HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-87-1149J-87-1109
12/10/87
Increment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 9 7-1 i49
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE DOWNTOWN MIAMI
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT, ENCOMPASSING AN
AREA OF THE CITY OF MIAMI UNDER THE JURISDICTION
OF THE MIAMI DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK
WEST AREA AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN,
PURSUANT TO AN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT
APPROVAL PROPOSED BY THE MIAMI DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; AUTHORIZING AN
INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT ORDER; APPROVING SAID
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AFTER CONSIDERING
THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SOUTH
FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AND THE CITY
OF MIAMI PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD, SUBJECT TO THE
CONDITIONS OF THE INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT ORDER
ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT "A", THE APPLICATION
FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL INCORPORATED HEREIN BY
REFERENCE, AND THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF
THE SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE; MAKING
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW;
PROVIDING THAT THE INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT ORDER
SHALL BE BINDING ON THE APPLICANT AND SUCCESSORS
IN INTEREST; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO SEND
COPIES OF THIS RESOLUTION AND THE INCREMENT I
DEVELOPMENT ORDER TO AFFECTED AGENCIES AND THE
APPLICANT; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE
ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO FULFILL THE CITY'S
OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT
ORDER; AND PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, on November 26, 1986, the Downtown Development Authority of the
City of Miami submitted a complete Application for Development Approval for a
Development of Regional Impact to the South Florida Regional Planning Council,
the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and the City of Miami pursuant to
F.S. 380.06 (1987), for the ongoing development through the year 2007 of a
portion of the area within the DDA jurisdiction, as legally described in the
Development Order attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting held on
December 9, 1987, following an advertised public hearing, adopted Resolution
No. 75-87 by 6 to 2 vote, recommending approval of the Increment I
Development Order for Downtown Miami as attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 1987, the City Commission conducted a public
hearing pursuant to F.S. 380.06 (1987); and
WHEREAS, the City Commission considered the Application for Development
Approval, the report and recommendations of the South Florida Regional
ATTACHMENTS
ENCLOSED
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF
1 DEC IO 1987
RESOLUTION No.'! /-1 1
Planning Council, and each element required to be considered by F.S. 380.06
(1987); and
WHEREAS, the City Commission determined that all requirements of notice
and other legal requirements for the issuance of the proposed Increment I
Development Order had been complied with; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission deems it advisable and in the best interest
of the general welfare of the City of Miami to issue a Increment I Development
Order as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA:
Section 1. The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are made with
respect to the Project as described in the Increment I Development Order for
Downtown Miami, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof
by reference, and is applicable to an area encompassing that area wi thin the
City of Miami under the jurisdiction of the Downtown Development Authority,
with the exception of the Southeast Overtown/park West Redevelopment District,
as more particularly described in Exhibit "A".
Section 2. The Increment I Development Order for Downtown Miami,
(Exhibit "A"),
is
hereby
granted and
issued.
Section
3.
The
City Clerk
is hereby authorized and directed to
immediately send certified copies of this Resolution together with Exhibit "A"
and copies of all exhibits, attachments, and written materials, including
portions of ordinances referenced in the text of the Increment I Development
Order to: The Florida Department of Community Affairs, 2571 Executive Center
Circle East, Tallahassee, Florida, 32301; The South Florida Regional Planning
Council, 3440 Hollywood Boulevard, Suite 140, Hollywood, Florida, 33021; and
the Downtown Development Authority, Suite 1800, One Biscayne Tower, Miami,
Florida 33132.
Section 4. The City Manager is hereby directed to take all actions
necessary to fulfill the City's obligations under the terms of the Increment I
Development Order for Downtown Miami (Exhibit "A").
Section 5. In the event that any portion or section of this Resolution
or the Increment I Development Order for Downtown Miami (Exhibit "A") is
determined to be invalid, illegal, or unconstitutional by a court or agency of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall in no manner affect the remaining
portions of this Resolution or the Increment I Development Order for Downtown
Miami (Exhibit "A"), which shall remain in full force and effect.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of December , 1987.
ATTEST:
jl;%TTY
HIRAI, CITY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
w ayt
VOS
LE. MAXWELLISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS
A A. DOUGHE
AND CORRECTNESS:
, CITY ATTORNEY
3
r
XAVIER L. SUAREZ, MAYOR
1
i�
Cqitu of +�iittxttt
OF
SERGIO RODRIGUEZ �`" ��s CESAR H. ODIO
Director t City Manager
�} .eae eons tt
� eu
December 14, 1987
Mr. B. Jack Osterholt, Executive Director
South Florida Regional Planning Council
3440 Hollywood Blvd., Suite 140
Hollywood; FL 33021
RE: Downtown Development Authority/City of Miami DRI
Dear Mr. Osterholt:
l
I am hereby notifying you that on December 10, 1987, the Miami City Commission
adopted the attached Resolution #87-1148 approving a Master Development Order
for Downtown Miami and the attached Resolution #87-1149 approving an
_ Increment I Development Order for Downtown Miami. An executed copy of these
resolution will be sent to you as soon as they are available from the City
Clerk.
Si ncerely,
odriguez, Director
a ng Department
SR/JAM/dr
dr87:262
cc: Roy Kenzie
Joel Maxwell
Robert Sechen
Natty Hirai
91 0301BC1
V7- //IF
a4l'i
PLANNING DEPARTMENT/275 N.W. 2nd Street/Miami, Florida 33126/(305) 579-6096
Mailing Address • P.O.Bos 330706 / Miami, Florida 33Z1341 0ti
8 7--1.148
a
(4'tt�r of 4niarni
SERGIO RODRIGUEZ
Director
December 14, 1987
Mr. Thomas G. Pelham, Secretary
Department of Community Affairs
2571 Executive Center Circle East
Tallahassee, FL 32399
RE: Downtown Development Authority/City of Miami DRI
Dear Secretary Pelham:
CESAR H. ODIO
City Manager
7
I am hereby notifying you that on December 10, 1987, the Miami City Commission
adopted the attached Resolution #87-1148 approving a Master Development Order
for Downtown Miami and the attached Resolution #87-1149 approving an
Increment I Development Order for Downtown Miami. An executed copy of these
resolution will be sent to you as soon as they are available from the City
Clerk.
Si ncerely,
r io Rodriguez, Director
nning Department
SR/JAM/dr
dr87:261
cc: Roy Kenzie
Joel Maxwell
Robert Sechen
Matty Hirai
PLANNING DEPARTMENT/VS N,W. 2nd Street/Miami, florid& 33128/(305) 579-6086
Mailing Address - P.O.Box 3307W / Miami, Florida 33233.0705
8 7-J148
12/14/87
Increment 1
EXHIBIT "A"
INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT ORDER
NAME OF DEVELOPMENT: Downtown Miami
NAME OF DEVELOPER: Downtown Development Authority of the City of Miami
AUTHORIZED AGENT OF DEVELOPER: Roy F. Kenzie, Executive Director; Downtown
Development Authority
and Sergio Rodriguez, Director, City of Miami Planning
Department, or their successors.
S
i
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Project consists
of development
in Downtown Miami
through the Year 2007,
including the
following land uses
and increments:
Land Uses
Increment I
Increment II
Increment III
Totals
Office
(gross square feet)
7,100,000
3,600,000
3,700,000
14,400,000
Government Office
(gross square feet)
300,000
250,000
200,000
750,000
Retail/Service
(gross square feet)
10050,000
400,000
500,000
1,950,000
Hotel
(rooms)
1,000
500
1,100
2,600
_
Residential
(dwelling units)
3,550
2,550
2,920
91020
Convention
(gross square feet)
500,000
0
0
500,000
Wholesale/Industrial
ff�
(gross square feet)
1,050,000
0
1,050,000
2,100,000
— I
Institutional
(gross square feet)
300,000
0
300,000
600,000
Attractions/Recreation
(seats)
3,400
1,600
5,000
10,000
Pursuant to F.S. 380.06(22) (1987),
the Project specifies
the total
amount of
development planned for each land use category, but
provides flexibility
for
such development to be located anywhere within the
Project Area,
subject to
local land development regulations. The Project Area includes all ,property
within the boundaries of the Downtown Development Authority, with the
j exception of that area between NE/NW 5th Street and I-395 known as "Park
West", as illustrated on the map in Exhibit 1 and described in Exhibit 2
attached hereto. The Project Area contains a total of approximately 839 acres
of land, including approximately 78 acres currently zoned and developed as
City parks.
it 1
E
10*
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: See Exhibit 2.
DEFINITIONS: For the purposes of this Development Order, the following terms
shall be defined as follows:
ADA or Application for Development Approval: The original Application for
Development Approval for Downtown Miami filed by the DDA on November 25, 1986,
pursuant to F.S. 380.06 (1987).
CADA or Consolidated Application for Development Approval: The revised ADA
prepared pursuant to paragraph 16 on page 13 herein.
Certificate of Occupancy: A permanent or temporary and/or partial Certificate
of Occupancy issued, pursuant to Section 307 of the South Florida Building
Code, for any "Net New Development" as defined herein.
City: The City of Miami, Florida.
Council: The South Florida Regional Planning Council.
DDA or Downtown Development Authority: The Downtown Development Authority of
the City of Miami, Florida.
DERM: The Metropolitan Dade County Department of Environmental Resources
1 Management.
DRI: Development of Regional Impact.
Development Credits: The individual units of land uses included within Total
Allowable Development, as measured by square footage or number of dwelling
units, hotel rooms, or seats.
FDER: The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation.
'.! Major Use Special Permit: A special permit issued by the City Commission
3?
,1 pursuant to Ordinance 9500, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, as
amended.
`i
t
r
- F j
1 li
} 111
1 97�-1.��9
Net New Development: Any construction or reconstruction which will result in
a net increase, within any "Parcel of Land", of residential dwelling units,
hotel rooms, seats in attractions/recreation facilities or gross square
footage for office, government office, retail/service, convention,
wholesale/industrial or institutional uses. Land uses to be removed by
demolition of a building or structure may be credited against the proposed new
land uses for purposes of calculating the net increase, if the Planning
Director determines that there was a valid Certificate of Occupancy existing
on the effective date of this Development Order for the land uses to be
demolished. If a change of land use is proposed, the Planning Director may
credit the prior land use against the proposed land use based upon equivalent
impacts as measured by peak hour vehicle trip generation. Any activity which
has on the effective date of this Development Order a valid building permit or
any currently effective development order shall not be included as Net New
Development. The Planning Director may exclude from Net New Development any
small development under 10,000 square feet in.floor area; if he finds that
such development would have no regional impact as measured by peak hour
vehicle trips.
Parcel of Land: Any quantity of land capable of being described with such
definiteness that its location and boundaries may be established; and which is
designated by its owner or developer as land to be used or developed as a unit
or which has been used or developed as a unit.
Project: That Project described in the "PROJECT DESCRIPTION" on Page 1
herein.
Project Area: The area included within the legal description in Exhibit 2.
Total Allowable Development: The quantity of Net New Development for which
Certificates of Occupancy may be issued under the terms and conditions of this
Development Order, together with the applicable Master Development Order; as
may be modified pursuant to F.S. 380.06(19) (1987), and which shall be
measured by the following land uses:
Office
Government Office
7,100,000 gross square feet
300,000 gross square feet
3
97-1149
/"^
Retail/Service
Hotel
Residential
Convention
Wholesale/Industrial
Institutional
Attractions/Recreation
1,050,000 gross square feet
1,000 rooms
3,550 dwelling units
500,000 gross square feet
1,050,000 gross square feet
300,000 gross square feet
3,400 seats
?� The City may permit simultaneous increases and decreases in the above
rt
described land use categories, provided that the regional impacts of the land
uses as changed will not exceed the adverse regional impacts of the land uses
in Increment I of the Project as originally approved, as measured by total
peak hour vehicle trips.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
The following findings of fact are hereby confirmed and adopted with
respect to the Project:
A. The findings and determinations of fact set forth in the recitals of the
resolution to this Development Order are hereby confirmed.
B. The real property which is the subject of this Development Order is
legally described in Exhibit 2.
C. The DDA filed the ADA with the City, the Council, and the Florida
Department of Community Affairs.
D. The CADA has been filed by the DDA pursuant to F.S. 380.06(22) (1987)
authorizing a downtown development authority to apply for development
approval and receive a development order for any or all of the area
within its jurisdiction. Individual developments are not identified or
required to be identified in the CADA.
E. The purpose of the CADA is to identify and assess probable regional
impacts and to obtain approval for Total Allowable Development in
accordance with the general guidelines set forth in this Development
Order and the CADA. The concept is to recognize the Project Area as a
single area of high intensity development and to focus the DRI review
process primarily on the impacts that Total Allowable Development within
n
W
`- 7-1.14:9
the area will have on land; water; transportation; environmental;
community services; energy and other resources and systems of regional
significance. The CADA seeks a single DRI review process for overall
phased development of the downtown area rather than requiring each
individual DRI scale development within the downtown area to file for
separate DRI reviews.
F. Development within the Project Area is expected to continue to be
accomplished over an extended period of time by a variety of developers,
which may include the City. These developers may respond to market
demand and technologies that can only be estimated in the CADA. The
CADA is intended to serve as a flexible guide to planned development of
the Project Area rather than a precise blueprint for its development.
Therefore, pursuant to F.S. 380.06(21)(b) (1987), the CADA seeks master
development approval for three increments of development over a period
of approximately twenty years and specific development approval for
Increment I, which is the first phase of development projected for a
period of approximately five years. Subsequent incremental applications
may need to be adjusted to more nearly serve as a living guide
recognizing the evolution of market demand and technologies.
G. The Project Area contains a total of approximately 839 acres, including
approximately 78 acres presently zoned and developed as City parks. The
CADA proposes Net New Development within the Project Area for the land
uses, quantities and phases defined herein as Total Allowable
Development.
N. The Project is not located in an area of critical state concern as
designated pursuant to F.S. 380 (1987).
I. A comprehensive review of the probable impacts that will be generated by
Increment I of the Project has been conducted by various City
departments, as reflected in the CADA, and the South Florida Regional
Planning Council staff.
J. This Development Order is consistent with the report and recommendations
of the South Florida Regional Planning Council, entitled "Development of
Regional Impact Assessment for Downtown Miami - Increment I", dated
October 5, 1987. The South Florida Regional Planning Council recommends
5
97--1.149
approval -of Increment I of the Project; and all conditions to which such
approval is subject are reflected herein.
K. Increment I of the Project is consistent with the applicable portion of
the State land development plan and the Regional Plan for South Florida.
L. Increment I of the Project is in conformity with the adopted Miami
Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan.
M. Increment I of the Project is in accord with the district zoning
classifications of Zoning Ordinance 95000. as amended.
N. Increment I of the Project will have a favorable impact on the economy
of the City.
P. Increment I of the Project will efficiently use public transportation
facilities.
Q. Increment I of the Project will favorably affect the need for people to
find adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of
employment.
R. Increment I of the Project will efficiently use necessary public
facilities.
S.
Increment I
of the Project
will include adequate mitigative
measures to
assure that
it will not adversely effect the environment
and natural
resources of
the City.
T.
Increment I
of the Project
will not adversely affect living
conditions
in the City.
U.
Increment I
of the Project
will not adversely affect public
safety.
V.
There is a public need for
Increment I of the Project.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
That, having made the findings of fact contained above; the City
Commission hereby concludes as a matter of law, the following:
A. The DDA constitutes a "downtown development authority" as defined in
F.S. 380 (1987)0 and is authorized by F.S. 380 (1987) to make
application for development approval and receive a development order.
B. Increment I of the Project complies with the Miami Comprehensive
Neighborhood Plan, is consistent with the orderly development and goals
of the City of Miami, and complies with local land development
regulations.
C
97-1149
C. Increment I of the Project does not unreasonably interfere with the
achievement of the objectives of the adopted State land development plan
applicable to the City of Miami and the Regional Plan for South Florida.
D. Increment I of the Project is consistent with the report and
recommendations of the South Florida Regional Planning Council and does
not unreasonably interfere with any of the considerations and objectives
set forth in F.S. 380 (1987).
E. Changes in Increment I of the Project which do not exceed the Total
Allowable Development or which do not result in a net reduction of more
than 5 percent in total acreage zoned and developed as City parks, shall
not constitute a substantial deviation under F.S. 380 (1987).
ACTION TAKEN:
That, having made the findings of fact and reached the conclusions of
law set forth above, it is ordered that Increment I of the Project is hereby
approved, subject to the following conditions:
THE CITY, ITS SUCCESSORS, AND/OR ASSIGNS JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY MAY ISSUE
BUILDING PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY FOR TOTAL ALLOWABLE
DEVELOPMENT, PURSUANT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ORDER
TOGETHER WITH THE ATTENDANT MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND SHALL:
1. Require all development pursuant to this Development Order to be in
accordance with applicable building codes, land development regulations,
ordinances and other laws.
2. For the purpose of base -line data collection, conduct air quality
monitoring for carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations based on the
following requirements:
a. CO monitoring data shall be provided for each of the three (3)
sub -areas as described in the CADA: Brickell, the Central
Business District and Omni.
b. The monitoring shall consist of four (4) weeks of data collection
during the winter months, November 15th through March 15th, for
each sub -area.
7
c. The monitoring for each sub -area shall be completed prior to the
issuance of any certificate of occupancy within that sub -area for
the first development under this Development Order which meets 100
percent of the presumptive threshold for Developments of Regional
Impact pursuant to Rule 27F, F.A.C.; within that sub -area; or
prior to March 15, 1991, whichever comes first.
d. The monitor will be located at the presumed worst case
intersection for the Brickell and Omni sub -areas. The location
will be selected jointly by the City, Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation (FDER), Dade County Environmental
Resources Management (DERM), and Council staff. It has been
agreed by these agencies that the existing monitor located in the
Central Business District will be acceptable for that sub -area.
e. Perform the monitoring required by 2a. and 2b. above as prescribed
by the policies and regulations governing DERM and submit final
air quality monitoring reports to FDER, DERM, and the Council
staff within 60 days of the completion of the monitoring.
3. Conduct air quality modeling of carbon monoxide impacts to determine
what, if any, changes are needed in air quality monitoring, including
the need to continue monitoring. The modeling shall be completed within
one year after the base -line data monitoring has been completed pursuant
to paragraph 2 above and the intersections have been selected pursuant
to 3a. below. The air quality modeling shall follow FDER guidelines and
shall:
a. Be limited to no more than ten (10) intersections to be selected
or
from among the intersections projected in the CADA to operate at
level of service E or F. The intersections shall be selected
Jointly by FDER, DERM, the Council staff, and the City.
b. Be submitted in a detailed and comprehensive air quality analysis
to FDER and DERM for comment and review, and to the Council staff
and the City for review and approval.
6
`97-11.49
C. Include proposed changes to air quality monitoring as justified by
the air quality modeling analysis.
