Loading...
Item U4 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: December 18. 2002 Division: Growth Management Bulk Item: Yes No -X- Department: Planning AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Second of two public hearings or the "amendment" hearing, to adopt an ordinance to repeal Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and to repeal Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Monroe County Code eliminating modest housing point assignment criteria in residential ROGO. ITEM BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission has held a series of public workshops and reviewed the modest housing regulations during the 90-day moratorium on the award of modest housing point criteria, as directed by the BOCC. As a result of public hearings and research done by the Planning Staff, the Planning Commission recommended to the BOCC that the moratorium on the award of modest housing points be continued until staff was able to bring amendments repealing the language from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations. On May 29, 2002 the Planning Commission recommended approval of both changes to the Board of County Commissioners. The first public hearing or "transmittal" hearing was held on June 19, 2002, where the BOCC authorized the transmittal of the draft to the DCA. The DCA has reviewed the proposed amendment to the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and has no objections to the proposed amendment as transmitted (DCA No. 02-02). PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: Resolution 033-2002 placed a 90-day moratorium on the award of modest housing ROGO points. After research and a recommendation by the Planning Commission, Resolution 173-2002 was passed at the regular meeting on April 17, 2002 to extend the moratorium until December 31, 2002 and directed staff to delete modest housing language from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations. At its regular meeting on June 19, 2002 the BOCC approved resolution 268- 2002 authorizing the Planning Department to transmit the draft ordinance to the DCA. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval TOTAL COST: N/A BUDGETED: Yes N/ A No COST TO COUNTY: N/ A REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No -X- AMOUNT PER MONTH Year APPROVED BY: County Atty -L. OMBlPurchasing N/ A DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL: DOCUMENTATION: Included X To Follow Not Required _ DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #4 Revised 2/27/01 ~~ YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENT ELIMINATING THE MODEST HOUSING POINT CRITERIA FROM THE RESIDENTIAL RATE OF GROWTH ORDINANCE ADOPTION HEARINGS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARATHON GOVERNMENT CENTER DECEMBER 18, 2002 PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT POLICY 101.5.4-19 OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SECTION 9.5-122.3(a)(19) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES TO AMEND POLICY 101.5.4-19 OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSNE PLAN AND SECTION 9.5-122.3(a)(19) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BY DELETING THE MODEST HOUSING POINT ASSIGNMENT RESIDENTIAL ROGO CRITERIA FOR DWELLING UNITS WITH 1,300 SQUARE FEET OR LESS OF HABIT ABLE SPACE, MODULAR UNITS, AND NON- WATERFRONT LOTS, FOR BOTH DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND THE USE OF TRANSFER OF ROGO EXEMPTION (TRE) FOR ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS. YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS Staff: Approval May 14, 2002 Staff Report DRC: Approval May 14, 2002 Resolution #D08-02 PC: Approval May 29,2002 Resolution #P36-02 BOCC: Transmittal June 19, 2002 Resolution #268-2002 DCA: No Objection October 28, 2002 Letter LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION RECOMMENDATIONS Staff: Approval May 14, 2002 Staff Report DRC: Approval May 14, 2002 Resolution #D09-02 PC: Approval May 29,2002 Resolution #P37-02. DRAFT BOCC ORDINANCE TO AMEND POLICY 101.5.4-19 OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE NO. -2002 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING POLICY 101.5.4-19 OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE BOARD TO FOR\VARD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan currently awards points in the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) for criteria related to the creation of moderately priced housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has issued Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 which defines the specific criteria to determine if a house is to be eligible for 'modest housing' points; and WHEREAS, despite further clarification of the intent behind the modest housing point criteria, problems implementing modest housing continued to occur; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 033-2002 on January 17th, 2002 directing Growth Management staff to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points for 90 days and to immediately begin working with the Planning Commission to review and prepare an amendment to the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan concerning modest housing ROGO points; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held two public workshops, February 27,2002, in Key Largo and March 13,2002, in Marathon, and completed a review of the regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the modest housing and modular construction criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation, precluding individuals who entered the system before the points were adopted and are no longer competitive; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that homes that have received modest/modular points are being sold for a price higher than a moderate-income level family can afford; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted on March 13, 2002 to recommend that the moratorium of awarding modest/modular points be extended so that the language may be repealed from the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 17, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution 173-2002 directing the Growth Management division to continue to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points until December 31, 2002 and to draft language that will repeal the modest housing criteria from the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on May 14, 2002, the Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of the request by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and Page 1 of 5 Initial WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee passed Resolution No. D08-02 recommending approval of the proposed text amendment; and WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on May 29, 2002, the Monroe County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text &I1d passed Resolution No. P36-02 recommending approval of the proposed text amendment; and WHEREAS, The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners were presented with the following information, which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing: 1. The Staff Report prepared on December 2, 2002; by K. Marlene Conaway, Director, Planning and Environmental Resources, 2. Proposed changes to the Monroe County Code, 3. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff, 4. Comments by the public; WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners examined the proposed amendments to Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan submitted by the Monroe County Planning Department at a public hearing on June 19th, 2002; and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed language change was transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs for their review on August 23,2002, and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs raises no objections to the proposed amendment as stated in a letter received from the Department on October 28, 2002 which serves as the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners held a second public hearing on the proposed amendments to Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan submitted by the Monroe County Planning Department at a public hearing on December 18th, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following Findings of Fact based on the evidence presented: 1. The intent of the modest housing point criteria was to encourage the development of housing that had characteristics that make them more reasonably priced, and 2. Insufficient definitions of what characteristics qualify a house as 'modest' and insufficient guidance in the point criteria do not assure that a house receiving modest housing points will be moderately priced, and Page 2 of5 Initial 3. Individuals who had applied for a residential building allocation before the modest housing criteria was adopted and might have received an allocation because of points accrued through years in the system, are no longer competitive and may not receive a allocation, and 4. As a result of the public workshops and a review of the regulations, the Planning Commission has recommended that the point criteria for modest housing be removed from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, and 5. At their regular meeting on April 17th 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution No. 173-2002 which extends the moratorium on the award of modest housing points and directed staff to remove the modest housing point criteria from the Year 2010 Plan and the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following Conclusions of Law based on the evidence presented: 1. The intent of the 'modest housing' criteria was to encourage the development of houses with 'modest' characteristics that result in moderately priced housing, and 2. The point criteria has not resulted in encouraging moderately priced housing and artificially inflated the score needed to obtain a ROGO allocation, and 3. Based on the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, we find that the modest housing criteria are not consistent with the other goals, objectives, and policies set forth in the plan and therefore should be removed from Policy 101.5.4 ofthe Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners hereby supports the decision of the Monroe County Planning Commission and the staff of the Monroe County Planning Department; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners that the following amendment to the Monroe County Code be approved, adopted and transmitted to the state land planning agency for approval; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1. Policy 101.5.4 -19 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan is hereby repealed as followed (repealed language shown with strike-through): Policy 101.5.4 19. Modest H01:lsing Points shall be assigned to encourage the development of residential d'.velling units with ehai'aeteristics that malee them relatively less expensive than similai' residential d,:.'elling units that lack these chai'aeteristics. Page 3 of5 Initial ~ , n '.J ..:_1 - -- . T T_ . '-'.~. HY . , ,.... Criteria Mi1'l.or Positive .^.n application ',ybich ql:lalifies for infill ROGO points l:lI1der Policy 101.5. 4 and which proposes the developmeat of a detaehed resiacntial d\yelling W1:it that Htilizes a ROGO allo..::ation and contains 01'1.0 thoasand thr-ec hooar-ed (1,300) sql:lare fect, or lcss, of habitable space. Thc parcel ofland pmposed for developing a detached residential dVlclling Hnit shall not qualify for negative enYH-{)nmental points l:lI1der Policy 101.5.4; hO\Ve'lef, pr-opcrties designated Residential High shall be exempted fr{)m this pmmbition. ..\n affor-ctable W1:it is not eligiblc for these points since a resideatial dwelling amt that l:ltilizes an affordable RDGO allocatioR is alr-eady required to contain ORe thol:lsand tiH"ee lwndred (1,300) squarc feet, or less, of habitable space. Minor Positivc f.dditional points shall be earned for proposing a . . . . . . . . . ... Minor Positive :\dditional points shall be earned for proposing a detached residential dwelling unit on a non - A , 'D . . ~ 11' . TT_:. . Minor Positive An application '.vhich qualifies for infill ROGO points ooder Policy 10 1.5.4 and ,:..hich proposes the development of an attach cd d'.velling l:lRit that utilizes a ROGO allocation and contaiRs one thol:lsand three hundred (1,300) square f-eet, or less, of habitable space. The parcel ofland proposed for de'leloping an attached residential dV/elling unit shall not qualify for Rcgative enviroflfl'l.cntal poiRts l:mdcr Policy 101.5. 4; however, properties designated Residcntial High shall be exempted from this prohibition. .^.n affordable unit is not eligible for thcse points sincc a rcsidential dv..elling unit that utilizes an affordable ROGO allocation is already required to contain onc thousand tm-ee hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable space. Minor Positive .^.dditional points shall be earned for proposing an attached residential d'::elling unit on a non - Minor Positivc .^.dditional points shall be earned for proposing an . . . . . '.1' ". :. Page 4 of 5 Initial Minor Positive .^ill applieatien shall earn an additional point for proposiftg an attaehea residential dwelling unit that atilizes a residential transfer of ROGO exeffiJ3tion (TRE), on a one for one basis (see Polie)' 101.5.10). Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such validity. Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. Section 4. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Planning Department to the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida Statutes. Section 5. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administrative Commission finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida at a regular meeting held on the day of 2002. Mayor Dixie Spehar Mayor Pro Tem Murray Nelson Commissioner Charles "Sonny" McCoy Commissioner George Neugent Commissioner David P. Rice BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Mayor Dixie Spehar (SEAL) ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFIOIENCY 1 /,C--j ..1 BY / /"--.-,. / . 'd Attorney's Offic~ DEPUTY CLERK Page 5 of 5 Initial DRAFT BOCC ORDINA~JCE TO AMEND SECTION 9.5-122.3(a)(19) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ORDINANCE NO. -2002 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 9.5-122.3(a)(19), MONROE COUNTY CODE, BY ELIMINATING POINTS FOR MODEST HOUSING UNDER ROGO; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR THE INCORPORATION INTO THE MONROE CODE; AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE BOARD TO FORWARD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) currently awards points in the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) for criteria related to the creation of moderately priced housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has issued Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 which defines the specific criteria to determine if a house is to be eligible for 'modest housing' points; and WHEREAS, despite further clarification of the intent behind the modest housing point criteria, problems implementing modest housing continued to occur; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 033-2002 on January 17th, 2002 directing Growth Management staff to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points for 90 days and to immediately begin working with the Planning Commission to review and prepare an amendment to the LDRs concerning modest housing ROGO points; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held two public workshops, February 27, 2002, in Key Largo and March 13, 2002, in Marathon, and completed a review of the regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the modest housing and modular construction criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation, precluding individuals who entered the system before the points were adopted and are no longer competitive; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that homes that have received modest/modular points are being sold for a price higher than a moderate-income level family can afford; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted on March 13, 2002 to recommend that the moratorium of awarding modest/modular points be extended so that the language may be repealed from the LDRs; Page 1 of6 Initial WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 17, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution 173-2002 directing the Growth Management division to continue to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points until December 31, 2002 and to draft language that will repeal the modest housing criteria from the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on May 14, 2002, the Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of the request by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to amend Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee passed Resolution No. D09-02 recommending approval of the proposed text amendment; and WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on May 29, 2002, the Monroe County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text and passed Resolution No. P37-02 recommending approval of the proposed text amendment; and WHEREAS, The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners were presented with the following information, which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing: 1. The Staff Report prepared on December 2, 2002; by K. Marlene Conaway, Director, Planning and Environmental Resources, 2. Proposed changes to the Monroe County Code, 3. