HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #5 - Discussion ItemTt,: I-~db~~~ble M ~tn'h~~ s t~f the
BATE: ~Gr ~,, 8 1~~ t=tt.E:
Clty Cr~mrnission
suB.tECT: planning Study far Cocanut Grove
qq ~~~~ #
+~~ La:•tti++~'LE~l~,~-"Z.~ Information presented to City~Comrri
FRbM: P~ w. Andrews REFERENCES: '-
City Manager fission by Planning Director on Septerr~:
ENCt.osuRES: ber 19th modifying the Planning Study
for Coconut Grove
In response to a request by the Commission on September 19, 1974, during
the Public Hearing on THE PLANNING STUDY FOR COCONUT GROVE,
the following are the recommended modifications to the Planning Study.
These recommended modifications are the result of discussions between
the Planning Department and the Coconut Grove Advisory Planning Com-
mittee, public agencies and various private interests.
Page 20 - #5 - Plan proposal of R-3A revised to R-3 to accommodate.
HUD elderly project.
Page 21 - #12 - Plan proposal of R-3A be changed to R-CC. Same intensity
but allows business and professional offices as well as
residences.
Page 21 - # 13 - Plan recommendation remain R - 3 but with Planned area
development opportunities to allow up to FAR of 0. 9 and
height of 48' or 4 stories.
Page 22 - #14 - Plan proposal of R-4 changed to R-3 but with Planned area
_ development opportunities to allow up to an FAR of 1. 0,
a height of up to 90 feet or 8 stories, and a density limit
not to exceed 500 units based on the traffic impact on
Bayshore Drive and surrounding community.
Map following Page 24 -Village Center Shopping District
Amend pedestrian street designation to include north aide
of Grand Avenue from Virginia Street to Mary Street. Add
to C-2A District area the rear half of lots adjacent to
Elementary School, presently zoned R-2.
Page 23 - # ib - Modify C-2A District to accommodate bonus incentive provisions
to encourage multiple use development, additional pedestrian
oriented plazas and outdoor retail activities, underground
parking, and pe rforming arts facilities, with a maximum FAR
of 1. ?5. No change in height limit of 4 floors.
~.
~~~ ~ ~ 15x4
~t~no~able 1Vlertzbers of the City Cotrir~issaoi-
Page 30 - #12 " A Farlane and Gra di ntersect on togn lode an alternative
Mc
design that would:
__ provide for 2 way traffic on all streets in Village Center.
__ Retain all advantages of one-way street system including
wider walkways, exclusive pedestrian signal phase;
bike lane and McFarlane Road improvements, and
landscaping.
Page 33 - # 1 Poinciana Street traffic diversion should be located at
ore effectively control
t
o m
Braganza Street rather than Plaza
conflicting through traffic.
Page 36 - #3-6_- Lane limo
establbshed that 4 lanes es
b
it
l
e
can
future date
h
until at s
would be essential to move traffic.
Amend list of streets to be considered for reductions in zoned
Page 38 right of way to include:
-- Center Street
-- Mary Street from Oak to W. Trade
-- Virginia Street from Oak to Coconut Avenue
-- Matilda Street
__ Allamanda Street
-- GiFford Lane
__ Florida Avenue from Brooker to Douglas and from
McDonald to Matilda
__ Day Avenue from Virginia to 27th Avenue
-- Shipping from Virginia to 27th Avenue
__ Bird Road from Dixie to Mary Street
__ W. Trade from Virginia to 27th Avenue
__ Catalina Street
-- Louise Street
__ Oak from Brooker to Douglas Road
-- Percival from Brooker to Douglas Road
Page 40 - #3 - Delete recommendation for sidewalks on Virginia Street.
~,;,
• •
~#ondra~ila Nt+~rr~befs of the City Commisaior- ~~ $ D ~g74
sage 4~ - #8 - Sidewalk should be on west side instead of east side.
page 40 ~ ~2ecommend additional consideration far pedestrian overpass
over Dixie Highway near Alatka Street.
Page_51 - Addition of Villa Sevena to list of historic structures.
p00
"DOCUMENT INDEX
ITEM N0. __..
• ., . _
F ~ ..
_.
crr~ d~ t~iaMi, rat o~tt~~
' 1iV"Y'~R•OFFt~E IV1EM~bRANbUM
..
DATE: SEP 1 g ~~4 F~l.~:
Tb: ~~ifi~~~bte iVli~~b~rs +~f the
Ci#~y fui~nmisso~- sue.,ECT: Summary: Special Planned
Development and SPD~ 1 bistrict;
- City Commission Meeting,
~' REFeaENCes5eptember 23, 1974
aROn~~ y~', Andrews
City Manager ENC~osuRes:
Pursuant to the request of the Commission at their meeting of
September 12, 1974, this memorandum presents a brief summary
of the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
pertaining to Special Planned Development Districts, Generally and
the SPD-1 Central Island District.
~.