4. If the results of the air quality modeling study, as described in
paragraph 3 above; are more than 85 percent but less than 100 percent of
the State standards for CO concentrations, implement an air quality
monitoring and abatement program following approval of the report
pursuant to 3b above. The monitoring and abatement program, including a
time frame for implementation, must be approved by the Council staff and
the City subsequent to review and comment by FDER and DERM. The program
may include, but is not limited to, the following techniques:
a. Transportation Control Measures (TCM).
b. Physical planning measures (e.g. signalization, parking area
locations, addition of turn lanes, etc.).
CO. The continuance of monitoring for specified sub -areas.
5. If the results of the air quality modeling study, as described in
Condition 3 above, exceed State standards for CO concentrations; do one
of the following:
a. Provide acceptable documentation which clearly indicates that CO
exceedences will not occur, or that the Net New Development
seeking approval will not contribute to the predicted CO
violation, or that any potential CO additions for each Net New
Development have been or will be mitigated (according to Council
staff and the City subsequent to review and comment by FDER and
DERM) prior to issuance of building permits for the particular Net
New Development. Such documentation may include a modeling study
which incorporates measures such as those contained in Condition
4a., b., and c., above. This documentation must be approved by
the Council staff and the City subsequent to review and comment by
FDER and DERM.
` 7-1149
b: Withhold the issuance of any building permits for Net New
Development within the sub -area that shows CO exceedences.
6. Based upon the transportation impacts generated by Total Allowable
Development for Increment I, pay or contract to pay $79543,419 (fair
share in 1987 dollars), to be expended on any or all of the following
transportation improvements:
a. SW 2nd Avenue bridge and approaches or the Brickell Avenue bridge
and approaches;
b. intersection improvements to the entrance and exit ramps to I-395
at NE 1st Avenue and NE 2nd Avenue;
ce other transportation improvements if mutually agreed upon by the
City and Council staff; subsequent to review and comment by Dade
County and the Florida Department of Transportation.
The City shall pay or contract to pay the fair share within 60 days `
following notice that the subject improvement has been let to contract
for construction. In the event the City contracts to pay the fair
share; such contract shall in no way affect the construction schedule of
the subject transportation improvement. If the improvements above have
not been let to contract for construction before the earlier date of a.
or b. specified below:
a: four years after the effective date of the Development Order, or
b. the date of issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for more than 80
percent of the Total Allowable Development;
then Council staff, the City, Dade County, and the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) will jointly decide the reallocation of $7,543,419
(fair share in 1987 dollars) within 90 days of the earlier date of
either a: or b: specified above:
7: Withhold the issuance of building permits for Net New Development if the
City has been determined to be in noncompliance with paragraph 6 above:
80' Make efforts to work closely with applicable governmental agencies to
ensure that the Metromover Stage II herein be completed as identified in
the current Metropolitan Planning Organization's Transportation
10
97-1149
Improvement Program (TIP) published in June; 1987. In the event that by
December 31, 1992, the Metromover Stage II improvements are not
substantially under construction, as determined by Council staff, then
this situation will be considered a substantial deviation from the
mitigative efforts anticipated to offset the adverse impacts of Total
Allowable Development. In this event, the Applicant shall be required
to undergo additional Development of Regional Impact review for
transportation impacts pursuant to F.S. 380.06(19)(a)(g) and (h),
(1986). Such additional Development of Regional Impact review, if
required, shall be initiated by March 31, 1993: Net New Developments
which have obtained building permits prior to December 31, 1992 shall
not be affected by any subsequent review:
9: Within 6 months of the effective date of this Development Order; prepare
and recommend to the Miami City Commission a Transportation Control
Measure (TCM) Ordinance; which shall require Net New Development to do
the following:
a. actively encourage and promote car and van pooling by establishing
or participating in a car pool information program; and
b: provide mass transit route and schedule information in convenient
locations throughout the individual development; and
c: encourage mass transit use by the provision of bus shelters, bus
turnout lanes; or other amenities to increase transit ridership:
In addition; the TCM Ordinance shall include other appropriate
transportation control measures to be selected from but not be limited
to the list entitled "Table 4:9 - Potential Transportation Control
Measures (TCM's) for Downtown Miami" on page 4=22(R) of the CADA: The
TCM ordinance must be approved by Council with input from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and the Florida Department of
Transportation:
-- 10. In the event that a Transportation Control Measures (TCM) Ordinance
substantially in accord with paragraph 9 above is not adopted by the
11
`�7-1.14y
Miami City Commission within 18 months of the effective date of this
Development Order, determine that this situation constitutes a
substantial deviation from the mitigative efforts anticipated to offset
it
the adverse impacts of Total Allowable Development. In this event, the
Applicant shall be required to undergo additional Development of
Regional Impact review pursuant to F.S. 380.06(19)(a)(g) and (h) (1986). •`
Such additional Development of Regional Impact review, if required, f:
shall be initiated by the Applicant within 90 days of the identification
of its need.'
11. Have the authority to assess development for its proportionate share of
the costs of improvements and/or services necessary to monitor and/or
mitigate any adverse impacts. The City shall also have authority to
assess development its proportionate share of the costs attributable to
preparation of the master plan, the Application for Development
Approval, and this Development Order, as well as the future costs of
reviewing individual development applications, monitoring compliance
with this Development Order, and any other costs reasonably related to
the administration and implementation of this Development Order. "If
necessary, the City shall establish a procedure for rebating any funds
collected in excess of those funds attributable to a particular
development and necessary to implement this Development Order or any
ordinance or procedure required to monitor and enforce compliance with
this Development Order and to mitigate the impacts of Total Allowable
Development."
12. Establish December 31, 1992 as the date until which the City agrees that
the grantees of building permits or Major Use Special Permits for new
development, under the Downtown Miami - Increment I Development of
Regional Impact shall not be subject to down -zoning, unit density
reduction, or intensity reduction to the extent of the amount of
development included within the building permit or Major Use Special
Permit, unless the City can demonstrate that substantial changes in the
conditions underlying the approval of the development order have
occurred, or that the development order was based on substantially
12
f1
Miami City Commission within 18 months of the effective date of this
Development Order, determine that this situation constitutes a — -
substantial deviation from the mitigative efforts anticipated to offset
i
the adverse impacts of Total Allowable Development. In this event, the r=
Applicant shall be required to undergo additional Development of
Regional Impact review pursuant to F.S. 380.06(19)(a)(g) and (h) (1986). `z
Such additional Development of Regional Impact review, if required,
s! shall be initiated by the Applicant within 90 days of the identification
of its need.
11. Have the authority to assess development for its proportionate share of
the costs of improvements and/or services necessary to monitor and/or
mitigate any adverse impacts. The City shall also have authority to
assess development its proportionate share of the costs attributable to
preparation of the master plan, the Application for Development
Approval, and this Development Order, as well as the future costs of
reviewing individual development applications, monitoring compliance
with this Development Order, and any other costs reasonably related to
the administration and implementation of this Development Order. "If
necessary, the City shall establish a procedure for rebating any funds
collected in excess of those funds attributable to a particular
development and necessary to implement this Development Order or any
ordinance or procedure required to monitor and enforce compliance with
this Development Order and to mitigate the impacts of Total Allowable
Development."
12. Establish December 31, 1992 as the date until which the City agrees that
the grantees of building permits or Major Use Special Permits for new
development, under the Downtown Miami - Increment I Development of
Regional Impact shall not be subject to down -zoning, unit density
reduction, or intensity reduction to the extent of the amount of
development included within the building permit or Major Use Special
Permit, unless the City can demonstrate that substantial changes in the
conditions underlying the approval of the development order have
occurred, or that the development order was based on substantially
12
`%�-1149
Applicant; or that the change is clearly essential to the public health;
safety or welfare.
MONITORING, REPORTING, AND ENFORCEMENT:
13. The City shall monitor the capacity of Total Allowable Development by
reserving the amount of Development Credits necessary for Net New
Development at a time, to be determined by the City, prior to or
coincident with approval of a building permit or Major Use Special
permit. The City shall place reasonable time limits on all building
permits and Major Use Special Permits to assure that construction
progresses within a reasonable period of time after approval to prevent
stockpiling of reservations for Development Credits. The time period
,t
established by the City shall take into account the size of the proposed
Net New Development in relationship to the time necessary to begin
construction.
140 Upon the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any Net New
Development; the City shall make appropriate subtractions from the
_ amount of Total Allowable Development under this Development Order. No
Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for Net New Development which
would, in the aggregate, exceed the amount of Total Allowable
Development under this Development Order.
- IS. The City shall integrate all original and supplemental ADA information
into a Consolidated Application for Development Approval (CADA) and
submit two copies of the CADA to the Council, one copy to the City
411.
Clerk, and one copy to the Florida Department of Community Affairs
within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Development Order.
The CADA shall be prepared as follows:
a. Where new, clarified, or revised information was prepared
subsequent to submittal of the ADA but prior to issuance of this
Development Order, whether in response to a formal statement of
information needed or otherwise, the original pages of the ADA
will be replaced with revised pages.
13
7-1149
i
sj
t�
b. Revised pages will have a "Page Number (R) - Date" notation; with
"Page Number" being the number of the original page, "(R)"
indicating that the page was revised, and "Date" stating the date
of the revision.
16. The Consolidated Application for Development Approval is incorporated
herein by reference and will be relied upon by the parties in
discharging their statutory duties under F.S. 380 (1987)9 and local
ordinances. Substantial compliance with the factual representations
contained in the Consolidated Application for Development Approval is a
condition for approval unless waived or modified by agreement among the
Council, City, and Applicant, its successors; and/or assigns.
17. All terms, proposals, suggestions and procedures proposed in the
Application for Development Approval, but not specifically incorporated
in this Development Order, shall not be considered a part of the
Consolidated Application for Development Approval insofar as they may
have been deemed to place a requirement on the City of Miami to take any
action or abstain from taking any action. The terms of this Development
Order shall control and any requirements of the City are specifically
enumerated herein.
18. The City shall prepare an annual report and submit copies to the
Council, the City Clerk and Florida Department of Community Affairs on
or before each anniversary date of this Development Order. The annual
report for Downtown Miami - Increment I must also be incorporated into
the annual report required in the Downtown Miami Master Development
Order so that a single annual report is compiled for the entire Project.
The annual report shall include, at a minimum:
a. A complete response to each question in Exhibit 3.
b. Identification and description of any known changes in the plan of
development, or in the representations contained in the CADA, or
in the phasing for the reporting year and for the next year.
c. A summary comparison of Total Allowable Development and Net New
Development proposed and actually approved during the year,
14
including locations; acreage; square footage; number of units; and
other units of land uses included within Total Allowable
Development, and the acreage zoned and developed as City parks.
d. An assessment of the Applicant's and the City's compliance with
the conditions of approval contained in this Development Order and
the commitments which are contained in the Application for
Development Approval and which have been identified by the City,
the Council, or the Department of Community Affairs as being
significant.
e. Specification of any amended DRI applications for development
approval or requests for a substantial deviation determination
that were filed in the reporting year or to be filed during the
next year.
f. An indication of change, if any, in City jurisdiction for any
portion of the development since issuance of this Development
Order.
g. A statement that all persons have been sent copies of the annual
report in conformance with F.S. 380.06 (18) (1987).
h. A copy of any recorded notice of the adoption of this Development
Order or any subsequent modification that was recorded by the
Applicant pursuant to F.S. 380.06(15) (1987).
i. Any other information required by the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) in accordance with F.S. 380.06 (18)(1987).
19. The City shall enforce the requirements of the Dade County Shoreline
Development Review Ordinance (85-14) for all subsequent developments
within the Shoreline Development boundary.
20. The deadline for commencing any development shall be two (2) years from
the effective date of this Development Order. The termination date for
completing development shall be December 31. 1992, provided that the
Applicant, or its successors and assigns, complies with paragraph 25
15
` 7-1149.
herein. The termination date may only be modified in accordance with
F.S. 380.06(19)(c) (1987).
21. The effective date of this Development Order shall be 45 days from its
transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Council, and
Applicant; provided, however, that if this Development Order is
appealed, the effective date will not start until the day after all
appeals have been withdrawn or resolved pursuant to F.S. 380.07(2)
(1987) .
22. The City shall not violate any of the conditions of this Development
Order or otherwise fail to act in substantial compliance with this
Development Order or permit any property owner within the boundaries
covered by this Development Order to violate any of the provisions of
this Development Order. In the event any entity controlled by the
Applicant and/or the City or any permittee or landowner of any Parcel of
Land violates (hereinafter "violator") the provisions of this
Development Order, the City shall stay the effectiveness of this
Development Order as to the Parcel of Land in which the violative
activity or conduct has occurred and withhold further permits,
approvals, and services for development in said Parcel of Land upon
passage of any appropriate resolution by the City, adopted in accordance
with this section, finding that such violation has occurred. The
violator will be given written notice by the City that states: 1) the
nature of the purported violation, and 2) that unless the violation is
cured within 30 days of said notice, the City will hold a public hearing
to consider the matter within 60 days of the date of said notice. In
the event the violation is not curable in 30 days, the violator's
diligent good faith efforts, as determined by the City, to cure the
r
violation within that period will obviate the need to hold a public
hearing and this Development Order will remain in full force and effect
unless the violator does not diligently pursue the curative action to
completion within a reasonable time, in which event the City will give
15 days notice to the violator of its intention to stay the
effectiveness of this Development Order and withhold further permits,
16
, ' 1149
i
approvals, and services to the Parcel of Land in which the violation has
occurred and until the violation is cured. The terms of this paragraph
may be modified from time to time by written agreement by the DDA, the
City, and Council staff, to enable the City to enforce the terms of this
Development Order to the fullest extent, while providing due process to !f
all developers under this Development Order.
P ,E.
23. The Planning Director, City of Miami Planning Department, is hereby
designated to monitor compliance with all conditions of this Development
Order and shall have the duty and authority to interpret the provisions`
of this Development Order and to promulgate rulings, regulations and
procedures necessary to implement it, provided the same are not
i
inconsistent with the terms hereof or of F.S. 380 (1987), or duly
r
r-
E
promulgated and adopted rules thereunder. Appeals to decisions of the
Planning Director may be filed pursuant to procedures set forth in
Article 30 of Ordinance 9500, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami,
Florida, as amended. Any noncompliance shall be subject to the
provisions of paragraph 22 herein.
24. The South Florida Regional Planning Council report and recommendations,
entitled "Development of Regional Impact Assessment for Downtown Miami -
Increment V. dated October 5, 1987, is incorporated herein by
reference.
25. Within 30 days of the effective date of this Development Order, it shall
be recorded with the Clerk, Dade County Circuit Court, pursuant to
F.S. 380.06(15) (1987), specifying that the Development Order runs with
the land and is binding on the Applicant, its successors, and/or
assigns, jointly or severally.
26. The existence of this Development Order shalt not act to limit or
proscribe the rights of any person under F.S. 380 (1987) to file an
Application for Development Approval and obtain an individual
development order for property covered by this Development Order, not
withstanding the existence of this Development Order. In the event that
such an individual development order is approved and becomes effective,
17
the individual development order shall control development of the
property covered by the individual development order and the terms and
conditions of this Development Order shall no longer be binding upon the
property. Any such individual development orders shall, by their terms,
be consistent with the objectives and conditions of this Development
Order.
27. This Development Order shall not repeal, nor amend in any way, any other
currently effective development order or building permit within the
subject area previously issued by the City Commission pursuant to F.S.
380 (1987). This Development Order shall not create nor authorize the
i
creation or imposition of any additional requirements or restrictions,
with respect to any present or future development under any currently
effective Development Order or building permit issued prior hereto.
?
Notwithstanding this paragraph, the City shall continue to have whatever
authority pursuant to law it may now have or may acquire in the future
(other than by virtue of this Development Order).
28. This. Development Order shall not create nor impose any additional
requirements or restrictions upon the City with respect to its powers to
enact impact fee or assessment ordinances on development, including Net
New Development under this Development Order and future development of
the City, as such impact fees or assessments may be authorized by law.
y
'
29. In the event that a substantial deviation is determined under the terms
-'
of this Development Order or F.S. 380 (1987), the City shall retain its
—'
ability to issue building permits and Major Use Special Permits and
shall continue to do so unabated, subject to the terms and conditions of
this Development Order.
30. In the event that this Development Order is subject to litigation
wherein an injunction is issued staying the enforcement of this
Development Order, the City shall either, under this Development Order
or under the powers granted it by state law, be permitted to continue to
issue building permits, Major Use Special Permits and Certificates of
Occupancy until such time as a final resolution of the litigation
occurs.
18
,97-1149
Exhibit 1
N.W. ,� st. i ��`�
I �1
I
�' —~
_ �.� � Q •KUttuw
1 D j ! � � � � •�e`�� �' Nir
77
Lj
10
►� �' D `_'
N.W. 5 ST. I� !,m
�L ! ��
Ulm
Wpow
MAGLER ST �—
r
Il°
DOWNTOWN MIAMI DRI BOUNDARY MAP 97-1149
11►A
EXHIBIT 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
t
Begin at the intersection of the centerlines of N.W. 5th Street and
N.W. 3rd Avenue (east side of N-S Expressway (I-95)), said point of
beginning also being the N.W. corner of the district; thence run
southerly along the center line of N.W. 3rd Avenue and the easterly side
x..
b;
of the N-S Expressway to the centerline of West Flagler Street; thence
westerly along the centerline of said West Flagler Street to the
centerline of the Miami River; thence meandering southeasterly along the
centerline of said Miami River to a point of intersection with the
easterly right-of-way (R/W) line of Metro Rapid Transit R/W (formerly
Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad R/W) said R/W line being 50 feet
easterly of and parallel with the centerline of said Metro Rapid Transit
Y
R/W; thence run southerly and southwesterly along said easterly R/W line
t
of Metro Rapid Transit to the intersection with the centerline of S.W.
