The waterfront mall is just too big
 |
| This is taking the place of Scotty's Landing and Chart House. |
Once the commissioners voted on this issue, I think it is their duty to let the public debate and decide the issue now. I'm not quite sure why people associated with Commissioner Marc Sarnoff's office are pushing the project in a very strong and nasty way. What's in it for them? Why are they so gung ho on this?
Charles brings up some excellent points like: "Commissioner Sarnoff and his staff member Ron Nelson, have stated on the record that those who oppose this development do so on a basis of misunderstanding and misrepresentation. In particular, one point that Commissioner Sarnoff continually repeats that in his opinion the proposed development conforms the Sasaki Plan."
I find it ironic that the developer of the project has not said a word -- they are lying low. The others are too vocal and never know when to just be quiet, which sort of makes people suspicious. Why not just ignore the issue for now and let the public debate it themselves?
Charles goes on to say, "I challenge Commissioner Sarnoff to show me where in the Sasaki Plan there is any recommendation that more than 100,000 SF of Retail /Restaurant space should be constructed on the Coconut Grove Bayfront let alone on this single parcel of land on the bay.
"In point of fact the Sasaki Plan is quite clear on this point," he goes on.
"Under the "Market Analysis" portion of the Sasaki Plan (Page 27 Paragraph 3) it is clearly stated that "The market analysis suggests potential support for roughly 4,200 -6,700 SF of food service uses on the Coconut Grove Waterfront". The Market Analysis goes on to state" 'Notably this does not necessarily mean net new space'. Referring once again to the Market Analysis portion of the Sasaki Plan ( Page 36, Paragraph3) it is stated "the Market Analysis was framed by the overarching concerns of both community residents and Center Grove businesses that any replacement or additional uses on the waterfront not compete with retailers or restaurateurs in the Center Grove commercial district
"This is not my 'misinformed opinion' as both Commissioner Sarnoff and Mr. Nelson suggest," says Charles. He goes on: "This is a statement of fact."
"The 100,000 SF + Retail/ Restaurant complex as included in this development plan for this single parcel of the Coconut Grove Bayfront far exceeds the maximum of 6,700 SF recommended in the Sasaki Plan. Once again The development of this parcel, as Commissioner Sarnoff is promoting, is in direct contradiction to the written words of the Sasaki Plan."
Charles is correct and that is what caught my attention from the very beginning. I honestly cannot see the Waterfront Working Committee agreeing to a chrome and glass 100,000 square foot mall when they were discussing the project at those ongoing meetings which took place over many years. Someone surely would have said something in all that time.
Charles goes on to say that the parking garage is going to be a monster.
The whole letter is here on Facebook, Charles makes so many great points, it's worth reading. The petition is at the bottom of the letter if you wish to read and sign that. Over 1000 people have already.
posted by Tom Falco at 6:00 AM
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.
17 Comments:
All they need to do now is build a tall concrete structure at the Seminole Boat ramp, the ONLY few yards - out of 5 miles of "bayside" property we once had in the Grove --where you can still see some water.
Guess we'll have to buy boats to see some water now.
What a shame.
CI.
Tom,
Your reference to a "chrome and glass structure, almost 100,000 square feet with a 250 square foot garage on the waterfront is preposterous," is not correct.
You make this sound like there is one building that is 100,000 square feet. That is not the case. The plan calls for the use of the 2 former seaplane hangers that total approximately 35,000-40,000 square feet.
The North Hanger - for which there was no square footage measurements provided in the proposal will be used as boat storage (56 boats) and an additional 2700 square feet of commercial space between the two Hangers will be created for "convenience retail..".
The South Hanger will be used for a "marine-related supplies and equipment" retail establishment.
The remainder of the space that will make up the project is comprised of several buildings that will house the Shula Steakhouse, Oceano Seafood, The Harbour Terrace and Hanger 42.
The total square footage of all of these combined restaurants is either 23,000 square feet (page 8 of the RFP proposal,) or 20,500 square feet ( page 45 of the RFP proposal.)
