Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Meena Jagannath-Statement of Objections SAP ApplicationSubmitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS AND EVIDENCE ON THE MAGIC CITY INNOVATION DISTRICT SPECIAL AREA PLAN APPLICATION Second Reading — June 27, 2019 Community groups, including Family Action Network Movement (FANM), on behalf of itself and its members, submit the following statement of objections and evidence corresponding to City of Miami Commission Planning and Zoning agenda items 10, 11, and 12 related to the Magic City Innovation District Special Area Plan ("MCID SAP") application proposed by MCD Miami, LLC ("Applicant"), which includes comprehensive plan/Future Land Use Map amendments and development agreement for approval at Second Reading. This statement builds upon and incorporates by reference all relevant arguments raised in previous statements of objections and evidence presented in relation to the MCID SAP matter. PART I: INCONSISTENCIES WITH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND MIAMI 21 As a preliminary matter, it must be noted that Applicant has not met its legal requirements for the City of Miami Commission to reasonably approve the MCID SAP application as it has been submitted for Second Reading. The following is a non -exhaustive list of issues that persist with the application: • glaring inconsistencies with the comprehensive plan ("comp plan") that remain to be resolved, especially since some of the findings by the Planning and Zoning Department (PZ Department) in its early analysis are no longer applicable to the application in its current form ' ; • a lack of evidence to show changing or changed conditions warranting the requested comp plan amendments; • an inadequate analysis by the applicant of why the existing zoning is inappropriate; • a failure to provide adequate buffers and transitions between the very high intensity buildings proposed on the site and the surrounding neighborhood — especially given the non-contiguous and irregular shape of the MCID SAP assemblage of parcels; • a lack of a preservation plan, pursuant to 3.9.1(h)(7) for the historically designated resources located within the SAP area; • and a considerable list of conditions of approval prescribed by the Planning and Zoning Department (PZ Department) that have yet to be satisfied before approval on Second Reading can be given. While we continue to raise questions about whether this development should be approved at all for rezoning and comp plan amendment as the below will show, it certainly should not be approved as is on June27,2019. ' There continues to be a question about whether the amended Development Agreement and Regulating Plan that have been altered to remove the previously structured Public Benefits program so as to make certain administrative findings obsolete do not constitute modifications that require the application to have to be re -presented to the hearing boards. tihn 'ohs \0\1\-\-0\- \\1\f'fa )0, \-o\ttiqiN o A"))et\-10A)/SAP k?tok\--an Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk msistency with Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) The Third Amended Statement of Objections and Evidence submitted to the Commission for First Reading on the MOD SAP application on March 28, 2019, detailed the enduring inconsistencies f :the application with the MCNP. For the sake of brevity, this statement does not repeat those arguments, but raises additional questions about whether the Applicant has met its burden of proof Lo emonstrate consistency with the relevant comprehensive land use plan, in this case the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, or MCNP. rni Honda, the standard for determining the legality of a comprehensive plan amendment. is consistency, "All land development regulations enacted or amended shall be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof,. and any land development regulations existing at the time of adoption which are not consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall be am.ended so as to be consistent." Sec, 163.3194(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added). The statute goes on to define "consistent": A development approved or undertaken by a local government shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan ifthe 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). As the Florida Supreme Court :found, " e tourden is upon the landowner who is seeking a:rezoning, special exception, conditional use permit, variance, site plan approval., etc. to demonstrate that his petition or application complies with the reasonable procedural requirements of the applicable ordinance and that the use sought is consistent with the applicable comprehensive zoning plan." Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Brevard Co. v. Snyder, 627 So.2d 469, 472 (Fla. 1993). In this case, Applicant has not met that 'burden. Proposed Land Use Change is Unwarranted — Present Land Use Designations Allow for Uses Pr scribed by Applicant begin with, the Applicant is proposing redevelopment of a jagged assemblage of parcels, that will have buildings rising to the heights of 20 and 25 stories in a neighborhood consisting primarily of .1-2 story buildings. See MCID SAP Assemblage and Massing Plan, attached hereto as Appendix A. Since the current built environment does not represent the highest and best use of the land under the present land use and zoning allowances that provide for a dynamic set of uses, densities and intensities, it is unclear why the Applicant needs to more than double the density and intensity to accomplish the stated purposes of the development ofbuilding "an innovation -oriented. mix of retail, restaurants, offices, civic uses, and housing." (Exhibit B to Applicant Nov, 12, 2018 Letter of Intent, or "Applicant Zoning Analysis"2 attached hereto as Appendix B) 2 Note: This analysis is not signed by any individual or entity, making it appear to be simply the opinion of the Applicant. It is questionable whether this can be considered "substantial, competent evidence" for the Applicant to meet its burden of proof. Submitted into the public record for item(s) P2.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk The current land use designations on the property include: medium density restricted commercial (allows for 65 dwelling units/acre, FLR of 6.0), light industrial (36 dwelling units/acre, FLR 10.0), and restricted commercial (150 dwelling units/acre, FLR 7.0-11.0) See Interpretation of the 2020 Future Land Use Map, Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (May 2018) at 19-27. All designations provide for mixed uses, including residential, hotel, commercial, retail, wholesale, restaurants and industrial uses; in short, all of the uses that Applicants propose in their application. The main difference is the number of allowed dwelling units per acre, which under the requested General Commercial designation would be 150 du/ac; however, the Applicant has not explained why bringing this level of density and intensity to a neighborhood where surrounding area prescribes mostly medium density uses. There is no evidence of changed or changing conditions. The proposed "General Commercial" redesignation of most of the MCID SAP parcels would carve up what is a relatively contiguous, rare -to -Miami section of Light Industrial properties for the sake of unexplained densification. Proposed Land Use Changes are Out of Character and Scale with the Surrounding Neighborhood Applicant characterizes the neighborhood as decrepit, vacant and unused. This mischaracterizes and demeans an otherwise active stretch of the Little Haiti neighborhood. That the residents and visitors frequenting the area may be low-income (as neighborhood demographics indicate) does not make the area any more devoid of a character it has developed over the years. The centerpiece parcel of the MCID SAP was once home to dozens of families living in the Magic City Trailer Park before it was bought by one of the main partners in the project and cleared of its tenants in 2015, contrary to what the Applicant Zoning Analysis indicates ("an abandoned nonconforming trailer park"). The project is located just north of the well -used and beloved Little Haiti Cultural Center, and along a main thoroughfare that runs through Little Haiti, NE 2nd Avenue. Parts of the SAP property abut the Little Haiti Soccer Park. Though recent changes in the neighborhood have accelerated the departure of many small businesses that served the area, it continues to be characterized by pedestrian traffic, visitors to the Little Haiti Marketplace and remaining small businesses in the area. As architect Danyealah Green -Lemons noted, 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. ... 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. Architect's Expert Report at 1-2, attached hereto as Appendix C. Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk What the Applicant is proposing is not complementary to this existing character and scale of the neighborhood, beyond surface commitments to comply with the existing Little Haiti/Creole District Design guidelines along NE 2nd Avenue alone and the retention of the Little Haiti name in its marketing. Instead, the proposed project seeks to transform the neighborhood in a way that is neither consistent with the comp plan nor compatible with the existing surrounding neighborhood. The Applicant Zoning Analysis states that "The MCID believes that in order to revitalize the Little Haiti neighborhood, we must create a mixed -use, 7-day per week active urban campus for living, working, shopping, learning and entertainment." The proposal subjectively dismisses the characteristics of the current neighborhood, which, though certainly suffering from decades of disinvestment, does not suffer for lack of activity. No specific changing or changed conditions are cited to justify the kind of development proposed, unless the Applicant is referring to a changing demographic. If so, then the development will only accelerate the demographic change given its failure to include measures to protect against displacement. Furthermore, the design does not create buffers or appropriate transitions in height on certain parts of the development, inconsistent with MCNP Policies LU-1.6.93 and HO-1.1.5.4 Because it is an irregularly shaped property, there are multiple tall buildings, slated to be designated MCID-2, or of a height up to 25 stories, that will directly abut single story warehouses with the Light Industrial use or park space. Based on the parcelization plan and massing diagram in the Applicant's Concept Book at 43-44, there is no buffer contemplated