HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-11414J-96-666
11 /21 /96
ORDINANCE NO. 114 4
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE
BY AMENDING ARTICLE 6, SECTION 602 IN ORDER TO
RESTRUCTURE THE PARKING REGULATIONS FOR THE
SD-2. COCONUT GROVE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of July 17, 1996,
Item No. 5, following an advertised hearing, adopted Resolution No. PAB 37-96 by a
vote of eight to zero (8-0), RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 11000 as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of this matter
deems it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami
and its inhabitants to amend Ordinance No. 11000 as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this
Ordinance are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully
set forth in this Section.
11414
Section 2. Ordinance No. 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Miami, Florida, is hereby amended by amending the text of said Ordinance as
follows.. I/
"ARTICLE 6. SD SPECIAL DISTRICTS GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 602. SD-2 Coconut Grove Central Commercial District.
MR
r
9 1
•
foF etheF nnn Fe idential sec
l� Words and/or figures stricken through shall be deleted. Underscored
words and/or figures shall be added. The remaining provisions are now
in effect and remain unchanged. Asterisks indicate omitted and
unchanged material.
11414
._MY
.,Fm
M NO
M NO
r
1
•
1
11414
Sec. 602.10. Minimum required off-street parking.
602101 Except as otherwise specified herein, the minimum off-street parking
requirements shall be as depicted in the chart below. Said minimum parking
requirements may be satisfied by providing the parking, pursuant to 602.10.4 , paving
in lieu of providing the parking pursuant to 602.10.12 or providing the parking on site.
No variances for the reduction of the number of parking spaces is permitted.
PARKING
ALL FAR UNDER 0.86 ALL FAR OVER 0.86
PATIn
UNDERUSES
SITES SITES OVER
SITES OVER SITES UNDER
000 SQ. FT. 20.000 SQ. FT, 20.000 SQ. FT. 20.000 SO.
NOW RESIDENTIAL '; 1 ! 300 SQ. FT
MAY PURCHASE MAY PURCHASE MAY PURCHASE i SHALL PROVIDE
GENERAL
'; ALL SPACES AT ALL SPACES AT ALL SPACES AT ALL PARKING ON
RATES SPECIFIED RATES SPECIFIED RATES SPECIFIED SITE
E IN ART. VIII, IN ART. VIII, i IN ART. VIII.
i CHAPTER 35, SEC. i CHAPTER 35, SEC. E CHAPTER 35, SEC. i
E 35-194 OF THE 35-194 OF THE i 35-194 OF THE
E CITY OF MIAMI E CITY OF MIAMI E CITY OF MIAMI E
E CODE. ? CODE. E CODE.
RESTAURANTSZ 1 1300 SQ. FT
MAY PURCHASE MAY PURCHASE E MAY PURCHASE E SHALL PROVIDE
i 1 /300 SPACES AT 1 /300 SPACES AT 1 /300 SPACES ATE 1 /300 PARKING
RATES SPECIFIED E RATES SPECIFIED E RATES SPECIFIED E ON SITE.
IN ART. VIII, CH. E IN ART. VIII, CH. E IN ART. VIII, CH. 35, E
E 35, SEC. 35-194 E 35, SEC. 35-194 E SEC. 35-194 OF E
E OF THE CITY OF E OF THE CITY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI E
MIAMI CODE. E MIAMI CODE. E CODE.
T
NOT PROVIDED ON: 0=4 ARM
law
THEATERS' 1/6 SEATS
MAY PURCHASE i MAY PURCHASE i MAY PURCHASE i MUST PROVIDE ALL
E ALL SPACES AT ALL SPACES AT ALL SPACES AT PARKING ON SITE
E RATES SPECIFIED E RATES SPECIFIED E RATES SPECIFIED i
E IN ART. VIII, E IN ART. VIII. E IN ART. VIII,
CHAPTER 35, SEC. E CHAPTER 35, SEC. E CHAPTER 35, SEC.
