the work. We a ure you that the extra investment in this process will serve the public good for many y..rs to come. Over the many years of my civic enga -ment in our community, I have been privileged to serve on a number of public b.: ds as the appointee of elected official(s). No service on any public board, in my vie , exceeds the importance of serving as a member of the City of Miami's PAB at . 's time in the City's transformation. I am very grateful to Commission Chair Joe S. ez for the privilege of serving on the PAB as his appointee. Likewise I have never s ed on a Board where members have been as thoughtful, deliberate and dedicat: to the tasks at hand. As dedicated and informed volunteers, they have put in an - traordinary number of hours to complete this responsibility. On behalf of • fellow PAB members, I am certain that they are equally grateful for their opportunit for service on the PAB. Respectfully submitted, Arva More P. s-McCa.e SUBSTITUTED The City and consultants began the public participation process by meeting with a sm- group of community representatives who were appointed by our City Commissioner-. Each representative was given the opportunity to comment on proposed outreach programs, proposed draft MCNP amendments, and effective methods of public outreach his or her community. Along with these committee group meetings, 10 neighborhood mee ngs were held (2 per commission district) to collect public input on the EAR -Based Amendme s. # Date Meeting Location 1 Thursday, November 01, 2007 Appointed Committee Group Meeting 1 Miami City Hall 2 Tuesday, January 08, 2008 Appointed Committee Group Meeting 2 Miami City Hall 3 Tuesday, January 29, 2008 District 1, Flagami Antonio Maceo Park 4 Wednesday, January 30, 2008 District 4, Flagami Kinloch Park 5 Thursday, January 31, 2008 District 2, Upper Eastside Legion Park 6 Friday, February 01, 2008 Appointed Committee Group Meeting 3 Miami Riverside Center 7 Monday, February 04, 2008 District 3, Coral Way St. Sophia 8 Tuesday, February 05, 2008 District 4, West Flagler St. Michael Meeting Hall 9 Wednesday, February 06, 2008 District 2, S/W Coconut Gro e Frankie S. Rolle Center 10 Thursday, February 07, 2008 District 3, Little Havana Citrus Grove Elementary School 11 Monday, February 11, 2008 District 5, Overtown Culmer Center 12 Tuesday, February 12, 2008 District 5, Model City Hadley Park 13 Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Parks Meeting wit iami Neighborhoods United Miami Riverside Center 14 Wednesday, February 13, 2008 District 1, Allap. ah Curtis Park 15 Friday, February 29, 2008 Meeting with s. Arva Parks, PAB Chairperson Miami Riverside Center 16 Wednesday, March 05, 2008 PAB Discu -ion Miami City Hall 17 Wednesday, March 19, 2008 PAB Wo shop Miami City Hall 18 Monday, March 31, 2008 PAB Recommendation Miami City Hall 19 Friday, April 11, 2008 Mee ng with Ms. Arva Parks, PAB Chairperson Miami Riverside Center 20 Wednesday, April 16, 2008 P • : Recommendation (cont.) Miami City Hall 21 Wednesday, April 30, 2008 "AB Recommendation (cont.) Miami City Hall 22 Thursday, May 08, 2008 City Commission - DCA Transmittal Hearing Miami City Hall 23 Thursday, July 24, 2008 Adorn Hearing (tentative) TBA Page 1 SUBSTITUTED Prior to the meetings listed on the previous page, the City actually initiated its EAR proc s with an extensive community involvement effort that occurred between April 2004 and J ly 2004. During this time, the Project Team conducted 30 meetings that entailed a series of ne-on-one meetings with key City staff and elected officials, an interagency scoping meetg held with adjacent local governments, and County, regional, and State agencies, five pu is workshops (one per Commission district), and a workshop with the City's Planning Adviso Board. # Date Meeting 1 Tuesday, April 27, 2004 Commissioner Gonzales Meeting (District 2 Wednesday, April 28, 2004 Commissioner Regaldo Meeting (Distric 4) 3 Thursday, April 29, 2004 Commissioner Winton Meeting (Distri' 2) 4 Friday, April 30, 2004 Commissioner Sanchez Meeting (''strict 3) 5 Friday, April 30, 2004 Mayor Diaz Meeting 6 Wednesday, May 05, 2004 Commissioner Teele Meeting I istrict 5) 7 Thursday, May 13, 2004 Historic Preservation Meeti • 8 Friday, May 14, 2004 EAR/Transportation Elem- nt Update 9 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 Public Information Mee 'ng (District 4) 10 Thursday, May 20, 2004 Public Information M: eting (District 2) 11 Friday, May 21, 2004 Capital Improvem- is Element Meeting 12 Monday, May 24, 2004 EAR Interagenc Scoping Meeting Issues at Miami City Hall 13 Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Public Inform- ion Meeting (District 5) 14 Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Brownfield eeting 15 Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Transpo tion Element Meeting 16 Wednesday, May 26, 2004 Parks eeting 17 Friday, May 28, 2004 Eco •mic Development Meeting 18 Tuesday, June 01, 2004 S mary of Issues — Housing 19 Tuesday, June 01, 2004 = ummary of Issues — Public Works 20 Thursday, June 03, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 1) 21 Monday, June 07, 2004 Public Information Meeting (District 3) 22 Wednesday, June 09, 200 Summary of Issues — Land Use 23 Thursday, June 10, 200, Summary of Issues — Solid Waste 24 Thursday, June 17, 2► s4 Planning Staff Issues and Ideas 25 Friday, June 25, 2054 Transportation Element — Person Trip Methodology 26 Tuesday, July 1 2004 Transportation Element — Person Trp Methodology 27 Thursday, Jul 5, 2004 Miami River Corridor — Urban Infill Plan Meeting 28 Tuesday, J 20, 2004 Transportation Element — Person Trip Methodology 29 Wednesd- , July 28, 2004 Miami River Corridor — Urban Infill Plan Meeting Via Teleconference 30 Wednesday, July 28, 2004 Planning Advisory Board Workshop SUBSTITUTED Page 2 PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTIONI PAB=08=O14 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO AMEND ORDINAN AMENDED, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBO' CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING, ADDING, AN OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE ELEM COMPREHENSIVE PL':°] REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTES, TO INCORPORATE CONTAINED IN THE 2005 EVALUATION AND THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGE EFFECTIVE DATE. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 AT:' (EST: ECOMMENDING NO. 10544, AS OOD PLAN OF THE DELETING GOALS, NTS OF THE CITY'S HAPTER 163, PART II, HE RECOMMENDATIONS PRAISAL REPORT (EAR) OF CONTAINING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR -IES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, iL rec _or Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014a A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ' ECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED MIAMI RIVER SUB-ELEME AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 6-2 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-O8-014b A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOA` . RECOMMENDINU APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING C NGES: GOAL PA-3: "THE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER WHICH ENCO ASSES THE WATER DEPENDENT MARINE ACTIVITY ON THE RIV'E-, INCLUDING SHIPPING AND THE ASSOCIATED SUPPORTING MARINE NDUSTRIES ZONED SD-4 ON THE MIAMI RIVER, SHALL BE EN • URAGED TO CONTINUE OPERATION AS A VALUED AND ECONOM ALLY VIABLE COMPONENT OF THE CITY'S MARITIME INDUSTRIAL : SE"; POLICY PA-3.1.1: "THE CITY MAY ENCOURAGE THE ESTABLI , MENT AND MAINTENANCE OF WATER. -DEPENDANT AND WATER -RE ten ALONG THE BANKS OF THE MIAMI RIVER ALONG WITH TER TAXI AND WATER; PLEASURE CRAFT USES ALONG THE ENT - E RIVER AND TO DISCOURAGE ENCROACHMENT BY INCOMPATI = E USES. THE CITY SHALL, THROUGH ITS LAND DEVELOPMENT RE c LATIONS, ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE I AIM RIVIER IN APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS, PROVIDED THE RESIDENTIA _ USES ARE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT LAND USES W ' - PR • ECTING THIE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER'S ECONOMIC FUNCTIO , + AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS"; AND POLICY PA-3.1.3: 'THE CITY SHALL ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT OF COMPATIBLE LA USES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PORT OF MIAMI RIVER TO AVOID F -THER DEPLETION OF LAND ZONED FOR MARINE INDUSTRIAL USE ND TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS ARISING FROM T .E PORT OF MIAMI RIVER UPON ADJACENT NATURAL RESOURCES A LAND USES". HEARIN SATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID 08-00223ct ITEM 0.: P.1 VOT : 8-0 ATTEST: 'c ar V Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, irector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-OB-014c A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD COMMENDING APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHA ES: POLICY LU- 1.4.10: "THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO DEVELOP ODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING REGULATIONS WITH THE INTENT OF P - OVIDING GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT TION OF MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE GENERAL D ' NTOWN AREA AUD PARTICULARLY ALONG THE MIAMI RIVER r OWNTOWN AREA AND PARTICULARLY ALONG THE MIAMI RIVER D r NTOWN IN ACCORDANCE NEIGHB OOD 9E AND r VELOPMENT STANDARDS ADOP E AMEN ., MENTS TO THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND O ' ER INITIATIVES"; POLICY LU- 1.3.3: "THE CITY SHALL ENC +% URAGE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF WATER DEPE ■ ENT AND WATER. RELATED USES ON THE MIAMI RIVER WITHIN XISTING DISTRICTS DESIGNATED INDUSTRIAL ON THE FUTURE L D USE MAP"; AND POLICY HO 2.1.4: "THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO - OMOTE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW, HIGH A QUALITY, DENSE URBAN NEI BORHOODS ►+ LONG. THE MIAMI RIVER (IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 19 • MIAMI DINER MASTER PLAN), IN CENTRAL BRICKELL AND IN SOUTHE ST OVERTOWN ! PARK WEST". HEARING DATE: Apri 0, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct '-ITEM NO.: P,.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchei, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014d A RESOLUTIO OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHAN "PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF LAND FOR USES"; OBJECTIVE CIM-3.1: "ALLOW NO NET DEVOTED TO WATER DEPENDENT USES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI"; POLICY CM-3.1.1: "FUT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WILL ENCOU USES ALONG THE SiHOR,ELINE".F HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 COMMENDIF ES: GOAL CM-: ATER DEPENDENT OSS OF ACREAGE ASTAL AREA OF THE E LAND USE AND GE WATER DEPENDENT monsimmossia Ana Gelabert=SanchezD ,ector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014e A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHAN 2.2.3: "THE CITY WILL REQUIRE, AS PART OF THE APPLICATION, PURSUANT TO STATE LAW, THAT ARCHAEOLOGIST BE NOTIFIED OF CONSTRUC SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL OF ARCHAEOLOGIC POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS ARE UNCOVERED DURING CON AND LOCAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL OFFICIA SURVEYING AND EXCAVATING THE SITE". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 rTEST: COMMENDING S: POLICY LU- UILDING PERMIT HE CITY OF MIAMI ION SCHEDULES IN ZONES AND WHERE R ARCHAEOLOGICAL RUCTION, PERMIT STATE S THE OPPORTUNITY OF Ana. Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014f A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOA APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING C 2.1.1: "THE CITY WILL ADHERE TO ITS 198E STO PLAN AND SUBSEQUENT UPDATES AS TH GUIDELINE FOR IMPROVING ITS STORM SYSTEM, AND WILL UPDATE THE ESTIMAT THAT PLAN THROUGH THE ANNUAL UP IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM INCLUDED I ELEMENT OF THE MCINP. THE CI SPECIFIED IN THE 1986 STORM PRIORITY GIVEN TO ADDRESSIN AREAS WITHIN THE CITY, Ala SUPPORTED BY A FINANCING P OF CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE VIII WATER UTILITY SYSTEM. 1" WITH MEASURABLE GOAL REPORTED AND REVIEWE HEARING DATE: Apr FILE ID# 08-00223c ITEM NO: 0.1 VOTE: 8-0 RECOMMENDING ANGES: POLICY SS- M DRAINAGE MASTER LONG-RANGE POLICY RAINAGE MANAGEMENT COST OF IMPLEMENTING ES TO [HE CITY'S CAPITAL HE CAPITAL IMF ? }' EMENTS WILL RANK THE PROJECTS INAGE MASTER PLAN, 'WIT 1 THE MOST CRITICAL PROBLEM IMPLEMENT THOSE PROJECTS AN ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS F THE CITY CODE, ENTITLED "STORM 1986 PLAN WILL BE UPDATED BY 2010 AND OBJECTIVES. THE PLAN WILL BE ANNUALLY AND AT TIME OF EAR". 30, 2008 Ana (;elabert-Sanchez, Director f Tanning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014g A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD )MMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "NATURAL GROUNDW! F ER AQUIFER RECHARGE" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPA VENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: B-0 ATTEST: Anae��a�bert San chez Ditior Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014h A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARRECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "POTABLE WATER" AS P SENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 A1TE Ana Gelabert-Sanchez,lbirector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD - ECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "SOLID WASTE COLLECTION" • S PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTES Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014j A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD COMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "PORTS, AVIATI O N AND RELATED FACILITIES". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014k A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD COMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "PARKS, RECREATION AND *PEN SPACE" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST* ,A3An Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, d'rector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-0141 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOAR! RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "NATURAL RESOURCE ' ONSERVATION" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATT = T: ,.4el. LA. Aria Gelabert-Sanchez, krector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014m A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ' ECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS" S PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATf ES AnaG I - he- e abert anc z director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014n A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ' ECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO ACCEPT "INTERGOVERNMENTAL •ORDINATION" AS PRESENTED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTES --4-1-61tA Ana Gelabert- anchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014o A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "HOUSING". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST - Ana Gelabert-Sanchez,' Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014p A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "SANITARY S 'ORM SEWERS". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTES Ana Gelabert- anchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014q A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD " ECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "COASTAL MAN , GEMENT". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanche , Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014r A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOAR APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORT "AREAS DESIGNATED AS MAJOR INSTITUTION TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" ALLOW F STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTIVI PRIVATE HEALTH, RECREATIONAL, C EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES, AND MAJOR T AND PUBLIC UTILITIES. RESIDENTIAL F USES ARE ALLOWED UP TO A MAXIMU LEAST INTENSE ABUTTING/ADJACE THE SAME LIMITING CONDITIONS". HERRING DATE: April 30, 200 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: RECOMMENDING ANGES: MAJOR ION AND UTILITIES: , PUBLIC FACILITIES, ILITIES FOR FEDERAL, S, MAJOR PUBLIC OR TURAL, RELIGIOUS OR ANSPORTATION FACILITIES ILITIES ANCILLARY TO THESE DENSITY EQUIVALENT TO THE ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Director Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014s A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD R APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CHAN 1.3.10: "THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO AGGRESSIVEL VIOLATIONS IN ITS NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH TH OF ONGOING AND NEW NEIGHBORHOOD IMPRO ENFORCEMENT STRATEGIES AND INITIATIVES; ENFORCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS APPR AND ENHANCE THE PHYSICAL CONDITIO COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS IN T CITY WILL REPORT ON AN ANNUAL BA END, WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMP REQUIREMENTS OF THIS POLICY". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 COMMENDING S: POLICY LU- ADDRESS CODE IMPLEMENTATION MENTS, AND CODE ND WILL ADOPT AND PRIATE TO PRESERVE AND APPEARANCE OF E CITY BY JULY 2009. THE S, AS OF CALENDAR YEAR (SHED TO FULFILL THE ATTEST: 't...1 Dtr��D Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Dif`ector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014t A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOAR APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING CH 1.5.3: "NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PROVIDED TO ANY NET REGISTERED HOMED FIFTEEN DAYS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF TH AFTER ISSUANCE OF THE DECISION" AND PO APPLICATIONS REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARIN ANY NET REGISTERED HOMEOWN ASSOCIATIONS AND TO OWNERS WIT PROPERTY". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: RECOMMENDING GES: POLICY LU- ERMITS SHALL BE NERS ASSOCIATIONS SPECIAL PERMIT AND ICY LU-1.5.4: "NOTICE OF S SHALL BE PROVIDED TO AND NEIGHBORHOOD 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, Ditto!. Planning Department SUBSTITUTED PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION PAB-08-014u A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ' ECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AS AMENDED, TO ACCEPT "FUTURE LAND - SE". HEARING DATE: April 30, 2008 FILE ID# 08-00223ct ITEM NO.: P.1 VOTE: 8-0 ATTEST: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, i irector Planning Department SUBSTITUTED OA Or City of Miami Legislation Ordinance City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, F 33133 www.miaigov com File Number: 08-00223ct Final Act' AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACH AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OF THE CITY OF MIA AMENDING, ADDING, AND DELETING GOALS, OBJECTIVES, A THE ELEMENTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS CHAPTER 163, PART II, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO INCORPO RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE 2005 EVALUAT REPORT (EAR) OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITT AGENCIES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE D n Date: NT(S), I, BY POLICIES OF QUIRED BY ATE THE N AND APPRAISAL ONTAINING A LS TO AFFECTED E. WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 163, Part II, Florid Statutes (F.S.), the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) was adopted by the City ommission of the City of Miami by Ordinance No. 10544 on February 9, 1989; and WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. an. Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) require that each local government periodicall update its comprehensive plan through the preparation and adoption of an evaluation and apprais- report assessing the success or failure of the adopted comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission 2005; and opted the Evaluation and Appraisal Report on December 1st, WHEREAS, R-05-0707, adop ng the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), indicated that the City of Miami shall consider mendment of the MCNP based on recommendations in the EAR and shall consider updating the co' prehensive plan in accordance with Sections 163.3184, 163.3187, and 163.3191, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Chapte' 163, Part II, F.S., requires that each local government incorporate recommendations con : ined in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report as amendments to the MCNP; and WHEREAS, t'e Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of April 30, 2008, Item No.1, following an advertised pub hearing, adopted by Resolution No. PAB 08-014, by a vote of eight to zero (8-0) recommendinAPPROVAL with modifications of text amendments to the MCNP, as attached in "Exhibit A" , and WH EAS, the Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of April 30, 2008, Item No.1, following an advertised public hearing, adopted by Resolution No. PAB 08-014a, by a vote of six to two (6-2) reco mending DENIAL of the proposed Miami River Sub -Element as presented by the Planning De'artment, as attached in "Exhibit B"; and City of Miami SUBSTITUTED Page 1 of 2 Printed On: 5/2 2008 File Number 08-00223c1 WHEREAS, on May 8, 2008, the City Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at ich time it voted to transmit the amendments attached as "Exhibit A" {1} for review by state, region:I and local agencies as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of this matter deem it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants t. amend the MCNP as hereinafter set forth. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORID Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble this Ordinance are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth this Section. Section 2. Ordinance No. 10544, as amended, the t NP, is hereby, amended by amending the text of the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of said 0 : finance as attached in "Exhibit A". {1} Section 3. The City Manager is directed to instruct e Director of the Planning Department to immediately transmit certified copies of this Ordinance and the amended MCNP to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Tallahassee, Florida South Florida Regional Planning Council, Hollywood, Florida; and any other public official or goverment agency requesting a copy for statutorily mandated review. Section 4. If any section, part of sec on, paragraph, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is declared invalid, the remaining prov :ions of this Ordinance shall not be affected. Section 5. This Ordinance shall b ome effective thirty-one (31) days after second reading and adoption thereof pursuant and subject §163.3184, 163.3187, and 163.3189, F.S. (2007). {2} APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CO' ' ECTNESS JULIE O. BRU CITY ATTORNEY f�c,V Footnotes: {1 } Words and/or •gures stricken through shall be deleted. Underscored words and/or figures shall be added. The re :ining provisions are now in effect and remain unchanged. {2} This Or.' ance shall become effective as specified herein unless vetoed by the Mayor within ten days from e date it was passed and adopted. If the Mayor vetoes this Ordinance, it shall become effective ►ate stated herein, whichever is later. City of Miami SUBSTITUTED Page 2 of 2 Printed On: 5/2,72008 EAR -Based Amend ents File ID: 08-00 ' 3ct Exhibit SUBSTITUTED Notice: This document is the Plannin recommended EAR -Based 30, 2008. Advisory Board endment document of April SUBSTITUTED Volume 1 of the MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLA GOAL o-, OBJEC IVES Po ICIES City of Miami Planning Department 444 SW 2nd Avenue • Miami, FL 33130 r 30 2008 The iami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan was adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989 and has been amended by the City Commission through March 23, 2006. SUBSTITUTED Volume 1 of the MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN GOALS OBJECTIVES POLICIES TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF AMENDING ORDINANCES IV FUTURE LAND USE 1 URBAN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 15 The Downtown Miami Master Plan 17 REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS 18 Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center 19 INTERPRETATION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MAP 22 CONSERVATION 22 RESTRICTED PARKS AND RECREATION 22 RECREATION 23 MARINE FACILITIES 23 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 23 DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL 24 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 24 HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 25 Little Havana Target Area 25 Southeast Overtown/Park West 25 Brickell, Omni, and River Quadrant 25 OFFICE 25 MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, T : 4 SPORTATION AND UTILITIES 26 MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSP I ' TATION AND UTILITIES 26 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL 28 MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRA PORTATION AND UTILITIES 28 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) 28 Residential Density Increase Areas.. 29 GENERAL COMMERCIAL 30 INDUSTRIAL 30 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI) 30 Live/Work District 31 Work/Live District 31 CORRESPONDENCE TABLE - ONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 32 HOUSING 33 SANITARY AND ST . M SEWERS 40 NATURAL GRO DWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE 45 POTABLE TER 46 SOLID ASTE COLLECTION 47 TR SPORTATION 50 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 ii SUBST1`1` u TED PORTS, AVIATION AND RELATED FACILITIES .64 PORT OF MIAMI 64 MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 65 PORT OF MIAMI RIVER 66 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE 68 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE COASTAL MANAGEMENT NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION EDUCATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 68 86 95 100 112 120 SUBSTITUTED LIST OF AMENDING ORDINANCES The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan was adopted in 1989 and substantially amended in 1991 in response to Florida Department of Community Affairs review comments. The ordina a adopting the Comprehensive Plan, including subsequent text amendments (only), are as follows: Ordinance Date of Adoption Description of Ordin. ce 10544 February 9, 1989 Adopted the MCNP 1989-2000 with m . • ifications that supersedes the MCNP (September 1985) and Adden• am, provided support documents are not adopted with the plan. 10700 January 11, 1990 Amended the definition of the Lan' Use Element to refine the definitions of Residential, Office and Industria , amended the Housing Element Objective 1.3 and Policy 1.3.4 and de ted Policy 1.3.5 pertaining to community - based residential facilities, . • ult congregate living facilities, family homes and family group and grout homes; and corrected a scriveners error. 10701 January 11, 1990 Amended the Drainas • Sub -Element, Policy No. 2.1.3, specifying which storm sewers in th= city will be designed for a 1-in-5 year event and establishing a sp-cific LOS standard for the remainder of the storm sewers; Coasta anagement Sub -Element, Policy 4.1.2, defining and designating th Coastal High -Hazard Area within the city; and adopted consistent L 6 S standards in both the Drainage Sub -Element and Policy No. 1.2.3 • of the CIP Element. 10832 January 24, 1991 Amend:. the MCNP Future Land Use; Interpretation of Future Land Use Maps• ousing; Sanitary and Storm Sewers; Natural Groundwater Aquifer Rec'arge; Potable Water; Solid Waste Collection; Transportation; Ports, A '.tion & Related Facilities; Parks, Recreation & Open Space; Coastal anagement; Natural Resource Conservation; and Capital Improvements and Intergovernmental Coordination elements. 10833 January 24, 1991 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use Map Plan by changing land use designations that affect approximately 5-percent of the total land area of the City. 11207 December , 1994 Allowed professional offices, tourist & guest homes, and museums within historic districts/structures within single family, duplex and medium density multi -family residential areas. 11242 M. ch 27, 1995 Allowed small-scale, limited commercial uses as accessory uses within medium, density multi -family areas. 11496 May 22,1997 Allowed professional offices, tourist & guest homes, museums, and private clubs or lodges within historic districts/structures within single family, duplex and medium density multi -family residential areas; density and intensity restricted to the structure(s). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 iv SUBSTITUTED Ordinance Date of Adoption Description of Ordinance 11779 March 23, 1999 Amended the MCNP Future Land Use; Housing; Sani , ry and Storm Sewers; Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge; Pot. de Water; Solid Waste Collection; and Parks, Recreation & Ope r Space elements according to 1995 EAR -based recommendations. 11781 March 23, 1999 Amended the Interpretation of Future Land U Map to conditionally include residential uses to the general commerci, land use designation. 11782 March 23, 1999 Amended the MCNP Interpretation of the ture Land Use Map to add "Restricted Parks and Recreation" an. "Marine Facilities" land use classifications. 11864 November 16, 1999 Amended the MCNP Future Land Us: lement to adopt the designation of an "urban infill" area to meet Stat: requirements regarding school siting and co -location. 11961 September 14, 2000 Amended the MCNP Future and Use Element, Policy LU-1.1.11, to exclude Virginia Key, Wat •n Island, and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay having a "c► servation" land use and zoning classification from the Urban Infill Are.. 12332 February 27, 2003 Amended the Trans. •rtation Element of the MCNP in accordance with recommendations • the 1995 Evaluation and Appraisal Report; revisions to the "Report of sufficiency Issues with Responses by the City of Miami" in response to e Florida Department of Community Affairs; affirmation of the designati• of an "urban infill" area adopted by Ordinance 11864; and in accorda ' - with the designation of an "urban streets" category of public thoroughf es. 12333 February 27, 2003 Amend-• the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element of the MCNP to inclu• - specific goals associated with a new park in Little Haiti. 12346 March 27, 2003 A, ended the MCNP Interpretation of the Future Land Use Map to add a ight Industrial" land use classification. 12442 November 25, 200 Rescinded Ordinance Nos. 12332, 12333 and 12346; updated the Transportation Element, added policies associated with a new park in Little Haiti, and added the "Light Industrial" land use classification. 12445 Novembe25, 2003 Amended the Future Land Use Element of the MCNP to include the designation of "Regional Activity Centers" within the City of Miami. 12446 Nov- ber 25, 2003 Amended the Future Land Use Element of the MCNP to designate the Buena Vista Regional Activity Center, and amended the Future Land Use Map to designate the Florida East Coast (FEC) Buena Vista Yard as a Regional Activity Center. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED Ordinance Date of Adoption Description of Ordinance 12536 May 6, 2004 Amended the Intergovernmental Coordination Elem: t of the MCNP in accordance to recommendations from the 1995 E : uation and Appraisal Report; amended the Future Land Use Element ,y deleting an objective and policies related to Intergovernmental Coor.' ation by transferring them into the Intergovernmental Coordination Ele • nt. 12635 December 4, 2004 Amended the Coastal Management, Natu :I Resource Conservation and Capital Improvements elements of e MCNP in accordance to recommendations from the 1995 Evalu. ion and Appraisal Report. 12741 November 3, 2005 Amended the Future Land Use Ele r ent of the MCNP and the Future Land Use Map to designate the Downt► n Miami Master Plan an Urban Central Business District. 12786 March 23, 2006 Amends certain policies .f the Future Land Use, Housing, Parks Recreation & Open pace, Coastal Management and Capital Improvements elemen . of the MCNP to incorporate language necessary to implement the Mi. ii 21 project. 12966 January 24, 2008 Adding a new ' ducational Element and amending and adding certain policies to the Capital Improvement and Intergovernmental element of the MCNP to incorporate language necessary to implement Public School Concurre ' cy. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 vi SUBSTITUTED FUTURE USE Goan ' U-1: Maintain a land use ern that (1) protects and enhances the neighborhoods; (2) fosters redevelopment an L.- declining areas; (3) promotes and facilitates economic dev grc•• ofjob opportunities in the city; (4) fosters the growth and deve as a re ;+ional center of domestic and international commerce, culture prom 'vs the efficient use of land and minimizes land use confli if / {. .3 (: !' .°'r1 iL� I :. :'[l.. �{.J 4.; {ti elf l.`i ✓� (6) /- city.s significant natural and coastal resources and (7) pr, the City's n..vi npfgi q ality of life in revitalization of lopment and the ment of downtown nd entertainment; (5) s 3nd tects and conserves the ily of Objective LU-1.1: Ensure land and developme regiilations are consistent with fostering a high quality of life in all areas, incl s ing the timely provision of public facilities that meet or exceed the minimum Ie%'I if service (LOS) standards adopted in the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) of tf Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Policy LU-1.1.1: Development orde . authorizing new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the Density or intensity of land use shall be contingent upon the availability of public f. ' titles Ytt: that meet or exceed the minimum LOS standards adopted in the CIE .pecitil k,u rm ." . _creation and transportation facilities. The public services and for provided to meet concurrency requirements shall be consistent with the . npmvements Element, or guaranteed in an enforceable agreement. The Services and facilities will include public schools when the Miami -Dade Coll ,chool Board and local governments in the county implement school concurre ursuant to . are+rash 163.3177 12 i F.S Policy L .1.2: The City's Planning Department, with the assistance of various City depart nts and agencies, at1 ns a-fer-rnen:itaring will-{11continuously land development activities to ensure compliance with the Future Land Use rap and the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use element of .�{CNP; (2) monitor a proposed amendments to land development regulations to _Isure consistency with the MCNP and will forward its recommendation on such amendments to the Plar1nirn n,1„'sr.r{ nn2rrT and to the C11,, r•,n rs?;s fir, (1) ~:nntinuously monitor the current and projected LOS starrrlaro provided by public facilities_ and. The PIanninn Dcpartrnent perforn the required concurrency review of proposed development for submittal to the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA), as required by Florida statutes and administrative rules Policy LU-1.1.3: The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 1 SUBSTITUTED natural or man-made amenities; anti (3) transportation policies that divide or fragmr ni established neighborhoods; and (4) degradation of public open space, environ, en1, and ecology. Strategies to further protect existing neighborhoods throe. ` the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering reguiremen : that do not diminish the amount of area encompassint the ad'acentlabuttin., residential neighborhood will be incorporated into the City's land development requl. ions. Policy LtJ-1.1.4: The City -will -I and fu Conti n the - n f roameni f . p rrnrmanse to Clark The ! ity will continue to aggressively address code violations in its neighborhoods thro +h the implementation of code enforcement strategies and initiatives with the i► ent of preserving and enhancing neighborhood environmental conditions. Policy LU-1.1.5: The Planning Department, with t • assistance of various City departments and agencies, shall annually monitor Ceps taken to fulfill the Goals, Objectives, and Policies (GOPs) of the MCNP a biennially report the status of the GOPs to the Planning Advisory Board and Cit ' ommission includinbut not limited to, improving measurability of objectives. Policy LtJ-1.1.6: The City's street and curb and gutter, and street landsc economically infeasible. m sewer improvement projects will provide ng, unless deemed to be physically or Policy LU-1.1.7: Land development regulations and policies will allow for the development and redevelop ► A of well -designed mixed -use neighborhoods that provide for the full range of • sldential, office. live/work spaces, neighborhood retail. and community facilities a walkable area and that are amenable to a variety of transportation modes* fading pedestrianism, bicycles, automobiles, and mass transit. . _ _ .. - . o e e t hoppin Ce1 T+�pp, gFne�e�'ie�; --dal►--�r�, rx. Tor c #ain me 1, a r 1 -sup iti ,es, Policy LU-1.1 the City's la and adjac conti public yen space. The City's Planning Department will be responsible for coordinating development regulations and policies with those of Miami -Dade County t municipalities, and in particular: with respect to impacts to infrastructure, s develo ' went with re s and to 'h sical hei ' ht and mass transitions and P icy LU-1.1.9: The City will maintain low to moderate density uses in the West lagami area of the city (as shown on Figure 111,1 of Volume it — Data and Analysis of the MCNP) as necessary to protect the secondary aquifer recharge area. (See Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Policy AR-1,2.1.) Policy LU-1.1.10: The City's land development regulations will encourage high density residential development and redevelopment in close proximity to Metrorail and Metromaver stet ions.; -se ster+t-with-th for each stati (See Transportation Policy TR-1.5.2 and Housing Policy HO-1.1.9.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 2 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED Policy LU-1.1.11: The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Vi .inia Key, Watson Island and th.' uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, the, have a I. d use and zoning classification of Conservation, as :n Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infi Area lyin generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all of the ty of Miar Areas designated Sindle-i-amiiy and Duplex—i esidentialon the IA'. 1-uture Lai Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from ch noes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office and i-dustrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density residential ch acter of these areas. Redevelopment_of corridors adjacent to these areas shall be couraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial corridors_ lisp -this -area- Outside of these residential are; the concentration and intensific ion of development aroun centers of activity shall be emphasized with the goa : of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viability of comme ial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adaptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of sutandard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this Designated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in ac'ordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standarc t;ity of Miami Person Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 • " the Transportation Element of the MCNP. Policy LU-1.1.12: In order to e'courage the development and maintenance of educational facilities in the City o iami, the City's Land Use policies permit schools in all land use classifications cept Conservation, Parks and Recreation, and Industrial. During pre -development program planning and site selection activities, the C. y shall coordinate with Miami -Dade Public Schools and continue to seek, wher: feasible and mu:,, ally acceptable, to co -locate schools with other facilities such as •arks, libraries, and community centers to the extent possible. Policy LU-1.1.13' City shall review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (U1A) an `or Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) within two years of the +option of this policy to determine, but not limited to, the following: the appropriat- ess of the areas included in the UTA andlor the TCEA: the benefits andlor disadva -ges resulting from the inclusion (or exclusion) of these areas within the UTA andlor the TCEA; the strategies to support mobility and alternative modes of rtation within those areas included in the UTA andlor the TCEA: and the to address urban design and network connectivity to improve mobility within e areas included in the UTA andlor the TCEA. Policy Lll-1.1.14: Improve facility and program accessibility through implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 199O. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 3 SUBSTITUTED Objective LU-1.2: Promote, facilitate, and catalyze the redevelopment a revitalization of blighted, declining or threatened residential, commercial d industrial areas through a variety of public, private, and public-p vale redevelopment initiatives and revitalization programs including,where appr : r date( historic designations. Policy LU-1.2.1: The City defines blighted neighborhoods as areas c racterired by the prevalence of older structures with major deficiencies and dY erioration, high residential vacancies, widespread abandonment of property litter and poor maintenance of real property. Declining neighborhoods a defined as areas characterized by the prevalence of structures having minor . eficienciies, a general need for improvements in real property, significant decline in real property values, high vacancy rates in commercial structures and incre ing difficulty in ',obtaining insurance. Neighborhoods threatened with decline are d fined as areas characterized by significant but infrequent property maintenance nlect, an aging housing stock, declining property values, general exodus of traditi.nal residents and influx of lower income households. Policy LU-1.2.2: The City's land develo+ ent policies will be consistent with affordable housing objectives and policies -;.opted in the Housing element -Element of the Miami-Caraap eheye NeigI borh ed - . MOP, Policy LU-1.2.3: The City's rp ; i : , _ . a €►striae revitali alien prograrne will contin„e fin _ yj hxjbest _ - my rs.n melee inig neinhhr oc £ee8nd-pr4erity to reversing -trends in declining areas , nnrl +hirri prin,. + •+r: i e-blighted-oonditionsr d t h e City-wilt--eeetinue--its a late-;4-^in4le ems. priorities in -I r ementino, facilitation, and encouraging redevelopment and revitalization projects r`.II be determined on an area specific basis in accordance with the adopted Consdl", ated Plan, Fiscal Years 2004-2009, adopted redevelopment plans, specific neiborhood and area plans, the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan. _ d the land development regulations. as appropriate and as incorporated tr he MCNP by reference in accordance with F.A.C. 9J-5.905(2)(Q). Policy L .2.4: The City will continue to adhere to its established policies regarding Community Redevelopment Districts and will continue to implement plans for the Omni and utheast OvertownlPark West as Community Redevelopment Districts. Policy LU-1.2.5: The City will continue to develop information programs on the vailability of redevelopment opportunities within the city. jective LU-1.3: The City will continue to encourage commercial, office and industrial development within existing commercial, office and industrial areas;; increase the utilization and enhance the physical character and appearance of existing buildings; encourage the development of well -designed, mixed -use neighborhoods that provide for a variety of uses within a walkable area in accordance Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 4 SUBSTITUTED with neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of t any r :. • latrrans nd concentra:,:e new commercial and industrial activity in areas where the capac y of existing public facilities can meet or exceed the minimum standards for vel of *Iry ice (LOS) adopted in the Capital Improvement Element (CIE). Policy LU-1.3.1: The City will continue to provide incentives f• commercial redevelopment and new construction e sua€tr rederreleemei te-t 1i, „ designated Neighborhaoi .uiopnnent Zones f NDZt, the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Browr• ,. id Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted a as. Such commercial redevelopment and new construction shall be cowl in accordance with neighborhood design and development standards a; d as a result of the amendments ' . itv cment ther in'' .ves.. Such incentives may be offered through the building facade reatment program, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, E:md .ther redevelopment assistance prog rams. Policy LU-1.3.2: The City will continue t• encourage the expansion of existing buildings and new construction through 'e private sector by assisting in making available commercial loan funds for rehRation and small business loans and seed moneys, particularly to local minorit businesses and encouraging the maximum participation, especially through pu c/private partnerships, of financial institutions, chambers of commerce, the Bea •n Council, other business organizations, property owners and residents of the are.. Priority areas include, but are not limited to, Center, SFLtleisFrOyertvw.'( cot, the-Gnrrncnt-Dtrct,cHIcr Rnvcr-innuusr,ni designated Neighborhood Develt2 t; t Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Brownfield R;+evelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted areas. Policy LU-1.3. { ese vedl--The City shall encourage development redevelopmen rf water dependent and water related uses on the Miami River with r existing dis s designated Industrial on the Future Land Use Map. Policy-1.3.4: The City will continue to work with the Miami -Dade County School Board o ensure the expansion of educational facilities in areas that are easily acc sible by public transit and facilitate the expansion of job training/job placement programs offered to youths (full time and summer terms) and low-income persons. Policy LU-1.3.5: The City will continue to promote through land development regulations, the creation of high intensity activity centers which may be characterized by mixed -use and specialty center development. uch activity „ordance with Plan and neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 5 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBS'rirr U TED Policy LU-1.3.6: The City will continue to encourage a diversification in the mix industrial and commercial activities and tenants through strategic and compreher ive marketing and promotion efforts so that: the te~eal-eeenomy_-desicnated Neighb� rhoad Development Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise ne, the Brownfield Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors and of r targeted areas is -are buffered from national and international cycles. Policy LU-1.3.7: The City will continue to use the City's, Enterpri Zone, and -Tax Increment Financing district, Empowerment Zone. Commerci« l usiness%Corridors, and Brownfield Redevelopment Area strategies to stimulate :)nomic revitalization, and encourage employment opportunities. Policy LU-1.3.8: The City will develop and implement raining and educational programs to assist the City's existing and future residef in achieving economic self-sufficiency utilizing government resources as nc ssary,•and will continue to work with appropriate State and County agencies to ► rect training programs and other technical assistance, to support minority and se skilled residents of the city. Policy LU-1.3.9: The. City will continue to co in small geographic areas that have redevelopment wen -as -the L Indu trial District a small -area action plans that hav owners. Policy LU-1.3.10: The Ci and will continue to the implementation enforcement strafe adsptiea enhance the p the city what has - en centrate Community Development efforts pedal opportunities and/or potential for rolal dicttrrct, ` 4;414er, l_[ttllCe Rivet Pafk-V-- est;-t Gan t Distfiet. Altapattah af•-Stn consistent with implementation of e support of neighborhood residents and business will inc oae a code enforcement efforts. l�u i Q%ch a year ssivel address code violations in its neighborhoods through ongoing and new neighborhood improvements, and code and initiatives, and will adopt and enforce eansid -t e performance standards appropriate to preserve and sical condition and appearance of commercial and industrial areas in by Ju 2009. The City will report on an annual basis, as of calendar year end, accomplished to fulfill the requirements of this policy. es Policy U-1.3.11: The City's land use regulations will provide incentives for the incl ion of day care facilities near major employment centers. olicy LU-1.3.12: The City's land use regulations will permit neighborhood -based health care facilities. Policy LU-1.3.13: [Reserved] Polity LU-1.3.14: The City will continue to enforce urban design guidelines for public and private projects which shall be consistent with neighborhood character, history, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 6 SUBSTITUTED and function, and shall be in accordance with the neighborhood design d development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's and development regulations and other initiatives. Policy LU-1.3.15: The City will continue to encouragea development attem that enhances existing neighborhoods by developing a balanced mix of es including areas for employment, shopping, housing, and recreation in close <imity to each other. )jective LU-1.4: Continue the growth of Do:. ntown Miami, expa • its role as a center of domestic and international commerce, fur' er its developm: t as a regional center for the performing arts and other cultural and entertainment activities and develop an u� > n residential base. Policy LU-1.4.1: [Reserved]. Policy LU-1.4.2: The City will continue to inve management districts, funded by special ass special events needed to attract visitors an and other special retail shopping areas in gate and, where appropriate, create sments to provide extra services and residents to the tagt�t retail core, owntown. Policy LU-1.4.3: The City will con ue to promote an active pedestrian sidewalk environment along the ground fl••r frontage of buildings on "pedestrian streets" through land development regula ons. Policy LU-1.4.4: he--Ct > retinue t supped onion; Dad ro unty in -cons► ;entef in dowFitown, f Reserved] - Policy LU-1.4.5: [Reserved] Policy LU-1.4.6: 'eserved] Policy LU-1 .7: The City will continue to enforce regulations within downtown to ensure thretail signage is of high quality and consistent with the design and develop ►-nt objectives for downtown. Poli ' LU-1.4.8: The City will continue to enforce land development regulations as n- essary in order to encourage rehabilitation and sensitive, adaptive reuse of historic roperties and older structures in downtown, and to exempt rehabilitation projects from Development of Regional Impact (DRI) mitigation fees. Policy LU-1.4.9: The City will continue to promote rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of vacant and underutilized spaces and provide incentives for rehabilitation of older buildings in downtown. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 7 SUBSTITUTED Policy LU-1.4.10: The City will continue to develop modifications to existi regulations with the intent of providing greater flexibility in the design nd implementation of mixed -use developments within the general Downtown are and particularly along the Miami River Downtown in accordance with neight orhoo► design and development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the ' ity's land development regulations and other initiatives. Policy L1J-1.4.11: The City will continue to streamline the developm- t application for development approvals to simplify and standardize the process, ile ensuring that the regulatory intent of the approvals is maintained. Policy LU-1.4.12: The City will continue to implement the D. ntown DRI development orders for downtown and Southeast Overtown/Park West, d seek approval for future increments of development in a timely manner. Objective LU-1.5; Land development regulations will rotect the city's unique natural and coastal resources, its neighborhoods, and its hi: oric and cultural heritage. Policy LU-1.5.1: Development orders in th city will be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies contained in the N ural Resource Conservation and Coastal Management elements of the . = •• s • • ^' ;'ei.r„i;;a MCNP. Policy LU-1.5.2: Land use regulations and development policies will be consistent with the intent and purpose of Ji-Dade County's Waterfront Charter Amendment, Shoreline Development Revi, :lance, and the_ -rules of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Management Area uiher appropriate requirements regarding waterfront access and management Policy LU-1.5.3: No of application for special permits shall be provided to any NET registered horr a w rs associations fifteen days prior to issuance of the special permit and after -is +once of the decision. Policy LU-1. ., Notice of application requiring public hearinns shall be provided to any NET re stered homeowner and neighborhood associations and to owners within 500 feet o he subject property. Objective -1.6: Regulate the development or redevelopment of real property within the city o insure consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of the Canripr ensive Plan. Policy LU-1.6.1: The "Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map" section of this element, which follows these land use goals, objectives and policies, establishes the activities and facilities allowed within each land use category appearing on the Future Land Use Plan Map, and the City's land development regulations snail be consistent with this section of the i MCNP. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood. Plan Goats objectives Policies April 30, 2008 8 SUBSTITUTED Policy LU-1.6.2: [Reserved] Policy LU-1.6.3: The City's Planning Department shall review all proposals to am d the City's Trnin; and any other land develop ent regulations, and shall report as to the consistency between any proposed am dment and the i G opf6"ei g-heec' et4-Pl MCN , to the Plannine Advisory Board, the City's "local planning agency," which will then forward its reco- mendation to the City Commission for approval and adoption. Policy LU-1.6.4: Any proposal to amend the City's z ling-7 ninr. that has been deemed to require an amendment to the Future Land se Plan Map by the Planning Department, shall require alev, r' _ review and a finding from the Planning Department that he proposed amendment will not result in a LOS that falls below the adopted minimum standards ,d in l'oiity GI-1.2.3, and will not be in conflict with any element of the Based on its evaluation, and on other r: event planning considerations, the Planning Department will forward a recommen. •d action on said amendment to the Planning Advisory Board, which will then fo .rd its recommendation to the City Commission. Policy LU-1.6.5: The City may continue to se special district designations as a land development regulation instrument fo the purpose of accomplishing specific development objectives in particular ar:.s of the city. Policy LU-1.6.6: The City will co nue to enforce signage regulations to ensure the quality of life in the city's neighb• oods. Policy LU-1.6.7: rig_ i he Lizy will provide adequate opportunity for public Uu��u<« �l fut�:iiULUt z, anges and variances within neighborhoods. Policy LU-1.6.8: Th City's land development regulations and policies will .Jow , nace #ement of th' the provision of open space in development projects in both residential and ommercial areas. Policy LU- .6.9: The City's land developmert regulations will establish mechanisms tomitigat: the potentially adverse impacts of :vel, ighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards r inq requirements that do not diminish the amount of area encompassing the Art/abutting residential neighborhood and through adequate notice to affected as. Policy LU-1.6.10: The City's land development regulations and policies will allow for the provision of safe and convenient on -site traffic flow and vehicle parking provide ac .... s by a v : _ ;cludinu cycles, automnbsles anri transit Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 9 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED Policy LU-1.6.11: The City's land development regulations and policies will insure i areas designated conservation are protected from development other than that + iKt promotes its passive appreciation. Policy LU-1.6.12 #:: The City's land development regulations will direct '-creational activities to areas of the city where facilities and services are available. Objee U 1-.7: L age-rec l-development-within-deli r ed recreation us^ ^$neen r g activities-w rage-thxisting bl Ia lidos -ter servo ck vnlopment mnnling adopted 1 ill--direct--ro c rational clog Objective LU-1.1: Ensure that the Miami Comprehe ive Neighborhood Plan is updated as needed to meet changing conditions ant improve its effectiveness and success. Policy LU-1.7.1; Update the MCNP by Jar nary 2009, to include a detailed list of definition of terms used by the MCNP with . effective time tine showing coordination and consultation with various City departm is and stakeholders. Goal LU-2: Preserve and protect the heritage the City of Miami through the identification, evaluation, rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, storation and public awareness of Miami's historic, architectural and archaeological r: ources. (See Coastal Management Goal CM-5.) Objective LU-2.1: Maintain, upda and amplify the City of Miami portion of the Miami -Dade County Historic Survey, which identifies and evaluates the etty-City's historic, architectural, and . chaeological resources, and continue to increase the number of eligible pry t ' s included in the Miami -Dade County Historical Survey (See Coastal Manageme Objective CM-5.1.). Policy LU-2.1. The City will continue to identify potential historic districts and conduct 4irth additional historic surveys -a -Gent ►tiflinanEl-Ransentril to identify e ".ible historic resources. (See Coastal Management. Policy CM-5.1.f.) Policy U-2.1.2: The City will continue to develop -and iFH-pIerenl-a maintain and upda the computerized database of all relevant information for ally sites in the Mi. i-Dade County Historic Survey. This listing will show, in three categories, all operties of historic, architectural or archaeological significance; together with their priority ranking for presentation. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.2.) jective LU-2.2: Protect archaeological resources within the city from destruction and loss. Policy LU-2.2.1: The City will pursue the designation of significant archaeological zones under the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 10 Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED Policy LU-2.2.2: The City will continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade Co ty Archaeologist in monitoring building activity near..rites ; of-ar activiti rear archeological sites. Policy LU-2.2.3: The City will require, as part of the building per application, pursuant to state law, that the Miami--Bade-C ttyCity of Miami cbaeologist be notified of construction schedules in significant historical of archaer ogical zones and where potentially significant historical or archaeological artifacts e uncovered during construction, (permit state and local archaeological officials 4.he .:;.001-tunitv of surveying and excavating the site. Policy LU-2.2.4: The City will—e scle,-t -need for-a'g` shall a an ordinance levying civil penalties for failure to report the disco ery of an archaeological site duringconstruction. Objective LU-2.3: Encourage the p.servation of :II historic architectural ind archai.. resources that have major siificance to the city by .ice continuing to increas+: the number of nationa and locally designated sites by -time percent each r or the period a O i to-2013. Policy LU-2.3.1: The City will contin - to review nominations to the National Register of Historic Places through the C ified Local Government Program. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.1.4.) Policy LU-2.3.2: The City h.d designated 67 historic sites and five historic districts pursuant to the Historic Preservation Article of the City Code. An additional 26 sites (or groups of multiple sites) d six districts have been identified as potentially worthy of designation. Of these, ' e City will designate 10 individual sites and two districts by , (See Coastal Management Noiicy CM-5.1.3.) Objective LU-2.4: Incr, ase the number of historic structures that have been preserved, rehabilitated or res .red, according to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation See Coastal Management Objective G:'. Policy -2.4.1: The City will encourage the conservatic 1, rehabilitation, restoration and a..ptive reuse of historic and architecturally significan housing resources through low ' terest housing rehabilitation loans that may be offered by City agencies. olicy LU-2.4.2: The City will continue to utilize the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation as the minimum standards for of historic properties. To receive public financial support from the City, designated xivately owned structures must meet these standards. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.2.1.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 11 SUBS1 1 l U l LI ) Policy LU-2.4.3: The City currently owns riineiaine historic sites and other poten .I archaeological sites. If it is deemed in the public interest: benefit for the City to trsfer title of City properties of historic, architectural or archaeological signifcanc.-, such transfers will include restrictive covenants to ensure the protection and presi- -ion of such properties. