Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Pre-publication Submittal - Feb 2019 FANM Statement of Objections
SECOND AMENDED STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS AND EVIDENCE ON MAGIC CITY INNOVATION DISTRICT SPECIAL AREA PLAN CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION - PLANNING & ZONING MEETING February 28, 2019 - Agenda Items PZ 6 and PZ 7 (First Reading) The Family Action Network Movement ("FANM")1 on behalf of itself and its members and , submit the following Statement of Objections and Evidence in the quasi-judicial proceedings related to the Magic City Innovation District Special Area Plan ("Magic City SAP") application presented by MCD Miami, LLC ("Developer"). The first reading on this application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and zoning change is on the City of Miami Commission Planning and Zoning agenda for February 28, 2019. A separate letter requesting intervenor status with facts supporting certain entities' legally cognizable interests that entitle them to intervenor status was submitted initially on September 24, 2018 and has since been amended and re- submitted once on November 15, 2018, and again on February 28, 2019. The Second Amended version is attached hereto as Appendix A. This statement incorporates by reference all facts therein.2 A. INTRODUCTION FANM is deeply concerned about the Magic City SAP application as currently proposed. While it boasts a number of exciting prospects for Miami, it does not do enough to address the likely tremendous impact it will have on the surrounding neighborhoods, and on Little Haiti in particular. Eight years since the passage of Miami's form -based zoning code, Miami 21, we are witnessing the danger of the Special Area Plan, a zoning mechanism that allows any property owner with over nine (9) contiguous acres of land to bypass the zoning code and essentially rewrite the code that governs their property. The stated intent for this mechanism is to encourage streamlined, master - planned developments subject to increased process to encourage dialogue with the community. However, we see that as large scale development proposals creep into well -established neighborhoods like Little Haiti, far from the urban center downtown, Miami's cultural history is increasingly under threat. The economic pressure on land prices and rental rates caused by large SAPs can be dramatic, driving displacement of low-income, vulnerable residents and small business tenants. If not done right, with the proper mitigating policies tailored to the specific area, these developments can transform the character of a neighborhood in one fell swoop.3 With one SAP already approved in Little Haiti4 and two large scale SAP applications pending over a 15-block stretch along NE 2nd Avenue,5 there is ample cause for alarm. This is what makes it imperative that we approach the Magic City SAP application in a measured, well-informed Family Advocacy Network Movement, Inc. (FANM) is a Florida Not -For -Profit corporation located at 100 NE 84th Street, Miami, FL 33138 in Little Haiti. FANM has a long-standing commitment to meeting the needs of low to moderate -income families and children since 1991 through counseling, wrap around services, access to health care, community outreach/ education, job training/economic development, financial literacy, organizing & advocacy services. 2 One particular concern that is also of deep concern is the high number of Alcohol Service Establishment permits being requested by the Developer (10), especially since the Development Agreement eliminate distance requirements from churches, schools and other establishments under the Miami Code. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article126501109.html 4 Miami Jewish Home and Hospital, located off of NE 2nd Avenue across from what is now Design Place. While this SAP is also a significant development, the density and building heights (maximum 8 story buildings) proposed are far less than what is being proposed by Magic City and Eastside Ridge. 5 The present pending Magic City SAP and the Eastside Ridge SAP at 54`h and NE 2"d Avenue. 1 manner This development has great precedential value for the other SAPs that may arise in the area, and large scale developments in neighborhoods across Miami. As this Statement will show, the project is inconsistent in numerous ways with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) and with the Miami 21 zoning code. The scale, density and intensity of the project are grossly out of proportion with the surrounding neighborhood, such that its impacts will ripple out far beyond the bounds of the SAP area in terms of traffic, noise, environmental impact and dramatic building height increases in a neighborhood largely zoned for building height no greater than five stories. Furthermore, the project risks deeply altering the housing affordability of Little Haiti as to land prices and rental rates, its demographics and cultural heritage. B. BACKGROUND The proposed project, the Magic City SAP, is located within the neighborhood of Little Haiti. This project stands to impact not just the immediate surroundings of the SAP area, but the whole neighborhood of Little Haiti as defined by the census tract6, and particularly the area within the officially -designated bounds of Little Haiti.' A large percentage of the tract of land that makes up the Magic City SAP area comes from what was formerly the Magic City Trailer Park, eventually closed and cleared of its 40 or so mobile homes in 2015.8 Other properties in the area were gradually acquired over time, resulting in the 17.75 acre assemblage that is now the subject of this SAP rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. The density and intensity proposed in the application — approximately 2,6309 residential units, 432 hotel rooms (or 201,600 square feet), 2,208,540 square feet of office space10, 520,970 square feet of commercial space, 119,610 square feet of expo space, 6,061 parking spaces, 215,493 square feet of civic space and additional 370,000 square feet for surplus parking (or 8,164,140 square feet total development on 17.75 acres) — is grossly out of proportion with the surrounding neighborhood and stands to permanently alter the lives of the residents and business owners in Little Haiti. Specific impacts include: • increased traffic caused by the proposed commercial, residential and entertainment uses of the property; • introduction of nuisances into the neighborhood, including noise, alcoholic beverage establishments allowed in proximity to religious institutions and schools; a https://statisticalatlas.com/neighborhood/Florida/Miami/Little-Haiti/Population 7 https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article80151417.html 8 http://biscaynetimes.com/index.php?option=comcontent&view=article&id=2051:the-passing-of-a-neighborhood&catid=50:community- news&Itemid=258 9 The number of residential units varies throughout the application and ordinance documents. In the title of the proposed ordinance (File ID 4668), the number cited is 2,662 but within the text of the ordinance, it is 2,630. The 2,630 number is used for the economic impact study, while a 2,490 residential unit number is used for the Water and Sewer Availability letter, among others. For the sake of consistency, the number we will cite from here forward is 2,630. 10 This number also varies between documents. 2 • increased load on the public infrastructure, including roads, schools, potable water and utilities; • transformation of the skyline from one with few buildings higher than three stories to one with towering buildings jutting out of a relatively small area; and • a change in rental rates and land prices in a neighborhood populated by predominantly low to moderate income households." Nothing has been presented to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of this project. It is puzzling that an environmental impact statement is not a condition of approval of zoning/land use changes of this magnitude, but rather remains listed only as a condition of the issuance of a building permit. At the same time, the Developer has not proposed sufficient resiliency measures beyond the simple statement that the land happens to be located along a coastal ridge that is of relatively higher elevation. In addition, the Development Agreement and Regulating Plan fall woefully short of the measures needed to mitigate the above -mentioned impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. The City can hardly justify granting what amounts to a windfall in development capacity by allowing the SAP rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendments as presently written without realizing better, more enforceable and clearer benefits for the community. To do any less at a time when the City is facing a deep affordability crisis, overburdened roads and climate change issues would be to invite future problems that the City will be left to clean up without adequate resources. Finally, the other approved or pending SAPs in Little Haiti will intensify the impact of the Magic City proposa1.12 (See Map 1 on next page) The SAPs (approved and pending13) should not be analyzed individually but in relation to one another. To analyze them individually would be to ignore the cumulative impact of all projects together on the surrounding neighborhood with respect to such keys things as traffic, displacement and density. And yet, the Magic City SAP is moving at break -neck speed through a process purportedly designed to maximize community input without properly engaging in a community -wide dialogue about the nature of the project and without taking into adequate consideration the previously -voiced request that the City of Miami consider the impact of the projects together. 