Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutsubmittal (2)HURRICANE COVE MUSP DOCUMENTS PRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE DURHAM PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PUBLIC RECORD FO SITE DATA _ C-1 ZONING W/ R-4 RESIDENTIAL SITE AREA CALGLLATIONS NET UPLAND AREA - 4.60 AC,R=_5 209,860.80 5?= NET 5UBMER6ERED LAND - 3.23 ACRES 140130.04 SF ULT TOTAL LOT AREA • 191 ACRES 944,481.64 5F PLOT LINE TO ¢ OF NW. K RIVER DRIVE . 0.10 ACRES 90,47q.g3 SF PLOT LINE TO ¢ OF 1b CT. 0.01 ACRES b84.g4 SF PLOT LINE TO 10'-0' INTO MIAMI RIVER= 17q AGREE 18,010.00 5F GR055 TOTAL LOT AREA - 10.416 ACRES 455,72b.5,1 5F PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT - SC-EME I PERMITTED PROPOSED DENSITY 150 DWELLIN& UNITS (DU) / NET ACRE BLDG. I BLDG I[ BLDG m COhM�RC1AL / 1.91 NET ACRES 050) - 11065 17J (PERMITTED) 325 I;IJ_ 314 DU, 1 314 M. RESIDENTIAL 1.013 Du. RETAJL TOTAL TOTAL FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) 2ES)DENTIAL COMMERCIAL BASE FAR= 112 TIME &ROSS LOT AREA (GLA) 342902 363,451 364-225 F.A,R. FAR. (I 72) 453,126501 S.F. (GLA) - 119,95051 SF, 5.F. S.F. S.F. I)IOpQI S.F, 2,400 SF. ARTICLE 5 SECTION 502 ( G ) 20% PUD INCREASE. (.20) 111,95051 S.F. = 155990,10 SF. 9 S,g40b1 SF, 1,112,491.00 S.F. TOTAL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ARTICLE 9 SECTION 914.1 25% INCREASED DEVELOPMENT BOWS 935ff40,61 S.F. TOTAL BASE FAR ALLOWED WITH 20% (.25) g3594Ob1 S.F. - 235M5515 SF, PUD INCREASE MAXIMUM TOTAL FAR= 1,169,925?b 5F. 11655034 S.F. INCREASED DEVELOPMENT WNIUS RECIUIRED 6 6.61 / 5.F, s 6 1,1115411,10 5JILDING FOOTPRINT 60,161 5.F. 6 PODIUM ROOF POOL DECK LEVEL (0.40) 10,41 ACRES 6RO56 LOT AREA - (4.16 ACRES) 112916.11 S.F. ® 6ARA6E PODIUM PERIMETER 101�503b 5F &K ---EN SPACE 55.651-26 5.F. PERVIOUS ON GROUND (0.10) 1041 ACRES &PO56 LOT AREA - (10416 ACRE'S) 26,01155 5.F- 11'2 POOL DECK LEVEL AREA 45,512.66 SF (1.20) - 5A,d4-7. 19 S.F. 547720.01 S.F. 6R3_EN SPACE PARKING REQUIRED PARKING PROP05E0 BLDG. I BLDG II BLDG m COM"52 iAL / TOTAL BLDG. I BLDG I[ BLDG ID ON GR DE TOTAL 552 5q5 539 R54AiL 1?20 415 614 601 41 1 T91 SPADES 5PACE5 SPACES 5PACE5 SPADES SPADES SPACES SPACES SPA :ES SPADES (IN 6ARA6E) (IN GARAGE) (IN (5ARAGE) EXISTING 190 SLIP MARINA TO BE REFURBISHED MARINA MARINA.5 SPACES • 1 FOR EA 2 BOATS OVER 16' IN LENGTH SHARED FARKING AGREEMENT COVENANT RESTAURANT 1,200 S.F. / 100 = 12 5PACE5 TO BE PROVIDED FOR 6096 USE BY COMMERCIAL 1 RETAIL 1200 S.F. / 900 = 4 SPACES PROJECT RESIDENTS, 20% BY PUBLIC 65 5P. (20%) - 15 SP. • 5 5P.-10 SPACES TOTAL FOR MARINA RE5TAURANT - 12 SPACES FOR RESTAURANT 4 SPACE5 FOR COMMERCIAL / RETAIL LOADING LOADING PROVIDED (9) 12' X 35' X IS' H6T SPACES IN BL06`�. BLD6 1 12'X 55'X Is' H&T.. 3 5PAGES (2) 12' X 555' X 15' H&T SPACE5 ON &RA.DE. 10' x 20' - 4 SPACES (12) la X 2a SPACES ON GRADE. BLD6 1[ 12' X 95' X 15' HbT. - 5 5PA.CE5 10' X 20' - 5 5PACES SLD& 12' x 35' x 15' H&T. - 4 51ACE5 10' x 20' - 5 SPACE5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT - SC --✓CME Tf - FILLED BASIN SITE AREA CALCULATIONS ( ISO MA) NET UPLAND AREA = 5.42 ACR -15 296',503.5 5F 814,4 NET 5UBMER&ERED LAND - 2.4q ACRES 108,464.4 SF 312.1 K ---T TOTAL LOT AREA - 1.91 ACRES 54 .,44!.64 SF 1,156.5 PLOT LINE TO ¢ OF NA. N. RIVER DRIVE 0.10 ACRES SO 419 a3 SF PLOT LINE TO ¢ OF 15 CT. 0.01 AGIL5 60444 5F PLOT LINE TO 10'-O' INTO MIAMI RIVER= 114 ACR -55 15.010.08 5F 68.055 LAT AREA - 10.4t ACRES 453,1265q SF REVISIONS I VDAZ- u,*/05 ! Hy 11 PRAWN DING. CHECKED T. aweT -ALE ne bo•M 06 NC HEE' i� 0.1.9 �Z � o� sHEErs MEDIUM DENSITY AULTIFAMILY IN-DUSTRIAL NW 15 ST NERAL CO A z VV N RIVE ERCT ENS IULT N LU I J ESIP �A HIGH DENSITY CONSERVAI MULTIFAMILY C) SE INDUSTRIAL PA 0 200 400 800 Feet Address; 1884 MW N RIVER DR 19 ZONING § 302 ARTICLE 3. OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS; OFFICIAL SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS Sec. 300. Official zoning atlas and supplements; adoption. The city is divided by this zoning ordinance into zoning districts, the boundaries and designations of which are shown in a series of maps, covering in combination the entire land and water area of the city, identified as the zoning atlas (the "Official Zoning Atlas" or the "official zoning atlas" or "the atlas") of the city. The official zoning atlas, together with all lawfully adopted explanatory material shown therein, is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be part of this zoning ordinance. For the special purposes set out below, where boundaries and designations are not shown directly on the atlas sheets, they shall be indicated by overlays to such sheets or as separate maps. Overlays or separate maps shall have the same force and effect as the atlas sheets. 300.1. Mapping SD Special Districts. Where SD special public interest districts (the "SD" or the "special districts") created by this zoning ordinance have the effect of supplanting existing districts, regulations, or proce- dures or of modifying requirements or portions of districts, the SD boundaries and designa- tions shall be shown directly on the atlas sheets. 300.2. Inset maps. Where the scale generally applicable to the atlas sheets or supplemental maps is inade- quate for presentation of details in particular areas, such areas may be cross referenced on the atlas sheets or supplemental maps to separate inset maps at appropriate scale. 300.3. Other supplements. Other supplements, in the form of maps, indexes, guides, illustrations, records, reports, interpretive material and standards, may be officially adopted, directly or by reference, to facilitate administration and public understanding of the official zoning atlas or of regulations adopted for the zoning districts or other divisions established thereby. Sec. 301. District regulations extend to all portions of districts surrounded by bound- aries. Except as otherwise specifically provided, a district symbol or name shown within district boundaries in the official zoning atlas indicates that district regulations pertaining to the district extend throughout the whole area surrounded by the boundary line. Sec. 302. Rules where district designation is not indicated; corrections. Except as provided at section 303.2.2, Exception in cases of apparently unzoned strips, the following rules shall apply: (a) Where a district designation is not indicated for an area in the official zoning atlas, the area shall be construed to be zoned as for the most restrictive adjoining district. 