Right Under our noses: House Bill 7203 covers City of Miami, Hialeah and all of Broward. By Geniusofdespair

I went to a Downtown Bay Forum meeting yesterday and heard Carolyn Dekle, Executive Director of the South Florida Regional Planning Council (you all must remember that Katy Sorenson was taken off the Council by Commissioner Chair Martinez last year).

I have an uncanny ability to zone out most of the time but still pick up what is important. I almost hit the floor when Dekle referred to a new law that has truncated review of (State Growth/Planning Reviewing Agencies) DCA and SFRPC. Deckle said the State agencies are moving towards letting local communities take more of a role in their growth management.

I am a pretty regular reader of the Miami Herald and not much slips by me...although I am on overload, but somehow this became a law right under my nose, never saw it in the Herald.

When I got home I quickly called Charles Pattison of 1000 Friends of Florida, a former staff member of the Department of Community Affairs. He said I should have looked on their website 1000 Friends of Florida . The Bill was there. (This is boring stuff but you have to know it so please read on).

In short, the bill is a pilot project. The process affects the City of Miami (not the county YET!) and is basically a modified “small scale” amendment process for all amendments – one hearing, DCA , RPC and state agencies, and any local government that asks, get copies of the proposed amendments, and they can comment if they want but they don’t have to. Individual comments are then sent back to the city, and then a 2nd adoption hearing is held. Any amendments that pass are sent back to the agencies, and the agencies can appeal if they chose. Standing by citizens affected to challenge any amendment remains the same. 1000 Friends wrote:

OVERALL IMPRESSION - not moving in the right direction as many more issues included:
1. makes it easier for development to occur regardless of transportation concurrency issues
2. dangerous extension of local government/developer agreements from 10 to 20 years when revenue forecasting less certain than ever
3. establishes a pilot program in several communities (Broward, Pinellas, Jacksonville, Miami, Hialeah, Tampa) that allows all amendments to be reviewed through small scale amendment process
4. citizens get little from this bill - developers and local governments get relaxed concurrency standards with limited requirement for consistency with the local comprehensive plan

It seems like we need - Florida Hometown Democracy Petition more than ever.

In short order — if the State keeps moving in that direction -- the Vile Natacha Seijas and other County Commissioners will not have the State scrutinizing land use changes they make for their developer pals.

If you hit “Read More” you can see what 1000 Friends of Florida wrote about this bill before it became law:

HB 7203, 2nd engrossed version, with amendments as of May 1, 2007

Our goal this year - only minor changes necessary to fix glitches from SB 360 regarding concurrency and financial feasibility this year, with more substantial and comprehensive revisions in 2008 session.

OVERALL IMPRESSION - not moving in the right direction as many more issues included:

1. makes it easier for development to occur regardless of transportation concurrency issues

2. dangerous extension of local government/developer agreements from 10 to 20 years when revenue forecasting less certain than ever

3. establishes a pilot program in several communities (Broward, Pinellas, Jacksonville, Miami, Hialeah, Tampa) that allows all amendments to be reviewed through small scale amendment process

4. citizens get little from this bill - developers and local governments get relaxed concurrency standards with limited requirement for consistency with the local comprehensive plan

HIGHLIGHTS as we see them on 5/5/07 (subject to update):

1. community redevelopment areas now included in Chapter 163 definition of "urban redevelopment"

2. comp plans deemed "financially feasible" when the capital improvements schedule shows that concurrency standards (for transportation and schools) will be achieved/maintained by the end of the 5 year schedule (means you don't have to meet concurrency in any one year IF you can demonstrate you will meet it by year 5)

3. allows plan amendments to be deemed "financially feasible" as well as meeting the "achieve and maintain" standard with respect to transportation facilities IF

(a) is a condition of development order of a DRI with proportionate share mitigation
(b) is part of a binding agreement with fair share mitigation where the amendment to the future land use map is within designated urban infill, urban redevelopment or urban service area - binding agreement must be based on maximum allowable amount of development on the map and/or in plan policy if less than the maximum
4. adds airport passenger terminals, concourses, air cargo facilities, hangars, aircraft maintenance/storage areas to existing transportation concurrency exemption for public transit facilities

5. clarifies that where urban service areas are to be considered for transportation concurrency, they can only be as large as the area covering a 10 year planning period (means that existing very large urban service areas that allow for more than 10 years of growth will not qualify)

6. allows existing Transportation Concurrency Areas to meet the tighter requirements established in 2005 at the time of the next EAR instead of 2006

7. clarification that DRIs using proportionate share not required to reduce or eliminate existing backlogs on roads and schools - extends this provision as well to Florida Quality Developments and optional sector plans

8. where a school board agrees to include a new facility in its next scheduled work program, developers can accelerate building of one or more schools

9. proportionate fair share mitigation specifically allowed to be focused on one or more transportation improvements - clarification that where such funding "significantly benefits" the overall transportation system as determined by the local government, development is allowed to occur even if concurrency not met

10. Transportation Concurrency Backlog Areas authorized:

a. allows creation of an authority (meaning the appropriate local government) that designates an area where one or more traffic deficiencies exist such that traffic volume(s) exceed the level of service standard (LOS) as found in the local plan
b. provides tax increment financing to raise funds needed to demonstrate that deficiencies will be addressed in 10 years or less - allows for bonds and related financing mechanisms
c. allows development to proceed once the improvement schedule is made part of the comprehensive plan - will be deemed "financially feasible" and meeting the "achieve and maintain" standard now required
d. also requires an overall plan showing deficient roadways, priority improvement list and financing schedule as part of the comprehensive plan
11. allows Jacksonville-Duval to have 720 acres (instead of 120) of small scale amendments/year - no more than 120 acres of such amendments allowed outside designated urban infill, urban redevelopment areas

12. Plan Amendment Review Pilot Progam:

a. designates Broward, Pinellas, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa, Hialeah to have all amendments reviewed under a modified small scale process
b. local government has transmittal hearing and DCA,FDOT, DEP, Education Commissioner, DACS, DOS, and Game Commission and any requesting local government may or may not comment within 30 days - Regional Planning Council comments limited to regional issues - use Chapter 125 or 166 notice requirements - DCA encouraged to focus on state and regional issues
c. local government has adoption hearing to consider any comments using Chapter 125 or 166
d. amendments go into effect if not challenged within 30 days
e. citizen standing allowed as before, with "preponderance of the evidence" test; state agencies may also challenge
f. any rural land stewardship, optional sector plan, EAR update amendment, implementation of any new statutory requirements, and new plans for newly incorporated areas required to use current system
g. Administration Commission takes final action within 45 days if administrative law judge recommends "not in" finding; DCA receives recommendations if "in compliance"
h. Where DCA finds amendment "not in", sends on to Administration Commission; if it finds "not in", may apply sanctions; if finding is "in", enters final order
i. OPPAGA to present evaluation report by December 1, 2008, to Governor, Speaker and President on pilot program
13. DCA gets 4 new positions for technical assistance

14. DRI buildout dates extended by 3 years without becoming substantial deviations

15. Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot Program (CHWIP) for building affordable housing renamed "Representative Mike Davis Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot Program

16. Conservation easement revisions which also appear in a DEP sponsored bill appear here regarding "Tax Increment Financing for Conservation Lands"

17. When Port Master Plans are integrated into a local comprehensive plan as part of an EAR, and the EAR is found not sufficient, the port master plan may still be adopted

18. DCA authorized to use rulemaking to implement Local Update Census Addresses (LUCA) tech assistance grants