11 According to a 2015 Needs Assessment, 70% of Little Haiti residents are low to moderate income. See Planning Department Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Analysis ("Comp Plan Analysis") at 9. 12 Though the Design District SAP is also technically in the Census tract of Little Haiti, it is a farther distance from the project in question. 13 As of the submission of this document the status of the Archbishop Curley Notre Dame High School property is up in the air, but we are including it here as a potential property to be rezoned as an SAP. 3 Legion Park 1 � 1 Magic City Innovation ... Jewish Health E istside Ridge Design District Map 1 — SAPs approved and pending in/around the Little Haiti neighborhood (based on Census tract) Bay Point antra Wa C. THE MAGIC CITY SAP IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN Pursuant to Florida statute, the standard for determining the legality of comprehensive plan amendment is consistency. "A development order or land development regulation shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the land uses, densities or intensities, and other aspects of development permitted by such order or regulation are compatible with and further the objectives, policies, land uses, and densities or intensities in the comprehensive plan and if it meets all other criteria enumerated by the local government." Sec. 163.3194(3)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added). 4 The statute goes on to define "consistent": A development approved or undertaken by a local government shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the land uses, densities or intensities, capacity or size, timing, and other aspects of the development are compatible with and further the objectives, policies, land uses, and densities or intensities in the comprehensive plan and if it meets all other criteria enumerated by the local government. Sec. 163.3194(3)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added). By this standard, based on the substantial and competent evidence presented below, it is clear that the project is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. (a) The Planning and Zoning Department's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Analysis identifies multiple inconsistencies of the proposal with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. In the Staff Analysis attached to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment agenda item ("Comp Plan Analysis"), the City of Miami Planning Department found certain changes to be inconsistent with several criteria under MCNP. A Department memorandum was issued on October 26, 2018, finding that some of the inconsistencies have been cured, but there are still gaping holes. No updated analysis has been submitted despite unresolved concerns regarding the consistency of elements previously found inconsistent. The following chart summarizes the Comp Plan Analysis and adds commentary based on any changes that may have taken place since the date of the analysis: MCNP Criterion Staff Analysis Staff Finding July 2018 Staff Finding October 2018 Changes since analysis completed? (Our commentary) Objective LU-1.3 — Unclear Inconsistent Consistent, given We still have questions about encouraging whether new that General whether the "select light industrial commercial, office industrial Commercial land uses" allowed under the General and industrial activity will use allows for Commercial land use resolve the development be select light issue of the overall depletion of the concentrated in an area where this capacity currently exists industrial uses. land in Miami with the "Light Industrial" designation. Policy LU-1.1.3 — Applicant is Inconsistent Consistent In addition to the concerns about protection from changing 15+ the Light Industrial land uses, the encroachment of acres of Light lack of information (i.e., an incompatible land Industrial land environmental impact statement) uses, adverse to Restricted makes it difficult to assess what impacts on Commercial potential adverse environmental or surrounding in the Future ecological impacts the project will neighborhoods, degradation of environment, ecology Land Use Map — this is found to be an encroachment of Restricted have on the surrounding neighborhood. Not clear that the 5 Commercial traffic impact is sufficiently mitigated. The environmental impact statement should be submitted before second reading to present a clearer picture of what the environmental impact may be if the project is developed as proposed. into the Light Industrial FLU designation Objectives LU-4.1, 4.2, 4.3 — mixed income developments and affordable and attainable housing Current application is requesting higher density but envisions by its Economic Impact Analysis that 100% of its residents will have an income of $75,000 Inconsistent Inconsistent — should be offering a percentage of dwelling units, not habitable space. The 7% affordable units and 14% workforce units promised need not be on -site. The Regulating Plan does not specify where the affordable housing should be built (and it could also be a payment in lieu) and the workforce housing need not be built on -site either, only within 1,500 feet of the SAP area. Furthermore, workforce housing should be out of the question altogether for this neighborhood since, if HUD AMI is used and the Applicant opts to build the units at 140% AMI (as opposed to the 120% AMI that the City asked to be the upper limit of the workforce allowance but the Applicant has refused to accept), rents will be set at rates far above local market rate. (About $2066 for a 1BR14 as opposed to the approximately $1200 current market rate for 1BR apartments) Goal HO-1 — increase the supply of safe, affordable and sanitary housing for extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate -income households Need for affordable housing in Little Haiti is well- documented Inconsistent Consistent — "The Applicant is making provisions for affordable and workforce housing in an area of the city with a great need for this type of housing." See above. For the scale of development proposed, 7% is not an adequate amount. Further, the language about where the housing will be located and whether it will be actual units built or a cash contribution in lieu is unclear. Need more specificity; public benefits offered in exchange for bonus height should be focused on on -site affordable housing, not workforce. Goal HO-2 Livable city center with variety of urban housing types for persons of all income levels in a walkable, mixed use development Plan is walkable and hospitable to multiple modes of transportation, but analysis assumes all Consistent, however Applicant must think further No comment. October 2018 analysis does not address this and the concerns remain. The failure to make a true commitment to building on -site on affordability component to the residential affordable or workforce housing 14 Florida Housing Finance Corporation SHIP Program Income Chart: http://www.floridahousing.org/docs/default-source/developers-and- property-managers/compliance/limits/2018-ship-income-rent-limits-3-3 0-18-eff-4-1-18. pdf?sfvrsn=71 f 1347b_2 6 residents will earn $75,000 while purporting to target incomes in the range of $55,000- 75,000 program, since residential component is based on a household income of $75,000 in the project's Economic Analysis (as reflected in the Development Agreement and Regulating Plan) makes it unclear and doubtful that this development will truly be mixed income. There also need to be more specific provisions providing housing for the elderly. See also above comment on workforce housing. Policy TR-1.1.1 - Concentration and intensification of development around centers of activity. On transit corridor on NE 2"d Avenue. Access to commuter rail is anticipated to become reality in the near future. Redevelops idle site. Consistent with qualifications regarding Light Industrial land. The staff analysis is not adequate on this point as it does not correct the assumption that there will be a commuter rail in the future to calm traffic. By the City's transit oriented development map and plans, there is no station planned or likely possible for the Magic City area (since there are planned stations at 79th Street/Little River and Midtown/Design District). While buses and bike lanes exist, it is not clear they can absorb the additional proposed density Policy TR-1.1.4 — infill close to Presents infill redevelopment to take advantage of transit corridor on NE 2❑d Avenue Consistent The original staff analysis is flawed. Transit along NE 2"d Avenue is primarily by bus, trolley or jitney. It is not clear that the density proposed can be adequately served by these options to truly reduce dependency on automobiles. multimodal transportation options TR-1.5.2 — transportation control measures (TCMs), transit discount and fare subsidy programs, etc. Applicant focuses on road network, bicycle infrastructure. While improvement for bicycling, need true TCMs to reduce vehicular