Going from 150 square feet to 21,600 square feet - NO
The folks from Grove Harbour Marina presented their project plans to the Village Council tonight. It was a rehash of what I posted here.
The developers wanted to show the before and after plans, showing that they have downsized the plans from their first draft. But of course, who is to say they didn't design a larger building to begin with and then pull the switch and end up with the smaller structure, which may have been their intention all the time. They say it went from 38,000 in size to 21,600 in size. The current building is 150 square feet.
They keep throwing in that the open area under the new structure will allow Fresh Market customers to have a dining area. But as one resident stated, there are parks on either side of the Fresh Market. Take your food there! The empy area next to the Fresh Market now, in the shade, is never used.
What is the point of all those years of designing the Waterfront Masterplan to have someone just come in and change it because they feel like it? That was the sticking point at the meeting.
They want to build a big building 22 feet from the water, the easement law is 50 feet!
This project is ready to go now, while the Waterfront Masterplan is still trying to come up with money and a start date. So the funny part is that this can be done and open years before the Waterfront Masterplan work even begins. The zoning board has recommended 5 to 2 in favor of the project. But it is felt they were mislead.
Felice Dubin (left), Council Member, was concerned about them trying to push the plan through. None of the neighbors was notified of this plan, it really did come out of the blue.
According to Santiago Echemendia, speaking for the project (a land use lawyer), he was before the Village Council as a courtesy, and didn't seem to want to be bothered with the Council. Felice felt that an office building is not needed on the waterfront. He felt that it fits in with the Waterfront Masterplan and that they had "vested rights," but offices were not approved as part of the Masterplan. This is an office building to be built on the water.
"You think going from 150 square feet to 21,600 square feet is a compromise?" scoffed Felice.
Michelle Neimeyer, head of the Village Council, and only one of two Council Members, for the project, stated that the marina was never treated as part of the Waterfront Masterplan, but it is a private business, with a 40 year lease -- a working marina, and it was just assumed that it would "do it's own thing" to survive in the businessword.
Dave Collins (right), Village Council member, proposed that the City Commission not support this project. Blocking the water is not a good thing in his view (in fact it will block views). He said "vested rights" is not a good thing to bring up either (as Echemendia did) to the Village Council, because the last group that used that phrase was Home Depot.
Council Member Martin Zilber didn't have a clue about this whole issue until the night before. He felt it should be revisited at a future meeting with more public input. Michelle did mention that we discussed it in the Grapevine, but it really did come up fast without much warning. But it makes no sense since the City Commission is voting Thursday next week. It's like closing the barn door after the horse has left. They are gambling that Commissioner Marc Sarnoff may defer the issue at next week's Commission meeting.
Martin moved to defer it until after the City meets. It was seconded. But Michelle Neimeyer felt they need to make a decision tonight and the deferral motion failed.
Village Council member Gary Hecht moved to deny building of the structure. It was seconded.
Santiago Echemendia, the attorney for the project, was full of hearsay. He talked about everyone and anyone that has approved the project. But there was no proof of any of this, not to say he was making anything up, but as an attorney he should know that hearsay means nothing in the court of law. He says, Enrique Nunez, the city guy in charge of the Waterfront Masterplan is for the Grove Harbour project. But does the City ever care about what the Grove wants? Is that a surprise?
Alyn Pruett, Village Council member, felt that it is odd that it is not part of the Waterfront Masterplan. It's like they are trying to do something that is not proper by holding the whole issue back. "Maybe it's a technical error," and should be an amendments on the Masterplan, according to Alyn.
"Is it absolutely necessary to have the square footage that you have now?" asked Lillian Dones, Council Member, wondering why leased office spaces are needed on the waterfront and not just a dockmaster's office.
Village Council members Michelle Neimeyer and Lottie Person were in favor of the plan, for various reasons of their own. The rest of the Village Council voted against it. Lottie felt it was "pretty," I really think that is not a good reason to screw up the waterfront and build an office building on the waterfront. She felt that Village Council members were against the plan because it isn't perfect. Lottie needs to get real, honestly. A four story office building on the water? How can that ever be made perfect?
So everyone voted to ask the City Commission to deny the project except for Michelle and Lottie. And the Council asked that the Sasaki people, who designed the Waterfront Masterplan, weigh in and see if they feel this should be part of their long drawn-out plan.
Village Council members at tonight's meeting: Michelle Neimeyer, Lottie Person, David Collins, Gary Hecht, Alyn Pruett, Felice Dubin, Lilliana Dones and Martin Zilber.
