HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-98-1084J-98-691
9/9/98
RESOLUTION NO. v v iy 8 4
A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENT, ACCEPTING THE
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY, ATTACHED AS
"EXHIBIT A", SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS,
AS A GUIDING TOOL FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
AND PRESERVATION OF THE COCONUT GROVE AREA AS
DEFINED IN THE STUDY.
WHEREAS, representatives of the Cocoanut Grove Village
Council appeared before the Commission on March 25, 1993 to
request a planning study; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Motion 93-211, adopted March 25, 1993,
the City Commission directed the City Manager to begin the
process of preparing the plan, and identifying funds; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1993 the City Commission adopted
Resolution 93-693 designating as a "Category B Project" the
acquisition of professional planning services for the Coconut
Grove Planning Study (the "Study"), further allocating $100,000
from the General Fund Special Program and Accounts for said
purpose; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 1994 the City Commission approved
the findings of the selection committee and found the firm of
Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Architects, Inc.(DPZ)
as the most qualified team to conduct the Coconut Grove Planning
ATTACHMENT
CONTAINED
car cobMSSION
NEE'rIrrG of
OCT 2 7 M8
k.
98-1084
Study; and
WHEREAS, on February 29, 1996, the City Commission adopted
Ordinance 11338 accepting grant funds in the amount of $50,000
from the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to
simultaneously perform a transportation study for the Coconut
Grove area; and
WHEREAS, on April 22, 1998, the Planning Advisory Board by a
vote of five (5) to zero (0), adopted Resolution PAB 45-98
recommending Approval of the final draft of the Coconut Grove
Planning Study, attached hereto as "Exhibit All; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Planning and Development
recommends acceptance of the attached study with the condition
that it not be binding upon the city and that implementation of
certain components of it undergo further analysis for
appropriateness, and that if during such analysis it is
determined that the study recommendations should not be
implemented because it would not be in the best interest of the
Coconut Grove area or of the City of Miami, such action shall not
be taken; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that, prior to implementation,
some of the recommendations incorporated in the Coconut Grove
2
98-i084
Planning Study shall require further approval by the City
Commission;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the
Preamble to this Resolution are hereby adopted by reference
thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this
Section.
Section 2. The Coconut Grove Planning Study (the
"Study"), attached hereto as "Exhibit All, is hereby accepted as a
planning tool for the future development and preservation of the
Coconut Grove Area, subject to the following conditions:
a) implementation of certain components of the Study shall
undergo further study for appropriateness and upon a finding that
such implementation is not in the best interest of the Coconut
Grove area or of the City of Miami, such component(s) shall not
be implemented;
b) certain of the components incorporated in the Study
shall require further approval by the City Commission prior to
their implementation.
Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective thirty
3
S8-1 4
(30) days after final reading and adoption thereof1l.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of
ATTEST
October , 1998.
JOE CAROLLO, MAYOR
In accofdance with Miami Code Sec. 2-36, since the Mayor did not indicate approval of
this legislation by signing it in the designated place provided, said legislation now
becomes effecdm with the elapse of ten (10) da from date of, Co mission action
regarding same, wlt W the Mayor exer�s'ir , 'X, i J i
WALTER J. FOEMAN, CITY CLERK
AND CORRECTNESS4
RJANDRO VILARE
TY ATTORNEY
W2918:csk:GMM
W�oeman, city Cleric
This Resolution shall become effective as specified herein unless vetoed
by the Mayor within ten days from the date it was passed and adopted. If
the Mayor vetoes this Resolution, it shall become effective immediately
upon override of the veto by the City Commission or upon the effective
date state herein, whichever is later.
4
PZ-17
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members DATE: SEP 21 1998 FILE:
of the City Commission
SUBJECT: Coconut Grove Planning
Study
FROM: onald Warshaw REFERENCES:
City Manager
ENCLOSURES:
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission approve the attached resolution
accepting the Coconut Grove Planning Study as a guiding tool for the future development
and preservation of the Coconut Grove Area.
BACKGROUND
The attached Coconut Grove Planning Study is the result of an unprecedented effort by
the Coconut Grove Community, the City of Miami and the consulting firm of Andres
Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Architects, Inc. to analyze and propose
recommendations which will guide the future development and preservation of Coconut
Grove.
It is the intended goal of this document to provide a frame of reference so that the
drafting of future regulations or revisions to existing regulations will more accurately
reflect the will and vision of the community as set forth by the participants in the study.
The Department of Planning and Development is recommending approval of accepting
the attached study with the understanding and condition that implementation of
certain components undergo further study for appropriateness; and that if upon
further study, a specific implementing action is not found to be in the best interest of the
Coconut Grove area or the City of Miami, that such action is not taken.
Specific issues which require further study are listed on the attached "Summary of
Issues" dated April 9,1998.
�.0.4 1
ilv
DHW: DB: LYS: lys
PLANNING FACT SHEET
APPLICANT City of Miami Department of Planning and Development.
HEARING DATE April 22, 1998.
REQUEST/LOCATION Consideration of the Coconut Grove Planning Study as a tool for
guiding the City of Miami in planning for the future development
and preservation of the Coconut Grove area.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION N/A
PETITION Consideration of recommending approval of the Coconut Grove
Planning Study as a tool for guiding the City of Miami in planning
for the future development and preservation of the Coconut Grove
area.
PLANNING Approval.
RECOMMENDATION
BACKGROUND AND The Coconut Grove Planning Study is the result of an
ANALYSIS unprecedented cooperation between the public and private sector
through the services of planning, design and economic
consultants; voluntary participation of individual citizens and civic
associations, and the active participation of municipal officials and
staff.
It is the intended goal of this document to provide a frame of
reference so that the drafting of future regulations or revisions to
existing regulations will more accurately reflect the will and vision
of the community as set forth by the participants in the study.
Further it is intended that the approach to the resolution of existing
and future issues faced by the community be informed by the
tenets herein articulated and thus guided more accurately toward
an outcome favorable to all.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Approval VOTE: 5-0
CITY COMMISSION Continued from CC 9/28/98.
APPLICATION NUMBER 98-023 Item #5
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
CITY OF MIAMi • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RO FLOOR • MIAMI, FLORIDA. 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1435
:...................................................................................................................................................................................................*..................................1.:
Date: 04/14/98 Page
0
RESOLUTION PAB - 45-98
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE COCONUT
GROVE PLANNING STUDY TO BE USED AS A TOOL FOR GUIDING THE
CITY OF MIAMI IN PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND
PRESERVATION OF THE COCONUT GROVE AREA.
HEARING DATE: April 22, 1998
ITEM NO. 5
VOTE: 5-0
ATTES
urdes Slazyk, Ass'stan for
Department of Planning and
Development
J-98-671
9/9/98
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENT, ACCEPTING THE
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY, ATTACHED AS
"EXHIBIT All, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS,
AS A GUIDING TOOL FOR THE VTrURE DEVELOPMENT
AND PRESERVATION OF THE COCONUT GROVE AREA AS
DEFINED IN THE STUDY.
WHEREAS, representatives of the Cocoanut Grove Village
Council appeared before the Commission on March 25, 1993 to
request a planning study; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Motion 93-211, adopted March 25, 1993,
the City Commission directed the City Manager to begin the
process of preparing the plan, and identifying funds; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1993 the City Commission adopted
Resolution 93-693 designating as a "Category B Project" the
acquisition of professional planning services for the Coconut
Grove Planning Study (the "Study"), further allocating $100,000
from the General Fund Special Program and Accounts for said
purpose; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 1994 the City Commission approved
the findings of the selection committee and found the firm of
Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Architects, Inc.(DPZ)
as the most qualified team to conduct the Coconut Grove Planning
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
SUMMARY
MIAMI, FLORIDA
APRIL - JU.Y 1996
REVISION DATE: -OC'I'OBER 1997
Prepared
for
THE CITY OF MIAMI
and
THE COCOANUT GROVE VILLAGE COUNCIL
CHARRETI'E TEAM:
Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Architects, Inc.
Carr Smith Associates
Arva Parks and Company
Ceo and Nardi, Inc.
Savino and Miller Design Studio
Judson and Partners
Gibbs Planning Group
98-1 S4
I H y
CORAL GABIFS
_ 0 I
1 I
SOLTH MIAMI —
I
J �
I I
COCONUT GI 'E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
=I5-
BLSCAYNE BAY
STUDY AREA
LOCATION MAP
Q FORT OF HIIMfl
00
ATLANTIC OCEAN
KEY BLSCAYNE
CJ �
s 1
98--ios4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
l . Introduction
2. Existing Conditions 4
3. Master Plan 7
4. Master Plan by Topic (including: existing conditions, recommendations, illustrations)
History 1?
Preservation 21
Landscape and Open Space 35
Housing 56
Retail 69
Traffic . 80
Note: In general, text precedes illustrations.
98-JS4u
COCONUT GR E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
INTRODUCTION
In April 1996, a group of concerned residents, business owners and community leaders gathered
with a team of design consultants and City of Miami officials to produce the Coconut Grove
Planning Study. A five day charrette took place at the Dinner Key Convention Center. It was
begun and ended with public presentations at the Coconut Grove Women's Club. In an interactive
process of meetings and drawings, numerous issues were addressed; the result of this work is
presented in this report.
The Planning Study was commissioned by the City of Miami. The Cocoanut Grove Village
Council and the two NET offices provided oversight and organizational assistance to the study
team. The study team consisted of seven firms: Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk,
Architects and Town Planners, Coordinating Team; Arva Parks and Company, Historic
Consultant; Ceo and Nardi, Inc., Preservation Consultants; Savino and Miller Design Studio,
Landscape Consultants; Clyde Judson, Housing Policy Consultant; Bob Gibbs, Retail Consultant;
Carr Smith, Associates, Traffic Consultants.
The foundation work for the charrette involved research by the study team, including all prior
reports on the study area, meetings with the Village Council and City departments, and six evening
workshops in March and April in which the different sectors of the Grove brought their concerns
to the study team.
The Coconut Grove study area has clearly defined boundaries: Route 1 on the North, Biscayne
Bay on the East, Battersea Road on the South, and Le Jeune Road, Lincoln Drive and Brooker
Street on the West.
Goals
The goals of the study were articulated by the Village Council:
1. Preserve the historic, low density, heavily landscaped character of the Grove's
residential neighborhoods.
2. Improve the means for landscape conservation and enhancement, for both private
landscape and public parks.
3. Maintain and improve the Village Center while reducing its negative impact on
surrounding neighborhoods.
4. Improve the parking situation in the Village Center.
5. Consolidate proposals for the Waterfront.
6. Review policies and regulations for housing, especially with regard to the West
Grove.
These concerns range from those of regional impact, to community based issues, to the needs of
individual streets and blocks. These three scale gradations are useful to keep in mind while
addressing the future of Coconut Grove.
The Region
Coconut Grove is privileged to be the founding place of metropolitan Miami. As such it lies at the
heart of a region blessed by its natural resources and beleaguered by human settlement which is
perceived by many to be out of control.
9 8 - oS4
Within this metropolis, th :ove is unique for its natural environs : and its history, exerting a
strong attraction for visitors, residents and businesses. Coconut grove has some of the most
valuable real estate in South Florida. This is both boon and bane for the Grove's constituents.
Residential neighborhoods characterized by lush landscape and historical buildings are threatened
by oversized new buildings. The commercial heart of the community has become one of the
region's few urban destinations, with restaurants, cinema and franchise retail accommodating a
heavy load of daily visitors. While the influx provides commercial benefit to most business
owners, some are currently in distress, and visitor activity brings severe stress to residents in
surrounding neighborhoods. Coconut Grove's location at the threshold to downtown Miami
invites commuting traffic from points south to crowd not only its arterial streets but also to intrude
into its local streets.
Clearly, a plan which restricts itself to the boundaries of this community cannot solve problems
produced by regional deficiencies. Until new growth in Dade County is structured to be transit
oriented and transit served, and until additional destinations of equivalent urban quality are made,
Coconut Grove will continue to attract more than its share of traffic and viskors.
Thus, with regard to regionally generated concerns, it is obvious this study can only offer
proposals of mitigation, not total resolution. And these measures of mitigation,. to be most
effective, must be designed specific to the problem and specific to site.
The Community
Within its own borders, Coconut Grove can point to characteristics and assets which are highly
valued by all its constituents and which, in the face of outside forces, present the challenge of their
conservation and preservation. The character of the place exists, a new vision is not required.
Rather its preservation, refinement and enhancement are the goal. This was clearly articulated in
the Council's goals for the Study.
To address the community's internal needs, the Study identified that the Grove has an urban
structure which identifies places of differing character and needs: four neighborhoods, two
districts, and eight corridors. Neighborhoods are mixed -use, primarily residential, pedestrian
friendly areas: North, Central, West and South Grove. Districts are areas dominated by a single
use: the Village Center and the Waterfront. Corridors are the connectors and separators of
neighborhoods and districts: Bayshore Drive, Tigertail, 27th Avenue, Bird Avenue, MacDonald
Street, Main Highway, Douglas Road, Grand Avenue, Le Jeune Road, and Dixie Highway.
The identification of this structure of neighborhoods, districts and corridors in an existing urban
condition facilitates analysis, design and implementation. Distance and dimension play an
important role in a citizenry's perceived responsibility for the maintenance and improvement of
urban places. A more elaborate description of neighborhoods, districts and corridors can be read
in Appendix F.
Streets and Buildings
The character of public space and private building receives the greatest concern from private
property owners in close proximity: the control of regional traffic on one's street, the control of
building scale and quality on adjacent lots to one's own, are examples of issues that offer daily
quality of life and long term investment value. This is the scale at which a community's character
is established. It is at this scale that most of this Study's recommendations are made: with site
specific design proposals as well as regulatory refinements which include building and landscape
detail.
From Region To Front Yard
This Study attempts to treat all topics with an understanding of all three scales of concern, from
regional, to community, to street. For example, cut -through traffic is addressed with traffic
2
98—o►s
calming suggestions whic_ Atigate cut -through traffic on a giver, _-teet without relegating the
problem to a neighboring street. The retail study proposes balancing the needs of residents and
visitors by adding the convenience shopping needed by local residents without destroying the
regional attraction of the Village Center.
The ultimate goal of this study is to help maintain a mixed use and mixed income, beautiful and
valuable community at the heart of metropolitan Miami. This should be seen not only as a goal to
serve the residents and business owners of Coconut Grove, but also as an absolute necessity for
quality of life in all of South Florida. Coconut Grove is an important example to all surrounding
communities striving for an ideal future.
98-io' S 4 3
COCONUT GR E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The following is a summary of the existing conditions in the neighborhoods, districts and corridors
of Coconut Grove. The workshop notes which produced this summary can be found in Appendix
"A". In addition, the following sections of the Study refer to specific existing conditions
appropriate to each topic.
The North Grove is a primarily residential area bounded dy Route 1, 27th Avenue, the
Waterfront and the Bay. The neighborhood's character is dominated by single family houses on
medium to large lots under a generous tree canopy. Civic institutions such as Vizcaya. Mercy
Hospital and Ransom Everglades Middle School are regional destinations embedded within the
neighborhood. A high rise residential colony on Grove Isle, high rise apartments and offices along
Bayshore Drive, and a commercial front along Dixie Highway are also part of the North Grove.
The concerns articulated by this neighborhood include:
- the need to control €e* traffic intrusion into residential sentrel-an streets used to
access the school and the hospital
- the beautification of its public places, including its road corridors and parks
- the preservation of trees, landscape, historic streets and buildings
- regulatory control of lot splitting and building scale
- the lack of recreational facilities for children and adolescents
The Center Grove is bounded by Route 1, 27th Avenue, Oak Street and 32nd Avenue. The
character of this area is somewhat ambiguous as it is in the midst of a several decade rebuilding
resulting from a re -zoning of single family to low rise multi -family. Several distinct sectors within
the neighborhood deserve attention, in order to encourage investment commitment exceeding the
merely speculative approach which characterizes too much of the recent building. These areas need
a predictable physical character and a uniform relationship of building to street. A retail center at
Bird Ave. and 27th Ave provides neighborhood conveniences, and apartments, offices and
automobile -oriented shopping along Route 1 add to the diversity of the Center Grove. The
advantageous location of the Center Grove adjacent to the Village Center is offset by the stress
caused by traffic and parking.
The concerns articulated by this neighborhood include:
increasing density and congestion
- improvement of its corridors to accommodate pedestrians and bicycles without
widening for vehicles
- enhancement of pedestrian access to Metro -Rail
- additional street tree planting, especially near the Village Center to discourage
visitor parking
- preservation of historic buildings threatened by higher density zoning
- the recharacterization of streets fronted by high walls, gates and off-street parking
- the need for a community center
- ensuring compatibility of physical character and use of sites available for
redevelopment
- vandalism and trash from Village Center visitors passing through
The West Grove is Miami's first Black neighborhood. A strong sense of history pervades this
community; several workshop participants identified themselves as sixth generation residents of the
neighborhood. The West Grove produced its own questionnaire in anticipation of its Planning
Study workshop (included in Appendix A) and its attendance exceeded that of the others.
4
1.064
Boasting a classic neighbo. d structure, the most complete comp, to its neighbors, the West
Grove has single family houses, duplexes, apartments, shops, schools, churches and cemeteries.
Repressed by its current demographic situation and the racial discrimination of its history, the West
Grove has numerous opportunities for improvement. A committed constituency of residents and
business owners is already involved in a series of improvement plans and deserves the support of
the surrounding community.
West Grove concerns include:
- improving the Douglas Road and Grand Avenue corridors
- developing a retail plan for Grand Avenue without commercial intrusion into
kapastiag the parallel Florida and Thomas Avenues
- renovating street and utility infrastructure
- maintaining the dominant single family character of the neighborhood while infilling.
and upgrading building stock, and encouraging homeownership
- additional housing
- traffic intrusion in residential neighborhoods
- the need for a youth activity center
The Planning Study identifies a number of directions and strategies for the West Grove, and
strongly recommends that a more detailed urban design plan which addresses streetscape and urban
design building guidelines, street by street, be undertaken immediately to support the community's
commitment to preservation and enhancement.
The South Grove is a primarily residential area, bordered by Kumquat Avenue, the Bay,
Battersea Road and Le Jeune Road. Dominantly residential in character, with single family homes
on medium and large lots, the neighborhood is home to a number of significant historical buildings
and institutions including several churches, Ransom Everglades Upper School, the Carrollton
School, the Vanguard School and the Kampong National Tropical Botanical Garden. As in the
North Grove, regionally based traffic accessing these institutions and passing through on the way
to downtown Miami cause stress not only to Main Highway but also to local streets used as
shortcuts.
South Grove concerns include:
- traffic intrusion on local streets
- traffic congestion caused by the schools along Main Highway
- preservation of historic trees and landscape, and historic streets and buildings
- regulatory control of lot splitting and building scale
The Village Center is bounded by Oak Street, 27th Avenue, the Bay and Franklin Avenue. A
regional shopping and entertainment destination, the Village Center is still the historic focus of
Coconut Grove. As such it is the object of both considerable pride and regret: pride for its
international renown, regret for its loss of local service and community identity.