73 W 'd MIAMI, FLORIDA (b) Upon discovery of such omissions, unless research reveals the correct official status (in which case map corrections and entries related thereto may be made without action by the city commission of the city, hereafter referred to as the "city commission"), the zoning administrator of the city (hereafter referred to as the "zoning administrator") shall report the need for a corrective amendment to the planning advisory board of the city (hereafter referred to as the "planning advisory board"), which shall initiate the proposed corrective amendment and transmit its recommendations thereon to the city commission. Sec. 303. Rules where there is uncertainty as to boundaries. Where uncertainty exists as to location of boundaries of districts, or other areas delineated for regulatory purposes in the official zoning atlas, the following rules shall apply: 303.1. Boundaries indicated as approximately following the centerlines of streets, alleys, rights -of way, or easements; variation between actual and mapped location, effect of vacation on zoning status of property. Boundaries indicated as approximately following the centerlines of streets, alleys, rights- of-way, ights- ofway, or easements shall be construed as following such centerlines as they exist on the ground (except where variation of actual location from mapped location would change the zoning status of a lot or parcel, in which case the boundary shall be so interpreted as to avoid such change). In the event of vacation, the boundary shall be construed as remaining in its location, except where ownership of the vacated property is divided other than at the center, in which case the boundary shall be construed as moving with the ownership. 303.2. Boundaries indicated as approximately following boundaries of streets, alleys, other public or private property lines, rights-of-way, or easements. 303.2.1. General rule. Except as indicated at section 303.2.2, boundaries indicated as approximately following boundaries of streets, alleys, other public or private property lines, rights-of-way, or easements shall be construed as following such boundaries, except where variation of actual location from mapped location would change the zoning status of a lot or parcel, in which case the boundary shall be so interpreted as to avoid such change. 303.2.2. Exception in cases of apparently unzoned strips; effect of vacation on zoning status of property. As an exception to the general rule above, where such boundaries are adjacent to streets, alleys, rights-of-way, public property, or easements, and are so located with relation to other opposing boundaries as to leave such streets, alleys, rights-of-way, public property, or easements without apparent zoning designation, such boundaries shall be construed as running to the centerlines of the areas in- volved. In the event of vacation, the boundary shall be construed as remaining in such central location, except where ownership of the vacated property is divided other than at its center, in which case the boundary shall be construed as moving with the ownership. 74 ZONING § 303 303.3. Boundaries indicated as approximately following city limits; changes in city limits. 303.3.1. Generally. Boundaries indicated as approximately following city limits shall be construed as following such city limits. 303.3.2. Effect of removal of areas from city. Where property previously within the city is removed from its limits, the zoning boundaries involved shall be construed as moving to conform with such change in city limits. 303.3.3. Effects of annexations to the city. Where property previously located outside the city is annexed, zoning boundaries shall not be construed as moving with city limits. Applications for required permits may be received and processed in relation to prop- erty in such areas, but no such permit shall be issued until the city commission shall have taken action as provided in article 22, Amendments, to establish the zoning status of such annexed property and the permits applied for are found to be in accord with the terms of such amendment. 303.4. Boundaries indicated as approximately following mean high water lines or centerlines of streams, canals, lakes, bays, or other bodies of water. Boundaries indicated as approximately following mean high water lines or centerlines of streams, canals, lakes, bays, or other bodies of water shall be construed as following such mean high water lines or centerlines. In the case of a change in mean high water line, the boundary shall be construed as moving with the change, except where such moving would change the zoning status of a lot or parcel, in which case the boundary shall be interpreted in such manner as to avoid such change. 303.5. Boundaries indicated as entering any body of water. Boundaries indicated as entering any body of water, but not continuing to intersection with other zoning boundaries or with the limits of jurisdiction of the city, shall be construed as extending in the direction in which they enter the body of water to intersection with other zoning boundaries or with the limits of city jurisdiction. 303.6. Boundaries indicated as approximately parallel to or extensions of features. Boundaries indicated as approximately parallel to or extensions of features described in sections 303.1 through 303.5 above shall be construed as being parallel to or extensions of such features. 303.7. Distances not specifically indicated. Where distances are not specifically indicated on any map in the official zoning atlas, they shall be determined by reference to the scale of the map. 303.8. Zoning board action in cases of remaining uncertainty, conflicts. In other circumstances not covered above, or where natural or man-made features existing are at variance with those shown in the official zoning atlas, or where the atlas is illegible or unclear, or where interpretations based on the above rules appear to produce contradictions or 75 The City of Miami has a Marine Industrial Zoning category, Special District (SD) — 4. which only exists along portions of the Miami River's shoreline. The City of Miami's adopted Comprehensive Plan states: PORT OF MIAMI RIVER' Goal PA -3: The Port of Miami River, a group of privately owned and operated commercial shipping companies located at specific sites along the Miami River, shall be encouraged to continue operation as a valued and economically viable component of the city's maritime industrial base. Objective PA -3.1: The City of Miami, through its Land development regulations, shall help protect the Port of Miami River from encroachment by non water -dependent or water - related land uses, and shall regulate its expansion and redevelopment in coordination with the City's applicable coastal management and conservation plans and policies. Policy PA -3.1.1: The City shall use its land development regulations to encourage the establishment and maintenance of water -dependent and water -related uses along the banks of