Page 45 also identifies the required parking to accommodate all of these various spaces and activities as 497, with a breakdown of 251 spaces for commercial, 164 for restaurant and 82 for civil support/boat storage.
This same page gives the square footage of the commercial and restaurant spaces as 62,700 for commercial and 20,500 for restaurants.
As I said,missing is the square feet in the North Hanger for boat storage, but from the renderings and from personal visits, I would estimate that it is at least 15,000 and more likely 20,000 square feet.
So, the numbers provided in the proposal call for 40,000 square feet of retail on the 1st floor of the parking garage, 20,000 square feet of marine-related retail in the South Hanger, 2700 square feet of convenience between the hangers, and 20,500 of restaurant space, that total comes to 83,200 square feet.
Missing from this total is the 15,000 - 20,000 square feet of the North Hanger, and the footprint of the boat racks that will accommodate the 350 boats, as well as the additional 2500 square feet in restaurant space that would be part of the 23,000 square feet of restaurant space.
Add all of these spaces and you will indeed come to over 100,000 square feet of combined space, but it won't be under one contigious roof.
As to the parking garage, there seems to be some debate there because this is really the elephant in the room for a lot of folks, but clearly if Art Noriega is to be believed, than the garage that is built will be for somewhere between 500 to 650 cars. This is because in addition to having to accommodate for the 497 parking spaces required for this project there is an expectation thast there will also have to be additional spaces to accommodate possible parking for City Hall and possibly Dinner Key Marina.
No matter whether it is 497, 500, or 650 parking spaces in that garage, the fact of the matter is that it will be one big-ass building.
The numbers I've cited above come directly from the proposal presented by the Grove Bay Investment Group, and can be found in their proposal. As such if anyone has any problems with them, then please address any further questions to someone from that group to explain why they came up with those numbers.
al crespo
I didn't mean to make it sound like it's one huge structure. And I have shown the diagram and drawing from above many times, so you can easily see it is not one structure. But it will come to about 100,000 sq. feet and the garage added to that is double that size.
Here is the diagram I speak of, which I have posted more than once and which will run in a story later this week: http://coconutgrovegrapevine.blogspot.com/2013/07/is-it-mall-on-waterfront.html
I also feel that the walkways between the buildings should be considered part of the project as they are not park space and it's sort of like being at Dadeland and saying the center mall space is not part of the mall because it isn't a store. But the walkways, etc. are part of this project and they add to the square footage as you are not going to be picnicing there or using it as you would an open park.
Several things.
First, why didn't the individual above have the courage to put their name to this post? In a situation like this, someone who posts this kind of material needs to identify themselves, especially since this represents an attempt to combine the proposal for the redevelopment of the Grove Key Marina/Scotty's Landing property and the public park that will be built after the Convention Center is torn down.
The proposal for this project does not include any reference to what is going to happen to the property currently housing the Convention Center. That is a separate project, and the only thing that ties them together is the number of parking spaces in the garage that will be allocated for park visitors.
Furthermore, the person who posted the above - yes I recognize who this person is, but I will leave them to own up to their identity - knows full well that Commissioner "Ethics" Sarnoff has, on his own, asked Arquitectonica to design another plan for this park, which may, or may not reflect the provisions of the original Sasaki Plan which they seem to be so enamored of.
Secondly, there is a deep resentment by a handful of folks about this effort to challenge the Grove Key/Scotty's Landing proposal proposal as being Johnny-Come-Latelys who don't deserve to have a voice at this point in time because they weren't part of the previous efforts associated with the Sasaki Plan.
That's like arguing that some innocent guy on death row doesn't deserve folks with fresh eyes involving themselves at the 11th hour to try and free him because they weren't there through the trial and original appeal.
GET OVER IT! These folks are here now, and now is when it counts!
Lastly, and most importantly, all of the numbers in the proposal, the numbers that I have used, and the numbers that everyone else will use between now and election day are merely placeholder numbers used by the developers of this project.
