Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisAnalysis for Major Use Special Permit for Paramount Park located at approximately 728 Biscayne Boulevard and 225 NE 7 Street CASE NO. 2005-033 Pursuant to Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, the subject proposal for Paramount Park project has been reviewed to allow a Major Use Special Permit per Articles 5, 13 and 17, located at approximately 728 Bis- cayne Boulevard and 225 NE 7 Street, Miami, Florida, to comprise of a 756-foot, 68- story high mixed use structure to be comprised of approximately 467 total multifamily residential units with recreational amenities; approximately 120 hotel rooms; approxi- mately 12,947 square feet of retail space; and approximately 818 total parking spaces; providing for certain floor area ratio ("FAR") bonuses. This Permit also includes the following requests: MUSP, as per Article 17 for development of 467 residential units and 120 hotel rooms; MUSP, as per Article 17 for parking structures with approximately 818 parking spaces; MUSP, as per Article 5 and Section 502, PUD to increase 20% of the total floor area, for a maximum of 249,806 square feet of bonus; Per City Code, Chapter 23-5a, Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for ground disturbing activity in an Archeological Conservation Area; CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 6, Section 606.3.2, for development of new construction within the Central Commercial Residential District; CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 15, Section 1512, to request a waiver of City of Miami Parking Guides and Standards to reduce one (1) of the required five (5) loading berths from 12' x 55' to two (2) 10' x 20'; CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 4, Section 401, to allow construction fence and covered walkway; CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 4, Section 401, for signage approval; CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 4, Section 401, to allow for outdoor eating areas and outdoor cafes; CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 908.2, for access from a public street roadway with driveway greater than twenty-five feet in width; CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 920.1, to allow a trailer(s) for construction and other temporary offices such as leasing and sales; CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 906.6, for pool/outdoor recreation area. CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 927, to allow temporary off -site parking during construction; CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 917.1.2 to allow valet parking for other uses; CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 906.9, to allow for a special event namely a ground breaking ceremony; Page 1 of 6 CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 918.2, for parking and staging of construction during construction; CLASS l SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 925.3.8, to allow development/construction/rental signage; CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 920.1, to allow a construction trailer and watchman's quarters; REQUEST for applicable MUSP conditions to be required at the time of shell permit instead of at issuance of foundation permit; and the requirement to record in the Public Records a unity of title or covenant in lieu of unity of title, if applicable. Pursuant to Articles 5, 13 and 17 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, approval of the requested Major Use Special Permit shall be considered sufficient for the subordinate permits requested and referenced above as well as any other special approvals required by the City which may be required to carry out the requested plans. In determining the appropriateness of the proposed project, the Planning Department has referred this project to the Large Scale Development Committee (LSDC) and the Planning Internal Design Review Committee for additional input and recommendations; the following findings have been made: • It is found that the proposed development project will benefit the area by creating additional residential opportunities in the Downtown NET District, located at the SW corner of NE 7 Street and Biscayne Boulevard. • It is found that the subject property is located in the "City of Miami" Plat within the Parkwest neighborhood of the City. • It is found that the existing zoning designation for the property pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida is the SD-6 "Central Commercial - Residential" Zoning District. • It is found that the proposed density of the project (587 units at 300 units per acre) is below the maximum 880 units (500 units per acre) on the 1.76± net acre site. • It is found that the project has convenient access to the Metromover system at the Freedom Tower and Park West stations, each located adjacent west of the subject property, for efficient use of existing mass transit systems • It is found that the proposed project is located within an Archeological Conservation area and is therefore subject to a Certificate of Appropriateness for any ground disturbing activity within the designated area. • It is found that the project is expected to cost approximately $284,637,500, and to employ approximately 1,285 workers during construction (FTE-Full Time Employees); The project will also result in the creation of approximately 88 Page 2 of 6 permanent new jobs and will generate approximately $3,067,593 annually in tax revenues to the City (2005 dollars). • It is found that Miami -Dade Public Schools provided a revised review of the proposed project on