JOIN US!!
For more information, contact us via email at mrc@rsmas.miami.edu

MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION 
c/o Rosenstiel School
4600 Rickenbacker Cswy,
Miami, Fl. 33149
305-361-4850
Fax: 305-361-4755
  e-mail: mrc@rsmas.miami.edu

Chairman Robert Parks called the Miami River Commission meeting to order at 12:00 noon on Monday, October 2, 2000 at the Downtown Development Authority, First Union National Bank Building, Suite 1818, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard in Miami.

• Robert L. Parks, Chairperson, Member at Large, appointed by the Governor

• Phil Everingham, Vice Chairperson, Chair of the Marine Council

• Jim Murley, Governor of the State of Florida, Designee

• Sandy O’Neil, Mayor Miami-Dade County, Designee

• Ernie Martin, Neighborhood Rep. appointed by City of Miami Commission

• Richard Bunnell, Chair of MRMG, Designee

• Christina Bahamoude, Mayor City of Miami, Designee

• James McDonald, Chair of GMCC, Designee

• Cleve Jones, III, Member at Large appointed by City of Miami Commission

• Theo Long, Rep. of Civic or Environmental Org. appointed by the Governor, Designee

• Gary Winston, Miami-Dade State Attorney, Designee

• Commissioner Bruno Barreiro, Miami-Dade County Commissioner

• Alfredo J. Gonzalez, Miami-Dade County Commissioner, Designee

• Frank Lopez, Executive Director Downtown Development Authority, Designee

• Eileen Damaso, City of Miami Commissioner, Designee

Ex Officio (non-voting) members: Cdr. Mike Miles, USCG, MSO Miami,  Capt. Larry Bowling, USCG, MSO Miami, 
Managing Director: David Miller, M.D. MRC

• Fran Bohnsack, MRMG

• Lavinia Freeman, TPL

• Chuck Flink, Greenways, Inc.