The truth of the matter is that if this proposal passes, then it will be AFTER that happens when the REAL blueprints for this project will be submitted for approval, and given the previous behavior of the Miami City Commission, the Planning Department,the Facilities Management Department and the rest of the ass-kissers and toadies in Regaladoland this project could turn out to bigger than it is currently projected.
One only has to look at the deal that just crash landed about the Watdon Island Mega-Yacht Resort to appreciate that not a single City Commissioner said boo about the fact that Jorge Perez, when he showed up at the City Commission meeting in June, handled them a fancy prospective that increased the size of that project by almost 300,000 square feet of new retail space," a new 100,000 square foot "Convention Center" and another 100 hotel rooms.
This City Commission, led by Sarnoff is NOT TO BE TRUSTED!
That's why the language of the Referendum is so loose.
So, while the numbers today are important for the sake of reference and discussion, they're not necessarily reflective of what will actually be built on that property if the Referendum is approved.
Think about all that, and then go and start talking to your neighbors, co-workers and anyone else you know who lives in the City of Miami.
al crespo
Live and Let llive people.just build it already its really the only hope the grove has
Al:
It's obvious that the anon poster above with all the supposed facts is someone in Sarnoff's Office. No cojones.
Anonymous said...
Live and Let llive people.just build it already its really the only hope the grove has
I am shocked and appalled at the cavalier attitude taken by this poster. How can this be considered the only hope that the Grove has when there is so much potential to decimate the center of the Grove with this new unnecessary project.
The response from Sarnoff's office in general has been so flippant and one-sided that suspicion and skepticism is a natural by-product. After all, this is Miami.
Im sorry but the center of the grove is dead to miami.its boring over priced parking dirty.hello have you been to the bathrooms downstairs by the fountain lately.there horrible falling apart.this might offend some people but im speaking the truth.its just plain bad over there.if you want people to come you need to change,clean up and fast.change is good especialy in miami where we are spoiled and like new things.if you dont agree your in the wrong city my friend.the new mall is an awesome idea that hopefully will come to life soon.i cant wait for DUFFYS to open and force those other dirty bars to close.and its not that i have something against them its that they need to clean these old places up.its time for change and im glad its finaly starting to happen in the grove
If casual visitors could even SEE a few yards of water, in the Bay, glimpse at the beautiful, exclusive bay without going deep into Kennedy park or the other parks, (which 95% of the people and visitors don't even know about)Coconut Grove would be a huge attraction a major business success.
Coral Gables, Pinecrest, Kendall, etc, etc etc, they don't have the WATER or the potential Bay views.
You can build as many restaurants as you want.. there are thousands everywhere. That's not what the Grove needs to stand out, and be reborn.
CI
People with OCD really shouldn't go out in public. Its disgusting everywhere, even in the newly built places. And those lemons in your drinks! Do you know how disgusting those are?
Marc Sarnoff doesn't understand the Grove. It's not an argument about change, it is the kind of tacky change that he is willing to support for a quick buck. He doesn't get it and he needs to be voted out. It's a shame we can't make him move, too.
This project does not seem consistent with Coconut Grove. Scotty's as it exists currently is the type of place that make The Grove interesting. This project looks like Iron Man's home, not the waterfront of an arts village.
One might say this is the commercial equivalent of a McMansion development, seeking to benefit from the character of its surroundings without contributing to that character. This is how Coconut Grove becomes Dadeland, sterile and ugly.
Someone posted above that he can't wait for a cleaner Coconut Grove with Duffy's. I submit that this person thinks he wants Dadeland in the Grove. Funny enough, he probably doesn't know it, but if it was Dadeland in the Grove, he wouldn't come. Ditto everyone.
We can do better. Let's do so.
Build and they wil come
If you ask, I bet this is what most of the Grove thought they were going to get, up graded facilities.
This starts on page 25 of the RFP after all of the other BS and pipe dreams. Lots of renovation/ redeveloping requirements not changing the complete face of the Grove, no retail, NO parking Garage!
Anything more than this is just some politicians wish list. I guess they figured they might as well see how much they can get while they were at it.
Out of the RFP page 25 so far back no one will read it.
