Item O08
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: March 19,2008 Division: Growth Management and Housing and
Community Development
Bulk Item: Yes - No -1L- Department:
Staff Contact Person: Lisa Tennyson/292-4462
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
A public hearing to adopt an ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending the
Land Development Regulations by adding Section 9 .5-266(b)( 4 )a. to clarify that inclusionary housing
requirements may be met through the deed-restriction of existing dwelling units as affordable in lieu of
constructing new units.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
At its July 7, 2007 meeting in Key Colony Beach, the Monroe County Workforce Housing Task Force voted to
request that the Board clarify that a developer or redeveloper could meet the County's inclusionary housing
requirements by deed-restricting as affordable housing an appropriate number of existing dwelling units for the
period prescribed for under the County's inclusionary housing ordinance.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
On April 19, 2006 the Board adopted Ordinance 017-2006 establishing "inclusionary housing" requirements for
development and redevelopment which was approved by the Florida Department of Community Affairs and
which has since been as a new Section 9.5-266(b) of the Monroe County Code.
At its December 17, 2007 meeting of the Development Review Committee staff recommended approval of the
proposed ordinance.
At its February 5, 2008 regular meeting, the Monroe County Planning Commission recommended approval of
the proposed ordinance.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/ A
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval
TOTAL COST: N/ A BUDGETED: Yes - No -
COST TO COUNTY: N/A SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes - No - AMOUNT PER MONTH_ Year -
APPROVED BY: County Arty X- OMBlPurchasing _ Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included --X- Not Required_
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #
Revised 8/06
~,.~
....... -""....
A )";
'Ii~ \;
\IY'
" ,-,~, ~--
"" "
~..- .
STAFF REPORT
TO: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Lisa Tennyson, Affordable Housing Coordinator
THROUGH: Reggie Paros, Division Director of Housing and Community Development
Townsley Schwab, Acting, Sr., Director of Planning & Environmental
Resources
DATE: February 25, 2008
SUBJECT: PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE MONROE COUNTY
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
MEETING DATE: March 19, 2008
I. PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
The proposed amendment is intended to clarify that inclusionary housing requirements set forth
in 9.5-266(b) can be met by an applicant through the appropriate deed-restriction of already existing
housing units in the County according to prescribed affordability standards. This means that
compliance with inclusionary housing need not be accomplished though construction or reconstruction
of new or refurbished units, but instead could be accomplished, for instance, through the purchase of
an existing duplex and deed-restricting it to meet affordable housing requirements.
A. Previous County Action:
In 2006, the County adopted an inclusionary housing ordinance relating to trailer park and
other multiple dwelling unit residential redevelopments. This amendment seeks to clarify inclusionary
housing compliance options by adding the following section 9.5-266(b)(4)a.:
a. Compliance with this subsection may be achieved through the deed-restriction of
existing dwelling units requiring that the affected units remain subject to the County's
affordable housing restrictions for a period not less than the period prescribed in
subsection (5)(c)3., below, according to administrative procedures established by the
County.
On December 17th, 2007, the Development Review Committee approved the proposed
amendment.
On February 5th, 2008, the Monroe County Planning Commission heard the proposed text
amendment at its regularly scheduled monthly meeting. The Planning Commission approved the
proposed text amendment on a 5-0 vote, and directed staff to include examples of various compliance
options. Specifically addressing the Planning Commission directions and public comments, the
following modifications were made:
The following example is set forth to illustrate potential application ovtions:
Example: Owner/develover has 100 develovment rights
. Ovtion 1: Owner/develover mav build uv to 70 market rate units and shall
build 30 affordable units (using conventional comvliance method.) The
owner's 100 development rights vield a ratio of 70 market rate units and 30
affordable units.
. Option 2: Owner/develover mav build up to 70 market rate units and shall
purchase and deed-restrict 30 existing market rate units (in lieu ofbuilding 30
new affordable units.) The owner's 100 development rights again vield a ratio
of70 market rate units to 30 affordable units.
. Option 3: Owner/developer mav build uv to 100 new market rates. If the
develover wishes to use all 100 development rights for market rate
development, his inclusionary comvliance requirement to vurchase and deed-
restrict existing market rate units increases, and in this case for example,
calculates to 43 total affordable units. (The owner's 100 development rights
vield a ratio of 1 00 market rate units to 43 affordable units, which is
equivalent to the ratio of70 market rates to 30 affordables: 100/43 = 70/30.)
B. Sponsor:
The Workforce Housing Taskforce and the Division of Housing and Community Development
originated the proposed text amendment; and the Planning Department worked to fmalize this
ordinance.