December 9, 2004. The student population generated by this development is estimated at 112 students. The schools serving this area of application are Frederick Douglas Elementary (26 students) — 61% Florida Inventory School Houses (FISH) Capacity with the proposed project; Riverside Elementary (26 students) — 144% FISH; Jose De Diego Middle (28 students) — 130% FISH; and Booker T. Washington Senior High (32 students) - 58% FISH. Pursuant to the interlocal agreement, Riverside Elementary and Jose de Diego Middle School meet the review threshold of 115%. At an average of $5,833 per K-12 student, the total annual operating cost for the additional students residing in this development, if approved, would total $653,296. Based on the State's January 2005 student station cost factors, capital costs for the estimated additional students to be generated by the proposed development is $1,788,224. • It is found that on December 27, 2004, the Miami -Dade Aviation Department provided a review of the proposed project and found that it does not conform to the Miami -Dade County Height Zoning Ordinances. • It is found that the Large Scale Development Committee reviewed the project on January 4, 2005 to address the expressed technical concerns raised at said Large Scale Development Committee meeting. • It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) on January 4, 2005, which approved (HEPB 2005-04) a Certificate of Appropriateness for ground disturbing activity involving new construction within an Archaeological Conservation Area subject to the following conditions: (1) A phase 1 archeological assessment prior to construction and archeological monitoring during ground disturbing activity shall be provided in accordance with the management plan submitted by the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc.; (2) The City Archeologist shall be notified prior to construction activities and in the event of a significant discovery, as per the management plan submitted; and (3) A final report shall be submitted to the City Archeologist documenting the results of this investigation. • It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on February 8, 2005 and the following pertinent comments were made: Urban Design - (1) The extension of the retail lining to cover more of the northwest and southwest corners of the building, and to further conceal the loading bay area, is appropriate. However, it is important to provide a similar treatment of continuous retail space along Biscayne Boulevard at the northeast corner of the site. The breaks in the retail frontage are inappropriate, as they allow views into the vehicular drop-off circle from Biscayne Boulevard; (2) The committee approves of the revised loading solution which allows loading functions to occur internally within the garage and loading vehicles do not have to reverse to or from the public right of way; (3) As the architect stated in the meeting with the design review committee, all ground floor service -related function rooms will be provided with spandrel glass, in order to blend these spaces with the actual glass material used for the retail and lobby spaces; (4) The provision of retail space lining the garage ramp along the ground floor level on NE 2nd Ave. is an appropriate design solution in order to conceal the ramp and Page 3 of 6 provide active uses at the pedestrian level; (5) The committee appreciates the revised garage podium plan in which the circular opening to the drop-off area has been removed, and active habitable liner units have been provided on the entire north and south sides of the garage, as well as the Biscayne Boulevard side. This will create a more activate facade on these streets; (6) The design of the retail terrace and steps is appropriate; Architecture - (1) Provide material samples or photographs indicating the different types of glass proposed for the Biscayne Boulevard retail and office elevation; (2) The detail of the west elevation indicates the use of glass for the garage facade. Please clarify if glass is intended to be used for the entire garage elevation, and if clear glass or spandrel glass is proposed; (3) The design concept allowing each of the three tower elements to be expressed all the way to the street level is appropriate; (4) The use of a large amount of windows, balconies and terraces in the units in the building is appropriate; Landscaping - (1) The placement and location of shade trees at the edge of curb along NE 2rn Ave., NE 7th St. and NE 8th St. is appropriate. Consider the addition of more shade trees along NE 7th St. and NE 8th St. near Biscayne Boulevard; (2) Consider providing a more lush landscaping treatment for the amenity level terrace. The Planning Department's review resulted in design modifications that were then recommended for approval to the Planning Director. • It is found that the proposed project was reviewed for design appropriateness by the Urban Development Review Board on February 16, 2005, which recommended Approval (UDRB Reso. 2-16-05-2) with the following conditions: Minimize use of opaque glass for retail; The entries on the north and east facade shall remain the same proportion as presented at the UDRB. • It is found that on February 21, 2005, the City's Traffic Consultant, URS Corp., provided a review of the Traffic Impact Analysis submitted by the applicant and has found the traffic analysis sufficient. • It is found that with respect to all additional criteria as specified in Section 1305 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, the proposal has been reviewed and found to be adequate. Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending approval of the requested Development Project with the following conditions: 1. Meet all applicable building codes, land development regulations, ordinances and other laws and pay all applicable fees due prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. Allow the Miami Police Department to conduct a security survey, at the option of the Department, and to make recommendations concerning security measures and systems; further submit a report to the Planning Department, prior to commencement of construction, demonstrating how the Police Department recommendations, if any, have been incorporated into the PROJECT security and construction plans, or demonstrate to the Planning Director why such recommendations are impractical. Page 4 of 6 3. Obtain approval from, or provide a letter from the Department of Fire -Rescue indicating APPLICANT'S coordination with members of the Fire Plan Review Section at the Department of Fire -Rescue in the review of the scope of the PROJECT, owner responsibility, building development process and review procedures, as well as specific requirements for fire protection and life safety systems, exiting, vehicular access and water supply. 4. Obtain approval from, or provide a letter of assurance from the Department of Solid Waste that the PROJECT has addressed all concerns of the said Department prior to the obtainment of a shell permit. 5. Comply with the Minority Participation and Employment Plan (including a Contractor/Subcontractor Participation Plan) submitted to the City as part of the Application for Development Approval, with the understanding that the APPLICANT must use its best efforts to follow the provisions of the City's Minority/Women Business Affairs and Procurement Program as a guide. 6. Record the following in the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Occupancy, a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions providing that the ownership, operation and maintenance of all common areas and facilities will be by the property owner or a mandatory property owner association in perpetuity. 7. Prior to the issuance of a shell permit, provide the City with a recorded copy of the MUSP permit resolution and development order, and further, an executed, record able unity of title or covenant in lieu of unity of title agreement for the subject property; said agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney's Office. 8. Provide the Planning Department with a temporary construction plan that includes the following: a temporary construction parking plan, with an enforcement policy; a construction noise management plan with an enforcement policy; and a maintenance plan for the temporary construction site; said plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of any building permits and shall be enforced during construction activity. All construction activity shall remain in full compliance with the provisions of the submitted construction plan; failure to comply may lead to a suspension or revocation of this Major Use Special Permit. 9. In so far as this Major Use Special Permit includes the subordinate approval of a series of Class I Special Permits for which specific details have not yet been developed or provided, the applicant shall provide the Planning Department with all subordinate Class I Special Permit plans and detailed requirements for final review and approval of each one prior to the issuance of any of the subor- dinate approvals required in order to carry out any of the requested activities and/or improvements listed in this development order or captioned in the plans approved by it. 10. If the project is to be developed in phases, the Applicant shall submit an interim plan, including a landscape plan, which addresses design details for the land occupying future phases of this Project in the event that the future phases are Page 5 of 6 not developed, said plan shall include a proposed timetable and shall be sub- ject to review and approval by the Planning Director. 11. Pursuant to design related comments received by the Planning Director, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: (a) Provide additional shade trees along NE 7 Street and NE 8 Street near Biscayne Boulevard; (b) A final land- scape plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. 12. Pursuant to HEPB Resolution 2005-04, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: (a) A phase 1 archeological assessment prior to construction and archeological monitoring during ground disturbing activity shall be provided in accordance with the management plan submitted by the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc.; (b) The City Archeologist shall be notified prior to construction activities and in the event of a significant discovery, as per the management plan submitted; and (c) A final report shall be submitted to the City Archeologist documenting the results of this investigation. 13. That the height of the proposed structure shall conform to the Miami -Dade County Height Zoning Ordinance as part of the process of obtaining a FAA "Determination of No Hazard". 14. That corrections on the Zoning Data Table reflecting hotel and commercial parking requirements shall be made prior to being heard by the City Commis- sion. 15. Applicant shall pay Downtown DRI fees within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Development Order. 16. Within 90 days of the effective date of this Development Order, record a certi- fied copy of the Development Order specifying that the Development Order runs with the land and is binding on the Applicant, its successors, and assigns, jointly or severally. Page 6 of 6