I. CHAIRS REPORT:

Mr. Parks asked for approval of the December 2001 minutes.  Sandy O’Neil made the motion to approve the minutes. Sallye Jude seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.  

            Mr. Parks stated they are still moving along with the dredging.  Letters were written pursuant to your direction to fish and wildlife concerning the problems that they are having and also soliciting Senator Graham and some of the other Congressmen’s support to get that minor problem resolved. 

II.  Wagner Creek Presentation

            Mr. Parks welcomed Betty Fleming who was the Executive Director for the Miami River Coordinating Committee for a number of years.  Mrs. Fleming made numerous and great contributions to the River. 

            Betty Fleming is now with the University of Miami who is one of the sponsors of this project.  Sergio Rodriguez is head of the Real Estate Department at the University of Miami.  Betty introduced Jason Uyeda and Oscar Garcia-pons to explained the project.  Mr. Uyeda’s firm, EDAW, selected this project and has been working with the University of Miami and others through their summer student program. This is a student based internship program and a two week workshop.  This project is close to the River and does connect to it, but doesn’t directly touch the River.  Their objective of the program is to facilitate and lead a community neighborhood planning workshop through their summer student program.  The project area is an area around the UM – Jackson Memorial Hospital Campus.  The neighborhood has never been studied.  They have 23 offices worldwide and have an office in Miami and based in San Francisco.  They specialize in land and community based issues; environmental planning, master planning, land planning and more.  They are going to do this project through an intensive two week workshop whereby they will select 14 to 16 students from around the world.  He showed the post card and poster that will go out around the world. The students come to one central location of for a project.  They have been to other areas around urban water waters with this program all looking at a problem and come back with alternatives and ideas.  They have worked with University of Miami.  They are helping with putting up the students for two weeks with food, transportation, etc.   They want to look at the plans.  This is an educational experience. It is a way for their firm to give back to their discipline of design and environmental planning so it is a once in a lifetime educational experience.  They have in the past created a vision and framework. They will have an implemental strategy for going forward.  This particular project is economic development. 

            It cost about $150,000 to do this program.  Between Mr. Rodriguez’s group and the University of Miami providing a lot of the in kind services, that covers about $100,000 and they are left looking for $50,000.  They are also looking for knowledge from other studies that have been done up and down the River incorporating those and bringing those into the vision.  They would like to take the 14 global students on a River Tour giving the history. They are looking for an event that would bring the students together to meet constituents of this project area. 

            Mr. Parks stated that he met with this group and there was one thing that he wanted resolved.   They are talking about the entire hospital area.  This project involves much more than the River.  They are looking for the MRC to become a partner with them with the MRC’s approval.  There is a significant portion of their boundary that does touch on the River.  The University is going to do this and take in everything but Spring Garden.  It seems like a worthwhile project.  Mr. Parks concern is with if what they are doing has any impact on the MRC’s proposed plans for the Greenway project  the MRC is doing in supporting with PPL.  It is Mr. Parks understanding is that it will not.  They are asking for the MRC to take them on a River trip with some appropriate speakers and provide access of data that the MRC has accumulated.  And, possibly become involved in a sponsorship and possibly give some money.  At this point, it was opened for questions.  Sallye Jude said that some of these areas are within the empowerment zone and as a source of funding to go forward in some segments of it might be a choice.  Betty Fleming stated Wagner Creek is within the boundary and a potential for Wagner Creek greenway going side by side.  A small pilot project could be done on Wagner Creek to show another type of greenway that could also start stretching up.   Janet McAliley made the motion to support EDAW and their community improvement process.  The motion was seconded by Sallye Jude/Phil Everingham and passed unanimously.  In it’s passing, Mr. Parks will have David and Brett coordinate the boat trip and the other part and the Executive Committee will review the finances.  There will be a function on June 20^th on the River.  They are meeting with the Urban Infill Group and have looked at their plans and see where this project location is around the infill study area, but they see that group as a strong partner in this. 

III.  Discussion of Proposed Bridge Crossing of the Upper Miami River

            Mr. Parks stated at the last meeting they had a presentation by a number of people who were involved with the government side of the new proposal for the bridges that are proposed to happen at the west of River in the shipping area.  The Commission would like to hear from everybody who was involved or had an interest in that.  Since the Commission represents all of the constituencies who make up the Commission, including shippers, business people, homeowners, etc. They want to hear from everyone regarding the reference to the location of these structures. 