The developers wanted to show the before and after plans, showing that they have downsized the plans from their first draft. But of course, who is to say they didn't design a larger building to begin with and then pull the switch and end up with the smaller structure, which may have been their intention all the time. They say it went from 38,000 in size to 21,600 in size. The current building is 150 square feet.They keep throwing in that the open area under the new structure will allow Fresh Market customers to have a dining area. But as one resident stated, there are parks on either side of the Fresh Market. Take your food there! The empy area next to the Fresh Market now, in the shade, is never used.
What is the point of all those years of designing the Waterfront Masterplan to have someone just come in and change it because they feel like it? That was the sticking point at the meeting.
They want to build a big building 22 feet from the water, the easement law is 50 feet!
This project is ready to go now, while the Waterfront Masterplan is still trying to come up with money and a start date. So the funny part is that this can be done and open years before the Waterfront Masterplan work even begins. The zoning board has recommended 5 to 2 in favor of the project. But it is felt they were mislead.
Felice Dubin (left), Council Member, was concerned about them trying to push the plan through. None of the neighbors was notified of this plan, it really did come out of the blue.According to Santiago Echemendia, speaking for the project (a land use lawyer), he was before the Village Council as a courtesy, and didn't seem to want to be bothered with the Council. Felice felt that an office building is not needed on the waterfront. He felt that it fits in with the Waterfront Masterplan and that they had "vested rights," but offices were not approved as part of the Masterplan. This is an office building to be built on the water.
"You think going from 150 square feet to 21,600 square feet is a compromise?" scoffed Felice.
Michelle Neimeyer, head of the Village Council, and only one of two Council Members, for the project, stated that the marina was never treated as part of the Waterfront Masterplan, but it is a private business, with a 40 year lease -- a working marina, and it was just assumed that it would "do it's own thing" to survive in the businessword.
Dave Collins (right), Village Council member, proposed that the City Commission not support this project. Blocking the water is not a good thing in his view (in fact it will block views). He said "vested rights" is not a good thing to bring up either (as Echemendia did) to the Village Council, because the last group that used that phrase was Home Depot.Council Member Martin Zilber didn't have a clue about this whole issue until the night before. He felt it should be revisited at a future meeting with more public input. Michelle did mention that we discussed it in the Grapevine, but it really did come up fast without much warning. But it makes no sense since the City Commission is voting Thursday next week. It's like closing the barn door after the horse has left. They are gambling that Commissioner Marc Sarnoff may defer the issue at next week's Commission meeting.
Martin moved to defer it until after the City meets. It was seconded. But Michelle Neimeyer felt they need to make a decision tonight and the deferral motion failed.
Village Council member Gary Hecht moved to deny building of the structure. It was seconded.
Santiago Echemendia, the attorney for the project, was full of hearsay. He talked about everyone and anyone that has approved the project. But there was no proof of any of this, not to say he was making anything up, but as an attorney he should know that hearsay means nothing in the court of law. He says, Enrique Nunez, the city guy in charge of the Waterfront Masterplan is for the Grove Harbour project. But does the City ever care about what the Grove wants? Is that a surprise?
Alyn Pruett, Village Council member, felt that it is odd that it is not part of the Waterfront Masterplan. It's like they are trying to do something that is not proper by holding the whole issue back. "Maybe it's a technical error," and should be an amendments on the Masterplan, according to Alyn.
"Is it absolutely necessary to have the square footage that you have now?" asked Lillian Dones, Council Member, wondering why leased office spaces are needed on the waterfront and not just a dockmaster's office.
Village Council members Michelle Neimeyer and Lottie Person were in favor of the plan, for various reasons of their own. The rest of the Village Council voted against it. Lottie felt it was "pretty," I really think that is not a good reason to screw up the waterfront and build an office building on the waterfront. She felt that Village Council members were against the plan because it isn't perfect. Lottie needs to get real, honestly. A four story office building on the water? How can that ever be made perfect?
So everyone voted to ask the City Commission to deny the project except for Michelle and Lottie. And the Council asked that the Sasaki people, who designed the Waterfront Masterplan, weigh in and see if they feel this should be part of their long drawn-out plan.
Village Council members at tonight's meeting: Michelle Neimeyer, Lottie Person, David Collins, Gary Hecht, Alyn Pruett, Felice Dubin, Lilliana Dones and Martin Zilber.
posted by Tom Falco at 9:34 PM
YOU MAY NOT LIFT THE PHOTOS & TEXT. IT'S COPYRIGHTED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. YOU CAN HOWEVER SHARE A STORY ON SOCIAL MEDIA BY USING THE LINKS HERE.
For linking to this one story, just click on the time it was posted & just this story will open for sharing - only through social media. Not copying and pasting.
11 Comments:
Excellent! Thanks a lot for this report Tom. Thanks to everyone who put the brakes on this irresponsible project. This Marina is just another obstruction to the Waterfront, whatever is left of it.. And the people pushing for it are a few select Boat Owners, CASH talking there, not for the benefit of every Coconut Grove Resident, City of Miami visitors, or Tourism.