Existing conditions requiring attention include:
- the MacDonald and 27th Avenue corridors and the connection to Metro -Rail
- off-street parking, its quantity and the capped Parking Trust Fund acting as a
moratorium on some retail development
- the deterioration of Commodore Plaza
- congestion at the main intersections
- the aesthetics of buildings including retail frontages and tall blank rear walls facing
residential areas
- parking and trash problem overflow into adjacent residential areas
- loss of small town commercial amenities
- the need for organizing better bus and taxi parking
- the future of developable sites such as the Pla house parking lot, the post office,
the Mutiny and the Naval Reserve Center
- McFarlane Rd. development
19 1.0S1 5
The Waterfront includes ... the publicly owned bayfront land frt- 2eacock Park to Kennedy
Park. Approximately a mile long, Coconut Grove's is one of scarce public waterfronts in the City
of Miami and indeed in Dade County. A public charrette organized by the City in March `94
provides the basis for the Planning Study's recommendations for this district.
Issues of concern include:
- the completion of the public promenade
- enhancement of the park's landscape
- restoration and re -use of the historic hangar buildings
- control of parking for recreation and not business uses
- consolidation of service to boaters including the boat ramp and its required parking,
and the establishment of a harbormaster.
b
98-ios4
COCONUT GRC PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
MASTER PLAN
STRATEGIC ACTIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION
The master plan illustrates the goal of the planning study - that is, the maintenance and
enhancement of a mixed use, mixed -income, unique, beautiful and valuable community located at
the heart of metropolitan Miami.
A series of recommen&tions is dcscribed in the apart sections which follow. They belting to ore
of three categories of action:
- regulatory
- management recommendations
- design specific to neighborhood, district and corridor
The following is a summary of these recommendations. Their further explanation in the topic
sections of this document includes suggestions for methods of implementation.
Regulations
Revise the City of Miami Preservation Ordinance .
Implement the Ad Valorem Tax program
Add a Thematic Resource District section to the Preservation Ordinance and designate six
new districts with design guidelines specific to each
Designate all National Register sites
Revise City of Miami Lmdseape Environmental Preservation Ordinance
Using County Tree Ordinance as foundation, add all the more demanding elements of the
City's ordinance
Strengthen the fines and mitigation policies
Revise the building permit process, reversing the order to require a tree survey and a
analysis of the impact of the project on trees at the beginning of the review process
appliantion
Revise City of Miami Environmental Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 17, following the
recommendations of this report
Revise the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance to promote compatibility of new construction with
historic context, following the recommendations of this rem
Revise the Parking Trust Fund regulations
Management
Add an historic and environmental preservation officer as a resource for the two NET offices.
Institute annual preservation and conservation education workshops for residents
Institute Comprehensive survey and listing of historic sites
Develop a method of property acquisition for completion of uniform right-of-way for 27th Avenue
and Bird Avenue
98-4484 7
Initiate organization of Watenront mooring facility, including instituti(_ A harbormaster
Institute a one -stop approval process for affordable housing, including the waiving of all permit
fees
Develop a unified merchandising strategy for the Village Center clarifying the location and
relationship of regional destination and local convenience retail facilities
Design Projects
Provide detailed urban design plans specifically for the West Grove, the Village Center, and the
Waterfront (to consolidate prior design efforts and to elaborate on the recommendations of this
report)
Develop specific designs for each park in Coconut Grove (schematic designs are included in this
report)
Prepare plans for trolley connection between the Metrorail and the Village Center
Prepare specific streetscape designs and engineering for each of the corridors, following the
recommendations of this report
Implement recommended neighborhood street improvements, including traffic calming designs for
specific locations in the neighborhoods, landscape plans for augmented street tree planting, and the
addition of a bicycle path network on designated streets
Study the replacement of the overhead utilities underground
Develop design for harbormaster building, dock and revised boatramp at the Seminole Dock
Develop specific design for landscape improvements of spoil islands
Develop pre -permitted plans for several single-family and duplex infill houses for purchase by
developers to ensure compatibility and neighborhood enhancement through new building
Initiate the design and development of a new public parking structure in the Village Center
Add bicycle lanes to designated streets
TOOST,"IM
COCONUT GR%. 2 PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
MASTER PLAN
avow 3mm m Ics 9
98-1084
COCONUT GRC PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
VILLAGE CENTER DISTRICT
10
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
MASTER PLAN
ILLUSTRATIONS
Design and Drawing, Charles Barrett, 1996
South Entry of the Village Center
Proposal for a two story retail front, concealing the parking garage
adjacent to the Playhouse along Main Highway .
11
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
MASTER PLAN
ILLUSTRATIONS
Design and Drawing, Charles Barren, 1996
West Entry of the Village Center at Grand Avenue and Commodore Plaza
Proposal for new buildings on both sides of MacDonald Street with retail at ground level
98-1084 12
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
MASTER PLAN
ILLUSTRATIONS
-74
Design and Drawing, Charles Barrett, 1996
Proposal for new parking garage at the Fuddrucker's site
with retail at ground floor along Grand Avenue
98-i084 13
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
MASTER PLAN
ILLUSTRATIONS
Design and Drawing, Charles Barrett1996
View of the Seminole Dock
Proposal for a pergola along the baywalk with Dockmaster's building beyond
7�+t r _ .T'�[t7iiEli!�ii •' �7i.' f + I
,W.�'zj:.. 1. s
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Overview
2. Historical Photograph .
COCONUT GRO v E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HISTORY
BY ARVA MOORE PARK
18
10
98 817
COCONUT GR(► , ,6 PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HISTORY
AN OVERVIEW BY ARVA MOORE PARKS
Summary
Coconut Grove, a sprinkle of land in a tropical paradise, attracted South Florida's earliest settlers.
The Grove pioneers were a hardy lot. Determined and eager, they endured the challenge of wars
and wilderness. Early homesteaders like Edmund "Alligator" Beasley, John Frow and the Pent
family survived the Seminole conflicts and claimed acres of prime Coconut Grove waterfront under
the U.S. Homestead laws. With bravado, they settled this undeveloped land and their homesteads
comprised the heart of Coconut Grove in the 19th century.
In time, more and more pioneers, whetted by an appetite for adventure, came to Coconut Grove's
shores. Englishman "Jolly" Jack Peacock arrived in the early 1870s and settled south of Beasley.
Staten Islander Ralph Munroe visited the area in 1877 and transformed the landscape forever. He
convinced his friends, Charles and Isabella Peacock, who had come to the area at the behest of
Charles' brother, Jack, to build a hotel among the unspoiled wilderness. The Peacocks opened the
Bay View House in 1884 on the ridge in what is now Peacock Park. The following winter, Ralph
Munroe brought in the first tourists, and re -christened the area "Cocoanut Grove" after he
discovered that there had been a post office by that name. Ironically, there were only two coconut
trees in the Grove at the time.
By the time the railroad reached Miami in 1896, "Cocoanut Grove" was a thriving community of
over a hundred people. It exploded with dizzying growth. Two general stores, a bathing casino,
numerous wharves, a waterfront factory, a school house, church, woman's club and a blacksmith
shop dotted the landscape.
With an eclectic spirit, Coconut Grove became the cosmopolitan heart of young Miami. South
Florida's first black community developed as pioneers, almost exclusively from the Bahamas,
came to work at the Peacock Inn. They taught the newcomers how to live in the tropics and built
fine "conch" houses, churches and clubs on what later became Charles Avenue. Fisherman and
comptie (wooy, tropical plants) diggers rubbed elbows with what one writer called the "most
sophisticated group of settlers this side of Tidewater Virginia." People like William Deering and
William Matheson helped give the bayfront the nickname, "Millionaire's Row."
When the United States entered World War I, the community catapulted to center stage. Dinner
Key became one of the first naval air stations in the United States. Over 1000 aviators trained on
the 31 acre peninsula.
By 1919 the world was safe for democracy once again, and Groveites were eager to return to the
unpoisoned pleasures of their pre-war life. Residents lobbied to close the noisy and disruptive
station. Firmly clasping to their independence and needing political muscle to fight the base, the
citizens of Coconut Grove incorporated the Town of Coconut Grove in 1919--complete with a city
hall, fire department, motorcycle police force, municipal dock and town seal.
In the early 1920s, the town fathers hired a Philadelphia architect, John Irwin Bright to create a
master plan. The plan promoted the grandiose Mediterranean style architecture that can still be seen
in the old Coconut Grove Bank and Coconut Grove Theater. The Bright Plan also included
impressive municipal buildings flanking a man-made mirror lake - today's MacFarlane Road. The
black community would have been relocated north of the railroad track into a planned development
with bath houses and day care centers and their neighborhood was slated to become a golf course.
Although adopted, the plan was never fully implemented.
98-1.0`848
Coconut Grove remained , .icorporated town until September 1 c when, despite the protests
of area residents, the rapacious City of Miami gobbled it up. In 029, amidst the pangs of
depression, a fledgling Pan American Airways bought out the New York, Rio and Buenos Aires
airline had been flying seaplanes from a houseboat terminal at Dinner Key. Soon the "Flying
Clippers" were leaving Dinner Key for points all over Central and South America, the Caribbean
and the West Indies. By the time Pan Am built a new Art Deco terminal in 1934, Coconut Grove
was the true "Gateway to the Americas." Pan Am continued to fly from Dinner Key until the
armed forces returned to the site during World War II. The airline never.came back after the war,
and within a few years, the City of Miami acquired its property and transformed it into Miami City
Hall.
The post-war years brought new residents and Coconut Grove became a laboratory for America's
rising social currents. Father Theodore Gibson and Fliiabeth Virride pioneemd "slum cleana.nce"
in the West Grove. Artists mingled with the upscale in the hometown setting. Developer George
Engle built the gray fake -stone Engle Building on the corner of Main Highway and MacFarlane
Road and his Florida Pharmacy served the affluent. In 1955, Engle coarverted the abandoned
Coconut Grove Movie Theater into the Coconut Grove Playhouse. With its opening in 1956 and
the hippie invasion of the 1960s, the Grove became an artists' haven. A long way from
undeveloped marshlands, the area was now a hybrid of sorts —vagabonds mixed with the wealthy,
artists lived among the millionaires, and its domestic tranquillity battled the forces of change.
The 1960s brought the area its first high-rise - the Coconut Grove Bank building. Within a few
years, development threatened the whole bayfront. It took the brazen Munroe family, who sold the
Barnacle to the State of Florida in 1973 instead of zoning the area for apartments, to finally stem
the tide. By 1974, a planning study and subsequent zoning change stopped the concrete
encroachment.
The 1974 changes, however, also encouraged greater development in the Village Center. By the
late 70s Mayfair opened and many of the quaint Mom and Pop establishments disappeared -
casualties of rising property values and higher taxes.
In 1991, a new development called CocoWalk opened on the site of Bright's proposed Coconut
Grove Municipal Center. Built in a style that echoed his vision, CocoWalk gave the Grove a town
square and has become a centerpiece for South Florida's flourishing tourist economy.
Today, Coconut Grove remains part of the City of Miami. The profoundly original community,
born out of the labors of homesteaders, steadfastly holds to its independent roots. Its spirit is seen
in lush, tropical vegetation and tree -lined streets. It glows from sparkling waters and echoes from
flapping sails. It emanates from an active citizenry who fight against over development. It thrives,
despite change, and among the tides of homogenized suburbs, Coconut Grove still remains
uniquely itself.
19
98*1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HISTORY
PHOTOGRAPHS
Y �.. III �IJL 7rK�
i . ft.. rrr
By 1896, all of the available land in Coconut Grove had been acquired through the Homestead Act.
_ COCONUT GRO . E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
BY ROCCO CEO AND MARIA NARDI / CEO AND NARDI, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
Introduction
22
2.
Neighborhoods i Problems and Opportunities i Recommendations
23
3.
General Recommendations
28
4.
Thematic Resource District
29
5.
Implementation / Incentives
30
6.
Illustrations
32
98-1084 21
COCONUT GRO v E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
INTRODUCTION
New Text
Community character is what distinguishes one place from another and makes a community a
desirable place to live and work. As witnessed by a healthy tourist economy, co.-nmunity character
is also attractive to visitors who a. -non fist cther things come to a community to experience its
character as defined by its cultural, historic and natural assets. Communities are also in constant
change, demographically, economically and socially and with these inevitable changes are
pressures that question hove much a community can change before its character and identity are
thrown into the balance.
Poorly managed growth erodes character and identity rapidly, not only impacting historic sites but
all of a community's cultural and natural assets not to mention general quality of life. It is the
responsibility of local government to create ways to manage growth that helps to preserve and
maintain a community's unique identity. One tool that local government has to manage growth is
preservation. Preservation has two categories that broadly define its objectives; they are, astrahmis
preservation regulations, which preserve traditional scale and land use patterns, and fiscal
incentives which stimulate certain types of private investment which could include rehabilitation of
historic structures and the creation of new businesses.
Preservation zA ast ietis regulations include historic districts, architectural and landscape guidelines,
tree and sign ordinances and preservation laws for open space. Fiscal incentives include property
tax abatements, freezes and credits as well as direct grant or loan programs. Although these
benefits often exceed the perceived detriments, it is important to point out why benefits are often
controversial.
Preservation Aesthetic regulations are often seen as restrictive to private propcM nights and
detrimental to economic interests because they are seen as preventing property owners from getting
as much income as they might if the property were free from restrictions. The ability to destroy a
building to build a much larger more profitable building must be weighed against the economic
benefits of keeping a historic building. Keeping sites such as the Barnacle and Viscaya has made
Coconut Grove more attractive, raised property values of surrounding sites, and has attracted
tourists and shoppers to local businesses thereby increasing expenditures for lodging, food,
gasoline, and souvenirs. Fiscal incentives although less controversial also generate considerable
debate about allocating public funds to promote special interests especially when tax benefits are
given. Fiscal incentives are however often needed to encourage rehabilitation of historic sites in
order to help defray additional costs that might be associated with preserving a historic structure.
The text that follows outlines some of the issues that face Coconut Grove and looks at how one
could more adequately face the preservation of Coconut Grove's community character. The
collective benefits of preservation are illustrated in the unique character that each community
maintains, and how well that community identifies with it and is identified by it.
98-1084
22
COCONUT GRG , c; PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
NEIGHBORHOODS / PROBLEMS, OPPORTUNITIES / RECOMMENDATIONS
North Grove
Problems and Opportunities
The North Grove is well anchored by Vizcaya which crosses South Bayshore Drive and assists in
creating the character of the Scenic corridor. North of this site along Brickell is millionaires row,
which contain a number of large estates that stretch between Brickell Avenue and Biscayne Bay
which both individually and collectively could be considered for designation. Concentrating at the
corner of SE 32nd Road and Brickell are the Coleman Estate, Villa Serena, J.S. Joyce Estate, and
the Amelia White Estate. These are fine examples of construction from the early 1900's in
hammock sites. Threatened because of their large lot size (100' x 500' average), future lot splitting
or incompatible development can easily turn a majestic street into walled subdivisions. Because
these sites contain large mansions with lush tropical Hammocks, they represent a double loss
unless creative techniques are employed to encourage restoration, adaptive reuse, and easements
for these historic sites. Designation of this district would extend the Vizcaya Historic FesseF�tion.
disaiet Site northeast helping to connect Wainwright park with Vizcaya.
Equally important are the sites that flank Bayshore Drive south of Vizcaya. A number of sites
lining both the low street side and high elevation of the bluff have created much of the character of
the street. These sites are continually under stress due to some pavement widenings read idellieg
pFejests and incompatible development. Careful consideration should be given to all future
right-of-way improvements so that the character of Bayshore Drive is maintained and the buildings
are not further separated from their immediate context. This area is known for having some of the
earliest architecture in the Silver Bluff and New Biscayne Subdivision. Lots tend to be long and
thin measuring 50' x 500' with some sites like the Trapp House having access on both Tigertail
and Bayshore Drive. In the Preservation plan we have identified a number of sites around 17th
avenue that individually and collectively could be designated.
The last area to be identified for designation is the subdivision of King Park. This 1923
subdivision is complete with at least 50% historic fabric and some of the best examples of
Mediterranean revival architecture. Lot sizes vary from wide and shallow to long and deep due to
the arrow -head shape of the subdivision. The subdivision is also unique in that its orientation is
toward the Bay instead of the Miami Street grid system and therefore carries the memory of the
shoreline even though it is a considerable distance away.
Recommendations
1. Designate properties and districts. Brickell Avenue, Bayshore Drive and King park are
identified as potential historic districts. Designation of these sites and Districts would further
protect the scenic corridor and further preserve the character of a range of different lot types,
landscapes and subdivisions.
2. Include original street names with numbers on street signs so that cultural connections to
individuals and natural features can be remembered and retained.
Target Groups
Bay Heights Homeowners Association
Coconut Grove Park Homeowners Association
Coconut Grove Civic Club
Cocoanut Grove Village Council
Friends of Wainwright Park
Natoma Manors Homeowners Association
Tigertail Homeowners Association
Vizcayans
Womans Club of Coconut Grove
Waterfront
Problems and Opportunities
The waterfront presents special challenges for preservation because it contains representative
examples of some of Coconut Grove's finest historic sites such as the Pan American Seaplane
Base and the Barnacle, yet is stretched along a waterfront that is discontinuous as a linear public
park. The challenge will be in how to preserve the integrity of existing historic sites while
sensitively incorporating future adjacent sites and programs. Additionally, there is community
interest in the rehabilitation of the Virrick Gym, the 1934 Art Deco office annex, and a number of
hangars for adaptive reuse. The waterfront, as indicated in the masterplan, is seen as a linear park
with historic structures beaded along its length. Kennedy Park, Bayside Park, Peacock Park and,
ultimately, the Barnacle State Historic Site, are four primary green spaces in this sequence.
Recommendations
Rehabilitate the Virrick Gym, hangars and Art Deco Annex.
Target Groups
Barnacle Association
Chamber of Commerce
Coconut Grove Civic Club
Womans Club of Coconut Grove
Cocoanut Grove Village Council
Center Grove
Problems & Opportunities
The Center Grove has already felt the effects of adjacent commercial development in a residential
setting. Having the greatest variety of zoning uses, the juxtaposition of scale and density has put an
incredible stress on what historic fabric has survived. Add to this cut -through traffic, overflow
parking, and an increased disregard for the area by weekend visitors, and you have a
neighborhood with problems. Residents have also expressed a concern for the preservation of the
remaining Dade County Pine Residences. The primary opportunities for this area are in the
designation of individual sites and the encouragement of more compatible development adjacent to
historic sites. Without designation of the Dade County Pine residences, there are few opportunities
for tax incentives or grants. Incentive zoning could offer some relief from the adverse effects of
development.
24
I 1.. #1
gg'It,1:84
Recommendations
Incentive zoning has often been used to allow developers an increase in density in return for
providing public benefits such as preservation of historic buildings, affordable housing,
community or day care facilities. Unfortunately, increasing densities has also added to the
problems one wants to avoid. Many cities such as San Francisco, and New York now require
developers to provide public benefits while still building within required densities, an. in a
compatible way with the community. Funds generated from incentive zoning, like paet 4@s,
could be used for providing additional services for the neighborhood or go toward the acquisition,
and or rehabilitation of a historic building for a community center.
Target Groups
Center Grove Homeowners Association
Coconut Grove Civic Club
Coconut Grove Treeman Trust
Cocoanut Grove Village Council
Dade Heritage Trust
Florida Ave Homeowners
Florida Ave. Homeowners Association
Village Center
Problems and Opportunities
The Village Center is a nervous mixture of important historic sites and the Grove's most successful
commercial development. The Coconut Grove Playhouse is considering plans for the expansion of
its parking facilities but should do so in a way that does not negatively impact adjacent streets or
the integrity of their historic building. Indeed, much of what has been done to the commercial
district has buried or greatly altered the character of the historic fabric of Main Highway.
