Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-03-0292J -02-490(a) 5/20/02 RESOLUTION NO. 03— 292 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD THEREBY DENYING THE APPEAL BY MR. ANDRE J. ZAMORANO, ESQUIRE, OF CLASS II PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 02-007 ISSUED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR ON JANUARY 10, 2002, TO ALLOW PERMANENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYFRONT PARK IN ASSOCIATION WITH A TEMPORARY EVENT, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 401 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A." WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board at its meeting of April 22, 2002, Item No. 1, adopted Resolution No. ZB 2002-0560 by a vote of seven to two (7-2), to affirm the decision issued on Class II Special Permit Application No. 02-007 by the Planning and Zoning Director on January 10, 2002, and WHEREAS, an appeal of the Zoning Board decision was filed by Mr. Andre J. Zamorano, Esquire; and WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of this matter, finds the application for Class II Special Permit does meet the applicable requirements of Zoning Ordinance No. 11000, as amended, and deems it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the City of Miami and its CITY COMMON MEETING OF �q r es +a► p "`4 1 MAR 2 I ?nnl T T J� �v t,� a.b Resolution No. 4.116'4 03— 292 inhabitants to affirm the decision of the Zoning Board and the Planning and Zoning Director and deny the appeal of Class II Special Permit as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Resolution are adopted by reference and incorporated as if fully set forth in this Section. Section 2. The decision of the Zoning Board to deny the appeal by Andre J. Zamorano, Esquire, of Class II Permit application no. 02-007 issued by the Planning and Zoning Director on January 10, 2002, to allow permanent road improvements in Bayfront Park in association with a temporary event for the property located at approximately 401 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida, as legally described in attached "Exhibit A," is affirmed, and the Class II Special Permit is affirmed. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and signature of the Mayor.'/ �i If the Mayor does not sign this Resolution, it shall become effective at the end of ten calendar days from the date it was passed and adopted. If the Mayor vetoes this Resolution, it shall become effective immediately upon override of the veto by the City Commission. Page 2 of 3 03— 292 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th _ day ATTEST: PRISCILLA A. THOMPSON CITY CLERK APPROVED Page 3 of 3 of March 2002. MANUEL A. DIAZ, MAYO 03- 252 INT=RNAL IUPROV: 4ZN1T FU2:D STATE FLORID_ P DZXD NO. 19UL7 �! KNO17 ALL MiN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the undersiSned, Trustees of the Internal Improvement Hind of the State of 1 a: under and by virtue of the authority of Section 253.12, Fly Statutes, 1941, and accordin: to the provisions provided f, Section 233.13, Florida Statutes, 1941, and for and in con - N tion oC the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars and other good and I valuable considerations, to them in hand paid by CITY OF YJ ALI, Dade County, Florida, receipt of which is here b�,acknorrledged, ' have Granted, bar -rained, sold and conveyed to the said CITY 07.1 iUIJAU! and its successors and assigns forever, the followin.e, do - scribal lands, to -wit: i �e-inninZ at the point of intersection of the Easterly production of the Cenper Line of Richaers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street) as shown on the Amended Plat of "RIC:Sai-ERS ADDITION" as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 2, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the West side of Biscayne Bay; thence run North- erly along said U. S. Harbor Line to a point on a line four hundred and fifty -feet North of and parallel to the Easterly production of the said Center Line of Rickmers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street); i thence run Easterly alone said line 450 feet Korth II of and parallel to the Easterly production of the Center Line of said Rickmers Street (now ;mown as N. E. 13th Street) to the point of intersection with that course described in Deed Book 361, Page 353, as follows: "Thence in a Southeasterly direction to the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of ` the Southwest Quarter (Sri' of SW;)' of Section 32, Tornship 53 South, Ran -e 42 East8; Thence South- easterly along the said last described course to the said Southeast corner of the St's: of Sq; of Section 32, Township 53 South, Ran,-; 42 East; Thence run South alonb the- West line of the NEI of NWI. of Section 5, Township 54 South, Range 42 r^.ast to a point eiPuby feet Northerly from and measured at i right angles to the Center Line• of the Miami Vuni- cipal Channel; Thence run Southeasterly followins-` that course*described in Deed Book 147?, Page 474 as follows: "Co-nencing at the intersection of the 'Rest Line of the Nr of JW1- of Section 5, Township 51: South, Range 42 East; and a line parallel to and eiGhty feet Northorly from, and measured at right angles to the Center Line of the Kl ami kuni- cioal Channel", to the East boundary of the West 3/I1, of said Section 5; Thence run South :long the East boundary of the Hest 3/4 of said Section 5 and Section 9, Township 54 South, Range 42 East, I to the Northerly Line of the FEC Railway Company Channel as described in aforesaid Deed Book 1472, • Page 474; Thence run Westerly along the said Northerly line of the FEC Railway Company Channel to the East line of the NUI%of Section 8, Town - E ship % South, Range 42 East; Thence run westerly 03- 292 r -A r7t lJ rr . r- (20f 3)1 along that line described in Chapter 13656 (No. 102) Laws of Florida - 1929 as follows: "Thance westerly to the Intersection of the P. do 0. S.S. Channel and the.Channel extending from the mouth of the b;iami River in a Southeasterly direction", to the East line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East; Thence run South along the said Fast line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East to a point 2000 feet North of the South line of Section 7,•Town3hip 54 South, Range 42 East, being that point at the teraination of the line described in Deed Book 1700, Pase 355 Parcel "B" as follows: "Thence North along the East Line of said Section 7 for a distance of 2000 feet to a point"; Thence Flom; the course de- scribed in Deed Nook 1900, Pa,e 355, as follows: "Thence Southwest 2828 feet to a point on the South boundary of said Section 7", to a point -2000 feet hest of the Southeast corner of said Section 7; Thence run West along the South line o: said Section 7 and the South line of said Section 7 produced Yiest, to the point of intersection with the U. S. Harbor Line on the Rest side of Biscayne Bay; thence run Northerly alon-.the said U. S. Harbor Line to the point of beginnin-. Except therefrom the following described BAY BOTTOM LAPD ARF.b FOR DREDGING; IN CONNECTION TITH PROPOSED 85 ACRE BUURLINGAME ISLAND. Beginning at the point of intersection of the South- easterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street, the same being the Southerly line of Highleym =s Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 184�of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the Westerly side of Biscayne Bay; thence Northerly alonS the said U. S. Harbor Line and the Northerly extension thereof 3800 feet, more or lesa,.to the point of intersection with the Southerly line of kiami River Channel, as shown and established on Sheet No. 2 of plan pre- pared by U. S. Engineer Office, Jacksonville, Florida, November 1934, showing Kiami River, Florida, condi- tions on completion of Dredging of Channel Project; thence Northeasterly along the said Southerly line o: wiami River Channel and the Northeasterly pro- duction thereof 2500 feet to a point; thence Southerly 5300 feet, more or less, along a line parallel to the Southerly production of the dividing line between Township 53 South, Ranae 41 East and Township 53 South, Ran -e 42 East to the point of intersection with the arcresaid Southeasterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street; thence Northwesterly 2900 feet, more or less, along the said Southeasterly Production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street to the U. S. Harbor Line, the point of beginninS. And further excepting therefrom all land title to which is in private parties. TO RAh'E' AND TO HOLD the said above mentioned and described land and premises, and all the title and interest of the Trustees therein as granted to them by Section 253.12, Florida Statutes, 1941, unto the said CITY OF MIAMI and its successors and assigns forever. 03-- 292 . .G AND RESERVING unto the Trustees f the Internal Improve nd of Florida, and their successors, an undivided three - interest in and title in and to an undivided three-fourths t in all the phosphate, minerals and metals that are or may on or under the said above described lands, and an undivide, f interest in and title in and to an undivided one-half in - in all the petroleum that is or may be in or under the said escribed land, with the privilege to mine and develop the " PROVIDED, HOL*lEV n, anything herein to the contrary notwith- standing, this deed is given and granted upon the express conditio: (subsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors and assigns l'xhall never sell or convey or lease the above described land or Many part thereof to any private person, firm or corporation for (,any private use or purpose, it being the intention of this re- striction that the said lands shall be used solely for public purposes, including municipal purposes and not otherwise. t i PROVIDED, FURTHER, anything herein to the contrary notwith- .standinZ, this deed ib given and granted upon the further express condition subsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors or assigns shall not give or grant any license or permit to'any pri- vate person, firm or corporation to construct or mace by any means, any islands, fills, embankments, structures, buildings or other Similar things within or upon the above described lands or any part thereof for any private use or purpose, as distinguished from any public or municipal use or purpose. ! It is covenanted and a�eed that the above conditions subse- lRuent shall run with the land and any violation thereof shall ,render this deed null and void and the above described lands shall, lin such event,.revert to the Grantors or.•tbrois successors. IN .,IT;-.,IT;WEEREOF, the Trustees of the Internal Improvement 'Fund of the State of Florida have hereunto subscribed their names land affixed their seals, and have caused the seal of the "DEPA.RT- U IT OF ACK-CULTURE OF T"KB STATS OF FLORIDA", to be hereunto taffixed, at the Capitol, in the City of. Tallahassee, on this the C' 21 t . day of February A.' D. Nineteen Hundred and nine. C omMi s s oner or Agr cu rd State of rtorida. Ca my of Dade. This in;t-ur..en: was filled for mord th•._.�-.•dal 15;9 at:/% - f t and duty ier9ed in.��-• 600k.s3,(�Q- on Pate3cs- ift No. Y..•�i9�1.� G a. 6CATMCRMA. Chit CW.U4 CWd 03- 292 ITEM PZ 1 ZONING FACT SHEET Case Number: 2002-0553 24 -Feb -03 Item 1 Location: Approximately 401 Biscayne Boulevard Legal: (Complete legal description on file with the Department of Hearing Boards) Applicant: Raceworks, LLC City of Miami, Owner 2601 South Bayshore Drive 444 SW 2 Avenue Suite #100 Miami, FL 33130 Miami, FL 33133 Rep. (305) 416-1025 Zoning: PR Parks & Recreation Request: Appeal of a Zoning Board decision, which denied an appeal by Mr. Andre J. Zamorano, Esquire, of a Class II Special Permit application number 02-007 issued by the Planning and Zoning director on January 10, 2002, to allow permanent road improvements in Bayfront Park in association with a temporary event. This item was remanded back to the Zoning Board by the City Commission on September 26, 2002. Purpose: This will allow permanent road improvements in Bayfront Park in association with a temporary event. Recommendations: Planning & Zoning Dept.: Denial of the appeal, approval of the Class II Special Permit. Public Works: No comments. Plat and Street Committee: N/A. Miami -Dade County No comments. Enforcement History, If any Case No: Last Hearing Found Violation(s) Ticketing Action: Daily $0.00 Affidavit Non -Compliance Issued Warning Letter sent Total Fines to $0.00 Lien Recorded Comply Order CEB Action: History: The City Commission remanded this case on September 26, 2002 to the Zoning Board. Analysis: See attached documentation. Zoning Board Resolution: ZB 2002-0560, vote of 7-2 and ZB 2003-0681, vote of 5-1 Zoning Board: Denial of the appeal. City Commission: Remanded to the Zoning Board on September 26, 2002, 03— 292 - . SUPPLEMENTAL ZONING FACT SHEET Case Number 2002-0553 APPLICANT APPELLANT HEARING DATE REQUEST LOCATION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION Raceworks LLC. Mr. Andre J. Zamorano December 11, 2002 Remand of Appeal of a Zoning Board decision, which denied an appeal of a Class II Special Permit. Approximately 401 Biscayne Boulevard (Complete legal description on file with the Hearing Boards Office). PETITION Consideration of a Remand of Appeal of a Zoning Board decision, which denied an appeal by Mr. Andre Zamorano, Esquire, of a Class II Special Permit application number 02-007 issued by the Planning and Zoning director on January 10, 2002, to allow permanent road improvements in Bayfront Park in association with a temporary event. PLANNING RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Class II Special Permit Findings: Denial of appeal. The above referenced appeal was remanded by the City Commission to the Zoning Board in order for the findings made by the Planning and Zoning Department to be incorporated into the written record for the subject appeal. See findings below. Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended, the following considerations and findings are hereby made: 1305.1. Ingress and egress. Review for adequacy shall be given to ingress and egress to the property and structure and uses thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or other emergency. • It is found that the proposed work, by providing wider roadways through the park with interconnectivity and a stabilized base, offers safe and convenient ingress and egress to Bayfront Park for both automobiles and pedestrians, and further convenient access for fire or other emergency vehicles. ................................. ..................... _.._........................................ _........................................................................................... _............. ......................................................... _.................................... CITY OF MIAMI • PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT 444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR • MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 ...... .............. _-....... -............................................................................................................................................................ _..... _............................................. _................... _..__................................ Date: 11/26/2002 Page 1 03- 292 1305.2. Offstreet parking and loading. Review for adequacy shall be given to offstreet parking and loading facilities as related to adjacent streets, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, internal traffic flow and control, arrangement in relation to access in case of fire or other emergency, and screening and landscaping. • It is found that the proposed work has no effect on offstreet parking and loading. 1305.3. Refuse and service areas. Review for adequacy shall be given to the location, scale, design, and screening of refuse and service areas; to the manner in which refuse is to be stored; and to the manner and timing of refuse collection and deliveries, shipments, or other service activities, as such matters relate to the location and nature of uses on adjoining properties and to the location and character of adjoining public ways. • It is found that the proposed work has no effect on refuse and service areas. 1305.4. Signs and lighting. Review for adequacy shall be given to the number, size, character, location, and orientation of proposed signs, and of proposed lighting for signs and premises, with particular reference to traffic safety, glare, and compatibility and harmony with adjoining and nearby property and the character of the area. • It is found that the proposed work has no effect on signs and lighting. 1305.5. Utilities. Review for adequacy shall be given to utilities required, with particular reference to availability and capacity of systems, location of connections, and potentially adverse appearance or other adverse effects on adjoining and nearby property and the character of the area. • It is found that the proposed work has complied with code requirements regarding utilities and will therefore have no adverse effects from such on Bayfront Park. 1305.6. Drainage. Review for adequacy shall be given to provision for drainage, with particular reference to effect on adjoining and nearby properties and on general drainage systems in the area. Where major drainage volumes appear likely and capacity of available systems is found marginal or inadequate, consideration shall be given to possibilities for recharge of groundwater supply on the property, temporary retention with gradual discharge, or other remedial measures. • It is found that the proposed work has complied with code requirements regarding drainage as specified in the Florida Building Code and will therefore have no adverse effects on drainage conditions in the park. 1305.7. Preservation of natural features. Review for appropriateness shall be given to provision for the preservation of existing vegetation and geological features whenever possible. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CITY OF MIAMI • PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT 444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR • MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 .... .................................... _.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... nate: 91/26/2002 Page 2 03- 292 It is found that the proposed work, by providing for tree relocation and mitigation as specified in the plans on file, will have no adverse effect on preservation of natural features. 1305.8. Control of potentially adverse effects generally. In addition to the review of detailed items indicated above, as appropriate to the particular class or kind of special permit and the circumstances of the particular case, review for appropriateness shall be given to potentially adverse effects generally on adjoining and nearby properties, the area, the neighborhood, or the city, of the use or occupancy as proposed, or its location, construction, design, character, scale or manner of operation. Where such potentially adverse effects are found, consideration shall be given to special remedial measures appropriate in the particular circumstances of the case, including screening or buffering, landscaping, control of manner or hours of operation, alteration of proposed design or construction of buildings, relocation of proposed open space or alteration of use of such space, or such other measures as are required to assure that such potential adverse effects will be eliminated or minimized to the maximum extent reasonably feasible, and that the use or occupancy will be compatible and harmonious with other development in the area to a degree which will avoid substantial depreciation of the value of nearby property. It is found that the proposed work involves permanent road improvements that are initially associated with a temporary event in Bayfront Park. The permanent improvements will add flexibility to the park that will make it more able to accommodate all sorts of other temporary events from races to festivals. Such improvements are found to be in keeping with the "regional' nature of Bayfront Park in that the benefits are to all residents and visitors within the region that is served by Bayfront Park. It is therefore found that the proposed work will have no adverse effects on the Park and will be harmonious with future uses and events planned within the Park and Biscayne Boulevard. ........... .................... -................................................... _.............................. _...... _................................... _..__.._......... ___....... __.......... ........................................................................ _..................... CITY OF MIAMI • PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT 444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RD FLOOR • MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 Uate: 7I/Lb/1UUZ Page 3 03 292 Miami Zoning Board Resolution No.: 2003-0684 Monday, February 24, 2003 Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza offered the following resolution and moved its adoption Resolution: A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING BOARD DENYING THE APPEAL BY ANDRE J. ZAMORANO, ESQ., OF THE CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 02-007 APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR ON JANUARY 10, 2002, IN ORDER TO ALLOW PERMANENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYFRONT PARK IN ASSOCIATION WITH A TEMPORARY EVENT (THIS ITEM WAS REMANDED BACK TO THE ZONING BOARD BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2002) FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 401 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" (HEREBY ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED PR PARKS AND RECREATION. Upon being seconded by Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: Mr. Charles J. Flowers Yes Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes Ms. Ileana Hemandez-Acosta Away Mr. Humberto J. Pellon Away Mr. Juvenal A. Pina No Mr. Allan Shulman Away Mr. Angel Urquiola Yes Mr. Georges Williams Yes AYE: 5 NAY: 1 ABSTENTIONS: 0 NO VOTES: 0 ABSENT: 3 Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 5-1 Teresita L. Fer and &. Executive Sec tary Hearing Boards 03- 292 Case No. 2002-0553 Item Nbr: EYh i bkt _ IYA" << oc 3) I I ` SNTLRNAL IMPROVZi 'i7T FUt:D i DEED NO. 19447 STATE c,. FLORIDA KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the undersiGned, Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund or the State of I a, under and by virtue of the authority of Section 253.12, F1c i Statutes, 1941, and accordinZ to the provisions provided ff Section 2-53.13, Florida Statutes, 1941, and for and in con - tion of the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars and other Good and valuable considerations, to them in hand paid by CITI 07' YIAILI, Dade County, Florida, receipt of which is hereb�,acknoriledged, have Granted, barzained, sold and conveyed to the said CI'ry o^ ;iIAL:I and its successors and assiGns forever, the followinG de- scribed lands, to -wit: ,,1�3eGinnin„ at the point of intersection of the Easterly production of the Cenper Line of Richraers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street) as shown on the Amended Plat of "RIC:GiERS ADDITION" as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 2, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the Brest side of Biscayne Bay; thence run North- erly along said J. S. Harbor Line to a point on a line four hundred and fifty.feet North of and parallel to the Easterly production of the said Center Line of Rickmers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street); thence run Easterly along said line 450 feet North of and parallel to the Easterly production of the Center Line of said Rickners Street (now :mown as N. E. 13th Street) to the point of intersection with that course described in Deed Book 351, Pace 353, as follows: "Thence in a Southeasterly direction to the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (Si,1y of SWI), of Section 32, Tov:nship 53 South, Rance 42 East; Thence South- easterly along the said last described course to the said Southeast corner of the SW-} of SFS* of Section 32, Township 53 South, Rance 42 East; Thence run South along the- Wast line of the NEI of NN-- of Section 5, Township 54 South, Range 42 hast to a point eichty feet Northerly from and measured at riZht an les to the Center Line of the Miami Muni- cipal Channel; Thence run Southeasterly following that course 'described in Deed Book 1)}72, Page 474 as follors: "Co-uaencinG at the intersection of the \ Wiest Line of the NES of JNIX, of Section 5, Township V 54 South, Range 42 East; and a line parallel to and eighty feet Northerly from, and measured at riSht angles to the Center Line of the Miami kuni- cioal Channel", to the East boundary of the West 3/4 of said Section 5; Thence run South along the East boundary of the West 3/4 of said Section 5 and Section 9, Township 54 South, Range 42 East, to the Northerly Line of the FZC Railway Company Channel as described in aforesaid Deed Book 1472, Page 474; Thence run Westerly along the said Northerly line of the FEC Railway Company Channel tc the East line of the NV11"of Section 8, Town- ship 54 South, Rance 42 East; Thence run Westerly 3- 292 along that line described in Chapter 13656 (No. 102) Laws of Florida - 1929 as follows: "Thence westerly to the Intersection of the P. & 0. S.S. Channel and the .Channel extending from the mouth of the Miami River in a Southeasterly direction", to the East line of Section 7, Township 511 South, Range 42 East; Thence run South alonr, the said East line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East to a point 2000 feet North of the South line of Section 7, -Township 54 South, Range 42 East, being that point at the teraination of the line described in Deed Book 1900, Pa -e 355 Parcel "B" as follows: "Thence North along the East Line of said Section 7 for a distance of 2000 feet to a point"; Thence alon:; the course de- scribed in Deed Nook 1900, Pare 355, as follows: "Thence Southwest 2828 feet to a point on the South boundary of said Section 7", to a point -2000 feet Hest of the Southeast corner of said Section 7; Thence run nest along the South line of said Section 7 and the South line of said Section 7 produced pest, to the point of intersection with the U. S. Harbor Line on the West side of Biscayne Bay; thence run Northerly along the said U. S. harbor Line to the point of beginning. M<cept therefrom the following, described BAY BOTTOM LAND ARFL FOR DREDGING IN CONNECTION VITH PROPOSED 85 ACRE BURLINGAME ISLAND. Beginning at the point of intersection of the South- easterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street, the same being the Southerly line of Highleyma is Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 154 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the Westerly side of Biscayne Bay; thence Northerly alonS the said U. S. Harbor Line and the Northerly extension thereof 3800 feet, more or less, :to the point of intersection with the Southerly line of Miami River Channel, as shown and established on Sheet No. 2 of plan pre- pared by U. S. Engineer Office, Jacksonville, Florida, November 19_14, showing Miami River, Florida, condi- tions on completion of Dredging of Channel Project; thence Northeasterly along the said Southerly line of 91ami River Channel and the Northeasterly pro- duction thereof 2$00 feet to a point; thence Southerly 5300 feet, more or less, along a line parallel to the Southerly production of the dividing line between Tor.mship 53 South, Ranse 41 East and Township 53 South, Range 12 East to the point of intersection with the aforesaid Southeasterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street; thence Northwesterly 2900 feet, more or less, along the said Southeasterly Production of the Northerly aide of S. E. 24th Street to the U. S. Harbor Line, the point of beginning. And further excepting thCrefrom all land title to which is in private parties. / TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said above mentioned and described land and premises, and all the title and interest of the Trustees therein as granted to them by Section 253.12, Florida Statutes, 1941, unto the said CITY OF MIAM and its successors and assigns forever. 