city of tampa dca#08-2ar - tbrpc prepared by city of tampa land development and coordination...
TRANSCRIPT
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
1
Agenda Item #3.H.1
04/13/09
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ADOPTED AMENDMENT REPORT
CITY OF TAMPA
DCA#08-2AR (EAR-based Amendments)
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
2
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
3
The following Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report Summary
was prepared by City of Tampa Land Development and Coordination Division staff.
January 8, 2009 (updated)
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
1
(1)
Adaptive Reuse
• Re
vise Policy 15.1.8 to clearly define the term “ad
aptiv
e reuse” and in
clud
e in
the Po
licy crite
ria by w
hich prope
rties c
an m
eet the ada
ptive reuse de
sign
ation.
• Re
vise th
e Plan to in
clud
e a de
finition se
ction that clearly defines im
portan
t, key term
s tha
t are used in th
e variou
s elem
ents of the Plan.
• Po
licy 15.1.8 w
as re
vised to be consistent w
ith th
e crite
ria ou
tlined in th
e Cha
pter 27.
(2)
Port Master Plan
• Re
vise Objectiv
e 19.2 and associated po
licies regarding th
e Plan
’s objectiv
es
and related po
licies regarding coo
rdination with th
e Ta
mpa Port A
utho
rity’s
Port M
aster P
lan to in
corporate the most recently upd
ated Port M
aster P
lan
that w
as ado
pted in Ju
ly 2008.
• Add
ition
al coo
rdination with th
e Po
rt is re
quired
. Th
e City w
ill process a plan am
endm
ent b
y Decem
ber 1
, 2009 to add
ress th
e ob
jection.
(3)
(4)
Military Base Compatibility & Noise Attenuation Standards
• Establish stan
dards, criteria an
d gu
idelines to achieve com
patib
ility of lan
d uses w
ith th
e AFB
.
• Limit de
nsity and in
tensity in th
e APZ I an
d II, and prohibit d
evelop
ment in
the Clear Zon
e.
• Dep
ict the Clear Zon
e, APZ zon
e I a
nd II, and noise con
tours on th
e Fu
ture
Land Use M
ap.
• Includ
e stan
dards for noise atte
nuation for d
evelop
ment in no
ise contou
rs.
Clarifie
d po
licies ‐
• Re
tain civilian term
s (i.e., M
acDill Flig
ht Path)
• Clear Zon
e, M
acDill Flig
ht Paths and N
oise Con
tours
will be show
n on FLU
M
• Proh
ibit vertical develop
ment in Clear Zon
e.
• New develop
ment to attenu
ate for n
oise con
sistent w
ith
Fede
ral g
uide
lines fo
r airpo
rt plann
ing (CF 14 Part 150)
• By Decem
ber 1
, 2009, FLU
M w
ill be am
ende
d to re
flect
new noise con
tour areas dep
icted in 2008 AICUZ Stud
y •
Add
ed a new policy stating that City w
ill con
tinue to
prov
ide inform
ation it receives from M
acDill AFB to th
e pu
blic.
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
2
(5)
Tampa International Airport Land Use Compatibility
• Includ
e po
licies, guide
lines and stand
ards th
at ensure de
velopm
ent in the
vicinity of a
ll airports are com
patib
le w
ith th
e functio
ns and activities of the
airport a
s required by State Law
.
• Prov
ided clarification regarding the Plan
’s policies a
nd
the M‐A
P plan category.
• Add
ed a new policy calling fo
r con
tinue
d coordina
tion
betw
een the City and th
e Aviation Autho
rity to achieve
land use com
patib
ility in accorda
nce with Cha
pter 333,
F.S.
(6)
Concurrency Management
• Re
vise th
e Plan to re
quire that tran
sportatio
n facilities need
ed to serve new
developm
ent sha
ll be in place or u
nder actua
l con
struction with
in th
ree years
after the lo
cal g
overnm
ent a
pproves a building pe
rmit or its fun
ctiona
l equivalent th
at re
sults in traffic generation.
• Includ
e a po
licy that in
corporates th
e lang
uage of S
ectio
n 163.3180(2)(a
), F.S.,
regarding the availability of w
ater sup
plies.
• Po
licy 20.1.1 w
as m
odified to re
flect th
e basic statutory
requ
irem
ents fo
r con
currency con
sistent w
ith Cha
pter
163.3180, F.S.
(7)
Future Land Use Map Classifications
• Define no
n‐reside
ntial u
ses tha
t can be pe
rmitted und
er th
e “n
eigh
borhoo
d serving no
n‐reside
ntial u
ses an
d special” uses allowed in th
ose catego
ries.