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-5.2.2.) Policy Ltf-2.4.,4: The City will continue to work with other focal goveri :+)Is that have title to properties of major historic or architectural significanc- to ensure the conservation, preservation and adaptive and sensitive reuse of su properties. Objective LU-2.5: increase public awareness of the hi orical, architectural, archaeological resources and cultural heritage of the city and public policy and programs to protect and preserve this heritage, throw, public information and education programs. Policy LU-2.5.1: The City will continue to develop a series of publications relating to historic preservation in general and the city's his ric resources in particular. Policy LU-2.5.2: The City will maintain a historic marker program for designated properties and other key areas, and will p : ish same. Policy LU-2.5.3: [Reserved] Policy LU-2.5.4: The City will itinue to provide information on the sits City°s historic, architectural and cultu -: I heritage for inclusion in public information, economic development promotion and +urism materials. (See Coastal Management Policy CM- 5.1.5.) Goal l_ LI-3: Encourage urba redevelopment in identified Urban lnfill Areas and Urban Redevelopment Areas. Objective l_U-3-1: 'romptly review and act on petitions for land use plan amendments and rezoning o property in Urban Infill Areas or Urban Redevelopment Areas to facilitate rede • lopment. Poll ► LU-3.1.1: Review existing Continue review of existing zoning regulations to de •rmine if they provide adequate flexibility to promote redevelopment with a mix of ses in Urban Infill Areas or Urban Redevelopment Areas and, if not, revise said existing zoning regulations or adopt new zoning regulations to promote redevelopment. Policy LU-3.1.2: Create Regional Activity Centers if appropriate in Urban Infill Areas and Urban Redevelopment Areas to facilitate mixed -use development, encourage mass transit, reduce the need for automobile travel, provide public open space and parks as required in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space element of this plan, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 12 SUBSTITUTED provide incentives for quality development, and give definition to the urban form. permitted uses and density and intensity of uses within a RAC shall be govern: . by the underlying future land use map designations of the subject property, ex►-pt as otherwise limited by the designation of the RAC in the comprehensive 'lan. A designated RAC shall routinely provide service to, or be regularly used by, , significant nurrlber of citizens of more than one county; contain adequate existing blic facilities as defined in Rule 9J-5, F.A.C., or cornrnitted public facilities, as '.entified in the capital improvements element of the (ity's comprehensive pl. , and shall be proximate and accessible to interstate or major arterial roadways. Policy 3.1.3: Designate the Downtown Miami Master PI. ' area an Urban Central Business District order to increase the Develop ent of Regional Impact threshold for development within those portions of d• ' ntown Miami that are not already in the DRI area. ( ;jective 3-2: [Reser -d] Policy LU-3.2.1: [Reserved] cy LU-3.2.2: [Reserved] PRO f SED ECONOMIC ELEMENT I Goal LU-4: The City will ackne (ge the inter -relationship between economic growth afw the reduction of economy`, irity within the City • issues of land use affordable housingthe adequacy of I, itucture including the ability of public transit to provide acceptable commutation t id from all areas of the city, education and training, the immi)op environment and the Po of the Miami River 4 Objective LtJ-4-1: Th City shall within, and no later than, two years of the adoption of this goal add an Ecan ► is Element to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborh od Plan that lays out goals obje ves and policies to provide an environment for sustained economic growth within e City, particularly with respect to those areas of economic activity characterize + `y higher -paying jobs, while reducing the economic disparity that currently exists amo g City residents. This Element shall be prepared through the collaboration of the a . r r,,r riate Cit de artments with a variety of stakeholders including.but not limited to, represtatives of neighborhood groups, business andenvironmental groins, organizations invol ed in manpower development and training and the Miami River Commission. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 13 SUBSTITUTED PROPOSED HISTORIC AND CULTURAL ELEMENT Goal L U-5: The City will acknowledge that: a) Historical resources offer an im R ortant cool for education, help to provide a distinctive '"sense of place" to various neighborho_ds in the City, and are a significant resource in promoting tourism; and b) Cultural reso ces are important reminders and remnants of the history of the area. These re,: :es offer physical evidence of the prehistoric and historic occupation of the land. Objective LU-5.1. The City shall within, and no later than, two years ofthis goal add a Historic and Cultural Element to the Mia Neighborhood Plan that lays out goals, objectives and policies significant historical, archaeological and cultural identities, T., Element will consider establishing notification procedures f may impact historic resources, The Element shall include used including, but not limited to, neighborhoods, redevelopment and revitalization; with clarity of mean This Element should be prepared through the c departments with a variety of stakeholders re resentatives of nei+hborhood trou s histor A • the adoption Comprehensive r those areas with e preparation of this land use changes that st of definitions of terms r aptive reuse, mixed use, g in the associated context. F aboration of appropriate City ncluding, but not limited to, eservation rou s and citizens. • • 1 Protection of historical and archaeolo`ical res is mandated b Federal law and by the State of Florida through the Division 1istorical Resources. PROPOSED NEIG ORHQOD MASTER PLANS Goal LU-S: The City will acknowledge s ) the importance of neighborhood planning and implementation as a tool for mairrta inq and enhancing the unique character of neighborhoods; and b) the sittnif ance of fostering a collaborative relationship between the community and City. Ob ective LU-6. • The shall no later than 2012, create Neighborhood Master Plans For the Citv's peighb+ oods. Policy LU .1.1:Within two years of the adoption of this policy, the City shall prepare maps d ineatinq the geographic boundaries of each neighborhood, which will serve as a t I for creating Neighborhood Master Plans. if P icy LU-6.1.2: The appropriate City department(s) shall, through the collaboration of akeholders, representatives of neighborhood groups, historic preservation groups. and community members, create Neighborhood Master Plans detailing each neighborhood's unique needs, values, and visions. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 14 • SUBSTITUTED Urban Central Business District An Urban Central Business District (UCBD) ide ifies the single urban core ea within the City of Miami. The UCBD shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan nd Future Land Use Map, shall contain mass transit service as defined in Chapter 9J- , F.A.C., and shall contain high intensity, high density multi -use development to include: r: ail; professional and governmental office uses; cultural, recreational and entertainment acilities; high density regidential; hotels and motels; and appropriate industrial activities. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 15 SUBSTITUTED URBAN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT MAP sW 3NI1 €T 1 s y_ a Hw t.rsr n•y lio NTH sr MTV 1411141•I r 4 PIW 1 ITII ST F h 17TF1 l' 1. 41. s .; lEnn Sr ow i 1iAmtl? 01111ice` MI • t reloginlii vial awl en= wida, %wimp Pi fT J 1 ;TTTe-" Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 0 5 125 0.Z OS YMs 1 1 yry 16 SUBSTITUTED accordance with Chapter 28-24.014(10)(a), F.A.C., the guidelines and standard o ,avelopment, a designated Urban Central Business District within the City of Miami sh 1. Increase the threshold for residential, hotel, motel, office, or retail devel fifty -percent (50%); 2. Increase the threshold for applicable multi -use guidelines and hundred percent (100%), provided that one land use of the mu is residential and the residential development amounts to n percent (35%) of the City of Miami's applicable residential t ment by s .ndards by one- -use development less than thirty-five eshold; and 3. Increase the threshold for resort or convention hotel d- elopment by one hundred - fifty percent (150%). le following area has been designated an Urban Centr. Business District (UCBD) on the °ty of Miami Future Land Use Map (FLUM): The Downtown Miami aster Plan Downtown Miami Master Plan was .dopted by the Miami City Commission by I ;asolution Number 89-990 on October 26, 989. The Downtown Miami Master Plan contains approximately 1, 354 acres and is bou oed on the north by: Northwest 20th Street on the north; Biscayne Bay, including Brickel ey (Claughton Island), on the east; Southwest 15th Road on the south; and Interstate •:, the Miami River, Northwest 5th Street, Interstate 395 and the Florida East Coast Railro. ' right-of-way on the west (see the Future Land Use Map for exact boundaries). Permitted Uses: Permitted uses within e Urban Central Business District shall be those of the underlying land use classificati• within the current Downtown Miami Master Plan, which includes: Central Business District; Major Institutional Public Facilities, Transportation & Utilities; Office; Restrict-. Commercial; General Commercial; Industrial; Recreation; High -Density Multifamily R: idential; and Medium -Density Multifamily Residential (see descriptions in Interpretatioof the Future Land Use Map). The folly ing minimum and maximum development thresholds shall apply: Th following numerical guidelines and standards shall be applied within the City of Miar an Central Business District according to Chapter 28-24.014(11), F.S.: 1. A development that is at or below eighty -percent (80%) of all n merical thresholds shall not be required to undergo development-of-regional-impac. _evie . Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 17 SUBSTITUTED 2, A development that is between eighty -percent (80%) and one -hundred (1 O%) percent of a numerical threshold shall be presumed to not require developent of regional impact review. 3. A development that is at one -hundred percent (100%) or betwee one -hundred percent (100%) and one -hundred twenty percent (120%) of a nu 'erical threshold shall be presumed to require development -of -regional -impact re ew, 4. A development that is at or above one -hundred twenty rcent (120%) of any numerical threshold shall be required to undergo deve1 ., ment-of-regional-impact review. Regional Activity Centers Regional Activity Center (RAC). A Regional Activit Center designation is intended to encourage and promote large-scale development a redevelopment as well as small parcel infill development and redevelopment that faci ' ates a balanced mix of land uses by providing maximum flexibility for development a redevelopment activities. In accordance with Chapter 28-24.014(10) , 2, F.A.C., a Regional Activity Center in the City of Miami shall be a compact, high int sity, high density multi -use area designated as appropriate for intensive growth as an rban infill or urban redevelopment area by the City and may include: residential use; • mmercial; office; cultural and community facilities; recreational and entertainment fa ities; hotels or motels; transportation facilities; utilities and appropriate industrial activit s. The major purposes of this designation are to facilitate mixed -use development, enc► rage mass transit, reduce the need for automobile travel, provide incentives for qualit development and give definition to the urban form. For an area to qualify a a Regional Activity Center, the following criteria must be met: 1, The typ • of land uses permitted within each Regional Activity Center and the densit of residential uses shall be specified herein and within the City of Miami Lan+ se Plan, gional Activity Centers shall include mixed land uses of regional significance. Regional Activity Centers shall consist of active pedestrian environments through high quality design of public spaces and buildings that create an appropriate human scale at street level and provide for connectivity of places through the creation of a system of pedestrian linkages, 4. Each Regional Activity Center shall be a defined geographical area of no less than 20 acres and shall be delineated on the City of Miami Future Land Use Plan Map. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 18 SUBSTITUTED 5. Regional Activity Centers shall be proximate and accessible to interstate or ajor arterial roadways. The following area has been designated Regional Activity Center within the y of Miami Land Use Plan: Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center The Ruena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center is designated tc, be . Chapter 380 Regior Activ :y Center and, subject to amendment of ::-e Strategic Regional Policy Plan for Soi Florida by the South Florida Regional Planning Council, as a reg'%nal development district eographic area specifically designated as highly suitable for ' creased threshold intensi for the purpose of increasing DRI thresholds. General Location: South of Northeast 36th Street, North of Northeast •th Street, East of North Miami Avenue and West of the Florida East Coast Railroad (FE right-of-way; excluding certain properties located along Northeast 29th Street. (See Futur: and 1 "-' Map for exact boundaries). Permitted Uses: Permitted uses shall be as for the un. •rlying lard use classification. however, the following minimum and maximum developme thresholds shall apply: Residential: 2,000 units inimum / 4,500 units maximum Commercial: 500,0 s.f. minimum / 1,200,000 s.f. maximum Office: 80,000 .f. minimum / 100,000 s.f. maximum Compatibility: The -ity shdevelop and implement desic l standards to address compatibility of developmen within the Buena Vista Regional \ctivity Center with the surrounding area, which des standards should further the following concepts: New streets and avenues should connect to the existing street grid. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 19 SUBSTITUTED NW 37T11 PF NW ;GTN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER MAP BUENA VISTA YARDS NE i®TX ST Ott S ITN 3T rid Nt 7NT1* yT ■rrrrz"i:�rrirrr�A Nt 1410 5r ►XW TTEN iT n W 221ID Sl i NW 3157 S' POW 10711 n 2STH 5T Nt 3ENT 97 ■ ■ r Nr r.r...E!--j ■ r—i f asrri irurrrrsrtr a r,,goi NE lorTN St #rrr* rrrrr ML 2N6 AtiE 'rT .U1H Y _ Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 ALT. 1111i N[ SETM IT 3 H TEE ?TN St N[3.1TH ST NE;3N0 Si 0 Fkt 1N0 NE I T;EL He letpiTtilt NE •i; . _ Kt EITX_ ITN_ TN CT Nf 1 0.2MWn- 1 20 SUBSTITUTED walks, as principal pedestrian throughways, should be designed to create a comfortable outdoor public space to accommodate a range of active and passive ped(: ar activities. ■ Buildings should have ground floor uses that activate the street a o relate new development to surrounding areas. ■ The context and scale of new development should be refle ed in new building design, including the setting back of upper floors in order t• accommodate height while maintaining human scale at the pedestrian level. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 21 SUBSTITUTED Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map The Future Land Use Plan Map is a planning instrument designed to guide the future dev: opment and distribution of land uses within the city in a manner that is consistent with the goals, •bjectives and policies of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP). The i ture Land Use Plan Map is a generalized ma » that does not depict are.: of less than 2 acre-. The Planning Director is responsible for m<,king all determinations • " concurrency as defined in state statutes, and will also interpret the map based on all applic, •le state laws and administrative regulations and on the consistency between the proposed c nge or changes and the g' : Is, objectives and policies expressed in the MCNP. The Pla ing Director will also determine whether or not proposed zoning changes require an amend nt to the comprehensive plan. Lanc ivelopment regulations and policies are to be consistent " ith the Future Land Use Plan Map. I he land development regulations further define and descr'•e all requirements applicable to zoning categories contained under each land use designatio permitting the treatment of new development according to the particular conditions exist g in different areas, and always consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the M 1 P, and specifically with the Land Use Element and its Future Land Use Plan Map. The land u - designations are general designations that may include more than one zoning category. All ac ' ities and uses within each designation are compatible with each other by virtue of their seal:, intensity and character, or by additional conditions required by the land development reg ations, more specifically by the City Zoning OrGlnance, which describes ::: i districts in order to achieve more definite goals and objectives. The lard use designations that appear in the uture Land Use Plan Map are arranged following the "pyramid concept" of cumulative inclusio whereby s bsequent categories are inclusive of those listed previously except as otherwise n• ed. These designations, and the uses allowed1 in them, are defined as follows: ;onservation: This land us designation is restricted to environmentally sensitive areas that are to be left in an essen •.Ily natural state. Only activities that reinforce this character are allowed. Public acces o these areas, including off-street parking, may be limited when unregulated access m, present a threat to wildlife and plant life within such areas. R ctr-irfi # Pub arks and Recreation: The primary intent this land use classificat to conserve goon -fie pen space and green spaces of -a park while allow access and es which will not interfere with the preservation of any signific environmentfeatures which may exist within the park. in guest,.: --his Ianuse designation allows only open space and park uses with r-nitcd rccr ationat Y sc�ttiv � , r1i� j 6�4:tr1+ ��-.tiii:caen�lE�.71 �:ilU cultural uses where the t. ouildin • foot • Tints ma cover no more than 25% of the park land area, h_imited .tegrat part of a p r4r's in CIlM1i1 3 m°9 /4nr�r nc+ �R`t onserve the openne&c or green- space of the park. Some of the recreational escs deemed to tie --appropriate include nature trails, interpretive-eentecs,pienie-erreaerplaygroundsreanee "Allowed" or "permitted" uses are allowed by right; "permissible" or °limited uses" are candidates for inclusion, subject to an interpretation of consistency by the Planning Director and a grant of special exception by the Zoning Board. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 22 SUBSTI u £ED 416 1 con stands restroomc ant{ o}hnr_ passive- recr atk t whose- to and manner ef_ nr.nra,lion arm similar-in—nta. turc to tho;c described —fir, h passive and active recreational uses shall be permitted including but not limited to - ai.ure trails, interpretive centers, picnic areas, playgrounds, canoe trails and launche., small concession stands, restrooms, gyms, swimming pools, athletic fields, culture facilities, marine and marina facilities and other facilities supporting passive and active -creational and cultural uses. Lands under this designation with specific qualities that make them desire e for commercial photography shall be allowed to be used in this manner conditionally, nd only when it is determined that conducting such commercial photography will not endanger significant environmental features within the area. [Added 3/23/99 by Ordinance 1782.] Commercial Recreation: This land use designation only allows :a tiG-parksand-rrcroation uses—Within--par-ks,such r tion-uatonal FA-Gu+ltur iIi#ies Soft -as mus u rn _ of aallerina an4rnrrinn fao4it' Sappecti ��Ci m8T-K}�,Flf�--r{n�Isrr�T�{.��,��}Pn�Tiis�ilc���'PP"'snfg sewi (restaurants, cafnor reta ".g} pit l4c-1 ealth-('�7�1'iriis-ard y. care-seetefs3-ar_rd lic sa€et e- facilitier�ar : . inment -fac�+tities--mays-also- be 'p'e`rfnissi'ble-prov .... . privately -owned recrea used open to the public or to private groups. Marine Facilities: This land use designation intended to apply to waterfront properties which are primarily public properties and intended to be developed and utilized in a manner which will facilitate public access to wa rfront activities. Permissible uses within this designation include marine and marinfacilities, marine stadiums, waterfront specialty centers (including restaurants, cafes . d retailing), recreational activities including water theme parks, cultural, educational and entertainment facilities and accessory hotel accommodations with maximum F limitations between the range of 0.65 to 1,72 and a maximum density of 130 hotel u per acre; the higher FAR may be approved only upon demonstration and finding that he application of the higher limitations will not adversely affect access. Permanent livi . facilities are not permitted within this classification, [Added 3/23/99 by Ordinance 1178 Nonresidential floor areis the sum of areas for nonresidential use on all floors of buildings, measured from the o ide faces of the exterior walls, including interior and exterior halls, lobbies, enclosed p ches and balconies used for nonresidential uses. Not countable as nonresidgnt}at flo• area are: 4 (a) Parki and loading areas within buildings; (b) Op- terraces, patios, atriums or balconies; or (c) S airways, elevator shafts, mechanical rooms. Sin• Family Residential: Areas designated as 'Single Family Residential" allow single fa ► y structures of one dwelling unit each to a maximum density of 9 dwelling units per acre, s 'jest to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the aintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 23 SUBSTITUTED Supporting services such as foster homes and family day care homes for children an• or adults; and community based residential facilities2 (6 clients or less, not including • ug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities also will be allowed pursuant to applicabl- state law. Places of worship, primary and secondary schools, child day care centers and - • ult day 'are centers are permissible in suitable locations within single family residential ar::s. Professional offices, tourist and guest homes, "museums, and private clubs allowed only in contributing structures within historic sites or historic district designated by the Historical and Environmental Preservation Board a locations within single family residential areas, pursuant to applicabl regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for su intensity limitations for said uses shall be restricted to those of the co r lodges are hat have been are in suitable land development uses. Density and ributing structure(s). Duplex Residential: Areas designated as "Duplex Residential" - ow residential structures of up to two dwelling units each to a maximum density of 18 dwe ng units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services ncluded in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Community based residential facilities (14 clients • less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) also will be al •wed pursuant to applicable state law. Places of worship, primary and secondary school , child day care centers and adult day care centers are permissible in suitable locations wit ' duplex residential areas. Professional offices, tourist and guest ho -s, museums, and private clubs or lodges are allowed only in contributing structures wit, rl historic sites or historic districts that have been designated by the Historical and Env''•nmental Preservation Board and are in suitable locations within duplex residential areas, pursuant to applicable land development regulations and the maintenance o required levels of service for such uses. Density and intensity limitations for said uses shall be restricted to those of the contributing structure(s). Medium Density Multifam Residential: Areas designated as "Medium Density Multifamily Residential" allo residential structures to a maximum density of 65 dwelling units per acre, subject to the d ailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of equired levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurr cy management requirements. Supporting servicesuch as community -based residential facilities (14 clients or less, not including drug, . cohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) will be allowed pursuant to applicable sta - law; community -based residential facilities (15-50 clients) and day care centers for c ' dren and adults may be permissible in suitable locations. Permissi• e uses within medium density multifamily areas also include commercial activities that art intended to serve the retailing and personal services needs of the building or building complex, small scale limited commercial uses as accessory uses, subject to the det-, ed provisions of applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of 2 :=, "•ommunity based residential facility" provides room (with or without board), resident services, and twenty-four hour supervision. Such a facility fu bons as a single housekeeping unity. This category includes adult congregate living facilities, facilities for physically disabled and handicapped rsons, for developmentally disabled persons, for non dangerous mentally ill persons and for dependent children, as licensed by the Florida Department of Health • and juvenile and adult residential correctional facilities, including halfway houses, as licensed or approved by an authorized regulatory agency. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 24 SUBSTITUTED required levels of service for such uses, places of worship, primary and secondary schools and accessory post -secondary educational facilities. Professional offices, tourist and guest homes, museums, and private clubs or lodg- are allowed only in contributing structures within historic sites or historic districts that h.. +e been designated by the Historical and Environmental Preservation Board and are suitable locations within medium density multifamily residential areas, pursuant to apcable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service dr such uses. Density and intensity limitations for said uses shall be restricted to those of e contributing structure(s). High Density Multifamily Residential: Areas, designated as "Hi. ' Density Multifamily, Residential" allow residential structures to a maximum density of 150 iwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land develop ent regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and se ces included in the City's adopted concurrency management requirements. Higher densi •s may be allowed as shown for these specially -designated areas: Little Havana Target Area 200 u ' its per acre Southeast Overtown/Park West 300 nits pet acre Brickell, Omni, and River Quadrant 50 I units per acre Supporting services such as offices and comet- cial services and other accessory activities that are clearly incidental to principal use are permitted; community -based residential facilities (14 clients or less, not including dr,g, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) will be allowed pursuant to applicable st. - law; community -based residential facilities (15+ clients), places of worship, primary and secondary schools, and day care centers for children and adults may be permissible in suit , e locations. Office: Areas designated as "Offi to "High Density Multifamily Re by the Planning Director th property makes it a lonticaf that adequate service a of potential residents; use, clinics and labo in designated are places of wors designation, allow residential uses to a maximum density equivalent dential" ;subject to the same limiting conditions and a finding the proposed site's proximity to other residentially zoned )(tension or continuation of existing residential development and d amenities exist in the adjacent area to accommodate the needs nsitory residential facilities such as hotels and motels; general office tones; and limited commercial activities incidental to principal activities Supporting facilities such as auditoriums, libraries, convention facilities,, and primary and secondary schools may be allowed with the "Office" The nonr: idential portions of developments within areas designated as "Office" allow a maximu- floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR A ay be increased upon compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land dev opment regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot ar:. of the subject property. Properties within a Regional Activity Center that are designated "Office" are exem •t from this FAR re • uirement• however the are subject to their s• ecific imitations within the Miami Comprehensive Neghborhood Plan. All such uses and mixes of uses shall be subiect to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 25 SUBSTITUTED and services included in the City's adapted concurrencv management requirements. designated as "Office" in the Urban Central Business District are exempt from thi FAR limitation and are allowed unlimited FAR. Major Insti= utional, Public Faci ities, Transportation and Utilities: Areas • ' signated as "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" al l• ' facilities for federal,state and local government activities, major public or private h:.lth, recreational, cu ural,religious or educational activities, and major transportation .cilities and public utilities.Residential facilities ancillary to these uses are allowed • a maximum density puivalent to :-Jouuul1gt iul c..a subject to the same limiting conditions. Areas designated as 'Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Tra portation apd Utilities' allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross ! ea of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the de} _ : ovisions of the applicable land development regulations, however, may not exceer! FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot area of the sub[ectproperty, except within the H'ealtl 'vic Center District where it may not exceed a total FAR of 3.2 times the gross lot area of subject property. All such uses and mixes of uses shall be sruhie to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the mai nce of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopter[currency management requirements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 26 SUBSTITUTED Health 1 Civic Center District NW flIH %1 NW OOP.tT 24IN ii z nM17iTri Si NW 59990 M. !9W SlRld;f _-. NW 29191ix9 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 27 .es..1::,ed Commercial: Areas designated as "Restricted Commercial" allow residential uses (except rescue missions) to a maximum density ( quivalent to "H',- Density '4ultifamily Residential" subject to the samo limi` ng conditions _io .� cit ui y `i ilir, ilk • v's proximit; ..:Li,/ zoned p: makes it a logical extension or cnntinuation of existing residential development n 'hat ader uate services `9. adjacent ar •_ any activity included in the "Office" designation as well as commercial activities ,oat generally serve the daily retailing and se• ice needs of the p . ic, typically requiring easy access by personal auto, and often locate( along arterial or c lector roadways, which include: general retailing, personal and professional services, rea estate, banking and other financial services, restaurants, saloons and cafes, general en -rtainment facilities, private clubs and recreation facilities, major sports and exhibition entertainment facilities and other commercial activities whose scale and land use impasimilar in nature to those uses described above, places of worship, and primary anecondary schools. This category also includes commercial marinas and living quarters on 'essels as permissible. The nonresidential portions of developments areas designated as 'Restricted Commercial" allow a maximum floor area ratio jl , of 1.72 times the gross lot area of the subject property; such FAR may be increaser' Jo compliance with the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulafi«• )wever. may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 times the gross lot area of the subieci h/. Properties delis nated as "Restricted Commercial" in the Urban Central Busirw 'strict are exempt from this FAR limitation and are allowed unlimited FAR. Properties i a Regional Activity Center that are designated as "Restricted Commercial" are ex pt from this FAR requirement; however, they are subject to their specific limitations wit n the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. All such uses and mixes of uses . hall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land develoment re • uI tions d the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the y"s adopted concurrency management requirements. C:entr' Business Dis ct (CBD): The area designated as "Central Business District (CBD) intended to apply . the central commercial, financial and office core of the metropolitan :c.gion, and allows . activities included in the "Office," "Restricted Cornmercial," and "Major Institutional, Publ'Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" designations. Residential facilities (except for res e missions) alone or in combination with other uses are allowable to a maximum de .ity of 1,000 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable I. d development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of service facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management luire r-nts. r isc: )ermitted is a mix of uses ranging from `.gh density multifamily residential to high in e ns ',y office uses with retail uses on the lower floors of structures. Intensity of uses within e CBD land use designation are generally higi,er than those allowed in other areas of the city. Areas designated as CF3D are exempt from other FAR limitations and are allowed unlimited FAR. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 28 SUBSTITUTED M MEN =MIENS Residential Density Increase Areas 1) Omni - 500 UnitslAc 2) Southeast Ovortown-Park West 3) River Quadrant • 500 UnitslAc 4) Brickell - 500 Units&Ac 5) Little Havana - 200 Units/Ac 300 UnitslAc IN 7 wigii..ureki NM MCI i I MN 1111IEre 2 1i2 1._siB_N min MI VA IMI atirgal Ili 1 _..,-. 1 i. ,. Ill -- rill_ ... MIMIC NI Ni i.I. `) Ng=um WI 111� MI 5 i M_ a- .sin M m41•11M Mil 1- MN Ms us Ema �MM= =wrIn11/1111111.6 �4 r. MEM P . UMW a a ■ rma .a---` a; 05 I 0 URIC fir 4 CO, I iYn Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 29 SUBSTITUTED General Corium ,3rcial: Areas designated as "General Commercial" allow all activities included "Office" and the "Restricted Commercial" designations, as well as wholesaling and distr activities that generally serve the needs of other businesses; generally require on and o facilities; and benefit from close proximity to industrial areas. These commercial activit retailing of second hand items, automotive repair services, new and used vehicle sales and garages, heavy equipment sales and service, building material sales and storag warehousirag, distribution and transport related services, light manufacturing and ass activities whose scale of operation and land use impacts are similar to those use Multifamily residential structures of a density equal to R-3 or higher, but not to e 150 units per acre, are allowed by Special Exception only, upon finding th proximity to other residentially zoned property makes it a logical extension o reside itial development and that adequate services and amenities exis accommodate the needs of potential residents. This category also allo living 'quarters on vessels for transients. The nonresidential portions of developments within areas de cis "General Goi 1 III lercial° allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed provision- of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR of 3.0 t , es the gross lot area of the subject property. Properties designated as "General Commercial" i r the Urban Central Business District are exempt from this FAR (imitation and are allowed unlimited AR. Properties within a Regional Activity Center that are designated as "Restricted Commerci. " are exempt from this FAR requirement; however, they are subject to their specific limitations thin the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. the ution oading s include arking lots wholesaling, mbly and other described above. eed a maximum of the proposed site's ontinuation of existing in the adjacent area to commercial marinas and All such uses and mixes of uses shall be subj. t to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenan of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrent agement requirements. Industrial: The areas designated a activitis. The "Industrial" designatio excessive amounts of noise, smo vist-' impact unless properly co and miler activities are ex desigr 'ion, except for rescu Areas designated as lot area of the sublet. provisic. of2.5k to the the mail adopted canal.: Industrial" al' )w manufacturing, assembly and storage generally incluc:as activities that would otherwise generate , fumes, illumination, traffic, hazardous wastes, or negative oiled. Stockyards, rendering works, smelting and refining plants uded. Residential uses are not permitted in the "Industrial" missions, and live-aboards in commercial marinas. ial" allow a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross ,perty; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed able land development regulations; however. may not exceed a total FAR lot area of the subject property. Furthermore, all such uses shall be subject of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's y management requirements. Light Ind striae (1_I): The primary intent of this land use classification is to mandate mixed use develop ent within this land use classification, and further, to facilitate the ability of developing a mixed •ccupancy within a unit in which more than one type of use is provided under Live/Work or Wor / 1,Q Districts. The Light Industrial category shall be designated on the Future Land Use '1 map as either LI-LW (live/work) or LI-WL (work/live). Areas designated as "Light Industrial" allow all tivities included in the "Office" and the "Restricted Commercial" designations, as well as iholesalirrg and distribution activities that Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 30 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBS1'TUTU ) generally serve the needs of other businesses; generally require on and off loading facilities; . -d benefit from close proximity to general commercial areas. These commercial activities (be .nd those permitted in the "Office" and the "Restricted Commercial" designations) include reta ' g of second hand items, new and used vehicle sales, parking lots and garages, who •saling, warehousing, Fight manufacturing and assembly and other activities whole scale of ope .tion and land use impacts are similar to those uses described above. This category also allows commercial marinas and living quarters on vessels for ancients. This land use category shall not permit storing, packaging, handling, processing •r distribution of explosive, flammable or otherwise hazardous materials; scrap yards; wh• -sale trade -marts; drive -through facilities; flea markets; health clinics; and auto care seruic centers and related activities. The hazard level of an activity shall be one of the determining factor as to whether that activity shall be permissible within a Light Industrial district; the detailed pro isions of the applicable land development regulations shall prohibit high-level hazard activities hin live/work developments. LiveMlork District: Within a live/work development, resdential uses shall occupy between fifty percent (50%) and ninety-eight percent (98%) f the area of the development and commercial uses shall be developed as a seconda use; employees and walk-in trade are not usually permitted; however, may be allowed on compliance with specified criteria as defined in the governing land developmen regulations; such criteria may include requirements that clients visit by appointment, nd/or limitations on number of employees. Work/Live District: Within a work/live deve spment, commercial uses shall occupy between fifty percent (50%) and ninety-eight pe ent (9B%) of the area of the development and residential uses shall be developed a a secondary use. Work/live space requires access according to the American Disabiliti-: Act. Areas designated as "Light Industrial" . ow residential uses to a maximum density of 65 dwelling units per acre, and both residential d nonresidential uses to a maximum height of six stories (with "story" defined as height bet +-en 8 and 14 feet per story) and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.72 times the gross lot . rea of the subject property; such FAR may be increased upon compliance with the detailed pr isions of the applicable land development regulations; however, may not exceed a total FAR o 4.0 times the gross lot area of the subject property. Ali such uses and mixes . uses shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulation and the maintenance of required levels of service for facilities and services included in , e City's adopted concurrency management requirements. The Light Industrial category not intended to be subject to the restrictions and limitations of home occupations as de ` ed in Zoning Ordinance No, 11000 (as amended). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 31 SUBSTITUTED Correspondence Table - Zoning and Comprehensive Plan ZONING ORDINANCE 11000) MCNP JULY 4 2008 CS CONS_.:RVATION CONSERVATION 'ESTRICT-EO-PARKS AND RE ' EATION ;OMMERCIAL RECREATION PR PARKS AND RE .;REATION f ;ECREATION PUBLIC P' `KS AND RECREATION MARINE FACILITIE R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY 'ESIr)ENTIAL R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX RE:IDENTIAL R-3 MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL_ MEDIU DENSITY MULTI'AMILY RESIDr JTIP_ R-4 MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HI DENSITY ' LTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 0 OFFICE OFFICE G/I GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTION MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION, AND UTILITIES C-1 RES F<ICTED COMMERCIAL RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIA GENERAL COMMERCIAL CBD CENTRAL BUSINE .: DISTRICT CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT I INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL RT FI.-D-GUID' WAY RAPID TRANSIT L=,ELOPENT DISTRICT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 32 SUBSTITUTED HOUSING Goal HO-1: Increase the supply of safe, affordable and sanitary housing for v4,y 'ow moderate:, ai.7,1 - ' " income households 're defined by f .0 ` and the elderly by alleviating ssiortages of very 1<7- low- , moderate /d e housing, rehabilitating older homes, maintaining, and revitalizing residential neighbor •ods to meet the needs of all income groups. Ohjective HO-1.1: Provide andlor encourage a local regulator', investment, and nughborhood environment that will assist the private sector in i ' creasing the stock of "ordable housing for all income levels, incluci_ so (as those terms are defined by HUD).. wit the city City at least 1l; percent by 24306 2010. Policy HO-1.1.1: The City defines affordable (moderate -income) housing in accordance with the current standards and egulations of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Develo )me (HUD). The City continues to promote equal access to housing opportunities .n44„ tom„ ,louu g-o;diu,.,ance nd re4: ..3es:The City, with other governme tal agencies and non-profit organizations educate appropriate parties regarding fair housing_and refer fair housing cone; the afr_propriate enforcement agency. Policy HO-1.1.2: Continue and and continue its participatio Documentary Stamp Surtr P e and the City's current affordable housing, programs in federal housing programs and the ounty gram. Policy HO-1.1.3: The y will continua to develop comprehensive neighborhood redevelopment plans a► • programs that encourage private developers to build new, or rehabilitate old, re '•ential structures and ensure that public investments are coordinated with p ' ate sector developments to increase the overall attractiveness of redeveloping neiy borhoods. Policy HO- .1.4: Tax Increment Financing districts, which are designated by Miami - Dade Co ty, as a mechanism for financing public improvements in residential areas and sti lating neighborhood revitalization, will continue to be used. Po y HO-1.1.5: The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen t •se sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve as enhance the general appearance and character of the neighborhoods an(: buffer such neighborhoods from incompatible uses through the implementation aN enforcement of transition and buffering standards that do not diminish the amount ,)+ %ill, area encompassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood. Policy HO-1.1.6: The City will continue to encourage the .4F,.,47.11.i restoration, and adaptive and sensitive reuse of historic or architecturally significant housing through Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 33 SUBSrTI1 u TED s zoning and other incept 'e deemed appropriate. Policy HO-1.1.7: The City will continue to control, through restrictions in the ' ity's land development regulations, large scale andlor intensive commercial and i ustrial land development which may negatively impact any residential neighbo ood and will provide appropriate transitions between high—rise and low— ise residential developments that do not diminish the amount of area compassing the adjacent/abutting residential neighborhood. Policy HO-1.1.8: Through the land development regulation , the City will protect and en# anee-existing viable neighborhoods in those areas sui .ie for housing and, where appropriate, enhance Them in a manner compatible with eir existing character. Policy HO-1.1.9: The City`s land development reg .tions will encourage high -density residential development and redevelopment i close proximity to Metrorail and Metromover stations, consistent with the Stati+ Area Design and Development Plan for each station. (See Land Use Policy LU-1. 10 and Transportation Policy TR-1.5.2.) Policy HO-1.1.10: Renewed, The City all report annually the extent to which the housing recommendations set forth in e adopted City of Miami Consolidated Plan (as they may be amended from time to telare being realized including those relating to: 1) the preservation of afforda e rental housing through the rehabilitation of existing rental stock and the enc • uragement of new rental housing construction, with a focus on serving the n - ' of small families and single person households, such as the elderly and p g n with HIVIAIDS; 2) the preservatio' existing affordable housing m homeowner retention by assisting very low-, low and moderate -income households to obtain repair financing from private Tend s, with preference given to the elderly, disabled and persons with H IV/AIDSi 3) assis . nce to residents to achieve homeownership by seeking to increase the tnv tory of affordably priced units through new construction and the creation of a P d rchase Rehab program; by providing second mortgage, down payment and losing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers, and the creation of a Lease to Purchase Program; and 4) stimulation of affordable housing development through the implementation of policy with respect to: a. the creation of a land acquisition program for Infill b. identification of additional funding for affordable housing c. expediting of the Tax Credit Process d. creation of special districts for mixed-use_proiects Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 34 SUBSTITUTED e. the continued provision of Affordable Housing incentives f. the . rovision of trainin. /workshos to develoers on Cit regulations g. streamlinini of the RFP srocess and the •rovision of multi- ear undin h. Increasing the capacity of non-profit housing providers. Policy HO-1.1.11: [Reserved] and Objective HO-1.2: Conserve the present stock of very tow low mode: ate -income housing . De terms a :1ert by l-l' thin the and ._u 7.1the number of substandard units through rehabilitati, reduce the number of :safe actures through dernolition lir rehabilitation, and nsure the preservation of historically significant housing through identification and •esignation. Polic: HO-1.2.1: The City define;:, log - income housing . _ in . cordance with the current standards and regulations of th.; United States DepAm: t of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the State of Florida. Policy HO-1.2.2: The City will continue nd when necessary expand; low- and moderate -income housing progr, s with the intent of preventing a net foss of low and moderate-inc • e housing Is thost A by HUD) units within the Policy HO-1.2.3: The City' ousing programs will provide for lew-aad—er-ate- i t--wale--sl-ltiei-iHr adiverse range of housing types in -all areas of I.y, including housing that is affordable to very- low-, low; ' ,, those te' . Te defined by HUDLas an alternative to the eographic concentration of low-income housing. Policy HO-1.2 : The City will continue to assist non-profit, community -based organizations n the development and p .ovision of very low- low and moderate - income ho .Ing iertneu toy i-IUD) projects to e public sector provision of and moderate -income housing. This a :'stance will include, but not be limited to, technical assistance, marketing and finanal planning assistance, and the provision of public improvements, such as street im► ovements, curbing, landscaping and public open spaces, proper drainage and reet lighting. Policy HO-1.2.5: The City defines substandard housing as any residential unit that lacks either complete kitchen or plumbing :< xirht ,:«U „i:iiities, dc:not satisfy health and safety codes .;v ,... ,. ine physical appearance of neight ._. , ,ibstandard housing as compliant with the State's definition of substandard housing in s.420.0004(12), F.S. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 35 s U BS'1'1"1' U 'ICED c Policy HO-1.2.6: With the intent of preserving and enhancing neighborhood charac r„ the City will utilize code enforcement to prevent the illegal conversion of single-f- milt' residences into multifamily units. Policy HO-1.2.7: The City will continue to enforce where-neGessapyi- neighborhood specific design and development standards that may b result of the amendments to the City's land development ren initiatives to strengthen those sections of the i d+Fiaciee-Zi are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance oitys City's neighborhoods. lement eloped as a and other ,iinance that character of the Policy HO-1.2.6: The City will increase code enforcem t efforts in areas where significant concentrations of substandard units are li. •ly to exist. The City will im+lement roerams to assist ver low- low- and m•ierate-inconne households as those terms are defined b r units. Owners of substandard units will be required to make needed repairs a timely manner and vacant or abandoned property will be required to be sec4red so as not to represent a public health or safety hazard. in rehabililatin Policy HO-1.2.9: The City will monitor .editions and if necessary formally request that Miami -Dade County maintain an ceptable quality of public housing within the oityy-City. Policy HO-1.2.10: The City will hrough its building code enforcement, demolish all structures determined to be str.cturally unsafe. Policy HO-1.2.11: Histor subjected to sections of the City's ly significant housing in the-Giyy City will be identified and Coeee^•^e Ar1is Chapter 23 and other appropriate de and Zoning Ordinance. Objective HO-1.3: Fac hate the private and public sector provision of housing in non - isolated residential ; reas for community -based residential facilities and foster care facilities (includir g those funded by the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative S vices). Policy 0-1.3.1: The City will permit the operation of group homes, foster care facil es and Adult Congregate Living Facilities (ACLFs), subject to restrictions reacted in the City Zoning Ordinance, in all residential areas at the residential ensities for which those areas are zoned. Policy HO-1.3.2: The City's land development regulations will be reviewed and amended where warranted, to prevent concentrations of group homes, foster care facilities, and Adult Congregate Living Facilities (ACLFs) in any area of the o4'—C ity Policy HO-1.3.3: [Reserved] Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 36 SUBSTITUTED 1 • Policy HO-1.3.4: [Reserved] Ohj::ctive HO-1.4: The City will continue to participate in a regional effort to p •vide adequate shelter for the homeless. Policy HO-1.4.1: The City, along with Miami -Dade County, Broward Cou y, the major municipalities of the region, the South Florida Regional Planning Cncil, and the State Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services will participate in the development of a coordinated plan to address the problem of ho lessness in South Florida. Policy HO-1.4.2: [Reserved] Policy HO-1.4.3: The City will assist in providing, hen necessary, temporary emergency shelter facilities to serve homeless familie an( children. Policy HO-1.4.4: The City's land development r-.ulatic will permit temporary crisis intervention facilities and short-term transitio al facilities (aimed at assisting the homeless to become self-supporting merr )- of society) to be located proximate to areas where social assistance and econo opportunities are available. Policy HO-1.4.5: The City will con 'ni • and expand its efforts to acquire and administer federal and state financia aid for homeless assistance. Policy HO-1.4.6: The City wprovide regulations for, and permit the siting of homeless shelters within it land devE ?ment regulations and take appropriate measures to prevent a net oss of shelter capacity cie laity will develop ten-vf ern pia ,L i;u pie ;�� viorkinq toward a more equitai i distribution of facilitie'> jbout Miami -Dade County. Objective HO-1.5: Pr ide 'e -assistance to displaced occupants where public redevelopment progr s require relocation. Policy HO- . .1: The City's housing program will continue to provide for assistance to occupant displaced by public redevelopment projects so that suitable relocation housin• n proximity to employment and necessary public '9rvices is available prior to the d: olition or replacement of existing housing serving low- and moderate- inc• a occupants. Obje' ive HO-1.6: [lerved) Provide and/or encourage a local regulatory investment an' fitht s iiuud iiood environment that will assist the • rivate sector in increasin • the ortive housing units that provide services such as child day care to single parent households and counseling to rehabilitated or rehabilitating substance abusers of very -low, low and moderate income households. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 37 SUBSTITUTED Policy HO-1.6.1: jRoc Supportivehousin:g developed in accordance with policy should be designed to primarily serve the needs of the community in which tl are located by offering units to residents of the surrounding community on a p►rrih basis. Goal HO-2: Achieve a livable city center with a variety of urban housing types r persons of all income levels in a walkable, mixed -use, urban environment. Objective HO-2.1: Design and create +estsian friendly environments and neighborhoods with varied housing profs) a pes and amenities catering to persons of diverse social, economic and culturbackgrounds, with a variety of urban housing types for persons of all income leve including those of very low-, low-, and moderate -income households (as those terms are defined by HUD) provided in a walkable. mixed -use, urban environment. Policy HO-2.1.1: Through the land development gulations, the City will continue to protect and enhance existing neighborhoods in wntown. Policy HO-2.1.2: The City will continue to r- Ise residential zoning district regulations to provide greater flexibility tor the • •sign and development of a variety of contemporary housing types and mixese developments with the application of new higher density zoning in accordwith neighborhood specific design and development standards that might adopted as a result of amendments to the Citv's land development regulations a other neighborhood planning initiatives. Policy HO-2.1.3: The City ill continue to assure that necessary support sdr+fices, institutions and amenities e available to existing neighborhoods. Policy HO-2.1.4: The ity will continue to promote development of new, high quality, dense urban neigh orhoods along the Miami River (in accordance with the 1992 Miami River Mast- Plan), ), in Central Brickell and in Southeast Overtown/Park West.0,,o) Policy HO-2 .5: The City will continue to encourage adaptive reuse of commercial space for r idential use by working to eliminate unnecessary residential requirements in the Zo-ing Ordinance that inhibit reasonable adaptive reuse. Poll ' HO-2.1.6: The City will continue to target available governmental housing a :lstance programs and funds to assist with development of affordable housing in isting viable neighborhoods and publicly designated redevelopment districts while avoiding undue concentrations of assisted horsing. Policy HO-2,1.7: Working together with private developers, the City will continue to apply for Urban Development Action Grants (UDAG's), arm Housing Development Action Grants. (H0DAG's)—, and other potential grant programs in the Soutl_ast Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 38 • SUBSTITUTED Overtown/Park West, Lummus Park, River Quadrant and West Brickell areas, w►ere housing can be developed as a part of mixed -use projects. Policy HO-2.1.8: Through changes in the City's land development regulation , the City will continue to expand the areas in which new commercial developmen ay receive incentives for Housing Trust Fund contributions. Policy HO-2.1.9: [Reserved] Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 39 SUBSTITUTED SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS Goal SS-1- • . nsure a clean, healthy urban environment through the proper mai enance, timely provision and efficient operation of a centralized wastewater treatment a : ancillary sewerage system. Objective SS-1.1: All residences and businesses within the City at have been approved are served by sanitary sewers, and the City will conti e to replace and repair aging segments of the system as required, and will coordi te with Miami -Dade County on the extension of, or increase in the capacity of, trea ent facilities to meet future needs. Policy SS-1.1.1: The City will continue to implemen existing plans to extend the sewerage system to all approved areas of the City. Policy SS-1.1.2: The City will complete ose say itary sewer projects described in the City's Capital Improvement Program as sched d. Policy SS-1.1.3: The City will monitor pr improvement projects on an annual implementation procedures. ress on all sanitary sewer related capital asis as part of its capital improvement Policy SS-1.1.4: Although the 'ity has no authority with respect to Miami -Dade County's wastewater treatment programs, the City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, contin -e to support, and cooperL . with, Miami -Dade Water and Sewer ' ) actions to expand th 3 capacities of its wastew. -r treatment facilities as expressed in that Department's Plan, Objective SS-1.2: Ens e that the practice of wastewater manaement is consistent wit_ i the protection a ' d preservation of natural resources. Policy SS- .2.1: Although the City has no authority with respect to Miami -Dade County's astewater treatment programs, the City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordi .tion Policies, support and encourage - e - F to continue to adhere to its current policies of: no discharge of wastewater to : rface fresh waters; advanced waste treatment at all "package" treatment plants at are granted variances from "no discharge" requirements; secondary treatment prior to discharge from ocean outfalls; secondary treatment, proven design, local operating experience and compliance with all regulatory agency requirements prior to discharge from injection wells; and secondary or higher levels of treatment, as required by regulations, prior to discharge to shallow groundwater to ensure no negative impact on the ability of the receiving waters to meet Federal Drinking Water Standards. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives policies April 30, 2008 40 SUBSTITUTED Policy SS-1.2,2: In the design and construction of new sewers, and in the repair al replacement of old sewers, the City will use appropriate design and construe 'on techniques to eliminate infiltration of storm waters into the sanitary sewer syst , or the overflow of wastewater into the storm sewer system. Policy SS-1.2.3: The City will use its authority under local codes and o inances to cooperate with Miami -Dade County DERM to identify and eliminate a. sites where there may be illegal connections of sanitary sewers to the storm sewe system. Policy SS-1.2.4: The City will, through its Intergovernmental +ordination Policies, negotiate with M OW # : D to seek cooperative agreements to ensure that the operation of the Central Dis et wastewater treatment facility on Virginia Key does not degrade the natural envi .nment or limit the public's access to recreational opportunities on the island. Objective SS-1.3: The City's land development regulat' . ns will ensure that approval of development or redevelopment will not occur until ` ere exists adequate wastewater transmission capacity to serve that development. Policy SS-1.3.1: The level of service sta►iard to determine adequate transmission capacity is 100 gallons per capita per da GPCD), Policy SS-1.3.2: All improvements f ' r replacement, expansion or increase in capacity of the sanitary sewer transmission etwork shall be compatible with the level of service standard adopted in Policy t .3.1 Policy SS-1.3.3: Since the .anitary sewer network is an interconnected; eCountywide system, the departments Public Works and Planning will cooperate with Miami -Dade County WASA Depa ent to jointly develop methodologies and procedures for biannually updating •:: 'mates of system demand and capacity. Policy SS-1.3.4•. he City will enfei-t feei,� ;cythat-r-equires C4 pefmi fei-monitor the perrnittin .f any development or redevelopment occurring outside of the City's boundaries ich by gravity connects to the City's sewer transmission network. Objective SS .4: The City's of Mfami's sanitary sewer collection system is a valuable and costly lenient of the urban infrastructure, and its use is to be maximized in the most effi ent manner. alley SS-1.4.1: The City regulations to --ensure that isceneistent with the-capacity-ef- he anitafy will -ensure, through its concurrency management system, that sanitary sewer and storm sewers shall be in place to serve new development or redevelopment no later than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. deye ea ent and redev&opmenl is non i tent with the anity of the say (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy 55-2,5,1.