Ord. No. 23-01-1754ORDINANCE NO. 23 -01 -1754
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH MIAMI FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE
SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND
USE CATEGORY FROM THE MDCED -USE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL
CATEGORY TO THE TODD, TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
CATEGORY ON PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 THROUGH 25,
BLOCK 15, LARKINS TOWNSITE SUBDIVISION. THE SITE IS BOUNDED ON
THE SOUTH BY S.W. 70TH STREET, ON THE EAST BY SW 59TH PLACE, ON THE
NORTH BY SW 69TH STREET, AND ON THE WEST BY SW 613T AVENUE;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Application No. LPA -01 -001 was submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department
by Shoal Creek Properties L.L.C. said application requesting to amend the Future Land Use Map of the
South Miami Comprehensive Plan by changing the future land use category from the Mixed -Use
Commercial Residential category to the TODD, Transit Oriented Development District category on
property legally described as Lots 1 through 25, Block 15, Larkins Townsite Subdivision, said site is
bounded on the south by S.W.70°i Street, on the east by S.W. 59°' Place, on the north by S.W. 69t` Street,
and on the west by S.W.6I' Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on , July 10, 2001, after Public Hearing regarding the proposed amendment, the
Local Planning Agency recommended approval of the application subject to certain conditions, by a vote
of 5-0: and
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to accept the recommendation of the Local Planning
Agency and enact the aforesaid amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That the Future "Land Use Map of the South Miami Comprehensive Plan is
hereby amended by changing the future land use category from the Mixed -Use Commercial
Residential category to the TODD, Transit Oriented Development District category on property
being legally described as Lots I through 25, Block 15, Larkins Townsite Subdivision, said site
bounded on the south by S.W.70th Street, on the east by S.W 59th Place, on the north by S.W.
69th Street, and on the west by S.W.61" Avenue.
Section 2 . That the development regulations applicable to the subject property shall be as specified
in the Land Development Code and as set forth in the zoning use district amendment ordinance which
will be required to be adopted in order implement the proposed development of the site.
Section 3 If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid
or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 4 All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are
hereby repealed.
Ord. no. 23 -01 -1754
PA
Section 5 This ordinance shall become effective thirty -one (3 1) days after the adoption of this
amendment.
I' Reading - July 24, 2001
2nd Reading - October 2, 2001 (as amended)
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:
-g�ff/ g 4A.L,
CITY ATTORNEY
COMMISSION VOTE:
5 -0
Mayor Robaina:
Yea
Vice Mayor Feliu:
Yea
Commissioner Russell:
Yea
Commissioner Bethel:
Yea
Commissioner Wiscombe:
Yea
Excellence, Integrity, Inclusion
To: Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor Date: October 2, 2001
City Commission
From: Charles Scurr RE: Agenda Item #
City Manager / Comprehensive Plan Future
Land Use Map Amendment: Shoal
Creek Properties
Request:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP OF THE SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY
CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY FROM THE
MIXED -USE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY TO THE
TODD, TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CATEGORY
ON PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 THROUGH 25,
BLOCK 15, LARKINS TOWNSITE SUBDIVISION. THE SITE IS
BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY S.W. 70TH STREET, ON THE EAST BY
SW 59TH PLACE, ON THE NORTH BY SW 69TH STREET, AND ON THE
WEST BY SW 618T AVENUE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map amendment in order to
construct a residential apartment building with 294 dwelling units and 6,812 square feet of
commercial / office space, according to the information submitted with the application. The
height of the proposed structure is six stories. The apartment building is designed to cater to
graduate and married students of the University of Miami and young professionals who are
looking for the convenience of the Metro -Rail and have easy access to most necessities within
walking distance.
The subject property encompasses the entire block bounded by SW 70th Street on the south, SW
59th Ave. on the east, SW 69th Street on the north, and SW 61St Ave. on the west. The property
consists of 23 vacant lots and two lots occupied by a one -story building currently used as a
Future'Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 2 of 9
dentist office. The site does not have any significant features other than the fact that a number of
large mature trees are scattered through out the site.
The subject property has a current Land Use designation of "Mixed Use Commercial
Residential ". The applicant has applied to the City to have the site's Future Land Use Map
category changed to the "Transit- Oriented Development District (TODD)" category.
PREVIOUS APPLICATION
In July, 2000 an application was submitted to the City requesting a Comprehensive Plan Land
Use amendment to the TODD category for the same property plus 9 additional lots facing SW
59`h Place. The size of the development parcel was 2.68 acres. The application, filed by JPI
Apartment Development, L.P., was proposing a similar residential development of 6 stories with
306 dwelling units and 3000 square feet of retail space. At the Local Planning Agency's meeting
on August 29, 2000, the applicant requested a deferral.
In April 2001, a revised application was submitted for the same block excluding the lots facing
SW 59th Pl. A smaller residential building containing 225 units was proposed. The revised
proposal was not heard by the Planning Board due to the lack of a quorum at the Board's
scheduled May 8, 2001 meeting. The applicant on June 6, 2001 submitted a third revised
application that is the subject of this report.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS: GENERAL INFORMATION
All proposed development projects must be compatible with the policies contained within the
Comprehensive Plan and with the land use categories listed in the Plan and as shown on the
Future Land Use Map (FLUM). A property owner or developer may want to use a property for a
use, which is not permitted in or exceeds the standards specified for the land use category
applicable to the site. This will require, as is the situation of the subject application, an
amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
An amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan Document or the Future Land Use Map
requires the adoption of an ordinance by the City Commission after receiving a recommendation
from the City's Local Planning Agency (Planning Board). Following adoption by the City
Commission, (after second reading of the ordinance) the application package is then submitted to
the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). This amendment qualifies as a small -
scale amendment; therefore, DCA will not review or comment upon the application unless a
compliance protest is filed within a specified time period.
The review process for a Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map amendment differs from the
process used to review zoning district changes, variances, and site plans. A future land use map
amendment review is concerned with the following basic issues: 1) compatibility of the proposed
use with surrounding uses; 2) compatibility of the proposed density and height to the limits
contained in the Plan and to the immediate neighborhood; 3) impact of the proposed use on the
City's infrastructure and; 4) is the amendment compatible with and does it advance the City's
objectives and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 3 of 9
COMPARISON OF LAND USE CATEGORIES
The applicant's request to amend the Future Land Use Map is a result of limitations contained in
the City's Comprehensive Plan for the existing land use category. The Mixed -Use
Commercial /Residential category, in which the proposed development site is located, mandates
mixed use development (office, retail, residential), whereas the proposed development is
primarily a residential development with limited amount of retail /commercial space.
The proposed development deviates from the standards set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for
the Mixed -Use Commercial /Residential land use category. The proposed development is more
appropriate for the TODD Land Use category and meets the standards set forth for TODD. The
maximum height of six stories for the project exceeds the maximum height of four stories
allowed in the Mixed -Use Commercial /Residential category but is within the TODD height
limitation of maximum of eight stories. The current Mixed -Use Commercial /Residential land use
designation further mandates that all developments shall be subject to a maximum residential
density of 24 units per acre. The density of the proposed project is 105 dwelling units per acre
will exceed the maximum permitted standards of the existing land use category. The TODD
category on the other hand does not impose development limitations in the form of dwelling
units per acre. Therefore the higher density would be permissible if the parking requirements are
met.
A full description of these categories also appears on p.23 of the Comprehensive Plan (copy of
the page is attached to this report).
SITE ANALYIS
HISTORY OF SITE
The City's records indicate that most of the previously exiting structures on this now vacant site
were built during the periods of 1920 -39 and 1950 -59. There were single - family residences
facing SW 70th Street and SW 69th. All of these buildings have been demolished.
In 1980, the subject site was part of the planning area for the South Miami Station Area Profile, a
part of the Dade County Station Area Design and Development Program. The report issued at
Comprehensive Plan
Land Development Code
Actual Use
Existing Land Use
Existing Zoning District
Category
North
Multifamily Residential
RM 18
Residential Condominium
Low density multi - family
117 units; 2 stories
2 story maximum perInitted
East
TODD
TODD (MU -4)
US Post office
2 story maximum permitted
South
Mixed Use Commercial/
MO/ Medium Intensity office
Hotel; Offices
Residential
4 story permitted
Mostly 4 stories
West
Mixed Use Commercial/
H/ Hospital/ height compatible
Hospital parking lot
Residential
w/ surrounding area
HISTORY OF SITE
The City's records indicate that most of the previously exiting structures on this now vacant site
were built during the periods of 1920 -39 and 1950 -59. There were single - family residences
facing SW 70th Street and SW 69th. All of these buildings have been demolished.
In 1980, the subject site was part of the planning area for the South Miami Station Area Profile, a
part of the Dade County Station Area Design and Development Program. The report issued at
Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 4 of 9
that time, designated the block as an opportunity area as a secondary commercial district where
significant redevelopment could occur.
The City's 1989 Comprehensive Plan identified the subject property in the Future Land Use Map
as "Medium- Intensity Office," four -story maximum height. In 1994, the adopted "Hometown
Plan Area 2" refers to the subject area in a section on the height of buildings and in a section
outlining specific proposals. The first reference addresses how the City should respond to
proposals which exceed four stories in height; the second addresses potential uses for the block
(mixed use with residential uses facing north). Excerpts from this plan document (pp 15, 20) are
attached.
In 1996, the subject block was part of a larger Comprehensive Plan amendment, which changed
the Future Land Use Category from Medium - Intensity Office Use to a new category, "Mixed -
Use Commercial /Residential." This amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was part of the City's
Evaluation and Appraisal Report, subsequently adopted by the City in 1997. The new land use
category was created to implement development concepts from the Hometown Two Charrette.
In 1998, upon suggestions from the Department of Community Affairs, the Land Use category
was amended to include development standards of 1.6 F.A.R. for the total development including
24 dwelling units per acre.
CURRENT PLANNING
The City's Zoning Task Force is in the process of reviewing the entire Land Development Code.
Its recommendations are expected to be completed by September 2001. A subcommittee of the
Task Force has examined the TODD zoning district. The Task Force has recommended the
expansion of the TODD (zoning district and land use district) to include additional blocks,
including the site subject to this application. The Task Force has also recommended allowing for
building heights to transition from four to eight stories. The eight stories would be limited
primarily along the properties abutting the transit station, four stories along the outer limits of the
TODD boundaries and six stories in between. A six (6) story height limit is recommended for the
subject property.
REZONING APPLICATION
The Land Use Map amendment is a pre- requisite for a future zoning district change application,
which will specifically allow for the new development. In order to proceed with the development
as proposed the applicant will also be required to submit a rezoning application in order to
change the current zoning district from the "MO ", Medium - Intensity Office Use District to the
"TODD (MU -5) ", Transit Oriented Development District (Mixed -Use 5) Use District. The
applicant has submitted a rezoning application that was reviewed and recommended upon by the
Planning Board at its August 28, 2001 meeting. The first reading of the rezoning ordinance was
held at the City Commission meeting on Septemberl8, 2001.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT REVIEW
1. Compatibility of Use: The proposal to place a residential development on this site is
permitted by the definition of the TODD Future Land Use Category. A residential
Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page .i of 9
development at this location would take full advantage of being adjacent to the transit station
and within walking distance of shops, post office, hospitals, restaurants and other amenities
of the downtown area. The use would also provide a transition between lower density
residential to the north and commercial development to the south.
2. Compatibility of Density/Height: The TODD land use category allows for a maximum
height of eight stories (four stories granted via incentives). The proposal to build six stories,
including a six story parking garage, is within the height limits of the TODD. The TODD
does not specify limits on residential density, which is generally expressed in terms of units
per acre. The developer has indicated that the project is contemplated to have 294 units, or
105 units per acre.
3. impact on Public Facilities: An important element of the land use map amendment is to
assess the impact of the contemplated development on the public infrastructure serving the
site. The developer, as part of his submission requirements, has submitted a document
entitled "Public Facilities Impact Report and Analysis of Comparable Projects" (attached)
which compares the infrastructure impact of the proposed development with what could be
built under the approved or existing land use and zoning use districts. For purposes of this
report, presented below is a summary of the impact of the proposed development on public
facility capacity.
a) Park/Recreation Facilities
Project 778 persons, requires additional 3.08 acres
LOS: City Comprehensive Plan: 4 acres per 1000 pop.
