HomeMy WebLinkAboutexhibit CExhibit C
Additional Conditions for DDRI Increment II Development Order
1. All development proposed for those portions of Watson Island located within the
DRI boundaries, which includes the submerged land, as described in Exhibit "A"
(the "Submerged Land") and the adjacent uplands, as described in Exhibit "B"
(the "Upland Property") (collectively, the "Watson Island Property") upon which
the proposed Island Gardens project will be developed, shall comply with the
adopted Watson Island Policy Plan and with the following Development Program:
Hotel rooms shall not exceed 605 rooms; retail uses shall not exceed 225,000 sq.
ft. of net leasable area; parking shall not exceed 1700 parking spaces, and the
mega yacht marina shall not exceed 50 mega yacht slips; all with associated
accessory uses as may be permissible pursuant to the underlying zoning
classification. In addition, all development for the Watson Island Property shall
further comply with such site plan as may be approved by the City through its
Major Use Special Permit, and only within those thresholds of development
established above.
Within the Submerged Land, there shall be no more than 19 marina slips (of the
total 50 marina slips) outside the vested footprint approved in the November 15,
2002 Department of Community Affair's Binding Letter of Vested Rights and
Interpretation of Development of Regional Impact Status (BLIVR 11003-001)
and depicted on the site plan attached to the June 21, 2004 Clearance Letter issued
by the Department of Community Affairs (the "Site Plan", as attached hereto as
Exhibit G); any change to the number or location of the slips on the Site Plan shall
require the issuance of a revised clearance letter prior to permitting.
3. The City shall not issue a building permit for the Proposed Marina, as defined in
the NOPC (and attached hereto as Exhibit G), unless and until (a) such
development has been approved by the Miami -Dade County Board of County
Commissioners for adequate Seagrass and Benthic Community mitigation; and
(b) the Applicant shall be in compliance with the Flagstone Island Gardens Mega -
Yacht Harbor Benthic Community Mitigation Plan, dated last revised June 9,
2004, attached as Exhibit "C", as such study may be amended from time to time.
4. Condition No. 14 of the Increment II Development Order shall be amended to
read as follows:
14. 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
1
Total Allowable Development under this Development Order. Total
Allowable Development will be limited to:
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY
(Including portions of Watson Island)
Use
Office (sf)
Retail (sf)
Hotel (rooms)
Residential
(units)
Convention
(sf)
Industrial (sf)
Institutional
(sf)
Attractions
(seats)
Parks (acres)
Marina
berths)***
Increment I
(approved)
3,681,890
1,453,500
4,500
10,550
500,000**
1,050,000
200,000
30,500
78
0
Increment II
(approved
December
2002)
1,300,000
750,000
1,500
7,500
500,000
750,000
450,000
60,000
0
Increment II
(revised)
1,220,000
747.774
1,605
6,750
300,000**
550,000
350,000
59,000
0
8
* Included in office
** Carried over from Increment I to Increment II
* * * This does not include the 42 vested slips for a total of 50 slips
Total
(revised)
Increment I
&II
4,901,890
2,201,274
6,105
17,300
300,000* *
1,600,000
550.000
89,500
78
8
The City may permit simultaneous increases and decreases in the above
described land use categories consistent with Exhibit F attached hereto,
without the need of filing for an NOPC (Notice of Proposed Change) provided
that the regional impacts of the land uses in Increment II of the Project as
approved, as measured by total peak hour vehicle trips are not increased.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, any increase or simultaneous increase or
decrease for permitted development on Watson Island Property that exceeds
the thresholds established herein for Watson Island, shall require the filing and
approval of an NOPC or amended ADA, as appropriate; in addition, the City
will not permit the simultaneous increase or decreases to convert any
development on the Watson Island Property to residential uses. The City shall
ensure that a minimum of 15 percent of the future residential units be
affordable. The DDA shall work with the appropriate parties to exceed this
standard and to meet the proportionate need of affordable housing for this
area. In the event that the Attractions use is not feasible the City shall
2
encourage the conversion of this use to support the development of a greater
percentage of affordable residential units within this project area.
If development of the Watson Island Property has not commenced by the
outside date for satisfaction of the conditions precedent (including all
applicable extensions) set forth in Article 6 of that certain Agreement to enter
into Ground Lease dated January 1, 2003 between the City and Flagstone
Island Gardens. LLC, as same may be amended from time to time (the
"Agreement"). which outside date is as set forth in Section 6.2.3 of the
Agreement, the development program and flexibility matrix in Exhibit D shall
supercede this condition. In no event however, shall the commencement
exceed a period six (6) years from the effective date of the Agreement (Jan. 1,
2009). Nothing set forth in the forgoing sentences shall extend the buildout or
termination date of this development order.
5. Condition No. 16 of the Increment II Development Order shall be amended to
include an additional subparagraph 1 to read as follows:
(1) An assessment of the Applicant's and the City's compliance with
all conditions contained in the Increment II Development Order, as
amended pursuant to Resolution No. , passed and adopted by the
City of Miami Commission on June 24, 2004; in addition, Flagstone
Island Gardens, LLC shall be responsible for providing the required bi-
annual report for the Watson Island Property.