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 41 Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED Goal ; 3-2: Provide adequate story ; ater drainage to reasonably protect against flo ' ding in areas of intensive use and occk., ',on, while preventing degradation of quality in eceiv r Objective SS-2.1: In accordance with the 1986 Storm Drainage M , ster Plan and subsequent updates, the City will address :he most critical draina; • problems. The City's goals for retrofii: _g subcatchment areas within the '' ° ►ill meet or exceed the :ilia; -year frequency, 24-hour duration standard while u lizing water quality design criteria. The City will confer with local agencies, .mely the Miami -Dada County Department of Environmental Resources Ma gement (DERM) when retrofitting City projects to incorporate design criteria and est management practices (BMPs). Policy SS-2.1.1: The City will adhere to its 198, Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates as the long-range poli guideline for improving its storm drainage management system, and will all., L?date the estimated cost of implementing that ian Plan through nciuual upates to the City's Capital —[,-0 Improvements element of the MCNP. The City will rank the projects specifie. it t piaeI? "" `'` �' Master in, with priority given to addressin! the most critical problem areas within the @Ciity, and implement those projects s.pported by a financing plan according to "r provisions of Chapter 18, Articl: VIII of the City Code, entitled "Storm Water Ut System." The 1986 plan wi be updated by 2010 with measurable Goals Obiectives. The plan will : :.rted and reviewed annually and at time of EAR Policy SS-2.1.2: The C will continue to monitor progress on all storm sewer related capital irnprovement %rojects on an annual basis as part of its capital improvement implementation pro►-dures. Policy SS-2.1..: ine City will ensure, through its concurrency management system, that unit, -ewer and storm sewers shall be in place to serve new development or redevr. Issuance of any developmE :.t permit shall require compliance with a drainage level of service standard of a one -in -five-year storm event while incorporating wet: quality considerations. L'.)je ive SS-2.2: The practice of stormwater management within the will be .ned to reduce pollutant -loading rates to surface waters. Policy SS-2.2.1: The City will retrofit the number of storm water outfalls that discharge into the Miami River and its tributaries, the Little River and directly into Biscayne Bay. If positive drainage systems to these water bodies are deemed to be the only feasible method of maintaining adequate storm drainage, then these storm sewers will be designed and constructed to retain grease and oil and minimize pollutant discharges. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 42 SUBSTITUTED (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-1.1.2 and Coastal Management 'olicy CM-1.1.2.) Policy SS-2.2.2: In order to reduce the level of contaminants carried Bay via the Miami and Little rivers, the Solid Waste Department should to increase the frequency and extent of street sweeping. (See Solid 1.3.3.) i • Biscayne encouraged ste Policy SW - Policy SS-2.2.3: The City will continue to seek cooperative a! eements and funding support from Miami -Dade County DERM, the South Flo 'ia Water Management District, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and any o er appropriate state and federal agencies in order to protect the quality of its surface waters and reduce pollutant loadings into the Miami River, its tributaries, e Little River, and directly into Biscayne Bay. Policy SS-2.2.4: The City shall require that 'test management practices" shall be used in the design and construction of storm 'ater management systems to minimize pollutant load eventually discharged to natu :I drainage systems, as well as to regulate the volume and timing of storm water deli -red to natural systems. Policy SS-2.2.5: The City will co Inue to enforce Florida Building Code requirements for the on -site rete ion of the first inch of storm water runoff. (See Natural Resource Conservation licy NR-2.1.2.) Policy SS-2.2.6: The City ill consider the inclusion of stormwater quality control structures in any new pro'-cts for major road improvements and commercial parking areas. Objective SS-2.3: As the City implements the storm water management improvements specified in the n}'' Storm Drainage Master Plan, it will ensure that stormwater ranagement contri.utes to the conservation of ground water as a f .ture potable water supply. -2.3.1: In its stormwater management practices, the City will promote infiltraion of storm water to surficial or artesian aquifers to prevent further saltwater intr .ion, where such infiltration is deemed to be feasible and cost efficient, and is not li y to represent an environmental hazard. Oib' ' ctive SS-2.4: All areas of the are no . served by storm drairage facilities, and City will continue to coordi a iie replacement, repair, extension, and capacity Increases of the system consistent with development and redevelopment needs. Policy SS-2..' : Through enforcement of its Storm Water Utility System as provided in Chapter 53.5 of the City Code, the City will use its authority "to construct, reconstruct, improve, and extend stormwater utility system and to issue revenue bonds and other debts if needed to finance in whole or part the cost of such system and to Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 43 SUBSTITUTED establish just and equitable rates, fees, and charges for the services and :cilities provided by the system." Objective SS-2.5: The City's o;oar storm drainage system is a valua element of the urban infrastructure, and its use is to be maximiz efficient 61w.111ier to serve this fully developed coo 71 unity. e and costly in the most Policy SS-2.5.1: The City will use its land developme regulations to ensure that development and redevelopment is consistent with t capacity of the storm drainage system. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy S:-1.4.1.) Objective SS-2.6: The City Municipal Se-arate Storm Sewer System discharges to the surface waters of the United States. ' ese discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Syst(NPDES) permit issued by fl:e United States Environmental Protection Agency. T►e City shall meet the requirements of the permit when operating its drainage faciliti Policy SS-2.6.1: The City will comply with e conditions in its NPDES permit. Policy SS-2.6.2: The operation of he City's drainage system to meet NPDES requirements shall meet the followi • crite ^: • The Miami Compr% Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) shall be consistent with Sstormwater m.nagoment program elements as defined in the NPDES permit shalt,isten► .nth the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MC-NP)- • Stormwater p'.jects and activities shall be consistent with the current local, state and f i eral regulations at the time of implementation. • Stormwa r capital improvement and operation and maintenance projects shall b: implementable. Policy SS .6.3: The City wlil, through its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System # PDES) Permit, enforce and educate ail construction sites and operators of such •instruction sites, for compliance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection FDEP re+uirements and the Munici .al Storm Sewer S stem MS4 •ermit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 44 SUBSTITUTED r'' ATURAL GRG ADWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE Goal AR-1: Protect the functions of the natural groundwater aquifer recharge are within the City. Objective AR-1.1: Ensure t'±4 t stormwater management practices ontribute to conservation of groundwater as a future potable water supply. Policy AR-1.1.1: As the City implements the projects identified in its 1986 Storm Drainage Master Plan and subsequent updates, it will promot the infiltration of storm water to surficial or artesian aquifers to prevent further sal ter intrusion, where such infiltration is deemed to be feasible, not to represent an - vironmental hazard, and to be cost efficient. Policy AR-1.1.2: The City will coordinate with a support local, state and federal agencies to achieve regional aquifer recharge otection objectives, including those pertaining to the quality and quantity of ground , .ter resources. Policy AR-1.1.3: The City will contin to support the South Florida Water Management District efforts to monitor if .eater levels at the salinity control structures within the City to prevent against fu er saltwater intrusion and protect the aquifer recharge areas and cones of influe e of wellfields from contamination. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy N 1.3.) Objective AR-1.2: The City will us' its land use and development gulations to ensure that land uses for areas within e City deemed to be aquifer recharge areas by the South Florida Water anagement District, maintain adequate recharge for the aquifer. Policy AR-1.2.1 ' e City will maintain low to moderate density uses in the West Flagami area o the City (as shown on Figure 111.1 of the Data and Analysis) as necessary to • otect the secondary aquifer recharge area. (See Land Use Policy LU- 1.1.9.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 45 SUBSTITUTED POTABLE WATER Coal PW-1: Ensure that all resents and workers within the City have adequat: access to safe drinking water through the efficient operation of centralized, County ope ated potable water trear >ynt facilities and ancillary potable water transmission system. Objec.. PW-1.1: Land development t.qulations will ensure that approval of development or redevelopment will not be granted unless a s until there exists adequate potable water transmission capacity to serve that ,ev°lopment. Policy PW-1.1.1: Since the potable water network is an system, the City departments of Public Works and Pla Dade County Departmen and procedures for biannually updating estimates ensure that sufficient capacity to serve develo Conservation Policy NR-2.1,4.) terconnected, ountywide ing will cooperate with Miami- o jointly develop methodologies system demand and capacity, and ent exists. (See Natural Resource Objective PW-1.2: Ensure adequate levels o safe potable water are available to meet the needs of the City. (See Natural Resour • Conservation Objective ..2-2.1.) r Policy PW-1.2.1: The City will rs ,ter facilitiec. redevelopment no later than equivalent in compliance v level of service standards (GPCD). (See Natur Improvements Policy re, Ihrough its concurrency management system, be in place to serve new development or lance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional Yrn pelabc water suopties meet the- estab1i7*T7t1T t r transmission capacity of 200 gallons per capita per d Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.5 and Capital -1.2.3.) Policy PW-1.2.2: he City will cooperate and participate to the fullest extent possible with Miami -Dal .. County and other county municipalities receiving potable water from WASAD in developing and implementing an acceptable countywide water conservati• plan as well as the Water Supply Facilities Workplan as required by Florida S .tutes. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1.7.) Poll • PW-1.2.3: [Reserved] olicy PW-1.2.4: [Reserved] Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 46 SUBS'1l t u fED 1 SOLID WASTE: COLLECTii3 L.l Goal SW-1: Ensure a clean, healthy urban environment through the proper mainte ance, timely provision and efficient operation of an integrated solid waste disposal and . ciliary solid waste collection system. Objective SW-1.1: The City will continue to provide solid waste collect' ► services to city City resid, s ; and businesses in 3 manner that ensures public h:.Ith and safety, and a clean urban environment. Pol icy SW-1.1.1: The ;.ty s se id waste coi;cction sae ;vief ;att-m.T ntan City will ansu;e, through its Goncurrency management system, tl waste capacity shall be in place to serve new development and/or cede,/ lent no later than a level of service standard of seven (7) lbs. per perso pe ' day, which is equivalent to 1.28 tons per person per year. Policy SW-1.1.2: Commercial structure anhigh density residential areas will continue to be served by either the City's Sol' 4 Waste Department or by private sector providers of solid waste collection services he City will require levels of service to be complied with by private haulers oper•. ing within the City's boundaries, and will enforce all City regulations regarding disposal and collection of solid waste. Policy SW-1.1.3: The City shall to serve the public needs acco 1.1.1. intain solid waste collection equipment as required ing to the service standard adopted in Policy SW - Policy SW-1.1.4: The Ci will take appropriate measures to ensure compliance with its "Garbage and Trash Ordinance," Chapter 22 of the Municipal Code. Policy SW-1.1.5: nd development regulations will be consistent with the provision of solid waste colle ion services in accordance with the adopted level of service. Policy '- .1.6: In the allocation of funds for the provision of solid waste services, first priori will be given to those improvements and programs that are necessary to protect e health, safety and the integrity of the environment, and meet federal, state and I. al legal and regulatory requirements. Second priority in the allocation of funds will 4e assigned to improvements that are necessary to meet existing deficiencies in c. .acity or service, or required to replace or repair needed equipment, while third riority will be assigned to those projects that increase the extent of services. Policy SW-1.1.7: The City shall, through enforcement of its powers to regulate solid waste collection services, require promoters of major public events to reimburse the City for extraordinary trash and garbage collection services required as a result of such events. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 47 SUBSTITUTED Objective SW-1.2: Although the City has no authority governing solid waste tran r and disposal, it will continue to support Miami- Dade County efforts intend • to ensure that transfer stations and disposal sites are sufficient to meet the needs Ff city City residents according to the service standards adopted in Policy 1.1.1. Policy SW-1.2.1: The City's departments of Solid Waste and Plannin., through the City's Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, shall request the -Works-Depadment, Divisieo-ef-,Solid-Wasste Miami -Dade Co, t De'artment of Solid Waste to jointly develop methodologies and procedures to • . - y biennially update estimates of system demand and capacity. Policy SW-1.2.2: The City shall support Miami -Dade Coun 's policy to implement the County's Solid Waste Disposal and Resources Recovery ' anagement Plan -and-those ...... _ y ,, ... 1 d Ser es1A--and-$. Policy SW-1.2.3: The City will continue to e plore the development of resource recovery and cogeneration activities and, ' ject to concurrence by Miami -Dade County, consider the implementation of pr'grams and procedures that decentralize solid waste disposal and reduce the vo me of solid waste that is disposed of at County landfills. Policy SW-1.2.4: The City will wor with, and support, the County's efforts to identify generators of hazardous waste, d to develop and enforce procedures for the proper collection and disposal of hazdous waste. Its departments will support the County's program to enforce all non ousehold producers of hazardous waste in identifying waste and disposing of it according to EPA, State, and local standards. The City will support Miami -Dade County's development of a hazardous waste temporary storage and transfer facility in : non -populated area. in coordination with Miami -Dade County, the City will work t. meet the Region's objective to reduce the incidence of improper hazardous mate Is and waste handling and disposal. (See Natural Resource Conservation Picy NR-1.1.8.) Policy SW .2.5: The City shall, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, encour-.. the County to utilize "amnesty days" to encourage small volume, non- comm cial producers of hazardous waste to safely dispose of such waste, and to dev • p a permanent system for households, small business and other low volume g - erators to safely dispose of hazardous wastes. Obj Live SW-1,3: It shall be the City's policy that solid waste collection procedures s :II be conducted in a manner that will reduce the quantity of litter, trash and andoned personal property on city streets. Policy SW-1.3.1: The City will continue its " 6 ppotl--the Csia, t ode--t eautiful regram —to actively support and Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 Oil SUBSTITUTED implement neiphboncood clean-up and beautification efforts through public awarene and information programs. Policy SW-1.3.2: The City shall, through enforcement of those provisions o he City that protect and enhance the appearance of neighborhos, ensure that streets and yards remain clean and attractive. Where the City Cod- ails short of the provisions necessary to accomplish this, revisions shall be proposed to the City Commission. Policy SW-1.3.3: The Solid Waste Department should be en'ouraged to increase street sweeping frequencies in order to reduce pollution to s. rface waters via storm water runoff and to reduce or elirninate litter in areas wher significant problems may exist. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.2.2.) Objective ":'-1.4: Although the City has no authority ± .verning solid waste transfer and disposal, it will continue to support and coo . rate with Miami -Dade County efforts to encourage the recycling of solid waste .terials and reduce the volume of waste aside for collection and disposal. Policy S I-1.4.1: The City shall, throug its publicity programs and mechanisms, encourage the use of recyclable packagi'g materials. Policy SW-1.4.2: The City shall ev, uate the development of reuse and/or recycling programs for used tires, waste oils and similar recyclable materials and make recommendations for applica► e additions or amendments to City procedures governing the disposal of the • materials. Policy SW-1.4.3: The y shall, through its publicity programs and mechanisms, encourage residents t• reduce the volume of yard and tree trimmings set aside for disposal by promotin the use of composting. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 49 SUBSTITUTED TRANSPORTATION Goal TR-1: Maintain an effective and cost efficient traffic circulation network within t City of Miami that provides transportation for all persons and facilitates commercial acti ty, and which is consistent with, and furthers, neighborhood plans, supports conomic development, conserves energy, and protects and enhances the natural environs ent. Ob <,;:tive TR-1.1: All arterial and collector roadways under C iunty and State urisdiction that lie within the City's bour aries will operate . levels of service ;stablished by the respective agency. All other City streets wi operate at levels of service that are :isedupon the multi -modal capacity of ±nsoortation system which recognizes the frequency of existing and prograri i pubic transit service operating within ems,_ "-with an urban center pc and characterized by :ompact development and moderate -to -high residential lensities and and use itensities, 1' ►nibs r° 11 and rr, within a transportation .oncurrenc:. exception area (TCEA). The City wil monitor the levels of service of all arterial and collector roadways to continue to •evelop and enhance transportation strategies that promote public transit and min' ' ize the impacts of the TCEA. Policy TR-1.1.1: The City hereby ado• s designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabi -d islands of Biscayne Bay that have a land use and zoning classification of Conse' ation, as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Miami - Dade County's designation of a rban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto Expressway and including all o' the City of Miami. %reas designated'3ingle-Family and uii Ldi iLI Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be protected from : s that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office arrr' Arial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density residential r` :ter of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these areas sh icouraged to be located primarily at major intersections of commercial ,. Within this area, Outside of these residential areas. the concentration d intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasized 'ith the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viabilit of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, daptive reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substdard sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this des' ; ated Urban Infill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in a ordance with the adopted Transportation Corridors level of service standards set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR- 1.1.3 of the i ransportation Element of the MCNP. (See Land Use Policy LU-1.1.11.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 50 SUBSTITUTE' Policy TR-1.1.2: The City of Miami originated and continues to utilize a person- methodology for measurement of local kevel of service (LOS) on a transport ion facility, which may be a roadway, mass transit service, pedestrian way, bike y, or any other transportation mode alone or in combination with others. T ' Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan [adopted_ as Ordinance 10544 on F . ruary 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the capacity of all transportation modes will +e used in the measurement of future, peak hour level of service standards, T'e City of Miami 'Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacitor' w• incorporated into the Transportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1 .2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was :+arately published as a report entitled `Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miiami`, September 1990. The y of Miami Person -Trip Methodologyv+s-4tes#nigue calculates the total .erson-trip capacity of all transportation modes utilizing a transportation faci ' y against the total person -trip demand for travel on that facility expressing the resulting ratio in letter grades LOS A through LOS F in the same manner as used by t - conventional va#icles volume -over- capacity (V/C) methodology. The measurem: t of LOS is made for the peak period (the average of the two highest consecutiv- ours of trip volume during a weekday), where and an overall minimum peak-perio. LOS standard of E (100 percent utilization of person -trip capacity) will be maintai d. Issuance of development orders for new development or significant expansion existing development shall be contingent upon compliance with these LOS standards, subject to the modifications described in subparagraphs 1.1.2.1 through .1.2.3 below, and any applicable provisions of the Urban Infill Transportation Con rrency Exception Area, 1.1.2.1: Where no . ublic rpa transit exists, and private passenger vehicles are the only vehic ar mode available for travel on the facility: minimum LOS E (100 percent o capacity) shall apply e sing 1 persona per yrhrc1e p; atit . ' y . 1.1.2.2: ere local bus mass transit service on minimum 20-minute headways is avail. Ile parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the facility, the facility shall operate at no grater than 120 percent of capacity. 2.3: Where express bus transit and/or rapid rail premium transit service on minimum 20-minute headways is available parallel to and within % mile of the facility, the facility shalt operate at no greater than 150 percent of capacity„ alicy TR 1.1.3: IRoseRtedi- Policy TR-1.1.3: Notwithstanding the foregoing, as required by s. 163,3180(10) F.S., the following standards established by rule by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) are adopted by the City of Miami as its minimum LOS standards for Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIRS) roadways within the City Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 51 SUBSTITUTED subject to any applicable provisions governing requirements of the Urban ' fill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (see Policy TR-1.1,1): 1.1.3.1: Limited access FIHS highways shall operate at LOS D or bet - r, except that where exclusive through lanes exist, such roadways may operat- at LOS E. 1.1.3.2: Controlled access FIHS highways shall operate at L►iS D or better, except that where such roadways are parallel to exclusive tra it facilities or are located within a Transportation Concurrency Exception Ar- : (TCEA), roadways may operate at LOS E. 1.1.3.3: Where FDOT has determined that a FIHS oadway is constrained or backlogged, such roadways operating below the •regoing minimums must be managed so as not to cause significant deter !• ation, which is defined as an average annual daily traffic increase in two-w, traffic volume of 10 percent or more, or a 10 percent or greater reductioin operating speed for the peak direction in the 100th highest hour. Policy TR-1.1.4: As port of tom'. AppA,-t. y:-,Jeinborhoed. Plan (ri __ nl�eduIed_fof nnn3pIcton.in 2 +4 the sub egunnt co aprchensiive— j by Amon mien f the AG-N4)I 4he Tlr C7�'17f�— 1 • Rspeft Finn Ele f ent o f the ISAI`'7 ,'� 'ti a eyiseri llt fodi se the !4 ium f t r eda ."r"'.[vnvrtress'+'cri[�va"-[rsa'nrr7^r ,.r,��,�y��•¢ri.,,, � 'per c ,.-,.,.{.,.�,,�,i,�.n�, �`+ ,.,,/.,-, rr. . {.,..., Tr, .9 s�F inn I pla .. 1 afor-f'ner T- onspertaiion Ge r1de c laa,--he plan identify, describe, measure, and evalue the multimodal transportation corridors, facilities and terminals in the City of Mi., i and recommend measures to enhance vehicular and mass transit operations, p •vide for greater pedestrian access and amenity, and offer incentives for use of ternative transportation modes. The -plat, will pay particular attention to he differing characteristics of Miami's neighborhoods such as land use, populati• density, economic activity, housir business type and quality, and will develop detailed standards for transportation facilities and services that will complement neighborhood development, redevelopmee , and conservation. �+..,... I, --to nrnmr' e p-n-r4frr fi-k-ifs-PAyi-rfS3FIP. 4}1ni dev€ n11--wi:r e 0th be nef --of -an mproved multimodal transportation system th Improve Transit access within neighborhoods, while improving their col y , ti-Dow +ewn--Tfa As a component of this effort, the City will al t le--per-sor ' J logy ' ' projected transit needs and programming on a route -by -route basis in coordination with the MPO and Miami -Dade Transit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 52 SUBSTITUTED Policy TR-1.1.5: The City, through its membership and regular attendance a meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council (TPC), and through s Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will support the County's efforts to increase the efficiency and enhance the safety of the existing thoroughfare network b such methods as improved signal timing, better intersection and street design, ca pooling, and encouraging staggered work schedules. The City +mill continue to force the Transportation Control Measures Ordinance pursuant to Section 14-1 of the City Code, to improve the efficiency of the existing transportation infrastruct e. Policy TR-1.1.6: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coon' ation Policies, will annually coordinate with Miami -Dade County on improving the ; ciencv expansion -of its public bus transit system, including new service d the expansion of neighborhood -based local circulator services, The City Il work with Miami -Dade Cflunty s-r- .., . .. , .. . lineally to promote the transit oriented development policies found in the Miami -I de Counlv's COMP. Policy TR-1.1.7: The City shall seek, wh= e appropriate, based on operational analysis, cost effectiveness, land develop , -nt regulations, and the concurrence of Miami -Dade County or FOOT, to restore fisting one-way streets to two-way operation to improve access and reduce trip lengtand vehicular speeds, particularly in the very high density areas of the City such .s Little Havana and Downtown/BrickelllOmni, where access to existing buildings d garages will not be diminished or impeded. Policy TR-1.1,8:: Through en rcement, amendment, and interpretation of its land development regulations, th• City shall require the provision of adequate vehicular parking facilities with en • gy efficiency lighting consistent with parking demand at locations That are not di ptive to nearby residential communities.. Policy TR-1.1,9: R ' uire new development in downtown to implement transportation control measure + ovisions in accordance with Section 14-182, "Transportation Control Measures" of lie City Code, to promote a general reduction in vehicular traffic by increasing a o occupancy and transit ridership. toga "e E vaivatior is. .:.: .. m iftal—t i fie City shall enforce existing fevise t e "Transportation Control ► easures" and shall promote compliance usingte dude current additional transp► ation demand management strategies ems• -for all future and existing dev +pments (as applicable pursuant to Section 14-1821, such as parking m agement and ridesharing programs to promote carpooling, vanpooling, car sharing nd use of hybrid vehicles. transit discount and fare subsidy programs, transit fare tax incentive programs, and -staggered work schedules, ffexible work hours, compressed work weeks, telecommuting programs, the construction of on -site transit shelters transit amenities, transit stops, transit drop-off locations or pull-out bays, bicycle storage facilities and additional laased—upon transportation demand management strategies and criteria established between the City and the business community. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives 'Policies April 30, 2008 53 SUBSTITUTED Policy TR-1.1.10: Upen-se,ninletion of the Eyaiuntior. and Anr.rn sal iRer,ort ILA: 2005, and in conjunction Y, , -.quent revision teL the M' NeigoFhood Plan, The City will nnualiy update the location of ration Element Nag- •fP:rit;iate imrilernent F _ a icons and de; existing and planned .,ture major parki on appropriate maps. of -the g facilities Policy TR-1.1.11: The City will continue to relocate and/or extend s eets that do not fit the developed street grid system of downtown, and have ontributed to the disruption of circulation. Policy TR-1.1.12: The City will, through its membership meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, encourage downtown connections to the expressway system by and from 1-95 at Northwest 20th Street, redesigni cap _,y and_a,3sthetics in .n, Pare. Be.l, er facilitate access to Overtowr construe a truck tunnel connecting the s Policy TR-1.1.13: New development the City Code. its--fa+r—share--taw vided-fer by the Deeetoprw OveFtewe-.412arkiAlest-Develc.'. d regular attendance at ouncil and through its mi-Dade County to improve roviding a means of access to the ex'ling 1-395 to improve its •Frn-+rt st and '3 r,d A ■ion.1. and port to 1-395. shall be required to contribute to .Iun fek:, , !_II.JiPI :,I;.:ab1e provisions in •e a a n n regional rnadaray impact r.s _)r-der-mp1ementing-the-downtewi--end Souti-.e.�st r� �'[GCfl�i fTnTiR li'S�4VS{L�R417T� Llf.%R 6f i�i:%R`..4 Policy TR-1.1.14: The City ill, through its membership on the MPO's Transportation Planning Council (TPC) .ntinue to participate in Miami -Dade County's formulation of policies, and will, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policie , support the County's efforts to increase reliance on remote parking a outlying Metrorail static 1s and express bus stops. Policy -1.1 5: Through enforcement of minimum and maximum on -site parking limitati. is, .. provided for in Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Cod:, the City will manage the downtown parking supply to maintain an appropriate balance among the need to promote economic growth, to facilitate local traffic irculation, and to encourage public transportation use. P.Iicy TR-1.1.16: Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14-182 Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, regarding downtown parking requirements, together with the powers of the City's Off -Street Parking Authority Department, the City will actively pursue the development of public and private peripheral parking garages near the expressway and arterial entrances to downtown in order to reduce congestion in the core area. In addition, the City will continue to enforce the maximum parking provisions mandated in Section 14-182. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 54 SUBSTITUTED Policy TR-1.1.17: The City of Miami will coordinate with South Florida Comm er Services and the Florida Department of Transportation to support and encourag City employee participation in the DowRt enient-- . tialwve 4M1 ... tabli ea I n nose �;se--ef-altemative modes of transpo' ation by T'[■ COiQu rt�r� offering Downtown employers and their employee's alternatives to driv g to work alone. The City will also work with the South Florida Commuter Sery esDowlitowri TMI to ensure consistent implementation of the City's Section 14-18 Transportation Control Measures" and provide assistance to employers and busi, sses required to implement the measures. In addition, the City will utilize the So Florida Commuter ServicesDeimitowe-TMI to establish the transportation deman management (TDMD) requirements for all future and existing employers with more an 50 employees in the City. The City of Miami will lead by example in developi Tl_ MD strategies for City employees_ pfief4e-tb. ten -an i isal- (EAR} Policy TR-1.1.18: The City will work with represen : tives of the Miami -Dade Transit Agency to increase the number of MDT bus r#tes operating within the City that participate in the Agency's Bike and Ride Progr. 6 Policy TR-1.1.19: Misr-te-su (EAR). 4The City will promote multi -mods ransportalion initiatives and the ameed-the TPA —E em nt • .. , . recommendations of the adopted Miami Downtown Transportation Master PI , arl c relating- ens Vista Varr1& Rogion l ❑cyity Cantor_ Policy TR-1.1.20: Prior he 200 valuation 7 a (EAR), 4The City will utilize ds provided through the People's Transportation Plan and funds collected fro raffic impact mitigation fees as specified in the Capital l provement Element ' the MCNP. ending- mechani for the cost of studies, plans and irograms contained herein as well as targeted physical improvements to sea the residents, employees and visitors of and to the RAC. Objective TR-1.2: the time of all development reviews, the City will determine rights -of -way and orridors needed for existing transportation networks and ensure those rights -of- ay will be designated and reserved prior to development. Policy R-1.2.1: The City will maintain and enforce, and where necessary revise, the mini ► um right-of-way requirements established in its City Code to ensure the tinuity and effectiveness of the thoroughfare network. Policy TR-1.2.2: The City will continue to maintain a comprehensive public rights -of - way improvements program for those major commercial streets that are under the City's jurisdiction and have high levels of pedestrian activity. Objective TR-1.3: The City's transportation system will enhance safe person -trip and vehicular movements and minimize collision potential for all modes of transportation through design. Beginning January 1, 2004, the City will implement the prioritized Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 55 SUBSTITUTED Capital I r rovements Program including sidewalk and curb replacements, and s et :surfacing and reconstruction. Policy TR-1.3.1: The City will continue to provide properl designed and safe system for controlling vehicuar traffic by dhering to design standards and procedures and ,:gnizinq those relevant standar( 'rocedures applicable to the agency with jurisdiction over the roadway or trans_pf on facility. Policy TR-1.3.2: The City, through its membership and r-.ular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Cou► it and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will annually co. dinate with Miami -Dade County to support the monitoring of locations of high accikent-frequency on the city's streets and its identification of design improvements at may alleviate hazardous conditions, especially to pedestrians. The City ize safety as an ev;. :s: • improvements :re incorporated into the City's Capital Improvement Element. Policy TR-1.3.3: The City will continue to p properly designed and safe system for pedestrian access by adhering to desk . andards and procedures which comply with the Americans with Disabilities A of 1990 and which are re.uired b the Engineering Standards for Design Copslruclion published by the Department of Public Works in December 2005 )jective TR-1.4: The City's street r •twork will be utilized to protect and enhance the character of the city's residen '.I neighborhoods and neighborhood commercial enters through coordination ith the Land Use Plan`Zoni: Code, and adopted eighborhood plans and reco mendations. .yler e 0& ;0 the Tansportatio+ ai ropose measures for neighborhood protection d enhancement i such - .- neighborhood traffic management and traffic calming plans. Policy TR-1. : The City will seek cooperative agreements, as necessary, with Miami -Dade County and with FDO to ensure that the County and StE transporta on improvements- are designed to minimize the intrusion of commuter traffic o City residential streets, do not sever or fragment well-defined neighborhoods, dh not result in major disruption to pedestrian traffic. r!-i'l,7•_ Thp rii., will coordinat "4drr1 Cns!n!,/ P.ndj with. FDOT to e,lcourage local traffic to use alternatives to the Honda Intrastate Highway System roadways, where practicable, to protect its interregional and intrastate functions. Policy TR-1.4. • The City will develop a streetscape design program that will guide landscaping, lighting and construction of sidewalks and bicycle paths along city streets, and such improvements will be coordinated with major repairs and renovation of city streets. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 56 SUBSTITUTED Policy TR-1.4.43: As streets undergo major repairs or renovation, the City will seekt eliminate dirt shoulders and provide curbing, gutters and sidewalks in order to impre the physical appearance and quality of the City's neighborhoods and districts. Policy TR-1.4.54: A new category of public thoroughfares is created entitl n 'Urban Streets,' defining the Urban Street as a pedestrian and vehicular way se primary function is to serve adjoining residential neighborhoods and the businesses that serve them in the City of Miami. Characteristics and standards for sue streets will be defined and specifications created on a case -by -case basis in corperation with the governmental entity having ownership of the street, local resid is and homeowner associations. Principles that will guide the design process will i elude, as appropriate; lower design speeds and control of traffic volumes utilizin• traffic calming devices including but not limited to modification of lane widths c• sistent with lower design speeds; wide sidewalks; medians; roundabouts; Ian ► caging; attractive lighting;; creative and informative signage; on -street parking; .nd other design features and amenities as appropriate. Urban Streets shall b subject to the level of service standards described in Policies TR-1.1.2 and TR- .1.3, The first such Urban Streets to be designated shall be: Biscayne Boulevard Grand Avenue Calle Ocho from Brickell Aven to S.W. 27 Avenue Coral Way from Brickell Ave e to S.W. 37 Avenue N.E. 2 Avenue from N.E. 3 Street to the North City Limit. Additional streets may be Commission upon recomm upon criteria developed conducted as part o Comprehensive Neig City Commission 0 Policy TR-1.4 the City of M" d w. ignated from time to time by Resolution of the City dation by the Planning and Zoning Department, based in connection with the neighborhood planning studies the comprehensive update and revision of the Miami orhood Plan in 2005. (Resolution No. 01-1126, adopted by the ober 24, 2001). Develop and encourage bicycle paths and bicycle lanes throughout mi in coordination with FOOT, Miami -Dade County and the MPG. Objective T-1.5: The City of Miami's continued development requires the provision of effective wubiic transit and paratransit services that serve existing and future land uses, t provision of safe and convenient public transit passenger transfer terminal facili s, the appropriate coordination of public transit with existing and future land use;, and the accommodation of the special needs of the City of Miami's population, ny of whom are transportation disadvantaged. Therefore, the City of Miami will upport Miami -Dade CountyE tic-h-is4km to--aUt efi -eilerate►r—of path etrans m Miami-DadeGem:ay, in the provision of these essential public transit services. Pr -War to the-2OO& A _lhn Gity will ame t-4o —nei ifte-Mia m , Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goats Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 57 SUBSTITUTED T fis# --u da-7'-anspe alien Development Plan--as-iF-fetes to the (T (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-3.2.2.) Policy TR-1.5.1: The City will, through its membership and regular atte dance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and 'rough its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, continually encourage Miami-D. le County to faei,;tate-exe, a improve cponnecctionn between+}transit modes u but not limited to, local circulator o transit services of Iransi tier rote rnnnnestin anc it iiRes- eterT nTT YY �mV ,T finals. CT7�� i� :]iT7[ Policy TR-1.5.2: The City shall conduct appropriate land us: and zoning analysis of the areas surrounding each +um tr-al... station as such station sites are approved by Miami -Dade Coun r the City of Miam; for development in order to determine whether appropriat and use an+C zoning changes should be implemented that foster the developme and use of the stations while protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatie development Such land se and zoning changes shall include minimum and maximum density and intensity s . ndards at the time of implementation. Policy TR-1.5.3: The City shall ara•SiGi the University of Miami/Jac "15pofta i i 'Rana, of - Health Distil, Center accessibility, traffic cis -eft ftwq-pr l' CTMQ -The (T shall en facility operators to transit station to help de 4t 1+:c;f. Policy TR-1.5.4: encourage Mia the River Qu land -de elegm nt regulations to Memorial Hospital to participate in .a c; rin meeting the demands xpansion and helping ;, solve the consequent parking problems freuy.: :.:_iiibershi en !rr f-in^np ion urage the -Oh Distr C -ic Center stakeholders and icrease 1iVletrorail ridership and utilization of the ease the need for excessive surface parking demand an nn he City will, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, -Dade County to provide a transit station to serve rant area of downtown. Policy T 1.5.5: [Reserved]. Poli TR-1.5.6: The City will, through its membership and regular att dance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its ergovernmental Coordination Policies, assist Miami -Dade County as necessary, in the : ap,,et f' ling --Fed- ns 4ien ef-teerail Phase II developinci the premium transit projects identified in the MPO's Lon Range Transportation Plan.by he City land development regulations to hnlp direct development where it will support the densities required for transit systems. Policy TR-1.5.7: The City shall, through its membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transportation Planning Council and through its Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 58 SUBSTITUTED fntergovernmentat Coordination Policies, request that Miami -Dade County includ appropriate public transit systems in its Transportation Pan to connect the follow ° g: Bayside to Flagler Street, the seaport to 'Metromover, the Miami International Ai • rt to de wntewnDowntown, Southeast Bayshore Drive to Metromover, Metr.,�uerrai;-P i.. E' 11 iri , Stadium to Health District/Civic Center:i Miami Beach to dDowntown and the FEC Corridor to Downtown. Policy TR-1.5.8: Prime-t„esrbraittal-of-t e-2005-EAR, tlhe City 11 amend -its -ban develGment—regulation&—and public-fae$ify--i;n,„ ont,ts--to -nsure a stronger interface between the development or redevelopment of neighb cod activity centers and the public transportation system by establishing design g delines for connectivity and transit infrastructure to be incorporated into the delopment/redevelopment program, The City shall require all new development an redevelowment in existing and planned transit corridors to be planned and desig -d to pry pedestrianism and transit usage through the following: A. The City shall encourage development of a rde variety of residential and non- residential land -uses and activities in no around rapid transit stations to produce short trips, minimize transfers attract transit ridership, and promote transit operational and financial effcie► res. Land uses that may be approved around transit stations shall include . using, shopping, and offices in moderate to high density and intensity, comp/- d by compatible entertainment, cultural uses and human services in va :± mixes. The articular uses that are as +roved in a given station area should: -spec! the character of the nearby neighborhood, strive to serve the needs of ; e neighborhood, and promote balance in the range of existing and planned l • + uses along the subject transit line. 8. tt is the _policy of the of Miami to accommodate new development around rapid transit stations t1at well designed, conducive to both pedestrian and transit use, and architectural', attractive. In recognition that many transit riders begin and end their trips as pedestrians, _ pedestrian accommodations shall include as appropriate, •ntinuous sidewalks to the transit station, small blocks and closely intersectin* streets, buildings oriented to the street or other pedestrian paths, parking is predominantly to the rear and sides of buildings, primary building entran'es as close to the street or transit stop as to the parking lot, shade trees, awn its and other weather protection for pedestrians. C. n all arterial and collector streets served by public transit new non-residential buildings and substantial alterations to existing non-residential buildings, and residential buildings wherever practical shall provide at least one full-time building entrance that is recognizable and accessible from the street and is comparably as close to the street and/or transit stop as it is to the primary parking_ lot. D. New residential and non-residential developments, subdivisions and replats shall provide for buildings that front the transit street, or provide streets or pedestrian Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Ohjectives Policies April 30, 2008 59 SUBSTITUTED connections that intersect with the transit street in close proximity to transit sto,s not more than 700 feet apart. E. Redevelopment of property within one-half mile of existing and planntransit stations and bus routes shall not cause an increase in walking rk nce from nearby areas to the transit services and shall, wherever practical done in a manner that reduces walking distances and is comfortable ,ractive to pedestrians. F. Land uses that are not conducive to public transit de -rship such as car dealerships, car -oriented food franchises and uses tip .' r.+wire transporting large obiects should not be permitted to locate or exp nri • : %4 mile of a rapid transit station. G. The City of Miami seeks to increase the (It- .tevelopment within walking distance of rapid transit stations in a manner late to the particular setting of each transit station and consistent with the , .vs of the MCNP that specify that existing abutting residential neighborhorrls re to be protected and preserved. Policy TR-1.5.g • The City will, throimembership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's ransportatioPlanning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination Po ies, encourage Miami -Dade County to approve the use of private jitneys where it determined that there exists public need for such services and conven'•nal bus transit services _ not satisfactorily meet the need. Policy iR-1.5.9B: The will promote water borne transportation as a commuter transit service and thr' rqi Jts membership and regular attendance at meetings of the MPO's Transporta an Planning Council and through its Intergovernmental Coordination PHir` . s will encourage Miami -Dade County to approve the use of water nror, tsasisr •-)n w,} cornnioir,, Inn0 cnr;rirr,. Policy TR- .5.10: Through application of the provisions of its land development regulation:, the City shall encourage residential development near large employment centers order to minimize Commutes within the City and near the large employment cente- The City shall continue to update the land development regulations, as ne ssary, to ensure the regulations promote residential development near large ployment centers and investigate opportunities for mixed -use developments. Policy TR-1.5.11: Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City will require new large-scale development to adopt and enforce measures that will reduce the generation of new single -occupant passenger car trip, in areas of high -density development, and encourage the use of multiple-occupa it vehicles, including public transit, for home -based work trips. The (''.y will coordinate with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 60 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED and -South Florida Commuter Services to provide support for transportation dema initiatives undertaken by new developments. Within one Year of the adoption of ' is policy, the City shall modify Article 17 of the City Zoning Code to incor orate Transportation Control Measures into the Major Use Special Permit atdlication process. Policy TR-1.5.12: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordinati. Policies, will continue to support Miami -Dade Transit resin its efforts to increase transit ridership. t ment{ation-cif--i+4i�r { �eoti to•'i se1the-avorage daily s are-of4rarrsit-r4dership Iy 30-per nt of --fetal R s'�c. tirusi yr r t.onthe 200,5. hR� s ibwiltla t dip _ e rty will coordinate with Miami -Dade Transit to develop weekday peak hour t. -nsit ridership data the armors at da►a Gettestion needs of transit__ridership to e ure that a baseline can be established to support the City's person -trip method ► ogycaparit-y level of service measurements and to support Miami -Dade Transit's orts to improve transit services. Policy TR-1.5,13: The City shall annually coordinate with Miami -Dade County and its update of the Five Year Transit Development P ograrn (TDP) to address transit needs consistent with the adopted level of service tandard and transit planning guidelines,. established by Miami -Dade County and %opu ation growth trends within the City of Policy TR-1.5.14:�t�• ., : * .� r . ._ , ate-and--Afif i (EAR), tlhe City will publish an anuaIyUstinr of'mend HHe Trancportatinn E3emont to mate the updated MD Transit Development (TDR) and its programmed improvements within the City •f Miami. Policy TR-1.5.15: Pri rr o-submittal of t ' -tThe City will p +lish an annual listing of amend -the ; podation,-€leaven#- to ineoFperate-the up + fed Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Long Range Transportation PI. (LRTP) and--its rogram ecl-improvements within the City of Miami, Objective TR-1.6. he City shall through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, annually coor+' ate and communicate its transportation plans and its public transit planning for ansportation disadvantaged people, with those of Miami -Dade County. The City w annually monitor programs sponsored by the State of Florida and seek opportu ies for coordination with other local municipalities. olicy TR-1.6.1: The City shall coordinate its transportation planning activities with a +ally--review-the annual update to the Metropolitan Planning Organization and subsequent Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Five -Year Transportation Improvement Program Rlar+s and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan Update, and coordinate- y's-tra„sp ration-piaaninq wi€ -t use-planE.-- Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 61 SUBSTITUTED Objective = The City shall, through its Intergov .ntal Coordination Policies, annually meet with Miami -Dade County to coordinate the protection of existing a signation of future public transit corridors within Miami, to ensure that p • lic transit expansion and improvement may be facilitated. Policy -1.7.1: The City shall use its I nd development regulations to adequate public rights -of -way are preserved for transportation pur includes the need for tf r__ transit services. Palic TR-1.7.2: The Cit shall deve&o when evaluating new nro'ects and their service. • • a transit corridor ri i ht- sure that ses, which y m p to use roximit to existin• and tune +tanned transit Objective TR-1.8: -@u ? The ,r!gulariv the transportation system and the information provided in e Transportation Element sI ,: =__ : with the goals, objectives and pol ies of the Land Use element, including coordination with the land use, map, 5opulation densities, housing, employment patterns, projected develo; -,T nt and edevelopment, urban infill, and other similar characteristics of land use that ;ave . n impac on transportation. Policy TR-1.8.1: The City shall continu properly designed and safe system fo thoroughfares through adopted desig City Public Works Manual as ado minimum address; • to assure provision of controlling vehicular accessibility to major tandards and procedures as contained in the ed for use in the review process, which at a 1. Adequate storag-..nd turning bays; 2. Spacing any d-.ign of median openings and curb cuts; 3. Provision of rvice roads along major thoroughfares, where applicable; 4. Driveway . ' cess and spacing; and 5. Traffic o'erations, including the provision of turning bays and or bus transit. Policy TR-1.8 : The Transportation Element will be amended to reflect changes to the Land U Element every five years, or as necessary, and include updated information based upon changes to the land use map, p•.ulation densities, housing, employment patterns, projected development and redev- opment, urban infill, and other similar characteristics of land use impacting the tra .portation system. olicy TR-1.8.3: The Transportation Element updates provided as part of Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) will utilize a long range planning horizon of a minimum of 20 years in order to achieve the maximum consistency with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 62 SUBS '1'1'1"UTED Objective TR-1,9: The City shall seek to achieve consistency and coordination betwee the Port of Miami and the Miami International Airport plans and the Miami Comprer-nsive Neighborhood P}an. Policy TR-1.9.1: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordinatio 'olicies, will annually coordinate with the Port of Miami and Miami International . port to ensure consistency between the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Pia and the port and airport master plans, and to improve access to and compatibility ith port and airport facilities. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Dbjeclives Policies April 30, 2008 63 SUBSTITUTED PC S, AVIATION AND RELATED FACILITIES Port of Miami Goal PA-1: Ensure that the de vela r'ment and expansion of Miami -Dade Couty's Port of Miami is compatible with and furthers the physical develcgment of ami's greater downtown area While mitigating negative impacts to ,,eivh[ro,Ytoods, y ;totaling the Part's econ i lr : function, operation, and potential improvements. Objective PA-1.1: The City of Miami, throes: i its land develop ent regulations, shall coordinate land use in areas of the cityadjacentto the ort of Miami with the transportation related activity which occurs within the pc to ensure compatibility and complementary land uses and activities while .sting negative impacts to neighborhoods, yet ,protecting the Ports economic furs ,11, operation, and potential improvements. Policy PA-1.1.1: The City of Miami shall, thr, gh its land development regulations, encourage facility improvement which will f her both the land development, coastal management and conservation goals and • .jectives of the City of Miami and the port development goals of Miami -Dade Coun and the Port of Miami. Policy PA-1.1.2: The City shall, thr' gh its land development regulations, ^ +. ens:. an as -quate amount of commercial and industrial land 4 h+-4-1,/illtIte to complement p . nned expansions of port activity, and will establl h a "free trade zone" within adeq .te proxirnity to the Port of Miami. belA 'r.1 n�iefije rnrnn1 41tai snrdi:nalion Pohcioc t e Cit„ of Ic`�--�,�jv'rorrrrrr`�rr ` f�o�rmrrcrtts:st--r-vm�rcv���--vrx r �rerre 1 inndi_Dade f ei enty to ag fee - hat-al1 nnrkieg 3d3 '}i��: rrvrrrrrr�rn�,--�.pvrn �c7�o-�yrcc- ansrrxy+-rcruva �i,ir to Georrmmocl to n�nw termin l ll be i7Tn eC�l ip' �GOfT'IrP1pQ��P[—i T� CPSriGT 1 t PPfn 4G 1201-ley PA 1. .44 Thrniegh- its--fntergoy mmnnlal Coordination PoIic, eC# i---Counfy- to---agree--that -all non elated --lam uses insl ing-fit not-limited-te-rot l al--off+ce, and stead -such uses will be ear-ereas-adjacent to Ole .Iicy PA-1.1.36: All surface transportation improvements providing access to the Port must be compatible with the needs, goals and objectives of the City of Miami as related to the development of the greater downtown area, and such improvements will be financed with an appropriate share of County, state and federal funds. Policy PA-1.1. The Port shall prepare guidelines that will serve as design criteria for the construction, renovation and landscaping of its facilities and such guidelines must comply with all City of Miami Code requirements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 64 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 1 1 Policy PA-1.1.57: The City shall, through its land development regulations, coop ate with Miami -Dade County and its Port of Miami operation to mitigate adverse structural and non-structural impacts from the Port of Miami upon adjacent natural resources and land uses. Policy PA-1.1.68: The City shall, through its land development regula • ns, cooperate with Miami -Dade County and its Port of Miami operation to pro'., t and conserve natural resources. Miami International Airport Goal PA-2. Ensure that the development and expansion of mall -Dade County's Miami international Airport is compatible with and furthers the phy cal development of the City of Miami. Objective PA-2.1: The City of Miami, through its and development regulations, shall coordinate land use in areas of the city adjac it to Miami International Airport with the transportation related activity which , ccurs within that facility to ensure ampatiblc and complimentary land u . s and activities. Through such land development regulations, the City will ' i igate negative impacts to nejohborhoods that might result from airport activi ' ,r while protecting the airport's economic function, operation, and potential im ! ovements. Policy PA-2.1.1: The City o Miami shall, through its land development regulations, encourage facility improver ent which will further both the land developrnept, coastal management and cons- ation goals and objectives of the City of Miami and the development goals oami-Dade County and Miami International Airport. Policy PA-2.1.2: 11 surface transportation improvements providing access to Miami International Airrort and impacting upon transportation within the City of Miami must be compatible ith the needs, goals and objectives of the City and such improvements will be fina ' ed with the appropriate share of County, state and federal funds. Policy ' A-2.1.3: The City shall, through its land development regulations, ensure that zoni • within the city protects existing aviation flight paths. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 65 SUBSTITUTED Fir Port of Miami River Goal PA-3: The Port of Miami River, r:. r .=.-•s .� - r -• r,:; -specificific s-along4ke-Miaffii-Ri-vef--which encamp .. water de endent marine activit on the river includin shi nina 3prl thr' supporting marine industries zoned .50-4 on the Miami Riv€- shall be enco u raged to continue operation as a valued and economically viable component of the cit s maritime industrial base. Objective PA-3.1: The City of Miami -shall help protect the Port of Miami River rom el croachment by non ater-dependent or water -related land uses, and shall regulate its expansion . d redevelopment in oordination with the City's applicable coastal management nd conservation plans ar: policies. Policy PA-3.1.1: The City "' may► se -its! encourage the establishment and maintenance of watei-depe %ent and water -related uses along the banks of the Miami River rises along the entire river and to discourage encroac: Tie by incompatible uses. I he City shall, through its land development regulations, , tor residential development along the Miami River in appropriate locations, Dr he residential uses are compatible with adjacent land uses while protecting rI t of Miami River's economic function, o aerations and potential im i rovemen Policy PA-3.1.2: The City shag! + r!h its ! in4— wxwP?ranment r(4111-11qti41rIS encourage the development and expansio of the Poi; of Miami River consistent with the coastal management and conservatio► elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Policy PA-3.1.3: The Cit, shall ;h-ii " ' m e encourage development of compa '+le land uses in the vicinity of the Port of Miami River indrl to mitigate potential verse impacts arising "rom ie Fort of Miami River upon adjacent natural resource and land uses. Objective PA-3.2: he City of C.:iami shall coo' mate the surface transportation access to the Port of ami River with the traffic and ,ass transit system shown on the traffic rculation m.p series. Pol y PA-3.2.1: . he City of Miarni shall, through the Transportation Element of the mprehensive Plan, coordinate intermodal surface and water transportation access erving the Port of Miami River. a 1-+3#-Miarni-Rover te-i f seas-14-indeptWE ..,, , Reft F 148&m. .dart. we-s14 sc as as# Psrt-et-Mian i aver s-msade 946-fame-sale e5en4saE1€ar a +1 r' E-r. 14 1 •rr -ver u e ri,l67 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 66 SUB'll'l u iED Objective PA-3.3: The City of Miami shall coordinate its Poriof Miami River pining activities with those of ports facilities providers and regulators including e U.S.. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, the Miami River Commission, and . mi Dade County's Port of Miami. Policy PA-3.3.1: The City of Miami, through its Intergovern Policies, shall support and coordinate with other 'urisdictions jurisdiction over the Miami River in order to support and en River's economic importance and viability as a port facility Miami River consistent with the future goals and objec Plan, particularly with respect to (he unique characterist location and its economic position and functioning and the necessity for coordination of these charact industry that complements, and often competes ntal nd a Coordination ncies havin Port of Miami e functions of the Port of es of the Comprehensive s of the Port of Miami River's in the local maritime industry, stics and needs with the maritime h, the Port of Miami River. N„) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 67 SUBSTITUTED PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Goal PR-1: Provide sufficientadeq ate opportunities for active and passive recceion to all eity-Cit , esidents based on access to parks, recreation and open space, p i.pita park funding, ; ,ular surveys of residents onpark and recreation needs. Objective PR open -spaces -Rol r per }e city's rieigkrboFhoods: 111111 }{{{...,, pions for any where-Ih Clic- ronotiorLTif nal 5snyce5,w th -theointent - of i{entifyinn mccuter address eatrentrdeflFfeFiies, so irneo to finance their implementation The --Oily wFfi-- i }I' improve -the nuality and _diversity-ef renrealional ern rams• offered of or.s:.. pafcs- cr^�ea,sin chaffa ho„ s-ef cipr er.�do' mcd o'cessar-fisc'Oallyjractic'abbbPeT-anTEd ou ag_ ree+ nna to he n....