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff, 4. Comments by the public; WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners examined the proposed amendments to the Monroe County Code submitted by the Monroe County Planning Department at a public hearing on June 19th, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners examined the proposed amendments to the Monroe County Code submitted by the Monroe County Planning Department a second time at a public hearing on December 18th, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following Findings of Fact based on the evidence presented: 1. The intent of the modest housing point criteria was to encourage the development of housing that had characteristics that make them more reasonably priced, and Page 2 of6 Initial 2. Insufficient definitions of what characteristics qualify a house as 'modest' and insufficient guidance in the point criteria do not assure that a house receiving modest housing points will be moderately priced, and 3. Individuals who had applied for a residential building allocation before the modest housing criteria was adopted and might have received an allocation because of points accrued through years in the system, are no longer competitive and may not receive a allocation, and 4. As a result of the public workshops and a review of the regulations, the Planning Commission has recommended that the point criteria for modest housing be removed from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, and 5. At their regular meeting on April 17th 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution No. 173-2002 which extends the moratorium on the award of modest housing points and directed staff to remove the modest housing point criteria from the Year 2010 Plan and the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following Conclusions of Law based on the evidence presented: 1. The intent of the 'modest housing' criteria was to encourage the development of houses with 'modest' characteristics that result in moderately priced housing, and 2. The point criteria has not resulted in encouraging moderately priced housing and artificially inflated the score needed to obtain a ROGO allocation, and 3. Based on the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, we find that the modest housing criteria are not consistent with the other goals, objectives, and policies set forth in the plan and therefore should be removed from the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners hereby supports the decision of the Monroe County Planning Commission and the staff of the Monroe County Planning Department; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners that the following amendment to the Monroe County Code be approved, adopted and transmitted to the state land planning agency for approval; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1. Section 9 .5-122.3( a)( 19) of the Monroe County Code is hereby repealed as follows (repealed language shown with strike-through): Page 3 of6 Initial 19) AI stlest hSIlSiHg: The follo'.ving poiats shall be assigFled in order to encolifage the construction of moderately prieed residential d'NelliRg ooits. . - . . . .- n. TT~:* ~.... n Criteria: ~ ~.... ~ f..n applieation which qualifies for infill ROGO points and proposes to develop a detached residential d'.velling ooit that contains one thOl:lSand three ht-rAcked (1,300) sqHai"e feet, or less, of habitable 5f*lee Additional requirements: 1. f..n affordable unit is not eligible for these points sinee a residential dwelling Hnit that Htilizes an affordable ROGO allocation is already reqHired to contain one thousand tm-ee lmndred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable spaee. 2. The pai"cel ofland proposed f()r developing the detached residential d'.velling unit shall not qualify f()r negative points under section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (8) or (9), except for a pai"cel oflamlloeated ,t'lithin a URM, URM: L, IS D or DR land use district. 3. Expansion of the habitable space of the detached residential dwelling unit .1.. .11 1.. . . '1.. ,. . _ ..1..~ . f.'~_~.. 1~~~.. /...,"\ .~~~. ~~ ~u \ J ~~.~ ~ .:\n application shall earn additional points for proposing a detached modHlar . . . . ". n_:" ~UH. AdditionslFCquirements: 1. To be eligible for these points, the detached modulai" residential d'llelling Hnit must meet the minimum '.vindload reqHirements for Monroe County. 2. Both affordable and mai"ket units ai"e eligible for these points. # An applieation shall earn an additional point f()r proposing a detached residential . ". :.. ~ -~. ,.. 1~.. Additien(1ll'CquiFCl'ncnts: 1. Both affordable and mai"ket Hnits ai"e eligible for this point. . . .no . . . . TT_ . n. . .~ Criteris: Page4of6 Initial ~ ..\11 application which proposes to develop an attached residential d\velling liI1:it that contains one thol:lsand three hundred (1,300) sql:lare feet, or less, of habitable ~t-" Additional rCfjftircmcnts: 1. Both affordable and market l:lnits are eligible for these points. 2. The pareel of land proposed for developing an attached residential d'Nelling unit shall not q\:Ialify for negative poiats uader section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (8) or (9), except for a parcel ofland located 'within a URM, URM L, IS D or DR land \:Ise district. 3. E)'pansion of the habitable space of an attached residential cP.velling unit _L_ll L_" . ., r . .1. . c__ _+ , /.." ,,"n...n v.. -.;:T ... .... .......,. .,... T"'U \ ...... .,. ~ ..\11 application shall earn additional points for proposing an attached modular attaehed . , ... ... .._:+ ...un. Additifmal1'Cfjftirollcnts: (1) To be eligible for these points an attached residential modl:llar dwelling unit must meet the minimum windload requirements for Mornoe County. (2) Both affordable and market units ar-e eligible for these pointG. # An application shall earn an additional point for proposing an attached residential ~ 1_+ ....' ..uu.~ ~un ~u Additional rCCjftircmcnts: (1) To be eligible for this point, the modular d\velling unit must meet the minimum windload requirements for MOrH"oe CO\:Inty. /"" "n. .1. -- . . .:I -,. ..-:+~ ,. . . r'. ..1. . . ... l"" .......~LU ~.... .~. ..u~ t-" ,.. ~ An application shall earn additional points for utilizing transfers ofROGO exemptions (TREs) in the development of an attached residential dv;elling unit on a one for one basis. All sueh transfers must occur in . .1. n ~ , "'n A /L '\ Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such validity. Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. Page 5 0[6 Initial Section 4. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Planning Department to the Department of Community Affairs to determine the consistency of this ordinance with the Florida Statutes. Section 5. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued oy the Department of Community Affairs or Administrative Commission finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Section 6. The Director of Growth Management is hereby directed to forward a copy of this ordinance to the Municipal Code Corporation for the incorporation in the Monroe County Code of Ordinances once this ordinance is in effect. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida at a regular meeting held on the day of 2002. Mayor Dixie Spehar Mayor Pro Tem Murray Nelson Commissioner Charles "Sonny" McCoy Commissioner George Neugent Commissioner David P. Rice BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Mayor Dixie Spehar (SEAL) ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK DEPUTY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FOEM A.Nb LEGAL SUFFICIENCY -l /[/L-::::L - ~/ -- BY - O"&:: / Attorney's r,lce ,---"- ' Page 60f6 Initial BOCC STAFF REPORT Memorandum W: FROM: DATE: RE: Board of County Commissioners K. Marlene Conaway, Director, Planning and Environmental Resour~t'C- December 2, 2002 Repeal of modest housing language from the Year 201 0 Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations. STAFF REPORT I. Background In 2000, the residential Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) was amended to encourage the construction of moderately priced housing by providing points for 'modest housing'. While the intent of 'modest housing' point criteria was clear, there have been many problems with its implementation. The ordinance does not provide sufficient guidance to assure that the housing has characteristics that make them more reasonably priced, nor does the point criteria sufficiently define what 'modest housing' is. Throughout the process of implementing modest housing, the Planning Director has written nwnerous memoranda explaining the intent behind the 'modest housing' point criteria. Consequently, Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 defines specific criteria to be used to determine if a house meets the characteristics of 'Modest Housing'. However, even with further definition, problems continued to arise because of the 'modest housing' point criteria. The Planning Director met twice with the Planning Commission as a part of their regular meetings to discuss concerns with the modest housing criteria. The Planning Commission received public comments on implementing the modest housing provisions at both of these meetings and at subsequent Commission meetings. On December 27,2001, the Planning Commission requested a 90-day deferral on the award of modest housing points from the Board of County Commissioners in order to provide time to review and amend the ordinance to clearly define when points should be awarded for 'modest housing'. During this ninety-day period, the Planning Commission held two public workshops to receive public comment and review research on the regulations. The majority of applications that were receiving points for modest housing criteria were being built by contractors/developers and then sold for a price that is not considered 'modest' (between $289,000 and $325,000). Additionally, modest housing point criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation. Some individuals who had applied for residential building allocation before the modest housing criteria was adopted and might have received an allocation because of points accrued through years in the system are no longer competitive. Page 1 of5 As a result of the public workshops, the Planning Commission has recommended that the point criteria for modest housing be removed from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Land Development Regulations. A letter from the chair of the Planning Commission to the Mayor and Board of County Commissioners stated the Planning Commission's findings and requested an extension of the deferral of modest housing points until the language could be repealed. At their regular meeting on April 17, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution 173-2002 directing the Growth Management division to continue to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points until December 31, 2002. Additionally, Growth Management staff was directed to draft language that will repeal the modest housing criteria from the Year 2010 Plan and the Land Development Regulations. The Development Review Committee unanimously passed resolutions supporting the proposed amendments at the May 14, 2002 regular meeting. The Planning Commission unanimously passed resolutions supporting the proposed amendments at the May 29, 2002 regular meeting. The proposed amendment was transmitted to DCA on June 19th, 2002 and a response indicating the Department had no objections to the change was received on October 28, 2002. II. Proposed Text The modest housing point criteria must be deleted from both the Year 201 0 Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations. The language in the Comprehensive Plan must be removed first, then it is possible to remove the language from the Land Development Regulations. However, in the initial stages of review both revisions may be considered at the same time. Underlined text is new language and strikethmugh text indicates language to be deleted. From the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan: Policy 101.5.4-19 19. Modest Housing Points shall be assigned to encoumgc the deYlelopment of residential &.velling Wlits with characteristics that malce them relatively less expCHsive than similar residential &::elling 1:H1its that look these characteristics. ~ , 1 ~ . 1 . ,~ " . T T. :~ Weighting Category Criteria Minor Positive ..^.n application wmch qualifies for infill ROGO points lffider Policy 101.5. 4 and which proposes the development of a detached residential dwelling \:I:I1it that utilizes a ROGO allocation and contains one Page 2 of5 tho\:l5and three huRdr-ed (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable spaee. The par-eel ofland proposed for developing a demebed residential dwelling I:I:Rit shall not qualify for negatiye etr;irornncntal poffits under Polie)' 101.5.4; however, pr-operties designated Resideftt:ial High shall be exempted fr-om. tlHs pr-ombition. P.R affor<lable unit is not eligible for these points sinee a r-esidential chvelling unit that utilizes an affor<lable ROGO allocation is already required to comain one thousand thr-ee btrndred (1,300) square feet, or less, ofhabimble spaee. Minor Positi';e .\dditional pOHRS shall be earned for pr-oposmg a detaehed modalar residential ch';elling un.it. Minor Positiye .^~dditional points shall be earned for proposing a detached residential chvelling unit on a non '.vaterfr-ont property. A , 'n . , ~ ., . . T. . Minor Positi'/e .'\11 application \vhich qualifies for infill ROGO points under Policy 10 1.5. 4 and '.vhich proposes the development of an attaehed chvelling unit that 1:ltilizes a ROGO allocation and contains one thousand three hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable space. The par-cel ofland proposed for developing an auaehed residential d',velling unit shall not ql:lalify for negative ell'lir-ornnental points tmder Policy 101.5.4; however, pr-operties designated Residential High shall be exempted from this prohibition. An affordable mrit is not eligible for these points since a r-esidootial d'.velling un.it that utilizes an afiOr<lable ROGO allocation is already required to contain one thousand thr-ee huRdr-ed (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable spaee. Minor Positive p.:dditional points shall be earned for proposing an attaehed residential dv;elling unit on a non waterfront Minor Positive p~dditional points shall be earned for proposing an attached modular residential dwelling llllit. Minor Positive An application shall earn an additional point for . , , . .".,. 'L +L_+ ....~. Page 3 of5 I =- :':==:=~::()fl (IRE), on a one fer one basis (soo Policy 101.5.10). From the Land Development Regulations: Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) 19) A18dest hSJlsiHg: The f-ollov;ing points shall be assigned in order to encourage the ,. . . . . . . . ... :... ~, _UU"O .~. n. . . .- . . . .- n. F . n. . CFiWFia: ~ ;\n application which qualifies for infill ROGO points and proposes to de'/eIop a detached residential dwelling unit that contains one thOtiSand three hundred (1,300) J:"_ ~_1 ~. w' ~"1--- .---, ~" "-~~, ~. ~~-_. Addi#f5mal r-cf:Jl:li1'Cmcnts: 1. ;\n affor-dable unit is not eligible for these points since a residential d'.veIling unit that utilizes an affordable ROGO allocation is alr-eady requir-ed to contain one thousand three hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, ofhabitahle space. 2. The parcel ofland pmposed for developing the detached residential d\velling unit shaH not qualify for negative points under section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (8) or (9), except for a par-cel ofland located within a URM, URM L, IS D or DR land use district. 3. Expansion of the habitable space of the detached residential dwelling unit .1. .11 1- w' w 1. . . . J:"_ ... 1. r'"7\ J--~ ~ An application shall earn additional points for proposing a detached modular resideatial . ow' -~_. _ 4d.:Ji#r:ma! rcqblircnlC1'ltS: 1. To be eligible for these points, the detached modular residential d',velling unit Fffilst meet the minimwn windload r-equirements for MOF1f-oe County. 2. Both affordable and market l:Hlits are eligible for these points. -14 ;\n application shall earn an additional point for proposing a detached residential d',veIling unit on a non '.vaterEr-ont lot. Additio1'ltll "Cf:Jblircmcnts: 1. Both affordable and market units ar-e eligible for this point. Page 4 6f5 , . .