• Define the “area wide” m
ix of u
ses, as ide
ntified in th
e mixed use categories
• Re
vise th
e plan categories to establish minim
um residentia
l densitie
s to ensure
developm
ent o
f a com
pact urban fo
rm th
at discourages urban sp
rawl.
• Ex
amples of n
eigh
borhoo
d serving no
n‐reside
ntial u
ses
and special u
ses a
re listed fo
r each of th
e plan
catego
ries, w
here th
ey are permitted
. •
The “area wide” term is defined as “
city‐w
ide”.
• Current land use patterns an
d market trend
s to not yet
justify th
e establishm
ent o
f “across‐th
e‐bo
ard”
minim
um densitie
s for a
ll plan categories throug
hout
the City
.
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
3
(8)
House Bill 697 (Energy Efficiency)
• Incorporate strategies dem
onstratin
g that th
e land use plan discou
rages u
rban
sprawl and promotes energy‐efficient patterns
• Dep
ict o
n the Fu
ture Lan
d Use M
ap th
e existin
g an
d future electric po
wer
generatio
n an
d tran
smission systems .
• Incorporate tran
sportatio
n strategies and alte
rnative mod
es of travel to ad
dress
redu
ction in greenho
use gas e
mission
s from th
e tran
sportatio
n sector
• Incorporate conservatio
n strategies to add
ress th
e protectio
n of fa
ctors that
affect energy conservatio
n an
d that con
servation areas be m
appe
d on th
e Fu
ture Lan
d Use M
ap
• Incorporate ho
using strategies fo
r energy efficiency in th
e de
sign and
constructio
n of new hou
sing
• Atta
chment A in
clud
es a crosswalk of th
e plan
’s policies
in re
latio
n to th
e requ
irem
ents of H
ouse Bill 697.
(9)
Rural Estates – 5 Plan Category
• Do no
t ado
pt th
e RE‐5 fu
ture land use category because it prom
otes urban
sprawl.
• Re
vise th
e catego
ry to be consistent w
ith th
e Cou
nty’s Agricultural 1 unit p
er
10 acres plan catego
ry to ensure that ru
ral agricultural lan
ds th
at are ann
exed
into th
e City are not con
verted to lo
w in
tensity
, low density, and single use
developm
ent in excess of d
emon
strated need
• Th
e Ru
ral E
states‐5 Plan Category was w
ithdraw
n an
d replaced w
ith a new plan catego
ry Rural Estates – 10
Plan Category. T
he RE‐10 is con
sistent w
ith
Hillsborou
gh Cou
nty’s plan category, w
hich th
e pa
rcels
are currently designa
te.
(10)
Affordable Housing
• Re
vise Objectiv
e 26.14 to be specific an
d measurable with re
spect to the
prov
ision of affo
rdable hou
sing
. •
Revise Policies 26.14.1 throug
h 26.14.10 to in
clud
e meaning
ful and predictable
guidelines and stand
ards to be im
plem
ented regarding affordable hou
sing in
orde
r to achieve the ob
jective.
• Th
e revised po
licies must ide
ntify ade
quate sites a
nd distribution of hou
sing
for v
ery‐low in
come, lo
w‐in
come an
d mod
erate‐income ho
useholds based on
• Ex
plained that th
e ob
jective an
d po
licy qu
estio
ns ra
ised
by DCA staff are ad
dressed in Objectiv
e 26.8 not
Objectiv
e 26.14. Include
d the ap
prop
riate po
licies for
DCA staff review
. •
Revised Objectiv
e 26.8 to in
clud
e the target of 2
1,156
affordable hou
sing units by 2025 as ind
icated in th
e Hou
sing backg
roun
d section.
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
4
the best availa
ble da
ta and ana
lysis a
nd th
e City
’s hou
sing needs assessm
ent.
(11)
(12)
Wetlands and Riverine Systems
• Re
vise th
e wetland polices to in
clud
e meaning
ful and predictable guide
lines
and stan
dards that w
ill ensure the protectio
n an
d restoration of w
etland
s.
• Define sign
ificant w
etland
s an
d riverine systems
• Includ
e gu
idelines and stand
ards to ensure that no encroachment into their
100‐year floo
d plain.
• Includ
e stan
dards a
nd criteria to guide develop
ment w
ithin th
e 100‐year
flood
plains so th
at th
eir fun
ctions w
ill be protected.
• Objectiv
e 38.9.1 and its a
ssociated po
licies were
with
draw
n an
d replaced w
ith policies from th
e existin
g plan re
lated to th
e protectio
n of w
etland
s an
d riverine
system
s.
• Th
e existin
g po
licies contained gu
idelines and
stan
dards w
hich w
ere more in line w
ith DCA staff’s
recommenda
tions.