35-194 OF THE 35-194 OF THE 35-194 OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI CITY OF MIAMI CITY OF MIAMI
CODE. CODE. CODE.
HOTELS4 i 1 / 2 UNITS
E ALL PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED ON -SITE AND RESERVED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE
E OF HOTEL GUESTS.
RESIDENTIAL E 1 / UNIT
E ALL PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED ON -SITE AND RESERVED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE
COMPONENT
E OF RESIDENTS OF THE COMPLEX.
( MIXED USE 1
RESIDENTIAL E 1.5 / UNIT +
E ALL PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED ON -SITE AND RESERVED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE
STAND ALONE E 1 / 10 UNITS
E OF RESIDENTS AND GUESTS OF COMPLEX AND MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
11414
..............
NON-RESIDENTIAL GENERAL CATEGORY INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING USES: RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS. SERVICE
ESTABLISHMENTS, OFFICES AND COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS PERMISSIBLE IN THE SD-2 ZONING DISTRICT.
RESTAURANT CATEGORY INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING USES: RESTAURANTS TEAROOMS CAFES BANQUET HALLS BARS
SALOONS. TAVERNS, PRIVATE CLUBS, LODGES, SUPPER CLUBS, GAME ROOMS AND BILLIARD HALLS.
THEATER CATEGORY INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING USES: THEATERS MEETING HALLS AND PLACES OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
HOTEL CATEGORY INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING USES: HOTELS, RESIDENCE HOTELS, LODGING HOUSES, TOURIST HOMES AND
i GUEST HOMES.
602.10.2. Outdoor areas used for commercial activities.
Where outdoor areas, including the public right-of-way, are regularly used for display
and sales, or as dining areas, including areas under awnings which are used for dining
and/or other commercial activities, the area so used shall be calculated as part of the
establishment's total floor area and shall comply with offstreet parking requirements.
Permit fees for sidewalk cafes shall be as prescribed by Section 54-111 of the Code of
the City of Miami, and additionally, a payment in lieu of providing offstreet parking may
be made in accordance with Section 602.12 of this Ordinance and Section 35-194 of
the Code of the City of Miami.
602.10.3. Shared parking.
1. Shared parking for mixed use development. Any mixed use development which
includes a theater as a component of the development, may, pursuant to a Class II
Special Permit, receive a credit for a portion of the required theater parking. Said credit
shall be based on a written justification of the peak demand timing for the uses
contained in the development. In no case however, shall the theater parking be less
than one (1) space per seven (7) fixed theater seats.
2. _Shared _ parking for uses for which parking demands occur at different times.
Facilities for which parking demands occur at different times may be permitted by
special exception, in accordance with the following: (1) all of the uses involved shall be
located within the SD-2 District: (2) the hours of operation for said uses shall not be
concurrent, and (3) shall comply with the criteria in Article 13, Section 1305 of this
Ordinance, the proposed shared parking shall have no negative effect on the
surrounding areas. Applications for shared parking shall be signed by the owners of all
of the properties involved. Such shared parking agreement shall be accepted in the
form of a recorded covenant running with the land, in favor of the City, and signed by
all of the owners of all of the properties involved. The covenant shall also establish the
limitations of the operating hours for all of the uses involved, the total number of
parking spaces available and committed, and the beneficiary(ies) of the
commitment(s). The planning director shall be notified by certified mail at least six (6)
months prior to anv termination. Such covenant shall be recorded, upon approval by
the City Attorney's Office, subsequent to the issuance of the special exception but prior
to the issuance of the Certificate of Use.
11414
602.10.4. Off -site parking.
1. For all nonresidential development, all required parking may be permitted off -site
anywhere within that part of the SD-2 district that lies east of Margaret Street, subiect to
an annually renewable Class I Special Permit which shall be accompanied by an
updated parking calculation survey: provided, however, that such required off -site
parking shall not be located on any property for which subsidies or other financial
assistance was obtained from the Coconut Grove Parking Trust Fund as described in
Chapter 35 of the City Code. All leases under this section shall be in recordable form
and approved by the City Attorney's Office and filed with the Zoning Administrator prior
to each issuance or renewal of a Class I Permit.