Capacity: sufficient: (Existing 57.6 acres, Required 52.2 acres before this project)
b) Schools
Project impact: 41 additional students
Capacity: School impact mitigation plan to be proffered by applicant (see Public Schools
letter dated 8/17/2000 attached)
c) Solid Waste
Project: 449.9 tons /annually; LOS: Determined by Miami -Dade County
Capacity: Applicant seeking County determination
d) Wastewater (Sewer)
Project: 62,200 gallons /per day; LOS: Determined by Miami -Dade County
Capacity: Applicant seeking County determination
e) Potable Water
Project: 62,200 gallons /per day; LOS: Determined by Miami -Dade County
Capacity: Applicant seeking County determination
Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 6 of 9
f) Traffic /Streets
Project: 1902 Average Daily Trips (Res. & office)
2084 Average Daily Trips (Res. & retail)
Capacity: sufficient, based upon:
Florida Department of Transportation review letter attached dated 8/18/2000
Applicant's engineer's report Traffic Impact Analysis (June, 200 1)
4. Compatible with Comprehensive Plan.
A proposed Future Land Use Map Amendment should be compatible with and advance the
goals and policies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment is
consistent with and supports the following goals and policies:
HOUSING
Goal 1 To assure the availability of sound and affordable housing for all current
and future residents of the City of South Miami with special focus on infill
and redevelopment and to include housing units in the Hometown District.
Policy 1.3.6 The City and the County will jointly support development in the Rapid
Transit Zone in order to encourage mixed -use residential multi - family
projects containing affordable housing units.
LAND USE
Policy 2.1.4 Discourage urban commercial sprawl by promoting growth in the core
area surrounding the Metrorail transit station by creating a district for the
new growth which is contained and transit - oriented, thereby relieving the
pressure for commercial re- zonings outside of this core area
Goal To achieve a tax base adequate to support a high level of municipal
services via increased mixed -use and flexible building heights in
conjunction with a Transit - Oriented Development District [TODD].
STAFF OBSERVATIONS
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with and supports the goals and policies of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The property is located in the Community Redevelopment Area. The amendment request and
the proposed project are consistent with the goals and objectives of the CRA Board.
3. Any future development on this site will have to have a mitigation plan for the mature trees
on site.
The existing land use category, Mixed Use Commercial /Residential, mandates a mix of uses
in order to create an active urban fabric. TODD on the other hand encourages mixed -use
development but does not mandate it. In the context of a transit oriented district mixed -use
Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 7 of 9
developments are generally preferable. However, a residential development with adequate
service related commercial serving the residential development and the surrounding
community, creating a mix of uses, is highly desirable. Such a development provides the
"eyes on the street" active street life by providing activities not limited to only certain hours
of the day and is transit supportive.
5. A residential development, which introduces into the neighborhood a critical mass of
additional residents (primarily graduate students, married students, young professionals) will
create a social and economic synergy that would be beneficial to the immediate area where
the project is located and to the vitality of the community at large. The proposed
development has the strong potential for acting as a catalyst for further developments in the
area to improve the quality of life and to create a safer neighborhood.
6. The traffic pattern from a residential development is generally more dispersed through out
the day and night and has less impact on peak traffic. Traffic analysis of the development
currently permitted as- of- right, as compared with the traffic that will be generated by the
proposed residential development, indicates that the proposed land use change may actually
reduce the total number of vehicle trips generated by this property.
7. The proposed amendment, which would allow for the placement of a residential building at
this site, would be compatible with the surrounding properties. The extension of the TODD
future land use category to this site is appropriate based upon the need to encourage new
development in the vicinity of the transit station.
8. Commitments have been made from the developer to provide employment opportunities for
local residents, in order to contribute to the economic vitality of the important residential
community adjacent to the property.
9. A traffic study analyzing the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding
regional roadway network has been submitted by the applicant. The report states that the
proposed development will generate less rush -hour traffic than the currently approved land
use for the subject site, and will not have negative impacts on the surrounding roadway
network.
STAFF CONCERNS
1. The proposed height of the project must be compatible with the scale and density of the
surrounding properties. Planning Department staff recommends that the height of the
structures proposed for the site be limited to a maximum of 60 feet / 6 stories, in order to
achieve compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.
2. It is important that the proposed commercial square feet of street -level frontage on S.W. 59"
Place be utilized to provide appropriate community oriented commercial, retail and service
establishments, in order to meet the goals for vitality, watkability and urbanism contained in
both the Hometown Plan and the TODD concept.
' Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 8 of 9
3. The mechanism used to place limitations or conditions on a development project is the
submission and approval of a detailed site plan, which is part of the rezoning process.
Although the applicant has submitted an illustrative site plan and renderings, the
Comprehensive Plan amendment review process does not require site plan review. The
applicant has agreed to submit a rezoning application containing detailed site plans and
development parameters. This information will be helpful as part of the final review and
approval of this Future Land Use Map Amendment. The approval of the Plan amendment
and the rezoning application should occur simultaneously at the City Commission level.
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY (PLANNING BOARD) RECOMMENDATION
The City's Planning Board, acting in its capacity as the Local Planning Agency, conducted a
public hearing on the amendment application at its July 10, 2001 meeting. The LPA adopted a
motion recommending approval of the proposed amendment with the following condition:
"Applicant shall submit a rezoning application, with detailed site plans, which are
restricted to the following development parameters: a) Maximum number of dwelling units
300 b.) Maximum height of structures on the site —6 stories (60 feet);c) Maximum floor -
area -ratio —2.25; d) Minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. of retail / commercial space to be located
along the ground floor of the S. W. 591" Place frontage.
The rezoning application shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commission prior to
the second reading final adoption) of this Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendment. The
approval of the Plan amendment and the rezoning application would then occur
simultaneously at the City Commission level. "
The motion to approve the application with a condition was made by Mr. Comendeiro and
seconded by Ms Gibson. The motion was adopted by a vote of 5 aye 0 nays.
CITY COMMSSION ACTION
The City Commission at its July 24, 2001 meeting approved on first reading, the ordinance
amending the Comprehensive Plan as requested. At that time the Commission also specified that
the second reading and adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map amendment
would be scheduled at the same meeting as the rezoning application is considered.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
amendment be approved on second reading, subject to the subsequent adoption of the related
rezoning application and the conditions specified therein.
This ordinance would be effective on the date when the Florida Department of Community
Affairs issues a finding of compliance with applicable Florida State Statues.
Future Land Use Map Amendment
Shoal Creek Properties
October 2, 2001
Page 9 of 9
Attachments:
Proposed ordinance
Application
Letter of Intent
Location map
Letter from Miami Dade Public Schools dated August 17, 2000
Letter from Florida Dept. of Transportation dated August 18, 2000
Comprehensive Plan excerpt (p. 23)
Excerpt from Hometown Plan Area 2 (Nov 1994) pp 15, 20
Excerpt from Station Area Profile (Fall 1980)
Citizen Comment letter (6- 29 -01) (14 pp)
Citizen comment letters (2)
Planning Board Minutes 7 -10 -01
Public notices
Public Facilities Impact Report
CSAL /SAY
D: \Comm Items\200t \f0 -2 -01 \Comp Plan Amend. Shoal Creek report.doe
City of South Miami
Planning & Zoning Department
City Hall, 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida 33143
Telephone: (305) 663-6326; Fax: (305)666.4591
Application For Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Public Hearing Before Local
Planning Agency (LPA) & City Commission
Address of Subject Property: SW 70 St. & 59th Place Lot(s) I -25
Block 15 Subdivision Larkin Tc_n
PB
-Z-105
Meets & Bounds: Se "Alt Size of Property : 2.8 Acres
Applicant Phone:
Shoal Creek Properties. LLC. (305)
859-8420
Representative: Joseph G. Goldstein, Esq, Organization:
A kerman, Senterfitt &Edison, PA
One SE Third Street, 28th Floor
Address:
Miami, F. 33133 Phone:
(3 )
75 -5855
Property Owner:. Signature:
See Attached Exhibit "B"
Mailing Address: & Consent Letters Phone.
Arch itecUEngineerMouriz, Salazar & Assoc., Inc. Phone: (305)
—Miami- RI 331,56
273 -9911
AS THE APPLICANT, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROJECT:
_Owner _Owner's Representative 1yContract to purchase _Option
to purchase _Tenant/Lessee
APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR THE FOLLOWING:
SUBMITTED MATERIALS
PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE ITEM:
PLEASE CHE�'K!A,14 THAT APPLY:
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
_XLetter of irlteng
Text:
_XJustificatioris for change::: :
Future Land Use Map Amendment:
Public Facilities (rnpact'Pjepory
Future Land Use Map Amendment Note:See DCA Form RPM -BSP
(Small -Scale Map Amendment) Small -Scale i (Attached)
XPubli of o hership or letter,from owrer
— � " ,
_ Power of attorney
Briefly explair, application, cite specific Plan sections to be amended; or indicate
FLUM
- XContract to purchase
cafe o char e:
_X Current surrey (? original sealed and
Amendment to the Comprensive Plan to include the
signed /1 reduced copy C 11" x 17 ")
X 15 copies of Ci:E, Plan
Subject Property in the TODD (4 + 4) Land Use
_
1 reduced copy (!� 11" :; 17"
_ 20% Property owner signatures
District.
_ Mailing labels (3 sets) and map
THA nn nr urn
_ Required Fee(s)
•o•• -� •• ...,„t,��rou ayyucarwlt anu represents mat me intormahon and all submitted materials are true ana
c rrect to e best of the cant's ovule ge and belief.
Ap St azure and le Dale
&� A�
n receipt_ applicwio 5 and all submitted materials will be reviewed for compliance with the City's Land Development Code, Florida Statutes and Florid,
dministrative .Code and other applicable regulations. Applications found not in compliance will be rejected and retumed to me applicant.
OFFICE USE ONLY:
Date Filed Date of LPA Hearing Date of Commission
Petition Required?_ Petition Accepted Method of Payment
8/2/00
PROPERTY OWNER'S SWORN TO CONSENT
I, Eliana Gonzalez, as President of Dental Professional Group, Inc., which is the Owner of
the property legally described in the attached Exhibit "A," and which is the subject of the proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, do hereby grant consent to Shoal Creek Properties, L.L.C., to
file this application for a public hearing.
Dated at Miami -Dade County, Florida, this 2-4r day of f4k)y 2001.
DENTAL PROFE..$,S GNAE- 'iROUP, INC.,
By:
Print Name: ZLi Aw g l+e.s s t Oet
Address: s9ad r«+ caf rw P
f .%tIfpg a' JCL. 3 ?►X13
WI
Signature
Print Name: s o STQ ra �j A M t F{p
Signature
Print Nan
M Mll/IAMESSn206J tltp %nrotLDMSlt] /07
EXHIBIT A - THE LAND
Lots 1 & 2, Block 15, TOWNSITE OF LARKINS, Plat Book 2, at Page 105,
City of South Miami, Miami -Dade County, Florida.
(MIS74838:3}EXHIBIT B- SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE Page 1
FROM : ELIRS PHONE NO. . 305 661 5791
P12OP»RTX OWNTR'S SWORN TO CONrSL;T
Jun. aB 200" 02:27PM P1
We, George Elias, Jr., Richard A. Elias and G. M. Elias, as Owilm of the?toperty IWIly
describcd in the attached Exhibit '`A " and vkia, is the subject of the proposed Comprehensive
Flan Amendment, do hereby grant consent to Shoal Creek Properties, L.L.C., to fric this
application for a public hearing.
Dated at Miami-Dade County, Florida, this �_?,dsy o£
�'7
2001.
oS;
Vj i 1T(1 ^ 'i F TCUAIW A. ELIAS
( � JIZ{ �� X t /
Signature
Print Name:
°e
Print Name:
E9: • ,�1
Ft L Q. M. ELIAS
Signature
Print Nama:� h ('. �"�"'1 (1. (=, t 1 QS.._.l � • _____.'?R �%,�.,;
x7' i n
s4natufc - ' // -
Print Narre:�_Z rzL 44 ;
1.4A. Ovss'Ei tz'r%' cL'iOC:N=t
,
FROM ELIAS PHONE NO. : 305 661 5791 Jun. 08 2801 O2:27PVI P2
05/1.5/2001 14152 305- 655 -8410 .Td 14ARRIS P:1Gc
EXHIBIT A - THE LAND
Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 21. 22, 23, 24 and 25 of Block 15 of the Larkins iowmsite Subdvision, City
of South Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida.