C. Characteristics of the proposed text amendment
The proposed amendment clarifies that compliance can be accomplished with the appropriate
deed-restriction of existing dwelling units.
This proposed amendment does not address specific criteria for the types and conditions of
housing units that shall be deed-restricted. Staff will develop administrative guidelines that outline
suitability and habitability requirements that will include but not be limited to ensuring that each
housing unit to be deed-restricted meets all current building codes and has a useful life for at least the
30 year deed-restriction period. The Planning and Building Departments shall determine habitability
for proposed units to be deed-restricted for each individual project.
2
II. ANALYSIS:
A. Consistency with the Land Development Regulations
County requirements for amendments to the land development regulations: Pursuant to
Section 9.S-Sll(d)(S)b of the Monroe County Code, the Board of County Commissioners may
consider the adoption of an ordinance enacting proposed changes to the text or maps based on one (1)
or more of the following factors, for which the following justification is provided:
(i) Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which
the text or boundary was based;
None.
(ii) Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends);
The County has encouraged preservation of existing affordable housing
stocks through required redevelopment of a percentage of dwelling units
in multi-family residential redevelopment projects as "affordable" units.
(iii) Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features
described in Volume I of the plan;
None.
(iv) New issues;
The County adopted an inclusionary housing ordinance in 2006 and
clarifications to the ordinance to better facilitate its purposes are to be
expected. This amendment does that.
(v) Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; or
Workforce Housing Taskforce and County staff have recognized the
need to clarify that appropriate deed-restricting of dwelling units, even
offsite units in particular cases, can fully serve the overall intent of the
County's inclusionary housing ordinance and lend planning stability and
options for potential housing redevelopers and thereby encourage
continued activity in the affordable housing development/redevelopment
area.
(vi) Data updates;
None
B. Consistency with the Principles for Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of
Critical State Concern.
The proposed text amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development as a
whole and is not inconsistent with any Principle. Specifically, the amendment furthers:
3
Principle (a) To strengthen local government capabilities for managing land use and
development so that local government is able to achieve these objectives without the
continuation of the area of critical state concern designation.
Principle G) To make available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the
population of the Florida Keys.
and
Principle (1) To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys
and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The proposed defInition amendment is justifIed by three (3) of the factors in Section 9.5-511 of
the Monroe County Code, which the BOCC may consider for amending the land use
regulations:
(ii) Changed assumptions (e.g., County's new Purchase and Development
Program); and
(iv) New issues; and
(v) Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness.
2. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the following Principles for Guiding
Development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern:
Principles (a), (j) and (I)
3. The proposed text amendment is in the interest of public welfare.
The amendments to the land development regulations contribute to the set of overall programs
and policies designed to preserve and protect the County's existing and future affordable and
workforce housing stock.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval.
4
ORDINANCE NO. - - 2008
AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE MONROE
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BY ADDING
SECTION 9.5-266(b)(4)a. UNDER ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE TO
CLARIFY THAT INCLUSIONARY HOUSING REQUIREMENTS MAY
BE MET BY DEED-RESTRICTING EXISTING DWELLING UNITS AS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN LIEU OF CONSTRUCTION OF NEW
UNITS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND REPEAL OF
INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS; PROVIDING EFFECTIVE DATE;
PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION IN THE MONROE COUNTY
CODE OF ORDINANCES
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has considered the comments of the
public, recommendations of the Planning Commission, recommendations of staff and the
Workforce Housing Task Force and its counsel, and other matters; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners makes the following Findings of Fact:
1. On August 17, 2005 the Board adopted Resolution 320-2005 deferring the
acceptance of the applications for the redevelopment of ten (10) or more units of multi-family
rental housing or mobile homes located in mobile home parks in order for the County's staff and
housing consultants to complete the drafting of an "inclusionary housing" ordinance for the
County.
2. On January 18, 2006 the Board adopted Resolution 029-2006 extending the effect
of Resolution 320-2005.
3. On April 19, 2006 the Board adopted Ordinance 017-2006 establishing
"inclusionary housing" requirements for development and redevelopment which was approved by
the Florida Department of Community Affairs and which has since been as a new Section 9.5-
266(b) of the Monroe County Code.
4. At its July 7, 2007 meeting in Key Colony Beach, the Monroe County Workforce
Housing Task Force voted to request that the Board clarify that a developer or redeveloper could
meet the County's inclusionary housing requirements by deed-restricting as affordable housing an
appropriate number of existing dwelling units for the period prescribed for under the County's
inclusionary housing ordinance.
5. These amendments to the land development regulations specifically further Fla.
Stat. Sec. 163.3202(3) and Fla. Stat. Sec. 125.01055 by implementing innovative land development
regulation provisions such as transfer of development rights, incentive and inclusionary housing.