2. All off -site parking arrangements outside of the SD-2 District shall be terminated
upon expiration of existing leases, or phased out over a period of thirty six months
commencing January 1, 1997, whichever occurs earlier. Parking spaces which are
required and located off -site and outside of the SD-2 District at that time shall come
into compliance with the provisions set forth herein.
Sec. 602.12. Payment in lieu of required offstreet parking.
602.12.1. Upon application to the planning director, the owner of a property for which
unable to provide onsite ,
may request a waiver of any or all of the reqaifed eligible parking spaces, as specified
in the chart included in Section 602.10 of this code, by substituting the payment of a
fee per space in lieu of providing the required parking spaces.
602.12.2. If the application for the waiver of required offstreet parking is approved by
the planning director, the appl+property owner shall pay the required fee per space
to the Department of Offstreet Parking for deposit in a special fund entitled "Coconut
Grove Parking Improvement Trust Fund" pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 35,
Article VIII of the Code of the City of Miami.
602.12.3. Except as otherwise permitted for required supplemental parking for those
uses specified in the minimum required parking chart included in Section 602.10 of this
Code, R payment of the required fee per space may shall be made in the form of a
payment of a fixed amount, eF iR the form of monthly payments feF as long as the
The rental fee in lieu of required supplemental
11414
parkinq shall be paid in accordance with Chapter 35-194 of the City Code as long as
the supplemental parking spaces for the specified use are required.
602.12.4. Fees for the parking waiver shall be as established by Chapter 35, Article
VIII of the Code of the City of Miami and shall be pested on the SGhedule of fees by the
602.12.5. If the GWReF of a pFepeFty applies feF and a property owner is gFaRted the
rift entitled to substitute pay a fee in lieu of providing required parking as provided for
in this Subsection, the initial payment,
payrneet, must shall be made in advance to the Parking Improvement Trust Fund as
specified in the letter granting the waiver, and as a condition precedent to the issuance
of the a Rparking Wwaiver Ccertificate, and of a
Ccertificate of Uuse, ale. Failure to make any required payment shall cause
the parking waiver to b� �'�. and the Ccertificate of
Cuse to be revoked.
602.12.6. Evidence of issuance of a waiver of required offstreet parking shall be in the
form of a feserdable Ccertificate of Wwaiver, recorded in the Public Records of Dade
County at property owner's expense issued in the name of the owner of the property for
which the waiver is granted. The date on the Ccertificate shall be the effective date of
the waiver thereby granted.
The Certificate shall carry a statement allowing the waiver to be transferred by the
Planning Director to a new owner within ninety (90) days of a written request to the
director; said transfer shall be granted, provided that all fees are current and other
requirements have been satisfied. A Certificate of 9ssupanGy Use shall not be issued
for the use of any property for which the parking requirements have not been satisfied
as provided for in this Article.
602.12.7. The waiver of required offstreet parking shall be applicable only to the
structure and use for which it is issued. New development or additions, or any
construction generating additional square footage of floor space or increasing the floor
area ratio, shall not be eligible fGF, ,li a the benefits of any \ aiYeP under the
s of this seGtman be reauired to comply with the parking requirements for said
additions or obtain waivers; Certificates of Waiver may be modified to include new
square footage as long as the overall thresholds as specified in Section 602.10. are not
exceeded.
11414
Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances insofar as they are
inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 4. If any section, part of section, paragraph, clause, phrase or word of
this Ordinance is declared invalid, the remaining provisions of this Ordinance shall not
be affected.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after final
reading and adoption thereof.
PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 30th day of
October , 1996.
s
114t4
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY
this 21 s t day of November , 1996.