03- 292 I I j 1 +1 03- 292 �x ►-i br+J:" t�'' I lil 1SAV.,..G AND RESERVING unto the Trustees of the Internal Improvt trent Fund of Florida, and their successors, an undivided three. 'fourths interest in and title in and to an undivided three-fourths ;interest in all the phosphate, minerals and metals that are or may ;be in, on or under the said above described lands, and an undivide( bne-half interest in and title in and to an undivided one-half in- terest in all the petroleum that is or may be in or under the said above described land, with the privilege to mine and develop the OVIDM, HOBiEVn, anything herein to the contrary notwith- g, this deed is given and granted upon the express condition ant that the Grantee herein or its successors and assigns ever sell or convey or lease the above described land or t thereof to any private person, firm or corporation for vete use or purpose, it being the intention of this re - on that the said lands shall be used solely for public s, includXng municipal purposes and not otherwise. WIDE), FURTHM, anything herein to the contrary notwith- :, this deed ib given and granted upon the further express Dn subsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors or shall not ,sive or grant any license or permit to any pri- rson, firm or corporation to construct or make by any means, ands, fills, embankments, structures, buildings or other thin -s within or upon the above described lands or any sreof for any private use or purpose, as distinguished from Lie or municipal use or purpose. Is covenanted and a5reed that the above conditions subse- iall run with the land and any violation thereof shall this deed null and void and the above described lands shall, event,. revert to the Grantors Or.•tb:eix successors. IN :,ITNZSS WHEREO?, the Trustees of the Internal Improvement 'Fund of the State of Florida have hereunto subscribed their names ,and affixed their seals, and have caused the seal of the "DEPART- UMIT OF AGR_'CULTURE OF T_•iE STATE OF FLORIDA", to be hereunto laffixed, at the Capitol, in the City of Tallahassee, on this the i' 24th. day of February A. D. Nineteen Hundred and SEAL) ;., Go nor (SEAL) Comptroller CommissioneroAg'r cu re( Slate of florin. Cot my of Dade. dz• ct..�=� This inst•u;::cn: x2s filed for record the- -• le— .64J and duly reo►rded in.� .�p..._.an PaYe�sjFife 10. Y...?�94�Q 600h..3 _. jM. {,EATNCRM 1t1 Gnrk Circuit Wart S T E E L I HECTOR I D A V I S INTERNATIONAL" February 20, 2003 G� Fri;; VIA FACSIMILE & US MAIL Ms. Teresita Fernandez Hearing Boards City of Miami Riverside Center 444 SW 2nd Ave., 4th Floor Miami, FL 33130 Re: Class II Permit Appeal Steel Hector & Davis LLP 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Suite 4000 Miami, FL 33131-2398 305.577.7000 305.577.7001 Fax www.steelhector.com Gabriel E. Nieto 305.577.7083 gnieto@steelhector.com Members of the City of Miami Zoning Appeals Board Dear Ms. Fernandez and Members of the Board: This law firm represents Homestead Miami Speedway, LLC, with respect to its appeal of a January 10, 2002 determination by the Director of Planning and Zoning regarding the issuance of a Class II permit for a Temporary Racetrack with Permanent Improvements (the "Director's Determination"). Back on September 26, 2002, the Miami City Commission heard our appeal of the Class II permit that we contend was wrongfully issued to Raceworks, LLC ("Raceworks"). After hearing the arguments of counsel, the City Commission remanded the permit issuance to the Zoning Appeals Board (the "ZAB"), and directed the Planning and Zoning Department to make specific findings of fact as required by the Miami Zoning Ordinance. As you know, this issue is currently scheduled to be heard by the ZAB on February 24, 2003. For reasons set forth below, we will not be presenting oral argument on the appeal, but continue to believe that the supplemental findings are inadequate. First, it is important to note that we are in this position because of actions taken by the City of Miami ("City") and Raceworks. Under Section 1803 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, an appeal of a Director's Determination "stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from ...," absent imminent peril of life and property. Regardless of this fact, the City allowed Raceworks to continue construction without an approved Class II permit in place. Furthermore, the appellate process was delayed at various junctures by the City and Raceworks, to the point that more than a year has passed since the Class II permit was issued. Miami West Palm Beach Tallahassee Naples Key West 03— 3— 292 Buenos Aires Caracas London Rio de Janeiro Santo Domingo Sao Paulo �; „, Ms. Teresita Fernandez, Hearing Boards Members of the City of Miami Zoning Appeals Board February 20, 2003 Page 2 Moreover, the findings by the Planning and Zoning Department as written in the Supplemental Zoning Fact Sheet still violate the Miami Zoning Code.' Essentially, the City Staff has checked off each of the Article 13 required findings, and merely stated in conclusory form that there is no issue needing to be addressed. The majority of the required findings have the following language "[i]t is found that the proposed work has no effect on" the given category, and a couple of others include such language merely stating that the set use has complied with the code requirements. We believe this falls far short of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, and, more importantly, does not put to rest the concerns set forth by the City Commission at the last public hearing.2 Additionally, we continue to believe that the issuance of this or any Class II permit allowing an automobile racing use of the park to be improper for the reasons previously articulated in our appeal papers and the various hearings before the ZAB and City Commission. These include the following deficiencies: • Raceworks failed to properly secure the needed approval to conduct a race pursuant to section 549 of the Florida Statutes. The approval was obtained, however, required findings pursuant to statute were not. A race course use is not a proper subject for approval by a Class II Special Permit. Under §1500 of the Zoning Ordinance, a Class II Special Permit can be issued only if regulations for the use appear in one of the following: (1) the official schedule of District regulations; (2) elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance; or (3) in Article 15, which specifically governs the issuance of Class II permits. Nothing in the Zoning Ordinance contemplates a race course use, nor are there any criteria by which to issue a permit for this type of use. The Class II permit is fundamentally inconsistent with the Parks and Recreation zoning district and the City's comprehensive neighborhood plan. The fact that the race event has come and gone is certainly a significant factor in our decision not to present oral argument at the upcoming hearing. As you know, according to Sec. 1503.4 of the Miami Zoning Ordinance, "[a]II Class II Special Permits shall expire one (1) year after issuance." As such -- since the City is of the opinion that The City staffs supplemental finding are attached. 2 As stated by Commissioner Sanchez, "one of the concerns that I had was there was no written findings of facts." The findings by the Zoning Board are mere conclusions with no actual findings of fact. 03- 292 Steei Hector & Davis LLP 'vv r LJ Ms. Teresita Fernandez, Hearing Boards Members of the City of Miami Zoning Appeals Board February 20, 2003 Page 3 a Class II permit is required for this activity -- it is our understanding that Raceworks must apply for another Class II permit to use the affected area as a Temporary Racetrack for the race event scheduled for this coming September. Of course, as we have explained on numerous occasions, more than a mere Class II is required and any application should be reviewed in the context of a Major Use Special Permit, even putting aside the other deficiencies we have outlined. Furthermore, it is our understanding that the configuration of the proposed race course must change, possibly requiring the construction of additional Permanent Improvements, and a corresponding permit. As a result, it seems inevitable that this process will be repeated again for this September's race event. It is our sincere hope that the City will refrain from the procedural tactics used to allow the prior race to be run without first reaching a final decision on our appeal. In any case, the City should rest assured that if this same tact is taken in the future we will seek immediate and appropriate court relief so as to preserve our clients rights to a full hearing, and judicial review, prior to any additional racing being run. Sincerely, coa li—t7-- Gabriel Nieto, Esq. Partner cc: Ms. Lourdes Slayzck, Assistant Director City of Miami Planning Department Mr. Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney City of Miami City Attorney's Office MIA2001 191916v1 Steel Hector & Davis LLP 03- 292 - SUPPLEMENTAL ZONING FACT SHEET Case Number 2002-0553 C- -, „ - f L-1 CL •. APPLICANT Raceworks LLC. APPELLANT Mr. Andre J. Zamorano HEARING DATE December 11, 2002 REQUEST Remand of Appeal of a Zoning Board decision, which denied an appeal of a Class II Special Permit. LOCATION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION Approximately 401 Biscayne Boulevard (Complete legal description on file with the Hearing Boards Office). PETITION Consideration of a Remand of Appeal of a Zoning Board decision, which denied an appeal by Mr. Andre Zamorano, Esquire, of a Class II Special Permit application number 02- 007 issued by the Planning and Zoning director on January 10, 2002, to allow permanent road improvements in Bayfront Park in association with a temporary event. PLANNING RECOMMENDATION Denial of appeal. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The above referenced appeal was remanded by the City Commission to the Zoning Board in order for the findings made by the Planning and Zoning Department to be incorporated into the written record for the subject appeal. See findings below. Class II Special Permit Findings: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended, the following considerations and findings are hereby made: 1305.1. Ingress and egress. Review for adequacy shall be given to ingress and egress to the property and structure and uses thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or other emergency. It is found that the proposed work, by providing wider roadways through the park with interconnectivity and a stabilized base, offers safe and convenient ingress and egress to Bayfront Park for both automobiles and pedestrians, and further convenient access for fire or other emergency vehicles. 03- 292 1305.2. Offstreet parking and loading. Review for adequacy shall be given to offstreet parking and loadings €acflilies as .related to adjacent streets, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, internal traffic flow and control, arrangement in relation to access in case of fire or other emergency, and screening and landscaping. It is found that the proposed work has no effect on offstreet parking and loading. 1305.3. Refuse and service areas. Review for adequacy shall be given to the location, scale, design, and screening of refuse and service areas; to the manner in which refuse is to be stored; and to the manner and timing of refuse collection and deliveries, shipments, or other service activities, as such matters relate to the location and nature of uses on adjoining properties and to the location and character of adjoining public ways. It is found that the proposed work has no effect on refuse and service areas. 1305.4. Signs and lighting. Review for adequacy shall be given to the number, size, character, location, and orientation of proposed signs, and of proposed lighting for signs and premises, with particular reference to traffic safety, glare, and compatibility and harmony with adjoining and nearby property and the character of the area. It is found that the proposed work has no effect on signs and lighting. 1305.5. Utilities. Review for adequacy shall be given to utilities required, with particular reference to availability and capacity of systems, location of connections, and potentially adverse appearance or other adverse effects on adjoining and nearby property and the character of the area. It is found that the proposed work has complied with code requirements regarding utilities and will therefore have no adverse effects from such on Bayfront Park. 1305.6. Drainage. Review for adequacy shall be given to provision for drainage, with particular reference to effect on adjoining and nearby properties and on general drainage systems in the area. Where major drainage volumes appear likely and capacity of available systems is found marginal or inadequate, consideration shall be given to possibilities for recharge of groundwater supply on the property, temporary retention with gradual discharge, or other remedial measures. 03- 292 It is found that the proposed work has complied with code requirements regarding drainage as specified in the Florida Building Code and will therefore have no adverse effects on drainage conditions in the park. 1305.7. Preservation of natural features. Review for appropriateness shall be given to provision for the preservation of existing vegetation and geological features whenever possible. It is found that the proposed work, by providing for tree relocation and mitigation as specified in the plans on file, will have no adverse effect on preservation of natural features. 1305.8. Control of potentially adverse effects generally. In addition to the review of detailed items indicated above, as appropriate to the particular class or kind of special permit and the circumstances of the particular case, review for appropriateness shall be given to potentially adverse effects generally on adjoining and nearby properties, the area, the neighborhood, or the city, of the use or occupancy as proposed, or its location, construction, design, character, scale or manner of operation. Where such potentially adverse effects are found, consideration shall be given to special remedial measures appropriate in the particular circumstances of the case, including screening or buffering, landscaping, control of manner or hours of operation, alteration of proposed design or construction of buildings, relocation of proposed open space or alteration of use of such space, or such other measures as are required to assure that such potential adverse effects will be eliminated or minimized to the maximum extent reasonably feasible, and that the use or occupancy will be compatible and harmonious with other development in the area to a degree which will avoid substantial depreciation of the value of nearby property. It is found that the proposed work involves permanent road improvements that are initially associated with a temporary event in Bayfront Park. The permanent improvements will add flexibility to the park that will make it more able to accommodate all sorts of other temporary events from races to festivals. Such improvements are found to be in keeping with the "regional" nature of Bayfront Park in that the benefits are to all residents and visitors within the region that is served by Bayfront Park. It is therefore found that the proposed work will have no adverse effects on the Park and will be harmonious with future uses and events planned within the Park and Biscayne Boulevard. 03-- 292 Rodriguez, Anel From: Rodriguez, Anel Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 4:21 PM To: Faria, Maria Subject: FW: Motion 02-1066 from Sept. 26 Maria, here is the info you requested. -----Original Message ----- From: Scheider, Sylvia Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 2:05 PM To: Rodriguez, Anel Subject: Motion 02-1066 from Sept. 26 ITEM A MOTION REMANDING BACK TO PZ -1 PLANNING AND ZONING AN APPEAL OF A ZONING BOARD DECISION OF AN APPEAL OF A CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW PERMANENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYFRONT PARK IN ASSOCIATION WITH RACEWORKS' TEMPORARY EVENT. 10/3/2002 Page 1 of 1 MOTION 02-1 MOVED: SANCHEZ SECONDED: GONZALEZ UNANIMOUS 03- 292 S T E E L I HECTOR ODAV I S' The Honorable Manuel Diaz Mayor Hearing Board Division Planning and Zoning Board City of Miami, Florida 444 S.W. 2d Avenue 7th Floor Miami, Florida May 7, 2002 Steel Hector & Davis LLP 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2398 305.577.7000 305.577.7001 Fax www.stee[hector.com Gabriel E. Nieto 305.577.7083 gnieto@steelhector.com The Honorable Members of the City Commission, City of Miami Re: Request For Review: Miami Zoning Board, April 22, 2002, Item No.' - 2002 -0553 `" Dear Mayor Diaz and Commissioners: This law firm represents Homestead Miami Speedway, LLC ("Speedway"), with respect to the appeal of a Class II permit approved on January 10, 2002 for a temporary racetrack with permanent improvements, which was heard by the City of Miami Zoning Appeals Board ("Zoning Board") on April 22, 2002. As there is no specific procedure identified in Article 20 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance governing requests for review of Zoning Board decisions, this letter shall serve as Speedway's formal request for review of the April 22, 2002 Zoning Board decision on Item No. 2002- 0553 pursuant to Article 20 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance.' A $500 filing fee and a $105 Notice fee are enclosed. Please notify us of any additional fees. 1 For your convenience the pertinent portions of the permitting record are attached. A copy of the Class II Permit issued on January 10, 2002 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 A transcript of the April 22, 2002, Zoning Board proceeding is attached as Exhibit 2. 03- 292 Miami West Palm Beach Tallahassee Naples Key West London Caracas Sao Paulo Rio de Janeiro Santo Domingo S T E E L C HECTOR EDAV I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 2 FACTUAL BACKGROUND A brief overview of the tortured history surrounding the issuance of a preferential no -bid contract to Raceworks LLC, ("Raceworks") to authorize its use of Bayfront Park as a racetrack, and the related issuance of the Class II permit for it to modify the park to this end, is necessary to understand the various defects in the Class II approval outlined herein.2 A. The Original Agreement between the City and Raceworks On August 9, 2001, the City Commission passed Resolution 01-845 authorizing the City Manager to negotiate with Raceworks an agreement (the Original Agreement") for the use of Bayfront Park and adjacent City property as a racetrack by Raceworks.3 Thereafter, on November 15, 2001, the City Commission approved Resolution 01-1229, authorizing the City Manager to execute the Original Agreement between the City, Raceworks, LLC, and the Bayfront Management Trust.4 Pursuant to the Original Agreement, Raceworks was authorized to hold two multi -day racing events each year, with the racetrack essentially engulfing Bayfront Park. The general public is to be excluded from the park while the race and associated preparations and tear -down periods occur. The net effect is that the park would be converted to a private use as a racetrack (as opposed to a park open to the general public) for two periods of more than 10 weeks each, for the next 15 to 25 years.' 2 Many of the issues that arose in the process and the various legal proceedings that followed would have been avoided by the City simply (i) allowing others to bid for the preferential racing contract issued to Raceworks and (ii) avoiding the permanent and far-reaching impact on the continued use of Bayfront park as a public park inherent in that preferential contract. 3 The interested parties to the agreement were the City, Raceworks, and the Bayfront Management Trust. 4 A copy of the Original Agreement, executed by the City Manager on January 7, 2001, is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. 5 Pursuant to the Original Agreement, the City and the Trust granted 03- 292 STEEL© HECTOR E D A V I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 3 The use of the public property contemplated in the Original Agreement was expressly subject to any "existing and other governmental restrictions." Id. at Section 6. Further, as noted in Section 12 of the Original Agreement the "[1]icensee has designed the Race Course which requires Initial Improvements. Based upon modifications to Public Property . . . the City will make the necessary Initial Improvements to the Public Property that will comprise the Race course. Licensee shall be financially responsible for the costs of the Initial Improvements contemplated herein. Section 18 of the Original Agreement states that "[tjhe City shall obtain licenses, authorizations and permits from the applicable county, state and federal agencies for the improvements, modifications and maintenance that it shall perform on the Public Property that comprises the Race Course." Thus, the Original Agreement recognizes that generally applicable governmental restrictions apply to the race, and that it may not be held unless it is in full compliance with the law, including the ordinances of the City of Miami. Although obviously subject to generally applicable legal restrictions and administrative approval processes, the Original Agreement calls for the use of public property specifically for a "Race Event" and contemplates numerous improvements to facilitate such racing. "Race Event" is defined in Section 2 (k) of the Agreement as, "the day(s) that a motor vehicle race sanctioned by a nationally or internationally recognized racing organization is conducted and includes the days for practices and qualifications for a race." In addition to the Race Event Section 2 (p) of the Agreement contemplates numerous "Support Events" which include the installation of a "Racing Village," Raceworks the "right to use its Public Property to state a maximum of two Race Events a year on the Race Course and within the Race Perimeter." Original Agreement, Section 6 Further " [t]he initial term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years, commencing upon the effective date of this Agreement. The Licensee shall have the option of extending the term of this Agreement for a period of ten (10) years. Original Agreement, Section 3. 