(e)
Required Renovations/Redevelopment:
The Proposer shall include a detailed renovation/redevelopment plan for the individual marina/boatyard and restaurant components of the Property, including the following below.
Proposers have the option to combine the casual and formal restaurant uses in one facility, so long as the following requirements are met.
Marina Renovations:
§
Renovating the two (2) hangar buildings in place to provide for best utilization of available space for dry rack storage and/or other uses. Exterior and interior of hanger buildings should be completely renovated pursuant to the City Code Section 23 in a manner compatible to the adjoining Grove Harbor Marina hangers.
§
The marina pavement must be designed and refurbished or reconstructed to meet applicable design criteria for appropriate vehicles and loads to result from the proposed marina use and be visually appealing.
§
The successful Proposer shall have the entire dock/bulkhead alongside the waterfront portions of the Property evaluated by a licensed structural engineer with background in marine/coastal projects. The City shall have the right to review, comment, and consent to the report. The successful Proposer shall renovate and/or reconstruct the dock bulkhead to address all structural deficiencies identified and shall provide an aesthetically improved wall. The successful Proposer shall maintain the dock/bulkhead wall in “new” condition for the duration of the lease.
§
The successful Proposer shall be required to provide no less than 400 dry racks on-site.
Casual Restaurant Renovations/Redevelopment:
§
The proposal shall include a detailed renovation/redevelopment plan for a casual outdoor restaurant component with a covered outdoor area and patio.
§
Kitchen facility shall be completely renovated or redeveloped in order to comply with all current and applicable local, state and federal code requirements including all applicable ADA requirements.
Formal Restaurant Renovations/Redevelopment:
The proposal shall include a detailed renovation/redevelopment plan for a formal restaurant component, including the following:
§
Kitchen facility shall be completely renovated and/or redeveloped in order to comply with all current and applicable local, state and federal code requirements including ADA compliance.
§
Interior of the restaurant shall be completely remodeled.
§
Structural modifications/reconstruction shall be made to provide full height windows to improve waterfront visibility.
Mandatory Dock Improvements:
The successful Proposer shall include the following improvements to maximize boating access and transient dockage participation reflecting concepts in the Master Plan and all applicable government regulations and agencies:
§
Proposers shall incorporate a new floating dock with permanent piles at the formal and informal restaurants as well as new floating finger piers with permanent piles for the fueling and boat storage operation.
Some Grovites don’t want Scotty’s Landing to change. Some want all of Scotty’s, Charthouse and Boat Storage areas demolished and made into a park. Some would like a Tropical Design. Some don’t want a parking garage. Some don’t think a 650 space parking garage will be sufficient. Nothing will satisfy everyone. The Sasaki Master Plan has been in the works since 2008. Why haven’t more Grovites been involved before now? The ship may have sailed and there seems to be a few unhappy folks at the dock, on “Latino Time”. Last year there were 4-5 RFP participants for the first round. This year, for the second round the City Manager bundled all three properties and only had 2 RFP participants. After considerable review, Grove Harbour was the only one that met and even exceeded the RFP requirements. Perhaps concerned Grovites should have met with Sasaki, Waterfront Board and City Manager long before now. Perhaps concerned Grovite architects and developers should have offered their expert advice to Sasaki, Waterfront Board, City Manager, RFP Selection Committee, as well as with the participating RFP Proposal Partners. Or perhaps some passionate Grovites should have organized a their very own RFP Proposal and Investor Group. Why was there not more concern about Monty’s Lease, Rusty Pelican Lease, demolition of Dinner Key Expo Center which has been a successful accidental Film Studio and the Peacock Park Glass House? Why was there no outcry when St. Stephens negotiated an exclusive deal to lease Peacock Park? If the Grove Waterfront is so important, than why is there not an effort to move City Hall to the MRC and return the Historic Pan Am Terminal to the Grove? Grove Harbour will be included in Novembers Public Referendum. Doesn’t get more Democratic than that. Except there are many more registered votes in Miami than in the Grove. And I suspect that most registered voters will cast their vote for anything that brings more money into the General Fund, so that their property taxes will not be raised. The folks that are unhappy with the way Miami is behaving towards the Grove should take this opportunity to organize efforts to be independent and form a Coconut Grove Municipality. Grovites may sign petitions and vent all they want via e-mails, Facebook, Instagram and Texting. Since this is Waterfront property, all of us in Miami will have the Democratic opportunity to vote in November. We were not offered the opportunity to vote on the Marlin Stadium subsidy, illegal spot zoning of Mercy Hospital, Home Depot, St. Stephens exclusive lease of Peacock Park or the demolition of Dinner Key Expo Center. But all Miami registered voters will have the opportunity to express their wishes of who will occupy the Mayor’s office and this Waterfront project in the November election.
