Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
M-84-0229
A �J��JC�T�C JGXiCKi��iC �C��G �G JC SPI-7 ZONING PRESENTATION A 0 716 6V 84 -2255. . ��ff III r._ C - (9110110 SUITE. 2600 • ONE BISCAYNE TOWER 2 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD MIAMI. FLORIDA 33131 • (.305) 358 INN) REALTORS" Februar 14 1984 (MrtfPR(t4t R""r SIRr.if Y , n11 Fr OPW V s1tF.$ LF.1 C! dA1)V�11rrW%I MIAMI PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Aaron J. Manes Patricia Kolski Donald Benjamin Tomas Diego Lorenzo Lusces Eladio Armesto-Garcia Jose Correa Dorothy Spohn RE: SPI-7 ZONING DISTRICT Dear Board Member, In the late 19701s, in anticipation of the Rapid Transit System approved for Dade County via the 1972 DECADE OF PROGRESS BOND ISSUE, the City of Miami initiated professional planning studies to sensibly plan and encourage development and/or redevelopment for property within a convenient walking distance of the Brickell Metrorail Station. On April 23, 1981, the Miami City Commission approved the "Brickell Station Area Plan" (A/K/A 111981 MASTER PLAN"). The adopted MASTER PLAN was the culmination of approximately four years (or more) of study, expense, time and energy expended from all segments of our community, private and public sectors, including local, State and Federal agencies. A partial list of contributors (of professional expertise or financial assistance or both), to the 1381 ;MASTER PLAN were, but not limited to: 1.) All Dade County citizens who voted in favor of the 111972 DECADE OF PROGRESS" Bond issue which included approval.of the "Rapid Transit System" 2.) Citizens Committees NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OFRFALTORS(k . SOCIF.T)' O[-'I.%'DL'STRIAI. RF.AI.TORSS - I.N'Dfl']DUAL AfEMBERSNIP MORTGAGE' BAA*KF.RS ASSOC'IATION... ACCREDITED AIANAGFMENT ORGANIZATION®... REAI.TORS NATIONAL MARKETING INSTITUTEG AMFRICAN SOCIETY OF RF.A1. FSTATF COUNSELORS ... AMERICAN SOCIETY OF APPRAISERS ... INSTITUTE OF REAL ES TATEMANAGEMF.NT INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE FEDF.R:1 TION ... BL'!l.DLti'G Uii'.1'/:RS AA'U.11AA'ACERS ASSOC/ATIOA .�.'�"C' SPI-7 ZONING DISTRICT February 14, 1984 Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3.) City of Miami Planning Department 4.) City of Miami Zoning Department 5.) Planning Advisory Board (Miami) 6.) City Commission (Miami) 7.) Metro -Dade Office of Transportation 8.) Kaiser Transit Group 9.) Dade County Board of Commissioners 10.) DDA (Downtown Development Authority) 11.) Property Owners, Agents, etc. 12.) UMPTA (Urban Mass Transportation Administration) 13.) U.S. Department of Transportation 14.) and many, many other groups from the private and public sectors on local, State and/or Federal levels The 1981 MASTER PLAN, after tremendous input and study from the above agencies and groups, was unanimously passed and adopted by the City of Miami Planning Advisory Board and ultimately by the Miami City Commission on April 23, 1981. The adopted 1981 MASTER PLAN concluded and recommended the following policies: ..."The 3rickzll Corridor (that is, from Brickell Avenue EAST to Biscayne Bay) should remain the same... "MAINTAIN EXISTIN3 R-CB DISTRICT"..."NJ CHANGE IN CURRENT POLICY; REQUIRE NE4 DEVELOPMENT TO MAINTAIN CHARACTER AND INTENSITY OF EXISITNG DEVELOPMENT" ...BECAUSE A :SELL ESTABLISHED PRECEDENT FOR DEVELOPMENT MAKES ANY CHANGES IN CHARACTER INFEASIBLE OR IMPRACTICAL". 8 t -2iv5 SPI-7 ZONING DISTRICT February 14, 1984 Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CONCURRENTLY, the 1981 MASTER PLAN concluded and recommended that the ar93 NO'd known as SPI-7 should: ..."BE THE HUB OF ACTIVITY IN THE BRICKELL AREA" ... "THE ENTIRE AREA IS WITHIN A CONVENIENT TWO -BLOCK WALK OF THE STATION"..."TRANSIT RIDERSHIP SUBSTANTIANY ABOVE AREA WIDE AVERAGES CAN BE EXPECTED FROM THIS AREA"... AND perhaps the most significant adopted plan for the SPI-7 are3 was succinctly stated in the 1981 MASTER PLAN as follows: ..."THE TOTAL ACCUMMULATED FLOOR AREA POTENTIAL IS INTENDED TO PERMIT A LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT WITH A COMPETITIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE OVER ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS AND OF SUFFICIENT MASS TO PROVIDE ITS OWN SPECIAL IDENTITY and ENVIRONMENT"... (NOTE: We suggest that the "alternative locations" above refers to the BRICKELL CORRIDOR.) 84-AZ 9- . i SPI-7 ZONING DISTRICT February 14, 1984 Page 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The 1981 adopted MASTER PLAN wisely concluded that the SPI-7 area must have the highest development intensity in the entire Brickell study area because the best way to ensure ridership of the Metrorail is to encourage development next to the Brickell Station. However, since the 1981 MASTER PLAN, zoning changes in the Brickell Corridor (SPI-5) have occurred, which serve to actually encourage development AWAY FROM THE STATION, thereby, reversing the policies of the 1981 MASTER PLAN which prudently encouraged development CLOSE TO THE STATION. The development of the SPI-7 area is critical to the success of the Brickell Metrorail Station. The SPI-7 area needs development incentives to overcome the overwhelming competitive advantages of the Brickell Corridor which are a Brickell Avenue or Bayshore Drive address and a view of Biscayne Bay. These amenites are the predominate reasons why the Brickell Corridor has and will continue to develop and the SPI-7 has essentially remained "dormant". Although the SPI-7 area is adjacent to the station, it may continue to remain underdeveloped unless the adopted principles of the 1981 LISTER PLAN are re-established. The 11SPI-7 OWNER'S SPONSORED AMENDMENT" will partially re-establish the MASTER PLAN'S policies of encouraging development next to the Brickell Station and therefore sitmulate Metrorail ridership. We urge you to seriously examine this presentation and the facts herein and respectfully request your approval of the 11SPI-7 owner's amendment" above. RLR/ jm. SAeRt#4- y/Aresident 84- Z, ;:J TABLE OF CONTENTS TOPIC PAGE COVER LETTER TO MIAMI PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ........................ .. TABLE OF CONTENTS...................................................0 .. PREFACE** ...... ...... e..6#o. 1 R-CB ZONING - 1970 to 1981........................................... 2 1970 — 1981 CITY ZONING MAP .............. 6........................... 3 TRANSIT ZONING PER 1981 MASTER PLAN .................................. 4 1981 MASTER PLAN ZONING MAP .......................................... 5 CURRENT ZONING - ORDINANCE 9500 ............................. I........ 6 CURRENT ZONING MAP (SPI-5 and SPI-7)................................. 7 SUMMARY OF ZONING TRANSITION FROM 1981 MASTER PLAN TO CURRENT ZONING. 8 CONCLUSIONS -ZONING TRANSITION 1981 TO DATE (from Master Plan - MXD-1 TO Ordinance 9500 - SPI-7)................. 10 BRICKELL STATION GRAND OPENING BROCHURE (Dedication Ceremonies, February 10p 1984)........................... 11 SPI-6 ZONING - ORDINANCE 9500 ESTABLISHES 12001 AS WALKING DISTANCE.. 13 ONE-WAY WALKING DISTANCES (MAP FROM BRICKELL STATION TO SPI-5 AREA... 14 WALKING DISTANCES (CHART) TO EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED BUILDINGS INSPI-5 FROM BRICKELL STATION ....................................... 15 CORRESPONDING MAP OF ABOVE BUILDINGS SHOWING LOCATIONS WITHINBRICKELL CORRIDOR ............................................. 16 WALKING DISTANCES (MAP) TO SPI-7 AREA FROM/TO BRICKELL STATION....... 17 MAP INDICATING THOSE SPI-7 OWNERS IN FAVOR (RED) OF UPGRADINGSPI-7 ZONING ............................................... 18 SPI-7 OWNER'S SPONSORED AMENDMENTS from: THE ALLEN MORRIS COMPANY ................................ 19 from: WENZEL INVESTMENT COMPANY....** .... 21 from: MICHEL E. ANDERSON, ATTORNEY, OF BEHALF OF ALMAGON, INC. 22 "LIFT MANDATE" LETTER TO MAYOR FERRE dated May 4, 1981................ 24 EXCERPT FROM 1981 MASTER PLAN STUDY AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY THE ALLEN MORRIS COMPANY for SPI-7 AREA .............................. 27 EXCERPT FROM 1981 MASTER PLAN STUDY "INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE 311 (F.A.R. DENSITIES CONSIDERED FOR SPI-79 SPI-59 ETC.) ................. 28 PREFACE TO PRELIMINARY "AMENDMENT" ................................... 29 GENERAL DETAILED SUMMARY TO THE "SPI-7 OWNER'S AMENDMENT" from THE ALLEN MORRIS COMPANY ........................................ 30 FINAL COMMENTS and RECOMMENDATION .................................... 44 PREFACE "OVERVIEW OF THIS PRESENTATION" This presentation is purposely structured to give the reader a brief factual history of the Brickell Area zoning., beginning in approximately 1970 and ending as of current date, February 1984. The purpose of this zoning history is to factually illustrate the transition in the Brickell zoning from the Adopted 1981 Master Plan to date. As will become evident to you, the SPI-7 area has suffered greatly in said transition due to the zoning changes in the Brickell Corridor (SPI-5). ►fir-AQ 0.0 D , R-CB ZONING The City of Miami zoning from approximately 1970 to 1931 was as depicted on the facing page. The SPI-5 (Brickall Corridor) and SPI-7 were essentially indentical in zoning, that is, R-CB. The development potential (F.A.R.) allowed under R-CB was depicted below (assume ONE 50' x 150' lot - 7,500 sq.ft.): BASE F.A.R.: F.A.R. WITH BONUSES: NET LOT AREA: DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITH ALL BONUSES: -R-CB- (SPI-5 ) (SPI-7 ) 1.5 1.5 2.5 2.5 7,500sf 7,500sf 18,750sf 18,750sf CONCLUSION: SPI-7 and SPI-5 had essentially equal zoning from 1970 to 1981, M/L. © Lie W.A .w. "TRANSIT ZONING" The adopted 1981 Jaster Plan approved the zoning depicted on the facing page. Please note that the SPI-5 area (Brickell Corridor) remained R-CB. Conversely, to encourage Metrorail ridership via new zoning development incentives, the SPI-7 area was zoned `4XD-1 . The Development Potential allowed under each zoning is outlined belo�+ (assume one 50' x 150' Lot - 7,500 sa.ft.): BASE F.A.R.: F.A.R. 4ITH BONUSES: NET LOT AREA: DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITH ALL BONUSES: R-CB t4XD-1 (SPI-5 ) (SPI-7 ) 1.5 3.0 2.5 7.0 7,500sf 7,5003f 18,750sf 52,500sf CONCLUSION: Since the SPI-7 (A XD-1) area is CLOSEST (within 3 1,200 foot w3l;tia; distance and less) tc the Brickell Station the 1981 Master Plan concluded that the SPI-7 must have the highest development intensity to encourage development and thus, Metror3il ridership. I tat t ? I :-1 Tv: 7QNljj Aa—PER ADOPT D l -H lit1 W -� � � � � _ 1 Elf l l_fT E 1E1 � � E f f ff E� f I=f�� ��= �f 1� t I�� . � _ 1 �►off E f � . _ 4� _� _- : _ ft1ill ff[ETI1111111H EPP I Ij J LL 11-1 R-CB P-P 1 11 [lV4-U1-=1 —"lTTMTl LLL—=Aw VM Metrorail StaLlor, Awl, cis P-R] —,R JIM .2 -Y P-R R-5 Note: 1. Brickell Corridor Remained R-CB 2. Area East of Station changed to MXD-) CO PrOl!)Ort! next to station. lot 84 x-,,M ORDINANCE 9500 The current (February 1984) City of Miami zoning map is depicted on the facing page. Please note the SPI-5 (Brickell Corridor) and the SPI-7 areas. The development potential allowed under each zoning is outlined below (assume ONE 50' x 15V Lot - 7,500 sq.ft.) BASE F.A.R.: F.A.R. WITH BONUSES: GROSS LOT AREA: DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITH ALL BONUSES: SPI-5 SPI-7 3.25 2.25 6.25 5.35 10,250sf 8,7505f 64,063sf 46,813sf CONCLUSION: Contrary to the 1931 Master Plan, the development incentives have now shifted to the Brickell Corridor (SPI-5) and away from the Brickell Station instead of the 1981 'faster Plan which adopted the highest development incentives in the SPI-7 area CLOSE TO THE BRICKELL STATION. SU �4MARY OF BRICKELL ZONING TRANSITION from the 1981 MASTER PLAN to the current ORDINANCE 9500 (ASSUME: ONE 50' x 150' Lot or 7,500 sq.ft.) BRICKELL CORRIDOR SPI-5 1981 MASTER PLAN SPI-5 (ORD. 9500) F.A.R. WITH BONUSES: 2.5 6.25 GROSS LOT AREA: 7,500sf 10,250sf DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITH ALL BONUSES: 18,7503f 64,0633f CONCLUSION: The development potential of