HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Staff Memo Re Amended Staff Analysis & Applicant's ResponseCITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Francisco J. Garcia DATE: October 25, 2018
Director, Planning
Department
FROM: Sue Trone
Chief, Comprehensive
Planning
FILE:
SUBJECT: Magic City Innovation District
SAP Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Staff Analysis
and Applicant's Addressing of
Inconsistencies
REFERENCES: Staff Analysis
ENCLOSURES:
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The application submitted for the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) change necessary for
the consideration of the SAP application for the Magic City Innovation District was
analyzed by the Community Planning Division for the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals
Board (PZAB) hearing of July 18, 2018. The staff report presented for this hearing
resulted in an analysis that utilized 14 criteria from the Miami Comprehensive
Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) based on its goals, objectives and policies. At that time, the
report found an equal number of consistencies and inconsistencies. The staff report
urged careful consideration of the conditions recommended with the companion
rezoning item in the SAP application, which would cure the inconsistencies. This memo
addresses changes to the application which have occurred in the time which has
passed since the PZAB hearing, curing inconsistencies to the proposed comprehensive
plan amendment.
SUMMARY OF INCONSISTENCIES
The staff report seven inconsistencies with the MCNP that can generally be
characterized in the following ways:
(1) Depleting the City of industrial land uses;
(2) Working counter to the City's goals for affordable housing solutions;
(3) Missing opportunities to support Transportation Control Measures; and
(4) Proposing development without paying an equitable, proportional share for the
cost of parks.
DEVELOPER RESPONSES
Since the July 18 hearing at PZAB, the Applicant has worked diligently to address the
inconsistencies with the MCNP. Staff finds that, as of the date of this memo, six of
seven criteria are now consistent. The table below summarizes the criteria by identifying
the Goal, Objective, or Policy referenced from the MCNP and how the Applicant has
addressed the inconsistency.
Summary of Inconsistent Findings for the Magic City FLUM Application
as of July 2018 and Current Findings (October 2018)
Criteria that were found to Summary of relevant Goal, Objective or Policy from MCNP Current findings since Applicant redress
be Inconsistent at PZAB
July 2018 October 2018
Objective LU-1.3(Criteria 2)
Policy LU-1.1.3 (Criteria 3)
Encouragement of commercial, office, and industrial
development in areas that already have such development,
including the encouragement of industrial activity where
existing public facilities can meet or exceed minimum
standards for LOS;
Protection of all areas of the city from encroachment of
incompatible land uses....
Objective LU-4.1, LU-4.2, LU- Objectives LU-4.1 through LU-4.3 establish percentages of
4.3 (Criteria 4) housing stock to be built for mixed -income developments,
for elderly populations with limited incomes, and low- and
workforce populations.
Goal HO-1 (Criteria 5)
Policy TR-1.5.2 (Criteria 11)
Policy TR-2.2.9 (Criteria 12)
Objective PR-1.5
(Criteria 13)
Goal HO-1 esta blishes the basic need for increasing the
supply of affordable housing, especially for extremely low -
through low-income populations through new housing and
rehabilitating existing housing.
PolicyTR-1.5.2 Requires new developments to implement
new transportation control measures to promote reduction
in vehicular traffic. PolicyTR-2.2.9 establishes a standard in
which the City considers income, age, ability, and car
ownership throughout the city when developing
transportation systems and facility improvements to
increase affordable travel options.
Objective PR-1.5 established Park Impact Fees. The
Development Agreement prior to PZAB proposed that the
Developer would be credited this impact fee.
The Applicant's original application was to change all land in
the 16.08-acre area to Restricted Commercial. At PZAB, the
Applicant changed the request to General Commercial.
General Commercial as a Future Land Use designation allows
some select light industrial uses. General Commercial cures
these inconsistencies. These are now CONSISTENT.
The Applicant's development agreement provides for
affordable housing and workforce housing a provision 16.
These provisions are presented as percentages of "Habitable
Space of Dwelling Units." In a 16+ acre area that will go from
having zero dwelling units to over 2,600 dwelling units,
within a study area in which the majority of households have
incomes under $10,000. The applicant is not expected to
match all the percentages of the referenced objectives
because those objectives are citywide; however, dedicating
habitable space for income restricted units will not
meaningfully address this inconsistency as a proffer from
the Applicant to reserve enumerated dwelling units. These
criteria remain INCONSISTENT.
The Applicant is making provisions for affordable and
workforce housing in an area of the city with a great need
for this type of housing. This goal is now CONSISTENT.
The Applicant has worked with the City and offered
Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) which have been
accepted by the Office of Capital Improvements. A
Transportation Sufficiency Letter was written on August 21,
2018 memorializing the Applicant's TCMs as acceptable. This
cures the staff report's findings of inconsistency. This criteria
is now CONSISTENT.
The reference to Park Impact Fee credits have been deleted
from the Developer Agreement. This cures the inconsistency.
This criteria is now CONSISTENT.
CONCLUSION
The table above shows that the Applicant has brought all criteria into consistency
except Criteria 4, relating to Objective LU-4.1, Objective LU-4.2, and Objective LU-4.3,
which pertain to mixed -income, affordable housing dwelling units for elderly populations,
and low- and workforce- housing dwelling units. A portion of the SAP is income
restricted by habitable space; however, to cure this inconsistency, the Planning
Department would look for the Applicant to proffer percentages of dwelling units.
Staff in the Community Planning Division are available to assist if any questions arise.