between the taller, 25-story primarily residential towers and properties immediately to the north or south of the SAP area to ease into the large- scale, dense development that the Applicant proposes. Indeed, as the architect further notes, even if Applicant were successful in achieving actual gradation of the buildings, 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 l0-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. Architect's Expert Report at 3-4. In other words, the stark difference in the scale and character of the proposed development from that of the existing neighborhood may actually isolate current residents and create an unwelcoming environment to those who do not fit the target population for whom the development is being built (including people currently living in and frequenting the Little Haiti neighborhood). "The City's land development regulations will establish mechanisms to mitigate the potentially adverse impacts of new development on existing neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements." 4 "The City will continue to enforce, and where necessary strengthen those sections of the land development regulations that are intended to preserve and enhance the general appearance and character of the City's neighborhoods and to buffer such neighborhoods from incompatible uses through the implementation and enforcement of transition and buffering standards." Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk The Applicant's own materials reflect this. In calling the development a "campus" and a "compact, amenity -rich enclave," the Applicant does not communicate that this project fits into the existing fabric of the community but rather downplays the character of the current neighborhood to make a case for a wholesale conversion of the property into a playground for "talented workers," where new residents of the neighborhood are not encouraged to assimilate into the existing community and infrastructure but to keep to the enclave built for them and enjoy what superior benefits the proposed development offers them. Applicant's Zoning Analysis at 1. Proposed Development Fails to Meet Equity -Related Goals, Policies and Objectives of the MCNP With respect to the MCNP's housing goals, policies and objectives, this project falls woefully short. Though a previous Regulating Plan and Development Agreement included, at the behest of the Planning and Zoning Department, a minimal, but not insignificant, number of committed affordable and workforce housing units (7% and 14%, respectively), that commitment was eliminated in the version of the application that was presented before the Commission on February 28, 2019 and later approved at First Reading on March 28, 2019. The consistency findings that hinge on the inclusion of these affordable and workforce housing units must be revised in light of the lack of firm obligations on the Applicant to create housing accessible to people of different incomes. In a neighborhood where the existing median household income is $24,800, this is unacceptable. The project is thus inconsistent with MCNP Objectives LU-4.1, 4.2, 4.3 on mixed income developments and affordable and attainable housing, as well as MCNP Goal HO-1 to "increase the supply of safe, affordable and sanitary housing for extremely low-, very low-, low - and moderate -income households," and MCNP Goal HO-2 to "develop a livable city center with variety of urban housing types for persons of all income levels in a walkable, mixed use development." Similarly, certain MCNP transit policies are not met by this project. The traffic impact analysis has congestion increasing to the threshold level of service (LOS) D, while equity -related policies like TR-1.5.2 on transportation control measures (TCMs), transit discount and fare subsidy programs, and TR-2.2.9 on systems being accessible to those in need are also not addressed. Specifically, it is not clear how the provision of a trolley stop and certain bicycle infrastructure will actually reduce car trips to/from the development. The condition of providing transit passes for workers was not addressed in the latest documents before the Commission on Second Reading. Nearly all community benefit from this project is subsumed in a community benefit contribution that is contingent on the issuance of building permits after the initial $6 million benefit contribution. While this submission will address the substance of the contribution and other aspects of the Development Agreement separately, it must be noted that a nebulous future promise of funds is not equivalent to making actual commitments to making transit access and housing access equitable. Application Fails to Meet Requirements under Miami 21 The application is fundamentally flawed in its failure to meet certain requirements under Miami 21. Some of these key areas are laid out below: Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk Miami 21 - 3.9.1(h)(10) — "Flexible allocation of development capacity and Height, excluding Density on individual sites within the Special Area Plan 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 for appropriate transitions." As detailed above, the SAP area is not self-contained but rather irregularly shaped, such that there have been no transitions or buffers provided between some 25 story buildings and abutting