ATTEST:
WALTER J. F M N
CITY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
G. MIRIAM MAER '
CHIEF ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND CORRECTNESS:
l
W182/GMM/amk
&iW���c.�/
'll" �j
ETARO • MAYOR
9
i14t4
0
PZ- 13
PLANNING FACT SHEET SECOND READ=_N3
APPLICANT Department of Community Planning and Revitalization
APPLICATION DATE July 1, 1996
REQUEST/LOCATION Amendment to Article 6, Section 602. Of Ordinance 11000
LEGAL DESCRIPTION N/A.
PETITION Consideration of amending Article 6 of Ordinance 11000, as
amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, by
amending Section 602. SD-2 Coconut Grove Central
Commercial District in order to modify parking provisions within
the district.
PLANNING Approval.
RECOMMENDATION
BACKGROUND
AND ANALYSIS The proposed amendment to Zoning Ordinance 11000 is for the
purpose of modifying the regulations pertaining to parking within
the SD-2 Coconut Grove Central Commercial District. The
regulations in effect today do not accurately reflect the `shared
parking" nature of the district by recognizing that patrons of
establishments in Coconut Grove usually visit more than one
establishment on the same vehicular trip. Another particular
problem of the current regulations is the allowance of off -site
parking outside of the district boundaries.
The proposed amendment herein and in the accompanying
_ amendment to Chapter 35 of the City Code recognize the
deficiencies described above, and, among other modifications, is
aimed at offering a real, comprehensive solution to the parking
problem in Coconut Grove.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Approval.
VOTE: 8-o .
CITYCOMMISSION: Passed on First Reading on CC 10/30/96.
APPLICATION NUMBER 96-260 July 17, 1996 Item # 6
Page # 1
11414
RESOLUTION PAB - 37-96
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO.
11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY
AMENDING ARTICLE 6, SECTION 602. COCONUT GROVE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO REVISE PARKING PROVISIONS WITHIN THE
DISTRICT.
HEARING DATE: July 17, 1996
VOTE: 8-0
ATTE4JfK
UFT, ICMENT OF C NITY
PLANNING & REVITALIZATION
DAVID J. GELL, PRESIDENT
CENTER GROVE NEIGIIBORIIOOD ASSOCIATION
3290 MATILDA STREET
COCONUT GROVE, FL. 33133
Tel:(305) 448-4884 I Fax:(305) 445-4554
THIS PRESENTATION WILL BE GIVEN AT THE CITY COMMISSION
MEETING SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 30, 1996 AT 2:00 P.M.
Mr. Mayor, City Commissioners, City Administrators, fellow Coconut Grove
Merchants and Residents. Almost four years ago many Coconut Grove businesses
were threatened with the reality of being shut down by having their occupational
licenses and certificates of use revoked or, at the least, not renewed. This
happened because many businesses had cheated on parking compliance as
required under previous ordinances, during a time of rapid growth and
development in the business district. It was clear to everyone that parking had
finally reached a critical mass and that it needed to be addressed.
The neighborhood responded to the crisis of overflow parking on residential
streets by organizing the first tree plantings along Oak Avenue to alleviate the wall
of metal (cars) that materialized every Friday and Saturday night. Tile cars choked
the ingress and egress of vehicles to the central business district and choked the
residents with fumes, noise and violent crimes against persons and property.
The businesses, through the Coconut Grove Chamber of Commerce, responded
by initiating the idea of phantom spaces. The only reason that the stop -gap
measure has come this far is because Yaromir Steiner, then President of the
Chamber recognized, from the very beginning, that the residential neighborhoods
surrounding the business district must be included in the process. He called me
and asked what it would take for us to agree on a plan to build parking. I
responded that we wanted our neighborhood back. Not the way it was, but at
least protected from the weekly onslaught of cars. We agreed that the ordinance
would provide for up to 30% of the trust fund to be earmarked for police in the
residential area, a possible tram, signage to direct cars away from the residences
and swale enhancements (trees) to prevent unwanted cars from parking on the
swales in the neighborhood.
And so, as these things do, the basic concept and premise has gone along. The
businesses didn't miss a beat in raking in record profits while the residents have
waited right up until today, this moment in time, to be true partners in the process.