-tit ed hi. t e i. I a-liese n +sect Pfks 11rcr+oiaton,- Fksand_-rocrrsatien seryisesriheso renulations wi4l str . C ng, but net ili lted--tt , cnen eve�l� onrnnntrTvn fir ce- m will be used ie--tom . , . •. 9-impacts-of such development Policy -PR 1. Plan. Pr ad ijofity of its land r use -as e�cTL onol land- rise ill contain a isting-porie-special recr .atkin, a ieatiort 'n`�' ri safetty ne age ;hiidren and the ei`ierly-within-tt e-*erne {f +_et p iities are t�eI-, it t es mreotinn lhn recreation and oduc-atien ri neec ofie t eld Policy -PR 1.1.8: Foolures that insr ase access for hand capped persenc will be rents of {park taei Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 68 SUBS Hi UTED Policy -PR des- ` 4-tie--cep - Of Pei' pc-Off:NafioR—o#--ate fulu development-of-4 unities fR Pokey -PR 1.1.i2 All City ownar{ a ..:.+ , FRG inn the -Miami Rier shofeiillesr, Wiii-pfovide-fof- i1G-apen - :.. • °We aesess4a4le-shofeline Pokily -GM 2.1.74 . _1 A 4te feta ve—A iooati F tf v4c y 2OO ioeS. (Sco Coastal-iMani e t fogf fts,witdlife obse vatk r.ai agod in_parkc anff_open srahnnr• for-o i4 Obi . ■ .1 sec- y-within the rr y p ks -fed+ -1 f 1-396-241 v „411 heirhooursro s to nnnna Page-. a } u+i I ec}ablich rogram to work +a+i4h (- rf141��j"'�,nT97�'r P1iTL4-TVri�nTi1'7 !i nrannrxrt Goiillf»r+oily nrirrsn a_ nis g oups to nccir4 Q so �pzT' ` °"' �"�o�r4-Cv-var"xro's icy -PR 1.2.4: - e bity--Yy}ki'-estabk h-a systrtcemsa "r ula'riinifefine i' - 'fals dommunity-and-neighbofted-por n all anti ra parke the City well maintain nn arinnuato numh r of ai vn uQct■p�7pncv'}c iv vet]■■Irrm['j/r9Rr31rr�PT{.#p0i.'ryT,'at[G iaonnvU''r-vx tf air vccta based-enuI r b36i 6 # 69RdU&%6afofjHR&p96tion Peh&y PR 1 2.& -The City w ll disseminate informnlion In thn p t4in nn n_ opr r caf y --�ar�-■�air'aiggc rr�co[P ri aavaTr7yi3orrr[o roc-Prrcnap vaa ca ti) yti� a}are o ihn follnaaied while si n nark faci tie F" x � r Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 69 SUBSTITUTED Obi qua Fccr Policy PR 1.3.1: The City's operating eta the -Capital -Improve (CIE) wltll- i�vc priority -to the quality of pregrams-inLr -- d' ,hysical e-p`•' , . rest programs leading to the deceeloement annrnnriate ni.6.li.. f.i -y. - `ifpfe'ernnents. Policy RR 1.3,4: The City- will impiemeht--iano +vn�macaNa emeent and --maintenance alg ternativeo dec ne Tthimiz ating an'. °Ia thethis oertent and n�uality of p ogramn or ad tinrt the hsr ir•al nondi#inn of nark -extent-�vNi.cJ v�-Prcn��c.a�.Tv-vr-cav7�, fe.,�!' �`1�.�.r[FTIS�S�h�Trrj-the-uT�Q1�S tasilitie�: ei Policy PR 1.3.5: The Gity wit - I , . . t nuhlinlnri. ate partnerships with- B,n s--and spaces - Pokey PR 1.3.6: [[Reserved' Policy PR 1.3.7: [Roy Petry, -PR 1.3.8 1. ,vi11 isti-a-permanent-parko-ad -is rReprG eRtat e-cc-' l-,. _ y for l p se of innreaeinr1 of foctiveness in the rfelyere, of rectaanexni -Thic boarri together wi g suppo t from the r inh twill-innliado Kitt not be zed list of n of tho City's recreation -service deliyerie_csrstem-anti an assessment 1 of this -element: egLita a • , . , . #acid, qui red-to-maira aft fnnili iee need d to sorrve-nci9 deyelopmenter redevelopment l -i'2 'Fhe City will perinriiealty_ ►evise all fear_ related to the ,lemma t o development ..ri a- redo, elop ennt e reflect inertia a in the coat_ of providing- pubUe epen-spasn aed recreational faeilit Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 70 SUBSTITUTED of-speei al -asp frrrrrl open space and r. _. . eas of the city. Rel4 . andardefor-1 space per-1.040-residents- nce-the-gua e nihirvrCi >R #Horn apd pl�rnr .nnir.4zhnr -manner . rec r fls r. rr.rdrnrs ar d W , ore a development,Vf7 Poliey-12R,, s&,_ 1 . peseryed] Policy PR 1.5.2: F ho City will c it t4„ i-efierY ciz ti rennial iJ 9r#r 'innl elopment-ofis €E_ ... _ _ . . rt ycal& + 1ven-i r Po„PR 1.5A: T-he City will -redevelop mbis--Rarli-in-the Riyercirin Di&tri,ct to ty-re ts7 Poky PR 1.5.6: zGreato cshnrmon'r 1hil,arfT nafn rtie#riot anrt merlon services -center -le -the -Rive l [l. C . triot 11t -[flf Norft-r Rwer drive. nn ¢ mi River, Relic n the- Afate frnnl Ma ter d cn and prc. rammed in tiro CLE hie City-will--pr: r 1_678 [Reseryorll in then Citzr of Miami Charter anrf R latnrf and r wovide -Werl4ef& d-v sit Iof cny-RR-14-. *,0 The City wilt r• ntinue to nnnnrtne dove.lnnmenf of i wban tr ee.t promenade. lw ika .es - wish_ wiclened sr kn high n pality material. liotztrnn nranhios. anrf fionionin Pol y to work toward irnprnv ont of the vr����t: Elie �l�jl--iMlll--�E3r�hrik}� �yreF--sit--crra ater Tnftec alooinn major borrtevardc me udiert Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 71 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 81sea a Boulevard Briekell A„en i anrt Rlorlh 1 Av, nue to eroate 1 viacz.f� i iu rsvrlfo >•ul u � vr�vacGirrncT7'v��7vrn��-+-s" �. , Policy PR 1.5.12: The City will continue tr, f„r,rl, tn,j,..rrl enhancemcnt ef-ptl a lc -spaces (en1fafle.64" plazaai A b ie etirtty r,[��.,,+�., 7nd �nrttf „�,([.y,-. - : {.,�a rt wnt �h1_a r Th`. City-wiIwheniever apprepnate-tf'I``ye 7 C in- ubllc -Pl - " f I'"en�. i . . a nS •. .PR-implement-new-park-disIFIR}rzs-irr-.., ed-areas-$ltle-E#ty naI pa �l�� fccfeat3eF}-o A made ayadlible-to city ,def Yftti �p��`�_ p� �fllLi�P-Yt77lFf•/l�G'TC fT.�t �f f eels fPelicy PR (�1:6.11 :: j(The ryd r� neclaexpansien-ef eer Ta1�e i spa. - s s-within the -Little -Haiti area; ra tty within---the--arm depicted , .low, sain'— s#a1lfz i dew, it plementatien-p an-anr--schedut s - . a,f r r : • : park -district Obiecti're PR-1,1: The City shall work o achieve a medium -term objective of providing a park within one-half mile of e ry resident by 2015 and to achieve a long- term objective of a park within one -guar •r mile of every resident by 2020. Policy PR-1.1.1: The City wil=stablish a new hierarchy for the City park system to reflect Miami's urban conditi+ as described in the Miami Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan dated May 20 t and adopted by the City Commission. The hierarchy will have the following eleme Citywide park c f stination parks - four types: conservation, waterfront over 3 acres, sports complex and aquatic, specialty tunigue programs] Community parks - parks over 3 acres that include active recreation facilities 0 Linear parks - greenways and traits _teighborhood parks - all remaining parks under 3 acres that do not fit in other categories ]icy PR-1.1.2: The City will focus on park land acquisi#ion according to_ _t_he allowing priorities that emerged from community preferences during the 2007 Parks Master Plan process: land with water views and/or water access; land for "walk -to" parks including.. neighborhood parks, in underserved areas of the City identified in Citywide and NET -area maps in the 2007 Parks Master Plan and any subsequent updates to these maps; land to expand destination and community parks; land for expansion or creation of linear park segments, information an target priorities and target areas for new parks will be disseminated to all relevant City departments to enhance the potential for n rkland acquisition in rnnnjunction with infrastructure and Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 72 SUBSTITUTED other projects. ideally, new parks should be at least one acre in size, but smaller are may be suitable, depending on the surroundings and proposed uses, Policy PR-1.1.3: The City will provide areas for safe, passive use including those in active recreational use parks. The passive areas will i green space with plantings, shade and seating. As, gable Policy PR-1.1.4: The City will conduct a study to support a revise(: : t,i of Service for parks, recreation and open space for concurrency purposes an cldopt a revised Level of Service for parks, recreation and open space for cr-... 1 ency purposes by January 2009 that will assist in achieving the access and per :a funding objectives of PR-1.1. Until that time, the Level of Service for concurren irposes shall be 1,3 acres of public park space per 1 000 residents. Objective PR-1.2: Provide sufficient per capita funds fo pain, aystem to support the parks, recreation and open space standards expec ov the public, as indicated in surveys and other res onses to ublic outreach f . r resources and programs that benefit the community. he City will strive to meet . nd exceed a benchmark level of s. endin u annual' of $100 ser ca ita in 2007 dollwithin fiscal limits and based on identified needs. Policy PR-1.2.1: The City will es` le cost of providing park and recreation programs and services, identify wl park and recreation services are to be offered according to criteria relato level of benefits to individuals and the community as a whole, identify. ` icn services and programs should be free, and formulate how a fee structure all a + d be set for other services and programs. Policy PR-1.2.2: The Cif, will develoannual parks and recreation budgets that explasn_the rational@@ pch.' d the program, operational and maintenance standards that the City intends to .irne , the costs of meeting those standards; and the per capita budget in comparito th similar cities, including cities in Florida, Policy` PR-1 .3: The City will allocate program revenues generated by the Parks and Recreation repartment to the departments budget. )olic ' R--1.2.4: The City will work to identify and create a dedicated funding source ar a park system, 'olicyy PR-1.2.5: The City will seek grants and other funding for new resources, ncludinq land, activities, and programs. Some of these funds may come from nonprofit ,-tnership groups that may be formed, such as a potential Miami Parks Foundation, Objective PR-1.3: Pursue expanded and new np_portunities identified in the 2007 Parks Master Plan (and any subsequent updates) to share park, recreation and open Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 73 Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED space resources with the school district, the housing authority, churches, no organizations, transportation agencies and other groups that may be able t land andprograms with the City Parks and Recreation Department. profit share Policy PR-1.3.1: The City will establish communication with and hag : s to agencies and groups that have existing and potential recreation and opens resources in order to pursue access to these resources by City residents. Policy PR-1.32: The City will evaluate current costs, ber and procedures for sharing resources and programming and will develop policie. ,,,id procedures that wilt maximize benefits for City residents. Objective PR-1.4: Expand existing and create new reenways and trails to meet resident needs. Polic _PR-1.4.1: The City will continue to wn with transit agencies to coordinate the park system and pedestrian connections v. pportunities to improve and expand the Metro -Path Trail. Policy PR-1.4.2: The City will i iue to work with transportation agencies to implement the Commodore Trail rt sovements and the Flagler Trail (FEC Corridor Greenway). Policy PR-1.4,3: The City continue to work to implement the Overtown Greenway plan to link the Miami Riv-rthrough Overtown to Downtown. Policy PR-1. ensure that gree proposed reg: Trail, the funding r' Lang-F 4.4: ne City will work with Miami -Dade County and other groups to y, trail and park systems within the City are effectively linked to trails such as the Venetian Connector, the Unity Trail, the Perimeter Trail, and the East-West Trail. The City will continue to advocate for ientified in the Miami -Dade Metropolitan Planning. Organization 2030 ransportation Plan. Poli PR-1.4.5: The City will designate as scenic transportation corridors those seents of roadways that have significant vegetative features and will encourage the •velopment of bicycle and pedestrian paths along such corridors, where appropriate. uture land development regulations will encourage the provision of sufficient land areas for uses that are compatible with and encourage the flow of bicycle and pedestrian traffic along these corridors. Objective PR-1.5: Ensure that future development and redevelopment pay an equitable, proportional share of the cost of public open space and recreational facilities reouired to maintain adopted LOS standards. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 74 SUBSTITUTED 1 Policy PR-1.5.1: The City's land development reulations will establish mechanisms meet expanded demand for Citywide parks, neighborhood parks, and recreati;nal programs resulting from new residential development, including, but not limi d to, impact fees, density bonuses and contributions in lieu of land that will be sed to provide new park and recreation resources to serve new development. Th, City will review these fees annually in accordance with recreation and open spec - needs and revise them as necessary to reflect increases in the cost of providin+ public open space and recreational facilities to meet its adopted Level of Se ice for parks, recreation and open space. Policy PR-1.5.2: The City will continue to work with develop of mixed use and nonresidential projects to ensure the creation of appropriate pu is spaces. Policy PR-1.5.3: The City wilt consider the use of special sessment districts to help fund open space and recreational facilities projects w public benefits tend to be localized to specific geographic sub areas of the Cit. Goal PR-2: Preserve and enhance existing parks Objective PR-2.1: Protect existing park land. Policy PR-2.1.1: The City has a no - procedures to this effect for park I recreation and cultural facilities any such land, will require t subject to public procedur park, recreation or conse d r _ eation f�cr�ities. t-lossibolicy for public park land and will adopt ¢ in the City Zoning Ordinances, as described in the 2007 Parks and Public Spares Master Plan, by 2010. These will allow only be built on park land, will limit building footprint on t conversion of park land for any other purposes be d replace the converted park land with land similar in n value in terms of usefulness and location. Policy PR-2.1.2: T , City will continue to define and protect conservation areas_in the zoning code, as .` as other parks and recreation areas. Objective PR.1.2 + aintain and enhance existing parks and recreation Facilities. Policy l-2.2.1: The City will provide appropriate staffing, services, equipment, and maint. once at all parks. Criteria for appropriateness will include park category `de or neighborhood), recreation programs, demand for passive and active es and activities, sizes, and facilities. .'olicy PR-2.2.2: The City will maintain and staff nine public swimming pools to be open all year round by 2009, with the remainder to be open year-round by 2012. Policy PR-2.2.3: The City, through the Parks and Recreation Department, will continue to develop and implement maintenance level of service standards, identify Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 75 SUBSTITUTED associated costs, and address funding those costs, including replacement procira for equipment and vehicles, before adding niore assignments. Goal PR-3: Increase public access to all parks, recreation, facilities and open paces including waterfront areas and the Picnic Islands in Biscayne Bat Objective PR-3.1: Enhance public access bypedestriansand bicyclists ; . parks and recreation sites Policy PR-3.1,1: The City will continue to implement sidewalk and ade tree planting programs along public roadways that connect to parks a + other community destinations. Tree planting programs will be implemented in ac-ordance with the 2007 City of Miami Tree Master Plan. Policy PR-3,1.2: The City will work with the Parks and ecreation Department and with neighbo1iood groups to identify pedestrian rout. within a half -mile radius of parks that are appropriate for improvements to `ewalks, Sighting, street trees, crosswalks and pedestrian count -down signals, an swage to support a ParkWalks program„."as described in the 2007 Parks anr! ';.lic Spaces Plan. The ParkWalks improvement plans will be included in the.apitat improvement Program, One ParkWalks planningprocess will be coot each Commission district annually beginning in 2[1 9, with implementation to . in the following year. Palic PR-3.1.3: Bic cle .arkinfacia es such as bike racks shall be provided in existing and future park projects. Objective PR-3.2: Enhance the p , tic's visual and physical access to waterfront areas. Policy PR-3.2.1: The ' itv will continue to work to complete the Bavwalk, encompassing as much the Biscayne Bay waterfront as possible, and to complete the Riverwalk and the ami River Greenway, Policy PR-32.2: All City -owned waterfront property, including the Miami River shorelines, wail t ovide for public open spaces that provide access to the shoreline. Policy P . .3: The City will incotporate provisions for public physical and/or visual access shoreline in its waterfront zoning regulations. (See Coastal Management Policy _.1.7.) Poi y PR-3.2.4: Where appropriate and in the interest of public safety and promotion o outdoor recreation opportunities on environmentally sensitive areas, future land evelopment regulations will require non -water dependent or related development and/or redevelopment to maintain public access to the coastal and Miami River shorelines. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-2.1.1.1 Policy PR-3.2.5: The City will continue to expand launch areas for personal kayaks/canoes, kayak/canoe rentals and other boating programs at parks on Biscayne Bay, the Miami River and the South Fork of the Miami River. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 76 SUBSTITUTED Policy PR-3.2.6: The City will pursue creation of water shuttles or water taxis t .t will expand public access to the Picnic Islands in Biscayne Bay off the tipper East de and the Dinner Key islands off Coconut Grove, Polic PR-3.2.7: The Cit will work with other orianizations and a.en -s to identif recreational opportunities, including boating, on the smaller waterws in the City, such as Wagner Creek, the Little River, and the canals. Policy PR-3.2.8: All renovations and improvements to Cit ks and recreational facilities will be designed to enhance rather than obstruct wati- Lt views. Policy PR-3.2.9 1 4: The City will increase pub. . <3creational opportunities on Virginia Key through • • - - - provided -or-in the Virginia Key Master Plan and its implementation. Policy PR-3.2.10: The City shall continue to a sure that park and recreational lands open to the public are included in redevelop ► ent prolects for Watson Island and will monitor the project after construction to e ure continued public access without any requirements far the public to make pur ases or any other barriers to open public use. Policy PR-3.2.11: As specified in e City nj Miami Charter and Related Laws. and more specifically the Waterfron Chartet. Amendment. all new development and redevelopment along the dow own waterfront is required to _provide a waterfront setback, and those developm: is that require publicly accessible shoreline walkways, will desi.n them in conform. ce. "'the "Ba walk/Riverwalk fiesiin Standards." See Coastal Management Pol. Ci 2:1.8.) The City will monitor these areas to ensure continued public access .s required. Objective PR-3.3: Park . { recreational facilities will be accessible to handicapped persons and provide o : i ortunities for special needs groups. Policy PR-3.3 All renovations, expansions, and development al park and recreation facilities will designed in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act requireme s, including handicapped parking spaces ramps, handrails, pathways and other essibility improvements to be appropriately located with respect to rec(ea ' • nal facilities. cy PR-3.3.2: Designs for renovations, expansions, and developments of park and Nation facilities will be evaluated to ensure that there are sufficient facilities within ,ti service area to provide for the recreation, education, and safety needs of ireschool age children, the elderly, persons with disabilities and other special needs iraups. Go, PR-4: Enhance the civilly of recreational and educational opportunities for all aqe r r ups,persons with disabilities, and other special needroups. Ob ectiv'e PR-4.1: Continue to improve the quality and diversity of recreational programs offered at destination and community parks1, and neighborhood parks where such programs may be offered. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 77 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED Policy PR-4.1.1: The City will use participant evaluation surveys, at the comple `in of recreational programs to evaluate program success, and online ;Public opinion 'rveys, at least once every three years, and scientific surveys at least once every se -n years to identify needed and desired programs. Policy PR-4.1.2: The City will increase staff and hours of operation w►-re necessary and fiscally Feasible, provide professional development opportunit's for park and recreation staff, and encourage staff to be certified by the Flori►. Recreation and Parks Association. Policy PR-4.1.3: The City will continue torovide interpre e displays, educational programs, wildlife observation locations, and picnic areas in •arks and open spaces for outdoor recreation activities. Policy PR-4.1.4: The City wilt continue to coordinate , ith nonprofit providers of social services to the elderly, youth, and other s+ecial n • ds . rou.s so as to 'ermit such providers to use public park facilities for meeti the recreational and educational needs of these groups. Goal PR-5: Improve management and operations in t e park and recreation system. Objective PR- 1 1--3- Increase the effi e r7 ,' of park operations, while improving the quality of recreation services and str gthe ii lg the financial support of the parks and recreation service system. Policy PR-5.1.1: The VI: J mission of the Parks and [Recreation Department will be revised to include th:. ?tection of green spaces and natural areas in addition to the existing focus on ,- <anonal and cultural activities. Policy PR---5.1.2 The City's ope,' ng budget and the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) will give priority to the quality of programs in, and the physical condition of, existing park .cilities and to meeting c fisting deficiencies, before con'ructing new facilities for p. ' s and recreation. , ,se additional land to be held in inventory for new parks in uMaser v ,eignuorlioods. Roti 't; � R 1 2 7.She f ihisuitt ertpbt rku of exr__e1i ense prnnram lor__eeteeted �-�--xr� T mrr`c�[vv rU-rr-c-�urn3-vrc�7cwr...Trs..�-r� I.+i us�-vn-rr- i+r �c•- Aity arks rhos staff n art an.i operations ann fec,ised en hegh ra,.nliiit olicy PR• c. 1 z 1 : A projection and analysis of operational and maintenance costs associated with all park and recreation re 3 sd capital projects which exceed $50,000, with their anticipated funding sources, will be required and made publicly available prior to the decision to appropriate public funds for capital improvements. Policy PR• 1. %4: The City will Intirtue to implement i iovative management and maintenance alternatives designed to minimize operating and maintenance costs while not reducing the extent and quality of programs or adversely affecting the physical condition of park facilities Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 78 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBS111 �T`�Eli benefit to the comimunitv, identifying costs and potential revenues, impr management accountability, establishing preventive maintenance and replacL programs, establishing formal policies and systems for working with groups that sponsor programs that use City facilities, and strengthening support services. Policy PR-5.1.3:5: The City will irnpler ent-pul iielprivate parfnorchips BO's a &gases assign staff time to develop and manage a network of vol. teer 'friends" groups for individual parks. ement pubflelpriyate parinewh'xipe w fth CHOP a r�-r4 '` ��r the mnintennnn.ei. nd enh moment of yu�hlie seaef IIf �t7TCTTT177Tf iS4YlAaf�+'O17Q`S37'r V � �� Policy PR-5.1.6 4- 3 6: wed} The City will continue .rve1op and implement public/private partnerships to contribute to the mainten, and enhancement of parks, recreational facilities, and public spaces, while j nsurinq that public spaces remain freely open to the public Policy PR-5.1. 7: fReseFvedi The City will reate a Citywide Miami Parks Foundation by 2010 to serve as a nonprofit p- ner to focus attention on the park system raise money to help support maintence, enhance and expand parks and recreational programs, attract volunteers, anbroaden the constituency for the park system. Objective PR-5.2: Create institutions nd procedures to ensure resident and community consultation in the develo t of system wide policies and planning for park and recreation program imps va{nts. Policy PR-5.2.1: The City w 'ablish a permanent Parks and Recreation Advisory Board made up of reF',' Au are; park users, program participants, and representatives of group. .ocial relevant expertise. The Board's responsibilities will include advising elef, . officials and staff on implementation of the 2007 Parks and Public Spaces M. Plan and any adopted subsequent updates to that Plan. The Board will be su • -A • rted by staff from the Parks and Recreation Department, and will report annually t the Mayor and City Commission on progress in implementing the Master Plan, intl. .r ng financial reports, holding at least one public hearing on the draft report before su ittinq it to the Mayor and Commission. The Board will also review and advise o capital plans and designs based on the Master Plan and advise the Commi;sion «n any proposals to expend more than $50,000 to acquire new park land, to djminis or convert existing park land, to accept donated land for parks, or to sell City land at may be suitable for parks. The City will periodicalfv review and refine the missio and charge of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board in order to ensure maxi um o.+ortunities for public involvement and effectiveness in addressing parks anrecreation needs. Proposed changes to the mission and charge of the Board will be implemented until after a public hearing by the appropriate public board. Policy PR-5.2.2: The City will survey City residents to monitor preferences, needs and satisfaction with the park system on a regular basis, at a minimum through evaluations of all programs by program participants to evaluate program success, online surveys every three years, and scientific surveys every seven years (starting from the Parks Master Plan survey of 2006). Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 200B 79 SUBSTITUTED Policy PR-5.2.3: The City will develop and implement regular procedures by .? t provide opportunities for park user and neighborhood consultation in the Oar' nd design of park and recreation facilities improvements and new parks and pry; Policy PR-5.2.4: The City will develop a full update on the Parks and P is Spaces Master Plan at least once every ten years, to coincide with a scien lc survey of residents' park and recreation needs and to precede and contrib to the EAR process. Objective PR-5.3: Continue to increase public safety and security - thin City parks. Policy_ PR-5.3.1: All parks will be equipped with adequa energy efficient night lighting by 2012. Policy PR-5.3.2: Citywide and neighborhood parks will increase their hours of operation and enhance their programs, whenever - asible, so as to encourage a greater public presence in the parks. Policy PR-5,3.3: The City's Police Department II continue to work with neighborhood residents to create and sue +ort communit c e watch r roues to assist in park safety and crime prevention. Policy PR-5.3.4: The City will continue qular. uniformed police patrols and presence in and around Citywide and neiphborhf .d parks. Policy PR-5.3.5: In all parks with =ctive recreation the City will maintain an adequate number of trained staff based o standards recognized by professional organizations such as the Florida Recreation and Park Association or the National Recreation and Park Association, and on a ular basis will conduct safety inspections of equipment and structural facilities. Policy PR-5.3.6: The ' ity will disseminate information to the public on proper safety procedures that are tbe followed while using park facilities. Policy PR-5.3.7: When parks are being renovated or designed, the City will evaluate the park's saf- , consulting with park users and the police whether high fences or other obtrusi security measures remain necessary. Goal PR-6: De ` and enhance the quality of parks and open spaces within theCity's downtown downtown an Uher neighborhoods in a manner that addresses the needs of City residents, wry# and visitors, and strengthens the City's economic development. PR-6.1: Implement the NET Area Visions in the 20O7 Parks and Public ::a Master Plan, using the NET Area Implementation Tasks and Park )ortunities section of the Plan as a guide to enhancing and expanding Citywide grid neighborhood parks, recreational facilities and programs. Policy PR-6.1.1: The City will annually review implementation sections of the 2O07 Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan to include implementation actions in developing an annual work plan and capital improvements plan for parks and recreation facilities and programs. Miami Comprehensive Neigh+ orhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 80 SUBS'111 U 1E14 Policy PR-6.1,2: The City will work to implement the specific master pl.: s that include parks and recreation facilities such as the Coconut Grove Waterf r< t Master Plan, the Museum Park Master Plan, and the Virginia Ke Master Plan and create pedestrian and water linkages among Fem Isle Park, Sewell Park the recently acquired Police Benevolent Association property, and Curtis Park to reate a Miami "Central Park." As depicted in the Waterfront Master Plan and p grammed in the CIE, the City will provide a continuous network of public parks a major attractions along the downtown waterfront. Policy PR-6.1.3: The City will continue to redevelop Lum ' s Park in the Riverside District to provide an activity/program center for histo riverfront activities and recreational facilities for visitors and City residents, incl . ding creation of a speciality "Fisherman's Wharf' cafe district and marine services c nter. Policy PR-6.1.4: The City will create a specialty "Fshermen's Wharf'" cafe district and marine services center in the Riverside District ono N.W. North -River Drive on the Miami River. Objective PR-6.2: Improve and enhance p 1ic spaces and linkages in the City. Policy PR-6.2.1: The City will contiue to encourage development of urban street promenade linkages with vvidene+ sidewalks. high Quality materials, shade trees, landscaping, lighting„ graphics an furnishes. Policy PR-6.2.2: The City 1 continue to work toward improving landscaping and pedestrian -oriented amenitialo • major boulevards, including Biscayne Boulevard, Brickell Avenue, and No 1st venue, and other major transportation corridors, to create distinctive image and unifying elements between downtown distracts. Policy PR-6.2.3: Th City writ continue to work towards enhancement of public spaces (entrances, plaza lobbies, courtyards and atriums) and gateways through artwork. The City will us.;.wtrenever appropriate, the "Art in Public Places" allocation in public facility constru,r "on budgets as well as the assistance of the County Arts Council staff, and enco 're private organizations to construct civic monuments at gateway location ,, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 81 SUBSTITUTED Little-14a t-PaFEc Wa +r fea I TT Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives policies April 30, 2008 82 SUBSTITUTED Goal PR-72 Develop public parks and open spaces that are aesthetically appeali . and enhance the character and image of the c :ity. Objective PR-7 2. 1: Improve the aesthetic qualities of arks and recreati t facilities +r iique-natur l far scape-featur horhoodparks. Policy PR-7.1.1: The City will use the design principles in the 2007 ' arks and Public Spaces Master Plan as a basic framework for the design and re' -sign of parks and park improvements, and prepare more specific design guidelines =s needed. Policy PR-7.1.2: The City will ensure that its staff includes Landscape architect with knowledge of best practices in park and recreation f - design and that this staff person will be employed to design park improvements. n designers are retained on contract, to review and monitor park design nro or}r Goal PR-ft 3: Encourage the development of high quality cultural arts facilities and programs within the eCity. Objective PR-8 3. '1: The -city will-Csontinue o develop and support cultural districts, facilities anti programs. u! ri-•rta aistr.ct— ithn the --down wit wi4hrn-tho ,r -will-be--c tile-:1town s&ich a dicer . Poke doweteWR -Pert Gecko -Wiling: ty in non trunt`nn of thet view icing b gilt in conformity wit the ir4grafts-theaters e o ment regulations. tits 'thin the 'ahoy PR-8.1.1: The City will continue to support development of a downtown cultural irts district as described in the proposed Downtown Master Plan, through land development regulations and other strategies. Policy PR-8.1.2: The City will support cultural and heritage programs and facilities in selected areas of the Cit such as, but not restricted to, Overtown, the Design District, and tittle Havana, including small performing arts venues, heritage trails, street fairs, and similar programs, through land development regulations and other strategies. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 83 SUBSTITUTED . Objective PR 4.1Pubilc accessibility -to -existing -park and, �� at aL facit -wft4-be improved by 2045:- Policy PR 4,1.1=Handieappcd parking spaces, ramps, handrai . , and other recreationalae ics. Policy —PR 4,1.2: Bicycle pail in„ fa„iiiiiec such as bike racks shall be provided to e isiirg.anci_ future park_ afeiccts _ Policy PR 4.1.3: Interpretative displays, cducattiona# ► ograms, wildbser,atien scs at parks. Goal PR-9: Establish sustainable and green practices in par design, maintenance, building, planting and energy efficiency. Objective PR-9.1: Protect and restore native pl , t communities, where feasible and appropriate, and provide educational pros . ms and interpretive signage about South Florida environments. Policy PR-9.1.1: The City will conti e its program of native plant protection and restoration and elimination of exnti plants at Simpson Park and the Virginia Key nature area; expand this progra the conservation area at Wainwright Park; restore native vegetation in woody - 'reline and streamfront edges of parks, where appropriate; establish, wher iodate, native plantings that require limited water and fertilizer in parks; and e: fish native plantings in public road, rail, drainage and utility corridors that are not - itable for pedestrian and recreation access. Policy PR-9.1.2: The ty will seek partnerships to establish coastal hammock exhibit plantings as part of nvironmental education programs and exhibits in community parks. Policy PR-9.1.3 The City will continue to promote the planting and preservation of native aecies . y property owners in the City through educational materials and programs. Objective P'-9.Z.° Introduce sustainable and energv-efficient materials and methods in park m>intenance and operations. P Iicy PR-9.2.1: The City will employ life -cycle costing to evaluate costs of new park .tructures and make efforts to incorporate energy- and water -efficient methods and materials, in new and renovated park structures including the use of green roofs, solar panels, and other innovative approaches. Policy PR-9.2.2: The City will implement best management practices such as water conservation, integrated pest management, water conservation, elimination of toxic chemicals, and similar sustainable practices. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 84 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED sticide and herbicide meth s of liance with the National Pollutant Di- hat Policy PR-9.2.3: The City will implement to all application for all sodded areas corn Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 85 SUBSTITUTED COASTAL MANAGEMENT Goal CM-1: N.jintain, protect, and enhance the quality of life and appearance o ' Miami's '`oas�ta/ one including the preservation of natural resources as well as the en ancement of the built environment. Objective CM-1.1: Preserve and protect ie existing natural s .tems including ;Hands and beach/dune systems within Virginia Key and those p► tions of Biscayne iy that lie within the City's boundaries; and improve water quity within the Miami . er, its tributaries, and the Little River. Policy CM-1.1.1: As a precondition to the development •r redevelopment of Virginia Key, a comprehensive assessment will be made of env' onmental hazards that are the result of past disposal activities at the Virginia ey landfill and other relevant environmental concerns. Such assessment wi be made in cooperation with appropriate County, State and Federal environ •ntal agencies, and an action plan to reduce or eliminate any hazards will be formulated. (See Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-1.1.1.) Policy CM-1.1.2: The City will retro the number of storm water outfalls that discharge into the Miami River and ' s tributaries, the Little River and directly into Biscayne Bay. If positive drainage .ystems to these water bodies are deemed to be the only feasible method of mai► aining adequate storm drainage, then these storm sewers will be designed ane constructed to retain grease and oil and minimize pollutant discharges. (See atural Resource Consen :tion Policy NR-1.1.2 and Sanitary and Storm Sewer- Policy SS-2.2.1.) Policy CM-1.1.3: [Re rved] Policy CM-1.1.4: ' he City wiii encourage the reduction ,s of pollution into Biscayne Bay through coordination with the Miami R. er Cornmission, Miami-Dac' ?. County DERM, the South Florida Water ManagemeDistrict, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and any other appropriate state anederal agencies in order to reduce point and non -point sources of pollution into Bi ayne Bay P. icy CM-1.1.5: Within the oastal r le, or along the Miami and Little Rivers, no nd uses which represent a likely and sign' ' cant source of pollution to surface waters will be permitted, unless measures which substantially eliminate the threat of contamination are implemented as conditions for approval of development or redevelopment. Policy CM-1.1.6: The City will adhere to Miami -Dade County DERM standards and require DERM approvals in its permitting procedures to ensure that all fuel storage Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 86 SUBSTITUTED facilities in the °Coastal ;i<Zone or near major canals do not pose aE significant threat to water quality. Policy CM-1.1.7: The City will regulate development on Virginia Key and he intermittent wetland areas of the coast of Coconut Grove to ensure that there ill be no net loss of functional wetlands; that beaches and dune systems on the i and will not be degraded or disrupted; that when non-native vegetation is remove►, it will be replaced with native species; and that wildlife habitats and native species •f fauna and flora will be protected. Priority will be given to water dependent Ianuses, and to development that enhances the natural environment and ensures < . equate physical public access to Virginia Key. Policy CM-1.1.8: Because of its unique character and enviro mental significance, all development on Virginia Key will be in conformance with th. 1987 Virginia Key Master Plan and/or an subs s uent Mans for Vir+ inia Ke at ave been or mi± ht be adopted by the City and, if necessa the +reparation o .n u dated plan. Policy CM-1.1.9: Site development criteria ensure that development or redevelopment within the °Coastal Zone not adversely affect the natural environment or lead to a net loss of public acr, s to the °it s-City"s natural resources. Policy CM-1.1.10: [Reserved] Policy CM-1.1.11: All City owned p Herty within the °Coastal zZone that may be identified as areas of significant o unique natural resources will be designated as Environmental Preservation lJis cts, and the City will also consider designating private properties within the c►.stal with significant or unique natural resources as Environmental Preservation stricts. Policy CM-1.1.12: The y will continue to requiro implement and enforce that all new and renovated marinmeet marina siting requirements and receive appropriate county, state, and f-•erai approvals du-Fi velep;;ien„er-matifig prec-ess in the land deve u.men', Fulations, Policy CM-1. .13: The City will continue to work with the Sisk a Maeagafeeet Plaae-Geri • appropriate agencies to support provisions of the committee that prevent -w development and redevelopment: along the shorelines from directly discharing storm water runoff into surface waters and to get support for state and coun funding for any infrastructure improvements deemed necessary to support de •lopment of Virginia Key and Watson Island. Policy CM-1.1.14: The City will cooperate with Miami -Dade County in fostering the protection of coastal wildlife and wildlife habitat through the protection of nesting areas, the establishment of wildlife corridors, the protection of travel corridors, and the promotion of public awareness of wildlife resources, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 87 SUBSTITUTED Policy C'.-1.1.15: The City will coc )erate with Miami -Dade County in he implementation of any antidegradation targets developed to protect Outst.• ding Florida Waters and Outstanding National Resources Waters of Biscayne Bay. Objective CM-1.2: The will continue to follow and enforce the Florida Building Code, which estaL fishes construction standards that minimize e impacts of man-made structures on beach and dune systems. Policy CM-1.2.1: The City will increase inspection and code e orcement efforts for coastal area construction to ensure the proper standards are t. Obje :tive CM-1.3: In order to enh ,,:e the built environ ' ent of the coastal area, redevelop and revitalizL, blighted, declining : threateneoastal areas. Policy CM-1.3.1: The City will continue to adhere its established policies regarding the designation of Community Redevelopment Di- ricts in appropriate coastal areas of the city. Policy C.1-1.3.2: Through increased cityw .e code enforcement of coastal areas with deteriorated conditions the City will report any structures in severe condition to the unsafe structures board to either forc- mprovements or facilitate the demolition of the structure. bjective CM-1.4: Ensure that la development regulations and policies for the oastal me are consistent h the City's ability to provide the capital facilities required to maintain adopted LOS standards and those needed to maintain or enhance the quality of life 'thin the Coastal of the city. (See Capital Improvements Objective CI .2.) Policy CM-1.4.1: e pastal one of the ty will adhere to the level of service standards as ad' •ted and amended in the Capital Improvements Element, and more specifically Po ' y CI-1.2.3 of that element. Goal CM-2: l zprov public awareness, L, eciation, and use of Miami's coastal resources by preserving tr. • itional water -dependent and water -related uses, ensuring adequate public access to suc uses, and minimizing user conflicts. ObjeC.,.-2.1: Where fe' r ble, increase, physical and visual public access to Biscayne Ba the shoreline Policy CM-2.1.1: Where appropriate and in the interest of public safety and promotion of outdoor recreation opportunities on environmentally sensitive areas, future land development regulations will require non -water dependent or related development or redevelopment to maintain public access to the coastal and Miami River shorelines. (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR- Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 88 SUBSTITUTED Policy CM-2.1.2: All City owned, waterfront property, including the Miami shorelines, will provide for public open spaces that provide access to the (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR-1.1.12.) Policy CM-2.1.3: By 2000, amend Amend the Downtown Waterfront M ter Plan to reflect changing conditions, and needs, • ! ! . - _ • and continue to implement projects in accordance with the Downtown aterfront Master Plan or other adopted plans that impact the downtown waterfront - appropriate_ -tom . : —F11ix of—pubIi a n d privato cect„r cnanain (See Parks, Recreation and Open Sp e Policy PR-1.5.2.), Policy CM-2.1.4: The City will continue development of e river walk and bay walk along City owned property as funds become availabland will continue to require development of the bay walk and river walk along + vate property through its land development regulations. Policy CM-2.1.5: [Reserved) The City shag along the baywalk and riverwalk in accorda Plan and other adopted plans as appropri �e Policy CM-2.1.6: [Reserved] t`p ntinue bo implement design guidelines wij me Miami River Greenway Action Policy CM-2.1.7: The City will i porate provisions for public physical andlor visual access to the shoreline in its w erfront zoning regulations (See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR- 14.- s 3.2.31.1.13) Policy CM-2.1.8: As spified in the City of Miami Charter and related laws, and more specifically the Wat. ront Charter Amendment and Ordinance 11000 (Zoning Ordinance for the y of Miami) all new development and redevelopment along the downtown wate ont is required to provide a waterfront setback, and those developments thin Special Districts (SDs) that require publicly accessible shoreline walkways, w design them in conformance with the "Baywalk/Riverwalk Design Standards.' See Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policy PR- 4,54 3.2,11.) Policy M-2.1.9: The City will continue to work toward increased physical public access to Virginia Key and Watson Island by pursuing appropriate development and re ► •velopment as directed by the Virginia Key and Watson Island master plans. Policy CM-2.1.10: The City will ensure that development regulations are not altered so as to prohibit water dependent uses such as swimming, boating, and fishing and will encourage and support such uses. Objective CM-2.2: [Reserved] Policy CM-2.2.1: [Reserved) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 89 Policy CM-2.2.2: [Reserved] Goat CM-3: tRese€ve4I-Provide an adequate supply of land for water dependent us Objective CM-3.1: fResewed}AJIow no net loss of acrea'e devoted to water in the coastal area of the City of Miami. enrlent uses Policy CM-3.1.1: [R]Future land use and develr�, ent regulations will -ourage water dependent uses along the shorelines. Goal CM-4: Ensure public safety and the protection of prope within the ':pasta/ -'one from the threat of hurricanes. Objective CM-4.1: Minimize the potential for loss o uman life and the destruction of property from hurricanes. Policy CM-4.1.1: Enforce building code s ndards that protect against the destruction of structures by hurricane winds and tid. swells. Policy CM-4.1.2: Continue to e ure that all development and redevelopment conforms to proper elevation req rements in the Coastal High Hazard Area, which is defined as e areas belo. =!evation { ;. _Jop, established by a Sea. Land Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) computerized storm sur iodel as depicted on the Future Land Use Plan Mapthat ar identi i d s a " Federal E eergency Mananement Agency (CEMA) Qi .R:-iili7TliT � k?y tl�i 1�VP3�RIZIT7GTG��T�[RT'iRl��iITTGI'fCT'�F�� Fj on its Flood Incur M RM) eu�o . Virr�ln% Lwhri r"c-yiceastLalf Constfuetion-Co+. ie4GGGL--)-has-eeen-establiseed7-either-the-110 area -seaward ef 'Cl-Whi,ileyer,-ii,c mOTe lanelw rd, chali define t e Coactal Wink Hazard Area (S-e map following je.) Policy CM-'.1.3: h )ail cos, ,-ten s rn for the pr,, ection of City owned historic properties from destruction in the event of a major s •rm, and plans for each site's restoration in the event of destruction or major dam. •e will remain in effect. P . licy CM-4.1.4: Immediately subsequent to the event of a major storm, the adequacy of existing building standards and the appropriateness of land uses and development gulations in the Coastal High Hazard Area will be reviewed, and all modifications to standards, zoning or land use policies required to reduce future risk of loss of life and property damage will be adopted prior to the approval of long term, post disaster redevelopment plans. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 90 SUBSTITUTED Policy CM-4.1.5: Each proposed future land use map change within the Coastal ,igh Hazard area of the city will require an analysis of its potential impact on evuation times and shelter needs in the event of a hurricane. Policy CM-4.1.6: [Reserved] Policy CM-4.1.7: The City will incorporate into its Comprehensive °Ian any relevant recommendations of interagency hazard mitigation reports as they ecome available. Policy CM-4.1.8: The City will work in cooperation with reglo r .I and state agencies to adopt plans and policies that protect public and private pro• rty and human fives from the effects of natural disasters. Policy CM-4.1.9: The City will work in cooperation regional and state agencies in the preparation of advance plans for the safe evac • tion of coastal residents. Policy CM-4.1.10: The City will adhere to it Emergency Operations Plan for Civil Defense in War and Natural Emergencies nd The Emergency Procedures Manual" for immediate repair and cleanup actions eeded to protect public health and safety. The City will update these manuals on annual basis. Objective CM-4.2: The City will adhere o and cooperate with the County in executing evacuation procedures as well a annually update information and procedural brochures for the public; these Brochures will contain information on evacuation procedures and routes, and wil be distributed to city residents at local businesses and government agencies. Policy CM-4.2.1: Th City's fire and police departments will continue to work with Miami -Dade Coun and regional emergency agencies to update and revise, as needed coordinat-# peacetime emergency and evacuation plans. Policy CM- ;..2: The City will annually update and distribute an informational brochure t+ establish public awareness and information programs that educate as to the need or evacuation, and indicate evacuation routes and procedures. Poli CM-4.2.3: The City will follow the County in providing appropriate evacuation r, a markers within City boundaries as part of a Countywide coordinated program.. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 91 Areas Subject to Coastal Flooding and High Hazard Flood Areas 'FEMA is in th ; wdl area. Th map _..__. below will be updated subsequently. ('1 t,' (f:'�121?1111 Areas Subject to Coastal Flooding, and Fit,h Hazard Flood Areas Zones eas Inundated by 100 Year Flood Areas Inundated by 100 Year Flood with Velocity Hazard Federal Emergency Managemerd Agency Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 92 SUBSTITUTED Objective CM-4.3: Ensure that public capital expenditures within the coastal zone not encourage private development that is subject to significant risk of storm dam age. (See Capital Improvements Objective CI-1.4.) Policy CM-4.3,1: Public expenditures for capital facilities in the coastal +h hazard area will be limited to those required to eliminate existing LOS deficien s, maintain adopted LOS standards in non -high hazard areas, improve hurricane a acuation time, or reduce the threat to public health and safety from storm eve . (See Capital Improvements Policy C1-1.4.1.) Policy CM-4.3.2: Public expenditures for capital facilities in t coastal zone intended to further the goals and objectives of the Miami Compreh: sive Neighborhood Plan will be limited to those projects that do not measurabl increase the risk to public health and safety from storm damage. (See Capital Imp +vements Policy CI-1.4.2.) Goal CM 5: Preserve and protect the heritage of the City f Miami through the identification, evaluation, rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, restoratio , and public awareness of Miami's historic, architectural and archaeological resources. • ee L and Use Goal L U-2.) Objective CM-5.1: Maintain, update and = npli€y-the--£ity-ef-liltiarni-pc ti - of -the increase the number of eli.ible .ro.ey ies contained in the Miami -Dade County, Historic Survey, which identifies and aluates the City's historic, architectural and. archaeological resources. (See Land • se Objective LU-2.1.) Policy CM-5.1.1: The City ill continue to identify potential historic districts and conduct further surveys of ontnbuting and noncontributing buildings. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.1.1.) Policy CM-5.1.2: T e City will continue to aintain a computerized dat• ase of all relevant information for all ST.368 sites in the Miami -Dade County Historic urvey. Th;s-fisting will--thow,-in three categenes, all -properties of historic„-atch , _ < . : arohaeolegieal-signi teanse; to witl:i their praerity ranking for-procont.. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.1.2.) Policy -5.1.3: The City has designated 6-7 numerous historic sites and five -historic distri s pursuant tot Chapter 23 of the Miami City Cope An-additionai 26 cites (or graunc of m&1tiple itified- as--potenttially weal docignatior 9 ity- will-eeigaate-40 The City will continue to designate sites and districts as appropriate and warranted. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.3.2.) Policy CM-5.1.4: The City will continue to review nominations to the National Register of Historic Places through the Certified Local Government Program. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.3.1.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 93 olicy CM-5.1.5: The City will continue to pf information on the historic, architectur.. and cultural heritage for incli sion in public infor tion, economic development promotion and tourism materials. (See Land Use Po cy LU- 2.5.4.) 0`ective CM-5.2: Increase the number of historic structures t .t have been p:,served, rehabilitated or resto- according to the U.S. Secreta , of the Interior's S' ,ridards for Rehabilitation. (See Land Use Ol ective LU-2.4.) Policy CM-5.2.1: The City will continue to utilize the U.S. ecretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation as the minimum standards •r preservation of historic properties. To receive public financial support from t►e City, designated privately owned structures must meet these standards. (See La► , Use Policy LU-2.4.2.) Policy C .:-2.2: The City currently owns historic sites and other potential archaeological sites. If it is deemed in the publi• interest for the City to transfer title of City properties of historic, architectural, or . - haeological significance, such transfer will include restrictive covenants to ensur the protection and preservation of such properties. (See Land Use Policy LU-2.4. ,.) Miami Comi e7 ensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 94 SUBSTITUTED NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION Goal NR-1: Maintain, preserve, enhance and restore the quality of natural resources 'thin the context of the city's urban environment. Objective NR-1.1: Preserve and protect the existing natural systems wi in Virginia Key, the Dinner Key spoil islands, and those portions of Biscayne Bay at lie within the City's boundaries. Policy NR-1.1.1: As a precondition to-thedo lopm;t-or-r: eloomenf-oVirginia :3re en ra-acse ismant -wibe -rmae -of-er ::In'ltri hazards that t are tie -result of past disposal --a ivits d-ot"er reii6v, Avirnrnental-eonc-efns; Such assessment will be marls The City shall continu, actions to protect and r the natural en, if Virqir in coope'.tion with appropriate County, State and Federal environmental agencies _:zarisdc win be f rmu,: See Coastal Mane., -ment Policy CM-1.1.1.) Policy NR-1.1.2: The City will retrofi the number of storm water Itfalts that 1:farc#ce dischara into the Miami Pi- -r and its tributaries, the Little River directly into Biscayne Bay in accordance- water duality irnprovement.prograrns and If positive r rainage sys -ms to these water bodies are deemed to be the only feasible method of maintaing adequate storm drainage, then these storm sewers will be designed and co .tructed to retain grease and oil and minimize pollutant discharges. (See Sani ry and Storm Sewers Policy 2.2.1 and Coastal Management Policy CM-1.1.2.) Policy NR-1.1.3: [Rc....rve Policy NR-1.1.4: Th- City will continue to participate in the State funded SWIM program for funding support in order to reduce point and non -point sources of pollution into Biscayne Bay Policy NR-1. .5: Regulate development on Virginia Key to ensure that there will be no net loss of nctional wetlands; that beach and dune systems on the island will not be degra,,ed or disrupted; and that wildlife habitats and native species of fauna and flora wi be protected. P . cy NR-1.1.6: Through land developmE it regulations, : nsure that development or development within the v: II not adversely affect the natural environm ant or 3ad to a net loss of public access .d public use (consistent with protection of natural systerri to the city's natural resources. Policy NR-1.1.7: The City will increase code enforcement to prevent illegal disposal of hazardous waste into the city's natural resources such as the Miami River and Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 20008 95 SUBSTITUTED Biscayne Bay, and will encourage Miami -Dade County to approve and post si warning against illegal disposal. Policy NR-1.1.8: The City will work with, and support the County's efforts dentify generators of hazardous waste, and to develop and enforce procedures ' proper collection and disposal of hazardous waste. The City will support Miami-. ,ounty's development of a hazardous waste temporary storage facility in a non-r 'cited area. (See Solid Waste Collection Policy SW-1.2.4.) Objective NR-1.2: Improve the water quality of, and ensure tieaiti safety within, the Miami River, its tributaries and the Little River, Policy NR-1.2.1: The City will continue to work with the . cayne Bay Management Plan Committee and with the appropriate actencies in ord to encourage and support Miami -Dade County Department of Environmental esource Management in the monitoring of contaminants within these water bodi and to ensure that the City is kept adequately informed of environmental conditi+ s. Policy NR-1.2.2: Continue to implement th- :iscayne Bay Management Plan and other relevant plans in order to reduce the 1. el of contaminants in these water bodies and improve the water quality within them Policy NR-1.2.3: Participate in st.. - and federally funded programs to remove abandoned and repair leaking derground fuel storage tanks on City owned properties. Policy NR-1.2.4: The City . Miami will continue to cooperate with the Miami River Commission, which has + -en granted broad powers over environmental and other issues related to the Mi i River by state statute. Among the issues to be addressed by the commission those related to acceptable water quality standards for the Miami River and it ributaries. The City of Miami will cooperate with the Miami River Commission in tabiishing such standards and, to the extent feasible, achieving them. Objective NR-1 .: Maintain and enhance the status of native species of fauna and flora. Pol y NR-1.3.1: Continue and, where necessary, expand the use of scenic corridor Environmental Preservation District designation. Policy NR-1.3.2: identify Syr--City-owned land with significant native vegetative features or wildlife habitats, and designate those areas as Environmental Preservation Districts, Policy NR-1.3.3: Continue designating private properties with significant or unique resources as Environmental Preservation Districts. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 96 SUBSTITUTED Policy NR-1.3.4: Review development and redevelopment to determine any adverse impacts on adjacent areas with significant native vegetative features, wildlife or mari life, and establish regulations that reduce or mitigate such impacts. Policy NR-1.3.5: Through the development review and approval process, en re that off -site mitigation for disruption or degradation of significant natural resources occurs in an orderly and sound manner, so as to maximize benefits to the o -rall natural system. Policy :.f t-1.3.6: Through the development review process, deny e use of intrusive exotic plant species, encourage the use of native plant species, . d those species that do not require the excessive use of fertilizers, excessive wa •ring, are not prone to insect infestation or disease, and do not have invasive root s tems. Policy NR-1.3.7: Permit applications for all boating faci ' les located on city shorelines shall be evaluated in the context of their cumulative ' pact on manatees and marine resources. Polic' t-1.3.8: Slow or idle speed zones s .II be adopted in areas frequented by manatees and enforcement of speed zones I be improved. Policy NR-1.3.9: To the extent that theyare wetlands on the Resources of Regional Significance, State Save Our Rivers or Dade County Environmentally Endangered Lands acquisition lists within the C. of Miami, consideration will be given to public acquisition and management of s h properties when such actions are feasible. Objective NR-1.4: Maintain, proid enhance the City's tree canopy and significant trees. Policy NR-1.4.1: The ►1tv will continue to protect the tree canopy and significant trees through the Tree Pr • -ction Ordinance. Policy NR-1.4. The City will work with public and private partners to achieve the 2007 Tree M. er Plan goal of 30% tree canopy coverage citywide by 2020. Policy N r-1.4.3: The City will develop an ordinance describing criteria for designation of C,'., f Miami Historic Trees, procedures for nomination of a Miami Historic Tree, in,' icedures for official designation and signage identifying Miami Historic Trees. Goal NR : Maintain an adequate and safe supply of water for the city residents. Objective NR-2.1: Ensure adequate levels of safe potable water are available to meet the needs of the city. (See Potable Water Objective PW-1.2.