the Miami River. and to discourage encroachment by incompatible uses. Policy PA -3.1.2: The City shall. through its land development regulations. encourage the development and expansion of the Port of Miami River consistent with the coastal management and conservation elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Policy PA -3.1.3: The City shall. through its land development regulations. encourage development of compatible land uses in the vicinity of the Port of Miami River so as to mitigate potential adverse impacts arising from the Port of Miami River upon adjacent natural resources and land uses. Objective PA -3.2: The City of Miami shall coordinate the surface transportation access to the Port of Miami River with the traffic and mass transit system shown on the traffic circulation map series. Policy PA -3.2.1: The City of Miami shall. through the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. coordinate intermodal surface and water transportation access serving the Port of Miami River. Objective PA -3.3: The City of Miami shall coordinate its Port of Miami River planning activities with those of ports ' The "Port of Miami River" is simply a legal name used to identify some 14 independent, privately -owned small shipping companies located along the Miami River, and is not a 'Port Facility" within the usual meaning of the term. The identification of these shipping concerns as the 'Port of Miami River" was made in 1986 for the sole purpose of satisfying a U.S. Coast Guard regulation governing bilge pumpouts. facilities providers and regulators including the U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, and Miami -Dade County's Port of Miami. Policv PA -3.3.1: The City of Miami. through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, shall support the functions of the Port of Miami River consistent with the future Goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly with respect to the unique characteristics of the Port of Miami River's location and its economic position and functioning within the local maritime industry, and the necessity for coordination of these characteristics and needs with the maritime industry that complements, and often competes with, the Port of Miami River." The following is a list of the approved, pending and potential applications for re -zoning from Marine Industrial (SD -4) to residential and mixed -uses, from 2000 — June 2004: Approved Zoning Changes I . 1951 NW South River Drive, SD -4 to High Density Multi -Family Residential (R- 4). 92.783 square feet, approved by City Commission in October 2000 (MRC recommended denial) 2. 2415 NW 16 ST RD. "River Run South" SD -4 to High Density Multi -family Residential. 116.836 square feet, approved. approved by City Commission in July 2002 (MRC recommended denial) 3. 615 SW 2 Ave, "Latitude on the River". SD -4 to SD -7, for High Density Residential & Mixed -Uses, 95,505 square feet, approved by City Commission in February 2003 (MRC recommended approval) 4. 610 SW 1 Ave. "Neo Vertika''. SD -4 to SD -7 for High Density and Mixed Uses. 57.500 square feet. approved by City Commission March 2003. (MRC Recommended approval) 5. 610 SW 1 Ave, "Neo Vertika". SD -4 to SD -7 for High -Density Residential and Mixed -Uses. 37.500 square feet. City Commission approved March 2003 (MRC recommended approval) 6. 610 SW 1 Ave. "Neo Vertika SD -4 to SD -7 for High -Density Residential and Mixed -Uses. 4,450 square feet. City Commission approved March 2003 (MRC recommended approval) 7. 1960 NW 27 Ave, "Agua-Clara'. 77,524 square feet, special exception granted to allow for High -Density Multi -Family. (MRC recommended denial) 8. 1001 NW 7 ST. "Royal Atlantic". SD -4 to C-1, for Residential and Mixed Uses. 274,864 square feet, City Commission approved in February 2004 (MRC recommended approval) Total Approved Removal of Marine Industrial Zoning = 756,962 square feet or 17.37 acres Pending Applications 1. 1884 NW N River Drive. "Hurricane Cove". SD -4 to C-1 for Residential and Mixed Uses. 379.230 square feet, submitted application to City of Miami 2. 201 SW 6 ST. 'Reflections of Miami River". SD -4 to SD -7 for Residential Development. 22.043 square feet. 3. 401 SW 3 Ave, former "Atlantic Boatyard" site, from SD -4 to Commercial for --Finnegan's River' Restaurant. 39.495 square feet Total Pending Applications to Remove Marine Industrial Zoning = 440,768 square feet or 10.11 acres Potential Future Aoplications 1. 1583 NW 24 Ave. "Florida Yacht Basin" site. from SD -4 to C-1 for Residential and mixed -uses. 409.764 square feet 2. 517 NW South River Drive. "Ameritrade Terminals". from SD -4 to a Residential use. 28.617 square feet 3. 555-663 NW South River Drive. "5th Street Terminal. Inc.". from SD -4 to a Residential use. 84.998 square feet 4. 236.298 & 300 SW North River Drive. 'River House Lofts — Proposed Phase III" current Garcia's seafood market to High -Density Residential Use. 33509 square feet Total Potential Future Applications to Remove Marine Industrial Zoning = 556,888 square feet or 12.78 acres Grand total approved, pending and potential zoning amendments along the Miami River, from Marine Industrial to Residential/Mixed uses, is 1,754,678 total square feet or 40.28 acres. Existing_ Marine Industrial Sites in the C 1) 510 NW 1V' ST. P&L Towing, 13.223 square feet 2) 101 NW S. River Drive, 4,008 square feet 3) 125 NW S. River Drive, 4,800 square feet 4) 129 NW S. River Drive. 5,700 square feet 5) 131 NW S. River Drive. 9,968 square feet 6) 151 NW S. River Drive, 22,980 square feet 7) 201 NW S. River Drive. 40.643 square feet 8) 243 NW S. River Drive. 28.171 square feet 9) 301 NW S. River Drive. 5.706 square feet 10) 311 NW S. River Drive. 7,072 square feet 11) 325 NW S. River Drive. 15.600 square feet 12) 341 NW S. River Drive, 16.617 square feet 13) 377 NW South River Drive, 10,831 square feet 14) 745 NW 4 ST. 12,429 square feet 15) 737 NW 4 ST. 23.000 square feet 16) 405 NW South River Drive. 25.450 square feet 17) 801 NW 4 ST. 17.300 square feet 18) 431 NW South River Drive. 40,982 square feet 19) 43 7 NW South River Drive, 3 8,729 square feet 20) 501 NW South River Drive. 32,137 square feet 21) 517 NW South River Drive. 28,617 square feet 22) 1270 NW 11 ST. Merrill Stevens. 143,312 square feet 23) 1261 NW 8 Terrace. Merrill Stevens. 57.312 square feet 24) 961 NW 7 ST. 20.750 square feet 25) 1884 NW North River Drive. 379.230 square feet 26) 2000 NW North River Drive, 176.542 square feet 27) 2100 NW River Drive. 65.791 square feet 28) 2154 NW North River Drive. 96.059 square feet 29) 2190 NW North River Drive. 15.250 square feet 30) 2199 NW North River Drive. 144.053 square feet 31) 2215 NW 14 ST. 191.985 square feet 32) 2490 NW 18 Terrace. 