03- 292 STEEL® HECTOR IDAV I S' City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 4 catering compound, hospitality suites, VIP club, merchandising facilities, and other related activities. All of these activities occur at least partially in Bayfront Park. To facilitate the "Race Event" and the "Support Events" the Original Agreement calls for numerous permanent and "temporary" improvements to be constructed throughout Bayfront Park. The permanent improvements (i.e., those that will be left in place between Race Events) include extensive repaving and modification of streets, curbs and gutters, removal of various types of traffic control devices and other modifications. And, this does not even begin to touch on the full scope of the work, as during each Race Event vast "temporary" improvements designed to transform the park into an automobile race course with tens of thousands of ticket -holding spectators will be installed in the park. The only thing distinguishing the permanent improvements from those that are deemed "temporary" is that the later will be dismantled and stored for some portion of the period between the semi-annual Race Events. The undisputed record evidence shows that these improvements, both permanent and "temporary," are designed specifically to convert Bayfront Park into a racing stadium and related attractions, and would no doubt become the defining use of the present park. As noted by Speedway's racing expert, Al Garcia, at the hearing, "it's very obvious that the improvements that were made to the surrounding areas and to the park itself were strictly for racing." Ex. 2, at 38. Indeed, even the review of a simple diagram of the track, such as those submitted into the record before the Zoning Board, can lead to no conclusion other than that the improvements are specifically designed to transform the park into a racecourse. As Zoning Board member Mr. Pina was quick to identify, "we're using public land where extensive improvements are being made and I don't think it's serving the general public." Ex. 2, at 43. The improvements in the park are for racing and nothing more; they simply serve no other logical purpose. B. The Circuit Court Litigation Speedway filed suit against the City and Raceworks on October 22, 2001, alleging, inter alfa, that the City improperly engaged in non-public discussions and negotitations with Raceworks regarding a proposed agreement to have Raceworks t: 03- 292 STEEL® HECTOR ®DAV I S_ City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 5 conduct a motor car race on City -owned waterfront property in downtown Miami.6 Speedway then moved for summary judgment on Counts V and VI of the Second Amended Complaint, on January 25, 2002. Those counts relate to the City's failure to engage in public bidding prior to entering into an agreement with Raceworks to use city waterfront property for a racecourse. As Speedway noted, the City Charter does not allow this, and expressly requires any contract for the use of such property to be awarded by public bidding. On March 4th, 2002, the Circuit Court granted Speedway's Motion and ruled that "[t]he contract between the City and Raceworks, which is acknowledged to have been entered into without the City having complied with any of the applicable competitive bid procedures, "is hereby declared null, void and of no further legal effect." See Exhibit 5, p. 15 (emphasis added).? In so holding, Judge Genden directed the City to place any contract for use of its waterfront property as a racecourse up for public bidding and declared that any such contract that failed to follow public bidding requirements would be invalid pursuant to section 3(f)(iii) of the City Charter. See Exhibit 5, pg. 12. In response to Judge Genderi s order, the City of Miami, the Bayfront Park Management Trust, and Raceworks, LLC entered into a subsequent Licensing Agreement dated April 11, 2002 (the "April 11 Agreement"). While the April 11th Agreement contains numerous cosmetic changes designed to address tangential aspects of Judge Genderi s ruling, the fundamental defect remains. The April 11th Agreement still fails to address the lack of competitive bidding which plagued the original Original Agreement. Indeed, the fundamental point of Judge Genderi s ruling was that any contract allowing for the use of the City's waterfront property to the exclusion of the general public must be submitted for public bidding. The City has simply refused to 6 A copy of Speedway's Second Amended Complaint is attached as Exhibit 4. 7 A copy of the March 4, 2002, Order is attached as Exhibit 5. Judge Genderi s ordered nullified the Original Agreement, effectively prohibiting the Special Improvements authorized in therein. Despite the fact that a Circuit Court order has declared the Original Agreement null and void, the City has continued to allow the construction of Special Improvements as identified in the voided Original Agreement. 03- 292 S T E E L p HECTOR pDAV I S'" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 6 comply with this requirement, despite the fact that it may receive a more favorable contract as a result.$ C. The Class II Special Permit Shortly after entering into the Original Agreement, on January 10, 2002, the City's Director of Planning and Zoning issued to Raceworks the Class II permit (No. 02- 007) that is the subject of this appeal. The permit authorizes both temporary and permanent improvements in Bayfront Park to facilitate the Race Events and Support Events set forth in the Original Agreement.9 These improvements, both temporary and permanent, relate directly to the racing and supporting event uses contemplated for the park. See Ex. 3, at Exhibit D. On January 25, 2002, Speedway appealed the Class II special permit. In its appeal Speedway pointed out numerous fatal defects in the issuance of that permit, which included: 1. The inconsistency of using of Bayfront Park for racing with both (i) the applicable zoning district in the City's Zoning Ordinance and (ii) the underlying future land use classification in the City's Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan; 8 Commissioner Teele recently sponsored a resolution allowing race promoters to submit proposals for unspecified additional races in the City. However, that did not address the fundamental problem of the City having failed to allow others to bid on the contract issued to Raceworks. Indeed, that contract contains numerous special accommodations, such as preferential racing dates and access to public financing that do not appear to be available to other race promoters. And, it is not clear whether the City will even allow an additional race to be held based on the submittals. 9 Special Permit No. 2002-0038, a separate Class II permit, was issued authorizing parallel improvements. Unlike the permit at issue, that authorization did not directly authorize the use of Bayfront Park for racing. 03- 292 STEEL© HECTOR pDAV I S - City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 7 2. The fact that several provisions in the City's Zoning Ordinance require, at minimum, review as a Major Use Special Permit for the contemplated racing use in the PR zoning district; 3. The fact that the Zoning Ordinance lacks any standards under which such use can be permitted; 4. The utter failure of the Director to make the findings expressly required under the Zoning Ordinance for approval of a Class II Special Permit and the related failure of the applicant to provide the necessary information from which such findings could be drawn; and 5. The fact that Raceworks had no valid authority to use the park for racing and therefore could not be issued a permit to construct specialized racing improvements. On April 22, 2002 the January 25t" appeal was considered by the Zoning Board. Item No. 2002-0553. Both the Speedway and Raceworks made arguments and presentations to the board. Raceworks did not, however, address the merits of the inconsistency with the PR zoning District or the land use classification, instead claiming that the City should simply ignore such legalisms and blindly issue the permit. Tr. Ex. 2, p.11-12. Similarly, Raceworks urged the Zoning Board not to accord any substantive consideration to the other arguments made on the basis that the Class II permit is only for "curb , gutter, drainage and paving,"10 in essence asking that the City (i) divorce those improvements from the racing use that is their sole purpose for existing and (ii) ignore the fact that the Class II permit also authorizes numerous temporary improvements such as grandstands and VIP suites that are similarly part of a racecourse." 10 Tr. Ex. 2, at 11. 11 Tr. Ex. 2, at 22. 03- 292 S T E E L I HECTOR NDAV I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 8 In essence, Raceworks asked the board to pretend that the permit is simply for improvements that Raceworks is making in the park, as if such work was being accomplished for no reason whatsoever. And, not stopping there, Raceworks would lead the City further down the path and have it to limit its consideration to only some of the improvements at issue. The City staff, through a presentation by Lourdes Slayzk, made comments that similarly sought to limit consideration of the substantive issues. Her primary theory was that the Class II permit was simply for "improvements" in the Park, not any particular land use, once again failing to take account of the specialized nature of the improvements, which have but one purpose. Ms. Slayzk's comments ignored the extensive temporary improvements that will be erected for each race, focusing on certain aspects of the permit to support the nonsensical theory that Raceworks is just building random improvements to the city park motivated by nothing more than civic pride and having nothing to do with a multi-million dollar Race Event. The fact that the improvements are perfectly suited to one specific type of auto -racing (the American Le Mans series), which just happens to be the type of racing Raceworks is sanctioned to conduct, is apparently treated as nothing more than mere coincidence City staff. At the hearing, the Zoning Board denied the appeal on a 7 to 2 vote. Several comments recognized that the improvements were not for the general public, and instead constituted a specialized private automobile racing use being constructed in the park. Tr. Ex. 2, at 43 and 44. And, Speedway supported this point with undisputed expert testimony which established that the improvements that were made to the park were specifically for racing. Tr. Ex. 2, at 38. Additionally, Speedway demonstrated that the improvements are specifically designed to meet the requirements of one Racing organization -- the American Le Mans series, Raceworks sanctioning body.12 This testimony also showed that were the City to 12 There are a number of sanctioning bodies that govern automobile racing, each with its own rules and regulations. A race course designed to meet the requirements of Raceworks sanctioning body (American LeMans) would not meet the requirements of other sanctioning organizations. Because each sanctioning body charges a membership fee typically in excess of one -million dollars, there is also a limit as to how many sanctioning organizations any one race sponsor will join. 03-' 292 STEELS HECTOR ODAV l S' City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 9 eventually entertain bids for the Race Event -- as Judge Genden has directed -- the specialized design and construction of the course would give an advantage to Raceworks. Were Speedway to be allowed to compete for the Race it would propose a far different Race Course. Indeed, this would be a requirment for it to comply with the regulations of its sanctioning organizations. The fact that the existing course was custom designed by and for Raceworks will certainly give it an unfair competitive advantage if and when the City finally allows meaningful competition for street racing in Downtown. D. Land Use and Zoning of Bayfront Park Bayfront Park is classified as Recreation use on the City of Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Land Use Map. The park is zoned PR (Parks, Recreation, and Open Space) on the Official Zoning Atlas for the City. The PR district's intent was for the establishment of "public and private parks, recreational facilities, educational and cultural facilities, marine and marina facilities, entertainment facilities, social and health related service facilities, public safety, and City of Miami administrative facilities, including authorities and agencies thereof, parkways and scenic corridors." See Section 401 Intent and Scale. Further, Section 401 identifies arts centers, museums, art galleries, restaurants, cafes, retailing, camping facilities as acceptable "conditional principal uses. " Article 25 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled Definitions, provides general and specific definitions of uses, and it does not contain a reference to automobile racing events or any of the supporting race event uses such as those contemplated for the park and for which it was modified. In fact, there is no reference anywhere in the Zoning Ordinance to these uses nor to any analogous use. E. Issuance of the Class II Permit Section 1303 of the Zoning Ordinance, provides that no application for a special permit shall be accepted or approved unless specific provisions for the particular special permit appear in the ordinance. It is clear from the intent provision of Article 13 governing Special Permits, that a Special Permit is required in addition to otherwise applicable zoning procedures and ,03- 292 S T E E L I HECTOR HDAV 1 S` City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 10 requirements. The Special Permit is intended to require special examination review, and findings in addition to the requirements of the underlying Comprehensive Plan designation and Zoning district requirements. "It is intended that this system shall assure special examination, review, and findings by appropriate agents, agencies, or bodies of the city in connection with proposed actions particularly specified in this zoning ordinance." Section 1300. ARGUMENT I. Raceworks Has Not Secured Approval For The Race As Mandated By Section 549 of the Florida Statutes. Chapter 549 of the Florida Statutes governs automobile race meets in Florida. The statute requires that prior to the issuance of a racing permit, a municipality must determine that the person applying for the permit has the following: (1) adequate insurance to pay any damages incurred because of loss of or injury to any person or property; (2) demonstrated experience in conducting a racing event on a highway or street or in a park; (3) adequate security and necessary facilities will be provided during the racing event; and (4) demonstrated the ability to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the municipality and those persons attending the racing event.13 The City of Miami has yet to issue a permit with specific findings that Raceworks has met the factors enumerated in Fla. Stat. § 549.08. Thus, Raceworks by applying for zoning permits, demolishing structures, repaving roads, and building a race track is violating state law. Further, the City of Miami is legislatively preempted from 13 See Fla. Stat. § 549.08. ,t, 03- 292 STEEL® HECTOR IDAV I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 11 authorizing the issuance of specialized improvements for racing until Raceworks has fulfilled the requirements mandated by state law. II. The City Of Miami And Raceworks Are Violating Circuit Court judge Genden's Order. On March 4, 2002, Judge Genden issued an order granting Plaintiff Speedway's motion for summary judgment on counts V and VI of the second amended complaint. Judge Genderi s Order was based on certain undisputed facts: First, that the City and Raceworks entered into a contract, the Original Agreement. Second, that the City of Miami never made any attempt to solicit bids or proposals. Third, that the City Commission on August 9, 2001 approved of and authorized the City Manager to execute the contract with Raceworks pursuant to City Commission Resolution No. 01- 845. Based on these facts and its review of the pertinent documents, the Court made the following findings: 1. Speedway has standing to assert its claims and the contract is a lease. 2. Because the contract is a lease, the City was and is required to follow competitive bid procedures applicable to leases, and the City's failure to do so renders the contract void as a matter of law. 3. Alternatively, even if the contract were not a lease, the City was required to follow competitive bid procedures pursuant to the provisions of City Charter § 3(f)(iii). The City's admitted failure to follow any competitive bid procedures renders the contract void as a matter of law. 4. The contract between the City and Raceworks, . .. is hereby declared null, void and of no further legal effect .... 14 14 Exhibit 5, at 13. 03- 292 STEELS HECTOR NDAV I S` City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 12 The contract which Judge Genden declared null and void is the same contract which upon which the Class II Special Permit is based. Thus, what the Zoning Board did on April 22, 2002 is approve a Class II permit which authorizes special improvements to facilitate a private use of City waterfront property that has been found to be prohibited by the City Charter, and thereby give life to a void contract that has been stricken by the courts. At best, the end result of the Class II permit will be that Downtown Miami will have an unauthorized and illegal private race track built upon public property to facilitate Race Events that the City has no power to allow (absent proper competitive bidding). III. A Race Course Use Is Not A Proper Subject For Approval By A Class II Special Permit. Under § 1500 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance issuance of Class II Special Permits is governed by regulations applying to special permits as set out in: (1) Article 13 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance; (2) The official schedule of District Regulations; (3) Elsewhere in the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance; or (4) Article 15. Further, all Class II Permits under Section 1514 shall be reviewed pursuant to provisions and standards contained in Article 13. The intent of Article 13 is to establish a special permit system. "It is intended that this system shall assure special examination, review, and findings by appropriate agents, agencies, or bodies of the city in connection with proposed actions particularly specified in this zoning ordinance." Section 1300. (emphasis added) Further, Section 1303 provides that [s]pecial permits relating to this zoning ordinance shall be required only where specific provision therefore is made by this zoning ordinance. No application for a special permit shall be accepted or approved unless specific provisions for the particular special permit appears in this zoning ordinance." Section 1303. (emphasis added) Thus STEEL6 HECTOR QDAV 1 S' City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 13 according to Article 13 and Article 15 of the City of Miami Ordinance, unless there are specific provisions in the Zoning Ordinance for the special permit, no special permit shall be accepted. The Class II Special Permit issued in this case was for a racing use that doesn't appear in the Zoning Ordinance and whose authorization was never contemplated. The fact is that a Class II permit was never intended to apply to an event which will have dramatic effects on parking, traffic, and which will bring in crowds that will reach an estimated 50,000 spectators. The Zoning Ordinance simply does not contemplate such a use and accordingly provides no applicable standards for permit review. If applicable provisions and standards do not exist to guide permit issuance, as is the case here, the permit may not be accepted or approved. See Section 1303. Indeed, the lack of sufficient standards to guide administrative decisionmaking and allow parties to determine their rights is a key defect running throughout the Class II permit approval. Any approval based on the undisciplined and standard less application of the Zoning Ordinance, in a context that was clearly never envisioned, would be constitutionally infirm even if it were allowed under the code. See Miami -Dade County v. Omnipoint Holdings Corp., 2002 V L 341654 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); City of Miami v. Save Brickell Avenue, 426 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Lastly, even if an argument could be made that neither provision applies, then Article 9 controls, which addresses "uses not specified." Section 904 states that the "default" applies when there is substantial doubt as to whether a particular use not specifically identified in the zoning ordinance is "of the same general character as those listed as permitted or conditional uses." (emphasis added). Here there is nothing specifically identified in the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance which is of the same, or even similar, character as a race track. Further, Section 904 provides that where there is substantial doubt as to whether a particular use is of the same general character as those listed as permitted or conditional, the department should consider "intent of this zoning ordinance concerning the district involved, the character of uses specifically involved, the character of uses specifically identified, and the character of the use or uses in question." However, again, nothing in the Zoning Ordinance even remotely resembles 03- 292 STEEL© HECTOR 6DAV I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 14 a race track, let alone a race track that will cause permanent changes to the Downtown appearance. IV. Whether a Class II Permit, a Major Use Permit, Or A Permit Pursuant To Article 9 Were Issued, Specific Written Findings Are Required. All special permits, whether a Class II Special Permit or a Major Use Special Permit, require written findings and determinations concerning such of the following matters as are applicable in the case: 1305.1 Ingress and egress. 1305.2 Offstreet parking and loading. 1305.3 Refuse and service areas. 1305.4 Signs and lighting. 1305.5 Utilities. 1305.6 Drainage.15 None of these written findings have been made, nor has any information even been submitted by which many of these findings could even be made. The race track requires grand stands, repavement of roads, demolition of sidewalks, and permanent changes to Downtown. The race will close down Downtown traffic and attract thousands of people. It will also convert a city park into a highly intensive use, and require the storage of thousands of tires and other equipment, not to mention tens of thousands of gallons of fuel in makeshift structures next to the bay. Yet, there has been no consideration regarding the adverse impacts of having this type of event each year, because the Director chose to apply a prefunctary "rubber stamp" approval without even bothering to make the minimal findings required for issuance of a Class II permit. 15 Article 13 of the City of Miami Zoning Code. 03- 292 STEEL© HECTOR IDAV I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 15 Lastly, the application submitted by Speedway to the City of Miami for the permit only consists of maps and a application form. Thus, the City of Miami had no proper basis or representations from Speedway as to the extent of what the Class II permit was authorizing. V. A Race Event Cannot be Autorized in the Parks And Recreation ("PR") Zoning District. The City of Miami's Comprehensive Plan designates Bayfront Park as PR. Section 401 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates PR Parks, Recreation and Open Space. The sections identifies (1) major structures such as performing arts centers, museums, and art galleries; (2) supporting social and entertainment services such as restaurants, cafes, and retailing; (3) City of Miami administrative offices; and (4) Camping facilities. Again, nothing in this section even remotely resembles a race track. The closest the PR District comes to authorizing a race track is through the "conditional principal use." of the PR district. The Zoning Ordinance allows for "[m]ajor structures such as performing arts centers, museums, art galleries and exhibition space which change the character of an existing park." Section 401. But, these are so removed from automobile racing as to be wholly inapplicable.i6 And, while Section 401 does have a "catch all" phrase which states "other activities which further municipal purposes as determined by the city commission," and such approval can only be made in the context of the Major Use Special Permit, not by perfunctory review as a Class II Permit.17 16 Even for these uses, the Zoning Ordinance requires approval by a Major Use Special Permit when the facilities exceed 3,000 square feet in total, which is clearly the case here. 17 Review as a Major Use Special Permits would also be required pursuant to 1301.4: "[i]t is intended that Major Use Special Permits be required where specified uses and/or occupancies involve matters deemed to be of city-wide or area -wide importance." A street race that will attract 50,000 people in one weekend, twice a year, build grand stands, close Downtown Miami two weekends a year, and which will require major construction and widening of Downtown Miami's streets, should at a minimum require a Major Use Special Permit. ©3- 292 STEEL® HECTOR 8DAV I S" City Commission May 7, 2002 Page 16 CONCLUSION The Class II Permit was issued in contravention of both the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, and without so much as contemplating the effects of what the permit approves, much less making specific findings as required by the Zoning Ordinance. That aside, the Class II permit approves special improvements whose origin is from a contract/ lease that has been declared null and void. And, it authorizes the conversion of a city park into a race course, for a race that has not even been approved according to the procedures set out by the Legislature. Therefore, it is clear that the Class II Special Permit was improper, the application was premature, the procedures that were followed were inconsistent with your zoning ordinance and inconsistent with your comprehensive plan, not to mention flagrantly defiant of a Circuit Court Judge's order. For these reasons we ask that you deny the Class II Special Permit. Very truly yours, Ste ect Davis LLP Jorge Luis Lopez Gabriel E. Nieto Juan Carlos Antorcha 03- 292 MLA2001. 1056434 , „' CITY Or= MIAMI. FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM Distribution below A elabe -Sanchez, Director lanning nd Zoning Department DATE . February 6, 2002 F LE ;_c 7 Class II Special Permit #02-0007 Bayfront Park; Clarification of January 29,2002 Memorandum It has come to my attention that it is impossible to accomplish the necessary construction of the internal park road approved by Class II Special Permit 402-0007 within Bayfront Park and necessary to prevent harm to life and property, as set forth in my findings issued by memorandum dated January 29, 2002, without approving the associated relocation of trees located on the road. The memorandum referenced herein, dated January 29, 2002 lifted the stay on building permits associated with Class II #02-0007 based on findings associated to peril to life and property unless the work, which has already begun, is completed. By way of this memorandum. the January 29, 2002 memorandum is modified to reflect the additional finding by the Director of the Planning and Zoning Department that the relocation of the five trees located on the internal park road is required for the same reasons set forth in the January 29, 2002 memorandum. Distribution: Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager John Jackson, Director Department of Public Works Albert Ruder, Director Parks Department Hector Lima. Director Building Department Lourdes Slazyk, Assistant Director Department of Planning and Zoning Juan Gonzalez, Zoning Administrator Department of Planning and Zoning Teresita L. Fernandez, Chief Office of Hearing Boards Zoning Board Members 03- 2=912 CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM Distribution below DAT= January 29, 2002 FILE JE Eck Class II Special Permit Bayfront Park �n,n.