| | | | | | | | | | 
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
| | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Item 11.
COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM | | | |
| | | | | | | | TO: Land Use and Sustainability Committee
|
| FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
|
| DATE: September 22, 2020
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | TITLE: | DISCUSS MAKING AESTHETICS A PRIMARY CRITERION IN FUTURE RESILIENCY PROJECTS
ACTION REQUESTED:
Discuss the item and provide a set of recommendations for consideration by the full City Commission if applicable.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION:
Conclude the item and provide a recommendation to the City Commission, if applicable.
|
| |
| | | | | | | | HISTORY:
| On March 18, 2020, at the request of Commissioner Mark Samuelian, the City Commission referred the discussion item to the Land Use and Sustainability Committee (Item C4Y). On June 30, 2020 the item was deferred to the September 22, 2020 LUSC.
|
|
| | | | | | | | ANALYSIS:
| BACKGROUND
Attached is an essay prepared by Mr. Aris Papadopoulos entitled: “Eleven Ideas to Improve Miami Beach’s Resilience Initiatives.” Mr. Papadopoulos is the founder and chair of the Resiliency Action Fund (RAF) and is affiliated with Florida International University's Extreme Events Institute. The following paragraph, quoted from the attached essay, provides the basis for this discussion item:
"Most residents and buyers choose to live on Miami Beach not for jobs, schools or family, but for its aesthetics. Aesthetics is an important component of life quality and market value perception...Miami Beach would benefit by elevating aesthetics to a primary criterion in comparing options."
ANALYSIS
Currently the City of Miami Beach has a very robust and extensive aesthetics review process. In addition to the DRB and HPB processes, City staff in multiple departments are sensitive to and competent in a high aesthetic standard for the City. When the ULI performed a critical evaluation of the City resiliency efforts in 2018, one of the recommendations was to further expand this high level of aesthetic as a co-benefit. The City administration is committed to this high level of aesthetics, at all levels and function of City government. This is more than just large public projects and includes everything the City engages in that has a finished product.
With regard to overall aesthetics pertaining to public projects, one potential for both elevating aesthetics and creatively addressing infrastructure requirements would be to develop a mechanism for more public-private partnerships. In this regard, over the last few years, developers and other interested parties have sought changes in various development regulations. These modifications have, in some cases, resulted in significant public improvements and benefits that resulted in elevated aesthetics.
The following are some potential mechanisms for further elevation aesthetics within our resiliency framework:
Public-Private Alliances
As the City is pressed for space in terms of accommodating future infrastructure, expanding and creating an alliance with private properties that have available space could be beneficial. For instance, when the City proposes to install underground infrastructure within close proximity to an outfall or well a pump station and related apparatus is usually required. Often times locating the above ground components is challenging due to the limited amount of public space available. However, if an adjacent property owner had available space, either as part of future planned development, or within a developed site, there may be an opportunity to leverage zoning or other benefits in exchange for access to and space on the private site. This would, in turn, allow for a more effective and aesthetically pleasing way of concealing what would be otherwise less than desirable above ground infrastructure within a right of way.
One option to facilitate these types of public-private alliances could, potentially, be through code changes and regulations. However, it may be difficult to codify a set of regulations that addresses each unique set of circumstances. A better option might be to evaluate the feasibility of such an alliance on case by case basis.
Aesthetics in City Projects
The City includes aesthetics as part of project scope and design. As the City moves forward with GO Bond projects, stormwater projects, and others, this is a prime way to integrate aesthetics from the beginning. For example, in the upcoming scopes of stormwater projects, aesthetics will be part of the design process. This includes creative placemaking, green infrastructure, trees, and landscaping.
Art in Public Places (AIPP)
The City has a very robust Art in Public Places (AIPP) Program. Specifically, section 82-587 of the City Code requires that 2% of the construction cost of any City project be allocated to the Art in Public Places Fund. An area of opportunity regarding this fund may be utilizing art to be a component of certain types of projects, such as the artistic screening of above ground equipment, such as electrical panels and generators. The AIPP process is more formal than the DRB/HPB review process, and is more selective regarding the credentials of potential artists.
|
|
| | | | | | | | CONCLUSION:
| The Administration recommends that the LUSC discuss the item, including the mechanisms identified herein, as well as any others that may be generated as part of the discussion, and provide a recommendation to the City Commission, if applicable.
|
| | |
| | | | | | | | | Is this a "Residents Right to Know" item, pursuant to City Code Section 2-14? | | Does this item utilize G.O. Bond Funds? | | | Yes | | No | |
| | |
|