the Brickell Corridor (3PI-5) is NOW 3421 of what was adopted under the 1981 Master Plan for the Brickell Area. SPI-7 1981 MASTER PLAN TSPI-7 (3RD.9500) F.A.R. WITH BONUSES: 7.0 5.35 GROSS LOT AREA: 8,750sf 8,750sf DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 4ITH ALL BONUSES: 61,250sf 46,813sf CONCLUSION: The development potential of the SPI-7 area is now 29% less than what was adopted under the 1981 Master Plan. SUMMARY OF BRICKELL ZONING TRANSITION from the 1981 MASTER PLAN to the current ORDINANCE 9500 (ASSUME: ONE 501 x 1501 Lot or 7,500 sq.ft.) F. A. R. WITH BONUSES: GROSS LOT AREA: DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITH ALL BONUSES: BRICKELL CORRIDOR SPI-5 1981 MASTER PLAN SPI-5 (ORD. 9500) 2.5 6.25 7,500sf 10,250sf 18,7503f 64,0633f CONCLUSION: The development potential of the Brickell Corridor (SPI-5) is NOW 342% of what was adopted under the 1981 Master Plan for the Brickell Area. F. A. R. 'IITH BONUSES: :CROSS LOT AREA: DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 4ITH ALL BONUSES: SPI-7 1981 MASTER PLAN I SPI-7 (ORD.9500) 7.0 5.35 8,750sf 8,750sf 61,250sf 46,813sf CONCLUSION: The development potential of the SPI-7 area is now 29% less than what was adopted under the 1981 Master Plan. 0-1•') 84- 40AW . IN FACT, although the development potential of the SPI-7 area has been reduced by 29% due to the conversion from the 1981 Master Plan to ORDINANCE 9500, the "MIX OF USES" within the SPI-7 has been drastically altered even more detrimentally. **PLEASE NOTE FACTS BELOW** COMPARISON -"NON-RESIDENTIAL" USE ASSUME 1 LOT (7500 sq.ft. - 50' x 150') "PURE OFFICE" (ALL NON-RESIDENTIAL) 1981 MASTER PLAN I ORD. 9500 ' NET REDUCTIONS DUE MXD-1 I SPI-7 TO CONVERSION TO ORD. 9500 BASE F.A.R.: 3.0 2.25 (.75) LOT AREA: 7,500 sq.ft. 8,750 sq.ft. BLDG SQ.FT.: 22,500 sq.ft. 19,688 sq.ft. (2,812 sq.ft.) a 12.5% DECREASE FACT: The SPI-7 owners (whose Lot fronts on a 50' Street) can build 2,812 sq.ft. less office per 7,500 sq.ft. Lot under SPI-7 than MXD-1. ******************** COMPARISON - "RESIDENTIAL" USE ASSUME 1 LOT (7500 sq.ft. - 50' x 1501) "PURE RESIDENTIAL" (NO OFFICE) 1981 MASTER PLAN ORD. 9500 NET REDUCTIONS DUE ;4XD-1 SPI-7 TO CONVERSION TO ORD. 9500 BASE F.A.R.: 3.0 3.75 .75 increase LOT AREA: 7,500 sq-ft. 8,750 sq.ft. 3LD3 SQ.FT.: 22,500 sq.ft. 32,813 sq.ft. 10,313 sq-ft. increase 45.8% INCREASE 9 CONCLUSION ZONING TRANSITION FR0;4 1981 TO DATE FROM MASTER PLAN (MXD-1) TO ORDINANCE 9500 (SPI-7) The factual results of the conversion from the adopted 1981 master Plan (40-1) to ORDINANCE 9500 (SPI-7) are summarized below: rNET DECREASE IN NON-RESIDENTIAL (-12.5%) NET INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL 45.8% rNET DIFFERENCE 58.3% r rFACT: The current SPI-7 zoning is 58.3% different than the adopted 1981 MASTER PLAN. r r COMMENT: Due to the drastic difference in the current SPI-7 zoning versus the 1981 Master Plan zoning for SPI-7, we propose that the intent ` of the 1981 Master Plan be re-established, that is, encourage and offer development incentives to the SPI-7 area which is within 1 ' Station. convenient walking distance to the Brickell r IProgram OPENING and PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Honorable Stephen P Clark. Mayor Metropolitan Dade County INVOCATION Dr Irving Lehrman, Rabbi Temple Emanu-El, Miami Beach WELCOME The Honorable Maurice A. Ferre, Mayor City of Miami REMARKS The Honorable William E. Lehman U.S. House of Representatives -- 17th Congressional District The Honorable Claude Pepper U.S. House of Representatives 18th Congressional District The Honorable Clara Oesterle Commissioner, Metropolitan Dade County Chairperson, Transportation Committee Mr. M. R. Stierheim, County Manager Metropolitan Dade County CLOSING REMARKS Mr. Warren J. Higgins, Executive Director Metro -Dade Transportation Administration UNVEILING OF PLAQUE Mayor Clark BRICKELL STATION r METRORAIL's Brickell Station is in the city of Miami on SW 1 Avenue at 10th Street near the Brickell Avenue office district. This aerial center -platform station is designed to serve a daily ridership of more than 8,500. There are 20 kiss n' ride spaces and six bus bays to accommodate commuting passengers. However, most passengers are expected toC arrive by walking to the station. The Brickell Station platform is higher than most other stations. Consequently, Brickell Station has three levels: a ground level entrance with an elevator, escalators and stairways; a mezzanine level where fare collection gates are located. and the passenger loading platform. Government Center Station's platform level will be higher. rAs a c;est+nation station, Brickell serves the rapidly growing Brickell Avenue downtown satellite office district. It will olso tjt� a transfer point for a future stage of the METROMOVER system now under construct;on. The continued development of the area surrounding Brickell Station will provide opportunities for expanded retail, commercial, and entertainment industries. r r DEDICATION OF THE BRICKELL METRORAIL STATION 11:00 a.m., Friday, February 10, 1984 it 1984 i� tl �r A1r '7 �t� • Metropolitan Dade County BRICKELL STATION Board of County Commissioners Stephen P. Clark, Mayor Barbara M. Carey Harvey Ruvin Clara Oesterle Barry D. Schreiber Beverly B. Phillips Ruth Shack James F. Redford, Jr. Jorge E.Valdes M. R. Stierheim. County Manager Warren J. Higgins, Transportation Director General Architectural and Engineering Consultant —The Kaiser Transit Group, A Joint Venture: Raymond Kaiser Engineers, Inc. Harry Weese & Associates, Ltd. Post. Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. Carr Smith and Associates Schimpeler-Corradino Associates Russell, Martinez. Holt, Architects, Inc. —Station Designer Finch. Alexander, Barnes. Rothschild and Paschal, Inc.— Consulting Architect Martinez and Associates. P.A.—Civil, Structural, Electrical and Mechanical Engineer Seymour -Henderson -Rosenberg- Scully & Associates, A.S.L.A.