Residents and businesses alike expressed concern over the lack of continuity of storefronts along
Main Highway; they asked for greater uniformity in signage, canopies, and the amount of
fenestration along the street, while maintaining the older architecture's eclectic character. Design
guidelines should be considered for the regulation of future renovation of the streetscape. Many
Mediterranean style buildings from the 1920's lie buried within the fabric undermining the
economic benefits of preserving the areas original small town character.
Recommendations
Consider the development of Design Guidelines for stores along Main Highway and on all historic
buildings.
Target Groups
Coconut Grove Treeman Trust
Coconut Grove Chamber Of Commerce
Coconut Grove Civic Club
Cocoanut Grove Village Council
25
198-wl484
West Grove
Problems and Opportunities
A strong and historically important community continues to be threatened both by lack of economic
development and by incompatible building development; there is also aR4 a lack of impieffientagen
of incentives for preservation and restoration. A well defined community of Bahamian ancestry
the West Grove has strong civic pride in building its community. The West Grove has a
concentration. of early one and two-story wood frame buildings that are some of Miami's earliest
Dade County Pine vernacular structures.
Streets such as Charles Avenue have a sufficient concentration of historic
buildings that make it suitable for designation as a district.
District designation (see below) would curb
incompatible development and clime by creating funding opportunities for new construction. With
the aid of relief from current zoning regulations and setbacks, new construction could be
compatible with the existing historic fabric. Wood Frame construction with porches that front the
street would assist in retaining its character. The larger scale drawing of Charles Avenue indicates
possible infill scenarios for new single family housing. In these three infill sites, the porch is
shown encroaching into the front yard setback to create better compatibility with adjacent historic
fabric. Current zoning requirements require that the building setback be 20 feet from the front
property line. With designation as a district, guidelines could be tailored into the HC District to
allow for better more livable and compatible infill architecture.
Recommendations
1. Designate individual site
2. Designate Charles Avenue (Evangelist Street) as a district.
3. Create guidelines and zoning relief from setbacks for new sites adjacent to historic sites to
allow new construction compatibility with historic fabric. This could be accomplished by creating a
historic conservation district and then tailoring an ordinance to allow for new construction to be
compatible with historic fabric.
4. Propose the construction of new oolitic rock walls around parking and the adjacent cemetery to
complete the rehabilitation of the corner of Charles Avenue and Douglas Road.
5. Educate the public about the incentives for restoration, rehabilitation, preservation of historic
sites, and the incentives for new construction through community workshops (See Incentives and
general recommendations).
Target Groups
Coconut Grove CAA -CD Board
Coconut Grove Cemetery association
Coconut Grove Civic Club
Cocoanut Grove Village Council
Dade Heritage Trust
Florida Ave. Homeowners Association
Local Development Corporation
Stirrup Grove Homeowners
West Grove Homeowners and Tenants Association
26
South Grove
Problems and Opportunities
The South Grove's primary preservation question is the loss of community character due to
incompatible development. Lot -splitting with higher density on large parcels is as much a problem
as land assemblage and large scale building that occurs in smaller scale neighborhoods. As land
value increases, there is a reciprocal pressure to neglect or destroy historic buildings and
landscapes for the potential rewards of future development. Increased development tends to
increase assessed values of surrounding sites making taxes higher, pressuring surrounding sites to
follow development patterns. Designation of individual sites and districts is the first step in
eligibility for funding for tax incentives for restoration. The South Grove has a number of
subdivisions with historic fabric that are eligible for designation.
Well defined, dense Coconut Grove Park has a Cartesian clarity, unique in Coconut Grove. Plaza
Street and Palmetto Ave cross in the center of a green marking the center corners of the
subdivision. With street names such as Loquat, Avocado, Palmetto, Royal Palm and Poinciana, it
is easy to see why the dense landscape has a park like setting. With a lot size of 50" x 140',
Coconut Grove Park has a deeper lot size than the typical Miami lot of 50' x 100'. This lot type
has allowed for buildings to have cottages and outbuildings placed deep to the rear of the lot
creating well defined streets, with private retreats to the interior of the block. The Cartesian quality
of the plan with its preference for the east west direction is subtly transformed by the rolling natural
landscape of solution holes and small bluffs. The subdivision is picturesque, retaining much of its
original architecture which is a range of oolitic rock bungalows, cottages, and Mediterranean style
buildings with Moorish detailing. Lot assemblage and incompatible development have, however,
begun to erode the fabric of this subdivision and, unless more protection is sought, the park -like
setting of this neighborhood will be lost.
Bay view Road and the triangle are another example of an area available for designation. Originally
the Sunshine Fruits Company Subdivision, the street retains the Dade County Pine and Oolitic
Rock Bungalows and Mediterranean Revival buildings of the early 1900's. Started as winter
residences for absentee owners of fruit groves, the street was once complete with grapefruit trees,
solution holes, and a majestic row of Washingtonia Robusta palms. Many of the Washingtonia
Robusta and fruit trees remain but are now being lost due to incompatible development or lack of
funds for their maintenance. The street retains most of its original character and platting but needs
designation as a district to encourage compatibility of future development and to create incentives
for the restoration of houses currently existing. Much of the background work is in place for the
designation application. Historic buildings and landscapes can be retained through designation,
implementation of tax credits for restoration, and through easement programs.
Recommendations
l . Designate individual sites such as the Kampong as indicated in the plan. Seek designation of
Coconut Grove Park and Bayview Road as districts in order to encourage compatibility of future
development and the restoration of existing landscape features and buildings.
2. Implement tax incentive programs such as the Ad Valorem tax program i
and easement programs that preserve the character of the
street, and plan.
3. Implement design guidelines for the subdivisions so that future development has a model to
work from for compatibility.
Target Groups
Cocoanut Grove Village Council
Land Trust of Dade County
Coconut Grove Civic Club
South Grove Homeowners
98'"i094
COCONUT GRO . E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
In Order of Priority
1. Increase City Staff in Preservation; provide and add a preservation officer to the NET office
as a resource for community efforts and education.
er itt3�se-tb 4 a-ici _ of ap-eess and t14Pm&Q;*
2. Educational workshops for citizens on:
Tax Incentives
Designation Process
Local, State, and National Resources
Coordination of Local Groups toward common goal
3. Dramatically increase the number of designated sites in Coconut Grove. The preservation
plan proposes an increase of approximately 540 sites. Many existing National Register sites
and pending or proposed sites can be immediately designated such as the Kampong, and
the Cemetery on Charles Avenue.
4. Designate Districts with design guidelines specific to each area or subdivision. The
proposed Designated districts are:
1. King Park Subdivision
2. Bay View Road
3. Charles Avenue; including a section of Plaza Street
4. Coconut Grove Park Subdivision
5. Brickell Avenue
6. South Bayshore Drive
These are illustrated below but the boundaries and specific details of designation would
need to be refined. Additional research may identify other districts too
5. Study and modify the current City of Miami Preservation Ordinance to allow for a broader
range of preservation possibilities and incentives. Implement the Ad Valorem Tax
Program, revise the language of the Preservation Ordinance, if necessary, to allow
Designated Districts. fe€ the designmen ef--sabdivisiea5 N4ake the se otien- of
Encourage local
6. Revise zoning to allow for better compatibility of new construction with historic fabric of
buildings and landscapes. For example: Allow for front porches to encroach into the front
setback area to allow for conformity with surrounding fabric.
7. Draft an ordinance for a Thematic Resource District for parts of Coconut Grove as an
additional incentive for the preservation of historic buildings and sites. This could be
treated as an overlay district in the Zoning ordinance
98-.1 84 28
COCONUT GRC PLANNING STUDY
MIAMi, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
THEMATIC RESOURCE DISTRICT
New Text
A Thematic Resource District (TRD) is designed to be a protective land use element in the CDMP
that outlines a mechanism and criteria for local governments to implement when called for. It is an
umbrella land use designation that will allow the appropriate body to tailor a plan for any
specifically defined area that meets the criteria and can include: overlay zoning, =h:tecriral and
landscape design guidelines, conservation and preservation strategies, community development
strategies, as well as incentive programs to accomplish these goals. In essence, a TRD is intended
to streamline land use regulations as they apply to a specific area to make them compatible and
complimentary to the broader objectives of the community.
In order for a TRD to be officially designated, the area would have to meet 3 out of the 5 following
criteria. A TRD should have:
1. A unique or historic architectural character present throughout the defined area. For example,
in the case of Coconut Grove it is its variety of small scale architecture from the turn of the century
to the 1930's and its dense landscape of both native and exotic plants.
2. Natural or historic landscape features such as natural forest communities, public or private
landscape themes which are prevalent throughout the area.
3. Specialized commerce. For example, a concentration of resort industry, antique or design
districts, or specific economic development objectives.
4. A unique town or suburban plan which is specifically noteworthy for its design and because it
serves the community in some quantitative way.
5. Other cultural features such as archeological sites, notable infrastructure improvements which
directly contribute to the aesthetic character of a community, or special public amenities.
When an area is determined to meet the necessary criteria for a TRD, the objectives for the
community need to be defined so a program can be designed.
29
98--2U84
Q
COCONUT GRG , E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
IMPLEMENTATION / INCENTIVES
Ad Valorem Tax Exemption
The Ad Valorem Tax Exemption This historic preservation property tax exemption available in
Floes. The purpose of this state legislation is to encotuage preservation by "freezing" ad valorem
taxes at the rate they were assessed before improvements are made. This "freezing" is
accomplished by removing from the assessment the incremental value added by the authorized
improvements. The City of Miami is currently drafting an ordinance for this program through the
Historic and Environmental Preservation Office.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
This federally funded program provides funds for local activities which improve the quality of life
in blighted neighborhoods, and provides the expansion of economic opportunities for persons of
low to moderate income. The City of Miami's CDBG Program is required to be implemented
within the physical boundaries of eight neighborhood target areas identified as needing economic
development, revitalization, housing and infrastructure improvements. The West Grove was
identified as one target area and was found eligible for CDBG funding. To be eligible for CDBG
funding, federal policies require that each activity (1) benefit low or moderate income persons, (2)
aid in the prevention of slum or blight, and (3) meet other community development needs having a
threat to the health and welfare of the community. Funds can be used for acquiring real property,
interim assistance activities, economic development activities, assisting private for profit entities,
historic preservation, the finance or subsidizing of construction of new permanent residences,
rehabilitation of public or private property, and code enforcement. This program is available
through the City of Miami Community Development Office: (305) 579-2461.
Florida Enterprise Zone Program
The Community Contribution Tax Credit Program (CCTCP) provides an incentive (50% tax credit)
to encourage Florida corporations to make donations toward community development and low
income housing projects. The tax credit is easy for a business to receive. Corporations located
anywhere in Florida that make donations to approved community development projects may
receive a tax credit equal to 50 percent of the value of the donation. This program is conducted
through the Florida Department of Commerce in Tallahassee, Florida: (904) 488-9357.
Historic Preservation Grants - In - Aid
Locally designated historic properties may be eligible for Historic Preservation Grants -In -Aid.
Eligibility of these properties increase if they are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
This program is available to not -for -profit organizations, units of the county or units of local
governments, and departments or agencies of the state including State Universities. This program
is available through the Department of State, Bureau of Historic Preservation in the Division of
Historical Resources, Tallahassee, Florida: (904) 487-2333.
Investment Tax Credit For Low Income Housing
This legislation provides for an investment tax credit for acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation
of qualifying units of low income housing. There is a 9% tax credit per year for 10 years for each
unit of low income housing acquired, constructed, or rehabilitated without other Federal subsidies
and a 4% tax credit for 10 years for units involving Federal subsidies ortax-exempt bonds. This
98-1084 30
program is available thro, _ the Department of State, Bureau of ,toric Preservation in the
Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee, Florida: (904) 487-2333
The Historic Homeownership Assistance Act
This Federal legislation provides an incentive to individuals to restore and preserve historic homes
by providing an income tax credit for qualified rehabilitation expenditures to historic homes.
Approval is pending.
Easement Programs
An easement is a partial interest in real property, through donation or purchase, recorded in the
deed, protecting the identifying elements of the interior/exterior or space around the property
deemed important to be preserved. An easement program enables a tax-exempt, charitable
organization or public agency to protect buildings or land against potential adverse development or
changes by acquiring partial interests in such properties. This program protects a property without
burdening an organization with the costs associated with full ownership. The property becomes in
a real sense a public/private partnership. Types of easements vary from Scenic or Open Space
Easements to Exterior or Facade Easements, to Interior Easements. Easements can also restrict
uses of a property, preventing a residential site from becoming commercial, or undeveloped land
from incompatible intensive uses. Easements ultimately have federal tax incentives allowing
owners to take a charitable contribution deduction for federal income, estate and gift tax purposes
for the value of the easement. State easement programs vary and one should consult with a lawyer
before setting up any easement program.
Revolving Fund
A revolving fund, normally administered by a non-profit or government agency, establishes a
monetary basis on which property can be bought, improved, maintained, and sold outright.
Revolving fund monies are subsequently returned and reused. The funds act to create a new
economic and social force in the community.
31
98-1084
COCONUT GRO' PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
PROPOSED HISTORIC DISTRICTS
32
98 `1084
COCONUT GRC. PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
PROPOSED AND EXISTING DESIGNATED HISTORIC SITES
A�
-- - A4
,fAY �Ati� �'A♦�Yvl�Y10 C `��
r J ,
r
4 r
• <�l
y� ♦6
pl •�•�I/r=
�1 � wV
it
Nx
,
'M
_• -jam \``.�
�I
■Av`vv1000�
� �
A
Af �
i
® ■
n
14 as
33
98-1084
COCONUT GRC PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
PRESERVATION
PROPOSED HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND SPECIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
98 - 684
_ COCONUT GRG + JE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
BY SAVINO AND MILLER DESIGN STUDIO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
Existing Conditions (natural environment, open space development, illustrations)
36
2.
Neighborhoods and Districts (overview, recommendations, illustrations)
40
3.
Parks and Recreation (overview, recommendations)
43
4.
Streetscape and Corridors (overview, recommendations, illustrations)
45
5.
Private Property and Open Space
51
6.
Policy Amendments
53
7.
Catalytic Projects
54
8.
Funding Sources
55
98-,10845
COCONUT GR(" , PLANNING STUDY
MIAM., FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Coconut Grove is located on the southeast coastline of Dade County, Florida roughly two miles
-,ouch of the Miami River, between the Rickenbacker Causeway to the north and the Coral Gables
Waterway to the south. Its western perimeter is defined by U.S. 1 (Dixie Highway) which
parallels the shoreline in a northwest direction.
Its location along the coast is ideally situated to take advantage of the prevailing southeasterly
winds blowing off Biscayne Bay. Along this coastline, an oolitic limestone ridge (part of the
Atlantic Coastal Ridge) provides an ideal habitat for tropical hardwood and pineland hammocks.
Part of the unique character of Coconut Grove is formed by the eastern edge of this ridge, known
as the Silver Bluff. It is most prominent along the bayfront to the north of Kennedy Park.
South Florida is known for its distinctive plant life and diversity. It is the only environment in the
continental United States which supports a naturalized communityof tropical flora. The origin of
the flora is generally considered to be the Caribbean islands to the south and east, migrating by
means of water, wind, animal and human activity. In addition, South Florida supports
non -tropical (northern), exotic, and native species which add to the tremendous plant diversity of
the region.
Nowhere is this more evident than in Coconut Grove.
The higher elevation and particular soil and geological characteristics of the Silver Bluff/Atlantic
Coastal Ridge created an ecological niche and habitat for tropical hardwood hammock
environments (Quercus, Bursera, Simaruba, Lysiloma, Eugenia spp.). In Coconut Grove, the
hardwood hammock dominated the coastal area from Rickenbacker Causeway south to the Mercy
Hospital area. Remnants of this type of hammock can be found today in ' Wainwright Park,
Vizcaya. and a small pocket at the Barnacle/Commodore Bay site. The remainder of the coastline -
between the Silver Bluff formation and Biscayne Bay - was inhabited by a thin band of coastal
hammock plant species (Mangrove, Spartina, Wax Myrtle, Buttonwood). (See Map Existing
Vegetation and Topography)
Behind Silver Bluff, the higher elevations of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge limestone formation
became ideal habitat for the slash pine/scrub plant community (Pinus elliotti, Pinus palustris,
Serenoa repens, Zamia spp.). In terms of acreage, the pineland hammock was the dominant plant
community in Coconut Grove. Many of the early homes and buildings found in Coconut Grove
were built from this "Dade County Pine" forest. Unfortunately, due to its poor sustainability in
development areas and the relative ease of clearing pineland compared to the hardwood hammocks,
most of the pineland is gone today. It is worth noting that much of the pineland was cleared
initially for agricultural development, then later for housing.
Perhaps less well known is the history of cultivated fruits which were grown in and around
Coconut Grove. Grapefruit plantations were widespread in the area. The Hayden Mango and the
Trapp Avocado were developed in Coconut Grove. At one time, a thriving guava plantation and
fruithouse could be found on the Kampong property. The early Bahamian settlers were
instrumental in bringing other tropical fruits to the area, and taught the white settlers how to
cultivate the difficult and rocky limestone terrain.
36
98-1084
OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT
Overview
Today, Coconut Grove is characterized by an abundant and diverse plant community. This wealth
of trees is probably the most obvious and beneficial aspect of the Grove, and is the principal
contributor to its unique character and image. For this reason, this study will focus on ways and
means to:
A. Preserve trees (and palms) in areas with already dense stands of vegetation
B. Enhance places in Coconut Grove where there is sparse vegetation
Existing Conditions
The existing vegetation was studi: d wi:h aerial maps; these quickly provide a glimpse of where
preservation and enhancement measures are most needed (F.ee Map Existing Tree Canopy).
The North Grove (except for the Bay Heights area) and South Grove, being stable
single-family neighborhoods, have a dense and evenly distributed tree canopy, and
lend themselves to focus on preservation measures.
For various reasons, such as retail/commercial development (Downtown), lack of
funds and proper maintenance (West Grove), and densification (Center Grove), the
tree canopy in these areas needs to be enhanced.
The attitude toward the vegetation aspect of the Study was evident in the neighborhood
workshops, where participants expressed the need for preservation or enhancement based on
whether they had extensive tree canopy, or did not. Notably, in the West Grove workshop,
participants voiced their concern that trees along Grand Avenue were not maintained as well as
those further east in the downtown district. A group in Center Grove concerned about random
crime and their vicinity to the Downtown is advocating tree planting as a means to detract visitors
to park in their neighborhood.
37
9&-1084
COCONUT GRO..,: PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
EXISTING TREE CANOPY
i &.X
38
)84
COCONUT GR(. PLANNING STUDY
MIAM., FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
OPENSPACE / INSTITUTIONAL
39
98-1084
COCONUT GROvE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
NEIGHBORHOODS AND DISTRICTS
Overview
The neighborhoods identified in the Coconut Grove Planning Study are defined by various means:
regional location, demographics, zoning, streetscape corridors and historical use. Yet, while
sharing many characteristics, each neighborhood has unique conditions and characteristics which
require unique responses. In terms of landscape and open space improvements, some
neighborhoods need to institute measures which preserve vegetation, while others are in greater
need to enhance their vegetation.