�L1V11VL, Lll VVLVL aE- crERE IvCES lannin nd Zoning Department Eu;,LOSURES On January 25, 2002, appeals were filed against Class II Special Permit #02-0007 (the Class II). The Class II was issued on January 15, 2002 for permanent roadway improvements on Bayfront Park in Downtown Miami. Please be advised that although there were two appeals filed for this Class II Special Permit, work has not ceased due to eminent peril to life and property (as specified in Article 18, Section 1803, of Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended). The proposed work commenced prior to the filing of the appeals. The purpose of the Class 11 was for road reconstruction/improvements on an internal park road frequently used by the public. The work cannot cease at the moment due to life/safety hazards associated with the public use of the road and upcoming Special Event to be held in the Bayfront Park area. The Special Event is expected to draw hundreds of thousands visitors to the area in question. A large part of the activity associated with the Special Event will take place in Bayfront Park. It is a public park, and as such will draw many people, among them, children and elderly people who stand a great risk of being injured if they inadvertently come too close to the construction area. The City anticipates that the proposed work will be completed prior to the event to ensure that there is no risk of injury to event patrons. A construction fence is not an adequate safety buffer for such large crowds, therefore work must be completed in time and should not cease while the appeals are in process. By way of this memorandum, I am finding that there is eminent peril to life and property which may result by ceasing the work being conducted on the internal park road in Bayfront Park in Downtown Miami. Distribution; Zoning Board Members Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager Joel Maxwell, Deputy City Attorney John Jackson, Director Department of Public Works Albert Ruder, Director Parks Department Hector Lima, Director Building Department Lourdes Slazyk, Assistant Director Department of Planning and Zoning Juan Gonzalez, Zoning Administrator Department of Planning and Zoning Teresita L. Fernandez, Chief Office of Hearing Boards 0 -92 S T E E L I HECTOR ODAV I S" VIA HAND DELIVERY January 25, 2002 Ms. Teresita Fernandez Hearing Boards City of Miami Riverside Center 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 4th Floor Miami, FL 33130 Steel Hector & Davis LLP 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2398 305.577.7000 305.577.7001 Fax www.steelhector.com Andre J. Zamorano Of Counsel 305.577.7052 azamorano@steethector.com RE: Class lI Special Permit for Temporary Race Track with Permanent Improvements File # 02-0007 Dear Ms. Fernandez: This law firm represents Homestead Miami Speedway, LLC and other interested parties (collectively "Appellants") with respect to this appeal of a Class II permit approved on January 10, 2002 for a Temporary Racetrack with Permanent Improvements. As there is no specific procedure identified in Article 18 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance governing appeals of Special Permit Decisions, this letter shall serve as the Appellants' formal appeal of the above referenced Approval. A $500 appellate fee is enclosed, as well as a $73.50 notification fee. Please advise us if any additional fees or information are required. Facts. On August 9, 2001, the City Commission passed Resolution 01-845, authorizing the City Manager to negotiate a Revocable License Agreement (between the City, Raceworks, LLC and the Bayfront Management Trust) for the use of City owned property located in and adjacent to Bayfront Park. Subsequently on November 15, 2001, the City Commission approved Resolution 01-1229, authorizing the City Manager to execute the negotiated Revocable License Agreement ("Agreement") between the City, Raceworks, LLC and the 03 292 Miami West Palm Beach Tallahassee Naples Key West London Caracas Sao Paulo Rio de Janeiro Santo Domingo S T E E L I HECTOR ®DAV I S- Ms. Teresita Fernandez January 25, 2002 Page 2 Bayfront Management Trust. Pursuant to Section 6 of the Agreement, the licensee is entitled to the temporary use of public property, subject to existing zoning and other governmental restrictions, for the purpose of conducting a "Race Event" and "Support Events" as defined in the agreement. The licensee is permitted to conduct a maximum of two Race Events annually for approximately 15 years. "Race Event" is defined in Section 2 (k) of the Agreement as, "the day(s) that a motor vehicle race sanctioned by a nationally or internationally recognized racing organization is conducted and includes the days for practices and qualifications for a race." "Support Events" is defined in Section 2 (p) of the Agreement as secondary racing series and other entertainment activities, which include having a "Racing Village," catering compound, hospitality suites, VIP club, merchandising facilities, and such other related activities permitted under the Agreement that are conducted with a "Race Event." Land Use / Zoning. Bayfront Park is designated as Recreation on the City of Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan Land Use Map. The park is zoned PR (Parks, Recreation, and Open Space) on the Official Zoning Atlas for the City. The Recreation land use designation does not identify any use even remotely similar to formula one automobile racing or any of the "Race Event" uses or "Supporting Event" uses described in the Agreement. Neither does the PR District describe automobile racing events as a Permitted Principal use or as a Conditional Accessory use. Accordingly, the American Lemans Series Course Event described in the Agreement is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and is inconsistent with the PR zoning district. Article 25 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled Definitions, provides general and specific definitions of uses, and it does not contain a reference to automobile racing events or any of the supporting race event uses described in the Agreement. In fact, there is no reference anywhere in the Zoning Ordinance to these uses. Accordingly, a land use plan amendment is required to authorize these uses in the Recreation land use designation and the PR zoning district. 03- 292 S T E E L I HECTOR NDAV I SW Ms. Teresita Fernandez January 25, 2002 Page 3 Despite the fact that the "Race Event" and "Support Events" are inconsistent with the land use designation for Bayfront Park and the PR Zoning district for the Park, on January 3, 2002, in violation of Section 1303 of the Zoning Ordinance, which provides that no application for a special permit shall be accepted or approved unless specific provisions for the particular special permit appear in the ordinance, the Department accepted an application for a Class II Special Permit for a temporary race track with permanent improvements. Director's Interpretation. Even assuming arguendo that the "Race Event" and "Support Event" uses were similar or substantially similar to other uses permitted in the PR Zoning District, the zoning director would have been required to follow the procedure in Section 904 of the Zoning Ordinance entitled "Determinations for Uses or Characteristics of Uses Not Specified." This provision addresses instances where there is a substantial doubt as to whether a particular use or uses not specifically identified in the Zoning Ordinance are of the same general character as those listed as permitted or conditional uses in the district. In the present case, the decision of the Director of Planning and Zoning approving a Class II Special Permit for a use not specifically authorized under either the Recreation land use designation or the PR zoning district must be reversed. It is clear from the intent provision of Article 13 governing Special Permits, that a Special Permit is required in addition to otherwise applicable zoning procedures and requirements. The Special Permit is intended to require special examination review, and findings in addition to the requirements of the underlying Comprehensive Plan designation and Zoning district requirements. Clearly the perfunctory issuance of a Class II Special Permit without even detailed conditions addressing the proposed temporary racetrack with permanent improvements results in a circumvention of the underlying zoning and land use requirements applicable to Bayfront Park. Moreover, as it relates to this application the City's Zoning Ordinance lacks sufficient standards to allow the issuance of a Class II permit. Similarly, the application utterly lacked the information required to allow the Director of Planning and Zoning to consider all of the potential impacts of the proposed use 03- 292 S T E E L I HECTOR IDAV I SW Ms. Teresita Fernandez January 25, 2002 Page 4 and to consider relevant safeguards and conditions as required under section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance. For all the foregoing reasons, the Appellants hereby appeal the decision of the Director of the Department of Planning and Zoning. The approval is inconsistent with the underlying land use designation and zoning district for Bayfront Park and constitutes a "Development Order" pursuant to F.S. 163.3164 that is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Due to the short time allotted to file this appeal and the fact that the City respond to our request for public records just yesterday, we reserve the right to amend this letter in the event that other issues pertinent to this appeal become apparent upon a more detailed review of the matter. Sincer An J. Zamorano cc: Ana Gelabert-Sanchez 03- 292 Miami Zoning Board Resolution No.: 2002-0660 Monday, April 22, 2002 Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza offered the following resolution and moved its adoption Resolution: A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING BOARD DENYING THE APPEAL BY ANDRE J. ZAMORANO, ESQ., OF THE CLASS fl SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 02-007 APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR ON JANUARY 10, 2002, IN ORDER TO ALLOW PERMANENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYFRONT PARK IN ASSOCIATION WITH A TEMPORARY EVENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 401 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" (HEREBY ATTACHED), PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; ZONED PR PARKS AND RECREATION. Upon being seconded by Mr. Charles J. Flowers, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: Mr. Fredric B. Bums Yes Mr. Charles J. Flowers Yes Mr. Joseph H. Ganguzza Yes Mr. Charles A. Garavaglia Yes Ms. Ilesna Hemandez-Acosta Yes Mr. Humberto J. Pellon Yes Mr. Juvenal A. Pina No Mr. Allan Shulman No Mr. Angel Urquiola Away Mr. Georges Williams Yes AYE: 7 NAY: 2 ABSTENTIONS: 0 NO VOTES: 0 ABSENT: 1 Ms. Fernandez: Motion carries 7-2 Teresita L. Fernandez, Executive Secrakary Department of Planning and Zoning Hearing Boards Division n�- Case No. 2002-0553 Item Nbr: 1 292 Exhl bi+1 IYA" <<ex -3) INTZRNAL IUPROV=.4ZNT FUT:D I DIED NO. 19!1117 I' KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: D8 313G., __.457 STATE u. FLORIDA That the undersit-ned, Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State o* 1 a: under and by virtue of the authority of Section 253.12, FlL Statutes, 1941, and accordin- to the provisions provided f, Section 253.13, Florida Statutes, 1941, and for and in con - tion of the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars and other good and valuable considerations, to them in hand paid by CITY OF YIA;::I, Dade County, Florida, receipt of which is hereb�,acknowledged, have granted, bargained, sold and conveyed to the said crrY 0? and its successors and assigns forever, the followrin- de- scribed lands, to -crit: 3e;innin3 at the point of intersection of the Easterly production of the Cen er Line of Richaers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street) as shorn on the Amended Plat of "RI MMERS ADDITION" as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 2, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the hest side of Biscayne Bay; thence run North- erly along said U. S. Harbor Line to a point on a line four hundred and fifty.feet North of and parallel to the Easterly production of the said Center Line of Rickmers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street); thence run Easterly along said line 450 feet North of and parallel to the Easterly production of the Center Line of said Rickmers Street (now ;mown as N. E. 13th Street) to the point of intersection with that course described in Deed Book 361, Page 353, as f6llows: "Thence in a Southeasterly direction to the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SVI of SWI)` of Section 32, Township 53 South, Ratite 42 East4; Thence South- easterly along the said last described course to the said Southeast corner of the SWA of SVA of Section 32, Township 53 South, Ran,-; 42 East; Thence run South along the. West line of the NEI of YN-I of Section 5, Township 54 South, Range 42 East to*a point eighty feet Northerly from and measured at right angles to the Center Line_ of the Kiani Muni- cipal Channel; Thence run Southeasterly following that course 'described in Deed Book 1472, Page 474 as follows: "Cornencing at the intersection of the \ West Line of the NEI of J#G'X of Section 5, Township �1 54 South, Range 42 3ast; and a line parallel to and eighty feet Northerly from, and measured at riSht angles to the Center Line of the Miami h;uni- cioal Channel", to the East boundary of the West 3/1, of said Section 5; Thence run South along the East boundaryy of the West 3/4 of said Section 5 and Section 6, Township 54 South, Range 42 East, to the Northerly Line of the FEC Railway Company Channel as described in aforesaid Deed Book 1472, Page 474; Thence run Westerly along the said Northerly line of the FEC Railway Company Channel to the East line of the NYtw'of Section 8, Town- ship 54 South, Range 42 East; Thence run Westerly 03- 292 62 Oe 5 along that line described in Chapter 13666 (No. 102) Laws of Florida - 1929 as follows: "Thence westerly to the Intersection of the P. & 0. S.S. Channel and the .Channel extending from the mouth of the Miami River in a Southeasterly direction", to the East line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East; Thence run South alone the said East line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East to a point 2000 feet North of the South line of Section 7,- Township 54 South, Range 42 =ast, being that point at the termination of the line described in Deed Boot: 1900, Page 355 Parcel "B" as follows: "Thence North along the East Line of said Section 7 for a distance of 2000 feet to a point"; Thence along the course de- scribed in Deed Nook 1900, Page 355, as follows: "Thence Southwest 2828 feet to a point on the South boundary of said Section 7", to a point -2000 feet Nest of the Southeast corner of said Section 7; Thence run nest along the South line of said Section 7 and the South line of said Section 7 produced West, to the point of intersection with the U. 6. Harbor Line on the Viest side of Biscayne Bay; thence run Northerly along the said U. S. Harbor Line to the point of beginning. Except therefrom the following described BAY BOTTOM LA*:D AREA FOR DRrDCIK.^a IN CONNECTION 9;ITH PROPOSED 85 ACRE BURLINGAME ISLAND. Beginning at the point of intersection of the South- easterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street, the same being the Southerly line of Highleants Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the Westerly side of Biscayne Bay; thence Northerly along the said U. S. Harbor Line and the Northerly extension thereof 3800 feet, more or less, :to the point of intersection with the Southerly line of Miami River Channel, as shown and established on Sheet No. 2 of plan pre- pared by U. S. Engineer Office, Jacksonville, Florida, November 1934, showing Miami River, Florida, condi- tions on completion of Dredging of Channel Project; thence Northeasterly along the said Southerly line of i,Uami River Channel and the Northeasterly pro- duction thereof 2500 feet to a point; thence Southerly 5300 feet, more or less, along a line parallel to the Southerly production of the dividing line between Tormship 53 South, Ranee 41 East and Township 53 South, Range 42 East to the point of intersection with the aforesaid Southeasterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street; thence Northwesterly 2900 feet, more or less, along the said Southeasterly Production of the Northerly side of S. E. 34th Street to the U. S. Harbor Line, the point of beginning. And further excepting therefrom all land title to which is in private parties. TO HAPS AND TO HOLD the said above mentioned and described land and premises, and all the title and interest of the Trustees therein as granted to them by Section 253.12, Florida Statutes, 1941, unto the said CITY OF MIAMI and its successors and assigns forever. 3-- 292 t I 3-- 292 �x hi LA+,,, ti,r' SAVl,,,; A14D RESERVING unto the Trustees of the Internal Improvt nt Fund of Florida, and their successors, an undivided three- upths interest in and title in and to an undivided three-fourths terest in all the phosphate, minerals and metals that are or may in, on or under the said above described lands, and an undivide( e -half interest in and title in and to an undivided one-half in - rest in all the petroleum that is or may be in or under the said ove described land, with the privilege to mine and develop the PROVIDED, HOWEVER, anything herein to the contrary notwith- tanding, this deed is given and granted upon the express condition ubsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors and assigns hall never sell or convey or lease the above described land or ny part thereof to any private person, firm or corporation for ny private use or purpose, it being the intention of this re- triction that the said lands shall be used solely for public urposes, including municipal purposes and not otherwise. PROVIDED, FURTHER, anything herein to the contrary notwith- tandinZ, this deed is given and granted upon the further express ondition subsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors or ssigns shall not give or grant any license or permit to any pri- ate person, firm or corporation to construct or make by any means, ny islands, fills, embankments, structures, buildings or other imilar thincs within or upon the above described lands or any art thereof for any private use or purpose, as distinguished from ny public or municipal use or purpose. It is covenanted and agreed that the above conditions subse- shall run with the land and any violation thereof shall r this deed null and void and the above described lands shall, ch event,, revert to the Grantorsor.•tYreLr successors. 1; IN WITH SS iMEREO?, the Trustees of the Internal Improvement iz'und of the State of Florida have hereunto subscribed their names !and affixed their seals, and have caused the seal of the "DEPART- MMIT OF AGRICULTURE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA", to be hereunto laffixed, at the Capitol, in the City of!Tallahassee, on this the I' 24th. day of February , A. D. Nineteen Hundred and ty-nine. commissioner or AgrF1 rey, _� State of f tori a. County of We. ds' cf.. =� � This insl'u;::en; :eas filed for record ih�....lf—••� 1949 aL�:11. -�i and duty re-.urd d in.od .sjFite book mo. Y.-.4.2'42 i 3/�� on Paeea3�..... Clerk Circuit {art 03 _- 292 • AFFIDAVIT Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared Carlos A. Gimenez , who being by me first deposes and says: 1. That he/she is the owner, or the legal representative of the owner, submitting the accompanying application for a public hearing as required by the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, affecting the real property located in the City of Miami, as described and listed on the foregoing pages of this affidavit and made a part thereof. 2. That all owners which he/she represents, if any, have given their full and complete permission for him/her to act in his/her behalf for the change or modification of a classification or regulation of zoning as set out in the accompanying petition, O including responding to day to day staff inquires; 10 not including responding to day to day staff inquiries in which case he/she should be contacted at (305) 416-1461 3. That the foregoing pages are made a part of this affidavit contain the current names, mailing addresses, telephone numbers and legal descriptions for the real property of which he/she is the owner or legal representative. 4. The facts as represented in the application and documents submitted in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct. Further Affiant sayeth not. Carlos A. Gimenez Applicant Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE Applicant Signature The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this r day of February 20 o2 by Carlos A. Gimenez of City of Miami a Florida Municipal corporation corporation, on behalf of the corporation. He he is personally- %nt to me or has produced as identification and who did dake an oath. (Stamp) Sig t ,,,,,• Gia D'Smith ��pY Ppm •� :�• ', ,Commission # OC 925933 Rev. 12/05/01 w; v; Expires May 23, 2004 ' OWNER'S LIST Owner's Name City of Miami Mailing Address 444 S.W. 2nd Avenue, Ste. 325 Zip Code 33130 Miami, Florlaa Telephone Number (305) 416-1025 Legal Description: See attached Deed Book 3-13Q Page 257. Owner's Name City of Miami, as Lessee Mailing Address 444 S.W. 2nd Avenue, Ste. 325 Zip Code 33130 rami, kloriCa Telephone Number (305) 416-1025 Legal Description: See attached Dept. of Army Lease Agreement. Owner's Name Mailing Address Telephone Number Legal Description: Zip Code Any other real estate property owned individually, jointly, or severally (by corporation, partnership or privately) within 500 feet of the subject site is listed as follows: Street Address 401 Biscayne Blvd., Miami, Florida 401 Biscayne Blvd., Miami, Florida Street Address Street Address Rev. 12/06/01 Legal Description Folio No.: 01 -0100 -000 -0520 -(See Attached) Folio No.: -01-0100-000-0525 (See Attached) Legal Description Legal Description 03'-- 292 DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 1. Legal description and street address of subject real property: See attached Deed Book 31.30, Page 257 and Dept. of Army Lease Agreement. 2. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: The Code of the City of Miami requires disclosure of all parties having a financial interest, either direct or indirect, in the subject matter of a presentation, request or petition to the City Commission. Accordingly, question #2 requires disclosure of shareholders of corporations, beneficiaries of trusts, and/or any other interested parties, together with their addresses and proportionate interest. City of Miami City of Miami, as Lessee 3. Legal description and street address of any real property (a) owned by any party listed in answer to question #2, and (b) located within 500 feet of the subject real property. 401 Biscayne Blvd, Miami, Florida Folio No. 01-0100-000-0520, 0525 Carlos A. Gimenez for City of Miami ,- Owner or Attorney for Owner Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE Owner or Attorney for Owner Signature The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this i day of Fpbruary 20_„2_, by Carlos A. Gimenez of City o Miami a Florida Municipal Corporation corporation, on behalf of the corporation. She is personally to me or has produced as ident kation and who did did not) ake an oath. (Stamp) Gia D. Smit.:. a o, Commission /I CC 9251 Expires May23,, 2U, Sanded Thfu Aflar& Bonding Co. ire Rev. 12/05/01 03- 292 a�_�.��......_. __ ..{�:.L:1+�ewsws1.�.'a�F•1il:t+tr,-..-�^F..:.v,,�«o.r« .....w+w.�+ifra»r'fiin:?17G4^M!tW!+a!S'� '. I INTERNAL IMPROVa;tZNT FUND STAT 0: E'10Ri.D.'