— Landscape Architect METRO - Clark -Fitzpatrick, Inc. —General Contractor EXCt-RP'r FROM "WEA S P1-1 ZONING NX 0 &- ve E q 5,00 Temporary special events involving gatherings at opening ceremonies, special promotions, amusement activities, and the like, to the extent not otherwise licensed, controlled, or regulated under other City regulations, shall be permissible only by Class B Special Permit subject to the following conditions: I. Such use shall not be established for a period exeeding fifteen (15) days, nor shall any one location be used within ninety (90) days for a similar purpose. 2. No acoholic beverages shall be sold on the premises. SECTION 1565. RESERVED. SECTION 1566. MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS: FLOOR AREA LIMITATIONS 1566.1. Minimum Lot Requirements. There shall be no specific dimensional requirements, but lots shall be of sufficient size to conform with other requirements and limitations of these and other _ lawful regulations. c 1566.2. Floor Area Limitations. I. The floor area for commercial, office and other non residential use buildings shall not exceed: C. 6.0 times net lot area if the main building entrances is more than -- 1200 feet walking distance from a designated station mezzanine of — the Regional Rapid Transit system or 600 feet from a designed station mezzanine of the People Mover system. b. 8.0 times net lot area if the main building entrance is less than 1200 eet walking distance from a designated station mezzanine of the __- Regional Rapid Transit system or 600 feet from a designated station mezzanine of the People Mover system. — 2. The floor area for residential buildings shall not exceed 9.0 times net lot area. -- 3. The floor area for buildings containing a minimum of 25 percent residential and 25 percent non residential uses shall not exceed 10.5 times — net lot area. 1566.3. Minimum Open Soace Requirements. 1566.3.1. Front and Street Side Yards. 1. Adjacent to Biscayne Boulevard, all yards shall be 15 feet in minimum — depth. 2. Adjacent to other streets, front and street side yards shall be a minimum • of 5 feet in depth. — 3. Adjacent to N.E. 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th Terraces, there ore no minimum yard requirements. 1560.3.2. Other Yards. Except as greater dimensions are required for building spacing, there are no requirements for all interior yards (sine, rear, and special). r , minimum 15-37 - 84-'A'.tA1 ii ti 5 N WALK 1NG DISTANCES Buildings or Buildings under construction From Brickell Station to Existing ONE-WAY MILES: FEET: BUILDING: II SITE: .39 2050 Barnett Center it 1 .34 u 2 1800 799 Brickell Plaza 2300 .44 Nortrust 3 2150 .41 Flagship 4 1650 . 31 Citizens Federal ii 5 3600 .68 6 Brickell Bay if 3320 .63 General Development ° 7 2300 2200 .44 .42 Mutual of Omaha n 8 Interterra ri 9 2050 '39 1110 Brickell Avenue ii 10 TWO-WAY BUILDING: II SITE: FEET: MILS: Barnett Center 1 4100 .78 799 Brickell Plaza u 2 3600 .68 Nortrust 3 n 4600 .88 Flagship n 4 4300 .82 Citizens Federal ri 5 3300 .63 Brickell Bay 6 if 7200 1.36 if General Development 7 6640 1.26 �I Mutual of Omaha �� 8 -+400 I ' .83 Interterra �i 9 4600 ,gg 1110 Brickell :Avenue �� 10 � 4100 .78 -- SCAI E 15n = 1' r,rc k e] I tat ion to ExisLina or Pr000 d 8 ti ldin eL _ MIAMI El as PO �j��'j /y/�a� !. �• i-..., + t ��i•lip r � 1 t ,reyla[���»� - ' ��� 'D..� ✓ i�'�.1�, r //// � � �4�':�I�B D�� 1` :... `1 i� I I'�'ra,l'�t'•M» J _.►�'� �..,,... _-.� `;. J ,� lr . _ � � jj�� �J11 � ,nJ i �A •i/ �VISi : .---- Jy+.1 �~v�'it • r . .l i' �.��+ It 9° I • 'ht� .. + kG •.,r e� `r �, ; _ •r 1'r � .' ��--,, I -.� -tom'+l ..r r• `.. R".�� / i - �:d \ 11 r Sr`�i,�r r �i(,r '. ,. .r �'_ +•+p �Lit ,pA m`,S rr� n +~ t .;ri 1-1 _ •. • J 1 �•i�1Ic Ott k,j.et PA ' -l9 > �1Ww•� r 90% + of SPI-7ry, 4 AK r , is within �� `�••. eA 100 Ft. to 1200 Ft< J• "'Nw* walking distance i •�• f the METRORAIL Station;, IL In I U ,►. .,on �.�• 1 � III-��. `��,J`I tot '• . �J 171, w- .+, I �'+IItrorail �'��'-�,7_�,. J, JI_I �i tt j� �. ��E, t l ���-_ o-- . ,�••1� ..- .�•• s. tr tt•Eo. —tat ion II ' . 1 j • t":•rt ra :� -ram � J . rw6 • ii�-• l `ram , '�+' t ; 'Ho • t • � - �I �- --�- . ` F Via , w<' .'C' i•,'.�'Cl '� r: �-::�j Cr;•• ,- P S I .` 'tb'u+ k. ........ Dogs ew J. R �1T Lim �i .M.t� 6 • �, �.• cam: _ �, : � • -_. It v 1 •. lid - � E t / _ s pop, ct ,� . as iA ETRORAIL STATIU1 I------- - � •e�scn�t a�xrlcv.,o _tr,r_ I- I, 7 SPI-5 lr s a S1 r 1 Q Elm SPI.4 So, st s- Pi-7� s. Metrorail station f , t Legend 0 PR a Numbers tndtcate a o ; walking distances in feet. One -Way d 1 1• ~ ij W •: 1 a� 1 it / t• I A tl� N A PR1, 4 RG -3/7 ►' � way � i A (Do 0 IN IN IN l Prepared January 1r•, 199:1 Rf i/.1nRs' Mr. Sergio Rodriquez, Director City of Miami Planning Department 275 N.W. 2nd Street Miami, FL RE: SPI-7 ZONING DISTRICT Dear Director Rodriquez, This letter is written in response to your request made at the January 10, 1984 meeting between the Planning Department and the SPI-7 owners/agents, that is, to advise you of any proposed changes which we feel should be made in the pending SPI-7 Zonis:;. On behalf of 1000 Brickell Ltd., Realty Leasing Corporation of Georgia, The Allen Morris Company and many other concerned SPI-7 property owners who also support this general proposal, we would propose that the equitable zoning for the SPI-7 area be made substantially the same as that presently governing the SPI-5 area (the Prickell Corridor) with the exception that the SPI-7 be granted an additicnal base floor area ratio of 5.0 fcr an:' use, prior to any on —site residential bonuses. This proposal will partially re—establish the comparative density ratios adopted in 192, under thQ "'•laster Plan" zoning for the °rickey_ Area. We have made the request for an edditiona'_ 5.0 floor area ratio ba::ed upon the following fact::. 1. The Ci` anc; .1LL government 3tu'Ji��s have r e c c ;nized t desirabiiit;✓ ,or encouraging; the highest density ✓ develop. ent in the area adjacent to the 'letrcrjil Station for the purpose of stimulating ridership. . The City has enacted said principle atove (1.) by your adoption of the existing S?I-6 zoning ordinance which allows additi,n== L,,+: `i2or area rat.., for any use for s..ructures tu.lt in close proximity to "proposed" transit stations. =n ✓i w o. t.