Innumerable meetings have taken place. Lighthearted discussions and respectful
lack of agreements have punctuated the working groups that have devoted so
much time up to this point. We have not yet seen the reciprocity promised, for
our support of solving businesses' problems. Several versions of the parking
ordinance, the latest of which is before you today, still is not meeting the needs of
the entire community it is meant to help. There is a major discrepancy that needs
to be resolved. It is not an insurmountable issue. It can be handled simply, here
and now. But it remains a real issue that is Important enough to address, for the
sake of all of us involved, as equal citizens, businesses and residents, working
together to bring, back to Coconut Grove a sense of equilibrium and harmony.
refer to an equilibrium and harmony that went sour during the past few years as
businesses have had an influence upon the greater Coconut Grove community that
far exceeds reasonableness. All of this has resulted in the detriment and
deterioration of the Center Grove in particular and the nearby residential area in
general. Where is the give and take? Where Is the concern for quality of life for
those that have lived here practically forever? Where was the City while I begged
for managed growth?
A
DAVID J. GELL, PRESIDENT
CENTER GROVE NEIGHBORIIOOD ASSOCIATION
3290 MATILDA STREET
COCONUT GROVE, FL. 33133
Tel:(305) 448-4884 / Fax:(305) 445-4554
The long and short of it is that when the needs of businesses, due to the lack of
parking, became so great that the City could no longer ignore the problem,
solutions began to be implemented. And, yes I have been in attendance every
step of the way. That was the first time residents were included in the discussion.
Yet, even then, the needs of the businesses came first and it took nearly two
years of meetings before I was recognized for the purpose of speaking on behalf of
the beleaguered residents to plead our case for mitigation of the negative impact
forced upon us by the unbridled growth and development.
Let me acknowledge fully the unprecedented devotion and "right thinking" of
everyone who has taken part in the process. This City and Coconut Grove owes a
real debt of gratitude to Mr. Robert Masrieh, as chair of the Parking Advisory
Committee. His stewardship of this board has been the reason for what surely will
end up as one of the great success stories of Coconut Grove. Great appreciation
for Mr. Clark Cook, in recognition of his fairness and respect for residents must be
given and expressed for everyone to hear. As Director of Off -Street Parking, Mr.
Cook and his staff have made important contributions of mitigation by
implementing enhancements to and enforcement of existing parking regulations.
Heartfelt gratitude and congratulations to Mr. Jack Luft and Lourdes Slayzec,
planners with ideas that take us into the future. They have almost completed,
save your conditions, recommendations and vote on the matter, perhaps the most
daunting task Coconut Grove has thus far faced in it's history of evolution and
growth. The taxpayers, businesses and residents alike, are blessed to have these
fine people on our payroll. Thank you also to my fellow board members for their
patients and courtesies. And finally, two special residents who have really carried
the heavy weight of this whole tree planting project, Mr. Michael Bushey our
Center Grove Neighborhood Association tree planting committee chairman and Mr.
Gerald Marston, a landscape architect who, pro bono, has provided the
incomparable expertise necessary to not only save the City thousands of dollars in
technical expenses but has exemplified the high minded attitude that when
civilians volunteer time and effort for the common good, anything is possible.
The next step is up to this commission. Shall we have come so far with hard
work by many people with good intentions and now drop the ball on the 1 yard
line? Shall we not take the final step, by adopting language that leaves out one of
the principal elements necessary to ensure success? Shall this commission favor
one group with inclusion and ignore an equally important participant and member
of the team, thus guaranteeing future unrest, confrontation and strife? 1 think not.
We are all better than that. This community, this City is too good for that to
happen. The final step is to give the residents the guarantee it deserves. The final
step is to give the residents the clout we need to partake of a bright future. The
final step is to secure, without question, the funds for all the trees, swale
enhancements and future needs as they become nuisances and ultimately real
problems needing to be solved. There is no closure to this issue until all the
parties feel that their interests are protected. All the waiting and patients exhibited
thus far by the residents, as the debates, discussions and evolution of the parking
ordinance progressed during the last three and a half years, was not easy for us.
