Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AnalysisANALYSIS MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT for 300 GROVE BAY RESIDENCES located at approximately 3663 South Miami Avenue LEGISTAR FILE ID: 06-01060mu Pursuant to Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, the subject proposal for the 300 Grove Bay Residences project, located at ap- proximately 3663 South Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida, has been reviewed to allow a Major Use Special Permit per Articles 5, 9, 13 and 17, to construct an a three building mixed use development ranging in height from approximately 304 feet to 411 feet to be comprised of approximately 300 total multifamily residential units with recreational amenities; and approximately 642 total parking spaces; providing for certain floor area ratio ("FAR") bonuses. This Permit also includes the following requests: MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMITS MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 17, Section 1701, Definition (9) and Article 5, Sect. 502. PUD districts; minimum area, maximum densities and maximum floor area ratios permitted (a)(c), to allow up to 20 % increase of floor area ratio, for an increase of approximately 171,433 square feet of floor area; MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 17, Section 1701. Definition (8) and Article 9, Section 914, Sub -Section 914.1 Dwelling unit, square footage, and off- street parking bonuses for contribution to Affordable Housing Trust Fund; excep- tions, to allow an increase up to twenty (25) percent of additional floor area as a de- velopment bonus of approximately 214,292 square feet, the user shall make a non- refundable bonus developer contribution of an amount of $2,657,220.80 to the Af- fordable Housing Trust Fund administered by the City of Miami; The Major Use Special Permit encompasses the following Special Permits and the additional requests: CLASS II SPECIAL PERMITS CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 923, Sub -Section 923.2, Sub - Section 923.2.1. Reduction in stall dimensions by Class II Special Permit; criteria and limitations on reductions, to allow reduction of two (2) loading berth dimensions as follows: Request to be reduced Proposed Total Proposed Two (2) 12 feet wide x 55 feet long x 15 feet high Two (2) 12 feet wide x 35 feet long x 15 feet high Six (6) 12 feet wide x 35 feet long x 15 feet high CLASS I SPECIAL PERMITS CLASS 1 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 927. Temporary structures, occupancies, and uses during construction, criteria for special permits, to allow tem- 06-01060mu Page 1 of 9 porary structures, occupancies, and uses reasonably necessary for construction such as construction fence, covered walkway and if encroaching public property must be approved by other city departments; CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 906, Sub -Section 906.9. Tem- porary special events; special permits; criteria, to allow temporary carnival, festival, fair or similar type event on privately owned or City -owned land such as a ground breaking ceremony; CLASS 1 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 916, Sub -Section 916.2.1. Temporary special event parking, to allow parking for temporary special event such as ground breaking ceremonies; CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 918, Sub -Section 918.2. Tem- porary off-street offsite parking for construction crews, criteria, to allow temporary off-street offsite parking for construction crews working on a residential project under construction; CLASS 1 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 920, Sub -Section 920.1.2. Limitations on occupancy of mobile homes, to allow parking of mobile homes, trail- ers or manufactured homes, when authorized for security or other purposes in con- nection with land development such as construction trailer(s) and other temporary construction offices such as watchman's quarters, leasing and sales centers; CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 10, Section 10.5, Sub -Section 10.5.4.3, R-4 Multifamily High -Density Residential, Temporary Signs (3), to allow temporary development signs; REQUEST, for waiver of Chapter 36 Noise, Section 36-6 Construction Equipment (a) permitting the operation of construction equipment exceeding the sound level of a read- ing of 0.79 weighted average dBA at any time and/or day subject to the City Manager Exception pursuant to Section 36-6 (c) and all the applicable criteria; REQUEST for applicable PHASED PROJECT, subject to qualifications by the Director of the Planning Department, at the written request of the property owner (s) 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, 9, 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. 06-01060mu Page 2 of 9 In determining the appropriateness of the proposed project, the Planning Department has referred this project to the Large Scale Development Cornrnittee (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 Northeast Coconut Grove NET District, located off of South Miami Avenue on the Mercy Hospital property. It is found that the subject property is located in the "Mercy Hospital" plat within the Viscaya neighborhood of the City. • It is found that pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, the existing zoning designation for the property is G/I "Government and Institutional" and the proposed zoning designation is R-4 "Multifamily High -Density Residential". (see companion File ID 06-01060zc) • 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 "Major Institutional Public Facilities, Transportation and Utilities" and the proposed Future Land Use category is "High -Density Multifamily Residential". (see companion File ID 06-010601u) • It is found that the proposed project is currently located within the same land of