congestion. Inconsistent — not enough detail Consistent - TCMs have been accepted by the Office of Capital Improvements and "a Transportation Sufficiency Letter was written on August 21, 2018 memorializing the Applicant's TCMs as acceptable. This cures the staff report's findings of inconsistency." We remain concerned about vehicular traffic to be generated by this development. Bicycle, pedestrian and bus shelter infrastructure is welcomed but will not make a reasonable dent in the traffic concerns, given Miami's climate. Still have questions about the extent to which the traffic impact has been measured alongside other development that may come to the area. Policy TR-2.2.9 — transportation systems accessible to those in need SAP is designed for people in income ranges Inconsistent — need to provide for more inclusive Looped in with Criteria 11 on TCMs. Remains unresolved. Analysis now finds the project consistent on this point, however 7 $55,000- of members the argumentation in the October 75,000, but with various 2018 memo doesn't address the workforce is incomes, question about inclusivity. No drawn from an abilities, etc. discounts or fare subsidies are area with high contemplated in the Development poverty rates. Agreement. The finding on this policy should remain inconsistent. While the Staff ultimately recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions attached to the rezoning item, it is not clear that the conditions adequately resolve the issues raised in the above analysis, particularly with respect to the housing, transportation and equity criteria. Indeed, the Comp Plan Analysis itself concludes by noting "Staff has genuine concerns about the current proposal under the goals, objectives, and policies of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. A quickly diminishing inventory of FLU designations that support activities that have potential to provide the most diverse opportunities for incomes that are above the median income is a grave concern of the Planning Department."15 The subsequent October 2018 memorandum found that some of the inconsistencies had been cured, but we continue to have concerns that inconsistencies persist as to the lack of adequate measures to ensure that this development is truly an inclusive, mixed income project. Furthermore, Staff must revisit the assumption that a commuter rail will come to the area, which served as the basis of the consistency finding for TR 1 1.1. (b) The project does not meet prevailing criteria for an "innovation district" Planning and Zoning staff engage in an important and pointed discussion in the Comp Plan Analysis querying whether what is being proposed is truly an innovation district. The Analysis cites 12 guiding principles for innovation districts compiled by the Brookings Institute.16 While this project attempts — in narrative form — to check some of the points from the list, there are significant holes, including a firm partnership with an educational institution17, a true commitment to diversity and inclusion and forward thinking on affordability. We have particular doubts as to these latter two, which we discuss further in the subsection (c) below. Furthermore, while we understand that comparing different campuses with different configurations is imperfect, the difference in the density between the proposed Magic City SAP and other innovation districts (cited in Developer's application) is marked: Project Land area (in acres) Square Feet of Development Magic City SAP 17.75 Kendall Square (Cambridge) 24 (of 43) 4.15M South Lake Union (Seattle) 206 9M IDEA District (San Diego) 95 6.68M 15 Comp Plan Analysis at p 21. 16 Comp Plan Analysis at p 10. 17 The Developer has alluded to conversations with Florida International University, but the Development Agreement does not inspire confidence as to a commitment to securing an anchor educational institution, as it cites only "good faith" efforts to secure such a partnership. 8 Midtown Innovation District (Atlanta 1.2 square miles (768 acres) 6.86M + 7,600 residential units Spring District 36 3M office space + 2000 residential units Indeed, the Analysis also cites the Brookings warning to guard "against across-the-board rezoning for increasing density, proximity, and mixing of uses due to the effect such zoning changes have on land prices."18 This is precisely our concern, and the very reason why we ask for more measured approaches to zoning and density increases. At the very least, we should take the time to play out the consequences of approving such a large project at one time. (c) The scale of the development and minimal attempts to mitigate impact on the surrounding community demonstrate further inconsistency with the MCNP. The sheer size and density of the proposed Magic City SAP are staggering and out of scale for the surrounding neighborhood. The U.S. Census counted 28,346 residents in the neighborhood occupying 9,289 households.19 As stated above, this project will add 2,630 new residential units, a 28% increase in density. Given this massive increase, it is vital that we interrogate who this project seeks to attract to the neighborhood, and who, in turn, would be displaced and denied the opportunities that come with increased public and private investment in the neighborhood. Per the Developer's own application, this development is not being built for City of Miami residents, much less current Little Haiti residents. In fact, their own economic impact analysis assumes that more than "half of the tenants within Magic City Innovation District will relocate from outside of the City. "20 In that same analysis, the developer purports to be targeting households with incomes between $55,000-$75,000 (though the total residential income in is calculated based on 100% residents at the $75,000 level).21 Median Household Income for the City of Miami is $31,600, and $24,800 for the Little Haiti area. By these numbers, it would take three Little Haiti families to afford just one apartment at the proposed Magic City SAP. The proposed micro -units could hardly accommodate such an arrangement. The standard of affordability for housing is thirty percent of income.22 This means that for the rent of the Developer's targeted demographic to be affordable, rent would have to be capped at $1,875 per month across the entire development. And yet the Developer has made no assurances that rents would be attainable to people at the high end of the income range they are supposedly basing their numbers on. Instead, the Developer is painting the 14% workforce housing provision in the Development Agreement (up to 140% AMI, but no specificity as to the number of units at the different income levels in that range) to be a boon to the surrounding community, when income at 18 Comp Plan Staff Analysis at p 11. 19 https://statisticalatlas.com/neighborhood/Florida/Miami/Little-Haiti/Population 20 Lambert Advisory, LLC, Economic Impact Analysis: Magic City Innovation District (June 2018) at p 5. 2' Id. 22 https.//www.huduser.gov/portal/glossary/glossarya.html 9 the highest end of the workforce allowance would equate to $73,220 (based on 2018 HUD AMI level for Miami -Dade County - $52,30023) — an income at the upper end of their supposed target population. At the same time, median rent for a one -bedroom apartment in Little Haiti was measured as $1,200 as of February 2018.24 Given the likely distortion that Magic City's over 2,600 units priced at income levels significantly higher than Little Haiti's median income will cause in the neighborhoods, it is imperative to include units on -site within the SAP area that are affordable to the surrounding community, at or below 60% AMI. A cash contribution in lieu will not go as far as brick and mortar units, since land prices are increasing in the neighborhood. Furthermore, while the current community is 73.4% Black, Black households are underrepresented in the income brackets targeted by the developer, making up roughly 17% of Miami -Dade County's households at that level. Failure to take these demographics into account will inevitably lead to a sweeping demographic change of Little Haiti and an uprooting of the Haitian -American community from its cultural home, presenting a potential fair housing issue. This would represent a loss not only to residents of the neighborhood, but do irrevocable harm to the fabric and identity of Miami as a whole. It is particularly concerning that this displacement coincides with new public investments in roads, schools, and other infrastructure that promise to turn Little Haiti into a neighborhood of opportunity. (d) The project is inconsistent with additional criteria in the MCNP. The Staff is right to be concerned about this project. In addition to the criteria listed in the above table, there are other key criteria that the Staff did not include in its analysis that show further areas where the project is inconsistent with the MCNP. Policy L U-1.3.2 — "making available commercial loan funds for rehabilitation and small business loans and seed moneys, particularly to local minority businesses and encouraging the maximum participation...of._property owners and residents of the areas." • While Paragraph 16(g)(4) of the Development Agreement (DA) includes a quota for subcontracts to go to community business enterprises or community small business enterprises (CBEs, CSBEs), there is no hard requirement, and no mention made of minority, women owned or