} : ,ct ::3t " .-;'=— district _s ccmp�tin .✓ith the :rickell Avenue Ccrriacr (SP:-5), which is perhaps Miami's most prestigious area and address, we feel additional base .`lour area ratio for any use is manadatcry if the City's adopted policy in paravraph one above is ever to become a reality the marketplace. �raiFrrr�riF�*iFi1r1i11rri1tt 1. 1lii• . it ;.1Cu. c l t l/0 "t- ,1, 111'+ ti•+ ll 71 4 /\1/i AI,.I I .'l I\l.11 i, " i; til;1Ql,1P u ilkT(-. :I-!11 .A'. Rti iC1u+';IIIW. it'i71! 1)ll'1:+.'I 1'•I :!i "K. 1 •!/ii. +', n'i~i. 'k'\ l);t+', .i At 7!'• i\�T!T'Tf� 1lit t. c r /1 i J' l I? 1l 1 1! i.\If�l'.'\�1 !/r)\ 1/. !;'1. 1/ L.S: I iMr. Sergio Rodriquez Prepared January 16, 19EL Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We also urge the Planning Department to relieve the restrictions currently imposed by the existing "light plane" ordinance as it pertains to the SPI= v district. We, of course, would have no objections to the continuation of the concept of a pedestrian mall on 10th Street (within SPr-7) and the additional zoning requirements that the mall would necessitate. However, since retail on 10th Street is a zoning requirement (not option@,), bonuses should be considered. In closing, on behalf of the above mentioned SPI-7 owners, et al, we hope and trust this streamlined SPI-7 proposal is responsive to your request and consequently, anticipate the City's serious consideration thereof in an earnest attempt to re-establish previously approved and adopted policies to encourage a successful Metrorail Transit, system. We welcome the opportunity to work with you and your staff in hopes of mutually supportinC, this "SF:-7 0.4ners Sponsored Amendment" . ThanE: you. Sincerely, THE ALLEN MOPFIS CD"Yh1;Y R. Larry Rentz Assistant to the Preridert RLRf' jm cc: Jack Luft Joyce Meyer,. . f course genera., nature' P.E. Mr. Rodrlque�.. tti�� at)��ve propose_ o. ccu. Je is In 1 however, we would be Glat '. - work wi tt'. you re_-,ard inC. the dPta i lr o.f t i;e propo�a' a your convenience, P:.east e4._ on me. I I I 11 I - L Mr. Sergio Rodriquez Prepared January 16, 1984 Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We also urge the Planning Department to relieve the restrictions currently imposed by the existing "light plane" ordinance as it pertains to the SPI-7 district. We, of course, would have no objections to the continuation of the concept of a pedestrian mall on 10th Street (within SPI-7) and the additional zoning requirements that the mall would necessitate. However, since retail on 10th Street is a zoning requirement (not optional), bonuses should be considered. In closing, on behalf of the above mentioned SPI-7 owners, et al, we hope and trust this streamlined SPI-7 proposal is responsive to your request and consequently, anticipate the City's serious consideration thereof in an earnest attempt to re-establish previously approved and adopted policies to encourage a successful Metrorail Transit system. We welcome the opportunity to work with you and your staff in hopes of mutually supporting this 11SPI-7 Owners Sponsored Amendment". Thank you. Sincerely, THE ALLEN MORRIS COMPANY R. Larry Rentz Assistant to the President RLRtjm cc: Jack Luft Joyce Meyers P.S. Mr. Rodriquez, the above proposal of course is general in nature, however, we would be glad to work with you regarding the details of the proposal at your earliest convenience. Please call on me. N to-"4 P.0 31 . iWENZEL INVESTIOENT CCMPA yY 801 Southwest 3rd Avenue • Miami, Florida 33130 • Telephone 305/858-8101 January 12, 1984 fir. Sergio Rodriguez Director of Planning C i t V of ;tiam 275 Second Street Miamd , FL Re: THE MXD STUDY - 1981 In accordance with MXD Zoning that was made at great tir..e and expense tc the Cit_: for develcpinq the higher densit:- suppert fer the Brickell Rapid Transit area, which later I resulted in t'-:e SPI-7 Zoning, we proceeded to design a building to ccmplement and support the Xe-tre Pail in acc-rd- ance with the now present SPI-7 Zoning. IWe are concerned that this SPI-7 area cicsest to the Rapi;: Transit Station will be adversely affected if the prcpese: zoning chances are enacted. IIn crder to initiate and promote develcpment- of the area therefore s pzc crt the Rapid Trans_t coals, the present ST'_- ' Zoning : hould� be maintained with the followi nc chances. 1. Have the residential buy out or similar to SPI-5 ' 2. Xaintain the present residential I:or.;:s ratio of 1-2 3. Do net institute a light plane height limitation in ' the SPI-7 area. Finally and most importantly, give SPI-7 the non-residential I base o; at least the sane as the other Rapi:3 Transit or People ~lover Station areas; ie: SPI-6 (Cnni People Mover area) ::hick is e aht ti,7es the net land area or sip: ti-es the gross land area, or the CBD-1 Zoning (Downtcwn Yetro Station) which area ' is closest in character to SPI-7 3s it also services the financial district of Miami. 1 %'er. tr: 1 y ..•curs, Peter :•,enzel President CC. Hcn . 2davor Maurice Ferre R. Wilson R. Kenzie WENZEL INVESTMENT COMPANY 801 Southwest 3rd Avenue • Miami. Florida 33130 • Telephone 305/858-8101 Januar•.• 12, 1984 Mr. Sergio Rodriquez Director of Planning City of miani 275 ::.w. Second Street Miami, FL Re: THE MXD STUDY - 1QQ1 ' In accordance with MXD Zoning that was made at great time and expense to the Cit.' for develcpina the hicher densit-% support for the Brickell ' Rapid Transit area, which later resulted in the SPI-7 Zoning, we proceeded to design a building to ccmplement and support the Metrc Pail in accc:d- ance with the now present SPI-7 Zoning. Lj tie are concerned that this SPI-7 area cicsest to the Racid Transit Staticn will be adversely affected if the prepese3 zoning chances are enacted. In order to initiate and prc.-;ote development of the area there -fore support the Rapid Transit goals, t!-e present Zoning should be maintained with the following chances. 