6. The City shall not issue a building permit for any vertical construction on the
Watson Island Property, until such time as it has secured a waiver from the State
of Florida of the Deed Restriction encumbering the Watson Island Property.
7. The City shall not issue a building permit for any vertical construction on the
Watson Island Property, until such time as it has secured from Flagstone Island
Gardens, LLC, its proportional fair share of S89,397 (2004 dollars) to the City of
Miami DDRI Transportation Mitigation fund as set forth in Exhibit E (Table
21.F1(R)) for the impacted segment of SR836; this fee is in addition to other
applicable fees.
3
Exhibit "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBMERGED PARCEL
Commence at a point marked by an 5/8" diameter iron rod and Cap Stamped F.D.O.T.,
shown as P. T. Sta. 25+50 on the "Official Map of Location and Survey of a portion of
Section 8708, designated as part of State Road A 1-A in Dade County, Florida", prepared
by the State Road Department of the State of Florida, as recorded in Map Book 56, at
Page 71 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida. Said point being the point of
tangency of the original center line of the Douglas MacArthur Causeway running
Easterly and South Easterly from the Westerly limits (West Bridge) of Watson Island as
shown on Sheet 3 of the State Road Department Right -of -Way Map, Section No. (8706-
112) 87060-2117, revised March 25, 1959, said most Northerly curve having a radius of
1432.69 feet and a central angle of62' 00' 00"; thence South 59' 51' 26" West departing
radially from said centerline, a distance of 987.36 feet to a projected bulkhead line;
thence North 17' 12' 21" West along said .bulkhead line, a distance of 238.86 feet to the
point and place of beginning; thence South 49' 32' 57" West departing said bulkhead line
a distance of 550.92 feet to a point of intersection of linesof turning basin limit .as
-established by U.S. Army Corps of engineers. and position by . coordinates North
527,878.62 feet; East 926,135.22 feet (based on North .AmericanDatum 1983-NAC83);
thence North 31 ' 03' 50" West., along the limits of said turning basin a distance of 428.44
feet to a point of intersection with the East right of way line of the intracoastal.waterway;,
thence North 03 ' 27' 54" West along said East right ofway line a distance of 874.43 feet
to a point of intersection with the Southerly right of way line of said Douglas MacArthur
Causeway, said point of intersection being a point on a curve concave Southerlyand
having a radius of 10,716.59 feet, a radial line to said point bears South 01 ' 15' 15". East;
thence run Easterly for 387.46 feet along the arc of said curve and along said Southerly
right of way line, through a central angle of 02' 04' 17" to a point of tangency; thence
South 89 '. 10' 55" East continuing Easterly along the said Southerly right of way line, a
distance of 31.87 feet more or less to a point of intersection with an existing bulkhead
line; thence South 17 ' 12' 21" East along said bulkhead line a distance of 924.70 feet to
the point of beginning.
Exhibit "B"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF UPLAND PARCEL
Commence at a point shown marked by an 5/8" diameter iron rod and Cap Stamped
F.D.O.T., shown as P.T. Sta. 25+50 on the "Official Map of Location and Survey of a
portion of Section 8706, designated as part of State Road A -I -A in Dade County,
Florida", prepared by the State Road Department of the State of Florida, as recorded in
Map Book 56, at Page 71 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida.. Said point
being the point of tangency o( the original center .line of the Douglas MacArthur
Causeway running Easterly and South Easterly from the Westerly limits (West Bridge) of
Watson Island as shown on Sheet 3 of the State Road Department Right -of -Way Map,
Section No. (8706-112) 87060-2117, revised March 25, 1959, said most Northerly curve
having a radius of 1432.69 feet and a central angle of 62 3 00100 seconds" thence South
59 ' 51' 26" West departing radially from said centerline a distance of 987.36 feet to a
Projected Bulkhead line; thence North 17 ' 12' 21' West .along said bulkhead line, a
distance of 238.86 feet to the point and place of beginning; thence North 17' 12' 21" West
continuing along said bulkhead line a distance of.924.70.feet.to the Southerly right of
way line of State Road A-1-A Douglas MacArthur Causeway; ' thence along said
Southerly right of way line the following courses and distances; South 89' 10' 55" East, a
distance of 73.08 feet; thence North 86 ' 44.' 00" East, a distance of 67.09 feet to non -
tangent curve concave to the Northeast whose radial line bears North 39' 29' 18" East
having a radius of 160.00 feet and central angle of 22' 09' 33"; thence along said curve
an arc length of 61.88 feet; thence South . 72 ' 40' 15" East continuing along said
Southerly right of way line a distance of 276.49 feet; to a curve concave to the Southwest
having a radius of 600.00 feet and central angel of 46 ' .17' 39" thence along said curve an
arc length of 484.79 feet to a point of tangency; thence South 26.' 22' 36" East continuing
along the southwesterly right of way line of State Road A I -A, a distance of 196.59 feet;
thence South 54 ' 07' 39" West Departing Said right of way line, a distance of 532.16
feet; thence North 35 ' 54' 03" West, a distance of 132.74 feet; thence South 54 ' 07' 39"
West, a distance of 150.14 feet to the point of beginning.
Exhibit "C"
Flagstone Island Gardens Mega -Yacht Harbor
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
Revised June 9, 2004
PROJECT SUMMARY
The proposed Flagstone Island Gardens Mega -Yacht Harbor Project (Project) includes
reconfiguration of an existing marina that is currently located along the Watson Island bulkhead.