- . . . .- n. TT_.~ '-' UN n Criteria: I' ~ .. ~ An applieation 'lIhi~h proposes to develop an attaehed r-esidemiaJ dwelling 1:H1it that contains one tB.oasand three OOnaroo (1,300) r. _~ 1 -. ., .. ----- , , Atiditienal FCfJuiromCl'lts: 1. Both affordable and market units are eligible for these points. 2. The par-eel oflana proposed for developing an attached residentiaJ d':lelling unit shall not qualify for negative points Wlder section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (8) or (9), except for a par-eel ofland located '.vitbin a UR11:, URM L, IS D or UR land use district. 3. Expansion of the habitable spaee ofan attached residentiaJ d'ueHing l.H1it shaJI 11.._ ,. . 1.... _ .' . ~L . r_ _~ 1 /..., v.. ....... ................ ~v. ..... ............,... ....." ~ An application shaJI earn additional points for proposing an attached modular attached . . . .., Additifmal rCfJuircmCl'lts: (1) To be eligible for these points an attaehed residential modular dwelling 1:1llit must meet the minimwn \...~.ndload requirements for Monr-oe County. (2) Both affOrdable and market units are eligible for these points. # f.n application shall earn an additionaJ point for proposing an attached residentiaJ m';elling urHt on a non waterfront lot. AtMitional r<:qui1'Cl'Iiems: (1) To be eligible for this point, the modular dwelling l.H1it must meet the minimum ':lindload requirements for Monroe County. l'l\ n~4-1.. ~ -' . .' '. . - . . . -~ ,__, ~v.... ........ ~......u~... e An application shall earn additionaJ points for utilizing transfers ofROGO exemptions (TREs) in the development of an attaehed residential dwelling urHt on a one for one boois. All such transfers must occar in aecordance with section 9.5 120.1.(b ). Page 5 6[5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #P36-02 PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. P36-02 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPRO V AL OF A REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND POLICY 101.5.4-19 OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY DELETING THE MODEST HOUSING POINT ASSIGNMENT RESIDENTIAL ROGO CRITERIA FOR DWELLING UNITS WITH 1,300 SQUARE FEET OR LESS OF HABITABLE SPACE, MODULAR UNITS, AND NON-WATERFRONT LOTS, FOR BOTH DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND THE USE OF TRANSFERS OF ROGO EXEMPTION (TRE) FOR ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS. WHEREAS, Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan currently awards points in the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) for criteria related to the creation of moderately priced housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has issued Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 which defines the specific criteria to determine if a house is to be eligible for 'modest housing' points; and WHEREAS, despite further clarification of the intent behind the modest housing point criteria, problems implementing modest housing continued to occur; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 033-2002 on January 1 ih, 2002 directing Growth Management staff to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points for 90 days and to immediately begin working with the Planning Commission to review and prepare an amendment concerning modest housing ROGO points; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held two public workshops, February 27, 2002, in Key Largo and March 13, 2002, in Marathon, and completed a review of the regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the modest housing and modular construction criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation, precluding individuals who entered the system before the points were adopted and are no longer competitive; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that homes that have received modest/modular points are being sold for a price higher than a moderate-income level family can afford; and Page 10f5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P36-02 Comp.doc WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted on March 13, 2002 to recommend that the moratorium of awarding modest/modular points be extended so that the language may be repealed from the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 17, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution 173-2002 directing the Growth Management division to continue to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points until December 31, 2002 and to draft language that will repeal the modest housing criteria from the Year 2010 Plan; and WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on May 14, 2002, the Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of the request by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to amend the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.4-19; and WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee passed Resolution No. D08-02 recommending approval of the proposed text amendment; and WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on May 29, 2002, the Monroe County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission was presented with the following information, which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing: 1. The Staff Report prepared on May 14, 2002 by Robert Will, Planner. 2. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff. 3. Advice from John Wolfe, the Planning Commission Counsel; and 4. Comments by the public; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. P37-02 to amend the Land Development Regulations Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) by deleting the modest housing point criteria was passed by the Planning Commission concurrently with this resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following Findings of Fact based on the evidence presented: 1. The intent of the modest housing point criteria was to encourage the development of housing that had characteristics that make them more reasonably priced, and 2. Insufficient definitions of what characteristics qualify a house as 'modest' and insufficient guidance in the point criteria do not assure that a house receiving modest housing points will be moderately priced, and Page 2 of5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P36-02 Comp.doc 3. Individuals who had applied for a residential building allocation before the modest housing criteria was adopted and might have received an allocation because of points accrued through years in the system, are no longer competitive and may not receive a allocation, and 4. As a result of the public workshops and a review of the regulations, the Planning Commission has recommended that the point criteria for modest housing be removed from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, and 5. At their regular meeting on April 1 ih 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution No. 173-2002 which extends the moratorium on the award of modest housing points and directed staff to remove the modest housing point criteria from the Year 2010 Plan and the Land Development Regulations; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding Findings of Fact support its decision to recommend APPROV AL to the Board of County Commissioners of the amendment to the text of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 101.5.4-19 as follows: Policy 101.5.4 19. Modest Housing Points shall be assigned to encOluage the developmcat of residential dwelling units with characteristics that make them relatively less expensive than similar residential dwelling units that lack these eharacteristies. . n .. .. T"">. ... T T_:.. ..., ~UH nr . . . " Minor Positi';e r Criteria ;\n application \vrnch ql:lalifies for infill ROGO poiflts lffider Poliey 101.5.4 and .....hieh pr-oposes the de';elopmern of a detoohed residential dwelling 1:IIlit that l:ltilizes a ROGO alloeation and contains ORe thol:lsand three hundred (1,300) sql:lare feet, or less, of habitable space. The parcel ofland pr-oposed for deyelopmg a detached residential dwelling unit shall not qualify for negati'/e envir-omnental points under Policy 101.5.4; however, pr-operties designated Residential High shall be exempted Er{)m this prohibition. .