(13)
Plan Amendments in the Coastal High Hazard Area
• Re
vise Policy 41.1.6 to delete the exception that allo
ws a
n increase in re
side
ntial
density in th
e CHHA. D
ensity in
creases in the CHHA are only allowed
consistent w
ith 163.3178(9)(a), F.S.
• Po
licy 41.1.6 has been with
draw
n.
(14)
Roadway LOS Standard
• Clearly define an
d identify the City
’s ro
adways that are classified as the “n
eeds
netw
ork” and
/or c
onstrained fa
cilities.
• Establish road
way LOS stan
dards for th
e City
’s needs network road
s, and
constrained road
s con
sistent w
ith th
e stan
dard established by th
e FD
OT.
• Po
licy 46.3.1 and Policy 60.4.2c.1 was re
vised to re
flect
the level o
f service stand
ard for C
ity ro
ads is LOS “D
”.
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
5
(15)
Transportation Concurrency Exception Area
• Ado
pt a clear app
roach for implem
entin
g lo
ng‐te
rm strategies to sup
port and
fund m
obility w
ithin th
e de
sign
ated excep
tion area, including alte
rnative
mod
es of transpo
rtation.
• Ado
pt strategies that w
ill be used to in
corporate projects and establish clear
prov
isions fo
r the fu
nding an
d availability of m
obility projects to sup
port
developm
ent w
ithin th
e TC
EA and im
prov
e mob
ility.
• An introd
uctio
n de
scribing th
e TC
EA strategy was
inserted before Objectiv
e 46.4.
• A new policy (46.4.1) re
quires th
at th
e TC
EA be map
ped
on th
e Fu
ture Lan
d Use M
ap.
• Po
licies 4
6.4.5 – 46.4.9 w
ere revised to clarify th
e relatio
n of th
e TC
EA su
b‐districts a
nd re
view
requ
irem
ents to th
e ov
erall V
ision of th
e plan
. •
Add
ed a new policy (46.4.15) ind
icating that th
e City
will amend its develop
ment regulations by July 1, 2010
to im
plem
ent lan
d use, urban design an
d tran
sportatio
n concurrency requ
irem
ents outlin
e in th
e Plan
. •
All of th
e po
licies were renu
mbered.
• Th
e initial strike‐ou
t and und
erlin
e form
at w
as very
confusing, so the respon
se w
ithdraw
s po
licies 4
6.4.1 –
46.1.16 an
d replaces th
em w
ith th
e revision
s sho
wn.
• A crosswalk show
ing ho
w th
e Plan add
resses th
e mob
ility, u
rban design, m
itigatio
n requ
irem
ents
requ
ired by Statute is sho
wn in App
endix C.
(16)
Constrained Roadway Table (Page 368)
Revise th
e Con
strained Roadw
ay ta
ble to re
flect LOS stan
dards o
n State facilities
consistent w
ith Rule 14‐94, F.A.C.
• Th
e Table show
n on Page 368 was m
odified
. According
to FDOT, th
ere are 3 SIS conn
ectors and 1 SIS fa
cility on
the table that can
not b
e classifie
d as “constrained.
These 4 facilities a
re re
mov
ed from th
e list.
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
6
(17)
Strategic Intermodal System LOS Table (Page 369)
• Re
vise The Table on Pa
ge 369 to provide clear, m
eaning
ful d
escriptio
ns
regarding levels of service stan
dards for SIS, FIH
S, and TRIP facilities, as w
ell
as all road
s with
in th
e City
. •
Identify an
d de
fine in th
e plan
, the H
igh Tran
sit L
evel of S
ervice Corrido
rs and
the constrained an
d de
ficient corrido
rs and id
entify the specific level o
f service
stan
dards for th
ese corridor ty
pes.
• Th
e Table show
n on Page 369 was w
ithdraw
n an
d replaced w
ith th
e Table from Rule 14‐94, Florida
Adm
inistrative Cod
e (F.A.C) establishing Level of
Service Stan
dards for State fa
cilities.
(18)
Maps / Data & Analysis Base Year
Revise th
e map
s and associated da
ta and ana
lysis to re
flect th
e current p
lann
ing
timeframe the map
s rep
resent and provide th
e up
dated map
s.
• Ex
plained that th
e base year for th
e Plan is 2005,
consistent w
ith th
e Ev
alua
tion an
d App
raisal Rep
ort.
All map
s, ta
bles, d
ata an
d an
alysis in
clud
e the 2005 base
year and th
e 2010, 2015 an
d 2025 plann
ing tim
eframes.
(19)
Capital Improvements Element
• Upd
ate the 5‐year sched
ule to cov
er th
e requ
ired five years
• Sh
ow projects on th
e schedu
le in a m
anner tha
t will allo
w th
e identification of
their location in th
e commun
ity.