• Mark Sell, Mark Sell Communications

• Roger T. Hernstadt, CMO

• Scott Mitchell

• Dianne Johnson, City of Miami/REED

I. CHAIRS REPORT

CHAIRS REMARKS

Mr. Parks stated that he had made a special request of the working group Chairpersons to provide reports only if it is absolutely necessary or if they needed some kind of action or resolution from the MRC today.  Mr. Parks would like to allow most of the meeting to be spent on the Greenways project.
    Mr. Parks provided a report concerning what the Executive Committee did and a general update of Miami River issues.  We are at the very last step to get the River dredged.  The Miami-Dade Commission will soon review and hopefully approve a Resolution, which will designate a site for the temporary drying site for the dredge spoils.  This should be the last official action required by the County Commission for the dredging project.  The City of Miami, at the Budget hearing last Thursday, approved their required allocation for the dredging project.  The federal government has recommended $4 million for the project and awaits final signature by the president.  The State of Florida has allocated $3 million for the project. 
     Sandy O’Neil advised everyone to focus on the merits of the project at the County Commission meeting.   Mr. Parks stated that they had a meeting of the Community Council whose District this site is located in and the Council approved the site unanimously.  Commissioner Morales has been attempting to get a commitment from the County Manager that at the conclusion of the dredging project this site could be turned into a park.  That is the status of the dredging project.
     At the last meeting of the MRC in September, there was a discussion concerning the use of funds that had been given to the MRC by the Miami River Coordinating Committee (MRCC).  This discussion involved reallocation of MRCC funds for the purpose of hiring and continuing to fund our state lobbyist, Doug Bruce.  The MRC passed a motion, which approved using those funds to pay for a state lobbyist.  After the September MRC meeting, Mr. Parks received a call from Betty Fleming and Janet Gavarette in which they expressed some dismay concerning the fact that the MRC had taken that action.  They believed there was a commitment by the MRC to utilize those funds as requested by the MRCC.   Mr. Parks indicated to her that he had specifically asked David to contact Betty because Mr. Parks wanted to make sure that bridge was crossed before the September Resolution.  Betty did not express the dismay or the commitment part to David as strongly as she did to Mr. Parks and she apologized for that.   She did advise Mr. Parks that the MRCC funds had come to the MRCC through a similar grant process as those funds of the MRC and have the same legal impediment as those of the MRC.  If you are funded by the State, you cannot use State funds to lobby the State.  Mr. Parks made the decision that he would not put the MRC in any funding situation that was the least bit controversial.  Mr. Parks told the Executive Committee what he had done and the committee fully concurred.   Mr. Parks stated that based on this decision, the MRC needs to raise about $12 to $15,000 in order to obtain the services of a lobbyist in Tallahassee. 
     In addition to the Greenway and dredging projects, there is another very serious issue with the State legislation concerning the sun setting of the MRC in July 2003.  This issue needs to have a lobbyist’s attention in Tallahassee to start laying the groundwork for extending the sunset date.  The MRC has decided that it is critical to remain in place for the continued improvement of the river.   Mr. Parks asked for thoughts and suggestions.   Discussion ensued.  There remains a serious funding problem in that the MRC needs a lobbyist in Tallahassee, so we need to raise funds from a source that allows funding of a Tallahassee lobbyist.
     Mr. Parks stated that the Ethics Committee met and former Chief Justice Kogan was present to provide his professional comments.  David Miller said that the essence of the Ethics Committee meeting discussion dealt with the dredging project and companies that would benefit from dredging.  The basic issue is that Dick Bunnell has a marine construction company and his company may receive sub-contractor work to assist in the dredging project.  Since Dick is the MRC’s Dredging Working Group Co-Chairperson, there may be a perception of a conflict of interest.  The matter was discussed in detail with Justice Kogan.  Initially Justice Kogan felt this could be a conflict, but after a detailed explanation of how the project would be bid and contracted solely by the Army Corps as the project officer, Justice Kogan was less concerned.   He suggested that the MRC write a letter to the State of Florida, Commission on Ethics and get a determination concerning this specific issue.  The Army Corps of Engineers was approached when this issue first came up in early 1999 and the Corps’ legal department verbally advised the MRC that they did not have a problem because all of the Dredging Working Group meetings are operating under the Sunshine Law and open to the public.  Mr. Parks would like David to “draft” a letter to the Ethics Commission and provide this draft to all MRC members for discussion at the next meeting of the MRC.

