I. CHAIRS REPORT:

II.        Managing Director Report

            a.  GMCC Goals Conference

David Miller provided an overview of the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce Goals Conference that Brett and he attended.  They have some significant River goals that were adopted by the Chamber.  Under the New World Center Group of the Chamber, a goal to support the development and implementation of the Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan was adopted.  All the other goals of the New World Center adopted for downtown Miami and development paralleled the chapters that are in the Urban Infill Plan.  It was very rewarding that our plan closely matched what Mayor Diaz discussed concerning neighborhood improvements.

            There were two goals under the Environmental Group that were presented by the Miami River Commission and Scott Mitchell.  One was to support development of the Miami River Greenway and specifically, the signature section of city public development called Lummus Landing.  That will be the first major public development of the Greenway on the River near Lummus Park.  The City has been working on the plans and implementation of this project with Trust for Public Land.  The other goal was to harmonize the Brownfield regulations.  The federal government has revised legislation to provide incentives and tax relief for property owners in urban areas that may have property that is contaminated called brownfields.  The problem is that the new federal regulations are far easier and logical to understand and implement than the state and local regulations.  There needs to be harmony with federal, state and local regulations.  The federal changes were just recently implemented.  Our recommendation, which was accepted, was to work toward harmonizing state and local regulations to match the improved federal regulations.  Otherwise, we will have many attorneys trying to define what the procedures and rules should be for each project, which will cause delays and excessive costs when developing a Brownfield site along the River. 

            Under Crime and Drug Prevention, there was a goal passed that encourages the city and county to adopt new regulations concerning “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)”.  In other words, when a structure is being built, it should be designed to have plenty of open spaces, good lighting, and low hedges so it reduces crime simply by the way it’s designed.  There was a great deal of support for this goal.

            The last goal that affects the River was from the Governmental Affairs Group and they proposed to support dredging and greenway funding at all levels of government.  The Group feels those are the two significant issues for the River. 

            Mr. Miller’s overall view of the goal conference (specifically highlighting the group meetings that he attended) was that the Chamber was very supportive of Mayor Diaz’s initiatives for improving neighborhoods.  Also, Commissioner Winston’s downtown and Bicentennial Park development carried strong support from the Chamber.

            b.  MRC Financial Report

The MRC funding data was presented at an Executive Committee meeting and they determined it was important and should be presented to the full commission.  David Miller distributed a hand out entitled “MRC Financial Overview of June 10, 2002”.  He went over the various grants and explained each item.  Mr. Miller is very pleased with the state’s appropriation of $200,000 for MRC operations for the fiscal year starting on July 1, 2002 and running until June 30 2003.  Discussion was held. 

Mr. Parks stated that the State Lobbyist has not yet been paid and the Executive Board is developing a “Fund Raising Working Group” to provide unencumbered funds for this purpose.  None of the appropriated funds allow the MRC to fund a lobbyist at the state level.  David explained that the various grants could only be used for the specific purpose stated in the grant.  Mr. Parks feels like the MRC is in good financial shape to finish up their tour as an agency, which will end in 2003.  The Executive Committee at it’s last meeting voted to put all of these funds, where there were balances remaining in one checking account.  The auditors have approved that procedure and the funds are earmarked.  The only item which was not to be included was the Riverday funds and the Executive Committee decided to take that money and put it in an interest bearing account until next Riverday.

