Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-75-0128"SUPPORTIVE DOCU ',7BITS 1L'._ i.. I:W EST: f RESOLUTION NO, 75=128 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING IN PRINCIPLE THE CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT STUDY ENTITLED "LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLAN- NING AND ZONING STUDY" DATED SEPTEMBER 19740 AND REFERRING THIS STUDY BACK TO PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FOR FURTHER STUDY. WHEREAS, the Planning Department is charged with the initial responsi- bility of preparing studies concerning the changing of comprehensive plans with- in the City of Miami; and WHEREAS, said Department has made a study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study" dated September, 1974; and WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Board at its meeting of December 4, 1974, Item No. 2, following an advertised hearing, adopted Resolution PAB 53-74 by a 5 to 0 vote (two members absent) recommending adoption of the City of Miami Planning Department study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study" dated September 1974; and WHEREAS, the Commission deems it in the best interest of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to adopt said study; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City of Miami Planning Department Study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study: dated September, 1974, be and the same is hereby adopted in principle, etc. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th day of February, 1975. City Clerk PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: Michel E. Anderson Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: John S, Lloyd City Attorney Maurice A. Ferre Mayor "DOCUMENT INDEX ITEM N0.1- " CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEB 121975 RF_ CLt�t�Ua ,1G. REMARKS: 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 MEA 12/16/74 RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY OP/MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT STUDY ENTITLED "LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING AND ZONING.STUDY�!= DATED SEPTEMBER 1974. WHEREAS, the Planning Department is charged with the initial responsibility of preparing studies concerning the changing of comprehensive plans within the City of Miami; and WHEREAS, said Department has made a study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study" dated September, 1974; and WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Board at its meeting of December 4, 1974, Item No. 2, following an advertised hearing, adopted Resolution PAB 53-74 by a 5 to 0 vote (two members absent) recommending adoption of the City of Miami Planning Department study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study" dated September 1974; and WHEREAS, the Commission deems it in the best interest of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to adopt said study; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; Section 1. The City of Miami Planning Department Study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study" dated September, 1974, be and the same is hereby adopted, 1974. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of MAYO 36 1 4 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 33 32 33 34 ATTEST: CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED tYt - (-1 MICHEL E ANDERSON Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: ./1" )( •-).A.Z../ / ,c.41 C /.. • ,I. ' - ,./ - .,.. /COHN S„ LLOYD v 'ity Attorney 2, 35 36 ttu of Honorable City Commission Attention: Mr. P. N. Andrews City of Miami, Florida Gentlemen: �f 12 Deterber 10, 1974 t MI 23 Re: LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING AND ZONING STUDY RECOMMENDED Initiated by Planning Department The Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of December 4, 1974, Item #2, following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution PAB 53-74 by a 5 to 0 vote (two members absent) Recommending adoption of the City of Miami Planning Department's study entitled LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING AND ZONING STUDY, dated September 1974 (see attached copy of Study). A-RBSOLUIVION to provide for the above has been prepared by the City Attorney's office and submitted for consideration of the City Commission. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" cm Attached: Minutes Study, dated September 1974 cc: Law Department S 'jicerei David Simpson, r., DiSEector Department of Administration Planning and Zoning Boards Tentative City Commission date: January 23, 1975. 4. Consideration of the City of Miami Planning ' Department's study entitled LITTLEAIVER_OOMMEMIALA CENTHR__PLANNI 'O., AND ZONING,,., STUDY, dated , September, 1974. 1 .t00. o Secretary filed proof of publication of Legal Notice of Hearing and administered oath to all persons testifying at this Hearing. PLANNING DEPARTMENT _ RECOMI+ NDAT IONS "SUPPORTIVE (See City of Miami Planning Department's DOCUMENTSstudy AL CENTER PLANNING ImAND FZONING STUDY", RIVER dated September 1974.) FOLLOW" Mr. Matthew Schwartz of the Planning Department Staff presented this Item. Good evening, on October 2nd a public hearing was held before the Board concerning the study entitled "Little River Commercial Center Planning and Zoning Study". At the request of the Board, an additional study was made of four points concerning four zoning recommendations that were made in this study. On October l6th, we met again before the Board in a workshop session and we presented some more information concerning these points. I believe that, before the Board, these Items were resolved. We talked to members of the community who objected, and I believe all of them were in general agreement with the Study. Mr. Clark, whose property abuts the F.E.C. railroad and his property is presently zoned R-1 and wishes to have the zoning on that property changed, I believe still objects to the recommendations of the Study. I think he'd like to speak before the Board. Mr. Paul Clark: The address is 399 N. E. 82nd Terrace; I have two addresses. Anyhow, I was just hoping that the Board would consider changing this in here so we could develop this property. This property is backed up, really, in a bad location for R-1. It's backed up against the railroad tracks all down through there; and we have a flood control district that do have an awful lot of vacant property up and down through that particular section; and it's a red light zone you might say; put it that way. It's very bad; it's bad for night it's bad for any time, and for housing, one -family housing R-1, it's not, it needs something in there that needs a lot of money stuck in there to build the thing up so it can be lit up and do something with it; it can't be done R-1. We have R-1 in there now and most of your properties in there, that are R-1, and it's been changed to R-1 districts - there are still people in there that still have single-family residences but it's in a location in that particular place that the property is so valuable that it shouldn't be R-1. It's valuable enough that it's so good in rental property that - it's overpriced value is what it is; and it's making a condition in there that is no good for R-1. I appreciate your consideration. Thank you. Mrs. Rockafeliar: Thank you Mr. Clark. Mr. Schwartz: I'd just like to mention that the reason the Planning Department would like to keep this property R-1 at the present time is the problem of sanitary sewers in the area and the access to the property; the difficulty in getting into the property of any large volume of traffic. Deceit ber 4, 1974 Item 2 PAD !�!N! �}N 1 II M�lA!lINNIINN!IINININM�IAllllll�l Vita . i ockafellar Is there anyone else that would like to speak? . Stnitht Cordon Smith, Little River Jewelry, At the last Meeting, t think if you remember, we pretty well stated tur position and 1 think the only thing is to look back a that and you'll see our position as far as the Cornrnerce Association of tittle Rinser is concerned. I feel we are short of people here tonight because of a mix= -up of a meeting last night, and most people thought that Meeting was this one. So I think they got confused and didn't come to tonight's meeting; they think they've been to the meeting'already. So, with that, I'll say thank you, and we'll look forward to a good - .. Mrs. Rockafellar: 1, personally, told a number of the dealers in Little River about this yesterday hoping we would have a good crowd. Mrs. Dunn: I'm Lorraine Dunn; Lorraine Designs. I am most grateful to this Board for the attitude they've displayed and particularly to certain Members who didcome out, as I've invited them, and take a walking tour of the area; and for the cooperation that's been displayed by these people, I cannot express my appreciation enough. It's marvelous to find this attitude in your city government. I have a great deal of sympathy with Mr. Clark in his position. I attended the meeting last night at Edison Senior High School, and it was, I'm not trying to be mean to anybody, but it was a very poorly organized and run meeting. I was a Federal employee long enough that I understood the gobble -de -gook that was put out; but I don't think there were more than five or six people there who did, so, there was in the list of things that they brought up, there was mention of monies to be made available for areas such as Mr. 11J Clark's; sewers where there were perimeter conditions on sewage and sanitary facilities and things of that sort. There was a very stringent requirement; that they must O ,�,, exhaust all other resources before they apply for these funds; they may then become available. ._0 O Mrs. Alexander: I have a question. At this meeting O Lt.,.last night everybody seems to be speaking about, what meeting was CO d this? Were you there? Mr. Schwartz: No I wasn't. Last night there was a meeting held for the Community Development Act * * and I recommended that many of the Members of the Commerce Association attend that meeting to try to work within the Task Force to try to get some funds for some of the projects that we do recommend for Little River. Mrs. Dunn: This is where I was going to speak next, but anyway, my thought was that this particular strip of land, while I go along with the overall plan, I think it's beautiful and I know a lot of time and money has been spent and I am in accord with all of it= but I do know, being a property owner in the area, and having certain problems that we're working out the best way we can, I do think that some aid should be given, or a consideration of it at least should be given to Mr. Clark because he is bottled up; and that area if you really take the trouble ' to really look at it is no longer -4- December 4, 2 974 Item 2 PAS "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" suitable for A-1. I know you've got a traffic problem. It means that you're going to have to get some kind of an easement and open it up ad that it won't be a bottleneck: but this, I think, is a very big obligation on the part of the Planning board to either recommend it or to take steps to see that it is done; because think this is a case where some assistance is in order. Thank you, Mrs. Rookafellar: Mrs. bunn I have a question for you l was very interested in that meeting last night and I jvet couldn't possibly make it. Mrs. Dunn: I have copies of the Agenda. Mrs. Rockafellar: I'd love to have one; The question I wanted to ask you is that you said they had to go through every other source. Now does everybody have to do that or just this particular application? Mrs. Dunn: No. As I understand it, it is a community project and any property owner, resident, they do not even have to be citizens to take part in it; if they are part of that community, they may take part in it but whatever action is either voted on, organized, decided upon or taken, they must exhaust all other sources of revenue applications for relief of a condition before they can apply to this particular bit of funding. This was made very, very clear; that it was emergency funding; seed money, construction money; things of that sort to alleviate unfair, unjust or severe conditions. I don't know whether this would help that particular portion of the Little River area or not; this is something that I don't have enough knowledge of. I thought the information might be of value. Mrs. Rockafellar: I appreciate that and thank you Mrs. Dunn. Mrs. Alexander: I've forgotten some of the measurements. How large is that property? Mr. Schwartz: It's approximately three acres. Mrs. Alexander: Three acres. O.R. Thank you. Mr. Clark: It's over three acres. 3.99 acres. Mrs. Baro: 3.99 acres? Mr. Clark: Well, it's been cut down; it's now 3.66. Mrs. Rockafellar: Mr. Clark, have you tried elsewhere to get help on this as far as the sewers are concerned? Mr. Clark: No I haven't. Mrs. Rockefeller: Not through the City? Mr. Clark: Never. It's never been put up for re -zoning. This re -zoning committee - actually, I haven't been called in on this. I didn't know there was a meeting last night, or I'd have gone to this meeting; I didn't even know this one was tonight. I just happened to learn of this one by accident. Commerce? Mrs. Rockafellars Are you a member of the Chamber of December 4, .I974 Item 2 PAS Mr, Clark: No, I'm hots I see I'm going to have to join though. Ctrs. Rockafellar: Mr. Acton, I was under the impression that the tittle River Chamber of Commerce was going to notify every merchant in tittle River about this meeting? Is that: right or nOtl Mr. Schwartz: They were notified, but 1 suggested this is somewhat my fault because I suggested that it might be more important for the Members of the Commerce Association to attend the meeting last night to possibly getting some government support - getting involved in the Task Force to obtain some of these funds for implementing some of these projects since I believe that the Members of the Commerce Association ware in general agreement with the Study, and the four problem areas that did come up at the last meeting, and I really was under the impression that they were resolved except for Mr. Clark's property. Mrs. Rockafellar: Well, the reason I asked that was because I talked with three of the merchants in Little River yesterday that didn't know anything about the first meeting they didn't know anything about any of the meetings; they didn't know that this was in the process at all; and I was wondering why the rest of them hadn't been notified? personally. Mr. Clark: I don't think anyone's been notified, Mrs. Rockafellar: I'm sorry about that. Mr. Clark: Well, yes, but I take that back - there is a bunch of us back in there in that section; I have a son-in-law here that has property in there. He's here tonight; but he's never been notified either. (Not Identified): Why don't you join the Association? Mr. Clark: Looks like I'm going to have to. One more thing,, if I may, on the sewage, I have an assessment down there for $7,000 worth of sewers; there's either an 8" or a 12" line, and there's a * * * station within 300 yards of my property; so we have sewage systems. If I remember, you can go out and look in that sewage system - there's manholes every 300 feet apart; and the sewers are not even being used. We have the sewers already there; it's not a matter of not having sewers; there's a * * station that connects up to a 36" line within 300 feet of my property. Now that takes care of the sewers. I brought this up to Mr. Schwartz who * * before; I told you that, and I told you all you've got to do is go out there and check into it; but it makes the community think that I don't have a sewer system in there. Mr. Schwartz: Mr. Clark's property is sewered. The only problem is that the sewers in that area are presently operating at capacity level and any increase in density that an R-3 or R-4 zoning would allow would overtax the whole system in that area. We had the Department of Public Works do a study on it and they said it would probably cost something like $200,000 for improvements of the pipes, the sewer lines to the pumping station, and they'd have to rebuild the pumping station for any significant increase in density in that area. This not only concerns your property, M. Clark, but any property in that R-1 area; if the density was increased, we'd run into this problem. December 4, 1974 Item 2 p This is possibly One of the things that can be funded through the Community Development program sanitary sewer;. It one of the prograina that the Federal government has funded in the past and this is one of the programs that is incorporated within the Community Development Act as fundable, and this might be something that the community can work for in the Task ?oroe too; get some improvement in the Brewers in the area. Mr. Clark: one more thing, That's on the outlet for traffic. The traffic department has been routing traffic, all this Boulevard traffic for the, last twelve or fifteen years through N. E. 82nd Terrace; they've routed half of their traffic there; they've got the streets turn up and everything else; now why, all of. a sudden, should they be,'you know, involved in a few more units, property units which would only use the streets probably one -tenth of one percent? Thank you a lot. Mrs. Rockafellar: Thank you Mr. Clark. Mr. Schwartz: The access into Mr. Clark's property is just a local street; it doesn't go through; it stops at the F,E.C. railroad property. I believe it's approximately 20 feet wide; rather narrow. Mrs. Rockafellar: Is there anyone else that wishes to speak? If not, we'll close the public hearing and have discussion among the Board Members. It seems, Mr. Acton, that that is the only thing left; Mr. Clark's property. Mrs. Alexander: I went out to see and take a walking tour with Mr. Schwartz and I was very impressed with the approach that had been made and the cooperation he had received from every- body and we did go and look at Mr. Clark's property, most specifically, and of course, the area that Mrs. Dunn was concerned about; all of the problem areas; the mini -warehouse area and what -not. ,The access to this property is literally a cul-de-sac; it's a very narrow street. Mr. Clark does have some, I felt, some reason for complaint. He does abut the railroad tracks and across those railroad tracks is R-4. Somewhere, it seems to me, that if these other things could be surmounted, the sewage, and perhaps some kind of access either easement or whatever, actually what does exist there in the R-1 looks awfully good; it really does. Now, maybe there is multiple occupancy, but it doesn't look like it. I mean, the houses seem well -kept; they're older but they have a great deal of charm and the whole area really has a very nice look about it. The property is beautiful. It was a nursery and perhaps at the periphery there could be some kind of buffer -zone but then on down to R-1 maybe some kind of SPD or PAD or, you know, a multiple kind of use. I don't know how it could be done. I don't know whether it's big enough to come under PAD, is it? Mr. Acton; Yes. Mrs. Alexander; And I thought about that as a possibility; and of course with the new monies that are available under Community Development, it seems that, I would think that we could certainly ease up on the R-1 subject to: the obtaining of Community Development money in order to increase the sewer flow; in order to get easement for streets; but we can't do special zoning for just one person. "SUPPORTIVE DOCU ; I FOLLOW„ 7-' December 4, 1974 Item 2 �'AB However, he does have Ovate tight oh his side when you consider that it was a nursery which is very attractive, you know, it's not bad when you're next to a nursery, and you know the area; but it does abut a railroad track and nobody in his right mind wants to put an R-1 house on a railroad track; whereas you Can conceivably get by with some kind of Multiple use, low-rise of one sort and buffer it from the 11-4 which is across the tracks; but I don't think„at this point, we oan do this. 1 think we have to let it sit and perhaps make recommendation that we try to get, or the area try to get Community Development funds which have just code in that there be a local 'Task Force to work with the Department on this and see if something can be clone because the funds are available; and we do need more housing. Rvidently everything is built up and occupied; every- where you look in this area. There don't seem to be any vacancies; bttt I don't see what we can do at this point except to accept the Plan as it is but keeping in mind that there is some flexibility in what's currently on the books since it is an area that's large enough for a PAD (Planned Area Development) which could, perhaps, give us a multiple use. Mrs. Rockafellar: In other words, what you're stating is that the sewer problem has to be taken care of. Mrs. Alexander: Oh, always that has to be taken care of; and the access is impossible. You start putting multiple use in there and there are still single-family houses, you're going to get an awful lot of static. It's going to back up in that little cul-de- sac; and you've got parking problems; one thing or another, it's going to have to be very skillfully done. Certainly, it can be done, but I think it depends upon uhat comes out of Community Development funds for this. Mrs. Fernandez: Mme. Chairman, I would like to know if Mr. Clark understands exactly what PAD is and why it has to be developed that way, and how for us to keep the R-1 intact at this time doesn't make it impossible for you in the future to develop as a PAD provided that the sewer and the accessibility to this area is solved; but I would like to know if you are aware and understand what this is all about? Mr. Clark: I have a pretty good idea. Mrs. Fernandez: Do you think, I mean, it's a solution to your point of view? doing but gives you you know? buy you a Mr. Clark: No, I don't. I appreciate what you're it still doesn't solve my solution. Mrs. Fernandez: Don't you think that the enough flexibility to develop that? Mr. Clark: Well anything is better than what I have, Anything that would help me out, I appreciate it. I'll steak! Unidentified; That's bribery. Unidentified: Not if he buys it for all the Board! Mrs. Alexander; Mme. Chairman, one thing - the nursery still exists? :c � � December 4, 1974 Item 2 DOCUMENT) PAB FICAJatir Mr. Clark: yes. Mrs. Alexander: And the nursery has been there, how many years/ Mr. Clark: 80 years. Mrs. Alexander: 0.K. all I want to say. I'd hate to see it go, that's Mrs. Lichtenstein: Mr. Schwartz, wanted to ask yOu; you mentioned that