disadvantage business entities (MBEs, WBEs, DBEs). • Though Paragraph 16(h) of the DA also provides for 20% of the retail merchandising units to be dedicated to Little Haiti businesses or residents, there is no subsidy, seed money or other support offered to incentivize participation of local residents. Policy LU-1.3.8 — `foster or develop and implement job training, vocational, and educational programs to assist the City's existing and future residents...support minority and semi -skilled residents of the city...." 23 http://www miamidade gov/housing/income-limits.asp 24 https://www.zumper.com/blog/2018/02/mapping-miami-neighborhood-rent-prices-winter-2018/ 10 • The only place where the DA mentions job training is in Paragraph 16(f) about the Magic City Innovation Foundation, which does not have specific language committing the Applicant to undertaking this activity. Similarly, the language to make good faith efforts to partner with an accredited educational institution is overly vague and does not commit the Applicant in any way to providing educational or training programs so that residents can benefit from the job opportunities created by the developments. • Though there is a loose commitment in Paragraph 16(g)(1) of the DA to local hiring according to a zip code schedule, there is no language specifying the time periods for recruitment or binding the Applicant to a certain percentage of local hires (and providing training opportunities/training center to meet that percentage). Similarly, the DA should include an expanded list of workforce development, community organizations or community media channels located in or primarily serving the Little Haiti neighborhood for job recruitment and advertisement. Policy LU-1.3.14 — "City will continue to enforce urban design guidelines...which shall be consistent with the neighborhood character, history, and function, and shall be in accordance with the neighborhood design and development standards adopted...." Objective LU-1.5 — "Land development regulations will protect the city's unique natural and coastal resources, its neighborhoods, and its historic and cultural heritage." • This project is grossly out of proportion to the surrounding neighborhood. While Applicant has accepted to adhere to the Little Haiti Creole Design Guidelines for properties along NE 2nd Avenue, the overall height, density and use of the property is not consistent with the neighborhood character, history and function. Simply including cosmetic design elements along NE 2nd Avenue is not enough to reflect the historic Haitian and Caribbean roots of the neighborhood. • More concerningly, the virtual elimination of Floor Lot Ratio (FLR) as a standard to measure intensity in the Regulating Plan is of deep concern and reveals a severe inconsistency with this provision. Policy LU-1.6.7 — "The City will provide adequate opportunity for public comment regarding zoning changes and variances within neighborhoods." • As the community raised as an objection at the Urban Design Review Board (UDRB) meeting, the scheduling of the UDRB hearing for the same day as the Planning and Zoning Appeals Board (PZAB) hearing prevented meaningful community input at both events. Generally, these processes take place on two different days, giving time for the Applicant to resolve any comments by the UDRB before the PZAB hearing. An ask we would have raised at the UDRB hearing (a need for a community wide meeting to evaluate design elements and other aspects of the project) was nullified by the fact that we had to present before a different board later on the same day. This appears to flout the spirit of the SAP approval process that includes multiple steps for the very purpose of soliciting feedback from the public and incorporating that into the project's ultimate design. 11 D. THE MAGIC CITY SAP IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE MIAMI 21 ZONING CODE. The Planning and Zoning Department staff also submitted a Staff Analysis ("Zoning Analysis") for the zoning change, which approved the project and found it consistent with the zoning code subject to heavy conditions. The below is a discussion of that analysis, which incorporates a granular critique of the Regulating Plan. Overall, we are deeply concerned that a Regulating Plan that so sweepingly changes and adds on to provisions of the Miami 21 code will undermine the spirit of the code in the long term and in fact prevent the community from realizing much needed benefits in exchange for the extreme density and heights requested. (a) The Zoning Analysis misses some critical inconsistencies and incompatibilities with Miami 21. a. Miami 21 Article 3 Analysis25 We recognize that some adjustments on building heights for the MCID designations have been made since the initial application that proposed 29 stories, and that the project is designed to step up to the most intense buildings. However, even with these modifications, the tallest buildings in the MCID-1 (max 20 stories, 12 by right and 8 bonus) and MCID-2 zones (max 25 stories, 12 by right and 13 bonus) will still tower over neighboring lots, including T-3 L, single-family or duplex residential areas to the east. The FEC train tracks are not an adequate buffer from the noise, traffic and other impacts the development may bring. A limit on building height should be contemplated and calculated according to the cumulative effect of this SAP together with other applications in the area. Affordable housing bonus height should be assigned to lower floors (13-17) so that height is not the trade-off for a critical community benefit. Moreover, both MCID-1 and MCID-2 bonus height should be eligible to be satisfied by affordable housing to further incentivize affordable housing construction. Any money contributed to a commuter rail station can go towards higher stories (18-20, for example), especially because it is highly unlikely that a commuter rail station will come to the area. See subsection (C)(c)(b) below. The recommendation to retain D-1 zoning on some parcels would also help reduce the intensity of development proposed while still offering a dynamic range of uses. We echo the Staff's concern about accessibility of the Open Space to the public, even with the expanded hours. There are few entry points into the area, and as the Regulating Plan is written, it appears that restaurant patios and other uses serving the surrounding businesses will dominate the area surrounding the walkway. It is not clear that there will be ample public space that is not oriented towards clients, customers or tenants of the development property. Furthermore, the Developer retains exclusive right to determine programming, landscaping and design of the area, which also raises questions about whether this Open Space is truly at the disposal of the public. Developer should not get the same amount of bonus height for space that is not in fact public. The tree preservation and relocation, however, are welcomed. 25 Staff Analysis and Maps ("Zoning Analysis"), File ID 4459, pp 8-13. 12 The public art should reflect the culture and history of the Little Haiti neighborhood. At present, under the DA Paragraph 28, the Developer has sole discretion over the art chosen for the park and has not specified any percentage of that art that may be commissioned from local artists. In addition to the community providing input into the Historic Lemon City/Little Haiti Creole District Design Guidelines (which should apply beyond just the properties fronting onto NE 2nd Avenue), there should be some public input into the art that will be displayed in the civic space if it is truly going to be dedicated to the public. b. Miami 21 Article 7 Analysis Criteria 1 cited in the Zoning Analysis asks whether the proposed amendment furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the MCNP, Miami 21 and other city regulations, and whether there is a need and justification for the proposed changes.26 Though the Planning and Zoning Department found the project to be consistent with the above criteria, as Section B above noted, there is substantial and competent evidence, including the Planning and Zoning Department's own analysis, to show that the project and its proposed FLUM changes are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Similarly, while the Staff Analysis indicates that the project is consistent with Miami 21, there are multiple, highly concerning alterations to the Miami 21 zoning code, the need for which has not been adequately shown. The Regulating Plan does not "emphasize compatibility with the Little Haiti neighborhood" for the multiple reasons detailed in the sections below. c. Elimination of Floor Lot Ratio One specific concern includes elimination of Floor Lot Ratio (FLR) as the measurement of intensity. Under Miami 21, Sec 3.4.2, FLR is to be used to calculate intensity, but the Regulating Plan creates its own criteria (Lot Coverage, Setbacks, Height and Floorplate standards) that appear to still be overly vague. Are the measures of total Floor Area for the different zones of the project in DA Paragraph 8(c) combined with the Article 4, Table 2 numbers enough of a measure to substitute FLR as a measure of intensity? While Developer may say eliminating FLR is necessary to have more flexibility with floorplates, it throws off the ability to regulate intensity altogether. There are many other measures that are tied to FLR. For example, can FLR still be used for the purposes of determine public benefits? Even so, Regulating Plan in some places has eliminated mention of FLR and retained it in other, inconsistent places. d. Public Benefits section of the Regulating Plan has been amended to minimize actual benefit output responsive to community needs and dramatically alters Sec. 3.14.4 of Miami 21. 