^Jl affordable unit is not eligible for these points sinee a residential dwellmg unit that l:ltilizes an affor-dable ROGO allocation is akeady reql:lired to contain one thousand tlH"ee hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable space. I Minor Positive I Additional points shall be earned f{)r proposing a Page 3 of 5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P36-02 Comp.doc I Milier Positive 1~?:::=~iRga i detached reSidentIal dwellIng lilut OR a nOfl . ~ . . . . .. . . T_ ~L Minor Positive An applieatisn '.."meh qualifies for infill ROGO points under Poliey 10 1.5.4 and whieh proposes the development of an attaehed dwelling linit that utilizes a ROGO aUoeation and eontains one thousand three hundred (1,300) sqliare feet, or less, of habitable spaee. The pareel of land proposed for developing an attaehed residential dv.'elling linit shall not qualify for negati';e environmental points under Policy 101.5.4; however, properties designated Residential High shall be exempted from this prohibition. .'\11 affordable l:U1it is not eligible for these points sinee a residential d':lelling l:lRit that utilizes an affordable ROGO allocation is already required to contain one tholisand three hundred (1,300) square f-eet, or less, of habitable space. Minor Positive .\dditional points shall be earned for proposing an attaehed residential dwelling anit on a non Minor Positive .\dditional points shall be earned for proposing an attaehed modular residential dv.elling linit. Minor Positive .^ill application shall earn an additional point f-or proposing an attaehed residential dwelling unit that utilizes a residential transfer of ROGO exemption (TRE), on a one for one basis (see Poliey 101.5.10). [The remainder of this page left intentionally blank] Page 4 of5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P36-02 Comp.doc PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Planning Commission of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 29th day of May, 2002. Chair David C. Ritz Vice Chair Denise Werling Commissioner P. Morgan Hill Commissioner Jerry Coleman Commissioner Alicia Putney YES YES YES absent YES PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY David C. Ritz, Chair Signed this _ day of ,2002. Page 5 of 5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P36-02 Comp.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #P37-02 PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. P37-02 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROV AL OF A REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND SECTION 9.5-122.3(a)(19) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BY DELETING THE MODEST HOUSING POINT ASSIGNMENT RESIDENTIAL ROGO CRITERIA FOR DWELLING UNITS WITH 1,300 SQUARE FEET OR LESS OF HABITABLE SPACE, MODULAR UNITS, AND NON- WATERFRONT LOTS, FOR BOTH DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND THE USE OF TRANSFERS OF ROGO EXEMPTION (TRE) FOR A TT ACHED DWELLING UNITS. WHEREAS, Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) currently awards points in the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) for criteria related to the creation of moderately priced housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has issued Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 which defines the specific criteria to determine if a house is to be eligible for 'modest housing' points; and WHEREAS, despite further clarification of the intent behind the modest housing point criteria, problems implementing modest housing continued to occur; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 033-2002 on January 17th, 2002 directing Growth Management staff to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points for 90 days and to immediately begin working with the Planning Commission to review and prepare an amendment to the LDRs concerning modest housing ROGO points; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held two public workshops, February 27, 2002, in Key Largo and March 13, 2002, in Marathon, and completed a review of the regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the modest housing and modular construction criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation, precluding individuals who entered the system before the points were adopted and are no longer competitive; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that homes that have received modest/modular points are being sold for a price higher than a moderate-income level family can afford; and Page I of 5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P37-02 LDR.doc WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted on March 13, 2002 to recommend that the moratorium of awarding modest/modular points be extended so that the language may be repealed from the Land Development Regulations; WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 17, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution 173-2002 directing the Growth Management division to continue to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points until December 31, 2002 and to draft language that will repeal the modest housing criteria from the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on May 14, 2002, the Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of the request by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to amend Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee passed Resolution No. D09-02 recommending approval of the proposed text amendment; and WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on May 29, 2002, the Monroe County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission was presented with the following information, which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing: 1. The Staff Report prepared on May 14,2002 by Robert Will, Planner. 2. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff. 3. Advice from John Wolfe, the Planning Commission Counsel; and 4. Comments by the public; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. P36-02 to amend the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.4-19 by deleting the modest housing point criteria was passed by the Planning Commission concurrently with this resolution; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following Findings of Fact based on the evidence presented: 1. The intent of the modest housing point criteria was to encourage the development of housing that had characteristics that make them more reasonably priced, and 2. Insufficient definitions of what characteristics qualify a house as 'modest' and insufficient guidance in the point criteria do not assure that a house receiving modest housing points will be moderately priced, and Page 2 of5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\wiIl-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P37-02 LDR.doc 3. Individuals who had applied for a residential building allocation before the modest housing criteria was adopted and might have received an allocation because of points accrued through years in the system, are no longer competitive and may not receive a allocation, and 4. As a result of the public workshops and a review of the regulations, the Planning Commission has recommended that the point criteria for modest housing be removed from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, and 5. At their regular meeting on April 1 th 2002, the Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution No. 173-2002 which extends the moratorium on the award of modest housing points and directed staff to remove the modest housing point criteria from the Year 2010 Plan and the Land Development Regulations; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding Findings of Fact support its decision to recommend APPROV AL to the Board of County Commissioners of the amendment to the text of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) as follows: Section 9.5-122.3(a) 19) "'f8dest h8HSillg: The f-ollo\'.'ing points shall be assigned in order to enCOl:lfage the ~+. , , , . , , 11 . ..- _uau. ~ . . ... .~ . -, ~ n. TT.. . n . ,. CritcriE.l: ~ An application whieh qualifies for infill ROGO points and proposes to develop a detached residential dv;elling unit that contains olle thousand three hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable Additiel'l3! rC(jblircmcl'lts: 1. "^..n affordable l:!nit is not eligible for these points since a residential dv.elling unit that utilizes an affordable ROGO allocation is already required to eontain one thousand three hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable space. 2. The pareel of land proposed for de';eloping the detached residential dwelling l:!nit shall not qualify for negative points lmder section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (8) or (9), exeept for a parcel oflaHd located '.vithin a URM, URM L, 18 D or DR land use district. 