there were four areas that, since the last meeting, have been Changed; one was Mr. Clark's property. What were the other three? zoning west was one. I and this is to speak to Mr. Schwartz: on 82nd Street, we recommended the R--C of N. E. 2nd Avenue which is presently C-1 now. That believe at the last meeting, Mrs. Dunn objected to that one of the reasons Mrs. Alexander and myself went there Mrs. Dunn about that. The other area was a recommendation, proposal, for changing, we had proposed on 79th Street C-4 zoning up to the F.E.C. Railroad; a proposal was made from the floor to change that to C-2 also; it presently is C-4. The proposal is for C-4; it's presently C-4; basically to remain in C-4. It's an area of heavy traffic commercial activity. And the other area that came up was the planting of trees within Little River; someone objected to the possibility - landscaping 79th Street would remove parking from in front of his property; and this I believe, the final design can be worked out to be modified. Mrs. Rockafellar: Mr. Acton, should we take a motion on #1, and go through all 4 of them, and then come back to this? Mr. Acton: I did't quite understand your• question? Mrs. Rockafellar: Well, there are four different things here that we're not settled on. Mrs. Baro: We have to approve all of it? Mrs. Alexander: I think the proposal is, as it is - right there - the Plan as proposed. Mr. Acton: You can amend of course. Amend the Study in any way the Board might wish. Mrs. Fernandez: Mme. Chairman, we don't have any written recommendations according to the last workshop that we had on October the 16th? Mr. Schwartz; We just discussed the points. Mra. Fernandez: But we don't have any written recommendations - d-- i, :.. • FOLLOW" Mr. Schwartz; No, nothing. Mrs. Fernandez: For this type of change? December 4, 1974 Item 2 FAN Mr. Bchwartt: No, these are the original proposals that were in the original. reports - documents = at the original pubic hearing. I think the problem is that the report, the whole document, wasn't approved by the Board. l believe the way the final terminology came rout was that it was sent back for re -study, but l believe the Board would vote to pass it, you know. Recommend the whole document, it would suffice. Mrs. Barot It was sent back for Mrs. Alexander: I think it was approved in principle with modifications, if necessary - Mrs. Rockafellar: well,the Chair will entertain a motion at this time. Mrs. Baro: That we approve it as is? Mrs. Alexander: I do so move. Mrs. Baro: I second. Mrs. Alexander: I would like to, however, suggest that we are aware that northeast R-1 perhaps could come into the Task Force for Community Development to see if there couldn't be some way of enumerating the difficulties around the railroad tracks. Mrs. Rockafellar: I think that's a good idea. In other words - Mr. Clark, we're not shutting you out. We're just keeping our fingers crossed and we'll all help you do what we can, and then you can come back again. O.K.? Thank you. A motion has been made and seconded. Will you call the roll Mr. Acton? Mrs. Alexander offered the following resolution, and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. PAB 53-74 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S STUDY ENTITLED LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING AND ZONING STUDY, DATED SEPTEMBER, 1974. Upon being seconded by Mrs. Baro, this resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mmes. Alexander, Baro, Fernandez, Lichtenstein, Rockafellar NAYES: None ABSENT: Messrs: Dannenberg, Borja Mr. Acton: Resolution passes 5 - 0. Mrs. Rockafellar: Thank you all very much. "SUPPORTIVE DOCU M NTS FOLLOW" -10- December 4, 1974 Item 2 Consideration of the City of Planning Dees rtJent's study entitled "LITTLE RIVER OoMN2RCIAL dal/tit PLANNING & ZoNtNG S'1WtH dated September 1974 Secretary filed proof of publication of Legal Notice of Tearing and administered oath to all persons testifying at this hearing. PIING DEPARTMENT tECOMMNDATIONS (See City of Miami Planning Department's study "LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING & ZONING STUDY", dated September Mr. Acton: This is the Little River Study that the considered in workshop and wail be presented by Mr. of the Planning Department. C 1974). — Board !id r+" Schwar r ta Mr. Schwartz: Good evening. The purpose of this p lice, hearing is to review the recommendations presented in the Pinning and Zoning studies entitled "THE LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER". This presentation will be brief in order to allow time for questions and recommendations from the Board and allow for comments from attending members of the Little River business community and residents of the area. The Little River Commercial Center located in the north- eastern portion of Miami, is bounded on the north by the Little River canal; on the south by 78th Street; on the west by North Miami Avenue; and the east by the F.E.C. right-of-way. It's the area directly west of the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. This 150 acre community is comprised of approximately 1500 residents and 212 businesses as of March of this year. Once a thriving business community, it has experienced during the last 20 years a sharp decline in commercial activity; but recently there has been strong positive indications of a resurgence of business activity and this is what fostered this study. Under utilized structures, low rent levels, underdeveloped land and a central location have all considered it to attracting businesses back to Little River. Significant growth has occurred during the last 10 years. In the last 10 years approximately 140 businesses have located in Little River of the 212 that are presently located there today. The greatest growth has been in office activity. Two new office buildings are under construction; one was just completed. A third office building is planned. There's been numerous apartment units built in Little River in addition to expansion of warehousing. The future of Little River we believe lies in its continued redevelopment as a sub -regional office center. This will require both public and private actions in order to attract new development. A major commitment must be forthcoming from the local business community since currently available public funds are limited. Public actions necessary include the upgrading of public facilities and services; legislative modifications that will promote better development. The following are some of the key problems that we have "r8U7i.' .7. DoCtJ ► NTS FOLLOW" October 2, 1974 Item 3 Con ideratioh of the City of Mi mi Planning t epti. rtrent's study entitled "LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING & ZONING STUDY", dated September 1974. Silcretary filed proof of publication of Legal Notice of Nearing and administered oath to all persons testifying at this hearing. t4AANNING DEt!PARTMNT RPCOMtIENDATION5: (See City of Miami Planning Department's l study "LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNING & ZONING STUDY", dated September 1974) . c-7 Mr. Acton: This is the Little River Study that: the Beard biald considered in workshop and will be presented b!' Mr. Schwart of the Planning Department. eaTaak V ril • Mr. Schwartz: Good evening. The purpose of this p lie --a hearing is to review the recommendations presented in the Panning and Zoning studies entitled "THE LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER". This presentation will be brief in order to allow time for questions and recommendations from the Board and allow for comments from attending members of the Little River business community and residents of the area. The Little River Commercial Center located in the north- eastern portion of Miami, is bounded on the north by the Little River canal; on the south by 78th Street; on the west by North Miami Avenue; and the east by the F.E.C. right-of-way. It's the area directly west of the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. This 150 acre community is comprised of approximately 1500 residents and 212 businesses as of March of this year. Once a thriving business community, it has experienced during the last 20 years a sharp decline in commercial activity; but recently there has been strong positive indications of a resurgence of business activity and this is what fostered this study. Under utilized structures, low rent levels, underdeveloped land and a central location have all considered it to attracting businesses back to Little River. Significant growth has occurred during the last 10 years. In the last 10 years approximately 140 businesses have located in Little River of the 212 that are presently located there today. The greatest growth has been in office activity. Two new office buildings are under construction; one was just completed. A third -office building is planned. There's been numerous apartment units built in Little River in addition to expansion of warehousing. The future of Little River we believe lies in its continued redevelopment as a sub -regional office center. This will require both public and private actions in order to attract new development. A major commitment must be forthcoming from the local business community since currently available public funds are limited. Public actions necessary include the upgrading of public facilities and services; legislative modifications that will promote better development. The fo l lowing are some of the key problems that we have '"'"'""TIVE Doicij?:ENTS FOLLOW' .7 October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD i!emPP ia�! identified in this report and to which this report addresses tself. .. CoMpetition in other market areas both retail and office activity, A lack of orderly function of land use arrangements. 3. At inadequate public utilities and facilities network to serve existing and future development. 4. Difficulties of land assembly because of absentee and fragmented ownership. 5. Unattractive strip commercial development. 6. Decreasing relative consumer income within the immediate service area. 7. An abundance of obsolescent commercial and residential structures. 8. An overabundance of land zoned for commercial activity. 9. The proliferation of small apartment units on minimum size lots. 10. Excessive amount of land being devoted to on -site parking. The first section of the report is a summarization of the existing conditions within the Little River business community. Through our extensive study of the area we have come out with what we believe to be the most feasible general land use plan for the area. (Second Map) Generally we would hope that the northeast portion of the study area, which is presently zoned R-1 and R-2 would remain as a low density residential area. This is an area containing many fine homes; the condition of the homes are generally in excellent condition. There's additional land there for expansion; a nursery site and some underdeveloped tracts - are development of a planned area development or a planned unit development allowable under the present zoning ordinance would allow for new construction of a slighter higher density but in keeping with the predominant land use. We envision N. E. 2nd Avenue to remain as a generally mixed retail and office strip commercial development; also 79th Street - that is the area in red. The area in brown on this map is a mixture of office and residential use. That is presently the northwestern quadrant and south of 82nd Street, Little River Parkway. We also would hope that the continued expansion of warehousing and wholesaling in the southeast quadrant will continue, So basically we find we areas in Little River: office and retInfillic tLOUai t, would recommend four general activity Low density residential, a mi tur-e. of ties along the major arterials - 79th Street ..8. October 20 1974 Item 3 MB °iiRl�l9�IAA'!poompo q!A!I!IIII!IPIIIIq!!1!I!I and 2nd Attenuet a Mikture of office and residential deve optttatt in the northwest quadrant along Little River Parkway; and the development of an industrial district to tortinue development of an industrial district in the southeast quadrant. We also prose expansion of public facilities in the area of which there id a critical shortage today; a kiver Walkway system and a system of linear parks in the northwest quadrant and four min parks scattered throughout the area, in addition to SOMe other recommendations. On page 28 of the booklet I'd like to go over the recommendations very briefly. We propose nine zoning changes. The first zoning change (please note map on page 28) 1) would be to change C-2 (Community Commercial) to C-1 (Local Commercial) along the northern part of N. E. 2nd Avenue, north of 82nd Street. This change would help to continue the orientation of this area as a service area for the surrounding communities, Little River, El Portal, Miami Shores. Also, this change would allow all existing uses that are found in the area, except the service stations. 2) R-3 (Low Density Multiple) family development; R-4 (Medium Density Multiple) to R-3 (Residential Office) development. This would be the area south of Little River Parkway to the east of N. E. 2nd Avenue. As the problem in the northeast section experienced with 82nd Street as the major thoroughfare, people in Little River have the same problem, we would recommend that the redevelopment of this as a mixture of residential and office would be in keeping with the character of the area; also it would provide additional site for office expansion. This is one of the better things that Littl o Rit nr has had going for it; the ability of having amle- space for conversion of excess retail and residential use to ofric-e activity. 3) The third recommR�n;lat:ir:n to the zoning change is R-4 (Medium Density Fs.ts1t.:i.ple ) te' C-2 (community Commercial) . This is just a small area 1,hi.ch is pro.sently residential; any future redevelopment of that site would be optimum as commercial development. 4) C-1 (Local Commercial) to C-2 (Community Commercial). This is to eliminate the conti nu•at:i.on of existing strip development along 79th Street is the prr1111Pni we're running into. The frontage on 79th Street is zoned one zoning classification; the remaining portion of the block is another. It's difficult to get optimum development. 5) C-5 (Liberal Commercial.) to I-1 (Light Industrial) to C-4 (General Commercial). v es that are existing on the site; warehousing, wholesaling would be feasible under C-4. 6) C-1 (Local Commercial) to R-C (Residential Office) . This is probably the major zoning recommendation. This is the northwr t quacirart of tt). ; t sti!- t; r a which is presently C 1. The area is prc dcminantly res :den?: ia1.. R-C development will allow for a more compatible t y,c-: of cevelopment. Existing under C-1 the retail-:1:tivity ':-111Li he put on these local streets which would be an inappropriate activity due to the size of the roadway; setbacks are improper in the area. Also the elimination of retail activity from this area would possibly strengthen the existing retail strips, commercial strips along 79th Street and timpy!,Avenue. Fou , October 2, 1974 Item 3 a- ) C-i (Local Commercial) to C 2 (Community Corot -retail, This Modification Will create parcels of sufficient site and i1niforntly zoned, 8) Ce4 (deneral Commercial) to Cal (Local Cotnereta1) to C-2 (Community Commercial) , We are hoping to create a distinet entryway on 79th Street when you enter Little River from the surrounding heavy commercial activity; encourage offiee development, 9) C-2 (community Commercial.) to R C (Residential Office)* This was a recommendation that was made at the last workshop by members of the Board. This is one block that is zoned C-2 the surrounding use is residential. Following this on page 30, we have recommended revisions to the zoning ordinance. The first recommendation is to amend ARTICLE XI (R-C, Residential-office)Section 1. Basically this recommendation would decrease the square footage; a requirement that 1500 square feet of lot area be provided for each dwelling unit in apartment buildings and apartment hotels with less than and including 15 units rather than the current 600 square feet per unit. For each dwelling unit above 15, 600 square feet of lot area shall be provided. Presently in R-C zoning, 1) the developer needs 600 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit; this would allow for, say, on a 50 x 150 foot lot, 14 units could be put on if it would be feasible with parking; probably 8 units could be put on that size lot under R-C zoning. This would be inappropriate in this area and in the other R-C zoning districts. This is following the R-4 recommendation that was made for "Little Havana" increasing the minimum square footage per dwelling unit. But anything over 15 units we would revert back to the existing 600 square feet. So this, hopefully, would encourage larger development; larger scale development, with hopef.Illy, more amenities. It would lower overall permissable residential densities; obtain better quality residential development; encourage new office development which would become more economically advantageous compared to the future lower number of residential units that could be constructed. Amend ARTICLE XIV Community Commercial C-2 District Section 1 (Use Regulation) to exclude adult bookstores and movie theatres. It is legally not possible to exclude the existing structures; the existing uses in the area. But the C-2 Districts which would be the predominant use at 79th Street and 2nd Avenue where these businesses are presently concentrated, it would prevent the expansion of this type of activity in this area. It's not legal to exclude this type of use throughout the City; we have to allow it in the C-4 districtwhich would be more in keeping with the heavy type of commercial activity that's generally found in C-4. Mrs. Rockafellar: Can't we change that ordinance? That would permit us to do away with them? Mr. Schwartz; I think we would run into a constitutional. question. Possibly Mx. Anderson could answer that. Mr. Acton; Would you please repeat the question? Mrs. Rockefeller; Yes. He said here on page 31, it's "S.UPPOII.TIVE DOCU ENT FO LLOW" -10- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD legally impossible to do- away with the adult bookstores and the movie theatres that are there now according to an ordinance, and 1 was wondering if it isn't possible to change that ordinande eo we could do away with them, those undesirable places' Mr. Anderson: the zoning ordinance would, assuming that the zoning change didn't allow the particular use, whether the use remaining there can stay; it would become a non -.conforming use: and you couldn't single out one particular type of use and say 'that's going to have to leave' the day you change'the zoning ordinance. Mrs. Rockefeller: My question was, could we not Change the ordinance whatever ordinance it is that forbids us to do away with this type of activity such as adult bookstores and movie theatres? Mr. Anderson: Are you referring to all adult bookstores? Mrs. Rockefeller: In this area. In the northeast and Little River. Mr. Anderson: It would affect those in the City and then you're running into a freedom of speech problem, freedom of press and so forth. Mrs. Lichtenstein: Mr. Anderson, we are so to speak, grandfathering the current movie houses and bookstores? Mr. Anderson: That's correct, and of course, if one of those left they could not move back in to that particular zone if you exclude adult bookstores in the new zoning. Mrs. Rockafcllar: Well then, Mr. Anderson, the only way that could be done away with it the people involved, the merchants and the people living !Al the area find a way to do away with it. Mrs. Alexander: Mr. Chairman, may I add a note of cheer? If they're continued as a non --conforming use, if they go out of business, then they can no longer be re -used as the same. Is that correct? And I read a very cheery note in the newspaper that said all the pornos, all over. the country, all the bookstores, all the movie houses are just fairly limping along. The public is fed up, bored, tired of the whole thing; and out on the west coast and in New York they're just dying on the vine. So maybe you can hope for just natural attrition and when they go out of business, anybody who comes in can no longer use that same use. Is that correct? Mr. Acton: Yes. The ordinance was amended in that manner. Mrs. Alexander: Amended to C-2. It would prevent any new business opening up under C-2? Mr. Acton; No. You would have to specifically amend the C-2 ordinance to prohibit adult bookstores and movie houses. Mrs. Alexander; But they are permitted in C--4 at the moment? Mr, Acton; At the moment C-2 also. We have in certain of Our zoning ordinances, and I'm thinking specifically of the R- 7, !, r: 0-1 S DOCQ -11- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD t ordinance. a allowed bookstores but they,re only for the'use of the general public.' The ordinance reads that way. If you Were to amend any ordinance you would have to say also'theatree for use by general public,. The problem is simply as Mr. Anderson raised that somewhere in the zoning ordinance you would have to permit them perhaps as a conditional use in certain districts until such time as the federal laws are straightened out. Mr. Schwartz! I think in Little River, l believe almost all the adult bookstores and movie theatres are in facilities that they do rent. If Little River takes off as an office center, the land will be too valuable; people will be trying to assefnble larger parcels for office buildings, hopefully, and t think that use will be driven out of the area. Mrs. Commerce can in to demand Rockafellar: Well maybe the Little River Chamber of get a little active in that area; bring more business the buildings. Mr. Schwartz: On page 32 we have OPEN SPACE recommendations. Open Space and pedestrian movement necessarily demand special emphasis in commercial centers as small and concentrated as Little River. The proposed open space system for Little River consists of an amenity spine of open space in the form of a promenade along N. E. 1st Place. ( A.)Development of a system of landscaped walkways and parks between N. W. 82nd S:reet and the Little River Canal. The first recommendation is the development of the 10 to 15 foot walkway along the Little River canal between N. E. lst Avenue and N. E. 2nd Avenue. Presently, there is a 10 foot maintenance easement along the canal, and hopefully, we'll be able to build • this in that easement. The development of a linear park adjacent to the Little River Post