the Mercy Hospital MUSP under Resolution No. 93-608, adopted on September 27, 1993. Applicant shall obtain approval of such MUSP non -substantial modification application prior to approval of this MUSP application. • It is found that there is no existing Development of Regional Impact (DRI) on the subject property, but a binding letter exists that essentially vests many of the older buildings from being calculated within the DRI thresholds. Therefore there is no DRI to be amended. • It is found that the proposed project is not located along a Primary Pedestrian Pathway. • It is found that the proposed project is located within an Archeological Conservation area. • It is found that the proposed project is located in FEMA Flood Zone "AE-13". • It is found that the proposed residential density of the project (300 units at 45 units per acre) is well below the maximum 1,008 units (150 units per acre) on the 6.72± net acre site. • It is found that the unit breakdown in each of the buildings is approximately 120 units (Tower 1), 100 units (Tower 2), and 80 units (Tower 3). • It is found that the total allowable combined floor area without bonuses for the 11.44± gross acre site at a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.72 is 857,167 square feet. The project as proposed is requesting a bonus of 20% PUD (171,433 sq. ft.) and 06-01060mu Page 3 of 9 25% Affordable Housing Trust Fund (214,292 sq. ft.) for a total proposed FAR of 1,200,000 square feet out of an allowable 1,242,892 square feet. • It is found that pursuant to Article 9, Section 914, the proposed project is requesting a development bonus of 214,292 square feet of additional floor area, and shall make a non-refundable bonus developer contribution to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund at amount of $12.40 per square foot for a total of $2,657,220.80. • It is found that the maximum height of the proposed structures are approximately 411 feet, 37 stories (Tower 1), 368 feet, 32 stories (Tower 2), and 304 feet, 27 stories (Tower 3). Pursuant to Article 4, Section 401, as the proposed location of the proposed project (not abutting a right-of-way) within the R-4 zoning district does not require a height limit. • It is found that the proposed open space for the project (75,000 square feet) is above the minimum required open space (74,753 square feet at 15% GLA) for this project. • It is found that the proposed total number of parking spaces (approximately 642) for the project is above the required minimum number of 630 parking spaces. • 1t is found that the location of the proposed project is currently a 606-space employee parking lot for Mercy Hospital that will be eliminated. There are also 189 parking spaces elsewhere on the hospital property that will be eliminated for the site of a new parking garage for a total of 795 eliminated parking spaces. Mercy Hospital has a pending Class II Special Permit for a 816-space parking garage to replace all the existing parking affected for the proposed project, which needs to be constructed prior to issuance of any construction permit of the subject proposed project; meaning the parking structure shall be constructed first to accommodate the parking previously required for Mercy Hospital. • It is found that the existing helipad on the proposed site is to be removed and will not be replaced by Mercy Hospital. • It is found that the narrow private road on the southerly end of the Mercy Hospital complex serves as both a Miami -Dade Transit (MDT) bus route and an emergency hospital entrance. • It is found that the project is expected to cost approximately $549,326,985, and to employ approximately 258 workers during construction (FTE-Full Time Employees); The project will also result in the creation of approximately 100 permanent new jobs (FTE) for building operations and will generate approximately $5,024,387 annually in tax revenues to the City (2006 dollars). • It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Internal Design Review Committee on April 4, 2006 and the following pertinent comments were made: Zoning — (a) The change of zoning of this property from Gil to R-4, combined additional FAR gained from bay frontage and adjacent roads, results in a project density that is inappropriate for the existing conditions of this area. The FAR bonuses in the application further exacerbate this situation. The Planning Department feels that this project is out of scale with the area, and that if the applicant chooses to rezone the property, it should be to a land use that is consistent 06-0106omu Page 4 of 9 with the adjacent neighborhood, which is R-1 zoning; (b) Please indicate how this project relates to the Mercy Hospital Master Plan; (c) Contact the Zoning Department to confirm the use of Perimeter Road Area in the FAR calculations for this project; (d) It is critical that the applicant conduct a traffic study and meet with Mary Conway, Transportation Director for the City of Miami regarding traffic circulation and access to the site. She may be contacted at 305-416-1027; Urban Design — (a) The north and west facades of the parking base front the Perimeter Road with a two-story blank wall, which is an unacceptable pedestrian environment; (b) The committee appreciates the integration of a baywalk into the site plan of this project. Ensure public access to this baywalk. Furthermore, provide section details of the baywalk with dimensions. Consider referring to the City of Miami Baywalk/Riverwaik Design Guidelines for ideas on further developing this area; Architecture — (a) Please include a clear indication of what type of materials are being proposed for all four elevations of the building, including windows, balconies, and garage screening materials. This information can be submitted as a labeled color rendering. Material samples and precedent photographs are encouraged; (b) Provide