HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS
MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT
for
CAPITAL AT BRICKELL
(fka SMA)
located at approximately
1420, 1430, 1434 and 1438 South Miami Avenue; 1401 and 1429 SW 1 Avenue; 21, 37,
45 and 65 SW 14 Terrace; and 26, 44 and 54 SW 14 Street
CASE NO. 2005-065
Pursuant to Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami,
Florida, the subject proposal for the Capital at Brickell (fka SMA) project (MU-2005-
019) has been reviewed to allow a Major Use Special Permit per Articles 5, 13 and 17,
located at approximately 1420, 1434 and 1438 South Miami Avenue; 1401 and 1429
SW 1 Avenue; 21, 37, 45 and 65 SW 14 Terrace; and 26, 44 and 54 SW 14 Street, Mi-
ami, Florida, to construct a mixed use two tower development ranging in height from ap-
proximately 607 feet to 649 feet to be comprised of approximately 832 total multifamily
residential units with recreational amenities, approximately 108,543 square feet of office
space; approximately 47,853 square feet of retail space; and approximately 1,274 total
parking spaces; providing for certain floor area ratio ("FAR") bonuses.
This Permit also includes the following requests:
MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMITS
MUSP, as per Article 17 for development of 832 residential units;
MUSP, as per Article 17 for parking of approximately 1,274 parking spaces;
MUSP, as per Article 5, Section 502, PUD Districts; to increase the floor area by
twenty percent, for a total 197,572 square feet in bonus.
Per City Code, Chapter 36, Construction Equipment Request for waiver of noise
ordinance while under construction for continuous pours.
The Major Use encompasses the following Special Permits:
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMITS
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article
space or private recreational open space;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article
new construction within the SD-7 Districts;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article
fence and covered walkway;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article
CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article
eating areas and outdoor cafes;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article
public street roadway with driveway greater
7, Section 607.8.3 to allow open
7, Section 607, for development of
4, Section 401, to allow construction
4, Section 401, for signage approval;
4, Section 401, to allow for outdoor
9, Section 908.2, for access from a
than twenty five feet in width;
Page 1 of 6
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 15, Section 1512, to request a waiver
of City of Miami Parking Guides and Standards for reduction of required backup
space for parking. Required 23 feet. Proposed 22 feet. Request to waive 1 foot.
CLASS 1 SPECIAL PERMITS
CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 906.9, to allow for a
special event namely a ground breaking ceremony;
CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 917.1.2, to permit valet
parking;
CLASS I 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 I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 904, for parking and
staging of construction during construction;
CLASS I 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 satisfied at the time of shell permit
instead of at issuance of foundation permit:
a) The requirement to record in the Public Records 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; and
b) The requirement to record in the Public Records a unity of title or covenant in
lieu of unity of title.
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 South Miami Avenue and SW 14 Street.
• It is found that the subject property is located in the "The City of Miami" Plat within
the Brickell Village neighborhood of the City.
• It is found that the zoning designation of the property is SD-7 (Central Brickell Rapid
Transit Commercial Residential District).
Page 2 of 6
• It is found that pursuant to the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan of the City of
Miami, Florida, the existing Future Land Use category for the property is "Restricted
Commercial".
• It is found that the residential density of the project (832 units at 299 units per acre)
is below the maximum 1,392 units (500 units per acre) on the 2.784± net acre site.
• It is found that the project has convenient access to the Metromover system at the
Financial District station, located approximately half a block east of the subject
property, with connections to the Metrorail and Tri-Rail systems, for efficient use of
existing mass transit systems.
• It is found that the project is expected to cost approximately $584,359,903, and to
employ approximately 312 workers during construction (FTE-Full Time Employees);
The project will also result in the creation of approximately 10 permanent new jobs
(FTE) and will generate approximately $2,978,341 annually in tax revenues to the
City (2005 dollars).
• It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Internal Design Review
Committee on February 15, 2005 and the following pertinent comments were made:
Context - The committee greatly appreciates the applicant's compliance with the
committee's request to show the project along with floor plans and 3-D models of the
buildings proposed and under construction on the adjacent sites. The tower
placement and the location of uses and open plaza spaces is appropriate to the
project's site and surrounding urban context; Urban Design — (a) The provision of
an opening within the building's frontage on South Miami Ave., and a pedestrian
connection through the block is appropriate in order to break up the scale of this
large city block; (b) The provision of loading and service functions internalized within
the site is appropriate. The revision to the ground floor plan to allow for retail on SW
1st Ave. rather than mechanical uses is appropriate; Landscaping - The landscape
plan, including the provision of sculptures, trees, fountains and landscaping within
the plaza spaces is appropriate; Architecture — (a) The committee would like to
commend the applicant on the high levels of design developed in this project. The
two towers have an appropriate scale and proportion, and the tops of the towers give
the project a signature and unique design quality for the Brickell area; (b) The
committee appreciates the submittal of architectural precedents, and material
samples indicating the proposed character of the project; (c) The artistic solution for
the portions of the garage which is exposed is appropriate in appearance. However,
provide material details of the proposed aluminum grills and panels designed to
cover the garage openings. These materials shall be designed to completely
conceal vehicles and mechanical systems within the garage from view; (d) The
perspective rendering shows three large openings in the south facade of the
building. Provide more detail on this design element and coordinate the floor plans
and elevations to reflect this feature; The Planning Department's review resulted in
design modifications that were then recommended for approval to the Planning
Director.