4
)r.
Paga t
J.W. Harris & Company
2665 South Bayshore Drive • Suite 702 • Coconut Grove, FL 33133 Licensed Real Estate Broker
Telephone: 305.859.8420 • Facsimile: 305.859.8410 Licensed Mortgage Broker
June 8, 2001
Mr. Richard Lorber
Planning Director
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, Fl. 33143
Re: Shoal Creek Properties, LLC - Comprehensive Land Amendment
Dear Mr. Lorber:
Pursuant to our conversation we have included the consent letters from the Elias property owners and
the Dental Group for the remaining parcels, a revised form of Application For Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and Public Hearing Before Local Planning Agency (LPA) & City Commission, a letter
from Mr. Harris describing the boundary modification and a letter from Mr. Gwynn Babe Elias
agreeing to provide either a site plan or enter into a covenant prior to final adoption of the land use
change.
Furthermore, as we discussed, if the necessary information or documents are not provided to the
City by the other property owners our application will continue to move forward ws"thout any
delays and if necessary remove those properties from the boundaries so our arhatided property .s
approved for final adoption in a timely manner
I appreciate all your cooperation and your assistance in this process.
Sincerely,
J. W. HARRIS & COMPANY
Michael J. Getz
Development Director
cc: James Harris
Joe Goldstein, Esq.
File
James W. Harris
2665 South Bayshore Drive ® Suite 702 • Coconut Grove, FL 33133 Managing Member
Telephone: 305.859.8420 • Facsimile: 305.859.8410
June 8, 2001
Mr. Richard Lorber
Planning Director
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, Fl. 33143
Re: Shoal Creek Properties, LLC - Comprehensive Land Amendment
Dear Mr. Lorber:
As requested we are modifying the boundaries of the application to include all the property within
Block 15 lots 1 thru 25, of the Larkin Township Subdivision PB 2 -105 covering approximately 2.8
acres.
However, we are amending these boundaries to include additional properties but reserve our right
to reduce the size of the property in the future in the event that the owners of the other properties
being added to the application fail to provide documentation or information that the City or we deem
necessary in order to secure the approval of this application on the amended property in a timely
manner.
y.
W. Harris
ing Member
cc: Joe Goldstein, Esq.
Michael J. Getz
File
AKERMAN SENTERFITT
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Joseph G. Goldstein
(305) 755 -5855
s"n iv.jgoldstein @akerman.com
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Mr. Richard Lorber
Planning Director
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, FL 33143
SuVTRUSr INTERNATIONAL CENTER
ONE SOUTHEAST THIRD AVENUE, 28rn FLOOR
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 -1714
PHONE (305) 374 -5600 • FAX (305) 374 -5095
http: //w .akerman.com
June 21, 2001
Re: Shoal Creek Properties, L.L.C. ( "Shoal Creek ") / Third Amended Letter of Intent
and Filing of Modification to Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Dear Mr. Lorber
This constitutes the second amended letter of intent to the pending application originally
filed by JPI Apartment Development, L.P. ( "JPI ") for an amendment of the City of South Miami
(the "City ") Comprehensive Plan. As you may be aware, JPI filed an application during July of
2000 to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan / Future Land Use Map as it affected an
approximately 2.68 acre parcel of vacant and unimproved property located at S.W. 59' Place and
S.W. 70 "' Street in the City (the "Original Application Property "). That request was scheduled
for consideration by the City's Planning Board, but was deferred in order to allow the
Application to be amended, with the understanding that the configuration of the Original
Application Property may change in light of concerns expressed by certain owners of that land.
JPI was, at the time, the contract purchaser who had assembled the Original Application Property
through a series of purchase and sale agreements (the "Original Agreements ").
In one form or another, those Original Agreements were terminated or assigned, and or
new agreements have been reached with a new entity, Shoal Creek Properties, L.L.C. for the
acquisition of 1.98± acres of land (the "Revised Property "), which included the majority of the
Original Application Property. As part of our first amended application, we had included a
portion of right of way that was adjacent to Larkin Hospital. We had filed an application to close
a portion of S.W. 61" Avenue and had intended to make that closed road part of our application
area. A second amendment removed that portion of the application property and formally
withdrew our application to close that street.
(N11629588;21
FORT LAUDERDALE
AKERMAN, SENTERFITT & EIDSON, P.A.
JACKSONVILLE • ORLANDO TALLAHASSEE • TAMPA WEST PALM BEACH
Mr. Richard Lorber
6/21/01
Page 2
This amendment adds a land that was included in the Original Application Property and
another small parcel that is currently located on the corner of S.W. 59" Avenue and S.W. 69"
Street. Shoal Creek has entered into contracts to purchase the Revised Property described in the
attached Exhibit "A" (the "Final Revised Property ") and seeks to amend the Application in the
following manner:
(1) modify the area subject to the Application to be the Final Revised Property
of approximately 2.8 ± acres; and
(2) provide new plans, data, forms and supporting documentation to address
the revised plans of Shoal Creek.
The Final Revised Property is generally zoned as a Medium - Intensity Office District
(MO) in the City's Official Zoning Map and is generally designated as a Mixed Use Commercial
Residential district (which maintains a fifty foot height restriction) in the Comprehensive Plan /
Future Land Use Map. It remains Shoal Creek's intent to amend the Comprehensive Plan /
Future Land Use Map to include the Final Revised Property within the boundaries of the Transit
Oriented Development District.
The Property is situated directly across the street from the South Miami MetroRail
facility and parking garage, and is surrounded by the following: a United States Post Office and
the MetroRail facility to the east and southeast, respectively; Larkin General Hospital and a
parking lot to the west; a condominium development to the north; and the garage of the 117 room
Hotel Vila to the south. The Property is also located within a few short blocks of the University
of Miami campus. Shoal Creek believes that this location is perfectly situated for a student
residential facility, and is proposing the construction of a six -story rental apartment building of
300± units, to be designed and marketed to meet the housing needs of the area, particularly
young professionals who work downtown and need easy access to the MetroRail and to
University of Miami undergraduate and graduate students.
The local geography uniquely qualifies the Revised Property for inclusion in the City's
Transit Oriented Development District (TODD). The TODD was created by the City
Commission to surround the mass transit facility and to encourage high density uses which will
promote the efficiency of the land use. The purpose of the TODD is to maximize the presence
of the rapid transit center within walking distance of the district boundaries. As mentioned, the
Revised Property is directly across the street from the South Miami MetroRail facility.
Moreover, parcels east of, and one block south of the Property that abut the MetroRail facility are
designated as TODD's on the City's Future Land Use Map. As you may be aware, it is Shoal
Creek's understanding that the TODD designation had been considered for the Final Revised
Property in early transit committee meetings.
In addition, the facility proposed for the Final Revised Property is consistent with the
type of development intended for this land use designation. The maximum utilization of the
TODD encourages high density residential uses in multi -story projects that are characteristic of
{ M [629588;2 }
Mr. Richard Lorber
6/21/01
Page 3
transit - oriented developments. It is expected that residents of this facility will more regularly
utilize the rapid transit system for going to work downtown or for attending classes and
extracurricular activities at the University of Miami, who will also be more likely to walk and
ride bicycles rather than consistently using vehicular transportation.
Furthermore, redevelopment with high density uses is actually encouraged in the TODD
through flexible zoning regulations. Bonus allocations are provided in the City's zoning code
which are intended to accomplish the aforementioned goals of higher density residential
development which reduces vehicular traffic, while at the same time, encouraging a high quality
pedestrian environment. In short, the proposed apartment building is precisely the type of
transit - oriented development contemplated by the TODD.
As further justification for this application, an analysis of the impacts of the proposed
student housing facility was prepared by the Curtis & Kimball Company and provided under
separate cover for your review. In addition, preliminary site drawings and elevations are being
provided so that City staff will have the opportunity to visualize what is being proposed. We do
note, however, that the enclosed plans are conceptual and that they are being provided merely to
represent the intent of the applicant as to height, bulk and general design for the project.
Detailed site plans will be provided as part of the zoning application, should the City approve
this revised application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
To that end and based on the foregoing, Shoal Creek respectfully requests your favorable
recommendation of this request for an amendment to the City's Compr ensive Plan / Future
Land Use Map to include the Revised Property in the Transit - Oriented evelopment District.
attachments
cc: Mr. Michael Getz
Mr. J.W. Harris
Mr. Tony White
Stephen M. James, Esq.
MIAN114AMESS /1155116 /_,@k01!.D0C /612 U01
t M1629588;2 )
9
19
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment
s r'
'.1 E=
r;ZTW °sT
�\ , 7
SUBJECT
PROPERTY �.
EE
�i
N
Z
1410
XIM
SW ; 72N 17ATEN
7
11 ► li N 11 X11 /► .I► 11 :/1 • ►1 ►11 _
MIAMI -DADS uOUNT-Y_ PUB GSCHOOL .
LAND USE POUCYANDACQUISfiION - 1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Room 525 -
(305) 995 -7280
Roger C. Cuevas
Superintendent of Schools
Mr. Joseph G. Goldstein
Greenberg, Traurig, P.A.
1221 Brickell Avenue
Miami, FL 33131
32
August 17, 2000 Miami -Dade County School Board
Ms. Perta Tabares Hantman, Chair
Dr. Michael M. Krop, Vice Chair
Mfr. G. Holmes Braddock
Dr. Robert B. Ingram
M$. Betsy H. Kaplan
Mrs. Marty Sabatds Morse
Mr. Demetrio Perez, Jr., M. S.
Dr. Marta Perez
Dr. Solomon C. Stinson
Re: PendingSouth Miami Comprehensive Plan Amen dmen t/Tnnsit Oriented Development
District ( "TODD ")
Northwest Corner of S.V. 59`h Place and S.V. 70`h Street
Dear Mr. Goldstein:
Attached please find Miami -Dade County Public Schools' (MD CPS) preliminary review of impact
for the above referenced application. Based on the information recently provided to NIDCPS, the
proposed application of 242 additional units would generate a school impact of 41 students;
22 elementary school students, 10 middle school students and 9 senior high school students.
The proposed application currently creates concerns. The District would be glad to further discuss
this matter with you. However, please note that should you desire to propose a mitigation plan, it
must be forwarded through the District's Management Team process. Please be aware that all
mitigation proposals also require School Board approval.
If you have any questions, or wish to be scheduled before the Management Team, please call me at
305 -995 -4603.
Sincerely,
Sally Osborne
Supervisor
SO:aj
L467
Attachments
cc: Mr. Delio G. Diaz (AUG 2
Mr. Alex David
-'Mr. Subrata Basa
-- ,IN
Florida Department of Transportation
JEB BUSH OFFICE OF PLANNING • D1SMCr SR
GOVERNOR 602 SOLrrH MUM3 AVEn7I M'LS4 FLORMA 37130
FIIO \'R: POP 377-4410 act 4-2.5910
FAX: 0057 377 -56M (SC) A52 -Sa4
August 18, 2000
Mr. Joseph Goldstein, Esquire
Greenberg Trauria, P.A.
1221 Brickell Avenue
Miami, Florida 33131
Dear Mr. Goldstein:
THOMAS F. BARRY,
Post -It" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 [4,f .
�Ta
su�-a.`E'c.
vpom
ca.
s
Dept,
'
FhanaA
Fax .Y
(T
Fax ..
.. .