The dredging limits for the proposed marina basin encompass approximately 15.81 acres,
including areas anthropogenically impacted by previous dredge and fill activities, to depths
ranging between —18 and —25 feet.
The proposed dredging is required to accommodate mega -yacht vessels ranging between
approximately 100 and 450 feet in length. The off-season slip mix of 50 vessels proposes smaller
yachts on the northern and southern pier arms during the slow season for mega -yachts (summer).
The area to be dredged contains a shoal with sediments ranging from silt to sand, and limerock
that are likely the result of spoil deposition from dredging activities in the adjacent turning basin.
EXISTING BENTIIIC RESOURCES AND PROPOSED IMPACTS
Benthic habitats within the Project area can be categorized into the following sub -communities
based on differential structure and other conditions: 1) turning basin wall, 2) sponge -dominated
communities, 3) bulkhead communities, and 4) mud/sand substrate. Sparse macroalgae is
ubiquitous in the former three community areas. These communities are further described below
and in the Field Observation Reports produced by Coastal Systems International, Inc.
Turning Basin Wall: The turning basin wall is a community that was created when the Port of
Miami dredged the area down to depths greater than 30 feet for navigation purposes. The wall
within the project area is located in water depths ranging from approximately —10 to —30 feet
NGVD, the slope of which averages approximately 1.5:1. To estimate coverage of this habitat by
resources, vertical surveys between approximately —10 and —30 feet NGVD were conducted
every 50 feet along the turning basin wall. The majority of resources are located on the wall
between water depths of approximately —10 and —20 feet (NGVD), with an average density
coverage in this zone of approximately 20%. Between water depths of approximately —20 and —
30 feet (NGVD), resource coverage is much sparser at less than 10% average coverage.
The dominant communities on the turning basin wall are sponges and soft corals. Several
branching (Occulina spp.) hard corals were observed on the turning basin wall. Macroalgae was
sparse.
Based on the average turning basin wall slope of 1.5:1, the total surface area between —10 and —
19 feet (impact zone) across the 1,050 linear feet of wall to be dredged is approximately 16,800
square feet (0.39 acre). The total surface area to be impacted between —19 and —26 feet for the
Coastal Systems International
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 2
500-linear foot deep dredge section is estimated at 6,300 square feet (0.14 acre). Please note
these impact area calculations include 1 foot of overdredge.
Sponge -Dominated Community on Debris: Sponge -dominated communities, attached to
exposed limerock, shell/rock fragments, logs, and other debris, are found within a 3.5-acre area
of the submerged lands at the Project site. This area contains sponges with a highly variable
density with an average density (non -weighted by area) of approximately 6.5% based on recent
quantitative surveys. As only that area containing hardbottom or debris at the surface is capable
of supporting sponge communities (versus the silt/sand surrounding the debris), the sponge
community habitat area is calculated at approximately 11,435 square feet (0.26 acre) within the
3.5-acre boundary. Typical sponge communities include loggerhead sponges, vase sponges,
encrusting sponges, and tube sponges. Miami -Dade County DERM staff reported one star coral
within the sponge -dominated community during the August 21, 2003 site inspection.
The estimated 0.26 acre of sponge community habitat is proposed to be impacted by dredging
within the Project area.
Bulkhead Community: The bulkhead (approximately 920 linear feet) within the Project site
supports dense benthic communities containing sponges, algae, a few hard and soft corals, and
other sessile organisms. To estimate organism densities, vertical surveys were conducted every
50 feet along the bulkhead. The bulkhead is nearly 100% covered with organisms from the water
line to approximately —12 feet NGVD. 50 to 60% of the resource coverage consists of sponges.
The number of soft corals on the bulkhead is estimated at 10.
The bulkhead will be directly impacted by installation of 14-inch-wide piles at the face of the
bulkhead to support the marginal dock. These piles will be spaced at approximately 15 feet on -
center, resulting in approximately 856 (n=1.17*61*12 vertical feet) square feet (0.02 acre) of
direct impact to bulkhead resources.
BENTHIC RESOURCE IMPACT MINIMIZATION
The Project goal has been to minimize impacts to benthic com nunities to the greatest extent
practicable, and then to adequately compensate for unavoidable losses to these habitats. The
proposed bulkhead replacement watenvard of the existing bulkhead, which is standard
engineering practice, was re -designed to be located landward of the existing bulkhead to
minimize resource impacts.
As the primary impacts to marine resources at the Project site are due to dredging activities,
dredge depths, particularly along the turning basin wall, have been scrutinized several times by
the applicant's consulting team. It is the applicant's goal to bring in the market's largest mega -
yachts into the proposed facility. While the slip layout shows vessels as small as 160 feet on the
exterior marginal dockage as a demonstration of typical slip mix, the range of vessel size these
slips will accommodate is up to approximately 450 feet. Re -designing the harbor to limit vessel
Coastal Systems International
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 3
draft to Iess than 18 feet would severely restrict the functional capabilities of the facility. It is not
possible to reduce the depth of dredging along the turning basin wall without compromising the
size of mega -yachts that can moor along the prime exterior marginal dock space. This evaluation
of impact minimization is described more fully in the document entitled "Avoidance and
Minimization Measures — Site Alternatives Analysis".