A.  ED&C Working Committee

            Mr. Parks asked Megan Kelly to give the group an idea of where the Economic Development Working Group is with reference to that.  Ms. Kelly said they had been trying to understand the multiplicity of River crossings that may or may not occur in connection with the Miami Inter Modal Center.  David Miller said he placed a hand out containing some general information about the upper end of the River.  There is a list of the resolutions of Economic Development Committee has passed in connection with the MIX project and the River crossings and the impact that will have on the working River.  Their specific concern is that this concern is that this concept of multi-modal transit has not been extended to the River crossing per se.  Each of these projects needs to proceed on a separate track each with its individual environmental impact and land acquisition program.  The opportunity to look at the location -- either bridge or tunnel -- and minimize some of the likely  economic and environmental impact to the working River just on the curve.  Megan said there would be a presentation from the Coast Guard and from the Marine Industry. 

B.     U.S. Coast Guard Bridge Branch

            Mr. Greg Shapley from the Coast Guard explained the Coast Guard’s role.  They are the permitting agency for bridge construction, modification, or alteration over navigable water of the United States as defined in law and federal regulation Title 33.  They are also the regulatory agency responsible for scheduling, maintaining the schedules and altering the schedules of openings for movable bridges.  They are wearing both hats.  They are also a cooperating federal agency since the project involves federal highway dollars.  They will be reviewing the environmental document associated with this before they issue a permit.    One of the key elements of any anticipated problems is jurisdiction.  When does the Coast Guard exercise its jurisdiction in terms of requiring a permit for bridges over navigable waters and that’s when those waters meet the definition described in 33© of the United States Code.  If the waterway is a federal project channel, then it is a key term in dealing with this.  Federal project channel can only be created authorized by Congress and in turn that is the only body that change it.   One else has that authority.  Since the Miami River from its mouth is a federal project channel.  The Coast Guard will have jurisdiction and will exercise jurisdiction in all these matters regarding regulations and permits. 

            Mr. Shapley said that one of the things that will come into play as they are approached for a permit is some discussion as to what the appropriate vertical and horizontal clearances for navigation are going to be with these structures.  To achieve this, they have published guide clearances since they do so much of it.  The width of the bridge would correspond to the width of the project channel.  That is the jumping off point.  Vertical clearance based on current waterway surveys is set at 65’. There is 75’ for the people mover and metro-mover or fixed bridges that are there.  This is a guide.  They Coast Guard would be receptive to hear arguments for more or less.  At this point in time, they have a final environmental impact statement by the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority and Federal Highway Administration.  The purpose is to describe what is being done and identify all its potential impact to the environment.  That would include property values, businesses, minority communities and so forth.  Each one of these has to be mitigated before the permit can be signed.  The shelf life for an environmental impact statement is four or five years.  This particular signed environmental impact statement is very near the point where it will require an updated supplement before it can serve as the final environmental impact statement in this case.  That will be federal highway doing that. 

          Other issues Mr. Shapley said they are concerned with is that all of this could be going on with another 9 to 10 major projects along this five mile stretch of waterway.  They are concerned about cumulative impact.  It is a very confined body of water to have that much going on at once.  The Coast Guard is planning to chair a comprehensive public meeting in the next 60 to 90 days to address this issue separately.  Mr. Shapley said that at the meeting that Sandy O’Neil put together for them in the County offices, they agreed that the issues that the Admiral laid out in his letter were these valid issues and they shared a consensus sense of priority for attacking these issues and agreed to meet again in the near future to talk about how to do this.  The record shows that the Coast Guard met with the Expressway Authority back in the 1994 and they had preliminary discussions.  Mr. Shapley has met with them again.

            In regard to the 65’ and 75’ this would hinge on the nature and volume of navigation that would have to access that reach of the River.

C.    Marine Industry Perspective

            Mr. Parks began the discussion with Phil Everingham with the Marine Council.  Phil Everingham said the Marine Council represents the whole marine interest and Miami-Dade County and South Florida, but their thrust is more toward the recreational side than commercial.  Phil Everingham said the Marine Council fully supports the concept of the working River and supports the interest of commerce on the River.  From the recreational side, they have three concerns.  The first is the boat yards that serve the recreational industry in Dade County and several other facilities located on the Miami River.  Any impact that restricts access to the Miami River any section of it in their view creates a bad precedent.  The marine industry is concern that their role on the River is maintained.  They have a concern that even 2400 or 1600 square linear feet on a bridge of the River could vote poorly for the industry.  They are concerned about a bad precedent.  The second, in line with that, the Marine Council fully supports proper access to their waterways for boaters.  And last, they have a great concern that the Miami River has not been given proper consideration in a large project that impacts all of Dade County and the River.  They would like to see the MRC play the role of the River to have a prominent place in all of the planning in these projects.  Mr. Everingham said that the marine industry concerns have not been properly addressed and would like to see a supplemental statement be brought forth.  Mr. Parks said that if anyone wishes to place a position with the Commission, they would welcome that they do that in writing and send it to David Miller.  Mr. Parks asked Phil to get a letter to them so that they can have that in his capacity as President of the Marine Council so they know were they stood as a matter of record.

