HomeMy WebLinkAboutsubmission GraftonTHORN GRAFTON, ARCHITECT, AIA
ARCFIITECTURE 8j PLANNING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, HISTORIC 8j COMMUNITY RESOURCES
901 Ponce de Leon Blvd. #202, Coral Gables, F1. 33134. 305.461.4007 305.461.6002 fax
DRAFT COMMENTS ON MUSP - ROYAL ATLANTIC 1001 NW 7TH STREET, MIAMI 1/22/04
GENERAL INTRO:
In the mid-1980's, my firm, then Zyscovich and Grafton, was asked to study the Miami River
between downtown and 27th Avenue to provide a vision of where and how riverfront development
should occur. We suggested the best form for development would be to reinforce density at each
end of that stretch — downtown on one end and then another focus of denser development at the
27th Ave., with the riverfront in between retaining its unique character while still allowing compatible
infill development for housing and live -work environments. The linkage we proposed between the
2 "nodes" (to use the terminology of urban design) was riverfront greenways, and improved
transportation including a water taxi system, and small energy -efficient buses. Our theory was that
by providing higher density only at the each end of that part of the river would strengthen all 3 parts
of the equation — but most importantly the middle section that would remain lower density. By
strengthen, I mean making places that over the long term retain quality of life values as desirable
places to live and work. Now why would this planning idea work, and why was it so well received
at the time? The forms that we were suggesting were distinct and contained, providing a sense of
continuity into a future where both development and a historic environment could co -exist. This
objective is the essence of urban design. The notion that anything can go anywhere is the
antithesis of urban design, with individual mistakes able to create grave damage to much larger
urban systems. The Royal Atlantic, radically out of scale with its place in this urban, environmental
and historic framework, is such a mistake.
EXCESSIVE BUILDING HEIGHT IMPACT ON HISTORIC SPRING GARDEN:
Recently, I have been working with the residents of Spring Garden, a historic residential
neighborhood on the North edge of the river directly across from the Royal Atlantic development.
The neighborhood has undertaken a series of related initiatives to strengthen its obvious and
wonderful historic and environmental characteristics. One such initiative, Spring Garden's Point
Park involves the creation of a special place where this section of the Miami River can be
experienced firsthand by the public. This Park at the confluence of the River and Seybold Canal,
will include restoration of a small historic cottage as a small visitor's & community building, and
extensive landscape & shoreline restoration. With City, County, State and not -for -profit grant
support, the thesis of the Point Park project is the ability to preserve and restore the qualities of
history and nature for the enjoyment of all, within an otherwise urban environment. Without a
doubt, a prime time for this enjoyment is expected to be those great summer evenings when the
sun sets late and folks can come out to the point and look up river and watch the sun set upriver.
Except of course for the 280 foot towers. These towers will also provide winter afternoon shadow
on the small public park directly across river from the site, as well as the dozens of homes and
townhouses that will be loose the sunsets they could have expected even with property developed
to the current height limit of 150 feet. If we change the zoning to residential use, let us maintain
the 150 foot height limit as being more consistent with existing land use patterns while still
providing a very reasonable return on investment for the owners / developers.
t.eraiton(a?mindsprin2.com Florida Registered architect #8200. Member, American institute of architects since 1980.
e Printed on recycled paper containing a minimum of30% post consumer waste. PLEASE RECYCLE!
DRAFT COMMENTS ON MUSP - ROYAL ATLANTIC 1001 NW 7714 STREET. MIAMI 1/22/04 page 2
OTHER VISUAL IMPACT ON HISTORIC SPRING GARDEN:
In addition to shadow, the impact of the towers as an overwhelming and modern day visual
backdrop alters the context for a recognized historic district in a very negative manner. The
residents of Spring Garden pursued and achieved Historic District status at great sacrifice of the
possibility of achieving a quick financial retum, preferring instead the road of making a place to call
home for generations. Again, the expectation was not having a looming backdrop demeaning their
special context. If the height limit of the existing zoning was not increased, these two points would
be harder for the neighborhood to make.
TRAFFIC IMPACTS:
The traffic analysis appears to be contradictory. The executive summary states that the traffic on
7th Street east of 12th Avenue adjacent to the project will increase an additional 43 to 51% of
existing peak traffic levels. It then goes on to conclude "that with or without the project there will be
only a minor level of deterioration in the level of service to those roadways most affected...". Since
when is a 50% increase at rush hour a minor deterioration?
For instance, the peak afternoon hour will generate 354 vehicles entering and leaving the project's
driveway. That is 6 per minute or 1 every 10 seconds on average, enough to make getting from
one side of the retail storefronts to the other across that driveway quite exciting during this after
school hour.
What is not clear in the traffic analysis is the effect of the revised river bridge at 12th Ave.
According to the DOT plans that I saw, there will be no eastbound left turn from 12 Ave. onto 7th
Street toward the project. The first opportunity for 12 Ave. southbound traffic to turn left, or east,
will apparently be NW 4th St., with the implication that such traffic will filter through the
neighborhood of small apartment buildings to the south of the project. Why was this major and
imminent transportation project not clearly addressed in the study?
TOWERS OF CONTRAST — A TEAR IN THE URBAN FABRIC:
The contrast between the proposed Royal Atlantic and the neighborhood to the south of the project
could not be greater. This neighborhood has its own design and functional challenges to surmount
in order to become a more attractive place to live. What is the plan for the immediate
neighborhood in the aftermath of this massive development? My guess is that the developer
would likely prefer the old fashioned scrape of urban renewal. The intrusion of a massive
construction project will actually take the level of desirability down a notch on these rental blocks,
to be followed by the sudden arrival of over 1500 people of means who might not be delighted to
meet their neighbors on the ground. The retail stores facing the rental neighborhood are supposed
to serve which group exactly? Or will these instead become some sort of glass display boxes to
decorate the street, never to open. Perhaps adding some stoops of actual living units along 7th
Street would have been a more sincere way to be a good neighbor. The greenway design is
shown to return to the street, not continue on to other properties as they develop along the river.
The reality of this riverfront greenway is that it could become a grand backyard, fenced most of the
time, unless the neighbors unite in a campaign to remind the groundskeeper to unlock the gate.
While the "liner buildings" at the garages are a good idea if thought through better than here, they
point out the real opportunity for this site. The site itself is a "liner site" on the edge of a beautiful
river, and the edge of a street of great potential. The apartments could do much better to create a
symbiotic effect with these elements, instead of adopting an intentionally exclusionary tower -in -the -
sky format. My professional recommendation is to request a compatible design for this project.
This summary report and opinion was prepared on a pro-bono basis, at the urging of the
residents of Spring Garden. I am a resident of the City of Miami. - Thorn Grafton, AIA