• Clearly state fund
ing sources a
nd define abbreviatio
ns.
• Prov
ide revenu
es and exp
enditures for e
very fu
nding source
• Dem
onstrate ade
quate fund
ing in each source to pay fo
r the im
prov
ements.
• Ite
ms show
n on th
e schedu
le to th
e ov
erall p
rojected cap
ital improv
ement
need
s of th
e City sho
uld be provide
d.
• Th
e Cap
ital Improv
ements Sched
ule an
d backgrou
nd
inform
ation was out of d
ate an
d contained errors. It
was re
placed by up
dated FY
09 – FY1
4 inform
ation that
addresses the qu
estio
ns ra
ised by DCA Staff
• Th
e revised inform
ation is con
tained in App
endix B.
(20)
Policy 46.4.8 – Plan Consistency
• Po
licy 46.4.9 allo
ws d
evelop
ment tha
t is incon
sistent w
ith th
e City
’s
Com
prehensive plan prov
ided th
ey m
ake fin
ancial con
tributions to offs
et
adverse im
pacts of th
e prop
osed
. •
This Policy is in
consistent w
ith Sectio
n 163.3167(b) w
hich re
quires all
developm
ent to be con
sistent w
ith th
e City
’s Com
prehensive Plan.
• Po
licy 46.4.8 w
as re
vised to add
ress th
e issue raised by
DCA staff.
Summary
Tampa Comprehensive Plan Update
DCA Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report
Obj #
Summary of DCA Objections
Summary of City Response
7
(21)
Water Supply Planning
Includ
e a Po
licy to ensure coordina
tion with th
e Southw
est F
lorida W
ater
Man
agem
ent D
istrict and Tam
pa Bay W
ater Autho
rity re
garding the City
’s Ten‐
year W
ater Sup
ply Work Plan
.
• A new policy (73.3.4) w
as add
ed callin
g for
colla
boratio
n with SFW
WMD and TBW
A in develop
ing
the City
’s Ten‐ Year W
ater Sup
ply Work Plan
.
(22)
Rural Estates FLUM Change
Ado
pt a land use category that permits no more de
nsity or intensity th
an permitted
unde
r the existing Hillsborou
gh Cou
nty Agriculture land use category, w
hich
allows on
e un
it pe
r ten acres, in orde
r to discou
rage urban sp
rawl and premature
conv
ersion of rural land
s to other uses, an
d maintain sepa
ratio
n betw
een urban an
d rural lan
d uses and protect natural re
sources.
• Th
e pa
rcels show
n in PA‐2008‐1 are de
sign
ated Rural
Estates – 10 as de
fined in th
e respon
se to Objectio
n #10.
(23)
Definitions
Revise th
e Plan to in
clud
e a de
finition se
ction that clearly defines im
portan
t, key
term
s that are used in th
e variou
s elements of the Plan.
• A definition
s section will be ad
ded to th
e ad
optio
n po
rtion of th
e Plan
. Th
e de
finition
s are in
clud
ed in
App
endix D.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
4
City of Tampa
EAR-based Amendments
“The City of Tampa introduces a new Comprehensive Plan to shape the City’s future. The new
plan builds on the work of the past five years and provides a framework for a Livable future and
a strategy for directing growth in the City of Tampa over the next 20 years. It recognizes that as a
city approaching build-out, Tampa’s future is about rebuilding and urbanizing, about “growing
up” because we have limited opportunities to grow out. It is not a synthesis of previous plans; it
is a new plan for a new city.
The following are staff comments:
Chapter 1: Livability and Choice
• TBRPC staff has no comment.
Chapter 2: The Livable City Vision
• TBRPC staff has no comment
Chapter 3: Urban Design and Land Use
• Industrial Development and Redevelopment: This section of the plan discusses the
importance of Industrial development and redevelopment within the City to bring in
higher wage jobs, to contribute to the property tax base, and the increasing demand for
industrial lands within Tampa.
This seems to be in direct opposition to the Objective and Policies related to Rattlesnake
Point which “encourages the transition of the Rattlesnake Point Waterfront Area from its
heavy industrial and light industrial uses to a residential/commercial mixed-use
waterfront community.”
This is a concern as we continue to see the conversion of Industrial designations to other
land use designations throughout Tampa and Hillsborough County—eliminating the
potential to support necessary industrial uses and for the creation of higher paying jobs.