~'
~"
Article.IV, Section 43
'fe.cial,Planned.ISeveloptri~nt, Dist~ictsy ,generally
Intent
The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance entitled
Special Planned Development Districts, Generally is intended to permit the
establishment of special planned development (SPD) districts in certain
areas of the community which because of their specialized uses, function,
or environmental importance require special land use controls to ensure
the most effective and harmonious development or redevelopment.
General Description
1. This Article does not in itself establish a new zoning district.
It merely sets forth the basic "enabling legislation. "
Z. The Ordinance is flexible. SPD regulations may replace
existing zoning districts or act as an "overlay district. "
3. Before recommending the special planned development approach
it must be clear that public objectives will be served to a greater
or equivalent degree than by conventional zoning.
4. All SPD districts must be in accordance with the comprehensive
plan and other officially approved plans for the City.
5. The ordinance provides general provisions and procedures for
potentiat transfer of development rights in special planned
development districts.
Procedures for Approval of SPD Districts
1. Proposals for the location of specific SPD districts may be
initiated by the Planning Department, the Planning Advisory
Board, or the City Commission.
2. Atl regulations for specific SPD Districts shall be prepared
by the Planning Department.
3. SPD districts are established only following recommendation
by the Planning Department and the Planning Advisory Board
and enactment of Zoning Ordinance amendments by the City
Commission.
Page 1 of 3
_~:,
~`
~, Once an 5"PIS District is este.blished by the Commission:
~eveloprnent witl~iri the district must be in accordance with
the specific 5'PD regulations. If a special application is
required, i. e. concept plan, it must be reviewed by the
Planning Department and the Planning Advisory Board and
brought to the City Commission for approval
Article XXI-3 SPD-1 Central Island District
Intent
It is the intent of the SPD-1 Central Island District to promote the most beneficial
and creative development of island areas in Biscayne Bay which are in close proximity
to the Central Business District. The ordinance encourages appropriate mixtures of
land uses and intensities compatible with the near mainland areas. Special considera-
tion is given to determinations of the potential impact of the development or redevel-
opment within the District upon existing traffic and transportation systems, educational
facilities, public utilities., market conditions and ecological system.
General Description
1. The ordinance specifies that the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for
a residential development in the district is 1. 0 plus possible bonuses
up to a total of 1.76. The maximum FAR for a mixed residential,
commercial and office development (with residential comprising
seventy-five (75) percent of the floor area) is 1. ?5 plus possible
bonuses up to a total of 2. 5.
2. At least fifty (50) percent of the gross area of the district be devoted
to pedestrian and recreational open space and that thirty-five (35)
percent of the gross area be devoted to ground level open space.
3. Bonus provisions are also provided for a pedestrian waterfront ease-
ment, unenclosed areas at ground level of buildings and principal
ground level open space. Density may be increased if a certain
percentage of workers live on the island.
4. Other features of the ordinance include special yard and open space
requirements and spacing requirements between buildings.
} Page2of3
3
t
..
• •
5. ~rtential transfer of development rights is provided; however,
s~secial approval by the City Com~rriission is required.
6. Development proposals within the district must be accompanied
by an acceptable application, including a "development concept plan"
fully describing the proposed uses, intensities and environmental
impact of the development.
7. Determination of the permitted uses and appropriate intensity of
develapment within the district shall be made only after a review
of the application by the Planning Department, the Planr~g Advisory
Board and the City Commission.
Procedures for Review of Application
1. Once an area is rezoned to the SPD-1 Central Island District an
application is required.
2. The application including the development concept plan is referred
to the Planning Department for review and recommendation.
3. The Planning Advisory Board will hold a public hearing on the
proposed development and then forward its recommendations to the
City Commission.
4. The City Commission will then hear the application and make
appropriate determinations approving or disapproving the proposed
development regarding the permitted uses, appropriate floor area
ratio shall also be made at that time.
5. Once the application is appraved by the City Commission all future
development must be in accordance with the approved development
concept plan. The developer must submit final development plans
for each building or stage of the dE~velopment program for approval
by the Planning Department.
6. If any major change is proposed in the use, intensity or character
of the approved development the developers must submit a new
application in accordance with the original procedures.
GJA:JWaVi:JAR:jd 1900
Page 3 of 3
"DOCUf~iENT I~~.~E
ITEM N0.
,.:
.:
,yam.. u _..,_ ~..-... -.. ..
- __ _ - _ --
-~.,.- --
. ,~
~r,~~~~r~ tl+r~w~r~~ir~rji~~ti ~~r~r~rr~~l~i~i
pr+~sident
5epter 1~, 19~k,
The Honorable Maurice Ferre
Mayor, City of Miami
P. Q. box 708.
Miami, Florida
Dear Mayor Ferre:
As a major property owner (about.2 acres on 8rickell Avenue who plans
to develop property for office building use, 1 want to indicate my
approval and support for the Claughton island development.
I. recognize that this is potential competition for my own utilization
but feel that the economic benefits to our community as well as the
increased activity in the. downtown area outweigh any narrow competitive
disadvantages. I urge your support for this important project. Please
convey this to your fellow Coamissioners for me.
S ncer ly, /")
umberg
D8/bh
executive offices 1440 bricke!! avenue miami, florida 33131