SUBJECT: City of South Miami: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Thank you for the opportunity to review your letter, dated July 27, 2000, and the attachments,
which outline the proposed amendment to expand the transit oriented development district. 1 have
reviewed the information, and it does not appear that the Department would have any issues with
the proposed amendment. Based on this information, it is unlikely that the Department would
have any objections, recommendations, or comments on the amendment when it is transmitted to
the Department of Community Affairs for review, provided there are no significant changes.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Phil Steinmiller, MCRP
Systems Planning Administrator
Gary Donri, District Director of Planning and Public Transportation
Subrata Basu, Assistant City Manager and Planning Director
mum" MR0.0
wvw.dot.state.fl.us ® RECYCLED p/PEp
Commercial Retail w )Mce (Two -Story) '
encouraging the containment of develo ment alone existing State and County hig _ " "`cnt by
_h design roadway
facilities (97 -lER)
Mixed -Use Commercial/Residential (Four - Story)
The mixed -use commercial.'residentiai land use category is intended to Provide for different levels of
retail uses. office uses. retail and office services. and residential duelling units with an em hasis on
mixed -use development that is characteristic of traditional downtowns. Permitted heights and intensities
shall be set forth in the Land Develo ment Code. Regulations regarding the permitted height, density
and intensih in zoning districts for areas designated as mixed -use commercial residential shall rovide
incentives for transit - oriented development and mixed -use development. Zoning regulations shall
reinforce "no widenings" policy set forth in the Traffic Circulation Element by encouraging use of
Nletrorail system. (97 -IER) Pursuant to the recommendation by the Department of Community
Affairs to include Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in the Comprehensive Plan (as opoos d to th
proyistons to the Land Development Code) the City adopts a F.A.R. of 1.6 for this land use
category which is the existing F.A.R. in the Land Development Code for the corresponding
zoning district. In addition. the City adopts a maximum residential density of 24 units per acre In
order to ensure a mix of uses. the City requires that a minimum of two of the above uses must ba
developed within this category ..For residential projects. at a minimt:m, at least one floor must
allow retail. For retail proiects. at a mimimum at least one floor must contain residential o
office. For office proiects at a minimum at least one floor must contain residential or r tail (9S
I ER)
Transit- Oriented Development District [TODD] (Flexible_Heiaht up to 8 stories)
The Transit - Oriented Development District is intended to provide for the develooment of off-ice uses.
office services, office - related retail, retail. retail services, and residential uses in multi -story and mixed -
use projects that are characteristic of transit - oriented developments Permitted heights and intensities
shall be set forth in the Land Development Code including design standard; Zoning regulations shall
encourage develooment within the TODD in conjunction with limiting ne%� development within the
Special Flood Hazard Area The City shall puree an incentives program for r develooment in ludin
flexible building heights and design standards- to insure that responsible. effective and aesthetically
pleasing proiects result (96 -IER)
Public -an4 Sem4—Ru4lie Institutional Uses (Four - Story)
The public and semi pablie institutional land use category is intended to provide tot u�b schools.
municipal facilities, utilities, and churches, temples. svnagogues and similar uses. Areas designated
public and a pmt institutional should not be used for other purposes without an amendment to this
plan. Zoning regulations could permit public and institutional se.rnj piibjjt uses on sites not so
designated by this plan.#oeh
I r dzxarteGh f made {e " .
arc (97 -1 ER)�s .
Educational Uses (os asub- category of the public institutional uses land use designation)
The "educational uses" land use sub - category is intended to provide for public schools uses Areas
designated as educational should not be used for other purposes without an amendment to this plan.
Zoning regulations could permit public educational uses on sites not so designated bv this plan Public
schools are hereby defined as public institutions of general education offering kindergarten through 12''
grade education or some substantial portion thereof, and are owned and operated by the Dade Count:
ocd. No. 12 -98 -1660. 8/4/98: DCA No. 98 -R1 EIe:IIelli 1
Pace `umber 23
c C
I
THE "HOMETOWN PLANT it
Detailing Additional Neighborhoods in
SO= ML"U'r FLORIDA
Dover, Kohl & Partners, Urban Design
with
Judson & Partners
Holland & Knight
Peter M.-Fernandez, PE
November 11, 1994
1-
Tile streets should be thought of as three - dimensional public slraces. The
buildings which front the streets form the walls of an agreeable spatial "room." If
the buildings are too low, the space dissolves (along with the shade and economic
productivity of the land). One -story buildings are inappropriate, for example, for
streets as wide or important as Sunset Drive, SW 59th Place, and SW 62nd Avenue;
buildings on these streets should be a minimum two stories in height.
uildino (lc
Presently a four - story height limit applies to most Sunset properties, although
there are taller existing buildings in the Sunset corporate corridor %chich were built
before that limit took effect. Strong feelings were expressed by some charrette
participants both for and against this regulation. By increasing the permitted height
to six or eight stories in certain circr»nstances v•ith special conditions, the
development attraction and the tax base could be enhanced. Such a change would
require an amendment to the City's Compreliensive Plan. This change, ijperr , ,
should he limited to properties fronting Sunset Drive or Sli' 62nd avenue south of
701h Street and north of Dcrie Highxcn. Two concerns arise from taller
buildings. but both are addressable:
First. there is concern about maintaining a human scale. Four stor,y. buildings
along the street create an agreeable street space and do not overwhelm pedestrians
or neighbors. If taller buildings are permitted, then they should be designed with
a sizable "step-back" terrace at the fourth floor terrace level, should include a
cornice or "expression line" betti%een the first and second floor, and should provide
an arcade over the sidewalk. The City should allotic exceptions to its jour -sto y
height crrsto»r only for buildings that are e.rerrrplan• in all other respects.
Second, there is concern that oversize developments, especially office
buildings, will generate undesirable traffic impacts. The issue is that large numbers
of workers will travel to single -use buildings at peak hours, congesting the road
network. If taller buildings are permitted. they could be required to include a
balanced mix of uses (with, for example, storefronts on the ground level, offices on
middle floors, and residences on upper floors). If taller office buildings are
permitted, they could be approved conditionally (upon, for example, the creation
of complintentar} affordable housing within walking distance.) The Cityshould
allotiti• exceptions to its jour - story height customs only jor developments that are
"self- ,rolcing" I ith regard to negative impacts on the surrounding neiohhnrhnnrl
15
Proper community pre; e, and visual blight Nvill be replac e n a setting that
inspires civic pride.
SW 70th Street and SW 71st Street:
• Continuing the pioneering effort of the Hotel Vila, infill the oversize parking
lots and vacant lots with new traditionally- scaled buildings. With the traffic
rerouting for north bound US motorists, properties fronting 70th Street will
• The blocks north of SW 70th Street between SIA'62nd Avenue and SW 59th
Place should have mixed -use buildings on their south half and residential
buildings (i.e. rowhouses) on their north half, to best face the Lee Park
Cooperative townhouse complex.
Ben fts: Economic development plus improved character and vitality.
Metrorail Station:
Add a "liner" building onto the
existing parking garage along 70th
Street and 59th Place.
Permit cart vendors or kiosks at the
transit entry plaza.
Re- orient the crosswalk at US I for the
shortest distance.
• Improve lighting within the gura-c.
Soncfts: The street will become a
safer place with retailer and office
workers providing "eyes on the street."
Both the streetscape and small park will be more attractive if faced by occupied
buildings rather than garage walls. Metrorail and local businesses will benefit from
new customers.
South Miami Post Office:
• Remove the chain link fence and barbed wire; these send a potent negative
message about the neighborhood.
• Plant trees along the sidewalks on the east and south of the site.
20
J
0 ;
WE
EJ
IF,
2 OQQ
I❑
Alo
i❑
\\ j
II,
ilea o I
LI ISTR
SUNSET OR. (5.w 72 stJ
— o !.
❑ C a❑' I
®O
OPPORTUNITIES
O
I
0 0 I
�I
,
D ION
El
r
J J _
r — —
In addition to the vacant tracts within the
station area where new development
may most obviously occur, there are at
least five distinct areas of the South
Miami Station area where the station
could spur significant new development.
The first tract (1) is that of the Holsum
Bakery, for it the bakery relocates, it
would leave a large, centrally located
tract of almost- 12 acres for redevelop-
ment.
The second area (2) is the area between
S.W 73rd and 74th Streets and S.W 57th
and 581h Avenues on the fringe of the
downtown. Here, vacant tracts and
large areas of at -grade parking indi.
cate the availability of the land, and
their location appears appropriate to
attract investment.
The third area (3) is the block im-
mediately south of the station site across
t�
1
votsutitaa'o: v
a
I
r
C-1
ar. I i
i
IL
U.S. 1, where sighifccnf private property
assemblage has e!ready occurred.
The fourth area (4) is immediately west of
the station site, in the blocks between
Sunset Drive, S.W. 69th Street, S.W. 541h
Place and SM. 62nd Avenue. Although
some significant structures exist here.
vacant land and many low intensity uses
could lead to significant redevelopment
of these blocks.
station site, despite its diversified own-
ership pattern, will likely see some
changes in usage. If these changes are
significant, theycould, in turn, lead to the
redevelopment of the tract north of the
industrial area on Red Road, currently to
game emporium. This piece of land has
C history of changing uses.
I
Jay F. Beckman if JUL 3 2001
6520 SW 65 Street
South Miami, FL 33143 FFIanning Department
June 29, 2001
South Miami Planning Board
Richard Lorber
City of South Miami
6130 Sunset Drive
South Miami, Florida 33143
Dear Planning Board,
This letter concerns the requested change in the future land use category of the
vacant site, located at the northeast corner of SW 70 St. and SW 61 Avenue, from the
Mixed -Use Commercial Residential (four -story height) to the TODD District category
(flexible height up to eight stories).
u ar
The proposed future land use /zoning change, with the current conditions of six - stories,
is opposed for the following reasons:
• Expansion of the TODD 4 +4 land use /zoning designation is not consistent with
the Hometown Plan.
• The proposed Land Use /zoning designation of TODD 4 +4, even with the current
conditions of six - stories, is not compatible with the scale (height) of
adjacent properties.
• The proposed increase in residential density increases the deficiency of city
recreation facilities.
• The impact on the local schools resulting from the proposed increase in
residential density has not been adequately addressed.
• Expansion of the TODD 4 +4 land use /zoning designation may ultimately lead to
over - development with respect to the traffic impact, which would adversely affect
residential neighborhoods.
• The proposed land use /zoning change is not compatible with many of the goals
and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
2
C__QMpatible With Hometown Plan
In 1993 the City of South Miami created it's "Hometown Plan ". One of it's major
thrusts was to limit buildings to four - stories, with certain arguable exceptions, in order
to maintain a small town atmosphere. The possible exception area was limited to
properties fronting Sunset Drive or SW 62 Avenue south of SW 70 Street and north of
Dixie Highway; and if six or eight -story buildings were permitted, they should be
designed with a sizable "step- back" terrace at the fourth floor level to maintain an
agreeable street space and to not overwhelm pedestrians or neighbors. The purpose
given for creating the exception area was: "By increasing the permitted height to six or
eight stories in certain circumstances with special conditions, the development
attraction and the tax base could be enhanced." In 1997 the Transit - Oriented
Development District (TODD) was established without the ability to require special
conditions as needed.
The proposed land use /zoning change to expand the TODD 4 +4 district, and the
existing TODD 4 +4 district, is not compatible with the "Hometown Plan" because (1) the
reasons given in the "Hometown Plan" Area 2 for allowing six or eight -story buildings,
in a confined area, do not exist anymore, (2) given the confined area and existing
buildings of four - stories or less, taller buildings cannot be reasonably fitted into the
area, (3) buildings taller than 4- stories are not consistent with the building design
principles given in the "Hometown Plan" area 2.
1. The reasons given in the "Hometown Plan" Area 2 for possibly allowing six or
eight -story buildings, in a confined area, do not exist anymore. One reason was to
enhance the development attraction. Renovation and new construction of buildings of
four - stories or less has greatly improved this area, and special incentives to attract
further development are not needed. The second reason given for allowing taller
buildings was to enhance the tax base. Increasing the building height by a few stories,
for a few buildings, cannot increase the tax base enough to have any appreciable effect
on property tax rates. Theoretically, if a larger area near the metorail were
redeveloped with taller buildings, the tax base could be significantly enhanced.
However, this over - development would adversely impact the aesthetics of the area,
public facilities, and the quality of life in the nearby single - family neighborhoods. This
would be a bad trade -off. Hence, the major concern should be that all buildings are of
high quality, are physically compatible with adjacent and nearby buildings, and beautify
the community. In the case of the subject property, this is best achieved by a four -story
limit.
2. Given the confined area, existing buildings of four - stories or less, and need to
step down building heights gradually to be compatible with the low-rise residential area
to the north; buildings taller than four - stories simply are not physically compatible with
the area. The distance between Sunset Drive and the existing low -rise residential
properties along 69 Street is only three blocks, and the area already is largely built out
mostly with buildings 4- stories or less. Most of these buildings are relatively new,
currently being constructed, or recently renovated.
3
It has been pointed out by City Staff that a subcommittee of the City's Zoning
Task Force has had preliminary discussions on expanding the TODD Zoning district to
include additional blocks including the property concerned in this application. It should
be recognized that many citizens, including the South Miami Homeowners Association
(SMHA), are opposed to this proposed zoning change because the possible harmful
effects caused by TODD zoning is greater than any possible beneficial effects. The
SMHA is working to get an initiative on the February 2002 Ballot to limit building
heights throughout the Hometown District to a maximum of 4- stories.