3. Expansion of the habitable space of the detaehed residential dVlelling lmit "1."11 1.~ ,. . '\. ,.. ~ +t . +~_"+ 1_ '"+ f'7\ uu_u ~_ ., -. .' / - Page 3 of 5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P37-02 LDR.doc -+4- fill applicatioFJ. shall earn additienal points f{)r proposing a detaehed modular . .> . .>. .". . - _.uu~ _un. Additiel'ltlll'CfJuircmcl'lts: 1. To be eligible for these points, the detached modular residential dwelling unit must meet the minimum windload requiremeHts for Monroe County. 2. Both affordable and market lmits are eligible for these points. 0+4- An application shall earn an additional point for proposing a detached residential -~- ,.. 1 - _uU.O ~u _ Additielltlll'CfJbliFC1'11cl'lts: 1. Both affordable and market units are eligible for this point. . ..... . . . .- .-. Tr~:.. ~..- n . .. Critcritl: ~ }.n application which proposes to develop an attached residential dwelling unit that contains one thousand three lumdred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable Additientlll<CfJuir-cl'llcnts: 1. Both affordable and market units are eligible for these points. 2. The parcel of land proposed for developing an attached residential dwelling 1:ffiit shall not qualify for negative points under section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (8) or (9), except f{)r a parcel ofland located 'Nithin a URM, URM: L, IS D or DR land l:lse district. 3. Expansion of the habitable space of an attached residential dwelling unit .1- .11 1- ' 1- ,. . ~ +1.. r. , .... ,..~,,~_ 1'7\ ~.1 _. .__~. ~_ _u ~ An application shall earn additional points f{)r proposing an attached modular attached . , . , .11' n_:+ . _.uuto. _un. Additiel'ltlll'CfJuir-c1'11cnts: (1) To be eligible for these points an attached residential modular dv:elling unit must meet the minimum windload requirements for Monroe C01:ffity. (2) Both affordable and market units are eligible fur these points. Page 4 of 5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P37-02 LDR.doc 014- .^..n aflplieatien shall earn an additional point fer proposing an attached residential .... .~ 1_+ .. uvu~ Addititmal rCfJNi1'CIHcntS: (1) To be eligible fer this point, the memllar dwelling unit must meet the minimum ',vindload requirements fer Menroe County. t,.,\ n."~1_ -- . . . ...:I . ., , L:"_ +1-' . .+ _u..~ ~ :\.n application skall earn additional points for utilizing transf-ers ofROGO eJ(emptions (TREs) in the development of an attaehed residential dv:elling llflit on a one fer one basis. :\ll sueh transfers must oceur in . . .L {\~1"'{\A/t..." PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Planning Commission of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 29th day of May 2002. Chair David C. Ritz Vice Chair Denise Werling Commissioner P. Morgan Hill Commissioner Jerry Coleman Commissioner Alicia Putney YES YES YES absent YES PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY David C. Ritz, Chair Signed this _ day of ,2002. Page5of5 Initial W:\Planning\Working Folders\will-robert\Text Amendments\Modest Housing Repeal\PC\PC Reso #P37-02 LDR.doc DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION #D08-02 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION NO. D08-02 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND POLICY 101.5.4-19 OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY DELETING THE MODEST HOUSING POINT ASSIGNMENT RESIDENTIAL ROGO CRITERIA FOR DWELLING UNITS WITH 1,300 SQUARE FEET OR LESS OF HABITABLE SPACE, MODULAR UNITS, AND NON-WATERFRONT LOTS, FOR BOTH DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND THE USE OF TRANSFERS OF ROGO EXEMPTION (TRE) FOR ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS. WHEREAS, Policy 101.5.4-19 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan currently awards points in the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) for criteria related to the creation of moderately priced housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has issued Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 which defines the specific criteria to determine if a house is to be eligible for 'modest housing' points; and WHEREAS, despite further clarification of the intent behind the modest housing point criteria, problems implementing modest housing continued to occur; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 033-2002 on January 17th, 2002 directing Growth Management staff to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points for 90 days and to immediately begin working with the Planning Commission to review and prepare an amendment concerning modest housing ROGO points; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held two public workshops, February 27, 2002, in Key Largo and March 13, 2002, in Marathon, and completed a review of the regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the modest housing and modular construction criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation, precluding individuals who entered the system before the points were adopted and are no longer competitive; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that homes that have received modest/modular points are being sold for a price higher than a moderate-income level family can afford; and Page 1 of 4 Initial WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted on March 13, 2002 to recommend that the moratorium of awarding modest/modular points be extended so that the language may be repealed from both the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on May 14, 2002, the Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of the request by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to amend the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.4-19; and WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee examined the staff report prepared by Robert Will, Planner and dated May 14, 2002; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. D09-02 to amend the Land Development Regulations Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) by deleting the modest housing point criteria was passed by the Development Review Committee concurrently with this resolution; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding findings of fact supports their decision to recommend APPROV AL to the Monroe County Planning Commission of the proposed text amendment to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.4-19 as follows: Policy 101.5.4 19. Modest Housing Points shall be assigned to ene01:lfage tHe development of residential dwelling \:lnits with characteristics that make them relatively less expensive than similar residential dv;elling \:lnits that lack these characteristics. - -..... . . ' . ~ ..' TT_:.. ~ . . r< Criteria Minor Positive An application '.vrnch q\:lltiifies for infill ROGO points 1:Iflder Policy 101.5. 4 and which proposes the development of a detached residential dwelling I:lIlit that milizes a ROGO allocation and contains one tho\:lsand three Hundred (1,300) sq1:lar-e feet, or less, of habitable spaee. The parcel ofland proposed for de';eloping a detaehed residential dv;elling 1:lftit shall not q1:lalify for negative envir-onmental points \:lfider Policy 101.5.4; howeyer, pr-operties designated Residential High. shall be exempted fr-om this prohibition. An afiOr-dable mHt is not eligible for these points since a residential dwelling I:lIlit that milizes an affordable ROGa allocation is akeady required to contain one tno\:lsand three hlffidrcd (1,300) sq1:lare feet, or less, of habitable space. Page 2 of 4 Initial Minor Positi';e l\dditioaal points shall be earned for proposing a ~ ~ ,- ~ . . . . . . , ". n_:. Minor Positive ;\dditional points shall be earned for proposing a detached residential d'.velling unit on a non waterfront property. . .- . - . -- ... TT_:. '-'.~. Minor Positive :\n application ".vflich qualifics for infill ROGO points Uflder Policy 10 1.5. ~ and which proposes the deyelopment of an attached dVlclling unit that utilizes a ROGO allocation and contains one thousand three hundred (1,300) squarc fect, or less, of habitable spaec. The parcel ofland proposed for de'/cloping an attached residential dv;elling Uflit shall not qualify for negati','c environmental points under Policy 101.5. 4; hO':lcver, properties designated Residential High. shall be exempted from this prohibition. .^.n affordable unit is not eligiblc for these points since a residential dwelling unit that utilizes an affordable ROGO allocation is already required to contain one thousand three hundrcd (1,300) square fect, or less, of habitable space. Minor Positivc .