            Item b of Chair’s report - MRC Sunset Issue

Mr. Parks asked if he could go back to the Sunset Issue under his report.  On June 30, 2003, this Commission is finished absent approval by the Legislature to continue it in some form or another.  One of the important items for the July MRC meeting is the governance structure, which is incorporated in the Urban Infill Plan.  Jim Murley has recommended a governance strategy and this issue is not only important to the urban infill plan, but it will be a factor with the legislative structure of the MRC, if we decide to request and extension of sunset provision.  The MRC has sufficient funds to take us through next year; however, the MRC membership needs to be making some key decisions concerning what we want to do at the next Legislative session regarding sunset provision and future funding.  Bob identified some general questions that need to be answered such as:  Do we wish to sunset?  Is there a better group than the MRC to provide river improvements, or do we wish to continue in our present structure.  These are the issues the MRC is going to have to deal with.  Mr. Parks believes that the MRC should have a “Sunset Review Committee” to develop recommendations that will eventually be placed before the Legislature.  Although the sunset issue is not until June 2003, the MRC needs to provide recommendations well before the legislature meets in January of 2003.  Mr. Parks feels that things have gone well for the MRC as to what they have been able to do and accomplish.  They have received a lot of responsibility and a large amount of work for David and Brett to handle.  Bob stated David and Brett have done a great job with the heavy workload; however, if the MRC is going to continue to take on the projects and to see them through to conclusion, they are not going to be able to do it with just two people working full time.  The MRC is at a crossroads and the MRC is going to have to decide what it wants to do with itself and what it wants to ask the Legislature to do with it.   Discussion was held.  Each MRC member will have to make a decision on whether to continue with the present form, amend legislation to a new or improved form or discontinue the MRC. Other groups need to give the MRC input as to what they feel is appropriate. 

            Mr. Parks said that question about the sunset provision was raised with Doug Bruce, our lobbyist in Tallahassee, specifically concerning the timing of when to seek new sunset legislation.  Doug has recommended that the MRC seek sunset extension in this upcoming legislative year and not any earlier.  Doug has done a very effective job for this Commission and his recommendation is why we have not looked at this issue earlier.  The Executive Committee wanted the full MRC to have the benefit of the Executive Committee’s thoughts on sunset and with the finances. 

            Phil Everingham said that all the people on the Commission and those they represent are very pleased with the work up to date.  Phil Everingham moved to extend the MRC sunset provision and create a steering committee to review MRC legislation and make recommendations to the MRC for approval.  Janet McAliley seconded the motion and it was approved unanimously.

            c.  Tunnel Study Proposal for 12^th Avenue Bridge

            David Miller said that at the Executive Committee meeting, a proposal for a study to look at the economic comparison of a bridge verses a tunnel.  The Executive Committee has reviewed this item and is forwarding it to the full MRC with a recommendation for approval.  The MRC needs to develop a future vision for the River.  One of the important items along the River is the discussion concerning bridges or tunnels.  Mr. Miller has been in contact with Richard Weisscoff who is a professor of economics at the University of Miami.  He is currently working with TPL, conducting a study on the economic improvements that will be generated by the development of a Miami River Greenway. 

The Florida Department of Transportation always conducts a comprehensive review of a bridge that needs to be replaced or repaired.  Unfortunately, they quickly eliminate one of the options of replacing it with a tunnel because the tunnel costs are much higher, normally 1.6 times that of a bridge.  Mr. Miller has been in contact with several transportation consultants, because he has learned that tunnel construction technology has improved significantly and made tunnels less expensive than in the past.  He has been in touch with Parsons Transportation Group.  He asked them for some basic cost data concerning construction of a tunnel and they came back with a standard proposal.  They stated, in general, they could build a 6-lane, 375-yard long tunnel with portal construction to go underneath a 180-foot wide river with a 17-foot depth for approximately $24 million, not including land acquisition.  When FDOT does their study they compare all the construction and land acquisition costs of a bridge and a tunnel and the tunnel always comes out more expensive.  This proposed study would take into account the long-term economic impact of a tunnel verses a bridge to the community, not just the initial construction cost.  The average life span of a bridge on the Miami River is 75 years.  The study will identify the 75-year community costs associated with a bridge verses a tunnel, such as: lost time waiting for the bridge by both vehicular and marine entities, how does the bridge impede future community growth, cost of extra fuel burned in cars and vessels, etc.  Obviously, the well-documented delays associated with the Brickell Avenue Bridge and the severe negative impact on commercial and marine development could have been totally alleviated had a tunnel been built.  The Brickell Avenue Bridge will continue to negatively impact downtown for many decades unless an alternative route is found or a tunnel is built.  Mr. Weisscoff feels his group can do a thorough economic study of this issue.  He has made a proposal that they could do this study over the course of the summer for $15,000 and a report would be available in September or October.  The main purpose is to enlighten the community about the real costs of a bridge and the study would provide the basis for a better review when planning the construction of a bridge or tunnel.

            Sandy O’Neil made motion to complete tunnel study of the 12^th Avenue bridge vs. tunnel for expenditure up to $15,000.00.  Motion was seconded by Janet McAliley and passed unanimously with the provision to email scope of study to MRC members.

