HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Dean Lewisr
OPPOSITION
SUBMITTED INTO THE
PUBLIC RECORD FOR
ITEM°30NF-G-oy .
MIAMI 21 -2009 January Draft Review
PERSISTING ISSUES and RECOMMENDATIONS
"New Urbanism may be about breaking conventions; but
secondarily it has created or reinforced a convention of
styles, which is resulting in an unfortunate
homogenization of many environments."
Alex Krieger
Chair of the Department of Urban Planning and Design, 1998-2004.
Harvard Graduate School of Design
Prepared by: DB LEWIS Architecture+Design
02095-
o/3 5 c-`
2095°/3i5c-` — o,bm',#o-i-aav,�ec�,r�s
02- 01q07zt
GENERAL TO ZONES - Refine FLR
3.4.1 Lot Area is used for purposes of Density and Intensity Calculation.
MIAMI 21 treats Corner Lots, Infill Lots and Waterfront Lots the same with regards
to Intensity (FLR) -Permitted Buildable Area within the same zone.
(Architects oppose this equation which does not reco nize the special characteristics of
each condition. Corner lots and Waterfront lots should have higher ermitted
Intensities than Infill Lots.) >Less per say than current 11000 code based on FAR,
Gross Lot including centerlines of ROW'S, but definitely allow, award and articulate
each lot condition to ensure the best urban development entitlements.
Recommendation: Intensity (FLA) Limits are established to ensure compatibility in
scale and proportion, and should recognize particular Lot Abutments and Adjacencies.
In particular, where more separation distance between lots occur due to increased
ROW abutments between neighboring lots, FLR Intensity Limits should be
proportionally Increased.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item SPA. SP.2 & SP.3
on 08-06-09
Priscilla A. Thompson
Transect Zones- Principles
"Transect Zones are sequential in Intensity: successional
zoning changes shall only be permitted sequentially and
respecting transitions across Abutting Transect Zones as
provided in Article 7. "
BUILDING DISPOSTION - Floor Lot Ratio
(FLR) + Bonuses
T6-8 =
5
/ +25%
Public
Benefit($) for
Height and/or
FLR
T6-12 =
8
/ +30%
Public
Benefit($) for
Height and/or
FLR
T6-24 =
7
/ +30%
Public
Benefit($) for
Height and/or
FLR
T6 -36a=
12
/ +40%
Public
Benefit($) for
Height and/or
FLR
T6 -36b=
22
/ +40%
Public
Benefit($) for
Height and/or
FLR
(Architects, AIA opposed this in 2008 due to inherent Conflict with Transect Principles,
Why Step Down to Step up? TheProgressive Transects are disrupted here. if Miami 21 truly wants
to encourage taller more etegant buildings, then remove the Cost of doing so in All T6 Zones.)
Recommendation:
T6-24 = 10 / + 30% Public Benefit ($) for FLR Only
do not require Fee($) for additional Height ! Not a Code for Sale
I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I f I I 1 i i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U R 3 A N
12, 22
�k
TRANSECT ZONES - T6 -Floor Lot Ratio (FLR)
"Transect Zones are sequential in Intensity: successional zoning changes shall
only be permitted sequentially and respecting transitions across Abutting Transect
Zones as provided in Article 7. "
Recommendation:
T6-24 = 10 / + 30% Public Benefit ($) for FLR Only Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item SP.1, SP.2 & SP.3
on 08-06-09
Priscilla A. Thompson
LOT OCCUPATION
URBAN CORE ZONES
URBAN CORE ZONES
a. Lot Area
5,000 sf. min 5,000 sf. min.
5,000 sf. min. 5,000 sf. min.
5,000 sf. min.
5,000 sf. min.
40,000 s.f. max." 70,000 s.f. max."
100,000 s.f.max. "
b. Lot Width5i
0 ft. min. 50 ft. min.
50 ft. min. 100 ft. min.
100 ft. min.
100 ft, min.
c. Lot Coverage
8800% max."" 80% max.' `
i
80% max." 80% max."'
80% max."`
80% max."
d. Floor Lot Ratio (FLR)
5 8
7
a.12 or b.22
a.11 or b.18
24
e. Frontage at front Setback
70% min. 70% min.
70% min.
70% min.
70% min.
70% min.
f. Open Space Requirements
10% Lot Area min. ! 10% Lot Area min.
10% Lot Area min.
10% LotArea min.
10% Lot Area min.
10% Lot Area min.
g. Density
150 du /acre ` 150 du /acre "
150 du /acre "
150 du /acre `
150 du /acre "
150 du /acre'
TRANSECT ZONES - T6 -Floor Lot Ratio (FLR)
"Transect Zones are sequential in Intensity: successional zoning changes shall
only be permitted sequentially and respecting transitions across Abutting Transect
Zones as provided in Article 7. "
Recommendation:
T6-24 = 10 / + 30% Public Benefit ($) for FLR Only Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item SP.1, SP.2 & SP.3
on 08-06-09
Priscilla A. Thompson
Transect Zones- T6
BUILDING SETBACKS
Abutting Side and Rear:
Oft.min.: 30 ft above 8 storey
(Architects, AIA oppose this due to inherent
Conflict with parking layouts in podium.)
Recommendation: 18 ft Max.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item SPA, SP.2 & SP.3
on 08-06-09
Priscilla A. Thompson
BUILDING HEIGHT
I
Max.
48
------L----------
g�----------L----
_�
--T--------i------------
t�l------- --------
MWc
25 i
Height
24
ABUMNG SIDE & REAR All ZONES EXCEPT T6, T4 & T3
To Whom It May Concern:
I am in agreement with the AIA Miami's current Position Paper in opposition to the current draft
of MIAMI 21.
While I applaud any effort to enhance our pedestrian environment by stringent controls on the
development of streetscape amenities, building massing., and landscaping, it is inconsistent to
allow the purchase of additional height if the developer is able to PAY for it. Other issues related
to the control of building footprints, defining their shape, orientation and placement, seem to
commandeer or usurp the creative ,judgment of the Architect and leave our skyline to a future of
formulaic redundancy. The net result of this code could be a series of cookie cutter buildings
instead of a skyline that is uniquely Miami.
This herculean effort byMayor Diaz and the truly brilliant members of the Miami 21 team to find a
more workable or simpl_�fied delineation to the myriad conditions of a complex City and our
present Zoning Code is a worthy mission. That effort has resulted in productive conversation
i
about the very essence of our built environment, our relationship to t and our responsibilities as
its stewards. I believe that, as written, this document could be a violation of that
stewardship. We must be more aware of the ramifications of allowing formulas to provide
answers to the very specific intricacies of the planning process.
After thoughtful review and critique by its diverse members, the AIA Miami, has promulgated a
"Position aper" that is consistent with a logical and appropriate approach to the "renovation" of
the existing Code as opposed to its total reconstruction. I am writing in support of that "Position
Paper" and in opposition to Miami 21.
Thanks to our Mayor and all those who have dedicated so much time and effort to this quest for a
better Miami.
Respectfully submitted,
.john P. Fullerton, AIA
John P. Fullerton, AIA I President I Tel. 305.442.4200 1 Fax. 305.444.6962
jfullerton@fdarchitects.con_
Fullerton Diaz Architects 1 366 Altara Avenue I Coral Gables, FL 33146 1 www.fdarchitects.com
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item SPA, SP.2 & SP.3
on 08-06-09
Priscilla A. Thompson
MIAMI 21 -2009 January Draft Review
� V- - -
Alex Krieger states that urban design guidelines should,
"Control the public realm, not the private."
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item SPA. SP.2 & SP.3
on 08-06-09
Priscilla A. Thompson