3. Buildings taller than four - stories are not consistent with the three design
principles for buildings given in the "Hometown Plan" Area 2. The first is included with
"Neighborhood Design Principles ", page 10, and states: "Compatible building types
should face one another across the street. Buildings should be placed along their
streets consistently to create harmony." The second is included with "Architectural
Design Principles ", page 11, and states: "The position and proportion of the building in
relation to the public space is far more important than the uses inside it or the style of
its architecture." The third included with "Building Height," page 15, and states: "First,
there is concern about maintaining a human scale. Four story buildings along the
street create an agreeable street space and do not overwhelm pedestrians or
neighbors." The best consistency with these design principles is achieved by
maintaining a four -story limit. In the case of the subject property, the proposed
six -story building would over -whelm the narrow, two -lane streets on all four sides; and
the two -story zoned properties on two sides.
Compatible With Adjacent Properties
In the City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Element,
Goals, Objectives and Polices; Policy 1.1.2 states, "In reviewing proposed amendments
to this plan and the Zoning Map, compatibility with adjacent uses shall be the major
determinant."
In order to assess the physical (building heights) compatibility of the proposed
development with adjacent properties, standards must be established. These
standards are given in the Comprehensive Plan and the Hometown Plan. Goal 1 of the
Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is, "To preserve and enhance the
City's small town character, especially the quality of life in the existing single - family
residential neighborhoods." Buildings taller than four - stories generally are not
consistent with a small town character, and the two reasons given in the "Hometown
Plan" Area 2 for possibly allowing taller buildings in a confined area, no longer exist
(see the previous section of this letter).
Building design principles are given in the "Hometown Plan" Area 2. The first is
included with "Neighborhood Design Principles ", page 10, and states: "Compatible
building types should face one another across the street. Buildings should be placed
along their streets consistently to create harmony." The second is included with
"Architectural Design Principles ", page 11, and states: "The position and proportion of
the building in relation to the public space is far more important than the uses inside it
or the style of its architecture." Hence, the Hometown Plan places the major emphasis
rd
on creating a physical harmony with the street space and surrounding buildings, rather
then on creating the largest building space that can be fit into an area.
Similar guidelines are given in the Modern Architectural classic, "A Pattern
Language," whose principles have been used extensively in the planning of small
cities and towns. in Pattern 21 it is stated, "In any urban area, no matter how dense,
keep the majority of buildings four stories high or less. It is possible that certain
buildings should exceed this limit, but they should never be buildings for human
habitation." In Pattern 96 it is stated, "Do not let the height of your buildings vary too
much from the predominant height of surrounding buildings. A rule of thumb: do not let
your buildings deviate more than one story from surrounding buildings. On the whole,
adjacent buildings should be roughly the same height."
It has been pointed out by City Staff that a subcommittee of the City's Zoning
Task Force is considering to expand the TODD and allow adjacent building heights to
transition as much as four - stories, such as from eight to four - stories. Such a proposal
is arbitrary and inconsistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and the Hometown
Plan.
For the subject property, the proposed six -story building is not compatible with
adjacent properties because (1) it is not compatible with existing adjacent buildings and
(2) it is not compatible with existing adjacent zoning districts.
1. An increased building height to six - stories is not compatible with the existing,
adjacent properties. To the east is a one -story Post Office. To the west is a parking
lot, then a two story building. To the north is a two story condominium complex. To the
south is a four -story hotel, a one story building at the corner of SW 70 Street and SW
59 Place, and a one -story building at the corner of SW 70 Street and SW 61 Avenue.
Hence, the subject property is bordered mostly by one and two -story buildings on three
sides and four -story buildings on one side. A three -story limit is compatible with
existing, adjacent properties.
2. An increased building height to six - stories is not compatible with the existing,
adjacent zoning districts, as shown on the City of South Miami Official Zoning Map.
The subject property is presently zoned Medium- Intensity Office (four -story maximum).
The property to the east is zoned TODD Mixed Use 4 (two -story maximum). To the
west is zoned Hospital (four -story maximum). To the north is zoned Low Density
Multi- family Residential (two -story maximum). To the south is zoned Medium - Intensity
Office (four -story maximum). Hence, the subject property is bordered on two sides by
zoning districts with a maximum height of four- stories, and on two sides by districts with
a maximum height of two- stories. A four -story limit is compatible with existing, adjacent
zoning districts.
Impact on Public Facilities
The impact of the proposed development on public facilities are discussed below.
However, if the possibility of the City's Zoning Task Force recommending expansion of
the TODD 4 +4 district is used to justify this application; the impact on Public Facilities
E
from the entire rezoning area needs to be accessed, rather than just the site subject to
this application.
Park/Recreation Facilities• A review of the Recreation and Open Space Element of the
South Miami Comprehensive Plan was done. A copy of this review is attached. The
findings are that current park acreage and some facilities are likely deficient. Hence,
land use /zoning changes that result in increased residential density may not be
appropriate.
chools, The proposed land use /zoning change will increase the impact on local
schools. The impact needs to be assessed for the scenario that the residents of the
building are working families rather than students, because that could be the case
someday. This should be done before decisions about land use /zoning changes are
made. It is unacceptable that our local schools become even more over - crowded, or
that local students cannot attend local schools. If the local schools are expanded, the
City loses recreation land. It would be a devastating loss if part of Palmer Park is lost
due to expansion of South Miami Middle School. Land use /zoning changes that allow
additional high- intensity multi - family development may not be appropriate.
Traffic /Streets: The subject property is not adjacent to the existing TODD (MU -5)
zoning district. Hence, the requested land use /zoning change of the subject property
must be viewed as part of a larger expansion of TODD (MU -5). As this zoning district is
enlarged, the uncertainties concerning the ultimate traffic impact get larger because it
cannot be known how many buildings will eventually be developed or redeveloped to
the higher TODD intensity. Therefore, it cannot be known what the ultimate building
intensity or mix of uses of the area will be, or what the ultimate traffic impact will be.
The TODD (MU -5) district, and especially an enlarged district, may lead to
over - development with respect to the ultimate traffic impact, which would adversely
impact residential neighborhoods. The traffic impact is especially significant because
the residential neighborhoods just west of 62 Avenue, between US -1 and 64 Street, are
currently being studied for traffic calming because of a large amount of cut - through
traffic.
Compatible with Comprehensive Plan
The proposed land use /zoning change is not compatible with many of the goals and
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
Future Land Use Element
Goal 1: To preserve and enhance the City's small town character, especially the quality
of life in the existing single - family residential neighborhoods.
Comment: The term "small town character" is never formally defined in the
Comprehensive Plan. However, attributes of it are mentioned throughout the
Hometown and Comprehensive Plans, and include: human scale buildings that create
an agreeable street space and don't overwhelm pedestrians and neighbors, buildings
C
proportioned in relation to the public space and adjacent buildings, buildings and
streetscapes that function as people - friendly space and encourage pedestrian
movement, development that transitions well to low rise residential neighborhoods, few
four -lane streets and no future street widening, manageable traffic that does not intrude
on residential neighborhoods, adequate open space and recreation facilities for the
residential population. The proposed land use /zoning change should not be approved
because in some respects it will do harm the City's small town character. The
"Hometown Plan" area 2, page 15, states: "The City should allow exceptions to its
four -story height custom only for buildings that are exemplary in all other respects."
Policy 1.1.2: In reviewing proposed amendments to this plan and the Zoning Map,
compatibility with adjacent uses shall be the major determinant.
Comment: Noncompliance with this policy was discussed in this letter under the
heading, "Compatibility With Adjacent Properties."
Policy 2.1.4: Discourage urban commercial sprawl by promoting growth in the core
area surrounding the Metrorail transit station by creating a district for new growth which
is contained and transit - oriented, thereby relieving the pressure for commercial
rezonings outside of this core area.
Comment: The subject property should not be given a land use /zoning change to be
included in the Transit - Oriented Development District, for all of the reasons given in
this letter. However, it is notable that the present zoning of Medium- Intensity Office
promotes this policy better than the proposed apartment building with some office
space.
Goal 3: To achieve a tax base adequate to support a high level of municipal services
via increased mixed -use projects and flexible building heights in conjunction with a
Transit - Oriented Development District (TODD).
Objective 3.1: Achieve over the next five years an increase in the tax base through
new development and increased property values.
Comment: As discussed in the "Compatible With Hometown Plan" section of this letter,
increasing the allowable building height of a few buildings near the metorail station has
little capacity to enhance the tax base or lower property tax rates. It makes no sense to
harm the small town character of the City, to possibly save homeowners a relatively
small amount in property taxes. There is allot of capacity for development within a
four -story limit in the "Hometown District ", on both sides of Dixie Highway. Special
incentives of allowing additional building height are not needed, as evidenced by the
renovations and new buildings currently under construction. The major concern should
be that all buildings are of high quality that enhance and beautify the community.
Policy 3.1.4: Create a Transit - Oriented Development District within walking distance of
the Metorail transit station to permit new development in a bounded and delimited core
area, including provisions for mixed -use projects, flexible building heights and
incentives to promote redevelopment.
The City of South Miami encourages development and redevelopment in the
Transit - Oriented Development District. Existing streetscape widths along S.W. 62
Avenue and Sunset Drive will permit increased building heights that are aesthetically -
pleasing. The City encourages transparent street -level retail with a mix of retail
services, office use, office services and residential uses in mixed -use and multi -story
projects, as well as encouraging a district -wide mix of land uses via multiple projects.
Comment: The Transit - Oriented Development District (TODD) is supposed to be in a
bounded and delimited area, and that area is supposed to be only along a portion of
Sunset Drive and 62 Avenue that have wider streetscapes to accept buildings taller
than four - stories. Although, it can be argued that eight -story buildings fronting these
streets is not aesthetically pleasing as evidenced by the eight -story building at Sunset
Drive and 59 Place, and the seven -story building at 62 Avenue and 70 Street. The
area is also confined to a small area to prevent over - development that would adversely
affect public facilities and quality of life in near -by single - family neighborhoods. The
subject property does not front Sunset Drive or 62 Avenue, but is bounded by narrow
two -lane streets on all four sides. The subject request and any other proposals to
expand TODD is not compatible with this policy.
Housing Element
Goal 1: To assure the availability of sound and affordable housing for all current and
future residents of the City of South Miami with special focus on infill and
redevelopment and to include housing units in the Hometown District.
Comment: This goal can be accomplished with the current land use /zoning
designations and four -story limit.
Traffic Circulation Element
"Future Land Use Plan Implications" (page54): Since the Land Use Plan calls for a
reduction in land use intensities (particularly commercial), no significant increase will
occur in traffic generated by South Miami. The principal goal of the land use plan is to
avoid the adverse impacts that accompany street widening.
Comment: The City recently reduced the development intensities of the Downtown
areas to protect the residential neighborhood character of South Miami. The residential
neighborhoods were being threatened by a high level of traffic filtering through
adjoining neighborhoods and the possibility of street widening (Comprehensive Plan,
page 8, Downtown). It makes no sense to enlarge the TODD (4 +4) land use /zoning
district as is currently being proposed. There is no way to predict what the final
building density will be because it is not known how many buildings will be redeveloped
IN
with the higher TODD intensity. Hence, there is no way to predict the ultimate traffic
impact from the TODD.
Recreation and Open Space Element
Policy 1.1.1: Retain the existing park" acreage and facilities, thereby providing a level
of service standard of 4 acres per 1,000 population. See Table 6 -3 for facility standard
guidelines. "Includes City and School Board recreation acreage.
Comment: Both the acreage and some facility standards are presently deficient.
Hence, land use /zoning changes that allow more high intensity multi - family residential
developments are not justified.
Recommendations
1. The proposed future land use /zoning change to TODD(4 +4), with the present
conditions, should be denied. If a residential development is desired at this location,
then a zoning change to Medium Density Multi- family Residential, which has a
four -story limit, may be more appropriate.
2. If the future land use /zoning change is to be granted, the building should be
more strictly conditioned to be compatible with the adjacent buildings and streets,
although this would require the present four -story limit. The conditions on the building
should be explicitly nailed down such as the number of stories, height of building and
residential density. In other words, be sure that only minor architectural changes can
be made after land use /zoning changes are approved.