properties, which include one story warehouses and the Little Haiti Soccer Park. See Applicant's Concept Book at 4. The application is clearly not meeting this fundamental requirement of the Miami 21 zoning code. Miami 21 7.1.2.8(c)(2)(g) — "An analysis of the properties within a one-half mile radius of the subject property regarding the existing condition of the radius properties and the current zoning and Future Land Use designations of the radius properties. The analysis shall include photos of Building elevations of both sides of the street extending three hundred (300) feet beyond all boundaries of the site. An aerial photo of the site and the radius properties shall be included. The 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." (emphasis added) Their application deficient because: • There does not appear to be an explicit analysis of the properties within a one-half mile radius of the subject property included with the application, only a narrative description of the general area. See Applicant's Zoning Analysis. • There is no part of the analysis that specifies building heights 300' from the SAP property. • There is no argument or analysis, based on substantial, competent evidence, about why the current zoning is inappropriate and why the requested zoning is appropriate. As one expert noted, As proposed, this development would reflect an FLR of 10.6 (8,164,140 S.F. of building area / 773,290 S.F. of land), or nearly double the 5.43 development intensity allowed under the current zoning. It would also allow buildings as tall as 25 stories rather than the maximum height current zoning allows at D1 (8 stories) and T5-O (5 stories). The proposed Magic City SAP would be a substantially more intense development than is allowed under current zoning. Edward Parker, MAI, Appraisal of 17.75 Acres of Land Comprising The Proposed Magic City Innovation District Development (MCID Appraisal) at 84. Attached hereto as Appendix D. Miami 21 3.9.1(h)(7) A preservation plan acceptable to the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board for any historic resources in the area of the Special Area Plan. • While there are multiple documents that allude to the existence of a preservation plan (including City Planning and Zoning Staff Analysis), apart from a photo in the Concept Book, a provision committing to the preservation of the DuPuis building in the Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk Development Agreement and an un-updated reference to the Applicant's efforts to work with historic preservation staff to arrive at a preservation plan, there does not appear to be a preservation plan included in the application materials. For example, the same text as is included as an exhibit to the more recently submitted March 2. 2019 Letter of Intent also figured in the Applicant's 2018 Letter of Intent: A preservation plan acceptable to the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board for any historic resources in the area of the Special Area Plan. Provided. The Applicant has been working (and will continue to work) closely with City of Miami and Miami -Dade County historic preservation staff to reach an agreed -upon preservation plan for the historic DuPuis Medical Office & Drugstore building at 6041 NE 2nd Ave. The preservation and use of the historic DuPuis structure figures prominently in the Magic City SAP, as illustrated in the Concept Book. It is unclear whether the Applicant has met this requirement through merely inclusion of a commitment in the Development Agreement instead of a Historic and Environmental Preservation Board (HEPB)-approved preservation plan. The language of the zoning code is not clear on whether this is an essential pre -condition for approval of the application but it must be noted here that by Second Reading, such a preservation plan does not appear to exist. The Planning and Zoning Department imposed conditions on its recommendation to approve the project, many of which have not been met The recommendation for approval by the PZ Department and some of the consistency findings under the comp plan and Miami 21 were conditioned on a number of changes being incorporated into the MCID SAP application. A failure to satisfy these conditions throws into question whether the City Commission can find the project to be consistent without the Applicant making key changes to meet the conditions. Indeed, the very text of the ordinance the Commission will be voting on is at odds with the procedural history and underlying documents of the application. It would be an unreasonable exercise of power to approve this project without requiring the Applicant to comply with the pre -conditions elaborated by Planning and Zoning staff. Some of these include: • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall provide a minimum of seven percent (7%) of its units as Affordable housing units serving residents at or below sixty percent (60%) area median income ("AMI") and fourteen percent (14%) of its units as Workforce housing units serving residents at or below one hundred twenty percent (120%) AMI. o Though these appeared in a previous development agreement to cure a comp plan inconsistency finding, the commitment to providing these units was since removed from the most recently submitted Development Agreement (dated May 1, 2019), and thus this condition