II. Greenway “Draft” Master Plan 

Mr. Chuck Flink stated that a draft plan was provided to MRC members.  Mr. Flink explained how the draft was put together and its purpose.  It is important to cover all the major subjects that would surround the creation and development of a River Greenway system.  He wants to present a complete train of thought from beginning to end.  At the same time, he wants to create a geographic information system (GIS) data set specifically for this project.  Obtaining this GIS data took 7-8 months due to the complicated procedures in place to obtain GIS data in Miami-Dade County. 
     The draft report is broken out into different chapters.  Mr. Flink sent a memo with 10 major questions that needs to be addressed by the MRC that pertain to the overall greenways concept that is represented in the report.  Mr. Flink stated that they needed the MRC and the Greenway Subcommittee to focus on the major concepts of the plan.  Over the next 30 to 60 days they are going through a thorough public review of this plan.  There will be a substantial review period of a draft document and after mid-November, they are going to go back in and make revisions and compose a final plan and a set of initial steps.  The main questions are:  Have all the major design elements that the MRC wants to see in a greenway been addressed and how does the MRC envision handling certain long-term functions such as maintenance, police protection and safety issues?
      Mr. Flink stated that there is a concept for a tax increment finance (TIF) district, which has been discussed with other River improvement proposals.  The question is should this TIF be represented in the greenways plan as a funding strategy and if so, to what level.  There are other questions concerning specific funding sources and Chuck hopes that more sources will become available.  This is their first attempt to put costs to the development of the greenway system.  They are hoping to have significant local input, which will refine the costs and provide a much more realistic and accurate cost estimate.  
    Importantly, they have suggested in terms of the lead facilitator and operator of the Greenway System that this would be the MRC, and this is an important question the MRC must answer.  If yes, what are the needs that the MRC would have in order to take on this role in terms of staffing and operational needs, funding issues, etc.  Mr. Flink did a very informal public opinion pole throughout this process and received about 120 responses.  One of the survey questions was what organization or government agency should be the overall facilitator or developer of the Greenway.  The answer came back as primarily two groups, first the MRC and second was to create a new public/private partnership with greenway development and management as their primary mission.  Chuck’s plan recommends that the MRC be the greenway manager and operator.  Mr. Flink then asked:  What would be the role of state and local government and other organizations with regard to development and operation of the Greenway System and facilities?  Are there any additional implementation steps that should be added to the Plan?   What about the notion of creating a Miami River Greenway Trust?  This would be an independent trust fund to generate dollars from both the pubic and private sector for development, operation and management over the life of the project.  A lot of details and fine-tuning still remain to complete the Plan.  Is the MRC comfortable with the document in particular the concepts outlined in the Plan?  Are there some things that should not be represented until additional discussion has taken place? 
     Mr. Flink completed his presentation and asked for questions.  Mr. Parks asked what is the timeline for implementation.  Mr. Flink stated that they would have a plan of action to take before city, county and state approval agencies at the first of the year.  Mr. Flink asked if they could work with Jim Murley to formulate the various options to make a clear presentation to the public. 
     Discussion was held concerning the funding issue and the TIF.  Mr. Parks suggested that the TIF concept be put out to different groups and hear what they have to say.  Ernie Martin described the MRC’s approach to the TIF and that was to have the Chairs of the various sub-committees determine their funding needs for River improvement projects.  The intention was to first determine what the capital budget is for redevelopment and capital projects. When that is totaled, they can figure out how much of a tax increment is necessary, which could make it clear and hopefully more palatable to the various governments involved.  The total funding of this Greenway Plan is currently estimated at a little over $3 million.  Mr. Parks stated that the MRC must get a handle on the costs associated with River improvement from the Stormwater Committee and other Working Groups to determine the amount of funds necessary for River improvement and to determine the feasibility of a TIF district.  If you have an estimated cost to get these projects done then there is more credibility to the whole TIF concept.   
    Mr. Flink wanted the plan to show the specific nature by which they can create those costs by a detailed spreadsheet.  The cost estimate will increase as they receive more information.  Mr. Parks stated that they are going to have to police the greenway, along with safety call stations.  Mr. Flink is looking at different Riverwalks in Florida and other places to get a sense of the operating costs, how areas are patrolled, the intensity of management, and more. 
     Mr. Flink said they are trying to create a physical identity on the River, which becomes identifiable as the Miami River Greenway.  They have specific recommendations and would love to hear from MRC members as they review the document.  Mr. Flink wants to give the MRC plenty of time to review the document, but needs comments by the end of October.  In mid-November, Chuck will complete a second draft, which will be distributed for review.  Mr. Flink asked that the comments be made directly on the document or provided to Lavinia at the Trust for Public Land.