15th Road; thence southeasterly along the centerline of 15th Road to a
point of intersection with the southerly prolongation of the westerly
line of COSTA BELLA DEVELOPMENT SUBDIVISION (107-14); thence
northeasterly, northwesterly and northeasterly along said westerly line
of COSTA BELLA to the intersection with the southerly right-of-way line
of S.E. 14th Lane; thence southeasterly, northeasterly, northerly, and
northwesterly along said southerly and westerly right-of-way line of
S.E. 14th Lane and S.E. 14th Terrace to the intersection with the
northwesterly property line of Lot 31 Block 2 of Amended Plat of POINT
VIEW as recorded in Plat Book 2 at Page 93 of the Public Records of Dade
County, Florida; thence northeasterly along the northwesterly line of
said Lot 31 to the northeasterly side of the existing ten foot alley in
Block 2 of said POINT VIEW; thence southeasterly along the northeasterly
side of said ten foot alley to the intersection with the property line
between Lots 4 and 5 of said Block 2 of POINT VIEW; thence northeasterly
along said line of Lots 4 and 5 and its prolongation thereof to the
centerline of S.E. 14th Street; thence southeasterly along said
centerline of S.E. 14th Street to a point of intersection with the
existing bulkhead and shoreline of Biscayne Bay; thence meandering
northerly along the existing bulkhead and shoreline of Biscayne Bay to a
point of intersection with the southerly boundary of Claughton Island
19
9 7-1149
Bridge; then. easterly along the said southi, y R/W line of Claughton _
i
Island Bridge to the intersection with the westerly bulkhead line of
Claughton Island, said bulkhead line being part of the Metropolitan Dade
i
County Bulkhead Line as recorded in Plat Book 73 at Page 18 of the
Public Records; thence southerly, easterly; northerly and westerly,
following said existing bulkhead and its westerly prolongation thereof
c'
around the island to the intersection with the mainland on the easterly
�f
,,
shoreline of Biscayne Bay; thence meandering in a northwesterly and
westerly direction along the shoreline of Biscayne Bay and the Miami
River to the intersection with the easterly R/W line of Brickell Avenue
Bridge (S.E. 2nd Avenue); thence north along said bridge to the existing
bulkhead on the northerly shoreline of the Miami River; said bulk line
1
also being the southerly boundary of the Dupont Plaza Center and Miami
Center Joint Venture property; thence northeasterly along the southerly
boundary of Dupont Plaza Center and Miami Center Joint Venture property
to a point of intersection with the easterly property line of Chopin
Associates and Miami Center Limited Partnership; said property line
being along the shoreline of Biscayne Bay; thence northerly along said
easterly property line of Chopin Associates and Miami Center Limited -_
Partnership property along Biscayne Bay to the southerly property line
i
of Bayfront Park; thence continuing northerly, northeasterly and
i
northwesterly along the bulkhead line of Bayfront Park and the Bayfront
—j
—
Park Miamarina; thence continuing northerly along the bulkhead line of
Biscayne Bay to a point of intersection with the centerline of N.E. 17th
Street extended easterly; thence westerly along the centerline of
N.E. 17th Street and its extension thereof to the easterly R/W line of
the FEC Railroad; thence southerly along the easterly R/W line of the
FEC Railroad to the limited access right-of-way of I-395; thence
southeasterly and easterly along the limited access right-of-way of
I-395 to the centerline of Biscayne Boulevard, thence southerly along
• the centerline of Biscayne Boulevard to the centerline of N.E. 5th
Street, thence westerly along the centerline and N.E. and N.W. 5th
Street to the point of beginning. The above described area contains
approximately 839 acres.
4C
` 7-1149
'0�
Bridge; then, easterly along the said south.- y R/W line of Claughton
k
Island Bridge to the intersection with the westerly bulkhead line of
} Claughton Island, said bulkhead line being part of the Metropolitan Dade
County Bulkhead Line as recorded in Plat Book 73 at Page 18 of the - -
Public Records; thence southerly, easterly, northerly and westerly, --
is
following said existing bulkhead and its westerly prolongation thereof
around the island to the intersection with the mainland on the easterly
shoreline of Biscayne Bay; thence meandering in a northwesterly and
westerly direction along the shoreline of Biscayne Bay and the Miami
River to the intersection with the easterly R/W line of Brickell Avenue
Bridge (S.E. 2nd Avenue); thence north along said bridge to the existing
bulkhead on the northerly shoreline of the Miami River; said bulk line
also being the southerly boundary of the Dupont Plaza Center and Miami
Center Joint Venture property; thence northeasterly along the southerly
boundary of Dupont Plaza Center and Miami Center Joint Venture property
5
to a point of intersection with the easterly property line of Chopin
Associates and Miami Center Limited Partnership; said property line
being along the shoreline of Biscayne Bay; thence northerly along said
easterly property line of Chopin Associates and Miami Center Limited
Partnership property along Biscayne Bay to the southerly property line
of Bayfront Park; thence continuing northerly, northeasterly and
northwesterly along the bulkhead line of Bayfront Park and the Bayfront
Park Miamarina; thence continuing northerly along the bulkhead line of
-� Biscayne Bay to a point of intersection with the centerline of N.E. 17th
Street extended easterly; thence westerly along the centerline of
N.E. 17th Street and its extension thereof to the easterly R/W line of
the FEC Railroad; thence southerly along the easterly R/W line of the
FEC Railroad to the limited access right-of-way of I-395; thence
southeasterly and easterly along the limited access right-of-way of
I-395 to the centerline of Biscayne Boulevard, thence southerly along
• the centerline of Biscayne Boulevard to the centerline of N.E. 5th
Street, thence westerly along the centerline and N.E. and N.W. 5th
Street to the point of beginning. The above described area contains
approximately 839 acres.
20
97-1149
Arl
AIN
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
BUREAU OF LAND AND WATER MANAGEMENT
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8244
(904) 486-4925
Exhibit 3
Page 1
BLWM-07-85
Subsection 380.060 6), Florida Statutes, places the
responsibility on the developer of an approved development of
regional impact (DRI) for submitting an annual report to the
local government, the Regional Planning Council the Department
of Community Affairs, and to all affected permit agencies, on the
date specified in the Development Order. The failure of a
developer to submit the report on the date specified in the
development order may result in the temporary suspension of the
development order by the local government until the annual report
is submitted to the review eaencies. This requirement applies to
all developments of regional impact which have been approved
since August 6, 1980. If you have any questions about this
required report, call the DRI Enforcement Coordinator at,
(904) 488-4925.
Please send the original completed annual report to the
designated local government official stated in the development
order with (1) copy to each of the following:'
It a) The regional planning agency of jurisdiction;
b) All affected permitting agencies;
c) Devision of Resource Planning and Management
Bureau of Land and Water Management
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Please format your Annual Status Report after the format example
provided below.
ANNUAL STATUS REPORT
Reporting Period: to
Month/Day/Year M� *nttr ay Year
Development:
Name of DRI
Location:
city County
Developer: Name:
Company Name
Address:
treeT Location
rA-
City, State, a ode
67
1—3.14.9
Exhibit 3
Page 3
SLWM-07-85
Page Three
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit 101.
6) Describe any lands purchased or optioned adjacent to the
original Development of Regional Impact site subsequent to
Issuance of the development order. Identify such land, its size,
and intended use on a site plan and map.
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit 'E'%
7) List any substantial local, state, and federal permits -
which have been obtained, applied for, or denied, during this
reporting period. Specify the agency, type of permit, and duty
for each.
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit 'F'. -
8) Assess the development's and local government;s�
continuing compliance with any conditions of approval contained
in the DRI development order.
Note: Attach as Exhibit 'G'. (See attached form)
9) Provide any information that is specifically required
by the Development Order to be included in the annual report.
10) Provide a statement certifying that all persons have
been sent copies of the annual resort in conformance with
Subsections 380.06(14) and (16), F.S.
Person co-noleting the -questionnaire:
Title:
Representing:
Ir
ee �
69
` 7-1149
J
65-B!
Planning Advisory Board
TO
CITY OF MI,AMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
i
XP1
Rodriguez, Director
FROM ng Department
November 30, 1987
OAtE FILE:
"Increment I" Development
SUBJECT Order for Downtown Miami DRI
REFERENCES:
ENCLOSURES:
It is recommended that the Planning Advisory Board recommend the attached
resolution approving the "Increment I" Development Order (DO) for the Downtown
Miami Development of Regional Impact (DRI). This DRI encompasses all of the
area within the jurisdiction of the Downtown Development Authority, with the
exception of the area known as "Park West", (which is a part of a separate DRI
application for the Southeast Overtown Park West redevelopment district).
Together with its companion item, the "Increment I" DO, this "Master" DO for
Downtown Miami will:
a. fulfill the City's final obligation under the Bayside Predevelopment
Agreement with the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA),
wherein the City would be prevented from using the new Bayf ront Park
amphitheater beginning six months after completion of the
amphitheater, unless a DO for the entire downtown is adopted;
b. provide the City with full control over approvals of large scale
development in the downtown area by eliminating individual DRI reviews
by the South Florida Regional Planning Council (SFRPC), and by usurping
the potential granted to Dade County under F.S. 380.065 (1985) to
assume responsibility for DRI reviews on behalf of the SFRPC;
c. encourage development within the downtown area by simplifying and
shortening the development approval process for large scale projects;
d. affect small scale new development as well as larger scale developments
greater than the DRI thresholds;
e. obl i gate the City to fu 1 fi 1 l numerous conditions including adopting
ordinances, providing information to developers, conducting air quality
studies, paying traffic mitigation fees, and other coordinating and
reporting functions; and
f. create for the City the same monitoring and enforcement
responsibilities that it assumes with all individual DRI projects.
Page 1 of 5
, -a.149
Planning Advisory Board
November 30, 1987
g. permit development in Downtown Miami having the following positive
economic impacts:
i. Over 44,000 construction jobs will be generated over the three
phases of projected growth through the year 2007. Increment I
will produce over 20,000 construction jobs. It is anticipated
that approximately 3,500 new permanent retail jobs, 67,000 office
Jobs, and 2,000 industrial jobs will also be generated between
1987 and 2007. Increment I accounts for approximately 50% of
these new jobs.
ii. The growth projected in this project will have a substantial
impact on the tax base of the City, the County and the School
Board. Based on 1986 millage rates and an assessment to value
ratio of 75%, over $157,00O,0O0 in new ad valorem taxes could be
realized resulting from new growth downtown from 1987 to 2007.
The City's share of this will be approximately $52,50O,000.
Increment I alone accounts for approximately $63.9 million overall
and $21.3 million for the City.
iii. Over $13,00O,0O0 in non -ad valorem revenues (permit fees, water
and sewer, Metromover assessments, etc.) could also be generated
from the projected growth. This does not include impact fees that
the City and County may assess new developments.
The "Increment I" DO differs from the "Master" 00 in that the "Increment I" DO
addresses the elements of DRI review considered by the SFRPC to require an
updated analysis approximately every 5 years. Thus, the "Increment I" DO
contains conditions of development approval concerning the two issues with
potential to constrain the future growth of downtown Miami: transportation
and air quality. The "Increment I" DO contains a completion date of December
31, 1992, but may be extended by the City Commission up to an additional 5
years without triggering a substantial deviation. Before Increment I
development is completed, it is intended that the City will file an Increment
II application including an updated transportation and air quality analysis;
however, the City Commission may elect to discontinue its role as sponsor of a
downtown -wide DRI after the C i ty' s obligations from the Increment I DO have
been fulfilled. In contrast, the "Master" 00 will be effective until at
least the year 2007, and contains conditions of development approval
concerning other infrastructure and environmental issues that do not require
incremental analysis. (Applications for approval of subsequent increments of
development under the Master DO will be required to also include updated
information on the project description, employment and economic
characteristics, wastewater treatment, water supply, solid waste disposal,
health care facilities, police service and fire protection service; however,
grounds for denial of any subsequent incremental applications will be limited
to air quality and transportation issues.)
Page 2 of 5
Planning Advisory Board
November 30, 1987
The "Increment I" DO allows the C i ty to issue Certificates of Occupancy for
the maximum amount of new development listed below as "Total Allowable
Development." There is some flexibility to increase Total Allowable
Development (up to 10%) and to trade off certain land uses between one
another, subject to the substantial deviation section of F.S.380.06.
Total Allowable Development:
Office
Government Office
Retail/Service
Hotel
Residential
Convention
Wholesale/Industrial
I nsti tuti onal
Attractions/Recreation
7,100,000 gross square feet
300,000 gross square feet
1,050,000 gross square feet
1,000 rooms
3,550 dwelling units
500,000 gross square feet
1,050,000 gross square feet
300,000 gross square feet
3,400 seats
It is intended that the City will have the flexibility to permit individual
development projects to be located anywhere within the boundaries of the
Downtown DRI, subject to local land development regulations. In addition'to
enforcing the existing comprehensive plan and zoning regulations; however, the
City may need to restrict the location or size of certain projects in order to
preserve the minimum standards for traffic and air quality imposed by state
law. Such determinations would be made on a case by case basis using the
small area traffic impact studies currently required to be submitted with
Major Use Special Permit applications under Zoning Ordinance 9500.
The "Increment I" DO will have no effect on projects that already have
building permits or their own DRI development order. In addition, individual
development projects may "opt out" of this DO in the future by obtaining their
own separate DRI development order.
The specialized conditions of approval for the "Increment I" DO, found in
paragraphs 2 through 11 on pp. 7-11 of that DO (Exhibit "A"), can be
summarized as follows:
a. Air Quality (paragraphs 2-5):
a group : New development will generate additional vehicular traffic
which will increase carbon monoxide (CO) emissions and hydrocarbon
emissions which are precursors for ozone formation. Dade County is
currently classified by the federal Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) as a non -attainment area for ozone and was, in the recent past, a
non -attainment area for CO. An existing CO monitor, located at 101 E.
Flagler Street and operated by Dade County, recorded violations of the
Page 3 of 5
1 _1.149
."A
r�
Planning Advisory Board
November 30, 1987
federal and state standards for CO concentrations between the years
1980 and 1984, and have been recording concentrations slightly below
the violation threshold since 1984.
Recommendation: The City will be required to conduct carbon monoxide
(CO) monitoring in the Omni and Bri ckel l areas to supplement data from
the existing monitor on F1 agler Street. Based upon the monitoring
data, the City is likely to subsequently be required to conduct
CO
modeling at the 10 intersections projected in the traffic study
to
operate at poor levels of service (LOS E or F). The monitoring
and
modeling must be completed by 1992 and is projected to cost
approximately $50,000 in consultant fees, which is expected to
be
funded from a proposed special fee assessment ordinance to
be
applicable to each new development seeking permits under this
DO.
Depending upon the results of the CO modeling exercise, either the City
or the individual developers seeking project approval may need
to
implement appropriate corrective measures, including such things
as
roadway improvements, parking limitations, ridesharing inducements,
and
transit enhancements. It is recommended that the special
fee
assessment ordinance for the Downtown DR I include a small fee for
air
quality induced transportation improvement needs, which would
be
rebated to developers if not needed for that purpose. If CO levels
are
predicted to violate the state and federal minimum standard
and
suitable corrective measures cannot be agreed upon, the City would be
required by the 00 to stop issuing permits for new developments in
the
subject subarea.
b. Transportation (paragraphs 6-10):
ac groun State law pro i i s local governments from issuing DRI
development orders unless it can be shown that the necessary public
infrastructure will be available coincident with the impacts of the new
development. Downtown Miami is fortunate to have most of its
infrastructure already in place, including a bus and rail transit
system; however, the State law mandates minimum "Level of Service"
standards for all major roadways that will be problematic to maintain
in the downtown area as growth continues beyond Increment I of this DO.
Approval of the Increment I growth is possible because the SFRPC, Dade
County, and the Florida Department of Transportation all agreed to
designate Downtown Miami as a "Special Transportation Area," thereby
approving a lower Level of Service standard than is otherwise applied
statewide.
Page 4 of 5
.S
87•1.149
Planning Advisory Board
November 30, 1987
Recommendation: The City would be obligated to spend $7; 543, 419 (fair
share in 1987 dollars) on certain qualified roadway capacity
improvements, as mitigation for traffic impacts projected to be created
by Increment I development. The entire sum is expected to be funded
from a special fee ordinance to be assessed on all new development
seeking permits under this DO. The DO enables the City to "contract
to pay" the $7.5 million so that payment can be extended over time
coincident with collection of the fees from individual developers. The
second major transportation related condition is that the State II
Metromover (Bri ckel l and Omni legs) must be under construction by the
end of 1992; or the City would be required to declare a substantial
deviation at that time, thereby requiring the City to submit a revised
traffic impact analysis for Increment I or an application for Increment
II. Finally, the City would be required to adopt and implement within
18 months a Transportation Control Measures (TCM) Ordinance that would
require developers to provide their tenants and visitors with
carpooling and transit information and, where applicable, to provide
onsite physical improvements to enhance transit ridership. The TCM
ordinance is also required to contain other measures yet to be agreed
upon by the City and SFRPC.
c. Dawnzoning (paragraph 11):
ac group prohibits local government from downzoning any
land which has a valid development order.
Recommendation: This DO will not
individual parcel of land unless
on that parcel. Thus the City
currently has to downzone land, u
specific development on that land
comes first.
SR/JAM/dr
dr87:249
be considered to be binding on any
development permits have been issued
would retain whatever authority it
p until the time that it approves a
or until December 31;, 1992, whichever
Page 5 of 5
87;-1149
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Matty 'Hirai DATE June 13, 1988 `«F
C� ty Clerk
SUBA,:' Stipulations of Agreement
W in Downtown DRI and
Southeast Overtown/Park West
k Joel F.. Maxw 11 REFEHEN ES DRI Appeals
f Assistant City Attorney Resolutions 87-1148, 87-1149,
IN-LOE✓a;S 88-110, 88-111, 88-447 and
388-456
i
Attached, hereto, are two additional original signed
Stipulations of Settlement and Exhibits relative to appeals of
City of Miami area -wide or downtown development orders taken by
s the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Said Stipulations
are as follows:
a. Department of Communitg Affairs vs. the City of
j
Miami, Case No. - this is t e Agreement
settling the Overtown/Park West DRI Appeal. _It
'
should -.be .filed, and copies cross-referenced, with
the following City Commission Resolutions:
1. 88-110 (approved Master Development Order),
2. 88-111 (approved Increment I),
3. 88-456 (approved Settlement);
b. Department of Community Affairs vs. City of Miami
and City of Miami Downtown Development Authority,
Case No. -16 8. This is the agreement settling
_
the Downtown DRI appeal. It should be filed, and
--
copies cross-referenced, with the following City
Commission Resolutions:
1. 87-1148 (approved Master Development Order),
2. 87-1149 (approved Increment I),
=
3. 88-447 (approved Settlement).
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
e-
Matty
Hirai
June
13, 1988
City
i
Clerk
Page
2
JEM/db/P570
cc: Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney (w/o attach.)
John J. Copelan, Jr., Deputy City Attorney (w/o attach.)
Sergio Rodriguez, Assistant City Manager (w/attach.)
Herbert J. Bailey, Assistant City Manager (w/attach.)
Matthew Schwartz, Deputy Director, Dept.
of Development (w/attach.)
Joseph J. McManus, Assistant Director
Planning Department (w/attach.)
Peter Andolina, Deputy Director, Downtown
Development Authority (w/attach)
Joyce Meyers, Planning Department (w/attach.)
Robert Sechen, Esquire (w/attach.)
STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS
Petitioner,
vs.
THE CITY OF MIAMI AND CITY
OF MIAMI DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
Respondents
CASE NO. 88-1638
STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT
The parties to this above -styled appeal, the Florida
Department of Community Affairs ("DEPARTMENT"), the City of Miami
("CITY"), and the City of Miami Downtown Development Authority,
an authority created pursuant to Chapter 65-1090, Laws of
Florida, and Section 14-25 of the City of Miami Code
("AUTHORITY"), enter the following agreement, which shall be
binding on their successors and assigns.
WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT is the state land planning
agency having the power and duty to exercise general supervision
of the administration and enforcement of Chapter 380, Florida
Statutes (F.S.) which includes provisions relating to development
of regional impact (DRI); and
—} WHEREAS, the State Comprehensive Plan has a goal to
encourage the centralization of commercial, governmental, retail,
residential, and cultural activities within downtown areas in
order to use existing infrastructure and to accomodate growth in
an orderly, efficient, and environmentally acceptable manner; and
WHEREAS, the attainment of said goal can be reached
through the policy of compact urban growth to accommodate future
development whereby full utilization may be made of existing
excess infrastructure capacity thus lessening the fiscal burden
on government to provide facilities and services over larger
areas; and
WHEREAS, in futherance of said goal, the State
Comprehensive Plan establishes policies to provide incentives to
encourage private investment in the preservation and enhancement
of downtown areas, to assist local governments in the planning,
financing, and implementation of development efforts aimed at
revitalizing distressed downtown areas, and to promote state
programs and investments which encourage redevelopment of
downtown areas; and
WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT, as the state land planning
agency, encourages the involvement of public agencies and private
groups involved in development and redevelopment of downtown
areas, provided that all impacts of development and redevelopment
are fully addressed and that provisions are made for all
facilities and services needed to support the proposed
development and redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, Downtown Miami, the largest and one of the
oldest downtown areas in the state, encompasses over 830 acres of
land area containing thousands of older deteriorating structures
in need of rehabilitation, reuse, or redevelopment; and includes
an area that has been declared to be slum and blighted, pursuant
to Chapter 163, Part III, F.S,; and
L
WHEREAS, the CITY, AUTHORITY and the DEPARTMENT entered
into a Predevelopment Agreement ("Agreement") on the June 28,
1985,; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, as amended, the
AUTHORITY prepared and timely filed an Application for
Development Approval ("ADA") for the City of Miami Downtown DRI,
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(22), F.S. (1987); and
WHEREAS, the AUTHORITY has timely filed the ADA with
the South Florida Regional Planning Council and obtained a Report
and Recommendations from the Council; and
WHEREAS, the CITY considered the ADA, the Report and
Recommendations of the South Florida Regional Planning Council,
and each element required to be considered by Section 380.06,
F.S. (1987); and
WHEREAS, the CITY and the AUTHORITY have considered the
impacts and needs created by the amounts of development by land
use as analyzed in the ADA and approved in the Increment I
development order; have provided for the necessary mitigation and
infrastructure needed to support the existing, permitted and
approved amounts in order that the approved amounts represent,
for accounting purposes, net new development; and have, thereby,
created an incentive to encourage redevelopment, rehabilitation
and reuse of existing structures; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown DRI provides an incentive for
large scale new development to locate in downtown Miami, but
could create a disincentive to small development, redevelopment
and rehabilitation of existing structures if applied
indiscriminately to all development; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission deemed it advisable and in
the best interest of the general welfare of the CITY to issue and
did issue the Master Development Order and the Increment I
Development Order, incorporated herein as Exhibit A, approving
the Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact on December 10,
1987, (hereinafter collectively "the Downtown DRI"); and
WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT pursuant to Section 380.07,
F.S., instituted this appeal of the CITY's Downtown DRI
development orders for the Downtown DRI, on February 4, 1988, and
sought to reverse the Downtown DRI development orders to the
extent that they are found by the Commission to be illegal and
violative of the provisions of Chapter 380, F.S. (1987); and
WHEREAS, the CITY, the AUTHORITY and the DEPARTMENT are
desirous of settling all issues raised in the appeal and have met
to discuss the mutual resolution of the issues raised in this
appeal. -
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises
and covenants contained herein, the parties to this appeal agree
as follows:
1. The CITY and the AUTHORITY shall abide by the terms
and conditions of this agreement. The CITY and the AUTHORITY
shall take no action in implementing and enforcing the Downtown
DRI or this Stipulation of Settlement which conflicts with the
terms and conditions of this Stipulation of Settlement and shall
utilize their best efforts to enforce and fulfill its terms and
conditions.
2. The CITY and the AUTHORITY shall include all
development, as defined by Section 380.04, F.S. (1987), in
implementing the conditions of the Downtown DRI in accordance
with, and limited by, the terms of Exhibit 8, attached hereto and
made a part hereof.
3. The term Total Allowable Development need not
include redevelopment or rehabilitation and reuse of existing
structures on individual parcels, as represented in the Downtown
DRI, because the methodology in the ADA for accounting for the
impacts of the existing, including previously approved and
permitted, amounts of development furthers the goals listed
above. The CITY and the AUTHORITY agree to maintain detailed
records concerning all development, as defined pursuant to
Section 380.04, F.S. (1987), including any redevelopment, and all
maximum 100000 square foot exemptions granted by the Planning
Director, that are excluded from Net New Development. The
cumulative sum of the exclusions made pursuant to the maximum _
10,000 square foot exemption shall be termed the "Aggregate
Exclusion" and shall be reported in the Annual Report to the
DEPARTMENT.
The CITY and the AUTHORITY agree that maximum 10,000
square foot exclusions from Net New Development will not be
granted to any development on a parcel where the amount of the
proposed new construction exceeds 10,000 total square feet. The
intent of this language is to clarify those developments which
would be eligible for the granting of an exclusion from Net New
Development by the Planning Director under the procedures as
outlined in the Downtown DRI.
4. When the sum of the approved Aggregate Exclusion and
the total amount of Net New Development equals the Total _
Allowable Development, then the CITY and AUTHORITY agree to _
amend, pursuant to the provisions of Subsection 380.06(19), F.S.,
the Incremental development order, by seeking approval for
additional development by an amount that equals or exceeds the
amount of the approved Aggregate Exclusion development, and, if
necessary, to re-evaluate the Increment I development order
conditions based on the regional impact review. The CITY shall
demonstrate that all impacts resulting from such proposed
development will be adequately mitigated and that public -
facilities necessary to serve that development will be
available. The CITY, the AUTHORITY and the DEPARTMENT agree that
nothing in the above language shall preclude the CITY from
proposing a change to the Downtown DRI under Subsection
380.06(19), F.S., prior to the time that the above thresholds are
met.
5. In the event that a proposed change is requested as
a Substantial Deviation, or a Substantial Deviation is declared,
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(19), F.S. (1987), the CITY may
continue to issue building permits and Major Use Special Permits
so long as such permits are issued as a result of any one of the
following: (a) a Predevelopment Agreement between the CITY and
the DEPARTMENT, or (b) the permits and the development allowed by
them are not affected by the proposed change which brought about
the request for a Substantial Deviation.
- 6. The CITY and the AUTHORITY specifically agree that
the provisions of paragraph 39 of the Master Development Order
and paragraph 30 of the Increment I Development Order will be
inapplicable and inadmissible in any litigation brought by the
DEPARTMENT in any injunctive action concerning Chapter 380, F.S.,
(1987) and the CITY and AUTHORITY hereby waive said right
purportedly granted by those paragraphs solely as to the
DEPARTMENT.
7. The CITY and the AUTHORITY shall not rescind the
Master Development Order pursuant to paragraph 40 of that Order
at the completion of the Increment I Development Order until the
CITY and AUTHORITY have fulfilled the mitigation requirements of
the Increment I Development Order.
S. The DEPARTMENT has received the Consolidated
Application for Development Approval (CADA) from the CITY and the
AUTHORITY. The DEPARTMENT agrees that submittal of the CADA is
no longer an issue of the appeal.
9. The parties agree that the Downtown DRI development
orders as approved shall be clarified by the terms of this
Stipulation of Settlement. This stipulation shall become
effective upon the filing, by the Department, of a Notice of
r
i Voluntary Dismissal with the Division of Administrative Hearings.
10. The rights and obligations of the parties hereto
shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the
I successors and assigns of the parties.
11. The date of execution of this agreement shall be
the date that the last party signs and acknowledges this
agreement.
12. Each party of this proceeding shall bear its own
costs, including attorney's fees.
13. The CITY and AUTHORITY agree to record this
Stipulation simultaneously with the Master Development Order and
the Increment 1 Development Order in the public records of Dade
County, Florida. A copy of the recorded Stipulation shall be
provided to the Department within 30 days after the effective
date of the Stipulation.
Approved/as to form and legal
sufficiXPcy:
Lucia h. Dougherty, {
City Attornery, City of Miami
WITNESS:,
---V/w
WITNESS:
CITY OF MI JI
By: �' L �•
Cesar *atty
ity Manager
Attested byi, City Clerk
The foregoi_pg instrument was acknowledge for me this
g?3tb day of b 4= �-- �'• 1 •
Notary Public, State of Florida
Notary Public State of Florida
My commission expirewco m;ssion Ex .Apr.26,
1990 olns.Und d Inneral
Approved as to form and legal
Sufficien -
lip
_ 8
o
y nz e, ive Director
Downtown DevqX41pment Authority
WITNESS. S�LZA
WITNESS:
STATE OF FLORIDA
The foregoingtrument was knowl g beforg me this
-aday of by
r
otary PAllc,, Stake of Florida
My commission expires:
Notary Pux• Steve cf Rom+
Com�w moues Wce 17,1g31
A
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF
Approved as to form and legal
Sufficiency:
urence Kejwdey, Gen al
Counsel, Mpartment of
Community Affairs
WITNESS:
WITNESS:
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF LEON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
By • a&690A . l�' C.
Thomas G. Pelham, Secretary
2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
T e forego nq inst ume was cl owledg a me s
day o , by ,
o the Depart*of of Community Affairs, an agencyof the state of
Florida, on beTialf of the Department. ,
Notary Public, State of Florida
My commission expires:
^1
EXHIBIT "B"
MASTER DO CONDITIONS
2. Within 6 months of the effective date of this Development Order, adopt
and implement a uniform ordinance that incorporates a requirement that
Net New Developments shall mulch, spray or plant grass in exposed areas
to prevent soil erosion and minimize air pollution during construction.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, other than (b.).
(b.) Exceptions for development with exposed areas of less than 5,000
square feet; or areas that will be exposed for 90 days or less.
3. Within 6 months of the effective date of this Development Order, adopt
and implement a uniform ordinance that incorporates a requirement that
Net New Developments shall place temporary screens, berms, and/or rip -
rap around sites under construction to filter or retain stormwater _
runoff during construction. ' -
Appl icabiI ity:
(a.) All development, other than (b.).
(b.) Exceptions for renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
structure or land improvement; new structures or additions to
existing structures of less than 10,000 square feet; or where
existing drainage facilities are adequate to retain stormwater
within the site.
4. Within 6 months of the effective date of this Development Order, adopt
and implement a uniform ordinance or establish an accepted procedure to
require Net New Developments to design, construct and maintain
stormwater management systems to meet the following standards:
a. Retain the runoff from at least a 5-year storm on each Parcel of
Land wherever feasible and construct drainage systems as proposed in the
Consolidated Application for Development Approval (CADA). Consistent
Page 1 of 10
with the CADA, individual drainage systems must be designed to retain at
least the first one -inch of stormwater runoff within drainage wells and
exfi 1 tration trenches.
all
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 0-4 of the "Public Works Manual" of Dade
County and the South Florida Water Management District Rules.
b. Install pollutant retardant structures (catch basin with down -turned
inlet pipe or other Dade County DERM-approved device) to treat all
stormwater runoff at each individual drainage structure and/or well, and
periodically remove pollutant accumulations.
Applicability:
(a.) All development except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM
pursuant to the South Florida Water Management District Rules.
c. Limit application of pesticides and fertilizers in vegetated storm
water retention areas to once per year for preventive maintenance and to
emergencies, such as uncontrolled insect infestation.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, other than (b.).
(b.) Exceptions for renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
structure or land improvement; new structures or additions to
existing structures of less than 10,000 square feet; excavation;
demolition; or deposit of fill.
d. Vacuum sweep all parking lots of eleven or more vehicle spaces and
private roadways serving the parking lots at least once per week.
Page 2 of 10
Applicability:
- (a.) All development, other than (b.).
(b.) Exceptions for renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
— ' structure or land improvement; new structures or additions to
,
existing structures of less than 10,000 square feet; excavation;
— demolition; or deposit of fill.
e. Both during and following construction, prevent the direct flow of
stormwater runoff (that has not been pre-treated pursuant to Condition
4a. above) into surface waters.
Applicability:
— (a.) All development, other than (b.).
_ (b.) Exceptions for renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
:f structure or land improvement; new structures or additions to
' existing structures of less than 10,000 square feet; or where
existing drainage facilities are adequate to retain stormwater
within the site.
s
5. Require Net New Development to comply with Dade County hazardous waste
requirements by the adoption and implementation of a uniform ordinance,
as may be found by the City to be applicable and necessary, providing
for hazardous materials accident prevention, mitigation, and response
standards, as described in a. through h. below. These standards shall
be maintained by individual developers who shall require by lease
agreement or building rule that all tenants classified by a SIC code
-1 listed in Appendix 12A-8 of the CADA, incorporated herein by reference,
that use, handle, store, display, or generate hazardous materials
(materials that are ignitable, corrosive, toxic, or reactive), including
those identified on page 6 of Appendix 12A-8 of the CADA comply
with these standards; provided however, that the uses in and the wastes
listed in Appendix 12A-8 of the CADA shall be simultaneously amended
upon the addition or deletion of any or all of the listed uses,
materials, or wastes by amendment to the "County and Regional Hazardous
Page 3 of 10
Waste Assessment Guidelines" incorporated by Rule 17-31.03(2), Florida
Administrative Code. At a minimum, these standards shall:
a. Require that buildings or portions of buildings where hazardous
materials or hazardous wastes, as defined above, are to be used,
displayed, handled, generated, or stored shall be constructed with
impervious floors, without drains, to ensure containment and facilitate
cleanup of any spill or leakage.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code.
b. Prohibit any outside storage of hazardous materials or hazardous
waste. The exception to this condition is for retail goods typically
associated with residential nursery activity, such as lawn fertilizers
and garden pesticides. Those areas used for the storage of these goods
are subject to the requirement contained in Condition 5c. below.
Applicability:
i
j (a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
j pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code.
C. Require that any area used for loading and/or unloading of hazardous
material be covered and equipped with a collection system to contain
leakage and accidental spills.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code.
d. Require all hazardous waste generators to contract with a licensed
public or private hazardous waste disposal service or processing
facility and provide Dade County DERM copies of the following forms of
documentation or proper hazardous waste management practices
- a hazardous waste manifest;
- a shipment to a permitted hazardous waste management facility;
or
- a confirmation of receipt of materials from a recyci er or a
waste exchange operation.
Page 4 of 10
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code.
e. Prohibit generation of hazardous effluents, unl ess adequate
s facilities, approved by Dade County DERM and Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation, are constructed and used by tenants generating
such effluents.
Applicability:
(a.) All development; except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code and
regulations of FDER.
f. Dispose of hazardous sludge materials generated by effluent
pre-treatment in a manner approved by the Federal Environmental
Protection Agency and the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code and regulation
of FDER and EPA.
g. Notify any tenant generating wastes of the penalties for improper
disposal of hazardous waste pursuant to F.S. 403.727.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code.
h. Allow reasonable access to facilities for monitoring by Dade County
DERM; Council staff; and the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation to assure compliance with this Development Order and all
applicable laws and regulations.
Page 5 of 10
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as may be exempted by Dade County DERM,
pursuant to Section 24-35.1 of the Dade County Code.
6. Enact an ordinance requiring Net New Development to remove all invasive
exotic plants, including Melaleuca, Casuarina, and Brasilian Pepper,
from their Parcel of Land as the parcel is cleared, and use only those
plant species identified in Appendix 8-4 of the CADA for landscaping.
Additional species may be used only if written approval is provided by
Council staff. Such approval will be based on the species under
consideration meeting the following criteria:
- does not require excessive irrigation
- does not require excessive fertilizer application
- is not prone to insect infestation or other pests
- is not prone to disease
- does not have invasive root systems
- such other criteria as may be appropriate.
Applicability:
(a.) Removal of invasive species applicable to all development.
(b.) Use of species listed in Appendix 8-4 of the CADA applicable to
all development, other than (c.).
(c.) Exceptions for renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
structure or land improvement; new structures or additions
to existing structures of 1 ess than 10,000 square feet;
excavation; demolition; or deposit of fill.
8. Direct the City Manager to establish procedures whereby the Police
Department and Fire Department shall make recommendations to incorporate
security measures into the design and operation of Net New Development.
Appl i cabi 1 i ty :
(a.) All development, other than (b.).
Page 6 of 10
(b.) Exceptions for Police Department recommendations for excavations
or deposit of fill.
9. Collaborate with the Dade County School Board, by providing planning
information and information on Net New Development of residential units,
to address concerns regarding the availability and access to schools for
students from future residential development within the project area.
Applicability:
(a.) All residential development.
10. Encourage the incorporation of energy conservation measures into the
design and operation of Net New Development by requiring that, at a
minimum, all Net New Development shall be constructed in conformance
with the specifications of the State of Florida Energy Efficiency Code
for Building Construction (State Energy Code).
Applicability:
(a.) All development, except as excluded within the State Energy Code.
15. Withhold the issuance of building permits for Net New Development that
cannot obtain a letter of availability from the appropriate agency that
wastewater treatment capacity will be sufficient to meet the needs of
that development.
Applicability:
(a.) All development that requires an increase in gallonage of
wastewater.
16. Withhold the issuance of building permits for Net New Development that
cannot obtain a letter of availability from the appropriate agency that
an adequate water supply will be available to meet the needs of that
dev el opment.
Applicability:
(a.) All development that requires an increase in gallonage of water.
Page 7 of 10
y
17. Withhold the issuance of building permits for Net New Development that
cannot obtain a letter of availability from the appropriate agency that
solid waste disposal capacity will be sufficient to meet the needs of
that development.
Applicability:
(a.) All development that requires an increase in volume of solid
waste.
INCREMW 100 CONDITIONS
5. If the results of the air quality modeling study, as described in
Condition 3 above, exceed State standards for CO concentrations, do one
of the following:
a. Provide acceptable documentation which clearly indicates that CO
exceedences will not occur; or that the Net New Development seeking
approval will not contribute to the predicted CO violation, or that any
potential CO additions for each Net New Development have been or will be
mitigated ( according to Council staff and the City subsequent to review
and comment by FOR and DERM) prior to issuance of building permits for
the particular Net New Development. Such documentation may include a
modeling study which incorporates measures such as those contained in
Condition 4a., b., and c., above. This documentation must be approved
by the Council staff and the City subsequent to review and comment by
FDER and DERM.
b. Withhold the issuance of any building permits for Net New
Development within the sub -area that shows CO exceedences.
Applicability:
(a.) All development, other than (b.).