remains unfulfilled. • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall show compliance with the Minority Participation and Employment Plan (including a Contractor/Subcontractor Participation Plan), which shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of any building permit including a Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk phased permit. The Applicant, owner, or successor shall follow the provisions of the City's Minority Women Business Affairs and Procurement Program as a guide, as applicable. o The May 2019 Development Agreement only makes reference to Community Business Enterprise, Community Small Business Enterprise and Small Business Enterprise preferences but does not mention minority or minority women's participation. Any promise along these lines should be an explicit commitment that appears in the Development Agreement. • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall permit the Planning Department an opportunity to adequately peer review the Magic City SAP's Economic Impact Analysis prior to Second Reading at the City Commission. o Unclear whether this has occurred. • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall provide more dynamic transportation control measures including, but not limited to, providing transit passes to employees hired through the local hiring requirements of the Development Agreement. o Some transportation control measures were specified, but they do not include transit passes for local hires or other equitable ways of ensuring transit access. • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall obtain an approved Tentative Plat for the Magic City SAP prior to Second Reading at the City Commission. o Applicant noted difficulty of obtaining a T-Plat but it is unclear whether this is satisfactory response from Applicant. • Conservation Assessment Report (Project is located within a high Archeological Probability Zone). o It is unclear whether this has been provided. • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall dedicate a minimum of 9,170 square feet of land to the City in close proximity to the Magic City SAP to be zoned "CS," Civic Space, in satisfaction of the City's no net loss of parkland policy. o No land has been dedicated to the City, nor does this promise appear in the Development Agreement. In fact, "The Developer shall not be required to dedicate, reserve or otherwise dispose of any land within the SAP Area for the Public Open Space." The refusal of the Applicant to dedicate land or otherwise provide a valuable property interest in park or open space in the SAP (or even outside of it) reveals a troubling unwillingness to support City efforts to continue to provide the essential public good of common public park or open space for residents to gather. • Section 16 of the Development Agreement, titled "Public Benefits", shall provide for a mechanism to increase the Public Benefit contribution cost per square foot on an annual basis. This increase shall be tied to annual increases in market value of the per square foot price being charged for units in projects within the Little Haiti Neighborhood. o With the elimination of the Public Benefits structure, the Application has rendered this condition null, but the spirit of the provision in tying any benefit contribution to market conditions is one that should be carried into the project. • The Applicant, owner, or successor shall propose specific resilience measures that will apply to the Magic City SAP. Those measures shall be reviewed by the Department of Resilience and Public Works prior to Second Reading at the City Commission. o Applicant replied that they do not need to do this, but unclear whether that answer is satisfactory. Submitted into the pubuc record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk This is but a selected list of the ways the Application departs from the purpose and intent of the comp plan and Miami 21 code. It is telling that the places where the application is most inconsistent with the comp plan and zoning code include those areas where the comp plan and Miami 21 attempt to incorporate principles of equity and inclusion into their master planning. If Miami is to continue to be a home to a culturally diverse, mixed income population, then it cannot ascribe lesser weight to these important provisions. PART II: Additional Considerations Displacement As recent Earth Economics report notes, it is well documented that new large scale developments contribute to deepening housing unaffordability. Earth Economics Report at 12. The report sets forth a methodology to determine the costs a displaced family may bear over time. Based on this methodology, which measured commuting costs, the costs of finding new housing, and environmental costs, the report found that "assuming the 3,154 housing -cost -burdened, low- income (<$20,000) households in Little Haiti are displaced, the total cost incurred by these households over the next ten years is more than $68 million, using a discount rate of 7 percent. In reality, the full 5,614 households earning less than $25,000 in annual income could be at risk of displacement, which would generate an even higher total damage estimate." Earth Economics Report at 15. More research needs to be done on the potential for displacement of vulnerable tenants, and a displacement study