1,000-unit pre-2010 plan near Miami River revamped, OK’d

A 1,000-unit residential development first proposed years ago for a site near the Miami River and the 27th Avenue Bridge is moving ahead.

Delaware Parkway is the first phase of a larger overall development known as the Miami River Rapids MUSP (Major Use Special Permit).

The city’s Urban Development Review Board has unanimously recommended approval of the project, with several conditions.

The original proposal was made as a MUSP under the city’s prior zoning code, before the adoption of Miami 21 in 2010.

Owner-developer Delaware Parkway Partners LLC is proposing three phases at 1701/1801/1825 Delaware Parkway.

The original plan called for five buildings and included retail and restaurants.

The updated plan shows three apartment buildings, two at 12 stories and the final one at 15, and a separate seven-story garage with up to 1,318 spaces.

Studio and one- to three-bedroom units are to range from 520 to 1,250 square feet.

Attorney Iris Escarra, representing the developer, told the board, “We’re going a little old school here, because we have a MUSP that we’re amending.

So those of you that were around during zoning ordinance 11000, back in the day if you were building over 199 units you were a Major Use Special Permit.

“Our application is simply to amend it, bring it forward to the many Miami 21 regulations. However, we are keeping one foot in the MUSP,” she said.

She said the development team is preserving two components of the original MUSP: the height allowing up to 15 stories, and the amount of parking required.

Ms. Escarra said architecture has changed from the original plan.

“The design is completely different,” she said. “The buildings and façade are new. The placement of the buildings is new. Now it’s three in the front and the garage in back.”

The project is designed by Miami-based architectural firm Anillo Toledo Lopez LLC.

Several review board members expressed concern over massing and similar design of the buildings and ground level swimming pools in sun-deprived courtyards.

Member Dean Lewis said, “I like the courtyard buildings, that’s always a win-win for me.” However, he voiced concerns about ground-level pools in a small courtyard that would not get much sun and create noise issues.

Member Francisco Perez-Azua said, “Those white panels on the building façades are very massive … break up the massiveness of that panel.”

Member Fidel Perez said, “I think the project is massive. I know you’ve tried to break it up into three pieces.”

He also agreed about the pool’s location.

“A pool in a courtyard does not work. You should really consider putting the pool somewhere else. A courtyard … it’s noisy and doesn’t get sunlight.

You’re going to have problems,” said Mr. Perez.

“I think it’s a lot better than before, and I think you’re going in the right direction but need a little more improvement,” he said.

The motion to recommend approval had these conditions:

■Break up the parking garage massing, keep the driveway passing through and make that a pathway to the rear of the property.

■Work on the buildings’ design and improve form, whether flipping their location or by providing a grand entrance.

■Integrate pedestrian activity with pedestrian bridges at mid-level.

■Move the pools out of the courtyard to the parking garage.

■Diversify the top level further with voids and roofline articulation and massing of the buildings.