Office extending between N. L. 83rd Street and N. E. 84th Street. This would entail the closing of N. E. lst Place, trading that property with First Federal which owns the property that we would hope to develop as a linear park. Create the development of a neighborhood park at N. E. 1st Place between Little River canal and N. E. 84th Street. The development of approximately one acre park over here would serve both the main areas of residential population and office development along N. E. 2nd Avenue. Hopefully, this type of park would be paths for recreational activities; it would be an urban scale with benches and heavily landscaped; these facilities for the residents. Development of A landscaped walkway along N. E. lst Place from N. E. 82nd Street to N. E. 83rd Street. This would involve the acquisition of additional right-of-way; the street is presently 20 feet wide, it's currently 30 feet; it is zoned for 50 foot right-of-way. Just the landscaped walkway connecting 82nd Street which we hopefully would have a lot of office development along with the Little River Canal so that it is a continuous walkway. There would also be a walkway developed hopefully by the bankto their property connecting to the arcade and to 2nd Avenue. itc, O .T " DOC fOL\--°\;1/4:7 -►12- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD 1 The development of vest pocket parks at 82nd Street presently on a portion of the municipally owned parking lot at that site. Might on the corner of 82nd Street and N. L. st dace: this is adjacent to a new office building; it's just been completed which will house Social Security. The redevelop>Y.ent arid expansion of the existing vest pocket park located adjacent to the Little Liver branch of the Metropolitan Dade County Public Library. On page 3S there is a concept plan for this site. The City presently owns a 21 acre parcel. On that parcel is the Auto Test Station, a library, small vest pocket park and a municipal parking facility. Recommendations include the conversion of the library into a community center. The library will be phased out by the 1980's for a new regional library west of 7th Avenue. The owner- ship of that property will revert back to the City. The Auto Test Station is leased to Dale County; hopefully, we'd like to see that developed as a new fire station for Engine Company #9 which is presently on 76th Street. We'd like to expand the mini- park in that area and provide additional landscaping in the public parking area. The retention of the small park located at N. Miami Court and N. E. 78th Street (Reed Hospital). This site is open to the public now. It was part of Reed Memorial Hospital. The County has recently purchased that site for use as an Alcoholic Rehabilitation Center program and would like to retain that for public use. The development of a small park on N. E. 80th Terrace. This is on property that is presently owned by the City but leased to First State Bank for their parking. It will be developed as a municipal parking lot once the new bank building is finished, we'd like to see just a small vest pocket park - a few benches - something to beautify the area; provide some amenities for the residents and the workers. III BEAUTIFICATION The introduction of street trees, the development of distinctive entry ways and general upgrading of facilities will assist to alleviate the overall poor visual appearance of the commercial center, as follows: Street trees should be, planted along N. E. 2nd Avenue, N. E. 79th Street and N. E. 82nd Street. The three major arterials that divide Little River are County maintained; any landscaping would have to be funded through Dade County. Funds are available through the Decade of Progress for landscaping of arterials within the County. "SU pFOfTi ,/ FOLL0'v',� -13- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAB II!!II!LIIIuII!!11 II!IIIIIIIII IIIII!I atraet trees should be planted d.ong iocal streetse Aa the local street system is upgraded, which is one of the recoMMendations that follows, landscaping will be put in, bistinetive markers should be placed at strategic entry points to identify the location of the Center. 1 think most people travelling oh e2nd Street, 79th Street, pass through Little River and do not realize that they are there. Some distinctive type of marker should be there showing 'Entering Little River', listing the types of businesses that are there; the types of services that can be found would help. A central directory should be constructed depicting the location of businesses within the district. Local merchants and property owners should be encouraged to upgrade their property, This is something that we hope the Commerce Association would sponsor. Existing sign controls should be enforced. This is a problem, especially with the adult bookstores. More stringent enforcement of the existing regulations need be exerted. IV. COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES Little River Library should be converted into a community -civic center. I think possibly at this site a local city hall program should be instituted which would include representatives of various municipal departments working out of this site periodically to offer assistance to residents of the northeast area that they might have incurred concerning public service and facilities. People living in the northeast area, living so far from Dinner Key many times have trouble getting down to Dinner Key and going through the red tape that one often encounters when dealing with the City. Also we recommend that this site be looked at possibly as a develop- ment of a police satellite station. Chief Garmire has spoken of possibly locating satellite stations throughout the community and this would be an excellent site for a station for some of the policemen who do work out of the northeast area. A new Fire Station should be constructed for Engine Company #9. I mentioned this before - on the existing Auto Test Station site. The sanitary sewer systems should be rebuilt to handle proposed residential and commercial densities. In the report it's brought out that the existingsanitary systems are operating at near capacity level and any additional growth in Little River, residential or commercial will overtax the system. "SUPPORTIVE DOCU?E FOLLOW" 4— October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD !!!III!I!II!!�uIJ!!!I�!J$J! tin..site parking should be consolidated into centralized locations throughout the district. 1. private parking condominiums should be organized. People would purchase a certain Aumber of parking spaces that they presently have at their site in this parking condominium. They would then be able to utilize that portion of their site for business expansion. 2. Municipally owned parking facilities should be consolidated at one location and a parking garage should be constructed. There are 4 municipally owned parking lots in Little River and are providing approximately 300 parking spaces. The construction of one parking garage at a centralized location, optimum location, would be between N. E. 82nd Street and N. E. 80th Terrace between N. E. 1st and N. E. 2nd Avenue - a block north of the new bank building. Consideration of this should also be given on a condominium basis - a joing private, public, undertaking. 3. A Special Assessment Park District should be established - This is similar to a recommendation that was reviewed on the "Little Havana" area; possibly this would work in Little River. We found that the major parking problem is caused by Southern Bell which employs 1000 people within the commercial center and provides parking for only approximately 300 of their employees. B. Restrict the amount of surface parking 1. Amend the zoning ordinance ARTICLE XXIII, Off -Street Parking and Loading, Section 2 to include: All commercial structures over 100,000 sq. ft. located within the R-C, C-1, and C-2 zoning districts shall provide at least 50% of their required parking within an enclosed structure. Generally office development or retail development in these districts are as a low scale - generally adjacent to residential areas; this would really be in keeping with the character of the area. It also would prevent the further expansion of the excessive amount of on -site parking that fragments Little River community on both sides of 2nd Avenue; behind the businesses there's a line of parking lots which sort of breaks the residential and business area. Generally, it's unsightly. 2. Acquire additional public off-street parking lots if the construction of a parking garage is unfeasible. Two sites are proposed: 1 west of the Post Office site, the second -1.5«• October 2, 1.974 Item 3 PAD one, adjacent to the presently owned city property fnttnidipat parking lot on 82nd Terrace adjacent to the new Social Security office. ail. TRAPP CAND TRANSPORTATION A. The intersection of N. E. 79th Street and N. E. 2nd Avenue should be improved. A study was conducted by Dade County DO'Tt a recommendation includes changing of the signalization. I believe this is going. to occur very soon. B. N. E. 4th Court should be extended and widened. This has to do with the proposed modifications on Biscayne Boulevard that have been made by the State`of Florida, DOT. C. Local streets that curbs, gutters and should be upgraded are presently lacking require resurfacing and rebuilt. This is especially true in the area to the west of N. E. 2nd Avenue and in the industrial area, south of 80th Terrace. VII. PUBLIC/PRIVATE COORDINATION We discussed this last time at the workshop; a public/private task force should be formed. The aim of this task force should be to work for the implementation of the proposals set forth in this plan. I would like to end this brief presentation with the statement that the development of Little River as a viable office center will require joint efforts by both the governmental agencies and the business community. Unless strong interest commitment and financial backing is forthcoming from the private sector, proposed framework for redevelopment will be unable to create a receptive environment. We have seen in the last year since we started this study - really a lot of changes in Little River, and the business community is very active, and I think any support the City can give to this area will be crucial. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. Mr. Koppen: Nobody ever said I was shy, so I'll give you my name. My name is Robert Koppen. I am the president of the Little River Commerce Association. I'm a practicing attorney in the City having had my offices in the Little River area for about twenty-two years. The plan that has been presented here tonight, insofar as I am personally concerned has just tremendous merit and I congratulate the City's Department for the very complete study that they have made here. I think it's tremendous that they have taken the time and shown the patience to meet with us on many, many occasions to really get down and understand what we think is wrong. The mere fact that we think something is wrong doesn't mean that they agreed with us in each and every instance. They were patient to listen, and I do thin% that they heard us and I see that at ].east in some of the proposals that they have reacted -16- October 2, 1974 Item 3 FAB favorably to our conoerris, They have had much imagnati5t, i think here; l think the proposals that they have Corte up with probably are within our grasp* I don't think that this is something beyond our reach. The people like myself who own property in the area are willing to cooperate by spending our dollars and to collie in there and do that which is necessary to upgrade. We are in the process of ekperiencing change now. We do know that our area is ideal for office development. We have completed our buildings. We do have other plans for building office space. That is not to completely divorce the area from all other uses that it may reasonably have. Whether or not in each category they've hit it on the button, I do not propose to be that critical here tonight. One area that may be at least discussed, possibly more completely than it has to this point, would be the residential area in the northeast quarter up there. That is residential now, and there is no question that it alould not be commercial. Insofar as the remaining designated proposed zoning section, speaking only for myself, I think it makes just tremendous sense. I can't see any flaw in what they have proposed. Insofar as the R-1 classification, I think that even a portion of that id proper although I do, personally, have some doubts whether they should eliminate the easternmost section there from possibly a different type of resdential; maybe the high-rise type. We have Mr. Clark here with us tonight who owns probably the largest single parcel. He, no doubt, will be able to voice his opinion about that section. It would be my feeling that if there is any portion of this proposed study that might require some slight modification, it would only be in that easternmost fringe area to maybe give it a higher type development use. Mr. Clark is not one of my clients; I'm not speaking for him; he'll be able to speak for himself, but I think that quite possibly his land might require some other zoning classification than single family residences. We do not believe we're going to invite new single family residences into the area. We have, as Mr. Schwartz has said, a nice residential community there, but it, for the most part, is that kind of a commercial use of the property in the sense that it is being rented out. The owners do not necessarily live on their property, and there's an awful lot of doubling up of families, I think in that area, to be completely candid about it. They are single family homes and we don't propose that you go in there with a bulldozer and sweep it all clean and come up with a high-rise; I don't think that's being practical either. So I think, as I said earlier, that Mr. Schwartz improbably come up with a sensible recommendation with the R-1 zoning. I wouldn't want to see the whole thing, myself, be R-2 or anything of that category because I don't think this area should be developed with the emphasis on high-rise apartments. Quite the contrary. I think our ideal location is such that we are office -oriented. I think that,we are going to have one heck -of -a fine office community. It takes time, and one of the difficult things that we've experienced is that if we race to acquire parcels to put up a good size building, the single lot that goes on the market, 50 x 100'or whatever it has been, constantly crop up with four and six unit apartments and that brings in families into the area, and families bring the congestion of dense traffic and cars parked all on this one little 50 n 150' lot, and really, it doesn't do us any good as far as really trying / -17- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD a a a to put a meaningful office c,mmuhity together.- It simply raises the coat of that land when w? try to accumulate it in a parcel for that day hence when we really could develop it in a meaningful way You can't deny a man the use of his property, we're appreciative of it, and we realise that the city can't come ih and say 'now don't develop it with a for and six unit apartment because some guy down the street, some day, may want to put up a big office building.' That's being a little less than practical too. So, these are the problems that the City faces. These are the problems that the developer faces, and somewhere itt between we've just got to try to use common sense to come up with it, Speaking individually, I have accumulated all of that land in a precise area on 2nd Avenue and 82nd Street, and have eliminated oh, I guess, four, five, six or more houses and we built a two- story building. We did bring in Social Security and I'm proud that the government has seen fit to come back into Little River and I, for one, feel that it's a step in the right direction. The Walker family and the Garner family have a long time ago voiced their confidence in the area with First Federal building being, of course, the prime building in the area; the First State Bank coming in now with a tremendous development that it has on 2nd Avenue and 79th Street. So, we've got a lot going for us, and we've got another fellow by the name of Mr. Joseph Alter who has acquired a very meaningful tract on 79th Street and 2nd Avenue; all of this area that Mr. Schwartz has pointed out there, is now under the control of one man who has great faith in Little River and I'm completely satisfied that when that time is appropriate, you're going to see something very meaningful go up there. He is not here tonight. He called upon me to express his keen interest in all that is done. He had a chance to study all that is being proposed. I'm not authorized to say that he is completely in favor of all that has been said, but I have been with the m<<n enough to know that what he is for is growth prospects an;1 I think that the Planning Department has shown us the way now. I think its proposals are sound and I think they're proper and I like the idea of extending the hand for communication and cooperation between the City and private interests. I don't think the City can do the job for us. I think that if there is anything you can do here tonight that is going to help Little River standing by yourself, the only people that can help Little River are the property owners and the people who live in Little River, that we can't do it by ourselves and we need your help, and I can tell you for one, I'm very pleased with the cooperation thus fat shown. The * * * has shown a very keen interest in this program, and there's just a whole lot of encouragement that I see. Everyone else can speak for them- selves but I, for one, think that we're going at it in the right way, and I think that we must, of necessity form a partnership so that we can get on with these practical solutions to what are very well known to be, problems in our area. Bookstores? Yes, we've got them. We've got the other problems too. We can't change that which is, but we can in a practical way eliminate them by upgrading and I'm confident that that time will come when we establish ourselves in a particular manner that those places will crawl under the rocks and that will be the end of the dirty bookstores. So they're a thorn in our sides, but they're not going to impede the progress of Little River. Little River is here to stay, and we've clot a traffic .1.8. October 2, 1974 lt.er 3 FAD 4 1."."* § LLI CD situation there at 82nd Stre''t, 75th, Street and Miami kVeniile and the alternate proposals of rapid transit, we've got a lot going for US in Little River. We've got a lot going for us eVen in spite of the probie a that they speak of. I say that we're unique in location, and I say that we have absolutely something there to Offer within the City that you don't have any place else in the City to offer. We're offering good rates as far as our rental pr'ograni is concerned, and l think you'll find in your booklet there, a report that we don't have any vacant office space. When office space becomes vacant in Little River, it gets snapped up and it's rented. Now that testifies to something. That tens me that we've got something going for us out there in Little River, and I'm satisfied to the point that I, together with a lot of other people in this room, have made sizeable investments with the sincere belief that it's commercially sound and economically sound to put money into Little River, and it's been a long time since anybody stood up before you and said that; because it's been a long time since I've seen the enthusiasm that I sense in Little River that is present today. It's there. We need your help, and I for one can say that I feel we're getting it. So I thank you. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. Next? Anyone else wishing to testify in favor of the item? Ms. Dunn: My name is Lorraine Dunn. I own Lorraine Designs at 130 N. E. 82nd. I have not had an opportunity to study the booklet. I haven't seen one until I came here tonight and I am with Mr. Koppen in most aspects. I think it's a marvelously planned project and proposal and I think it's been well thought out; well presented. I am concerned with one area, and that's the dark brown area which is marked R-C. I think this is a correct designation from N. R. 82nd Terrace north. I differ very, very strongly that it should include 82nd Street itself. I cannot see, excuse the expression, I cannot see any sense in mixing residential and office in an area that is already, definitely., commercial; and developing only in a commercial direction; and I have sunk everything I own in that assumption that it is going to remain commercial. If you start dumping ready-made tenements like the two little multi -unit apartments that went on 50 foot lots into that area, you're going to ruin every one of us: and to that particular designation on 82nd Street proper, I strongly object. otherwise, I think it's a . marvelous plan. It has absolutely my backing and cooperation. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you very much. Next? Ms. North: My name is Barbara North and I'm likewise a practicing attorney in the Little River area at 8202 N. E. 2nd Avenue. I would like to add my voice to the study that has been explained to us tonight. I think that it's a marvelous plan and I would like to address myself spe.cifically to the park portion of this study. I would encourage your consideration of that as well as I would like to ask Mr. Schwartz whether you have available the architectural sketches or the things that you have indicated were available for face-lifting in the Little River area? This is an item that the Commerce Association, I'm satisfied, is willing to undertake and cooperate with the City on. There is a need for this effort on our part in cooperation with the City. There are existing buildings that certainly in the immediate future will not --19- October 2, :974 Item 3 PAD be destroyed or deMo1ished lout there can be mueh done for the area if these places are renovated, face lifted and in Gore general manner if we could stake available to the property oWnera some plan that they could use that they don't have to 1315 out and fire architects and do things that 1 understand these sketches are available. Is that right? Me. Schwartz: Ms. North, I'm sorry they're not available. We will be glad to dive any assistance now, to any property owner. Ms. North* When we had the last meeting, I'm sorry now, correct me if I misunderstood the discussion that we had. I thought that there were drawings or ideas or whatever it was that the City has available to assist the area and property owners in putting a new face; we're talking now about faces of existing buildings, and I thought you mentioned that you had drawings that we'd like desperately to acquire those if we could and start our own committee working in the Little River area through the Commerce Association to accomplish that. Mr. Schwartz: We do have drawings for one block on 2nd Avenue from 79th to 80th, and we'd be glad to work with you on possibly other sites: work on concepts of what ideas that we have, that we'd like to see, with you. Ms. North: Well we would like to cooperate with the City in any way that we can, and we do strongly recommend your approval of the plan. Thank you. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. In a plan of this magnitude sometimes you'll find that you do agree with the general study and you'll find some things that you disagree with. It's kind of hard to say who is for, and who is against. So if you disagree with a certain part of it just come up and speak. Sir? Mr. Holland: I'm George Russell Holland, 257 N. E. 79th Street. My interest in Little River goes back to 1940 when my father had a dental office on 79th Street. The plan, generally, without having had a chance to study it more than the time than was given here tonight appears to be very good and it is quite meritorious but I vehemently object to the planting of trees in existing streets, or that would take up any parking or driving space whatever. I don't think that they add to the traffic improvement on F'lagler Street; we do not have the walking traffic there; * * * and in my own case, I have to have the front clear both for parking of customers and for delivery of merchandise because 80th Street, which is behind my store, is blocked in on each side of me by garages that have been there since the 1920's, and trailers that make deliveries to me cannot turn; both of my deliveries have to come in the front door. Any trees planted in the streets would be an impossibility, and from what I've seen in other place, unless you change the whole street into something like Lincoln Road Mall, I think it's a bad thing all the way because 79th Street just carries too much traffic and so does N. E. 2nd Avenue. Mr. Dannenberg; Anyone else wishing to make a statement? Mr. Smith: I'm Gordon Smith. I own.Little River Jewelry at 8001 N. E. 2nd Avenue, and I have been very pleased to work with Mr. Acton and Mr. Schwartz and others in his department in -20T October 2, 1974 /tem 3 PAB working out this plan which I'd like io dompliment the hard work and strenuous work they've put in to levelop it. I think it's a very fine plan because we started out with a bodge podge of this, that, and the other thing and any tine anybody wanted to do anything they had to run down to the City and get a variance to do it. One of the things we're trying to do is clear up some of these problems. There is only one thing I would like to ask you as a committee here, the Hoard, to take a strenuous look at, and that is that C-4 area depicted in gray on the first color map there, and in red with C4 on the other one. Now true, we have some little service organizations in that area and we have probably a couple of warehouses; they're small and insignificant in size and nature; but with a broad scope of looking at this here as a development which is going to develop in the future, and looking at the adjacent area which would be south of 79th Street, which is a pretty much a commercial warehouse, wholesale warehouse type of section that possibly that should be studied and modified, in my opinion, to help reduce that and open that space up so that a concise and complete development can take straight through to the railroad tracks to Miami Avenue; and I would recommend very highly that you give it serious consideration. I thank you. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. Mr. Acton: Mr. Chairman, could I ask Mr. Smith to be more explicit in what he is recommending? Mr. Smith, could I ask you to be more explicit in the type of action you think should be taken in that area. For instance, C-4 to what? Mr. Smith: Well I would say to the same type of development that you've run down between 79th Street and 82nd Street; the red area that you show over here; what do you have there, Mr. Schwartz? Mr. Schwartz: It's an office and retail activity. Mr. Smith: That's right. That would be looking at it from a long range viewpoint that as this develops and if the things that we see projected in the future, then this would be better to run that totally through. Once this other development takes place south of 79th Street which is a more compatible area for it. Do you understand me? Mr. Acton: Yes. Ms. Dunn: This same treatment is what I would suggest very, very strongly to be given to 82nd Street proper. It is what belongs there. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. Anyone else? Mr. Clark: I think Mr. Koppen has said about everything I could say with the exception of this piece of property right in here. This is the property that I own, the Little River Nursery; and I feel that Mr. Schwartz's program here is wonderful - but he left me out, and I think I've been left out of this whole section right in here. Everything around me in this area is apartment house or either commercial; along the east side I have a railroad track and I said that we need some kind of a buffer zone -21- October 2, 1974 Item 3 In@sePIPMPI IPRIF east of the railroad track, why, t think he's got cotnrnerdial and I'd like to get this upgraded somewhere to where we could use it, Most of these houses all in here, in this section in here, all these houses, they're rated k-I, they're zoned 11,4, but what they do they Come in and buy that house and split it up and they're actually two, three, four, five familieet and all you have to do is go through there; they've already pttt in street lights in here and downgraded the whole section in here instead of upgrading it. I'd like to see them upgrade this a little bit as this is nothing but a cancer in this whole s?ction over in here, and if they don't change it and upgrade this Oise area in here, it's going to kill everything they're going to do in this other section. I think I've said my say. Mr. Dannenberg: Anyone else wishing to testify? Being none, we'll now close the public hearing and we'll go into questions from members of the Board. Mrs. Rockafellar: Mr. Chairman, I have a question for Mr. Schwartz. Mrs. Dunn brought up the question here on R-C which is residential and commercial, and if I understood her right she said that there's two lots in there that are 50 foot lots that you're putting in the residential along with that commercial in this big R-C section over here. Is that right? Mrs. Dunn? I understood you to say there's only two 50 foot lots in there that's residential in the R-C zone? Mrs. Dunn: Well, within the past year, and actually one of them is not yet completed, it's under construction now, and across the street from it one was recently completed and is now fully occupied. There are two, three-story apartment houses that went up on 50 foot lots; one on each side of 82nd Street; one on the north side and one on the south side in the same block in which I have my Shoppe, and I appreciate the fact that we're a free country and everybody has the right to use their property to their best ability, but this is what we have zoning for and I cannot understand where in an r.rea that is as commercially developed already as 82nd is, and with every straw in the wind, indicating further commercial structure, I mean use and development, I cannot understand how these buildings got in there. I really can't. Especially, I'm grandfathered at the moment in my building. I'm waiting for an opportunity to purchase land for off-street parking so that I can extend my building which I cannot do until I can acquire off-street parking; but I,see in your proposal here that you say that new buildings are supposed to provide for off- street parking without using the side strip for driveway or parking; by using the rear for parking; they've got these buildings that are doing both of these things. There's one little narrow strip of flowers and plants and a couple of Australian umbrella trees or (Botanical name) if you want to get technical, between them and the sidewalk and the rest is parking; and it's paved parking; and to me it's a ready-made tenement. It is not an adlition to the proper development of the land use of 82nd Street. It: would be beautiful .on-80th Terrace or something like this, but both sides of 82nd Street and 80th Terrace, I said 80th Terrace a minute ago and I meant 82nd Terrace, 80t1 Terrace is south of 82nd Street and that's mostly telephone Company and a couple of apartment buildings, an attorney's office and the new State Bank building and that's just about all there is in that area, and that's about all it will accommodate. -22- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAB I111g9PORMRIIAR&I�R J) :::: j On 82nd Street:, we have insurance offices, read. estate Offices, Shopper, beauty salons, Anothet attotr►ey s offide, Mr, itoppen's new building that has the Social Security office, his office, his astO iate, Mr. Watkins' office. I fail to see encouraging a shall, inti1:ti'story eight and twelve unit apartment building on SO foot lots; it shouldn't even be considered to be passed in this area. Mrs. Rockafellar: Thank you Mrs. Dunn. Mr. Chairman, do I still have the floor? Mr. Dannenberg: Yes. Mrs. Rockafellars It seems like the merchants, the people who have spoken here tonight are in general in agreement with this plan with the exception of a few things they've pointed out. I wonder if it wouldn't be wise of us, before we consider this any further, to send this back to the Department for reconsideration of maybe these three or four items that they mentioned and then being brought back to us. Mr. on a few of think maybe Schwartz: Mrs. Rockafell.ar, if I perhaps can elaborate those points; what the basis of our thinking was, I it would clear up some of those points. Mr. Clark, who spoke about his site, which is approximately three acres, is presently used as a commercial nursery. It's quite a beautiful site. The reason the zoning for this site was not recommended to be changed is because of accessibility to that site, and the existing public services and the facilities being; the sewer system is developed for a low density, single-family residential area and unfortunately, has not been upgraded unless it would upgraded if we knew exactly when it would be,possibly we could make this recommendation. But I think the, biggest problem is that it's the accessibility to that site. To get into Mr. Clark's property you have to go down off 82nd onto a very narrow street then to 82nd Terrace and up. The properties fronting this are all prime single family residences, and from just our visual survey they are excellently kept and it seems -:o be prime property. That's one of the major reasons for this area. Property like Mr. Clark's could be developed on the planned area development which would allow about somewhere from 24 to 30 units to be put into that site; possibly a townhouse development, which on a 3 acre site would be rather low density from the standpoint of return on investment, but I believe it would be a most appropriate use now for that land. The otherquestion about the allowing of residential units on 82nd Street; we're trying to change that with the R-C. Presently in the C-i district, it's C-1 zoned, that area of 82nd Street is zoned C-1. C-1 zoning allows for a six unit building to be put up on a 50 x 130' to 150' lot; the same problem the Board reviewed in Little Havana survey. We are attempting to follow the recommendations that were made for the Little Havana study, changing this to R-C, and upping the minimum floor area requirements for units, discouraging this type of small scale residential development in the R--C district; this overcrowding of lands the construction of six unit buildings with limited amenities. Mrs. Rocka€e tar; But isn't there a difference in this -23- October 2, 1974 Item 3 FAB I! I MITI I I I I I II I I I I! I!I IIIIII II11111111I IIm i IIIIII!!I II P I I I IIII III I I II IIPI 111 I III1ll area and tittle 1#aVana? As I remember, tittle Havatia is almost overpopulated and they almost had to get that many units do SO foot lot in order to take care of the population that lives in Little Havana, and 1 don't believe they have that problem in Little River. 1 think the development there is going more toward comMercial= like offiee space and retail that they have been talking about here tonight. M. Schwartz: Unfortunately in this C-t dittriet since the toning was changed in 1961 from A-4 to C=1; Ry-4 is similar to what we have in Little Havana today to C-1; there's been no commercial expansion to speak of;seventeen of these 6 and 8 unit apartment buildings have been constructed, and all the signs of the tittle Havana district are evident here. There are three, four, five, six in a block; cars are flowing over into the street, it's the same problem. Mrs. Rockafellar: Thank you. Mr. Dannenberg: Any further questions from Members of the Board? Mrs. Alexander? Mrs. Alexander: Yes, Mr. Dannenberg. I was looking at the R-C district and have seen what the uses were and evidently apartment buildings and apartment houses not exceeding a density of one dwelling unit for each 600 sq. ft., but you're proposing to change that to 1500 sq. ft., is that correct? Mr. Schwartz: Right. Mrs. Alexander: In other words, you're proposing to change to whole city-wide ordinance? Mr. Schwartz: Right. Mrs. Alexander: O.K., and also it allows great height areas in terms of height of building but cutting down on lot coverage and that is supposed to remain the same; in other words a 20 foo.t high building can cover 30% of the lot area and a 120 foot building can only cover 16%? Mr. Schwartz: Right, Mrs. Alexander. Mrs. Alexander: All right, then my question is if you don't build up some of this residential within this area, you've got a lot of businesses, but you also have 44 retail firms and 61 service oriented businesses, and you're looking for some kind of strip retail so that people will walk in, walk by, and shop. I presume this is the thing you're angling for. You have to have residents to go to those Shoppes, because you're not going to draw them from way out, or are you? Mr. Schwartz: The type of businesses that have been able to survive in Little River are the type of businesses thatit services all of North Dade county; the small dress Shoppe, the local shoe store have gone out of Little River; they really have no place now in Little River. Those types of facilities are provided by the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. What you find - the businesses that were able to remain in Little River and which probably have the most opportunity of possibly expanding are places like stationery stores, wholesale glass firms; firms that have aervi.ce areas all of North Dade county, and the excellent location -24- October 2, 1974 Item S PAB of tittle ?'over and the major crossroads of Miati Avenue, /4. t. 2nd Avernus, 79th Street, 82nd street help those businesses. In the business profile when we did a questionnaire to the businesses very few of the businesses were dependent upon the local tittle River walk -,in trade. Any expansion in retail or service actiVity would probably be associated with the office Ube; possibly additional restaurants, some type of stores that More or less would be geared to the additional office development; lunch-time business. Mrs. Ale.:�andet: Well then, may 1 follow•this up; your anticipation as far as this R-C is not for more residential, but for more commercial that would close out i- - Mr. Schwartz: R-C would allow compatible residential and office development and that's what we're looking for in those areas. Mrs. Alexander: When you say compatible, what do you mean? Mr. Schwartz: Well the location of, say, a real estate office or a doctor's office next to a single family residence or a two-family residence or a 16 unit apartment building is what we would consider compatible; but the opening of a food store on one of these local streets, which is permissable now, under existing zoning would be inappropriate. Mrs. Alexander: May I ask another question, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Dannenberg: Yes you may. Mrs. Alexander: Then in terms of this R-1 development that's the F.E.C. right-of-way is it not? Mr. Schwartz: Just a small portion of this. This is the F.E.C. a day. Mrs. Alexander: How much usage does it get at this point? Mr. Schwartz: Very little. I believe two or three trains Mrs. Alexander: The fruit trains? Does anybody here -? Mr. Schwartz: I think Mr. Smith possibly. Mr. Smith: Just possibly one train in the morning and about two in the evening and that's all. Mrs. Alexander: The fruit express. I was interested in your idea about planned area development, planned unit development and Lord knows we need more of that. Could there be any possibility of any other development? Mr. Schwartz: In that site? In the R-] district there's one other site that's over an acre which would e ample for a planned area development, inir development which is right over here. There are a few scatter,1 sites. Some of the homes are on two or three lots; additional density could be gotten under existing zoning or coming in under the flexible items that we do have in the zoning ordinance. -2 5- October 2 , 1974 Item PAD AR!#IAIR A!!9IRltIFI!IR!!a!! I! Mrs. Alexander: than:: you. M. 5annenberg 'hank you. Any further questions from members of the ward? Mrs. Lichtenstein: Mr. chairman, Mr. Schwartz, have you approached the First federal Bank in regard to the park that you proposed and to close the street there to take some of their parking, their current parking? Mr. Schwartz: We've spoken to Mr. Loudermilk who is Vice President of the bank tnd he is here. He has stated that First Federal was interested in the past in closing that street to give them a contiguous parking lot; they own quite a bit of property in that area. When we spoke to Mr. Loudermilk about this, unfortunately the bank was just in the process of beginning to re -landscape the parking lot they have on the west side of N. E. 1st Place by the Post Office, and the bank presently went to considerable expense landscaping that property. I don't know how the bank feels now, but I feel it's still feasible to do this. Maybe Mr. Loudermilk would like to comment. Unfortunately we weren't far enough along with this study at that time to present any concrete proposal. Mr. Loudermilk: My name isn't Walker, so I'm not the President, but I am a Vice President. I'm Gene Loudermilk and the manager of the Little River office for 25 years this month. Unfortunately, the First Federal for many years was desirous of closing that street but within the past year beginning last fall we spent a very large sum of money buying an apartment building of about 20 units, and tearing that building down and remodeling that entire lot that has cost an awful lot of money; additional drainage facilities, repaving, curbing and landscaping and all the things that you folks know the City requires and we want to put in. We also are in the process of leasing additional parking to the Post Office facility which is immediately west of us. I can only say that this proposal is always one we wanted but it is a most inopportune time right now to have it come up; but the First Federal has always tried and worked in any way possible for the betterment of the Little River area and we would try our best to work up some plan to help this situation. That's about all I can say right now. Thank you. Mr. Dannenberg: There were some other people that wanted to ask some questions. Ma'am, will you come up to the microphone please? Mrs. Dunn: It really wasn't my intention to wear you all out tonight, but as these things come up I have thoughts; and as I said to begin with, I'm not bashful. He pretty well reinforced my argument a moment ago in the discussion of the resources of the area; the location of the area, and from where we draw our traffic and the vitality that this area has so strongly. I have been here since 1948 and I have seen Little River wax and wane a couple of times in that period and I think this is the thing that made me decide to put my business in there. We really have become a megalopolis from Palm Beach down to Homestead and we are right squarely in the center of that; and -26October 2, 1.974 Item 3 PAD I know for myself, I'm 25 to 30 minutes from Fort Lauderdale, and 1 AM 25 to 30 minutes from the Gables or South Miami and it's not mote than that to Iadeland by using that expressway provided it's not at the rush hour, and this gives me, plus the fact that /9th Street brings me to the beach in minates to I have all this territory to draw from. To me, this is why I Iodated here, and to me 82hd Street being your main artery to 1-95 from the beaci from the entire northeast section, to me, residential use just doesn't make sense. It just does not. And I think this discussion of this subject pretty well reinforces my statement. Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. Any further questions from members of the Board? Any statements? Mrs. Rockafellar, you made a statement a while ago about sending this back to the Department? Mrs. Rockafellar: Yes I did and Mr. Schwartz said he could clarify them; although it doesn't seem like they're clarified yet so I'd like to have a vote on the Board on it. Whether to send it back to the Department for clarification or whether we should go ahead and vote. I think we should ask Mr. Acton about this or members of the Board. please? Mrs. Alexander: May I ask Mr. Schwartz one more question Mr. Dannenberg: Yes. Mrs. Alexander: There seems to be a slight difference of opinion about this R-1 area as to its use; it's doubling up and tripling up and this in fact, a matter of fact. Mr. Schwartz: From our land use survey we didn't see evidence of it. Unfortunately we don't interview each of the home owners due to the time and expense involved in a study like this. I believe it's probably so to a certain extent. I don't know. I don't believe it's to the degree that Mr. Clark said, but Mr. Clark owns the prope:ty there and he's more familiar with it. I think possibly what Mr. Clark is thinking of is the new duplexes that were built directly south of his property which is R-2; which is a higher density. Presently it's illegal to convert in the R-1 district. Unfortunately there probably are some. send some Mrs. Alexander: Thank you. Mr. Dannenberg: Mr. Acton, would it be easier for you to this back to the Department and have them amend or change of this and then bring it back to the Board? Mr. Acton: Mr. Chairman, we have to have more explicit directions from the Board - exactly what you have in mind. There have been a number of comments made this evening pertaining to recommendations made by the Department, but we need more explicit directions from the Board in the consideration of any particular recommendation that we've made in the study. Mrs. Alexander: Mr. Chairman, may I suggest, we're asked at this point to approve this pan in principle, to accept it; any further dealings will have to be on a piece by piece basis with ordinances to amend the various ordinances that are already on the books. I was very impressed with the fact that almost without exception every person who spoke tonight, almost without -27- October 2, 1974 Item 3' PAS exception, were Very much in favor of the general overall land use plan. 1 think that we would have nothing to gain to send this back to the Department at this point. 