• It is found that on February 28, 2005, the Miami -Dade Aviation Department provided
a Height Analysis review of the proposed project and found then that it did not
conform to the Miami -Dade County Height Zoning Ordinances. At that date, the
heights of two towers were 860 feet and 795 feet Above Ground Level. The
maximum allowable height at this location is 710 feet Above Mean Sea Level
Page 3 of 6
(AMSL). The proposed building height requires the applicant to file with the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 7460-1, "Notice of Proposed Construction
Alteration for Determination of Known Hazards". In addition, construction cranes for
this project exceeding 200 feet in height must be filed using the same form.
• It is found that Miami -Dade Public Schools provided a revised review of the
proposed project on July 6, 2005. The student population generated by this
development is estimated at 150 students. The schools serving this area of
application are Southside Elementary (69 students) — 204% Florida Inventory School
Houses (FISH) Capacity with the proposed project; Shenandoah Middle (37
students) — 117% FISH; and Miami Senior High (44 students) - 155% FISH.
Pursuant to the interlocal agreement, all the schools meet the review threshold of
115%. At an average of $6,549 per K-12 student, the total annual operating cost for
the additional students residing in this development, if approved, would total
$982,350. Based on the State's July 2005 student station cost factors, capital costs
for the estimated additional students to be generated by the proposed development
is $2,418,573.
• It is found that the Large Scale Development Committee reviewed the project on
March 2, 2005 to address the expressed technical concerns raised at said Large
Scale Development Committee meeting.
• It is found that on March 14, 2005, the City's Traffic Consultant, URS Corp.,
provided a review (W.O. #101) of the Traffic Impact Analysis submitted by the
applicant and has found the traffic analysis sufficient.
• It is found that the proposed project was reviewed for design appropriateness by the
Urban Development Review Board on April 20, 2005, which recommended Approval
(UDRB Reso. 4-20-05-3).
• It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Historic and Environmental
Preservation Board (HEPB) on June 7, 2005, which approved (HEPB 2005-40) a
Certificate of Appropriateness for ground disturbing activity involving new
construction within an Archaeological Conservation Area subject to the following
conditions: (1) Submit monthly reports to the City of Miami during any archeological
testing and monitoring activities to document the results of any finds; (2) Submit two
final reports to the City of Miami within 90 days of completion of the archeological
investigations and monitoring; (3) Submit a detailed archeological management or
mitigation plan to the City of Miami prior to the commencement of any further
archeological investigations or construction activities if significant archeological
material is identified.
• It is found that at the July 6, 2005 meeting of the Planning Advisory Board, the PAB
passed a separate resolution (PAB 81-05) with the condition that the developer and
architect meet with the homeowner's associations as discussed in the July 6, 2005
PAB meeting prior to the item being heard by the City Commission on July 28, 2005.
• 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.
Page 4 of 6
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.
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 re-
sponsibility, 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 Con-
tractor/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 man-
datory 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 in-
cludes 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 ap-
proval 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.
Page 5 of 6
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 devel-
oped or provided, the applicant shall provide the Planning Department with all subordi-
nate Class I Special Permit plans and detailed requirements for final review and ap-
proval of each one prior to the issuance of any of the subordinate approvals required in
order to carry out any of the requested activities and/or improvements listed in this de-
velopment order or captioned in the plans approved by it.
10) If the project is to be developed in phases, the Applicant shall submit an in-
terim plan, including a landscape plan, which addresses design details for the land oc-
cupying future phases of this Project in the event that the future phases are not devel-
oped, said plan shall include a proposed timetable and shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Director.
11) Pursuant to HEPB Resolution 2005-040, the applicant shall meet the follow-
ing conditions: (a) Submit monthly reports to the City of Miami during any archeological
testing and monitoring activities to document the results of any finds; (b) Submit two fi-
nal reports to the City of Miami within 90 days of completion of the archeological investi-
gations and monitoring; (c) Submit a detailed archeological management or mitigation
plan to the City of Miami prior to the commencement of any further archeological inves-
tigations or construction activities if significant archeological material is identified.
12) Within 90 days of the effective date of this Development Order, record a
certified 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