HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-03-0476Resolutions
For 5/8/03 City of Miami
Commission Meeting
We strongly recommend that the Commission immediately
convene a Committee made up of all interested parties
including but not limited to members of the community,
business owners, property owners, residents, a representative
from the School Board and most importantly professional park
planners to take a holistic approach to creating a park or parks
in Little Haiti. This Committee will look at opportunities which
may or may not include the area within the specified 60 acres.
This Committee will look at the entire Little Haiti area.
(We need one more study. This is too crucial and too expensive a
decision to make without having all the facts.)
We strongly recommend that the City of Miami Commissioners
vote to eliminate the threat of eminent domain from the process
of creating a park or parks in Little Haiti.
(This will allow the businesses to get back to work renovating,
expanding and adding employees to their successful companies.
The goal is to create jobs and expand the economic base in Little
Haiti.)
Submitted Into the public
record in connection Pith
item._ _on
Priscilla A. Thompson
resoluriona rMO3 City Clerk
03- 476
Momingside
NE 67 TER
NE 87 ST
i
t
>
n
t»
4
N p
N
1M
Z
w N 67
MQ /q
p
yt
M
z
i
a•
M
m
NE 6587
W
>
>
a
tq
w in w6
w
PL"
tt:
{1�
RE 62 TER
N
0:
w IL
>
_
z
�
W
NE 62 ST
NE 8/ TER
Iff/l
z 81
W
11!
K
f ) • 12
b
f
i
I
0 6 f >
1/ is if 17
V
92
93
N fi
»
t/3 e
W
z
Momingside
NE 67 TER
n
t»
iv
M
W
r
2
168
,6t < 171
+
tt:
{1�
RE 62 TER
>
z
4
N
NE 62 ST
W
Z
f ) • 12
f
i
I
0 6 f >
1/ is if 17
3 m 16 11 n 13
»
z
NE 81 ST
22 23 21 26 20 27 2f 29
20 11 32 33
34
20 21
EATON
CRY Tmlw Pok (Dwww Trod)
as
PARK
NE 60 ST
NE 60 ST
3) 1f is r6 /1 /2 u
u u of u u
ss
so
61 53 f/ s5 K 67 •E 68 b sl
62 61 N
66
62
NE 59 TER
6T 6• 56
TO
>
h -
V
N
72<
)/ 76 n n » 7f e6 6+
82
0
W
z
n z
Z
W
z
NE 59 ST
Submied Into the pub is
NE 58 TER
connectio w h
N E 5 8 7 E R item on �..
Pris 'lla A. Tho 3
[� ►n^ s n
N E 5 8 S T City Cie k
NE 58 ST
NE 57 ST
> NE 57 ST
U N U
>
city of fawiam= Little Haiti Park Properties
03— 476
/ f ilk�3 � % Iii` VA i m_ •v-� C�
'I / r
May 8, 2003 / xv
To this City Commission:
There are still many unanswered questions pertaining to the Proposed Little Haiti Park.
Either this Commission has no idea of the scope of devastation being created or this body
of City Government Just Does Not Care.
As asked more than once, on record and in writing and still no answers;
I ) Will the adjacent and surrounding properties be subject to ANY zoning change,
proposed changes in use, restrictive covenants of any sort or future compliance
with building or use restriction setbacks from the boundary of the park?
2) If the All frontage property on 2°d Ave is to remain, what will those properties
zoning be? Will all uses and the present zoning remain perpetual with conforming
status both in use and structure?
3) Building and land use consistency with the park has been stated many times. As
asked many times what uses are not consistent and subject to use restriction?
Where is the list of acceptable a consistent use with this park?
4) Will the 2°d Ave properties be within the park boundary or will they share a
common property line with different zonings?
5) What security measures will be used to separate the park playground from the
industrial district and industrial uses that will share a common property line?
6) Since the park property acquisition and subsequent development will take several
years, what interim maintenance and security measures are to be employed?
Additionally what City departments will be burdened with this duty and expense?
Do they know they must start this program within weeks with these property
acquisitions?
7) Is this City Commission willing to go forth with this project as proposed, start city
property ownership, displacing residences, closing business's, eliminating the
jobs base all with full knowledge these acquisition cost may cost double the
money that you have appropriated?
This commission has spent over $800,000.00 on this project in studies reviews and
proposals. All have proven the LITTLE HAITI PARK as proposed will have cost
overruns doubling land purchases. There is a constitutional matter of relocation and
compensation for owner occupied buildings and businesses. This has not even been
considered as an additional legal defense or even settlement cost. This Commission
must step back and rethink the scope, and location of this park. To plunder along,
haphazardly buying here and there knowing this City will suffer double expenditures
Is just short of criminal --- or is it?