1 think that we could aeCept the plan in principle, and then when the ordinances do Come up, as they will piece by piece, then we also are subject to public hearings and at time we will have explored, the Department will have explored, the people in'the area will have explored and can make their more definite recommendations at that time. Overall, everybody seems to find it a good plan. I'm very impressed with the Department. I'm very impressed with Mr. Schwartz. I think this has been a wonderful example of townhall meeting kind of thing, and I would like to move that we accept this plan in principle, Mr. Dannenberg: Move that the Planning Advisory Board tentatively approve in principle the study entitled LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER, Planning and Zoning study dated September 1974, for purposes of further discussion for possible amendment. O.K.? Mrs. Alexander 7 Mrs. Rockafellar: I second that. Mrs. Dunn: Is it possible for the Board at this point to recommend whatever you're going to recommend that the C-2 be extended to 82nd Street and 80th Terrace? That's the only complaint I have. If that could by done by you at this point, I think it would solve the whole thing for a long time to come. Mrs. Alexander: Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't feel ready to do that at this point. I personally would like to do a little drive -through myself and 1 think that can all come up in due time at the time of the ordinances as we take it up. Mr. Dannenberg: I agree with you. It's a point well taken. Seconded by Mrs. Rockafellar. Is there any discussion on the motion? Being none, call the roll. Mxs. Alexander offered the following resolution and W moved its adoption: 7 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING '`1 ADVISORY BOARD TENTATIVELY APPROVE IN Cr ! { PRINCIPLE THE STUDY ENTITLED LITTLE RIVER CD .._.2 COMMERCIAL CENTER, PLANNING AND ZONING STUDY 0- .-...1 DATED SEPTEMBER 1974, FOR PURPOSES OF FURTHER (.� 0 DISCUSSION FOR POSSIBLE AMENDMENT. CP 0 Upon being seconded by Mrs. Rockafellar, this resolution was passed by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dannenberg Mmes. Alexander, Baro, Fernandez, Lichtenstein, Rockafellar NAYES: None ABSENT: Mr. Borja Mr. Acton; Resolution passes 6 0. - 'IVE MINUTE RECESS -280. October 1974 Item 3 FAB Mts. Aiexander: Pot purposes of clarification restate r' Mation if the Second will agree for Move to rescind it, and then Make new one, whichever you prefer. Mrs. Rockafellar: If it's all tight with the board I'll be glad to teedind my second, Mr. Dannenberg: O,t. The second has agreed to -rescind, Mrs, Alexander: Then I move that this board aceept in principle the City of Miami planning Department Study entitled "TIE LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CENTER" Planning and Zoning Study dated September 1974 with the recommendations to the Department that those areas of differences as reflected in the minutes will be brought to this Planning Board at the earliest possible next public hearing for further discussion. Mrs. Rockafellar: Mr. Dannenberg: by Mrs. Rockafellar. Is I second it. There's a motion on the floor seconded there any discussion on the motion? Mr. Anderson: What this will mean, your ultimate function in the adoption of the Master Plan is that you recommend them to the Commission. Now this is not the recommendation to the Commission. I just want to make sure that everyone understands that there will be additional public hearings before recommendation to the Commission if you pass this. Mrs. Alexander: That was the essence of the motion if I could speak to it; is that we are accepting the plan in principle because there are certain areas of disagreement that we would like the Department to consider and bring back further reports, and I would also in speaking to the motion, say that I personally would like to cruise through the area and get a better view of it. I think it would be a good idea if we all did. Mrs. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, on discussion of the motion, I'm quite confused. I understand that we all agreed - the persons who have given us their recommendations - we have all agreed on the different recommendations contained from page 28 to the end, except: I. Zoning, and I think the rest, Open Space, and so on, I haven't heard any discussion about that. I think everybody agreed with that and I believe what we're really doing is deferring this and that we should give a specific input to the Planning Department because we have heard the answer of the Planning Department about the opinion of the different members of the Task Force who worked with this study and if we don't give specific directions to the Planning Department, I don't believe they are going to come up with different recommendations than the ones we have right in front of us. They have answered to different questions posed by the Task Force Committee; they have their arguments; I believe that the real thing is that we are not ready to make a final decision to the zoning change right now; that we want more time to study this - Mrs. Alexander: Exactly. That's my motion. Mrs. Fernandez:- because the Department is not going to come in front of us with different recommendations than these; we have to study and go back to the minutes of this meeting and see what the arguments of the Planning Advisory Board's Planning Department are, and evaluate the different arguments posed by -29- October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAD '!i�R�I�AAI!lI�RA��14P�1�!�II the different persons who have spoken before us tonight, and they are specifically related to this southwest - southeast part of the Zoning C-4, southeast part of this recommended zoning; and also to the f-C portion of this northwest section and 82nd Street: and maybe something in connection with the R.al part in the north.. east section. I think that is about ail we have to clear up with the planning Department, and see if we are convinced by their reaction or if we think along the lines of the Task Forde Committee. Mrs. Rrockafellar: Mr. Chairman, - are you through Mrs. Fernandez? Mrs. Fernandez: :Yes. Mrs. Rockefeller: Mr. Chairman, was this not clarified when we brought this up before Mr. Acton and Mr. Anderson a while ago that if we pass this in concept, and then as these various things come up, it would come back to us as the different ordinances came up because some of these things are programmed for the future; not immediate use; and I think that the ordinance we passed before we broke for recess should stand because these things will come back to us as these ordinances are changed. Now, did I understand that right Mr. Anderson? Mr. Anderson: If I understand your question; let's assume that you recommend this portion of the Master Plan to the City Commission and they adopt the Plan; that should not change any zoning at all. The Department would then come before you and recommend the changes of zoning and at that time, of course, each individual property owner could state why his particular property should or should not be changed so your recommendation of a Master Plan to the City Commission and their eventual adoption of the Plan does not change any zoning at all. It approves the Master Plan and it does set the basic cour.;_e of things but each individual change of zoning comes before this Board for recommendation to the Commission and they will,study each individual portion at that time. Mrs. Rockefeller: Well Mr. Anderson, my next question to you then, was the motion that we passed and approved before we broke for recess, wouldn't that take care of this as it stands instead of remaking a motion? Mr. Anderson: I'm afraid that I interpreted that motion to mean that you were going to discuss it further tonight, and apparently that was not the - you see, normally when you take these plans and approve them in principle for the purposes of discussion, you go through them bit by bit as has been done in the past, and then at the end if there's any changes to it, you figure out what those changes are and you recommend the entire thing to the Commission with the changes. So that was my impression of what you were going to do. Now Mrs. Alexander told me that was not her intention and that's why we had this discussion afterwards to try and clarify this. Mrs. Alexander: If I may explain why 1 changed this, I am not personally prepared to vote on this as a total package tonight. There are three areas of disagreement; I think that these are well reflected in the minutes; they've been spelled out by Mrs. Fernandez; I think that I personally need a visual look. I don't know how anybody else feels, but I am personally not prepared to vote on recommending this and taking it up item by item tonight until. I see this, .�3p.. October 2, 1974 Item 3 'AR • F Mrs, Rockefeller: Mrs. Alexander I totally agree with yi u. 1 misunderstood the concept of the motion. 1 thought We passed the concept and then each thing would cbrne before us individually, but 1 thoroughly agree with your second motion. Mrs, Alexander: You just read my mind Grade. Mts. taro: Well 1 was rescinded that first motion so Number 2) there's a new motion to proceed to vote. going to say that we have already really we're wasting time, number 1, which has been seconded so we have Mrs. Rockefeller: Pine. I'm ready. Mr. Dannenberg: We're in discussion right now. Is there any further discussion on that motion? Being none call the roll. Mrs. Alexander offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, PAB 45-74 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD TENTATIVELY APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE THE STUDY ENTITLED"LI`l'TLE RIVER COMMERCIAL CErTI'ER' PLANNING AND ZONING STUDY DATED SEPTEMBER, 1974 WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE DEPARTMLUr THAT THOSE AREAS OF DIFFERENCE, AS REFLECTED IN THE MINUTES WILL BE BROUGHT BEFORE THIS BOAR!) AT THE NEXT EARLIEST PUBLIC MEETING FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. Upon being seconded by Mrs. Rockefeller this resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Dannenberg Mmes. Alexander, Baro, Lichtenstein, Rockafellar NAYES: Mrs. Fernandez ABSENT: Mr. Borja Mr. Acton: Resolution passes 5 - 1 Mr. Dannenberg: Thank you. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" October 2, 1974 Item 3 PAB RE LITTLE RISER COMMERCIAL CE.N "SUPPORTIVE D' DEPARTMENT i9?S L-L .OW" CITY OP MIAMI PLANNING a. ,e ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The City of Miami wishes to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of Mr. Gordon Smith. Mr. Robert Koppen and the Little River Commerce Association in the preparation of this study. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTR ODU CTION INTR ODUCTION HISTORICAL EVOLUTION AREAWIDE RELATIONSHIPS EXISTING CONDITIONS SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTER LAND USE BUSINESS PROFILE ZONING PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES TRAFFIC, TRANSPOR TATION AND CIRCULATION PROPERTY VALUE STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS CONSTRUCTION TRENDS 1965-1974 OWNERSHIP PATTERNS POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" 1 2 3 4 11 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 FRAMEWORK FOR REDEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR REDEVELOPMENT . . ....... . . 25 LAND USE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 RECOMMENDATIONS ZONING .............. OPEN SPACE BEAUTIFICATION COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES PARKING TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ACTION PROGRAMS 28 32 36 3 44) 41 11 INTRODUCTION "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" iv INTRODUCTION The Little River Commercial Center, located in the north- east portion of Miami between North Miami Avenue. the FEC right-of-way, N. E. 78th Street and the Little River Canal, was once a thriving commercial center, serving the resi- dents of the Northeast portion of Dade County. During tile last 20 years a sharp decline in commercial activity naoc- curred. but recently there has been strong positive indica tions that a resurgence. of business activity is unden.w.y, business district survey conducted in March, 1974, re\ that office vacancies were almost non-a:xistent. and compares favorably io the ia,,erall .iccuparicy rat, Dade County. 72",;;, for Brichill Avenue and 797i, for Miami. On May 24, 1973, the Miami City Commission adopted Resolution P73-384 requesting the Planning Department in- stitute a zoning study of the "Little River Area. ' This ac- tion was prompted by a request made by representatives of the Little River Comm, -e Association, who have worked along with the Planning Jepartment in the preparation of tilt, study. The Commerce Association identified several matters re- quiring municipal assistance in the areas of planning and zoning. Among those items which the association identifiwiN. as needing attention were: tji-ftiRTIVE Dr(--ij r.:ip they felt inhibited the Center's growth potential. Re-evaluation of existing zoning controls which The provision for additional planned parking facilities. The provision of public park and recreational facilities to complement commercial endeavors. The provision of area -wide municipal improve- ments to better service and augment the expansion of office development. APIEA STUDY APE.. ti R T H. i • 1. • , Ilf"'"'!""VrAnr`1..• • nrEs it , E11,6, ANAGA I -IP , 1I , 1 , a...a. ow.W..11 t 1 . , M t A• . . ITTLE R VER LOCATION MAP MISM 11 The purpose of this study is to evaluate eNisting comiitions ..ithin the commercial center, ascertain problem areas and recoil-LT:end a course of action for future cleveloprner,t and 0'1 pfricni„ Maier eleMents of this study include a 1 husIness survey which has revealed the magnitude of th,: have tatcn place within the busIness ^ • 1,7 onci c.c.eilina analysis-, and a series of yon.n;:. anrl: 111 11 li 11 11 11 11 yr, ny,.,r‘t TirVIr! 'her- rtn. Lay Causev\ 1;e:on In reinierc- IN , nr enter for ',be northern p,-,rtIon u Lzd County. reatly benclited fronrN. centrn. location between Doe, ni.„-Yr North Dade, s:sliami Beach andiiteai which Z.1 ‘.",..- pilrienceci rapid growth, during. the period of economic eiNcran- on .•,•:1.1, 1920s. By the late 1940's over 200 retail establishments we r.:- i o - enc. area. creatiner a grea,er L:ciltnne of retail activity inan any other Miami suburb, Ficeinninc in the mid-1950's Little River began to decline as .dable commercial area. The rapid growth of Dade County, the accompanying sprawl of urban development, tile . .'cation oi st:-eral outlying shopping centers, changes in economic and social character of its service area contributed to a sharp decline in commercial activity in Little R i v e r . 1' ----.. --' SET Ti.EiviENT ifiLiERNS DADE "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW?' - - Dade Play,rn4 Dop:tr:tr.1.-nt 2 6 11 11 il 11 11 11 11 11 1 The decline in retail activity, as major retailers such as F. W. Woolworth, Jackson's Department Store and i\layor's Jewelers. vacated their Little River iocations, resulted in high commercial vacancy rates. and the ernercencZifl -c of ma r retail establishments, adult boo!: EtCres and .7'. rataH theaters. • 1(4'..101s and c-aro, !Gt. ' sC a - at'L‘In• • 14, inev. CIL • zrov•l!!!.!'1;til subcat,'Zr,ries tbe bness sectcr has "of en 2-eatest, s.nie 1 First ..b..eser_r‹.! • • Con-I:Tierce. i V(..01;11nenclatio:,e. zonini7 ellange,t transp,irtai:on prH.,c-sale of this s'_urtiy. nortirAest portiol, study s rezoned_ RELATIONrHIPS Located on the northern periphery of the City-, the Little River Commercial Center is approximately three miles from the major urban .cores of downtown Miani. Miami .Beach, Iiialean and North Miami, Location has playeS decisive part in the development of the Little Ever Con.1- inercial Center. Major north -south iNorth Avenue and NE 2nd Avnuel an east -west ,;NE: 79th Street S2nd Street l arterials bisect Little F.ivor providing direct, access to all portions of Dade County. Interstate 95 arid US 1 (Biscayne Boulevard) lie adjacent to the stud!„! area. The 79th Street Causeway, connecting Miami to Miami Beach lies to the east of the study area and provides the only connection to the Beach between 36th and 12.5th Streets. Le. ateri within a mile radius of the study area are found an array of distinct urban activity areas To the north and • are located the upper and rniddle income low density • aidentizil communities of El Portal and Miami Shores. • tinilted cort-,t.t.ecial dc.velopment has resulted in Per for 2ooch: ancl teo- r!-.t! !!!,c• 1-!,1!!“taytric lies "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS. FOLLOW" / 11 BIMINI CONDITIONS "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" SCE10-ECUKOMIC CHARACTER .A four square rnile service area bounded by N. W. 7th Avenue, Biscayne Boulevard, 62nd Street and 103rd Street has been delineated for planning purposes. The 33,000 people who reside here represent potential consumers and employment resources for the center. Included are the Lemon City. Little River, Edison Park and Northeast neighborhoods of the City and the suburban communities of El Portal and Miami Shores. Overall, this area has higher income and homeownership levels than is found with- in the Metropolitan area. The immediate trade area comprise Census Tract #.14 in which major changes in the socio-economic charasteristics of the population have ocurred and have had important ram- ifications upon the business community. Of most signifi- cance has been the declining relative income levels of the residents. Between 1960 and 1970 median income has in- creased at a lesser rate than that of the City (315 increase vs 415 for the City.) In 1970 over 26% of the population of Census Tract # 14 had in. omes below the poverty level.* This is also an area of transition with a high percentage of the population over 62 years of age (24%) and a rapidly in- creasing non -white population (267)• Fifteen hundred people currently reside in the study area, over 725 of the residents are living in rental units. It is foret.ast that the population has increased since 1970 due to thecontinuation of apartment construction. Between 160 and 19'0 there was a slight increase in population due to new apartment construction which has replaced single family with 4 and 6 unit structures. Since 1970 there has been a significant change in the com- position of the population with an increasing number of non- -whites moving into the western portion of the study area. It is anticipated that the population will continue to increase as long as it is economically feasible to replace wood frame structures by 4. 6, and 8 unit structures which are allow- able under the current C-I and R-4 zoning. The population is concentrated north of 81st Street, west of N. E. 1st Place and east of N. E. 2nd Court. Almost all recent growth has ocurred in the area west of N. E. 2nd Avenue.. The poverty level as defined by the U. S. Census in 1970 was an income of 53700 or less for a family of four and S1,800 for 2n unrelated individual. 1970 SOCIO - ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS Study Census Service City of Area Tract Area Nitarni Population 1.46., ,015 33,500 334,075 Population Chr,ige 1960-1,73 o7 -on • 14.8 7 Less than 13 vrs. old 12. 35%, 23 7 25.27, Over 62 yrs. old 347 24 207. 13'ii White 49.ra 78.4 7 337, 737 B acii 17. 21.67, Spanish Mother TOII2Ue NA 17'7. 1‘57, 43'7 Nurnber of dweiltritt ur.tts 720 3521 13,•599 124.910 Percent ownecupied 287 387, 477 35'7 Percent renter occupied 72 6-271, 537, 65'7 One Person „ionseholis 407, 357 22'7 157, Mean Income Farnilies & 1:nrelated individuals NA 5, 602 8 . 011 1911, /0-67, Persons Below Poverty Level NA - Not Available Soirce - U. S. Census, 1970 NA 207. "S U P PO RTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" ..............................................„..„ ; ...-------:;-•::"-"H"-1 r71--------------s----•,--,.... ; - 0 , 0 0 i 0 ' -1 - r • ; - 0 , ! i 0 0 • 0 0 . 0 ° 1 0 Q 0 0 , 0 ' c 0 0 0 O 0 0 : : - O 0 0 0 0 0 . ' 0 0000 ; 0 0 0 : OH ; i 0 o 0 0 0 • 0 • , 0 C 0 C 0 0 , ; •t; o0000 ; n JO 0. 00000 I 0 0 tii00 0 0 ° . , I .0 .! '0 t . I t ! I 0 Ii I I : LID:1,', il_ . _. • - -- 0 . 1 I 0 I • - - i 1 1 • I ""iV 1--)TI• 0 H 0 0 • o o o o 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 ; . 7 , 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 o o 0 o o o o 7 ' 0 10 PERSONS SOURCE ' S CE NSUS I 970 1ELtsumvEY 6/73 STUDY , 1TTLE RIVER POPULATION DISTRIBUTION A 1973 r...Z1 .. , --• [7,77.,.....„:...:.,,[..,......,...,,,..„:,........,...-..,...:.,,,,.,..,...,,,-_,...,....,,i..7::.",.....-,:,.4,-,.. .. ii,:::,,... ..-...,:."..:.,,,,.,......1,,,, [,,,...,,.:.,,,.,,,,....,,,i....,,.,.....n.;..:::,...,-...,.,.,.,41,,....,t,:::. ...-_-........:.7. _ 1 . • __. • 1'...t." f::. ,--. '• •- ' ' • 4 ' i ,,,, ,.....,,,....,. : i Li...........„7. 7"....,..1./... •....v•...,..... .,... . ! - •• : ; ..1 k , - . , : t:,......: i,....'....:'.. ; ,",....a t.-..; .., -• : ......-1 ;•• • ----- '..,: 1 ‘" •:. :2 '... •:•:i !;.•:::-../•::::•:: !:-..•;;.*•::-..:*;;;;•:::,:; ; : ;:-. ..i ::::-:;.:.::::,::•••: ;:::: -::.-:;.; ::::::::i 1 I ;, , . ... • • ; ' k r•-.-- ":7-.07:•77 F7-7.: :-7 ...:•"-7-7-7-1"--.:17-7.7.--1 c•- •.:. t .1,..".. . ".......:.'......'.':.:'.':....* .:.-.......: .......'......... .......'............ . - - . - ..... ..- . 1 fa r - t::';':i h, -____- .