. DEED NO. 19447 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PR`.SENTS: That the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the =tate a, under and by virtue of the authority of Section 2;3.12, 'lc Statutes, 1941, and accordin„ to the provisions provides: f Section 253.13, Florida Statutes, 1911, and for and in :)r. - tion of the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars and other Coop: an< valuable considerations, to them in hand paid by CI7f 0:'IY2jL Dade County, Florida, receipt of which is hereb�,acknor edE,cl have granted, bargained, sold and conveyed to the said rITY idlnf.",I and its successors and assigns forever, the follo-irn ,l: - scribed lands, to -wit: 3e7,innin3 at the point of intersection of the: Easterly production of the Center Line of Rich¢iers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street) as shown or.. the Amended Plat of "RICKMERS ADDITION" as recorded. in Plat Book 3, Page 2, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the 'hest side of Biscayne Bay; thence ;run North- erly along said U. S. Harbor Line to a point on a line four hundred and fifty -feet North of and parall::: to the Easterly production of the said Center Line o.' Rickmers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street); thence run Easterly along said line 450 feet North of and parallel to the Easterly production of t:h- Center Line of said Rickmers Street (now known as N. E. 13th Street) to the point of intersection with that course described in Deed Book 361, Page 353, ria follows: "Thence in a Southeasterly direction to the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW of SV,' )' of Section 32, Township 53 South, Range 42 EastA; Thence South- easterly along the said last described course to the said Southeast corner of the SW of SIVI of Section 32, Township 53 South, Range 1,2 East; Thence run South along the•Y:'est line of the NEI of N'N* of Section 5, Township 54 South, Range 42 East to a point eighty feet Northerly from and measured at right an ;les to the Center Line of the Miami Muni- cipal Channel; Thence run Southeasterly following that course 'described in Deed Book 1472, Page 474 as follows: "Coanencing at the intersection of thL 'Nest Line of the NE= of NVIA of Section 51 Township �1 51;. South, Range 42 vast, and a line parallel to and eighty feet Northerly from, and measured at right angles to the Center Line of the Miami Muni- cipal Channel", to the East boundary of the 'Nest 314 of said Section 5; Thence run South along the East boundaryy of the Viest 3/4 of said Section 5 and Section S, Township 54 South, Range 42 East, to the Northerly Line of the FEC Railway Company Channel as described in aforesaid Deed Book 11.72, Page 474; Thence run Westerly along the said Northerly line of the FEC Railway Company Channel to the East line of the NVII'of Section 8, Town- ship 54 South, Range 11.2 East; Thence run Westerly 0'3-.292 I along that line described in Chapter 13666 (No. 102) Laws of Florida - 1929 as follows: "Thence westerly to the Intersection of the P. & 0. S.S. Channel and the.Channel extending from the mouth of the Miami River in a Southeasterly direction", to the East line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East; Thence run South along the said East line of Section 7, Township 54 South, Range 42 East to a point 2000 li feet North of the South line of Section 7, -Township 54 South, Range 42 East, being that point at the termination of the line described in Deed Book 1900, Pa -e 355 Parcel "B" as follows: "Thence North along the East Line of said Section 7 for a distance of 2000 feet to a point"; Thence along the course de- scribed in Deed Nook 1900, Page 355, as follows: "Thence Southwest 2828 feet to a point on the South boundary of said Section 7", to a point -2000 feet j Nest of the Southeast corner of said Section 7; Thence run West along the South line of said Section 7 and the South line of said Section 7 produced West, to.the point of intersection with the U. S. Harbor Line on the West side of Biscayne Bay; thence run I{ Northerly along the said U. S. Iiarbor Line to the point of beginning. Except therefrom the following described BAY BOTTOM LAND AREA FOR DREDGING IN CONNECTION Y;ITH PROPOSED 85 ACRE BURLINGAME ISLAND. Beginning at the point of intersection of the South- easterly production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street, the same being the Southerly line of Highleyman's Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page lF4 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, with the U. S. Harbor Line on the Westerly side of Biscayne Bay; .thence Northerly along the said U. S. Harbor Line and the Northerly extension thereof 3800 feet, more or less, to the point of intersection with the Southerly line of Miami River Channel, as shorn and established on Sheet No. 2 of plan pre- pared by U. S. Engineer Office, Jacksonville, Florida, November 1934, showing Kiami River, Florida, condi- tions on completion of Dredging of Channel Project; thence Northeasterly along the said Southerly line o: Miami River Channel and the Northeasterly pro- duction thereof 2500 feet to a point; thence Southerly 5300 feet, more or less, along a line parallel to the 1 Southerly production of the dividing line between Township 53 South, Range 41 East and Township 53 South, RanSe 42 East to the point of intersection with the aforesaid Southeasterly production of the Northerly I, side of S. E. 14th Street; thence Northwesterly II 2900 feet, more or less, along the said Southeasterly Production of the Northerly side of S. E. 14th Street to the U. S. Harbor Line, the point of �beginning. I And further excepting therefrom all land title to which is in private parties. TO RAV2 AND TO HOLD the said above mentioned and described land and premises, and all the title and interest of the Trustees therein as granted to them by Section 253.12, Florida Statutes, 1941, unto the said CITY OF MIAMI and its successors and assigns forever. 03- 292 SAVING AND RESERVING unto the Trustees of the Internal Improve ,fent Fund of Florida, and their successors, an undivided three - ourths interest in and title in and to an undivided three-fourths ;interest in all the phosphate, minerals and metals that are or may 'be in, on or under the said above described lands, and an undivide( bne-half interest in and title in and to an undivided one-half in- terest in all the petroleum that is or may be in or under the said above described land, with the privilege to mine and develop the same. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, anything herein to the contrary notwith- I standing, this deed is given and granted upon the express condition n;subsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors and assigns I'phall never sell or convey or lease the above described land or any part thereof to any private person, firm or corporation for any private use or purpose, it being the intention of this re - astriction that the said lands shall be used solely for public �urposes, including municipal purposes and not otherwise. I PROVIDED, FURTHER, anything herein to the contrary notwith- :standin3, this deed i•s given and granted upon the further express condition subsequent that the Grantee herein or its successors or assiggns shall not give or grant any license or permit to any pri- vate person, firm or corporation to construct or make by any means, any islands, fills, embankments, structures, buildings or other similar thins within or upon the above described lands or any part thereof for any private use or purpose, as distinguished from any public or municipal use or purpose. It is covenanted and agreed that the above conditions subse- uent shall run with the land and any violation thereof shall ender this deed null and void and the above described lands shall, n such event,. revert to the Grantors or. -their successors. IN WITH SS WHEREOF, the Trustees of the Internal Improvement �xund of the State of Florida have hereunto subscribed their names ,and affixed their seals, and have caused the seal of the "DEPART- tdENT OF AGRICULTURE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA", to be hereunto !affixed, at the Capitol, in the City of, Tallahassee, on this the 1! 24th, day of February , A. D. Nineteen Hundred and ty-nine. SEAL) :} Gnor or. (SEAL) • Comptro er EAL) Treasurer Attorney General Comm s's o\ 01, Agr cu renfL ) State of Florida. County of Dade. This inst u;:;en; -.vas tired for record the.._. __da7 C 19119at�1�./�.44- "l. i and duty iewrded in.� 600k..�/�Cl..._on Page, ''File tio. E, D. LEATNCRMA" Clerk Cirwit G)drt BY_17, - _._._.._.__n.c: 03- 292 CITY OF MIAMI CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT FINAL DECISION File No. 02-0007 To: Raceworks LLC 2601 South Bayshore Drive, Suite 1000 Miami, FL. 33130 From: Ana Gelabert, Director Planning and Zoning Department PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT I HAVE REACHED A FINAL DECISION ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER: Title: Temporary racetrack with permanent improvements. Address: 401 Biscayne Blvd., Downtown Final Decision: ❑ Approval Q Approval with conditions ❑ Denial FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS: The subject proposal has been reviewed for Class 11 Special Permit pursuant to Article 15, Sections 1511 of Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida. Section 1511 requires explicitly that a Class II Special Permit shall be required prior to approval for development between Biscayne Bay and first dedicated right of way. Pursuant to Section 1301.2. of the above cited Zoning Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Department has made referrals to the following Departments and Boards. • Zoning Division, Planning and Zoning Department • Downtown NET Office, Neighborhood Enhancement Team Their comments and recommendations have been duly considered and are reflected in this final decision. In reviewing this application, pursuant to Section 1305 of the Zoning Ordinance, the following findings have been made: FINDINGS • It is found that the temporary and permanent proposed works for the American Lemans Series Course (racecar event) are consistent with the character of this type of events at the proposed location in terms of size and scale. • It is found that the proposed project is partially located within the Bayfront Park boundaries and South Biscayne Boulevard. • It is found that this Class II Special Permit is only for the area located within the Bayfront Park boundaries. • It is found that approximately six (6) trees will be relocated as part of this project, but it is also found that this Class II Special Permit do not include the approval of the tree relocation plan, the tree relocation will be decided by the Bayfront Park Management Trust and will be part of the building permit process for the tree removal.. Based on the above findings and the Considered advice of the officers and agencies consulted on this matter and pursuant to Section 1306 of the Zoning Ordinance, the subject proposal is hereby approved with conditions subject to the plans submitted by the applicant and on file with the Planning and Zoning Department as well as the following limitations: 1. The Class II is only for the area located within the Bayfront Park boundaries. 2. The tree relocation plan will be approved as part of the building permit process for the tree removal. NOTICE The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board by any aggrieved party, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards, located at 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 7d' Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. Telephone number (305) 416-2030. Signature . C4414� Ana GelaberLDirector Planning and Zoning Depa ent PA Date O/ /O d )_ 03- 292 CLASS n SPECIAL err - CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT ZONING REFERRAL COMPLETED BY APPLICANT OW R OWNER PHONE NUMBER / Zrn� q 3v—o LAG _?aS--OC7S'9- .1,0-5 -0 APPLICANT APPLICANT PHONE NUMBER / FAX NUMBER 11601 Iy (�� /21� Z &00 33 APPLICANT ADDRESS / ZIP CODE BUILDING PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER CERTIFICATION ..•'' Michael Reinstein " Expires Jan. 27, 2004 P rs nt to the fee schedule, a fee of $ shall be requir tt�q& ce of thi la s ll e ' I Permi it fees are non-refundable. 3.0 Z PRO RTY OWNER PUBLIC NOT The bject proposal has been reviewed by Zoning Division of the Planning & Zoning Department. It is found to be in com nce with all ap I' zoning r gulations and requires a Class II Special Permit pursuant to the above cited Se ti n(s) of 0!ina 1000, a amen d, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Mi i, Flori a. d Kew rN7 PLANS EXAMINER / DATE CI AftS 11 COORDINATOR DATE A building permit for the work proposed herein and/or a certificate of occupancy and/or certificate of use for the use proposed herein, must be obtained within one (1) year from the issuance of this special permit, at which point the subject special permit shall expire unless extended.�-- 03- 292 CITY OF MIAMI CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION TO: ABUTTING OWNER NAME ; - ABUTTING PROPERTY ADDRESS _�,r moi- J.1 _�v �vi-7-ov0/ APPLICANT j _ APPLICANT ADDRESS CITY, STATE CODE w: /./ .3 �3 You are hereby notified' that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of Miami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class II Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Nliami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: SUBJECT PROPERTY INF -1 This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class II Special Permit, consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2nD Avenue, 3r° Floor. For an appointment. please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Director's decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended. within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2"° Avenue, 7" Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. =s The Zoning Ordinance of the City of !Miami requires that all abutting property owners be notirred of Class 11 Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMI • PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 444 S'.v 2"' AVENUE. 3"0 FLOOR MIAMI. FL 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 03" 292 CITY OF MIAMi CLASS it SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION TO: ABUTTING OWNER NAME ABUTTING PROPERTYADDRESS APPLICANT APPLICANT ADORESS 3 / �//moi( . CiTY, STATE COOE �if�� /:'� .3 - _r .Z You are hereby notified' that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of Miami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class II Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: SUBJECT PROP TURE OF APPLICATION This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class II Special Permit: consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2"d Avenue, 3rd Floor. For an appointment, please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Director's decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by riling a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2nO Avenue, 7" Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. :s The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami requires that all abutting property owners be notirred of Class 11 Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMi - PLANNING & ZONING- DEPARTMENT 444 SYJ 21"' AVENUE. 3"3 FLOOR MIAMI. Fl 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 G R 92 CITY OF MIAMI CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION TO: ABUTTING OWNER NAME— ABUTTING PROPERTY ADDRESS/3 — APPLICANT APPLICANT ADDRESS CITY, STATE CODE You are hereby notified' that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of Nliami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class Il Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: SUBJECT PROPERTY ZONING DESIGNATION . NATURE OF APPLICATION This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class 11 Special Permit; consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2n1 Avenue, 31 Floor. For an appointment, please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Director's decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000. as amended. within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2nD Avenue, 7`" Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. :s The Zoning Ordinance cf the City of 1Lliarni requires that all abutting property owners be notified of Class 11 Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMI - PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 4.4.1 5Yv 2'"' AVENUE. 3"O FLOOR MIAM1. FL 33130 PHONE (305) 416.1400 292 CITY OF MIAMI CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION T0: ABUTTING OWNER NAME S LLC ABUTTING PROPERTY ADDRESS �° Q APPLICANT ,cy� APPLICANT ADORESS 3 n/, CITY, STATE CODE You are hereby notified' that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of Miami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class II Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: SUBJECT PROPERTY ZONING DESIGNATION NATURE OF APPLICATION This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class 11 Special Permit; consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 3rd Floor. For an appointment. please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Directors decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2" Avenue, 7" Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of AAiami requires that all abutting property owners be notirred of Class 11 Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMI - PLANNING & ZONING -DEPARTMENT 434 S'i`/ 2"' AVENUE. 3"0 FLOOR. MIAMI. FL 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 292 CITY OF MIAMI CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION TO: ABUTTING OWNER NAME ABUTTING PROPERTY ADDRESS APPLICANT ,Gp� j APPLICANT AOORESS 3 �/� e x,�( CITY, STATE COOE .3 --3 -7- You are hereby notified` that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of Nliami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class II Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Nliami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: ZONING DESIGNATION NATURE OF APPLICATION This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class II Special Permit; consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans -and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 31 Floor. For an appcintment, please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Director's decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000. as amended, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2n° Avenue, 7`" Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami requires that all abutting property owners be notiFed of Class It Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMI - PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 444 SVP/ 2—AVENUE. 3"0 FLOOR MIAMI. FL 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 292 .CITY OF MIAMI CLASS 11 SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION T0: ABUTTING OWNER NAME ABUTTING PROPERTY ADDRESS APPLICANT APPLICANT ADDRESS CITY, STATE CODE -3 �3 You are hereby notified' that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of tiliami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class II Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: SUBJECT PROPERTY ZONING DESIGNATION NATURE OF APPLICATION Y -- This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class 11 Special Permit; consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2nd Avenue, V Floor. For an appointment, please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Director's decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2" Avenue, V' Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of tiliami requires that all abutting property owners be notirred of Class l/ Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMI - PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 113 5'i`l Y"' AVENUE. 340 FLOOR MIAMI. FL 33130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 03- 2-92 CITY OF MIAMI CLASS Ii SPECIAL PERMIT NOTIFICATION LETTER NOTIFICATION TO: ABUTTING OWNER NAME / 2nrr yc! ABUTTING PROPERTY ADDRESS I !7QQ APPLICANT ,cpj APPLICANT ADDRESS 3 / n/r CITY, STATE CODE You are hereby notified' that an application will be submitted by the above to the Director of the City of Nliami Planning & Zoning Department for approval of a Class II Special Permit under the provisions of Articles 13 and 15 of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance, for the following proposal: su RE OF APPLICATION This project will be reviewed for approval for a Class II Special Permit; consequently the Planning & Zoning Department will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this proposal. Should you wish to review this file, it will be made available to you after submittal and upon your request at the City of Miami Riverside Center, located at 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 31 Floor. For an apocintment, please call at (305) 416-1400. The Planning & Zoning Department will take into consideration any comments you may have about the proposal: however, such comments will not be binding upon the Director's decision. The final decision of the Director may be appealed to the Zoning Board, pursuant to provisions set forth in Article 18 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, as amended, within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance by filing a written appeal and appropriate fee with the Office of Hearing Boards located at 444 SW 2n° Avenue, 7=" Floor, Miami, FL. 33130. For an appointment, please call (305) 416-2030. :s The Zoning Ordinance of the City of i Iiami requires that all abutting property owners be notified of Class 11 Special Permit applications as set forth in Section 1501. CITY OF MIAMi - PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 444 S%N Y" AVENUE. 3`0 FLOOR. MIAMI. FL. 13130 PHONE (305) 416-1400 O 3 - 2 92 r'``_ PYR(f SECURITY Ar ')N L SCR MOD +/- - PAGE 1 0200-,464 BUILDING AND KING RECEIPT PROCESSING (21) RECEIPT NO 02003464 DATE 01/09/2002 WAIVED N PERMIT NO _ NAME RACEWORKS LLC/'/..4/�,�,-� ADDRESS 401 BIS.CAYNE BLVD, MIAMI PHONE 305 8592050 COMMENTS -CL II 2002-0007 MAINTAINED BY: EMP FEES /C/D TYPE CLASS SUB DESCRIPTION UNIT TYPE UNITS R 140 003 CLASS II PLANNING PERMIT 150.0000 SUBSID 000000000 CLASS II PLANNING PERMIT FEE 150.00 SUBSID SUBSID SUBSID SUBSID SUBSID RECORD ADDED... PLEASE CONTINUE i.r e ir- tom• 7 3 .'k 1r M i ..•^,M i - 7777, FEE FEE FEE FEE FEE ----------------- TOTAL 150.00 03- 2g-2 nnr.7;;;u L _,i c�,trya -j1n'9 it X'17E ,-i FEE FEE FEE FEE FEE ----------------- TOTAL 150.00 03- 2g-2 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 - Page 46 12 stenotype notes of the proceedings. 13 14 Dated this day of 15 2002. 16 17 18 19 JOANNE FIEGER, CSR, RMR, CRR 20 21 22 23 24 25 03-- 292 JC Antorchn - 042202ZB.V1 Pane 11 f' 1 1 MIAMI ZONING BOARD 2 3 4 item No. 2002-0553 5 6 7 City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive Dinner Key, Miami, Florida 8 Monday, 8:00 p.m. April 22, 2002 9 10 11 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: 12 Chairperson lleana M. Hernandez Charles Garavaglia 13 Allan Shulman Joseph Ganguzza 14 Charles J. Flowers Georges Williams 15 Juvenal Pina Humberto J. Pellon 16 Fredric B. Bums Yamile Marrero-Trehy, City Attorney 17 Erica Wright, City Attorney Terisita L. Fernandez, City Clerk 18 19 ALSO PRESENT: 20 Lourdes Slazyk Gabriel Nieto, Esq. 21 Lucia Dougherty, Esq. 22 23 24 25 29 NM JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa e 2 2 1 MS. FERNANDEZ: We are going to item No. 1? 2 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ. Now we're going to item 3 No. 1. 4 MS. FERNANDEZ: Approximately 401 Biscayne 5 Boulevard. This is an appeal by Andre J. Zamorano of 6 the Class II special permit application No. 02-007 7 approved by the Planning and Zoning Director on 8 January 10, 2002, in order to allow permanent road 9 improvements in Bayfront Park in association with a 10 temporary event. 11 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Lourdes, please. 12 MS. SLAZYK: Thank you. This an appeal of a 13 Class II special permit for -- basically Class 11 14 special permit was not for a use. The use in the 15 park was under a separate City Commission approval. 16 And if you read the appeal that was filed on this 17 item, the appeal really talked to the use issues and 18 whether it's appropriate or consistent with the land 19 use for a race use in the park. But that's not what 20 the Class II special permit was for. 21 The Class II special permit was for physical 22 work, physical improvements in the park. Tree 23 relocation, the roadway and the sidewalk relocations 24 and the work that was going to be associated with an 25 event in the park. But the event was not a subject 03- 292 JC Antorcha 042202ZB.V1 Page 3 3 1 of the Class II special permit. Therefore, the 2 Planning and Zoning Department granted the Class II 3 special permit finding that the work was appropriate 4 for the park, it was not inconsistent with the plan 5 for the park and it would actually allow for more 6 flexibility for uses in the park. 7 So we stand by our Class II special permit and 8 recommend denial of the appeal. 9 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Thank you. Name? 10 MR. NIETO: Thank you. Gabriel Nieto, 200 South 11 Biscayne Boulevard on behalf of Homestead -Miami 12 Speedway. 13 Before I begin, let me address the comments 14 made. You have a permit that's for temporary and 15 permanent improvements that essentially convert the 16 park into a race course. They're very specialized 17 improvements and I don't see how you can draw a 18 distinction between those improvements and the use. 19 And as far as I know, there hasn't been any other 20 approval from the Planning and Zoning Department or 21 any other department for — 22 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Whose handing this out? 23 On whose behalf are you handing this out? You're 24 with him? 0.3- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa e 4 25 This is for now? 4 1 MR. NIETO: It's not as bad as it looks. 2 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: You're not kidding. You 3 want us to read all this now and make a decision 4 based on this now? Are they pictures? 5 MR. NIETO: There are pictures. 6 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: 7 MR. NIETO: There are pictures and a map. 8 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Okay. 9 MR. NIETO: Getting back to my point. I don't 10 see how you can separate the use from the 11 improvements. The improvements are there for racing 12 use in the park and theyre going to, according to 13 their contract with the City, which is in the package 14 of materials that was handed to you, they're going to 15 use this park for racing potentially twice a year for 16 the next 25 years. And I think that is a -- it is a 17 use that's being made of the park and that's clearly 18 what was authorized and therefore, I think our 19 arguments are directly on point. 20 We've filed an appeal that raises several 21 arguments. I don't want to go into each one in 22 detail. There are several points that we've made. 23 But I would like to give you an overview of our 0 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 fage 5 24 argument. 25 I'd also like to reserve some minutes for 5 1 rebuttal, if I may. 2 The materials that you were just handed were a 3 compilation of exhibits we'd like to move into the 4 record. The first item is a map which is the same 5 one that's up on the easel. It shows the race 6 course, just to give you a feel for the extent to 7 which it engulfs the park and how it really converts 8 the park into a racetrack. 9 And the second tab you'll have a series of 10 photographs that do basically the same thing. They 11 show the level of modification that's been made. 12 The remainder are various legal documents that 13 I'll walk through as I go. 14 Before going into any of them, I think there's a 15 threshold issue that you all need to consider. And 16 that is that they're using this park for racing 17 originally when they applied for this under a 18 contract between Raceworks and the City of Miami that 19 was declared null and void by a court in litigation 20 that we filed. And in doing that the Court, A, 21 declared their contract null and void, and B, said 22 that the City cannot allow them to use this park for 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 6 23 racing unless and until they put that up for public 24 bidding. And that has never happened. 