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 97 SUBSTITUTED Policy NR-2.1.1: In periods of regional water shortage, the City will support the So Florida Water Management District's policies and regulations regarding :ter conservation. Policy NR-2.1.2: The City will continue to enforce Florida Building Code re irements for the on -site retention of the first inch of storm water runoff. (See Sanit. and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.2.5.) Policy NR-2.1.3: The City will continue to support the Sodth Florida Water Management District efforts to monitor the water levels at the sa ity control structures within the city to prevent against further saltwater intrusion nd protect the aquifer recharge areas and cones of influence of wellfields from c• tamination. (See Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Policy AR-1.1.3.) Policy NR-2.1.4: Since the potable water network is an interconnected, countywide system, the City departments of Public Works and ' anning will cooperate with Miami - Dade County WASA Water and Sewer Dep. ment (WASD1 to jointly develop methodologies and procedures for biannually iodating estimates of system demand and capacity, and ensure that sufficient ca .city to serve development exists. (See Potable Water Policy PW-1.1.1.) Policy NR-2.1.5: Ensure potable wat supplies meet the established level of service standards for transmission cepacft :s set in the Capital Improvements Element. (See Potable Water Policy PW-1.2.1 Capital Improvements Policy C1-1.2.3.) Policy NR-2.1.6: [Reserved] Policy NR-2.1.7: The C will cooperate and participate to the fullest extent possible with Miami -Dade Cou y and other county municipalities receiving potable water from Wn —WASD in d eloping an acceptable countywide water conservation plan. (See Potable Water Poy PW-1.2.2.) Policy NR-2. .8: [Reserved] Goal NR-3: Attain : nd maintain a degree of air quality that is safe and to meet all attainment standards set b the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the city as a whole. Objec ' e NR-3.1: Improve the monitoring of air quality within areas perceived to have thr ` ighest potential for air quality problems. Policy NR-3.1.1: The City shall Ccontinue working with GCounty, estate and federal environmental agencies to ensure that the number of air quality monitoring stations maintained by these agencies areie sufficient to ensure accurate onpoinq monitoring of air quality standards,hi-areas moat likely to have problems Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 98 SUBSTITUTED �cctive NR-3.2: Prevent the degrasi :.;an of ambient air qua within the city. Policy NR-3.2.1: Establish vehicular transportation patterns that re.uce the concentration of pollutants in areas known to have ambient air quality prob •ms. Policy NR-3.2.2: Aith^.,.,r- mace tfaas r n ri-be operate-d-wmi e-# + yf Miami oriiy u ayso u t." }ty-of -Metro politan lice„ -Dade o,: e City of Miami continue 1 the provision of effic' nt -transit and paratransit services that serve existing and future trip genera •rs and attractors, the provision of safe and convenient -transit passenger t :nsfer terminal facilities, and the accommodation of the special needs of the (' ty of Miami's population. Therefore, the City of Miami will support Miami -Dade County in the provision of these essential transit services. (Se- ransportation Objective 1.5) Policy NR-3.2.3: irk with the a:: County transportation planning agencies to continue to increase the 5uality of Effa transit services within the city. Policy :"1-3.2.4: The City will work wit he appropriate federal, state, regional, and county agencies to ensure that owne of buildings and facilities with unacceptable levels of asbestos (according to EP .nd State Standards) in ambient air test remove, treat and seal asbestos-containi materials as long as this action will not cause further degradation to the air qu. ty. Policy NR-3.2.5: The City ill monitor developers to ensure that they appropriately treat exposed constructi• areas by means such as mulching, spraying or grass coverings, to minimize .'r pollution. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 99 SUBSTITUTED EDUCATION GOAL DU-1: DEVELOP, OPERATE, AND MAINTAI'''A SYSTEM OF PUBLIC EDUCA ION BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, IN COG `ERATION WITH THE CITY A 1 OTHER APPROPRIATE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, WHICH WILL STRIVE TO IM'ROVE THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AVAIL :LE TO THE CITIZENRY OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Objective EDU-1.1: Work :wards the reduction of the overcrow exists in the Miami -Dade County Public Schc ols, while strivin level of service pursuant to Objective ED J-1.2. Provide overcrowding so that citywide enrollment in Miami -Dade C eet state requirements for class size by September 1, 20 ng which currently to attain an optimum dditional solutions to nty's public schools will Policy EDU-1.1.1: Cooperate with the Miami -Da • - County Public Schools in their efforts to continue to provide new student station hrough the Capital Outlay program, in so far as funding is available. Policy EDU-1.1.2: Cooperate with the ami-Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to develop and implement alter, Ave educational facilities, such as primary learning centers, which can be con ructed on small parcels of land and relieve overcrowding at elementary schools in so far as funding and rules permit. Policy EDU-1.1.3: Cooperate ith the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to provide public sch. facilities to the students in the City, which operate at optimum capacity, in so f as funding available. Operational alternatives may be developed and irnplem: ted, where appropriate, which mitigate the impacts of overcrowding while m.' taining the instructional integrity of the educational program. Policy EDL•1.1.4• Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to n aint.'n and/or improve the established level of service (LOS), for Public Educational F.,cilities, as established for the purposes of school concurrency. Policy E l-1.1.5: The Miami -Dade County School Board (School Board) comments shall b- ought and considered on comprE-^nsive plan amendments and other land use . d zoning decisions which could impact the school district, in order to be co istent with the terms of the state mandated Interlocal Agreement pursuant to ctions 1013.33 and 163.31777, Florida Statutes. Policy EDU-1.1.6: Capital improvement programming by the Miami -Dade Public Schools should be based on future enrollment projections and demographic shifts arid targeted to enhance the effectiveness of the learning environment. The future enrollment projections should utilize student population projections based on information produced by the demographic, revenue, and education estimating conferences pursuant to Section 216.136, Florida Statutes, where available, as Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 100 SUBSTITUTED modified by the School Board based on development data and agreement with the Cit of Miami, the State Office of Educational Facilities and the State SMART Schools Clearinghouse. The School Board may request adjustment to the estimating conferences' projections to reflect actual enrollment and development trends. I formulating such a request, the School Board will coordinate with the City re. ; rding development trends and future population projections. Policy EDU-1.1.7: The City will through the Staff Working Group of th- nterlocal Agreement for Public School Facility coordinate with Miami -Dade County Public Schools, and applicable Cities to review annually the Education F lent and school enrollment projections. Objective EDU-1.2: The City of Miami shall coordinate with the future availability of public school facilities2 level of service standards for public school concurren those projects necessary to address existing deficie capital improvements, and meet future needs base the adopted level of service standards throughout esidential development lsistent with the adopted to ensure the inclusion of cies in the 5-year schedule of upon achieving and maintaining e planning period. net, c Policy EDU-1.2.1: Beginning January 1, '08, the adopted level of service (LOS) standard for all Miami -Dade County publi► school facilities is 100% utilization of Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Ca►.city (With Relocatable Classrooms).This LOS Standard, shall be applicable in eac public school concurrency service area (CSA), defined as the public school att- dance boundary established by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools. Policy EDU-1.2.2: It is thgoal of Miami -Dade County Public Schools and The City of Miami for all public sch..l facilities to achieve 100% utilization of Permanent FISH (No Reiocatable Classros s) capacity by January 1, 2018. To help achieve the desired 100% utilization o Permanent FISH by 2018, Miami -Dade County Public Schools should continue . decrease the number of relocatable classrooms over time. Public school facilitie that achieve 100% utilization of Permanent FISH capacity should, to the extent pr sible, no longer utilize relocatable classrooms, except as an operational solution' By D ember 2010, the City and County in cooperation with Miami -Dade County Pu. c Schools will assess the viability of modifying the adopted LOS standard to 1 i% utilization of Permanent FISH (No Relocatable Classrooms) for all CSAs, Level %f Service standards for public school facilities to those traditional educational facilities, owned and orerated by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, that are required to serve the residential des - men( within the.it established Ct custency Service Area. Level of Service standards do not apply to barter schools. However, the capacity of both charter and magnet schools will be credited against the pact of development. No credit against the impact of development shall be given for either magnet or charter schools .if their districtwide enrollment is at. or above, 100% FISH Capacity Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 101 SUBSTITUTED Policy EDU-1.2.3: In the event the adopted LOS standard of a CSA cannot be met a result of a proposed development's impact, the development may proceed provi at least one of the following conditions is met: d 1,2.3,1: The development's impact can be shifted to one or more adja ' nt CSAs that have available capacity located, either in whole or in part, with' the same Geographic Areas (Northwest, Northeast, Southwest, or Southeas , see Figures 1A, 2A and 3C shown in "Exhibit A") as the proposed developmen , or 1.2.3.2: The development's impact is mitigated, proportionat to the demand for public schools it created, through a ornbination of one or more proportionate share mitigation options as defined in :.section 163.3180 )(e)1, Florida Statutes. The intent of these options is to provide for tho mitigation of residential development impacts on public school facilities, g ranteed by a legal binding agreement, through mechanisms that include, • e or more of the following: contribution of land; the construction, expansion, •r payment for land acquisition or construction of a permanent public school fa ' ty; or, the creation of a mitigation bank based on the construction of a permanent public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits. The p •portionate share mitigation agreement is subject to approval by Miami -Dade County School Board and Miami -Dade County Board of County Commissio and must be identified in the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities W. Program. 1.2.3.3: I ;le development's im will be available. If none of t be approved. cts are phased to occur when sufficient capacity above conditions is met, the development shall not Policy EDU-1.2.4: Conc rency Service Areas (CSA) shall be delineated to: 1) maximize capacity utiliz• ion of the facility, 2) limit maximum travel times and reduce transportation costs, acknowledge the effects of court -approved desegregation plans, 4) achieve •cio-economic, racial, cultural and diversity objectives, and 5) achieve: other rel- ant objectives as determined by the School Board's policy on maximization of apacity. Periodic adjustments to the boundary or area of a CSA may be made by e School Board to achieve the above stated factors. Other potential amendmen . to the CSAs shall be considered annually at the Staff Working Group meeting . take place each year no later than April 30 or October 31, consistent with Sectio • of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning. Po cy EDU-1.2.5: The City through the implementation of the concurrency anagement system and Miami -Dade County Public School Facilities Work Program for educational facilities, shall ensure that existing deficiencies are addressed and the capacity of schools is sufficient to support residential development at the adopted level of service (LOS) standards throughout the planning period in the 5-year schedule of capital improvements. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 102 SUBSTITUTED Policy EDU-1.2.6: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Progra will be evaluated on an annual basis to ensure that the level of service standards continue to be achieved and maintained throughout the planning period. Objective EDU-1.3: Obtain suitable sites for the development and exparlsio of public education facilities Policy EDU-1.3.1: In the selection of sites for future educational fa ity development, the City encourages the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to onsider whether a school is in close proximity to residential areas and is in a locati+ that would provide a logical focal point for community activities. Policy EDU-1.32: Where possible, the Miami -Dade County Public Schools should seek sites which are adjacent to existing or pia r ed public recreation areas, community centers, libraries, or other compatible civic uses for the purpose of encouraging joint use facilities or the creation of ogical focal points for community activity. Policy EDU-1.3.3: The City acknowledges d concurs that, when selecting a site, the Miami -Dade County Public Schools will Fnsider if the site meets the minimum size criteria as recommended by the State r partrnent of Education or as determined to be necessary for an effective education. environment. Policy EDU-1.3.4: When consid. ing a site for possible use as an educational facility, the Miami -Dade County Publ' hoots should review the adequacy and proximity of other public facilities and s• rvices necessary to the site such as roadway access, transportation, fire flow a'd portable water, sanitary sewers, drainage, solid waste, police and fire service , and means by which to assure safe access to schools, including sidewalks, b ycle paths, turn lanes, and signalization.- Policy EDU-1.3.. When considering a site for possible use as an educational facility the Miami Dar • County Public Schools should consider whether the present and projected su +unding land uses are compatible with the operation of an educational facility. Polic EDU-1.3.6: The City shall encourage and cooperate with the Miami -Dade Oou '' y Public Schools in their effort for public school siting reviews to help accomplish objectives and policies of this element and other elements of the MCNP. The City IA cooperate with the Public Schools to establish provisions for a scoping or pre - application meeting as part of the educational facilities review process, if determined to be warranted. Policy EDU-1.3.7: The City will continue to cooperate with Miami -Dade County Public Schools in utilizing Miami -Dade County Public Schools as emergency shelters during county emergencies. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 103 SUBSTITUTED Objective EDU-1.4: The I::.ni-Dade County Public Schools, in conjunction with t City of Miami and other appropriate, Gies, will strive to improve security safety for students and staff. Policy EDU-1.4.1: Continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Publ. Schools to develop and/or implement programs and policies designed to reduce t►- incidence of violence, weapons and vandalism on school campuses. Encourag he design of facilities, which do not encourage criminal behavior and provide clea sight lines from the street. Policy EDU-1.4.2: Continue to cooperate with the Miami -Dade ounty Public Schools to develop and/or implement programs and policies designee o reduce the number of incidents related to hazardous conditions as reported by t' • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the fire marshal, the State Department •.. Education (DOE), and other appropriate sources. Policy EDU-1.4.3: Continue to cooperate with the iami-Dade County Public Schools to provide for the availability of alternative programs for at -risk students at appropriate public educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.4.4: Coordinate with th- Miami -Dade County Public Schools and municipalities to provide for pedestria and traffic safety in the area of schools, and signalization for educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.4.5: Coordinate w the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Division of School Police and other law e orcement a encies, where appropriate, to improve and provide for a secure Iearr nvironment in the public schools and their vicinity. I Jjective EDU-1.5: Continue o develop programs and opportunities to bring the school; id community cI ser olicy EDU-1.5.1: C•operate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to provide "full se ' e" schools, parent resource centers, adult and community schools and programs as ppropriate. Policy EDU- .5.2: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in their efforts to continua to provide opportunities for community and business leaders to serve on committ- s and task forces, which relate to the development of improved provision of public educational facilities. P. icy EDU-1.5.3: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools to continue to ork with the development industry to encourage partnerships in the provision of sites and t_w.aational facilities including early childhood centers. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 104 SUBSTITUTED Policy EDU-1,5.4: Cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools thr gh agreement with appropriate agencies to increase medical, psychological, and social services for children and their families as appropriate. Objective EDU-1.6: Miami -Dade County Public Schools will continue o enhance effectiveness of the learning environment. Policy EDU-1.6.1: Miami -Dade County Public Schools is encourad to continue the design and construction of educational facilities which create the perception of feeling welcome, secure and positive about the students' school environ nt and experiences, Policy EDU-1.6.2: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools encouraged to continue to design and construct facilities which better provide student ccess to technology designed to improve learning, such as updated media centers and ience laboratories. Policy EDU-1.6.3: The Miami -Dade County Public chools is encourage to continue to improve existing educational facilities, in so far as nding is available, through renovation and expansion to better accommodate increaei . enrollment, new educational programs and other activities, both curricular and extra-c.rricular. Objective EDU-1.7: The School Board, t e City, and other appropriate jurisdictions shall establish and implement m hanism for en going coordination and communication, to ensure the adequ . e provision of public educational facilities. Policy EDU-1.7.1: The City shal coordinate and cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools, the State, m - icipalities and other appropriate agencies to develop or modify rules and regulations n order to simplify and expedite proposed new educational facility developments and r- ovations. Policy EDU-1.7.2: Th= ocation of future educational facilities should occur where capacity of other public tacili ' -s and services is available to accommodate the infrastructure needs of the educational .cility.. Policy Ei3U- .7.3: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools should coordinate school capital improvement plans with the planned capital improvement projects of other County and muni ' ipal agencies. Poli EDU-1.7.4: The City shall cooperate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in khefforts to ensure that they are not obligated to pay for off -site infrastructure in excess their fair share of the costs. Policy EDU-1.7.5: City of Miami and the Miami -Dade County Public Schools will annually review the Educational Element and the City will make amendments, it necessary. Policy EDU-1.7.6: The City shall seek to coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools in formalizing criteria for appropriate sharing of responsibility for required off -site Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 105 SUBSTITUTED facility improvements attributable to construction of new public schools or expansion of existing ones. Policy EDU-1.7.7: The City shall coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Publi Schools and Miami -Dade County to eliminate infrastructure deficiencies surrounding exi- ing school sites. Policy EDU-1.7.8: The City and the Miami -Dade County Public Schoo : shall coordinate efforts to ensure the availability of adequate sites for the required educ. Tonal facilities. Policy EDU-1.7.9: The City and the Miami -Dade County Public schools shall coordinate ffe appropriate roles and responsibilities of affected governmr .I jurisdictions in ensuring the timely, orderly and efficient provision of adequate educati• al facilities. Policy EDU-1.7.10: The City will work with Miami-D. .e County will account for the infrastructure needs of new, planned or expanded ed ational facilities when formulation and implementing its own capital improvement plans. MOMTORING AND EIVAL UA TION PROGRAM In orck to enable the preparation of the periodic valuation and Appraisal Report (EAR) as required by Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes (F. . , and Rule 9J-5.0053, F.A.C., this section will outline the procedures for the monitoring and evating of the Element and its implementation. Monitoring Requirements The primary mechanism to monitor progress in achieving the objectives and policies in this t-lemer, is the collection and update •f appropriate baseline data.-urther, as required by the Strte Requirements for Educational ' acilities, at least once every five (5) years the School Board shall arrange for an educational p .nt survey to be conducted. This plant survey will include data regarding existing facilities and : five (5) year project n of student population. The written report from th's survey shall inclt. e following: Invents inventory of existing anci -.y and educational plants and auxiliary acilities. Student Population An analysis of past and projected student population. Capital Outl. An analysis of expenditures and projected capital outlay funds. Facilitie Statements of proposed types of facilities, grade structure, and list student capacity. Funding A proposed funding plan. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 106 The information obtained from the educational plant survey will be used to generally moni the progress of the objectives and policies contained in the Educational Element and wil provide specific indicators for Objective EDU-1.1 and Objective EDU-1.4. The enforcement or adoption of interlocal agreements shall be explored as a eans to help implement components of the Educational Element, and to coordinate the effi ent provision of public educational facilities. The performance of any agreements related ti objectives of this element will be monitored as they are set in place. Objective EDU-1.1 policies relating to the maintenance and improv- ent of specific level of service for public educational facilities, as specified in the Educa '.nal Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance, shall be reviewed annually. Each year, the Miami -Da• County Public Schools will compare the official enrollment of the school system with the nu ,er of student stations available to determine the current operating LOS. Objective EDU-1.2 will be measured through an annual r-,lew of the latest adopted Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facility Work Program in order • determine if the adopted concurrency level of service standard (including the Interim LOS st. dards) is being achieved. The number of development orders approved, those disapproved a ' d those that have achieved LOS standards through mitigation options will also be reviewed. Objective EDU-1.3 will be monitored through e annual inventory and assessment by the Miami - Dade County Public Schools of School Boa o owned property. The number of new sites shall be reported annually and in the full review pe .d reported in the EAR. Objective EDU-1.4 will be monitore' hrough the review and analysis of the statistics relating to school safety, as compiled annuall , by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools Division of Police. A review and analysis of new d existing reactive and proactive safety and crime prevention programs will also be conducteon an annual basis. Objective EDU-1.5 shall b monitored by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools by reporting and reviewing the progress , - d number of new and existing community oriented programs, including an enrollment analysis, b age and ethnicity, of adult, community and vocational programs. Objective EDU-1 shall be monitored by the Miami -Dade County Public Schools by reporting the number of edu tional facility enhancements such as media centers, art/music suite, and science laboratories, Objective EDU-1.7 will be addressed by implementing and tracking the development of approp 'ate mechanisms, including interlocal agreements and coordination efforts, which serve to exile- Ile the provision or enhancement of public educational facilities. onitoring methods may be added or deleted as circumstances and criteria evolve. Any significant modifications to the monitoring process will be dealt with, as appropriate, through the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan amendment process. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED '] 07 Evaluation Available data regarding the various public educational facilities will be used to assess progr-ss on specific ohjeetives. In order to evaluate the level of service being provided, student capa ' y totals will be reviewed in comparison to student enrollment to determine the itatus of the curr t level of service t ,1,H provided. Similarly, r.)rformance in terms of achieving Jther objective can also be analyzed by tracking the number of completed capital projects, as well as the d- elopment and implementation of other programs associated with each objective. Results of t'ese calculations and measures will be analyzed and changing circumstances and opportunities I be considered. Any actions, changes or modifications to the Goal, C )jectives, and Poli -s will be explained in accordance with the results of this process of continue(: monitoring and : aluation. Any necessary changes will be made through the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhoo Plan amendment process. Future Conditions Maps Consistent with Section 163.3177(12) (g), Florida Statutes, maps howing existing and future conditions are included in the element. A map series (Figures 2B and 3C shown in "Exhibit A") indicate the public school and ancillary facility locations as D-cember 31, 2007. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 108 SUBSTITUTED Figure 1 A Ctrs of Murat Public Educational and Ancillary acilities September 2007 3C.SCal CZ! crLIcrarricm. gqrri-54 NrC04 C 41.1. E•zeurrern p.tirr ';cntua 0 0,25 0_5 MAIM .1ACIC50111i 0 ALLA PATTAji AllIC'r Legend goisaim Naomi COW 14:611111 Pak ESKIMOS* 1411111C Pak Mir • "QUI" ; 11+1014A CAMP - MAN MOON a Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 Nea tap exis RIM PWYLIJI — 109 SUBSTITUTED Figure 20 City of Miami Public Educational and Ancillary Facades September 2007 SAME CRY Clf MX, CRWTIA1Ly ixosec armor csmr mimeo= PA ar A A &MOM AT4 0 025 01 1 llolffi _EMINNOMIMI[114loo ssa-2402 • CaRilb GROVE MAUI GROVE II SEMAAIDOAli 3IINA$DOAI RevERimmE CORAL WAY , . 1 t t i rtka. It.• ElOtIOLgtSO 1 144 • - ADA INEIRRITT k 1 tearoilk, SO() TFISIDE Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 r.. 110 SUBSTITUTED Figure 3C City of Miami Public Educational and Ancillary Facilities September 20D7 0 C 25 C.5 5 Wes railla.A011 man asap a irgend plir OMNI Plaaaa echaabi roma= trffisomps • Ai MBA AaciME11 IMAt Ttlanirgen, Polati"".1.1071' • Alili•1 PrilLCCH PAX 10.541ING7014 PARK NAM SENIOR MOH AOSUPOILUILE- CO•1111111.1T WV: FitSJICESITtr • R- Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 • YER !SFr- 111 SUBSTITUTED CAPITAL IMP = OVEMEINi !:; Goal Cl-1: Adhere to sound fiscal management policies that ensure the timely ! ovision of public capital facilities required to maintain existing public infrastructure, at meet the need for public facilities resulting from future development and redevelos ent, and that enable the provision of public capital facilities that enhance the quality of I. e within the city. Objective CI-1.1: The Capital Improvements 1 dement of the Co provide for the sound fiscal planning of capital facility needs capacity of the City to undertake capital im;,: ovement projec .. rehensive Plan will d assess the financial Policy CI-1.1.1: The Capital Improvement Element (CI' and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) represent the means by which the c..ital facilities needs of the city will be addressed, and both the CIE and CIP will be r• vised on an annual basis to reflect changes in the economic, social and public fisca enviror rent. Policy CI-1.1.2: All capital expenditures in ' xcess of $5,000 per distinct project must appear within the CIE and CIP, with the -xception of expenditures required to meet public emergencies or unforeseeable c• tractual obligations. Policy CI-1.1.3: The City will adop a Capital Budget that corresponds to the first year of the CIE and CIP. Policy CI-1.1.4: As capit•. projects are incorporate, into the CIE and CIP, consideration will be giv: to the elimination of public hazards, the elimination of shortfalls between the adopted level of ^rvice (LOS) standards and the existing capacity of public fac ies; the impact of proposed capital projects on the capital and operating budgets % the City; the fiscal capacity of the City to meet future capital spending needs; he economic and social benefits to be generated by proposed projects; the -nvironmental impacts of proposed projects; the public facility requirements of new development or redevelopment; consistency between proposed capital pro cts and the goals and objectives set forth in the various elements of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan; and the coordination between proposed City projects and those projects and programs of federal, state, and county agencies and e South Florida Water Management District and Miarni-Dade County Public S ools. Policy CI-1.1.5: In the appropriation of capital funds priority will be given to the maintenance, repair and replacement of existing public capital facilities. Policy CI-1.1.6: All bond authorizations must be in conformance with the capital facilities needs, programs and expenditure requirements as expressed within the City's Capital Improvement Element. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 112 SUBSTITUTED Policy C1-1.1.7; The City will continue to seek the advice of qualified counsel to ensure the proper timing of debt issuance and efficient management of its capit financing resources. Policy C1-1.1.8: Debt issuance timing, size, and amortization schedules 'll be planned and executed to maintain a level repayment and minimize fluctuati+ s in the ad valorem tax rate. Policy C1-1.1.9: Competitive sale will be utilized whenever possible t. assure that the City obtains the most competitive interest rate in the municipal mark: s. Policy C1-1.1.10: The City will maintain its long standing licy of avoiding the issuance of short term financing in the form of Bond Anticipa on Notes, and Revenue Anticipation Notes, unless there is a compelling need or ex .ordinary circumstance for such interim financing. Policy CI-1.1.11: The ratio of net direct general obligation debt as a percentage of the assessed valuation of taxable property will not e ' -ed 25°I0 of the Charter -mandated limit of 15% of the assessed valuation, or 3.75% f assessed valuation. Policy CI-1.1.12: Total debt service pay - nts as a percentage of the Combined General Fund, Enterprise Fund, and Deb ervice Fund expenditures shall not exceed 15%, Policy CI-1.1.13: To the greatest a ent possible, capital projects financed through the issuance of general obligation b• ° ds shall have an expected useful life commensurate with the period of the financin Policy CI-1.1.14: Direct -t general obligation and special obligation debt shall be maintained at below $1, p per capita. Policy CI-1.1.15: e City will seek to attain a bond rating of investment grade to ensure that its cif' ens benefit from the lowest possible interest rates on its bonds. Policy CI-1..16: The City will assist where possible Miami -Dade County Public Schools a► i Miami Dade County in providing school concurrency related capital improve ,ents and seeking to expand the funding sources available to meet those requir ents. Objec ve C1-1.2: Ensure that through the City's land development regulations and poli 1CS arre--.4risislenzc nt with t e C°yabilitFx�ty-to- j advde-t capital--faeititi r-equired--to airttaiu-or f—fife—with --thc city that development orders authorizing new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the density or intensity of land use shall be contingent upon the availability of public facilities and services that meet or Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 113 Goals objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED exceed the minimum LOS standards for sanitary sewer, solid waste, scorn potable water, adequate water supply, parks and recreation, and Van,_e facilities, tfrt;;.t i :. rx ,.r z'''iltail' yF'. r ,z s: ! f ;c's4, the MCNP. (See Coastal Management Objective CM-1.4 or Educational Object' e EDU- 1.2.1 Policy CI-1.2.1: The impact of proposed future land use map chan;es on ,eeting adopted LOS, aia;at, ,i i s public capital facility need , mancial abil ty to pfo. reguire will be assessed en n the financial feasibility of the MCNP before such proposals are adopted io land use map change will he annrr vert financially feasible. Policy CI-1.2.2: All development orders authorizing chans in permitted land uses for new de v . , u, i;.,1 v or intensify nr VIM u will be contingent u ion the a.' ity of existing nrrkap,infret.' public u: iiities to continue to provide sery ce at or above the adopted LOS standard :lie development orders may be ranted, howevuir, it capital improvements whic ould eliminate any resulting service aeficiency are programmed to begin within of - year and are included in the current Capital Budget. !!e public fedii to serv: _ K:w development or redevelopment snail be !ii wince and available to serve ne development as follows_ a) Sanitary sewer, solid waste potable water facilities and adequate water supply shall be in place and available to serve new development or redevelopment no later , the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalen, concurrency requirement for sanitary sewer may be met through a.)i onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems approved by the L'17ent of Health. Prior to approval of a building permit or its function =' , . Avalent, the city shall consult with the Miami -Dade County Water and sr Department to determine whether the adequate water supplies the new development will be available no later than the anticiv ite of issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equiv; b) Par and recreation facilities shall be in place or under construction to serve n development or redevelopment no later than one ft) year after the ssuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. The acreage for such facilities shall be dedicated or acquired by the city prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent, or funds in the amount of the developer's fair share shall be committed no later than approval to commence construction. I ransportation tacilines snail De in place ana availaole to serve new development or redevelopment no later than three (3) years after the issuance of a building permit or its functional equivalent that results in traffic generation. consistent with the provisions of Policy TR-1.1.1, TR-1.1.2 and TR-1.1.3. If the funds in the CIE are insufficient to fully fund the transportation facility Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 114 SUBS III L TED improvement required, the City may enter into a binding proportionate -sr, -re agreement sufficient to mitigate the impacts by paying for one or more improvements which will significantly benefit the impacted trans nation system, which _ improvements shah be adopted into the 5 y:;s r capital improvements schedule at the next annual CIE update. d) Storm -sewer. Issuance of any development permit shall - ire compliance with the stormwater level of service standard. Policy CI-1.2.3: Acceptable Level of Service Standards for p lc facilities in the City of Miami are: a) Recreation and Open Space - 1.3 acres of •ublic park space per 1000 residents. (See Parks, Recreation and Ope Space Policy PR-1,4A. Policy PR-1.1.4.�, b) Potable Water Transmission Capaci - 200 gallons/ resident/day. (See Potable Water Policy PW=1.2.1 an. Natural Resource Conservation Policy NR-2.1,5.). c) Sanitary Sewer Transmissio Capacity - 100 gallons/ resident/day. (See Sanitary and Storm Sewers 'olicy SS-1,3.1.) d) Storm Sewer Capacity ii re &)mpiiant w tlh a d . ina level --et One -in -five-year storm event, (See nitary and Storm Sewers Policy SS-2.1.3.) Solid Waste C lection Capacity - 1.28 tons/resident/year. (See Solid Waste Collection P. cy SW-1.1.1.) f) Traffic C culation - The minimum level of service standard on limited access, arteri. , and collector roadways that are not within designated Transportation Co +ors is the eak period LOS E, with allowable exceptions and ifications therefore; with LOS measured by conventional methodology +ursuant to Objective TR-1.1, Policy TR-1.1.1, Policy TR-1.1.2 and Policy TR- 1.1.3. The measurement of LOS is made for the peak period (which is the average of the two highest consecutive hours of trip volume during a weekday). Within designated Transportation Corridors, which include approximately 95% of the roadway mileage within the City of Miami, a minimum peak period LOS E is also maintained, but the measurement methodology is based on the peak -hear period person -trips wherein the capacities of all modes, including mass transit, are used in calculating the LOS. An overall minimum peak --period LOS standard of E (100 percent utilization of person -trip capacity) will be maintained on Transportation Corridors. Specific levels of service by location and mode are set out in Policies TR-1.1.2 (addressing transportation corridors and TR-1.1.3 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 115 SUBSTITUTED g) (addressing FIHS facilities) from & the Transportation lament of the Gem Plar+MC.; . Miami -Dade Public Schools - Beginning January 1, 2008, the adop • d level of service (LOS) standard for all Miami -Dade County public scho. facilities is 100% utilization of Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) ' apacity (With Relocatable Classrooms). This LOS standard shall be a•.licable in each public school concurrency service area (CSA), defined a the public school attendance boundary established by the Miami -Dade Col ty Public Schools. h) Adequate Water Supply — As determined by the ami-Dade County Water and Sewer Department, Policy CI-1,2.4. The latest point in the applicatio► process for determination of concurrency shall be prior to the approval of an as • Iication for development order or permit that contains a specific plan for development, incltidinq the densities and intensities of development. Cancurrency be determined by the Planning Department during the review of a Maior U>° Special Permit, rezoning, and special permits and exceptions pursuant to the Cit s land development regulations. Policy CI.1.2.5: The Planning De ' . rtment, with the assistance of various City departments and agencies, shall be responsible for monitoring and ensuring adherence of the issuance of d elojarnent orders to the adopted level of service standards, the schedule of al improvements and the availability of public facility f rscly. Objective CI-1.3: Ensure at future development and redevelopment pay an equitable, proportional s►are of the cost of public facilities required to maintain cdted LOS standards Policy CI-1.3.1 he City will continue to use developer contributions, including development i - pact fees, to help fund the cost of public facilities needed to serve new developmen .r redevelopment. Policy devel cap I -1.3.2: The City will periodically revise all fees related to the impact of new ment and redevelopment to reflect increases in the cost of providing public facilities. olicy CI-1.3.3: The City will consider the use of special assessment districts to help fund capital projects whose public benefits tend to be localized to specific geographic sub areas of the city. Policy CI-1.3.4: The City will take appropriate measures to ensure that increased property values resulting from new development and redevelopment are accurately reflected on the County Tax Assessor's property tax rolls in a timely manner. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 116 SUBSTITUTED Policy CI-1.3.5: The City will work with the Miami Dade County and the Miami -Da County Public Schools to identify appropriate funding mechanisms in order to as the fiscal resources to maintain acceptable levels of service. re Policy Ct-1.3.6: The Miami -Dade County Public Schools Facilities Work Pr► cram will be evaluated on an annual basis to ensure that the level of service st . ndards will continue to be achieved and maintained throughout the planning period, Objective CI-1.4: Ensure that public capital expenditure within the stal—Coastal i e--Zone does not encourage private development that is subje to significant risk of storrn damage. (See Coastal Management Objective CM-4.3.) Policy Ci-1.4.1: Public expenditures for capital facilities the coastal high hazard area will be limited to those required to eliminate existi 1 LOS deficiencies, maintain adopted LOS standards in non -high hazard areas, imp .ve hurricane evacuation time, or reduce the threat to public health and safety om storm events. (See Coastal Management Policy CM-4.3.1.) Policy CI-1.4.2: Public expenditures for capitfacilities in the coastal zone intended to further the goals and objectives of the Mia► i Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan will be limited to those projects that do not Measurably increase the risk to public health and safety from storm damage. (See C. -stai Management Policy CM-4.3.2.) Objective CI-1.5: The Cit 's Ca as follows in A r endix CI-1 of the rrrvements Pro ram and Schedule is ado ' ted CONCURREN MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Concurrency refers to a p .vision of Florida law that requires certain public facilities and services to be availabl- when the impact of land development occurs. They must be available "current with" he impact of development. Paraphrasing Sction 't 63.3202, Florida Statutes, each county and municipality must incorporate s• cific and detailed provisions which shall provide that public facilities and services m:-t or exceed the Levels of Service (LOS) standards established in the Plan's Capital I ►.rovements Element and are available when needed for the development, or that th-. development orders or permits are conditioned on the availability of these public facilit• s and services necessary to serve the proposed development. L vets of Service (LOS) are measures that determine the capacity of the pubic facility per nit of demand. Local governments are required to adopt LOS standards for the following services:. Recreation and Open Space Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 117 SUBSTITUTED Potable Water Sanitary Sewer Storm Drainage Solid Waste Traffic Circulation Educational/ Public School Facilities The Levels of Service for each element are adopted by the local g• ,ernment in its Comprehensive Plan and approved by the state. Consequently, if any •f the facilities or services are not available, or are deficient in their LOS, developme cannot take place until they are provided at the required level, and "concurrent w " the impact of the G3velopment. Because the City of Miami is a fully developed city , its a,•pted Land Use Plan Map is designed so that the land use densities and intensitie shown on it are supported by appropriate infrastructure that will meet the cities a. •pted LOS standards. Moreover, Miami's zoning regulations have been made consis nt with its adopted Land Use Plan Maps required by Florida's Growth Manageme' Laws. herefore, development or redevelopment that does not exceed allowable ,,ned uses and intensities will not require concurrency review as a condition of issua e, because it is generally supported by adequate infrastructure. If a development permit being requeste• requires a Land Use/ Zoning change, or a Major Use Special Permit or similar consider. on, a concurrency review will be required. Impacts of the proposed development on t►e required LOS standards will be calculated, and a determination made as to whet r the required infrastructure capacity will be available concurrent with the impact of d- elopment. Planning Department will consult departments •f PW, SW, Parks & Recrea '•n, , and others as appropriate for input to the LOS impact evaluation. An affirmative principa concurrency determination will be required before a prospective developer can obtain . subsequent development order. Public Schoo acilities: Necessa public school facilities must be in place or under actual construction within three y )ars arer of final issuances of final subdivision of site plan approval, or the functional Jquiv•- ent. he City in coordination with the Miami -Dade County Public School shall by ordinance, include proportionate share mitigation methodologies and options for public school facilities in its concurrency management program and Interlocal Local Agreement for Public Facility anning between Miami -Dade County Public Schools, Miarni-Dade County and the Cities in Miami -Dade County, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Miami Comprehensive Neic:' ':orhood Plan 118 Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED The intent of these options is to provide for the mitigation of residential developme impacts on public school facilities, guaranteed by a legal binding agreement, thrr egh mechanisms that include, one or more of the following: contribution of land; th construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition or construction of a ermanent public school facility; or, the creation of a mitigation bank based on the co truction of a permanent public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity redits. Capital improvements associated with the construction of educonal facilities are the responsibility of the Miami -Dade County Public. School. To a.fress financial feasibility associated with school concurrency, the Miami -Dade County P btic School Facilities Work Program dated September 2007 for educational facilities wil +e incorporated by reference in the CIE. The City shall coordinate with the Miami -Dade Count, Public Schools, to annually update its Facilities Work Program to include existing and - ticipated facilities for both the 5-year and long-term planning periods, and to ensure t .t the adopted level of service standard, including interim standards, will continue to •e achieved and maintained. The City, through its annual update to the Capital provements Schedule, will incorporate by reference the latest adopted Miami -Dade +aunty Public Schools Facilities Work Program for educational facilities. The City a'd the Miami -Dade County Public School will coordinate their planning efforts prior + and during the MCNP Amendment process and during updates to the Miami -Dade C my Public Schools Facilities Work Program. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 119 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Goal IC-1: Increase effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of government .ervices through the appropriate coordination of local government actions. )bjective IC-1.1: To establish formal procedures for coordinating Cit )erating functions that are directly related to the City's comprehens o;:i-Dade County School Board, Miami -Dade County Water an ,::a > rrient, Miami -Dade County Public Works Department, S '-mi-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource M eaport Department (Port of Miami), Aviation Departme !irport), the Miami -Dade County Metropolitan Planning Or County Shoreline Development Review Committee, Mi Florida Regional Transportation Authority, the Sou Council, the South Florida Water Management Dis Transportation, the Florida Department of Envir Department of Health and Rehabilitative Se Resources, Department of State, adjacent loc local or federal agency whose cooperation objectives of the comprehensive plan. planning and e plan with the Sewer Authority id Waste Division, agement (DERM), the t (Miami International nization, the Miami -Dade i-Dade Transit, the South Florida Regional Planning ict, the Florida Department of nmental Regulation, the Florida ices, the Division of Historical governments, and any other state, required to accomplish the goals and Policy IC-1.1.1: By 2005, establi by interlocal or other formal agreement with appropriate jurisdictions joint pro.-sses for collaborative decision making on issues including, but not limited to, th- location and extension of public facilities subject to concurrency and the siting o facilities with countywide significance, including locally unwanted land uses. Policy IC-1.1.2: The • ty will continue implementation activities associated with the Interlocal Agreeme for Public School Facility Planning in Miami -Dade County, effective February 7, 2003, including, but not limited to, coordinating City, County, and School Bo. • plans based upon consistent projections of the amount, type, and distribution of populatior growth and student enrollment; participating in decision- m'?'ing, thr• gh floating membership on the School Board's School Site Planning and Construc'•n Committee, regarding potential sites for new schools and proposals for significt renovation, the location of relocatables or additions to existing buildings, and • •tential closure of existing schools; and collaborating to identify options aimed to pr• , ide the capacity to accommodate anticipated student enrollment demand sociated with increases in residential development potential. Policy IC-1.1.3: [Reserved] Policy IC-1.1.344: The City will continue to seek membership on the Biscayne Bay Management Committee, the principal coordinating body for Biscayne Bay, as a means of expressing its policies pertaining to Biscayne Bay. Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 120 SUBSTITUTED Policy IC-1.1.45: The City KIGOW89138-Miami-Dade-County-te-Feviewevalik*. rni oomTm er t i.r hail r changes (a) to tang prrdize infGrmpiien anr± (b)to prop ity nwnore_ so That all—enicIave lying boh ee igitnipal. through-annaxatien -shall maintain its membership and 'ihn"v^oi meat with committees and groups addressing the environmental healthy and r quality of Biscayne Bay. Policy IC-1.1.6: The city wail coordinate with county, state an ' :1I governments, districts and agencies to create partnerships to share open s , : ces and recreational facilities and promote enhancement and expansion of parks, -creational facilities and programs, greenways, trails and similar resources for use b iami residents. Polio IC-1.1.7: The Citywill continue to irnplemethe Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), National Poltut. t Eliminatioli System (NPDES) Permit addressing the requirements for compile - with .the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for pollutants entering city boun+ water bodies and ultimate Biscayne Bay. Goal IC-2. Promote orderly and appropriate reg'•nal land development and transportation policies through consultations with Miami -Da • County, adjacent counties, the region, and locally impacted municipalities. Objective IC-2.1: To further a strengthen existing and potential planning coordination mechanisms to ens re that consideration is given to both the impacts of land development and transpor . tion policies within Miami an areas outside the City's ,jurisdiction and the impacts land development outside the City's boundaries an the City of Miami. Policy IC-2.1.1: e City will continue its active participation in the Miami -Dade Planners' Tech' ical Committee (PTC) for the purpose of addressing common concerns ansharing resources toward solving planning problems, with particular emphasis o+ examining State of Florida planning requirements in the context of Miami - Dade Co. nty's unique governmental structure to more effectively coordinate local plannin efforts, Po cy IC-2.1.2: Working through the Planners' Technical Committee, the City will are copies of its comprehensive plan and plan amendments as well as information regarding scheduled comprehensive planning -related public hearings for the benefit of adjacent and other interested jurisdictions, and will encourage other participating jurisdictions to provide this information as well. Policy IC-2.1.3: The City will support the South Florida Regional Planning Council in developing informal coordination mechanisms such as regional issue study groups that coordinate land development and transportation policies among local governments; Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 SUBSTITUTED 121 and to establish mediation mechanisms to resolve potential regional conflicts. (S Intergovernmental Coordination Policy IC-3.1.1.) Policy IC-2.1.4: [Reserved] Objective IC-2.2: [Reserved] Policy IC-2.2.1: [Reserved] Goal IC-3: Contribute to an atmosphere of cooperation among /oca governments within Miami -Dade County. Objective IC-3.1: Maximize the use of informal, coo erative agreements as mechanisms for intergovernmental conflict resolution wit ► n Miami -Dade County and minimize the use of litigation. Policy IC-3.1.1: The City will exhaust all efforts solve intergovernmental conflicts arising from adoption and implementation of rnprehensive plans through informal mechanisms, including but not limited to wo ing through the Miami -Dade Planners' Technical Committee or utilizing the Mia -Dade County League of Cities and the South Florida Regional Planning Co cil's mediation process, before seeking remedies through the judicial system, p'•vided that efforts at informal resolution do not prevent the City from seeking legal r medies, or jeopardize the City's ability to prevail in any legal action. (See Intergovermental Coordination Policy IC-2.1.3.) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Goals Objectives Policies April 30, 2008 122 SUBSr1 Y fUTED APPENDIX CI-1 The following data was extracted from the City of Miami 2006-2007 Capital Improvements 'rogram and Multi -Year Capital Plan. This data presents the cost phases, funding sources, and oject listings for each of the capital funds elements relevant to the MCNP. This spe was intentionally left blank. SUBSTITUTED 2006-2007 CAPITAL BUDGET AND MULTI -YEAR CAPITAL PLAN SECTION 4 INDIVIDUAL FUND REPORTS SANITARY SEWERS The Sanitary Sewer fund includes projects that will improve the City's existing sanitary er system. The two projects currently in this fund have total funding of $725,000 or 0,1% of the ova. all Capital Plan. The following reports summarize the cost phases and funding sources for the Sanit. r Sewer fund as well as provide a listing of projects. FUNDING SUMMARY BY FUND - TOTAL OF $1300,514 ■ $0.7M 0.1 % $28.5Mn$1D8.3M / 3.6% 13.5% $6.6M D$5.5M D 0.8% _i 0.7% ❑ $54.0M o $88.6M 6.7% 11.1% $162.1 M 20,2% C3 $3.9M 0.5% $86.1M 10.8.E SUBSTITUTED D 301-CRA projects Co 311-General Government 0 312-Public Safety D 313-Disaster Recovery 325-Public FacI hies IJ 331-Parks and Recreation El 341Stroeta and Sidewalks ❑ 343-Mass Transit 18 351-Sanitary Sewers 0 352-Storm Sewers 0 353-Solld Waste Active & Future C1P Projects Only FUND: 51-Sanitary Sewers Phase 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source Total Prior Current Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011.2012 Management $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Land Acquisition $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Planning $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Design $41,250.00 $41,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Construction $645,000.00 $645,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Equipment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Administration $11,2 00 $11.250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Other $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Construction Engineering $27,500.00 $27,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total S725,000.00 $72a. 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 50.00 S0.00 Fund Fund Total Prior -rent No. Name Funding Y ears 2007 2007-2008 200 -2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 371100 Series 1995 Sanitary Sewer Bonds Total $725,000.00 $725,000.00 S725,000.00 $725,000.00 $0.0. $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 S0.00 SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CEP ProjeOnly FUNDING 351-Sanitary Sewers Sanitary Sewers 13-30199 Virginia KBP Sanitary Force City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Management System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No. Rd RRcons1mcoon Total Prior Funded Years S725,000 S725,000 Total Sanitary Se%er5 S725,000 S725,000 Tonal 35 Sanitary Sewers S725,000 5725,000 Current Future Funding Estimates 2006-2007 2007-2008 200E-2009 SUBSTITUTED St) SO SO SO SO S0 SO $0 SO 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 SO SO 50 SO SO SO $0 50 SO 2006-2007 CAPITAL BUDGET AND MULTI -YEAR CAPITAL PLAN SECTION 4 INDIVIDUAL FUND REPORTS STORM SEWERS The Storm Sewers fund accounts for storm sewer projects that result in improv:d drainage throughout the City of Miami. These projects represent 13.5%, or $108,340,277, of the total ' apital Improvement Plan. The following reports summarize the cost phases and funding sources for e Storm Sewers fund as well as provide a listing of projects. FUNDING SUMMARY BY FUND - TOTAL OF $800.5 $108.3M 13.5% ❑ $5.5M ❑ $0.7M ❑$6.6M 0.7% 0.8% 0.1% $256.2hi 32.O% ❑ $54.OM ❑ $3,9M 0.5% C$86.1MI 10.8% SUBSTITUTED ❑ 301-CRA projects ❑ 311-General Government ❑ 312-Public Safety ❑ 313-Disaster Recovery ❑ 325-Public Facilities ❑ 331-Parks and. Recreation 341 Streets and Sidewalks ❑ 343-Mass Transit ❑ 351-Sanitary Sewers 352Storm Sewers ❑' 353-Solid Waste Active & Future CLP Projects Only FUN . 352-Storm Sewers Phase 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan. Fund by Phase and Funding Source Total Prior Current Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Management $500,821.00 S0 110 $250.4! 1 00 $250 4 1 i i.00 $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 50.00 Land Acquisition $0.00 SO Ott S0.00 50.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0 00 S0.00 Planning S0.00 $0.00 59.00 $0.00 50.00 S0.00 SO 00 $0.00 Design 57,737,481.84 S5,291,842.84 $2,403,639.00 S42,000.00 50.00 $0.00 SO 00 $0.00 Censtructson ,89,471.66741 S25,386,328.41 525,776,489.00 523,749 900 00 $8,560,950.00 53,000,000.00 53,000,000.00 SO 00 Equipment $ . 51.061.00 $2,513,461 00 5637.600.00 $0.00 50.00 S0.00 S0.00 50.00 Adminrstratwn $,2,49 ,:`'2.14 S1,235,11214 5560,290.00 $320,000.00 $382,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 Other $311,691 S30,691 00 Sii.00 $0.00 50.00 S0.00 SO 00 $0.00 Construction Engineering S4,950,652.63 1,849,833 63 $1,695,819.00 $640,000.00 S765,000.00 SO 00 S0 90 $0.00 Fund Fund No. Name Total 1118.340,277.02 536,31 ,269.02 531,324,248.00 S25.000,310.00 S9.708,450.00 S3,000.900.00 $$-3,000,000.00 $0.00 Total Funding Prior Current Years 2 -2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 000000 Non-CIP Funding 356001 Local Option Gas Tax 356005 Streets Bond Program 360001 Stormwater Utility Trust Fund 367001 Impact Fees 385200-1 2002 Homeland Defence Bonds (Series 1) 3R5200-2 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds (Series 2) 399001 1976 & 78 Stori Sewer G 0 Bond 888899 FEMA liassird Mitigation Grant 888905 Dept of Community Affairs 888909 FL Dept of Environmental Protection 888919 South Florida Water Management District 888925 FEMA Recovery Assistance 888926 Prior Year Fund Balance 888930 Transit llalf-Cent Surtax 888947 MDC Building Baler Communtnes GOB S60,000 00 S60,000 00 5'. i SO 00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 5 (95,1100 00 S195,000 00 59.00 50.00 50.00 S0.00 S0.00 S0.00 $30,671,826,00 $000 515,190,471500 72,900.00 S6,708,450.00 SO 00 S0.00 S0.00 $27,049.69702 $12,776,376.02 $2,022,911 00 53,25*, 0.00 53,000,000.00 53,000,000.00 $3,000,000.00 S0.00 $5,I32,866A0 $3,658,300.00 S1,474,566.00 50.'F 't..Uti SO 00 S0.00 $0.00 $4,457,000,00 $4,457,006 41' $0.00 $0.00 u : 50.00 50.00 $0.00 S5,543,000,00 $,. 1 13,000 00 50.00 inr SO 00 S0.00 S0.00 51,397,48100 $1,397,4r•i t SO 00 50.00 J. u t.tif1 S0.00 50.00 57,904,28700 $7,904,287 uu $0,00 50.00 t.iitt S0.00 S0.00 $401,436.00 $401,436 nrs son?, $i,.nrs u'O $0.00 50.00 $3,000,000 00 • )t).0 • xn nn $0.00 $0,00 S0.00 51,452346.00 $1,452,346.00 $0.00 $n iti: . uri 0.00 $0.00 50.00 52,581.815,00 52,581,815.00 500.00 Su Ott 50.0( 50.s: 50.00 50.00 S91,565.00 591,565.00 $0.00 50 00 $0 00 S0.00 50.00 $0.00 S3,401,95800 51,331,66300 52,070 95.00 SO DO SO 00 50.00 $0.00 50.00 $15,000,000.00 $0.00 52,023,000.00 512,977,000.00 50 00 $0.00 i 00 50.00 Total 108.340,2/7.02 S36,307,269.02 S31,324-248.00 S25,000,310.00 S9.7101.450.00 S3,000.000.00 S3,000,000.0( SUBSTITUTED 50.00 Active & Future CIP Projects Only FUNDING 352-Storm Sewers Storm Sewers B-30008 Glenroyal Storm 5_:wer e lit $10,227,450 $0 $681,000 $2,838,000 $6,708,450 S0 $0 B-30011 Englewood Storm Sewer - Pha III $9,652,500 S0 $4,075,500 $5,577,000 $0 $0 $0 B-30014 Northwest Storm Sewers $8,638,400 $0 $669,000 $7,969,400 $0 $0 $0 B-30I56 Storm Sewer Equipment Aquisition $3,151,061 $2,513,461 $637,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30205A Pre -Disaster Mitigation Grant Application (PD,)15" 06') $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30262 Citywide Storm Sewer Repair Project $600,000 $600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30534 FEMA Funded Stormwater Drainage Project - Comfort Ca 1 $500,821 $0 $250,411 $250,410 $0 $0 $0 B-50643 Wagner Creek / Seybold Canal Dredging $5.507,174 S5,507,174 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50650 Riverview Stormwater Pump Station Upgrades $197,329 $197,329 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50650B Riverview Stomiwater Pump Station Upgrades FY07 9500 $319,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50650C Riverview Pump Station Emergency Generator FY07 $103,1' S103,092 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50652 Lawrence Stormwater Pump Station Upgrade $266,077 $266,077 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50653 Orange Bowl Stormwater Pump Station Upgrades $797,500 7,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50654 Overtown Stormwater Pump Station Upgrades $608,352 $608, - $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50658 Downtown Storm Sewer Projects - Phase II $671,495 $671 495 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50672 Belle Meade Storm Sewer Project, Phase II $7,500,000 S2.229,705 S. 70,295 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50685 Avalon Storm Sewer Project, Phase I - II $4,184,773 $4,184,773 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50690 NE 71 Street Storm Sewer Project $4,100,000 $2,473.500 $1.626,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 SC B-50695 Flagami/West End Storm Sewer Impr. Project Ph2 $10,651,200 $4,435,558 $6,215,642 $0 $0 $0 $0 S9 B-50696 Flagami/West End Storm Water Pump Stations Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 $5,710,228 $5,710,228 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50700 Battersea & Douglas Road Storm Sewer Improvement $967,204 $967,204 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50702 Fairlawn Storm Sewer Pump Station Project, Ph2A $3,405,000 $2,705,000 $700,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO B-50703 Fairlawn Storm Sewer Improvements Project Ph 3 $3,992,800 $1 10,000 $3,882,800 $0 -0 $0 $0 S0 B-50704 Fairlawn Storm Sewer Improvements Project Phase III $6,800,500 $614,000 $821,000 $5,365,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-50705 Kinkoch Storm Sewer Improvements Project $3,000,000 $714,000 $2,286,000 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 B-50706 Tamiami Storm Sewer Improvements Project S3_000,000 $564,000 $2.436,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-5673A2A Flagami-Report-Fairlawn Storm Sewers Project Phase 2 $10,321 $10,321 $0 $0 $0 $i $0 $0 B-59900 Citywide Drainage Projects $13,772,500 $0 $1,772,500 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 000,000 $0 City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Manage rent System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No. Total Prior Current Funded Years Future Funding FSCinuates 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 lFG Total Storm Sewers S108,340,277 S36,307,269 S31,324,248 $25,000,310 $9,708,450 S3,000,000 $3,00i,100 SO Total 352-Storm Sewers S108,340,277 S36,307,269 $31,324,248 S25,000,310 $9,708,450 $3,000,000 S3,000,000 $0 SUBSTITUTED 2006-2007 CAPITAL BUDGET AND MULTI -YEAR CAPITAL PLAN SECTION 4 INDIVIDUAL FUND REPORTS SOLID WASTE The Solid Waste fund is presented in this section. This fund includes projects for equipment or facility construction for the collection and removal of solid was( at $6,600,134 and represent 0.8°/® of the total six -year Capital Improvement PI The following reports summarize the cost phases and funding sources f:} provide a listing of projects. FUNDING SUMMARY BY FUND - TOTAL OF $80 El $0.7M 0.1% 28.5M 3.6% s 5256.2M 32,0% EJ $108.3M 13.5% $r6.6M 0.8% Li $5.5M 0.7% I ❑$54.0 6. , '/a o $162.1 M 20.2% o $3.BM 0.5% 05136.1M 10.8% SUBSTITUTED acquisition of projects are valued e Solid Waste fund as well as a 301-CRA projects ❑ 311-General Government El 312-Public Safety C 313-Disaster Recovery • 325-Public Faclltties O 331-Parks and Recreation ❑ 341Streets and Sidewalks ❑ 343-Mass Transit D 351Sanitary Sewers n 352Storm Sewers ❑ 353-Solid Waste Active & Future CIP Projects Only FUND: 53-Solid Waste Phase 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source Total Prior Current Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Management $0,00 $0.00 Land Acquisition $0.00 $0.00 Planning $0.00 $0.00 Design $181,559.00 $181,559.00 Construction 2,501,048-00 $2,030,219.00 Equipment $3,7,527.00 $417,527.00 Administration '. .00 $0.00 Other $0.0► $0.00 Construction Engineering $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $470,829.00 $3,500,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 . $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total S6,600,134.00 S2,6 05.00 S3,970,829.