1. Have the residential bu• out or similar to SFI-5 2. X.aintain the present residential bonus ratio of 1 3. Do not institute a light plane height limitation in the SPI-7 area. Finally and most importantly, give SPI-7 the non-residential base of at least the same as the other Rapia Transit or People "lover Station areas; ie: SPI-6 (C.:,ni People ?lover area) hich is eight ti.:.es the net land area or six tines the gross land area, or the CBD-1 ZoninR (Downtown Xetre Station) which area is closest in character to SPI-7 3s it also services the financial di=_rice of Xiani. Ver: truly _curs, Peter t•:enzel President CC. Her.. Mayor Maurice Ferre R. t; i lson R. Kenzie 13 1 MICHEL E. ANDERSON ATTORNEY AT LAW 520 BRICKELL KEY DPIVE OFFICE PLAZA SUITES 3015 • 3p7 MIAMI. FLORIOA 33131 13051 374.3800 January 16, 1984 Mr. Sergio Rodriguez Planning Director City of Miami. Attn: Mr. Jack Luft 275 Northwest 2nd Street Miami, Florida Dear Jack: I represent Almagon, Inc. the owner of 90,000 square feet of land in the SPI 7 district. When my client purchased this property, it was purchased on the basis and a philosophy that the SPI 7 District would permit the highest density in the Brickell area due to the proximity of the rapid transit station. My client has no objection to the construction of residential units on the property; however, it wishes to make maximum availability of the property for non- residential uses and let the market control as to how much residential should be placed on the property. It is important to note that although everyone believed that Rapid Transit would start service to this area in December of 1983, and even with the construction delays, Rapid Transit will probably serve this area by March of 1984, there is not one new major project that has been started in the SPI 7 District. At the same time, on Brickell Avenue there is no shortage of new projects. I believe that these are very telling signs which clearly indicate a need for providing incentives to the SPI 7 area. The current zoning in the SPI 5 District completely reverses the previous philosophy of providing greater development incentives to the area near the Transit Station and thus insures failure of the Brickell Station. Let me paint for you the following scenario: An individual leaves his home or apartment on West Kendall Drive, drives to the Dadeland Station, finds a place to park, goes up stairs, waits for a Rapid Transit Train, fights the crowd into the train, arrives at the Brickell StaITTon, fights the crowd out of the train, goes to the mezzanine, awaits the people mover, fights his way onto the people mover, arrives at the people mover station, goes down to ground level, walks a short distance to an office , ♦,Ta: 11 • "'A.A." t' �14 '64 i t I I 1 L I MR. JACK LUFT Page Two January 16, 1984 building, waits for an elevator, and finally arrives at his office. This is about all an individual will stand. In effect, I believe that even the requirement for riding the people mover is a good reason to retain SPI 7.1 and SPI 7.2. It is really too much to expect that same person to get out of the people mover and walk anywhere between a third of a male and a mile to an office building on Brickell Avenue. Thus, it seems clear from a logical stand point that neither the Rapid Transit Station nor the people mover will serve Brickell Avenue. Therefore, we are requesting the following modifications to the SPI 7 District: (1) Give the SPI 7 District the same provisions as the SPI 5 District, plus an additional permitted floor area of 4.0; (2) Completely eliminate light planes. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Cordially, v � MICHEL E. ANDERSON, ESQUIRE MEA/ag 1ri „'Wdj s SUITE 26M ON 2 SOUTH g(gC E BISCAI^YE TOWER MIAMI. FLOR)DA 3131E BOULEVARD (305) 359.1000...E RF.ALTORS • Cf?"OPC1AL 4 4%0L11'PL4I Otr Fr. OP4rt%7 SALt.S Lt ASrVr AND NA%A rt Ht:ST The Honorable Maurice Ferre City of Miami 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Re: City Commission Session on April 23, 1931, Brickell Station Area Plan, (Brickell Rapid Transit Station) Dear Mavor Ferre: On behalf of The Allen Morris Company and its clients I the purpose of this letter is to request that the mandate to build residential use buildings be lifted from the proposed T-MXD, zoning district, thereby allowing the free market to voluntarily determine the use of the land adjacent to the Rapid Transit Station as opposed to forcing the use via restrictive zoning. (See attached map for location of Area 1). In Area 1, the City Planners have recommended an accumulated floor area ratio of 7.0 inlcuding bonuses, however, a private property owner must build at least 33 1/3% of the building(s) in residential use to obtain the approved 7.0 density. Consequently, a private o�-.ner must "speculate" on residential use in this area to maximize the density recommended by the City Planners. I use the term "speculate" due to the fact that the market has heretofore not demanded new residential use in Area 1 but instead, office use and retail use as a logical extension of Brickell Avenue, which is the only direction office use can expand since all the Bayfront property is or will be consuruned by residential condominiums. In short, office use has no where to expand but west from Brice:ell Avenuo toward the Rapid Transit Station. It may be that residential use will be demanded by of the free and open market, if so, then course residential will be built in Area 1. But, if residen- tial is not demanded then the land in Area 1 will probably remain under -improved if residential is mandated via zoning and the ridership needed to support the Rapid Transit System will be depleted. 11 ` A. A . 'VATInVAL ASSOCIATIO.-,' OF RFALTORS"� SOCIETY OF I.\'DI'STR14l. RF.4I.TORS'9 - 1.%•DII-IDI'AL ilE.%IBERSHIP .4fORTr,4GF_B.4:AF.RSASSOCIATIO%' .. 4CCRi.D177'1)114%4(;11-%11•.%TOR(:4.%'ll,4TIO.%'I REALTORS NL ATIO.YALWARK£T1:G1TC'TFQ AAf£RICA.N'SOCII-,T)'OFRFAI.FST.4TF.COC'.%'SE•I.r)RS A%IFRICA.ISOC'11'TYOF4PPR4ffFRS... l%ST1TUT£OFRFAFST.aTF%IAAA.�AGF�1F`•T r.•rrn. . rr .