25 Now, the City and Raceworks have negotiated a 6 1 new agreement and so on, but it still uses the park, 2 which is what this Class II permit is for, and it's 3 exactly what the Court said they could not do. So 4 our position is that they do not have any right to 5 make use of the park and therefore have no right to 6 even apply to you in the first instance to make 7 improvements for racing for a use that was 8 specifically prohibited in a court order. 9 And in the packet there's a series of materials 10 which gives you some history of the litigation. The 11 Court entered the order voiding the agreement, they 12 at one point appealed. They then relinquished the 13 appeal and essentially took it back to the trial 14 court under their new contract, but the judge's order 15 still stands and they've never complied with it. And 16 because they've never put this up for bid, we feel 17 they don't have any right to apply to you at all. 18 Moving on to the core of planning and zoning 19 issues. 20 Actually, one more threshold matter to make. 21 Chapter 549.08 of Florida Statutes, which is also in JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pae 7 22 the packet of materials we handed to you, requires a 23 city that wishes to authorize racing follow some very 24 specific procedures and to make some very specific 25 findings. That has never happened. It may happen in 7 1 the future, but at this point as we stand here today, 2 it has not. And its our position that the City 3 cannot issue authorizations for specialized 4 improvements for racing use until that occurs. Its 5 legislatively preempted. 6 Now moving on to the more specific zoning 7 matters. 8 Section 1500 of the zoning ordinance makes clear 9 that a Class 11 special permit only applies to uses 10 that have provisions in the zoning code that provide 11 criteria before you apply. Similarly Section 1303 12 provides that no special permit is to be accepted 13 unless specific provisions appear for it in the 14 zoning ordinance. 15 What you have here is a permit authorizing a 16 racing use that was never contemplated; that appears 17 nowhere in the zoning ordinance; and would it have no 18 standards under which to issue. it just simply was 19 never thought of. And we feel that the lack of 20 standards in and of itself requires that you deny 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 T Page 8 21 this permit. 22 And keep in mind that this is a very intensive 23 use. This is not simply using the park for one 24 weekend for a concert. They're going to make 25 temporary improvements. According to their own 0 1 marketing materials, they're going to draw 40 or 2 50,000 people, spectators for a three day race 3 weekend twice a year potentially for the next 25 4 years. That number, by the way, is four times that 5 the ERI threshold if you were building some kind of 6 permanent attraction. 7 So it's very intensive use. It's going to going 8 close the City streets, and yet you've got almost the 9 most cursory review you can imagine by the City using 10 this Class II special permit which was never intended 11 to authorize this kind of use. 12 In fact, if you look in the zoning code at the 13 PR zoning district, parks and recreation zoning 14 district which governs this park, it provides -- 15 first of all, it provides a set of principal uses 16 that clearly do not apply to racing. Public or 17 private parks, open spaces and recreational 18 facilities. None of that could possibly authorize a 19 race course. 03- 292 1C Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa e 9 20 If you go to the conditional uses, the closest 21 thing that exists is the provision that allows, and 22 I'll quote this for you, "Other activities which 23 further municipal purposes as determined by the City 24 Commission." That's all well and good and 25 potentially that could apply. The problem is that — E 1 actually there are two problems. A, that has to be 2 approved by the City Commission initially, and B, it 3 has to be in the context of a major use special 4 permit. Not a Class II permit. 5 So even if the PR zoning district itself 6 recognizes that when you're going to use -- when 7 you're going to make use of a park for things that 8 were never contemplated, you have to have a serious 9 level of review. You can't just give it a cursory 10 review like you're going to have one single concert, 11 have a few folks in the park, put up a tent and 12 leave. And this is something that's going to — it's 13 going to permanently alter the character of this 14 park. And we feel very strongly, at the very least a 15 major use special permit should have been used. 16 And keep in mind also along the same, section 17 904 of the zoning ordinance has a procedure that 18 applies for when you're going to approve a use that 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 19 was not contemplated. It requires a specific 20 determination by the director. That was never done 21 either. This, again, just slid through under the 22 most cursory review you could possibly imagine. 23 Along the same line, your comprehensive plan 24 designates this park as a recreation land use. 25 There's nothing in that plan that could possibly be 10 1 read to authorize it to be converted into a racetrack 2 to have motor sports and have cars running through at 3 150 miles an hour for two major events vents a year 4 for the next 25. 5 And finally, procedurally, even if -- even if 6 you could use a Class II special permit, even if the 7 zoning allowed, even if the comprehensive plan 8 allowed, when you issue a Class II special permit 9 there are specific written findings that Section 1305 10 of your zoning ordinance requires that director make. 11 Findings regarding ingress and egress, findings 12 regarding parking. Keep in mind you're talking about 13 40,000, 50,000 spectators. That's a huge number of 14 cars. Findings regarding general adverse impacts. 15 None of these appear on the permit. I don't see them 16 anywhere. And I think for all those reasons this 17 Class II special permit was improper, they were not a °° 03� JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 11 18 proper applicant, the procedures were not followed, 19 inconsistent with your zoning ordinance, inconsistent 20 with your comprehensive plan, and we ask that you 21 deny it. Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Thank you. 23 Yes, Lucia. 24 MS. DOUGHERTY: Good evening, Madam Chair, 25 members of the Board. Lucia Dougherty with offices 11 1 at 1221 Brickell Avenue here today on behalf of the 2 applicant which is Raceworks and, of course, the City 3 of Miami is the owner of the park. 4 First of all, to reiterate what Lourdes says, 5 this is not a permit for the use of a race event. 6 This is a permit for curb, gutter, drainage and 7 paving. That is simply what has transpired. 8 And there are three reasons why I don't think 9 that you can actually rule on their position. In 10 fact I think you ought to dismiss the case outright. 11 First of all, they have no standing. They 12 haven't even alleged any standing that they could 13 possibly have. 14 There is this — the issue is actually moot 15 because the work has been completed. 16 And thirdly, and most of all, there is nothing 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pae 12' 17 in their appeal upon which you can rule. 18 They first of all said that the PR zoning 19 doesn't allow a race event. Well, that's not 20 something that you can rule upon on a Class II 21 permit. That is a -- and the way that your code is 22 set up, you have the zoning administrator who makes 23 decisions with respect to interpretations of zoning 24 law and what uses are permitted, and you have the 25 planning director who decides whether or not a Class 12 1 II or makes determinations, not interpretations. 2 In this case, the zoning administrator made an 3 interpretation on January the 9th and said that this 4 use and this activity is permitted under the zoning 5 code. That interpretation was never appealed within 6 15 days as required by your zoning law. And 7 therefore, they cannot raise this as a use at this 8 time under this Class II appeal which only deals with 9 again, curb, gutter, drainage and whether or not 10 there's adequate access, whether or not the use — I 11 mean, whether or not the permits and the activity 12 that is occurring in terms of drainage, paving, et 13 cetera, is adequate for this park activity. 14 Secondly, they say that there has to be a 15 director's determination. That is the zoning -- that 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pae 131 16 is the planning director's determination as opposed 17 to what has occurred here by the director issuing a 18 Class II permit. We don't need a planning 19 department's determination if the zoning 20 administrator has already interpreted that this is 21 something that is permissible. 22 Thirdly, they say that your ordinance is 23 ineffectual and therefore because it lacks standards, 24 and that's not something that you can make a 25 determination on. It's not even something that the 13 1 planning department can make a determination on. So 2 how can they appeal that determination to you when 3 that's not something that they're authorized to make 4 an interpretation or determination on in the zoning 5 ordinance? 6 And lastly, they have said that this violates 7 the comprehensive plan, and they call it a 8 development order pursuant to 163.3164, and if that's 9 the case, the only way and the sole remedy is to file 10 an action in Circuit Court to overturn that or to 11 challenge the comprehensive plan and that is 163.3215 12 (B). So there is absolutely nothing in this appeal 13 upon which you can make a determination. 14 Secondly, under that Chapter 163, and I only 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Paa 14 15 bring this to your attention because it actually 16 defines what an aggrieved and affected party is. And 17 I'm going to read this to you because it goes along 18 with exactly what the courts have also determined how 19 you determine whether somebody has standing. 20 It says, "Aggrieved and adversely affected party 21 means someone, some person or local government which 22 will suffer an adverse effect to an interest 23 protected or furthered by the local government 24 comprehensive plan, including interests related to 25 health and safety, police and fire protection service 14 1 systems, densities, intensities of development, 2 transportation facilities, health care facilities, 3 equipment, et cetera." 4 And then it says, 'The alleged adverse interest 5 must be shared — may be shared in common with other 6 members of the community at large, but shall exceed 7 in degree the general interest in the community good 8 shared by all other persons." 9 And that happens to be exactly what the courts 10 have also said. In order to have standing in this 11 kind of matter, you have to have something special. 12 These folks are from Homestead. They have no 13 interest in this property or anything around it. And 03- 292 IC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pae 15 14 in fact, it's very interesting to hear them say this 15 evening that you shouldn't be allowed to run a race 16 in it because in their court lawsuit they've been 17 saying that they want — in order to have standing in 18 their lawsuit, they've been saying that they want to 19 also compete and have a race in the park. 20 So they've been saying two things out of both 21 sides of their mouth for now months. And we would 22 only ask that you at this time dismiss this case. 23 And furthermore, it is moot. The work is 24 already done. 25 Thanks very much. 15 1 MR. NIETO: Allow me to address a couple of 2 things, if I may. 3 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Pardon me? 4 MR. NIETO: May I address a couple of things? 5 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Certainly. 6 MR. NIETO: Let me address the mootness point 7 first because it's the easiest one. 8 We filed our appeal days literally, slightly 9 over week after the permit was issued. They came up 10 the first time and asked it to be deferred. It was 11 improperly advertised for. The second hearing the 12 City asked that it be deferred. In the meantime, 09- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1_ Paqe 16 13 they've gone and continued work under what I consider 14 to be a very specious argument that the work was 15 needed for health and safety reasons, life, health 16 and safety reasons. 17 It's interesting. They originally were going to 18 run the race in April. They got the City to issue -- 19 to make that determination based on the argument that 20 if the work wasn't continued expeditiously, the race 21 would be dangerous. 22 They then moved the race back to October taking 23 away the so-called emergency but kept on doing the 24 work. 25 Essentially what they're trying to do is say, 16 1 "We've run the clock, you don't get a right to be 2 heard, because we can build faster than you get the 3 matter heard." 4 1 think it's specious and I encourage you not to 5 follow that. 6 On the issue of standing, I think it's ironic 7 that they talk about what the courts have held 8 because a court has, in fact, reviewed the standing 9 of these two parties. We sued them and the City 10 regarding what we consider to be an improper 11 agreement. The first thing out of their guns was 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 17 3 12 standing, saying that we could not challenge their 13 contract with the City. And what the Court found, it 14 found very specifically, it's in the court order in 15 your materials on pages 5 and 6, was that we were 16 qualified bidders to conduct racing in downtown 17 Miami; that if we'd been given the chance, we would 18 have conducted racing in downtown Miami; and that 19 that interest is enough to give us standing. 20 Now, how does that relate to zoning and what's 21 before you? Mr. Al Garcia from International 22 Speedway Corporation is here. I'm going to call up 23 him up. He'll testify that what they're building, 24 these specific improvements are very specialized type 25 of race course. They're specifically created for a 17 1 specific type of racing. Type of racing that they 2 do. Once this is built — now that it is built — it 3 essentially locks out other types of racing. 4 The way it works is there are several 5 sanctioning bodies that allow racing. They all have 6 their own rules. The way for the streets, the kinds 7 of curbs they use, et cetera. They designed the 8 track in sort of a way it has the effect of 9 precluding other types of racing from being 10 conducted. And I think that very clearly gives us 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 18 11 standing because just as the City we feel improperly 12 locked us out by not putting this up for bid, they're 13 trying to do the same thing by building a race course 14 that's meant to suit them and will give them a 15 competitive advantage whenever somebody goes to bid. 16 And on the issue of us -- 17 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Did your people have a 18 better offer? 19 MR. NIETO: We were never asked if we had an 20 offer and that's our whole point. If we would have 21 been asked, we would have made an offer and the City 22 could have a made a decision as to whether ours or 23 theirs was better. 24 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That's a shame. 25 MR. NIETO: And on the issue of racing in the 18 1 park, if we had been given a chance, we would have 2 proposed a racetrack that looks far differently from 3 this. 4 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That's why the City 5 always in trouble. 6 MR. NIETO: We were never given that 7 opportunity. 8 We feel that as this has gone forward, it's had 9 the effect of simply trying to lock us out of racing 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pae 19 10 in downtown and of competing for this special deal 11 that they've gotten. 12 And I would like to let Mr. Garcia address very 13 quickly the issue of the specialized nature of this 14 use just for the record, if I may. 15 MS. DOUGHERTY: Madam Chair, this is outside of 16 the scope of my rebuttal. 17 MR. NIETO: You raised the issue of standing and 18 this is directly related to standing. So it is 19 rebuttal, it's direct rebuttal. 20 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: I've just been told by 21 the attorney that on April 11th Commissioner Teele 22 invited your group to appeal — 1 mean, to bid and 23 you haven't done anything? 24 MR. NIETO: He did not actually. He invited us 25 to bid generally. Commissioner Teele made it very 19 1 clear that we could not compete for this speck 2 race; that they would get first choice of race 3 weekends; that this track can be built, and that we 4 can then submit a bid for some other race — 5 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: How many races do we 6 have in the City of Miami? We're not that big. 7 MR. NIETO: That's the point. That's exactly 8 the point. E- JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 20 9 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: You're sure? That's not 10 what the attorney is telling me. 11 MR. NIETO: I am sure. I was there. My 12 partners who are here were there. That is exactly 13 what was said. And there was a resolution passed by 14 the City -- 15 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: If we leave here tonight 16 and I can get -- Charlie, why don't you call 17 Commissioner Teele and ask him if they invited them 18 to bid. 19 MR. FLOWERS: I heard the whole conversation at 20 the commission meeting and that is not before us. 21 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: I'll tell you why. 22 Because if he is saying that he is not being allowed, 23 that their group was not allowed to bid, I'm just 24 really worried because this is something that if it 25 would be good for the City and have more money and 20 1 he's saying the City is saying no — 2 MR. NIETO: Let me make this very clear just so 3 1 don't misstate the intention of my prior comments. 4 Commissioner Teele proposed a generic invitation 5 to bid for racing in Miami. But it was made very 6 clear that we could not compete for their race dates; 7 that we would not get the specialized — this is 03— l�1� JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 21 8 really going outside the scope of this, but just so 9 you understand, that we would not get the same kind 10 of accommodations that they got. And the Court in 11 our opinion said that we get to compete their for 12 race. We don't get to compete for some other race 13 that's potentially not as good of a deal. 14 MS. DOUGHERTY: You don't get to compete for 15 this one date in October of this year. He made it 16 clear that you can compete for any other October date 17 in any other year. 18 MR. NIETO: Not to get completely -- 19 MR. GANGUZZA: Mr. Flowers, these are issues 20 that really are outside and not before us. 21 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Okay. Bring — who else 22 would like to speak on this item, please? 23 MR. NIETO: I'd like to bring you up Mr. Garcia 24 for just a few minutes to talk about the specialized 25 race course. 21 1 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Okay, Lourdes, while he 2 speaks to Mr. Garcia I have to ask you, why not a 3 major use like he was saying? 4 MS. SLAZYK: Okay. The reason this is not a 5 major use special permit is — and he actually 6 mentioned it in his own presentation when he talked 09 292 JC Antorcha- 042202ZB.V1 ' Pa e 22 7 about concerts. Concerts and races and other special 8 event uses do not fall under the scope of a major use 9 special permit. A major use special permit is if 10 they were building a permanent racetrack with 11 permanent grandstands and permanent parking 12 facilities like the American Airlines Arena, like the 13 Performing Arts Center, it's permanent facility for 14 continuance year round use, then it needs a major use 15 special permit. A concert in the park does not need 16 a major use special permit. Any other circus in the 17 park, Cirque de Soleil didn't need a major use 18 special permit. Anything that falls under a special 19 event, even if it's a special event that is couple 20 times a year, they're allowed two special events a 21 year without having to get a major use special 22 permit. 23 So even if you were to do an annual event. 24 Coconut Grove Arts Festival doesn't need a major 25 use special permit. Neither does Calle Ocho, neither 22 1 does any other major festival, the Orange Bowl 2 parade. This is no different than anything else that 3 falls under a special event that the Commission can 4 approve. 5 But that's not what this Class II special permit 03- 292 .......... ®. 1Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1� Pa a 23 6 is for. It's not for the use, and they keep going 7 back to it and your jurisdiction here with this 8 special permit is for physical improvements in the 9 park. 10 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That's why it's 11 important that we clarify. 12 MS. SLAZYK: But the Planning and Zoning 13 Department felt when we looked for the Class II 14 permit, when we applied the standards and the 15 criteria, we didn't look at a race because that was 16 not the application before us. We didn't apply the 17 ingress and egress standards of a race because that 18 was not the application before us. We looked at the 19 park. What is the best thing for the park. Is this 20 a good physical change for the park. Because that's 21 all that's before you. The physical improvements to 22 the park. 23 When you make these kind of physical 24 improvements to the park, you increase the 25 flexibility of that park being able to be used for 23 1 other things. We are not going to plan a park around 2 a one time race. 3 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That would be — 4 MS. SLAZYK: The flexibility of the park is what 03- 292 _,�_. ------ ---'I JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pale 24 5 we looked at. We applied the standards to that. 6 MR. WILLIAMS: Did you review the document on 7 page 39 about the park risking problems? 8 MS. SLAZYK: I'm not sure I understand. 9 MR. WILLIAMS: Did you look at their book? 10 MS. SLAZYK: I wasn't given a copy. I'm not 11 familiar with it. 12 1 can speak to the Class II, to the design 13 review that we do under the Class 11, to the 14 potential adverse impacts to the park. All the 15 criteria of 1305 was applied and it was found to be 16 in compliance with the criteria of, 1305, again 17 noting we did not apply the criteria to a race 18 because the Class II did not approve a race. It 19 approved physical improvements to the park. 20 MR. PINA: Madam Chair? 21 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Yes. 22 MR. PINA: It strikes me that we're here 23 listening to testimony with regards to the physical 24 change and the flexibility of the use of the park, 25 Bayfront Park. 24 1 MS. SLAZYK: There's one other -- 2 MR. PINA: The flexibility. Now, when you make 3 specific improvements to where — from what I see -- 03- r;"7 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 25 4 I'm not going -- I'm not going to get technical, but 5 when you see these improvements, they're clearly for 6 a race. Okay? It's not flexible. I mean, I don't 7 know how many other events can you hold in this 8 specific area that do not involve some type of race 9 and don't open it to 'concerts and that type of thing 10 because that's very flexible with regards if you want 11 to hold a concert, you can pretty much hold it 12 anywhere. But when you get outside the realm, 1 13 don't see the flexibility of this with regards to the 14 use and the improvements other than a race. 15 MS. SLAZYK: That's absolutely not true. 16 Building a road -- 17 MR. PINA: It's not? 18 MS. SLAZYK: It isn't and we looked at it. You 19 know what, the Planning and Zoning department did 20 take a look at this. When other events are brought 21 into the park, the lack of sufficient roads in the 22 park -- we've actually torn up grass, bringing trucks 23 and things into the park. Bringing a road into the 24 park does increase the flexibility and actually 25 reduced costs in other things because we're not 25 1 tearing other things up. I don't — these physical 2 improvements did not cause any adverse impacts to the 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 ' Page 2611 3 park. 4 MR. PINA: You're saying these physical 5 improvements can be utilized for other specific -- 6 MS. SLAZYK: I think they can be utilized for 7 other things. 8 MR. PINA: So you can hold this race and you can 9 hold a drag race, another type of race. I don't 10 think so. I think it's specifically for this 11 particular type of race, which I'm not saying is bad 12 for the City of Miami. Actually, it's good for the 13 City of Miami. But the modification is specifically 14 designed to promote this type of racing. And when 15 you use the terminology "flexibility," I don't see 16 any flexibility. 17 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Let's hope it brings 18 more money than the other Grand Prix did. 19 MS. SLAZYK: There's one other thing I need to 20 put into the record. If this had been any other park 21 anywhere else in the City it wouldn't have needed a 22 Class II. The only reason for a Class II special 23 permit here was because it was between water and the 24 first right of way which any improvements between 25 water and first right of way need a Class II. 26 1 The specific purpose of that has always been to 03- 292 T.i , . .. 3... a JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1. Page 27 , 2 review buildings that are along our waterfront. This 3 doesn't propose any buildings. So even with 4 relationship to — as it relates to what the purpose 5 of the Class II was for, again, typically we look at 6 all development between the water and the first right 7 of way to look at building impacts. There are no 8 buildings here. 9 Also, the fountain was improved. The streets 10 were widened. 