additional details of all garage entrances and openings, including screening materials, and entrance dimensions; (c) Provide elevation drawing details, showing all of the building's elevations at the street level, at a scale no less than 118"=1', in order for the committee to review the building's impact on the pedestrian realm, In particular, present the north and western facades of the parking base, and provide enlarged elevation details of the public baywalk. The Planning Department's review resulted in design modifications that were then recommended for approval to the Planning Director. • It is found that on April 28, 2006, the City of Miami Public Works Department provided a review of the project and commented that (1) Platting is required to create new divisions of Tracts "A" and "C" of the Mercy Hospital subdivision. The proposed new tract shall access to and frontage on the private road. Platting is a long lead time procedure and the Public Works Department recommends an early investigation into this process; (2) South Bayshore Drive/South Miami Avenue is a scenic transportation corridor, is a Miami -Dade County maintained roadway, and expansion and redevelopment of this corridor is strictly regulated by the Florida Statutes; (3) The narrow private road on the southerly end of the Mercy Hospital complex serves as both a Miami -Dade Transit (MDT) bus route and an emergency hospital entrance. The traffic circulation plan for this development must consider the limited access to the proposed development site and the ungainly intersection of the private road at South Bayshore Drive/South Miami Avenue; and (4) The Public Works Department strongly recommends that the traffic engineer consults with the City's Capital Improvement/Transportation Office, Miami -Dade County Public Works Department and the Natoma Manor/Bay Heights Homeowner's Associations concerning traffic impacts caused by the proposed project and the relocated Mercy Hospital traffic on the local neighborhood streets. • It is found that an May 2, 2006, the Miami -Dade Aviation Department provided a Height Analysis review of the proposed project and found that it conforms to the Miami -Dade County Height Zoning Ordinances at that location. In addition, the analysis indicates that the structure may impact the Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) for Departure and Approach on some of the runways at Miami International Airport (MIA). Any proposed construction exceeding 200 feet 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, 06-01060mu Page 5 of 9 construction cranes for this project exceeding 200 feet in height muss be filed using the same form. • It is found that the Large Scale Development Committee reviewed the project on May 17, 2006 to address the expressed technical concerns raised at said Large Scale Development Committee meeting. It is found that the proposed project was reviewed for design appropriateness by the Urban Development Review Board on May 17, 2006, which recommended Approval (UDRB Reso. 5-17-06-7) with conditions. • It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) on June 6, 2006, which approved (HEPB 2006-54) 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 (2) 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; (4) The approval of the application shall in no way be construed as an endorsement by the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) of the actual project. • It is found that on June 7, 2006, the City's Traffic Consultant, URS Corp., provided a review (W.O. #159) of the Traffic Impact Analysis submitted by the applicant and has found the traffic analysis sufficient. URS commented that the applicant secure approval from the appropriate local agencies for all the proposed modifications and improvements which include the following: (1) Install a new traffic signal at the intersection of Halissee Street (Mercy Hospital emergency access road) and South Miami Avenue (South Bayshore Drive). The applicant will need to coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Works Department on the traffic signal. Add a southwest bound left turn lane on South Miami Avenue. Realign northeast bound through lane. The applicant also needs to coordinate with the County and the City on the future project for the reconstruction of South Bayshore Drive, the segment from Darwin Street to Mercy Way; (2) SW 17th Avenue — Add a right turn arrow to the existing traffic signal and modify signal timing; (3) East Fairview — Add existing traffic signal to coordinated signal system; (4) Mercy Way — Re -stripe existing northbound right turn lane for left and right turns; (5) Additionally, the Class II permit for the proposed Mercy Hospital parking garage, the structure to replace the surface parking lot at the Grove Bay site, will need to be approved before this project's Development Order is finalized. • It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Miami Zoning Board on September 11, 2006, Item No. 3, for a Change of Zoning from Gil "Government and Institutional" to R-4 "Multifamily High -Density Residential", in which the Board recommended DENIAL passed (Reso. ZB-06-1222) by a vote of five to two (5-2), which requires City Commission approval (see companion File ID 06-01060zc) • It is found that Miami -Dade Public Schools provided a revised review of the proposed project on September 18, 2006. The student population generated by this 06-01060mu Page 6 of 9 development is estimated at 43 students. The schools serving this area of application are Coconut Grove Elementary (21 students) — 101%/% Florida Inventory School Houses (FISH) Capacity with the proposed project; Ponce de Leon Middle (9 students) — 99% FISH; and Coral Gables Senior High (13 students) — 130% FISH. Pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement, only Coral Gables Senior High meets the review threshold of 115%. It is found that with respect to all additional criteria as specified in Section 1305.2 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, the proposal has been found to adhere to the following Design Review Criteria: (1) Site and Urban Planning; (2) Architecture and Landscape Architecture; (3) Pedestrian Oriented Development; (4) Streets and Open Space; (5) Vehicular Access and Parking; (6) Screening; (7) Signage and lighting; (8) Preservation of Natural Features; and (9) Modification of Nonconformities. 