BENTHIC RESOURCE IMPACT MITIGATION
The compensatory projects address unavoidable impacts to the benthic community resources
described above through creation of similar habitat with equal or greater services over time. The
state's Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM), Chapter 62-345, Florida
Administrative Code, was used to confirm appropriate levels of mitigation.
Turning Basin Wall: Prior to commencement of dredging activities, soft corals and hard corals
within the impact area that can be efficiently and successfully moved will be relocated to an area
north of the proposed dredge activities. Immediately north of the FDOT right-of-way and
MacArthur Causeway, shallow submerged areas are proposed as recipient areas for relocated soft
and hard corals (see Benthic Organism Relocation section).
The turning basin wall is an artificial habitat that was created by dredging a vertical wall at the
edge of the Port turning basin. The location is isolated and is not part of a larger continuous
ecosystem. Pelagic fish and invertebrates use the habitat for refuge and foraging; the hard
substrate supports sessile benthic organisms. The community structure for the upper turning
basin wall consists of an average of 20% coverage by sessile epibenthic organisms, with low to
moderate diversity of species (majority of species coverage is by sponges and soft corals) as
noted above. The lower turning basin wall community structure consists of Iow coverage of
benthic organisms (less than 10%), with a low diversity of species. The water is turbid and water
clarity is poor, particularly at deeper elevations of the wall, but good flushing exists due to the
high degree of tidal influence. These factors are addressed in the values input into the UMAM
spreadsheets entitled "Uniform Mitigation Assessment — Turning Basin/Upper Region" and
"Uniform Mitigation Assessment — Turning Basin/Lower Region", attached.
To compensate for the immediate and interim loss of habitat, creation of a benthic community
with equal or greater function than the impacted habitat is proposed. The UMAMs for the upper
and lower turning basin walls use a time factor of 10 and 5 years, respectively, to replace the
functions lost within the impact area. The shorter time lag factor for the lower turning basin wall
is based on the fact that the mitigation project is located in a much better environment than the
impact area (higher level of water clarity, etc.) so the same level of services as what is impacted
will be reached relatively quickly. A conservative risk factor of 1.5 is used in the LJMAMs.
The LMAM results indicate that approximately 0.72 acre of mitigation at the Brickell Artificial
Reef site is needed to compensate for the 0.39 acre of impact to the upper turning basin wall
(approximately a 2:1 ratio). The UMAM results indicate that approximately 0.15 acre of
Coastal Systems International
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 4
mitigation is needed to compensate for the 0.14 acre of impact to the lower turning basin wall
(approximately a 1:1 ratio). The proposed mitigation will consist of two elements to
appropriately address replacement of the functions created by the more vertical nature of the
turning basin wall for pelagic fish species in addition to the refuge functions for invertebrates
and substrate/foraging functions. Pelagic refuge functions of the onsite vertical mitigation
element are anticipated to offset impacts more immediately than other community structure
functions.
Offsite Mitigation: The first mitigation component to compensate for lost turning basin wall
functions consists of benthic habitat creation offsite at the Brickell Artificial Reef site (see sheet
1 of the enclosed sketches for location information). This component is provided to
accommodate substrate functions for sessile benthic and boring organisms that are similar to
those provided by the turning basin wall. The habitat will be constructed of 2- to 4-foot diameter
limerock boulders. For the 0.39 acre of unavoidable impact to the upper (higher quality) zone of
the turning basin wall, approximately 0.78 acre of habitat is proposed offsite (2:1 ratio - see sheet
5 of the enclosed sketches for conceptual layout and typical cross-section). Florida Department
of Environmental Protection (DEP) and DERM permits, including a Consent of Use relative to
the state lands, have been issued and are active for the Brickell Artificial Reef site. Authorization
will be issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as part of the Flagstone Island Gardens
project or to DERM separately (see attached DEP and DERM permits for artificial reef creation).
The 0.14 acre of impact to the lower (elevation and quality) zone of the turning basin wall will,
in addition to the onsite mitigation, be further mitigated by the creation of 0.14 acre of benthic
habitat at the Brickell Artificial Reef site (1:1 ratio - see sheet 5 of the enclosed sketches for
conceptual layout and typical cross-section).
Onsite Mitigation: The second mitigation component is proposed onsite to compensate for the
loss of functions provided due to the vertical wall characteristics, which were difficult to address
clearly in the UMAM analysis, as well as to provide additional substrate for sessile benthic and
boring organisms. This element includes creation of a high relief habitat by placing 3 to 4-foot-
diameter limerock riprap boulders onsite in water depths similar to those where the impacts will
occur (see sheets 3 and 4 of the attached permit sketches). This element provides 0.53 acre of
surface area, mitigating for the refuge function lost from the entire turning basin wall face at a
1:1 ratio. This element of the mitigation design is in addition to that mitigation which the
UMAM analysis indicates is necessary to adequately offset impacts.
Summary: Therefore, to account for interim loss of functions, a total of a 3:1 and 2:1 mitigation
ratio is proposed for the upper and lower, respectively, turning basin wall areas cumulatively by
the two components described above; this level of mitigation exceeds that calculated by the
UMAM.