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Fund Total Prior Current No. Name Funding Years 21 i -2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 367001 Impact Fees 382001 Contribution From General Fund 382008 Contribution From General Fund 2007 Total $1,919,156.00 $1,180,978.00 $3,500,000.00 $1,448,327.00 $1,180,978.00 $0.00 $470,829 $0.00 $3,500,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,600,134.00 S2,629,305.00 83,970,829.00 '.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SUBSTITUTED eti & Future CIP Pr its Only FUNDING 353-Solid Waste Solid Waste B-30396 Solid Waste Bldg. Remo+ , and Feasibility 1Stuly) S852,388 $381,559 $470,829 30 $0 $0 SD S4 B-73202 Solid Waste Collection Equipm $3,702,000 $202,000 $3,500,000 $0 $0 50 50 SD B-73204 Solid Waste Capital Improvement. F • 99 - FY 20p , $215,527 $215.527 $0 50 50 5O 50 5D 8-73206 Soltd Waste Removal Ptlot Program $1,830,219 $ I ,830,219 50 50 5D $0 5O 5O City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Management System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No. Total Prior Current Funded Years Future Fundiiu2 l wtitnttle� 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 To Su1idViaste $6.600,134 S2,629.30S S3,970,829 S0 SO S0 SO 50 Tatai353-Scald Rate S6,600.f34 $2,629.305 53,970,829 SO SO 50 SO CO SUBSTITUTED 2006-2007 CAPITAL BUDGET AND MULTI -YEAR CAPITAL PLAN SECTION 4 INDIVIDUAL FUND REPORTS MASS TRANSIT The Mass Transit fund is presented in this section. The City of Miami's most initiative is the Miami Streetcar Project. In coordination with the Florida De the City is proposing to build the Miami Streetcar Project from Governme through Park West, the Entertainment District, Health District, Wynwoo the Design District and Buena Vista East District. The streetcar is an i operate in existing roadways, and provide connectivity among majo retail establishments, as well as residential communities througho Transit fund accounts for 3.6% of the Capital Plan or $28,471,9 ignificant mass transit artment of Transportation, t Center in Downtown Miami /Edgewater, Midtown Miami to an transit circulator that will activity centers, commercial and the project corridor. The Mass The following reports summarize the cost phases and fundi sources for the Mass Transit fund as well as provide a listing of projects. FUNDING SUMMARY BY FUND -TOTAL •F $400.5M1 $28.5M 3.6% $0.7M [1$108.3M 0.1% 13.5% $256.2M 32.0% ❑ $6.6M 0.8% ❑ $5.5M 0.7% ❑ $54.064 6.7% ❑ $88.6M 11.1% ❑$162.1M '0 2°!- ❑$3.8Il1 0.5% l ❑$86.1M 10.8% ❑ 301-CRA projects ❑ 311-General Government ❑ 312•Public Safety ❑ 313-Disaster Recovery ❑ 325-Public Facilities ❑ 331-Parks and Recreation ❑ 341 Streets and Sidewalks 1 43-Mass Transit ❑ 351-Sanitary Sewers ❑ 352-Storm Sewers ❑ 353-Solid Waste ♦ It is anticipated at next year's capital plan will include a detailed finance strategy for this critical transportation -, d transit infrastructure project that is anticipated to be delivered using a Public Private Partnership, hereby the City partners with a private entity to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the streetc for an extended twenty-five (25) to thirty-five (35) year period. SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CLP Prr"ects Only FUND: 3 ass Transit. Phase 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source Total Prior Current Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Management $2.400,000.00 1600,000.00 $600,000.00 S300,000.00 $300,000.00 5600.000.00 10 00 $0.00 Land Acquisition $25 000 00 50.00 $25,000.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 $0.00 Planning S0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 S0.00 $0.00 1O.DO Design 8.369,323.00 $7,297,572.00 51,071.751.00 $0.00 10 00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Constnrction $17, ,634 00 $6,101 431 00 51.285 652 OD 52,336.406.00 $2,487,999.00 $5,466,146.00 $0.00 $0.00 Equipment ! 00 S0.00 SO 00 $0.00 S0.00 S0.00 SO OD 50.00 Administration SO + SO_00 $0.00 S0.00 $0,00 $0.00 50.00 5O 00 Other 50.00 10 00 $0.0 50,00 S0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0 00 Construction Engineering S0 00 SO 00 $0.00 SO 00 S0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Fund Fund No. Name 528,47I,957.00 Si3,999,003,;+ S2.982,403.00 S2,636,406.00 S2,787,999.00 S6.066,146.00 50.00 S0.00 Total Prior ent Funding Years 2006-21!7 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 000002 Special Rev Budget 367001 Impact Fees 888917 FDOT Other 888930 Transit Half -Cent Surtax 888931 Transit 'talc -Cent Surtax {FYO7) $1.500,297 00 S 1,500?97 GU SO 00 1000 $0,00 $0 00 $0 00 S0.00 $2,749.174 00 12.749,174.00 SO 00 50.00 S0.00 S0.00 $0 00 SD 00 $3,700,000.00 13,700 000.00 $0 00 , .00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S 17,840 083 00 $6,049,532.00 5300,000.00 $2,636,406 0 . 12,787,999.00 56,066,146.00 SUDO 50.1/0 $2,682,403 00 $0.00 $2.682,403 00 SO 00 50.00 SO 00 $0.00 $0.00 Total S28.471,957.00 $13,999,003.00 S2.982,403.00 S2,636,406.00 52.7.' 999.00 $6,066,146,110 $0.00 $0.00 SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CIP Proje Only _ ,LADING 343-Mass Transit Mass Transit B-31201 Intermodal Planning Comport, $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71201 Circulator Services $2,400,000 $600,000 $600,000 $300,000 $300.000 $600,000 $0 $0 B-71215 Miami Street Car Project S16,721,640 $5,145,437 $1,285,652 $2,336,406 $2,487,999 $5,466,146 $0 $0 B-71215D Miami Streetcar - Underground Infrastructure ' Midtown Miami $3,758,378 $3,758,378 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71215E Miami Streetcar - Program Management - Specialty rviccs $2,496,950 $1,500,199 $996,751 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71215F Miami Streetcar - Alternatives Analysis - Gannett Fleming $1,713,291 $1,713,291 S0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71215G Miami Streetcar - Topographical Survey Services $875,000 $800,000 $75.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71215H Miami Streetcar - Utility Master Plan $296,698 $296,698 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71215J Miami Streetcar-Geotechnical Services 85,000 $85,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-71215K Miami Streetcar - Land Acquisition $25,:40 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Management System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No. Total Prior Current Funded Years Future F'undin2 Estimates 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-•2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Total Mass Transit $28,471,957 3,999,003 S2,982,403 S2,63e ,406 S2,787,999 S6,066,146 $0 $0 Total 343-Mass Transit S28,471,957 S13,999, S2,982,403 $2,636,406 S2,787,999 S6,066,146 SUBSTITUTED $0 $0 2006-2007 CAPITAL BUDGET AND MULTI -YEAR CAPITAL PLAN SECTION 4 INDIVIDUAL FUND REPORTS PARKS AND RECREATION The Parks and Recreation fund is presented in this section. It includes capital intprov City of Miami's park system which comprises over 100 parks. These projects total $ 62,055,439, representing 20.2% of the CIP. The following reports summarize the cost phases and funding sources for the P ks and Recreation fund as well as provide a listing of projects. FUNDING SUMMARY BY FUND - TOTAL OF $BQD.SM I fl $108.3M 13.5% fJ $6 SM ❑ $5.5M 0.8% 0.7% The City is nearing completion This plan approaches Miami urban design, recreation, c demographics. It is antic candidate projects iden implementation of al ❑ $54.OM 6.7% ❑ $3.9M 0.5% G $8tl.IM 14.8% ❑ 301-CRA projects ❑ 311-General Government O312-PublicSaat ty ❑ 313-Disaster Recovery ❑325-Public Facilities Ill 331-Parks and Recreation F1341 Streets and Sidewalks C 343-Mass' Transit ❑ 351-Sanitary Sewers O 352-Storm Sewers ❑ 353Solid Waste f the citywide Parks Master Plan for the city's parks and public spaces. park system from multiple perspectives - nature and environment, park and munity development, culture and cultural identity, and changing ated that next year's capital plan will include a comprehensive listing of fied through the master plan process as well as a funding strategy for or a portion of the identified projects. nts made to the d SUBSTITUTED Ac 've & Future CIP i'eels only. FUNDING 331-Parks and Recrea Parks and Recreation B-60319 Simpson Park Wood B-60430 Antonio Maceo Park New +v unity Building B-60475 Douglas Park Recreation Buildin• ' enovations B-60496 Grapeland Heights Park Site Developm - Ph1 B-75000 Watson Island Public Boat Ramp Baywalk estroom B-75001 Watson Island Infrastructure B-75814 Armbnster Recreation Building Improvement B-75840 Dorsey Park Building Renovation Expansion B-75847 Douglas Park Playground & Furnishings B-75848 Douglas Park Parking Lot and Lighting B-75849 Douglas Park Sports TurfUpgrades B-75851 Douglas Park Irrigations B-75859 Lummus Park Recreation Building Improvement B-75892 Henderson Park Irrigation System B-75900 Jose Marti Park Recreation Building & Furnishings B-75904 Manuel Artime Fencing B-75905 Manuel Artime Playground B-75906 Manuel Artime Parking Upgrades B-75910 Riverside Park Playground B-75941 African Square Water Playground B-75991 Williams Park Improvements B-78502 Museum of Science - Development in Bicentennial Park B-78503 Museum of Art - Development in Bicentennial Park City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program F1md Source Management System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No. Total Prior Current Funded Years Future Funding Estimates 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 $107,215 $107,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,464,710 $1,244,710 $220,000 $0 50 $0 $0 $0 $2,211,860 $51,689 $2,160,171 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,342,087 $15,342,087 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $295,000 $295,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $315,000 $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $570,000 S570,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $500,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,105 $4,105 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 141 102 $141,102 $0 $0 80 $0 $0 $0 $5 ,'00 $50,000 $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $605,000 455,000 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $31,819 S3 :19 $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 $0 $52,657 $52,65 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 S40,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 S0 $0 $19.413 $19,413 ':i $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $192,040 $192,040 $0 50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,564 $100,564 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,886,213 $877,200 $1,009,013 ';! $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,800.000 $700,000 $2,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,800,000 $700,000 $2,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Parks and Recreation $162,055,440 S94,502,279 $39,451,355 $28,101,806 Total 331-Parks and Recreation S162,055,440 S94,502,279 S39,451,355 $28,101.806 1 SaTITITTED $'1 $0 SO $0 S0 SO SO $0 Active & Future Projects Only FUN Phase 331-Parks and Recreation 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source Total Prior Current Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-20I2 Management $0.00 SO 00 SO DID $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 $0.00 50.00 Land Acquisition $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Planning $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50 00 $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 Design S 12,307,625.73 $11 951,657.89 5355 967 84 $0.00 80_00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 Construction 132 247.029 01 $77,349,809 85 $32.845,594.16 522,051,625.00 $0.00 50 00 $0.00 $0.00 Equipment 68,030.00 51,168,030.00 51,500,00000 $0.00 $0.00 5000 $0.00 SO 00 Administration $1,63 ,• 1 00 $1 518,396 00 $114,515 00 SO 00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 S0.00 Other 510,600,585;. $350,404 00 $4,200,000 00 $6,050,181 00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 Construction Engineering $2,599,258,03 $2,163.980 03 $435,278 00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $000 $0.00 Total 162.055,438„77 594„ ° 277.77 839,451,355.00 $28.101,806.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 Fund Fund Total No. Name Funding 000000 Nan-CIP Fundtn( 000005 Bayfront Park Mgt Trust Budget 000006 Non City Funding 367001 Impact Fees 373001 Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond 382001 Contribution From General Fund 383001 CIP Misc. Revenue 385200-1 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds 1Series 1) 385200-2 2002 Homeland Defense Bands I Series 2 385200-9 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds Ini st 888895 Land & Water Conservation Fund 888918 FIND Waterwa}s Assistance Program 888919 South Florida Water Management District 888927 Federal Aviation Admin. Grant 888934 Japan World -Expo Commemorative Fund 888943 1-95 Pedestrian Overpass 888947 MDC Building Better Communities GOB 888949 Florida Dept of State Division of Library & 888951 Other Public & Private Contributions $2,642.00 $100,000.00 5250,000 00 $8,153,246 95 S3,950,426,87 S2,790,196.65 S7,624,679.00 $55,250,209.56 $39,923,343,00 $4,415,424.74 $200,000.00 $2,425,000.00 $325,000.00 $150,000 00 $40,528.00 MOO $35.800,000.00 S500,000,00 $154,742 A0 Prior Current Years 2 i t 6-2007 $2,642 00 $100,000.00 $000 $5,757,654 95 $3,950,426 87 $1.819,971 65 S7,624,679.00 S55,250,208.56 $0.00 S3,915,424.74 5200,000.00 S1,425,000.00 $325,000.00 $150,000.00 S40,528.00 $0.00 $13,786,000,00 $0.00 $154,742 00 $0.00 $250,000 00 $2,395,592.00 $0.00 $970,225 00 $0.00 $1.00 $33,835,537.00 $500,000.00 $0.00 $1,000,000.00 $0.00 $0,00 50.00 $0.00 $0,00 5500,000.00 $0,00 2007-2008 SO 00 S0.00 S0 00 $0.00 SO DO SO DO $0,00 86.087.806.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 50.00 S0.00 S0.00 $22,014,000.00 S0.00 50.00 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 201I-2012 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SO DO $0.00 $0.00 50.00 0.00 5 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 S0.00 S0.00 Total 162,055,438.77 $94,502,277.77 S39.451.355.00 S28,101,806.00 50,00 SUBSTITUTED $0.00 SO 00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 OD $0.00 $O 00 $0.00 $O 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 000 $0.00 $0.i+ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ' 0.00 SO 00 $0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 SO 00 SO 00 $0 00 $0 00 $0.00 SO 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 00 1 Active & Future CIF Projects Only FUNDING 331-Parks and Rec tion Parks and Recreation B-30374 Virginia Key Row. ; Center Improvements $654,742 $654,742 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30376 Ichimura Miami Japan - den ADA Improvements $40,528 $40,528 S0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30386 Sewell Park -Boat /Kayak L• . ch Area $55,625 $18,000 $0 $37,625 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30508 Virginia Key Beach Park Museum4461 $11,073,892 $27,127 $1,046,765 $10,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-3054I Citywide Park Equipment & Site Improve ents $1,500,000 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-30544 District 2 - HD Park Improvements,[ $3,138,408 $0 $3,138,408 80 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35806 Curtis Park Pool Renovation �` $9,295 $9,295 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35808A Curtis Park Playground Equipment and Site Furnishing Tl %. $56,123 $56,123 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35811 Curtis Park Sports Turf Improvements $1,667,462 $887,237 $780,225 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35812 Duarte Park Building Renovation/Expansion $957.198 $167,221 $789,977 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35828 Grapeland Park Improvements Phase 2: Nev. Water Park $1 . 4'0,000 $6,699,000 $800,000 $9,641,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35832 Kinloch Park Community Recreation Building improvements $734, - 1 $682,251 $52,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35838 Kennedy Park Restroom Building Improvements $4,900 $4,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35844 Lummus Park Historic Building Restoration $208,637 '. 08,637 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35846 Momingside Park Recreation Building Improvements $816,592 $61., •2 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35847 Momingside Park Restroom Building Renovation $4,100 $4,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35853 Virrick Park Pool Building Renovation $950,000 $750,000 .700,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35855 Miami Watersports Center - Hangar Improvements $533 950 $524,029 $ 21 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35857 Jose Marti Park Gym $11,302,432 $8,027,432 $3,275,00$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35864 Simpson Park Building Expansion $336937 $336937 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35865 Coral Gate Park Building Improvements $1,114,227 $54,093 $1,060,134 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35868 Robert King High Park Ne.+ Bldg Const $2,271,001 $310,778 $] 960,223 $$0 $0 $0 $0 B-35871 West End Park Pool Improvements $665,000 $645,000 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35883 Hadley Park Restroom Building Renovations $4,995 $4,995 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35889 Athalie Range Park Swimming Pool Improvements $1,524,469 $1,524,469 $0 $0 $$0 $0 $0 B-35889A Athalie Range Park Pool Improvements $614,705 $414,705 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35889B Athalie Range Park Pool SNPB Audit 2006 $5,500 $5,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35894 Reeves Park Building $308,015 $308,015 $0 $0 $0 ! $0 $0 B-35895 Parks Master Plan $700,000 $700,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35896 Margaret Pace Park Improvements - Phase II $751,641 $682,909 $68,732 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35898 Virginia Key Beach Site Improvements $63,235 $63,235 $0 $0 $0 $0 '.1 $0 B-35904 Neighborhood Parks - Improvement Contingencies $6,075,585 $25,404 $0 $6,050,181 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35905 Antonio Maceo Park $56,547 $56,547 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-35907 Athalie Range Park Soccer/Football Complex $1,976,250 $281,734 $1,694,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 B-38500 Little Haiti Park - Soccer & Recreation Center $9,014,829 $8,207,229 $807,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Management System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No. Total Prior Current Funded years F111nre Funding Estimates 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CIP Projects Only 331-Parks and ' reation Parks and Recreatio 13-30002 Dinner Key R ation/Enhancement of Spoil Islands A,B,C,D,E 13-30080 Duarte Park Water ' ound B-30081 West End Park Splash Pia and 8-30087 Roberto Clemente 1 Safety Surfa B-30100 Miami Watersport Center - Boat R 13-30105 Grapeland Park Com Rec. Facility & Prkg - Ph3 B-30107 Lemon City Park 1 Resurfacing Basketball Courts B-30132 Parks Facilities General Improvements B-3D134 Bryan Park New Tennis Center B-30159 Technology Upgrades for Parks 11-30160 Park Maintenance Equipment Acquisisition B-30164 Virginia Key Beach Park Master Plans B-30165 Hadley Park Black Box AC Structure B-30170 .Art Museum -Contribution to Park Master Plan B-30172 Robenu Clemente Park Bldg Improvements B-30184 Virginia Key Beach Park Circ. Rd & Prkg Improv B-30224 West End Park Building Terrace Remodeling 13-30229 Robert King High Park Soccer Field B-30238 Virrick Park Message Center Structure B-30246 Ovcrtown Youth Center - Patio Enclosure B-30270A Miami Watersparts Center Building Improvements 13-30273 Spring Garden. Point Park Seybold Canal House Restoration 13-30291 Athatte Range # 1 Mini Park Improvements 13-30292 Virrick Park Com. Center -Library & Classroom B-30295 Little Rani Park - Cultural Campus B-30304 Shenandoah Park lmprovcmumts B-30305 Gibson Park Lmprovemenls B-303I0 Bicentennial Park Shoreline Stabilization - Phase 111 B-30316 Fern Isle Park B-30317 Morningsidc Park Shoreline Stabilization Project B-30319 Curtis Park Bleacher Renovations 13-30347 Virgins Key Wild Life & Nature Center 13-30348 Citywide Mini Park Sae Furnishings B-30363 Virginia Key Master Plan 13-30369 Bicentennial Museum Park Technical Assessments City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Management System Funding Detailed by Fund & Project No - Total Prior Current Funded years Future Funding Estimates 2006-2007 2007-200 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 S1,115,079 $875,000 $240,079 $0 10 SO 50 $0 S260,000 $260,000 SO SO SO SO SO SO S252,381 $252,381 $0 SO $O SO So S0 S57,000 $57,000 SO SO $0 SO $0 50 S 17,500 $17,500 50 50 SO SO SO $O $3,369,152 $3,019,152 $0 $350,000 $0 SO SO SO S7,800 $7.800 SO SO SO $0 SO SO $90,001 S90,0111 SO SO 5O SO $0 SO S1,514,676 $104,978 11,409,698 SO SO $0 50 50 S214.444 5214,444 SO SO SO SO SO 5O 000,000 $1,00O.o00 SO SD $0 SO SO SD 3 722 $371,722 SO SO SO $0 SO SO $301,01 $10,830 $290,185 SO 50 SO $0 50 $700,000 -5700,000 SO SO SO $0 50 S0 52,095,623 $. ;529 $1,410,094 SO $0 SO SO SO 53,294,877 $3.294.3 " $0 SO SO SU SO SO $175.155 S175,155 SO SO SO $0 5O 50 $2,476,250 S 156.136 $2, :.114 S0 $0 SO S0 SO 513,691 S13,691 SO $0 $O SO SO $150,000 $150,000 £U St? $0 SO SO SO $149,500 $149.500 SO SO SO SO 50 S0 $32,500 S 12,500 520.000 .11 $0 SO 50 SO $153,287 5153287 SO $0 $0 SO 5O SO $1,100.000 $600,000 $500,000 50 SO $0 SO SO 515,495,804 $11,876,404 $1,596,400 $2,023,000 ;0 50 SO SO $2,711,352 $1,711,352 $1.000,000 $0 SO SO SO SO $2,221,743 $1,721.743 $500,000 SO $0 SO 5O SO S6,654,117 S3,882,017 S2,772,100 50 50 S0 SO SO 56,063 289 55.913,289 $150,000 $0 $0 51 SO SO $1,000,300 S600,300 $400,000 SO SO SO 50 50 5440.170 $440.170 SO SO SO SO 50 $0 5435,996 5435,996 So So So SO 5 SO $39,894 S39,894 S0 50 SO SO 50 SO $640.000 S640.000 5O SO SO SO SO 50 521,266 S21,266 SO SO SO SO SO SUBSTITUTED 2006-2007 CAPITAL BUDGET AND M I_ LTI-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN SECTION 4 INDIVIDUAL FUND REPORTS STREETS AND SIDEWALKS The capital projects in the Streets and Sidewalks fund provide reconstruction, ma' , r maintenance and beautification to Miami's street system. The street improvement projects have . total funding amount of $256,240,150, representing 32.0% of the total six -year Capital Plan. The following reports summarize the cost phases and funding sources for e Streets and Sidewalks fund as well as i_ovide a listing of projects. FuNDIN SUMMARY BY FUND ^TOTAL OF S800.5 ❑$6.6M n $0.7M C3 $108.3M 0.8% 0.1% 13.5% $28.5M l $256.2M 32.0% ❑ ;$5.5M 0.7% ❑ $54.OM 8.7% ❑ 88.8M $162.1M 20.2% ❑ $3.9M 0.5% .1M 10.8% ❑ 301-CRA projects ❑ 311-General Government ❑ 312•Public Safety ❑ 313-Disaster Recovery ❑ 325-Public Facilities ❑ 331-Parks and Rekareation CI 341Streels and Sidewalks ❑ 343-Mass Transit ❑ 351 Sanitary Sewers ❑ 352-Storm Sewers ❑ 353 Solid Waste The proposed Streets Bond is . integral component of the fund strategy for street improvements. However, additional revenu-. need to be identified to comprehensively address the remaining unfunded portions of the citywide st et infrastructure as well as to develop a routine 25 year maintenance and preservation cycle as is stomary for public works infrastructure. SUBSTITUTED Active & Future C1P Projects Only FUND: 341-Streets & Sidewalks Phase 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and. Funding Source Total Prior Current Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Management $11,926,211.90 $9,114,875.00 12,865,336.90 80.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Land Arquisition S3,000,000.00 $3,000,000.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0 00 Planning $251,794.00 $0.00 1251,79400 So 00 $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 $0.00 Design $24,393,109.66 S17,686,594.66 $5,970,82700 $322,330.00 $91,122.00 $261,11800 161,118.00 S0.00 Construction 180,408,129.09 556,987,234.97 143,175,570.02 146,346,76900 S26,066,756.00 17,004,045.00 1827,755,00 $0.00 Equipment C20,000,00 $20.000.00 WOO S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Administration . 384,664.50 S2,321,738.00 12,845,726.50 $729,685.00 $371.745.00 $104,643.00 S11,127,00 S0.00 Other $13.95 ."16.00 10.00 S81,085.00 $3.187,404.00 $3,366,592.00 $3,633,049,00 $3,685,386,00 S0.00 Construction Engineering $15,908,723 $3,619 0t13 59 S5,360,441.10 $3,229,459.00 $3,180,805.00 $519,015 00 $0.00 S0.00 total 256,240,149.74 . 2,749.446.22 S60,490.780,52, S53.815,647.00 833,077,020.00 S11521,8711.00 14,585,386.00 $0.00 Fund Fund Total Prio Current No. Name Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 000002 Special Rev. Budget S329,622.47 $329,622 47 SO.00 S0.00 $0.00 000003 Special Rev. IiurricaneAect. S450,894.70 S450,894.70 0 S0.00 $0.00 354001 I988 Highway Bonds $645,147.00 $645,147.00 $0.[)(1 $0.00 $0 00 354002 interest on'88 Sale'80 Highway Bands $196,116.00 $196,1 16.00 S0.00 S0.00 $0 00 356001 Local Option Gas Tax S4,807,348.00 S4,807,348,00 50.00 50.00 SO 00 356003 Parking Surcharge S3,570,644.00 $3.570,644,00 $0.00 +.t0 $000 356005 Streets Bond Program 120,100,348.00 $0.00 134,545,475.00 147.187,540.00 $29,430,462.00 360001 Starmwater Utility Trust Fund S460,000,00 S460,000.00 $0,00 S0.00 $0.00 365001 1987 Highway Bonds S76,634.00 176,634.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0,00 367001 Impact Fees 53,683,790.02 12,053,904.00 11,629,886.02 S0.00 St. 0 382001 Contribution From General Fund $8,461.926,00 $6,951.227.00 51.510,699.00 $0.00 50.00 385200-1 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds (Series 1) S22,165,237.76 522,165,237.76 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 385200-2 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds (Series 2) $6,768,445.00 $0.00 $6,768,445.00 $0.00 $0.00 385200-9 2002 homeland Defense Bonds interest S6,088,978.00 S6,088,978.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0 00 888893 Peoples Transportation Plan $11,715,000.00 S2, 240,000.00 S9.475.000.00 S0.00 $0.00 888902 Community Development Block Omni S300,000.00 5300,000.00 S0.00 S0.00 SO 00 888913 FDOT Transportation Enhancentcn! Program 56,530,000.00 S4,530,000.00 $0.00 S2,000,000.00 $0.00 888917 FDOT Other 15 738,381.00 55,738 38] 00 S0.00 50.00 S0.00 888924 DR1 Transportation Fee 14,501 353.00 13,448,989.00 1350,525.00 $350,788.00 S351,051.00 888930 Transit Half -Cent Surtax 543,828,797 29 $27,600,907.29 $2,645,679.00 13,116,319.00 53,295,507.00 888931 Transit lialf-Cent Surtax (FY07) $3,517,071.50 $0.00 $3,517,071.50 S0.00 $0.00 888938 Miami -Dade County GrantiContribution $1,274,000.00 S1,074.000.00 S0.00 $200,000.00 $0.00 888947 MDC Building Better Communities GOB $96I.000.00 S0 00 $0.00 S961.000.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 50 00 S0.00 $0.00 50.00 S0.00 18,036,871.00 8900,000.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 S0 00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SO 00 S0.00 $0.00 SO 00 S0.00 Si ' t S0.00 SO 00 $0.00 $0,00 SO 00 50.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 .0 00 S0.00 $0.00 SO t S0.00 50.00 50.00 $0.00 83,484,999.00 S3,685,386.00 SO 00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 SUBSTITUTED ive & Future CIP ' .'ects Only FUND: 3 treets & Sidewalks 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source Fund Fund Total Prior Current No. Name Funding Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 888950 Donation Commision:; DislrJ _ 4 888953 Miami -Dade Metropolitan Planning $21,416.00 521,416.00 $48,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S48.000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total 256,240,149.74 $92,749,446.22 560,490,780.52 $53,815,647.00 $33,077,020.00 811,521,870.00 $4,585,386.00 $0.00 SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CIF' Projects Only FUND: 341-Streets & Sidewalks Pi Total Funding 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source Prior Years Current 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Manageme 511,920211.90 59.114,875.00 $2,805.336.90 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 5000 LandAcquisiuon $3,000,000 00 53,000,000 00 $0 00 SO 00 $0.00 50.00 SO 00 S0.00 Planning $251,794.00 $0 00 5251.794.00 $0.90 WOO $0.00 SO 00 50.00 :Design 524,393.109 66 II 7,686,594.66 $5.970,827.00 5322,330.00 $91,122.00 $261,118.00 S61,118.00 $0 00 Construction 180,408,129.99 $56,987,234.97 543.175,570 02 $46,346,769.00 $26,066.756.00 $7,004,045.00 $827,755.00 TO OD :Equipment $20,000 00 520,000 00 $0,00 $0.00 50.00 $0 00 S0.00 SO DO .Administration 56.384 664.50 52,321.738.00 S2,845,726.50 $729,685.00 $371.745,00 $104,643 00 511.127.00 SO DO Other -1600 SO 00 $81,085 00 53,1 87,404.00 53,366,59.2.00 S3,633,049 00 53,685,386.00 SO DO Construction Engineering 5; 5," • 5.3,619,003.59 S5,360,441 10 $3,229,459.00 $3,180,895 00 S519,015.00 S0.00 SO DO Fund Fund No. Name Total 2s6.240,1 49., Total Funding 592.749,446.22 560.490,780.52 S53,815,647.00 533.077.020.00 511,521,870.00 54,585,386.00 50.00 0 Yea Current 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 000003 Special Rev. Hurricane Acct $450,894 70 $450,894 7u u S0 CO SO 00 SO 00 S$ irj}. 0° CC: 000002 Special Rev Budget 5329,622 47 $329,622 47 $0 00 35411.....2. Interest on '88 Sale '80 Highway Bonds 5196,116 00 $196,11600 - - -F,0 SSO°.01 $S00 00c€ SO 00 SO 00 354001 1988 High -my BoncLs $645,147 00 $645,147 00 :00 0000 1 Local Option Gas Tax $4,807,348 00 $4.807,348.00 ‘,.. i - $0.00 :CC!' ono° $o oo Parking Surcharge $3.570,644 00 $3,570,644 00 S.) - - [-,.-. 5000$ (10IC50 00 356005 Streets Bond Program 120_100,348,00 $0. OC1 $34,545,475 00 $29.430.46"2.0M0 $8,036,87$°1 LI) 50.00 SO 00 SO 00 $4,-...•p...)(hi S900,00$0°,-0°0° 50.00 360001 ,Stomilwater Utility Trust Fund $460,000 00 SO 00 $0.00 SO 00:00.0000 367001 Impaut Fees 53,683,790.02 $2,053.904 00 $1,629,886 02 $0.00 SO 00 $0$0i0000 $0 00 365001 1987 Highway Bonds S76.634 00 $7,,,.,-34 .,tj r $0 00 $(.110 • I i 50.00 SO ,00 $0.00 50.00 SO 00 $8,461,926.00 $6.951,227 09 $1,510,699 00 $$0,.0,0, 382001 Contribution From General Fund $0 00 38520U-2 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds (Series 2) $6,768,445 00 $0.00 $6,768,445 00 $0 00 SO:00 $0.00 SSD110°°0 385200-9 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds Interest 888893 People's Transportation Plan 511.715,000 00 $2,240,000.09 $9,475,000 00 S6,088,978 00 S6,088,078 00 $0.00 50,00 50.00 $0.00 S$ 0°° 7( I / $0.00 SO 00 $$00,0000 $0 00 385200.1 2002 Homeland Defense Bonds (Series 1) $22,165,237 76 $22,165,237 76 888902 Community Development Black Grant $300,000 00 S300,000 00 50 00 $0.00 SO 00 $0 00 SO 00 5$11711°..0°0° $0,00 888913 FDOT Transportation Enhancement Program $6,530.000.00 54,530,000.00 SO 00 $2,000,000.00 50.00 $0.00 888917 FDOT Other S5,7311,381.00 55,738,381 OD $0.00 50.00 $ 50.00 $00,.0000 50.00 DR1 Transportation Fee S4,501,353 00 53.448,989 00 $350,525 00 $350,788.00 $351,05(1)°G00°0 S00:00 888931 Transit. Half-Cern Surtax (FY07) $3,517,071 50 $0.00 53,517,071 50 $0.00 S0.00 50.00 $0.00 0 888930 Transit Half -Cent Surtax S43,828,797,29 $27,600,907 29 52„645,679 00 53,116,319.00 53,295,507 OD 53,484,999.00$° $3,685,386.00 1 0 888938 Miami -Dade County Grant/Contribution $1,274,000 00 $1,074,000 00 SO 00 $200,000.00 $0.00 $00.0000 888947 MDC Building Better Communities GOB $961,000 00 $0.00 $0.00 5961.000.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50. SUBSTITUTED Active & Future C ojects Only 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Plan Fund by Phase and Funding Source FUND: - -Streets & Sidewalks Fund Fund Total Prior Current No. Name Funding Years 2006=2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 888950 Donation Commissioner Di .. 4 $21 416.00 $21,416.00 888953 Miami -Dade Metropolitan Plannin_ •rg $48,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $9.00 $48,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total 256,240,149,74 $92,749,446.22 $60,490,780.52 $53,815,647.00 $33,077,020.00 $11,621,870.00 $4,585,386.00 $0.00 SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CIP Projects Only FUNDIN 341-Streets and ewalks Streets and Sidewal B-30020 Street Maintena e Program Project $5,657,690 50 5420,819 SO SO $5,236,871 SO SO B-30021 Street Mannerism •ram Project $6,00I,684 50 S446,406 50 S5,555,278 SO $0 S0 8-30023 Strut Maintenance Pro _ • Prestiect S4,655,375 5O S346,267 S4,309,108 50 SO St) SO Bt-30024 Street Maintenance Program Pr + $5,441,261 SO $404,722 $0 S5,036,539 SO SO S0 B-30025 Street Maintenance Program Project S5,106,681 SO $379.836 $0 $4,726,845 50 SO SO B-30030 Sued Maintenance Program Project S4,810,798 SO $357,828 54,452,970 TO 5O SO S0 13-30031 Street Maintenance Program Project $5,875,280 SO $437.004 S5,438,276 SO S0 SO S4 B-30034 Street Maintenance Pr gram Project $3,054,688 S0 S231,690 $2.822.998 SO SO SO 50 B-30035 Street Maintenance Program Project S3,996,976 SO $0 $297,295 S3.699,681 SO SO SO 13-30041 Street Maintenance Program Project $4,855,451 SO $361,149 S4,494,3112 S0 SO SO SO 8-30083A SW 2.7 & 28 St Closures - East of 27 Ave - Cortstruuclion Phase 445.693 $170,775 S274,918 $0 S0 $0 SO SO 8-30094 Brickell Area. Street improvement $6 r 000 $600,000 50 $0 $0 S0 SO SO B-30130 Miami River Greenway SW 2nd Ave to S Miami Ave. $500,0 50 SO SO 5500,000 SO SO SO B-30138 Model Chet Floral Pail - Street Improvements Pli 11 55,681,353 54 S5,681,353 SO Sta 50 50 Si) 13-30149B Transit Half -Cent Surtax Annual Balances S13,582,211 $0 $0 $3,1 16,319 53,295,507 S3,484 999 S3,685,386 50 B-30167 ShenandoahTraflicCalming - Phase I S1,343,500 $1,343,5t= 5O S0 SO SO 50 S0 13-30167B Shenandoah Traffic Calming - Phase 2 $2.200,000 S0" '.2,200,000 S0 SO $0 SO S0 E-30168 Silver Bluff Traffic Calming - Phase l S1.343,500 $1,343,500 50 SO 50 TO SO S0 13-301688 Silver Bluff -Traffic Calming - Phase 2 $2,500,000 $0 $2,500, SO SO 3O SO S0 B-30176 Brickell Village Improvements $400,000 5400,000 SU SO $O SO $0 S0 B-30177 Downtown Infrastructure Streets - Phase II S3,665,370 $3,058,800 $606,570SO SO SO SO 5O 8-30179 Downtown Baywalk Master Ilan & Design $450,000 SO $450,000 '.0 SO S0 SO SO S-30181 Miscellaneous Street Improvements I?1 $2,627,91 I SO 5254314 52,373,597' SO S0 $0 SO B-30209 Gateway Signage and landscape improvements, S230,388 $230,388 5O SO SO SO 50 SO 13-30222 Calle(k)itBeautification Improvements - East of37Ave, 51,093,303 SI06,953 $986.350 S0 SO S0 SO B-30226 Allapattah NW 22nd Court Improvements 5812,500 $812,500 SO SO $O 5O SO SO B-30230 Glen -oval Parkway Enhancements $327,001 5162.693 $164.308 SO SO SO SO SO B-30232 Gateways for 1-95 and 1-395 $519,252 $519,252 5O SO SO S0 $0 SO 8-30235 Citywide Traffic Circles $506,100 5506,100 SO SO SO $t 5O 50 8-30235A West Little Havana. Horne Depot Area Traffic Circles $465.489 $465,489 SO TO S0 SO s0 50 I3-302358 Shore Crest Along NE 85 and NE 86 Streets 51 13.850 SO S113,850 SO 50 Sft SO SO B-30248 Civic Center Implementation Plan S373.850 $213,850 $160,000 SO SO Sri S 5O B-30322 Grand Avenue improvements - Extension from Mary to Matilda 51,748.717 S1.525,401 $223.316 $0 SO $0 5O SO 8-30323 Buena Vista Heights - Phase 11 S5,663,052 S350,052 50 $5,313,000 SO $0 $0 SO B-30328 NW 20th Street Streetscape S384,500 S384,500 Sit SO $0 SO 50 City Of Miami - Capital Improvement Program Fund Source Management System Funding 'Detailed by Fund & Project No. Total Funded Prior Current Years Future Funding Estimates 006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 SUBSTITUTED Active & Future CIP Projects Only FUND/NC City Of Miami - Capital Improv Fund Source Management Funding Detailed by Fund & Total Prior Funded Years ement Program System Project No. Current Future Funding Fslimales 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 0II-2012 341-Streets an `dewalks Streets and Sidewa B-30336 Miami River B-30337 Biscayne Blvd. Rec B-3034IA Transportation Services B-30345 Calle Ocho Landscaping Impr B-30346 MUSP Traffic Studies B-30357 NE 4th Street Improvements B-30377 Sidewalk Repairs & ADA B-30398 NW 27 Ave Beautification B-30400 Street Maintenance - MPR- Various B-30500 Civic Center Infrastructure B-30504 Linear Parks, Greemvays and Baywalk Improvements B-30506 VMS Traffic Initiative B-30507 NW 32 Street, NW 23 Avenue, NW 24 Avenue B-30517 MUSA Island Drainage Improvement B-30530 Vizcaya Column Repair & Plaque Installation in the Roads B-30535 South Bayshore Drive Medians Beautification B-30536 Peter Pan Monument B-30540 Little River Industrial Park B-30542 US -I Crash Barrier Wall B-30543 Shorecrest Street Improvements B-31204 SE 8 Street Two Way Conversion B-31206 Dupont Plaza Traffic Recirculation B-31208 NE 39 Street Reconstruction (Design District / FEC) B-31209 NE 38 Street Reconstruction B-312I I NE 1st Avenue Reconstruction B-31220 Downtown DRI Transportation Component B-3122I NW NW 35th Court Medians B-3122IA NW 16 Street Improvement Project B-33100 NE 9, 10 & 11 Streets Two Way Street Conversion B-38503 Overtown Landscape Improvements B-38504 Overtown Sector Signage Project B-3990I Downtown Infrastructure Improv.-One Miami B-39902 Downtown Infrastructure Streets Phase I B-39911 Venetian Causeway Improvements B-40643A North Spring Garden Greenway enways - NW 5th Street Bridge Extension struction - NE 14th St. to NE 15th St. (PAC Miami 21 Project meets $277,280 $3,809,133 $50,000 $389,625 $329,622 $1,173,526 $4,500,000 $150,000 $5.557,727 $10000,000 $961,000 0,000 $1.020 $460,000 S 18,630 S21,368 $21,416 $2,000,000 $2,700,000 $2,000,000 $179,995 $12,833,398 $2,343,600 $2,473,800 $2,604.000 $2,469,896 $413,824 $566,176 $247,209 $250,000 $120,000 $4,352,000 $4,363,001 $1,900,000 $4,130,710 $277,280 $3,809,133 $50,000 $301,828 $329,622 $1,173,526 $0 $150,000 $5,557,727 $0 $0 $20,000 S 1,020,000 $460000 $0 S21,416 $0 $0 $0 $179,995 $3,221,495 $2,343,600 $335788 $220,13 8 $1,417,532 $413,824 $566,176 $247,209 $250,000 $120,000 $4,352,000 $4,363,001 $0 $404,800 $0 $0 $0 $87,797 $0 $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $1,150,000 $0 $0 $0 S0 $18,630 $21,368 $0 00,000 $2,501,'00 $300,000 $0 $599,784 $0 $2,138,012 $2,383,862 $350,525 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $100,200 S0 S0 $350,788 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S0 S0 $3,625,710 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $8,850,000 $961,000 $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 $1,700,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 SO S0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S0 $0 $9,012,119 $1 $0 $0 $0 g3S1,05 �l $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S0 $1,900,000 $0 $0 S0 S0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUBSTITUTED Active Future CIF Projects nlr FUNDING 341-Streets and Sidewalks Streets and Sidewalks f3.40565 Brentwood Village Project B-40666 Brickell Streetscape Project 13-40666A Brickell Lighting Project 13-40667 Hagler Street Marketplace Streetscape Project B-4067213 Flagami Traffic Ciaitnmg Improvement 0rirase'2) B-40686 Miami Rivet Greenwaysf Streetscape Segment D IELH) B-40691 Miami River Greenway Strcet.scape Project - Seg 8 8-40692 Miami River Greenway Streetscape Project - Seg C. 8-40693 Miami River Greenway Streetscape Project - Segment E2. B-40695 Miami River Green,' Project - Searnent G-Jose Mani Extension. B-40698 SW 16 Terrace Road Reconstruction Project B-40704 SW 32 Avenue Improvements B-431 I4 Sidewalk Repair & ADA 8-431 14A Citywide Sidewalk Replacement Phase 29 13-60459 Spring Garden Bridge Repairs 9-60479 South Miami Avenue Improvements B-71209C City of'Miami Disown Paramres Simul Model (Rev) B-71210 Downitenvn Street Conversions 13-71212 SW 3 Avenue Two Way Conversion B-71214 HDR Program Management Services B-78500 Buena Vista East Historic Didrier-Streetscape Improvements 13-78504 Model City Infrastructure Improvements B-78505 Model City infrastructure -MLK Boulevard 8-78506 NE 29 Street Pocket Park 8-78507 NW 34 Street rocket Park B-78508 NE 2 Avenue Improvements 8-78509 City Of Miami - Capital Improv Fund Source Management Funding Detailed by Fund & Calle Ocho Improvements Total Prior Funded Years $1.000,000 $123,618 $1,360.198 $1,350,198 $1,817,467 81,817,467 S13,713,834 $12.913,834 S2,135,469 $0 85,088,500 S181,250 51,127,728 $1.037,138 70,337 $615,250 $6 .. 49 S636.149 51,272,301 S1,272,300 51,550,200 560,200 $3,749,760 $3 • : 900 $1,071.895 $1,071,89 $947,000 S947.004 81,406,346 S I ,406 346 S4370 501 $4 42+a;6pt S2I4, I22 $214,122 550,000 $50,000 $25,000 $25,000 S 13,425.574 S9.114,875 S5.959,060 $380,960 $3,000,000 S3,000,000 S4,700,000 S4.700,000 $355,000 S0 $355,000 S0 S12,880,000 $1,480,600 $1,208,350 SZ22,000 ement Program System Project No. Current 2006-2007 2007-2008 Future Funding Estimates $876.382 $0 S0 $800,000 S2,135,459 S296,966 $90,590 555 087 SO S0 SO 53,350.860 SO SO $35 SO SO $0 S4,3I0,699 55,378,100 $O S0 $355,000 S355,000 $11,399,400 5986,350 50 $0 50 S0 So $4,610,284 $0 $0 S4 SO SO $0 $0 $O SO SO SO SO SO SO S0 SO SO SO 50 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 S0 S0 $0 $0 $0 SO SO SO S0 SO $0 SO 50 5(1 SO SO 50 SO SO S0 SO 50 SO S0 50 SO SO $0 S0 SO S0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 S0 S0 SO $4 $0 SO S0 S0 SO SO SO SO S0 SO 0 0 $D SO SO S0 SO S0 SO SO 50 SO 50 S0 SO S0 SO SO SD S0 SO SO SO S0 S0 S0 SO SO 5O SO SO $0 $0 SO 50 50 $0 SO SO $0 SO 50 50 Su SO 50 $0 SO S0 $0 $0 SO S0 50 S0 SO 'loin/ Streets and Sidewalks $256,240.150 S92,749,446 $60,490,781 S53,815,647 S33,077,020 811,521,870 $4,585, SO Total 34I-Street+and SidcwaIka 5256,240,1511 S92,749.446 S60.490,781 553.815,647 S33,077,020 511 521,870 54,585,386 SUBSTITUTED SO 1 Miami River Goal PA-3: -companies Exhibit . ur4aIbaseDeveIopment along the Miami River shall encourage reside ial and mixed use development and continue to provide for water -dependent a d water -related commercial, industrial, and recreational uses along the Miami River. Objective PA-3.1: The City of Miami, through its Land dDev- opment fRegulations, shall promote the co -existence of water and water -related commercial, industrial, and recreational uses hje.''.ntial and mixed use af h.. development along the Miami River. t ' t, Policy PA-3.1.1: The City shall use throu its and dDevelopment fRegulations to encourage the establishment and mainte oce owater-dependent and water -related uses along the Miami iver and to discourage encroachment by , , oat1eses , , .'-.e including the us:: ifAivaler taxi and water pleasure craft, while not excluding residential uses with ch activities. The City shall, through its Land Development Regulationsall*r residential and mixed use development along the Miami River, Provided the reSto zi tial uses are compatible with adjacent land uses. Policy PA-3.1.2: The y shall, through its Ltand Ddevelopment Rcegulations, encourage the d9vepP ent and expansion of the Port of Miami River consistent with the coastal manage ent and conservation elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Policy PA-3. : The City shall, through its 1Land dDevelopment fRegulations, encourage -velopment of compatible land uses in the vicinity of the Port of Miami River so to_mtigate potential adverse mpacts arising from the Port of Miami River upon a.. cent natural resources and land uses. promote the co- existence of water depe ent and water related commercial, industrial, and recreational uses with esi ential and mixed use development. Obje we PA-3.2: The City of Miami shall coordinate the surface transportation access to e Port of Miami River with the traffic and mass transit system shown on the traffic culation map series. ..k 44444- !y-a- lame s ,ci :deal-ify-,sothe-44414,14, efivaisly owned small ^1. anis& locatod ale4g the lAiam;--Rive, a-m4 is-ilot "Pei1 Facirfty" the estial-meer,ll)g-of the °erth 'The t to' fthc csh;ppiwj •conseths-as-the "-Port of uemi SUBSTITUTED Policy PA-3.2.1: The City of Miami shall, through the Transportation Elem- t of the Comprehensive Plan, coordinate intermodal surface and water transporta n access serving the Por-tf Miami River. Objective PA-3.3: The City of Miami shall coordinate its Pert -of Mia River planning activities with those of deep water ports facilities' providers and r.-.ulators including the U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, The Miami Riv r Commission, and Miami -Dade County's Port of Miami, as applicable. Policy PA-3.3.1: The City of Miami, through its Int: governmental Coordination Policies, shall support and coordinate with other ..vernmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Miami River to support and enh ce the Miami River's economic importance and viability, tThe functions of the Po of Miami River shall be consistent with the future goals and objectives of the Comprehensive pja\particularly with respect to the unique characteristics of the 'aort of Mianni,Rivefs location and its economic position and functioning within th ocal maritiR itichstry, and the necessity for coordination of these charactenstics nd need VOith*l'maritime industry t a complements and often competes with o Port of ianiRier. Mg? SUBSTITUTED Additional Comments on the Draft EAR I CM-3: Provide an adequate supply of land for water depe •ent uses. Objective CM-3. Allow no net loss of acreage devoted to water dependent including along the ban of the Miami River. Policy CM-3.1.1: Future land u and development regulations will encourage water dependent us- along the shoreline, including the banks of the Miami River. Not Deleting Comp Plan "Policy PR-1.5.8: Expan• e existing Jose Marti Park to provide additional recreational opp• ' unities for the area's residents, workers, and visitors." 5 I Concurring with City Commissioner Sanchez' recommendatio made during a public hearing regarding the EAR recommended amendments to the Comp Plan, to insert City support for citywide Water Taxi / Water Bus services within the Transportation element of the Comp Plan. 6 Not deleting PR-1.4.1 and PR-1.4.2 regarding development impact fees for parks and insert the EAR based amendment for the sections. As directed by the PAB and City Commission when considering the EAR in December 2004, inserting "Fisherman's Wharf' in PR-6.1.3 to become consistent with PR-6.1.4. Why is there not at least the skeleton of an Economic Element? With a target date for completion? —Hadley Williams Future projected build out is where one predicts what a likely density is for a given area. In other words, the number of expected units per acre, for a precise area. This might be 10, 20, or 30 years into the future. Planning claims they cannot yet, when I ask "why" since they did this and used the results to support the streetcar, do they now tell me this cannot be done? 5 months later, Planning has not answered this The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. _ The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-2.2 and its related policies, and has been broadened to include all existing parks and recreational facilities. Waterborne transportation has been addressed in Policy TR-1.5.9B. This comment s been addressed in Objective PR-1.5 and its related policies. The requested modificatio This comment has been noted. Page 1 ectives and Policies submitted • • • • • • • • • SUBSTITUTED question, I wrote them. Not quantifying projected densities ows vague and too general policies. Quantifying, like "fut projected densities", allows the policies to too easily accom •date special interest needs rather than interests of the residen at large. So please ask Planning (1) why were you recently ab : to create "projected future build outs", but now claim this is "i •ossible" to do? —Richard Strell 10 When will a draft of the 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 commended "Historical and Cultural ew?—Unknown in the Comp. Plan Policy in zoning or land use tion, of the decision of [illegible] of or Element" be available for r Why is the following not inclu LU-1.1.5: "An applicant for a chan regulation shall give notice of the app or recommendation of the planning staff, the planned change subsequent to the decis recommendation to all property owners within 50. -et of and registered neighborhood associations in the [illegible •jacent NET areas on the subjact property." —Barbara Bisno The Central Business District (map on pg. 12) allows "residential facilities...to a maximum density of 1,000 dwelling units per acre..." The "high density multifamily residential" designates "special -designated areas" (top of pg. 21) with 200, 300, and 500 units per acre. See the map on pg. 24. Comparing the two maps, they are the same areas. Which maximum density applies? —Hadley Williams Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City._ This language is appropriate for the City's Zoning Ordinance, not the MCNP EAR -based Amendments. The "Central Business District" designation permits 1,000 dwelling units per re regardless of where it is located. The Residential Density Increase Areas ap• only to the "High Density Multifamily Residential" designation and other catego -s where the residential density is stated to be equivalent to this category, •ich are presently "Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Transportatio - nd Utilities"; "Restricted Commercial" & "Office". Reference #67 from "Actions Taken to Address Public Input" refers to the Port of Miami River (not "the ports"). The action taken ?efers to a different text amendment, not the EAR based amendments. —Unknown My question was —you did it for the streetcar —why can't you now? —Unknown_ 15 Why is Transportation Policy TR-1.5.8(G) not in the Land Use Element (pg. 53 bottom)? Cross-reference. —Unknown 16 The Housing Element is missing some policies supporting This comment has be- • noted. This comment has been noted. Policy TR-1.5.8(G) reads as follows: G. Residential development around a rapid tran ' station should have a density of at least 15 dwelling units per acre (du/ac ithin % mile walking distance from a station and 20 du/ac or higher within 7, . feet of the station and at least 10 du/ac between''/, and % mile walking distance the station. Business and office development intensities around a rapid tra - t station should produce at least 75 employees per acre within % mile walks • distance from the station, 100 employees per acre within 700 feet, and at least em•lo ees .er acre between % and mile walkin• distance from the sta In response to this comment, the Economic consultant will follow-up with the Page 2 SUBSTITUTED ecial needs housing. xactly is the minimum LOS in Policy LU-1.1? Polic U-1.1.3, what is "divide or fra• ment"? 19 BBibeau: Per yo following friendly re respectfully recommen PR-6.1.3 in order to becom request last night, I'm emailing you the der. Miami River Commission inserting "Fisherman's Whar' into onsistent with PR-6.1.4. 20 LU-1: Line 2 — Residential protection removed. Why? Line 3 — Blighted or declining areas — what standards are used to define (a) blighted (b) declining? 21 LU-1.1: Line 3 (LOS) and to the end — where are these standards in the Capital Improvements Element? Please show them to me. Mai PAB member who made this comment. This comment has been addressed in the Capital Improvements Element. This comment has been noted. LBrown: I took a look at the two policies you reference below. PR-6.1.4 mentions the Fisherman's Wharf concept for the riverside district, as it is a reinstatement of the earlier PR-1.5.5 as requested by the Commission. However, I interpret PR-6.1.3 as being about the park itself — the recreation activities in the park, enhanced interpretive activities around the historic buildings that have been moved into the park, and the idea of linking park activities to the public spaces that will be part of "Lummus Landing" on the river. I do not see a Fisherman's Wharf as being inside the park, so it doesn't seem appropriate to me to include language on Fisherman's Wharf in that item. Fisherman's Wharf was not included in the original PR-1.5.4 item that you asked to be reinstated and whose language is exactly the same as the current PR-6.1.3. LBrown [second email]: I consulted with the Parks Department and they told e that Lummus Landing will be owned and managed by them, which makes m ore comfortable about including the Fisherman's Wharf language in the item a ou requested. (The proposed Miami 21 CS zoning can cover both publicly o ed and privately owned spaces.) So, I don't see any problem with includin• the = •uaae in PR-6.1.3. Addressed in LU-1.2. Addressed in CI-1.2.2, CI-1.2.3 22 LU-1.1.2: Lines 3 & 4 — Comment — please respond. Anything can be consistent with a plan that has neither measurable goals and objectives nor standards. Definition of an established neighborhood. 23 I LU-1.1.4: Why was this policy measure (10%) removed? This policy includes the provision for monito • • progress as a means of measuring the accomplishment of goals, objects" -s and policies as set forth. Addressed in new policy LU-1.1.5. The policy has been structured to be broadly inclusive, allowin address multiple issues at varying scales. Quantitative means to effectiveness and accomplishment of issues at hand vary from proble o problem, and do not necessarily prioritize current or pressing issues. For example, ten percent performance standards for code violations such as wee non -removal may not necessarily equate to the keeping of dilapidated and unsecured structures. to effectively rmine the Page 3 SUBSTITUTED 24 . LU-1.1.11: Third DCA says no urban infill designation for waterfront — please comment on how this courtcase affects this policy along the river? 25 LU 11: City of Miami per -person trip methodology is not used in t - rest of the U.S. and this method of counting transportatio mpact has done nothing to improve traffic congestions in t = city. You mention bicycle tra •ortation as a way of alleviating some auto traffic — but there bike lanes downtown. nothing in the CIP concerning LU-1.3.10: This rare measurable goal in the MNCP [sic] is removed. Why? LU-1.3.14: Lines 4 and 5 — where are these "neighborhood" design and development standards found in the code? This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. The City of Miami originated the person -trip methodology for the measurement of local level of service on a transportation facility to address the multi modal transportation infrastructure that characterizes the City of Miami. The methodology was designed to address existing demand and capacity to move people on the transportation system primarily using the roadway network and the transit system, while other modes such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities were also included to a lesser degree. The methodology was designed to evaluate each transportation mode alone, or in combination with others, as applicable to the particular transportation facility. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the capacity of all transportation modes would be used in the measurement of future, peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into the Transportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), d was separately published as a report entitled "Transportation Corridors: Me - g the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami', September 1990. Multi-m••al level of service standards which recognize transit service as a function o ' e capacity of the transportation system) are adopted in many counties throu• out the State of Florida (i.e. Miami -Dade, Broward and Polk Counties to name : ew), however no other county or city in Florida has a premium transit syste similar to the combined effect of Tri-rail, Metro -rail and Metro -mover, which mak- the use of the person -trip methodology a viable concurrency management toor the City of Miami. The CIP is updated annually. Policy TR-1.4.3 addres -s the development of a streetscape design program by the City to guide the place ent of landscaping, lighting, sidewalks and bicycle paths along City Streets in c.•rdination with major repairs and street renovations. The policy has been structured to be broadly inc ive, allowing it to effectively address multiple issues at varying scales. Quantita - means to determine the effectiveness and accomplishment of issues at hand va from problem to problem, and do not necessarily prioritize current or press! issues. Inclusion of new language that requires annual reporting is an effective -thod to measure policy success. Addressed in the City of Miami Design Standards and Guidelines. Page 4 SUBSTITUTED Currently the only standards by^naighbor uud^ is [sic] the Dand historic requirements. Where are the standards for ( She 'nduahand Little Haiti, abc.? _ 28 LU- /|.^:performing arts center is built 29 LU-1.4.8: ' isalecUvaanforcamant-inthis legal? � _ PuUovLU-1�4�4vwyn�hckonin|kauuf�h�cummanL _ _ _ _ The policy is not selective, but covers a large number ufproperties in various 30 LU-1.4.1 0: Line 4, a; icularly along the Miami River - how - - - This is alegaisouaand- within the purview -� ufthe City Attorney, not the MCNP does this fit with recen DCA rulings? 31 |LU-1�.4:Line 5-Where a'these adopted minimum | standards hobefound? Since `'nyufour Trans. Corridors | hovaaabandavdufF-duanthis `'nthat auto traffic impacts | will not be[illegible]concerning these "angeohothe zoning 32 | LU-1.6.8:This policy need not bahere ooitde` nothing. The requested modification has been made inPolicy LU-1.G.8. Please define "appropriate". Encourage vs. require is an arbitrary decision. Fairness? Equal treatment? P� 33 LU'1.G1D:Line 4-bicycles -wahave nubicycle lanes Th' |Pisupdated annually. Co-ordination issue between City and County has | downbown-numunaynataoidainC|PP|ananddunct baan'^"nannad. control countystate roads. 34 LU-2.4.3: Change public interest to public benefit. That is a The phrase "pb -lic interest" was changed to "public benefit" to address this standard that is easily understood and can bamet. comment. Addressed hnCl-1.2.3 35 LU-2.4.3: Return the number - do we own 9? How many do The number 9 was rei erted subsequent to the March 19, 2008 PAB � we own? VVorknhuo is the point if the City defines itself as totally urban Addressed -�--thaadditiuna| p ""uaadGoals, Objectives and Policies � | inf0? Does this mean encourage hothe Cd 37 LU-3.1.2: RAC is a new designation. These areas will have The requested modification has been - ade in Policy LU-3.1.2. high density and intensity and will require both green space and open space. Please make this arequirement.'Page 12: UCBD Map - cannot read - please replace it with a |larger and readable map. 39 1 Page 14: RAC Map - need FLUM with these RA Centers included - need large enough and colored and legible street number boundaries. 40 Page 18: Paragraph 2 - eliminate the decision making of Planning & Zoning Authority as well as the City Commission | | concentrating all power inthe hands ufthe Planning Director. ! | This map was improved boaddress your commna This map was improved hoaddress your comments. The Planning Director shall make afinding and the finding may be'""anledby specifying the grounds thereof and filing the appeal with an officer or as c t designated bythe city manager. The officer ovagent designated bythe cit manager shall promptly transmit the notice of appeal to the zoning administrator or the director of the department of planning, building and zoning, � Page 5 | / | � SUBSTITUTED 41 Pag- 8: Paragraph eliminates up to 25% of all public park spaces • 25% - too much concrete. 42 Page 21: Paragraph 3 — Office — Line 5 — There is •o standard for "adequate" and this determination should be mad- • the Planning Authority with the consent of the adjacent or proximate existing residents who will be required to share th existing services and amenities. Enormous FAR. 43 Page 21: Paragraph 4 — Major Institutional Public...etc. — same comment as paragraph 3 — again enormous FAR 44 Page 22: Paragraph 3 — Restricted Commercial — same comments as pg 21,paragraphs 3 and 4 45 Page 24: Need legible map with legible boundaries as the case may be. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall forthwith transmit to the zoning board all the materials constituting the record upon which the decision appealed from was taken. Revisions to the Future Land Use interpretation language were made that are consistent with language in the parks master plan and clearly distinguish between public park/recreation and commercial recreation areas. Previous language allowed up to 0.65 FAR, which, since most building in parks is one story, allowed up to 2/3 of the area to be covered with buildings. The new language provides for a 40% reduction while still preserving some flexibility that is needed to encompass a system that includes small, urban parks where 25% for a small support, recreation or cultural structure may be appropriate. The parks master plan contains many recommendations on procedures to ensure public participation in park design and improvements, so that the specifics of each case can be taken into account. A policy document like the MCNP needs to allow for some flexibility_in specific implementation. Addressed and also within CI-1.2.3 ssed in CI-1.2.3 Addresse CI-1.2.3 This mawas im ed to address your comments. 