30.000 square feet Total Existing Marine Industrial Sites in the City of Miami with no Known Current Plans for Re -Zoning = 1,724,247 square feet or 39.58 acres Therefore, currently there is more Marine Industrial Zoning which has been removed from the Miami River or has pending and potential applications to remove the Marine Industrial Zoning (40.28 acres), than there are existing marine industrial sites along the Miami River with no known plans to remove their existing zoning and land use (39.58 acres). MIAMI RIVER CORRIDOR URBAN INFILL PLAN football: the Orange Bowl. Scheduled for $16 million of bond - funded improvements, the Orange Bowl is greatly underutilized. This site needs to be studied as a community resource and an asset to the river. Access to the stadium is good — and slated to improve, should the presently un -funded East-West Metrorail expansion bring a station directly into the site — and although the Orange Bowl is distant from other activity centers and surrounded by low- to medium -density residential uses, several avenues of potential improvement bear investigation. NW 7"' Street, presently zoned for office use, provides one link to the river that will be activated through construction of the planned greenway and could be enlivened further through a broadening of allowable uses. In particular, incorporating mixed use development into the Orange Bowl site itself should be considered as a means of generating activity on the approximately 330 days a year that the Orange Bowl is not in use. Another connector to the river is NW 17"1 Avenue. While residential on the south side of the river, this corridor hosts a vital neighborhood -oriented commercial district immediatelv north of the river and is adjacent to the Civic and Medical Centers. With trolley or other transit service, this link could allow for additional options for before- or after -game eating and entertainment. Both pedestrian and transit access from the Orange Bowl to the river and Civic/Medical Centers should be explored. A park-and-ride facility at the Orange Bowl could help to relieve traffic congestion on the north side of the river and reduce the illegal parking in the residential neighborhoods of Spring Garden and Highland Park. ALLAPATTAH (17th Avenue to 27th Avenue, north bank) E i i v •xw� n+a�srr eu.ny �M+sn MewieR MY VISION FOR THE RIVER Allapattah is said to take its name from a Seminole Indian word meaning alligator; indeed, until Miami ,s building boom of the 1920s Allapattah remained largely a place of floods and farms. Today, the neighborhood retains a strong link to its agricultural past, with numerous produce and flower markets flourishing along its main street, NW 17`h Avenue. A thriving wholesale and retail clothing district on NW 20`" Street brings thousands of shoppers to Allapattah daily, and the large and well -programmed Curtis Park (including the rivers only public boat ramp) and neighboring community Curtis Park- the home of the onlv public boat ramp on the Miami River center provide activities and social services for Allapattah's young and elderly populations — and everybody in-between. The Allapattah neighborhood's waterfront is zoned for waterfront industrial, park, and residential use, with residential intensities including from duplex, medium -density multifamily, and high- density multifamily and is the home to thriving marinas and two of the largest yacht basins on the river. The appropriateness of high density residential located directly on the river is Hurricane Cove- a commercial marina in Allapattah �i h� Prepared by Kimley-1 lorn and Associates. Inc. -June. 2002 ^ Vf – MU1M1-.n—E Prepared for the Miami River Commission 33 MIAMI RIVER CORRIDOR URBAN INFILL PLAN highly questionable and should be reconsidered. Likewise, lower density residential development may not be the most appropriate use of this neighborhood's Miami River frontage. Waterfront development in Allapattah, particularly near the NW 17"' Avenue commercial corridor and the potential Mahi Shrine redevelopment site east of 17", should be oriented toward low- to medium -density mixed use (not exceeding the existing intensity of NW 17`h Avenue), allowing the neighborhood flower and produce markets of NW 17"Avenue to be brought to the river. With a potential cross -river link to the Orange Bowl and to Sewell Park (see next section), riverfront development also should require public access to the waters edge. As throughout the river corridor west of I-95, Allapattah's waterfront industrial zoning should be maintained. Residential Allapattah is predominantly low in density, with older single family homes and newer duplexes interspersed. Much of the neighborhood lacks curb and gutter improvements, which, combined with an abundance of cars has led to the deterioration of swale areas. A proliferation of overhead wires adds to the unsightliness of the public right-of-way, and low -hanging cross -street connections from utility pole to residence provide hazards. Housing Existing 'superblock'housing detvlopmenr- An Infill housing opportunity (28) conditions vary, with many homes quite well-maintained. One notable exception to Allapattah's generally solid residential fabric is a privately -owned affordable housing complex consisting of seven mid -rise buildings spread across fourteen acres — a typical example of the superblock approach to housing of earlier decades. Though well-maintained, this development is out of context with its surroundings and unnecessarily interrupts the neighborhood's urban street grid. In the event that the site is redeveloped, a more urbanistically VI.SIONFOR THE RIVER appropriate site plan should be developed. It should be possible to redevelop this site at a higher density while better preserving the character and context of the neighborhood. NW 17" Avenue, in addition to being a vital business corridor, contains a number of potentially historic commercial structures dating from the 1930s thorough 1950s. A survey of historic resources should be conducted with the intent to identify and designate historic sites, giving particular attention to the identification of sites eligible for listing in the National Register that might benefit from the tax incentives associated with National Register designation. DURHAM PARK/ WEST LITTLE HAVANA (17th Avenue to 27th Avenue, south bank) Allowable uses along the Durham Park waterfront including the south fork of the river are conservation, restricted commercial, waterfront industrial, and residential, with intensities including single family, duplex, medium -density multifamily, and high-density multifamily. The neighborhood contains four direct conflicts* between residential and industrial zoning; as further evidence of its troubled land use situation, the