--- - - 7 71 rz,.77:7,7---;-.--.777:71 1,' '-' %. - ... a ....—..-.. • il'';''''.',';.,,'/:...'':•:':/•' 1 t 1 • ' I I _1 .. " F.71--7-1, . - .1-i- . ' '' : - -- :-.4--is-` - — L -iir s 7. 1 ' /--..'11 ._ 7(- 7271 i L ' - --, r---1 r----- .---i r— — 1 f - • . • J - I • : 2, 40 aEOPL.r c'EP 20 PEOPL SO PEOPLE 40 PEOPLF - I Efp at:$-4E- pEm AC4. PEP Acr7e 66 REOPLE PEP 4C' SOURCE S CENSU5 ).,". LITTLE RIVER POPULATION (DENSITY - 197C STUDY ---1_2117.7L .•' 5 LOD OE IN'itl-c17.: 1-9 =,.cre jr anresoltinc ient roaCivc,,; t =11, a poor image tor the business district ano open spac-, landt,caping ali ac erne: in do not satisfy the needs of the community. The frag,iminted land use pattern and "strip" commercial development filar. predominate deter from the development of a unified bus- iness core. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" L , F177, - CITY OF ',NAM. PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILY • 1973 LAND USE stgIsf,' LITTLE RIVER i r , ‘111,1, 300 The following is a summary of the major land uses: RESIDENTIA L Single-family Single family structures are found throughout. To the east of 2nd Avenue in the northeast quadrant is Located a substantial single family neighborhood con- taining numerous physical amenities. To the west of 2nd Avenue a mixed low and medium density res- idential pattern is found. Many of these structures are of wood frame construction showing signs of deterioration. Two -Unit (duplex) Scattered throughout are duplex structures, most built on minimal size lots (50 feet). As is charac- teristic of single f roily development, those to the west of 2nd Avenue are older and are lacking amen- ities. Multi -family Residential A great array of apartment buildings, including con- verted motels, seasonal lodgings and new 4, 6 and 8 unit apartment structures are interspersed through- out the area. Many structures originally built to accomodate tourists have been converted to year- round housing, providing only minimal size housing units. Recent apartment construction has been cen- tered between 1st Avenue and North Miami Avenue. north of 79th Street. RESiDENT►AL t SINGLE i vim UNIT ;DUPLE�f � coMMERCtG.L.. A.NO RELATED USES .:.F+:•NC RETG',_,SER OF:!LE N^UET A.,5T - AGE,NL+C_ES:.u." E. Et:TE73..:MENT OTFtER USES r, Q J .6t- oUeuC UT:,. ;Tr vCCANT LtN0 STPEETS,5 EW4LK,PU5 C R{GHT-CF- Ww zj=yl?IiVE NE, DOC Li "_` }ANTS i il.t F,t i �� � ►%i ULi_UV1i C 2C 30 40 50 60 PERCENT CF TGT4. ACRES LAND LISE LITTLE RIVER COMMERCIAL. CENTER i Grouc Quarters Included within this category are hotels, motels and rooming houses. ':any of these facilities are in deter - .orating condition. The largest facility is the Little River Hotel, located on N. E. 79th Street, which con- tains over seventy rooms. COMMERCIAL AND RELATED USES Two hundred twelve business establishments are situ- ated within the commercial center employing 2.000 people. Included are a great array of businesses in- cluding 44 retail firms. �6] service oriented businesses. 84 offices, a. exclusively wholesale establishments and 4 movie theatres. Parking An excessive amount of land is devoted to on -site park- ing. Over one-half or 21 acres of all the land devoted to commercial and related uses is in parking. Approx- imately 1800 off-strrh,ht parking spaces are provided for non-residential u.e; 280 of these spaces are located in three municipal parking lots. A corridor of parking lots lie adiacent to 2nd Avenue on both the east and west sides of 2nd Avenue, which provides a functional bound- ary between residential and commercial activity. An additional 277 parking spaces will be provided in the parking garage to be built in conjunction with the new bank building. High occupancy ratios are found at ail parking facilities, including the three municipal lots presently in operation. The municipal parking lot located adjacent to the Little River Library, which for many years operated far below capacity, has recently had a significant increase in use. The short term re- moval of parking due to construction of the new bank building on 79th Street and the increased office employ- ment within the immediate vicinity has increased de- mand at this facility. "Slip Pr�,R,-IVE L LJv AUFSA LITTLE RIVER r.icaiv•F;r_f,lr3EnrrlAL PARR Office Over 1°0. 000sq. ft. of office space is found within the Little River Commercial Center. Concentration of firms dealing with real estate, insurance and profes- sional services are the major tenants. Office activity is concentrated along 2nd Avenue and the adjacent block aor.: 7 °th Street. A majority of office space is utilized by smaller firms requiring limited floor areas. Ex- isting office space is generally located in older office buildings, which are generally well maintained, and in converted retail structures. Much of the former retail space has been transferred to office use. The First Federal Savings and Loan Association building located at N. E. 83rd Street and N. E. 2nd Avenue, provides the most prestigious office facility in the area. Retail and Service Activity Once the predominate commercial activity it has now been relegated to a )rdinate position. These ac- tivities have been most adversely effected during the last twenty years by economic trends within the Little River service area. Most adversely effected have been businesses that were primarily dependent on the immediate service area; these establishments include service oriented busi- nesses and those specializing in convenience goods (food stores etc.) Those firms dealing with goods such as office machines, appliances, etc., have been least effected by competition from the adjacent shop- ping centers and the socio-economic changes in the surrounding neighborhood. Retail and service activity is centered along the 79th and 2nd Avenue corridors. Marginal retail establish- ments, such as thrift shops, adult bookshops, and '1, !: ram,_ �l' 1 1 i'' It + p. t 1 s '4 TS `tom a y+t�1T v l'yl : r r r• TE;is sTTi I;LITTLE RIVER ACTIVITY GENERATORS 1 1 1 1 used furniture stores are centered on Znd Avenue. south of 82nd Street and the adjacent blocks along N. E. 79th Street. The existing low rent structure and high vacancy rates have attracted these establishments. Along Znd Avenue north of 82nd Street are located numerous businesses -vhich provide goods and services to the surrounding residential areas. Banking is an important component of the business community. Two maior banks the First State Bank of Mi- ami and the First Federal Savings and Loan Associa- tion. are located within the study area. Their loca- tion along N. E. 2nd Avenue provide a northern and southern anchor for the Little River commercial center, and act as a major generator of business. Banks are also one of the major employers within the area. In addition, several finance companies are located along N. E. Znd Avenue. lndustrial, Stora e. holesaline Wholesaling activities .re found on the eastern peri- meter of the study area east of N. E. 3rd Avenue. A recent expansion of warehousing has ocurred along N. E. 80th Terrace. The principal firms in this cate- gory are Suddath Moving and Storage Company and the Wig Corporation of America. Ent e r ta inrn en t Four movie theatres are located at the intersection of N. E. 2nd Avenue and N. E. 79th Street. Currently, all of these theatres are showing adult -oriented enter- tainment exclusively. A three acre commercial nursery is located along the Florida East Coast Railway in the northeast corner of the study area. OTHER USES uasi-Public A limited number of facilities of this type are located within the study area. including the Little River Public Library and Auto Test Station; the Miami Art League. and Recd Nlernorial Hospital. Utility Southern Bell is the largest single employer within 1-ittle River. Currently, five facilities are located here. including a new switching center aiong the Lit River Canal at is Avenue. Vacan Land and Stora Small parcels of vacant land are scattered throughout the study area. Slated for office construction. is the northeast corner of 2nd Avenue and SZnd Street. No public park facilities are presently found in 1.1tric River. A small recreation area is provided adjacent to the Little River Public Library. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUM,`INTS FOLLOW" BUSINESS PROFILE A questionnaire was distributed to all businesses in the area to determine a current profile of the business community. Approximately 60°-c. of the firms responded and this provided a valuable information resource. The most significant finding has been the magnitude of the transformation that has occurred within the business com- munity during the last ten years: durin this time two -third of all present businesses located in Little River. owned small iiusinessc.., emplcwina end(' r five v Pi& _ - .iClni or. Dade (-curt,: and v_o � re-:'. .. - ture predominate. Office deveiner., ixtparlring locally oriented retail an service tv ,.. :using es ,+ . Emphasis of development shifted hifted from :i ':.'tiit- clining_ p '" service oriented business cii:strict to e tice development. ent. Southern Bell. employing. appro.,irnatel`. 50?; of the wore: force of the center has been Xpan office and operational facilities strengthening the econc>rzi< base of the area. Tncreasing crime rates (burglary and robbery), an increas- ;nn low income population and general visual blight were identified as major constraints to future growth and matters requiring municipal action. The following is a summarization of pertinent findings. Employment Seventy-six percent of all businesses employ five or less people. Major employers include Southern Bell with ap- proximately 1,000 employees; First State Bank. 260 employees; Viking General, 180 employees; and WCA with 125 employees. Floor Area Requirements One-half of the businesses occupy less than 1,000 square feet of floor area; this is most notable in office uses where approximately t;1% are housed in less than 1, 000 square feet. Ownership r�G o%-er -`I:cirrirrc. proportion of firms rent their iaC:.hies S2..7 nc re locally owned c (`aU' ti t been c a the ii :^.t l+ r!c'. sp-in . _`r . , ofa1JUSine sse .t' years. The .1 O.i .:i ..1,I_.a: .3. `a Jt• et"F !? t i c t' a. r t;. _ t .. Grf,:- tc t v I -.a. .. beer. hG`.i-n .ICE' _.rrrterYi:i.siriejS S. c+cational Decision Centrality has always played a crucial role in the fi ;vent of the commercial center. Over 45% of the bus le sse.s listed central location as a ir.ajor factor in their decision. This has been most important for both reTr •l a:'H office use. Also of signific< nee has, been the pro:.. the owner's home, rent ievcis, and availability c Relatively unimportant factors have been nearness, proximity to allied businesses and availability puhi,.. transportation. It is of internist to note that over '. G`;. of the respondents stated that their original reasons for locating in Little River are still valid. 11 1 Service The service area extends to all of Dade County and in certain instances nationally. Only those firms dealing with service oriented activities were dependent on the immediate north- east Miami, El, Portal and Miami Shores market area. FuturPlans Over 72% of the respondents stated that they will remain in Little River, and 11% indicated a desire to expand their operations. Rent Levels A great variation exists within the rent structure. per qRe fools on new construction range from $6. -$ on an annual basis while new leases in older structures range from $4. -$4. 50 a square foot; 36%u of the firms r pay rent between $100-$200 monthly, and 39% pay O monthly; higher rent levels are paid by offices and the low- est rent structure has been in the service field. Parkin Over 70% of the businesses provide parking for their employees while only 63% provide parking for their cus- tomers. If no on -site parking is provided, both employees and customers utilize curbside parking. Business Volume During the last five years there has been a significant ex- pansion of business activity. Over 60% of the firms stated that their volume of business has expanded. The most noticeable increase was noted by retail establishments. The businesses that have faired the worst during the Last five years have been those involved in service oriented operations, 2/3 of the respondents encountered a stationary or declining level of business activity. Yfa'or Problems Confrontin the Area Both crime and an increasing low income population within. the surrounding area were noted as most significant pro- blems. Competition shifting markets werennot' lack off land fororexpansion and noted as major constraints. I i i Number of Firms Number of Employees 1-5 6 - 10 104 Floor Area 1,000 sq. ft. and less 1, 100 - 2, 000 sq. ft. 2, 100+ sq.ft. Ownership Own building Rent space Locally owned Present Location 5 or less years 6 - 10 years 10+ years *Locational Decision* Near market Near owner's home Central location Rent levels Available space Near public transit Proximity allied business (Aber Little River Commercial Center Business Survey Results Total Retail Office Service 111 29 46 27 Original Reason for Locating, Still valid Not valid 76% 76% 74% 88% 15 24 12 4 9 14 8 50 41 61 43 23 9 16 23 27 50 13 26 18 16 16 12 82 84 84 88 91 96 93 88 43 42 48 25 23 31 15 32 34 27 37 43 15 17 13 22 36 14 57 22 45 66 54 33 33 38 35 30 27 35 30 15 17 35 11 11 11 21 9 7 3 7 4 Service Area* Little River Northeast Miami El Portal, Miami Shores North Dade County Dade County Other Total Retail Office Service 80 20 23 18 19 25 48 24 Future Plans* Remain at Present Location 72 Expand in Little River 11 Relocate in same area 9 Relocate outside area 8 Rent On -Site Parking Employees Customers $100 or lestt.:7'' $101 - $200 `•-•�3 ; +� i• 4 i `•+-36 $201 - $300 D l:'`t $300+ ..'Li. 4. :.� .c il39 3 ..?t �� Other than On -Site Parking Private Lot Public Lot Curbside 70 63 20 44 76 91 91 9 9 9 11 9 11 9 9 35 22 59 54 3 46 90 87 21 9 7 9 7 4 18 24 38 28 2'1 45 57 59 80 55 67 8 7 33 36 67 57 80 20 56 41 30 22 63 7 19' 4 63 17 17 56 63 14 29 57 J Little River Commercial Center Business Survey Results Total Retail Office Service Total Retail Office Service Number of Firms Number of Employees 1-5 6 - 10 10+ Floor Area 1,000 sq. ft. and less 1, 100 - 2, 000 sq. ft. 2, 100+ sq. ft. Ownership Own building Rent space Locally owned Present Location 5 or less years 6 - 10 years 10+ years *Locational Decision* Near market Near owner's home Central location Rent levels .Available space Near public transit Proximity allied business tither 111 76% 15 9 29 46 27 Original Reason for Locating Still valid Not valid 76% 74% 24 12 14 88% 4 8 50 41 61 43 23 9 16 23 27 50 13 26 18 16 16 12 82 84 84 88 91 96 93 88 43 42 48 25 23 31 15 32 34 27 37 43 15 17 13 22 36 14 57 22 45 66 54 33 33 38 35 30 27 35 30 15 17 35 11 11 11 21 9 7 3 7 4 Service Area* Little River Northeast Miami El Portal, Miami Shores North Dade County Dade County Other Future Plans* Remain at Present Location Expand in Little River Relocate in same area Relocate outside area Rent On -Site Parking Employees Customers 80 20 91 91 80 9 9 20 23 9 11 56 18 9 11 41 19 9 9 44 25 35 22 30 48 59 59 22 24 3 46 -- 72 11 9 8 $100 or les1 --a i 't` 6 $101 - $200 v 4.- $201 - $300; s '-, 39 $300+ �. , .. '� 9 i ; I, LiLL(J Other than On -Site Parking Private Lot Public Lot Curbside 70 63 90 87 63 21 9 7 9 7 7 4 19 18 4 24 38 63 28 21 17 45 57 17 59 80 56 55 67 63 20 8 7 14 44 33 36 29 76 67 57 57 /3 Little River Commercial Center Business Survey Results Business Volume Last 5 Years Declined 16 12 15 29 Remained the same 24 20 20 38 Increased 60 68 65 33 Major Problems* Crime 67 72 57 74 Increasing low income pop. 51 45 65 37 Competition Biscayne Shopping Center 9 3 15 7 Lack of land for expansion 8 10 9 Shifting markets 13 10 13 19 Other 3 -- 4 of total respondents VS V 1 R •' <.L s TS 77 ; r�sti s � ; • � l s. 'e`..1 U y } 11 11 1 11 i I 1 ZONING The present zoning pattern in the study area is made up of ten different zoning classifications. The predominate classification is Commercial Zoning, constituting 72', of the area: the remaining 28% is made up of Residentiai and Industrial zones. with the latter comprising less than 170 of the total area. The C-1 zoning classification is predominate and comprise the bulk of the north-west quadrant or the study area. ThiE. classification is intended for local business activities of convenience nature. Community Commercial l'C-Z) fo!lov, in importance and is located along N. E. :Ind Avenue an: N. E. 79th Street; most of the existing commercial activi:y is found within this zone. General Commercial (C-4) zoning, a more liberal commercial zone which permits uses as wholesaling.and those of a light industrial character, is found along 79th Street at the eastern and western perime- ters. A small section south of N. E. 79th Street is zoned Liberal Commercial (C- which permits warehousing, storage and wholesaling activities. Residential zoning is almost exclusively limited to the north- east quadrant of the commercial center north of N. E. 80th Terrace. Approximately 65% of the area zoned for resi- dential use is zoned Single Family (R-1). Small zones of R-2 (two-family dwellings); R-3 (low density multiple family), and R-4 (medium density multiple family) is found south of the R-1 district; east of N. E. 2nd Avenue. The R-C zoning classification located at the Northwest corner of the study area allows for mixed residential and office development. .A small industrial zone is located south of N.E. 79th Street along the F. E. G. right-of-way. ) R -C 1 " C-1 C-4 C -1 R-4, C- 2 --T....4 FOLLOW" s'"t;tiCL-.ITTLE RIVER) zap.' R-1 R-2 C-4 -`1 15 1 The present zoning pattern does not reflect the existing land use. While 7Z%r of the area is zoned for commercial use, less than Z7?'o is currently being used for this purpose. Since the 1960 rezoning of the northwest quadrant from R-4 to C-1, there has been little expansion of commercial acti• i except for parking facilities. Because C-1 zoning alloy _ .or residential development at medium density, nu- merous apartment structures have been constructed through- out this portion of the study area. It has been more econom- ically expedient to replace single family wood frame build- ings with multiple -family units, creating an undesirable fragmented residential -commercial land use pattern. The construction of new residential structures has ocurred on scattered sites, preventing the assemblage of contiguous parcels of sufficient size for modern commercial develop- ment. Residential densities permissible under C- 1 zoning have resulted in the construction of 4, 6 and 8 unit struc- tures on minimal size lots (50' x 100-150') where limited physical amenities can be provided and where parking and open space requirements are barely sufficient. As a result of this zoning change, neither a strong business nor a desirable residential env;:onrnent has evolved. The existing municipal facilities, streets, open space, sewers, were developed for a lower dentisy residential use and have not been upgraded to meet the requirements and demands im- posed by the existing•C-] zoning. The over -abundance of land (72%) zoned for commercial purposes has created a fragmented development pattern lacking the benefits that can be derived from compactness. A small -grained pattern, intermingling numerous types of business activities in close proximity, generates an inten- sity of activity needed for a viable business district. Park- ing (which consumes 21 acres of land) should be centralized, but the availability of extensively zoned commercial areas has made it unnecessary to incur the additional expenses for the construction of such facilities. Cl COMMERCIAL RESIDE. NT IAL ®, INDUSTRIAL ZONING CATEGORIES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Residentially -zoned properties comprese 291l, of the total area. In actuality. these properties consume over 4 of the total area and represent the predominate land use. The inclusion of low -density residential zoning adjacent to the commercial district is a benefit to the community, al- though proposals have been made for its modification. This residential node provides an important resource by main- taining an area of fine quality homes for workers and acting as a stabilizing force in a transitional area c1-4afroicferizIlerd, r: y declining home ownership levels. I \V VUDLIG FlinVIggS LED UTILITra DOCUNTS Sanitary Sewers '. FOLLOW The area is served by sanitary sewers functioning at near capacity levels. The residential area to the cast of N. E. Znd Avenue has adequate sewer capacity if the present residential densities are maintained. To the west of 2nd Avenue. a rnore critical condition exists since the sanitary sewers are currently operating at capacity levels. A large .ixpansion of residential or commercial use will require an enlargement of sewage capacities. The sanitary sewer system was designed for a maximum of 60 people per acre, present standards for C-1 zoning permit development to 150 people per acre. No improvement has been slated for this area through 1976 (City of Miami Capital Improvements Program). Storm Sewers Scattered local drainage is provided in all portions of the area except the R-1, R-Z residential areas. Posi- tive storm sewers are installed along the Little River Canal, west of N. E. Znd Avenue and north of N. E. 84th Street. Street Lighting Street lighting is provided throughout the study area New high intensity sodium vapor lights have recently been installed in all portions of the study area.. i.ihrartc The Little River Library is located on N. E. 79th Street and N. E. Znd Avenue. This facility is slated for replacement by 1980 by a new regional facility tc located outside of the study area. Fire Station A new two company fire station in the vicinity of N. E. Znd Avenue and N. E. 7th Street ha been proposed to replace the existing station .;='l located at 7561 N. E. 1st Avenue. Post Office The Little River Post Office, located at N. E. 84th Street between N. E. 1st Place and N. E. 1st Avenue. has inadequate parking facilities. Parks and Recreation The only public open space is a small area located tc the west of the public library. The closest recreationa area is Soar Park, a County facility located west North Miami Avenue which has programs geared for senior citizens. The closest City park is Legion Park, located at Biscayne Boulevard and N. E. 69th Street. Funds have been designated in the Parks fo-r People for acquisition and development of a neighborhood park in the general Little River Area. mArPiC. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION The Little River Commercial Center is strategically situated in regard to major north -south, east -west transportation: corridors. Historically, this crossroad position has berm highly significant in its development. Four major arterials bisect the study area, N. E. and Avenue and North Miami Avenue (north -south), N. E. 79th Street and N. E. 82nd Street (east -west). All other streets are collector and local streets. The construction of Little River Parkway (N. E. 82nd Street: which provides three lanes of east -bound traffic movement across. Little River, has alleviated traffic congestion along N. E. 79th Street. Both N. E. 2nd Avenue and North Miami Avenue provide two lanes for north -south and south -north traffic flow. The internal circulation pattern has not been modified to handle the residential and commercial densities permitted under the existing zoning. This problem is most critical along North Miami Court, N. E. 1st Avenue, N. E. 1st Place between Little River Parkway and N. E. 83rd Street, N. E. 3rd Court and N. E. 80th Street. (Note map.) The existing roadway width at these locations is under twenty feet, which is below recommended standards for roadways with two moving lanes of traffic. Parking located along the shoulders of these roadways increases circulation problems. Those streets located in the low density residential district east of N. E. 2nd Avenue are adequate to handle present demand. The overflow of commercial parking into the northwest quadrant and higher residential auto ownership has increased the amount of on -street parking in this area, adding to the existing difficulty of traffic flow. est V A rill T LION' y.. .erp -- • r'OE T, VED .-- •:., •,' 1 TnGF[:/ SIGNAL rupg.,--.LNG TG.Ic[i(' •. 0,,IN1E H DIRE cTION, of ACJ : C'ni..r4T FVS o urE.S_ - w,s•c..es.cn - Nw m. a. vs% OowN•ow' - - •..'-N-nwN - .P).. 3? Nett...nee" CENT,w ----pn*NTOA+J - • f 703 1• --.---C CC'. *••s• •..N •v[ - w•.•:.•NF S.•OPP,NO C[ .vF .. _. _ ..,p• [.., w.r_C .net. V . N,aw, OC4Cw LITTLE PIVLRTRAFFIC S TRANSPORTATIOM AOU CVO ROC. A study recently completed by Dade County, Department of Transportation has indicated a major traffic hazard exists at the intersection of N. E. 2nd Avenue and N. E. 79th Street. Over 50 accidents were recorded at this location during fourteen months. The overwhelming cause of accidents has involved northbound turning movement of cars headed east along 79th Street and their subsequent blockage of eastbound movement along 79th Street. The State of Florida Department of Transportation is studying the feasibility of extending N. E. 4th Court from N. E. 79th Street to N. E. 6th Avenue and Biscayne Boulevard. The extension of N. E. 4th Court would provide a much needed north -south street which would give relief to N. E. 2nd Avenue and to Biscayne Boulevard. No other proposals are currently being made for the study area. The area is currently well served by public transportation. Six bus routes pass through the study area, linking it direct- ly to Miami Beach, Hialeah, Broward County, Downtown Miami and Coconut Grove. PROPERTY VALUES Average block property values have been calculated using the 1973 assessments for land and structures. The average assessed value per block gives an indication of variation in values. Assessments tend, especially in fully developed established areas, to run significantly below true market value. Higher land values are concentrated along N. E. 2nd Avenue, with higher values at 79th Street and 82nd Terrace. (Note map) LLI CD CL 00 L J • ASSESSED VALUE PER SO. WT LAND- AND IMPROVEMENTS saTvov (LLITTLE RIVER) PROPERTY VALUE CD WOO- •OR 13 ShhTJCTURAL G ITITIUNS An overall blighted appearance is caused by dilapidated and deteriorated residential and commercial structures located throughout the Study Area. A concentration of wood frame residences, west of Znd Avenue, built over 40 years ago. have limited utility due to their structural condition, the inability of obtaining financing and the diminishing market for this type of structure. Commercial deterioration is evident along Znd Avenue south of 82nd Street. Many of the older structures have been remodeled and updated to meet current business standards. Minor exterior alterations to many buildings would greatly enhance the overall appearance of the area. Most residential structures located east of Znd Avenue and north of 80th Terrace are of CBS construction, structurally sound and pro- vides excellent housing resources for the community. "SUPPORTNE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW„ 0 0 0 C) •, • ai coo a 0 0 a - • iI O as ,❑ oo of 'a s.__1 _ _1l a WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE ocTER10 ATED CBS sTRUCTURC ,'? 1 a SOURCE F +ELO SURVEY sA'A LITTLE -II RIVER' STRUCTURAL CONOITIOD CONSTRUCT ON TRENDS 1965- 74 From 1965 thru January 1974, thirty-one new structures have been completed including seventeen apartment buildings containing between four and twenty units; four duplexes, three single family structures, six commercial structures and three warehouses. Presently under conwo struction there a en - three multiple family structures, cluding the new headquarters of the First State Bank of Miami. Most new construction has ocurred in the northwest quadrant, where 4. 6, and 8 unit apartment buildings are gradually re- placing older wood frame single-family structures. As a result of this new construction, there has been a significant increase in residential densities. Prior to 1973, only two small office and three retail buildings were con rutted, new office development will have a sign.- ficant impact upon the center; the First State Bank of Miami. located at 2nd Avenue and 79th Street, with over 100 physical d square feet of office space will provide both a p y visual focal point as well as symbolizing a strong demon- stration of confidence in the resurgence of the business com- munity; a new office building on Little River Parkway at 82nd Street and 1st Place denotes the beginning of the devel- opment of Little River Parkway as an office corridor. Southern Bell has recently completed a multi -million dollar telephone switching center along the Little River Canal. Warehousing is expanding in the southeast quadrant near the Florida East Coast Railroad Right of Way and north of the Little River Industrial district. 0 • w A •• w w r,o�rre„„ , c� Nx, Tucr,.c ..•,, oVki u. t �iuvf-,v BiV OYI LITTLE RIVER ni9965 •Ew EONSTRuartom9973 O WNERSH P PATTERNS In general, an extremely fragmented pattern of land owner- ship exists except along 2nd Avenue, where approximately 50% of the frontage is in contiguous ownerships. Numerous separate ownerships make it extremely difficult to acquire sufficient size parcels required to produce a bet- ter quality residential and commercial development. This condition is most prevalent in the C-1 zoned area west of 2nd Avenue. Developers of both residential and commercial properties require larger parcels of land to provide enough space for economically viable structures and the inability to acquire sufficient size parcels of land for redevelopment has been one of the factors leading to the economic stagnation of Lit- tle River during the last twenty years. Recently there has been efforts made by members of the bus- iness community to assemble parcels of sufficient size to encourage new development. Over 160 homes are owner - occupied; the major concentration is located at the R-1 zoning district east of 2nd Avenue. A high number of residents between 82nd and 84th Streets are also owner -occupied, reflecting its original low density character. Many of the residential and commercial properties are owned by people who presently do not reside or work within the area and subsequently have had limited involvement if efforts to improve the Center. } E 1'1. ` _ r 1i__.__— TWO OR MORE CONTIGt'OUS .•,•. ' 0ARCELS UNDER SAME ER". 4 R SOURCE, i973 Tax ROLL AQEa'' LITTLE RIVER' OWNERSHIP' PATTERNS STUOV . t^ 400 200 f J 000 POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT There are numerous vacant and under-utilized sites located within the Little River Study Area that are suitable for new residential and commercial development. However, insuffi- cient dernand has resulted in a lack of construction. Since the mid-1950's only a small amount of new construction a most exclusively residential has occurred, but increasing activity within the Little River Commercial Area has promp- ted an interost and re-evaluation of ma nsites suitable fcr new e „:.' r � d�',et.l�lc1I7d ��r .E'rCJb[ �'!)i rtr'.i�`t101"i. Th+:' nificant constraints on de.t-eloprrrc,r} are the frag- mented ownership pattern and the litnitcd infrastructure capacity i. e. streets and sewers. To ascertain the long-range impact of residential develop- ment that is allowed by existing zoning, all potential de‘eiop- ment sites, including si' ,le family structures located on sites zoned for higher ir;tensity land use and vacant parceis, were identified. These sites include approximately 22 acres of land or 15% of the study area. Within the 22 acres there are 9 acres of vacant land; a 3 acre nursery site: and 10 acres of single family structures. The holding capacity of these 22 acres was then calculated under existing zoning. If all new development were residential and maximum densities could be achieved, over 1100 new residential units could be added to the housing stock or a 150'Ioincrease. The effect of this potential development would severely impact the street and sewer systems. In reality, the extent of development outlined here is remote but it does indicate what existing zoning would allow and the residential densities that are cur- rently possible. J } 0 LITTLE RIVER STU OY : ta - 19- DWELL tNG I:N, TS 20 - 39 DWELLtN , DWELLING LiNtTS 60 + DWELLING uNt TS DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA .. VACANT LOT, EXISTING ZONING, SINGLE FAMILY DWELL NG. MAXIMUM RESIDENT/AL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL PER BLOCK :53L' _.. out 23 1 1 1 To ascertain the extent of possible commercial development. potential commercial sites under existing zoning were identi- fied. These sites include approximately 16 acres. A con- centration of potential sites lie north of 82nd Street and west of 2nd Avenue, and south of 79th Street east of 2nd Avenue. In addition, numerous marginal structures along 79th Street and N. E. 2nd Avenue could be replaced if there is a demand for additional commercial spac?. Additional sites for ooten• tial development might be considered if other existing com- mercial and multi -family residential structures were to be replaced and if portions of the 21 acres of land devoted to parking were to be consolidated. Commercial zoning -- R-C, C-1, C-2 -- was applied to this area to encourage the expansion of commercial activities, but instead it has allowed for potentially excessive residen- tial densities. In 1961, the northwest quadrant of the study area was rezoned from R -4 to C- 1. This change in zoning allowed a 25% increase in possible residential densities. Commercial expansion has not occurred to the extent original- ly visualized: instead, new apartment structures have only gradually been replacing the older housing stock in a hap- hazard pattern. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" • • R-1 R_22- R-3 R. g Li] 17.777 .-� - ,.1,",.o9 co w .noo— .17i.coo okvE LOPMENT CR$rERIA. VACANT LQT, x,ST,N3 20N,NG, rAM•L- mveLL.N-+ Alien LITTLE RIVER i NORt- RESIQERLTIAL sTvovll• �i DEVELOPMENT PCITERLTFAL PER BLOCK ,- �, JZ� g 1 1 1 1 FRIMEWORIC FOR. MEMO "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FRAMEWORK FOR REDEVELOPMENT Underutilized structures, low rent levels, underdevel- oped land and a central location have combined to re - attract businesses to the Little River Commercial Cent- er. In the last ten years approximately 140 new bus- inesses have located here. Significant growth has oc- curred in office activities; office vacancies are almost. non-existent. Two office structures are currently under construction and a third office building is planned. These three structures will provide approximately a two-thirds increase into the existing office space in- ventory. Recent expansion of warehousing has also been observed with the construction of three new mini - warehouses. .A gradual replacement of residential frame structures by small apartment units is also occurring, in areas better suited and needed for business expansion. These changes are producing residential densities greater than the capacity oi xisting sewer and street networks. The mean income level of the residents of the area has not kept•pace with either City or County wide averages. Local retail and service establishments which are strongly dependent upon the population in the service area have been most detrimentally affected by these declining consumer income levels. The future of Little River as sub -regional commercial center will require both public and private actions in order to attract new development. A major commit- ment must he forthcoming from the local business community since currently available public funds are limited. Pliblic actions necessary include the upgrading of public facilities and services and legislative modi- fications that will promote better development in the area. he following is a list of key problem, areas that have already affected the redevelopment of the Center: Competition from other market areas A lad: of an orderly functional land use arrange- ment An inadequate public facilities and utilities net- work to serve existing and future development An inadequate local street network Difficulties of land assembly because of absentee and fragmented ownerships Unattractive strip commercial development. Decreasing relative consumer incomes within its service area An abundance of obsolescent commercial and res- idential structures Excessive amounts of land being devoted to on site parking An overabundance of land zoned for commercial activity. IvE DOCUM EN IS • FOLLOW" 25 1 1 1 j 1 1 1 LAND ODE PLAN The land use proposals for the Study Area have been guided by the predominantly built-up character, the limited market potential, and the physical constraints posed by the public infrastructure. The thrust of the planning proposals deals with zoning ordinance text and boundary changes and the expansion and upgrading of public facilities. Offices The Center's predominant function will be as a sub -regional office and administrative center. The advantages of a central city location, regional transportation facilities, labor force accessibility, available parking, support services and facili- ties within and nearby will provide additional office develop- ment opportunities which will aid to expand the area's econo- mic base. New growth of office activity will expand along N. E. 82nd Street and the portion of the Study Area west of 2nd Avenue. Large scale office development will be centered 8dnd along 2nd Avenue with smaller office structures located on Street and the adjacent side streets. Opportunities will exist for the continuation of the conversion of residential and retail structures to office use. Retail and Service The inclusion of retail and service functions in the overall revitalization of the area is essential. However, because of the size and competitive impact of Biscayne Plaza no signifi- cant expansion has been planned. Adequate land for retail functions presently exists to support present and future needs. Expansion of retail or service activity is projected only where it will support ancillary office services, such as restaurants. These activities will remain along the existing commercial corridors (2nd Avenue and 79th Street). Northeast 2nd Avenue. north of 82nd Street will continue in its present use as a local service center for the surrounding residential area and the 1 r E] LOW DENSITY IDENT I AL F'•"�..f RESIDENTIAL OPPICE RETAIL OFFICE WAREHOUSE% LIONT INOUSTRIa- PUSLIC SEMI -PUSLIC PAPAS AND OPEN SPACE AREA LITTLE RIVER PROPOSED LAND USE STUDY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 adjacent suburban communities of El Portal and Miami Shores. Community oriented sales and services will be centered along 79th Street and along N. E. 2nd Avenue, south of 82nd Street. Light Industry - Wholesaling and Warehousing These activities while presently limited, occupy an important position in the economic framework of the Center. The plan provides for their integration and limited expansion. Located in close proximity to the Florida East Coast Railroad and between 78th and 82nd Streets, the industrial district corn- bines the advantages of accessibility, rail access and isolation from surrounding uses. The recent expansion of wholesaling and mini -warehousing in the southeast quadrant has been an important component of the redevelopment of Little River. Residential A flexible housing program is envisioned. To maintain and reinforce the activity, spontaneity and vitality essential to commercial growth, both multiple family and single family opportunities are necessary. In the northeast quadrant the existing single family and duplex character should be retained. The superior environmental quality of the area and the housing opportunities'which it provides together with its stabilizing effect upon this transitional area all help to enhance this community. To encourage the development of vacant and underutilized tracts development of a planned area and planned unit nature could be undertaken. These types of low scale development would allow for small increases in residential densities that would be compatible with the overall low density and scale that presen In the northwest quadrant to the west of N. E. Znd Avenue, and along the south side of 82nd Street east of N. E. Znd Avenue, a mixture of office and medium density residential development should be encouraged. Many of the existing resi- dential structures could be converted to office use. New apart- ment construction should be of a somewhat larger scale to pro- vide quality residential development to attract the Labor force needed for the center. Public Facilities The provision of public facilities is an important considera- tion in the successful redevelopment of Little River. With an expanding population and Labor force, the need for public open space, parking, landscaping and pedestrian amenities is ap- parent. An open space system will serve as the amenity spine for generating quality office and residential development. The plan for Little River provides for the development of a limited river walkway system in the northwest quadrant. This walk- way is but one element of a park and open space system which would penetrate the core area by expanding the rights of way to permit broad landscaped walks on the east side of N. E. 1st Place interwoven with linkages to the shops on N. E. 2nd Avenue and terminating at the river's edge in a small park. Locations for park development are tentative; however, the V^ amenity spine concept remains valid and essential. Other public facilities are proposed at the municipally owned property at 79th Street and N. E. Znd Avenue including: the conversion of the existing Little River Library into a community center: the replacement of the auto test station - with a new fire station for company #9; a small passive park, and the retention of the existing off-street parking. Through- out the commercial areas, vest pocket parks are proposed to provide needed recreational areas. The existing off-street parking lots will be retained. 27 RECGMMENDITIONS "SU -f, ORTiVE DOC U:'.V LNTS FOLLOW" EEDOINT NDaTIO!IS I. ZONING A. Proposed Zoning Changes To encourage the development of land use consistent with a subregional office center, the following zoning changes are recommended: 1. C-2 (Community Commercial) to C-1 (Local Commercial. This portion of northeast 2nd Avenue has opera- ted as a service area for the surrounding resi- dential areas to the north, and this orientation should be continued. C- 1 zoning will allow for all the present uses, except for service stations, and prevent any new commercial activity that will be detrimental to the existing character of this commercial strip. 2. R-3 (Low Density Multiple) R-4 (Medium Density Multiple) to R-C (Residential Office.) The widening of northeast 82nd Street, subsequent high volume traffic and its designation as a major east -west arterial has deterred from its attrac- tiveness as a residential street. A major asset of the commercial center has been the availability of structures that could be converted to office use. The majority of office uses recently attracted to the area could be housed in these existing resi- dential structures with minor alterations. The continued availability of moderate rental office space is an important component for future growth. R-C zoning will allow for a compatible residential office mix. Development of office activity along P r7 ARE A s runs/ 1! C-s Cc --I C •- 1-1 C ] RF_CGMME MtDE0 20ht1N0 C-2 LITTLE RIVER PROPOSES{ ZQrwNG Cl-#AIVGES 82nd Street east of northeast 82nd Street will aid to link the Little River Commercial Center with the Biscayne Shopping Center and surrounding office and retail uses. 3. R-4 (Medium Density Multiple) to C-2 (Community Commercial. ) Although this small area is residentially zoned, its relationship to commercial uses and its future development potential suggests it be designated for commercial activity or the mixture of uses per- mitted in this zone. 4. C-1 (Local Commercial) to C-2 (Community Com- mercial. ) The convenience -oriented commercial uses which are allowed in C-1 have been declining within the Little River area especially south 82nd Street. The existing zoning which splits blocks between two zoning districts will only serve to encourage the continuation of the existing strip development along 79th Street. Optimum zoning south of 79th Street should include the total block as C-Z. 5. C-5 (Liberal Commercial) and I-1 (Light Indus- trial) to C-4 (General Commercial. ) Uses as warehousing, assembly and wholesaling are suitable for this portion of the study areas. They will aid to support other inter -dependent functions. • i1 A"A LITTLE RIVER RECOMMENOEQ ZONING STUDY 00 400 6, C-1 (Local Commercial) to R-C (Resident -Office.) This area is predominately residential with new development being exclusively residential. A more compatible and orderly land use relationship providing expanded amenities will be achieved with R-C zoning. This recommendation can serve to provide needed landscaping, open space and visual amenities. The additional setback to 20 feet will be a significant asset to the properties along Little River Parkway. which have minimal set- backs due to the recent widening of the street. The containment of retail activity to the 79th Street and Znd Avenue corridors will better serve the residential and office community rather than allow for the future proliferation of retail activity on local streets which in most cases are not designed to accomodate the resulting traffic and are not located close to the existing commercial core. 7. C-1 (Loca mercial. ) unity Co This modification will create parcels of sufficient size, uniformly zoned, to allow for proper devel- opment and be consistent with the proposed overall zoning pattern. 