26 Zoning Analysis at 13. 13 A close reading of the changes made to the Public Benefits section of the Regulating Plan (generally found in Sec. 3.14.4 of Miami 21) reveals that the Developer attempts to reduce to the extent possible the public benefits that accord with the asks of the public (affordable housing, decent jobs, funds for community activities, small business incentives) while maximizing the amount of bonus height they can get for elements of the project that would be constructed anyway as part of the project. While it is not a surprise that the Developer would propose such modifications — because, after all, they are trying to maximize their profits to the extent allowed by law — the City of Miami and the people of Miami need not accept it as is without significant conversation interrogating whether the benefits truly serve to mitigate the overwhelming impact this development will have on the surrounding neighborhoods. It is incumbent upon City officials and the broader public to look closely at these documents and ensure that the Developer is creating the community space necessary to engage in the kinds of exchanges that will ensure that this development (and the public benefits it is offering in exchange for significant height bonuses) is responsive to the needs of Miami residents. More specifically, the table below details some of the changes the Regulating Plan makes to Sec 3.14.4 of Miami 21 Public Benefits Program section. Fundamental changes to bonus height ratios, types of benefits eligible for bonus height and the number of times a particular benefit could count towards the bonus should be construed as contrary to the intent of Miami 21 and prohibited. It is befuddling that an applicant can alter the benefits section as they see fit without further scrutiny from the Planning and Zoning Department or the City Commission. Our major concerns and comments are in the right -most column (below only includes the provisions of concern). Benefit Bonus Square Footage Under Sec 3.14.4 of Miami 21 (ratios expressed in square feet given : square feet of bonus height) Bonus Requested in Magic City SAP Regulating Plan Our Comments and Questions27 a.1(a) Alt to below: DOES NOT EXIST — Each dollar spent on This formula should not be Cash spent on Applicant is pulling development of affordable applied to any affordable development of out affordable housing housing on site or within housing developed outside of affordable housing as a benefit distinct 1,500 ft of SAP area the SAP area. Should not be treated as cash from workforce (including shared spaces) option to the exclusion of contribution to Public housing, but = 1 dollar towards cash option (b) below. Benefits Trust Fund puzzlingly chooses to contribution to Miami 21 call what is essentially workforce housing "affordable/workforce" Public Benefits Trust Fund Need more precise numbers on market rates to be able to evaluate which option is more favorable to the community. a.1(b) On -site DOES NOT EXIST 1:3 1:2 for truly on -site housing. Affordable Housing 27 These are initial comments we offer but are in no way meant to supplant a process by which these benefits are discussed with the public at large. 14 Considers within 1,500 1,500 ft from the SAP area should not be considered on - site. feet of the SAP area to be on -site. a.2 Affordable Housing Off -Site 1:1 1:1 More than 1,500 from SAP Area is considered off -site. Anything outside of the SAP Area should be treated as off - site. However, to encourage building within 1,500 feet of the SAP area, perhaps a ratio of 1:1.5 can be offered. a.3 Trust Fund Contributions Cash contribution based on a percentage of the market value per square foot price being charged for units at projects within the As City defines per square foot price Need more clarity on per square foot calculation. Need to also specify a required percentage of on -site units and a certain amount of Trust Fund contributions to go into a revolving loan fund for Little Haiti. market area up to the bonus height and FLR. b. Office Floor Area DOES NOT EXIST 1:3 How is this a public benefit? Should eliminate c.1 Affordable/Workforce Housing on -site 1:2 1:2 Considers within 1,500 Should simply be called "Workforce Housing" 1,500 ft of the SAP area should not be considered on - site. See also Section C(c) on housing. feet of the SAP area to be on -site. c.2 Affordable/Workforce housing off -site 1:1 1:1 More than 1,500 from SAP Area is considered off -site. Should simply be called "Workforce Housing" Anything outside of the SAP Area should be treated as off - site. c.3 Trust fund contributions (seems duplicative of above) Same as a.3 Same as a.3 Same as a.3 d. Public Parks, Open Space or Park Improvements 1:2 Adds Civic Space to this section. (to cover the Promenade du Grand Bois, which is considered to be a Civic Space Type) Is not Civic Space a threshold requirement for an SAP application? Seems to be double counting. Also duplicative of 3.14.4.h d.1.iii — Park improvements Park Improvements for Public Parks in areas below 50% media income threshold shall be allowed 2 times the valuation. Adds public Open Space/Civic space within the SAP area in exchange for bonus height, 1:2 valuation. This should be eliminated. Seems to be a triple counting of civic space that is not even a public park. Only if a commitment to improving a true public park is made 15 should this be allowed to stay (as written originally in 3.14.4.d. l .iii of Miami 21) d.2 Public Open Space Public Open Space as approved by the Planning Director provided on site is given 1:1 bonus. Adds Civic Space Types (to cover Promenade du Grand Bois, again). Eliminates requirement of Should only be able to count any civic space towards bonus once. Should require Planning Director approval because some pieces of open land are unusable for the public (e.g., the areas between 61St and 62nd street on NE 2nd Avenue) Planning Director approval. 1:1 bonus h. Civic Space Types and Civil Support Uses 1:2 bonus for donation of Civic Space or Civil Support Space on site to the City of Miami Adds "within SAP area donated to the City of Miami or dedicated to for public access" Again, counts Promenade du Grand Bois towards this for a 1:2 bonus Should not be allowed to double or triple count area. Notwithstanding above, space dedicated for public access should not be valued the same as donated space in terms of getting bonus height. i. SAP Passenger/Commuter Rail Station DOES NOT EXIST Monetary contribution to Development cost of passenger/commuter rail station that is being privately funded in whole or in part by an SAP Owner is treated as a cash contribution to the Miami 21 Public Benefit Trust Fund. Amount of bonus area in exchange is determined by applicable Language is opaque. Not likely to be a commuter rail station in the SAP area. See Section D(e)(e)(ii) below. price per square feet set by City. If the bonus heights were more appropriately allocated, without double counting or unduly rewarding things that should not be counted as benefits, there is significant room for achieving higher numbers with respect to affordable housing, good jobs and other benefits responsive to community needs. e. There are multiple other concerning elements of the Regulating Plan i. Micro -Units What is the purpose? If not to increase affordability, then is it to decrease the costs for the developer while increasing density? As per the Regulating Plan, micro -units may have a common kitchen and living areas. This appears akin to dormitory -style living. It may reduce the costs of development but are not likely to actually be affordable. 16 As indicated above, the hard bargaining we had seen from the Developer28 to reduce the commitment of workforce units is bewildering given the fact that we are dealing with 50% of residential units as micro -units. If we take 140% of HUD -defined AMI ($52,300) and use the Florida Housing Finance Corporation's 2018 Income Limits and Rent Limits, the rent for a one bedroom apartment would be $2,066. That certainly is out of proportion to the current market rate of $1,200 and thus we must infer that these micro -units will not address the affordability crisis in Miami. Finally, in the Article 4 Tables of the Regulating Plan, the MCID Zones are allowed a density of 150-1,000 dwelling units per acre, which is staggering. There has to be more clarity on this aspect. ii. Parking reductions because Regulating Plan claims that SAP is in a transit oriented development (TOD) area. The SAP area is located along a transit corridor, but not in a TOD area, which is defined under Miami 21 as being'/2 mile from a transit node. Based on the map created to track TOD in Southeast Florida, there is no planned station for the Magic City/Little Haiti area.29 See Map 2 on the next page. Instead, there is a planned station at 79th Street/Little River approximately 1.8 miles to the north of the SAP area and a planned station approximately 1.2 miles south of the SAP area. The standard spacing for a commuter rail is 2-8 miles,30 making it highly improbable that a commuter rail station will eventually come to the Magic City SAP in the near future. Add to this the uncertainty of the funding and bureaucratic approvals of the project and the probability sinks lower. As a result, all references or policies dependent on the commuter rail project being in a TOD area should be removed. Similarly, the map included as Diagram 11 of Article 4 is misleading because the Developer drew in the station they want to build even though the current Miami 21 TOD diagram does not have that station included.31 Article 4 Tables proposed by the Applicant include significant parking reductions (50-80%) based on being in a TOD area. This does not make sense based on the above. 