In addition, the mitigation structures are designed based on simple ratios of surface area lost to
surface area created; in reality, the interstitial spaces created by the large limerock boulders to be
Coastal Systems International
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 5
used for construction of the onsite and offsite habitats will provide much greater surface area
than that lost.
Sponge -Dominated Community: Prior to commencement of dredging activities, sponges, soft
corals, and hard corals within the impact area that can be efficiently and successfully moved
(those that are attached to discrete pieces of debris such as cobbles and logs) will be relocated to
the area immediately north of the FDOT right-of-way and MacArthur Causeway (see Benthic
Organism Relocation section for additional information).
The existing sponge -dominated habitat is very discontinuous and the maturity of the organisms
within it varies widely. The community structure is scored at the highest level (10) in the
UMAM (see attached spreadsheet entitled "Uniform Mitigation Assessment — Sponge
Community"), because the only way to accurately estimate the area of the patchy community
was to document the area containing sponges; therefore, we are addressing impacts to a sub -area
of 0.26 acres at 100% coverage. A time lag to achieve full services for the mitigation project of
10 years is used. The UMAM recommends 0.72 acre of mitigation to compensate for the 0.26
acre of impact based on the weighted value of the habitat (approximately a 2.8:1 ratio). Benthic
habitat creation is proposed offsite with equal or greater functions (more continuous substrate
and better water clarity) to compensate for the unavoidable impacts to sponge -dominated
community habitat. This design will consist of hardbottom habitat construction at Miami -Dade
County DERM's Brickell Artificial Reef mitigation site (see sheet 1 of the attached permit
sketches for a location map). Additionally, we anticipate that sponge -dominated communities
may colonize the substrate post -dredging, as sponges and soft corals are found at depths of —18
to —19 feet currently along the turning basin wall. Therefore, for 0.26 acre of impact to the
sponge community at the Project site, 0.72 acre of habitat is proposed to be created (2.8:1 ratio)
offsite in addition to the onsite hardbottom area that will be available for sponge colonization.
The offsite mitigation structure design is based on simple ratios of surface area lost to surface
area created; in reality, the greater rugosity created by the limerock boulders to be used for
construction of the mitigation project will provide much greater surface area and continuous
habitat than that lost.
Bulkhead Community: The UMAM for bulkhead community impacts (see attached spreadsheet
entitled "Uniform Mitigation Assessment — Bulkhead Resources") addresses compensation for
impacts to the relatively mature community structure that exists on the face of the existing
bulkhead. The flat vertical substrate of the wall will be replaced by the installation of piles,
although this habitat may be of a slightly lower value than the existing due to potential shading
impacts from the proposed marginal dock (this is addressed in the UMAM post -impact values).
The UMAM requires creation of 0.04 acre of mitigation (approximately a 2:1 ratio), Creation of
approximately 0.04 acre of benthic community at the Brickell Artificial Reef (a 3:1 ratio) is
proposed. As with the sponge community mitigation, the rugosity provided by the limerock
boulders to be used for construction of the mitigation project will provide much greater surface
area than that lost.
Coastal Systems International
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 6
Seagrass Impact Mitigation — Out of Kind Habitat Creation: Pursuant to discussions with
South Florida Water Management District staff, mitigation for 1.92 acres of unavoidable
seagrass impacts at the Project site is required at a 3.5:1 ratio. This mitigation will be provided at
a 3:1 ratio through restoration of seagrass habitat within Biscayne Bay; the remaining 0.5:1 ratio
of mitigation will be permitted by SFWMD staff through habitat creation at an artificial reef site.
Therefore, the applicant is proposing to add 0.96 acre of benthic community habitat to the
Brickell Artificial Reef site to complete the seagrass mitigation requirements.
Summary: The total benthic community mitigation to be provided at the Brickell Artificial Reef
site is 2.5 acre of surface area. The total benthic community mitigation to be provided onsite is
0.53 acre of surface area. This provides approximately 0.44 additional acre of habitat than the
UMAM analyses indicate should adequately offset functional losses for benthic community
impacts. The final design will be adjusted based upon coordination with all regulatory agencies.
As noted above, DEP and DERM permits, including a Consent of Use proprietary authorization
relative to state lands, are active for the Brickell Artificial Reef site (see attached DEP and
DERM permits for additional information). Authorization will be issued by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers as part of the Flagstone Island Gardens project permit and/or to DERM under a
separate pending permit.
BENTHIC ORGANISM RELOCATION
The purpose of the benthic organism relocation plan is to minimize impacts to submerged marine
resources to the greatest extent practicable. This relocation plan is estimated to benefit up to 25-
30 sponges and approximately 4 and 10 hard and soft corals, respectively. No bulkhead resources
are proposed to be relocated in this plan, as the new bulkhead will be replaced landward of the
existing one; a pre -construction survey will be conducted in the areas where piles are proposed
and any hard or soft corals that would be directly impacted will be relocated.
Relocation Site and Conditions: Two relocation sites are proposed based on two different types
of environments organisms will potentially be salvaged from.