future land use designations of one waterfront industrial parcel in the neighborhood have been changed to residential in response to property owner requests within the past two years, resulting in a net loss of waterfront industrial property. Additional factors, including circulation impediments related to the south fork of the river and S.R. 836, unusually inaccessible parks, and a low level of neighborhood organization make this area difficult to plan for. Follow-up study and work with property owners and residents is strongly recommended. Despite these difficulties, the Durham Park/West Little Havana Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates. Inc. June, 2002 Muwi - oaoe 34 'a�' Prepared for the Miami River Commission MIAMI RIVER CORRIDOR URBAN INFILL PLAN VISION FOR THE RIVER Need.Jor improved boat access at Se" -ell Park (29) neighborhood has several strong assets that should be central to any follow-up planning effort for this area. Among them is Sewell Park — one of the City of Miami's most beautiful, historic, and environmentally significant parks. Presently inaccessible from the water (its one boat slip has become unusable) and nearly inaccessible by land. The potential exists to provide kayak and canoes available at the slip to view the unique geological ridge and caves. This park warrants careful attention. Another asset is the former Florida Yacht Basin site (30), a marine industrial site with deep -water slips and the potential to compliment the planned Watson Island mega -yacht marina as a mega -yacht servicing facility. This site is one of only a few with the physical infrastructure and geographic proximity to Watson Island to serve this purpose. This is consistent with the City of Miami Comprehensive plan which encourages the establishment and maintenance of water -dependent and water -related uses along the banks of the Miami River. Also of significance is the opportunity to develop educational facilities for the marine trades, of which there presently are none within the Miami River corridor. An incentive program targeting education and job creation should be explored, along with a potential affiliation between Miami - Dade Public Schools to provide maritime vocational training. The following page illustrates one of many development scenarios that could occur on the Florida Yacht Basin Site. Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. -June, 2002 W' - Prepared for the Miami River Commission 35 MIAMI RIVER CORRIDOR URBAN INFILL PLAN TRANSPORTATIONALONG THERIVER THE RIVER ASA MULTI -MODAL CORRIDOR Prepared by Kimley Horn and Associates. Inc. June. 2002 = MlAAII - DADE .v55 Prepared for the Miami River Commission ol A 1 y 5-4 r e #t v 'tri S' .� r s r St ° (3 � :Gp MASTER PLAN FINAL REPORT - JANUARY, 1992 CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & ZONING wr'MAll c1AI Maritime Industry The function of the Miami River as a "working waterfront" should be preserved. Scarce waterfront land should be reserved, wherever possible, for use by businesses that are dependent on a waterfront location or are essentially re- lated to the maritime economy of the area. The river should grow as a shallow draft seaport - a lifeline to the Caribbean Basin - providing good -paying jobs for city residents. New shipping terminals should be located where they will not be detrimental to residential neighbor- hoods. The river's role in the regional market for repair, sales and service of boats and marine equipment should be main- tained and strengthened. The marine character embodied by the fishing industry on the river should be preserved. Management The river's diversity, vitality and exotic character shou be preserved. Improvement efforts should strive to mat it without totally taming it. Crime and the perception of crime along the river mull reduced. Law enforcement efforts should be enhanced increased manpower and new laws tailored to curtail tl port/export of contraband and stolen merchandise. Safety should be improved in the navigation and opera of vessels and marine facilities along the river. Problei such as improper loading of cargo, lack of safety equil ment, inadequate training of crew members, and substi dard maintenance practices need to be addressed with regulations applicable to foreign flag vessels. Owners of vessels should be made financially responsi for costs and penalties associated with abandoned or derelict vessels, navigational accidents, mechanical fa fuel or pollutant spills, and code violations. Management and enforcement efforts need ongoing fu. and coordination among numerous public agencies at I city, county, state and federal levels. An official port c ganization would be one way to accomplish this, as wi other benefits such as carrying out port -related capital provement projects, marketing and promotion. CHAPTER 1: THE WORKING WATERFRONT GOAL: Preserve the working waterfront. INTRODUCTION More than one-third of the Miami River corridor is a "work- ing waterfront" of over 100 marine businesses. Location is its most important asset, offering high accessibility to major markets, both domestic and international. Within South Florida, the Miami River has relatively little competi- tion as a center for highly varied maritime activities. In- dividual sectors such as shipping, marinas, and yacht repair may have competition within the region, but no place boasts the variety and concentration of marine services that is found on the Miami River. I MUMFPCIAL SHIPPING Commercial activities on the Miami River essentially revolve around the transportation of cargo, in particular to the shallow draft ports of the Caribbean and northern South America. The Miami River is ideal for these ports as ships they require are typically small and have shallow draft, just the type of vessel that can navigate the Miami River. The Miami River accommodates both containerized and break bulk cargo, and serves as a transshipment point for con- tainerized cargo going into the Port of Miami (Dodge Is- land) but ultimately destined for one of the shallow draft ports in the Caribbean Basin. The location of shipping ter- minals is indicated on Map 1.1 (page 1.5). A 1990 survey conducted by the Beacon Council found that the Miami River shipping terminals that responded to the survey employed 403 workers. It is estimated that if all es- tablished terminals were included, the employment number would increase to 545. In addition to the freighters operat- ing from these terminals, the Miami River is used by an es- timated 25 to 35 smaller wooden vessels which primarily serve ports in Haiti. These vessels are operated in a more informal manner, tying up at various sites along the river and generally using crew members, rather than local employees, to