M E M O R A N D U M

October 14, 2003

City of Dade City

38020 Meridian Avenue

Dade City, Florida 33526-1355

Dear Mayor Black:

The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the City of Dade City (DCA 03-2), which was received on July 29, 2003. Based on Chapter 163, F.S., we have prepared the attached report, which outlines our findings concerning the amendment. It is particularly important that the City address the Aobjections@ set forth in our review report so that these issues can be successfully resolved prior to adoption. We have also included a copy of local, regional and state agency comments for your consideration. Within the next 60 days, the City should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment. For your assistance, our report outlines procedures for final adoption and transmittal.

The City’s proposed Amendment 03-2 consists of one text amendment to Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.6 (Amendment CPA03-01) and two Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments (FLUMA03-02 and FLUMA03-03). The proposed Policy 1.1.6 revises the Comprehensive Plan to authorize the “Residential, Institutional, Office” (RIO) zoning district for the High Density Residential FLUM category. The Department has concerns that Policy 1.1.6 does not resolve potential inconsistencies between the FLUM category and the RIO zoning district regarding maximum allowable residential density of use, and therefore, the amendment may result in the Comprehensive Plan authorizing a zoning district to be implemented inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Similarly, the Department is concerned with Amendment FLUMA03-03, which applies the High Density Residential category to the FLUM on a 1.21 acre parcel.

If you, or your staff, have any questions or if we may be of further assistance as you formulate your response to this Report, please contact Marina Pennington, Regional Planning Administrator or Scott Rogers, Senior Planner, at (850) 922-1823.

Sincerely,

Valerie J. Hubbard, AICP

Director, Division of Community Planning

VJH/sr

Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report

Review Agency Comments

cc: Mr. Harold Sample, City Manager, City of Dade City

Mr. Manuel Pumariega, Executive Director, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council

TRANSMITTAL PROCEDURES

The process for adoption of local comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in s. 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-11.011, Florida Administrative Code.

Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the City must submit the following to the Department:

Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendment;

A copy of the adoption ordinance;

A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed;

A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance; and

A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report.

The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent.

In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendment, and pursuant to Rule 9J-11.011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to Mr. Manuel Pumariega, Executive Director of the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council.

Please be advised that the Florida legislature amended Section 163.3184(8)(b), F.S., requiring the Department to provide a courtesy information statement regarding the Department’s Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses at the local government’s plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by the law to furnish to the Department the names and addresses of the citizens requesting this information. This list is to be submitted at the time of transmittal of the adopted plan amendment (a sample Information Sheet is attached for your use).

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS

FOR

CITY OF DADE CITY

AMENDMENT 03-2

October 14, 2003

Division of Community Planning

Bureau of Local Planning

This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010, F.A.C.

INTRODUCTION

The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department’s review of the City of Dade City’s proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan (DCA number 03-2) pursuant to Chapter 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.).

The objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection would take precedence.

Each of these objections must be addressed by the local government and corrected when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections, which are not addressed, may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items, which the local government considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed.

The comments, which follow the objections and recommendations section, are advisory in nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension.

Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report.

OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS

FOR

CITY OF DADE CITY

AMENDMENT 03-2

I. CONSISTENCY WITH CHAPTER 163, PART II, F.S., AND RULE 9J-5, F.A.C.

The Department raises the following objections to proposed Amendment 03-2:

A. FLUE Text Amendment CPA03-01: A proposed amendment to Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.6 to add the “Residential, Institutional, Office” (RIO) zoning district (land development regulation zoning district) to the list of zoning districts that are allowed within the “High Density Residential” (HDR) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) category.

1. Objection: Policy 1.1.6 is intended to show zoning districts that are compatible with the associated FLUM category. The HDR FLUM category allows residential and nonresidential uses. The RIO zoning district allows a variety of land uses, including residential and nonresidential uses.

Pursuant to Rule 9J-5.005(6), F.A.C., and Sections 163.3194, 163.3201, and 163.3202, F.S., land development regulations shall be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. A comprehensive plan should not authorize a zoning district to be implemented inconsistent with the comprehensive plan.

Current Policy 1.1.6 has a footnote regarding consistency of the FLUM descriptions with the zoning districts, and the footnote states that “Only land uses and intensities specified for the underlying future land use category are permitted unless zoning district uses and intensities are more restrictive. In such cases, the zoning regulations shall prevail.”

The current footnote resolves inconsistencies between the RIO zoning district and FLUM category regarding type of land use and intensity of use in a manner consistent with the rule and statute. However, the footnote does not clearly address and resolve (with a meaningful and predictable standard) potential inconsistencies regarding maximum allowable residential density of use. Therefore, the proposed amendment may result in the Comprehensive Plan authorizing a zoning district to be implemented inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and this result is inconsistent with the requirements of Rules 9J-5.005(6), and 9J-5.006(3)(c)7, F.A.C., and Sections 163.3194, 163.3201, and 163.3202, F.S.

Rules 9J-5.005(6); 9J-5.006(3)(c)7, F.A.C.; and Sections 163.3194; 163.3201, and 163.3202, F.S.

Recommendation: Revise the footnote to FLUE Policy 1.1.6 to ensure that the zoning regulations do not exceed the maximum density of use allowed by the FLUM category.

B. FLUM Amendment FLUMA03-03: A proposed FLUM amendment to change 1.21 acres from Low Density Residential (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre) to High Density Residential (10 to 20 dwelling units per acre; and commercial) located south of Willingham Avenue and west of US Highway 301. The parcel is vacant and the intended land use is an apartment complex.

1. Objection: The proposed FLUM amendment designates the High Density Residential FLUM category on a 1.21 acre parcel. The Department is raising an objection to the proposed Amendment CPA03-01 to FLUE Policy 1.1.6 regarding the High Density Residential FLUM category (see Objection # 1 above) because the amendment to FLUE Policy 1.1.6 is inconsistent with the requirements of Rules 9J-5.005(6), and 9J-5.006(3)(c)7, F.A.C., and Sections 163.3194, 163.3201, and 163.3202, Florida Statutes. Because the FLUM amendment applies FLUE Policy 1.1.6 to the FLUM, the FLUM amendment is similarly inconsistent with the requirements of Rules 9J-5005(6), and 9J-5.006(3)(c)7, F.A.C., and Sections 163.3194, 163.3201, and 163.3202, F.S., that the land development regulations shall be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan.

Rules 9J-5.005(6); 9J-5.006(3)(c)7; 9J-5.006(4), F.A.C.; and Sections 163.3194; 163.3201, and 163.3202, F.S.

Recommendation: Revise the proposed FLUE Policy 1.1.6 as recommended for Objection # 1 in this report.

II. CONSISTENCY WITH STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA03-01 and Amendment FLUMA03-03 are not consistent with and do not further the following provisions of the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, Florida Statutes) for the reasons noted in the objections raised above:

(a) Goal 15.a (Land Use); Policy 15.b.3.

Recommendation: Revise the plan amendments as recommended for the objections raised above.