III.  Miami-Dade County New Sewage Pump Station

            Mr. John Chorlog, Assistant Director for the Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Department (WASD), discussed a project that is vital to the county and city, and critical to the Miami River Corridor - the construction of a large new pumping facility for the sanitary sewer system called CPA.  He made a presentation that followed his printed handout.  He discussed the sanitary sewer pump stations and how they mostly are built in pairs in order to provide back up capability should one fail.  He explained the significance of the need for a new pump station and specifically one to back up Pump Station One, which is located on NW North River Drive (near Garcia’s Restaurant) directly on the Miami River.  John stated that the department would need approximately one square acre of land to build the new Pump Station CPA.  The cost of the project is about $35 million, and this would provide a backup for Pump Station One and also incorporate a currently unsuitable pump station located on the median of Brickell Avenue.  John explained that the new pump station would eliminate the risk of sewage overflows into the Miami River and that this is a vital project to the MRC, particularly if we are advocating additional urban infill projects in the lower river.  He explained that the current sanitary sewer system will soon be at maximum capacity and no additional development can occur until sewer capacity is increased.  WASD will be putting a resolution before the Miami-Dade County Board of Commissioners for approval to evaluate and appraise certain properties on the south side of the lower river, east of Route 95.  John requests that the MRC support the proposed resolution.  WASD understands that they will be back before the MRC again for final approval of the specific piece of property and the development plan.  There was discussion held.  Mr. Parks stated there should not be a pump station on Riverfront property like Pump Station One.  Mr. Parks wanted to amend the proposed resolution so that if the only property available is on the River, then the county will reserve 50% of the property directly on the River for open green space and under no condition could the pump station be built directly on the River.  Mr. Chorlog said they would amend the language in this section of the resolution to accommodate Mr. Parks’ comments.

David Miller stated that the Stormwater Subcommittee reviewed this and one of the options they didn’t want to eliminate was to remove every property that was on the River from consideration.  If there were a suitable property on the River, WASD would purchase 50% additional property to provide open green space on the River.  As an example, WASD would have to purchase a two-acre property on the River to build a pump station, one acre for the pump station will be away from the River and a full acre on the River to be reserved as open green space.  Sandy O’Neil made the motion to approve WASD Resolution for allocating pump station CPA.  Janet McAliley seconded the motion.  A friendly amendment was made that if Riverfront property is utilized, the structure cannot be closer than 200’ to the River and 50% of property nearest River must be left available in open green space.  No portion of the structure of the pump station shall abut the Miami River closer than 200 feet. Discussion continued.  The amended motion passed unanimously.

VI.   Tamiami Canal Forward Pumping and Swing Bridge

            Capt. John Smith, of Bojean Boat Yard at 3041 NW South River Drive, addressed the MRC concerning issues involving the Tamiami Canal.  In addition to his presentation he provided a detailed handout for the MRC members.  He reported on the poor condition of the swing bridge that crosses the Tamiami Canal and recommended it be considered for replacement.  His rationale for replacement is as follows: 1) the bridge restricts the canal to only 47 feet between foundations creating excessive currents and hazards navigation; 2) the bridge is the oldest bridge in the Miami River system with a build date of 1921; 3) the bridge has a 30 ton weight restriction and Capt. Smith stated this restriction is often exceeded; 4) Several large marine businesses must pass thru this swing bridge and their businesses are negatively impacted by the old bridge; 5) with the Miami Intermodal Center (MIC) development, this bridge is seeing increased usage which will continue with completion of the MIC. 

Also he wanted to disagree with a proposal in the Urban Infill Plan to realign South River Drive.  His written comments clearly support his view that the proposed road alignment change would not be satisfactory.  Discussion was held. 

David Miller stated that Capt. Smith’s comments were provided to the consultant for the Urban Infill Plan.  The plan focused mostly on the bridges over the Miami River and somewhat neglected this one.  It is clear from his presentation that it is an old, narrow bridge; with weight limitations that are probably exceeded and replacement would be a good recommendation.  Cleve Jones moved to conduct a traffic study of Tamiami Canal Swing Bridge and study restrictions to water conveyance.  Sandy O’Neil seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved.  Capt. Smith said that he looks forward to working with the MRC on this project and looks forward seeing the draft traffic study in three to four weeks.  Humberto Alonzo of the SFWMD advised that his office would investigate Tamiami Canal flow capacity issues with reference to the bridge and forward pumping issues.

