2001-24591 RESO
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-24591
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN
AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE
CATEGORY FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE "ALASKA" PARCEL, A
PARCEL OF UNPLATTED LAND OF APPROXIMATELY 3.4 ACRES, LOCATED
NORTHWEST OF SOUTH POINTE PARK, FROM THE CURRENT MR, MARINE
RECREATIONAL, TO THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY CPS-3,
COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE MIXED USE.
WHEREAS, the property owner filed an application to amend the Future Land Use Map (PLUM)
of the Comprehensive Plan for the "Alaska" parcel; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed this application during a public hearing on September
6,2001; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviews amendments to the FLUM in an advisory capacity to the
City Commission; and
WHEREAS, to enable the City Commission to hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment
in a timely manner at its October 17, 2001 meeting, the Administration is requesting that the public hearing
be set at this time;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that a public hearing to consider the
amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Miami Beach, as
described above, is hereby scheduled on October 17, 2001 in the City Commission Chambers at 1700
Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida, and the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
publish and distribute the appropriate public notice of the public hearing at which time all interested parties
will be heard.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 20th day of
September
!JIi
MAYOR
ATTEST:
~rp~
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LANGUAGE
AND FOR EXECUTION
/t11~
City Attorney
t1f~ 1')..- 0 I
Date
F,IPLAN\$PLBICCMEMOS\2001 11505RESO. WPD
City of Miami Beach
Planning Board
Staff Report and Recommendations
FROM:
Chairperson and Members
. Planning Board
Jorge G. Gomez, AlCP ...If#-
Planning Director If:::!)
September 6, 2001
TO:
Subject:
File No. 1505
Consideration of an application to amend the Future Land Use Map of the City of
Miami Beach Comprehensive Plan by changing the future land use category for the
property known as the Alaska Parcel.
The applicant, East Coastline Development, Ltd., 404 Washington Avenue, suite 120, Miami Beach,
Florida, is requesting to amend the Future Land Use Map of the City of Miami Beach
Comprehensive Plan by changing the future land use category for the property known as the Alaska
Parcel, a parcel of unplatted land of approximately 3.4 acres, located northwest of South Pointe Park,
from the current MR, Marine Recreational, to the proposed Future Land Use Category CPS-3,
Commercial Intensive Mixed Use, thereby increasing the floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.25 as
permitted in MR zoning district, to 2.50 FAR as permitted in CPS-3 zoning district.
BACKGROUND
After a discussion and advise from the City Attorney's office, this item was continued at the August
28,2001 to a date and time certain of September 6,2001 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission
Chambers.
The applicant originally submitted the subject application several months ago. The City Code
requires that any proposed comprehensive plan or code change for a parcel ofland that encompasses
less than ten contiguous acres, be noticed by mail at least 30 days before the public hearing date, to
all property owners within a 375-ft radius of the subject property. The first required notice
scheduling the public hearing for the June 2001 meeting of the Planning Board was deficient in that
the FAR for the proposed change was listed wrong. Because of the 30-day notice requirement, this
application could not be heard until this meeting.
Shortly after the applicant submitted the application, staff requested a plan that would show a
concept of the proposed development for the site. The attached site analysis was delivered a few
days ago. This site analysis is fairly comprehensive in that it shows the approved development
projects under the approved Portofino DRl and other existing built and/or approved developments.
It should be noted that the area east of Washington A venue and north of South Point Park, where the
Porto fino Tower, South Pointe Tower and the future Continuum development project are located,
is not part of the Porto fino DR! and is subject to the R-PS4Iand development regulations.
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28. 2001
Page 2
HISTORY
The southern portion of Miami Beach extended south to what is today Fisher Island. In the early
1900s, the federal government dredged a cut through the narrow isthmus in order to create an access
from the Atlantic Ocean to the mainland of Miami-Dade County, hence "Government Cut." The
federal government retained control of the land on the north and south of the Cut for maintenance
purposes until it was declared surplus and deeded the parcels known as South Pointe Park and
"federal triangle" in 1979 to the City, with a restriction that it be used for park or public recreational
purposes only and subject to a 50-foot easement in perpetuity for channel maintenance. Any changes
to the stipulations of the deed have to be by mutual consent between the U.S. Department of Interior
and the City. The land known as the "Alaska" parcel was part of the federal government land
reservation. The government deeded this parcel to the Cook Inlet Region, Inc. of Alaska at the time
the Alaskan oil pipeline was being constructed.