8. C-4 (General Commercial) and C-1 (Local Com- mercial) to C-2 (Community Commercial. ) This recommendation will allow for the develop- ment of land uses consistent with the development of an office center, and create a distinct entryway at 79th Street and Miami Avenue to provide a visual break with the surrounding heavy commercial uses. fi. J C-2 (Community Commercial) to R-C (Residential Office.) This change will eliminate the spot zoning which exists at this site and which has had a detrimental effect on surrounding residential development. RECOMMENDED REVISIONS TO THE ZONING ORDI Amend ARTICLE XI Jude: A requirement that 1500 sq.ft. of lot area be provided for each dwelling unit in apartment buildings and apartment hotels with less than and including fifteen (15) units, rather than the current 600 sq.ft. per unit. Far each dwelling unit above 15, 600 sq. ft. of Lot area shall be provided. C. Residential- Office) Amend ARTICLE XI (R-C. Residential -Office) If a lot has a minimum average width of at least fifty (50) feet and a minimum Lot area of aof at least ast six thousand (6,000) square feet, which platted lot of record prior to September 25, 1946, it may be used for four (4) units, provided that neither the side nor rear yards are used for parking surfaces or driveways_ If a lot has a minimum average width of at least fifty (50) feet and a minimum lot area of seventy-five rrundred (7,500) square feet, which was a platted lot of record prior to September 25, 1946, it may be used for five (5) units, provided that neither the side nor rear yards are used for parking sur- faces or driveways. Benefits to be derived from these changes include: a) The prevention of the continued prolifera- tion of small and 8-unit apartment struc- tures on minimal S0 foot wide lots and lack- ing amenities. These structures have been an adverse influence upon the community. Encouraging larger scale residential development. Lowering overall permissible residential densities. These boundaries will better reflect the existing physical infrastructure of the area (streets, sewers, etc.). d) Obtaining better quality residential devel- opment through the construction of larger units coupled with more open space. e) Encouraging new office development which will become more economically advanta- geous compared to the lower number of residential units that would otherwise be permitted. Currently, on an average 50 x 150 foot lot, a 6-unit structure can be built; proposed modifications will allow only for a 5-unit structure. b) c) Amend ARTICLE XIV Community Commercial C-2 District :..action 1 (Use Regulation) to exclude adult bookstores and movie theaters. Aduit-oriented movie theaters and bookstores have had a blighting influence on the surrounding office and retail establishments. Any additional concentration and expansion within the C-2 District will undermine any private and public efforts to upgrade the area. Although it is not legally feasible to force existing adult-orientec entertainment establishments to vacate their Little River locations. it is anticipated that market forces and the increasing demand foi space by more prestigious tenants will encourage landlords to restrict renewal of future leases to these establishments. These uses will only be permitted in the C-4 (General Commercial.) district where they will ha ::c: less of a deleteri- ous effect on surrounding commercial land uses. II. OPEN SPACE Open space and pedestrian movement necessarily demand special emphasis in commercial centers as small and con- centrated as Little River. In an effort to provide an environ- ment that is conducive and congenial to balanced community development, these necessary pedestrian areas and open spaces are recommended by street closures, setbacks, land- scaping and the reservation of parts of parking areas for mini -parks. The proposed open space system for Little River consists of an amenity spine of open space in the form of a promenade along N. E. 1st Place via a landscaped plaza adjoining the Post Office: linked to 2nd Avenue and extended to the Little River canal where a 1-acre park should be developed. A developed walkway along the canal further amplifies the system. The amenity spine should serve to generate redevelopment while complimenting and supplement- ing existing open space. Active recreational pursuits of the residents will continue to be satisfied by nearby community parks - Soar, Legion, Edison and Morningside. The inclusion of well but simply designed street and park furniture within mini -parks or plazas contemplated for new private buildings will aid to effectively upgrade the streetscape. The specific recommendations are as follows: A. Development of a system of landscaped walkways and parks between N. E. 82nd Street and the Little River Canal 1. Development of a 10-15 foot walkway along Little River Canal between N. E. First Avenue and N. E. 2nd Avenue. The Riverfront is not now a gateway" to the business district but rather a "back door." Existing parking lots and scattered residences effectively block airy functional or visual iink CO it .dfi 11: !WI ;a� 1 1 i1 • C.1• — it r.•:. r �1•s—.i:�si 'LION A1 :-O l—A. MP s .. sl—. ant OM.. E A'ilf ....I.". , ii I t` • • • M=�7 I COMMUNIT1 CEN'•r_R *r01,.A.: f �s sr ^?sws••rfr rlC....... s— s: s. s es 1A Mt r ss-rs _I_ E.;-44 1; r Ii if J i_ _i' ARLA STU OY FIRE STATION LITTLE RIVER ENTRYWAY ?I c,r-S i 10..s On S-rREe r LANO R! P+NG WAL..1, WA, MIPN• ' PK.5 RA RA,c BEAUTIFICATION & OPEN SPACE PROPOSALS a OPEN SPACE CONCEPT NORTHWEST QUADRANT 1. Riverwalk 2. Neighborhood Park 3. Linear Park 4. Close N. E. 1st Place 5: Private Walkway 6. Landscaped Walkway 7. Mini -Park "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" 8. Landscape N. E. 2nd Avenue and N. E. 82nd Street 9. Entry Monument 10. Expanded Municipal Parking ,'E •--...� PARKING PARK slat LANDSCAPE ram, • •� 'Q� �� '~='��`''• "`--Ls TLE j�,��"� ?''T SOUTHERN BELL tip•-c�,•� };; ;77- N.E. e . ST. 1 It POST OFFICE N.E. 83 ST. C3 o�C7000o �l ❑ D EGo 0 N.E. 82 TERR. 3 t--zsJ Q �s7szs►nsflal— "IFsrs�rrriE) 82 ST. pwzzssetaztss•rrsftttteeitstt'yvtu„;flsrCt2sYttxttsstEk[i; 1 a SHOPS t, OFP1 C E tc lw" 33 between the canal and the commercial center. A landscaped walkway providing public access to the canal should be developed along the existing maintenance right-of-way. Walkway development should occur concurrently with the redevelopment of properties fronting on the canal. This area should be well -illuminated for nighttime use. 2. Development of a Linear park adjacent to the A fifty foot linear park between 83rd and 84th Streets should be developed. Land for this linear park could conceivably bo obtained by the abandonment of N. E. First Place between N. E. 83rd Street and N. E. 84th Street and trading this fifty foot right-of-way for bank - owned property located adjacent to the Post Office. The City would retain a utility easement, while portions of the closed street could bede- veloped by the bank for parking. Thep po includes a landscaped walkway through First Federal Savings and Loan Association's parking lot connecting to the existing arcade and N. E. Avenue. 3. Development of a neighborhood park at N N. A 1-acre neighborhood park providing recrea- tional facilities to both the residential and employee population is needed within the north- west quadrant. The acquisition of the four pri- vate parcels at this location will link the pro - RIVER WALKWA'i 11 posed amenity spine to the river walkway. Future development of this site could include: a picnic area, rest rooms, and a tot lot. 4. Develo N. E. N. E. 83rd Street. The existing street right-of-way along N. E. 1st Place is currently 30 feet although the zoned right-of-way is 50 feet. The acquisition of.an additional 10 feet right-of-waY along the east side of the street will alloy,' for the con- struction of landscaped walkway - an integral part of the amenity spine. 5. The development of vestocket arks a 2nd Third place. A small portion of these two off-street parking facilities will provide an opportunity to develop small passive plazas containing benches and landscaping. In addition the site on 82nd Street should be developed as a bus stop. B. The redevelopment and expansion of the existingves pocke to the anch of As part of the renewal of the 21 acre municipally owned tract located between 78th and 79th Streets an expanded passive recreation area should be included. Elements of the redevelopment of this area include the conver- sion of the Library into a community and civic center when the existing lease expires, replacement of the auto test station by a new fire station for Engine " SU DOCij . ENTS FOLLOW" 1 ‘-ia-C"--0/ C-----0 (----1---1S2C••;'‘ i -.C.?:----th.''? „I LJ ,e3 t•A A. AA A. R LD DL1Q OPEN SPACE CONCEPT 2nd AVENUE AND 79th STREET 35 Company #9, an off-street parking facility and an expanded park area. C. The retention of the small ark located at N. Miami Court and N E 78th Street (Reed Hos itP atl• This property was recently purchased by Dade County and is part of the proposed alcoholic rehabilitation center. This park site should continue to be made available to the residents of the immediate area. D. The development of a small park on N. E. SOth Terrace. A small passive sitting area should be developed as part of the new municipal parking facility that will be located at this site. 111. B Ua1FIUA IGN The introduction of street trees, the development of dis- tinctive entry ways and general upgrading of facilities will assist to alleviate the overall poor visual appearance of the commercial center, as follows: A. Street trees should be planted along N. E. 2nd Avenue, N. E. 79th Street and N. E. 82nd Street. Due to the existing narrow sidewalks it would be more feasible to locate new street trees in the swale area, where possible, by eliminating some of the existing street parking. These major arterials are main- tained by the County and all improvements would have to be funded through Dade County. Sources of County funding include the Decade of Progress Bond Program which has allocated $3.5 million for beautification of FOLLOW" c1l` > t-i57C EXAMPLE STREET LANDSCAPING arterials County -wide and the County Capital Outlay Reserve Funds. Alternate means of funding include the formation of a private development corporation to be funded by local businessmen. B. Street trees should be planted along Local streets. Street trees will be planted concurrently with the re- construction of local streets. Abutting property owners will be assessed for 25% of the total cost of this improvement. C. Distinctive markers should be placed at strategic entry points to identify the location of the Center. D. A central directory should be constructed depicting the location of businesses within the district. A small plaza should be constructed at 2nd Avenue and either 82nd Street or 79th Street containing a directo:-r of local businesses. This construction could be spon- sored by the Commerce Association. E. Local merchants and property owners should be en- couraged to upgrade their property. The Little River Commerce Association should spon- sor a program to encourage the facelifting of existing structures to better harmonize with the surrounding uses. The continuing demand for retail and office space and the proposed public capital improvements should provide support to these privately funded efforts. r F. Existing sign controls should be enforced... More stringent enforcement of existing sign control ordinances should be undertaken by the City of Miami Building Department, as part of their program of systematic code enforcement- Many business estab- lishments, especially adult movie theaters and book stores, are in blatant violation of the ordinance. IN S tCo 7 r._., G • NE 2nd AVENUE PROPOSED STREET LANDSCAPING / 37 IV. COSIDIONITT FACILITIES AND SERVICES Public facilities and services-- the provision of adequate sewer, street, fire and police protection -- are crucial components in the ability of a community to sustain itself and attract new growth. Key recommendations are as follows: Upon the relocation of the library fAvenuies t eto aenewing regional center west of N. civic structure should be converted to a community center providing activities for all segments of the population including day care programs for both children and senior citizens. In addition a "Local City Hall Program" could be instituted with repre- sentatives of various municipal departments working out of this site periodically in order to assist resi- dents of the northeast area with problems themay incur concerning public services and facilities. The use of a portion of the structure as a police satellite office for officers working in the northeast area would also be advantageous to the community. Upon the expiration of Dade County's current lease of the auto test station site in September 1976, a new firc station should be constructed on this site to replace the obsolete structure housing Fire Company #9. Funds are available through the 1972 Bond Issue for the con- struction of a new fire station. This site would provide direct access to 79th Street and the major portions of the station's service area which lies east of the FEC right-of-way. As redevelopment occurs the sanitary sewer system will have to be modified to meet increased system nd. Although constructed only 16 yeagos the was designed for currently outdated standards and for a lower zoned density that then prevailed. The exist- ing system is operating at near capacityy signlevelsant and will be insufficient to support organized. Under the sponsorship of the Little River Com- merce Association or*otr private de el op ent uc- mechanisms a parking garage ted in which property owners would be able to purchase parking spaces commensurate with their anticipated future needs. The ability of businesses to transfer their current on -site parking to a centralized location off -site kilt allow for additionalexpansion space for their present location and provide iness- es which do not have any on -site parking and are presently leasing space throughout Little River. 1 ntlunici all owned arkin facilities should bea e consolidated at one location and a arkin should be constructed. Through the sale or trade of property presently owned by the Off -Street Parking Authority, a site should be purchased for the construction of one centralized parking structure providing space for 300-500 vehicles. S nn od Stir'Um loca- tion would be between N. 1st and N. E. nd N. E. 80th Terrace. and N. E. Znd Avenue. Consideration should also be given to the development of a joint public -private parking structure that and also d be eode et0Pedremon - a condominium basis, o{develop . site parking for businesses. This type ment should only be considered if a strong econ- omic backing is available from the business cocur. munity and further business expansion 3. A Special Assess aise off str t parkin center established to ee com eTc cial pro ep roes to provide a aired under cu e space e in standards• Such an chan a in Section 56 of the Charter of the C of Miami. An assessment could be placed on all properties presently not providing ° spaces within the proposed the required parking district. Funds derived from this assessment would be used for the development of a public off-street parking garage within the district. t Parkin and a b a (re�i east 75 p or e in al a cen rren Di the n ex nd bus of the par kin off-street park - action would re uire a rict should be con the st uc on 0 e River n con ness) mer failin Real property could be assessed on a poet/ d ndtage of parking spaces that are not being provifn based on current ordinance requirements. orderLessen , the assessmenthardship couldld be potential to small property rtt y owners, ap- plied to commercial structures and to strre uctu al - containing four or more units, which This gmeneral- ly classified as income-producing.y prove a useful device in encouraging the private sector to take action to increase within the number speciaof off-street parking spaces benefit district. Such a program has been utilized in Baltimore County. Maryland, to provide low-cost shopper parking. Benefits derived include: the excessive area currenvly sde voted and to on -site parking, creating functional barriers within the con-mintit',. could be reduced. the difficulty private developers have in obtaining parcels of sufficient size for redevelopment due to the excessively xc s scald be fragmented ownership p alleviated. new opportunities for expansion and con- solidation of business along existing con- .- mercialcorridors would be provided. 39 i 11 i B. Restrict the amount of surface parking. 1. Amend the zoning ordinance ARTICLE XXIII, Off -Street Parking and Loading, Section 2, (Location, Character and Size) to include: .11VE` L. _ ITS VI. A. ii. All commercial structures over 100, 000 square feet located within the R -C, C-1 and C-2 zoning dis- tricts shall provide at least 50 per- cent of their required parking withir, an enclosed structure. This :measure wiII prevent the further ex of the excessive amount of surface parking that fragments the Community. Acquire additional public off-street parkin h t if the construction of a parking garage is un- fea sible. a. Acquire two corner parcels at N. E. 1st Place and N. E. 82nd Terrace. b. Acquire a site west of the Post Office along N. E. 1st Avenue. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION The Intersection of N. E. 79th Street and N. E. 2nd Avenue should be improved. Traffic studies conducted at this intersection by Dade County Department of Traffic and Transpor- tation resulted in inclusion of a left -turn lead for the eastbound traffic on 79th Street which will sub- 11 II I 111- EN-__ N ENE:RENE ar ell- N= :N:EWE ENE EN 411 ells r: =■ EN :Nis :N EN: -N_ EN: ?N axemssissssss _N_ ors N_- EN t AREA STUDY ■1111111af111111 uNpER 20' RAVED W10TH sssssssstaass; ills CURBS 04 GUTTERS WtOENh' G OP STREETS LITTLE RIVER PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENTS C iTv OF NI.AMI HL ANN. NC: OEDAATMENT • JUNE, Ite'Y_f 1111.111•1111I NI 1 stafltiallv irnprOvethe operation of the intersection and reduce accidents related to left -turn move- ments. This modification will require changes in the signal phasing coordination of this progression with the traffic signals at 80th Terrace and 82nd Street on N. E. 2nd Avenue. B. N. E. 4th Court should be extended and widened. The proposed extension and widening of N. E. Ith Court to Biscayne Boulevard should be examined for its residential impact by Florida Department of Transportation and the City of Miami. Local streets that are presently lacking curbs, gutterndssauirelesurfacin shp_Ad_b_9.1_3.u_r_aded and To accomodate the proposed increase in commer- cial and residential densities, the local street sys- tem must be improved. A portion of the study area west of N. E. 2nd Avenue has tentatively been included within the proposed Phoenix Park Street improvement district. Recommended improve- ments include widening, resurfacing, curbing, guttering and landscaping. VII. PUBLIC/PRIVATE COORDINATION A Public/Private Task Force should be formed. The aim of this task force would be to work for the implementation of theproposals set forth in the plan and for the continued re- development of the area. Plriodic meetings should be scheduled to review current problems. This Task Force would be jointly sponsored by the City of Miami Planning Department and the Little River Commerce Association and should include residents of the area. c. SU 1\0[1! PPErEIT Recent expansion of office space. the construction of mini warehouses and the ability demonstrated by Little River to attract new firms to the area are all strong indications that significant redevelopment can he achieved. The development of Little River as a viable office center will require joint efforts by government agencies and the business community. Unlesb strong interest, commitment and finan- cial backing is forthcoming from the private sector the pro- posed framework for redevelopment will he unable to create a receptive environment. The purpose of this report has been to establish framework: for the revitalization of the Little River Commercial Center. The public actions to he given priority are as follows Implementation of proposed zoning changes - City of Miami intersection and Signalization Modification at N. E. ORT!VE 2nd Avenue and N. E. 79th Street rTSDade County. Department of Transportation FLA 'II fiv voiy, The Development of Vest Pocket Parks and Pedes- trian Linkages -- City of Miami, Department of Parks and F'...ec re- ation, Off -Street Parking Authority Upgrading the Sanitary Sewer System -- City of Miami. Department of Public Works Repair and p0ildtng of Local Streets 't\ 4t -- City of %Miami, Department of Public Works Beautification of N. E. Znd Avenue, N. E. 79thtreet) Street and Little River Parkway (N. E. Dade County, Department of Public Works Department of Public Works, Department of Parks and Recreation Consolidation of Municipal Parking Facilities into Centralized Garages City of Miami, Off -Street Parking Authority The construction of a new Fire Station #9 at the Auto Test Station Site City of Miami, Fire Department The conversion of the Little River Library into a Community -Civic Center City of Miami, Department of Parks and Recreation The creation of a Public/Private Task Force to assist in Planning and Imp City of Miami, Planning Department Private actions to be given priority are, as follows: The creation of a Private Development Corporation under the sponsorship of the Little River Commerce Association to consider: sponsoring the construction of private parking condominiums sponsoring a program to refurbish commercial properties coordinating privately funded landscaping along commercial streets funding the construction of entr}nvay signs publicizing Little River in order to help create a more positive image soliciting new businesses for the area coordinating cooperative advertising programs C';ry of Miami, Department o: Public Wor"i