Generally though, the planning study for Open Space & Recreation recommends:
1. Street tree planting for those streets with little or no tree canopy
2. Creation of a streetscape network of paths, signage and planting which orients
pedestrians and bicyclists to neighborhood and community facilities and points of
interest, i.e. parks, places of worship, schools, and historic places
3. Thematic plant associations, such as hammock, pineland, or tropical species, which
can help to define the various neighborhoods
In addition, general policy recommendations for private development are proposed to:
1. Increase planting (enhancement) presently required under the Metro Dade
Landscape Ordinance
2. Increase required "greed' space or building setbacks (preservation) under the City
of Miami Zoning Ordinance
Landscape And Open Space Recommendations
North Grove
Streetscape
A. Our recommendations for a streetscape program in North Grove include:
1. Planting improvements on Tigertail Avenue, 27th Avenue and Bayshore Drive
2. Improvements to continuous wall on south ROW of U.S. 1 from 17th Avenue to
I-95, possibly including:
a. Art installation by local artists or school children;
b. Living fence of creeping fig (Ficus repens) w/ Thrinax palms
3. Streetscape "infill" where tree canopy is sparse, esp. In Bay Heights Area
(tropical hammock trees; Live Oak, Gumbo Limbo, Paradise Tree, Strangler Fig).
4. Create a viable bike lane running north and south on Bayshore Drive
5. Signage/graphics system for user orientation at key intersections and points of
interest
6. Streetscape planting on key streets to churches, parks, historic places and schools
Center Grove
Neighborhood Concerns
A. The major concern in the Center Grove neighborhood is the problem of
vehicular/parking overflow from the Downtown district resulting in increased
crime, vandalism, litter and deterioration of the existing swales
B. To discourage these problems, several neighborhood activists have initiated a tree
planting program for the swales. A street tree program, now in the planning stages,
proposes planting roughly 320 trees as a first phase for the Center Grove
neighborhood
Streetscape
A. Create a street tree network with the following priorities:
Neighborhood Association plan for street tree planting
a. Large canopy trees, i.e. Live Oak, Mahogany, Paradise trees, on swales
with no overhead wires
b. Small to medium trees, i.e. Lysiloma, Dahoon Holly, Pigeon Plum,
Loquat, Frangipani on swales with overhead wires. (See Metro Dade
Landscape Ordinance for other recommended plants adjacent to power
lines)
C. Small palms or shrubs on berms of no greater than 18" height can be
planted between the street trees to discourage parking between them, as
opposed to placing limestone rocks or concrete bollards, which
expose the City to liability
d. Coordinate street tree program with neighborhood parking requirements
2. Creating street hierarchy to prioritize tree planting in swales on streets closest to
Downtown district
3. Planting improvements on 27th Avenue, Bird Road and MacDonald Avenue
4. Palm planting on south side of U.S. 1
5. Streetscape planting on key streets to churches, parks, historic places and schools
B. Signage/graphics system for user orientation at key intersections and points of
interest
West Grove
Streetscape
A. Create a street tree network with priority on:
1. Grand Avenue, Douglas Road and MacDonald Avenue
(See Streetscape Corridors Recommendations)
2. Streets with direct access to schools, parks, churches, and historical districts
3. North -south streets from Grand Avenue
4. Palm planting on south side of U.S. 1
B. Create provisional community gardens in vacant parcels where feasible. Organize
Co-ops to plant and maintain. Potential market with street vendors/farmers market.
C. Botanical garden/orchard at schools, churches (where possible) for education, such
as small citrus groves, guavas, recapturing the spirit of the origins of Coconut
Grove
D. Planting improvements at cemetery
41
98-1084
E. Possible p, .c palette could include various tropic, lowering and fruit trees to
recall the plant community which migrated from the Caribbean:
West Indian Cherry, Yellow Elder, Lignum Vitae, Wild Tamarind
F. Possible restoration of pineland hammock community in Charles Avenue Historical
District, to represent area's original visual character
G. Signage/graphics system for user orientation at key intersections and points of
interest
South Grove
Generally, the quality of tree canopy and open space is very good
Stretiscape
A. Our recommendations for a streetscape program in South Grove include:
1. Streetscape "infill" where tree canopy is sparse (tropical hammock trees such as
Live Oak, Gumbo Limbo, Paradise Tree, Stag)
2. Streetscape planting on streets to churches, parks, historic places and schools.
3. Planting improvements with traffic -calming measures
4. Bikeways to parks and schools
5. Signage/graphics system for user orientation at key intersections and points of
interest
Village Center/Waterfront Grove
Streetscape Network
A. Create a street tree network with priority on:
1. Coconut palm plantings on main retail streets or native canoRy tree, where retail
Signage would not be blocked. and sidewalk is wide enough
2. Where sidewalk is wide, possible canopy tree planting on secondary streets
3. Coconut Grove palm planting along Myer's ParkBayshore Drive
4. Palm planting on Bayshore Drive
B. Explore various options to create a bike path and sidewalk from Coconut Grove
Playhouse area to waterfront to relieve congestion at Main Highway/Grand Ave.
intersection
C. Selective mangrove pruning to open up "windows" to Biscayne Bay, as approved
by Dept. of Environmental Resources Management
D. Create landmark "Lighthouse" on Dinner Key water's edge Piems-Islam- as focal
point from intersection of McFarlane Ave. and 27th Avenue vistas
E. Signage/graphics system for user orientation at key intersections and points of
interest
42
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
PARKS AND RECREATION
Overview
Parks and open spaces, like streetscapes, are an integral component of our urban fabric. As such,
they are; a direct re; ection cf our social and cultural well-being. 7«ey prcvidc anesse;i:ial naed in
community building bringing us together to play, get to know tacit other, and "ie-create;"
ourselves.
A successful park system offers a diverse set of recreational opportunities allowing for various
kinds of recreation which serve all members of the community. We advocate, as many
municipalities are doing, well -programmed parks that provide activities which get youths "off the
street" and reduce neighborhood crime.
As we heard so often in the workshops, crime is a major concern in Coconut Grove. With a
combined effort of community and city agencies, parks and recreational programs can be utilized to
reduce its crime problem. Given the ever -tightening squeeze on municipal budgets, it is vital that
neighborhoods become active in "taking back" their parks. In fact, we encourage neighborhood
associations to be formed in order to plan, program activities, monitor and maintain their parks.
Municipalities cannot do it alone: there needs to be closer public/private partnership in the care of
neighborhood parks and open spaces.
The Parks Bond Issue
An upcoming county -wide bond issue for parks, called the Safe Neighborhoods Parks Act of
1996, is scheduled for the November election. The Parks and Recreation Departments throughout
the County are formulating budget "wish lists" proposals for critical park needs (staffing, new
facilities and playgrounds, park furniture, programs) in their respective municipalities.
Presently, the City of Miami Parks and Recreation Department has prepared a budget proposal for
roughly $20 million for its park program. Many of the recommendations made in this proposal are
being suggested for Coconut Grove parks, and some were the result of the team observation and
community input.
Parks and Recreation Recommendations
Park Design
Certain design principles are important in park design:
1. They should be well -lit, with emphasis on installing vandal/bullet-proof fixtures
2. Dense foliage should be removed from the perimeter to facilitate easier visual
monitoring
3. High walls or barriers should be removed or made transparent
4. Areas should be designed for use of children of different age groups
5. Seating areas should be designed close to tot -lots for comfortable parental
monitoring
6. Use of playground play structures which incorporate the principle of "integrated
play" (as opposed to the old playground concept of spreading playground
equipment helter-skelter throughout the park)
88-1043
84
7. Equipmem auld be designed with long-term main nice and safety in mind -an
important factor given shrinking parks budgets and potential for litigation
Parks Maintenance
1. Native, drought -tolerant vegetation should be planted to reduce maintenance and
conserve resources
2. Allow some areas to become more "naturalized".
3. Plant design should utilize "xeriscape" principles, which reduce demand on
municipal water supplies
4. Irrigation systems can be designed in accordance with "xeriscape" principles, and
provided with rain/groundwater moisture sensors to eliminate over -watering
5. All parks should have a maintenance sY.,cification prep,:.red for L'isir specific n=ds
Special Park Districts
A relatively old concept in regional park management, known as Special Park Districts (SPD), is
also gaining momentum. These are independent districts which have their own tax base, elected
boards of directors, and considerable public involvement. These districts are created out of citizens
desire to control the delivery of park and recreation services apart from other services.
SPD's have shown they can reduce overhead costs while improving the overall efficiency,
response time, and economics for parks and recreation services. Some distinct advantages are:
1. Their independence allows SPD's to act "more boldly" than parks and recreation
departments in legislative matters
2. They can focus full attention on fulfilling public recreational needs
3. They can move into the private community for private funding drives
4. They enjoy more active community involvement
In 1988, a $225 million park bond issue for the East Bay Regional Park District, created in 1934,
was passed (a 2/3 majority was required) indicating substantial approval for the SPD and its
program and services. With a upcoming bond issue in Dade County, the creation of a SPD should
be studied to effectively master plan and manage the county -wide park system based on successful
models around the country.
Note: Following is a table detailing park by park descriptions of existing conditions and
recommendations. Most parks are illustrated, a few very small parks have written
recommendations only.
COCONUT GRG . E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
STREETSCAPE AND CORRIDORS - EXISTING
CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overview
The streetscape, usually defined by the public right-of-way (ROW), is a major factor in shaping
our urban landscape. Streetscapes - and i:he manner in which architecture and open space with
them - define what we call the public realm. Codes and ordinances do not address the public
streetscape beyond the right-of-way line, but can strongly influence the character of the public
realm.
This study addresses the following aspects of streetscape improvements:
1. Ways to improve the visual quality of streetscapes through planting
2. Alternatives for street configuration to create a pedestrian -friendly environment
while facilitating vehicular, pedestrian and bikeway circulation
3. Enhancement of view corridors and scenic corridors
General Recommendations
A. Prepare a Streetscape Master Plan which identifies a palette of street trees and
palms to be planted in various neighborhoods based on existing plants,
maintenance requirements, and feedback from neighborhood representatives/city
The plan would analyze:
1. Coordination of private development Street Tree requirements with proposed
planting in right-of-ways
2. Thematic plant communities, such as tropical hardwood hammock, coastal
hammock, tropical fruit and flowering trees, to define the historicallcultural patterns
of Coconut Grove
3. Establishment of a hierarchy to prioritize streetscape/street tree planting in Coconut
Grove and each neighborhood
4. Feasibility of relocating overhead electric lines underground
5. Recommendations for bike lanelpaths, streetscape furniture, and signage
Major Corridors
Based on the findings of the planning study process, ten streetscapes were identified as major
corridors. These were defined as the corridors having the greatest need, and potentially having the
most beneficial impacts for streetscape improvements.
1. Bird Avenue
2. 27th Avenue (Grapeland Avenue)
3. Grand Avenue (West of Downtown)
4. Douglas Road (North of St. Hugh Oaks)
5. MacDonald Street
6. Dixie Highway (U.S. 1)
7. Main Highway
8. Bayshore Drive
9. Le Jeune Road
10. Tigertail Avenue
45
9-1084:
1. Bird Avenue
Existing Conditions
A. A principal east -west corridor with major impact on the Center Grove
Neighborhood
B. Overhead utility lines create an unsightly image, and limit potential planting in
swales
C. Identified as an "up and coming" commercial district at its western end, close to the
27th Avenue intersection
D. Little or no pedestrian sidewalks/amenities
E. No bikeway/path
F. Major intersc ctiozs: MacDo.,ald Aveauc and 27th Avenue
Recommendations
A. Reconfigure street to allow for sidewalk, bikeway and planting in swale areas
B. Relocate overhead utility lines underground to improve visual character and allow
for large canopy tree planting
C. Make extensive streetscape improvements in commercial district including expanded
sidewalks, parking reconfiguration and planting improvements
D. Define 27th Avenue/Bird Avenue intersection with planting islands and new
signage
2. 27th Avenue
Existing Conditions
A. A principal north -south corridor with major impact on the Center Grove
Neighborhood and North Grove Neighborhood
B. Overhead utility lines create an unsightly image, and limit potential planting in
swales
C. Variable right-of-way and private property lines create difficulties in major
expansion and continuous streetscape improvements
D. Little or no pedestrian sidewalks/amenities
E. No bikeway/path
F . Major intersections: Bird Road, Tigertail Avenue and Bayshore Drive
G. Metrorail Station north of U.S. 1; marina and bay view at south terminus
H . One of few corridors that connects straight to Bay but, presently, it is not obvious
Recommendations
A. Reconfigure street to allow for sidewalk, bikeway, planting improvements and
future at -grade trolley line
B. Relocate overhead utility lines underground to improve visual character and allow
for large canopy tree/palm planting. As minimum, explore options of having
overhead on one side of street only
C. Encourage city to study ways to widen the right-of-way to create greater
opportunities for streetscape improvements and better circulation
D. Define 27th Avenue/Bird Avenue intersection with planting islands and new
signage
E. Locate visual landmark at south terminus 27th Avenue. Dockmasters Building,
Lighthouse on spoil island - possible ideas
F. Improve pedestrian connection to Metrorail Station
46
98,1484
3. Grand Avenue
Existing Conditions
A. A principal east -west corridor with major impact on the West Grove Neighborhood
and Downtown District
B. Overhead utility lines create an unsightly image, and limit potential planting in
swales
C. Existing median with marginal planting from U.S 1 to Douglas Road
D. Narrow pedestrian sidewalks/few amenities
E. No bikeway;path
F. Major intersections: Douglas Road, MacDonald a4, ain Highway and Mary
=
G. Primarily retail/commercial uses on both sides of street
Recommendations
A. Extend median where appropriate from Douglas Road to MacDonald
Avenue
B. Relocate overhead utility lines underground to improve visual character and allow
for planting of large canopy trees/palms. As minimum, explore options of having
overhead on one side of street only
C. Expand sidewalk at opposite sides of street to create mini -plazas with seating,
planting, kiosk. Connect with concrete paver crosswalks
D. Enlarge existing tree planter islands; replant with large canopy trees or palm
clusters
E. Widen pedestrian sidewalks where feasible
F. Planting and signage improvements at Douglas Road and MacDonald Avenue
4. Douglas Road
Existing Conditions
A. A principal north -south corridor with major impact on the West Grove
Neighborhood and South Grove Neighborhood
B. Overhead utility lines create an unsightly image, and limit potential planting in
swales
C. Metrorail Station north of U.S. 1
D. No pedestrian sidewalks/amenities south of Grand Ave. Sidewalk on both sides
from Grand Avenue to U.S. 1
E. No bikeway/path
F. Major intersections: Grand Avenue, primarily commercial use: Main Highway and
Ingraham__ Highway
G. Schools, churches, residential and commercial uses along street
IL Desigpat as a scenic transportation corridor south of Kumquat Avenue
Recommendations
A. Reconfigure street.(lane width number of circulation lanes, etc.) to allow for new
median, sidewalk and planting improvements from cemetery to U.S. 1
B. Relocate overhead utility lines underground to improve visual character and allow
for planting of large canopy trees/palms
C. Improve pedestrian connection to Metrorail Station
D. Planting and.signage improvements at Grand Avenue intersection
t8 `108`�-47
5. MacDonald Street
Existing Conditions
A. A principal north -south corridor with impact on the West Grove Neighborhood and
Center Grove Neighborhood
B. Overhead utility lines create an unsightly image, and limit potential planting in
swales
C. No pedestrian sidewalks/amenities from Shipping Ave. to Florida Ave (except for
one block -long sidewalk on east side from Percival to Day Ave). Sidewalk on both
sides from Bird Rd. to Shipping Ave.
D. No bikeway/path
E. Major intersections: Grand Avenue, Bird Rd, U.S. 1
F. Mainly residential uses along street, except at U.S. 1 and Bird Rd. intersections
Recommendations
A. Reconfigure street to allow for sidewalk and planting improvements
B. Relocate overhead utility lines underground to improve visual character and allow
for planting of large canopy trees/palms. As minimum, explore options of having
overhead on one side of street only
C. Planting and signage improvements at Bird Road and Grand Avenue intersections
6. Dixie Highway (U.S. 1)
Existing Conditions
A. Principal east -west highway corridor with major impact on the entire Grove
B. Overhead utility lines on some south swales (between Natoma and I-95) create an
unsightly image, and limits potential planting in swales
C. Primarily office, gas station and "strip shopping" uses along south R.O.W.,
residential use between 27th Ave. and 1-95
D. Very unsightly in West Grove and North Grove (between Natoma and 1-95) where
walls/fences constructed helter-skelter on south R.O.W.
E. Intermittent sidewalk on south R.O.W.
F. Major intersections: Le Jeune Road, Grand Avenue, Bird Road, MacDonald
Avenue, 27th Avenue, 22nd Ave, and 17th Avenue
G. Existing median with Royal Palms or native tree
Recommendations
A. Install continuous sidewalk on south side where feasible for pedestrian safe1y and
access
B. Relocate overhead utility lines on south swale where feasible
C. Coconut Palm planting on south swale where feasible, prioritize in West Grove
D. WalUFence improvements to include artist mural/planting, etc. between Natoma
and I-95
E. Planting and signage improvements at major intersections (esp. Grand, Bird, and
27th Ave.)
48
98-1a84
7. Main Highway
Existing Conditions
A. Principal east -west corridor with major impact on the South Grove and Village
Center
B. Large canopy trees and vegetation, stone and concrete walls, the narrow roadway
and architecture create a good street
C. Sodium vapor lighting not ideal color for vegetation, large canopy trees create
"dark" areas below
D. Narrow asphalt sidewalk functions as sidewalk and bikeway/path (south side)
E. Major intersections: Douglas Road, Grand Avenue, Royal Palm. Poinciana Avenue
F. Overhead electric on north side from Douglas Road to Royal Road
G. Primarily residential and institutional uses along street; retail in Village Center
H. Designated as a Scenic Corridor
Recommendations
A. Minor sidewalk/bike path improvements to include widening where possible,
especially at critical "intersections"
B. Replace chain -link fence at Douglas/Main intersection with keystone bollards
C. Install specialty "moonlighting" from large canopy trees to illuminate dark areas
D. Explore feasibility of replacing sodium vapor street light lamps with Mercury
Vapor lamps
E. Minor "in -fill" planting improvements
F. Signage to indicate Scenic Corridor and/or Historic designation
8. Bayshore Drive
Existing Conditions
A. A principal east -west corridor with major impact on the Village Center and North
Grove
B. Intermittent overhead utility lines on north side create an unsightly image, and limits
potential planting in swales
C. Existing median with planting from McFarlane to Aviation Ave
D. Intermittent sidewalk on south side which functions as jogging trail and bike lane,
creating conflicts
E. Wood bollards installed to discourage parking in Kennedy Park/Myers Park areas
F. Major intersections: Mcfarlane, 27th Ave., Aviation Ave., 22nd Ave., 17th Ave.,
east terminus at US 1Brickell AveJSouth Miami Ave.
G. Primarily residential uses along street; retail/entertainment and office at Village
Center
H. Designated as a Scenic Corridor
Recommendations
A. Reconfigure street to provide continuous bike lane on both sides and sidewalk
B. Relocate overhead utility lines underground to allow for planting improvements
C. Minor planting improvements, such as Garden Club flower planting in existing
median
D. Coconut Palm planting on south sides adjacent to park and water (replace wood
bollards with Coconut Palms
E. Planting and signage improvements at major intersections: Mcfarlane, 27th Ave.,
Aviation Ave., 22nd Ave., 17th Ave., and east terminus at US IBrickell
AveJSouth Miami Ave.