• r r nt' r r r , r - rr-.r .. .. n• r .. .. r .. .. A ■ ■ � � ,c.f A►'t. SURF 2f+Ix) ONE RIS c.' AY^1F TO'1.'ER C� 2 ,0UTH RISCAYNE= ROI II.UVARD MIAMI, Fl_ORIDA 33131 0S) 3rAlow M.15' The Honorable 1;aurice Ferre City of Miami 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, Florida 331.33 Re: City Commission Brickell Station Transit Station) Dear Mavor F erre: Session on April 23, 19,1, Area Plan, (Bri.c ell i?a:yid On behalf of The Allen Morris Co , :)a;,r anc: its clients, the purpose of this letter is to recuest that the mandate to build residential use buildings be lifted from the proposed T-MXD, zoning district, there!:; allowing the free market to voluntarily deter-mi:le the use of the land adjacent to the Rapid Transit Station as opposed to forcing the use via restrictive zoning. (See attached map for location of :Area 1). In Area 1, the City Planners have recommended an accumulated floor area ratio of 7.0 inlcud4ng bonuses, however, a private property owner must build at least 33 1/3° of the buildings) in residential use to obtain the approved 7.0 density. Consequently, a private or;:ner mmust "speculate" on residential us,2 in this area to maximize the density reconmended by the City Planners. I use the term "speculate" due to the fact that the market has heretofore rot demanded new residential use in Area 1 but instead, office use and retail use as a logical extension of Bri.ckell Avenue, c..hich is the only direction office use can e:,pand since all the Bayfront property is or will be consu=med by residential condominiums. In short, office use hs no where to expand but West from Br;c;:ell Avenue toward' the Rapid Transit Station, V R£ALTOR.S• rnr.urcrr+r. Ai .nrs-nr+r nr r r ruv�.r 1- su r s rr+srvr; A.Yn NA 1+6r W T It ma..r be that residential use will be demanded by the free and open market, if so, then of course residential will be built in '.rea 1. But, if residen- tial is not demanded then the lard in Area 1 will probably remain underimiDroved if residential is mandated via zoning and the ridership needed to support the Rapid Transit System will be deoleted, .YATIOVAL ASSOCIATIO': OFRF.ALTORS" SOCIFTYOFINDC'STRIa1. RFAI.TORS`4 - I.YDIVIT) 'AL AlFiiBf.RSNIP MORTrAGEBAAA"FRSASSOC1ATIOV . 4CCRI01171) 114%4(;1.ill'ATOR(;i.�1t.4T.10A-' REALTORSA'ATIONA1. %YARKFTI%C!.�'ST1TC'TF� ASIERICANSOCIF.TVOFREAL F.ST.4TF. COUASELORS AllFR1G4.% Sr)C'!!'T)' ()r al"R41.cFRS.. INSTITC'TEOI•'RFAI. FSTaTF sl.a.%AG1'S11 `.T I 1 I I fl �•ti1: T{()i'.-''r?l�ln ,'l:?•.iri -, Win:-,-'-� in am in c?,.T nn^ Ilt :lf tl t= lr. rcr ;"....-... 1;'d dE'nSlty by the City Planners �)ilt rep-' CC t1Vf'1y re '1 -=:t Of you and the City Commissioners to seric�us]y ccns1:ter lifting the mandated residential uses in Area 1 and allow the market to seek its own level as to use and thereby insure that the land in Area 1 will be put to its "highest and best use", via the unhibited and voluntary interfacing of an open and free mar} -.et. Than}: you . Sincerely, Larry Rentz Assistant to the President LR/eg AttachTent cc: Theodore R. Gibson, City Cc�issicncr J. L. Plug, City C .:., ssicner Ar,;,ar o Lacasa, City Cc,-,mssicrer Joe Carollo, Cite Ca-mssioncr IjO and V. Gary, City Pa-nager L. Allen Morris, ChaiMan of the r.`oard, The Allen W. Allen !•?orris, President of The :Alen .•lorris Cc7---any G. Emerson Travis, Senior Vice president of The All,-!,' °Iorris Cc=.zany noT, ,an J . Buh naster, Vice Presia`nt of The Allen . ,C- - is N t r ~' 25 w I t I I I I IX - i AREA 4- J J-4 410 55 . 't " I', -', -I' � , A D C C-P P i Flom 19 $ I M A-si EK ?CA 4 Amendment 'Jo. AMEI jr)t'EI IT TO T-N1XD PROF'OSED HIGH DF-HSITY MIXF.[) (JY7, DISTRICT AREA Permitted t)ses: Include all existing P-CB & R-C-I '1 Lj- the T-,AXD uses listed. Conditional Uses: As stated in T-MXD Floor Area Ratio: Base of 6.0 IBonuses: (A) Lot Assemblage - .5 up to 200 feet of frontage with additional .5 for every 200 feet above Ist 200 feet and .25 for every 100 feet above =400 .feet. (B) 100`o structured parking -- 1.0 I(C) Open space - for each square feet of open space above required setback, 6 square feet of additional floor area up to .75 FAR bonus. ' (D) Preservation on site - .50 (E) For each square foot of residential, 3 s,ucre feet of office space up to 2.0 max. (F) Theatre - 250 seats, .25 bonus. I(G) Each square foot of ;round level retail. 2 square feet of residential and attic: everywhere in T-MXID, except; Alone: Mth Street, where a bonus of 4 squares feet of Office Space and 2 squ(ire feet of residential will apply for each square foot of ground level retail. ` Yard Areas: Some as existing - WK. everywhere except loth Street mall where no front yard setback will be required so as to cornple-nent "reauired" retail. IH e i ;ht: PJo limit - sarne as no.v - O.K. i�Uc�n Space: Residential - 120 square feet per unit, 70:'0 of which I open to sk•r - O.K. Pcrkinn: O.K. as per staff recommendation I P,-!aestrinn Streets: 70';0 of frontage on 10th Street and Ist avenue to retail uses - with above I to 4 bonus structure recited in (G). C - 29 Intensity Alternative 3 Maximum Increase w EXC'ERP7- `k0q l9?l R#S'-ER /:�anl 46 A --1 011 'WOW ", 110 Intensity Alternative 3 Maximum Increase 5 EYCEP,P7- R,4S/7P- ID64fV za 1111", t 46 PREFACE TO "SPI-7 OWNER'S AMENDMENT" SPONSORED BY THE ALLEN MORRIS COMPANY Due to insufficient time to adequately analyze the Planning Department's most recent proposal, (consisting of 42 pages presented to the SPI-7 owners at approximately 4:O0pm on February 14, 1984) the preliminary amendment generally detailed on the following page is subject to modification by The Allen Morris Company, subsequent to future meetings with the Planning Department and prior to the City Commission Hearing scheduled for February 28, 1984. L SUT-VARY OF **PRELIMINARY#* 11SPY-7 OWNER'S AMENDMENT" SPONSORED BY THE ALLEN MORRIS COMPANY (See pages 19 and 20 for general proposal outlined in letter to Sergio Rodriquez, prepared January 16, 1984) "SPI-5 + 5.0" USE F.A.R. and BONUSES A.) BASE F.A.R. ANY USE 8.25 (3.25 + 5.0) B.) ADD BACK LOSS OF OPEN SPACE and PARKING BONUSES: .45 C.) RETAIL BONUS (for any use) 1. ON 10th STREET MALL 1.5 (1 sf RETAIL FOR 3 sf BONUS) 2. ELSEWHERE IN SPI-7 (.5) (1 sf RETAIL FOR 3 sf BONUS) (NOTE: The 1 for 3 retail bonus is identical to SPI-5) D.) 100% STRUCTURED PARKING 1.0 (75% Structured Parking) (.75) E.) "OFF -SITE" RESIDENTIAL BONUS FOR ANY USE (SEE BELOW#) F.) "ON -SITE" RESIDENTIAL BONUS FOR ANY USE G.) DAY CARE CENTER BONUS 2.75* (AS PROPOSED BY PLANNING DEPT.) 2.75 (1 sf RES. FOR 2 sf BONUS) (NOTE: The "on -site" Bonus ratio of 1 for 2 maintains the current SPI-7 zoning as originally adopted) "O.K." AS PROPOSED BY PLANNING DEPT. H.) THEATRE BONUS "O.K." AS PROPOSED BY PLANNING DEPT. (BELOW IS A SLIGHT MODIFICIATON TO THE "PLANNING DEPT.'S PROPOSED "BUY OUT" OR "BUILD NOW" OPTIONS) *OPTION TO "BUY OUT" OR "BUILD NOW" "BUY to City Housing for 1. If OUT", contribute $1.00 per sq.ft. program every 1.0 non-residential bonus up to maximum bonus of 2.75 to be used for any site within SPI-79 SPI-7.1 or 8PI-7.2 or within 1 mile of Brickell Station. 11 2. Build on -site now up to maximum bonus above as proposed by Planning Department. fq4-42;3 30 FINAL COMMENTS and RECOMMENDATIONS FINAL COMMENTS As evidenced from the facts herein this presentation, the ultimate "conversion" from the 1981 Master Plan (MXD-1) to the current Ordinance 9500 (SPI-7) has resulted in drastic, unfair alterations in the SPI-7 zoning district. These unexpected changes to the SPI-7 area are in contradiction to the adopted 1981 Master Plan and at least, an injustice to all the local, State and Federal agencies who contributed to the 1981 Master Plants formulation and adopted. In addition to the above, more intense immediate injustices and hardships have been suffered by the present SPI-7 owners which represent a combination of private property owners who: 1.) Are investors who purchased property in the SPI-7 district based on the 1981 Master Plan which permitted the highest density development in the entire Brickell Area due to the close proximity of the SPI-7 district to Brickell Station; and/or 2.) Are developers who have assembled property in SPI-7 based on the development incentives for SPI-7 under the 1981 Master Plan; 0"V 31 84.-22 s 0 FINAL COMMENTS and RECOMMENDATIONS 10 10 FINAL COMMENTS As evidenced from the facts herein this presentationg the ultimate "conversion" from the 1981 Master Plan (MXD-1) to the current Ordinance 9500 (SPI-7) has resulted in drastic, unfair alterations in the SPI-7 zoning district. These unexpected changes to the SPI-7 area are in contradiction to the adopted 1981 Master Plan and at least, an injustice to all the local, State and Federal agencies who contributed to the 1981 Master Plan's formulation and adopted. In addition to the above, more intense immediate injustices and hardships have been suffered by the present SPI-7 owners which represent a combination of private property owners who: 1.) Are investors who purchased property in the SPI-7 district based on the 1981 Master Plan which permitted the highest density development in the of entire Brickell Area due to the close proximity the SPI-7 district to Brickell Station; and/or 2.) Are developers who have assembled property in SPI-7 based on the development incentives for SPI-7 under the 1981 Master Plan; and/or 3.) Long-time owners of SPI-7 property who participated, as citizens, in the formulation of the 1981 'Master Plan and upon its adoption were very encouraged by the Optimistic and sensible Master Plan for SPI-7 only to become very disappointed in their property's future as currently zoned; and/or 4.) Long-time residents who plan to sell their property for the best price possibly and use the sale proceeds 10 for income in their retirement years; and/or 5.) Publicly owned property which is planned to be 10 offered to the market or may be offered to the market in hopes of generating monies from the sale or lease of the public property to use for general public purposes to serve our community. WM FINAL RECOMMENDATION On behalf of the SPI-7 owners who are in favor of upgrading the current SPI-7 (essentially 100% of the owners contacted) zoning ordinance to reflect the intent of the adopted 1981 Master Plan, that is, to ensure a successful Metrorail Brickell Station by allowing the SPI-7 area to be developed at an VMintensity in excess of any other district in the Brickell area, due to SPI-71s close proximity to the Station, we respectfully urge you to approve the 11SPI-7 owner' s amendment" sponsored by The Allen Morris Company on behalf of the vast majority of the SPI-7 property owners. Thank you. IN INg, r en s i to the resident 32 10 and/or 3.) Long-time owners of SPI-7 property who participated, as citizens, in the formulation of the 1981 Master Plan and upon its adoption were very encouraged by the Optimistic and sensible Master Plan for SPI-7 only to become very disappointed in their property's future as currently zoned; and/or 4.) Long-time residents who plan to sell their property for the best price possibly and use the sale proceeds for income in their retirement years; and/or 5.) Publicly owned property which is planned to be offered to the market or may be offered to the market in hopes of generating monies from the sale or lease of the public property to use for general public purposes to serve our community. FINAL RECOMMENDATION On behalf of the SPI-7 owners who are in favor of upgrading the current SPI-7 (essentially 100% of the owners contacted) zoning ordinance to reflect the intent of the adopted 1981 Master Plan, that is, to ensure a successful Metrorail Brickell Station by allowing the SPI-7 area to be developed at an intensity in excess of any other district in the Brickell area, due to SPI-71s close proximity to the Station, we respectfully urge you to approve the "SPI-7 owner' s amendment" sponsored by The Allen Morris Company on behalf of the vast majority of the SPI-7 property owners. Thank you. F4 Si y is �. r en s i to the resident 10 32 LL I " I " mob it i I ti 1 ♦�_�.tt. iL f +x u At ♦ y Thy �1 jr �.y+ S + - r, 1, `le 11�,1 ,?,. }'f_ ��••�_ 1 do! s L �L