Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hallandale Beach planning board approves ordinance amendment to streamline affordable-housing bonus density allocations
Summary
The Hallandale Beach Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to approve an ordinance amendment that would revise the city zoning code to allow the local planning agency to allocate affordable-housing bonus density in some cases and update public-notice requirements, forwarding the recommendation to the City Commission.
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Hallandale Beach Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to approve a recommendation to the City Commission to amend the city’s zoning and land development code to revise how affordable-housing bonus density is allocated and how the city notifies property owners.
City planning staff presented the ordinance amendment on the board’s agenda item 7A. Christie Dominguez of the Planning and Zoning Division said the draft language aligns the city code with Broward County Land Use Plan Policy 2.16.3 and would allow the local planning agency to allocate bonus density in some circumstances where the requested density exceeds the underlying zoning maximum. “Tonight's presentation is on the bonus density unit,” Dominguez said, and she summarized that the change would permit the local planning agency to grant bonus units when the request does not include additional approvals that must go to the City Commission.
The change would also amend Article 9 of the zoning and land development code to expand public-notice requirements. Dominguez told the board that when a project requests density above the zoning maximum a publicly noticed meeting — including a legal advertisement and mailings to property owners — would be required.
Board members and commenters asked how the bonus-density rules work in practice, particularly for ownership units converted to condominiums. A board member asked whether deed-restricted for-sale units would still carry maintenance-fee obligations; Dominguez answered that when income restrictions apply to a for-sale unit the restriction is recorded as a deed restriction and “the developer would only be able to sell those to someone who met the income requirements.” She added that affordable-sale restrictions would remain in place if a building originally approved as a rental later underwent a condominium conversion.
The board discussed practical effects and examples. Staff noted a density example used in the presentation: at 14 units per acre a parcel might be entitled to one unit and a second unit would put it over the maximum, requiring bonus-unit approval. Dominguez said most projects that have used bonus units in Hallandale Beach have been rental developments; sales (condominium) projects are less common. She also said the city has seen smaller properties increasingly seek bonus units under the county policy.
One commenter, identified in the record as Mr. Jay, offered an anecdotal reason developers tend to propose units at the higher income tier: “This is why you see a lot of these projects coming before you at the higher end of the income threshold... In other words, they're not proposing to do very low or low income housing. They’re tending to trend up to moderate,” Jay said, and added, “I think a 1 bedroom, it's $2,500 if I'm not mistaken,” by way of describing typical rental-rate thresholds referenced in the discussion.
After staff presentation and questions, a board member moved to approve the recommendation to the City Commission; another member seconded the motion. The Planning and Zoning Board approved the motion unanimously, 4-0; recorded votes in the transcript show board members Sherry Wu, Vice Chair Garson, Board member Levinson and Board member Plasterstein voting yes. Board member Catan was absent.
The board also received a liaison report noting the City Commission will consider an unrelated amendment on Sept. 29 that would give the Planning and Zoning Board authority to approve distance-separation waivers for alcoholic-beverage establishments; that item will be heard by the commission on first reading Sept. 29 and second reading in October.
The board’s approval forwards the ordinance amendment to the City Commission, which retains authority for projects that still require commission approvals (for example, developments that also need variances or conditional-use permits). Staff recommended the commission adopt the code change.
The board scheduled its next meeting for Oct. 16.