11 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Lourdes, what are those 12 block like things? 13 MR. PINA: The fountain should have been 14 improved a long time ago whether we had a race or 15 not. 16 MR. NIETO: I believe the blocks are VIP suites 17 if I am guessing correctly as to which ones you're 18 pointing to. 19 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Rectangles. This one. 20 Rectangles. Big rectangles. Those. 21 MR. NIETO: These are grandstands. 22 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: They're not permanent, 23 I'm assuming? 24 MS. SLAZYK: No. Those are not part of the 25 Class II. That's not part of the Class 11. 27 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 28 1 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: So what the are the 2 improvements? 3 MS. SLAZYK: The Class II improvements were 4 related to tree relocation. There are roads that go 5 through the park. They were enhanced and widened. 6 The fountain was improved. There were improvements 7 to the park and they're in -- they're not the 8 grandstands, they're not bleachers, they're not 9 anything else that's of a temporary nature, but that 10 doesn't need a Class Il. That's approved under 11 special event -- 12 MS. DOUGHERTY: Curbs and gutters. 13 MS. SLAZYK: And streets and trees. 14 MR. GARAVAGLIA: Has all this work been done? 15 MS. SLAZYK: Yes, the work is completed. 16 MR. GARAVAGLIA: Why is this in front of us? 17 MS. SLAZYK: That's the point. 18 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: You mean like the poor 19 people we penalize for doing this? 20 MR. PINA: So these people started the work, 21 they're already advertising? Who started the work? 22 MR. GARAVAGLIA: The City. 23 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Madam Chair, members of the 24 Board, the work was started, and because you cannot 25 leave a road that is used by the public in a state : ig I 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 29 28 1 where it would harm the public or travelers, the work 2 was allowed to be continued. It is not because of 3 the date or whatever. It was merely because you have 4 a road that's used by the public, or may be used by 5 the public, and once it is tom up with asphalt and 6 everything in the area, you cannot leave it in that 7 condition. So there was a finding made by the 8 planning director to that effect. That is why the 9 work continued. 10 MR. PINA: But they would need a Class II to 11 start the work? 12 MS. SLAZYK: They got the Class It. 13 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: They had the Class ll, sir. 14 MR. PINA: So why are they coming before us? 15 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: There was an appeal of that 16 Class It. They appealed the construction of the -- 17 MR. PINA: They started the work and now it's 18 being appealed? 19 MR. NIETO: Essentially in our opinion they 20 proceeded at their own risk. Once they knew of our 21 interest in this and — 22 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: You know, I mean, that's 23 beside the point. That is moot. 24 MR. FLOWERS: Madam Chair, if the Board members 25 have read the entire package, they would know it was 47r - 2 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 30 29 1 appealed. There was a letter from the planning 2 director. 3 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Yes. 4 MR. FLOWERS: It's in the package. 5 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Yes, it is. 6 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Thank you very much, 7 Mr. Flowers. That's very enlightening. 8 MR. SHULMAN: Madam Chair, I just have a 9 question for Lourdes. What was the pavement on the 10 ground at the fountain? You're not looking at the 11 pictures that we're looking at. But it shows a 12 before and after of the fountain and -- 13 MS. SLAZYK: What's the pavement? 14 MR. SHULMAN: I'm just looking here. There's 15 some substantial changes and I'm just wondering what 16 these are. Perhaps I could show it to you. 17 MS. SLAZYK: I am not looking at what you're 18 looking at. 19 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Do you have one of 20 these? 21 MS. SLAZYK: No. 22 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That's terrible. You 23 really should have given it to her. She's very 24 important. 25 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: We found it here. 03 292 IC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 31 30 1 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: She's a VIP, really. 2 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: We're sharing a book. We'll 3 soon find out what the water fountain was about. 4 Water fountain is part of the improvements. 5 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: They did not a water 6 fountain in Bayfront Park? We did not? 7 MS. FERNANDEZ: We did. 8 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: I think it was improved. 9 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: How do you improve a 10 water fountain? Please, let me know. 11 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Miss Erica Wright from the 12 office apparently has some details, if you'd like 13 some details. 14 MS. WRIGHT: What happened was the Army Corps of 15 Engineers put together the baywalk for Bayfront Park. 16 About a quarter of the property that was improved was 17 the walkway that's right along the baywalk. When 18 they were doing their improvements to the park, some 19 of that area was tom up and destructed. 20 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: So they tore it up and 21 then they fixed it? 22 MS. WRIGHT: Well, what they did was — 23 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Gets better. 24 MS. WRIGHT: Right. In order to do the 25 improvements, what they had to do is strengthen the 03- 292 r JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 31 1 asphalt. So what happened was, the area around the 2 fountain that the Army Corps installed was made out 3 of coral rock. What they've done now is strengthen 4 it. And there's also a walkway that I think extends 5 from the fountain that the Army Corps installed all 6 the way to Bayfront Park -- I mean, to Biscayne 7 Boulevard which was also improved as well. 8 MS. DOUGHERTY: Madam Chair, it wasn't Raceworks 9 that tore up the fountain. It was the Army Corps. 10 And it was leaking, it was substandard, there were -- 11 there was drainage problems and we actually improved 12 it. 13 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Madam Chair, that was for 14 purposes of explanation. Again, outside of the — 15 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That's very interesting 16 and enlightening. Thank you. 17 1 think there's a question for you somewhere. 18 MS. SLAZYK: I think he just got his answer. 19 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: You had a question. She 20 was looking at a picture. 21 MR. SHULMAN: I just was wondering if that's 22 Keystone paving that was tom up and replaced with 23 concrete. It looks that way in the photograph, but 1 24 wasn't sure. If the paving at the fountain area was 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1._.. Pa a 33 25 Keystone and replaced with concrete; is that right? 32 1 MS. WRIGHT: I think that sounds right. Are you 2 talking about in Exhibit 3? 3 MR. SHULMAN: A3. 4 MS. SLAZYK: What page? 5 MR. SHULMAN: Page 11. Sorry. 6 MS. WRIGHT: Of what exhibit? 7 MR. SHULMAN: Exhibit 2. 8 MS. WRIGHT: Exhibit 2 is prepared by 9 Homestead -Miami Speedway, I believe. 10 In Exhibit 2 that was something -- those were 11 photographs that you all took? 12 MR. NIETO: Yes. In Exhibit 2 there are series 13 of before and after photographs of the work. Just to 14 get a feel for the nature of the improvements. 1 15 think the pictures speak for themselves. 16 MS. WRIGHT: In Exhibit 3 that contain the 17 agreement with the City of Miami and Bayfront Park 18 and it contains the improvements that Raceworks 19 presented to the City at the end of it. 20 MR. GANGUZZA: Madam Chair, are you ready for a 21 motion? 22 MR. PINA: Is there anyone opposing in favor of 23 the item? Opposing — 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 34 24 MR. NIETO: I would like to present my expert 25 testimony. I requested it earlier. 33 1 MR. PINA: You have expert testimony? 2 MR. NIETO: Yes. The issue had come up -- 3 actually, two issues came up. One, as to whether 4 these are just general improvements or they re for a 5 racetrack, and two, we have a point in response to 6 their standing argument these are for a specific type 7 of racing and -- 8 MS. WRIGHT. One moment, please. 9 MR. NIETO: I'd like to bring up Al Garcia. Al 10 is the vice-president of operations at 11 Homestead -Miami Speedway. He's designed, operated 12 and managed over 25 races around the country and he's 13 an expert sanctioned by the compliance and design of 14 raceways. 15 MR. PINA: Thank you. 16 Mr. Garcia, state your name and address for the 17 record. 18 MR. GARCIA: Good evening. My name is Albert 19 Garcia. 1 have a business address at One Speedway 20 Boulevard in Homestead, Florida. I'm a resident of 21 the City of Miami for the last 30 years. 22 (Thereupon, the witness was duly sworn.) 03- 292 JC~Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 35' 23 MS. FERNANDEZ: Do you work for Homestead 24 Speedway? 25 MR. GARCIA: Excuse me? 34 1 MS. FERNANDEZ: Do you work for Homestead 2 Speedway? 3 MR. GARCIA: I'm an employee of Homestead -Miami 4 Speedway, yes. 5 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Then you need to be a 6 registered lobbyist in order to speak. 7 MR. GARCIA: I am nota registered lobbyist, no. 8 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: If he's an employee of the 9 appellate, he needs to be a registered lobbyist. 10 MR. NIETO: He's an expert witness — 11 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: He may be an expert witness, 12 but if he is being retained or paid or being 13 compensated for his appearance, he is, in fact, and 14 he's indicated that he is an employee of Homestead 15 Speedway. 16 MR. NIETO: We can certainly hear that first 17 thing tomorrow morning. 18 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: I'm sorry. Hear what? 19 MS. FERNANDEZ: We can give you the application 20 now. 21 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: No, it has to be here now. 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 36 22 We'll take five or we can go on to another item, 23 Madam Chair, if you would like to. 24 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Sorry? 25 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: They're going to have to do 35 1 the lobbyist registration. Do you want to take five? 2 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Let's take five or ten. 3 1 just spoke to -- 4 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: I didn't mean item 5. 5 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: I do want to take five. 6 That's a very good idea. Let's take five. But 7 before we take five, lest someone think that we're 8 willing to interrupt the Sunshine Law and I will be 9 tempted to say something, I just spoke to former 10 Commissioner J. L. Plummer who as on the Bayfront 11 board for many years, as you know, Lucia, and I asked 12 him because I was curious about your question on, 13 Allan, on the stone. He says that there has, in 14 fact, always been stone and that one of the big 15 concerns was oils spillage from the cars on the 16 stone; that he does not know if they have broken up 17 some of the stone and replaced it with concrete. 18 Have they replaced it with concrete? Lourdes? 19 The fountain is supposed to be all stone and the 20 pavement was supposed to be stone. I'll let you look 03'- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 37 21 it up. 22 MS. SLAZYK: I can't tell from this if this was 23 stone. The parks department -- 24 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: No, J. L. told me it was 25 stone. He was there for 20 some years. And 36 1 apparently the oil would really mess up the stone. 2 MS. SLAZYK: I don't know the answer to that. 1 3 don't know if it was stone. 4 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: It was. J. L. told me 5 it was. And I trust him. He was there for a long 6 time. Okay. We will -- it's 8:37. We'll come back 7 at five to ten. Ten being the maximum, five being 8 the minimum. 9 (Recess taken.) 10 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: We're back. Are we 11 ready? 12 MS. FERNANDEZ: Lucia, for the record, are you a 13 registered lobbyist? 14 MS. DOUGHERTY: No. 15 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 16 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Madam Chair, are you ready 17 for them to proceed? 18 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Yes, I'm ready. 19 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Go ahead. 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pale 38. 20 MR. GARCIA: Madam Chair, members of the board, 21 my name is Albert Garcia. As our partner stated 22 here, I have been operating and designing permanent 23 racing facilities for about the last seven years. 24 Twelve years prior to that, as they said, I was 25 responsible for designing and building over 25 37 1 temporary race courses all over the country. And 2 some through parks, some through cities. 3 So what we see here is that these improvements 4 were made to the park specifically for racing. I 5 understand about building roadways through the park 6 and all that, but I don't think you'll see any other 7 park in the country that has walkways that are 40, 8 35, 40 feet wide. That's not necessary as a roadway 9 through a park. Most parks the roadways are 15, 20 10 feet wide and that's more than enough to accommodate 11 any traffic from concerts or special events or 12 whatever it may be. 13 So it's very obvious that the improvements that 14 were made to the surrounding areas and to the park 15 itself were strictly for racing. 16 To that end, and without getting too speck, 17 these modifications were designed and built for 18 sports car racing, for the American Le Mans series. 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 39 19 Since, theyve now proposed adding another 20 sanctioning body, CART. Well, that track will not 21 support the open wheel racers that CART brings to 22 them. 23 So if is this able to be put together, they will 24 be back before this board asking for more permits to 25 make more modifications because I'm here to tell you 38 1 that that track right there will not suit the CART 2 open wheel race or the Toyota Atlantic or some other 3 type of racing series that could possibly come to the 4 City of Miami. 5 So they're very specific to the American Le Mans 6 series and Trans Am series which are sedans. 7 Something was said about that we're talking out 8 of both sides of our mouth; that we're saying this is 9 not suitable for racing, but at the same time we want 10 to put in a bid. Well, if we were given the 11 opportunity to bid on this event and to host the CART 12 series and American Le Mans series downtown, we would 13 design and build something substantially different. 14 1 don't know and I don't see the room there of 15 where they could support that type of a show. Simply 16 to store 10,000 gallons of methanol, 15,000 gallons 17 of gasoline, plus park in excess of 100 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202Z6 V1Page 40 18 tractor -trailers. We just don't feel that that venue 19 would support that type of an event. And it's not 20 hard to see because they do these races in Cleveland 21 and theyjust had one in Long Beach last weekend. If 22 you see the foot print and the amount of real estate 23 used for those events, you will see that this 24 certainly will not support that type of event. 25 Thank you for your time. 39 1 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Thank you. 2 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Madam chair, if that's the 3 last question of that witness, there is a right to 4 cross-examine if Miss Dougherty wants. 5 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Does that complete your 6 presentation? 7 MR. NIETO: Yes, it does. 8 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Thank you. 9 Yes, Lucia. 10 MS. DOUGHERTY: I don't want to cross-examine 11 him. But I think I just heard him say, and the only 12 expert testimony that he offered is that CART, who is 13 our potential partner, would not run on this track. 14 And from my understanding, CART has already inspected 15 the track and is willing to take it as is. 16 So he is now testifying as opposed to anything 03- 292 K•N JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pa a 41 17 else that our partner won't take this track. 18 MR. NIETO: I believe that he mentioned about 19 four or five other different sanctioning bodies, 20 different types of races that also would not run on 21 that track. 22 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Your presentation is 23 concluded. She's getting two minutes for rebuttal. 24 So unless a Board member specifically asks you a 25 question, I'm sorry, but time's up. Eli] 1 MR. NIETO: I apologize. 2 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That's okay. 3 MS. DOUGHERTY: Madam chairman, I don't have 4 anything further. 5 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Thank you, Lucia. 6 We will now close to this to the public and open 7 it up to the Board for questions or motions. 8 MR. GANGUZZA: I'm prepared to make a motion, 9 Madam Chair. 10 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Go ahead, please. 11 MR. GANGUZZA: I move the request on agenda item 12 1 of the Planning and Zoning director be affirmed and 13 the appeal be denied and the requirements of 14 Ordinance 11000 as amended were satisfied by relevant 15 efforts — relevant evidence in the record of the 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Pale 42 16 public hearing. 17 MR. FLOWERS: I second. 18 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Motion for what? 19 MS. FERNANDEZ: Denial. This is a motion for 20 denial of the appeal. 21 MR. GANGUZZA: That's correct. To affirm the 22 determination of Planning and Zoning director and 23 denying the appeal. 24 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Mr. Flowers, did you second 25 that motion? 41 1 MR. FLOWERS: Yes, ma'am, i did. 2 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Okay. Thank you. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Ganguzza? 4 MR. GANGUZZA: Yes. 5 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Flowers? 6 MR. FLOWER: Yes, ma'am. 7 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Bums. 8 MR. BURNS: Yes. 9 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Garavaglia? 10 MR. GARAVAGLIA: Yes. 11 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Pellon? 12 MR. PELLON: Yes. 13 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Pina? 14 MR. PIMA: I just want to make a statement here. 03- 292 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 Page 43 15 And my decision is going to be based on the fact that 16 we're using public land where extensive improvements 17 are being made and I don't think it's serving the 18 general public. Although I am in favor of the Gran 19 Prix and it has nothing to do whether it was 20 competitive bidding and so on, I don't think these 21 improvements are — will benefit the general public. 22 So my decision is no. 23 MS. FERNANDEZ: Yes? 24 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: No. 25 MS. FERNANDEZ: Oh, no? 42 1 Mr. Shulman? 2 MR. SHULMAN: I echo Mr. Pina's comments. No. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Mr. Williams? 4 MR. WILLIAMS: I think it would be good for the 5 City of Miami. I say yes. 6 MS. FERNANDEZ: Miss Hernandez? 7 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: I'm going to go along 8 with denial of the appeal, but I am really going to 9 be keeping my eye on this. 1 don't like the fact 10 that it's coming to us where I don't know what 11 improvements — I mean, it has nothing to do right 12 now whether its racing or not racing. The only 13 thing that's supposed to be before us is the Class 11 JC Antorcha - 042202ZB.V1 _ Page 44 14 and improvements. These are definitely not 15 improvements for the park for the people. That we 16 know. 17 I'm concerned that if they are going to be 18 breaking up valuable stones and they're going to 19 spill oil on it and stuff like that that's not going 20 to look pretty and it's not going to be good for the 21 general public, I am definitely going to be looking 22 at that when they start coming back for other permits 23 and other variances and other things. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: Okay. This motion passes seven 25 to two. This decision is final unless appealed to my 43 1 office within 15 days 2 MR. FLOWERS: I'd like to make a statement. 3 Miss Chair and other board members, I was over there 4 on Sunday riding my bicycle and there was about 3 or 5 400 females that had walked, I think, for some 6 charity, and they were all on the same pavement. I'm 7 sure they were happy that the roads are paved so 8 they'd have a place to put their luggage and their 9 backpacks. 10 So 1 do ride my bicycle every Sunday over there. 11 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: If they didn't put a 12 couple of cops there, I can't see females walking. �3- `Z92 JC Antorcha 042202ZB.V1 Page 45 13 MR. FLOWERS: There were cops there, there were 14 at least 3 or 400 females from all over the state. 15 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: Yes, but that one day. 16 MR. FLOWERS: I'm only there on Sundays. 17 CHAIRPERSON HERNANDEZ: That made them safe. 18 They were unsafe if you were there. 19 MS. FERNANDEZ: Miss Dougherty, do we have a 20 copy of that exhibit? Do we have a reduced copy of 21 that exhibit? 22 MS. MARRERO-TREHY: Please provide an 8 by 11. 23 (Thereupon, the hearing was concluded at 9:00 24 p.m.) 25 44 1 CERTIFICATE 2 ----- 3 4 STATE OF FLORIDA 5 COUNTY OF DADE 6 7 8 I, JOANNIE FIEGER, CSR, RMR, CRR, Notary 9 Public, do hereby certify that I was authorized to and did 10 stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and that 11 the transcript is a true and correct transcription of my 03- 292 REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT ISSUED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO RACEWORHS, LLC for the use of City -owned property located in and adjacent to Bayfront Park, Miami, Florida. Q3- 292^` t',a-0 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Recitals 2 1. Recitals 2. Definitions 3. Term 4. Trust's Use Fee 5 5. City s Use Fee 6 6. Grant of Temporary Use of Public Property 6 7. Permitted Use 7 8. Concessions Agreements 8 9. Name of Race Event 9 10. Media 9 11. Scheduling of Race Events 9 12. Initial Improvements to the Race Course 10 13. Payment of the Costs of the Initial Improvements 11 14. Subsequent Improvements to the Race Course 12 15. Pavment of the Costs of Subsequent Improvements 12 16. Modifications to the Race Perimeter 13 17. Storase 13 18. Licenses. Authorizations & Permits 14 19. Citv Police. Fire & Sanitation Services 15 20. Traffic Plans for Race Events 16 21. Set Up & Tear Down of the Race Perimeter During the Use Period 16 22. Licensee's Operations of Race Events 17 23. Risk of Loss 18 24. Signage 19 25. Financial Obligations 19 26. No Claim to Assets or Rights of Licensee 19 27. Bayside Marketplace & Concorde Cruises 19 28. Non -Interference & First Right of Refusal 19 29. Licensee's Records & Financial Statement 20 30. Compliance with Municipal Motor Vehicle Racing Act 20 31. Promotion by City & Trust 20 32. Quality of Events 20 33. Taxes 20 34. Compliance With Laws 21 35. Additional Expenses 21 36. No Discrimination in Hiring 21 37. Indemnification 21 38. Insurance 22 03- .292 39. Risk Review 40. Audits 41. Inspections ; 42. Public Records _ 43. Nondiscrimination 44. Affirmative Action ,4 45. Conflict of interest 46. Late Payments 47. Failure to Stage Events 48. Assignment 26 49. Licensee's Release From Agreement 26 50. Notices -17 51. Waiver 28 52. Force Majeure and Impossibility 28 53. Failure to Obtain National or International Sanctioned Event 29 54. Default and Termination 29 55. Permanent Improvements 29 56. Restoration of Public Property 30 57. Compliance with Environmental Laws 30 58. Invalidity 31 59. Time of Essence 31 60. No Interpretation Against Draftsmen 31 61. Further Acts 31 62. Litigation 31 63. Successors and Assigns 31 64. Third Parry Beneficiary 32 65. No Partnership 32 66. Amendments 32 67. Miscellaneous 32 68-- Entire Agreement 32 69. Authority 32 70. Approval by Emergency Financial Oversight Board 33 71. Approval By The U.S. Department of the Army, Army Corps of Engineers 33 Exhibit A Public Property Exhibit B Course Layout Exhibit C Race Perimeter Exhibit D Modifications Exhibit E Commitment Letter from the American Le Mans Series Exhibit F Mitigation Plan Exhibit G Tree Disposition Plan 03 292 REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT This revocable license agreement ("Agreement') is entered this day of moo (but is effective as of ), by and between the City of Miami. a municipal corporation of the State of Florida ("Cin "). Bayfront Park Management Trust (-Trust-). a limited agency and instrumentality of the Citv of Miami. and Raceworks. LLC. a limited liabilit} corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and=iicensed as a foreign corporation in the State of Florida ("Licensee"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the staging of the original "Miami Grand Prix." for many yeap in the Cite. provided favorable nationwide and worldwide publicity and advertising for the City attracted thousands of individuals as participants and spectators to the race. many of whom ti aveled to the Citv from other locales, and thus caused a significant beneficial impact on the economy of the City; and WHEREAS, subject to certain terms and conditions herein, in Bayfront Park. Miami. Florida ("the Park"); and in the public roadways that are adjacent thereto, the Licensee plans. on an annual basis to promote and stage Race Events (as hereinafter defined) in a manner similar to the original "Miami Grand Prix.