Sponge Community Organisms: The first relocation site is located north of the Project site and
north of the MacArthur Causeway Bridge; this area will be utilized for relocated sponge
community organisms (see sheet 2 of the attached permit sketches for location). The sponge
relocation area contains populations of sponges and macroalgae in the sparse to medium density
range (see Mixing Zone Survey in Appendix D of the April 15, 2004 submittal). No sponge or
macroalgae resources at the relocation site will be supplanted by the relocation process. This site
was chosen because it maintains the same characteristics as that of the Project site. These site
characteristics include water depths, temperature, salinity, current velocities, and light
penetration.
Bulkhead/Turning Basin Wall Organisms: The second relocation site was chosen as a suitable
location for the placement of relocated hard/soft corals currently attached to the turning basin
Coastal Systems international
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 7
wall (see sheet 2 of the attached permit sketches for location). This second site is located west
and slightly north of the Project site, along the northern turning basin wall. This relocation
choice maintains similar characteristics to those identified at the western turning basin wall.
These characteristics include vertical habitat (instead of horizontal to maintain natural
orientation), light penetration, water depth, temperature, salinity, and current velocity. Once
removed, the organisms will be relocated to similar depths along the northern turning basin wall.
These submerged lands are owned by the City of Miami (see Deed No. 19447 in Appendix of
the July 11, 2004 SFWMD application submittal package).
Relocation Methodology:
Sponge Community Organises Relocation Techniques
1. The relocation area will be staked off with buoys during benthic organism relocation. GPS
coordinates will be collected to confirm the four corners of the area. Underwater markers
will be permanently installed to delineate the relocation area for the life of the monitoring
project.
2. Sponges and corals attached to discrete debris within the sponge community will be relocated
utilizing a shovel, pick, or other dislodging device. Where possible, the debris will be
dislodged with sponge community organisms attached, and transported in plastic trays by
boat north to the relocation area. Sponges and corals will be restored on debris with the same
or similar physical orientation as when removed.
Turning Basin Coral and Sponge Relocation Techniques
1. The relocation site will be flagged using buoys and other submerged markers. The
submerged markers will remain in place for future monitoring and evaluation.
2. To the greatest extent practicable, corals (hard and soft) and sponges will be dislodged from
the Tuming Basin Wall with a piece of substrate attached. If necessary, the base of the hard
coral will be dislodged from the substrate utilizing a hand pick and hammer. All handling of
coral will be done in conjunction with best management practices and relocation techniques,
such as utilizing gloves to handle the corals, and keeping the corals submerged in water to
avoid desiccation during transport.
3. The subject corals will then be transported via boat to the Turning Basin Wall relocation
area.
4. A two-part epoxy will be used to re -attach the rock or other debris containing the coral, or the
coral base itself to suitable substrate.
Relocation Monitoring:
Monitoring Schedule: Monitoring is proposed for a total of 5 years. A baseline survey will be
completed and for the first year, monitoring should consist of quarterly updates, followed by bi-
Coastal Systems International
201701
Benthic Community Mitigation Plan
June 9, 2004
Page 8
annual reporting for the remaining 4 years. The following is the proposed schedule for
submission of reports, if relocation work was to be completed by August 2004:
• 1St Report - December 2004
■ 2rd Report — March 2005
• 3rd Report - June 2005
■ 4th Report — September 2005
• 5`h Report - December 2005
• 6th Report - June 2006
• 7th Report - December 2006
• 8th Report — June 2007
• 9th Report - December 2007
• 10th Report — June 2008
• 11th Report - December 2008
• 12th Report — June 2009
Monitoring Criteria: The following are monitoring criteria for sponges and corals. Ten percent
of each relocated organism type, or 5 organisms of each type (sponge, soft coral, hard coral),
whichever is greater, will be monitored to provide data that may be useful for consideration of
future projects by the regulatory agencies.
■ Visible signs of stress including but not limited to color (dying or dead membrane),
bleaching, alga or fungus growth (to include measurements of the area impacted to evaluate
increase/decrease in size of area over time)
• Signs of new growth/size of organism (width/height)
■ Additional colonization of new organisms adjacent to the relocated resources
Success Criteria: No success criteria are proposed, as the number of organisms to be salvaged is
relatively small and this benefit is not considered within the habitat creation mitigation
components. The reporting regarding success can be used by the agencies to evaluate feasibility
of larger scale relocation efforts for future projects.
. ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MONITORING
Onsite Invertebrate/Pelagic Habitat Creation: To be determined, as applicable.
Offsite Mitigation: Monitoring for placement of riprap at an established Miami -Dade County
reef project site is not proposed, as the area has been established as an acceptable location for
artificial reef creation and the success of artificial reef projects in southeast Florida is well
documented.
F PTajettV017011MilipationlBcrt c Camwtnityl(04-O6-09) Bauhie Canynidolty Mitigation Plan - rcvised.dae
Coastal Systems International
1
1
I 1 Exhibit "D"
DEVELOiMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY
USE
INCREMENT 1
(approved)
INCREMENT II
TOTAL
INCREMENT I & 11
Office (sf)
3,681,890
1,300,000
4,981,890
Retail (sf)
1,453,500
750,000
2,203,500
Hotel (rooms)
4,500
1,500
6,000
Residential (units)
10,550
7,500
18,050
Convention (sf)
500,000**
500,000**
500,000**
Industrial sf
1,050,000
750,000
1,800,000
Institutional (sf)
200,000
450,000
650,000
Attractions (seats)
30,500
60,000
90,500
Parks (acres)
78
0
78
*Included in office
**Carried over from Increment I to Increment II
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit "D"
LAND USE EXCHANGE RATES FOR THE DOWNTOWN MIAMI DRl UPDATE -INCREMENT II
OMNI-CBD-BRICKELL
LAND USES
TO:
i
OFFICE
(KSF)
MOVIE
THEATRE
(SEATS)
BALL
PARK
(SEATS)
INSTITUTIONAL
(KSF)
CONVENTION
(KSF)
INDUSTRIAL
(KSF)
RESIDENTIAL
(D,U.)