load the vessels. Miami River cargo tonnage for 1989 was 733,089 tons, which in value terms equates to about $1.7 billion. As a point of reference, if the Miami River was considered as a separate port, it would have ranked fifth in the state. The estimated total cargo volume on the Miami River in 1990 is in excess of one million tons, with a value of about $2.3 bil- lion. Dynamic Growth During the 1980's While the above-mentioned numbers are quite impressive, it is important to put them into perspective vis-a-vis other industries. A Dade County report, which analyzed employ- ment trends in over 370 sectors of the metropolitan economy during the 1980-1986 period, concluded that marine cargo handling ranked third in the number of new jobs created after adjusting for the national rate of growth and industrial mix. Interestingly enough, a related sector - trucking - ranked first, while another related sector - bulk petroleum terminals - ranked 39th, While this data pertains to the Dade County economy, it is important to point out that cargd tonnage at the Port of Miami (Dodge Island only) expanded by 13 percent, while tonnage through the Miami River grew by 22 percent. Thus, it appears that the Miami River shippers played a very important role in the dynamic growth of marine cargo handling and related sec- tors. Provision of Low Skill Employment One very important economic aspect of the shipping in- dustry is the provision of low skill employment oppor- tunities with per hour wage rates, in some cases, as high as four times the minimum wage rate. Based on discussion with industry leaders, the occupational structure of com- mercial shipping on the Miami River is depicted below. Fig. 1.5 Occupational Structure of Commercial Shipping Approximately 270 low skill jobs (stevedores) are provided by the Miami River shippers. This takes on added impor- tance as the number of workers in the Miami area with limited job skills is increasing (due to such factors as immigration from the Caribbean and Central America) and employment in many other industrial sectors is declining. Data on the geographic distribution of these jobs by residence of workers, indicate that over 37 percent of the workers resided in the City of Miami from Little Havana as far north as Liberty City. These workers received on average over $18,500 in annual wages. This equates in hourly wages to more than twice the current minimum wage scale and is almost 25 percent higher than the average hourly earnings of manufacturing workers coun- tywide. Since shipping on the Miami River is poised for rapid growth during the 1990's, more relatively good paying employment opportunities will be available to the low skill component of the workforce. Also, there is currently a need for trained stevedores to load some of the smaller is- land freighters (see page 2.10). This presents an oppor- tunity to provide job recruitment and training within City neighborhoods for additional stevedores. Good public transportation service is needed to the terminals west of NW 27th Avenue, Future Growth Prospects and Constraints Given the previously mentioned prospects for increased trade with the Caribbean Basin, and that during the 1980's cargo tonnage on the Miami River was doubling every four years, one should expect continued robust performance. However, the Miami River faces certain constraints in regard to expansion of commercial shipping. Competition from the Port of Dania, the Port of Palm Beach, and Port Manatee (Tampa) has affected the Miami River shippers. In particular, Port Manatee which can ac- commodate ships with over a 20 foot draft, increasingly poses strong competition for trade with ports west of Cuba, where Miami does not enjoy a locational advantage. A strong marketing and promotion program may help the Miami River terminals increase their share of trade among shallow draft ports. A binding constraint on the expansion of trade on the Miami River is the sediments which have accumulated in the main shipping channel, making it narrower and shal- lower. Large vessels can pass only at high tide, limiting the number of trips per day and the amount of cargo that may be loaded to about 80 percent of capacity. More alarm- ing is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers calculation that vessel maneuvering width will continue to decrease an average of one foot per year throughout the length of the Miami River. Without dredging, larger cargo vessels will be forced to cease operation on the river within the next five to ten years, jeopardizing the economic feasibility of the river's shipping industry. Although much of the anticipated growth in the shipping in- dustry can be accommodated by more efficient use of exist- ing terminals and cargo vessels, there will inevitably be new entrepreneurs seeking to open additional shipping ter- minals along the Miami River. There are approximately 8 acres of vacant or undeveloped land along the river that could be converted to terminal use without a change of zoning. Roughly 38 additional acres could be obtained by displacement of existing marginal businesses. However, some of this land is not appropriate for shipping terminals and other industrial uses because it is adjacent to residen- tial neighborhoods. As discussed on pages 1.12 - 1.13, the "SD -4, Waterfront Industrial" zoning district should be sub- divided into two categories, allowing expansion of ship- ping terminals wherever they can operate safely and con- veniently without disruption to residential neighborhoods, Other noteworthy issues affecting future growth of ship- ping on the river are navigational constraints posed by bridges and highway access for trucks carrying cargo to and from the terminals (see pages 2.6 - 2.9). RECOMMENDATIONS Objective: 1.2 Support growth in the shipping industry on the Miami River in terms of increasing employment and value of cargo. Policies: 1.2.1 Support environmentally safe dredging of the Miami River by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by 1994 to remove sediments which impair navigation by cargo vessels. 1.2.2 Establish a unified program to market and promote shipping terminals along the Miami River within the Caribbean Basin marketplace. 1.2.3 Encourage expansion of shipping terminals in loca- tions where they can operate safely and convenient- ly, without negative impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods. 1.2.4 Provide improved bus or jitney service in the vicinity of shipping terminals to provide acces- sibility to jobs for City residents. 