In the early 1970s, City government created the South Shore Redevelopment Agency in an effort to
reverse the economic and physical decline of the area south of 5th Street. However, in 1983, due to
a lack of progress with the revitalization plan, the Mayor's Ad Hoc Committee on Planned Area
Development for South Shore was established and a new South Shore Revitalization Strategy was
prepared and adopted by Ordinance No. 84-2403 on February IS, 1984. One of the concepts
envisioned in the South Shore Revitalization Strategy, among others, was that the area be a tourist-
oriented neighborhood along the ocean and bay with a residential neighborhood in the interior area
and public access to the bay and ocean through a 50-foot pedestrian and bicycle path along the
shoreline, which would also connect with the South Beach area.
The zoning map at that time showed the U.S. Government reservation classified as MR marine
recreation, and the area from 5th Street south to Biscayne Street, west of Alton Road, along the
waterfront was classified MU government use. The Land Use designation and the Zoning district
classification for the "Alaska" parcel, as well as the adjacent and surrounding areas are detailed in
the chart below. Some of the permitted uses in these areas have changed as these areas have
evolved. For instance, warehouses, heavy industrial and similar uses have been eliminated as more
cornmercial, marine-related and residential uses have been established. The marine recreational use
remains a more compatible use as it relates to the surrounding and adjacent area of marina use,
residential and open space park.
ZONING AND SITE DATA
Zoning Classification: MR, Marine Recreational
Land Uses: The "Alaska" parcel is adjacent to Government Cut on the south; South
Pointe Park (ROS), irnmediately adjacent to the east; the city-owned park
parcel known as the Federal Triangle (ROS) to the northwest; Portofino
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28. 2001
Page 3
Tower and South Pointe Tower (R-PS4) to the northeast; and the "Hinson"
parcel (C-PS3) immediately adjacent to the north.
The "Alaska" parcel is also designated MR in the Future Land Use Map.
Zonine History of the" Alaska" parcel
Year Zoning District Area Use District Adjacent Use Districts
Regutations
1934 - Zoning District I - No restrictions - BG - Business - Unrestricted Be - Business - Mostly industrial
Ordinance No. adjacent to District 19 which uses
289 establishes required setbacks (Only Federally owned land had
such designation) BE - Business - includes
(Only Federally owned land had substantial # ofrnarine uses.
such designation)
1936 - Same as Same Same Same as above. In addition,
above BB - warehouses, gas or oil
stations, fish markets and similar
uses.
RE - multiple family dwellings
1939 - Same as Same Same Same
above
1941 - 1949 Same Same Same
Same as above
1951 - Same as Same Same Same as above. In addition, BA
above category introduced in what is
known today as the Hinson parcel
- uses include bathing casinos,
theaters, post offices, and storage
of vehicles above the ground floor
with access through an alleyway.
1953 - Same as Same Same Same as above. In addition, two
above city parks appear north of federal
lands.
1955-1961 - Same Same Same
Same as above
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28. 2001
Page 4
Year Zoning District Area Use District Adjacent Use Districts
Regulations
1971 - Ord. No. This ordinance changed district Permitted uses included marine To the north, where the marina is
1891 designation to MR Marine recreational-type uses including presently located, designation is
Recreational District, a waterfront marine motor service, storage and MU Municipal uses; C-5 General
district designed to accommodate similar Business to the northwest and
recreational boating activities and northeast; and C-6 Intensive
services; also the permitted uses, Commercial (Industrial District) to
and development regulations were the north
included; i.e., max. height 30 ft.,
max. lot coverage 30%
1983 - Same as Same Same Same
above
1989 - Ord. No. The district purpose remains the The main permitted uses were CPS (commercial) and RPS
89-2665 same; Development regulations more defmed and expanded to (residential)
for the district now include a base include marina, boat docks, piers,
FAR of 0.25 with a max. FAR wi etc. for non-connnercial or
bonuses of 0.75. The max. height commercial vessels and related
increased to 40 ft. There is a upland structures; aquariums,
required setback facing any body restaurants, connnercial uses
of water to be 50 feet.