RETAIL
(KSF)
HOTEL
(ROOMS)
FROM:
PM PK HR
EXT
TVEH
RIP IRATE
0.7050
0.0772
0,0103
0.8511
0.6580
0.5707
0.1884
2.4827
0.3500
OFFICE
(KSF)
0.7050
1.0000
9.1321
68.4466
0.8283
1.0714
1.2353
3.7420
0.2840
2.0143
MOVIE THEATRE0.0772
(SEATS)
0.1095
1.0000
7.4951
0.0907
0.1173
0.1353
0.4098
0.0311
0.2206
BALL PARK
(SEATS)
0.0103
0.0146
0.1334
1.0000
0.0121
0.0157
0.0180
0.0547
0.0041
0.0294
INSTITUTIONAL
KSF)
0.8511
1.2072
11.0246
82.6311
1.0000
1.2935
1.4913
4,5175
0.3428
2.4317
CONVENTION
(KSF)
0.6580
0.9333
8.5233
63.8835
0.7731
1,0000
1.1530
3.4926
0.2650
1.8800
INDUSTRIAL (KSF)
0.5707
i
0.8095
7.3925
55.4078
0.6705
0.8673
1.0000
3.0292
0.2299
1.6306
RESIDENTIAL
(DM
0.1884
0.2672
2.4404
18.2913
0.2214
0.2863
0.3301
1.0000
0.0759
0.5383
.)
RETAIL
(KSF)
2.4827
3.5216
32.1593
241.0388
2.9170
3.7731
4.3503
13.1778
1.0000
7.0934
HOTEL
(ROOMS)
0.3500
0.4965
4.5337
33.9806
0.4112
0.5319
0.6133
1.8577
0.1410
1.0000
Notes:
(1) Exchange rates are derived by dividing the PM Peak Hour external vehicle trips
(2) Example: The exchange rate between office and industrial is 1 sq. ft. of office for every 1.2353 sq. ft. of industrial
1000 sq. ft. of office is equivalent to 1235 sq. ft. of industrial.
Page 2 of 2
I1
08-Apr, 04_ -
TYPE OF
ROADWAY ROADWAY
INO SEGMENT(MPROVEMENT
1 SR 836
I..
2
3
NW 12 AVENUE TO
NW 17 AVENUE
SR 836
NW 42 AVENUE TO
NW 57 AVENUE
SR 836
NW 72 AVENUE TO
SR 826
ADD 2L TO
CREATE 8 LD
ADD 2l TO
CREATE 8LD
ADD 2L TO
CREATE 8LD
IU
UNIT
COST
PER MILE_
$3,734,200
$3,734,200
$3,734,200
TABLE 21.F1 (R)
DOWNTOWN MIAMI DRI UPDATE
PROPORTIONATE SHARE FOR SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED SEGMENTS
ESTIMATED
ROAD I DESIGN & PERSON
SEGMENT ESTIMATED 1PERMITTING TOTAL CAPACITY
LENGTH JCONSTRUCTIO4 COSTS ESTIMATED WITHOUT
(Mlles)_ l COST ;.-_ IOW__ COSTIMPRQVEMENT
0.60 $2,464,572 I 9,584
1,60
0.60
62,240,520 6224,052
$5,974,720 6597,472
$2,240,520 6224,052
$6,572,192
$2,464,572
9,584
9,584
PERSON PERSON
CAPACITY DIRECTIONAL
WITH PROJECT
IMPROVEMENT TRIPS
13,072
13,072
13,072
886
696
865
PERSON I (2)
CAPACITY APPLICANT'S
INCREASE PROPORTIO- Ii
WITH NATE APPLICANT'S
IMPROVEMENT. SHARE _ CONTRIBV_TIQMI
3,488
3,488
3,488
25.40% $626,001
19.95%
24.80%
$1,311,152
$611,214
ROADWAY COST:
ROADWAY COST FROM APPROVED INCREMENT 11:
L DIFFERENCE•
NOTES:
(I) BASED ON THE 2002 FDOT TRAN$PORTATION COSTS FOR STATE URBAN ROADS.
(2( PROPORTIONATE SHARE BASED ON RATIO OF PERSON PROJECT TRIPS TO INCREASED PERSON ROADWAY CAPACITY.
S2,548,361
S2,458,970
WITHOUT SEAPORT CONNECTOR
PAGE I OF I
EXHIBIT F
LAND USE EXCHANGE RATES FOR THE DOWNTOWN MIAMI DRI UPDATE -INCREMENT II
OMNI-CBD-BRICKELL-WATSON ISLAND
LAND USES
TO:
OFFICE
(KSF)
MOVIE
THEATRE
(SEATS)
BALL
PARK
(SEATS)
INSTITUTIONAL
(KSF)
CONVENTION
(KSF)
INDUSTRIAL
(KSF)
RESfOENTIA
L (D.U.)