28 Le., the initial application included no provision for affordable housing and only a vague reference to workforce housing until the Planning and Zoning Department prevailed upon them to include 7% affordable at 60% AMI or below and just 14% at 60-140% AMI. 29 http://www.citiesthatwork.com/tod-inventory-and-map-2017-update-draft/ 3o http://www.fdot.gov/roadway/CSI/W2/TransitFundamentals.pdf 31 Official map on file with the City Clerk 17 Map 2 ARTICLE 4. DIAGRAM 11 TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT Note. The :IF col V:ami 21 TOD Diaram s mant3med ,n tie Office of the Cry C'ffit MIETRORAIL FUTURE METRORAIL W£TROANDVER BLZ SOUTH STREETCAR HEALTH DISTRICT CIRCULATOR HEALTH DZTR1CT TOP FUTURE TRANSIT DiEDS I i°2 MLC UlED 14 IA LE PEDESTRIAN SMED 18 iii. SAP Permits While we understand the desire for a more streamlined process, the City might want to look more closely at whether there are elements that would require more process than what is required to obtain an SAP Permit. (b) Appropriateness of Magic City SAP The Staff Analysis found that the proposal maintains many of the goals of Miami 21, however, several aspects of this project raise questions about whether these goals are truly being met. First of all, since "a primary purpose of [Miami 21] is to implement the Comprehensive Plan," the inconsistencies listed in Section B above apply to the rezoning analysis as well. Under Sec. 2.1.1(b), the purpose of Miami 21 is "to promote the public health, safety, morals, convenience, comfort, amenities, prosperity, and general welfare of the City and to provide a wholesome, serviceable, and attractive community." The project certainly projects out creative space making and mixed uses, with a potential to catalyze new things in Miami. The question is, for whom? This is the question we must ask ourselves when a development like the Magic City SAP comes to a neighborhood like Little Haiti where 70% of the population is low- to moderate income. As presently configured, with a Regulating Plan actively seeking to reduce the commitment of on - site resources that go towards affordable housing, a Development Agreement making vague, unenforceable promises regarding jobs, housing and other community benefits, and an active resistance to holding an open, community -wide meeting on the project, the Magic City SAP, in both substance and process, seems to undermine the purpose and intent of Miami 21. The complete circumvention of the use of FLR as a measure of density, for example, is one way that the project sees itself as unbound by regulations that Miami 21 seeks to use to encourage uniformity across developments. (c) The Staff Analysis recommending approval of the zoning ordinance change is heavily conditioned, however, Applicant has not adequately met certain conditions. The numerous conditions that the Planning and Zoning Department staff attached to their Zoning Analysis are indicative of the serious concerns this project presents with respect to its potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood and the failure to adequately mitigate those impacts through design, benefits or other mechanisms. (d) Development Agreement (DA) falls far short of meeting requirements for providing benefits and must be negotiated with the community through a public process. 19 We will not go through the content that should take the place of the Development Agreement, given that much of that content is in flux. It has not thus far been the product of a truly transparent process, and thus the document we have before us as an attachment to the agenda item for this hearing is likely not the document that will be under discussion during the February 28th hearing. E. CONCLUSION In general, while it could be positive that the Applicant is willing to offer money as one way of mitigating the issues with this project, there are certain elements that money alone cannot resolve. We know that this development will be looked to as an example of SAPs to come, and therefore, it is important to ensure that the documents that govern the project are adequately examined and brought into line with the Goals Objectives and Policies of the MCNP, the intent of the Miami 21 zoning code and in alignment to the vision of a future Miami that is both resilient and inclusive. As it is, we do not have a project that substantially advances any of those things. For the foregoing reasons, FANM presents this evidence related to the Magic City SAP development and ask that the City Commission take a much finer look at the content of the project and work with the community to secure greater, more appropriate benefits before approving the SAP. By: Dated: February 28, 2019 Meena Jagannath, Esq. Florida Bar No.: 102684 meena@communityjusticeproject.com 3000 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 106 Miami, FL 33137 20 APPENDIXA February 28, 2019 Miami City Commission 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 Re: Second Amended Request for Intervenor Status for February 28, 2019 Hearing on Magic City SAP Dear City of Miami Commissioners: Family Action Network Movement (FANM)1 submits the following letter requesting intervenor status pursuant to Sec. 7.1.4.3 of the Miami 21 Zoning Code in the quasi-judicial proceedings related to the Magic City Innovation District Special Area Plan ("Magic City SAP") application presented by MCD Miami, LLC ("Developer"). Having been continued twice before, the first reading on the application is on the City of Miami Commission Planning and Zoning agenda for February 28, 2019 as PZ 6 and PZ 27. FANM and its members residing or located near the proposed project have legally cognizable interests that stand to be adversely affected in numerous ways by the massive development coming to the neighborhood and the Magic City SAP in particular. Intervenor status is the proper vehicle by which they can make their concerns heard at the hearing in an organized, coherent manner Impact of the project on the surrounding Little Haiti Neighborhood While the Developer will present a list of the groups they have met with, they have flatly refused to meet with the community as a whole. From the neighborhood associations to Little Haiti community groups, we have been dismayed at the lack of transparency in how this project has been shaped. It is not enough to meet with individuals or groups outside of the view of the general public. A project of this scale should be the product of concerted feedback from and consultation with the communities that stand to be most impacted. This has not been the case here. Presumably, the series of steps in the SAP approval process under Miami 21 should provide multiple opportunities for community engagement as a collective around how to mitigate the impact of projects like the Magic City SAP. However, in this case, two hearings that normally take place on separate dates and are separate parts of the approval process2 were collapsed into one day, Family Action Network Movement, Inc. (FANM) is a Florida Not -For -Profit corporation located at 100 NE 84`h Street in Little Haiti. FANM has a long-standing commitment to meeting the needs of low to moderate -income families and children since 1991 through counseling, wrap around services, access to health care, community outreach/ education, job training/economic development, financial literacy, organizing & advocacy services. 