Please try to WALK from Scotty's to Monty's. Or try to get a GLIMPSE of the water walking by S. Bayshore Dr. Not easy.
Will a big business minority win again? Or do we want to save what little is left of the Waterfront?
We should all join in and veto this Concrete Building 22 ft from the water.
Actually, one can walk from Scotty's to Monty's along the waterfront - without a glimpse of Bayshore! There are even nice little benches and some greenery.
"Actually, one can walk from Scotty's to Monty's along the waterfront - without a glimpse of Bayshore! There are even nice little benches and some greenery"
So we have a great, awesome Waterfront Boardwalk? Are you kidding me? Try any other city in the USA or Europe and the World, and compare our lousy little "boardwalk" to theirs.
It is interrupted all the way from Peacock Park, to Monty's, Grove Harbor Marina has it's huge Boat Crane blocking the way most times, then you get to Shake a leg, a bit nicer 5 feet wide compromised little alley, not to mention going over to Kennedy Park, or Alicia Wainright Park, where it simple doesn't exist.
Try running from Scotty's to the Toll plaza and the bridge, careful with traffic.. Most people don't even know you can hardly walk through there.. and you can't even see the Water from Bayshore Drive, except for a Glimpse at Seminole boat ramp Sad, but true.
And now they want to build a huge Office concrete building 22 feet from the water, just for some wealthy boaters.. beautiful.
Boy Carlos! Reading your comments reminds me of trying to have a conversation with a six-year-old.
Initially, you said "Try to walk from Scotty's to Monty's" - distinctly implying that it could not conveniently be done. When someone corrected you with the fact that the waterfront is perfectly open between those establishments, you went off on three or four totally irrelevant subjects. Who said anything at all about a "boardwalk", and why would we want one. If you want tourists riding rental bikes among T-shirt booths and hot dog stands, move to Hollywood. So you can't see the water from Bayshore Drive; you can't see it from Dixie or Coral Way either. What's your point? Do you want a four-lane along the edge of the Bay?
Maybe if you would encourage people to take advantage of the peaceful access we do have, there would be more support for protecting and expanding it. If all you can do is gripe about "little alleys" and "cranes", it makes others wonder why bother.
Why was this last message (6:09pm) posted? "Anonymous comments that judge or put down are deleted." What happened? Who wants to be told that reading their comments is like, I quote, trying to have a conversation with a six-year old? This is very disappointing. One may disagree with someone else's ideas but nonetheless stay respectful. I hope the facilitator of this blog will no longer allow such belittling comments to be posted.
Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami have a 50 ft setback from the waterfront requirement for many good reasons. There is no reason to approve this request to violate the 50 ft setback, except greed. It was greed that has given us many problems. The Commissioners should just say NO.
It's quite simple: Money and special interests here rule. The Grove Harbor Marina, and the Key Marine next to that, they make tons of money. Their customers are elite people, with economic power, some of them with real political leverage.
They know people in high places.
The Village Council saved the day for now. The next meeting on Sept 25 is crucial. Are a few wealthy boaters going to get away with this aberration?
22000 square feet, up to 47' tall, of a Concrete structure, BUSINESS OFFICES, 5 floors, only 22 feet away from the water?
Great for our casual Tourists! or any one just trying to enjoy a weekend morning just walking next to the water.
It would be a crying shame if those few powerful people get away with that massive Office Building.
Lets all go to the City Hall next Thursday morning and put a stop to this nonsense.
Why does does the Chair of the VC always try to impose her views on the rest of the Board? Isn't the job of the Chair to run the meeting, speak her piece but not interupt others whether they are on the Board or the public, and then vote. She should give an impartial report. I know she is part of the Waterfront Working Committee but she has to know that not everyone agrees with her or the so-called plan!
I heard the lady from the West Grove say the other night at the Village Council meeting she thought the building should be allowed there because "it is pretty." Now there's a good reason to violate our rights and the code. And we are going to knock down the Expo Center and build an office building on the waterfront. What's up with that?
For those who care about whatever little is left our our Waterfront, just go to City Hall this Thursday, Sept 25 after 10am. We need to stop that 22000 sq. feet OFFICE Building to be build by a wealthy CLUB minority Blocking the little Water left between the Charthouse and the Fresh Market, 22 feet from the water. The Grove Harbor Marina, Key Marina and others are blocking the view enough with their huge Waterfront structures as it is, no wonder, they make between 500$ and 2000$ in cool rent per month per boat.
Just stop by om Thursday, there is a public invite from the City, let our voices be heard.
Right, let's not be swayed by the Chair of the Village Council. There is no way an office building should be built on our waterfront.
Why did we go thru a Waterfront Master Plan to end up with this?
Post a Comment
<< Home