46 Page 25: Paragraphs 3 and 4 both work live and live work This can be addresse should be allowed in Historic and Conservation neighborhoods to encourage both preservation and adaptive reuse. 47 HO-1: Last line — The [sic] have a greater need for very low Addressed income housina_and this needs to be defined in some way 48 MHO-1.1: Due to limited resources the City need not fund high The City does not fund, but creates an in end development amenities and capital improvements. This housing. category should pay impact fees. the proposed Historical and Cultural Element. tive program for affordable 49 HO-1.1.10: Please include very low and low income as The requested modification has been made in Policy defined by HUD in each of these paragraphs. 50 HO-1.2.4: As an alternative to the "public sector provision" — The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1. what is the current "public sector provision" and why is one superior to the other? Why not use both? 51 L HO-1.2.5: Please provide the definition that is referenced. The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1.2.5. 0-1.1.10. 52 HO-1.5: Why "provide for" instead of "provide"? The City The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-1.5. should provide assistance for alternative housing close to Page 6 SUBSTITUTED v 44.4JeNW " 44 . .,4' < -," : public transportation. Development projects should be ! required to include some of the displaced through •evelopment regulation and should be required to contribute fin- cially to allow for relocation. Please comment. 53 54 55 HO-2. ' 1: Please add in line 4 after "variety of urban housing types for • : sons of all incomes, especially those of low low The requested modification has been made in Policy HO-2.2.1. [sic' income'. ou disaAree — please explain. SS-1.3.1: Accord' • to Miami Dade WASA actual measured consumption of City • iami residents is 157 gallons per capita per day. Why is t : LOS standard for sewage transmission lines only100 • : ons per capita per day? There is more water input for irrigation, pool, and miscellaneous activities requiring higher water levels then sewer output levels. SS-1.3.4: This policy should not • - changed. Without City permits — we will not be able to mon , these impacts. If you do not agree — please state how you wi -cquire this important knowled e. The City does not issue permits, WASA does. The City will monitor the permitting outside of the City boundaries as described in the policy. 56 ' 57 SS-2: Reasonable protection is not defined — w ,t would any City [illeglblej. think is reasonable? _ The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. _..., SS-2.1.1: Please define periodically, i.e. "every 3 to 5 y- - s" or whatever you believe is a reasonable period of time. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 58 59 SS-2.2.2: Last line — Please put in a number to measure what they are doing now and what is the goal. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. SS-2: Line [illegible] — please define "reasonably protect". What is the City's standard for reasonable protection in this oal? The '05 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 60 61 62 63 SS-2.1.1: Line 3 — periodically has no meaning — please put time frame to fit with CIP budgeting and budget protections. This was a criticism of the EAR by DCA — which was supposed to be remedied by the CIP and CIP budV. SS-2.1.3: Line one "concurrency management system" — please provide a copy of the concurrency management ystem for review. The requested • ification has been made in SS-2.1.1. The concurrency management - stem is laid out in Policy CI-1.2.2 and the associated policies. SS-2.2.1: Systems are deemed to be the only feasible < solution. What standard and methodology will be used to make the determination? Are positive drainage systems contemplated in the CIP bud•et and budget projections? The 2005 EAR does not require any modi 1 -tions to this policy. SS-2.2.2: Line 2 "should be encouraged" does not constitute a rational policy. Please amend this by deleting should be encouraged and change to "will" plus time frame. Please < insert current frequency of cleaning and what the future frequency we wish to attain. There should also be an ordinance to fine business and home owners who sweep their The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this • , icy. Page 7 SUBSTITUTED sidewalk debris into the storm drains. SS-2.2.6: Please explain the reason you do not require quality trol structures in commercial parking areas. Parking lots and • rages produce enormous amounts of water pollutants andsho• • require these structures. 65SS-2.4.1: .t is the current impact fee charged for storm water drainage . 'd what percentage of the system is currently financed by the impt fee? What percentage of the construction, reconstru .n improvement, and extension of the storm water utility syste will the City deem to be fair and equitable in the future and wha tandard will be used to compute this? Please insert the o ance reference that establishes this criteria into this MNC cypolicy section. 66 SS-2.5.1: Please reference land developmt ordinance / regulation that enforces the standard. Please • ovide this ordinance / regulation to me. SS-2.6.2: Line 2 NPDES — please provide this permit Paragraph 3 — please explain what you mean by this paragraph 68 AR-1.1.1: Last line — definition and standard for "cost efficient" 69 AR 1 2 Line 3 please define and_give standard for adequate 70 Page 40 — Potable Water — MNCP [sic] calls for water lines with 200 gallon per person per day capacity, but sanitary sewer capacity of 100 gallons per person per day — please rectify this inconsistency or explain why 150-200 gallons in only requires 100 gallon capacity out 71 ' PW-1.2.1: Line 1 — please provide reference for Concurrency Management System ordinance and provide same to PAB for review. 72 SW-1.1.1: LOS standard — how was this arrived at and how does this compare with cities of similar size? 73 SW-1.3.3: Please put a measurable frequency — what is done now and what should be expected in the future. This impacts water quality. 74 SW-1.4.1: Please put time frame such as "within one year will evaluate, etc...." 75 TR-1.1.1: Please provide a list of these major transportation _J Major intersections are typically the intersections of the east -west and north - The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 1 The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. 005 EAR The 20 There is , e requiring highe does not require any modifications to this policy. EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. water input for irrigation, pool, and miscellaneous activities ater levels then sewer output levels. The City has no "Concu -ncy Management"ordinance. The authority underlying its concurrency m- agement system is contained in its Comprehensive Plan and land • : elopment regulations. The City is incorporating additional concurrency ma :.ement language through its school concurrency amendments, recently adopted • the City. The requested modification has been made in P.• SW-1.1.1. Currently the City conducts street sweeping seven da a week. The City is broken down into zones. Each zone is swept between 2 to times per week, primarily at night. An additional frequency is to achieve app •ximately 100 erson hours per week. Regular monitoring is conducted. Language could be incorporated to review on a regular basis. Page 8 SUBSTITUTED ubl corridors with a legible map where the streets and cross treets can be read. The existing FLUM shows a major idor running E& W (and in some areas N & S) every five Allowing for buffer transactions as described in the ction — these SF neighborhoods will [illegible] to ou respond to this comment? c block- Allo land use exist. How Line 10 "major inter showing these major in ions" — please insert a legible map ections. Second to last line — Per Perso rip Methodology — this method of measuring traffic impact used in no other city of our size in the U.S. This method of m-- urement should be done away with as no development that h- done a traffic study has ever been shown to impact the curr- ' traffic — yet most major roadways are impassable for more th- ' 4 hours each day. The City has often promised they would use another metho and to respond to the EAR concerns at public meetings this method should be replaced now. Please ask the consultants to respond with alternate methods used elsewhere for review by the PAB. o ultan' .fC'�r F pi n south section -line and half section -line roadways. Major transportation corridors are also typically those same section -line and half section -line roadways. The City currently maintains a functional classification map to categorize the local and regional roadway network, identifying State, County, and local jurisdiction of roadways within the City of Miami, and to show classification as an arterial, collector, or local street. We are currently working with the City to update a map depicting the transportation corridors. Maps TR-1 and TR-2 were prepared by the City during the EAR process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to identify the number of travel lanes and functional classification for all highways, major roadways and local streets in the City of Miami. The City of Miami originated the person -trip methodology for the measurement of local level of service on a transportation facility to address the multi modal transportation infrastructure that characterizes the City of Miami. The methodology was designed to address existing demand and capacity to move people on the transportation system- primarily using the roadway network and the transit system, while other modes such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities were also included to a lesser degree. The methodology was designed to aluate each transportation mode alone, or in combination with others, as ap• able to the particular transportation facility. The Miami Comprehensive Neighb• hood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) establishes under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation orridors, the capacity of all transportation modes would be used in the measb -ment of future, peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Metho• •logy for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into th ransportation Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on uary 24, 1991 (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was separately published a report entitled "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth -nagement in Miami', September 1990. Multi -modal level of service standards hich recognize transit service as a function of the capacity of the transporta • system) are adopted in many counties throughout the State of Florida (i.e. ami-Dade, Broward and Polk Counties to name a few), however no other cou k or city in Florida has a premium transit system similar to the combined effect • Tri-rail, Metro -rail and Metro -mover, which makes the use of the person -trip = hodology a viable concurrency management tool for the City of Miami. Please note that in addition to the Person -Trip Methodology, the Cit •f Miami analyzed the vehicular only traffic conditions for the arterial and co ctor roadway network (inclusive of the section -line and half section -line roadwa s) as •art of the EAR Process durin• the •reparation of the Transportation Page 9 SUBSTITUTED 76 TR-1.1. Who walks '/ mile in July and August? The elderly and young cannot without exposing themselves to serious health h ards. Transit must be'/< mile or Tess to be accessible. 77 TR-1.1.2.2: Who walks elderly and very young can serious health hazards. Trans' accessible. ile in July and August? The without exposing themselves to ust be % mile or less to be 78 TR-1.1.2.3: Who walks % mile in July and Aug b t? The elderly and very young cannot without exposing th - selves to serious health hazards. Transit must be % mile or les o be accessible. 79 TR-1.1.4: Line 10 — incentives for alternative transportation modes. Question (1) What are these? (2) If bicycles are used as an alternative — where are the provisions planning and funding for bike lands in downtown? 80 TR-1.1.8: New garages both City owned and [illegible] be required to be built with storm water retention structures for run-off to protect the potable water supply from the bay and keep pollutants out of the rivers. 81 TR-1.1.15: Line 4 — what method / standard will be used to define "appropriate"? Who will make this determination? 82 TR-1.4.1 and TR-1.4.2: [These policies] are inconsistent Element Data and Analysis (November 2004). As part of the development review process, the City continues to require applicants to provide vehicular only traffic analyses for portions of the City where transit service is not provided. Policy TR-1.1.2.1 refers to the adopted level of service standard on roadways where no transit service exists, so this policy does not reflect the PAB- member's written concern. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.2 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 120% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within % mile of a transit route which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. _ _ The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.3 is also consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami - Dade County pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 150% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within '/2 mile of mmuter Rail or Express Bus transit service which operates with a minimum of . minute headwa s. Alterna ' - transportation modes are mobility choices for all modes other than the single • cupant vehicle. Policy TR-1.4.3 addresses the development of a streetscape de n program by the City to guide the placement of landscaping, lighting, sidewalks . nd bicycle paths along City Streets in coordination with major repairs and st =-t renovations. Map TR-6 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process -s part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to • - •ict existing bicycle facilities citywide. The City is currently engaged in a Bi cle Facilities Study to enhance bicycle connectivity. ...................................................... This comment is noted. The City is authorized to manage the downtown par • supply pursuant to Section 14-182 (b), (c), (d) and (elof the City_Code._ These policies are not inconsistent. TR-1.4.1 addresses th- •revention of impacts to city residential streets as the indirect result of Cou or State roadway improvement projects. TR-1.4.2 reflects the general state licy to protect the interregional and interstate functions of the FIRS roadway s b encouraging local traffic to use alternatives to this system consisting of 1-9 Page 10 SUBSTITUTED 83 I TR- .5: Please include in line 6 after the word "street", and local re •ents and Homeowner Associations. 84 TR-1.5: Aft- he word "service" in line 8, add "and will provide local circulator ice to feed Miami -Dade County transit stops." 85 TR-1.5.1: After modes line 4, add "an • ill provide circulator service in areas where the population is t - sit disadvantaged and will encourage and provide [illegible] mo for start-up private jitney services in all areas of the City to e ourage the use of mass transit and reduce dependence on indiv . al automobile use especially in the downtown core and alo existing densely populated corridors." 86 TR-1.5.2: Line 5 on page 52 — after protecting adjacent neighborhoods from incompatible development add in height, _ density, intensity, use, and scale. 87 TR-1.5.7: Line 6 — Southeast Bayshore Drive to Metromover — since SE Bayshore Drive is already connected through bus service and this is a stable residential area. This upgrade of service will encourage increased density and will [illegible] the surround stable neighborhoods in Coconut Grove. Land use regulations in this area should not be changed to increased densities. Please delete Bayshore Dr. Funds for planning and increased mass transit are scarce and should be used in areas where the residents are transit disadvantaged. This policy also supports increased residential densities in the area of Mercy Hospital and the Catholic High School next door. I am sure the Catholic church will be happy to sell their properties as soon as the density is increased. 88 TR-1.5.8.G.: These densities will obliterate Silver Bluff, Golden Pines, and parts of North and Central Coconut Grove to name a few neighborhoods. What, if any, protections are you offering these property owners? How will this affect their quality of life? I-395/SR 836, I-195/SR 112, and SR 826 within or adjacent to the City of Miami. Use of other state roadways and county roadways would be the alternatives to the FIHS system. The requested modification has been made in Policy TR-1.4.5. The Objective as proposed gives the City and the County the flexibility to determine the appropriate transit mode needed to service a particular transit demand, and the City has the ability to "support" the County in the provision of transit service through direct participation or planning as they are currently doing with various projects throughout the City (ie. in the development of local circulator service for the Health District and in the development and design of the Miami Streetcar). The policy has been modified to add a portion of the requested changes, while maintaining the flexibility to respond to improved connections between transit modes without dictating the specific type of mode. Policy TR-1.5.9A addresses private jitney transit services. he requested modification has been made in Policy TR-1.5.2. Based up Southeast Ba area of Downtow and does not refer to the requested modificat document dated 3-24-08, th a further review of the PAB member's comment, the reference to hore Drive to Metromover refers to connectivity in the Brickell iami, between Southeast Bayshore Drive and Metromover, oconut Grove from Bayshore Drive to Metrorail. While was made in Policy TR-1.5.7 in the MCNP hange should in fact not be made. TR-1.5.8.G identifies residential density and employment s dards that are intended to promote pedestrianism and transit usage through the ► -sign review of projects located at and around rapid transit stations. These sta -rds are not meant to conflict with other underlying land use policies such - . the proposed modifications to LU-1.1.11 or TR-1.1.1 where the protection of sin Page 11 SUBSTITUTED How many square feet per employee are you [illegible]? How oes a City [illegible] figure out how big each office building wi •e? 89 TR-1. 1: Line 2 — delete seek (another qualifying word with no standa 90 TR-1.5.12: W hould the taxpayers money be used to pay for very expensive .nsultants to develop weekday peak hour transit ridership data • -nsure that a baseline can be established to support the ity's per person trip methodology when we should be counting -hicles per trip as is done everywhere else. Please comme 91 1 TR-1.7.1: This policy has not been a it be in the future? 92 TR-1.8.2: Line 3 — Why 5 years? Could it be - onger period of time? 93 1 PA-1.1.2: Line 2 - By changing the language from ensur- o encourage the City is once again failing to commit to economic improvement for the Port. The Port competes w/other ports — especially in Ft. Lauderdale and failure to ensure an adequate amount of commercial and industrial land puts the City at an economicdisadvantage. 94 PA-1.1.3, PA-1.1.4, and PA-1.1.5: Removal of these policies will detract from the economic viability of the Port. Please have the economic consultant respond. 95 1 PA-3.1.1: residential uses are incompatible with industrial po uses and will destroy the economic viability of marine port uses. Please have the economic consultant respond. 96 PA-3.3.1: Please delete new language as this weakens the authority of the Miami River Commission which has been constituted by the State of Florida to protect the river and its marine industry. 97 ` Page 61: Parks Recreation Open Space Please add green space to title. red to in the past. Will 98 1 Goal PR-1: Add green space to objective after open space 99 PR-1.1.3: Please put this olic back into the MNCP sic 100 PR-1.1.6: Why has this policy been removed? 101 Objective PR-1.1.1: [sic] Why will this objective require 7 years to be met? family residential is established as a priority. The requested modification has been made in Policy TR-1.5.11. This policy has been misunderstood by the PAB member. Miami -Dade Transit collects and maintains the ridership data, and the policy modifications have been drafted to ensure that the City coordinates with MDT to obtain this information so that it can best be used by the City to quantify existing ridership using the transit system during peak travel hours (ie. morning and evening rush hours). This comment has been noted. The five year time frame corresponds to other planning horizons in the region such as the update to the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan which occurs every five years. This is a legal issue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. This is a lega " sue and within the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. This is a legal issue and "thin the purview of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. 1 This is a legal issue and within the p i iew of the City Attorney, not the MCNP. In planning practice, "green space" is not a separa - -ntity from parks, recreation and open space but included within those c- -•ories. In planning practice, "green space" is not a separate entity m parks, recreation and open space but included within those categorie Addressed in PR-1.5 and PR-1.5.1 Addressed in PR-3.3. and PR-3.3.2 Assuming that Objective PR-1.1 is the subject of the questions (not Policy 1.1.1) — acquisition of land and establishment of parks in underserved areas o Page 12 1 SUBSTITUTED 102 PR-1. Why were the words "in principle" not deleted from the Parks -ster Plan when the City Commission agreed to and voted to • -te these words when they unanimously voted for the Parks Mas = Plan? Please correct this oversight now. 103 PR-1.1.2: Please distr te copies of these maps — Please have legible copies 104 PR-1.1.4: I strongly object to green and ope •ace being reduced by up to a total of 25% when we have s• ew acres per person available in the City. This would reduce - LOS of 1.13 acres per person 1000 residents to 0.85 acres per ' 100 residents of open recreation and green space. 105 PR-2.1.1: Cultural facilities bring a net Toss of green and open space and this policy does not limit their footprint by a percentage number which might be more than an acceptable number to the residents. 106 l PR-2.1.1: Line 6 and 7 - Please change to public referendum as public procedures may not be even include a vote by the an urban area takes coordination, the ability to take advantage of market and other opportunities, and, after land is acquired, time to design and establish the parks. This is not a comprehensive plan issue. The maps are in Chapter 5 of the Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan and also in a separate, large -format appendix prepared for the final plan document. The PAB received a draft version of the parks master plan which contained these maps and voted to approve it. The final plan has been available online and continues to be online at www.miamiparksplan.org, which can be accessed through the cif web site as well. All park systems have some parks that include buildings to support use of the parks and a number of highly -regarded urban park systems include museums and other cultural assets, from San Diego to New York. For the purposes of comprehensive planning, LOS includes all park acreage, including buildings and parking lots, as well as open/green space. This policy does not refer to a 25% lot coverage rule. That reference is from the revisions to the MCNP s- tion on interpretation of the future land use map. A brief discussion of the ratio = e for those revisions is provided at Comment 54 above. The parks m= ter plan recommends an LOS measure based on access and funding rather t' : on acreage, an approach that is more appropriate for urban park systems and i . easingly used by park planners, but is not easily incorporated in the tra• '•nal concurrency systems arising from the suburban development model that un• -rlies the Florida concurrency system. This policy is in the MCNP to provide for a ort period (until January 2009) to devise a way to use the new access- and f • ing-based LOS as a concurrency measure that will provide criteria and - • echanism for private sector developers to show when the LOS requir- •• ent for parks has been met.. As noted earlier, all park systems include so = buildings and impervious surfaces on parks. This policy focuses on elimin. ' g the use of park land for municipal or other purposes that are not related to re -ation or culture. It establishes the principle that the stock of public park Ian • , ill not be diminished by non -park uses and that the amount of building will be limi :•. As a policy matter, specific limitations are not suitable in this section and sh• Id be resolved in zoning or other ordinances (e.g., conservation land sho have greater use limitations than other types of park land). The procedures referenced in this policy, as described in the parks master plan, provide for an alternatives evaluation process for any proposed Page 13 SUBSTITUTED City Commission 107 PR-2.2.3: ' ase add and until sundown in the summer at least 2 weekd- evenings per week so working parents can bring their children . swim. 108 I PR-3.2.4: Please expl .? How will this be enforced? 109 PR-3.2.9: Please provide the Master Plan for rev : With _appropriate legible maps. __ 110 PR-3.2.10: Please add including access to private parkin garage at fees that are comparable to those established by the Miami Parking Authority throughout the City. 111 I PR-3.2.11: Line 4 — change those developments that require to all development and redevelopment will require. 112 I PR-3.2.11: Line 6 — after Policy CM 2.1.8 add before a building permit will be issued. 113 PR-4.1.2: Line 3 Add and scientific polling surveys every 5 years (since the EAR cycle is 7 years by FL statute) 114 PR-5.1.3: Line 4 after publicly available add and a process for public comments by the residents of the City. 115 I PR-5.1: After facilities add and City residents and City residents [sic' neighborhood parks 116 PR-5.2.2: Line 3 Change five to three. If a program is not working after 3 years, it should be eliminated. g p public space. Assuming this is for PR use participant evaluation su to evaluate program success, every three years and scientific identJy needed and desired Addressed in PR-5.2.1 where described with the role of ad occur in a public forum with public comment. Assuming that the comment is on PR-5.1.4: This policy that, among other things, "groups that sponsor programs t contribute appropriately (with funds or otherwise) for their are paid for by the city for public use. For example, privately leakues use fields that the city maintains. Changes made. Policy PR-5.2.2: The City will survey City residents to m references, needs and satisfaction with the •ark s stem on a re•ular basis, advising conversion of public park land; public hearings by the PAB, the proposed new Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and the City Commission; a supermajority vote of the Commission; and replacement of park land taken for other uses by land of similar conservation, park or recreation value. This is a more rigorous process than public referendum. This level of detail is not suitable for a comprehensive plan policy statement. This is currently enforced on the downtown stretch of the Miami River by the public setback requirement that is part of the permitting process and would similarly be enforced through zoning and permitting requirements for future development of non -water dependent uses. Enforcement of public access after construction has to be through periodic monitoring of the space to see that it has not been privatized, which can be promoted by requiring signage to notify users that these are public spaces. { As noted earlier, the PAB received the draft plan and the final plan is available at www.miamiparksplan.org. This should be addressed through agreements with the developer/parking operator. Th language comes from the previous plan and was not recommended for chang nder the EAR process. The only new language is the last sentence about mo rin for continued ublic access. The point oft' sentence is that monitoring should occur after permitting and construction so th rivate uses and barriers do not begin to creep into the Page 14 • 1 • ro• .: Changes made. Policy PR-4.1.1: The City will ys at the completion of recreational programs an online public opinion surveys at least once sury s at least once every seven years to a new Parks d Recreation Advisory Board is on capital pl- and designs, which would rams. about making sure use City facilities" use facilities that el spon red sports • .• tor SUBSTITUTED 117 PR-5.2. Line 1 after develop add implement. We have had many plan •eveloped which are settling gathering dust all over this City. ns w/no implementation in a timely fashion need expensive re ions or are re -done. 118 PR-5.2.4: Line 3 0 de - 'ideally'. 119 PR-6.1.2: Please provide inia Key Master Plan for review 120 PR-6.1.4: Please define "Cafe Dis •ct" and this currently in 1100? Define "marine service center'. 121 I PR-6.2.1: Line 2 after materials add sha• rees 4" dia [illegible]. 122 Page 75: Purpose of this map? 123 Goal CM: After of natural resources add especially water quality 124 CM-1.1: After Little River add the stormwater outfall of Biscayne Bay 125 CM-1.1.2: Sentence # 2 on line 3. Who determines the need for positive drainage system — What authority and by what criteria? What is budgeted for this now? minimum through evaluations of all recreational programs by program participants to evaluate program success; online public opinion surveys at least once every three years; and scientific surveys every seven years (starting from the Parks Master Plan survey of 2006). This comment has been noted, and will be addressed in the next draft. The requested modification has been made in Policy PR-5.2.4. The Virginia Key Master Plan is available online at http://www.edsaplan.comNirginia Key/home.html City to respond. Changes made. Specific dbh size is not suitable for a policy document. Policy PR-6.2.1: The City will continue to encourage development of urban street promenade linkages with widened sidewalks, high quality materials, shade trees, landsca in , li htin , ra hits, and furnishings The map has a red line through it — it is deleted in the amended version. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element ursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were pr- •itated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amen. 4 ents. The City o pursuant to precipitated by th Amendments. 126 CM-1.1.3: Line 2 Please describe the "committee" Does this committee have a name — who are the members? Infrastructure improvements funding is not adequately addressed. The City is responsible for all storm water sewers — where is this addressed in the CIP budget? This is not a County function. 127 CM-1.3: Please define 1. blighted, 2. declining, 3. threatened. What are the standards used for each? 128 CM-2.1.1: Line 4 after access should be added with ba walks iami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element ida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were AR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based The City of Miami has m pursuant to Florida Statute precipitated by the EAR and are Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. Non precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outs! Amendments. e changes to the Coastal Management Element .3178. None of these amendments were erefore outside the scope of the EAR -based e Coastal Management Element f these amendments were the scope of the EAR -based The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Manage pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendment precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the Amendments. t Element ere based The Cit of Miami has made chan•es to the Coastal Mana•ement Element Page 15 SUBSTITUTED and open space 129 4.1.2: Add including all current and any future FEMA regu - ons 130 CM-4.1.5: Who perform this analysis? And the review? And who will be respsible for enforcement? Please • incorporate ordinance re - ence. 131 CM-4.1.9: What is the current a uation plan and where can • it be found. Please reference the cu -nt plan. NR-1.1.2: Line 4 and 5. Please reference by or• ance or regulation. NR-1.1.6: After net Toss of public access add and NR-1.2.4: line 6 "feasible". Please provide a standard for feasible or delete this modifier. 135 Include a 1-2 year time frame for adopting an Economic Element and a Historical and Cultural Element into the MCNP. 136 Define "neighborhoods" and create a map showing the neighborhoods. This map should go into a Historical and Cultural Element. 137 Please review the Urban Infill designations. pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. The City of Miami has made changes to the Coastal Management Element pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3178. None of these amendments were precipitated by the EAR and are therefore outside the scope of the EAR -based Amendments. This comment has been noted. The requested modification has been made in Policy NR-1.1.6. 1 The 2005 EAR does not require any modifications to this policy. Addr to the Ci Addressed i to the City. 138 Not all corridors are the same. Not every corridor needs high densities. 139 Please review the intensities in residential neighborhoods. 140 Include definitions, standards, and specific time frames. 141 Provide the public with periodic updates of what has been accomplished in Miami. sed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted e additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted Addressed in the additi to the Cif. This comment has been noted. Chapter 9J-5, FAC, identifies the nee. •r establishment of standards for densities or intensities of use for each futu - land use category. The City's interpretation is to maintain densities measure or residential land uses and intensity measures for non residential land uses. -asures are also identified in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives to the City under Goal LU-5. This comment has been noted. Policies submitted 142 The changes to the Major Institutional, Public Facilities, '; It unclear how the changes to the Major Institutional, Public Facilities, Page 16 proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted; SUBSTITUTED 1 143 Objective 1.1: This policy assum urban center. How can the City effe person trip methodology is double dippi additionally ramping up the vic ration. VIC = ` 1.4IC`I.6 An additional policy should be in place to evaluate efficacy of the person trip methodology. The City had said tha - study would be done regarding the Vehicle occupancy rate. ' leson had reported it to be 1.2. Therefore the 1.6for capacity see • arbitrary. 144 Policy: 1.1.1. Question: How will Redevelopment of Corridors be encouraged to be located at major intersection of Commercial Corridors. How will this be achieved? A target date for review of single family status should be inserted. Ten ears? 145 I Policy: 1.1.2 This policy is confusing. The methodology should be expressed more clearly. E+ 100% of person trip methodology where no Mass transit exists. (The person trip should be explained within the document and not just reference the other document) 146 I Policy: 1,1,2,2 [sic]: The policy should read --Where bus transit exists with transit service with minimum 20 minute headways within 114 of the facility shall operate at no greater than 120 %. (No one walks a half a mile to a bus) 147 Policy: 1.1.2.3 States that "Where express bus transit and or Premium transit service on minim 20 minute headways is available parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the facility the facility shall operate at no greater than 150%.". An ex Transportation and Utilities section violate the spirit of the so ailed Grovenor Ordinance that was passed unanimously by th ity Commission and the Planning Board. 2008 Comments from Karen MoCnul r� Ii11N7 rrii Nei hk orhoods k i that the City is an entire The City is currently re-evaluating the vehicle occupancy standards utilized in ely monitor when the the Person -Trip Methodology. Alternative standards were utilized by the City E+ J20 E+ J50 and during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004), and these standards were subsequently updated by FDOT during their review of the City's Person -Trip Methodology and the EAR. The vehicle occupancy standard developed by FDOT reflects a rate of 1.23 persons per vehicle for existing occupancy developed using travel characteristics from the 2000 census data (compared to 1.4 persons per vehicle resulting from surveys conducted by the City in 1989). The practical acity of the private vehicle is still under review by the City. Standards for occupancy are being developed in coordination with FDOT. ying land use on the Future Land Use Plan map identifies those major intersections where non-residential development is -family is protected pursuant to the language proposed under Transportation and Utilities violate the spirit of the Grovenor Ordinance, as the last paragraph in the subject -section clearly establishes a link to the Zoning Ordinance and states that all development shall be subject to the detailed provisions of the applicable land regulations. The types of implementing requirements in the "Grovenor Ordinance" are typically detailed in the Zoning Ordinance. The MCNP provides the City's land_ planning policy framework. The Zoning Ordinance implements the detailed requirements. vehi The un locations permitted. Sin TR-1.1.1. The policy is clear. The unless other provisions apply opted LOS standard is E (at 100% of capacity) suant to TR-1.1.2.2, TR-1.1.2.3 and TR-1.1.3. The level of service standard provided un. - Policy TR-1.1.2.2 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard main = ned by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page II-11 of the Transportation Elemen the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard i 20% of capacity for those roadways located parallel to and within 'A mile of a ansit route which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.3 with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade pursuant to page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade Co press bus that CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 150% of capacity fo Page 17 onsistent ounty ty SUBSTITUTED sits in the same traffic as other vehicles and does not have designated right-of-way is not premium transit. Beside that the mile allowance at E+ 150 should just be around the statio or express bus stops with designated right of way not alb the -ntire line. 148 Policy: 1.1.3.IHS and SIS within the City limits should be identified. What - - the performance measures and strategies for protecting these - ilities? Map should be included LOS MAP for entire City sho also be included. 149 Policy: 1.1.4 This policy states that - City will continue to do studies regarding multimodal transporta •n etc. Performance measures and target date need to be are p ided, such as the following: A sidewalk inventory will be undertaken by June 2009. , urrent sidewalks are at 80% of neighborhoods. The City will imp e 2% per year. Ridership and bus loadings are at 80% of capacity at peak hour Ridership will be increased within the City by 3% annually, through the promotion of TDM strategies and in cooperation with MDT The City will cooperate with MDT to provide an annual status report. those roadways located parallel to and within '/ mile of Commuter Rail or Express Bus transit service which operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. Map TR-3 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict the limited access facilities citywide inclusive of the FIHS and SIS facilities. Map TR-8.1 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to address vehicular level of service. The comment is noted. The City has already prepared or partnered in the following specific neighborhood studies, each with their own set of recommendations and implementation measures. • Coconut Grove Area Traffic Study • Health District (Civic Center) Implementation Plan • Health District Comprehensive Traffic Study • Orange Bowl Traffic and Parking Assessments Flagler Street Marketplace/Flagler Street two-way conversion • Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan • ► -tson Island Traffic Master Plan • Mia fiver Multimodal Corridor Study (prepared for the MPO and the Miami -r Commission with the City of Miami) • Miami River reenway Plan • Miami Design D rict-Little Haiti District Planning Study/Master Plan • Miami Design Distri •esign Guidelines • NE 36th Street Traffic dy prepared for the MPO with involvement from the City of Miami • FEC Corridor Master Plan (incl es the Buena Vista Yard, now Midtown Miami) • 1-395 Project Development & Environm. t (PD&E) Study (more analysis underway) • NW/NE 79th Street Livability Study (complete • -nd PD&E Study (not completed) • Flagler Street PD&E Study • DuPont Plaza Traffic Circulation PD&E Study (more analy underway) • Brickell Avenue PD&E Study (completed) • Overtown (Dover Kohl) Master Plan Page 18 SUBSTITUTED TR 1.1. 9 Need performance measures to ensure that nsportation Control measures are effectively providing tran •ortation alternative to vehicles and that the needs of busines -nd residents are not being negatively effected. 151 1 TR 1.1.11: in place by the report shows how ere is the current parking study? This should be e of the EAR amendments. This baseline ctive TDM policies have been �t! r .t t Section 14-182 (d) of the City Code already includes a monitoring and compliance procedure and obligation for the Transportation Control Measures Plan. The comment is noted. 152 TR 1.1.12: Peak hour - - p loading should be part of this analysis 153 1 TR 1.1.13 When should new • elopment throughout the City be subject to transportation mitiga n fees? Is this proportionate share which only applie o the Downtown DRI or is this a new impact fee? If the whole a : - is a TCEA aren't the developers exempt from mitigation fees? hat about instituting a transit fee on high density transit cor 'ors? The comment is noted. 154 TR: 1.1.19 As part of the multimodal initiative the City shoul do a sidewalk, bike path and connectivity analysis to see where there are existing deficiencies and what the existing connectivity to transit within the buffer parameters may be and how barriers or degraded facilities can be removed or improved. Performance measure should be applied with reporting timeframes. Ex. The City shall conduct a connectivity analysis to gauge the existence of sidewalks and roads that connect with the designated buffer for public transportation. This study will be done by _ and updated biannual. 1551 TR-I.I.20 Are PTP funds and traffic impact mitigation fees only to be provided for the RAC. What about other high density areas that may develop in and along transit Corridors? Will these also be eligible for impact and PTP funds? All development located within the City of Miami is subject to the payment of transportation impact fees to Miami -Dade County. Development located within the Downtown Miami DRI and the SEOPW DRI are also subject to the payment of Transportation Mitigation Fees as outlined in Article 13 of the City Code and as mandated by each of the two DRI approvals. Developments located within the TCEA are not exempt from the payment of fees. In fact, the City of Miami assesses impact fees for all effected properties pursuant to Section 13-6 of the City Code. Map TR-6 and Map TR-7 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as art of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to de'ct existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities citywide. Existing bicycle level of se e and existing pedestrian level of service also was calculated using the FDOT me odology from the 2002 Quality/LOS Handbook, and was presented in Map TR-• nd Map TR-10. The City is currently engaged in a Bicycle Facilities Study t• nhance bicycle connectivity. PTP funds are not only providefor the RAC, however Policy TR-1.1.20 was specifically drafted to support the = ena Vista Yards RAC and to specifically address the resources to support the in -structure to serve the RAC. 156 ' Objective TR-I.2: Identify transportation development Corridors in Conjunction with MD County to determine where high density growth is anticipated and to determine whether additional right of way requirements should be instituted for provision of multimodal infrastructure such as designated bus lanes, additional sidewalk widths 12', bike or service lanes. 157 1 Objective TR. 1.4: Parking analysis should also be included. 1581 Policy TR 1.5.3 What about a park and ride facility with Structured Parking. Need to provide info how the effectiveness These issues are addressed under TR-1.2.1, -1.2.2, TR-1.7.1 and TR-1.7.2. Parking is addressed under TR-1.1.8, TR-1.1.9, TR-1.1.10, TR-1.1.1 TR- 1.1.15 and TR1.1.16. Structured parking serving Metro -rail already exists in the Health District, an tanned for the Civic Center area. Stakeholders are presently working with the Page 19 SUBSTITUTED of these strategies will be evaluated. 159 TRI. 5. 6 ase reevaluate the "premium transit" definition. 160 Policy TR-1.5. 7 All pb •lic transportation systems are addressed but the most • emium" is omitted, which is the FEC corridor line which shou be on top of the city's list. This line will provide premium service rom Palm Beach County to Downtown Miami. 161 TR-1.5.8 F. Car servicing businesses sh Id be added such as carwashes and auto repair. 162 Policy TR-1.5.12: Need performance measure and • -te when baseline report should be achieved. That information s Auld already be available. 163 Policy TR-1.5.13 The City needs to coordinate with the County regarding the LU of the downtown. All transportation infrastructure has been centralized there because it was the business hub. LU's and City zoning for mixed use should encourage and promote business development and construction in the downtown area. 164 Summary of recommendations: 1. Clarification of the adopted LOS standards 2. Enforcement of Transportation Demand Management strategies. And ensure that tenant board is responsible after developer no longer manages the facility. 3. Coordination with MDT on the expansion and improvement of headways of the bus transit system 4. Coordination with MDT to improve connections between transit modes 5. Provision of performance measures for achieving mobility in the TCEA. 6. Provide true multimodal options by providing support and investment in pedestrian and bike path amenities. 6. Evaluate long range right -of -way needs for the provision of transit in high density corridors 7. Coordination with FOOT to ensure that Transportation improvement minimize the intrusion of commuter traffic on jy City of Miami and the MPO to evaluate areawide transportation issues, strategies to maximize transit ridership, strategies to improve pedestrian and transit corridors, local circulator transit service, Miami Streetcar connections, streetscape improvements and re Tonal trans ortation access. Premium transit is the terminology used by the MPO in the adopted Miami - Dade County Year 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan to address a wide range_of urban commuter rail, BRT or fight rail transit systems. Policy TR-1.5.7 has been modified to include the FEC Corridor connection to Downtown. This comment is noted, however one perspective on car servicing businesses and auto repair is that if these uses are located within %4 mile of a rapid transit station, then patrons can drop off their cars for repair, and take transit to work. No performance measure needed. The City will coordinate with MDT immediately to obtain the weekday peak hour transit ridership data. This comment is noted. Many provisions in the MCNP already promote b b iness development and construction in the downtown area, especially Obje ve 3.2 addressing the Urban Central Business District (UCBD) Designa'•n. See also the land use density and intensity incentives provided for the CBD : d properties located within the UCBD. 1. Clarification of a• . •ted LOS standards are addressed in TR-1.1.2, TR-1.1.3, CI-1.2.2 and CI-1.2.3. 2. Enforcement of TDM str -gies are addressed in TR-1.1.5 and TR-1.1.9. 3. Coordination with MDT is a• . essed in TR-1.1.4 and TR-1.1.6. 4. Coordination with MDT is addre ed in TR-1.5.1, TR-1.5.12 and TR-1.5.13. 5. Achieving improved mobility in th- CEA is addressed in TR-1.5.8 and in new policy LU-1.1.13. 6. Support and investment in pedestrian an• , cycle amenities is addressed in TR-1.4.3 and TR-1.5.8. 6. Transit right-of-way needs are addressed in TR-1. 7. Coordination with FDOT is addressed in TR-1.4.1. Page 20 SUBSTITUTED residential streets 165 C Miami. two Ordinance office, preparing preservation 166 LU-1 requirements encompassing neighborhoods. sure Coral Gate. March 4g 20 8 �t tme t fr+a t rac I Gate is the first Planned Unit Development in the City of • ur homes were built between 1948 and 1950. All but are s standing. One was lost to fire; one was lost to 9 transitional use zoning and is now used as an but it is sti oned R-I. Because this EAR is also the way fo iami 2J, we wish to ensure the of Coral Ga as it stands. 1.3 (4) degradation.. tr- ition and buffering that do not diminis he amount of area the adjacent/abuttin • ngle family Wording in red be adde• We would like to be that we don't automatically upzone an • roperties in 167 The same addition in LU-1.6.9; HO-1.1.5; HO-1.1 1.1.1. 168 i LU-1.1.11 - Refers to Single Family Residential on the MC Future Land Use Map but how does this change when we have T3 zoning? Same question in the "Interpretation of the future Land Use Plan Map" Only the present zoning classifications are referred to. 169 LU-1.1.2.3 "redevelopment and revitalization.... specific neighborhood and area plans." How is "Neighborhood" defined? (There is no glossary of terms.) and LU-I.3.1 - "in accordance with neighborhood design" What's a neighborhood? Because the five blocks of Coral Gate from 32 Ave. to 37 Ave. along S.W. 2! ST. are very different from the 3 to 4 blocks of S.W. 21 St. from S.W. 27 Ave to S.W. 30 Ave. 170 E LU-1.3 - "encourage the development of well -designed, mixed use neighborhoods... " How does the City intend to protect established neighborhoods and at the same time accomplish development of well -designed, mixed use neighborhoods? Do they not violate their own intent by professing to do both without including areas that are excepted from the imposition of mixed -used neighborhood rules. 171 LU-1.6.5 States that the City will continue to use "Special Districts? Should not the NCO be mentioned here also? and TR- a'rflr This comment has been noted. The requested modification has been made in Policy LU-1.1.3 The requested modification has been made in Policy LU-1.6.9, Policy HO- 1.1.5, and Policy HO-1.1.17 This is a Zoning amendment request, and outside of the MCNP EAR -based amendments. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, to the City. Addressed in the new policy LU-1.1. ectives and Policies submitted Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies subm to the City. Page 21 SUBSTITUTED HO-1.1.8 - "City will protect and enhance existing viable ighborhoods." Wh would be an enhancement? If the neighborhood is viable. • •es it need to be enhanced? larchi 19,, 173 Not Deleting C• ' • Plan "Policy PR-I.5.8: Expand the existing Jose Marti Park to • ovide additional recreational opportunities for the area's residents, orkers, and visitors." 174 Concurring with City Com sioner Sanchez' recommendation Water borne transportation has been addressed in Policy TR-1.5.9B. made during a public hearing=•arding the EAR recommended amendments to the omp Plan, to insert City support for citywide Water Taxi / Wate : us services within the Transportation element of the Comp Plan. 175 ` Not deleting PR 1.4.1 and PR 1.4.2 regarding impact fees for parks and insert the EAR based a for the sections. 176 As directed by the PAB and City Commission when considering the EAR in December 2004, inserting "Fisherman's Wharf in PR 6.1.3 to become consistent with PR 6.1.4. A tc Ousel ddressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted the City. Marine, This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-2.2 and its related policies, and has been broadened to include all existing parks and recreational facilities. velopment ndment ,2008 MNU Ova 177 i 1. The time -frame scheduled by the City for public input is too short. We have been requesting your Board (the designated Agency) and the City Administration to establish a Project to work on these Amendments for over two years. This comment has been addressed in Objective PR-1.5 and its related policies. This requested modification has been made in Policy PR-6.1.3. R=bsetl amendment The very rst task undertaken by the City in preparing for the EAR Amendments as to request citizen participation through an Advisory Committee mad- up of representatives appointed by each District City Commissioner so th, feedback on the amendment language (and on public outreach) could be facile .. ed during the EAR amendment process. The very first task undertaken by the ►•nsultant Team preparing the EAR Amendments was the analysis of MNU com -nts submitted to the City dated October 6, 2005 (as part of the EAR proces and the drafting of responses to these comments to indicate which of these co ents would be incorporated into the amendments to the goals, objectives a • policies of the MCNP. This information was submitted to the Advisory mittee (which included key MNU representatives) on December 21, 2007. • January 18, 2008, a first draft of the EAR Amendments was submitted to the A. sory Committee, with a follow-up draft submitted on January 28, 2008 to incorpor the GOP's for the Park and Recreation Element. The Advisory Committee met h City Staff and the Consultant Team to discuss issues of concern, process an• eframe on November 1, 2007, January 8, 2008 and February 1, 2008. At the =•ruary 1, 2008 meeting, committee members from the Upper East Side and from iami River Commission provided specific comments to the draft GOP's, - 'd requested that modifications be made to address their concerns. The MNU Page 22 SUBSTITUTED 1781 2. Notwithstanding the commitment of the City in 2005 tha EAR -based Amendments would not be restricted to issues raised in the EAR, the City is now maintaining that those are the only Amendments they will consider at this time. 179 3. Information requested from the City is not being provided. 180 4. We are generally pleased with the work on the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element, although it needs some more work and Measurable Objectives need to be added. 181 > 5. Land Use Element. We have recommended definition of two types of neighborhoods, essentially "Suburban Neighborhoods" and "Urban Neighborhoods", in order to properly differentiate protections for Suburban Neighborhoods from unnecessary density, mixed uses, etc. appropriate for Urban Neighborhoods. The consultants agreed at a Committee Meeting to work on this, but notwithstandin tilta representative generally discussed issues related to population projections, density and single-family residential, but did not offer specific language modifications to the drafted GOP's. The Consultant Team requested comments from MNU on the drafted GOP's ASAP since a new draft of the EAR Amendments would be provided at the conclusion of the Public Outreach program in order to incorporate comments received from the public. The City Staff and Consultant team had already simultaneously begun a public outreach program consisting of 10 public workshops held on Jan. 29, 30, 31, Feb. 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, at which the MNU representative attended at least four of these workshops. Requests for feedback on the drafted GOP's from MNU went unanswered. None were provided during the March 5, 2008 public workshop held with the Planning Advisory Board. Feedback was finally received 6.5 weeks after the February 1, 2008 Advisory Committee meeting, with comments received at the March 19, 2008 workshop held with the Planning Advisory Board, after which the Consultant Team only had 3 days to turn around revised GOP's to incorporate comments received by the PAB and b_y the public Burin the March 19, 2008 workshop. The EAR amendments include numerous changes to GOP's based upon issues raised through the Public Outreach process, and through feedback eived at the PAB workshops which address numerous changes not required by - EAR recommendations. The drafting of new optional comprehensive plan el- bents cannot be accomplished within the timeframe established to complete t EAR amendments. The City has committed to undertaking additional com• -hensive plan modifications after the EAR amendments are adopted, through standard twice per year opportunity afforded by the City to amend their com. re -nsive Ian. Additional informational r-. received by the City on Febr 16 began responding to the infor - - information was provided to MNU r • below the complete responses to informa This comment has been noted. ests related to land use and transportation were 2008. The Consultant team immediately tion requested. An initial submittal of resentatives on March 4, 2008. See n requested. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives to the City. Page 23 d Policies submitted SUBSTITUTED 182 follow-up, nothing has been done. Many additional changes have to be made in various elements to distinguish Policies for urban Neighborhoods from Policies appropriate for Urban rhoods. 6. The Trsportation Element needs a significant amount of work. Please -e our DRAFT "MCNP Transportation Element Issues" and "Exc- •ts from .... Case Studies". The latter points out many policies an • evels of measurement which should be included in the Transpo ion Element. 183 ' 7. MNU has been recomme .'ng since 2004 that an optional Economic Element and Historic ' eservation Element, among other option Elements be included i e Amendments. No such Elements are included. MNU is w• ing on a draft Economic Element. 184 8. MNU is continuing to work on the various El- ••ents and will be submitting additional suggestions and requests the Planning Dept. P Trani 185 I. Major Issues A. The City's Future Land Use Map (FLUM) is not in coordination with the CIE, the TIP or the Long Term Transportation Plan. FS 163 and related Rules and Best Practices from DCA (Transportation Concurrency Best Practices Guide - TCBPG) assume that the current, approved FLUM is properly supported by a financially feasible capital improvements plan (5 year or 10 year), and therefore all focus on proposed amendments to the FLUM and the impact of corresponding increased density and intensity. In the case of Miami, we believe that the current FLUM is grossly in excess of the current and planned infrastructure capacities. This is not in line with the "current situation" assumed in the statue, nevertheless, the TCBPG on page 102, in the Appendix: Evaluating the Impacts of Comprehensive Plan Amendments and pp 104-109 "Guidelines for Evaluating Comprehensive Plan Amendments" specify use of "existing and proposed future land use map (FLUM) designations using the maximum density/intensity of the existing and proposed land use classification ...". Our calculations using a County property records database of all lots in the City with their current Use designation could result in a population of 2 million or more (current population approximately 360,000). With Miami 21 This comment has been noted. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. This comment has been noted. 2008.W .Mr►r rrs The standard methodology to evaluate Comprehensive Plan Amendments ich propose a change to the land use designation on the Future Land Use Plan iap (FLUM) does specify a comparison between the maximum allowable use for e underlying (existing) land use designation, compared to the maximum - .wable use under the proposed land use designation. This comparison is d to evaluate the impacts of a proposed land use plan map change on the de nd for parks, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater, transporta and water supply. This approach is followed both by the City of Miami in their r- iew of land use plan map changes, and by Miami - Dade County in their review o oposed land use plan map changes. Page 24 SUBSTITUTED heading toward more mixed use and more built -out square footage, intensity will increase substantially. 186E = Urban Infill Area (UIA) and Transportation Concurrency tion Area (TCEA) Designations claims that the County has declared the whole City TCEA and the City has no choice. Exc 1 I. The is a UlA an 187 ` 2. Miami -Dade County and the MPO say that the City is free to designate, or not, one or more UTA's or TCEA's. 188 i 3. The "TCEA Case Studies" document refers to "activity centers" of "high intensity, mixed -use", similar to the definition in: "FS 163.3 1 80(5)(b)5. An urban service area specifically designated as a transportation concurrency exception area which includes lands appropriate for compact, contiguous urban development, which does not exceed the amount of land needed to accommodate the projected population growth at densities consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan within the 10-year planning period, and which is served or is The Urban Infill Area (UIA) and Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) was established by Miami -Dade County pursuant to Amendment No. 94-2 and includes the UIA and the TCEA for the municipalities of Aventura, Hialeah, Miami, Miami Beach, Miami Gardens, Miami Lakes, Miami Shores, Miami Springs, North Miami Beach, Palmetto Bay, Pinecrest and South Miami. The City of Miami amended the MCNP in the year 1999 pursuant to Ordinance 11864 to designate the City of Miami as an Urban Infill Area consistent with the actions taken by Miami -Dade County to establish the TCEA. The City of Miami then amended the MCNP in the year 2000 pursuant to Ordinance 11961 to exclude (from the UIA) Virginia Key, Watson Island and the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay having a "conservation" land use and zoning classification. In the year 2003, the City of Miami amended the MCNP to respond to the recommendations from the 1995 EAR and reaffirmed the UIA. To respond to the concerns raised during the EAR amendment process, Policy LU-1.1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments, an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency xception Area (TCEA) to determine at a minimum the following: the a • , ropriateness of the areas included in the UIA and/or the TCEA; the benefits and/• disadvantages resulting from the inclusion or exclusion of these areas within th UIA and/or the TCEA; the strategies to support mobility and alternative •des of transportation within those areas included in the UIA and/or the TC • and the strategies to address urban design and network connectivity to impr e mobility within those areas included in the UIA and/or the TCEA. The City of Miami can re-e = uate the designation of lands as an UIA and as a TCEA, and therefore, Policy Lb .1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the « ' amendments as an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate the - eas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrency Excep .gin Area (TCEA). Once again, the City of Miami can re-evalua the designation of lands as an UIA and as a TCEA, and therefore, Policy LU-1.1. ' has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the R amendments as an obligation on behalf of the City to review and evaluate e areas designated Urban Infill Area (UIA) and/or Transportation Concurrenc Exception Area (TCEA). Page 25 SUBSTITUTED planned to be served with public facilities and services as provided by the capital improvements element." (emphasis ded) 189 4. - MCNP must be revised to remove the whole City as a TCEA • • designate appropriate "activity centers" as new TCEA's, co istent with the MPO Long Term Transportation Plan and the L. • • Term Water & Sewer facilities plan. This will require Amen. ' - nts to the Transportation Element to concur with the requir- ••ents of FS 163.3180(5)(d), (e), and (f) as also mentioned in the - nsportation Planning "Efficient Transportation Decision Maki Process" paper of DCA (attached). 