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 including the required Affordable Housing Trust fund contribution of $12.40 per square foot for any applicable FAR increase sought under those provisions. 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 06-01060mu Page 7 of 9 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. 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 design related comments received by the Planning Director, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: (a) The project is out of scale with the area, and the rezoning of the property should be consistent with the adjacent neighbor- hood, which is R-3 zoning; (b) Remove the FAR bonuses requested from the applica- tion; (c) Ensure public access to the proposed baywalk; (d) Applicant shall obtain ap- proval of non -substantial modification to the Mercy Hospital MUSP (Res. 93-608) prior to approval of this MUSP application; (e) The proposed Mercy Hospital parking garage (Class II permit) shall be constructed prior to issuance of any construction permit of the subject proposed project, so as to accommodate the parking previously required for Mercy Hospital. 12) Pursuant to comments by the City of Miami Public Works Department, the following shall be required: (a) Platting is required to create new divisions of Tracts "A" and "C" of the Mercy Hospital subdivision. (b) The traffic circulation plan for this devel- opment must consider the limited access to the proposed development site, the impact on the narrow private road on the southerly end of the Mercy Hospital complex that serves as both a Miami -Dade Transit (MDT) bus route and an emergency hospital en- trance; and the ungainly intersection of the private road at South Bayshore Drive/South Miami Avenue; (c) Applicant shall consult with the City's Capital Improvement/ Transpor- tation Office, Miami -Dade County Public Works Department and the Natoma Manor/Bay 06-01060mu Page 8 of 9 Heights Homeowner's Associations concerning traffic impacts caused by the proposed project and the relocated Mercy Hospital traffic on the local neighborhood streets. 13) Pursuant to comments by the City of Miami Transportation Department, the following conditions shall be required of the applicant: (a) Install a new traffic signal at the intersection of Halissee Street (Mercy Hospital emergency access road) and South Miami Avenue (South Bayshore Drive), and coordinate with the Miami -Dade County Public Works Department on the traffic signal; (b) Add a southwest bound left turn lane on South Miami Avenue and realign northeast bound through lane; (c) Coordinate with the County and the City on the future project for the reconstruction of South Bayshore Drive, the segment from Darwin Street to Mercy Way; (d) SW 17th Avenue — Add a right turn arrow to the existing traffic signal and modify signal timing; (e) East Fairview — Add existing traffic signal to coordinated signal system; (f) Mercy Way — Re -stripe existing northbound right turn lane for left and right turns; (g) The Class II permit for the pro- posed Mercy Hospital parking garage, the structure to replace the surface parking lot at the Grove Bay site, will need to be approved before this project's Development Order is finalized. 14) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter of approval of the proposed height from the Miami -Dade County Aviation Department. If no such approvals are granted, the height of the proposed project shall be reduced to those heights referenced in the letter from Miami -Dade Aviation to the Planning Department dated May 2, 2006. 15) A development bonus to permit a mixed use of 214,292 square feet of floor area shall require a non-refundable payment to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund of an amount of $12.40 per square foot for a total of $2,657,220.80. 16) Pursuant to HEPB Resolution 2006-54, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: (a) Submit monthly reports to the City of Miami during any archeological test- ing and monitoring activities to document the results of any finds; (b) Submit two (2) final reports to the City of Miami within 90 days of completion of the archeological investiga- tions and monitoring; (c) Submit a detailed archeological management or mitigation plan to the City of Miami prior to the commencement of any further archeological investiga- tions or construction activities if significant archeological material is identified; (d) The approval of the application shall in no way be construed as an endorsement by the His- toric and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB) of the actual project. 17) That the requested accompanying applications for Land Use Change (File ID 06-010601u) and Change of Zoning (File ID 06-01060zc) an this property are approved by the City Commission. 18) The applicant shall record a covenant, subject to review and approval by the city attorney, within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this resolution, which states that in the event that this Major Use Special Permit expires or is abandoned, any future development of the subject properties shall require design review and approval by the Planning Director, utilizing the same criteria as the original Major Use Special Permit. 19) 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. 06-01060mu Page 9 of 9