This ordinance also establishes the
PS Performance Standard District
for the Redevelopment area (south
of 5th Street)
1997 - Ord. 97- This ordinance establishes the total Same Same
3097, which number of stories permitted in the
amends MR district.
comprehensive
Ord. 89-2665
1998 - Ord. 98- This ordinance eliminates the FAR Same Same
3107, which bonuses and limits development in
amends all zoning districts to the base FAR
comprehensive already established.
Ord. 89-2665
Planning Board
File No. J 505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28, 2001
Page 5
Vear Zoning District Area Use District Adjacent Use Districts
Regulations
1998 - series of 1. Lowering of the F ARs and the Same Same
ordinances modifying the rnaximwn height
amending the and number of floors restrictions
City Code that for development throughout most
begin the of the City.
downzoning
process 2. Zoning Map changes which
throughout the reclassify several properties south
City ofBiscayne Street, with the
exception of the Portofmo DRI
properties
REVIEW CRITERIA
In reviewing a request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Map, the board shall consider the
following when applicable:
1. Whether the proposed change is consistent and compatible with the comprehensive
plan and any applicable neighborhood or redevelopment plans.
Not Consistent - The proposed change would not foster the goals to develop the City in an
appropriate manner. Policy 1.1 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan
states that the land development regulations should regulate the use of land to ensure the
compatibility of adjacent land uses. Moreover, the proposed change is not consistent with
several of the objectives of the Conservation/Coastal Zone Management Element.
Objective 3: Water-Dependent and Related Uses states that the amount of shoreline devoted
to water-dependent and water-related uses shall be maintained or increased without creating
a negative environmental impact.
Objective 4: Hurricane Evacuation, requires that the time period needed for the evacuation
of people from Miami Beach prior to the arrival of sustained gale force winds shall be
maintained or lowered. Policy 4.9 addresses this issue as it states that "...population density
maximums shall be reduced as part of this Plan..." [Comprehensive Plan].
In addition, Objective 6: Water Quality, Policy 6.1 requires that the City shall not permit
dredging and filling of Biscayne Bay; and Objective 9: Density Limits requires that
population concentrations be directed away from City-wide coastal high hazard area by
prohibiting residential density increases.
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28, 2001
Page 6
Lastly, Objective 10: Public Shoreline Access of the same Conservation/Coastal Zone
Management Element, Policy 10.3 states that in order to minimize impacts of man-made
structures and activities on shoreline resources, the filling, spoiling or placement of structures
in or over coastal waters should continue to be prohibited.
2. Whether the proposed change would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent
or nearby districts.
Partially Consistent - The proposed change would become an isolated district with respect
to the properties that surround the subject site along the waterfront. South Pointe Park,
located east of the subject site, and the Federal Triangle, located northwest of the site, are
designated ROS, Recreation Open Space. This designation is compatible with the existing
MR, Marine Recreation designation of the "Alaska" site. Changing the current designation
to C-PS3, Commercial Intensive Mixed Use, would allow for an intense mixed commercial
and residential development inconsistent with the surrounding park lands.
The only consistency of the proposed change is with respect to the Hinson parcel, located
north of the site. This 0.85-acre parcel was proposed, in 1998, to be designated R-PS4,
Residential Mixed Use, but was ultimately excluded from the amending ordinance and thus
remains designated C-PS3.
3. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
city.
Not Consisteut - The proposed change would not be in scale with the needs of the
neighborhood or the City. The proposal would add an additional 3.4 acres of land used for
residential uses, as opposed to current designation which would provide for marine recreation
activities. In addition, the South Shore Revitalization Strategy, adopted by the City
Commission on February 15, 1984 as a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the area
south of 5th Street, recommended that:
. the beachfront parks be connected by a linear waterfront walk system and that they
utilize their unique locations and vistas to the fullest extent. (Emphasis added)
. Provide passive recreation activities. The existing MR designation would offer
opportunities to create such activities by the private sector.
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28. 2001
Page 7
4. Whether the proposed change would tax the existing load on public facilities and
infrastructure.
Inconclusive- The parcel of land subject to the proposed change is part of a Development
of Regional Impact (DR!) approved by the City Commission on April 15, 1998 (Ord. No. 98-
3121). Notwithstanding, there are several development projects under construction at this
time and it is not clear whether the capacity for public facilities and infrastructure are, or will
continue to be available when all the projects come on line.
As of this date the applicant has not provided an analysis of the impact this proposal would
have in conjunction with other developments in the area.
5. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Partially Consistent - The existing vacant parcel ofland, designated as Marine Recreational,
situated along Government Cut and Biscayne Bay near the City of Miami Beach Marina and
adjacent park land, is not illogically drawn. This current designation allows future potential
development with uses that would be compatible and consistent with the surrounding uses
and designations.
6. Whether changed or changing conditious make the passage of the proposed change
necessary.
Not Consistent - The MR, Marine Recreational District designation of the "Alaska" parcel
has been in effect since 1971, when Zoning Ordinance No. 1891 was adopted. This zoning
ordinance defined the district purpose as "a waterfront district designed to accommodate
recreational boating activities and services." The application for development approval for
the DRI of 1998 represents and confirms the "Alaska" parcel as MR and development has
proceeded on the balance of the properties in accordance with the DRI. The distribution and
intensities of uses presume the site remaining MR, Marine Recreational.
7. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
Partially Consistent - The proposed change may adversely impact the living conditions and
quality of life in the neighborhood. The FAR for the MR zoning district is 0.25 and the
maximum height is 40 feet with a maximum of four ~tories. The development regulations
for C-PS3 permit a maximum height of 80 feet, 8 stories and a maximum FAR of 2.50,
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28, 2001
Page 8
thereby increasing the density tenfold. The DRl contemplated spreading out the approved
density, with the "Alaska" parcel zoned low density MR.
8. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion
beyond the levels of service as set forth in the comprehensive plan or otherwise affect
public safety.
Partially Consistent - Although the "Alaska" parcel is included in the Porto fino DRl, it was
shown on the proposed designation of the DRl as MR, Marine Recreational. Furthermore,
other development projects unrelated to the DRl properties, in the immediate neighborhood
are under construction and will come on line in a short period of time, creating the potential
for a degradation oflevels of service. No additional traffic information has been submitted
to confirm the ability of the area to support the increase of development at this location, in
conjunction with other surrounding developments.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
Partially Consistent - By increasing the density of the subject property, there is a potential
for reducing light and air to adjacent areas, in particular to the designated parklands
immediately adjacent to the east and northwest.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values In the adjacent
area.
Partially Consistent - The proposed change may adversely impact property values because
of the increased density.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the Improvement or development
of adjacent property In accordance with existing regulations.
Partially Consistent - The proposed change would not be a deterrent to the improvement
or development of adjacent property. The underlying zoning regulations remain in effect for
the surrounding zoning districts.
12. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
Not Consistent - There are no substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning. The existing regulations permit the development of the
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28, 2001
Page 9
subject property as marine recreational land use with an its rights and privileges under the
land development regulations of the City.
13. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the city for the proposed use in
a district already permitting such use.
Not Consistent - It is not impossible to find other adequate sites for the higher intensity
commercial and residential uses that the applicant proposes for this parcel.
ANALYSIS
The site analysis shows a proposed tower 37 stories, 396 ft. high, sited on the Goodman and Hinson
parcels, with a 3-story, 30 ft. high commercial structure on the Goodman parcel, facing South Pointe
Drive. The site analysis indicates a 3-story, 32 ft. high townhouse residential development, facing
Govemment Cut and an 8-story, 86 ft. high residential tower facing Washington A venue, sited on
the "Alaska" parcel. The site plan also indicates a 5-story, 45 ft. high parking facility in the center
of the parcel, surrounded by the residential townhouse and tower proposal, as wen as a pedestrian
walkway 25 feet wide along the water's edge, the fining of the existing inlet and private recreational
space on the waterfront portion of the Hinson parcel.
In reviewing and analyzing this request, staff has several concerns; they are:
. Inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed change would contravene several
objectives and policies, as discussed under review criterion No.1, of the Comprehensive
Plan, including:
Future Land Use Element
... Objective 1: Land Development Regulations - Policy 1.1
Conservation/Coastal Zone Management Element:
... Objective 4: Hurricane Evacuation - Policy 4.9
... Objective 6: Bay Water Quality - Policy 6.1
... Objective 9: Density Limits
... Objective 10: Public Shoreline Access - Policy 10.3
. The filling of the inlet may contravene Objective 10: Public Shoreline Access of the
Conservation/Coastal Zone Management Element, which seeks to minimize impacts of man-
made structures and activities on shoreline resources, and prohibit the filling, spoiling or
placement of structures in or over coastal waters.