\dditional points shall be earncd for proposing an attached residential dwelling unit on a non ~ Minor Positive .\dditional points shall be carned f-or proposing an attached modular residential d..velling unit. Minor Positive .^.n applieation shall earn an additional point for proposing an attached residential dwelling unit that utilizes a residential transfer ofROGO exemption (TRE), on a onc for onc basis (see Policy 101.5.10). [The remainder of this page left intentionally blank) Page 3 of 4 lni tial PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Development Review Committee of Monroe County, Florida at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of May, 2002. Fred Gross, Director, Lower Keys Island Planning Team Ed McGee, Director, Upper Keys Island Planning Team Ralph Gouldy, Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources Jerry Buckley, Planner Department of Health (by fax) Department of Public Works (by fax) Department of Engineering (by fax) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA By Fred Gross, DRC Chair Signed this _ day of ,2002. Page 4 of 4 Initial '. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION #D09-02 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION NO. D09-02 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT AL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND SECTION 9.5-122.3(a)(19) OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BY DELETING THE MODEST HOUSING POINT ASSIGNMENT RESIDENTIAL ROGO CRITERIA FOR DWELLING UNITS WITH 1,300 SQUARE FEET OR LESS OF HABITABLE SP ACE, MODULAR UNITS, AND NON- WATERFRONT LOTS, FOR BOTH DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND THE USE OF TRANSFERS OF ROGO EXEMPTION (TRE) FOR ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS. WHEREAS, Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) currently awards points in the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) for criteria related to the creation of moderately priced housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has issued Administrative Interpretation No. 01-113 which defines the specific criteria to determine if a house is to be eligible for 'modest housing' points; and WHEREAS, despite further clarification of the intent behind the modest housing point criteria, problems implementing modest housing continued to occur; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 033-2002 on January 1 ih, 2002 directing Growth Management staff to defer the award of modest housing ROGO points for 90 days and to immediately begin working with the Planning Commission to review and prepare an amendment to the LDRs concerning modest housing ROGO points; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held two public workshops, February 27, 2002, in Key Largo and March 13, 2002, in Marathon, and completed a review of the regulations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the modest housing and modular construction criteria have inflated needed ROGO scores to receive an allocation, precluding individuals who entered the system before the points were adopted and are no longer competitive; and Page 1 of5 Initial WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that homes that have received modest/modular points are being sold for a price higher than a moderate-income level family can afford; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously voted on March 13, 2002 to recommend that the moratorium of awarding modest/modular points be extended so that the language may be repealed from the LDRs; WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on May 14, 2002, the Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of the request by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to amend Section 9.5-122.3(a)(19) of the Land Development Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee examined the staff report prepared by Robert Will, Planner and dated May 14, 2002; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. D08-02 to amend the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.4-19 by deleting the modest housing point criteria was passed by the Development Review Committee concurrently with this resolution; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding findings of fact supports their decision to recommend APPROV AL to the Monroe County Planning Commission of the proposed text amendment to the Monroe County Land Development Regulations as follows: Section 9.5-122.3(a) 19) A/8Rest !J8using: The follo\'/ing points shall be assigned in order to enC01:lrage the r . . . . . . . ... .~ '" ...un..,. ..,. . . - . . . .- ... TL . '"" Criteria: !~ ~ An application '.vhieh qualifies for infill ROGO points and proposes to dc'..elop a detached residential d'.velling unit that contains one thousand three hundred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable 5J*lee Page 2 of5 Initial -- AtMitie1'lal1'eqblircmcHts: 1. .^.n affordable 1:lIlit is not eligible for these paints since a residential dwelling lmit that atilizes an affafdable RaGa allocation is already required to contain ene thousand three lumdred (1,300) square feet, or less, of habitable space. 2. The parcel of land proposed for developing the detaehed residential d'.velling unit shall not fiualify for negati'le points ooder seetioFl 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (&) ar (9), exeept for a parcel ofland located within a URM, URM: L, IS D or DR land use district. 3. Expansion of the habitable spaee of the detached residential d'.velling unit -'- .11 L_'" L ,. . ~L . r. 1 __..__ f"7\ ...."'..... -14 ;\n applicatioFl shall earn additional points f{)r proposing a detached modular . , . . ... . Adti-itiena1 r-cqblil"cltwHts: 1. To be eligible for these points, the detached modular residential dV/elling unit must meet the minimum '.vindload requirements for Monroe Co1:lnty. 2. Both affordable and market l:mits are eligible f{)r these points. =14- An application shall earn an additional point for proposing a detached residential An...' . - 1- ."'.. Adti-itienal r-cquircmcnts: 1. Both aff{)rdable and market units are eligible f{)r this point. . . .- . - - ... TT. ~ '"" Criteria: r ~ .^.n application 'Nhich proposes to develop an attached residential dwelling unit that contains one thousand three hundred (1,300) sq1:lare feet, or less, of habitable ~ Page 3 of5 Initial ~ Adti-itiena! FOljli.iFCIHcnts: 1. Both affordable and market 1:1nits are eligible for these points. 2. The parcel of land proposed for dey/eloping an attached residential dv/elling 1:lflit shall not qualify for negative paints 1:lP.der section 9.5 122.3(a)(7) or (&) or (9), except for a parcel oflaRd located \vithin a URM, URM L, IS D or DR land use district. 3. Expansion of the habitable space of an attached residential dwelling unit .'- ." '- , . .. '- ... . ..L L'_ .~ , f"7\ ~..-.. ~- ~, "'.. ...- ~"'. -14 An application shall earn additional points f{)r proflosing an attached modular attached '., ' ... Adti-iti$nal FCfJli.ir-cmcnts: (1) To be eligible for these points an attached residential modular dwelling unit must meet the minimum windload requirements f-or Momoe County. (2) Both afiOrdable and market UIlits are eligible for t:hese points. =14- An applieation shall earn an additional point for proposing an attached residential , ... ~ .. - ,.. "... Additienall'CqNir-cmcHts: (1) To be eligible f{)r this point, the modular dwelling unit must meet the minimum windload requirements for Monroe County. f'-'\ n~..1... ,..,.. , " ~_A , u_:"" ~_~ -,' ~L , r~_ ..1....~_ _~'_.. l-/ ...u~ ...u..~ -14 .^ul application shall earn additional points for utilizing transf"6rs of ROGO exemptions (TREs) in the development of an attached residential dwelling unit on a one for one basis. ;\11 sMcn transf~rs mast ocelli' in , ..:..1... n c ,,-,n II f1...\ [The remainder of this page left intentionally blank] Page 4 of5 Initial PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Development Review Committee of Monroe County, Florida at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of May, 2002. Fred Gross, Director, Lower Keys Island Planning Team Ed McGee, Director, Upper Keys Island Planning Team Ralph Gouldy, Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources Jerry Buckley, Planner Department of Health (by fax) Department of Public Works (by fax) Department of Engineering (by fax) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA By Fred Gross, DRC Chair Signed this day of ,2002. Page 5 of5 Initial