1 ^` IN'
i
Submitted Into the public
record in connection w' h
item -�/ _on s" P Oa
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
03- 476
To our Honorable Commission of the City of Miami:
I am Bennet Pumo, owner of several warehouses targeted by the proposed park property
acquisition campaign. My family business has been committed to this area for over 50
years. We welcome this Commission and the efforts toward area revitalization. It is fact
this area, the North East district has, for years been neglected by past commissions with
most revitalization efforts being directed to Park West, Downtown, Brickell Ave, Little
Havana and other projects void of the North East quadrant of Miami, A park is a great
start, but for the City to get wrangled into the expense of this very ambitious and broadly
scoped project may prove very difficult. The maintenance, security, professional park
employment and the perpetual expense to keep this endeavor truly first class must be
scrutinized with all pitfalls identified.
There have been many statements of conjecture with reference to the boundary lines, the
job loss and the number of business's that will be lost. With the proposed boundary, there
has not been a detailed impact study of the surrounding community with "the good of this
park" versus the loss of the well-established business community providing a great
percentage of the job base in the immediate area
We all agree the area needs help. One would think a park should be built near a school,
surrounded by the residences to firquent it. This proposal places the children's park
within an industrial park area. There also has been a future proposed transit terminal
along the present railroad alignment within the park boundary that could serve the entire
community.
This commission has approved the immediate action to buy property for this park, but at
what cost? There are reports and statements to this acquisition. The purporting cost is not
within a five, ten or even twenty percent plus or minus estimation, but of estimates with
the varied cost of two, three and almost four hundred percent in difference for this
acquisition. This Commission must be proof positive in this expenditure. With the
possible cost that may exceed 60 million dollars, the plus or minus of only a few percent
means big bucks, yet alone these estimates being subject to suggested 100 percent
variable.
Care must be taken with this areas vacancy availability, for the evicted business owners
and leasing occupants to relocate their shops and maintain this districts needed job base.
Pumo has 6 buildings, with approximately 25 business's occupying over 76,000 square
feet, providing perhaps 150 jobs that are subject to this proposal. Occupancy ranges from
the Actors Playhouse — Children's Miracle Theater to Steiner Atlantic, a worldwide
distributor of commercial laundry equipment and many small family owned businesses
within the other units.
As of this date, the area has 98% occupancy. This certainly is not enough footage in
relocating just the Pumo affected tenancy. Most assuredly the majority of the evicted
businesses will leave the area and those related jobs will be lost forever. With this, the
City will have to make up the loss of all revenues generated by these businesses.
Consideration must be given with the property tax loss for 60 acres of this largest
industrial zoned property with its close proximity to the port, downtown and design
district. With the effected Pumo property alone, the property tax loss will be in excess of
$37,000 per year, "forever." Submitted Into the public
"A park, yes, a great start for this district, but not this monster!" record in connection ith
item d I on r � i3
Priscilla A. Tho son
City Clerk
03- 476
A few questions that must be considered:
1) is this park location the best choice for children's pedestrian access from school
and residential areas;
2) can "this proposal" be completed for the 25 million dollar budget;
3) in this time of world defense and City preparedness, is this Commission prepared
to spend another 25 or even 30 million dollars of "OUR" HOMELAND ? L
SECURITY BUDGET to complete this existing park proposal; {�,'
t
4) where will the City make up the loss of the millions in tax revenues over the years
to come?
5) does the struggling parks department have the budget revenues to staff the many
areas within this 60 acre park;
6) does public works have it their proposed budget approved to maintain the
expansive park green areas, fields, stadium and the some twenty to forty
additional structures that are a part of this proposed project?
7) does the police department have the additional officers to secure this park?
8) does this City have any intentions of "down -zoning" the surrounding industrial
properties, for it was mentioned that activity inconsistent with the park will be
subject to City action? How consistent is industrial activity with soccer fields and
children's playgrounds sharing the same property line?
9) with the appearance of utilization and application of a "mass appraisal to value
calculation," will a proper study with the determination of realistic acquisition
cost for the economically valued buildings and realistic cost and compensation to
the owner occupied business's be done on a building to building basis?
10) many property owners within the proposed boundaries will vigorously fight the
destruction of their livelihood. Is the City prepared to pay these expanded cost for
the years of legal negotiations ahead?
Thank you for this opportunity to address these concerns for our district must maintain
the vitality through its job base and give our residents the safe haven and facilities it
deserves. We must maintain vitality of this area. Nurture the businesses, expand the
neighborhood job base and most importantly enhance this areas quality of life with a safe
environment with projects that are well thought out for all peoples of this North East
District. Thank you again. Submitted into the public
record to connection wlia.3 h
i sem � 11 on _S` F
Priscilla A. Thorn son
City Clerk
03- 476