F. Signage to indicate Scenic Corridor designation
49
98-1084
9. Le Jeune Road
Existing Conditions
A. A principal north -south corridor with major impact on the South Grove
B. Existing planting creates a good visual character
C. No pedestrian sidewalks or bike lane on east side
D. Major intersections: Hardie Road, though Poinciana, Crawford and Loquat used
as "short-cut" roads by commuters/school users
E. Primarily residential use along street
Recommendations
A.
C.
Q.
Create traffic -calming measures at Hardie, Poinciana, Crawford and Loquat
intersections (see Traffic section)
Minor "infill" planting in swales
Coordinate with The City of Coral Gables to maintain a unified and symmetrical_
design of having. trees and lighting.
10. Tigertail Avenue
Existing Conditions
A. A principal east -west corridor with major impact on the North Grove
B. Overhead utility wires create an unsightly image, and limits potential planting in
swales
C. Intermittent sidewalks, but primarily without sidewalk
D. Existing vegetation creates a good visual character where utility lines are not
overhead
E. No bike lane or path
F. Major intersections: 27th Ave., Aviation Ave., 22nd Ave., 17th Ave.
G. Primarily residential use along street
Recommendations
A. Residents do not want sidewalk additions or extensive street widening, which
would cut into their usable front yard areas
B. Possible slight street reconfiguration for bike path, if feasible
C. Relocate overhead utility wires underground to improve visual character and allow
for planting of large canopy trees/palms. As minimum, explore options of having
overhead on one side of street only
D. "Infill" planting in swales, especially where overhead electric is located
50
4Q-1(1QA
COCONUT GR *E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
PRIVATE PROPERTY AND OPEN SPACE
Overview
Coconut Grove is defined by its unique and diverse plant community, and its residents' sense
of stewardship towards it. Residents who attended the workshops and charrette made it clear that
the p esen,ation of Coconut Grove's tree and p?1m canopy was a paramount concern. Presently,
existing policies governing private development are allowing the destruction of too many trees.
During the charrette, it became clear that - if preservation and enhancement of tree canopy were to
be successful - the planning study must address existing zoning and landscape policy for private
development.
It is beyond the scope of this study to examine these policies in detail. However, aside from actual
zoning changes, factors having the greatest impact on private property's landscape character are:
1. Building Setbacks
2. Parking Requirements
3. Landscape Requirements
Building Setbacks (See drawings at page 114
As buildable lots decrease in size and residential square footage increases, the net result has been
significant loss of green space. Increasingly, new single-family (R-1) and townhouse (R-2).
development in Coconut Grove is replacing the tree canopy based on existing setback requirements
(this is especially true where R-1 zoning is changed to R-2 zoning). The critical factor in site
development for typical R-1/R-2 zoning - due to typical lot layout dimensions - is the side setback.
The front and rear setbacks are less critical in that there is usually adequate space to site plan
around critical site features such as specimen trees.
At present, the side setback for R-l/R-2 zoning is 5' minimum width. On a typical lot width of
50', the percentage of maximum buildable area/lot width is 80% (40750').
The planning study proposes to decrease the percentage of maximum buildable area/lot width-Ie
=Q4 05'150', with .. c' an sthmasv (See Housinv-Section)
Parking Requirements
1. For R-1/R-2 zoning, allow 12'-0" maximum driveway width at property
line crossing.
2. Provide incentives for site plans which "stack" cars and minimize
driveway width.
Landscape Regulations
At present, the new Metro -Dade Landscape Ordinance (MDLO) sets county -wide standards for
landscape requirements. The City of Miami is currently revising its landscape code to conform to
the MDLO as a minimum standard. The City of Miami i& may upgrade these requirements based
on its own specific municipal needs.
51
99-16R4
The planning study proposes the following standards for inclusion into a Coconut Grove Special
Landscape Overlay District (in its entirety).
1. For R-1/R-2 zoning:
A. Increase the minimum number of trees required from three to five for typical lots,
five to seven for corner lots
B. Provide incentives for specimen tree preservation (i.e. bonus for FAR, building
height, parking, green space requirements)
C. Increase penalty for unperrritted trm removalldestruction
D. Revise building permit procedure to require tree survey submitted - and
superimposed ono - the bite development plan
Site plan approved only after existing tree management/mitigation plan is submitted
and approved by CGEHPO or Landscape Architect
E. Create position - as appointed by the Coconut Grove Village Council and managed
through the Grove NET office - for Coconut Grove Environmental and Historic
Preservation Officer (CGEHPO) who is responsible for reviewing development
applications, building permits, etc. Make recommendations for tree transplanting
mitigation and preservation. Require CGEHPO sign -off for permit approval.
Prepare GIS Existing Tree inventory. (See section for Chapter 17 proposed
amendments) *
e_: + bit �•'- = = �. ! .0 u1n7ru ' .r'rfr • '.'-r ! =5 • w d
Consensus has not been reached for test in italics
98- 04 52
COCONUT GI. IE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
POLICY AMENDMENTS
Chapter 17:Environmental Preservation
li _Mend a".c rdi t4 recommendations, (See Planning's Study Section on PrQRosed
Ame dments to Chapter 17)
Building Setbacks (R-1/11-2 zoning)
1. Decrease the percentage of maximum buildable area/lot
width '^'' % `39' 50'`' with " `' "''"""""' " aak (See Housing_ Section)
Parking Requirements (R-1/R-2 zoning)
l . Allow 12'-0" maximum driveway width.
2. Provide incentives for site plans which "stack" cars and minimize driveway width.
Permit Process
1. Amend process to include the following documents for initial -plan review b, The Coconut
a. Site survey showing all trees 4= 3" caliper or greater,walls or other pertinent site
features.
b. Landscape Management plan: indicating proposed tree removal, transplanting and
mitigation plan as required under the revised City of Miami Chapter 59.
C. Landscape Plan: indicating proposed new planting, paving and other site
improvements as required under the revised City of Miami Chapter 59 by registered
e.
Historic and Environmental Preservation
Genes Board
Create position Qf "Coconut Grove Environmental and Historic Preservation Conservation
Consensus has not been reached for text in italics.
98-1081
General
1.
2.
3.
4.
COCONUT GRt Z PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
CATALYTIC PROJECTS
Begin GIS data base of all trees over 6" in diameter at breast height (except plans not
requiring tree removal permitunder Chapter 17). Use for building permit analysis.
Create Overlay District for Coconut Grove to upgrade Metro -Dade Landscape Ordinance
R-1 and R-2 planting requirements, and increase side building setbacks.
North Grove
1. South R.O.W. of U.S. 1., between 22nd Ave. and the I-95 ramp - Wall/fence
improvements combining art/mural from local artists & schoolchildren and planting
improvements.
2. Tigertail Road streetscape project.
3. Wainwright Park improvements.
4. Kennedy Park improvements.
5. Bay Heights street tree planting.
Center Grove
1. "Fast -track" Neighborhood Street Tree Planting Plan.
2. Bird Road Streetscape Project.
West Grove
1. Landscape improvements at cemetery.
2. Start Community Gardens project on city -owned vacant land.
3. Grand Avenue Streetscape Project.
4. Relocate Clinic outside of virrick park; commence with landscape and facilities
improvements.
5. Douglas Road Streetscape Project.
South Grove
1. Main highway- Specialty "moonlighting" in large canopy trees along bike/walkway
2. Landscape improvements associated with traffic -calming street configurations
3. Sidewalk/bike path improvements along Main Highway
Downtown/Waterfront Grove
1. Provide a shoreline boardwalk extension from Peacock Park to the Barnacle site.
2. Peacock Park/Myers Park Landscape Improvements.
3. Coconut Palm plantings on major retail streets, where needed.
4. Design competition for Landmark "Lighthouse" on Dinner Key Picnic Island.
Consensus has not been reached for text in italics.
54
98-1084
Parks
COCONUT GR, iE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
FUNDING SOURCES
A. General Obligation Bond/Dade County: The Safe Neighborhoods Park Act of 1996;
scheduled for November referendum
B . Public/private partnerships
Streetscape
A. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency & Enhancement Act (ISTEEA)
B. Highway Beautification Grants (Federal/FDOT);
Contact: Gary HenryPh.(904) 922-7210
C. Coconut Grove Festival Fund
D. Special Assessment District
L Florida Power and Light
Special Projects
A. Neighborhood Assessment
B. National Historic Trust for Preservation
C. Art in Public Places
D. Private Foundations
1, Dade County Community Based Organization Grant:
Contact: Nancy Masterson Ph. 372-6555
F American Forests
G Cool Communities
98.1081
COCONUT GRt,, . E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
BY CLYDE JUDSON / JUDSON AND PARTNERS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction
2. Recommendations
3. Existing Zoning Requirements and Specific Changes to the Zoning Code
4. Grand Avenue Proposal
57
58
61
67
98-108456
COCONUT GR,,, a PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 19%
HOUSING
INTRODUCTION
There are four distinct neighborhoods in Coconut Grove. While they share the strong common ties
of being part of the historic village and still focusing on its commercial center, they have very
different characteristics and each has its own concerns.
The forth and South Grove. tend to have higher incomes, higher assessed properties, a lesser
perception of crime, better housing stock, more foliage, and are predunr nar tly white. With regard
to housing, they share concerns about neighborhood character preservation, lot splitting, and
oversized new building.
The Center Grove tends to be middle income, with a range of assessments for a mix of single
family and multiple family housing. It is also predominantly white. Walled complexes and town
houses offering garages as their primary face to the street are the unfortunate result -of rezoning
without design guidelines, giving Center Grove a character of fragmentation and social isolation.
The West Grove is predominantly black and has social problems that are becoming more acute with
the population becoming poorer; the majority of residents are renters and real estate is often
assessed lower than its replacement value. The West Grove has a denser population, is more urban
in appearance, has a large stock of deteriorated buildings, and has far less foliage than the rest of
the Grove. The median household income in the West Grove is approximately $14,000 compared
to as high as $100,000 in the North, $50,000 in the Central and $100,000 in the South Grove
neighborhoods.
It should be noted that historically the Center and West Grove neighborhoods have provided the
most affordable housing for the village. The experience of the last half century and good
neighborhood planning principles indicate that congregating low income families and income
segregation in general are unhealthy, and the detrimental effects on an entire region can be far
reaching. Thus, redevelopment efforts aspiring to preserve the cultural character of the Center and
West Grove should not be required solely to produce low income or affordable housing.
Significant features of historical or cultural character may be preserved and protected through
historic designation, design guidelines, and redevelopment that encourages home and business
ownership.
All of Coconut Grove must confront the need for improvement in the West Grove and the need for
increased home ownership there . As well,
the North and South neighborhoods should share in meeting the affordable housing needs of
Coconut Grove as a whole. Given that these two areas are completely built out, offering little
opportunity for building anew, the fulfillment of this goal is only possible ig ther ethef by a public
commitment to purchasing and managing individual scattered houses, or perhaps more easily
implementable, by the regulatory introduction of secondary residences (granny flats) in existing
single family zoning.
98-1084
COCONUT GR., VE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
RECOMMENDATIONS
For the North, South, and Center Grove, most of the housing concerns voiced by residents are
related to preservation zoning regulations and insensitive building design. In the West Grove,
additional issues revolve around the coincident but divergent desire for improvement and fear of
gentrificatien. A s:r_es of diagrams follow, illustrating the shortcorrings of current zoning with
regard to the former neighborhood concerns, and some proposed solutions.
For the West Grove, the following are recommendations intended to encourage affordable in -fill
single family house development:
A. Decrease soft -costs related to affordable housing development:
Waive all impact, processing, permits, certificate of occupancy fees for
affordable housing.
Provide one-step expeditious city approval process.
Reduce professional fees:
1. Solicit architects deers to design and prepare construction
documents for several prototypes for repeat use that meet historic,
preservation and design guidelines
2. Process prototypes with one-step / one-time approval for repeat use
Use C.D.B.G. funds to up -grade water and sewer utilities in affordable
housing target areas.
Implement the City of Miami's affordable housing strategy as W the
Annual Action Plan for fiscal year 1997.
Request WASA and the City to prioritize utility up -grades.
B . Enhance buyer 4sensumar- education:
Expand and increase current pre -qualification program.
Develop and implement COME BACK TO THE GROVE marketing
campaign.
Increase Unnitay and market to reliable renters currently living in the
neighborhood.
C. Increase Market small housing developers participation
- Identify and pre -qualify developers.
- Educate dgvelT about opportunities, incentives and subsidies
- Offer City owned property as catalytic inducement (identify lots)
- Use City housing funds as construction loans to developers who already
the risk and increasing the profitability of the.project.
Provide development assistance grants for
compliance with design guidelines and historic preservations requirements.
Request appraisers to use a construction cost method when appraising
affordable housing rather edw than prior sale method.
98-1084 58
Req_ t other funding sources to become mo, ggressive in target areas.
Extend Affordable Housing Trust Fund concept to select areas of Coconut
Grove with limitations on use of funds to affordable housing development
in Coconut Grove mgien:
Establish a ramalyge 4 model area for concentrated single family housing in -
fill development.
D. Develop Design Guidelines, to enhance, preserve, and restore neighborhood
character and history (see design sketches )
- Permit and/er require• encourage porches and main entries to face street
frontage.
- Limit perimeter wall height and the extent of solid surface _Md require
transparency at the front of ft I -
- Prohibit garages and parking eA-st-ree'. 4eatages at the front of the lot.
- Create overlay zoning for R-2 zoning to encourage R-1 type development
with incentives i.e. affordable housing, financing Plygibilily allowing home -
businesses and secondary units, rental apafwAms padgag Fader, etc.
- Prohibit lot splitting.
- Discourage lot aggregation for multi -family, by placing a cap on street
frontage width, `m '• d ` ming e .Q o
Create design guidelines that require building facades and massing to be
consistent with neighborhood character.
E. Create Historic District (see Preservation).
98•-1084 59
3
COCONUT GRO PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
COCONUT GROVE ZONING MAP
60
98-1084
f�LTtf o
I �0*
COCONUT GRI. E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
EXISTING ZONING REQUIREMENTS /R1
(NOTE: DIAGRAM DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM ALLOWED)
RI SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
—� REQUIRFMENTS
Minimum Lot Size:
l five thousand 11,0001 square
feet
Height:
25' above flood level or sidewalk
j Floor Area Ratio:
max. 0.60 times the gross lot area
Building Footprint:
max. 0.40 times the gross lot area
8 Green Space:
min. 0.15 times the gross lot area
Uses:
1 dwelling/lot
community based residential max. 6
daycare, schools, worship
Parking:
dwellings: min. 2 spaces/unit
day care ctr: 1 space owner, 1 space
per employee, 1 space unloading
for up to 10 clients
home occupation: 1 space per
employee
61
98-"1084
COCONUT GRU VE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE ZONING CODE /R-1
Section 401, R-1
Intensity:
Minimum lot size: add "In Ccconut Grove, lots in multiples of allowable minimum which have
hang existing buildings shall not be subdivided."
Setback: add " In Coconut Grove, a porch may encroach a maximum of 10' into front setback (see section 908.8).
one side setback shall be a minimum of 10' for at least 50% of building length and rear setback for
accessory use structure may be five (5) feet. In historic districts, front setback may be varied to average
that of adjacent lots. "
Permitted Principal Uses: (look for: accessory structures)
Permitted Accessory Uses:
1. Detached garages and car shelters: add "In Coconut Grove, on lots of 7.500 sf or more. these
shall not exceed 450 SF in feet • and for propgrties which are owner occuRied and with
aRFroval of adjacent RroveM owners (Mlication for s=ial exoZion) may include a subsidiary
living unit."
Off Street Parking Requirements:
Dwellings. Dwellings, minimum two (2) spaces per unit. Add "In Coconut Grove, garage doors- shall only face the
street if they are setback 20' from front facade. Driveway width at property line shall be a maximum of 12'.
Driveways of permeable material are encouraged. Tandem wrking is allowed "
Sign Regulations:
Real Estate: add " In Coconut Grove, these may not exceed 40 square inches in area"
Construction: add " In Coconut Grove, PDH construction signs shall not exceed six (6) square
feet in area."
Section 908.8
Fences, Walls:
Add. In Coconut Grove, fences, walls or hedges forward of the front facade shall be 50% transparence
For those proyerties with fences. walls or hedges forward Qf the front facade less
than 42 inches. a frrontporch me encroach a maximum of 10 feet into front setback
-Section 908.10
Limitations of driveways:
b. " ... driveways which are limited to a width of twenty (20) feet", add: "and in Coconut Grove
twelve (12) feet,"...
Consensus has not been reached for text in italics. 9 8 -10 94
iy
,
,
�tf b
N
I
no
COCONUT GR( E PLANNING STUDY
MIAM,., FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
EXISTING ZONING REQUIREMENTS /R2
(NOTE: DIAGRAM DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM ALLOWED)
R2 TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
REQUIREMENTS
Minimum Lot Size:
five thousand (5,000) square
feet
Height:
-771 25' above flood level or sidewalk
Floor Area Ratio:
max. 0.60 times the gross lot area
Building Footprint:
max. 0.40 times the gross lot area
Green Space:
min. 0.15 times the gross lot area
/ Uses:
1 or 2 dwellings/lot
�. community based resid. max. 14
daycare, schools, worship
I
Parking:
dwellings: min. 2 spaces/unit
day care ctr: 1 space owner, 1 space
per employee, 1 space unloading
for up to 10 clients
home occupation: 1 space per
— - - employee
63
98-1084
COCONUT GRL . E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1"6
HOUSING
SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE ZONING CODE /R-2
Section 401, R-2
Intensity
Setback . add "In Coconut Grove, the front setback may be 0 for 50% of the lot width, provided the first 20' of
building depth is porch or habitable space, with a minimum 25% of the front wall, at the street or within the porch,
to be clear glazing. The raise setback may be 10' ".
Permitted Principal Uses:
..
Off Street Parking Requirements
Dwellings: Dwellings, minimum (2) two spaces per unit. Add "In Coconut Grove, garage doors shall only face the
street if they are setback 20' from front facade. Driveway width at property line shall be a maximum of 12'.
Driveways of permeable material are encouraged. Tandem Aarking for individual units is
allowed•"
Sign Regulations:
Real Estate: add " In Coconut Grove, these may not exceed 40 square inches in area"
Construction: add " In Coconut Grove, PDH construction signs shall not exceed six (6) square
feet in area."
Section 908.8
Fences, Walls:
Add: " In Coconut Grove, fences, walls or hedges forward of the front facade shall be 50% transparent, or a
maximum height of 42 inches. In Coconut Grove R-2 districts, fences and walls aligned with facade facing street
may be 8' tall. "
Section 908.10
Limitations of driveways:
b. " ... driveways which are limited to a width of twenty (20) feet", add. "and in Coconut Grove twelve (12)
feet, "...
Consensus has not been reached for text in italics. 9 8 - 1 U 8 5t
COCONUT GRt. , E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
EXISTING ZONING REQUIREMENTS /R3
(NOTE: DIAGRAM DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM ALLOWED)
I
1
IN
R3 MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
REQUIREMENTS
Minimum Lot Size:
five thousand (5,000) square
feet
Height:
50' above flood level or sidewalk
Floor Area Ratio:
max. 0.75 times the gross lot area
Building Footprint:
max. 0.40 times the gross lot area
Green Space:
min. 0.15 times the gross lot area
Parking:
one family/ two family: min. 2
spaces/unit
multi -family: 1 space for 1 & 2
bedroom unit;
2 spaces for 3 bdrm unit;
3 spaces for 4 bdrm unit;
& 1 for every 10 units -visitors.