Scenic Transportation Corridors
• The Courtney Campbell Causeway is a designated Scenic Highway with the east end of
the Causeway within the City of Tampa.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
5
• FDOT’s Scenic Highway Program suggests that, at a minimum, the following elements
of the Corridor Management Plan should be adopted into the appropriate local
government Comprehensive Plan (the City of Tampa and the City of Clearwater):
• Corridor Vision
• Corridor Identified on a Map
• Goals, Objectives and Strategies
Current plans can be amended to incorporate scenic corridors, or communities can use the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) process to update their plans to include scenic
corridors.
• The City of Tampa is encouraged to adopt the following Policies, or something similar,
into its Comprehensive Plan to recognize the Courtney Campbell Causeway as a Florida
Scenic Highway and to support its mission and goals, objectives and strategies:
Objective – The natural, recreational, scenic, historic, and cultural resources of the Courtney
Campbell Causeway shall be preserved and enhanced for the City of Clearwater
residents.
Policy The City shall support the mission and goals, objectives and strategies of the
Courtney Campbell Causeway Florida Scenic Highway designation as approved
by the City Council on _(date)_for the causeway located between McMullen
Booth Road and Veteran’s Highway as shown Citywide Design Structure Map
A-14 in the Future Land Use Element.
Policy The City shall support efforts to retain the current physical cross sectional
character of the causeway reminiscent of its historic origin.
Policy The City shall participate in efforts to maintain the natural environment by
supporting a coastal-style, native Florida landscape and promoting community
partnerships to control litter on the causeway.
Policy The City shall support FDOT’s pedestrian, bicycle and transportation
initiatives for the causeway including safety enhancements.
Policy The City shall continue to participate with the Corridor Management Entity
(CME) as an ongoing and effective sponsor and advocate for the Scenic
Highway designation process and implementation of improvements.
Policy The City shall continue to cooperate with intergovernmental coordination efforts
as one of the four governmental entities that include City of Clearwater, Pinellas
County, City of Tampa and Hillsborough County.
Policy The City shall participate in the education program efforts for promoting the
location and features of the causeway.
Policy The City shall participate in the maintenance and enhancements of the
recreational opportunities along the causeway and in establishing the Causeway
as a tourist point of interest.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
6
Policy The City shall cooperate with FDOT’s enhancement efforts to improve the
visual appearance of the causeway.
Chapter 4: Building Sustainable Neighborhoods
• TBRPC Staff has no comment.
Chapter 5: Sustainable Environment
Conservation Element
• Policies 38.1.1 and 38.1.13, which address the acceptable use of alternative fuels
“...proven to do no harm to other sections of the world economy, population or
environment, and are secure, resource efficient and sustainable...”
Comment: There is no supporting information provided by which to identify the
acceptable alternative fuels as delimited in the policies.
• Policy 38.1.10 refers to the West Central Florida Air Quality Coordinating Committee.
Comment: This committee has disbanded.
• Policy 38.2.6 requires the preservation or conservation of representative stands of upland
native plant communities.
Comment: Size standards would be helpful to ensure that the protected communities
are of a sustainable size.
• Policy 38.5.5 states that the City will cooperate with the U.S. Department of Agriculture
and the FDEP to eliminate exotic nuisance plant species.
Comment: The City should cooperate with all agencies in such an endeavor.
• Policy 38.7.3. The City shall continue to cooperate with EPC, SWFWMD, and other
appropriate entities monitoring surface water quality, particularly for those sampling sites
relevant to protecting water quality within the City’s reservoir, in order to monitor
compliance with state water quality standards.
Comment: This cooperation should extend to all surface waters within the
Hillsborough River basin.
• Objective 38.21. To ensure that all discharges to natural surface water bodies in the
Tampa Bay watershed shall comply with state water quality standards for their designated
use.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
7
Comment: This Objective and its supporting policies are very pertinent, given the
current mandates for improved surface water quality at the state and
federal levels.
Coastal Management Element
• Policy 41.1.1 The City may wish to revise the definition based on recent
recommendations of the DCA. “The area below the elevation of seaward of the category
1 storm surge line as established by the NOAA Storm Surge model, SLOSH1 and
depicted in the most recent regional evacuation study, Storm Tide Atlas”.
• Policy 41.1.9: Expansion of existing “special needs” facilities including adult congregate
living facilities, hospitals, nursing homes, homes for the aged and total care facilities in
the Coastal High Hazard Area may be considered if an evacuation and shelter plan is
approved by the County Emergency Management Department.
Comment: The City should carefully consider the expansion of existing “special needs”
facilities in the CHHA as evacuations of these vulnerable populations can have
potentially life-threatening consequences.
• Policy 41.2.3: The City of Tampa shall evaluate the feasibility of applying a 12-hour
evacuation time to shelter space level of service standard (or less) in approving proposed
plan amendments that increase residential density in the Coastal Planning Area for all
evacuation scenarios.