1.2.5 Provide job recruitment and training opportunities for the additional stevedores that will be needed by Miami River shippers. MARINAS AND BOATYARDS In terms of formal marina activity, the Miami River is home to approximately 650 wet slips, of which over 500 are commercial in nature. The remainder are at two con- dominium complexes. The commercial wet slips are divided almost equally between facilities which provide boat repair services and those which serve exclusively as marinas. On the river there are essentially two types of boat repair establishments. First, there are the larger in- tegrated facilities like Richard Bertram and Allied Marine which provide sales, repair and storage services for yachts. These larger facilities provide about 160 jobs. Secondly, there are the smaller and intermediate -sized boatyards which provide about 140 jobs. Problems Facing Small Boatyards and Marinas While there are a number of boat repair facilities that have a growing business, many of the marinas and small boatyards (under 10 employees) on the Miami River have experienced a contraction in business activity since 1985. In fact, four of the 26 small boatyards and marinas iden- tified in 1985 by the draft Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Management Plan, are no longer in business nor have they been replaced by a marine business. One factor affecting this decline has been the rapid expan- sion of competing facilities in Broward County. A com- parison of boat registration data shows that ownership of larger pleasure craft (26 feet and above) increased much more rapidly in Broward County than in Dade County during the I980's (Figure 1.6). The 1989/90 retail marine sales in Broward were almost twice that of Dade County. The data are indicative of the trends which began during the 1970's, wherein Ft. Lauderdale developed into a major yachting center with modern boatyards and marinas, as well as marine retail facilities. The widespread opinion among persons in the marine industry is that much of Broward's growth in business came from customers in Dade County. The owners of establishments that were surveyed for this planning study suggested additional reasons for the decline in marina and smaller boatyard business. Crime and per- ception of crime are believed to be a major problem. Also, difficulties in the permitting process for repair and small expansions, in particular with DERM; and high cost factors including taxes, insurance and high workman's compensa- tion rates were frequently cited problems. Further, it was mentioned that marinas on the river face competition from more modern facilities which offer greater amenities and do not suffer from a "bad image." The problems for marinas and small boatyards have been deepened by the recessionary climate which has hit the boating industry rather hard. Further, the reputation of the river as a hur- ricane sanctuary was undermined as a result of statements by the South Florida Water Management District (later retracted) regarding the potential of a wall of flood water being released into the Miami River from the Everglades drainage structures. This resulted in an estimated loss of $46,000 in marina revenue during the 1990 hurricane season. In fact, the Miami River is one of the safer harbors in Dade County for vessels properly moored to withstand storm conditions. Fig. 1.6 Growth in Pleasure Craft Registration (over 26 ft.) Th—M. 1009 Ices 1090 e,o.■rd � ■.use �.aa 9.na o.e. ■.ns ■.7sI s.�sa Land Values One issue which directly affects the continued viability of marinas and small boatyards, as well as other businesses along the Miami River, is that of increasing land values and the concomitant increase in property taxes. Clearly this has been the case in the Downtown portion of the river and has resulted in the displacement of marine businesses with office buildings. From this experience some have sug- gested that "blue -belting", which involves restricting the as- sessed value of waterfront property to its value in its present use, would be an appropriate remedy. In order to accurately assess the potential benefits of blue - belting, an analysis was performed of assessed property values for all riverfront parcels (excluding the Downtown section). Average assessed land valuations per square foot for riverfront parcels increased by 109 percent during the period from 1980 to 1990. While this increase is substan- tial, it is much less than the 182 percent average increase experienced by all properties in the City of Miami (exclud- ing downtown) for the period 1979 to 1989. This suggests that assessments on riverfront businesses were not artificial- ly inflated by speculation on changes to "higher" uses; therefore, blue -belting would not have been helpful. Fur- thermore, the existing "SD -4 Waterfront Industrial" zoning district prohibits property from being used for anything other than water -dependent and water -related marine uses. Since state law requires the tax assessor to consider zoning restrictions in determining the value of property, in effect, this acts like blue -belting. One factor that may lead to disproportionate increases in riverfront land value is the anticipated growth in commer- cial shipping. If trade with Cuba should open up, the demand for riverfront property could dramatically increase. In order to mitigate the impact of such a situation upon as- sessed valuations for other businesses, the separation of marine industrial from marine commercial uses is sug- gested on pages 1.12 - 1.13. Growth Prospects and Constraints Demand for marina slips in Dade County is projected to in- crease by about 700 by the year 2005 (updates from 1984 DNR projection). The location of new slips will be limited by countywide environmental regulations (see pages 3.12 - 3.13), and it is not yet known whether the Miami River will be a place where permits for new slips can be obtained. Since many of the existing commercial slips on the Miami River are in poor condition, a primary issue is under what circumstances would it be economically viable to upgrade these facilities. One possible inducement, as is indicated in Policy 1.3.2, is to permit a limited amount of mixed-use development to supplement the marina income. Another remedy is to overcome the shortage of land available to meet minimum parking requirements by permitting off-site parking. The available sites for expansion in boatyard services in Dade County are even more limited than marina sites due to zoning restrictions on this type of heavy commercial/in- dustrial use. Thus, it is important to encourage and facilitate the continued operation and expansion of these businesses on the Miami River. The location of new marina slips within easy access to Miami River boatyards is one way to reinforce this industry. Virtually all of the land along the Miami River is located in a state Enterprise Zone. However, few businesses take ad- vantage of the tax incentives available in the Zone, either because they are not aware of them or because they fear the difficulty of qualifying for tax incentives may outweigh the benefits. Technical assistance should be provided through the Beacon Council or another appropriate agency. RECOMMENDATIONS Objective: 1.3 Preserve the marine repair, service, equipment and related industries along the Miami River that are vital to the shipping industry or the recreational boat- ing industry. Policies: 1.3.1 Protect boatyards and related marine businesses from displacement by higher land value'uses by adopting separate "marine industrial" and "marine commer- cial" zoning district classifications. 