should be standard for all such large scale developments. Zoning & the Speculative Market Applicant has insisted that it has not displaced any resident (though not this is not true, because the Magic City Trailer Park was inhabited before Robert Zangrillo purchased it), but it masks the fact that real estate brokers are explicitly using the pending Magic City development as a means to upsell properties to investors and mark up real estate. A cursory review of websites such as Trulia and Realtor.com at three points between May and June 19, 2019 show that at least forty listings specifically mentioning proximity to Magic City and the changes in the Little Haiti neighborhood (or beyond). Note that many of the properties are not being marketed to homebuyers to live in, but to investors to develop, flip or rent out. See List of Properties for Sale attached hereto as Appendix E. Applicant itself stands to make a fortune from the zoning change alone. As the MCID Appraisal shows, the land value alone will increase to $148 million upon approval of the SAP. This will impact land values all around the property and, if the Applicant sells the upzoned SAP property to another developer, will cause rental rates to have to be set at higher rates. Environmental Concerns The full costs and impacts of this project should be examined further through an environmental impact analysis. While this analysis is a condition of obtaining a building permit, it should be required before zoning and land use changes are approved. Absent a further study, the Earth Economics report details certain environmental costs and considerations. According to the report, the Magic City project may generate environmental harms that can translate into significant costs to the public and residents; Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk For example: o The project's net harmful impact on existing urban vegetation is unclear and should be made explicit. By a comparison of the aerial photographs of the current conditions and the proposed development of the property, it seems that some of the grass or pervious surface will be reduced by construction of buildings on either side of the former trailer park site. This conversion would have costs. According to the report, in the Miami area, just an acre of trees or grass provide $487 and $223 of ecosystem services each year, respectively. This includes siormwater management, which is of critical importance in Miami. Earth Economics Report at 8. o The project may create local air pollution issues, due to increased congestion and the potential for street canyons, which are caused by tall buildings. As the Report notes, "The canyon effect is a particularly salient problem for the proposed Magic City SAP, given the volume of additional traffic it would generate. Additional traffic means that, in the presence of urban canyons, additional hazardous emissions such as carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and particulate matter 2.5 (PM2.5) will be concentrated at street level." Id. at 11. o Tailpipe emissions measurably increase health costs for local residents. The emissions associated with all daily vehicle trips could generate nearly $200 in health -related costs, per mile driven. ld. at 9. These costs need to be taken into consideration and mitigated against so that they are not externalized onto the City or residents. Climate Gentrification A growing debate around the concern of climate gentrification in Miami, which sees climate change or sea level rise as an additional factor that figures into real estate decisions, has raised questions about how to maintain equity and ability for people of all incomes to access and live on higher elevation sections of the city. Across multiple studies, inclusionary zoning that assures mixed income housing is cited as a key climate adaptation measures that can mitigate against climate gentrification, which threatens to push low-income, disadvantaged families to less resilient, lower elevation areas of the city. See, e.g., Jesse Keenan, Affordable Housing Policy in Miami: Inclusionary Zoning and the Median -Income Demographic, Journal of Affordable !lousing & Community Development Law., Vol. 14, No. 2. 110-121, at 118. Densification of higher ground areas should certainly by coupled with measures to ensure that all people have access to the housing being created in those areas. Robynne Boyd, Has Climate Gentrification Hit Miami? The City Plans to Find Out, EcoWatch, March 11, 2019, https://www.ecowatch.comlclimate-gentrification-2631305311.html. Traffic While the Applicant's contractor appears to have followed the City -adopted methodology for measuring traffic, there are some questions about how the methodology may be improved to account for the community experience of increased congestion. Maps, like those we asked Kittelson and Associates to produce based on the data provided in the Applicant's Kimley Horn traffic impact analysis, should be standard. Additionally, since the methodology focuses on vehicle trips during peak hours (two hours in the morning and two hours in the evening), it misses painting a picture of what the impact of traffic looks like over the course of a day. The Applicant should Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk study traffic impact over the course of a 24-hour period to really quantify