Comment: This policy seems to indicate that the City will seek to apply a 12-hour “to
shelter” LOS with proposed plan amendments. This can only be accomplished if the City
can demonstrate that there is sufficient shelter capacity in Hillsborough County.
According to the EAR, Hillsborough County still has a deficit for Category 4 and 5
storms (see page 10-13). By not adopting an LOS for out of county evacuation, the LOS
became 16 hours. Therefore mitigation would be required for all proposed plan
amendments.
• Policy 41.5.1: By 2009, the City of Tampa shall complete a Post Disaster
Redevelopment Plan to create a process for making sound post-disaster decisions and
preparing for long-term recovery needs.
Comment: Hillsborough County is currently developing a county-wide Post-Disaster
Redevelopment Plan (PDRP). Will the City adopt this plan or is the City developing its
own PDRP?
• Policy 41.5.3: The City will limit expenditures for infrastructure within the Coastal High
Hazard Area to those projects that can demonstrate…
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
8
Comment: The second bulleted item should be clarified to extend expedited permitting
to minor repairs only. The last bulleted item should refer to the Future Land Use Element,
the Local Land Development Code and PDRP.
Comment: Pg 10-11 of the background information of the Coastal Management
Element refers to a City of Tampa Peacetime Emergency Plan (PEP). The Tampa Bay
Regional Planning Council is not familiar with a City PEP and has not reviewed one
since 1985. In fact the term PEP has not been used in 15 years. The City has coordinated
with the County in the development of the Hillsborough County Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). If the City has a separate plan, the CME should
document the consistency with the CEMP.
Chapter 6: Sustainable Infrastructure
Mobility Element
• Policy 42.2.10: Assist in the coordination of a trail network with the Hillsborough
County Greenways Committee, the Tampa Greenways and Trails Advisory Committee,
MPO’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees, and appropriate agencies.
Comment: Recommend consideration of coordination with adjacent county MPOs and
trail committees when developing plans for trail networks.
• Policy 43.1.5: The City of Tampa shall coordinate transportation plans and programs
with HART, the MPO, TBARTA, and FDOT to improve transit service delivery in the
City.
Comment: Recommend consideration of coordinating with adjacent MPOs and local
governments, in addition to the agencies currently listed, when planning for regional
connectivity of the city’s transit services.
• Policy 45.2.4: The City shall encourage new development to participate in transportation
demand management (TDM) strategies such as carpooling, vanpooling, parking
management, flexible work hours, or provision of bicycle and mass transit facilities.
Comment: The City should also encourage “employers” to participate in TDM
strategies. In addition, telework (telecommuting) should be added to the list of TDM
strategies.
• Objective 47.4: By 2025 provide for a transportation system that permits safe evacuation
in the event of man-made or natural disasters within the parameters established in the
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council’s evacuation plan.
Comment: Recommend changing TBRPC’s “evacuation plan” to read TBRPC’s
“Regional Evacuation Study.”
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
9
Chapter 7: A Vibrant Economy
• TBRPC staff has no comment.
Chapter 8: People Shaping, Changing and Growing Our City
• TBRPC staff has no comment.
$ Regionally Significant: Yes, based on the fact that by their breadth and scope, the
EAR-based amendments will directly or indirectly be related to or impact regionally
significant resources and facilities.
$ Result in extra-jurisdictional impacts?: No.
$ Effects of the amendment on the following issues:
$ Compatibility among local plans including, but not limited to, land use and
compatibility with military bases:
$ Impact/protect regional facilities/resources identified in the SRPP, including
but not limited to, groundwater recharge and the availability of water supply: During the planning period of this Comprehensive Plan the City will re-
evaluate actual levels of service and adjust water consumption LOS accordingly.
However, the City will continue to rely on Tampa Bay Water to meet future
demand. In addition, the City will expand reclaimed water service, will continue
to increase conservation efforts, and will continue to protect wellhead areas and
surface water bodies.
$ Affordable housing issues and designation of adequate sites for affordable housing: Housing policies address providing residents a variety of housing
choices that accommodate various income levels and address the need for decent
and affordable housing, public housing, and special needs housing.
$ Protection of natural resources of regional significance identified in the
SRPP including, but not limited to, protection of spring and groundwater resources, and recharge potential: The City will continue to work with the
SWFWMD, EPC and other agencies in the protection of groundwater resources.
$ Effectiveness and enhancement of economic development within the region
including, but not limited to, preservation of military bases: As a result of citizen input the City recognizes their vision for a City with a
“diverse, equitable and vibrant economy and goals, objectives and policies that
promote prosperity.” This Chapter addresses supporting Vibrant Economy
opportunities through arts and culture, community redevelopment areas, economic
engines, industrial development, international markets, and maritime uses, to
name a few.