3. Revise the TODD as follows: have a four -story limit for the existing (MU -5)
zones; possibly allow the existing (MU-4) zone, south of 70 Street, to be rezoned for
four - stories; possibly allow the southern half of the existing (MU-4) and (LI-4) zoned
area, between SW 68 Street and 70 Street, to be rezoned for four - stories. There are
also a few one -story buildings within the existing (MU -5) zone that could be
redeveloped. Hence, there is room for growth in the area, while creating an
environment where buildings are compatible with each other and the street - space, and
not creating zoning districts that could one day lead to over - development of the area.
Jay F. Beckman
6520 SW 65 St
South Miami, FL 33143
July 2001
REVIEW OF SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, RECREATION AND OPEN
SPACE ELEMENT
5_urnmalj�t
As mandated in Appendix A -6 of the South Miami Comprehensive Plan, a review of the
Recreation and Open Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan was completed. A
thorough and reasonable assessment shows that current recreation acreage and
facilities are likely deficient.
Compliance with Objectives and Policies
Policy 1.1.1 states, "Retain the existing park" acreage and facilities, thereby providing a
level of service standard of 4 acres per 1,000 population. See Table 6 -3 for facility
standard guidelines. `Includes City and School Board recreation acreage.
Tables 6 -1, 6 -2 and 6 -3 from the Comprehensive Plan are attached and have been
corrected to reflect current conditions. Corrections made to Table 6 -1 include the
following: at South Miami Field eliminated six tennis courts because they don't exist,
reduced number of playing fields to the number of games that can be played at any
time, reduced the basketball courts to 3.5; at Murray Park reduced playing fields to the
number of games that can be played at any time; at Williamson park eliminated the
tennis courts because they don't exist; at Brewer Park reduced the basketball court to
one -half because there is only one basket and the court size is less than half - court;
eliminated the S. Martin Community Center because this building is being used as
office space; added Open Space Park which is being developed.
Corrections made to Table 6 -2 include the following: at Ludlum Elementary School the
acreage has been reduced because of school expansion; the Girl Scout Little House
was eliminated because it is a privately owned property with limited access to a very
small portion of the city population; inclusion of the YMCA property is questioned
because it is privately owned property (not City or School Board recreation acreage as
described in Policy 1.1.1), and has more limited public access than City or School
Board recreation property,
It can be seen on the attached Tables 6 -1 and 6 -2, that if the YMCA property is
included that there is 4.97 acres of recreation acreage per 1000 population; and that if
the YMCA is eliminated that there is 4.06 acres of recreation acreage per 1000
population.
2
However, an examination of the northern portion of the city (see attached map) shows
that the YMCA and Fairchild Elementary are surrounded by large areas of County
residential areas. In fact Fairchild Elementary is not included within the city borders. If
all of the residential areas north to the YMCA and Fairchild Elementary were annexed
into the city, even with the YMCA included, recreation acreage would likely be deficient.
If the spotty residential areas to the extreme north were deannexed to even out the city
border, than both the YMCA and Fairchild Elementary are lost and recreation acreage
again is likely deficient. Also, there is interest in annexing property south of the city,
which contains no recreation acreage, further making recreation acreage deficient.
It can be seen on the attached Table 6 -3 that with infill annexation, the number of
tennis courts and football /soccer fields could be deficient.
Recommendations
1. Address how adequate parkland and facilities will be achieved given that the YMCA
is private property and does not fit the definition for parkland as given in the
Comprehensive Plan, and the likelihood of annexation or deannexation to smooth out
the northern border of the city.
2. Do not allow anymore large scale multi - family developments that will further
overload the area schools and recreation facilities. The loss of part of Palmer Park due
to expansion of South Miami Middle School would be devastating to recreation in the
city.
3. Although opportunities are limited, add passive park/green space areas whenever
possible, including in the downtown area.
4. Design and construct a city -wide sidewalk/bikepath system with tree lined streets to
allow recreational walkers, runners and bikers to move throughout the city.
5. Lobby Miami -Dade County to construct a tree - shaded multi -use recreation path
along the abandoned railroad tracks that run along the western boundary of the city.
Table 6 -1 (1995) , :ion cd k-v,prek -h Si ✓e P/av\n
y
Y
¢
d
a
}
H
Z
0
U
O
Z
d
d
Q
O
2
tC
O
m
S
ED ED
Z
U
Gdy.,
F- J
O
N
LL
O
}
F
U
m
Y
m
}
J
� C
E?
}
om
U
c
0
•}
N
trD
e
a
m «
m U
S
V
`m
a
m c
y
v
= U
L
V/
�v
�m m
0. V'
a w
U
m
m
N
F U
\
O
F-
C «
w
m
d
m
'a. d
rn
�
.n
of
cn
o
d
U'
C
fj
E
w
N
d
T
tm
d
N
3:
j
C
J
'1i
C
Z
W
M
m
c
m
E
`m
a
c
0
m
U
m
E
E
0
U
0
O
to
vi
W
m
E
m
O
`o
}
0
y
C
m
KW
Table 6-2
QUASI- PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES, 198 7
SERVING THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
Activities & Facilities
Facility Name Size BB SF PG CMP
Source: South Miami Recreation Department.
James Duncan and Associates.
/. G'
Ludlam Elementary School
12-15-0c.
--Adc -
_vx
South Miami Elementary School
4.0 ac.
__ LL
SS __
Fairchild Elementary School
3.2 ac.
__ Xt
CC
, RE Lee Comm. School
1.5 ac.
Lt
t\
YMCA
9.6 ac.
SC Lt
SS
Girl Scout House
—gam ac-
LS
f tilt l i Y�c,��
3
Note: BB= Basketball. SF= Softball. PG--Playground.
CMP= Camping.
Source: South Miami Recreation Department.
James Duncan and Associates.
ror, Cb r1 f a' &'fr Ve Acc ,
Table 6 -3 (1995)
LEVEL OF SERVICES, CITY RECREATION FACILITIES, 1995
CIT v OF SOUTH MIAAG
Facilities
Basketball Courts
Tennis Courts
Playing Fields
Tot Lots
Community Parks
Neighborhood Parks
1987 National Service
Standard
1/5,000 residents
1/1,500 residents
117,500 residents
1/15,000 residents
1/25,000 residents
1Ac. 11,000 residents
1995 City Level of Service
-144—,t03-residents 1//r7S U
4466 — residents 1 /1r 3o
+Mt, residents `/jp o
�(�aSP6�l9� 1/3,557 residents f',,J ru(jj
1/10,518 residents5,) cc ey-)
3 Ac. /1,000 residents
Source: City of South Miami Recreation Department, 1995.
Brian T. Soltz, City of South Miami 1995.
ED
U
VmC A
Figure 1.7
Enclave Annexation Area
i o c- t !Gt
Flea-,
SGJjJ4 P
iOUTH MIAMI
S h C-Ld� GL CeO S
CO Ltin ,(
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Regular Meeting
Action Summary Minutes
Tuesday, July 10, 2001
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 735 P.M.
Action: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call.
Action: Mr. Morton performed roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mr. Liddy, Mr. Illas, Mr. Morton, Ms.
Gibson and Mr. Juan Comendeiro.
Board member absent: Mr. Mann.
City staff present: Subrata Basu (ACM), Richard G. Lorber (Planning Director), Sandy
Youkilis, (Planning Consultant), Luis Figueredo, (City Attorney), and Maria M.
Menendez (Board Secretary).
III, Local Planning Agency: Public Hearings
LPA -01 -001
Applicant: Shoal Creek Properties L.L.C.
Request :CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP OF THE SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE
FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY FROM THE MIXED -USE COMMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL (FOUR -STORY HEIGHT) CATEGORY TO THE TODD, TRANSIT
ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CATEGORY (FLEXIBLE HEIGHT UP TO
8 STORIES) ON A 2.8 ACRE VACANT SITE, SAID PROPERTY BEING LEGALLY
DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 THROUGH 25, BLOCK 15, LARKINS TOWNSITE
SUBDIVISION. THE SITE IS BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY S.W. 70TH STREET,
ON THE EAST BY SW 59TH PLACE, ON THE NORTH BY SW 69tH STREET, AND
ON THE WEST BY SW 6IST AVENUE. THE PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION IS
TO ALLOW FOR THE FUTURE CONSTRUCTION OF A RENTAL APARTMENT
BUILDING.
Planning Board Meeting
July 10, 2001
Action: Mr. Illas read the request into the record and Mr. Lorber presented a summary of
the request where the applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map
amendment in order to construct a residential apartment building, designed to cater to the
University of Miami students and young professionals who would welcome the
convenience of the easy access to Metro -Rail and to most necessities within walking
distance. The above - referenced amendment will change the site's Future Land Use Map
category to the "Transit- Oriented Development District (TODD)" category. The main
factor in this would be a switch from a primarily office /commercial designation to a
residential designation, Mr. Lorber added. Also, the proposed amendment is consistent
with important goals and policies of the City, such as: assuring availability of affordable
housing; encouraging mixed -use residential multi - family projects in the Rapid Transit
Zone; as well as discouraging urban commercial sprawl by promoting growth in the area
surrounding the Metrorail transit station.
The Board expressed some concern about setting a precedent with the expansion of the
TODD zone, but staff explained that the Zoning Task Force has been discussing this issue
in recent meetings, looking at the TODD in general, and is planning on recommending a
moderate expansion in that district.
It was also clarified by staff that this hearing was for the purpose of considering a map
change only, not for considering specific site development regulations.
The Board and staff also discussed the amount of stories that should be allowed, as well as
the traffic issue. Mr. Lorber noted that a detailed traffic study had been submitted by the
applicant.
Applicants: Joseph Goldstein, James Harris, Michael Getz (Shoal Creek Properties)
Mr. Goldstein provided a detailed visual / verbal presentation of the proposal. The Board
inquired about which lot size measurement (gross or net area) is used to determine F.A.R
(floor -area ratio). Mr. Goldstein referred to the City's zoning code for explanation. The
Board inquired as to the square footage size of the dwelling units. The applicant's
representative responded that the average size will be 930 s.f. with the highest being 1,130
s.f. (for the 3- bedroom unit). Mr. Lorber emphasized that all those details will be covered
in the zoning application.
The Board also raised concern regarding the height of the building which appears to them
to exceed the maximum height allowed by code. Staff explained that some ornamentation
above the roof may give the appearance of a higher structure but it is not counted as part of
the height. Mr. Lorber informed the Board that the applicant would be required to go
before the Environmental Review & Preservation Board (ERPB) for the ornamentation
phase of the project.
The Board expressed concern regarding this project as it would contribute to consume the
valuable resources of the few vacant land existing in the City, and the fact that no
provision was being made to provide affordable housing. Staff noted that renting is much
more affordable than purchasing and a large scale of the population could benefit from the
project.
2
Planning Board Meeting
July 10, 2001
The Board further inquired about the relatively small percentage of space designated for
retail presented with the proposal. The applicant's representative noted that there were
various issues involved such as security issues, possible lack of tenants, and that they
would be bringing more information on this issue at their next presentation.
Before opening the public hearing the attorney noted there was no need for the speakers to
be sworn in since the following would not be a quasi-judicial hearing.
Speakers:
(residents in support of the proposal):
Cal Rosenbaum, 6101 Sunset PI
Joe C.
Michael Miller, 6796 SW 62nd St
Bill Enright, South Miami Hospital
Christopher Cook - Yarborogh, 6800 SW 64`h Ave
Lueiana Barreto, 5959 SW 71" St
Charles Fostini, 5900 SW 82nd
Dick Ward, 8325 SW 62nd Ct
David Tucker, Sr., 2556 SW 78`h Ter
Roxanne Scalia, 6925 SW 63`d Ct
Al Elias, 7150 SW 62 "d Ave
Greg Oravec, CRA Director
(residents against the proposal):
Walter Harris, 7100 SW 60 Ct
Francis Meltzer, 8340 SW 60th Ave
Dean Witman, 6259 SW 70th St
Mark Radosevich, 5703 SW 83`d St
Mario J Salazar, 7030 SW 63`d Ct
Ida Harris, 7100 SW 64`h Ct
Gus Williams, 7000 SW 63rd Ct
In summary, residents who spoke in support of the proposal, felt that the construction of a
primarily residential apartment building would be beneficial to the City, since it would
enhance the area, create a safer environment, particularly at night, and definitely be much
better than having an office building. They also favor the idea of having accessible retail
in the proposed area.