PROPOSED NOVEMBER REFERENUM:
"SHALL THE CITY BE AUTHORIZED TO LEASE APPROXIMATELY 7 ACRES OF WATERFRONT AND SUBMERGED LANDS IN COCONUT GROVE TO GROVE BAY INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, PROVIDING FOR 1) A MINIMUM OF $1.4 MILLION IN GUARANTEED ANNUAL RENT AND 2) APPROXIMATELY $17.9 MILLION OF PRIVATELY FUNDED IMPROVEMENTS TO REDEVELOP AN EXISTING MARINA AND PUBLIC BAYWALK, CONSTRUCT RESTAURANTS AND, PARTIALLY FUND A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE, FOR A 50 YEAR TERM WITH TWO 15 YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS."
It is my understanding that the Grove Harbour RFP is the best one of all those presented over the past year. I plan to vote YES, for improving our Grove Waterfront with the enormous efforts, time and expense that has been designated by the Sasaki Master Plan and all those that helped in its years of research, dialog and development.
The last post on the Grapevine is correct in that this is a great time to start the ball rolling on incorporating the Grove and moving city hall to the MRC building where it belongs! It is a good time now, to bring this up, when we have a lot of resident’s attention.
Now Groveites will realize that their future depends on the voters outside the Grove and now is the time of action.
When we tried this before the city gave us a Grove consulship to appease us, a lot of good that did!
If you want to read more on Incorporation;
http://www.ehow.com/how_6759526_form-city-incorporation.html
Times have changed since the last attempt in that we have more direct communication through social media to get the big picture across and open their eyes to the selloff of the Grove. As an example Key Biscayne and Pinecrest did it, why can’t the Grove?
If we win “Stop Grove Harbor” it will strengthen the idea, if we lose it will do the same!
This is the time of action!
I originally posted negative comments about this development. I did this principally as a reaction to the picture posted with this article. Subsequently, however, I stopped by Marc Sarnoff's office to speak with his Chief of Staff, Ron Nelson. We visited for nearly an hour, after which I became a proponent of this waterfront development.
This development, as combined with the Waterfront Master Plan, adds considerable green space to Coconut Grove, and will tie the village area to the waterfront. After reviewing this, I believe the perceived mass of buildings in the area will not increase, but in fact will decrease as the expo center is demolished and converted to green space. The parking garage that is being built, which notably allows the parking next to the Expo Center to be converted to green space, is to be the same height as the historical hanger it is to be neatly tucked behind (between the hanger and Bayshore). Also, the bunker of a building that houses the Chart House (who designed that horrid Chart House structure) is to be replaced with a structure more open to the waterfront, with the "open" accomplished with glass and a promenade extending all the way to Bayshore, toward the village.
Be your own judge by reviewing the information publicly available:
Sasaki Waterfront Master Plan:
http://www.miamigov.com/Planning/pages/master_plans/Coconut_Grove_FINALREPORT-12_08_WEB.pdf
Grove Bay project 'The Harbour'
http://www.miamigov.com/PublicFacilities/pages/1213001/RFP12-13-001_Illustrative%20Boards.pdf
http://www.miamigov.com/PublicFacilities/pages/1213001/RFP12-13-001_Technical_Proposal.pdf
Post a Comment
<< Home