6. The proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations are consistent
with and further goals, objectives and policies of the Year 20 I 0 Comprehensive Plan.
7. At its December 17, 2007 meeting of the Development Review Committee staff
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance.
8. At its February 5, 2008 regular meeting, the Monroe County Planning Commission
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. At this meeting, the Planning Commission also
directed staff to include examples of compliance options in the ordinance. The Planning
Commission and this Board considered demonstrated factors supporting the proposed amendment
as outlined in the staff report and as required by Section 9.5-511 of the Monroe County Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Section 9.5-266(b) is amended by adding new (4) a. to read as follows:
(4) Alternative Compliance
a. Compliance with this subsection may be achieved through the deed-restriction of
existing dwelling units requiring that the affected units remain subiect to the
County's affordable housing restrictions for a period not less than the period
prescribed in subsection (S)(c)3.. below. according to administrative procedures
established by the County.
The following example is set forth to illustrate potential application options:
Example: Owner/developer has 100 development rights
. Option 1: Owner/developer may build up to 70 market rate units
and shall build 30 affordable units (using conventional compliance
method.) The owner's 100 development rights yield a ratio of70
market rate units and 30 affordable units.
. Option 2: Owner/developer may build up to 70 market rate units
and shall purchase and deed-restrict 30 existing market rate units
(in lieu of building 30 new affordable units.) The owner's 100
development rights again yield a ratio of 70 market rate units to 30
affordable units.
. Option 3: Owner/developer may build up to 100 new market rates.
If the developer wishes to use all 100 development rights for
market rate development. his inclusionary compliance
requirement to purchase and deed-restrict existing market rate
units increases, and in this case for example. calculates to 43 total
affordable units. (The owner's 100 development rights yield a
ratio of 100 market rate units to 43 affordable units, which is
equivalent to the ratio of 70 market rates to 30 affordables:
100/43 = 70/30.)
tt;JL In-lieu fees. The developer of a project subject to the requirements of this
subparagraph 9.S-266(b) may contribute a fee in-lieu of the inclusionary
housing requirements for all or a percentage of the affordable housing units
required by subsection (b )(2). The developer shall pay per unit in-lieu fees
the current maximum sales price for a one-bedroom affordable unit as
2
established under section 9.5-266(a)(M-6.2). All in-lieu fees shall be
deposited into the affordable housing trust fund and spent solely for the
purposes allowed for that fund. The developer, along with any
corresponding in-lieu fees, shall transfer to the County ownership of the
associated ROGO-exempt development rights for any affordable unites)
required by this section for which the in-lieu fee option is used.
&:---9:. Land Donation. Upon the acceptance of the board of county
commissioners of a proposed onsite or off site parcel (or parcels), a developer
may satisfy the requirements of this subsection 9.5-4 (M-6.2) by donating to
the County, or other agency or not-for-profit organization approved by the
board, one (I) IS or URM lot for each unit required but not provided through
actual construction or in-lieu fees (or a parcel or parcels of land zoned other
than IS or URM as long as the donated parcel( s) will support the development
of an appropriate number of affordable units). Lots or other parcels so
provided shall not be subject to environmental or other constraints that would
prohibit immediate construction of affordable housing units. The developer,
along with any corresponding donated parcel(s), shall transfer to the County
ownership of the associated ROGO allocations or ROGO-exempt
development rights for any affordable unites) required under this section.
Section 2. Severability.
If any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence or provision of this ordinance shall be
adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect,
impair, invalidate, or nullify the remainder of this ordinance, but the effect thereof shall be
confined to the section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence or provision immediately involved
in the controversy in which such judgment or decree shall be rendered.
Section 3. Conflicting Provisions.
In the case of direct conflict between any provision of this ordinance and a portion or provision of
any appropriate federal, state or County law, rule, code or regulation, the more restrictive shall
apply.
Section 4. Transmittal.
This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department to
the Florida Department of Community Affairs to determine the consistency of this ordinance with
the Florida Statutes and as required by F.S. 380.05(6) and (11).
Section 5. Filing.
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 Administration
Commission approving the ordinance.
3
Section 6. Effective Date; Incorporation into Code of Ordinances.
This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and stated above and shall be
incorporated into the Monroe County Code of Ordinances at such time. Where Comprehensive
Plan amendments may be required in order for any part of this ordinance to be deemed consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan, the effective date of such part shall be as of the effective date of the
required Comprehensive Plan amendment and as otherwise required by law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida at
a regular meeting held on the 19th day of March, 2008.
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Mayor Pro Tern Mario DiGennaro
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Dixie Spehar
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
Deputy Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
4