Planning Board
File No. 1505 - "Alaska" parcel
August 28. 2001
Page 10
. Upzoning - Changing the land use category from MR which has an FAR of .25 and a
maximum height of 40 feet, to C-PS3, with an FAR of2.5 and a maximum height of80 feet
increases the density and intensity of the uses, which may have an adverse impact on the
general welfare of the residents of the South Pointe area.
. The development of the proposed tower on the Goodman and Hinson parcels. Because the
DR! properties were exempted from the amending height ordinance, the Hinson and
Goodman parcels can be developed to a maximum height of 300 feet. By changing the land
use designation of "Alaska" to C-PS3, the potential for a transfer of development rights
would create a development much greater than what is allowed in the underlying regulations
for the existing land use designation.
It should be noted that the language which allows residential and hotel development to have
an unlimited height was struck out of the Code in an amending ordinance in October 1998,
however this change was inadvertently excluded from the final version and thus not codified.
Staffwill shortly bring to the Planning Board a corrective amendment which will clarify the
height for residential and hotel development in the C-PS3 district.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing analysis and the inconsistencies with the review criteria, staff recommends
that the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use category of the comprehensive plan for the
subject property be DENIED.
JGGIML
c. Gary Held, First Assistant City Attorney
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\ci.miami-beach.f1.us
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members of the City Commission
DATE: September 20, 2001
FROM:
Jorge M. Gonzalez ~ . /
City Manager rv 0
Setting of Public earing - Cbange to tbe Future Land Use Map
SUBJFCT:
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO
CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE
FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE
"ALASKA" PARCEL, A PARCEL OF UNPLATTED LAND OF
APPROXIMATELY 3.4 ACRES, LOCATED NORTHWEST OF SOUTH POINTE
PARK, FROM THE CURRENT MR, MARINE RECREATIONAL, TO THE
PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY CPS-3, COMMERCIAL
INTENSIVE MIXED USE.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
The Administration recommends that the City Commission set the required public hearing for a
time certain on October 17, 2001 for this proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map for the
parcel of unplatted land known as the "Alaska" parcel.
ANALYSIS
The owners of the "Alaska" parcel made application to change the Future Land Use Map category
of the property from MR, Marine Recreational, to C-PS3, Commercial Intensive Mixed Use.
In reviewing and analyzing this request, staff expressed several concerns; they are:
. Inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed change would contravene
several objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, including:
Future Land Use Element
* Objective 1: Land Development Regulations
Conservation/Coastal Zone Management Element:
AGENDA ITEM
e.7L
f -JO-O I
PB File #1505
DATE
Commission Memorandum
September 20,2001
Setting Public Hearingfor change to the Future Land Use Map
Page 2
ANALYSIS (continued)
* Objective 4: Hurricane Evacuation
* Objective 6: Bay Water Quality
* Objective 9: Density Limits
* Objective 10: Public Shoreline Access
. Upzoning - Changing the land use category from MR which has an FAR of .25 and a
maximum height of40 feet, to C-PS3, with an FAR of2.5 and a maximum height of80
feet increases the density and intensity of the uses, which may have an adverse impact on
the general welfare of the residents ofthe South Pointe area.
. Because the DRl properties were exempted from the amending height ordinance, the
Hinson and Goodman parcels (immediately adjacent to the "Alaska" parcel to the
northwest) can be developed to a maximum height of 300 feet. By changing the land use
designation of "Alaska" to C-PS3, the potential for a transfer of development rights would
create a development much greater than what is allowed in the underlying regulations for
the existing land use designation.
The Planning Board heard this matter at a public hearing on September 6,2001. After lengthy
discussion, legal arguments and public participation, the Board voted 4-0 (3 members absent) to
recommend to the City Commission denial of this request.
The subject amendment to the Future Land Use Map requires a 30-day mailed notice of public
hearing. To enable the City Commission to hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment in
a timely manner at its October 17, 2001 meeting, the Administration is requesting that the public
hearings be set at this time.
Based on the foregoing, the Administration recommends that the City Commission set the required
public hearing as referenced above and more particularly as set forth in the attached resolution, for
October 17,2001, after 5:00 p.m..
JMG\~~\ML
attachments
F:IPLAN\$PLB\CCMEMOS\2001 \1505SET. WPD