            Fran Bohnsack said they became aware of this a long time ago.  They were surprised to realize that all of these projects that were going to curtail part of the channel.  The documents, she feels, were somewhat misleading.  Fran went to Mr. Price and asked for his help.  He said that when Fran came to him and outlined what the concerns were, he tried to outline for her what the valued points were related to this matter.  When the EIS was created, it was created well in advance of the $80 million commitment by the Federal Government to dredge the River.  The EIS statement is totally silent as to that as it would be because it is four years old.  One of the problems with the EIS is that they become dated based upon changed circumstances and new facts.  He respectfully asked the MRC on behalf of the Miami River Marine Group is to created an additional dialogue with the Expressway Authority to determine whether the $80 million federal government commitment to dredge the River has created a new factor which was not contemplated in the EIS report and that they issue a supplemental report and re-study the area.  He knows there are a lot of factors involved but feels the government should cooperate with one another and they should try to come up with a consistent plan for the future development of Dade County in this area.  He asked the MRC to encourage supplemental view by the Expressway Authority. 

            Commissioner Barreiro asked why the issue of doing the bridge in that area is to connect 112 to 836.  The expansion between 112 and the airport is extremely underutilized in his opinion.  If that road going to the airport connected to 836, it would be much shorter and much less costly.  It doesn’t make sense.  Jesus Sanchez from the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority stated that because of the glide path next to the airport, the Airport Representatives wanted it to be removed from there.  The ramp that goes from S.R. 112 to the airport was done a few years ago as a temporary or until this inter connector came in. They would construct the inter connector to connect from the airport or 836 to S.R. 112 and once that is connected that would remove the other ramp.  The glide path is way too close.  That ramp encroaches into the existing glide path today.  Discussion took place.  It was done as a temporary.  Mr. Parks asked if the Expressway Authority has any present plans in light of the dredging project has come on since the original EIS was done to look at that again and do a supplement EIS.  This is a substantial change from when the first one was done.  They acquired roadway from DOT.  They have not had any thought of re-addressing the EIS issue.  Because of funding Mr. Sanchez stated that it might be difficult.  Mr. Foutz stated that there is a crossing with CFX Railroad at the lowest point on the glide slope and that cannot be grade separate, so having a freeway to freeway inter connector with a railroad grade causing across it makes the area problematic.  That was in response to Commissioner Barreiro’s comment. 

            Sandy O’Neil asked if the funds could be found how long would it take.  Mr. Sanchez stated that it would probably take a copy of years. Frank Zeinali representing the MDX project explained his views (couldn’t hear).  Dick Bunnell stated that the Miami River Marine Group also wants to explain that this is just one project of many of six crossings over the River that are contemplated and he feels that it is important that the MDX do a supplemental EIS before advancing further.  The River, after dredging, use will be used even more than at present and a very big impact on industry.  He would like to MRC back the proposal to perform a supplemental EIS.  Cleve Jones said there is a decision being made on the CSX bridge which is totally opposite of Miami Dade Expressway.  They are looking to widen the current bridge and it would be currently a 10’ clearance. That would hamper the whole rest of the River and that is what MDX was looking at.  He feels a presentation should be done by Corridor??  (couldn’t hear).  Jim Murley said that the County Commission voted not to expand S.R. 112.  There is still a toll because MDX has not raised the toll in that corridor because there are no plans to improve.  If the road is not going to be improved that is receiving the north/south corridor, it is not like the east/west corridor is under-utilized, there is going to be more traffic put into a corridor that the County has already voted not to expand.  It is not even taking money up for it.  He feels there is some sequence that can be clarified.  He feels all this happened before MDX or in some sequence that happened.  Discussion was held about District 4.  Mr. Parks asked if a District 4 FDOT representative could be in attendance at the next meeting.   Tri-rail was unable to attend the meeting but a member of their staff who said that after September, they had no plans for needing to tie down or widening the bridge over the Miami River.  Mr. Parks stated the MRC needs to find out specifically whether they do or they don’t.  Mr. Parks asked what the wishes were of the MRC regarding this issue.  It was discussed and will be placed on the agenda for next month. 