the impact of traffic congestion on the area. This may include measurement of the environmental and health factors like those raised in the Earth Economics Report. Development Agreement - Public and Community Benefits The Applicant stands to gain an incredible windfall through an approval of its SAP application. This is evident from the thorough and detailed MCID Appraisal, but also through the terms of the Development Agreement (dated May 1, 2019), which has provisions overwhelmingly in favor of the Developer, at the expense of the City, which is offered little discretion or space to account for unforeseen circumstances. A few specific points: A. Preservation of the DuPuis Medical Office & Drugstore Building — This provision needs to explicitly refer to the process and provisions of City Code Ch. 23 on Historic Preservation, including the need to obtain a certificate of appropriateness for any relocation or other modification of the historically designated resource. B. Public & Community Benefits - 16(a) — Public Open space o (3) There is no valuable property right — dedication, reservation, or easement transferred to the City. As mentioned above, this is unacceptable and going forward Miami 21 should be clear that at least the 5% open space contribution should be a transfer or dedication of the space to the City. o (4) Applicant has all rights to control over the Public Open Space including determining programming, which opens the possibility of arbitrary or speech - based denials of requests to use the space. o (5) Essentially the Applicant is reserving 60 days (or more, if approved by the City Manager) to hold temporary or special events in the Public Open Space. - 16(b) — Community Benefit Contribution o (2) Contribution of $31 million is woefully low. Based on the MCID Appraisal, the removal of 7% affordable and 14% workforce housing units on site from the prior development agreement resulted in a savings of $54.5 million to the Applicant in housing contributions alone. See MCID Appraisal at 7. This means that we are leaving over $20 million on the table in accepting a $31 million contribution that is distributed in an unpredictable manner after the first $6 million Initial Benefit Contribution. This Initial Benefit Contribution is insufficient to produce the same level of housing as would have been possible if there were percentage contributions. ■ (2)(iii) It it problematic that further payments are contingent on issuance of building permits on a $4.03 per square foot basis. The contribution does not account for inflation, nor does it provide a payment schedule that would provide the Little Haiti Community Revitalization Trust with the stability and predictability it needs to be able to leverage and deploy funds sustainably. Given that this contribution is to count for replacement of affordable and workforce housing units, it is a poor substitution because it is neither enough to produce an equivalent number of units nor is it clear that the funds will be forthcoming. Submitted into the public record for item(s) PZ.10, 11, 12. on 06/27/2019 , City Clerk • (2)(iv) It is not clear why 482,569 square feet of Floor Area SAP Parcel No. 8 are exempted from any portion of the Community Benefit Contribution. is due to be the first building to be developed according to the Phasing Plan, but if that is the case, the square footage should count towards the Initial Benefit Contribution. ■ (2)(vii) This provision makes clear that it is possible that the $31 million benefit contribution may never materialize. The Applicant only promises a little over $24.1 million, which could either be paid (i) over 30 years from now or (ii) when the City issues a final Certificate of Occupancy for all of the SAP Floor Area Capacity — this should be "SAP Floor Area Capacity requested." • This is unacceptable where the Applicant stands to gain a windfall in land value from obtaining the SAP zoning alone, $148 million, by conservative estimates. See MCID Appraisal at 7. o (3) Use of Community Benefit Contribution. This is a laundry list of potential uses, of which affordable housing is just one point. This is not enough to satisfy consistency with housing -related MCNP goals, nor is it enough to guard against a possible Fair Housing Act violation presented by the failure to assure that the housing would be mixed income and accessible to people from the surrounding neighborhood. C. Joinder One example of a particularly egregious provision that we must pay attention to is Sec. 38 of the May 1, 2019 Development Agreement on Joinder, that allows subsequently acquired abutting property be incorporated into the SAP. Taken to its absurd conclusion, this could bring the whole neighborhood under the jurisdiction of the SAP Regulating Plan/Development Agreement the way that it's written, and the City itself would be considered in breach of the agreement if it objects. The City must absolutely reconsider this before signing onto such a provision. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the City Commission should not approve the MCID SAP application until all inconsistencies with the MCNP and Miami 21 are cured and the Development Agreement is revised to ensure greater protection of the interests of the City and the surrounding communities. By: ena gannath, Esq. ommunity Justice Project, Inc. Date: June 27, 2019