2 On July 18, 2018, the Magic City SAP was on the agenda for both the Urban Design Review Board (UDRB) and the Planning and Zoning Appeals Board. It was the same day as a City of Miami Commission special hearing on the Miami FC stadium, and thus the UDRB hearing had to be moved into a cramped room in the back. Almost no one from the public attended as a result, and one of the UDRB members noted their absence even though we noted the difficulty of mobilizing the community to attend both meetings in one day. See: https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article213459079.html © 2018 BY FANM, INC. fanm.org I frontdesk@fanm.orq 1100 NE 84th Street, Second Floor Miami, FL 33138 frustrating the spirit of the process and arguably, the due process of those who will be impacted by a project like this. A proposed mixed -use development of this size, as presently configured, will significantly alter the landscape, land uses, density, affordability, demographics and cultural heritage of not just the immediate surroundings of the SAP area, but also the whole neighborhood of Little Haiti as defined by the census tract3, and particularly the area within the City of Miami -designated bounds of Little Haiti.4 As we have seen occur in Little Havana and other neighborhoods in Miami5, the nature and scale of this project will generate upward economic pressure on rental rates and land prices across the Little Haiti neighborhood that will make it difficult for long-time residents to remain, for existing small businesses to thrive, and for housing affordable to low to moderate income residents to continue to be available in the neighborhood. Moreover, the tremendous size of the project is cause for concern with respect to the potential environmental impact of the development, which has not been adequately assessed.6 As explained further below, many members of FANM are either property owners or tenants (both residential and commercial) in the immediate vicinity of the project. They have lived or had their businesses there for years - possibly decades — and have been the cornerstones of the Little Haiti community. They believe, correctly, that property values will increase significantly in the area around the project. They believe, correctly, that their rents will either be raised to unaffordable levels or that they will be summarily evicted. As a recent Harvard study found, the added factor of climate vulnerability has also exerted pressure on the real estate market in Little Haiti causing prices to rise.? In addition, the size of the project will lead to increased noise, traffic and nuisance to the area. They believe that the project and the documents that structure it make scarce attempt to ameliorate, or even analyze, these secondary impacts.8 The neighborhood is already shifting. FANM has already had to support members who were small business owners facing displacement. Other tenant members within the neighborhood were served with eviction notices from their substandard building and were unable to find housing in Little Haiti, forcing them to move to North Miami and North Miami Beach.9 Similar to West Coconut Grove, crumbling housing stock in a neighborhood where property values are dramatically rising is creating an incentive for neglectful landlords to move out their tenants and allow their properties to fall into disrepair in order to sell the property off at higher rates.10 The community has had to bury artist and community leader Joseph Daleus in late 2017,11 who signaled an oncoming crisis https://statisticalatlas.com/neighborhood/Florida/Miami/Little-Haiti/Population 4 https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article80151417.html 5 https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/little-havana/article168110927.html 6 This project is an example of the many developments cropping up along the FEC coastal ridge, which is on higher ground. Developer's primary argument for resiliency is that it is on this higher ground. Neighborhoods like Little Haiti and Liberty City are at risk if this is the sole argument about how this project meets resiliency requirements, as resiliency should incorporate concepts of housing security and availability of higher quality housing to those most vulnerable to climate change impacts like hurricanes. See: https://www.theroot.com/color-of-climate-is-climate- change-gentrifying-miami-s-1797516942 https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/29/climate-gentrification-is-changing-miami-real-estate-values.html s These deficiencies will be fleshed out in accompanying Statement of Objections and Evidence. 9Nadege Green, "Cheap Apartments Are Disappearing from Little Haiti," WLRN, July 25, 2018, http://www.wlrn.org/post/cheap-apartments- are-disappearing-little-haiti. 10 Jessica Lipscomb, "Miami Sues Coconut Grove Landlords for Renting Moldy, Sewage -Filled Apartments," Miami New Times, August 22, 2016, https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/miami-sues-coconut-grove-landlords-for-renting-moldy-sewage-filled-apartments-8699775. 11 https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/haiti/artic1e189551389.html © 2018 BY FANM, INC. fanm.org I frontdesk@fanm.org 1100 NE 84th Street, Second Floor Miami, FL 33138 in Little Haiti as he was pushed out of his gallery space in 2015.12 FANM and its Members are entitled to Intervenor Status FANM is entitled to intervenor status. According to the definition in Sec 7.1.4.3(d) of Miami 21, "Intervenor shall mean a person whose interests in the proceeding are adversely affected in a manner greater than those of the general public." In Renard v. Miami -Dade County, in which the Florida Supreme Court established the prevailing tests for standing in zoning -related challenges, the Court defined an "aggrieved or adversely affected person having standing to sue [as] a person who has a legally recognizable interest which is or will be affected by the action of the zoning authority in question." Renard v. Dade County, 261 So. 2d 832, 837 (Fla. 1972). The Court then provided a non -exhaustive list of factors that may be considered in determining the sufficiency of the parry's interest for the purpose of conferring standing, including the proximity of his property to the property to be zoned or rezoned, the character of the neighborhood, including the existence of common restrictive covenants and set -back requirements, and the type of change proposed are considerations. The fact that a person is among those entitled to receive notice under the zoning ordinance is a factor to be considered on the question of standing to challenge the proposed zoning action. Id. It noted, however, that location within the notice area was not determinative of the question of who has standing. Id. FANM meets these requirements. FANM Meets the Requirements for Standing FANM is a social services organization located in Little Haiti, dedicated to meeting the needs of low to moderate -income families and children since 1991 through counseling, wrap around services, organizing and many more services. Since multiple Special Area Plan (SAP) applications have been filed or proposed in a small section of the Little Haiti neighborhood, FANM has been deeply affected as an organization, as have its members who live as residents or property owners in Little Haiti in the immediate vicinity of the Magic City SAP project.13 As demonstrated above, the Little Haiti neighborhood stands to be dramatically changed by this project in terms of demographics, culture and physical landscape. With its members residing or doing business in Little Haiti facing displacement due to rent increases, business closures and other hardships brought on by the economic pressures exerted by large scale development, FANM will have to continue to expend scarce organizational resources in serving members' mounting needs while also engaging at the systemic level in the time-consuming and complex land use and zoning processes associated with SAPs and other developments. Furthermore, FANM itself risks losing its own home in a neighborhood it helped build, as its members leave the neighborhood and experience difficulty traveling to the FANM office: if there are fewer and fewer people who can access its services, FANM may have to expend additional resources to attend to the needs of its members, or be forced to move somewhere more geographically proximate to its members. This would be tragic. z https://www miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article47835450.html 13 A list of names and addresses of affected members will be furnished at the hearing. © 2018 BY FANM, INC. fanm.org I frontdesk@fanm.orq 1100 NE 84th Street, Second Floor Miami, FL 33138 As FANM and its members residing in the vicinity of the SAP area have definite interests that exceed those of the general public, they should be recognized as qualified intervenors for the sake of protecting their interests in the quasi-judicial proceedings related to MCD Miami, LLC's SAP application. This would allow for a more robust, well -organized presentation of concerns from the community members whom these organizations represent. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, annath, Counsel on behalf of: Marleine Bastien Executive Director FAMILY ACTION NETWORK MOVEMENT © 2018 BY FANM, INC. fanm.org I frontdesk@fanm.orq 1100 NE 84th Street, Second Floor Miami, FL 33138 DECLARATION OF MARLEINE BASTIEN ON BEHALF OF FAMILY ACTION NETWORK MOVEMENT 1. My name is Marleine Bastien. I am over the age of eighteen and understand the obligations of an oath. 2. I am the Executive Director of Family Action Network Movement, or FANM. 3. Founded in 1991, FANM is a social services organization located in Little Haiti, dedicated to meeting the needs of low to moderate -income families and children through counseling, wrap around services, organizing and many more services. 4. FANM currently has at Ieast 30 members residing or having their place of business in the 33137, 33138, 33150 and 33127 zip codes, which are the zip codes in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Magic City Innovation District Special Area PIan ("Magic City SAP"). Some members have already been displaced since development pressures picked up over the last few years. 5. The beneficiaries of FANM's services in Little Haiti number approximately 200 people, including children participating in FANM's youth programs. 6. FANM members, program participants and beneficiaries who live in the above zip codes will be disproportionately impacted by the traffic, noise, density, rising rents and other effects that may stem from the approval of a rezoning the size of the Magic City SAP. 7. As a result of increasing development pressures in the neighborhood, FANM has had to expend significant resources to support members and other individuals facing eviction from their homes and businesses in the Little Haiti neighborhood. 