(b.) Exceptions for renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
I. structure or land improvement; new structures or additions to
existing structures of less than 10,000 square feet where such new
structures or additions are projected to generate a net increase
of 5 or less peak hour motor vehicle trips; excavation;
demolition; deposit of fill; or redevelopment where redevelopment
Page 8 of 10
redevelopment means any new construction that replaces, with an
equal
or
lesser
amount of square footage,
an existing structure
that
had
a valid
certificate of occupancy on
the effective date of
the Increment I Development Order.
9. Within 6 months of the effective date of this Development Order, prepare
and recommend to the Miami City Commission a Transportation Control
Measure (TCM) Ordinance, which shall require Net New Development to do
the following:
a. actively encourage and promote car and van pooling by establishing
or participating in a car pool information program, and
b. provide mass transit route and schedule information in convenient
locations throughout the individual development, and
C. encourage mass transit use by the provision of bus shelters, bus
turnout lanes, or other amenities to increase transit ridership.
In addition, the TCM Ordinance shall include other appropriate
transportation control measures to be selected from but not be limited
to the list entitled Table 4.9 - Potential Transportation Control
Measures (TCM's) for Downtown Miami" on page 4-22(R) of the CADA. The
TCM ordinance must be approved by Council with input from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and the Florida Department of
s
Transportation.
{
Applicability:
(a.) "a." and "b." above applicable to all development, other than
(b.). "c." above must be applied with discretion to only those
developments where specific transit amenities are needed and where
the scope and cost of the construction would justify the expense
of providing the specific transit amenity.
(b.) Exceptions for' renovation of existing structures or land
improvements; change of use or intensity of use of an existing
structure or land improvement; new structures or additions to
existing structures of less than 10,000 square feet; excavation;
demolition; or deposit of fill.
Page 9 of 10
(c.) The TCM ordinance will be presented to the South Florida Regional
Planning Council prior to adoption, and the applicability will be
addressed at that time.
Page 10 of 10
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM n
JAN I 1 F1112: �
To. Matty Hirai DATE -January 8, 1988 _ FILE. '
City Clerk PliA 1 T °t i.R.A
Attention: Sylvia Lowman SUBJECT: Resolution NoC'Tq't1+�-Kw.
fM D put Ci y/Clerk and ResoluEikl>' )FWgW,49
Y7-
FROM4A.83
Eaxwell REFERENCES: City Commission Meeting
stant City Attorney December 10, 1987; Downtown
ENCLOSURES: DRI
Pursuant t our telephone conversations of yesterday, I am
submitting to your office, for insertion in the subject
resolutions, five new original pages. These pages correct
scrivener's errors and do not, in any way, make material changes
in the resolutions. In fact, the only changes on any of the
pages is the removal of inadvertent un�cerlining which occurred
during the printout process.
Because the pages do not contain substantive changes, you
may insert these pages into the original documents in your files
and discard the pages that they replace. It is not necessary to
notify any of the agencies of this action because of its
immateriality.
Pages 12 and 19 of Resolution No. 87-1148 should be replaced
by the new original pages 12 and 19 tFat accompany this
memorandum. I have taken the liberty of penciling in on said
pages 12 and 19, Resolution No. "87-1148" so that there will be
no confusion as to which resolution these pages are intended for.
Pages 12, 17 and 18 of Resolution 87-1149 also have been
identified by the pencil notation "87-1149." —
JEM/db/P450
Attachments
cc: Sergio Rodriguez, Director, Planning Department
Attention: Joyce Meyers, Planning Consultant
Peter Andolina, Assistant Dir., Downtown Dev. Authority
Robert Sechen, Esquire
t
E
5�
8 7--1149
F�
f
f
k
r,.
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
65mm"B j-
TO Honorable Mayor and Members of DATE. December 8, 1987 FILE:
the City Commission
do -
FROM Rodriguez, Director
ng Department
SUBJECT. Development Order for Downtown
Miami DRI - Increment I
REFERENCES:
Agenda Item 65-B
ENCLOSURES.
Attached is a copy of Agenda Item 65-8, the
Increment I Development Order for the Downtown
Miami DRI, which may have been inadvertently
omitted from your agenda package.
SR/JAM/dr
dr87:254
Y
i
1
I
t
I_
1�
., M% '° F
'sin•
.<w
¢
T
-
INTRODUCTION
This assessment of the proposed Downtown Miami - Increment I development
has been prepared by the South Florida Regional Planning.Council, as
required by the Florida Environmental Land and Water Management Act for
all Developments of Regional Impact.
The assessment is based on information supplied by the Applicant, Dade
County, and the City of Miami staff, official plans, consultants, and
field inspection. Additional research relative to specific issues was
conducted by Council staff where needed.
In accordance with the Act, this assessment provides an overview of the
positive and negative impacts likely to result from the proposal. The
recommendations are intended to assist the City Commission in reaching a
decision on the proposed development through consideration of regional,
in addition to local, impacts and issues.
Copies of any "development order" (an order granting, denying, or
granting with conditions an application for a development permit) issued
with regard to this project must be transmitted to the South Florida
Regional Planning Council and the Florida Department of Community
Affairs.
8'7--1149
r
Holi 9-0
j .�.
PART I - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A.
B.
r
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Project Name: Downtown Miami - Increment I
Applicant: Downtown Development Authority; City of Miami
Suite 1818
One Biscayne Tower
Miami, Florida 33131
Date of Acceptance of Application: August 14, 1987
Date of Receipt of Local Public gearing Notice: September 219 1987
Deadline for Council Action: November 9, 1987
Date of Local Public gearing: November 12, 1987
Type of Development: Mixed -use
Location of Development: City of Miami
It
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Miami development has undertaken a Development of
Regional Impact for a portion of the City within the jurisdiction of
the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) pursuant to s. 380.06(22),
F.S. The DDA, an authority of the City of Miami, as the Applicant,
has proposed to have the Downtown Miami DRI be reviewed as a
Master/Incremental development pursuant to s. 380.06(21), F.S., and
Rule 9J-2.28, F.A.C., which states the following:
If a proposed development is planned for development over an
extended period of time, the developer may file an application
for master development approval of the project and agree to
present subsequent increments of the development for
preconstruction review.
N
8'7-IL149
4
f
It is further stipulated in s. 380.06(21), F.S., that the
Development Order for a Master ADA shall specify the information
which must be submitted with an Incremental ADA and shall specify
those issues which can result in the denial of an Incremental ADA.
The recommendations contained in this impact assessment report
Include a breakdown of those issues which are dealt with in a Master
Plan Development Order (DO) from those issues vhich will be dealt
with in future Incremental Plan Development Orders. The
recommendations contained in this impact assessment report deal with
only -those issues which vere defined for preconstruction review for
Incremental ADAs in the Downtown Miami - Muster Impact Assessment
Report. Those issues to be part of the Downtown Miami - Increment I
Development Order will be discussed in the body of this report.
Other issues which cover the entire Downtown Miami development,
including Increment I, have been discussed in the Downtown Miami -
Master Impact Assessment Report.
The DDA District encompasses approximately 1.6 square miles. The
district is generally bounded by SS/SW 15th Road on the south,
Biscayne Bay on the east, NE/NV 17th Street on the north, and the
Metrorail alignment, the F.S.C. Railroad, and NV 3rd Avenue on the
vest (Figure 1). For the purposes of review, the DDA District has
been divided into four sub -areas:
3
I
8'7s-1149
LW
Y
jp.0
)AN
J
#071A
176
FLORIDASOUTH
REGIONAL
COUNCIL
i
PROJECT
rwM•.1•• •
IM �./•M
�
� f
YJ•�wr% ���
•
•l
/
\
r
r TJ
I
•
.�
`
• �j.
Y
l..
• rl� r r•
r
,
LOCATION MAP
Source:AOA
I
r_
FIGURE
1 �t-
NOT TO
SCALE
J 'rye,•,
k
A jL
Aft
r
1) Central Business District (CBD)
2) Brickell
3) Omni
4) Park Vest
The Park Vest sub-area'is being revieved as a separate DRI and is
not included as vithin the area of reviev of this assessment. The
other three sub -areas make up the area of reviev of this assessment
and are shove in greater detail in Figures 2-4.
The project area currently contains development as shove in Table I.
two 1 •
dal &
Government Retail/service Attraction/
Office Space Speee Botel Residential Institutional Recreation
(SQ. Ft.) (SA. Ft.) Ro= s) (SQ. Ft.) . Ft.
1498409600 417220700 6,5M 39075 349400 59000
BMW: ADA
For additional development vithin the study area, the analysis has
been broken into three phases spanning the period 1987-2007.
Increment I development consists of the first phase proposed for
construction during the period 1987-1992. The amount of development
proposed for Increment I is shovn in Table 2. The development
5
• .-Ate..,.-. e...
ti
8'7-1149
f
IL
r
S.
�
w
EFF
:to
0
h
N
z.
4 1 3M
J - -�
J
,
-Lip
.
■ --
ONE
•
-:.
:1IM11■
Rum
V!i ir=
z=
�IItr11 ""
Min,
nil _I
M
_i.177
■n- imn
=iPlump
■ EMU: r
.�
•�� �
��
'.
cI-IRIPS
-�1
W,
s
\AW
proposed for Increment I is further broken into sub -areas in Table
3. The Master Development Plan is shove as Figure 5.
Sub -Area land [1se Phase I
Omni: Office
1,000,000 S.F
Govm=wt Office
1501000 S.F.
Retail/Service
5090M S.F.
Hotel
0 Rms.
Residential
S00 Mb
Convention
25090M S.F.
Wholesale/Industrial
1,000,000 S.F.
®D: Office
3,100,000 S.F.
Govetnmt Office
150,000 S.F.
Retail/Service
6509000 S.F.
Hotel
M Rms.
Residential
1,000 DDs
Convention
25090M S.P.
ftlesal,eJIndustrial
509000 S.F.
Institutional
30090M S.F.
Attractions/Recreation
3,400 Seats
Brick)ell: Office
3,000,000 S.F.
Retail/Service
350,00D S.F.
Hotel
350 Rms.
Residential
29050 ab
Wig: ADA
10
N
r
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
Title
Pane
1
Existing Development .......................................
5
2
Increment I Proposed Development ...........................
9
3
Increment I Proposed Development by Sub -Area ...............
10
4
Construction Costs .........................................
14
5
Permanent Employment .......................................
15
Permanent Employment Impacts ...............................
16
w6
I
F i s cal Im pac is . . • .... . .. . . . . .. . . . ........ . ... . ........ 0 . .. ,
17
8
Water, Vastewater, and Solid Waste .........................
18
9
Police, Fire, and Emergency Medical Services ..............0
19
10
Existing Traffic Conditions - Segments Operating
at or Below LOS "E"........................................
22
11
Committed Transportation Improvements ......................
24
12
Constrained Roadways .......................................
28
13
Proposed Development Program ...............................
29
14
On -Site Improvements Needed to Accommodate Project
and Other Traffic Impacts ..................................
32
87. 1149
1
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit No. Title Page
1 Metromover • Stage II Improv,,ments ........................ 65 =-
i
2 Master Development Plan ................................... 66
3 Annual Status Report Form..............................0.0 67
t_
r
8'7--1149
w
Y
u
4
i
i
i
t
LIST OF FIGURES
FiR_ure No. Title
Page
1
Location Map ...............................................
4
2
Central Business District Sub -Area .........................
6
3
Brickell Sub -Area
7
...............................,..........
—
4
Omni Sub -Area ..............................................
g
5
Master Development Plan ....................................
11
bTraffic
Impact Area ........................................
21
i
1
97--1149
1
x
VA At
MU1
r�
65 B
DRAFT REPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENT -
FOR
DOWNTOWN MIAM1 • INCREMENT I
Located in the City of Miami
73.05
E
t
i
's
SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL —
1
October 5, 1987
97 -1149
f
r
E, E
wy—mp rnr
TABLE OF CONTENTS !�
Page '_--
LISTOF
FIGURES.......................................................
i
LISTOF
TABLES........................................................-
LISTOF
EXHIBITS.......................................................
INTRODUCTION..........................................................
1
PARTI.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................
2
A. APPLICANT INFORMATION .... ......... .....:...............
2
B. PROJECT INFORMATION ....................................
2
PARTII.
PROJECT IMPACTS AND ISSUES .................................
12
A. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES ......................
12
B. ECONOMY ................................................
14
C. PUBLIC FACILITIES ......................................
18
D. TRANSPORTATION .........................................
20
PART
III.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER REVIEWING AGENCIES .....................
34 =—
PARTIV.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................
44
8'7. 1149
r S
f
ice_ ssso
M% 1 / I
NV1 10 St---
NIA 9 Sr===�m� :; \ICE --
r
N%V 8 SI : �!---
NW 7 ST �--
NW 6 ST�sss--=�i :--r—
N%'1' S St' Zcae '—
• N%% 3 St--
v�� 2 S1
,V�V 1 Sire �♦'• • ¢si� U � t=
SW 1 Si EE
S%% 2 Sf S% 3 SL.—�,.
S% 4 Sim: = -
S% 5 ST
SW 7 St. `
S%% 8 Si
i
SOUTH
FLORDA
REGIONAL
COUNCIL
ZZ
....::
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Central Commercial
f
Government office
High Intensity
Institutional
®General
Commercial
Moderate Intensity
Special Mixed Use
Liberal Commercial
-Wholesale 'Industrialr1mma
n"%
parks
Source: Applicua
FIGURE
5
NOT TO
SCALE
iit
PART II - PROJECT IMPACTS AND ISSUES
A. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
1. Sum
Impacts of the proposed development on the environment and
natural resources vere addressed in the Dovntovn Miami - Master
Impact Assessment Report. The exception to this is air quality
impacts which are addressed below.
2. Air Quality
The Applicant has submitted an air quality study for the
Dovntovn Miami Areavide Development of Regional Impact. The
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER), Dade
County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM),
and Council staff have evaluated the study.
The study contains sufficient documentation of past and current
air quality data obtained through 1987 (existing conditions).
Data is obtained from an existing air quality monitoring site
operated by DERM as part of a County -vide carbon monoxide (CO)
monitoring netvork. The monitor, located in the Central
Business District (CBD), has recorded exceedences of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards for CO in the
years 1983-85. Since 1986, one exceedence of the EPA standards
12
8 7-1149
WL
for CO has been recorded in Dade County. The reduction of CO
concentrations has been attributed to the Federal Motor Vehicle
Control Program.
Sovever, if acceptable air quality standards are again
exceeded, then the EPA may designate Dade and Brovard Counties
as non -attainment areas for carbon monoxide. In the event that
this designation occurs, the Counties vould be required to
develop plans to reduce carbon monoxide to acceptable levels.
This could involve a loss of Federal funding,*constructing
. additional roadvay improvements in the area, and/or
establishing a vehicle inspection and maintenance program to
monitor vehicle emissions.
With the possibility of air quality violations associated vith
areavide development, coupled vith the potential cost to the
Region, it is recommended that the Applicant implement an air
quality monitoring and abatement program. In addition, it is
recommended that the Applicant conduct an air quality modeling
study to determine vhat, if any, changes are needed in the
monitoring netvork, including an assessment of the need to
continue monitoring. Conditions 1 through 4 in Part IV of this
report address air quality issues.
13
TIM
87-1149
E
1
B. ECONOMY
1. Summer
Impacts of the overall proposed development on the economy has
been addressed in the Dovntown Miami - Master Impact Assessment
Report. The impacts of the Increment I proposed development on
the economy are addressed below.
2. Project Costs
Table 4 summarizes project costs, including construction
employment.
TOE 4
M SII=ON COSTSk
f
Cost Item
Incremt I Total Percent in Rggicn
Lard
$ 578,0419200
100
Labor
491,626,692
100
Materials'
19008,333,144
70
Interest
129,642,833
70
Peary
PLyrdN
50.416,657
50
�1'AL
3292589O6O952b
84%
1 Construction &Flom - 20,413 a plgmie-years
Construction Wages - $24,O84 per emplayee-year
* 1997 dollars
SOEEM: AM
14
I
9 7--1149
I}
iu
-'fir. '�Llr`t➢F�r
RR
¢
I I� $y� F T• X
Tt'
3. Permanent Employment
Table 5 summarizes the project's permanent employment.
TAM 5
PERMl W Fly DMW OAAW of BRAOYees)
Retail Office Industrial Total
Incremmt I 1,553 329886 19051 359490
90tRM: AOA, SFM
About 25 percent of the jobs, 8,873 employees, can be -
considered nev to the Region. Table 6 summarizes the indirect
and induced effects of these nev employees for Increment I
development.
4. Fiscal Impact
Table 7 summarizes the projected fiscal impacts of Increment I
on the Region using 1986 millage rates and historical average
expenditure rates.
15
8 7-1149
s
i
t!
r_
F�
ram--
TABLE 6
PFRMAI= DRDMW WAM
A. EMPLOYMENT
SO. FLA,
PALM
BROWARD
DADE MONROE
REGION
BEACH F-
AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY. FISHING*
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
AGRICULTURAL SERVICES
23.
34.
8.
65.
24.
MINING
2.
5.
0.
6.
0. -
CONSTRUCTION
170.
273.
7.
451,
94.
MANUFACTURING
247.
950.
2.
1199.
211.
TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES
240.
1264.
11.
1515.
114.
WHOLESALE TRADE
112.
612.
4,
728.
97.
RETAIL TRADE
1602.
4080.
98.
5779.
843.
FINANCE„ INS. AND REAL ESTATE
1620.
8554.
40.
10214.
762.
SERVICES
2001.
12221,
94.
14317.
1044.
GOVERMENT*
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
TOTAL
6019.
27992.
265.
34276.
3149.
Be TOTAL, WAGES (1000 S)
AGRICULTURE. FORESTRY, FISHING
60.
200.
0.
259.
593.
AGRICULTURAL SERVICES
151.
253.
56.
460.
167.
MINING
20.
46.
3.
70.
36.
CONSTRUCTION
1p44.
2772.
107.
4822.
1095.
MANUFACTURING
2299.
9882.
36.
12216.
1587. --
TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES
3700.
16307.
227.
20235.
1782.
WHOLESALE TRADE
1270.
7119.
81.
8471.
758.
RETAIL TRADE
9326.
22668.
681.
32875.
4800.
FINANCE, INS. AND REAL ESTATE
9022.
107200.
'311.
116532.
4798.
SERVICES
18208.
140440.
1232.
159880.
10086.
GOVERMENT
1232.
2882.
75.
4188.
695.
TOTAL
47431.
309769.
2809.
360008.
26398.
C. VALUE OF OUTPUT (1000 S)
-
AGRICULTURE. FORESTRY, FISHING
286.
958.
0.
1244.
2845. -
AGRICULTURAL SERVICES
424,
712.
158.
1294.
470.
MINING
$4.
190.
14,
288.
149.
CONSTRUCTION
12496.
17817.
687.
31000.
7040. -
MANUFACTURING
11843.
50910.
185.
62938.
8176.
TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES
11633.
51267.
714.
63614.