In addition the City recognizes its challenges such as competition with the
suburbs and surrounding counties, corporate consolidation, cost of growth,
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
10
diminishing human services programs, older industrial areas, quality education,
and skilled workforce, as a few examples.
$ Compatibility with regional transportation corridors and facilities including,
but not limited to, roadways, seaports, airports, public transportation systems, high speed rail facilities, and intermodal facilities: The City is
looking closely at transit, at infill and redevelopment and TCEAs as ways to force
more multi-modal transportation system options, including rail. The City will
also support and encourage Transportation Demand Management strategies,
including bike lanes and more sidewalks.
$ Adequacy of and compatibility with emergency preparedness plans and local
mitigation strategies (plans) including, but not limited to, the impacts on and
availability of hurricane shelters, maintenance of county hurricane evacuation clearance times, and hazard mitigation: See Coastal Management
Element comments on page 5.
$ Regional Comments: None.
• Applicable SRPP Policies: The additions and revisions contained in the
adopted amendment were found to be supportive
of and further the goals and policies of the SRPP=s
five subject areas.
$ Consistency with SRPP: Consistent.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
11
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
12
AMENDMENT # 08-2AR (CIE)
$ Description: The City of Tampa has submitted their Capital Improvements Element
(CIE) in accordance with DCA. The CIE is required by SB 360 (2005) and HB 7203
(2007). The CIE, part of the Comprehensive Plan, identifies all capital projects that need
to maintain Level of Service (LOS) standards over the next five years.
$ Regionally Significant: Yes, the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) contains all of
the capital improvement projects that require a level of service within the Capital
Improvements Plan (CIP) within the next five years. A number of the projects are
regionally significant, primarily regarding transportation.
Below is a summary update of each area:
Stormwater – The City currently provides a level of service of “C” or better to 97% of
its basins within the city. The other 3% are currently not meeting adopted level of
service of “C.” Three stormwater projects are identified to address stormwater
deficiencies; it is not stated if these projects will satisfy the basins to meet a level of
service of “C” or better.
Parks and Recreation – The City is currently meeting level of service standards and
anticipates continuing to stay within compliance beyond the year 2015. New parkland
acquisitions are anticipated in year 2013.
Wastewater (Sanitary Sewers) – The City is currently meeting level of service
standards and anticipates continuing to stay within compliance beyond the year 2015. No
new wastewater projects are anticipated.
Potable Water – The City is currently meeting level of service standards and anticipates
continuing to stay in compliance beyond the year 2015. No new wastewater projects are
anticipated.
Solid Waste – The City is currently meeting level of service standards and anticipates
continuing to stay in compliance beyond the year 2015. No new wastewater projects are
anticipated.
Mobility (Road Network) – The City is currently not meeting level of service standards.
Projections are listed for 2015 and 2025. Several projects are listed to address various
deficiencies.
Mobility (Transit) – The City is meeting adopted level of service on all routes, except
for two. These two routes show a load factor of 1.24 and 1.20, which is greater than or
equal to the adopted 1.2 load factor. New buses or a reconfiguration of alternative routes
can be used to address this deficiency.
$ Result in extra-jurisdictional impacts?: No
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
13
$ Effects of the amendment on the following issues:
$ Compatibility among local plans including, but not limited to, land use and compatibility with military bases: Yes.
$ Impact/protect regional facilities/resources identified in the SRPP, including
but not limited to, groundwater recharge and the availability of water supply: The City of Tampa has not identified any LOS deficiencies with potable
water supply.
$ Affordable housing issues and designation of adequate sites for affordable housing: Not applicable to the amendment.
$ Protection of natural resources of regional significance identified in the
SRPP including, but not limited to, protection of spring and groundwater resources, and recharge potential: Not applicable to the amendment.
$ Effectiveness and enhancement of economic development within the region including, but not limited to, preservation of military bases: Not applicable to
the amendment.
$ Compatibility with regional transportation corridors and facilities, including
but not limited to, roadways, seaports, airports, public transportation systems, high speed rail facilities, and intermodal facilities: Yes.
$ Adequacy of and compatibility with emergency preparedness plans and local
mitigation strategies (plans) including, but not limited to, the impacts on and
availability of hurricane shelters, maintenance of county hurricane evacuation clearance times, and hazard mitigation: Not applicable, except for
transportation.
$ Regional Comments: None.