8. For example, yesterday, February 27, 2019, FANM had to advance funds to help a small business owner vacate from a rental property just blocks from the Magic City SAP area. FANM staff members had to take time out from their very busy schedules to ensure that this individual did not lose his livelihood, as the property owner threatened to sell his belongings and inventory if he did not vacate immediately and pay all monies they claimed he owed in cash. 9. This type of scenario occurred multiple times in the last year for FANM members who were both residential and commercial tenants in Little Haiti, causing an inordinate amount of suffering and turmoil for those members, and creating fear and anxiety in other similarly situated FANM members who believe they too could be displaced as a result of development pressures. 10. In addition to the resources FANM has had to expend to support its members, the organization has had to divert significant resources towards educating and organizing the community to understand the emerging dynamic of gentrification, 1 development and displacement in the Little Haiti neighborhood. This includes resources in terms of my time and that of my staff, as well as material resources such as food for meetings and buses for members to attend hearings as they may come up. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Marleine'�en Executive Director, FANM Date 2 APPENDIX B EXPERT WITNESS STATEMENT ON INCONSISTENCY OF MAGIC CITY INNOVATION DISTRICT SPECIAL AREA PLAN CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION - RE -ZONING MEETING February 28th, 2018, As prepared by Danyealah Green -Lemons, M. Arch, Assoc. AIA Good Afternoon, I am Danyectich Green -Lemons. Two years ago, I graduated with my Masters of Architecture degree from the 5-year Accelerated Masters of Architecture program at Florida International University. Since then, I have worked as a designer in two of Miami's top firms: Bermello + Ajamil and Shulman + Associates. I am a proud member of the Miami Chapter of the American Institute of Architects and have a passion for architecture that is rooted in my love for great urbanism. I believe that architecture at its best is a form of social activism. The urban fabric - the city - is the canvas on which critical ideas of place, ownership, and identity are expressed. When I consider the neighborhood of Little Haiti, its demographic, physical character, scale, and density, it is an ideal place for understanding the critical impact of social infrastructure. I present the following site analysis and documentation as part of foundational evidence to the incongruent nature of the proposed Magic City Innovation District Special Area Plan. The existing character of Downtown Little Haiti along its main corridor of NE 2nd Avenue consists of two-story, 25-foot commercial storefronts: small businesses, restaurants, bookstores, galleries and religious spaces. This historic social infrastructure of low-rise buildings, developed during the early migration of Haitian immigrants to Miami during the 1960's, has generated neighborhood profit, cultural stability, and local identity for Little Haiti to -date. The definitive urban scale and proportion of the neighborhood, is made of sidewalks between 7-8 feet in width off the storefronts, a 12-foot green buffer, and 7-foot wide parallel and angled parking spaces flanking the street (as per my October 6th, 2018 site -visit for the purposes of a research grant). The character of the storefronts are whimsical - designed in the "Gingerbread" architectural style reminiscent of Haiti, with a tropical color palate of pastels, and white latticework elements. The storefronts are kind to the pedestrian with awnings that provide shade for passersby, and storefront displays speak a neighborhood language that fosters a sense of community evident in the relationships between the residents and small business owners. The surrounding area, branching off minor roads such as NE 3rd Avenue is made of 15-20-foot high warehouses, as well as civic and residential buildings that do not exceed more than 50 feet. Moreover, with the establishment of the Miami 21 Code, the existing zoning of Little Haiti allows for a maximum building height between 8-10 stories, consistent with the low- to mid -rise intimate building pattern. The re -zoning proposed in the Magic City Special Area Plan, MCID -1 AND MCID-2, would increase the maximum allowable building height to 20-25 stories, nearly triple times the existing. Beyond the explicit astronomical environmental and infrastructural impacts of re -zoning to this capacity, the urban implications are grossly out of scale and character with the existing neighborhood. According to Article 3, section 3.9.1 H for the Special Area Plan, item 10 states, "Flexible allocation of development capacity and height... shall be allowed so long as the capacity or height distribution does not result in development that is out of scale or character with the surrounding area and provides appropriate transitions." Based on Illustration no. 4 detailing the proposed zoning designation of the Magic City Special Area Plan, the core block of buildings between NE 2nd Avenue and NE 4th Avenue would spike from a modest 1-2 stories to 20-25 stories, completely disrupting the continuity of the street block and urban scale. Furthermore, should the proposed SAP present a "gradual transition" of building heights from the central core, outward to the surrounding urban zone of Little Haiti as a reasonable solution, this would only solidify the lack of thorough analysis of the existing urban fabric. For example, the proposed the "gradation" of building heights in the SAP for the zones surrounding the existing green space of the Magic City Trailer Park would create an insular and isolationist urban experience. Though the proposal provides D-1 zoned parcels with a maximum building height of 10 stories, the majority of the parcels in the surrounding area are still 1-3 stories high. This is evident in the existing zoning along the intersection of NE 4th Avenue and NE 59th Street, and the same follows for the zones along the intersection of NE 2nd Avenue and NE 60th Street. In my expert opinion as an architect, locating the tallest buildings of 25 stories abutting the proposed "central promenade," with a transition to 20, and then 10-story buildings would create the opposite of the desired urban effect, essentially obstructing views and access to what could otherwise be an open and accessible, renovated green space for the community. This type of urban gesture will propagate the idea that the existing social infrastructure is inferior and incompatible with the newly proposed buildings and will disconnect residents in the adjacent suburban nodes from the very development meant to reflect an innovative district identity. Additionally, as specified in Article 7, section 7.1.2.8 c 2, in the application for rezoning under item G, it states, "The [applicant's] analysis shall explain why the zoning change is appropriate and why the existing zoning is inappropriate, in light of the intent of the Miami 21 Code and particularly in relation to effects on adjoining properties." The current application as presented by the MCD Miami LLC and others, hardly legitimizes the existing zoning of Little Haiti as inappropriate, and only includes the minimum required level of analysis with inclusion of an aerial photo, existing land use map, and a few diagrammatic illustrations of the proposed re -zoning. With a Special Area Plan of this magnitude and scale, further investigation and analysis must be completed to fully comprehend the drastic transformations on the existing urban fabric of Little Haiti. In closing, let us be mindful of role of the architect: architects and urban planners can provide "push back," to the broader cultural narrative of polarity and design with a critical consciousness in lieu of sea -level rise. Methodologies of urbanism and place -making act as litmus tests for effective/ineffective social place -making. If policymakers discount the importance of Little Haiti's existing social infrastructure in the approval of the Magic City Special Area Plan, this would sorely negate Miami's identity as a coastal city leading in innovative urbanism in lieu of climate change and sea -level rise. Human relationship to place, translates to scale. The cultural association to place through memory and history translates to identity. The modern preservation of scale, neighborhood character, and cultural identity should be one of the intrinsic drivers of any re-development/re- zoning in the City of Miami. HOUSING EQUITY IN LITTLE HAITI MIAMi-DADE METRO AMI FORA HOUSEHOLD OF FOUR WORKFORCE HOUSING $11O,180 $62,960 $47,220 30% AMI $23610 i 0 $1,418 i 30% AMI $77,032 MINIMUM WAGE Area Median Income and rent limit figures are based on 2018 FL Housing Finance Corporation data. 2019 not yet available at time of publishing. Minimum wage based on 2019 rates Different AMI levels may apply in limited circumstances after a recent amendment of Miami 21. City Commissioners have raised the possibility of revamping affordability definitions to account for lower City of Miami incomes, but the above figures are current as of the publication of this document, COMMUNITY JUSTICE PROJECT