5601.
WHOLESALE TRADE
2487.
13941.
159.
16587.
1485. -
RETAIL TRADE
21537.
51250.
1539.
74326.
10852.
FINANCE, INS. AND REAL ESTATE
49858.
592440.
1717.
644015.
26518. -
SERVICES
35212.
271590.
2382.
309164.
19505.
GOVERNMENT
1692.
3981.
88.
5761.
959.
TOTAL
147552.
1055056.
7643.
1210251.
83600.
D. VALUE ADDED (1000 S)
AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY, FISHING
140,
470.
0.
611,
1396.
AGRICULTURAL SERVICES
240.
402,
90.
732.
266.
MINING
52.
11e.
a.
178.
92. -
CONSTRUCTION
2161.
3081.
119.
5360.
1217.
MANUFACTUlt I NO
4664.
20051.
73.
24788.
3220.
TRANSPORTATIO4 AND UTILITIES
7887.
34757,
464.
43128.
3797.
WHOLESALE TRADE
1583.
8877,
101.
10562.
946.
RETAIL TRADE
108".
25857.
776.
37499.
5475.
FINANCE, INS, AND REAL ESTATE
27515.
326940.
947.
355402.
14634.
SERVICES
24584.
189620.
1663.
215867.
13618.
GOVERNMENT
1354,
3232.
72.
4658.
763. -
TOTAL
810".
613406.
4334.
698787.
45425. ��-
* Dallars•to-Emoloyment Conversion Factors are not aysltecle
for these Industries.
t-
Z We: Nufters way not total due to rounding.
-
SD=E: SFRPC
il:
87-1149
TAB($ 7
FT:�(Al. I,f�ACTS
DOWNTOWN MIAM19 PFIASE 1
NAME nF DEVELOPMENT
1 OCAT I ON M I AM f
CITY DADE
COUNTY SFWMD/DDA/LIPRARY
4;FrC1AL DISTRICT DADF
r,CHOOL DISTRICT
TYPE OF DEVELOFIlENt MIXED
MULTIFAMILY
M[1t%ILE-NQME TOTAL
S[N6LE-FAMILY
TYPE OF DWELLING UNIT
3550
0
NUMBER OF UNITS
0.00
NIIMNER OF STUDENTS PER UNIT
.„7
0.00
0.00
l.77
NUMBER OF PERSONS PER UNIT
N
`j 95H.
TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS
6-76 j.
UL
RESIDENT POPATION
NUME;ER OF EMPLOYEES 35496.
PROPERTY VALUE 3421415424.
CONDUCTED USING AVERAGE COEFFICIENTS
ANALYSES
DISTRICT SCil00L DISTRICT TOTAL
CITY
CaI�lTy
SPECIAL
$ A. 4 4726574.
ONE-TIME REVENUES
•
t-661774. t 219(17012.
Ex rNDITURFS t EI'Oi!�b4.
f 9rih14'•b.
!1 `9q�1gi).
iA
TOIM. MCW ANNUAL-
♦ 4gnSIS60-
�^
ri1
S Iq=3-•696.
f 177i)164is,
f 2bb575b.
TOTAL tip W ANt�MN'`l RrVFfII�S
ramok
C. PUBLIC FACILITIES
1. Water, Vastevater, and Solid Waste
Table 8 summarizes the projectIs impact on
water, vastevatert
and solid waste.
TABLE 8
V=9 VASMQ=t AND SOLID ;MM
Public Averp Peak
Provider of
Available
Facility Demand Dead
Service
Capacity
Potable Vater 2t140t000 H3D 5t350o000 H3D
Dade Canty
Yes
Wastewater 10740,000 M3D 4,3150,000 MM
We Canty
Yes
Solid Waste 119-13 TM WA
Dade Ownty
Yes
649.26 CYPD
GPD - Gill= per day
7FD - Tws per day
CYM - Cubic Yards per dgy
WA - Not applicable
SMM: AM
2. Police, Fire, and Emergency Medical Services
Table 9 summarizes police, fire, and emergency medical
service
availability.
87-1149
.ZL
TABLE 9
POLI(Eo FIE, AND 90CM MEMCAL S�EVRVIfFS
Service
Provider
Location
Response Time
Police
City of Miami
a
Miami Police Station
3-5 minutes
400 NW 2rd Avwm
e
Omnoan Mini Station
3-5 minutes
1600 NW 3rd Ave ie
Fire
City of Miami
a
Omi Fire Station #2
tms than 4
1901 North Miami Ave.
minutes
e
f2D: Fire Station #1
Less dour 4
144 NB 5th Street
minutes
e
BridceU: Fire Station 04
Less than 4
1105 SW grid Avemn
minutes
Medical
lade Comity
a
Jackson Memorial Bosp.
-
Services
Federal Gov't.
1611 NW 12th Averue
Private Sector
e
Cedars Medical 0enter
-
1400 NW 12th Street
e
Victoria Bospital
-
955 NW 3rd Street
e
Veterans Ad inistr-ation
-
Bospital
1201 Nib 16th Street
90iRtE: AD4
19
8'7-1149
011
ON
D.
TRANSPORTATION
1. Existing Traffic
The project traffic impact area consists of tvo components
(Figure 6). The first component is the Dovntovn Miami DRI
study area vhich is defined as NE/NV 17th Street on the north,
SE/SV 15th Road on the south, Biscayne Bay on the east, and
Metrorail, I-95, and FEC railroad on the vest. The Port of
Miami is also included for traffic analysis purposes because
all Port traffic flovs through the Dovntovn street system.
The second component of the project traffic impact area is the
major arterial and expressway systems serving Dovntovn. These
regionally significant roadvays include Port Boulevard,
Brickell Avenue/Bayshore Drive, SW 3rd Avenue/Coral Way, SW
7th and 8th Streets, Vest Flagler Street, Biscayne Boulevard
and MacArthur Causevay for a distance of three miles outside
the study area boundary and Interstate 95, SR 836 and US 1 for
a distance of five miles outside the study area boundary.
Based on these criteria, the traffic impact area is generally
defined as North 79th Street on the north, LeJeune Road (West
42nd Avenue) on the vest and south, and Alton Road on the
east.
Of the roadvay segments studied six currently operate at LOS
"E" or belov. Levels of service on these roads are shovn in
20
87-1149
i
i .rtr-
SOUTH
FLORIDA
REGIONAL
COUNCIL
oX
f
TRAFFIC IMPACT AREA
* * * • Traffic Yepact Area
ommoo"o Roadwat, lints Ineiuded
In 1 he Anah sis
EDDowntown DRI Stud) Area
FIGURE
6
NOT TO
SCALE
87-1149
{
i
:r
r f y
'7tc
C
r
Table 10. Forty-two critical intersections are also
Identified for analysis. Based on the volume to capacity
(v/c) ratio analysis procedures used in this study, almost all
the roadway segments within the Downtown Miami DRI study area
exhibit good operating conditions. However, it is important
to notice that these operating conditions are measured over a
one hour period. This type of analysis is therefore not
sensitive to peak 15 and 30 minutes surges which occur on the
Downtown streets.
TAME 10
F Q7[S= 7PAFM OMMM S -
SS 2M OPMA= AT OR BELOW LOS "B"
-
F�esic-hour
PANIMY
From
7b
Time
Drirectim
S
BiscW* Blvd.
NB 62nd St.
NB 36th St.
PH
North
F -- ,v
Bisca�= Blvd.
NE 36th St.
I-3%
E"
North
B
Coral gay
Brickell Ave.
SW 15th Rd.
PM
vest
B
t8 1
I-95
SW 17th Ave.
PM
South
F
US 1
SW 17th Ave.
DmK3ag Rd.
PM
South
F —
NB 2nd Ave.
I-395
Flagler St.
AH
South
F
SOURM AD&
i
k -
22
I
13 7-:U49
J
2. Future Background Traffic Impacts
a. Committed Transportation Improvements
Committed transportation improvements, for the purpose of
this study, are defined as 1) those having construction
funds allocated for the current year in the Capital or
Transportation Improvement Program, 2) projects which are
currently underway, and 3) those required by a
development order. For Increment I development, only
those committed transportation improvements are included
for the purposes of analysis (Table 11).
b. Permitted Developments
Permitted developments include three types of
development. The first type include projects which are
complete and less than 90 percent occupied. The second
• type include projects which are under construction, and
the third type include projects which have received prior
approvals. In addition to the Downtown.study area, the
Port of Miami and Southeast Overtown/Park Vest have been
included because all traffic from these developments have
to travel on the Downtown Street system being analyzed.
23
87-1149 -_
a f
i
1
§j
i=-
TABLE 11
amcm v*am TtN DavVl3 m
Construction Can wxtion
to ation
ITMwmts
Cost*
Yaer
SW 8th St.
Reamstnction
S 3,300,000
U*s w
I-95 to US 1
I-95
Dmmtoun Distributor
Add NB ]one
2,7979000
U*r-w
to I-395/St 836
Videti entram
rap
North 2nd St.
Reooretructian
19775,000
86/87
North 3rd St. a
North 4th St.
Biscayne Blvd. to
NW 1st Ave.
Port Bridge, US 1
New 6-lane
27,491,000
mm
to Dodge Island
bridge
St 9721SW 13th St.
Dndnoge
228,000
mm
SW 1st Ave. to
SW 2nd Ave.
SR 112
Road construction
39390,000
86/87
NW 22nd Ave. to
NW 12th Ave.
I-95
Southbourd front-
830900D
86/87
NW 54th St. to
age road
NW 62nd St.
I-95
Road ramstruc-
7,598,000
86/87
NW 39th St. to
tiara, I-95 wv
NW 58th St.
Qnmtor
I-95 Aveue
HN Bridge
24,450,000
86/87
SR 112 to
NW 49th St.
I-95
Vides to
599900D
am
SW 25th Rd.
2-lane cap
NW 14th St.
4-Lm
6BD900D
8687
NW loth Ave.
to I-95
24
87-1149
i
h
t
t
wu 11 (Cmtimw)
SW 17th Ave.
4-]arse
3o6009Opp
US 1 to F7a91er St.
Metro:ail Parking
2950 spaces
20,6629000
Metrobus
50 buses
7,875,000
Brickell Ave./
Turn lane 6
959000
SS 10th St.
Signalimion
Bricke3l Ave./
S4Mal uticn
709000
SE 12th St.
BrldmU Ave. /
s4F alintian
90,000
SE 14th St.
Modify Intersec-
ticn
SW 13th St./
Signallution
70,000
SW 15th Rd./
Striping
SV 3rd Ave.
* 1986 dollars
SOURCE: ADA, SEM
25
r004IN
86/87
8687
86/87
86/87
86/87
86/87
to
8 7-1149
Oi
r
3
t
i
C
The projection of traffic volumes associated with
Permitted Developments, as well as Additional Approvable
Development, is based on the trip generation model
equations used by Metro -Dade Transit Agency in its
Transportation Plan Update. Other parameters used in the
traffic projections, including vehicle occupancy and mode
splits by development phase and sub -area, were also
provided by Metro -Dade Transit Agency.
At the end of Increment I (1992), except for traffic from
Additional Approvable Development, future traffic
includes existing traffic, traffic generated by Permitted
• Developments, including the Port of Miami, a background
growth factor for roadway links outside the Downtown
study area, and traffic generated by planned development
in the Southeast Overtown/Park Vest redevelopment area.
3. Level of Service Standards
The City of Miami has proposed the designation of the Special
Transportation Area bounded by NE/NV 20th Street on the north,
NE/SV 7th Avenue on the vest, Rickenbacker Causeway on the
south, and Biscayne Bay on the east. This proposal was
approved on July 7, 1987 by the Dade County Metropolitan
Planning Organization and concurred by the Florida Department
26
8'7-1149
4
'`a
i
l
t i,x
AW
t
1
104
of Transportation staff and the South Florida Regional
planning Council staff. The approved levels of service (LOS)
criteria within the Special Transportation Area are peak -hour
LOS "D" on the interstate highvay system (I-95 and I-395)9 LOS
"E" on the State highway system, and LOS "E" plus 20 percent
of roadway links or intersections below LOS "E" for the
remaining regionally significant roadways.
4. Constrained Facilities
The Florida Transportation plan recognizes that there are
physical and financial limitations to the continued expansion
of the State Highway System. This is particularly true in a
rapidly growing urban area where a "threshold" is reached
beyond which expansion is no longer cost-effective. This has
led to the definition of these thresholds which will be used
to define "constrained facilities." This recognition allows
for the redirection of funds from a specific state highway to
an alternate facility (usually parallel) or mode, such as
transit. Based on the knowledge of the physical, historical,
.. and aesthetic constraints within the traffic impact area,
certain roadways have been identified as "constrained
facilities" (Table 12). Roadway improvements required for
constrained facilities will be termed "theoretical
improvements."
27
S'7-1149
1 -
j
Si�J
'gMr'
7x _
TAME 12
DT'MADED R0Atx1AYS
Roadway Name
State Route Designation
Constraint
I-95
SR 9A
Physical
I-395
SR 836
Physical
Dolph Expressway
SR 836
Physical
Biscayne Boulevard
SR 5
Physical*
Brickell Avenie
SR 5
Physical 3 Aesthetic
tb 1
SR 5
Physical
Plagler Street
SR 968
Physical
Coral Way
SR 972
Physical & Historical
SW 7th/8th Street
SR 90
Historical 6 Physical
* Additional right-of-way is available along
Biscayne Boulevard between
IE 5th Street and I-395.
SOURCE: ADA
28
8'7-1149
,
}
Ti
4 r
5. Additional Approvable Development
Table 13 identifies the proposed development, i.e., Additional
Approvable Development for Increment I, by land use for each
of the Dovntovn Miami sub -areas.
TABLE 13
PROPO® DSVI LWW PROGRAM
land Use
Phase I
Omi: Office
19000,000 sq. ft.
Government Office
150,0o0 sq. ft.
Retail/Service
50,000 sq. ft.
Hotel
0 Rooms
Residential
500 chits
Gotwestion
250,000 sq. ft.
Vhotesalerrndxtrial
1,0009000 sq. ft.
(ED: Office
391009000 sq. ft.
Goverment Office
1509000 sq. ft.
Retail/Service
650,000 sq. ft.
Hotel
650 Rooms
Residential
19000 hits
Convention
250000D sq. ft.
Vbtesale/I dustrial
50,000 sq. ft.
Institutional
300,000 sq. ft.
Attractiors/Rccreation
3,400 Seats
Brickell: Office
3,000,000 sq. ft.
Retail/Service
350,000 sq. ft.
Botel
350 Rooms
Residential
2,050 Chits
,Yr'A
5',
6. Additional Improvements Needed to Accommodate Project
Traffic
Roadways vhich vill be operating belov LOS "D" for interstate
systems (I-95 and I-395) and belov LOS "E" for state highvay
systems by the end of Increment I (1992) are identified.
Since all of these roadvays are constrained facilities,
therefore, only theoretical improvements are recommended.
In addition to the state highvay system, another 17
directional roadways were analyzed during the PM peak -hour,
and 5 during the AM peak -hour. Of these 17 links, 3 are
projected to operate below LOS "E" during the PM peak -hour.
This represents 18 percent of the links and is belov the
established criteria. During the AM peak -hour, one link, or
20 percent of those analyzed, vill operate belov LOS "E".
This is also within the allovable criteria.
A total of 41 intersections vere analyzed to determine
operating conditions at the end of Increment I development.
All 41 intersections were subjected to PM peak -hour analysis
and 14 vere also analyzed for the AM peak -hour. The results
of this analysis are that 9 intersections vill operate at LOS
"E" and only one is projected to operate below LOS "E". This
one intersection represents only tvo percent of the 41
intersections analyzed and is well belov 20 percent alloved
under the LOS standards in a Special Transportation Area.
30
8'7-1149
i
WO
Each of the 10 intersections projected to operate at or below
LOS "E" vere investigated to determine if there vere any
geometric or operational improvements vhich vould improve the
projected level of service. It vas found that a majority of
these intersections are built to the maximum cross-section
within existing physical constraint.
Table 14 shovs the additional "theoretical improvements,"
associated construction costs, and the Applicant's fair share
assessment. A total of S22,867,320 (1987 dollars) in
additional off -site theoretical improvements to resolve
project impacts have been recommended, vith the Applicant's
fair share being $7,543,419 (1987 dollars).
31
t 87-ii49
`g4¢�K�,^.,��rw+.,:,�ni•.,y'i,i!.lFeai�iy�l
i
1 1411 L" iJ%j *..3J:,P :)s see
IIJ581WRIllik: i fl, ;
rq=Vement
Applicant
Thmoreticd rqnvvwmts
Omrk
Fair Sure*
1.
SR 836/1-395-o Add am lane in
S 1t22D,000
S 281,689
each direction from Biscqm
Boulevard to 1-95
2.
SR 836/1-395: Add one lane in each
2,8069000
6649704
direction from 1-95 to W 27th
Avemie.
3.
SR 836/1-395: Add one lane in
1,830,000
409,542
each direction from W 27th
Avemie to Lela= Road
4.
Biscayne Boulevard: Add are lane
62490DD
2329258
in each direction from M 62nd
Street to NE 36th Street
5.
Biscayne Boulevard: Add one lane
960t000
358tI09
In each direction from NE 36th
Street to 1-395
6.
Coral Way: Add one lane in each
200,000
83,594
direction from Brickell Avenue
to SW 15th Read
7.
Coral Way: Add am lane in each
960,000
318,799
direction from SW 12th Ave to
SW 27th Avemie
8.
Bridcp-U Ave Add am lane in
960900D
4240845
each direction from SE 7th Street
to Rider ftdrar Cn=W
9.
US 1: Add tvo lanes in each
869j12D
3149662
direction from 1-95 to SW 17th
Ave=
10.
tIS 1: Add two hers In each
2v400q00D
8659785
direction from SW 17th Ave
to Ib IZI a Road
11.
1-95: Add one Iva in each
3,126,250
19063,876
dircticn from W 79th Strut
to SR 112
12.
1-95: Add one lane in each
5946295M
2,1559678
direction from SR SM to
SW Sth Street
32
87-1149
41:
TABU 14 (Cmtlmnd)
13. 1-95: Add one lane in each
direction from SW 8th Sheet
to is l
14. M 1st Ave ian-395 (North Ramp):
Add one lane to vestbwd ramp
and restripe
WEAL
* 1967 Dollars
33
1937295M 358,998
76,950 10,682
=,8671,32O 37,543,419
PART III - COMMENTS FROM OTHER REVIVING AGENCIES
This section contains comments sent to the Council by other agencies
revieving the Downtown Miami - Increment I DRI.
34
87—IIL49
moor_-_
L ", �
ARI
STATE OF FLOgICA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
TWIN TOWERS OWICE BUIL01"
26W SLAIR STONE ROAD
TALLAMASSEE. FLORIDA 3IM44M
June 19, 1987
S.F.R.P.C.