Day care ctr: 1 space owner, 1 space
per employee, 1 space unloading for
up to 10 clients
home occupation: 1 space per
employee
Other uses -see R I
98-1084 65
COCONUT GR(, . E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE ZONING CODE /R-3
Section 401, R-3
Intensity
Setback: add "In Coconut Grove, the front setback may be 0 for 50% of the lot width up to a height of 25 % Yrovidrd
the first 20' of building depth is porch or habitable space, with a minimum 25% of the front wall, at the street or
within the porch, to be clear glazing. "
Permitted Principal Uses:
Add: "5. Bed and Breakfast lodging of one unit per 1500 & . lot area for no more than six units ".
Off Street Parking Requirements
Dwellings. Add "In Coconut Grove, garage doors shall only face the street if they are setback 20' from fiont facade.
Driveway width at property line shall be a maximum of 12'. Driveways of permeable material are
encouraged. Tandem parking for individual units is allowed."
Sign Regulations:
Real Estate: add " In Coconut Grove, these may not exceed 40 square inches in area"
Construction: add " In Coconut Grove, PDH construction signs shall not exceed six (6) square
feet in area."
Section 908.8
Fences, Walls:
Add: " In Coconut Grove, fences, walls or hedges forward of the front facade shall be 50%
transparent, or a maximum height of 42 inches. In Coconut Grove R-3 districts, fences and walls
aligned with facade facing street may be 8' tall."
Section 908.10
Limitations of driveways:
b. " ... driveways which are limited to a width of twenty (20) feet", add: "and in Coconut Grove
twelve (12) feet,"...
Consensus has not been reached for text in italics. 9 8 =10 8 4 66
COCONUT GR�,,iE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
GRAND AVENUE PROPOSAL
w Text
One of the impediments to the enhancement of the residential areas in the West Grove is the
seeming uncertainty of the neighborhood's future as portrayed to the visitor by Grand Avenue.
This impression derives from the condition of the properties lining the street; some of the
apartments on the east end of the street and the renovated storefronts at the Douglas Road
intersection are inhabited and well maintained; but in the intervening blocks there are numerous
properties that are poorly maintained, or uu-inhabited and boarded up, and a number of unkempt
empty lots. The image of disinvestment set forth by Grand Avenue is incongruous with that of the
bordering residential areas which appear more stable. ,
West Grove residents have not yet reached a consensus on the role of the street. Ambitions for
Grand Avenue range widely: from those espousing a higher density of commercial development
the full length of the street, requiring structured parking and the use of the full block depth, to
those simply proclaiming that no loss of residential lots along Florida and Thomas Avenue is
acceptable.
This study proposes for Grand Avenue a strategy of infrll building and small parking lots restricted
to a single lot depth, mixing small scale retail with office and housing uses to enhance its local
main street character. The ambition to bring to the West Grove the intensity of retail and
entertainment uses of the Downtown Grove is neither realizable in the near term, nor in the long
term would it be beneficial to the stability of the adjacent residential streets; it also discourages
current maintenance and individual property owners improvement efforts.
The vision of revaluing the existing with complimentary renovations and infrll, rather than large
scale clearing and rebuilding, requires two actions for greatest near term benefit: modification to
the streetscape and modification to the zoning for the properties lining the street.
The modification to the streetscape should reinforce Grand Avenue's local main street character.
This includes a reduction in number and width of the travel lanes. Several options for a new
design are shown in the street section drawings. They range from two to three lanes, with and
without a landscaped median, always maximizing on street parking to support retailers and buffer
the sidewalks. In such a renovation, all efforts should be made to keep the existing trees which
have grown to maturity and provide significant shade that would take years to replace.
West of Douglas Road, Grand Avenue crosses from the City of Miami to the City of Coral Gables.
The future of this area needs to be coordinated by the two municipalities. The parkway
improvement of several decades ago has not produced the new investment hoped for along it, in
large part due to the discontinuous street section: retail and residential buildings and empty lots on
the north side provide a framework for infrll, but the- variety of fronting and backing uses .on the
south'side preclude a coherent picture of street space and uses.
The modification to zoning along Grand Avenue is needed to produce the specific building types
desired. A drawing follows which illustrates an infrll building type, a small courtyard apartment
building, intended to compliment and re -value the existing building fabric.
A detailed design for the full length of Grand Avenue should follow this study, to provide a vision
of physical predictability and to build investor confidence.
98-1084
COCONUT GRt, ,/E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
HOUSING
GRAND AVENUE
98-1094
COCONUT GR E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
RETAIL
BY BOB GIBBS / GIBBS PLANNING GROUP
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Existing Conditions and Recommendations 70
2. Illustrations 74
69
�fC I p
r � i
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 19%
RETAIL
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A three day qualitative analysis of Coconut Grove retail shopping districts was carried out during
the charrette. The intention of the study was to identify the character of each retail area in the
Grove, such that future enhancements could consolidate plans of unique identity and function, thus
minimizing competition among them and reinforcing their interrelationship. Based upon this
analysis and experience of similar projects, this study concludes that Coconut Grove has five
primary shopping areas:
- Cocowalk and Mayfair - regional destination retail and entertainment
- Commodore Plaza - core retail/neighborhood services better than it looks
- Grand Avenue - neighborhood service retail
- Bird Avenue - neighborhood service retail
- Dixie at MacDonald and 27th Avenue - highway retail
The three neighborhood service districts have a small trade area of 1-3 miles in size and primarily
offer local convenience goods and services for Coconut Grove residents. Historically, Coconut
Grove was a local shopping area centered around Commodore Plaza. Long time residents
remember Commodore Plaza as Miami's Worth Avenue, and that it offered a very high quality of
services to the area. Its nature changed in the last decades when Mayfair and Cocowalk opened.
Commodore Plaza lost mane of its goods and services and became a local convenience area. There
is a strong merchant and property owner impetus to improve Commodore Plaza.
This loss of goods and services at the heart of the Grove, including convenience food markets, hair
care, professional services, home accessories and decorating, etc. is still regretted by residents of
the Grove.
Coconut Grove is renown for its regional shopping and entertainment facilities (Cocowalk and
Mayfair). Its trade area extends beyond Miami Beach and offers an extensive amount of
entertainment and shopping opportunities including restaurants, movie theaters and national
franchise retail stores.
The following observations begin with an overview of the regional context, and then focus on
Commodore Plaza whose current diminished activity warrants attention.
The Larger Context
1. The Coconut Grove area is seen within the region as a very busy theater/entertainment area
with a shortage of parking. The Village Center has a very strong market for restaurants,
entertainment and movie theaters.
2. The residential area south of Downtown Miami which include the Grove, is weak in the
quality of super markets. There is a demand for one more quality market of approximately
60,000 square feet in this area of Miami. The region is lacking in moderate family
shopping and entertainment, also.
3. Coconut Grove is perceived to have been, at one time, much like South Miami with a full
range of strong local stores.
4. Coconut Grove may )loose some of its regional destination retail to South Miami's Bakery
Center when its renovation is completed.
98-1084 70
Village Center
1. The Village Center can report very high sales statistics, triple the national averages
(Cocowalk $1,000/sf), however the low quality of architecture and construction makes the
seemingly invincible destination retail area vulnerable to competition from new
development such as the Bakery Center in South Miami.
2. Proposed Mayfair redevelopment offers a positive contribution to Coconut Grove:
- Addition of real useable parking with redesigning of garages
- Addition of street retail, replacing internal court entries
- Increased access at Rice Street
- Bringing in quality retail such as Borders Book Store
3. Cocowalk is expanding towards Commodore Plaza; its type of stores are overtaken by
Fuller Street.
4. At Grand and Main there is a small core retail complex with good quality shops, good
selections of apparel. At Grand and MacDonald, a pharmacy and farmer's market are stand
alones, not particularly connected to the area's retail traffic.
Commodore Plaza
Existing Conditions
I. It services a small trade area of less than 2 miles, providing local neighborhood
conveniences. There is a great deal of vacancy approaching Grand intersection.
2. It still functions mostly as local neighborhood services.
3. It has many tired and dated storefronts.
4. It is conveniently accessible from Main Highway and MacDonald Street. It has easy to use
street parking.
5. It lacks anchors at both ends. (Playhouse and movie theater on Grand served as anchors at
an earlier time)
6. It needs a new identity, including one or two specialty niches.
7. The streetscape, lighting and trees need updating. The paving bricks and caulking are in
good condition.
9. The existing restaurants and outside cafes reduce shopping potential, by occupying retail
space and by making sidewalk passage difficult.
10. It presently receives little positive impact from Cocowalk or Mayfair but it is impacted
negatively by their traffic.
Recommendations
1 4b- Create an overall management/leasing program or Coconut Grove Downtown Development
Authority, for all of Downtown Grove, to bring the commercial district up to modern
standards.
_Z.4— Upgrade street lights, furniture, signage, etc.
3.2 - Improve storefronts and window displays.
98-1084 71
4- Add off street parking in surrounding area with small garages which continue street front
retail.
6
6 4- Decide on ideal characteristics of the retail mix.
- A continuation of Cocowalk(?)
- Return to neighborhood retail(?)
- Add 25,000 sf market at Grand and MacDonald as an anchor for Commodore
Plaza.
- Develop a Value Center of upscale specialty retailers (Coach, Sak's Fifth Avenue,
Nordstrom, DKNY, Polo, etc.) at Grand and MacDonald.
7�- improve pedestrian crossings at Grand and Main to facilitate access of regional visitors
throughout Downtown.
Organize and motivate existing Commodore Plaza property owners to be reasonable in rent
expectations and recognition of individual responsibility.
Postpone plans to tear -up Commodore Plaza: keep the sidewalks and curbs; improve
lighting and seating; prune trees aesthetically. Major street construction at this type could
cause street to bottom out, which may be desirable but should be intentional.
J_QT,B- Widen sidewalks along Main Highway from Cocowalk.
.,4,- Complete a continuous retail frontage loop from Mayfair and Cocowalk along Main
Highway onto Commodore Plaza and back up Grand Avenue to Cocowalk, e.g. infilling
fronts of Post Office and Fuddruckers's parking lots.
1244.- Infill retail along Grand between Commodore and Fuller.
13.44- Develop a mid -block pedestrian access between Fuller and Commodore Plaza (extend
existing partial connection).
44-
en Main Highway.
14.4-3-- Allow for some waivers on signage restrictions for larger retailers. Presently the
storefronts facing streets and with multi -levels have disadvantages over one level
courtyard retail
15 .,4 4.
, Maintain and improve condition of
shade trees. Prune trees aesthetically to improve visibility and persuant to arboreal
standards.
l�f .44.r Add pedestrian directories and information centers for shopping and restaurants
72
98-1084
Grand Avenue
Grand Avenue is a historical neighborhood retail district that has recently been expanding and
renovating itself. Many of its businesses have good visibility to incoming traffic into Cocowalk
and Commodore Plaza. Presently, many of the Grand Avenue shops have a very small trade area
servicing only local residents. Grand Avenue shopping district does have a potential to capture the
Cocowalk traffic and increase its trade area.
Bird Avenue
The Shops on Bird Avenue are a local business area offering easy to use markets, carry out
restaurants and scr.,ice tusinesses. The shopping area presently looks da-:ed but dccs offer a
number of very good services and food opportunities. It appears that Bird Avenue shops area have
a small trade area that could be expanded if they developed an overall identity and capital
improvements in building exteriors, streetscape and parking.
Dixie Highway at MacDonald Street and 27th Avenue
Dixie at MacDonald and 27th Avenue has a variety of highway dependent businesses such as
service stations and restaurants. These businesses offer little benefit or competition to other
Coconut Grove retailers.
Note: The following diagrams of the Village Center show existing conditions and some
proposals for directing its retail organization.
98.1084f3
COCONUT G� , VE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
RETAIL
REGIONAL ANALYSIS
® Regional Retail
U Neighborhood Retail
74
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
RETAIL
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Neighborhood Specialty
® Core Retail
® Family Entertainment
Anchor
75
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
CT 0
Jai
RETAIL
PROPOSAL I
[_] Neighborhood Specialty
® Core Retail
Family Entertainment
Anchor
D
r
98-1084 76
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
RETAIL
PROPOSAL II
[] Neighborhood Specialty
® Core Retail
® Family Entertainment
Anchor
77
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
RETAIL
PROPOSAL III
Q Neighborhood Specialty
Core Retail
Family Entertainment
Anchor
98-1084 78
COCONUT GR, E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
RETAIL
GRAND AVENUE
79
98-1084
COCONUT G1 'E PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TRAFFIC
BY MARK ALVAREZ / CARR SMITH ASSOCIATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
Regional Mobility
82
2.
Neighborhood Traffic Intrusion
87
3.
Pedestrian Safety
91
4.
Bicycle Facilities
95
5.
Transit Access .
97
6.
Parking
106
80
98-1084
TRAFFIC AND PARKING
The master plan elements for traffic and parking take an integrated approach to guiding the
future of transportation and parking efforts in Coconut Grove by supporting the other elements of
this plan. The overall goal of the transportation element of the plan is to maintain the village
character and support the future vision of Coconut Grove, while supporting regional functions of
transportation.
• As a component of the retail plan, circulation and parking are critical tools to redirect
commercial development and define the scale, pattern, and character of the commercial
district.
• As a component to the housing plan, the volume and speed of vehicular traffic, the ability
to use non -motorized modes of transportation, and the pedestrian character of the street
are used to:
• redefine residential areas,
• maintain an integrated urban form of neighborhoods connected by multiple
streets,
and to help redirect traffic to support the redevelopment of other neighborhoods.
• As a component of the conservation and landscape plan, streets provide one of the most
significant opportunities for landscaping as the streets are the primary system of public
open space for the Village of Coconut Grove.
The Traffic and Parking Master Plan is comprised of seven sections:
1. Regional Mobility
2. Neighborhood Traffic Intrusion
3. Pedestrian Safety
4. Bicycle Mobility
5. Transit
6. Parking
7. Corridors
81
98-1084
REGIONAL MOBILITY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The combination of congested conditions along Dixie Highway and driver behavior in a street
grid to seek out alternate paths, has a significant impact on Coconut Grove by forcing an
alternate commuter path through the Grove. The primary through uaffic (vehicles which enter
and leave Coconut Grove with stopping at a destination within the Grove) path is South
Bayshore Drive, Main Highway, Douglas Road, and Ingraham Highway.
Some of the significant existing conditions that were observed in the Village Center, due to
commuter traffic and due to traffic attracted by entertainment and other commerce are:
• The Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection is currently operating at LOS F. With its
existing signal phasing and combinations of permissive and protected turns, the conflicts
illustrated in the accompanying diagram were observed.
• At the Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection, the most congested approach is the
McFarlane approach, even though signal timing prioritizes this movement.
• During weekend night time peaks, the congested Village Center traffic is characterized by
pedestrian conflicts.
• The approaches to the Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection do not clear during peak
periods, and traffic queues block the Virginia, Matilda, and Fuller approaches.
• Property and business owners consider that circulation on Commodore Plaza is not
adequate to support the street's economic redevelopment.
• Left turns from Grand to Virginia conflict with west -bound Grand Avenue traffic, and
causes queues which prevent the right turns from clearing on McFarlane Road.
• Queues waiting to enter parking facilities along Virginia Street block the Virginia Street /
Oak Avenue intersection.
• The left and right turns from Grand Avenue to Mary Street has an unusual prioritization,
causing driver and pedestrian confusion.
• Charter bus drop offs and pick ups create a nuisance for residents and visitors, and buses
block the visibility of commercial establishments.
• The pedestrian phase at the Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection is inadequate.
98-1094
RICE ST C:-::
w w
I D
w w
Q
�U z
O �
�
VIRGINIA STREET
N
V
N � C
O
G� U
C
O
C
C .0
�+ L
V �
E"
MATILDA STREET
w b�L
w
z D
w z
>
o Q �O
u 0 00�
83
98-1084
RECOMMENDATIONS
Preserving regional mobility is paramount to preserving the relationship of Coconut Grove to the
City of Miami and Dade county, as well as to insuring the latitude for the Village of Coconut
Grove to continue to develop in the manner it finds most appropriate. This flexibility can only
be insured by maintaining the roles of regional transportation facilities, while gradually lessening
their negative impacts on the neighborhoods.
Operational changes to South Dixie Highway should be considered for implementation in the
short term. Further study of these intersections should also consider alternatives that involve
physical improvements as well as operational improvements.
In response to the findings, the objectives of the Plan's regional mobility recommendations are:
• Preserve the urban relationship of Coconut Grove to the City of Miami network, while
maintaining and improving the quality -of -life and high commercial trade value of the
Coconut Grove neighborhoods and business districts.
• Minimize distortions to the street network by minimizing street closings, and operational
restrictions which negatively impact the Florida Intrastate Highway System and other
regional routes.
• Recognize the constrained status of the regional routes: South Dixie Highway, Ingraham
Highway, Main Highway, and South Bayshore Drive.
• Utilize existing programmed improvements and coordinate with County, State, and City
roadway jurisdictions to maximize the benefit of the improvements to support
neighborhood, corridor, and district plans.
• Support existing regional transit use, and plan for amenities, pedestrian facilities, and
intermodal activity centers that promote greater utilization of existing and future transit
investments.
• Based on the findings of turning conflicts illustrated in the Existing Conditions section,
restrict turning movements at the Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection to increase
throughput at this intersection. Corresponding to the number for each conflict in the
diagram, the restrictions are:
1. Permissive right-hand turns from eastbound Grand Avenue to Main Highway
conflict with left turns from westbound Grand Avenue to Main Highway. The
right turn, in addition to conflicting with other vehicular traffic, allows drivers to
make a turn without clear visibility through the whole turn for crossing
pedestrians. If the turn is restricted, traffic can effectively make the turn safely
through Fuller Street.
98-1084'4
2. Permissive right-hand turns from eastbound Main Highway to McFarlane Road
conflict with right-hand turns from Grand Avenue to McFarlane Road. This
permissive right turn also creates pedestrian conflicts as drivers stop in the
crosswalk to be wait for gaps from the Grand Avenue right turning traffic. The
turn should only be restricted as a permissive turn (right -on -red). No alternate
path is required.
3. Left-hand turns from westbound Grand Avenue to McFarlane Road conflict with
movement from northeast -bound Main Highway to eastbound Grand Avenue.
The left turn, although prohibited, did not have sipgm age indicating the restriction
at the time of the study. The turn should be prohibited. Signage indicating the
alternate path to South Bayshore Road is also recommended.
4. Permissive right-hand turns from the McFarlane Road approach to eastbound
Grand Avenue conflict with straight through eastbound movement on Grand
Avenue. Furthermore, much of this traffic also turns left on Virginia Street to
head to parking for Cocowalk or Mayfair. There is only room for about four
vehicles to queue in the through lane of Grand Avenue for this left turn. This
queue frequently cannot clear before extending to the intersection. Complete
restriction of the right turn from McFarlane to Grand Avenue is recommended.
Signage indicating the alternate route from South Bayshore Drive to parking
garages is also recommended.