190 5. Transportation Concurrency Management Areas should also be designated as per FS 163.3180(7). This concept was The Transportation Concurrency Exception Area was created by the Florida Legislature pursuant to Section 163.3180(5)(a), F.S., where the Legislature recognized that under limited circumstances dealing with transportation - facilities, countervailing planning and public policy goals might come into conflict with the requirement that adequate public facilities and services be available concurrent with the impacts of development. The Legislature determined that often the unintended result of the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities resulted in the discouragement of urban infill development and redevelopment. Such unintended results were found to be in direct conflict with the goals and policies of the state comprehensive plan. Therefore, exceptions from the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities were permitted as provided by Section 163.3180(5)(a), F.S. At the present time, the "whole City" is not included in the TCEA as referenced above. Recognizing the concerns expressed during the EAR amendment process, Policy LU-1.1.13 has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments as an obligation on behalf o e City to review and evaluate the areas designated Urban Infill Area (UTA) and/o ransportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). At the pres-'t time, compliance with Section 163.3180(5)(d),(e) and (f) is l addressed purs nt to Section 163.3180(5)(g). Miami -Dade County, as the recipient of the TC must show compliance with these sections. Miami -Dade County, through the e .blishment of the People's Transportation Plan, the half -percent sales surtax, he Citizens' Independent Transportation Trust (CITT) and the MPO Long R. • •e Transportation Plan (LRTP) have already taken major steps toward mitigatin• ' pacts to the Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) roadways. The LRTP provi• - for an East-West Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative tra -I modes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to SR 836. The LRTP provides for Kendall Link Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative travel mo• -s and will mitigate vehicular impacts to SR 836, SR 821, SR 874 and SR 878. 'e LRTP provides for the FEC Premium Transit Corridor which will promote altern- 've travel modes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to 1-95. The LRTP provides •r the South Link Premium Transit Corridor which will promote alternative travel •odes and will mitigate vehicular impacts to SR 821, SR 874 and SR 878. The City of Miami can evaluate the appropriateness of Transp. ation Concurrency Management Areas as a tool to promote infill development d Page 26 SUBSTITUTED bhp nt supposed to be incorporated in the Transportation Element as the "Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan (MTI)", which arently has never been completed. redevelopment, and can incorporate the Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (as applicable) during the evaluation of the Urban Infill Area and the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area pursuant to Policy LU-1.1.13 which has been submitted to the PAB for their consideration to include with the EAR amendments. 191 6. We do no derstand whether or how FS 163.3 1 80(8) of the City of Miami. 192 7. We do not understand how 163.3 180(9) applies to the City of Miami. Assuming there are eral designated and approved TCEA's there should also be : long-term concurrency management system in coor. • .tion with the County and MPO, which could enforce limitati• • on redevelopment if appropriate. 193 C. The TCEA Case Studies have a great many recommendations for the Transportation Element of the MCNP. Why are they being ignored? See attached "Summary of Case Study Recommendations" 194 I II. Significant Issues A. The "person -trip" methodology used by the City does not comply with: I.) FS163.3180 (I)(b) "Local governments shall use professionally accepted techniques for measuring level of service for automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and trucks. These techniques may be used to evaluate increased accessibility by multiple modes and reductions in vehicle miles of travel in an area or zone. The Department of transportation shall develop methodologies to assist local governments in implementing this multimodal level -of -service analysis." or 2.) TCBPG p104 Guidelines for Evaluating Comprehensive Plan Amendments). 195 I As stated in the "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami" Revision I, September 1990 on page 9: "Finally, it should be stressed that the Transportation Corridor is a new and innovative approach to dealing with the urban transportation policy dilemma - as Section 163.3180(8), F.S. provides a transportation concurrency "vesting" to existing development undergoing redevelopment equal to 110 % of the transportation impacts calculated based upon the existing use. Only the increment of new development impacts for redevelopment sites (above the 110%) shall be assessed for transportation concurrency. The adoption of a long term transportation concurrency management system pursuant to Section 163.3180(9), F.S. is not mandatory. At the present time, long term transportation planning is orchestrated through the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) which establishes the long term cost -feasible transportation priorities for the county for the years 2005 through 2030. The LRTP is updated every five years to re-evaluate transportation trends and the need for additional or modified transportation improvements. The comments are noted. In co •ance with Section 163.3180(1)(b), vehicular, transit, bicycle and pedestrian -vels of service were evaluated by the City of Miami during the EAR Process -s part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004). Vehicular capacity measurements were performed by the City of Miami using th_ roadway capacities as provided by FDOT in the latest edition of the 2002 Qua Level of Service Handbook. Vehicular capacities and vehicular levels of servic- ere based upon Table 4-4 - FDOT Generalized Peak Hour Two -Way Volumes • Florida's Urbanized Area. Pedestrian and bicycle levels of service were also b- -d upon the criteria provided by FDOT in the 2002 Quality/Level of Service Hand.. •k, in conjunction with data and level of service measurements provided by the ami-Dade County MPO. Transit capacities and transit demand applicable to co •ors with transit service were calculated using service headway and ridership da = from Miami -Dade Transit. Factors used to calculate persons per vehicle were ba -d upon the Southeast Florida Regional Travel Characteristics Study. As previously stated above, vehicular, transit, bicycle and pe service were evaluated by the City of Miami during the EAR Proc the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004). capacity and level of service measurements were based upon Table FDOT Generalized Peak Hour Two -Way Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Are Page 27 trian levels of as part of hicular -4 - SUBSTIUTED with all new ideas, it lacks refinement and much more esearch, testing, analysis, and evaluation need to be done w • it." Miami is believed to be the only jurisdiction in Florida, and p sibly the whole United States, which uses this methodo •• . The DCA recommends and the MPO/County are using D. capacity measurement standards and "Mode Split" (TCPBG p : and p. 108) modeling. The City should use the same LOS stan • = d and performance measurement as the County. Mode Split -thodology should assist with better planning for the various mo• of transportation available in each sector. 196 B. We wish to verify whether the County and the MPO have received from the City all small scale MCNP Amendments and information on all redevelopment growth, in order to properly calculate the both vested and cumulative pending trips when assessin necessa rowth in ca acities. 197 : C. Why is there not provision for at least some Proportionate Fair Share Mitigation or Impact Fee funding to support the increases in density in the City? Incentive to increase density in activity centers has considerable merit, but not to the total exclusion of the impact of the growth on scarce infrastructure resources. Pedestrian and bicycle levels of service were also based upon the criteria provided by FDOT in the 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Transit capacities and transit demand applicable to corridors with transit service were calculated using service headway and ridership data from Miami -Dade Transit. Factors used to calculate persons per vehicle were based upon updated standards from the Southeast Florida Regional Travel Characteristics Study. The City of Miami's level of service (LOS) standards are consistent with Miami - Dade County. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.1 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami - Dade County pursuant to page 11-8 and page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is E (at 100% of capacity) unless other provisions apply pursuant to TR-1.1.2.2, TR-1.1.2.3 and TR-1.1.3. The level of service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.2 is consistent with the adopted level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page 11-9 and page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County CDMP where the adopted level of service standard is 0% of capacity for those roadways located within % mile of a transit route whi operates with a minimum of 20 minute headways. The level • service standard provided under Policy TR-1.1.2.3 is consistent with the adop = • level of service standard maintained by Miami -Dade County pursuant to page -9 and page 11-11 of the Transportation Element of the Miami -Dade County IMP where the adopted level of service standard is 150% of capacity for tho - roadways located parallel to and within % mile of extraordinary transit service has commuter rail or express bus. This comment is noted. All development located within the City of Miami i ubject to the payment of transportation impact fees to Miami -Dade County. De = opment located within the Downtown Miami DRI and the SEOPW DRI are also s •'ect to the payment of Transportation Mitigation Fees as outlined in Article 13 of t = City Code and as mandated by each of the two DRI approvals. All other • = elopments located within the City of Miami are subject to the payments of im• -ct fees pursuant to Section 13-6 of the City Code. The intent of Section 13 of th City Code is to impose impact fees, payable at the time of building permit issuan Page 28 SUBSTITUTED 198 ' Policy LU-1.1.3: Please • •vide references to the sections of the current ordinances whic •rovide specifically for protection from: encroachment, adverse i = -cts. 199 ' Policy LU-1.1.4: Please provide the" code enforcement strategies and initiatives" referred to. 200 Policy LU-1.1.9: Figure 111.1 of Volume 11- Data and Analysis of the MCNP) City,Response in order to fund capital improvements, capital facility capacity and capital equipment needed to address demand for public facilities attributable to new development. This article is not intended to authorize imposition of fees related to capital facility or equipment needs attributable to existing development. This article is intended to allow new development in compliance with the comprehensive plan and to provide a mechanism for new development to help address the burdens created b new development. HadI,,Wirlita The City of Miami Zoning Ordinance controls and protects neighborhoods from encroachment and adverse impact through its zoning districts. Article 4 (Zoning Districts) of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance establishes an R-1 (Single -Family Residential) district that intends to protect neighborhoods by limiting density to one unit per typical lot size. This category allows a maximum density of approximately nine units per net acre. Article 8 (NCD Neighborhood Conservation Districts), Section 800.1 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance states that the purpose of the NCD is to "Protect neighborhoods or districts that have significant architectural and historic merit d a distinct character but that do not qualify for historic district status or have lost •me of their integrity through incompatible additions and new develo• -gent." The City of Mi i Zoning Ordinance is available online at www.municode.com. Article 21 (Administra 2108 of the City of Miami strategies. Enforcement, Violations, and Penalties), Section ning Ordinance addresses code enforcement Penalties of code violations are outlin 2109 (Penalties). in the succeeding section, Section A hard copy of the Data and Analysis of the MC ' may be obtained from the City of Miami Planning Department. 201 Policy LU-1.1.10: Station Area Design and Development Plan for each station The Miami -Dade County Code of Ordinances outlines the S = ion Area Design and Development Plan process in Section 33C-2(d). Such plan -re authorized by Miami -Dade County Resolution No. R-829-77. Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Miami -Dade County Code Ordinances and Resolution No. R-867-76, the County has enacted six Page 29 SUBSTITUTED 202 Policy LU-1.1.1 hat, specifically, are the "centers of activity"? Maps. Ple- define "livability" and the specific "goals of enhancing the ability" with references ordinances accepting Station Area Design and Development studies: No. 80- 129 (Earlington Heights), No. 81-29 (Martin Luther King, Jr.), No. 81-30 (Dadeland North), No. 81-31 (Brownsville), No. 81-32 (Northside), and No. 82- 12 (Dadeland South). Generally, centers of activity are located at the intersection of section and half- - section line corridors where lands are currently designated for commercial and/or multi -family use as shown on the City of Miami Future Land Use Map January 2008. Centers of activity also exist along major thoroughfares such as Biscayne Boulevard and US 1 where these corridors intersect section and half - section line corridors on lands currently designated for commercial and/or multi -family use as shown on the City of Miami Future Land Use Map January 2008. "...enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods" means ensuring that neighborhoods are attractive places to live, play, visit, raise a family, retire, and enjoy diversity. MCNP Goals, Objectives, and Policies designed to enhance livability are as follows: Page 30 SUBSTITUTED Future Land Use Element Goal LU-1 Objective LU-1.1 Policy LU-1.1.3 Policy LU-1.1.7 Objective LU-1.2 Objective LU-1.3 Policy LU-1.3.10 Policy LU-1.3.15 Policy LU-1.4.3 Objective LU-1.5 Policy LU-1.6.10 Policy LU-3.1.2 Various points under the "Regional Activity Centers" heading Various points under the "Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center" heading Various points under the "Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map" heading Ports Aviation and Related Facilities Element Objective PA-2.1 Policy PA-3.1.1 Coastal Management Element Goal CM-1 icy CM-2.1.7 Goa M-5 Ca. ital Im ements Element Goal CI-1 Housing Element Policy HO-1.1.3 Policy HO-1.2.6 Policy HO-1.2.7 Goal HO-2 Objective HO-2.1 Transportation Element Goal TR-1 Policy TR-1.1.4 Policy TR-1.1.5 Policy TR-1.1.9 Policy TR-1.1.12 Policy TR-1.1.18 Policy TR-1.2.2 Objective TR-1.4 Policy TR-1.4.1 Policy TR-1.4.4 Rage 3 Policy TR-1.4.5 Policy TR-1.5.8 Policy TR-1.5.9 Parks. Recreation and Open Space Element Objective PR-1.1 Policy PR-1.1.2 Objective PR-1.4 Policy PR.1.4.1 Policy PR-1.4.2 Policy PR-1.4.3 Policy PR-1.4.4 Policy PR-1.4.5 Goal PR-2 Goal PR-3 Objective PR-3.1 Policy PR-3.1.1 Policy PR-3.1.2 Policy PR-3.1.3 Objective PR-3.2 Policy PR-3.2.1 Policy PR-3.2.2 Policy PR-3.2.5 Policy PR-3.2.6 Policy PR-3.2.8 Policy PR-5.1.6 Policy PR-5.1.7 Goal PR-6 Objective PR-6.1 Policy PR-6.1.2 Policy PR-6.1.3 Objective PR-6.2 Policy PR-6.2.1 Policy PR-6.2.2 Policy PR-6.2.3 Goal PR-7 Objective PR-7.1 Policy PR-7.1.1 Goal PR-8 Objective PR-8.1 Policy PR-8.1.1 'cy PR-8.1.2 9.2 1 9 Goa - Objectiv- • R Policy PR-9. SUBSTITUTED Objective LU-1.2: Please identify for us those areas in the City hich are "blighted, declining or threatened residential, mercial and industrial areas". We have noted the map of Id areas covering a large portion of the City and do nd how many neighborhoods designated are included. Please explain. Brow not unde Brownfield ar 204 Policy LU-1.2.3: Please identify exactly where in the MCNP "the adopted Consolidated Plan, Fiscal Years 2004-2009, adopted redevelopment plans, specific neighborhood and area plans" are incorporated by reference in the MCNP. Please provide a list of all "adopted redevelopment plans" and "specific neighborhood and area plans". 205 Policy LU-1.3.1: Please provide maps and references to each: "designated Neighborhood Development Zones (NDZ), the Empowerment Zone, the Enterprise Zone, the Brownfield Redevelopment Area, Commercial Business Corridors, and other targeted areas". Those areas in the City which are "blighted, declining or threatened residential, commercial and industrial areas" are the areas which fit the definitions found in Policy LU-1.2.3, as follows: Policy LU-1.2.1: The City defines blighted neighborhoods as areas characterized by the prevalence of older structures with major deficiencies and deterioration, high residential vacancies, widespread abandonment of property, litter and poor maintenance of real property. Declining neighborhoods are defined as areas characterized by the prevalence of structures having minor deficiencies, a general need for improvements in real property, significant declines in real property values, high vacancy rates in commercial structures and increasing difficulty in obtaining insurance. Neighborhoods threatened with decline are defined as areas characterized by significant but infrequent property maintenance neglect, an aging housing stock, declining property values, general exodus of traditional residents and influx of lower income households. The location of these areas changes over time as the conditions in the neighborhoods change. The neighborhoods within the existing Community development Areas have been identified as areas in the City which are "bli• ed, declining, or threatened residential, commercial and industrial areas". The Cit •f Miami Consolidated Plan for FY 2004-2009 (http://www. iamigov.com/communitydevelopment/ConPlan) designated areas in the City that - - most distressed and in need of the most assistance as "Neighborhood De - opment Zones" (NDZs). The NDZs are as follows: • Allapattah • Coconut Grove • Edison/Little River/Litt - aiti • East Little Havana • West Little Havana • Model City • Overtown • Wynwood Smaller, more specific geographic areas (called "Model the Consolidated Plan. A map of the Neighborhood Development Zones can be found un "Maps" section of the City of Miami Consolidated Plan at: http://www.miamigov.com/communitydevelopment/ConPlan/index.htm ks") are detailed in A map of the Enterprise Zone can be located on the Cif of Miami website at: Page 32 SUBSTITUTED 206 Policy LU-1.3.4: Please provide a list of •b training/job placement programs offered to youths (full t terms) and low-income persons". e and summer 207 Policy LU-1.3.5: A.) Please define and identify specifically existing and planned "high intensity activity centers". B.) "Such activity centers will be in accordance with the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives" In accordance with what Policy of the MCNP? Why aren't the neighborhood design and development standards set as Policies in the MCNP? 208 I Policy LU-1.3.8: What are the specific objectives of training for "support minority and semi -skilled residents"? 209 Policy LU-1.3.9: What "small geographic areas that have special opportunities and/or potential for Redevelopment"? Please identify, including on a map. 210 Policy LU-1.3.10: What "neighborhood improvement and code enforcement strategies and initiatives"? Please provide details including measurable standards in use. 211 Policy LU-1.3.14: Please identify all "urban design guidelines". http://www.miamigov.com/economicdevelopment/paqes/Businesslncentives/En terpriseZone.asp The Brownfield Redevelopment Area map can be found on the City of Miami website at: http://www.miamigov.com/economicdevelopment/pages/Brownfields/Brownfield sMap.asp A map of the Empowerment Zone can be found on the Miami -Dade County GIS Portal website at: http://gisims2.miamidade.qov/CServices/CSMap.asp?Cmd=DUMMY&ShowWh at=702 ACCESS (Assets, Capital, Community, Education, Savings, and Success) Miami (http://www.accessmiamiiobs.com/) offers "One Stop Centers" which assists residents with job placement and job guidance (among other services) specifically for low-income persons. Residents may visit these centers in person (which have free computer access) or may dial 311 for guidance. The ACCESS Miami website also provides a searchable database of local job opportunities. item is being researched with City Staff. The specific objective is to provide •b training and educational opportunities for the City's unemployed and undere •toyed residents so that may be employed in jobs leading to their economi dependence. This item is being researched with City Staff. This item is being researched with City Staff. The City of Miami has an Urban Development Review Board (http://www.miamigov.com/planninq/paqes/Boards/Boards.asp) whose objective is to "evaluate projects and recommend actions to be taken by the Director of Planning based on principles of urban design." The Urban Page 33 SUBSTITUTED 212 I Policy LU-1.4.2: Please 'entify, including maps, all existing and planned "managemen , .stricts" 213 Policy LU.1.4.7: Please provide the esign and development objectives for downtown". We would a • appreciate knowing, if not clear in the objectives themselves, h• , these objectives are measured for enforcement. Development Review Board typically meets the third Wednesday of every month at Miami City Hall. Architecture and Urban Design Guidelines can be found in Article 6, Section 628.9 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the City of Miami Design Standards and Guidelines can be obtained from Edelberto Perez at 305 416.1413. The Miami Downtown Development Authority (DDA) is an existing "management district". The DDA programs and boundaries can be reviewed on their website www.miaimidda.com. Design and development objectives for downtown can be found in the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance which is the implementing document. See Article 6 SD Special District General Provisions and other Articles in the Zoning Ordinance. These "objectives" are "measured" by staff ensuring that the project design and development conform to these requirements. 214 Policy LU-1.4.11: What specifically are the objectives to Development applications are reviewed by many individuals and departments accomplish with the policy to "streamline the development 'thin the City. Projects with different uses vary in the type of information application for development approvals to simplify and ne-, -d to complete the application. In addition, each department requires standardize? differe orms of information to complete its review of the application. One of the objects -s of this policy is to provide the applicant a clear set of rules and requirements • • roperly complete the application and ensure that all departments have e data and anal sis needed to com lete their review. 215 Policy LU-1.5.2: Can you please provide .pdf files or links to The Shoreline Develo. ent Review Ordinance can be found in Article 3, .pdf files of referenced "Miami -Dade County's Waterfront Section 33D-31 of the Cit •f Miami Zoning Ordinance. Charter Amendment, Shoreline Development Review Ordinance, and the rules of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Rules of the Biscayne Bay Aqua . Preserve Management Area can be found Preserve Management Area, and other appropriate online at: htt•://www.de•.state.fl.us/cstal/downloads/18-18. •df requirements regarding waterfront access and management". 216 Goal LU•2: Can you please provide a definition of "adaptive Adaptive reuse is generally defined as a pro -ss that adapts old buildings for reuse"? new uses while retainin their historic features. 2171 Goal 3: (Goal LU 3?): What is the purpose of including "Urban The phrases "Urban Infill and Urban Redevelopmen " reas" and "Urban Infill 1 Redevelopment Areas"? Is this a mis-quote of the term "Urban and Redevelopment Areas" are meant to be interchang--ble. Infill and Redevelopment Areas"? 218 Policy LU.3.1.2: Are any additional "Regional Activity Centers" j No additional Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, Regional Activity planned? If so, please identify specifically. 1 currently under review. 219 j Policy 3.1.3: Please explain this Policy. The Downtown Miami Master Plan is a defined boundary that is co -ter us with the dark areas shown on the Urban Central Business District Map on ..• e 12 of the Draft MCNP dated February 28, 2008. Portions of the area within th - Page 34 SUBSTITUTED 220 Policy TR"1.1.1 MCNP", 221 ' Policy TR"1.1.2: We would appreciate examples of 1.1.2.1 through 1.1.2.3. ase provide the "Appendix TR-1 of the Downtown Master Plan are included in approved Development of Regional Impacts (DRI). Policy 3.1.3 designates the area of the Downtown Miami Master Plan as an Urban Central Business District to increase the threshold for projects required to through the DRI process which are not within an existing DRI. A description of increased DRI thresholds for the Urban Central Business District can be found on a e 13 of the Draft MCNP dated February 28, 2008. The first EAR recommendation (TR-1) suggested that the adopted Person -Trip Methodology be included in a designated Appendix to the Transportation Element. In response to the EAR recommendation, new Appendix TR-1 was suggested. A recent review of the 1990 published version of the Person -Trip Methodology revealed that it was excerpted from the Transportation Element from the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-1990, and therefore it was already a part of the plan. Additional research found that the City of Miami originated the person -trip methodology for the measurement of local level of service on a transportation facility, which could consist of a roadway, transit service, pedestrian corridor, bikeway, or any other transportation mode alone or in combination with others. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989) established under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 that within designated Transportation Corridors, the acity of all transportation modes would be used in the measurement of futu peak hour level of service standards. The City of Miami "Methodology for Cal ating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity" was incorporated into the Transporta •n Element of the MCNP under Policies TR 1.1.2 and TR 1.1.3 on January 24, 1 • • (adopted as Ordinance 10832), and was separately published as a rep • entitled "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Manageme "n Miami', September 1990. A separate Appendix to the Transportation Eleme s no longer being pursued since the Person -Trip Methodology is already part o e MCNP and is already utilized by the City as a separately published report. A • •f copy of the 1990 version of the Person - Trip Methodology is attached herein ed Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Mana • ement Example of 1.1.2.1: Where no public tran service exists along a roadway undergoing level of service evaluation and rev"-w, only the capacity of the roadway will be utilized to determine compliance , ith the adopted level of service standard. Where no transit service exists for th oadway, the adopted level of service is E, which equates to a numerical value e• al to 100% of the roadway capacity. Pursuant to the City of Miami "Methodolog or Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity", the level of service of the roa• , ay can be expressed in a volume to capacity ratio based upon the vehicular volu of the roadway segment compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway seg - nt, or the person-tri • volume of the roadwa se• ment com • ared to the Page 35 SUBSTITUTED capacity of the roadway segment. Pursuant to the 1990 version of "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami', vehicle trips are converted to person -trips using a vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.4 persons per vehicle, and vehicle capacity is converted to person -trip capacity using the vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.6 persons per vehicle. Example of 1.1.2.2: Where bus transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minute headways or better, and transit service is available parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where transit exists with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation facility shall be 120 percent of capacity (or 120% of level of service E). The evaluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person - trip capacity of the transit service. Current data would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak hour period. Current transit idership information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the perso trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit ro and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The volume to . •acity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine compliance with e adopted level of service standard at 120% of level of service E. Example of 1.1.2.3: Wher- -xpress bus and/or premium transit service exists on a roadway operating with • minute headways or better, and express bus and/or premium transit service is --ilable parallel to and within 1/2 mile of the roadway segment undergoing level service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the ansit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted le = of service standard. Where express bus and/or premium transit exists with least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation faci shall be 150 percent of capacity (or 150% of level of service E). The evaluation • level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway seg _ t (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the express bus a /or premium transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadw- segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip capacity of the expr- . bus and/or premium transit service. Current data would be evaluated to esta• ' h the existing vehicular traffic for the beak hour period. Current transit ridershi Page 36 SUBSTITUTED information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit route or transit mode and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The volume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard at 150% of level of service E. Example of 1.1.2.1: Where no public transit service exists along a roadway undergoing level of service evaluation and review, only the capacity of the roadway will be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where no transit service exists for the roadway, the adopted level of service is E, which equates to a numerical value equal to 100% of the roadway capacity. Pursuant to the City of Miami "Methodology for Calculating Peak Hour Person -Trip Capacity", the level of service of the roadway can be expressed in a volume to capacity ratio based upon the vehicular volume of the roadway segment compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment, or the person -trip volume of the roadway segment compared to the person -trip capacity of the roadway segment. Pursuant to the 1990 version of "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami", vehicle trips are converted to person -trips using a vehicle occupancy do of 1.4 persons per vehicle, and vehicle capacity is converted to person -trip ca.:city using the vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.6 persons per vehicle. Example • 1.1.2.2: Where bus transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minut- eadways or better, and transit service is available parallel to and within '/z m - of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and revie he capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to dete ine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where transit exi with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transport •n facility shall be 120 percent of capacity (or 120% of level of service E). The aluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the road segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the transit rvice, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted • •erson-trips) and the person - trip capacity of the transit service. Current • - would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak ho •eriod. Current transit ridership information would evaluated to determine the rship data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applies o establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service freq = cy of each transit route and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate n• rs. The volume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to det- ine compliance with the adopted level of service standard at 120% of leve Page 37 SUBSTITUTED 222 Policy TR.1.1.4: A.) What happened to the Miami Intermodal Transportation (MIT) plan? B.) Please provide a list of all "specific neighborhood transportation plans" and five specific plans, C.) Please provide the "detailed standards for transportation facilities and services that will complement neighborhood development, redevelopment, and conservation". D.) Please provide the Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan. service E. Example of 1.1.2.3: Where express bus and/or premium transit service exists on a roadway operating with 20-minute headways or better, and express bus and/or premium transit service is available parallel to and within % mile of the roadway segment undergoing level of service evaluation and review, the capacity of both the roadway and the transit service shall be utilized to determine compliance with the adopted level of service standard. Where express bus and/or premium transit exists with at least 20 minute headways, the adopted level of service for the transportation facility shall be 150 percent of capacity (or 150% of level of service E). The evaluation of level of service shall include both the vehicular volume of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip volume of the express bus and/or premium transit service, compared to the vehicular capacity of the roadway segment (converted to person -trips) and the person -trip capacity of the express bus and/or premium transit service. Current data would be evaluated to establish the existing vehicular traffic for the peak hour period. Current transit ridership information would evaluated to determine the ridership data for the peak hour period. A series of calculations would be applied to establish the person -trip capacity of the transit service using the service frequency of each transit route o ansit mode and the capacity of the transit vehicle to accommodate riders. The , ume to capacity person -trip ratio would be calculated to determine complian with the adopted level of service standard at 150% of level of service E. Examples of spe is neighborhood Plans are listed below. Coconut Grove Are- raffic Study • Health District (Civic Ce -r) Implementation Plan • Health District Comprehens - Traffic Study • Orange Bowl Traffic and Parkin • ssessments • Flagler Street Marketplace/Flagler -et two-way conversion • Miami Downtown Transportation Maste ' Ian • Watson Island Traffic Master Plan • Miami River Multimodal Corridor Study (prepar-. for the Miami - Dade MPO and the Miami River Commission with - City of Miami) • Miami River Greenway Plan • Miami Design District -Little Haiti District Planning Study/Ma er Plan • Miami Design District Design Guidelines • NE 36th Street Traffic Study prepared for the Miami -Dade Metropo Planning Organization with involvement from the City of Miami • FEC Corridor Master Plan (includes the Buena Vista Yard, now Midtown Page 38 SUBSTITUTED 223 Policy TR-1.1.5: Is the Transportation Control Measures ordinance and the MCNP going to be amended to that the Transportation Control Measures ordinance is applicable outside of downtown? 224 Policy TR-1.1.6: Please provide "the People's Transportation Plan" and the County's "Transit Oriented Development Policies" or links to them. • • • Miami) 1-395 Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study (more analysis underway) • NW/NE 79`h Street Livability Study (completed) and PD&E Study (not completed) • Flagler Street PD&E Study • DuPont Plaza Traffic Circulation PD&E Study (more analysis underway) • Brickell Avenue PD&E Study (completed) • Overtown (Dover Kohl) Master Plan Standards for design and construction of transportation facilities vary in accordance with the functional classification of the facility as well as with ownership. For its municipal streets, the City of Miami uses the "Engineering Standards for Design and Construction" handbook dated December 2005 and published by the Department of Public Works. The Florida Department of Transportation's Roadway Design Office develops and provides policies, procedures, criteria and standards for the design and construction of roadways and bridges under state jurisdiction. Similarly, Miami -Dade County Public Works Department has developed guidelines and standards for design and struction of facilities under County jurisdiction. The above publications can be de available to the public by contacting the respective agency. A Zink to t = Downtown Miami Transportation Master Plan was found on the MPO's website. See below. A pdf copy of the 19 meg file can also be obtained from City Staff. http://www.co.miami-dade.us/m•o/m10-downloads-docs.htm#dtmp A Transportation Control -asures Plan is regularly included in the development impact traffic studie •rovided as part of the Major Use Special Permit Application Process and as •: of some Class II Applications located outside of downtown. The Citizens' Independent Transportation Tr. t (CITT) is the 15-member body created to oversee the People's Transportatio ' Plan funded with the half - percent sales surtax. See the link to the Miami -Da • ITT website: htto://www.miamidade.gov/citt/ The Miami -Dade County MPO documents and studies which ..mote the County's Transit Oriented Development Policies are provided in the : ached links: Page 39 SUBSTITUTED 225 ' • licy TR. 1.1.7: Please provide "Appendix TR-2 of the MC 226 Policy TR-1.1.10: What happe planned future major parking facil A Separate TR Objective concerning with Policies. to "depict existing and on appropriate maps"? king must be added 227 i Policy TR•1.1.104: What streets have been or are anned to "relocate"? 228 ` Policy TR-1.1.15: Please provide a reference link to "the powers of the City's Off -Street Parking Authority Department" 229 Policy TR-1.1.16: Please provide a link to Downtown Miami Transportation Management Initiative (TMI). Also, please provide current "TMD strategies for City employees". 230 Policy TR-1.4.5: Please provide "Characteristics and standards for such streets" and "Characteristics and standards for such streets". Please also provide a list of streets being considered for desnation of "urban street". OLP. http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/docs/MPO newsletter 2007 tod.pdf http://www.miamidade.pov/mpo/mdcfictodd/index.htm There will not be an Appendix TR-2 in the MCNP. The City will instead maintain a current annual listing of the MPO Transportation Improvement Projects located and funded within the City limits, the Long Range Transportation Plan projects located within the City limits and the transit routes, stations and service improvements located within the City limits. This list is currently being updated to reflect TIP 2008, the 2030 LRTP and the 2007 Transit Development Program. The City currently maintains the location of existing major parking facilities (citywide) on their GIS system. In addition, Map TR-3 was prepared by the City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict significant parking facilities. The Downtown Transportation Master Plan identifies a program of phased improvements for Downtown, some -of which include proposed changes to local streets. See Section 23 — Department of Off -Street Parking - found in Subpart A of the ity Charter addressing the City of Miami Off -Street Parking Department and treet Parking Board. A link is • •vided to South Florida Commuter Services, the clearinghouse Iagency in th Florida which specializes in transportation demand management stra ies, programs and implementation. The TDM strategiesfor City employees is bei ' researched with City staff. htt • ://www.1800234ride.com The list of designated Urban Stre- is provided in Policy TR-1.4.5. 231 Policy TR-1.5.6: Please provide a map and list of "existing and planned transit corridors" and "nodes around rapid transit stations" 232 Policy TR•1.5.8:Please provide identification of all "large employment centers", including on a map. Map TR-5 and Map TR-11 were prepared by t = City during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and A - sis (November 2004) to depict the corridors with existing Metrobus Transit Ro -s and the location of Passenger/Freight rail facilities. "Large employment centers" is a general term used under TR-1.5. • to refer to areas in the City of Miami which are currently zoned for CB►, office, commercial and industrial uses where greater concentrations of emplo 'gent can be expected to occur. In addition, Map_TR-4 was prepared by the CI Page 40 SUBSTITUTED 233 Policy TR•1.5. • Please provide examples of "transit ridership data". 234 Policy TR•1.5.1 : Please provide a Zink t• e current "Five Year Transit Development Program (TOP)" 2351 Policy TR•1.6.1: Please provide links to the "Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) Five -Year Transportation Improvement Program Plans and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan Update" during the EAR Process as part of the Transportation Element Data and Analysis (November 2004) to depict the location of Major Trip Generators and Attractors inclusive of parks, arenas, stadiums, museums, ports, airports, hospitals and downtown employment. MDT currently publishes daily and monthly Transit Ridership Reports — see attached link to the November 2007 Ridership Technical Report. The policy is being amended to request peak hour transit ridership data from Miami -Dade Transit. http://www.miamidade.gov/transit/librarv/pdfs/rtr/2007- 11 Ridership Technical Report.pdf The Year 2007 MDT Transit Development Program (FY 2008 — FY 2012) is not available online, nor is it available as a pdf (we have checked with Miami -Dade Transit staff). Hard copies of the 2007 TDP can be obtained from: Miami -Dade Transit located at 701 NW 1st Court, 15`h Floor, Miami, FL 33136 Maria C. Batista, Principal Planner, Miami -Dade Transit - 786-469-5245 office John Garcia, Principal Planner, Miami -Dade Transit — 786-469-5252 office The ' 0 TIP 2008 is a 12.3 meg file which is available for download from the—. Miami-� : e County MPO Website — see attached links: http://www.comi-dade.fl.us/mpo/m10-plans-tip.htm http://www.co.mia .ade.fl.us/mpo/docs/MPO tip 2008 final.pdf The MPO Long Range Tr-.sportation Plan to the Year 2030 is a 30 meg file which is available for downlo- from the Miami -Dade County MPO Website — see attached links: http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/docs PO Irtp 2030 final 20050107.pdf http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/mpo/m10-pla Irtp.htm 236 Policy TR-1.8.1: What is the definition of "major thoroughfares"? Please provide a link to the City Public Works Manual. "Major thoroughfares" is a general term used under -1.8.1 which refers to section -line, half -section line or quarter section -line roa• - s which may be classified as either arterial or collector roadways in accorda • - with the FDOT functional classification system. The Public Works Manual refe o the document titled "Engineering Standards for Design and Constructio published by the Department of Public Works and dated December 20 covering the minimum requirements for the design and construction of subdivision im.rovements. This document can be reviewed by contacting the Page 41 SUBSTITUTED 237 If the to the appropriate consider which 2009 accomplished the process. 239 40__ 2 time pressures to advance the EAR -based amendments to do not allow the formulation and adoption of an istoric and Cultural Element, then please addin o those amendments a time -certain date by this will be a omplished. We suggest April as a deadline by ich this important task be and pledge r assistance and participation in 238 Goal LU-1 ... and (7) protects the integrity and qualit existing neighborhoods by insuring public n appellant rights regarding changes in existing zo regulations. Objective LU-1.5 Land development regulations will prot- the city's unique natural and coastal resources, its neighborhoods, and its historic and cultural heritage. ___ Policy LU-1.5.3 Notice of applications to change current zoning regulations generally and on a parcel(s) of land as well as decisions and recommendations on said applications of the zoning or planning administrators and planning/zoning boards and committees mailed by the property owner seeking the change to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and to registered neighborhood/homeowner associations within the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) districts will serve to protect neighborhoods. Failure to give such notice shall negate any changes to the zoning regulations. f the City's o , input and • Public Works De artment. Addressed in the additional proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies submitted to the City. Notice requirements are appropriately a part of the city code of ordinance, not the MCNP, and are regulated in part by state law. The language proposed in the comment goes beyond what is required by either state law or the existing city code. Therefore, the consultants recommend that this comment not be included. This comment is identical to Objective LU-1.5 in the MCNP. It is unclear what the concern/comment may be. No e requirements are appropriately a part of the city code of ordinance, not the M . P, and are regulated in part by state law. The language proposed in the comm- 4t goes beyond what is required by either state law or the existing city code. The fore, the consultants recommend that this comment not be included. Page 42 SUBSTITUTED • Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan EAR -Based Amendments SUBSTITUTED Presented by: The City ©, f Miami Planning Department • Comprehensive Planning What do you envision for your City's future? Economic Prosperity 9 . Compatible Land -Use Adapt to Change Strong Communities ySufficient Public Benefits SUBSTITUTED Comprehensive Planning Comprehensive planning assembles Goals, Objectives and Polices to address the constant change and evolution of a community. Comprehensive plans are.prepared to address compatibility issues between various: uses of land management and preservation of natural resources identification and preservation of historically significant areas — adequate planning for infrastructure needs. SUBSTITUTED Common MISINTERPRETAT IONS of the Comprehensive Plan is the Plan is made up of Land Development Regulations, Building Code, Code Enforcement, etc'? Can the plan only change/updated ogee. every 7-years documents? Does the MCNP incorporate detailed housing development needs and guide federal grant programs? SUBSTITUTED Outside comprehensive plan issues may be addressed in: Land Development Regulations - Zoning Ordinance • Proposed. Miami 21 Design Standards, Development aid Preservation Strategies - Master Plans (Parks and Public Space, Coconut Grove Waterfront, Virginia Key, etc.) Detailed Housing Plans and Implementation Programs - Consolidated Plan (Department of Community Development, HUD & State funding) Building Code Official Florida State Code and National Building Standards Historic Preservation Regulations arni City Code Chapter 23 SUBSTITUTED • Outside issues continued..... Budgeting Appropriations - Capital Improvements Program CodeEnforcement liami Code of Ordinances Transportation Improvements NIPO Transportation Improvement Program (includes funded five year projects for FDOT, Turnpike, County, MDT, MDX, Tri-Rail and Municipalities) MPO Long Range Transportation Plan to the Year 2030 (includes planned ansportation projects prioritized by need for FDOT, Turnpike, County, MDT, D, Tri-Rail and Municipalities) unding appropria ed by City Corr mission) SUBSTITUTED Comprehensive Plan anization Diagram: " • • Documents ity of Miami Frame Is,Objective ndPolicies U 1) ►J 1 1 1 U 1 I JILT► Background The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP)... Required by state law that guides the City's existing and future development. ByFlorida Statute 163, each city and county in Florida must adopt a comprehensive plan. Adopted as Ordinance 10544 on February 9, 1989 and contains amendments by the City Commission through March, 2006. The state of Florida allows the plan to be amended twice - a -year, separate from statutory amendments, emergency situations, and minor land use changes. din NIL AM EL EL Mk What does the plan do? • Indicates how the City and future: Residents Visitors Businesses Preserve the character and quality of its communities. i;! meet the needs o How does the plan impact You? As population grows, density and public services will increase to support existing and future communities. The plan creates a policy framework that has the effect of law, to guide all public and private development decisions in the City. ,: v 1401 1 1 u Y E1 1)0 1 1 1 U 1 TJI., Goals, Objectives and Policies Each element contains goals, objectives and policies to address how the city will meet existing and future needs for the residential and business communities. The elements in the MCNP are: Future Land Use Natural Ground Water Transportation Coastal Management Intergovernmental Coordin • Housing Potable Water Ports, Aviation and Re ated Facilities Natural Resource Conservation ion Educational • Sanitary and StormSewers Solid Waste Collection Parks, Recreation and Open Space Capital Improvements Public School Facilities Element Miami -Dew,. County Public Schools In 2005, the State Legislature mandated school concurrency to be implemented through the comprehensive master plan (Chapter 163, F.S.). School Concurrency 'assures -that adequate public school facilities will be available concurrent with the impact of new development. Local governments must adopt a Public School Facilities Element and an Interlocai Agreement (ILA) between the County, City and School Board as part of the comprehensive development master plan. The City of Miami adopted its School Concurrency Element and ILA on January 24, 2008. Atik MA AM MP AN IS, AIR Mk NW VALUATION 9AV tAI L MIAMI COMPREHIVE NEIGHEOI.HOQi P 3Un3Y11 U ll.ly What is the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)? The Report will evaluate how successful the MCNP is in addressing major community land use planning issues State •law requires that every 7-years, each city and county complete a report for their comprehensive plans SUllS1iiUY t 4 Major issues identified The need for, and Impacts of, Equitable Redevelopment and Development Preservation and Enhancement df Natural, Historic, Archeological and Recreational Resources Neighborhood Integrity Transportation Recommendations that address the 4 major issues are: Gathered through public outreach. Applied to the MCNP through the EAR Based Amendment Process. 1111, All EL IN ft AM EL MIL Ek ►:7 V Ail ►7 1 1 1 lJ 1 L' ll -"f7r-7Zatfigq r, , • 3 -• •3, ' • 1)0 1 1 1 U 1 What are the EAR -Based Amendments? • Each city and county must amend its comprehensive plan to address the issues identified in its EAR report. Review original recommendations and modify the goals, objectives, and polices. The city must seek more public ou Identify that changes will be made based on the recomme dations and include additional modifications to the MCNP. State Mandated Amendments New State statutory requirements that will impact the MCNP will be included along with the recommended amendments. State law requires this process to be completed by August 2008 EAR Recommendations/Public Input S U 1iS'1'1'1' U'1 Lam, Appointed Committee Group • The City began the public participation process by meeting with a small group of community epresentatives. Community representatives were identified by our City Commissioners Each representative was given the opportunity to: Provide review and comment on proposed outreach programs; - Provide review and comment on proposed draft MCNP amendments; and Identify effective methods for public outreach in their community. O JI_J3111v1LI Committee Meeting Highlights Meeting 1 - November 1, 2007 • Introduction • Indicate tasks by City/consultants. • EAR process/background • Committee role identified Meeting 2 - January 8, 2008 • Statute Issues -New State Statute updates -DCA August 2008 Deadline • Response to MNU suggestions to MCNP • Outreach Timeline / NET Meetings ,.. 4/11111,MIn Meeting 3 February 1, 2008 • Specific changes to DRAFT discussion • Current Capital Improvement Plan • City Public Hearing schedule 3U133111 U 1ILI • • January 2008 — Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) Meetings January 29, 2008 District 1 (Flagami) January 30, 2008 District 4 (Flagami) January 31, 2008 District 2 (Upper Easizide) February 2008 Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) Meetin February 4, 2008 District 3 (Coral Way) February 5, 2008 District 4 (West Flagle February 5, 2008 District 2 (SIW Coconut Grove} February 7, 2008 District 3 (Little Havana) February 11 2008 District 5 (Overtown) February 12, 2008 District 5 (Model City) February 13, 2008 District 1 (Allapattah) T March 2008 - Planning Advisory Board (PAB) March 5, 2008 PAB Discussion March 19, 2008 PAB Discussion 2 March 31, 2008 PAB Recommendation April 2008 - City Commission April 24, 2008 DCA Transmittal Hearing • July 2008 (Tentative) -- City Commission July 24, 2008 (Tentative) EAR -Based Amendments Adoption Hearing Amended Elements of the MCNP • Future Land Use • Housing • Sanitary and Storm Sewer. Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Potable Water • Solid Waste Collection • Transportation • Ports, Aviation, and Related Facilities Parks, Recreation, and open Space Coastal Management • Natural Resource Conservation • Capital lmprovements • Intergovernmental Coordination J V ►J 1 1 1 V 1 ILaly Future Land Use Element • Create well -designed, mixed -use neighborhoods — Consistent with neighborhood character, function and history Opportunity for multi -modal transportation Implemented through land development regulations (Miami 21) Enhance existing strategies Prevent unacceptable infrastructure levels of service Prevent encroachment of incompatible uses Create appropriate height and mass transitions Prevent degradation of open space, environment and ecology '1LA:10111U JAL') Land Use • Need better historic and neighborhood preservation • Need height restrictions next to single-family residential • Single-family neighborhoods should be buffered from other uses • Need density and intensity standards in the land use categories The entire city should not be in the TCEA/Urban.Infill area • Cumulative impacts of multiple projects in the Upper Eastside not addressed during individual project approvals • Create a low-rise office land use category • Does not make sense that the Restricted Commercial land use category can be translated into high density residential • The FEC corridor and sidings should be put to better use • Promote green buildings in the City of Miami s U 13s"1'1'1' u 1 u Urban Infill Area Policy LU-1. 1: The City hereby adopts designation of the City, excluding Virginia Key, Watson IsIan® .nd the uninhabited islands of Biscayne Bay, that have a land use and zoning classificatiof Conservation, ," as an Urban Infill Area pursuant to Mia -Dade County's designation of an Urban Infill Area lying generally east of the Palmetto xpressway and including all of the City of Miami. Areas designated Single -Family — '" esidential on the MCNP Future Land Use Map within the Urban Infill Area shall be pro : ted from changes that permit higher density residential uses and from commercial, office end industrial uses within those areas, in order to preserve the low density resi . tial character of these areas. Redevelopment of corridors adjacent to these ar..s shall be encouraged to be' located primarily at major intersections of commercial . orridors. Within this area, Outside of these residential areas, the concentration . nd intensification of development around centers of activity shall be emphasize • with the goals of enhancing the livability of residential neighborhoods and the viabili of commercial areas. Priority will be given to infill development on vacant parcels, adap ' e reuse of underutilized land and structures, and the redevelopment of substanda . sites. Maintenance of transportation levels of service within this designated Urban •fill Transportation Concurrency Exception Area shall be in accordance with the adopte Transportation Corridors level of service standards and the City of Miami Person -Trip Methodology as set forth in Policies TR-1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of the Transportation Element of the MCNP. SUBSTITUTED importing and Monitoring Land Use Policy 1.1.2 • Housing Policy 1.1.10 Sanitary and Storm Sewers Policy 1.3.E Capital Improvements Policy 1.2.5 Transportation Policies 1.1.5, 1.5.12, 1.5.14, 1.5.15, and 1.6.1 • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Policies 1.5.1, 3.2.10, 3.2.11, 4.1.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, and 7.1.2 113111V1L1.1 eation and Open Space Element Completely reworked based on the Miami Parks and Public Spaces Plan adopted May 2007 by the City Commission. ►JVD►J111 V 1r 1J SUIS'111 U i rJii Parks Continued..... New access -based and funding -based Level of Service measures: Park within '/2 mile of every resident with future �/4 mile goal $100 per capita funding ►J U 1S ►J 1 11 U 1 LL Parks Continued Highlights • No net loss of park land Enhancement of existing parks, facilities and programs Park land acquisition according to community priorities Increased public access by pedestrians, bicyclists, disabled persons • Increased visual and physical access to waterfront areas Expansion of greenways and trails JU15 111 U 1L1J Parks Continued..... Highlights Shared resources with other agencies, groups Improved efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability • Additional funding, including impact fees, developer contributions, public benefits for density bonuses, grants, volunteer contributions, philanthropy Enhanced community participation in park and recreation policy and planning Annual reports on implementation of the parks master plan SUBS it IU'rA, Housing Element • Clarify that the Comprehensive Policies address the needs of the very -low and low-income groups Require that the progress being made toward meeting the goals of the Consolidated Plan be publicly reviewed on a periodic basis Consider an economic element that would among other issues address the issue of economic disparity that underlies the need for affordable housing Mik v ii 0 1 11 U 1.L11 Transportation Element • Protection of Single -Family Residential in the TCEAIUrban Infill Area • Further clarification of the Adopted LOS Standards • Enforcement of the Transportation Control Measures Ordinance • Coordination with MDT on the expansion of the transit system to serve neighborhoods with increasing population Coordination with MDT to improve connections between transit modes Coordination with FDOT to ensure that transportation improvements minimize the intrusion of commuter traffic on residential streets Provision of design guidelines for development in existing and planned transit corridors to promote pedestrianism and transit usage through improved connectivity and transit infrastructure • Included water taxi commuter service as a transit mode Updated TDM strategies to include preferential parking for hybrid vehicles Included the development of a transit corridor right-of-way map to use when evaluating new projects and their proximity to existing and future planned transit service )U1SJ111 U 1Llj Transportation • Transit should be available to serve all neighborhoods • Expanded transit services should extend into neighborhoods with population increases resulting from new residential projects • Expand multi -modal transit to serve the east -west commute • Address the City's high automobile dependency • Funding increased county -wide for transit, but never applied Identify the transit improvements funded using PTP dollars Reemphasize the need for a transit hub in Liberty City to provide parking solutions for NW 7th Avenue • Residents do not want reversible lanes on NW 7th Avenue • Ramp metering at entrances to 1-95 will cause queuing onto NW 7th Avenue • Consider water taxis as a commuter travel mode and promote their use along the Miami River • Improve air quality by encouraging green highways and the use of hybrid vehicles 1110 Sun, l 1 TUTED • Capital Improvements Element Specifies that development orders authorizing new development or redevelopment that results in an increase in the density or intensity of land use shall be contingent upon the availability of public facilities and services that meet or exceed the minimum LOS standards for sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater, potable water, parks and recreation and transportation facilities Specifies that land use map changes must maintain the financial feasibility of the MCNP Juii ill U 1ED • Miami Parks and Public Spaces Master Plan: http://www.rniarniparksp..Ian.com Miami 21: http://wwwmirni21o.r - a Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) and EAR -Based Amendments DRAFT document: h .com/Plannin ,U1:1 111UlLD