JUN 251987
008 OVER 0
DALE TWANN
SECRETARY
Mr. B. Jack Osterholt
Executive Director
S. Florida Regional Planning Council
3440 Hollywood Aoulevard
Hollywood, Florida 33021
Dear Mr. Osterholt:
Re: Downtown Miami DRI
We have reviewed the City of Miami's latest proposal for
addressing the air quality issue in the A.D.A. for the Downtown
Miami DRI (letter of June 3, 1987, from Sergio Rodriguez to
you) and have the following comments and recommendations.
Comments
�e
First, the two December 1986 reports referenced in the above
letter do support the hypothesis that carbon monoxide (CO)
levels related to emissions from the adjacent intersection/
roadway and to emission density in the immediate area (within
500 meters of the monitor) will decrease at the East Flagler
Street monitoring site over the next ten years. However, the
reports do not consider future CO levels related to other
potential intersection/roadway "hot spots" in the downtown area
or to emission density over the larger area encompassing the
downtown and nearby fringe area. For these reasons, we believe
.that future CO levels in the downtown area are a legitimate
concern.
Second, we recognize that the draft "Interim Guidelines" for CO
modeling are in need of revision, particularly with respect to
their applicability to areawide DRI's. Although these
revisions are underway, they will not be completed in time to
affect our recommendations with respect to the Downtown Miami
DRI. Therefore, the recommendations given here should not be
considered as "precedent setting."
35
Ptotecdng Florid& and Your Quality of Life
8'7-I.149
f
p:i` A
Mr. B. Jack Osterholt
Page Two
June 19, 1987
Recommendations
Provided the Dade County Department of Environmental Resources
Management (DERM) agrees, we support the City's proposal to
fund three new CO monitors to be located at sites selected by
DER and DERM with the assistance of the City's consultants. We
recommend that the City make the funds available to DERM as
soon as possible after approval of the development order (e.g.,
within three months) to expedite the purchase of equipment and
startup of the monitoring sites.
In addition, we recommend that the development order contain a
provision allowing for the air quality issue to be revisited no
later than six months after completion of two winters of CO
monitoring. At that time, we recommend that the CO monitoring
data be reviewed in conjunction with modeling results for the
most critYcal intersections and roadways in the area as
determined by DER and DERM in consultation with the City. The
critical intersections and roadways would be selected from
those projected to operate at level -of -service E or F and would
include, as a minimum, any intersections or roadways for which
monitoring data are available. New traffic data would not
necessarily be required but should be used if available,
particularly if major deviations from the data given in the
original A.D.A. are expected.
The purpose of the revisit would be as follows:
1. Ta determine, based on the CO monitoring data and on
projected changes in areawide emissions density, what, if
any , mitigation measures are needed to prevent CO
violations due to areawide growth.
2. To determine, based on the modeling results in conjunction
with the monitoring data, what, if any, mitigation measures
are needed to prevent CO violations due to traffic
congestion at critical intersections and roadways. (The
monitoring data would be used to assess the reasonableness
of the modeling results --not to "calibrate" the model.)
3. To determine what, if any, changes are needed in the
monitoring network, including an assessment of the need to
continue monitoring.
36
N7-1149
Mr. B. Jack Osterholt
Page Three
June 19, 1987
If mitigation measures are determined to be necessary, the City
should be under commitment to implement them through the
original development order.
If you have any questions on these recommendations, please feel
free to call me at SUNCOM 278-1344.
Sincerely,
C. H. Fancy, P.E. 111
Deputy Chief
_ Bureau of Air Quality
Management
CHF/LG/s
cc: D. Barker
L.,George
B.'Offord
P. Wong
37
87--IL1.49 -
e
now
n
i
Oft STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
T"N TOWERS OFFICE "' O"o
2= 9LAlq STONE ROAD
TALLAHASSEE, FLORDA 323M400
August 28, 1987
Mr. Patrick Kellogg, Regional Planner
S. Florida Regional Planning Council
3440 Hollywood Boulevard, suite 140
Hollywood, Florida 33021
Dear Mr. Kellogg:
S.F. R. P. C
•
AUG 31 1987
Re: Downtown Miami Areawide DRI - Air Quality
BO GOVERNOR
DALE
SECRETARYSE
Thank you for your letter of August 18, 1987, enclosing the City
of Miami's latest proposal for addressing air quality. As you
point out, there is no mention of future air quality modeling.
Our recommendation remains as stated in my June 19, 1987, letter
to Jack Osterholt: that the development order require the air
quality issue to be revisited no later than six months after
ccMpletion of two winters of CO monitoring. At that time, we
recommend that the CO monitoring data be reviewed in conjunction
with modeling results for the most critical roadways and
intersections in the area. Further details regarding this
recommendation may be found in the June 19 letter.
On a related matter, Bruce Offord has relayed to Joyce Meyers,
through Tim Murphy, a request that the city provide us with the
data (traffic counts, road geometries, signal cycles, etc.)
needed to identify candidate roadways and intersections for
monitoring. If these data could be obtained prior to issuance of
the development order, we could perform a rough modeling analysis
ourselves to allow you to specify the preferred CO monitoring
locations within the order. We believe this would expedite the
start-up of the monitoring program. Therefore, we would
appreciate any assistance you can give us regarding this
request.
Sincerely,
&tA
C. H. F cy, P.E.
Deputy Chief
Bureau of Air Quality
Management
CHF/LG/s
cc: B. Offord L. George
D. Barker P. Wong
Protecting Florida and Your Quality of Life
3e S 7-1149
:'it
f a
7
� t
_. _
r
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA J
METRO•DAOE CENTER
ENviRoNMENTAL RESOURCES MANSAG EMENT
111 N w 1ft STREET
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33128.1971
005I 375.3379
August 21, 1987
S.F.R.P.C.
Mr. Patrick Kellogg
AUG 251987
South Florida Regional Planning Council
3440 Hollywood Boulevard, Suite 140
Hollywood, Florida 33021
RE: Downtown Miami Areawide DRI - Air Quality
Dear Mr. Kellogg:
Please be advised that this Department concurs with the recommendations made by
the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) as indicated in their
letter of June 19 to Mr. Jack Osterholt of your office. The development order for
the Downtown Miami Areawide DRI should contain provisions that air quality
modelling be required if this Department or DER deem it necessary after
completion of a two-year carbon monoxide (CO) monitoring program funded by the
City of Miami.
Provisions for future modelling is necessary since the creation of additional canyon
sites in the downtown area poses a definite risk for potential exceedances of the
CO ambient air quality standards. CO concentrations in this area remain a concern
for this Department, especially in consideration of the recent exceedance recorded
on July 17, 1987 in downtown Miami.
Be -further advised that should the City of Miami opt to do areawide modelling,
provided that appropriate data is available on traffic and development in the
downtown area, this Department would not require case by case air quality impact
assessments in the future.
If you have any questions please call Robert Wong or myself at 838-0601.
Sincerely,
f
H. Patrick Wong, Chle
Air Section
Environmental Monitoring Division
RW/aas
cc: Clair Fancy, F-DER Tallahassee
Bruce Offord, F-DER West Palm Beach
39
8'7-1149 -
ji
G `
4
A
104
SERGIO RODRIGUEZ
Director
July 21, 1987
IfTifu af Unnit
Mr. Jack Osterholt
Executive Director
South Florida
Regional Planning Council
3440 Hollywood Boulevard
Hollywood, FL 33021
.(.ee fern O
\O • w
�0 o •F,Ri��
JUL 24 1987
CESAR H. ODIO
City Manager
RE: Downtown Miami/DRI
Dear Mr. Osterholt:
Attached *for your information is a copy of a resolution, adopted by the Dade
County MP09 approving the designation of Downtown Miami as a Special
Transportation Area. Please advise me as to what additional documentation, if
any, is required to show the concurrence of FDOT, SFRPC, and the City of
Miami.
Sincerely,
Joyce A. Meyers
Project Manager
Downtown Master Plan/DRI
JAM/vh
cc: Sergio Rodriguez, Director/Planning Department
Peter Andolina/Downtown Development Authority —
Robert Sechen
Joel Maxwell
Kahart Pinder
vh/87/081
I
PLANNING DEPARTMENTIM N.W. 2nd Stirm/Miami. Florida 3I12s/IPA) pV.M -
Madml Address • I.0.I10u J)f1 W / MiUM. FWWa ))Uj.W 1 _
ao 87-1149
{
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
DADS
�Mro,
�,�
METRO
°1'
; I f 1 1► ".:'
METQO-DADS CENTER
OFFICE OF COUNTY MANAGER
-"�
SUITE 2910
111 N W. lot STREET
MIAMI. FLORIDA 7312E-1EN
M) 3754311
July 14, 1987
`—
' W. Sergio Rodriguez
City of Miami Phasing Departmesst
275 N.W. 2nd Street
_ Miami. Florida 33128
Dee? Mr. iguez:
The purpose of this letter is to
formally submit
to the City of Miami
Resolution No. MPO 15-87 approving Miami MPO
concurrence with the
designation of Downtown Miami as a
"Special 7yansportation
Area, including
go:u�aronce with the levels of
highway service
wA area bcaasdaries
recby the City of Miami.
lice Metropolitan
Playing Organisation
Board unanim ply passed this at its
meting of July
7, 1987.
_ Should you have any questions concerning this, please contact the MPO
Secretariat's office at 375-4507.
JiM/YPS/jm
41
MM:7/14/87: jm
8 7-1149
t ;.,3
RCN NO. MPO 25-87
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Agreement cresting and establishing the
Metropolitan Planning Or, for the Mind Urbanized Area requires
that the Metropolitan Plaratirg Org
anization Governing Board provide a
structure to evaluate the adequacy of the tr=Mwtation pleasing and
programing process, and take action to ensure that legal and procedural
requirements are mete as more fully described In the Prospectus for
Transportation Improvamnts for the Mimi Urbanized Area (Second Edi-
tion), and
WHEREAS. the City of Mimi has requested MPO concurrence with the
Special Area designation action as reflected in the attached
c�gspon�ce from the Downtown Developcont of Regional Impact Project
WHEREAS, a sWx=udttee of the Transportation Plan Tedtlieal
Advisory Cmzdttee (7 O has been discvutsing the various issues
involved in the special designation action. and
.-
WHEREAS. staff of the various entities involved have participated
In reviews concerning the proposed designation and all concur with the
recaomer:dation on levels of highway service for the area and area
baandaries as detailed in the attached letter from the MI Project
tea' •
WHEREAS, the lYansportation Planning Camcil wishes to Ao on record
stating concerns regarding the potential air quality impacts of the
levels of highway service proposed for adoption in the downtown
Developmant of Regional Impact (DRI) and wishes that these concerns are
adegdsaCID addressed in the MI process.
14W9 MMMME, BE IT FMMVID BY MM WVMMIG HOARD OF 7HE
trE'lltOE�.ITAN MAINIM CPZMn7AnCN RR VE MUM URBANi2£D AREA:
Section 1. Mat the MPG! Board approves concurrence with the
designation of Downtown M mmi as a "Special lYansportation Area' to
include the area b=wd1sries r by the City of Mimed.
Section 2. lhat this concurrence includes a dm sament of the
highfway levels of service recommended by the City of Miami provided that
the final and approved MI document includes appropriate and timely air
quality impacts mitigation measures.
Section 3. 7hat not withstanding the stated ceneu 7mn with the
proposed levels of highway service, which include naval of service D on
R RF.M:74: jm 42
137-I149
r
�.�._ -. .tom,__ ... � ....__... ......_
the Interstate Hi ftmy Systw, every effort should be made to strive for
level of service C on the interstate higilmy sepmts Affected by this
Me
The foregoing resolution vas offered by C =issimw Clara Oesterle
who mmvd its adoption. The nation was seconded by Cemissiaw Beverly
Phillips and upon being put to a vote. the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Barbara M. Carey - present
Cm=4 sioner Clara Oesterle - present
Caeadssioner Beverly Phillips - present
Commissioner James Redford - present
Cadssioner Harvey Ravin - present
Ca ndssimm Barry D. Scimeiber - absent
Coamdssioner Jorge E. Valdes - present
ftmissioner Shermm Wim - present
Mayor Stephen P. Clark - present
7h* Chairem thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted
this 7th day of July 1987.
IMliO MIW FLAMM ORGjMUMV
FOR ME MLAM 1WKI AREA
By fl
G`
Jose- esa
MPO Secr9tariat
Rf.4�O:74: jm
8 7-1149
jy9
pal
t
PART IV - SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The Development of Regional Impact assessment for Dovntovn !Miami -
Increment I indicates that the project vould have the following positive
regional impacts:
e Up to 89873 permanent nev jobs vould be directly generated by the
project. Nearly 34,276 additional full-time jobs could be indirectly
generated in the three South Florida counties, vith a $360 million
increase in total vages and $698.8 million in value added to the
regional economy.
•
e A net positive fiscal impact of nearly $26 million would be created by
the project.
Council evaluation indicates that the proposed development should not
create adverse regional impact on soils, animal life, or vegetation.
Hovever, in terms of adverse regional impact, the project vould:
• Increase potable vater demand by an average of 2.14 million gallons _
per day.
• Potentially increase the amount and number of hazardous materials used
on -site and the hazardous vastes (a vaste that is ignitable,
44 .�
13 7-1.149 "-
1y y
11
corrosive, reactive, or toxic) generated, thereby possibly posing a
threat to the Regionts sole -source drinking water supply.
• The project's proposed stormwater management system will increase the
quantity of pollutants entering the Biscayne Aquifer.
• Generate an average of 120 tons, or 650 cubic yards of solid waste per
day.
• Generate an average of 1.74 million gallons of wastewater per day.
• Place additional unfunded demands upon police, emergency rescue, and
fire services, although the public agencies responsible for providing
these services have indicated that they will serve the project.
• Generate over 6,169 PM peak -hour vehicle trips on the regional roadway
network and, along with other development traffic, reduce levels of
service below "D" on many segments of the regional roadway network,
which, without corrective action, would produce a significant adverse
regional impact.
Recommendations
Based on consideration of the above specified positive and negative
ispacts, it is the recommendation of the Council to the Miami City
Commission that the Application for Development Approval for Downtown
45
s 7-1149
40
Miami - Increment I be APPROVED subject to incorporation of the folloving
conditions into the Development Order to increase the probability of
realising positive regional impacts and to mitigate, reduce, or eliminate
adverse regional impacts.
THE CITY SHALL:
1• For the purpose of base -line data collection, conduct air quality
monitoring for carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations based on the
folloving requirements:
a. Provide CO monitoring data for each of the three (3)
sub -areas: Brickell, the Central Business District and Omni.
b. The monitoring shall consist of four (4) veeks of data
collection during the vinter months, November 15 through March
15, for each sub -area.
c• The monitoring for each sub -area shall be completed prior to
• the issuance of any certificate of occupancy vithin that
sub -area for the first development under this Development
Order vhich meets 100 percent of the presumptive threshold for
Developments of Regional Impact pursuant to Rule 21F, F.A.C.,
vithin that sub -area, or by March 15, 1991, vhichever is
sooner.
46
8 ■ -114.7
d. The monitor vill be located at the vorst case intersection for
Brickell and Omni sub -areas. The location vill be selected
jointly by the City, Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER), Dade County Environmental Resources
Management (DERM), and Council staff. It has been agreed by
these agencies that the existing monitor located in the
Central Business District vill be acceptable for that
sub -area.
e. Perform the monitoring as required by la. and lb. above as
prescribed by the policies and regulations governing DERV and
submit final air quality monitoring reports to FDER, DIRM, and
Council staff within 60 days of the completion of the
monitoring.
2. Conduct air quality modeling of carbon monoxide impacts to
determine what, if any, changes are needed in air quality
monitoring, including the need to continue monitoring. The
modeling shall be completed vithin one year after the base -line
data monitoring has been completed pursuant to Condition 1 above.
The air quality modeling shall follov FDER guidelines and shall:
a. Be lioited.to no more than ten (10) intersections to be
selected from among the intersections projected in the ADA to
operate at level of service "E" or "F". The intersections
47
8'7-1149
shall be selected jointly by FDER, DERM, Council staff, and
the City.
b. Be submitted in a detailed and comprehensive air quality
analysis to FDER and DERM for comment and reviev, and to
Council staff and the City for reviev and approval.
c. The report submitted pursuant to 2b. above is to include
proposed changes to any air quality monitoring as justified by
the air quality modeling analysis.
�. If the results of the air quality modeling study, as described in
Condition 2 above, are 85 percent or more of the State standards
for CO concentrations, an air quality monitoring and abatement
program vill be implemented by the City folloving the approval of
the report pursuant to Condition 2b. above. The monitoring and
abatement program, including a timeframe for implementation, must
be approved by Council staff and the City subsequent to reviev and
comment by the FDER and DEN. The program may include, but is not
United to, the folloving techniques:
a. Traurncrtation Control Measures (TCM).
a_
b. Physical planning measures (e.g., signalisation, parking area
locations, addition of turn lanes, etc.).
c. The continuance of monitoring for specified sub -areas.('-=
T r. 48
8'7-1149
i
i -
f
it
1'
Y .
„? ;,, .e
4. If the results of the air quality modeling study, as described in
Condition 2 above, exceeds State standards for CO concentrations,
do one of the following:
a. Withhold the issuance of any building permits for nev
construction vithin the sub -area that shovs CO exceedences.
b. Provide acceptable documentation vhich clearly indicates that
CO exceedences vill not occur, or that a particular developwMt
seeking approval does not contribute CO additions, or that
any potential CO additions have been mitigated (according
to Council staff and the City subsequent to reviev and comment
by FDER and DERM) prior to the issuance of building permits
for the particular development. Such documentation may
include a modeling study vhich incorporates measures such as
those contained in Condition 3a., b., and c., above. This
documentaton must be approved by Council staff and the City
subsequent to reviev and comment by FDER and DMM.
5. Within sixty days folloving the notice of Dade County that
improvement to either SW 2nd Avenue Bridge and approaches or the
Brickell Avenue Bridge and approaches has been let to contract for
construction, pay or contract to pay $7,543,419 (fair share in 1987
49 { P
-1149
r
7
I
f„ S
r-,A
t
.;j
�'r r
t
54
f
f
f
dollars) to Dade County to be used tovard improvement. In the
event the City contracts to pay the fair share, such contract shall
in no vay affect the construction schedule of the bridge. If
improvement to neither SV 2nd Avenue Bridge and approaches nor the
Brickell Avenue Bridge and approaches has been let to contract for
contribution before the earlier date of as or b. specified belovs
as four years after the effective date of the Development Order,
or
b. the date of issuance of certificates of occupancy for more
than 80 percent of the Increment I development,
then Council staff, the City, Dade County, and the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) vill jointly decide the
reallocation of $79543,419 (fair share in 1987 dollars) vithin
90 days of the earlier date of either a. or b. specified above.