9-8-108485
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TRAFFIC
INTERSECTION STUDIES
GRAND AVENUE AND MAIN HIGHWAY
Ll
G�++IJ AV�,NUL
At
Existing Condition
J
r
Proposal
98-10g64
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC INTRUSION
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Coconut Grove is situated at the southeastern edge of the City of Miami street network. Essential
to the definition of an orthogonal street grid. are the opportunities of multiple paths. If the
arterial street network in Coconut Grove cannot adequately accommodate longer -distance
through traffic and commuter traffic originating or ending in the Grove, then there is a greater
likelihood that some motorists will intrude upon and use local residential streets as alternate
paths. Conversely, if the arterial facilities provide adequate speed, level -of -service, and roadway
capacity, then there is greater likelihood that few operational or physical alterations will be
necessary to reduce or eliminate through traffic intrusion.
When local residential streets are used as alternate paths, the problems of traffic intrusion on cut -
through routes is encountered. The residents concerns relate to their individual experience of the
cut -through traffic as it adversely impacts the livability of their street, their public space, and
their neighborhood. The minutes of the Neighborhood Workshops contain many specific
comments relating to traffic intrusion on local neighborhood streets. The problems are
summarized in the following table.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The quality -of -life in Coconut Grove is undergoing increasing pressure from the ever increasing
introduction of automobiles onto the streets of the Grove.
While the usefulness of alternate paths is essential to the function of the urban orthogonal grid,
many streets now support traffic which adversely impacts the enjoyment and safety of residents.
The function of many residential streets is first to provide public space, then to operate as
circulation facilities. In many cases, pedestrians and cyclists have been forced off of the roads,
and meeting, exercising, or other outdoor streetspace activities have been seriously encroached
by vehicular traffic.
Though attempts to segregate traffic from pedestrian sensitive areas can be successful, in
Coconut Grove it is not possible in most places. In the Village Center, traffic cannot be removed
from the streets without causing serious economic consequences to the vitality and activity of the
district. In the residential areas, part of the character of the Grove is the physical quality of the
narrow, curving, mature -growth streets without curbs and sidewalks. Pedestrians simply share
space with automobiles as has been historically the case, and as is appropriate to the scale and
character of a traditional village setting. On these streets it is essential to calm traffic so that it
does not jeopardize the safety of other street uses.
Although road closures have been used to reduce traffic intrusion in the past, they solve the
problem of one street by =king that of a neighboring street worse. Although street closings can
produce initial benefits to local residents, the long-term benefit is not proven: they impede
98- f 084 17
emergency access, produce inequities, and the cumulative impact of street closings is detrimental
to the overall street traffic network.
Apart from these traffic control measures, traffic calming maintains direct access while focusing
on the actual negative impacts of traffic. The approach is to adapt the volume, speed, and
behavior of traffic to the primary functions and characteristics of the street through which it
passes, rather than adapt the streets to the ever-increasing demands of vehicular traffic.
Addressing the current street closing policy, the Dade County Public Works Department, and the
Metropolitan Planning Organization have completed the Stree: Closure / Traffic Flow
Modification Study. The traffic calming recommendations contained in this study are consistent
with the objectives, concepts, and methodology of the County's Study. It is recommended that
the application procedure contained in the Street Closure / Traffic Flow Modification Study be
followed for implementing traffic controls which accomplish neighborhood objectives, and
consider County needs.
From Chapter 7, of the Street Closure / Traffic Flow Modification Study, several category levels
are used to distinguish the least restrictive (passive) to the most restrictive (active) measures of
traffic calming. The least restrictive measures should be employed first, followed by
progressively active traffic calming methods.
The overall approach to the recommendations was to incrementally implement traffic calming
measures one level higher than existing conditions, except where pedestrian and traffic mixing
on narrow streets with significant existing friction suggested that two levels may be necessary.
In cases where inappropriate geometry for the street purpose were observed, such as wide corner
radii on residential streets, remedies addressed these first. In all cases, changes in vertical
geometry were avoided as these contribute to noise in residential areas, and present difficulties to
providing efficient emergency medical service.
The specific street -by -street recommendations are a preliminary guide based on principals
contained in the County's study, environmental conditions, and engineering judgement. Each
each instance should require further study to determine impacts to schools, emergency access.
Preliminary site design for each traffic calming device would then incorporate aesthetic
considerations, cost, special drainage considerations, bicycle facilities, etc.
98♦108488
Residential Street Traffic Intrusion and Cut -Through
WIDTH
HADIUS
BETWEEN
I TYPES
CONDITION
yr 1 a,AL
ALUACtNT
PRIMARY
EXISTING
CUT -THROUGH
DIRECTIONAL
PROBLEMS
(feel)
(appos. feel)
TERSECTIONS
WIDTH
LAND USES
ROADWAY
TRAFFIC
Gr NERATORS
INTRUSION
'
(appos. Ip
(appros feel
USE
CALMING
AT ENDS
FLOW
FRANKLIN
DOUGLAS RD
LOCAL
AWAY
28'lo bulbouta
.,:.: ,,.30
--
trom road ed�o)
,a,u. en sj
LEVEL
:.
(al ne period)
AVENUE
l0
44'NLaI
800
4-WAY
URB B GUTTE
BOTH SIDES
NO
'""r'
50
"SIDE 1.
RESIDENTIAL
`VEHICULAR
a 1
>~
MAIN HWY
and
set back homes
(children
bold., l
orer landscape
NO
YES
VOLUME
3WAY
play on sliest)
lies canopy
SPEED
ELIZABETH
STREET
GRANDAVE
LOCAL
2-WAY
28'to bulbouts
30
4-WAY
URB & GUTTE
BOTH SIDES
' • ..�
, `•`. '''
--
>-:,r .,
- `
,.,,,,,,y,,;, ,,,>,.;
�> 1-«:>
w
to300
44'blal
N
100�
RESIDENTIAL
VEHICULAR
NO
"NOS»
aiu
CRIME
THOMAS AVE
(park & lit)
COMMERCIAL
border landscape
PARK
(ledree drug
tree canopy
sae bell.)
CHARLES
DOUGLAS RD
LOCAL
2-WAY
28'lo bulboula
- .: 30.
1600
....:
,:°':
„^..:: •.'..,�.,
>>'
:,
AVENUE
to
44 bLal
4-WAY
URB &GUTTE
BOTH SIDES
NO
50
RESIDENTIAL
VEHICULAR
_
._
-
MAIN HWY
set back homes
(chBdren
'
bo der -anduape
NO
YES
SPEE
SPEED
play on street)
tree canopy
LOOUAT
AVENUE
LE JEUNE RD
LOCAL
,. 2-WAY
18
151020
500
3 WAY
CURB 1 SIDE
NONE
to
SOLANA RD
SWALENONE
1 SIDE
NO
510 10
SCHOOL
MIXED
RANSOM
YES
VOLUME
(even edge)
one side
RESIDENTIAL
LJEHGL7DES
SPEED
OVER So
SCHOOL
other
KUMQUAT
SOLANA RD
LOCAL
2 WAY
18
10 to 15-
600
4-WAY
SWALE
AVENUE
to
NONE
NO
5to 10
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
1
RANSOM
_
YES
DOUGLAS RD
(even edge of
fences &
border landscape
EVERGLADES
VOLUME
pavement)
landscape
tree
SPEED
canopy
SCHOOL
1.:
LOQUAT
SOLANA RD
LOCAL
2-WAY
.:.18....:
1010 15
61X1
4-WAY
SWALE
-:
>..,. ; -.:
_.�.,. %i.a..t>.+_
• a4...s<..,..
:..
AVENUE
tot
NONE
NO
510 10
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
RANSOM
YES
DOUGLAS RD
(even edge of
lens &
border landscape
EVERGLADES
VOLUME
pavement)
landscape
tree
SPEED
canopy
SCHOOL
LOOUAT
DOUGLAS flD
LOCAL
2-WAY
•:.: IS...
10
700
4WAY
".,•
SWALE
•,••..:., ', ,+
.,.e„u._aras
t.ia�... n,... .,.
'.'• •••.,. y<>
,« ,. ;::.
AVENUE
b
(uneven
NONE
NO
0
RESIDENTIAL
M.XEO
1
P EV SCHOOL
YES
VOLUME -
HIBISCUS ST
edge
of pavement)
old wwth at
g
border landscape
'LYMOUTH
SPEED
pavement edge
Tree canopy
& ST HUGH
r:..
..2-WAY
CHURCHES
CRAWFORD
LE JEUNE HD
LOCAL
18
20
600
;
AVENUE
4-WAY
SWALE
NONE
NO
0
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED A
2
DOIKiIAS RD
and
(even wipe of
gow4h at
YES
VOLUME
SWAY
pavement)
pavement edge
mull way
SPEED
a op signs
POINCIANA
LE JEUNE RD
LOCAL
2WAY
18
20
700
4 WAY
SWALE
,,«.�.:.;.
`
AVENUE
to
NONE
NO
0
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
2
NO -
-
MAIN HWY
and
(even edge of
gowlA at
YES
VOLUME
3WAY
pavement)
pavement edge
mc:i
SPEED
stop signs
BATTERSEA
LE JEUNE
LOCAL
2-WAY
.. lg
2030
700
4-WAY
"'•
SWALE
,•.' .'.:
>_ _,. _ -V
....
-
-
ROAD
to
and
(even edge of
NONE
NO
10 to 50
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
i.
GABLES
YES
VOLUME
DOUGLAS RD
Landscaping
border landscape
CONDOS
3 WAY
pavement)
and front yards
tree canopy
IA
SW 17TH AVE
LOCAL
TWAY
17
20
-`
>"
"•
-+�..�.-
ait7 r:.vkba}er.
$W,:ra�
>;i$wy,;,,,rsyar,1;
;....
,
/y&
DRIVE
DRIVE
b
850
SWAY
SWALE
NONE
f40
5b40
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
j.,.i...
.:W_NO"
YES
VOLUME
�J
NATOMA ST
(even edge of
kns of Uses
hordes lnnduape
1
pavement)
front yards
SPEED
bee ranoyy
SECOFFEE
NATOMA
ST
LOCAL
2WAY
t8
O _ STREET
to
20
450
3 WAY-
SWALE
(even
NONE
NO
10ca
RESIDENTIAL
MIXED
I
NO
YES
VOLUME
SW
22NO AVE
edge of
landsping &
border landscape
pavement)
tree$
uee ...nopy
SPEED
''..
00
SW23110AVE
LOCAL2WAY
28
30
550
4-WAY .URB
&GUTTE BOTH
110T7�t;
"�.
SIDES
=. •:
..
EN.,,+aa.:._.
STHEETI
1.
and
410DENTAL
VEICUTAR
2
NO
YES
SPEED
SW25111AVL
�way3
WAY
aheaH
I
Residential Street Traffic Intrusion and Cut -Through
STREET
FROM/TO
FUNCTION DIRECTION
PAVEMENT
WIDTH
—INTCHSEOTIOt
RADIUS
LONGEST DIST
UEIWEEN
INTEHSECTIO
TYPES
STREET EDGE
CONDITION
SIDEWALK
BIKELANE
OPTICAL
ADJACENT PRIMARY
EXISTING
CUT -THROUGH
DIRECTIONAL
PROBLEMS
Qeel)
tappoe. leeq
NIERSECTIONS
WIDTH
LAND USES ROADWAY
TRAFFIC
GENERATORS
INTRUSION
(applo*. tt)
(appoa teal
USE
CALMING
AT ENDS
FLOW
SW 23H0
DIXIE
..0
'•
Irom toad edge)
LEVEL
(alone pe wd)
HWY
LOCAL 2-WAY
28
30
250
4WAY
:URB & GUTTE
- ` S -
:.a...,__.� ,,,,
3e.�,da.iz �
i,.'� a. ._..,-_. s*;»awl+� rs.I%
,a ev1w,_Vi .k
-
-
,
AVENUE
to
BOTH SIDES
NO
40
RESIDENTIAL MIXED
NONE
A NO .0
�� a rv.
a
SW 28TH ST
sidewalk*
YES;
SPEED
Eonl yafd*
SW 24TN
DIXIE HWY
LOCAL 2-WAY
-.,.:;.28 �...
30
250
4-WAY
URB6GUTTE
BOTH SIDES
pNO
.x..aM ,z.7vTzt
.,-..`ti, au .:...x ra,
., �,_.,.,
_
~�4',�;
AVENUE
to
40
RESIDENTIAL MIXED
NONE
NO
YES
SPEED
SW 28TH ST
*Idewalke
honl yards
COCONUT
SW 27TH AVE
LOCAL 2-WAY
i&
20
500
AVENUE
to3
WAY
SWALE
NONE
NO
20-�30
RESIDENTIAL MIXED
NONE
VIRGINIA ST
(even edge of
Ilonl yeld*
NO
YES
SPEED
pavement)
... ,, .v;.".
IN TRADE
,',:.
SW 27TH AVE
LOCAL 2-WAY
I&
20
350
r •
�
AVENUE
b
3-WAY
SWALE
NONE
NO
20 30
RESIDENTIAL MIXED
NONE
NO
a
•"
VIRGINIA ST
(even edge of
Eont yard*
YES
VOLUME
pavement)
SPEED
SW
DIXIE HWY
-LOCAL 2-WAY
18
20._:
950
'.,.
COURT
COURT
b
3 WAY
SWALE
BOTH SIDES
NO
20-30
RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES
NONE
NO
`D
BIRO AVE
(even edge of
6ont yalda
YES
SPEED
pavement)
BRIDG EPORT
DIXIE HWY
., LOCAL : .:2 WAY
::. 18
20
850
3-WAY
SWALE
.. ,`s
r..,...,. 7,.u.k.., .:
...:..,t.
b
DELIVERY
BOTH SIDES
NO
20-30
ifVEHICLES
NONE
NO
YES
BIRD AVE
(even edge of
Lont yards
L COMMERCIAL
SPEED
pavement)
TRUCKS
TIGERTAIL
MARY ST
LOCAL AWAY
28
AVENUE
to
COLLECIOR
3U
700
4WAY
SWALE
BOTH SIDES
NO
20
RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES
""
NONE
CO '
COMMUTE
^• —'
SW I7TIl AVE
and
(even edge of
*wales
&SCHOOL
YES
SPEED'
SWAY
pavement)
and
PEUDESTRIAN
VILLAGE CTH
SAFETYat
OAK
MARY ST
LOCAL ,2-WAY
28
30
4-WAY
,.,.::.
URB&GUTTE
,. ,.:.:
... .•
�v�k .-r�r,..a*.
�-`� ' 111. "' ,. 1';V ...L,,, ,;c_
:.,v, ,.
R E ELEM.
AVENUE
to
OLLECTOH
BOTH SIDES
NO
20-30
RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES
NONE
NO
YES
MC DONALD AV
and
h°nt yawd*
COMMERCIAL
SPEED
3WAY
PEDESTRIANS
SCHOOL
at-,_.,. ,%....
MINOR ..2 WAY
... 36
30
..
,:� _
•- "^:•
•.,.•.: -
••.T».nw;ase
-,3.: ae.. .,,.-�;;Ek:.:..e,a,
-
wo (hwe ule)
UAYSFIORE
KMATHLA
ARTERIAL
3-WAY
SWALE
ONE SIDE
BIKE PATH
10
RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES ,
NONE
COMMUTE
DRIVE
EMATfILA ST
(even edge of
Swale
PARK
and
NO -
SPEED
pavement)
50 •
& SCHOOL
VILLAGE CTR
Kennedy Pawk
MAIN al
MINOR TWAY
25
20
..
.., ..a
,.._
s„ •��
.#: d+.v a
-� ,��•
HIGHWAY
HIBISCUS ST
ARTERIAL
TWO NEAR
SWALE
110TH SIDES
BIKE PATH
0
RESIDENTIAL` VEHICLES
-- _ -
t
- " '
COMMUTE
3-WAY
(even a of
edge
edge
of Ixvame
CHURCH &
aide gwordn
and
NO
SPEED
pavement)
Ese*-4
SCHOOL
and eae canopy
VILLAGE CTR
old gmwlA
,c
_
0
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Residential Neighborhoods
The streets �_n the residential neighborhocds of the North Grove, the South Grove, and the Center
Grove are generally without sidewalks. Along most of these streets, mixed use of the street
surface appears to occur with satisfactory safety and enjoyment. On some of the streets,
especially those use for cut -through routes, there are potential conflicts and unsafe conditions
between vehicles and pedestrians. These streets area identified in traffic intrusion table.
Corridors
Mixing of pedestrian activities and vehicular traffic are inappropriate for commercial corridors
where pedestrian volumes, traffic volumes, and traffic speeds are high. The following
commercial corridors, neighborhood collectors, and arterials were found to have insufficient
pedestrian facilities by these criteria:
• SW 27th Avenue / Grapeland Boulevard, from US-1 to South Bayshore Drive
• SW 32nd Avenue / McDonald Road, from US-1 to Grand Avenue
• SW 37th Avenue / Douglas Road, from US-1 to Grand Avenue
• Main Highway, from Charles Avenue to Poinciana Avenue
Village Center
The Village Center commercial district streets are characterized by very high levels of pedestrian
activity with high volumes of frequently congested vehicular traffic. The streets have grade -
separated sidewalks on both sides; however, the widths are frequently inconsistent, and in some
places, too narrow for the volumes of pedestrian traffic which they carry. Observable
deficiencies in sidewalk width were found at:
• South side of Grand Avenue, from McFarlane Road to Virginia Street
• North side of Grand Avenue from Matilda Street to Rice Street
• Northeast side of McFarlane Road
• Northwest side of Main Highway, from Grand Avenue to Commodore Plaza
Waterfront
At the Waterfront District Workshop, residents and community leaders indicated that there is a
strong community desire for a continuous, lighted, active pedestrian path along the waterfront
from the Barnacle to the Virrick Gym. This path does not currently exist.
91
98-1084
Crosswalks
At the Neighborhood Workshops and during field observations, the need for crosswalks at
specific locations was identified at locations where there were frequently observable pedestrian /
vehicular conflicts, or locations where school children cross roadways with 85th percentile
speeds that are above 20 mph, or traffic volumes above 1,500 vehicles per day. Some of these
locations have limited drivsr visibility due to horizontal or vertical curves on the approaches to
the locations. The locations are listed below.
• South Bayshore Drive at Emathla Street
• South Bayshore Drive at Kirk Street
• Tigertail Avenue at Emathla Street
• Main Highway at Royal Road
• Main Highway at Devon Road
• Main Highway at Anchorage Way
• Oak Avenue at Matilda Street
• Grand/Main/McFarlane intersection
RECOMMENDATIONS
The pedestrian safety component of the Master Plan addresses five issues:
1. Sidewalk and pedestrian inadequacies in the Village Center,
2. Sidewalk and pedestrian inadequacies in the Waterfront District;
3. Corridors where separated pedestrian space is needed but not presently existing;
4. Residential areas where pedestrians mix with traffic;
5. Areas where school crossings area needed.
This element of the Traffic and Parking Master Plan has been developed to support the Florida
Department of Transportation's Florida Pedestrian Safety Plan, and the Walkable Communities
Program.
Village Center District
The Village Center recommendations incorporate the following recommendations:
92
98-1084
• Widen the sidewalk on both sides of Grand Avenue from McFarlane to Mary Street.
Realign landscaping, parking, canopies, and street furniture to maximize the effective
width of the sidewalk.
• Provide street crossings which accommodate the physical abilities of pedestrians. The
maximum crossing width, without refuge should be no longer than 48 feet. Pedestrian
signalization should be provided for a 3.5 foot per second walking speed.