III. Riverfront Zoning Discussion

Jim Murley explained the Riverfront Zoning issue at 1951 NW South River Drive. There are two actions pending before the City Commission.  The first is a request to do a land use change from “Industrial” to “High Density Multifamily Residential” and that is followed by a zoning request from “SD-4 Waterfront Industrial” to “R-4 High Density Residential”.  Mr. Murley feels it is more appropriate for the MRC to look at the land use change in the comprehensive plan, which is a policy decision of the City.  New projects have been occurring on the River and they either meet the zoning requirements or require relatively minor zoning changes or development review decisions.  This issue is the first change in the City’s Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, which is required by State law.  With reference to this property at 1951 NW South River Drive, if you don’t have a land use change, you cannot even apply for the zoning change.  When this land use and zoning change was first proposed, the landowner initiated it and the City decided to make an initial transmittal decision and send it to the Department of Community Affairs.  The City also had pending an amendment to designate a large part of Miami as an urban infill area.  They eventually got that approved.  One of the benefits of the approval to the City is that it enlarges the areas within the City that do not require State of Florida land use review and approval.  They are called small-scale amendments.  Now this land use change will go forward under the City’s small-scale review process and does not require any State of Florida approval.  This proposed change has a second reading before the City Commission on October 26^th.   The City and County have signed a joint planning resolution to work on the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan.  Mr. Murley recommends that the MRC request that the City and County not change their comprehensive plans in the Miami River corridor until completion of the joint MRC, City and County Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan.  It will not tie up other zoning issues along the River only the larger land use issues.   Dr. Martin felt that the recommendation would support the public interest in that local public hearings could be held and involve the neighborhoods.   Discussion was held.   Mr. Murley felt that it was time for the MRC to make its opinion known.  Dr. Martin feels the neighborhoods would have a strong objection if the change brings in another high-rise proposal.  Mr. Murley made the motion that the MRC recommend to the City that they do not approve the land use change at this time and defer decision until such time as the MRC, County and City jointly complete the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, which will specify how that property will be affected.  Dr. Martin seconded the motion.   Sandy O’Neil suggested an amendment for a maximum time frame of 6 months so that the land use decision is not placed in limbo for a prolonged period of time.   Dr. Martin did not accept the amendment for a time frame.   Discussion ensued.  Mr. Parks stated that the Motion, as he understands it, is that the MRC take a position to oppose the City Resolution or the land use change proposal as it is presently framed until such time as the MRC and the City have had an opportunity to determine what the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan is going to accomplish concerning amending the current comprehensive plan in the Miami River corridor.    The motion passed 8 for and 2 against. 
     Mr. Parks asked Jim Murley to draft a position paper on why the MRC is making this recommendation and include the positive issues that a good urban infill plan would solve these land use problems.

IV Committee Reports -

Economic Impact Study - David Miller stated the Miami River Economic Impact Study was lacking information for the recreational boating industry.  The committee has data for all other major industries.  They have recently more data on the recreational boating industry and this updated information has been passed to Dr. Lipner and he is going to re-examine the additional data and update his statistics.  The plan is to have a draft report at the next Economic Development & Commerce meeting which is toward the end of October and hopefully have a draft report available at the November MRC meeting.

V. NEW BUSINESS

     It was brought up by Fran Bohnsack that an article in the Miami Dailey Business Review suggested that a new development project south of the Intercontinental Hotel by The Related Group of Florida is asking the City to scrap the 50-foot set back required by the city code along waterfront properties.  Mr. Parks stated that the MRC has an unyielding position that the Riverwalk criteria be required of all new developments.  Mr. Parks stated that every developer has come and said that they would keep the Riverwalk and try to build it out around bridges, etc.   Mr. Parks will write a letter on this.  The Riverwalk is supposed to be 20 feet wide per the City zoning requirement.  This article is talking about encroaching on the 50-foot setback, which may or may not affect the Riverwalk.  Mr. Miller will obtain additional information on this and bring it up for further discussion.
    David Miller said that Diane Johnson is going to be the liaison between the City of Miami and the Miami River Commission.  This is a result of the City Commission passing Resolution #00-320 on April 13 2000.  This Resolution requires all issues affecting the River to be reviewed by the MRC first and then the MRC would provide a written recommendation to the City Commission.  The City Commissioners would then have the benefit of the MRC recommendation to help in making their decision.  Mr. Parks thanked Ms. Johnson. 

 There being no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

_______________________________Recording Secretary

IV. Adjournment 

      HOME      CALENDAR       ABOUT THE RIVER         ABOUT THE COMMISSION       DREDGING      GREENWAYS    URBAN INFILL PLAN  
  STORMWATER RETROFITTING   MINUTES OF MEETINGS      LINKS