Shall that effort have been in vain. Were we dupes for the business community?
Did they lie about their intentions? I hope not. I wish to remind the commission
that the businesses received benefits the day the decision was made to create
phantom spaces to legalize their illegal activities at the expense of the residents.
The residents on the other hand are just now beginning to see the fruit of our
efforts and with the phased plan will not be whole and complete for another two
11414
DAVID J. GELL, PRESIDENT
CENTER GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
3290 MATILDA STREET
COCONUT GROVE, FL. 33133
Tel:(305) 448-4884 / Fax:(305) 445-4554
to three years. That is a lop sided agreement that needs to be renegotiated. What
we do recognize is that we have been dealing in good faith, sacrificing our quality
of life and waiting for relief from the negative impact of all the development. It is
not an overstatement to say that many lives have been impacted. Yes, lives have
been lost due to violent crime as a result of this situation. Our prayers are that all
the criminal activity and all the violent crimes will become historical footnotes in
the ongoing story of Coconut Grove. That regrettable era is hopefully behind us as
we move forward. But that will only happen when this Commission understands
our needs and provides for us, the voting public, a fair shake in this ordinance.
You are the only real protectors we have left.
In conclusion, the residents of the Center Grove Neighborhood, and all residents
near the SD-2 Central Business District, deserve the same guarantees and
assurances that our ongoing problems and future unforeseen problems will be
addressed with Parking Trust Fund revenues. The residents need guarantees and
assurances that money that has been long deserved, because of the horrible
experiences we continue to endure as a result of development, will be actually
given to us through a clear, well defined and secure process. It is imperative that
the language be explicit, comprehensive and unequivocal, as everyone agrees was
always the intention. Please give us equality in "standing" with the businesses,
under the law. The residents want the same guarantees that we will actually
receive the 30% of the revenue as the businesses have their guarantees to the
70% of the revenues. Residents deserve a guarantee, we deserve fair treatment
under the ordinance, we deserve the peace of mind that funding for our
neighborhood needs will be available and forthcoming, we deserve to know for
sure that we are as protected under the law as is the business community and we
deserve equal consideration and treatment at the hands of the City Commission.
We do not want to have to continually come before the City Commission to solve
future problems that can easily be addressed successfully today.
Respectfully submitted,
David J. Gell
11414
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 24, 1996
To: Miami City Commission
From: Gerald Marston, President, Lemontree Village Condominium Association
Re: Proposed New Parking Ordinance for Coconut Grove
The following is a brief history of the Center Grove Neighborhood's understanding of and
concerns related to the proposed new parking ordinance for Coconut Grove.
1. The original ordinance was adopted in 1993 with a cap of 1000 spaces for which
commercial business pay $ 40.00 / month / space required to meet their zoning
requirements.
2. As of this date, the Off Street Parking Authority has collected approximately $ 1.2
million.
3. As of this date, 3 years later, the Off Street Parking Authority has not built or
provided one space.
4. By numerous estimates there is a shortage of 1000 spaces in the Coconut Grove
Commercial District today.
5. The proposed garage at the Farm Store / Rice Street site will accommodate
approximately 400 spaces.
6. -If that garage were in operation today, we would have a 600 space shortfall without
raising the cap.
7. Increasing the cap without addressing our issues is unacceptable to our
community.
8. The original ordinance allowed for up to 30% of the collected funds to be used for
mitigation of impacts in our neighborhood within 1000 ft. of the commercial
properties.
9. For the past 6 years since the opening of Cocowalk, our neighborhood has been the
FREF, PARIQNG for the employees and patrons of the Coconut Grove Busiross
District.
4
record i
IteBi
Wafter FCYeT,� ,-
11414 City Clerk
10. The City of Miami has been collecting taxes from the commercial development
allowed by the original ordinance.
11. At $40.00 / month , assuming a parking garage space costs $10,000, it takes 25 years
to buy one space.