            Sandy O’Neil said it was discussed about one of the agencies of the private and public sector that would be effected by the bridge work that was going to be on going for the next decade.  What is coming from the Coast Guard is basically a proposal that will ask Representatives from Coast Guard, City of Miami, Miami-Dade County, and any of the various agencies that would be affected within those respective government agencies.  They plan to meet once a month and look at what’s out there and map a schedule the various projects and how they are going to be coming on line and make sure that all of the agencies that are involved in these construction activities can meet also and they are not caught short on what’s happening, but can proceed in an appropriate direction.  They are waiting for that proposal to come forth from the Coast Guard.  Mr. Parks understands that there is some move to have the MRC act as the coordinating authority of all these other groups which the Executive Committee is going to get some information together on and look at because there are so many issues before they can make any recommendation.  Mr. Parks hope they can do that and bring it back for the next meeting agenda.  Mr. Parks asked Megan if her group could come back considering the things discussed at this meeting which would be (a) the supplemental EIS statement, the CSX matter and with some guidelines and definitive statement as to what they are thinking about so the MRC can take a position.  Mr. Parks said that what is being proposed is a straw man proposal is that they are really talking about creating a massive working group of all the people who are involved with issues River wise in terms of bridges and structures and having this Commission act as the group that coordinates that.  This is a big job with a lot of responsibility.  This will be on the agenda for the next meeting as well.  The Commission has to take a position on some of these issues at some point.  It is critical as to the constituency of the Commission.  Perhaps Mr. Sanchez or the appropriate person of his group could give some impact to the MRC’s Economic Working Group on that issue would be helpful.  If Mr. Sanchez’ group is thinking about doing it and if not, why not, and if so, how long will it take, etc.

IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS

a.  Dredging

Mr. Bunnell stated that at the last meeting December 18^th , the County informed them that Dade County is still reviewing the PGA agreement between the local sponsor and the Corps.  There are some issues regarding the PGA as far as the County is concerned.  They are moving on it as quickly as possible.  Tom Goldstein is the County Attorney who has been assigned to get the problems of the PGA agreed to.  It is his understanding that Mr. Goldstein is hard at work on this.  The conceptual Water Quality permit was issued on December 5^th and they are very happy that the Florida Department Environmental Protection did that.  There are some issues regarding the sediments in the River as to what is in the federal channel and what is not in the federal channel.  The Corps has been using an estimate of 450,000 yards which is approximately half of the million yards that they estimated necessary to dredge out the River corridor.  They are hoping that their new survey will indicate how much of the material along the edges are solid rock and how much is actually sediment because the permit to dredge the River will not include virgin rock and will not be part of the dredging.  It may be half the 450,000.  They are hoping that the Corps and the full impact of the MRC behind them on this and Dade County wants the Corps to actually include all of the dredging of the Miami River Corridor in their federally sponsored dredging program.  They are trying to convince the Corps to dredge the entire River. 

b.  Public Safety

            Commander Nancy Good Ridge with the USCG reported for Capt. Watson.  (can’t hear) Mr. Parks wants this to be followed up on. 

c.   Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan

            Jim Murley had a hand out.  They have the lower, middle and upper (can’t hear). They met at UM last month.  They plan to do a workshop in March or April.

d. Greenways

Dr. Martin stated that in regard to the issue brought up at the last meeting, he is unaware of any progress.  They had one meeting.  They received word that they may be losing some of the federal money as a result of the number of years it has taken for the City to implement to the two different projects.  They heard that they were looking at alternatives or ways they could respond to Mr. Parks’ December 5^th letter asking for an explanation of might be the best way they could move out of this quandary of losing the money if they don’t spend it.  They asked for a meeting through MRC to meet with City Manager.  Mr. Parks has heard nothing further about it.  Dianne Johnson has been in regular contact with the people.  (can’t hear)  They have discussed some alternatives. They are looking into spending the money on public rights of way or possibly Dallas Park.  She is attending another meeting regarding this. Dr. Martin said they have always known that this money had been applied for the purpose of building the Greenway on the north side of the River from the metro-rail to the metro-mover.  They prepared a strategy adopted by the City and the County and with the guidance of the Trust for Public Land; the first major construction of a Riverwalk will be a continuous path from the mouth of the River up to the Lummus Park area, and hopefully to the Fifth Street Bridge.  In the heart of this was this money that was earmarked for this purpose. They are now being told the money cannot be used for this purpose.  Mr. Parks is the money is available will it be received for that project?  That is the bottom line.  Dianne Johnson explained it further.  Mr. Parks said they need a meeting with the City Manager and perhaps Mr. Sanchez’ office could assist and Mayor Diaz.  Mr. Parks is concerned that it is not going to go on the River.  Private property owners are required to put in a Riverwalk at their own expense. There is also ample precedence for Greenway being done as a public/private venture.  In order to encourage economic development on the surrounding property, if the property owner would be willing to dedicate the permanent use of that for the public for 50’ deep or so and have it built by the funds that are currently available.  That would help that individual market their property and would also serve a public purpose of completing the Greenway.  They need to be flexible and not have a rigid principle.  There is a precedent from the DuPont Plaza to the Inter Continental Hotel built by the City on private property.  Mr. Parks said that he would like to make this a priority item before the next meeting. 

              e.  Grant Investigation

Brett reported that Department of Cultural Affairs  (can’t hear) on a grant award for $4,5000.00.  They still have _______________ before River Day. 

f. Stormwater Subcommittee

Sallye Jude said that next month the final report should be ready. 

g.  Economic Development and Commerce