  VII.   Committee Reports

a.    Dredging Working Group

            David Miller said that the dredging project is moving forward, but slightly off the previous schedule.  He gave a quick overview.  The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has been published for public and agency comment.  The comment period was extended for the State of Florida to provide their comments.  Once the Corps receives the state comments, they are going to move right on to the final EIS.  The bank to bank dredging (beyond the navigable channel) will be an option on the Corps’ channel dredging project and will be implemented when the local sponsor provides permits and funding.  The tributary dredging will probably accomplished under a separate contract.

b.  Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan

            Jim Murley reported that they are making progress.  Discussion took place. Copies of the second draft of the plan are available.  David Miller said that they had a meeting with the consultant last week and he talked with him this morning.  Basically, the city, county and MRC did not meet their goal of getting final comments to the consultant by May 15^th.  The consultant cannot complete another updated draft document to be ready for MRC review at the scheduled July 1, 2002 MRC meeting.  David said the regularly scheduled MRC meeting is July 1^st and they can still meet at that time, but there will be no Urban Infill Plan to review.  Janet McAliley moved that the MRC Meeting be changed to July 22^nd in lieu of July 1^st.  Sandy O’Neil seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

d.  Greenways

            Dr. Martin reported that the Sewell Park issue of allowing horse stables and dog training for the police department in the park is still under discussion and the city needs to go back and look at other alternatives.  Certain guidelines were suggested.  Dr. Martin knows that it has to go before the Planning Advisory and Zoning Boards because it is a zoning change.  Many in the community are actively opposing the recommendation for horse stables in the park.  The Parks Advisory Committee is asking for a master plan for Sewell Park be completed before any decision is made about the stables or dog training being placed in the park.  Ernie stated that many comments were received and the City of Miami must thoroughly analyze all other city locations before a decision on Sewell Park is even contemplated.  Discussion was held. 

            Dr. Martin said the next item was the request by the County transit authority to lease some property underneath the metro-rail, where the county bike trail meets the Miami River Greenway.  This is between 6^th Street and the River.  The lease proposal will most likely be for parking.  The County has advertised a request for proposal for a lease of this property and is soliciting bids.  Dr. Martin said the County did set certain requirements, which they included in the request for this lease RFP, mainly to provide suitable greenspace along the River, a sitting area to compliment the Greenway and the existing bike path has to be upgraded to newer standards.  This is to be brought back to Dr. Martin’s group.  

            The Greenways committee approved a recommendation authorizing staff to develop a grant proposal to the FDOT for Greenway funding.  Dr. Martin made the motion authorizing the MRC staff to submit FDOT grant applications for Greenway Funds.  Sandy O’Neil seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

            Dr. Martin said that the Tax Increment Financing Committee has received some new revenue estimates for the TIF District that was proposed at the previous meeting.  They identified an area that would be included for tax increment financing that would basically follow the Greenway and then go one block further north or south depending on which side of the River it was. The County budgeting group has reviewed tax data and revenue projection estimates and will work with Dr. Martin and his committee.  At the city’s request, the group has removed Brickell Key properties from the TIF District.  The TIF District is proposed to fund infrastructure improvements such as:  bank to bank dredging, tributary dredging, greenway construction, stormwater retrofitting, road improvements and incentive programs for development. 

            e.  Economic Development & Commerce

            Megan Kelly said that a draft report for the Miami River Economic Impact Analysis was presented to the Board a few months back.  The report was not approved due to time constraints at the earlier meeting.  The actual research drafting of that report predates her involvement, but they have a draft report that needs to be finalized.  In her opinion, certain language in the report was poor and it did not read well.

            David Miller said that two months ago it came before the MRC and there were comments made about how it was written, but there were no specific recommended changes.  The report was mailed two months ago to everyone and there have been no comments or revisions.  There was no final motion of approval and it is still pending for the MRC to make a decision to approve it or not.  Phil Everingham said there were some areas that were vague.  David Miller said he would await comments and next month the MRC could review it again for final action.