12. Constant parking in the grass swales;
• is used primarily by employees and grove business patrons
• has brought increased crime to our neighborhood
• has brought drunken patrons, vandalism and litter to our neighborhood
• leaves us with hard packed dirt without grass in our neighborhood
• has negatively affected our property values
• has lead to an increase in renters replacing owner occupants
13. As a neighborhood, residents and developers in the Day Ave. / Virginia Street area,
have collected approximately $50,000.00 and spent $40,000.00 to landscape the swale
areas eliminating parking. We have spent countless hours surveying, planning,
designing, fund raising and obtaining property owner approval and permits for the
improvements to date.
14. Our streets are not built as urban onstreet parking roadways with curb and gutter,
drainage, sidewalks, lighting and etc.
15. The City of Miami has, in the past, tried to raise the cap to cover administrative /
clerical errors.
16. The Offstreet Parking Board has "reluctantly" transferred $25,000.00 to Public Works
to help our landscaping program and continue to insist that these moneys are not a
commitment to continue funding of our mitigation program.
17. Public Works has not expedited the release of these earmarked funds.
18. Eliminating free parking in our neighborhood will force approximately 200 employees
and patrons to use the city and private pay lots and garages.
19. The proposed City of Miami Planning Department Ordinance eliminating the cap:
• has adjusted fees to make the time for creating parking spaces more reasonable
• has again used "weasel words" regarding use of collected funds to be used in
mitigation of neighborhood impacts.
20. Cities investing in commercial and residential neighborhoods to protect tax base is
good business.
21. Requiring developers to mitigate their impacts on communities and their environments
is common practice by Florida law.
11414
11
22. We believe a strong Coconut Grove Commercial District will be good for our
neighborhood if we are protected from noxious impacts.
23. We believe the proposed ordinance is "more than fair" for all potential new
commercial development.
24. We will endorse the proposed new ordinance provided:
• the City Commission attach a stipulation to the ordinance which guarantees
timely mitigation of impacts in our neighborhood
• the City Commission directs the Department of Public Works to expedite the
release of the $25,000.00 in "earmarked" funds
25. We would suggest that the N iami City Commission could amend the proposed',
ordinance to include a $500.00 / space mitigation impact fee which would not be
administered by the Offstreet Parking Board or stipulate a percentage of fees collected
to be spent at the time of collection for mitigation of impacts. (i.e. 30% to a limit of
$500,000.00)
26 PLEASE REMEMBER WE ARE:
• YOUR NEIGHBORS
• CITIZENS OF AHAMI
• TAXPAYERS
and
• VOTERS
WE DESERVE YOUR HELP AND RESPECT
11414
MIAMI DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW
Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays
Miami, Dade County, Florida.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
Sookie Williams, who on oath says that she Is the Vice
President of Legal Advertising of the Miami Daily Business
Review f/k/a Miami Review, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday
and Legal Holidays) newspaper, published at Miami in Dade
County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement,
being a Legal Advertisement of Notice in the matter of
CITY OF MIAMI
ORDINANCE NO. 11414
In the ............ XXXX ..................... Court,
X
wff puCblis ed In salryngvgpaper In the Issues of
Affiant further says that the said Miami Daily Business
Review is a newspaper published at Miami In said Dade
County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Dade County, Florida,
each day (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) and
has been entered as second class mail matter at the post
office In Miami in said Dade County, Florida, for a period of
one t preceding the first publication of the attached
cop f adv Isement; and a" ant further says that she has
nei er pai nor promised any person, firm or corporation
an discou t, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose
of ecurl this advertisement for publication In the said
3 0 S'"Decemsubscribed before me tyt
...... day of ......................... A.D. 19......
�!• • • �............
(SEAL) ,`p,RY P& OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL
Sookie Williams Icy kno_44toQWRYL H MARMER
N'~ f * COMMISS10N NUMBER
yf� O CC545384
0F FL�(1 APR COMMISSION
EXPIRES