For those residents who spoke against of the proposal, the majority expressed concern
about over development within the City, and also preferred a four -story as opposed to a
six -story building.
Mr. Goldstein returned to the floor and recapped his presentation, assuring those present
that the applicant will be working with the City with the details of the proposal as part of
the rezoning process, which should be back before the Planning Board at its August 141"
2001 meeting.
Motion: Mr. Comendeiro moved and Ms. Gibson seconded the motion to approve the
request to amend the Future Land Use Map of the South Miami Comprehensive Plan by
changing the Future Land Use Category from the Mixed -Use Commercial Residential
(four -story height) category to the TODD, Transit Oriented Development District category
(flexible height up to 8 stories); the approval to be subject to the following staff
recommended conditions:
3
Planning Board Meeting
July 10, 2001
Applicant shall submit a rezoning application, with detailed site plans, which are
restricted to the following development parameters:
• maximum number of dwelling units 300;
• maximum height of structures on the site —6 stories (60 feet);
• maximum floor -area -ratio —2.25;
• minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. of retail / commercial space to be located along the
ground floor of the S.W. 59`h Place frontage.
The rezoning application shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commission
prior to the second reading (final adoption) of this Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendment. the approval of the Plan amendment and the rezoning application would
then occur simultaneously at the City Commission level.
Vote: Approved 5 Opposed 0
LPA -01 -002
Applicant: City of South Miami
Request: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ADOPTED SOUTH MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN IN ORDER TO UPDATE THE RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE AND
CONSERVATION ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN, BY ADDING AND REVISING OBJECTIVES
AND POLICIES ENCOURAGING LAND ACQUISITION FOR PARK AND
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, GREENWAYS AND TRAILS, AND PROTECTION OF
NATIVE SPECIES; PROVIDING FOR RENUMBERING AND /OR COMBINATION PARTS
OF THIS ORDINANCE WITH OTHER SECTIONS OR PARTS OF THE SOUTH MIAMI
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Morton read the request into the record. Staff presented the item emphasizing
the need for this amendment which will help the City to score much higher on competitive
applications for grants that will be used in the acquisition of recreation and open space
facilities, preserve and protect native species, and encourage the creation of greenways and
trails.
Speakers: Joe C.
Jay Beckman
The Board and staff briefly discussed the request. Staff advised that time is of the essence
on the proposed amendment due to a deadline in November of this year in order to qualify
for the competition of these grants offered by the State. Staff also explained that these
amendments are not intended to revise the entire element. The Conservation and
Recreation elements are revised once every five years and the process is called EAR
(Evaluation and Appraisal Report).
0
Planning Board Meeting
July 10, 2001
Mr. Beckman addressed the Board and staff that during research for the previous LPA -0I-
001, he found discrepancies in the Comprehensive Plan having to do with public facilities,
etc. Mr. Lorber accepted his suggestions stating that these will be addressed at a later date.
Motion: Mr. Comendeiro moved for approval of the request and Mr. Illas seconded the
motion.
Vote: Approved 5 Opposed 0
At this point Mr. Morton closed the Local Planning Agency agenda and called the
Planning Board to order.
IV. Planning Board : Public Hearings
Mr. Morton announced that item PB -01 -011 (Corporate Property Services) on the agenda
would be deferred at the request of the applicant.
Applicant: City of South Miami
Request: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 4 OF THE CITY'S
CODE OF ORDINANCES, WHICH IS ENTITLED "ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES," IN
ORDER TO EXEMPT RESTAURANTS LOCATED ON US I (SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY)
FROM THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FROM RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT, AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Action: Mr. Morton read the request into the record and staff presented the item.
Speakers: David Tucker, Sr.
Ricky Warman
The Board and staff discussed the proposed amendment. Mr. Lorber explained there is a
provision of the City Code which requires a minimum distance between an establishment
selling alcoholic beverages and residential property, churches, and schools. The distance is
five hundred feet. However, this provision also exempts restaurants facing Bird Road.
The amendment would extend this exemption for all restaurants located on properties
facing USL The issue of setting a precedent as for other fast food establishments to sell
alcoholic beverages was also discussed.
Motion: Mr. Morton moved approval of the request subject to the inclusion of wording
limiting this exemption only to restaurants with consumption on the premises. Mr. Liddy
seconded the motion.
Vote: Approved 5 Opposed 0
Planning Board Meeting
July 10, 2001
V. Approval of Minutes
Action:
A. The Board duly voted on and approved the minutes of May 29, 2001 with an
amendment to item PB -01 -004 (AT &T Wireless Services). See attached
Revised Page 2 of May 29, 2001 minutes.
Vote: Approved 5 Opposed 0
VI. Discussion Items
There were no discussion items.
VII. Adjournment
Action: There being no further business before the Board, Mr. Morton adjourned the
meeting at approximately 10:30 PM.
RGL /mmm
K: \PB \PB Minutes\2001 MinutesW(INS 07- 10- 0I.doc
n$
C�AHm
H 3vm
d
n b W
l H
.
tli
bi
i O r N
h P
31
�o
a�
3
H�
bJ
G ••
i q
�3
CO
Z
�H
d�
m
m
AAA
bMi
drop
O�
�z
0
�H
CITY OF;SOUTH'MIAMI' ;
NOTICE OF, COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT.,'.
NOTICE`OF PUBLIC; HEARING
All interested persons are hereby, notified that the City
Commission of the City of South Miami will. conduct a
public hearing at" Its`:re.16W City;ComIT) s., n`meetirig
scheduled for Tuesday, October 2, 2001, beginning at
7:30 PM in the City Commission Chamber, City Hall
6130 Sunset Drive, to consider the following described
ordinance(s).
AWORDINANCE OF,THE.MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION:
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH °MIAMI FLORIDA; AMENDING THE
FUTURE -LAND USE'.MAP OF THE SOUTH- ;MIAMI
COMPREHENSIVE, PLAN'6Y. CHANGING THE` FUTURE
LAND USE CATEGORY' "FROM'I`THE. MIXED -USE-
COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL.CATEGORY TO THE TODD,
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT,DISTRICT CATEGORY.
ON PROPERTY LEGALLY, DESCRIBED AS LOTS
THROUGH. .' 25, '.BLOCK,; 15, LARKINS., TOWNSITE,
SUBDIVISION. THE SITE IS BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY
S.W. 70TH STREET, ON THE EAST BY S.W. 59TH PLACE, ON
THE NORTH BY S.W. 69TH STREET, AND ON THE WEST BY
S.W. 61ST AVENUE; PROVIDING FOR- SEVERABILITY;'
PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT, AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
C
wnncr
�I eRDVfRTT °'.•.•
77• SfA
Location Map: Proposed Amendment
The subject ordinance can be inspected in the City
Clerk's Office, Monday = Friday during regular office
hours. Inquiries concerning this item should be directed
to the Planning Department at 305 - 663 -6326.
All interested parties are invited to attend. '
Ronetta Taylor, CMC
City Clerk
City of South Miami
weuem io iwme snMa Zee o,os, tln chy 1w, W/ xMxe Xn wdC tlu� X e parean aeclMe'a ypew v„ptlebn
r.N gWaMMtld�iMeeNnpAeq �yery bert/meRee,avYMeU elMmprygylpvhp.MIXNe
wN� +. eeMN Ga<w+meY noea b me+e OiM C.wbflM
reccN d ep gareMirly b mo0o Mke laga YquNe T ttevYnary eM wMXrxv uym MM yie vppecl b b b
Wua.
Public Facilities Impact Report
and Analysis of Comparable Projects
Introduction
This application for an amendment of the City of South Miami's Comprehensive Plan was
originally submitted in July 2000, by Greenberg Traurig on behalf of JPI Apartment
Development, L.P. A revised application was submitted on February 14, 2001. A second revised
application was submitted March, 2001. As described in this narrative, the proposed project
remains essentially as envisioned in the original (July 2000) application. The primary changes
from the original application are as follows:
The developer is Shoal Creek Properties, LLC.
The total area of the parcel has been recalculated and increased from 2.68 acres to
2.82 acres.
The proposed commercial /office space is increased from 3,000 square feet to
approximately 10,000 square feet.
The proposed number of dwelling units remains at approximately 306 units
The purpose of this section of the revised application is to provide information and analysis
supporting the proposed comprehensive plan amendment designation from "Mixed -Use
Commercial Residential" to "TODD (4 +4) Story" for the parcel (the "Parcel "). Included in this
section is an analysis of the potential impacts the approved versus proposed designations might
have on public facilities and services. This section also presents examples of comparable
projects in South Florida and a discussion comparing the proposed designation to policies in the
City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan (March 7, 2000).
As now proposed, the boundaries of the Parcel are SW 69 Street to the north; SW 59 Place on
the east; SW 70 Street to the south; and SW 61 Avenue to the west.
The Parcel is currently vacant and is surrounded by a variety of land uses — residential, public
and institutional, and commercial (see Figure 1). Directly to the north, across SW 69 Street, is a
large, fenced Community Redevelopment Housing complex of two -story, multi - family
condominium buildings widely spaced among landscaped areas with large trees. To the east,
across SW 59 Place, is a two -story, block -long, U.S. Post Office. To the south, across SW 70
Street, is a sequence of commercial buildings: two one -story office buildings dominated by two
four -story office buildings, approximately 54 feet in height and the back of The Hotel Villa (also
four stories and approximately 54 feet high, plus roof -top space) with a parking garage
entrance. To the west is a parking lot for employees of Larkin Hospital, which is visible beyond.
The Parcel is located in the City's Community Redevelopment Area and is also adjacent to the
City's Redevelopment and Infill District on the east and south. The bikeway path along SW 70
Street is immediately south of the Parcel.
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 1
Legend
OSingle- Family Residential
O Duplex Residential
O Townhouse Residential
® Multiple- Family Residential
Mixed -Use Commercial Residential
El Commercial Retail
O Commercial Office
O Educational
99 Public & Institutional
®Parks & Open Space
O Vacant Land
Zl Water
— —, Property Boundary
Figure 1
Existing Land Use Map
City of South Miami
Plan1060601.existing ?and use mop.Option2 Source. Febmary 1996 City of South Miami; The
ME
The Comprehensive Plan's New Future Land Use Map designates that the Parcel will be
bounded by Multi - Family Residential to the north; Transportation Oriented Development District
(TODD) to the east; Commercial Retail and Commercial Office to the south; and, Mixed -Use
Commercial Residential to the west (see Figure 2).
Public Facilities Impact Assessment
When compared to the designated use, this amendment will create additional impacts to water,
sewer, solid waste and park facilities in the City of South Miami, yet the proposed use will have
less impact to P.M. peak hour traffic (see Tables 1 -5). For comparative purposes, generation/
demand rates for each of the public facilities, given maximum development under current land
use, were calculated as follows:
a) The Parcel area was converted to square footage by multiplying the acreage (2.82) by
43,560 square feet/acre,
b) The resulting square footage (122,839 square feet) was multiplied by the floor area ratio
(FAR) of 1.6 for Medium - Intensity Office District (MO), the current zoning classification.
c) The sum — 196,543 — was used in the calculations shown in Tables 2 and 4, Approved
Designation Impacts, and in Tables 1A and 1 B.
Table 1A provides a summary comparison of solid waste, potable water, wastewater and park
level -of- service standards for the approved designation and the proposed designations,
demonstrating that water, wastewater, and solid waste impacts would increase above the
approved designation if the proposed amendment is approved. Table 1 B compares the number
of trips currently approved with the maximum number of trips allowable under the proposed
designations. Tables 2 -5 give more detail regarding each calculation. Please note that as now
proposed, combined office and retail square footage totals 10,000. For the purpose of
determining the maximum impacts possible, office and retail calculations were figured as if each
were 10,000 square feet, and the higher impact for each infrastructure system was reported. As
Tables 1A and 1 B indicate, the maximum impact on solid waste would result from all
commercial space being utilized as retail, while the maximum impact on water, wastewater, and
P.M. peak hour traffic would result from all commercial space being utilized by offices.
Preliminary information from the Miami -Dade County Water and Sewer Department suggested
that a fire -flow test needed to be performed on the existing 8 -inch water main located in SW 59
Place and SW 69 Street before water and sewer availability could be determined. The main was
tested on June 23, 2000 and demonstrated an available flow greater than 2,000 GPM.
