Sorry, but I have removed this question for violating the sub's 20-year rule. The way the question is phrased ("why does russia need" "russia has...") is decidedly in the present tense, and leaves the door open for non-historical discussion of current events.

I encourage you to try and rephrase the question in a way that refers to events before 1994. Technically, a question asking about why the Russian Black Sea Fleet remained based in Sevastopol after the breakup of the Soviet Union would be allowed.

Also, there was a recent megathread that might answer your question.

They don't need it for that. They have their own coast and have for a time been building a naval base in Novorossisk, likely in case they were to lose the rights to their bases in Crimea. The have of course made significant investments in the infrastructure there, which would be lost if they lose those bases, though.

Russia needing a warm-water port was important to their naval strategy durng Peter the Great's time, it's not that important now. Prior to the 18th century, Archangelsk (way up on the White Sea) was Russia's main port. They did not have access to the Black Sea or even the Baltic. Since Archangelsk's port was frozen a substanial portion of he year, a warm-water port was a significant priority. But since then, Baltic ports were built (notably Saint Petersburg), the Black Sea coast was taken, and in the north Murmansk has been founded, which has a naturally ice-free port. So does the Pacific fleet base of Petropavlovsk in Kamchatka. The non-ice free ports of Vladivostok, in the Baltic and large parts of the Bering Sea are kept open year-round with icebreakers.