• In coordination with the redevelopment of Rice Street as a pedestrian plaza, a mid -block
cross walk on Grand Avenue, aligned with Rice Street should be provided.
• The Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection should be raised, with textured pavement to
slow traffic through the intersection, and facilitate facilitates pedestrian mobility.
• The Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection should have an all -ways pedestrian only cycle
which allows crossing in any direction. Obstructions, such as outdoor dining tables can
not block the pedestrian crossing. To create the pedestrian phase without lengthening the
signal cycle time turning movement restrictions must be implemented.
Waterfront District
The Waterfront District, Peacock Park, and future redevelopment of the Virrick Gym includes a
continuous, lighted active pedestrian path from the Barnacle to Virrick Gym.
Corridors
The following corridors were studied for redesign and commercial redevelopment: Grapeland
Boulevard (SW 27th Av.), Grand Avenue, and Bird Avenue. Five others: South Bayshore
Drive, Main Highway, Aviation Avenue, Douglas Road, and McDonald Street were studied for
redesign as urban spaces and transportation corridors. Pedestrian facilities include:
• sidewalks on both sides of no less than 4-feet (in most cases 5-feet and 6-feet);
• landscaping or parking between sidewalks and moving traffic lanes;
• utilities and meters are cleared from the walkway;
• . pedestrian crosswalks with raised median crossings for pedestrian refuge and/or bulbouts.
Details of these improvements are listed and illustrated in the Corridors Section.
Residential Areas
Residential streets throughout many of the neighborhoods of Coconut Grove have mixed
pedestrian and traffic zones. Sidewalks, and curb and gutter improvements would not be
98-1091
consistent with the village character of most of the neighborhoods. No pedestrian improvements
are included in the Neighborhood sections, unless they are near a school or other institution
which produces high pedestrian volumes. The mixing of traffic and pedestrians on common
street space is addressed in the residential traffic calming components.
School Crossings
The locations where traffic volumes, roadway geometry, and high volumes of pedestrians from
schools produce potential pedestrian/vehicle conflicts listed above need pedestrian crossing
improvements. The recommendations below are primarily based on the MUTCD and the Florida
Pedestrian Safety Plan.
• Pedestrian indications should be provided
• The signals should be pedestrian actuated. Pedestrian signaUation should be provided
for a 3.5 foot per second walking speed.
• Signs and pavement markings are included. A raised and/or textured pavement to create
a mental and physical suggestion to driver to slow down through the area should be
considered.
• Traffic calming devices can be employed to slow traffic, so long as they do not obstruct
sight to the pedestrian crossing or waiting area. Speed humps or other vertical geometry
deviations should not be employed on the approaches to the crosswalk.
• The maximum crossing width without a raised median for refuge should be no longer
than 48-feet.
• Crossing width can also be reduced by bulbouts or chokes.
• Parking or other obstructions to view should be prohibited at least 100 feet in advance of
and 20 feet beyond the crosswalk.
• Intersection lighting should illuminate the crossing and waiting areas and/or create
backlighting to make the pedestrian silhouette clearly visible on approach.
98-1084 94
/Y
BICYCLE FACILITIES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Within Dade County, there is an existing and planned bicycle network consisting of streets and
paths used by cyclists. This network is planned for continued expansion as a first step to
encourage more bicycle riding as a part of the transportztion mix.
The Miami Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has analyzed the current
roadway network to measure how well the existing roadway system serves bicyclists, with
consideration of the division of abilities that differentiate experienced adult riders from younger
or less accomplished cyclists. A grid system of improvements was designed, comprised of on
and off road facilities, and prioritized into a short-range and long-range program.
Below are excerpts the pertinent projects from the Bicycle Facilities Plan, Interim Stand Alone
Projects List.
METRO-DADE BICYCLE FACILITIES PLAN EXISTING STAND ALONE PROJECTS
Proiect
Project Site
From
To
Improvement
Signage
S. Bayshore Drive
McFarlane Dr.
Rickenbkr Csy.
"Bicycles
Sharing Roadway"
Signage
S. Bayshore Dr.
Existing path
SW 32 Rd.
"Route"
Peacock Park
Signage
Main Highway
Existing path
The Barnacle
"Route"
N. Prospect Dr
Design Review /
Intersection
Ingraham Hwy.
Douglas Rd.
Intersection
Upgrade
Improvement
Reconstruction
SW 27 Avenue
S. Bayshore Dr
US-1
Add shoulders
Restriping
intersections along entire existing bikeway system
Bicycle Racks /
Metrorail
Bicycle racks and
Lockers
Stations
locker installations
RECOMMENDATIONS
The bicycle mobility component of the Traffic and Parking Element of the Master Plan focuses
on integrating with the Corridor Studies to include bicycle facilities in them. In residential
neighborhoods, cyclists simply mix with existing traffic to provide safe transportation and
recreational use by all levels of bicyclists. Where vehicular traffic speeds are too high for
cyclists' safety, traffic calming techniques may be applied.
These bicycle facilities are incorporated into the Corridor Studies for: Grapeland Boulevard (SW
27th Av.), Grand Avenue, Bird Avenue, South Bayshore Drive, Main Highway, Aviation
Avenue, Douglas Road, and McDonald Street. They include:
98-108495
• Bike lanes
• Wide curb -lanes
• Wide outside -lanes
Busy commercial districts such as the Village Center, have shared use traffic lanes. Traffic
speeds are slow enough to allow safe shared use with Group A bicyclists. The following
accommodations are made for bicycles:
• Wide curb -lane or wide outside lane
• Curb inlets are used instead of drainage grates. If grates exist, they should not be of the
parallel bar design.
• Clearance intervals for traffic signal tinting should allow for bicycles, and traffic actuated
signals should be sensitive to bicycles.
Within the Village Center in public spaces and in municipal parking facilities, and also along
commercial corridors, there should be Class III bicycle parking facilities for short-term use.
Class III facilities include ribbon racks and inverted U racks which allow one wheel and the
frame to be easily locked by a U-bolt type lock. The bike racks should be in clearly visible, well-
lighted locations.
Class III facilities should be included in municipal parking facilities if the racks are located in a
well -lighted location near the parking attendant. To meet the long-term needs of bicycle
commuters, Class I facilities (bicycle lockers) should be provided.
TRANSIT ACCESS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Coconut Grove is provided transit service through the resources of the County -wide Metro -Dade
Transit Agency system. County -wide, Metrobus and Metrorail capture approximately 2.5% of
the total transportation mode split. The system presently targets the needs of transit dependent
riders; however, it is transitioning to capture a greater share of choice riders (those whom choose
to ride transit for convenience). The Village Center of Coconut Grove is particularly well suited
to providing enhanced service to attract choice riders, such as visitors to the area.
At the Neighborhood Workshops and the Charrette, residents and business owners suggested that
greater utilization of transit should be a goal of the Coconut Grove Plan. This would accomplish
the several objectives:
• Reduce traffic congestion in the Village Center without reducing patronage;
• Reduce cut -through traffic through neighborhoods;
• Open up more available parking in the Village Center by providing transit links to points
beyond a 5-minute walk;
• Reduce parking spill -over into the Center Grove Neighborhood;
• Create a more pedestrian oriented environment;
• Improve the transportation choices for Coconut Grove residents and commuters;
• Provide an opportunity to have high profile transit service to attract more entertainment
and retail business without sacrificing the safety or quality -of -life of residents.
The impediments to greater utilization of transit service are that the Metrobus routes are
perceived to offer too poor a level -of -service in terms of headway, enroute travel time, reliability,
and intangibles, such as ride, seating, noise, and exhaust emissions. Metrorail service, while
overcoming many of these deficiencies, fails to attract ridership because of the walking distance
and lack of appropriate intermodal transfers. The lack of adequate, safe, convenient pedestrian
facilities further reduces the likelihood that choice riders will use Metrorail.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Grapeland Boulevard Corridor (SW 27th Avenue) includes a proposal for an at -grade, light
rail trolley. Two potential alignments are shown in the accompanying studies. The motivations
for the proposal of this light -rail vehicle are:
98-1084 97
• ' Provide a centerpiece for a complete revitalization of Grapeland Boulevard (SW 27th
Avenue) as the gateway to Coconut Grove.
• It would unite activities and parking along the Waterfront area, and help to activate it
during the evening.
• As a daytime transit operation, by providing a direct connection to the Metrorail Station,
it could significantly extend the service area from that station to the Village Center and
the office buildings along South Bayshore Drive. By enhancing the intermodal transfer,
and by creating a highly visible transit component that changes the image of transit from
the transportation of last resort to the transportation of choice, ridership on Metrorail
would increase.
The proposal which is illustrated in the Grapeland Boulevard (SW 27th Avenue) Corridor
Studies would have the following characteristics:
• One double -ended vehicle could be used, running along a single track from the Metrorail
Station, along the west side of SW 27th Avenue, the south side of South Bayshore drive,
and the west side of McFarlane Road. There would be four signalized intersection
crossings.
• The vehicle would be manned, and operated at slow speeds which would not jeopardize
pedestrian safety.
• At an estimated average travel speed of 6 mph, the 1.2-mile route (one way) could be
traveled in 5 minutes. Leaving time for short layovers at end points, a 15 minute
headway could be achieved with one vehicle, and a single track.
• A location for maintenance would be required.
• The US-1 crossing would require signal timing alterations.
98
98-1.084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TRAFFIC
TROLLEY ROUTE
OPTION I
L
0
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MUMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TRAFFIC
TROLLEY ROUTE
OPTION II
_ a Rc w
<
c
Z
�
�l
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
a
Z l
C
1�
II
co
TRAFFIC
TROLLEY ROUTE
OPTION III
101
98-1084
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
zv
59,
Row.
TRAFFIC
CORRIDOR SECTIONS
GRAPELAND (27TH AVENUE)
1 • 1
COCONUT GROVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TP*,AFMc
CORRIDOR SECTIONS
GRAPELAND (27TH AVENUE)
ff
721 KAOWWM�ll Its
I �
75 ikow
��'
1 I
f
1
}�C.,,.
�
�� �y_�o
I
�'I
j
'
y
T
.-4
98-10901
COCONUT ,..JVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TRAFFIC
CORRIDOR SECTIONS
AVIATION
�-
l 1 /
u��yk��i"' ' t1►ir�it 1%ulul
1 71
/ '
7. 7, 24'
(00 ROvJ
104
98-1084
COCONUT uj&OVE PLANNING STUDY
MIAMI, FLORIDA APRIL, 1996
TRAFFIC
CORRIDOR SECTIONS
AVIATION
L � L
c
' 1❑
1 A
u uuut4l
l5!
GO Row
PARKING
EXISTING CONDITIONS - PARKING
The parking element of this planning study focused primarily on three issues:
1. Parking in the Village Center, including bus, taxi, and potential valet operations;
2. Parking in commercial corridors to support economic redevelopment, land use,
transportation, and quality of life objectives;
3. Parking spillover in the Center Grove Neighborhood.
Village Center Parking
Based on current data by the City of Miami Records, there are 678,000 square feet of gross
leasable retail area in the Village Center (SD-2 Overlay District). Of this, it is estimated that
approximately 35% is occupied by restaurant uses. Including theater and hotel -based demand
there is a parking demand of 5,095 spaces for weekend nights in the Village Center. Peak hours
of accumulation for this area were determined to be on a Saturday night between 7:00 p.m. and
2:00 a.m. This corresponds to the peak hours stated by Village Center managers and property
owners during the Planning Charrette.
Parking capacity is that which is within or just at the edge of the 5-minute walking distance of
the Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection, which for purposes of analysis, is used as the center
for measuring walking distances. With respect to walking distances, it should be noted that a
weekend night walking distance survey was conducted as part of the 1992 Parking Study. The
results of this survey are:
Walking_ Distance
Percent of Respondents
Less than 100 feet
22%
100 to 500 feet
39%
500 to 1,000 feet
36%
Over 1,000 feet
3 %
The following table calculates the parking deficit in the Village Center, based on the calculated
demand, and facilities within a 5-minute walking distance.
A large additional existing capacity of surface parking exists just outside of the 5-minute walking
distance at the Convention Center parking lot. At this location, there are approximately 700
surface lot spaces which are available most weekend nights after 9:00 p.m.; however, utilization
is low due to distance and -user attitudes toward security at this lot and along the walking path.
1996 ESTIMATED VILLAGE CENTER PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND
COMPONENT
Publicly
Publicly
Demand
Available
Unavailable Deficit
Supply
Supply
On -street
280
marked and unmarked
Municipal Lot # 6
143
near Coconut Grove Playhouse
Sailing Club Surface Lot
37
Cocowalk
497
Mayfair Public Garage
346
Mayfair Valet Garage
690
Cocoview
62
on McFarlane Rd
Grand Avenue Surface Lot
30
across from Mayfair
Coconut Grove Bank Surface Lot
350
Fuddruckers Surface Lot
100
McFarlane Road Surface Lot
60
Commodore Plaza Surface Lot
40
Coconut Grove Elementary Surface Lot
35
Grand and McDonald Surface Lots
45
Oak Avenue and Rice Street Surface Lots
40
Mutiny Garage
200
MaryStreet Surface Lot
90
Cumulative Total 5,095
2,755
290 2,050
107
98-1084
The lack of bus drop-off / pick-up spaces, layover areas for buses to wait between drop-off and
pick-up, and designated bus routes, leades to the following problems:
• Buses emit noxious fumes, and create noise;
• Bus drop-off and pick-ups can frequently block traffic;
• Buses moving through the Grand / Main / McFarlane intersection exacerbate congestion
and pedestrian movement at that intersection.
Neighborhood Parking Intrusion
Due to the deficit of available parking in the Village Center, a significant number of vehicles find
parking in the north periphery of the Village Center. This neighborhood, the Center Grove, is
plagued by continuous Swale parking in front of the residences from 7 p.m. to 4 am on weekend
nights. Spill -over parking is most prevalent on the blocks north of Oak Avenue to Day Avenue,
and from McDonald Street on the west to Tigertail and SW 27th Avenue on the east.
Commercial Corridor Parking
Three corridors have been given emphasis in the Planning Study for future redevelopment, and
infrastructure improvements. Among these, the following findings are pertinent to each.
SW 27th Avenue generally has adequate on -site parking, except between US-1 and West
Trade Avenue, where parked cars overflow into the right-of-way. Generally, on -site
parking along the corridor is disorganized, and there is little distinction between the right-
of-way and parking areas. If pedestrian infrastructure and landscaping is improved along
the corridor, parking will have to be reconfigured.
• Grand Avenue does not have adequate parking to meet the intended needs of the
redevelopment of the corridor.
• Bird Avenue, in the segment from SW 27th Avenue to Virginia Street does not have
adequate parking. Parked cars from on -site lots overflow into the right-of-way.
Generally, on -site parking along the corridor is disorganized, and there is little distinction
between the right-of-way and parking areas.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Parking element of the Master Plan address three issues related to vehicular parking:
1. Shortage of parking capacity in the Village Center on weekend nights, and the
construction of additional parking to meet demand;
2. Parking spillover in the Center Grove Neighborhood;
3. Parking policy issues in the Village Center.
Village Center
Four locations have been studied as potential sites for the development of additional parking.
These locations, shown with their corresponding 5-minute walk radii in the accompanying
Village Center map, are described with their potential capacities in the table below. Also shown
in the figure is the need to locate garages as interceptor parking facilities. Interceptor parking
captures parking vehicles before they enter the most heavily congested are of the Village Center.
PARKING STUDIES SUMMARY
Site Location Number of Approximate Number of Entrance/
Levels Height Parking Spaces Exit Location
Farm Store Site
Mary/Oak/Rice 4
30'
351
Mary St.
Playhouse
Main Highway 4
30'
460
Main Hwy.
-143 existing
Fuddrucker's
Grand Ave. 4
30'
266
Grand Ave.
-100 existing
Grand Ave.
Grand/McDonald 3
28'
315
McDonald St.
& Margaret St
Total
1,149
With a demand for 5,095 parking spaces, the deficit would be reduced to 201 parking spaces.
Additional parking structures must be programmed sequentially to minimize the impacts of
construction on the already extremely congested traffic flow. Construction of more than one of
the garages at any one time could have detrimental impacts on the commerce and quality -of -life
in the Village Center. The garages must also be planned with a circulation plan for the Village
Center to minimize congestion.
Parking Spillover in the Center Grove
Parking spillover in the Center Grove neighborhood would be substantially alleviated by the
addition of new parking facilities to the Village Center. Still it can be expected that there will be
some "free -riders" who will park in this neighborhood to patronize or work in the Village Center.
Based on input from residents at the Coconut Grove Planning Charrette, and suggestions from
some' of the Village Center business managers, a set of recommendations to remedy spillover
parking have been developed. They are:
• Retain swale drainage without curb and gutter
• Swale areas are landscaped with a combination of low plants and trees at spacings which
are too small for car to fit into.
98-1084109
• Swale areas should remain level to maintain their drainage functions.
• Curb buttons and pyramids are not to be used.
• If after the landscaping is complete, parking spillover is not alleviated, a permit program
with guest passes and regular enforcement should be considered.
Parking Policy
The following recommendations are based on the findings of this study, meetings at the Coconut
Grove Planning Charrette, and citizen input. The recommendations are the same as those
produced by the City of Miami staff, working with the Coconut Grove Planning Study Design
Team, in the performance of the May, 1996 Coconut Grove Parking Study.
The recommendation is to redefine the City of Miami parking ordinance for Coconut Grove to
allow the following:
• The basic parking requirements for the district shall remain as 1 space per each 300
square feet of gross retail area, 1 space per each 100 square feet of gross restaurant area
including outdoor dining areas, 1 space per each 5 fixed theater seats, and 1 space per
each hotel room.
The parking requirement may be met by being grandfathered in, providing parking on
site, or by purchasing the required parking from the Coconut Grove Parking Trust Fund
bank.
• For development sites of 20,000 square feet or less:
• All parking required for the first 0.86 floor area ratio (FAR) of development may be
purchased at a fee of $5,000 per space.
• All development above an FAR of 0.86 may purchase all of its required parking at a
fee of $10,000 per space.
For development sites over 20,000 square feet:
• All parking required for the first 0.86 FAR of development may be purchased at a fee
of $5,000 per space.
• All development above an FAR of 0.86 may not purchase additional parking. it must
provide parking on site.
For all development, there will be no temporary "rentals" of parking spaces for the basic
requirement of 1 space per 300 square feet; however, restaurants, theaters, and other uses
which require more parking than 1 space per 300 square feet may provide the difference
of required parking by paying a supplemental fee for said difference on a monthly basis.
This fee shall be $50 per month, and shall be raised each year according to the Consumer
Price Index (CPI).
98-11084
• There will not be a cap of a maximum number of parking spaces for the district. Each
development within the district will be able to purchase all of its required parking based
on the square footage of development, the size of the property, and the nature of the uses
contained in the development.
The last issue involving parking policy in the Village Center is that of valet parku.g. If a policy
is adopted which allows valet parking, it should observe the following guidelines:
• The number of valet stations must be limited.
• The valet operations must be fully contained within parking lanes.
• Valet station operations must not block access to nor inhibit public on -street parking.
• The valet station should not block or restrict the walkway of the sidewalk.
• Valet stations should be located at mid -block locations.
• If valet operations are shared by more than one establishment, their affiliation must be
clearly posted.
• Fees paid by the valet operators should be to the Coconut Grove Parking Trust Fund.
98--10III
84