Therefore the main passed the fire -flow test. Water connection can be made from the property
to a 12 -inch water main to be installed westerly in SW 69 Street to SW 61 Avenue, followed by
installation and connection of a 12 -inch water main southerly in SW 61 Avenue to SW 70 Street,
and interconnection to an existing 8 -inch water main in SW 70 Street, The County also owns
and operates an 8 -inch gravity sewer main located in SW 69 Street and SW 59 Place and
abutting the northern boundary of the site. The Applicant can connect to this gravity main,
provided that there is sufficient depth, and that there are no obstacles that would preclude
construction of the sewer.
With regard to solid waste, the Miami -Dade County Department of Solid Waste Management
does not measure waste disposal capacity utilization on a case -by -case basis. Instead, the
adequacy of capacity is evaluated on a system -wide basis in terms of existing waste delivery
commitments from both public and private sector waste haulers, The Applicant is coordinating
this issue with the Department of Solid Waste Management.
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 3
Legend
Figure 2
OSingle- Family Residential
®TO.D.D.
0Duplex Residential
❑Residential Office
Future Land Use Map
OTownhouse Residential
❑Educational
City of South Miami
M Multiple - Family Residential
® Public & Institutional
El Mixed -Use Commercial Residential
0 Parks & Open Space
13 Commercial Retail & Office —
— Property Boundary
dws�aa
land use map Optlon2 Source February 155E Ct/ d Snub+ Miami; The Curtis & Kimball Company January
r
U
l0
m �
m -
E a>
� Q N
C
N
5
E
� �U
d E
O >� '-
V) >
N � L
6 O J
E .E o
_N t0v
N CI
s
Q
<o
a
M
Z
Z�;
Y
N
a
d
=
N
o
R
�
d o
7_
Z
o
0
0
N
=
O
N
O
O
0
n
0
p
z
¢
O
a�
O
N
H 2
O
N
N
Z
W
y
>
O
O
d
9
O
O
K
o
a
W
i
o
0
W)
N
_
O
O
O
O
O
LIJ
W Q
_
0]
(g
cNo
}ra
aN
W p
N
N
Q
Q
w
"S O
a
zz
zz
�
C3
o
°
o
Q
N
F
N
m
V
W
M
N
cri
rn
H
Y)
v
U
�Z
IL
D�
i
OJ
:N`Nyo\
O
Ma
Q
G y
N
Q
m
z
z
W
N
O
N
G.
N
W
=
N
w
Z
Z
a
z
a
d
R W
Q
O
O
O'tL
fn
Z
O
O
O
O
F0
W
N
c
M
y
U
N
a
O
a~
r
U
l0
m �
m -
E a>
� Q N
C
N
5
E
� �U
d E
O >� '-
V) >
N � L
6 O J
E .E o
_N t0v
N CI
E- O'
]z\§
0
zs
E
E E
(\([
\ \\
c
E 0
w
E
0
00 w F, E
ao � s M
-a � w E
z c) m
0- x
BE
o
vi
C)
0
M,M
\i))
\\\ -
E
0 0 E 0 0
0 EMS
0
E
0
Mo 3:
] ;( \2
0
.� �: E
E 0 E
—�S
0 0
0 0 0
0
am=
Oa 'E . E 3:
2»»`§
-
a= cm,
9 E
>
E 2
C
0
LU
w
w
H
N
d
w
N
-
O
KF
F-
r
J
o
W
N
UJw
R
C
x
4
3
w
O
n
o
W
o
d
(�
c
J
U
Q
IL
N
N
z
OJ
~_
N
Q i-
O
mzuj
a~
v N +
Lu
to pF
Y
Q W 2
Q
~00
a
o
CL N
n
O
x
X
W
a
(L
W
r
r
N
U
H
o
LL
h
U.
Q
c
J
�
O
I
Z
O
M
O
p
W
Wp
t O
o
N
v
I
U
N
w
V)
0
m
_
C
0
LU
w
w
H
Tables 4 and 5 separate the approved and proposed designation impacts for traffic, again
calculated to show maximum impacts. P.M. peak hour vehicular trips would decrease under the
proposed designation using either 10,000 square feet of office or 10,000 square feet of retail.
The City of South Miami Comprehensive Plan LOS standards are based on number of persons.
Therefore, the approved and proposed designations were converted into number of persons
based on industry standard conversion rates as follows:
• Office — 1 person per 250 square feet
• Retail - 1 person per 500 square feet
• Multi - Family Residential — 2.54 persons per household (City of South Miami Comprehensive
Plan)
For purposes of analysis, the approved use and square footage is based on the zoning
classification for the site, Medium - Intensity Office District (MO) (see Figure 3).
The City of South Miami has excess park and recreation facility capacity to serve the proposed
project. At present, the City of South Miami has 57.6 acres of park and recreation facilities. The
comprehensive plan LOS for park and recreation facilities is 4 acres /1,000 population. The city
currently has a permanent population of 10,467 residents with an additional seasonal population
of 2,577 persons, for a total population of 13,044 residents. Based on the adopted LOS, this
population requires 52.2 acres of park and recreation facilities. Therefore, the city has 5.5 acres
of excess park capacity.
If the proposed designation attracts additional population into the city, up to 2.83 acres of park
will be needed to serve the residents of the proposed project. After subtracting the 3.01 acres
from the 5.5 acres of excess capacity, 2.39 acres of excess park and recreation facility capacity
remains.
Drainage impacts from both the approved and proposed designation must meet the level -of-
service standards for both flood protection and water quality. Therefore, there is no difference in
impact between the two developments on flood protection and water quality issues.
The proposed project is intended and designed primarily as housing for students at the
University of Miami. This type of facility is more comparable to a hotel- condominium use than to
a residential- condominium use; student housing is usually short term and is not typically a
primary homestead. It is anticipated that the majority of these residents will be unmarried and
without children. Thus, it is anticipated that impacts on the public school system will be minimal.
Joseph G. Goldstein, attorney for the Applicant, wrote to Ms. Sally Osborne, Supervisor of the
Department of Development and Governmental Affairs for the Miami -Dade County Public
Schools, on July 27, 2000, informing her of this proposed project and requesting a statement of
the project's impacts on public schools. Copies of Ms. Osborne's response, dated August 17,
2000, and a letter from her to Mr. Subrata Basu, the city's then - Planning Director, dated August
18, 2000, a copy of which was sent to Mr. Goldstein, are included as Exhibit 1.
There are two restrictions governing maximum development in a Transit Oriented Development
District (TODD), the proposed land use: building height (MU -5 - eight stories, maximum 100
feet) and density ( "as many units as may be permitted as can be provided with parking "). The
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 8
Legend Figure 3
Property Boundary Zoning Map
City of South Miami
map.Opoon2 Source. February 1996 Cty d South Miami The Cures & Kimball Company January
maximum height of the proposed development is eight stories, 69 feet. For each of the 306
dwelling units there will be two parking spaces, for a total of 575 spaces.
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 9
The prevailing appearance of the neighborhood shows a low to medium range of building
heights, from one story to multiple stories. The skyline includes the 92- foot -high Larkin Hospital,
The Shops at Sunset and other substantial buildings. Looking down SW 70 Street and
connecting to the neighborhood to the southeast, one sees the imposing architecture of the five -
level, 92 -foot Metrorail parking garage that adjoins the elevated tracks. Close by, on Sunset
Avenue, are the City Hall, public library, police station, and commercial outlets, including a bank
and a gasoline station. The addition of several levels to the parking garage and additional retail
in the immediate vicinity of the Metrorail station may result in further change to the future
character of the neighborhood.
The neighborhood, as described, is made up of a variety of land uses in close relationship, The
project site is surrounded by this mix of uses, but can be viewed as a transition area between
retail /commercial /office /hotel and lower density residential. The proposed building will be
compatible with the neighborhood, both in appearance and function. The project will aid in the
fulfillment of several planning goals to create a pedestrian- friendly, mixed -use neighborhood
with generous off - street parking; conveniently located near offices and public services such as
medical facilities, a library, police station and a hotel. The project will bring new residents to the
neighborhood who will support the retail establishments and use the mass transit system.
Quoting from the City's Land Development Code, the purpose and intent of the TODD
designation is "to encourage a mix of high density uses, specifically residential, retail and office
uses." TODD encourages residential density by giving a bonus of one additional floor of
residential use (with required parking) for every floor of residential use.
TODD zoning does not specify a floor area ratio (FAR). Instead, floor area minimums are
established for efficiency /studio, one -, two- and three - bedroom apartments. The proposed
project is not the maximum development scenario that can be designed within these restrictions.
More apartments could be added. The project as configured is the maximum that is marketable.
Comparable Projects
Jefferson at Douglas Entrance, at the northwest corner of Douglas Road (37 Avenue) and
Calabria Street in Coral Gables, is comparable to the proposed development. The project will
have 224 units in 16 stories (height: 155 feet) on 1.6 acres. (See Exhibit 2.) This development
will neighbor commercial buildings, one -and two -story single family homes, and small multi-
family buildings. Considering the variety of land uses and architectural styles in close proximity,
this project has similar neighborhood characteristics and contrasts of density and height to the
proposed project in South Miami.
Two developments elsewhere in South Florida are offered as additional comparable projects.
Both are located in central, urban environments with Community Redevelopment Areas, and
both have densities comparable to the proposed South Miami project:
Fort Lauderdale - NE 6th Street (Sistrunk Boulevard) between NE 2nd and 3rd Avenues.
2.27 acres; 226 units; 100 units /acre; 8 stories, 73 feet high. (See Exhibit 3.)
Jefferson at Young Circle, Hollywood - Van Buren Street between 19th and 20th Avenues,
two blocks south of Hollywood Boulevard, one block south of Harrison. 1.76 acres (does not
include 6 -story parking garage to be owned and operated by the city); 232 units; 132
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 11
units /acre; range of building heights (3 -8 stories, stepping up to a height of 73 feet). (See
Exhibit 4.)
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The proposed designation is consistent and supportive of City of South Miami Comprehensive
Plan. The Plan begins with a statement of Future Vision, which is quoted below in full:
We value our socially diverse neighborhoods, our traditional retail service areas, our
modern medical community and our small town character. We will strengthen our
neighborhoods, support our Hometown District, and encourage development of our
urban core link to the Metrorail transit station in a manner that enhances our community
and improves our tax base.
The proposed project is appropriately located for a concentration of residents in the urban core,
in an attractive pedestrian - oriented setting within walking distance of public services such as the
library, a variety of retail establishments, and mass transit. While improving South Miami's tax
base, the project will not detract from the city's small town character.
The proposed project supports a number of goals, objectives and policies in the city's
Comprehensive Plan, including those in this partial listing:
Chapter 1: Future Land Use Element
Policy 2.1.4 Discourage urban commercial sprawl by promoting growth in the core
area surrounding the Metrorail transit station by creating a district for new
growth which is contained and transit - oriented, thereby relieving the
pressure for commercial rezonings outside of this core area.
Goal 3 To achieve a tax base adequate to support a high level of municipal
services via increased mixed -use and flexible building heights in
conjunction with a Transit - Oriented Development District [TODD].
Policy 5.1.4 Implement priority SMCRP programs and projects, including but not
limited to: "in- fill" housing, construction of multi - family units, substantial
rehabilitation of housing (HUD Complex), and streetscape and
infrastructure improvements.
Chapter 2: Transportation Element
Policy 1.1.1.c. There is a Metrorail station in the heart of the City's only intensive
development area; this Metrorail station puts extraordinary commuter rail
transit service at hand. Further, development of the area around the
Metrorail station will further state and local goals for "in- filling" already
urbanized areas and reducing urban sprawl.
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 12
Chapter 3: Housing Element
Goal 1 To assure the availability of sound and affordable housing for all current
and future residents of the City of South Miami with special focus on infill
and redevelopment and to include housing units in the Hometown District.
Policy 1.3.6 The City and the County will jointly support development in the Rapid
Transit Zone in order to encourage mixed- use /residential multi - family
projects containing affordable housing units.
Chapter 4: Infrastructure Element
Goal 1 To provide and maintain the public infrastructure in a manner that will
insure public health, safety and quality of life.
Chapter 5: Conservation Element
Policy 1.1.3 Continue to encourage the use of Metrorail, bicycles and other
alternatives to the automobile (through capital improvements).
City of South Miami Revised June 2001
Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Page 13