RETAIL
(KSF)
HOTEL
(ROOMS)
FROM:
PM PK HR.
Ems'
VEHICLE
TRIP RATE
0.7148
0.0775
0.0103
0.8543
0.7100
0.6327
0.1898
3.0531
0.3919
OFFICE
(KSF]
0.7148
1.0000
9.2232
69,3981
0.8367
1.0068
1.1298
3.7661
0.2341
1.8239
MOVIE THEATRE
(SEATS)
0.0775
0.1084
1.0000
7.5243
0.0907
0.1092
0.1225
0.4083
0.0254
0.1978
BALL PARK
(SEATS)
0.0103
0.0144
0.1329
1.0000
0.0121
0.0145
0.0163
0.0543
0.0034
0.0263
INSTITUTIONAL
(KSF)
0.8543
1.1952
11.0232
82.9417
1.0000
1.2032
1.3502
4.5011
0.2798
1
2.1799
CONVENTION
jKSF)
0.7100
0.9933
9.1613
68.9320
0.8311
1.0000
1.1222
3.7408
0.2326
1.8117
INDUSTRIAL
(KSF)
0.6327
0.8851
8.1639
61.4272
0.7406
0.8911
1.0000
3.3335
0.2072
1.6144
RESIDENTIAL
(DU)
0.1898
0.2655
2.4490
18,4272
0.2222
0.2673
0.3000
1.0000
0.0622
0.4843
RETAIL
(KSF)
3.0531
4.2713
39.3948
296.4175
3.5738
4.3001
4.8255
16.0859
1.0000
7.7905
HOTEL
(Rooms'
0.3919
0.5483
5.0568
38.0485
0.4587
0.5520
0.6194
2.0648
0.1284
1.0000
Notes:
(1) Exchange rates are derived by dividing the PM Peak Hour external vehicle trips
(2) Example: The exchange rate between office and industrial is 1 sq. ft. of office for every 1.1298 sq. ft. industrial 1000 sq. ft. of office is equivalent to 1235 sq. ft. of industrial.
CN
2
FLOATNG
>ct
1
o
l
1
c3.317.1ft\t,
-a o
VESTED FOOTPRINT-�\ PGo` II Olt
1
TURNING eti51N ` \ t\ \\
DOCK..
•
ill
ci
.
4444444.44,•4444.444.44.444.44.4444444.4.-4
\ 1 -`..
1 X 4 V:
\ \ \ \\ NAM' �rQ1�'.4
�.-4 Iw
pn \; o
•
•
\ f —e •
\ /�
Exhibit G
NOTE
ACTUAL VESSEL NUMBER WILL VARY
ACCORDING TO MOORING CONFIGURATION;
SLIP MIX IS AN EXAMPLE BASED ON
TYPICAL CONDITION. A MAXIMUM OF 50
VESSELS IS PROPOSED.
-F1XE0 DOCK
REMOVABLE PILINGS
(CAPPED DURING IN -SEASON), TYP.
FIXED MARGINAL DOCK
NEW BULKHEAD,
LANDWARD OF EXISTING
REMOVABLE PILINGS
(CAPPED DURING
NOTES i IN -SEASON), TYP.
1. FOR PIER TRAFFIC FLOW, SEE SHEETS 14 & 16.
0 100 200 2. FOR SECURE STAIRS PLAN, SEE SHEET 11c.
/-- IN FEET 3. ALL DOCKS ARE FLOATING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
SCALE
1L = 204. 27 PERMANENT, 46 REMOVABLE MOORING
PILES; SEE SHEET 19c AND 19b FOR DETAIL
5. SEE SHEETS 20 & 21 FOR SEWAGE PUMPOUT INFO.
PROJECT SITE
2-3 SERVICE VESSELS (DO
NOT LEAVE MARINA)
r
OBSERVATION DECK, TYP. /
SEE PROFILE SHEET 13 //
SLIP MIX TABLE
VESSEL
NUMBER
SIZE
OF SUPS
LENGTH
200'
1
200'
160'
13
2,080'
140'
2
280'
125'
10
1,250'
100'
2
200'
70'
13
910'
40'
4
160'
30'
2
60'
20'
3
60'
TOTAL
50
5,200'
T.K. 94W KE NS 1 ?
FLREG.559'0
CITY Of MIAMI & FLAGSTONE ISLAND GARDENS, LLC
WATSON ISLAND
MIAI,4I, FL 33132
COASTAL SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC
.M to,d. tiiJ. Hl�lw.y. Coal GW... F, • 1]]a6
id, ja /a41-:tip F.c 3C7/Et 1-lill .w.Cosla]/,I..nrN<om
7TTt d F1L4 A CO ► OO
Co..,.. [..J.v....n<AI, Qd tn{b,..M1.d and Management
YAT6 MA
ISLAND GARDENS MEGAYACHT HARBCR
OVERLAY OF PROPOSED
MARINA ON VESTED MARINA FOOTPRINT
J08: 201701
GATE: 06/04/04
BY: 1.4JP/VC
SHEET 1 CF 1