6. Hake efforts to vork closely vith applicable governmental agencies
to ensure that the Metromover Stage II improvements identified in
Exhibit 1 herein be completed by June 309 1992, as identified in
the current Metropolitan Planning Organisation's Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) published in June, 1987. In the event
that by December 31, 19929 the Metromover Stage II improvements
Identified in Exhibit 1 herein have not been substantially under
4
50
87-1,149
i
.r.
ti
' construction as determined by Council staff$ then this situation
vill, be considered a substantial deviation from the mitigative
efforts anticipated to offset the adverse impacts of proposed
development to the existing transportation netvork. In this event,
the Applicant shall be required to undergo additional Development
of Regional Impact reviev for transportation impacts pursuant to s.
380.06(19)(a)(g) and (h). P.S. (1986). Such additional Development
of Regional Impact reviev, if requiredg shall be initiated by the
Applicant vithin 90 days of the identification of its need.
7. Vithin 6 months of the effective date of the Development Order,
prepare and recommend to the Miami City Commission a Transportation
Control Measures (TCM) Ordinance. The City vill vork closely with
Council staff in developing this ordinance. The TCM Ordinance must
" be approved by Council staff and. the City subsequent to reviev and
` comment by DCA and FDOT. The TCM Ordinance may include but not be
limited to the folloving:
I. •Ridersharing related
S
A. Participate in a locally sponsored ride -matching
service
B. Conduct in-house ridershare matching
C. Provide preferential parking for high occupancy
vehicles (BOV's)
r
51
s 7-11.49
D. Reduce parking cost for 80V's
E. Operate vanpool or buspool service =
P. !Monitor employee travel modes.
II. Public transit related
A. Employer -subsidized transit passes
B. Elimination of parking costs subsidies C. Developer shuttle services: implementation or
expansion D. Developer transit amenities -
E. Enhanced bus service
P. Park and Ride parking facilities.
III. Traffic flow related
A. Peak hour restriction of on -street parking
B. Peak hour restriction of on -street loading zones
C. Reduced bus route circulation through downtown
streets/increased bus interface with
Metrorail/Metromover stations or consolidated bus
terminals
D. Strict enforcement of traffic laws by Miami Police _ —
Department.
52
S'7-1149
{
MW
IV. Parking Related
A. Shuttle service to off -site parking locations
B. Shared use parking --share parking spaces vith another
use vith non -overlapping peak parking demand.
C. Limitation on on -site parking.
V. Other TCM actions
A. Commuter bicycle and pedestrian facilitiest shovers
and lockers
B. Employment or designation of an employee transportation
coordinator (ETC)
C. Implementation of flex -time or other vork schedule
conducive to ridersharing and transit use
D. Enhanced enforcement of Dade County anti -tampering and
fuel snitching ordinance
F. Mandatory emissions control device inspection program.
8. In the event that a Transportation Control Measures Ordinance
pursuant to Condition 7 above is not adopted by the Miami City
Commission vithin 18 months of the effective date of this
Development Order, then this situation vill be considered a
substantial deviation from the mitigative efforts anticipated to
offset the adverse impacts of proposed development to the existing
transportation netvork. In this event, the Applicant shall be
required to undergo additional Development of Regional Impact
reviev for transportation impacts pursuant to s. 380.06 (19)(a)(g)
53
8'7-1149
01
C
004
and (h), F.S.(1986). Such additional Development of Regional
Impact reviev, if required, shall be initiated by the Applicant
vithin 90 days of the identification of its need.
9. Integrate all original and supplemental ADA information into a
consolidated Application for Development Approval (CADA) and submit
two copies of the CADA to the Council, one copy to the City of
Miami and one copy to the Florida Department of Community Affairs
within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the Development
Order. The CADA shall be prepared as follows:
a. Where new, clarified, or revised information vas prepared
subsequent to submittal of the ADA but prior to issuance of
the D0, whether in response to A formal statement of
Information needed or otherwise, the original pages of the ADA
will be replaced with revised pages.
b. Revised pages will have a "Page Number (R) - Date" notation,
with "Page Number" being the number of the original page,
"(R)" indicating that the page vas revised, and "Date" stating
the date of the revision.
10. Prepare an annual report in accordance vith the requirements
specified in Condition 19 herein and submit copies to the Council,
Dade County, and the Florida Department of Community Affairs on or
54
87-1149
.,
t
3
before each anniversary date of the Development Order. The annual
report for the Downtown Miami - Increment I must also be
incorporated into the annual report required in the Downtown Miami
- Master Development Order so that a single annual report is
compiled for the entire project.
11. Vithhold the issuance of any building permits if the City has been
determined to be in non-compliance with Condition 5 herein.
12. Establish December 31, 1992 as the date until vhi'ch the City agrees
that the Downtown Miami - Increment I Development of Regional
Impact shall not be subject to dovn-zoning,'unit density reduction,
gr intensity reduction, unless the City can demonstrate that
substantial changes in the conditions underlying the approval of
the development order have occurred, or that the development order
was based on substantially inaccurate information, or that the
change is clearly essential to the public health, safety, or
welfare.
13. Establish compliance dates, including a deadline for commencing
physical development and for compliance vith conditions of approval
or phasing requirements, and include a termination date that
reasonably reflects the time required to complete the development.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the deadline for commencing
development shall be one (1) year from the effective date of the
55
9'7-1149
Development Order. The termination date for completing development
shall be December 319 1992 provided that the City complies with
Condition 22 herein. The termination date may only be modified in
accordance with s. 380.06(19)(c), Florida Statutes, 1985.
14. Identify in the DRI Development Order any approved development,
Including the acreage attributable to each approved land use, open
space, areas for preservation, and green belts; and the structures
and/or improvements to be placed on the property, including
locations, acreages, gross square footage, number of units, and
othgr major characteristics or components of the development.
15. 1�stablish the effective date of the Development Order as 45 days
from transmittal of the Downtown Miami - Increment I Development
Order to the Florida Department of Community Affairs and Council;
9'
provided, however, that if the Development Order (DO) is appealed,
the effective date of the DO will not start until the day after all
appeals have been withdrawn or resolved pursuant to s. 380.07(2),
Florida Statutes.
16. Meet the following State criteria for issuance of a DRI Development
Order:
8'7-1149
C-
_
K
{i
C. .. j
1
/--N ew*A
a. The DRI Development Order shall specify:
• The name of the development.
• The authorized agent of the developer.
• The name of the developer.
• A statement that:
- The Application for Development Approval (ADA) is
approved; or
- The ADA is approved subject to conditions, specifying
the conditions, or
The ADA is denied, specifying the reasons for denial and
changes in the development proposal, if any, that vould
make it eligible to receive a development approval.
b. Findings of fact and conclusions of lav addressing vhether and
the extent to vhich:
• The development unreasonably interferes vith the
achievement of the objectives of an adopted state land
development plan applicable to the area; and
• The development is consistent vith the local land
development regulations and the adopted local comprehensive
u
plan;
• The development vill be consistent with the recommendations
i
of the Council DRI Assessment pursuant to s. 380.06(12)0
Florida Statutes; and
57
8'7-1149
is
a
i
• The development makes "adequate provision for the public
facilities needed to accommodate the impacts of the
proposed development" or the City commits in the '
Development Order to provide these facilities consistent with the DRI development schedule.
C. A legal description of the property including acreage.
17. Not violate any of the conditions of the DRI Development Order or
otherwise fail to act in substantial compliance with the
Development Order or permit any property owner within the
boundaries covered by this Development Order to violate any of the
provisions of the Development Order. In the event any entity
controlled by the City or any permitter or landowner of any tract
or portion of a tract violates (hereinafter "violator"), the
provisions of the Development Order, stay the effectiveness of the
Development Order as to the tract, or portion of the tract, in
vhich the violative activity or conduct has occurred and withhold
further permits, approvals, and services for development in said
tract, or portion of the tract, upon passage of any appropriate
resolution by the City, adopted in accordance with this section,
finding that such violation has occurred. The violator will be
given written notice by the City that states: 1) the nature of the
58
1
8 7-1149
w
f
purported violation, and 2) that unless the violation is cured
within 30 days of said notice, the City will hold a public hearing
to consider the matter within 60 days of the date of said notice.
In the event the violation is not curable in 30 days, the
violator's diligent good faith efforts to cure the violation within
that period will obviate the need to hold a public hearing and the
Development Order will remain in full force and effect unless the
violator does not diligently pursue the curative action to
completion within a reasonable time, in which event the City will
give 15 days notice to the violator of its intention to stay the
effectiveness of the Development Order and withhold further
permits, approvals, and services as to the tract, or portion of the
s
tract, in which the violation has occurred and until the violation
is cured. For purposes of this paragraph, the word "tract" shall
be defined to mean any development site for which a building permit
has been requested under the terms of this Development Order within
the area of proposed development identified on the Downtown Miami -
Increment I Master Development Plan (Exhibit 2). In addition, the
phrase "portion of a tract" means a division of a tract into more
than one ownership as created by deed or plat.
18. Designate an official to monitor compliance with all conditions of
the Development Order and specify monitoring procedures that, at a
minimum, require Development Order conditions to be reviewed by the
City prior to issuance of any local development permit.
i
,l
59
87-1149
f -
:n .F
i�
t
t-
1,
1A
} rpj�yST�'oil
'
r.,
19. Require that an annual report be submitted to the Council, City,
and DCA on each anniversary of the effective date of the
Development Order, vhich report shall include, at a minimum:
a. A complete response to each question in Exhibit 3.
b. Identification and description of any changes in the plan of
development, or in the representations contained in the ADA,
or in the phasing for the reporting year and for the next
year.
C. A summary comparison of development activity proposed and
actually conducted for the year.
• t
d. Identification of undeveloped tracts of land, other than
individual single family lots, that have been sold to a
separate entity or developer.
e. Identification and intended use of lands purchased, leased or
optioned by the developer adjacent to the project site since
the Development Order vas issued.
f. An assessment of compliance with the conditions contained in
the DRI Development Order and the commitments vhich are
contained in the Application for Development Approval.
60
--1149
i
t
g. Specification of any amended DRI Application for Development
Approval or requests for a substantial deviation determination
that were filed in the reporting year and to be filed during
the next year.
h. An indication of change, if any, in local government
jurisdiction for any portion of the development since issuance
of the Development Order.
i. A list of significant local, state and federal permits which
have been obtained or which are pending by agency, type of
permit, permit number, and purpose of each.
J. A statement that all persons have been sent copies of the
4
annual report in conformance with s. 380.06(14) and (16), ,
Florida Statutes.
e
k. A copy of any recorded notice of the adoption of the
Development Order of any subsequent modification that was
recorded by the Applicant pursuant to s. 380.06(15)9 Florida
Statutes.
1. Copies of one of the following documentations of appropriate
disposal of all hazardous waste: —
61
8'7--1149
t
4�
t
E
t
�
Wr
1
i
d
K
e a hazardous waste manifest;
• a bill of lading from a bonded hazardous waste transporter
indicating shipment to a licensed hazardous waste facility,
or
• a confirmation of receipt of material from a recycler, a
waste exchange operation, or other permitted hazardous
waste management facility.
m. . Any other information required by the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) in accordance with s. 380.06(14) and (16),
Florida Statutes (1985).
The annual report for the Downtown Miami - Increment I must also be
incorporated into the annual report required in the Downtown Miami
- Master Development Order so that a single annual report is
compiled for the entire project.
r:
20. Incorporate the Consolidated Application for Development Approval,
as revised pursuant to Condition 9, by reference into the -
Development Order for Downtown Miami - Increment I. as follows::
( "The Consolidated Application for Development Approval is {.a
incorporated herein by reference and relied upon by the
parties in discharging their statutory duties under Chapter
380, Florida Statutes, and local ordinances. Substantial
0
I
compliance with the representations contained in the
Application for Development Approval is a condition for
approval unless waived or modified by agreement among the
Council and the City."
21. Incorporate the Council DRI Assessment by reference into the
Development Order.
22. Require, within 30 days of the effective date of the Development
Order, recordation of the Downtown Miami • Increment I Development
— Order with the Clerk, Dade County Circuit Court, pursuant to s.
380.06(15), Florida Statutes (1986), specifying that the
Development Order runs with the land and is binding on the
Applicant, its successors, and/or assigns, jointly or severally.
23. Attach copies of all exhibits referenced in the DRI Development
Order.
24. For the purposes of these recommendations, a building permit can be
defined as a permit for any construction which will result in a net
increase in development. This definition excludes renovation
construction activity and reconstruction activity to replace
existing development. -
25. It is recommended that, pursuant to s. 380.06(16), F.S. (1986), the
City receive a credit for any fees for services and improvements `
paid under this Development Order by the Applicant and/or the City
63"-
8'7-ILIL49
r -
f
i
compliance with the representations contained in the
Application for Development Approval is a condition for
approval unless waived or modified by agreement among the
Council and the City."
21. Incorporate the Council DRI Assessment by reference into the
Development Order.
22. Require, within 30 days of the effective date of the Development
Order, recordation of the Downtown Miami - Increment I Development
Order with the Clerk, Dade County Circuit Court, pursuant to S.
380.06(15), Florida Statutes (1986), specifying that the
Development Order runs with the land and is binding on the
Applicant, its successors, and/or assigns, jointly or severally.
23. Attach copies of all exhibits referenced in the DRI Development
Order.
24. For the purposes of these recommendations, a building permit can be
defined as a permit for any construction which will result in a net
increase in development. This definition excludes renovation
construction activity and reconstruction activity to replace
existing development.
25. It is recommended that, pursuant to s. 380.06(16)0 P.S. (1986)9 the
City receive a credit for any fees for services and improvements
paid under this Development Order by the Applicant and/or the City
63
q
87-1149
against any impact fees that may be charged in the future by the
implementation of any local government impact fee ordinance for
such services and improvements.
64
j METROMOVER EXHIBIT =-
SOUTH Stage II Improvements
FLORDA
REGONAL. • MUROMOVER EXTENSION
PLAN *:IE NOT TO -
COUNC� Source: AOA SCALE
t-
_ fi5
8'7-1149
f -
1
-Itttlitl
ow—
rr
�a-rrs.�it .
1 .1\\,14,
!§. �IJMZ
MO.
..I�IAC,1R1Hl1fi
N%% 11 Sr • - s ,.
i�..............
NN 6 St
NN' S STI XCEc
Sw 1 sT
SIA 3 Si. .. �=-
SV1 i S1ae� a
n ...
SN S St
Wr 6 ST
5%% 7 S;
SM 8 ST•---�_ a
SN 9 SP= — t _
1
i0b
110D
SOUTH
FLORIDA
REGIONAL
PLANNING
COUNCIL
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Central Commercial
High Intensity
rr
Government Office
Institutional
General Commercial
Moderate Intensity
Special Mixed Use
Liberal Commercial
Wholesale Industrial
tvvw
�
Parks
� 6 S7-1149
EXHIBIT
2
0
NOT TO
SCALE
STATE OF FLORIDA BLW'1-07-85
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
BUREAU OF LAND AND WATER MANAGEMENT
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8244
(904) 488-4925
Subsection 380.0606110 Florida Statutes, places the
responsibility on the developer of an approved development of
regional impact (DRI) for submitting an annual report to the
local government, the Regional Planning Council the Department
of Community Affairs, and to all affected permit agencies, on the
date specified in the Development Order. The failure of a
developer to submit the report on the date specified in the
development order may result in the temporary suspension of the
development order by the local government until the annual report
is submitted to the review agencies. This recuirement ao »lies to
all developments of regional impact which have been aporoved
since August 6, 1980. If you have any questions about this
required report, call the DRI Enforcement Coordinator at,
(904) 488-4925.
Please send the original completed annual report to the
designated local covernment official stated in the development
order with (1) co.y to each of the following:'
a) The regional planning agency of jurisdiction;
c) All affected permitting agencies;
c) Devision of Resource Planning and Vanagement
Bureau of Land and Water Managemenr
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Please fcrmat your Annual Status Report after the 4crTat example
provided telow.
ANNUAL STATUS REPORT
Reporting Period: to
Montn Day Year Month/Day/Year
Development:
Name of Oki
Location: ,
City County
Developer: Name:
Company Name
Address:
Street Location
City, STaTe, Zip Coca
67
{
T.�
K
4,
M
1
1
I
Pppo,
!
SLWM-07-,
-1` 1 "
Page Two
1) Describe any changes made in the or000sed plan of
development, phasing, or in the representations contained in the
Application for Development Approval since the Development of
-
Regional Impact received approval. Please note any actions
(substantial determinations) taken by local government to address
these changes.
Note: if a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit 'A' a detailed description of each change and copies of
the modified site plan drawings. Exhibit 'A' should also address
the following additional items if applicable.
a) Describe changes in the plan of development or phasing
for the reporting year and for the subsequent years;
b) State any known incremental DRI applications for
development approval or reouests for a substantial
deviation determination that were filed in the reporting
year and to be filed during the next year;
c) Attach a copy of any notice of the adoption of a
development order or the subsequent modification of an
adopted development order that was recorded by the
developer pursuant to Subsection 380.06(14)(d), F.S.
—
2) Has there been a change in local government jurisdiction
for -Iny portion of the development since the development order
was issued? If so, has The annexing local government adopted a
new Development of Regional Impact development order for the
_
project? Please provide a copy of the order a�opted by the
annexing local government.
3) Provide cozies of any revised raster plans, incremental
site plans, etc., not previously submitted.
�.
Note: if a response is to be more than one or two sentences,
attach as Exhibit
4) Provide a summary comparison of development activity
proposed and actually conducted for the reporting year.
_
Example: Number of dwelling units constructed, site improve-
ments, lots sold, acres mined, gross floor area constructed,
barrels of storage capacity completed, permits obtained, etc.
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit 'C'.
5) Have any undeveloped tracts of land in the development
(other than individual sinale-family lots) been sold to a
separate entity or developer? If so, identify tract, its size,
and the buyer. Please provide maps which show the tracts
involved.
Tract _Wyer
68
87-1149
IC
1 Ob
-
1 �9 -
OLWM-07-85 �
page Three
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit
6) Describe any lands purchased or optioned adjacent to the _
original Development of Regional Impact site subsecuent to
issuance of the development order. Identify such land, its size,
and intended use on a site plan and map.
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as
Exhibit 'E'/
7) List any substantial local, state, and federal permits -
which have been obtained, applied for, or denied, during this
reporting period. Specify the agency, type of permit, and duty
for each.
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach as —
Exhibit 'F'.
8) Assess the development's and local government:s
continuing compliance with any conditions of approval contained
in the DRI development order.
Note: Attach as Exhibit 'G'. (See attached form)
9) Provide any information that is speci4'=ally required
by the Development Order to be included in the annual report.
10) Provide a state-ent certifying that all persons have
been sent copies cf the annual re:crt in confcr-Bnce with
Subsections 380.06(14) and (16), F.S.
Person coToletinc the questionnaire:
Title:
Representing:
{
F
69
8 7-114s
'a
77