$ Applicable SRPP Policies: Economic Development 2.C, 2.I, 2.14, 2.71
$ Consistency with SRPP: Consistent.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
14
AMENDMENT #2008-1 - Future Land Use Map
Wilderness Crossing Subdivision Annexation
“The request would permit consideration of low density residential uses at a rural scale of
development of one dwelling unit per five ten acres. Based on the gross acreage of 378.63 acres,
the maximum residential buildout potential would allow for approximately 75 37 residential
units. This is an increase of 38 units over the current potential. In addition, neighborhoods
serving commercial, office, or multi-use projects up to 20,000 s.f. or 0.25 FAR, are subject to
locational criteria.”
• From: Hillsborough County Agricultural-1/10
• To: City of Tampa Rural Estate-5 10 (one dwelling unit per 5 10 acres)
• Size: 378.64 acres
• Location: East side of Morris Bridge Road at the Pasco County line.
• Existing Use: Agricultural, Single-Family/Mobile Home, Heavy Industrial, Vacant
• Proposed Use: Low density residential uses
• Adjacent Designations:
• North: Residential-1
• South: Preservation
• East: Planned Environmental Community (1 du/2acres)
• West: Suburban Mixed-Use-3 and Environmentally Sensitive Area
• Adjacent Uses:
• North: Pasco County
• South: SWFWMD Lower Hillsborough Flood Detention Area
• East: Thomas Ranch Property
• West: K-Bar Ranch
• Regionally Significant: Yes, New River and all of its wetlands are designated
Regionally Significant Natural Resources.
• Result in extra-jurisdictional impacts?: Morris Bridge Road is the main road that lies
on the west side of the proposed amendment site and continues into Pasco County. It is
unknown at this time what the transportation impact, if any, will be in Pasco County.
• Effects of the amendment on the following issues:
• Compatibility among local plans including, but not limited to, land use and compatibility with military bases: The amendment is consistent with the City of
Tampa’s Comprehensive Plan.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
15
• Impact/protect regional facilities/resources identified in the SRPP including, but not limited to, groundwater recharge and the availability of water supply: New River
and its wetlands are found on the proposed amendment site. All of the wetlands, plus a
buffer, should be placed in a conservation easement, and septic tanks should be kept as
far from the wetlands as possible.
• Affordable housing issues and designation of adequate sites for affordable housing:
Not applicable to the adopted amendment as the parcels are individually owned.
• Protection of natural resources of regional significance identified in the SRPP
including, but not limited to, protection of spring and groundwater resources, and recharge potential: See comments above regarding wetlands.
• Effectiveness and enhancement of economic development within the region including, but not limited to, preservation of military bases: Not applicable to the
adopted amendment.
• Compatibility with regional transportation corridors and facilities, including but
not limited to, roadways, seaports, airports, public transportation systems, high speed rail facilities, and intermodal facilities: Morris Bridge Road is the main road
that lies on the west side of the amendment site and continues into Pasco County. It is
unknown at this time what the transportation impact, if any, will be in Pasco County.
• Adequacy of and compatibility with emergency preparedness plans and local
mitigation strategies (plans) including, but not limited to, the impacts on and
availability of hurricane shelters, maintenance of county hurricane evacuation clearance times, and hazard mitigation: The adopted amendment is not in a
hurricane evacuation zone, however a large portion of the site is in the 100-year
floodplain.
• Regional Comments: None.
• Applicable SRPP Policies: Natural Resources: Policies 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.17,
4.43, 4.44, 4.47, 4.98, 4.99, 4.100
• Consistency with SRPP: Consistent. However all of the wetlands, plus a buffer,
should be placed in a conservation easement and septic tanks should be kept as far from
the wetlands as possible.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
16
TBRPC Natural Resources of Regional Significance
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
17
FEMA FIRM Zones
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
18
City of Tampa
Proposed Future Land Use Map
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
19
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
20
2008-2
City of Tampa
3311 Granada Street
“The plan amendment site is located in the Palma Ceia neighborhood on Granada Street between
Concordia and Ferdinand Avenues. The property is approximately 5,000 s.f. in size.”
“The Tampa City Council has requested this property, which was subject to the areawide Palma
Ceia amendment (PA 04-13), be changed from Residential-10 to Residential-20. The purpose of
the amendment is to recognize the existing duplex development of the site. The duplex
development requires a Residential-20 future land use designation to retain its current use. It
was the intent of City Council not to create any non-conforming uses by the previous action of
Council regarding PA 04-13. This update will correct the error.”
_________________________________
Based on the material presented, it has been determined that adopted Ordinance #2008-2 is not
Regionally Significant and the amendment is consistent with the Council=s Strategic Regional
Policy Plan.
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
21
City of Tampa (2008-2)
Adopted Future Land Use Map
For Council meeting of April 13, 2009 Staff Contact:
Report prepared March 4, 2009 Jessica Lunsford, ext. 38
22
City of Tampa (2008-2)
Adopted Future Land Use Map