1.3.2 Expand the income producing potential of marine commercial properties by modifying the zoning dis- trict regulations to permit limited non -water -depend- ent uses such as restaurants or apartments, while retaining requirements for water -dependent use as a principal use. Permit off-site parking within 600 feet of these business establishments. 1.3.3 Expand the local market for recreational boating ser- vices provided by Miami River establishments by supporting plans for a megayacht marina and general marina expansion on Watson Island. 1.3.4 Encourage existing businesses to improve their facilities by simplifying the permit procedures and requirements for maintenance, repair and minor im- provements. 1.3.5 Provide assistance to small businesses for filing ap- plications for financial assistance and waterfront con- struction permits. FISHFRIF_S Changes in the Industry There have been significant changes in the character of the fishing industry during the last several decades resulting from the level of catch available domestically, competitive- ness of U.S. fishing vessels, and the economics of the processing and distribution end of the business. For the local industry, perhaps the factor most responsible for the change in character of the industry was the decision to declare the Bahamas off-limits to local fishermen in 1976. This drastically decreased the amount of fresh catch landed on the Miami River and negatively impacted the sub- sequent processing operations. These changes are readily apparent from employment numbers for firms primarily engaged in fish and seafood processing. Countywide employment at fish and seafood processing plants stood at 390 in 1980, and dropped to only 96 in 1987. On the other hand, wholesale activity in the fishing in- dustry registered significant gains during the same time period increasing by 70 percent to 674 in 1987. Unfor- tunately, since wholesale activity does not require a waterfront location, the expansion of wholesale activity has taken place away from the Miami River in other areas of the county. The result has been a relative decline in the Miami River's role in the fishing industry. The current level of direct employment in both processing and wholesale activity by Miami River fisheries is 150. In the survey of businesses on the river, comments from the owners of these fish establishments indicated that much of the seafood arrived by truck, and that the Keys and the air- port were important sources. Although for many, location on the waterfront is no longer critical to their operation, the Miami River area does provide good access to major arterials and proximity to the air and sea ports. This provides an economic rationale for these establishments to remain in their current locations. In general, business for these establishments has been steady over the past five years and, for some, exports are an important sales com- ponent. Local Seafood Catch Although the functions of fisheries along the Miami River are now primarily storage and distribution, the Miami River continues to be the principal focal point in Dade County for landing the catch of the local fishing fleet. Employment in the local fishing fleet associated with the Miami River is between 40 and 50. According to the Southeast Fisheries Center, the value of seafood catch landed at fish houses along the Miami River in 1989 was about $2.7 million. This represented 59 percent of the county total. The major catch landed are spiny lobsters and sponge. In fact, over 25 percent of the sponge catch for the entire state was landed on the Miami River in 1989. There are processing operations for both sponge and lobster on the river. Growth Prospects and Constraints While the industry is no longer a major source of employ- ment on the river, it still maintains a significant presence particularly at the wholesale level. As long as land values and accessibility remain favorable, these wholesale opera- tions are likely to remain. Their location along the riverfront in East Little Havana and Lummus Park offers the potential of contributing to the "fishermen's wharf" character envisioned in neighborhood revitalization plans. A concentration of seafood restaurants, retail seafood markets, outdoor cafes and night time entertainment in a small district along both sides of the river from SW 2nd Street to NW 4th Street would create a lively attraction for local residents, downtown employees and tourists. This proposed district has been named "Riverside Market". Lack of space for on-site parking is a constraint that needs to be removed by permitting off-site parking. The lobster traps and fishing boats which represent an im- portant aspect of the maritime character associated with the Miami River have dwindled in number. It is likely that local fishermen will continue to be under pressure in future years. The recent decision to prohibit sponge fishing in Biscayne National Park (effective December, 1991) will hurt the industry. In addition the lack of mooring space for fishing boats, cost factors (including land price and narrow margins) have negative impacts on future viability. Al- though the -local fishing industry will continue to change, it is important to retain a portion of it on the Miami River, both for the jobs it creates find the authentic character it lends to the working waterfront. In addition to mooring and storage space throughout the entire length of the river, there should be places within the 'Riverside Market" dis- trict where fishermen could sell directly to the public. RECOMMENDATIONS Objective: 1.4 Preserve the fishing industry along the Miami River. Policies: 1.4.1 Encourage existing fish houses to adapt to urban revitalization efforts in surrounding neighborhoods by opening retail outlets and/or restaurants and out- door cafes. Permit reduced parking or off-site park- ing within 600 feet of these business establishments. 1.4.2 Encourage public and private property owners to pro- vide mooring space for fishing vessels. Designate locations where fishermen would be encouraged to sell seafood to the public.