-' and WHEREAS, Licensee has received a commitment for a long-term sanction agreement with the American Le Mans Series to stage a Race Event annually in downtown Miami and in the Park. subject to the execution of this Agreement by the City and the Trust; and WHEREAS, the City is the owner or lessee of portions of the Park and, pursuant to Section 38-101. City of Miami Code, the Park is managed by Bayfront Park Management Trust ("Trust'); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. . the City Commission has authorized the City Manager to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 01-027, the Trust has authorized its Executive Director to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Licensee is negotiating other agreements from other rights-of-way holders to obtain long-term commitments to utilize their properties in order to secure the rights to the proposed Race Course (as hereinafter defined) for the Race Events; and WHEREAS. Licensee has developed a mitigation plan and has developed traffic flow and logistical plans to minimize the disruption to Downtown businesses and hotels. 2 03- 292 WHEREAS. subject to applicable laws and the Iimitations set forth herein. the Cin and the Trust maintain Public Property and each possess the respective authority to permit and license the use of Public Property for periods of time and for the purposes set forth herein: and WHEREAS. this Agreement is subject to the Corps Lease. as hereinafter defined. and is subject to approval by the United States Army Corps of Engineers ("Corps"). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein. the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. 2. Definitions. a) "City Manager" is the City Manager for the City of Miami. b) "City Ticket Fee" is the cumulative amount of fees paid to the City pursuant to Paragraph 5 of this Agreement. C) "City Use Fee-' is the Use Fee that Licensee pays to the City. d) "Event Weekend" is the Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday of Race Events and Support Events. e) "Executive Director" is the Executive Director of the Bayfront Park Management Trust. f) "Hazardous Materials" are diesel, propane, oxy-acetylene, paints, lubricant solvents, used oil, and other hazardous substances, toxic substances, pollutants, contaminants or hazardous waste materials. g) "Initial Improvements" are the improvements to be made upon the portion of Public Property, which comprises the Race Course for the initial Race Event. h) "Instrument" is an irrevocable letter of credit or other form of security instrument acceptable to and approved in writing by the City Manager i) "Public Property" is real and personal property located within the Race Perimeter that is owned or leased by the City or managed by the Trust. A diagram of the Race Perimeter is depicted in Exhibit A. incorporated hereto and made a part hereof. 3 03- 292 j) "Race Course" is the specific route through the Public Property upon which the Race Events shall be conducted. A diagram of the Race Course is depicted in Exhibit B incorporated hereto and made a part hereof. k) "Race Event" is the day(s) that a motor vehicle race sanctioned by a national/,,. or internationally recognized racing organization is conducted and includes the days for practices and qualifications for a race. 1) "Race Perimeter" includes Public Property and other properties within which the Raceworks Events shall take place and which is temporarily used by the Licensee to promote a Race Event, as depicted in Exhibit C. m) "Raceworks Events" include collectively Race Events. Support Events or endeavors resulting from the Iicense granted hereunder conducted during an Event Weekend. n) "Services" are the services rendered by the City's Police, Fire. and Solid Waste Departments during Race Events or Support Events. o) "Subsequent Improvements" are the modifications, improvements and/or maintenance of the Race Course that may be requested by Licensee after the initial Race Event occurs. P) "Support Events" are, secondary racing series and other entertainment activities which include having a "racing village". catering compound, hospitality suites, VIP Club. merchandising facilities and such other related activities permitted under this Agreement that are conducted with a Race Event. q) "Trust Ticket Fee" is the cumulative amount of fees paid to the Trust pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Agreement. r) "Trust Use Fee" is the Use Fee that Licensee pays to the Trust- s) "Use Fee" is the fee that Licensee pays to the City or the Trust, as the case may be, for the use of its facilities and property. t) "Use Period" is the period of time allotted for the set-up, presentation and dismantling of a Race Event. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the City and the Trust. the set-up period shall commence no earlier than forty-five (45) days prior to the first date of the Race Event. and dismantling shall begin immediately upon the conclusion of the Race Event and shall conclude within thirty (30) days thereafter. The City and Trust may extend the Use Period for a Race Event. in writing, should Licensee require a longer period for set-up and dismantling of the same. 4 ;O,S_ 292 3. Term The initial term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years. commencing upon the effective date of this Agreement. The Licensee shall have the option of extending the term of this Agreement for a period of ten (I 0) years. If Licensee elects the option to extend the term of this Agreement. Licensee shall give the City and Trust written notice of its intention to exercise the option a minimum of sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the Agreement. 4. Trust Use Fee Licensee will pay to the Trust the Trust Use Fee of $50.000.00 which shall be due no later than thirty (30) days after each Race Event. The Trust Use Fee shall increase annually in accordance with the Consumer Price Index, as published by the U.S. Department of Labor. however in no event shall the increase exceed four percent (40;o) of the Trust Use Fee for the Iast Race Event of the previous year in which a Race Event occurred. The Trust Use Fee is inclusive of the fees for the use of the Park. its amenities and facilities for each such Race Event and includes the janitorial services, electrical and water services that are normally available in the Park. In the event that the Licensee requires electrical, water and janitorial services that exceed those that are normally available in the Park. then Licensee shall be responsible for paying the Trust for providing or causing said services to be provided by independent companies. Licensee agrees to pay to the Trust the Trust Ticket Fee for any and all tickets sold by Licensee. The Trust Ticket Fee shall be payable as follows: Year Trust Ticket Fee 1-5 $1.00 6.10 $1.25 11-15 $1.50 During any extension of this Trust Ticket Fee Agreement 1-5 $1.75 6-10 $2.00 Each printed ticket shall be itemized to show the admission price, applicable taxes, any service charge from outside ticket agencies and the Trust Ticket Fee. Licensee agrees to record the Ticket Fee as a separate item in the certified statement of accounts for the Race Event. Licensee shall be responsible for the collection of the Ticket Fee, which shall be held by Licensee in trust for the Trust. Licensee shall pay Ticket Fee to the Trust, within sixty (60) days after the conclusion of a Race Event. Licensee shall maintain all books and records pertaining to 5 03- 292 the Race Event and the revenue therefrom and shall make such books and records available for Citv and Trust's inspection and auditing as provided herein. The Trust shall not require Licensee to pay any additional surcharges. or other charges for the use of the Park or its facilities. equipment or services unless it is mutually- agreed upon b.' the parties in writing. 5. Citv's Use Fee. Licensee will pay to the City the City Use Fee of $50,000.00 which shall be due no later than thirty . (30) days after each Race Event. The City Use Fee shall increase annually in accordance with the Consumer Price Index, as published by the U.S. Department of Labor. however in no event shall the increase exceed four percent (4%) of the City Use Fee for the last Race Event of the previous year in which a Race Event occurred. Licensee agrees to pay to the City the City Ticket Fee for any and all tickets sold by Licensee. The City Ticket Fee shall be payable as follows: Year City Ticket Fee 1-5 $1.00 6-10 $1.25 11-15 $1.50 During any extension of this City Ticket Fee Agreement 1-5 $1.75 6-10 $2.00 Each printed ticket shall be itemized to show the admission price, applicable taxes, any service charge from outside ticket agencies and the City Ticket Fee. Licensee agrees to record the City Ticket Fee as a separate itam in the certified statement of accounts for the Race Event. Licensee shall be responsible for the collection of the City Ticket Fee, which shall be held by Licensee in trust for the City. Licensee shall pay City Ticket Fee to the City, within sixty (60) days after the conclusion of a Race Event. Licensee shall maintain all books and records pertaining to the Race Event and the revenue therefrom and shall make such books and records available for City and Trust's inspection and auditing as provided herein. The City will not require Licensee to pay any additional surcharges, or other charges for the use of the Public Property, its facilities, equipment or services unless it is mutually agreed upon by the parties in writing. 6. Grant of Temporary Use of Public Property 03- 292 For the term of this Agreement or an extension thereof, the City and the Trust grant Licensee the right to use its Public Property to stage a maximum of two Race Events a year on the Race Course and within the Race Perimeter. Subject to existing zoning and other governmental restrictions. Cin' and the Trust. respectively grant to Licensee a license to conduct the Raceworks Events on the Public Property during the times agreed upon herein. During a Raceworks Even. the Licensee may limit public. vehicular and pedestrian access to the Race Perimeter in a manner agreed upon by the Cit- Manager and the Executive Director. This Agreement solely authorizes Licensee to the temporary use of Public Property for the limited purposes set forth herein and for no other purpose. The parties hereby agree that the provisions of this Agreement do not constitute a lease. The rights of Licensee hereunder are not those of a tenant. but are a mere personal privilege to do certain acts of a temporary character on Public Property and to use Public Property, subject to the terns of this Agreement. The City and the Trust retain dominion, possession and control of the Public Property. Therefore, no lease interest in the Public Property is conferred upon Licensee under the provisions hereof. Licensee does not and shall not claim at any time any interest or estate of any kind or extent whatsoever in the Public Property by virtue of this Agreement or its use of Public Property hereunder. Additionally. Licensee does not and shall not claim at any time any interest or estate of any kind or extent whatsoever in the Public Property by virtue of any expenditure of funds by the Licensee for improvements, construction; repairs, partitions, or alterations to the Public Property which may be authorized by the City or the Taut. The grant of rights hereunder does not affect the private property rights. where applicable, of any other property rights or privaterights holder to any of the property underlying the Race Perimeter, which does not constitute the Public Property. In order to stage the Race Events, the Licensee agrees to make separate arrangements with any entities having a legal interest in non -Public Property located within the confines of the planned Race Perimeter, including, but not limited to, the public rights -of -ways not owned by the City or managed by the Trust, and Licensee further agrees to provide pedestrian access along all public sidewalks adjoining private businesses included within the boundaries of the Race Course and the Race Perimeter. 7. Permitted Use Subject to the conditions stated herein and any applicable laws, Licensee may limit access to the Race Perimeter under Licensee's paid ticketing and credential system, create viewing and pit areas, charge admission fees to persons attending the Race Event, provide food and beverages (including beer, wine and Iiquor), sell merchandise and other concessions, broadcast through any and all forms of media and sponsor other Support Events 7 03- 292 In addition to. but concurrently with the Race Event. Licensee will also sponsor Suppon Events within the Race Perimeter which could feature secondary racing series and other entertainment activities, subject to approval by the City Manager and the Executive Director. Subject to any legal requirements. authorizations and permits. to the extent that the Cite and Trust possess such rights, the City and the Trust grant a license to Licensee to conduct Race Events and Support Events during the limited mutually agreed upon time periods provided herein. Support Events may consist of the following: fireworks displays. musical and other ; concerts and festivities, boat shows, amusement rides, animal shows, fashion shows and talent contests. high performance ride and drive activities, air shows. high performance motorized boat / races adjacent to the Park, temporarily limit access to and/or close down City streets and buildings to traffic or pedestrian access, limit access to the waterways adjacent to Bayfront Park, rent mooring space in the waterways adjacent to Bayfront Park, display giant televisions, laser shows, television transmission requirements. above ground temporary or other type of voice, data telephone cabling, conduct night racing and set up flood lights and other equipment to do so, sell corporate hospitality and VIP Club tickets. to set up temporary catering facilities for the preparation and sale of food, to sell advertising rights, space and signage upon and throughout the Race Course, Race Perimeter. Park and Race Perimeter fencing, including on barriers, debris fencing, pedestrian bridges, and other forms of advertisement on scoreboards and giant television screens. signs and banners, to temporarily limit access to and/or re -direct or close traffic. The Licensee shall submit a schedule of proposed Support Events at least thirty (30) days prior to a Use Period, and the City Manager and the Executive Director shall have the discretion to oppose any Support Event that either may consider not in the best interest of the City or the Trust. respectively. Subject to all applicable laws, the City and Trust hereby grant Licensee a Iicense to conduct Race Events and Support Event in a safe and lawful manner as scheduled. to establish and maintain the Race Course on a temporary basis, to enable the temporary set up and tear down of the Race Course. the right to erect pedestrian bridges and hospitality facilities. establish the Race Course and Race Perimeter and otherwise to enable the Raceworks Events to be promoted. effectuated. staged, operated, managed, performed. and conducted in a lawful, safe and professional manner consistent with the requirements of the racing series, the sanctioning organizations. industry standards. 8. Concessions Agreements Subject to all applicable laws, and pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, and to the extent that the City has the ability to control or permit, the Licensee may exclusively operate concessions and enter into concession agreements to operate all concessions and merchandising —of articles associated with Race Events within the Race Perimeter during Event Weekends. Concessions include. but are not limited to, merchandise, souvenirs, catering, food service, and beverages (including beer, wine and liquor) and all other commercially related activities, including media. marketing, and sponsorship for Raceworks Events. Licensee shall indemnify, hold and save harmless. and defend the City and the Trust. their directors. officers. employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims demands. liens. judgments. Iiabilit".. losses or damages. including but not limited to costs. expenses and attorney's fees arising out of or attributable to the concession agreements that Licensee enters into for concessions. 9. Name of Race Event Licensee has the right to create the name of the Race Event and shall notify the City and Trust in writing of the Race Event name. Licensee agrees to utilize the name "Miami" in the Race Event's name. and to feature the "City of Miami" and "Bayfront Park" and "Bayfront Park Management Trust" in any and all promotional materials for the Race Events. In the event that Licensee ceases to conduct Race Events within the confines of the legal boundaries of the Cite. Licensee's agrees not to use "Miami" and "Bayfront Park" in the name of subsequent race events. 10. Media The City and the Trust further understand and agree that the Licensee will have the exclusive privilege to own, sell. license, sub -license, assign, convey and transfer every manner and method of transmission, whether by satellite master antenna television systems. fiber optic, direct broadcast satellite, transmission to TYRO receiving dishes, video dial tone system, open video system. cable, microwave, multipoint distribution services, multi -channel MDS, radio and by the internet. whether in a form which is existing or subsequently invented, and by means of any similar or dissimilar electronic. analog or digital means now known or hereafter invented, as well as by the World Wide Web of the Internet. including computer on-line media, real time telemetry rights. time and scoring information, simulcast video streaming rights. and telephonic transmission and any other internet technology whether existing now or in the future, relating to the Race Events and the Support Events that are contemplated within this Agreement. In addition, so long as the Race Events are conducted in the City and within the Park. Licensee agrees to utilize the names "City of Miami." "Bayfront Park Management Trust," respectively, and their logos (whether in present form or as subsequently created or modified) in said media for purposes of promoting, merchandising, and marketing the Race Events and Support Events in any form, subject to the approval of the City and the Trust. 11. Scheduline of Race Events The initial Race Event, featuring the American Le Mans Series, shall be held April 5 -7, 2002. Licensee will conduct a maximum of two Race Events annually during an Event Weekend. Licensee will conduct one Race Event in either the Spring or Fall. Race Events may 6 03- 292 be scheduled during the Summer or Winter. however such an alternate time must be mutual/% agreed upon by the parties and is subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein. The parties shall attempt. whenever reasonably possible. to select the same time period to schedule Race Events annually. However, in no event shall there be more than two Race Events per year. The City and the Trust shall. using their best efforts. attempt to accommodate the dates and scheduling requirements in which Licensee proposes to conduct Race Events. Licensee shall have a preference in scheduling dates for the Race Events given the scheduling limitations put upon Licensee by the sanctioning organizations and by television broadcast requirements. Licensee shall use its best efforts to schedule the Race Event(s) at approximately the same time of the year. Licensee shall give the City and the Trust nine (9) months written notice of the proposed dates for any Race Event. The City Manager and the Executive Director shall have ten (10) business days to approve or disapprove the proposed dates. The City and Trust's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. In deciding whether to approve or disapprove a proposed date for a Race Event, the City. through its City Manager, and the Trust shall give weight to a) the scheduling requirements of the pertinent racing series and/or sanctioning organization; b) the television broadcast requirements: and c) whether there are other events scheduled in the Park. The City and Trust each acknowledges that the Licensee is constrained by the racing series sanctioning organizations and television broadcast rights agreements, and the City and the Trust shall take reasonable steps to accommodate the Licensee's proposed race dates. 12. Initial Improvements to the Race Course Licensee has designed the Race Course which requires Initial Improvements. Based upon modifications to Public Property that is depicted as Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated as part of this Agreement, subject to obtaining approvals from the applicable government entities, the City will make the necessary Initial Improvements to the Public Property that will comprise the Race Course. Licensee shall be financially responsible for the costs of the Initial Improvements contemplated herein. Payment for the costs of the Initial Improvements shall be made in accordance with Paragraph 13 below, entitled "Payments for the Costs of Initial Improvements". Some of the Initial Improvements require approval by the Army Corps of Engineers, State of Florida Department of Transportation, Miami -Dade County, the Water and Sewer Authority. other federal, state and local government agencies, and any other entity which has the right to permit or provide approval for access to Public Property and the City makes no representation to the Licensee concerning such approval. Using its best efforts and as soon as reasonably possible. the City and the Trust, respectively, shall take the steps necessary to obtain the requisite approval and/or permits to make said Initial Improvements. The City Manager shall 10 03- 292 f review and approve the proposed contracts for such expenses and services on an expedited basis. The Cin' will make Initial Improvements on a timely basis so as to facilitate the timer promotion and staging of the initial Race Event that is scheduled April -5-7. 2002. subject to the force majeure provisions contained herein. In the event that additional design and construction is required. the parties will cooperate in good faith to complete such design and construction, respectively. on an expedited basis so as to facilitate the initial Race Event to be conducted as scheduled. 13. Payment of the Costs of the Initial Improvements Licensee shall prepay the City or provide to the City an Instrument securing the costs of the Initial Improvements, which shall be constructed by the City in phases ("Phases") to be determined by the City Manager in his/her sole discretion. Prior to the City making Initial Improvements. the City shall provide Licensee with an invoice determining the amount of the costs for the initial Phase to be constructed. A minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the Citv commencing construction of the said Phase. Licensee shall either: 1) present an Instrument to the City Manager to secure the costs of said Phase or 2) prepay the costs of said Phase. The City shall not be obligated to commence construction of any Improvements, until it receives and approves the Instrument or receives pre -payment for the cost of each Phase. In the event that Licensee elects to provide an Instrument to secure the costs of a Phase and does not prepay the costs of such Phase. Licensee shall provide such Instrument a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the first date that the City will commence construction of said Phase. The City shall have the right to draw upon or exercise its rights under the Instrument immediately upon completion of construction of any Phase. For subsequent Phases, the City shall invoice Licensee for the costs of the next Phase in the same manner as with the initial Phase. Licensee shall provide an Instrument to the City Manager a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the first date that the City will commence construction of the each Phase subsequent to the initial Phase, until all Phases have been completed. In the event of a default by the Licensee, the City shall have the immediate right to draw upon or exercise its rights under the Instrument. In the event that Licensee does not elect to provide an Instrurnent to secure the costs of a Phase. Licensee shall pay the City for all costs associated with a Phase a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to first date that the City commences construction of the initial Phase. For subsequent Phases. Licensee shall pay all costs to the City a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the date when the City will commence construction of the next Phase, until all Phases have been completed. If Licensee fails to provide an Instrument or fails to prepay the costs for a Phase, as the case may be, as required hereunder, then Licensee will be in default and the City will cease making further Initial Improvements. The City will not begin a new Phase until all payments 11 03- 292 Exhibit A (Public Property) 03- 292 LEGEND RACE C"M 1 ATOUI 11 $L "11 SI 011 AREA PA000CII ARI A RAC! PERIL! IER 0,1f "RAM[ R WN I !I- Nf11 RI *At l P111"IERIEICL U Uelsc. 1 vim•• -� 1 ,>�� • • ---v (7 f yNE 6tVD tSM' — ra Y F11 > N E Nd AVE --- - 4A N -1 -- - -- - .j -- o — � —V (--- - - —ISE Id AVE - w 0° t4 � IL— w w U z z z NE 2nd AVE Ir°J--'T,fl, o too Tao Am eoo American Le Mans Series Course - Public Property SI. ' Exhibit B (Course Layout) 03- 292 Exhibit C (Race Perimeter) 03 292 E_. O I tZ LEGEND IIIIIIIIIIIII01 COVAS( I ATOU11154 M1 11I MOP0.IIDMIKAI,NPIER NNI PROPOSIONIARIA PINPOSE 011- Nfj1 P41 MNI Ei NIOPOSEO KM9IRAN CIOSSOYF R IROGE ---- "KVM0PII" F>• MIOPO/IG PA00001 ARA MOPOOCO PIMIC v11•pI A=U *4 IMP" -PNOPO,,OOPIPAGOAM,IAIOS PROVIMOV I P CPIOVI"M /• I no IIIOCWAI, ►RGPos1G CIA[Ml PUII1c cAl(U A la P"OP11MOEMINP I EAn GATE P11pP05I0 K MIIOR I ccka LHON fIM11 IncAEi UfOA Pfan m PRI/tuov4p IRACR so &off$ 41111110 PROP06EO rt1110 YPACI1111 I. ... I iwA06E0IPMAIIAUPA NLA YAOUIIIII BISCAYNE BAY Bit Ell IL� foo _ x I > - r UIus N.E. JM AVE. P.. L�' I j CO � S E Ad AVE. - I --- _ _ _ IA �_-_--- N E. 2nd AVE _ - - 0 100 gTi IUI M1 American Lemans Series Course - Course Layout SOf 1, 1,N 0. MIMI' B LEGEND MCI C"W IAeOUIl15AAINES1 PIKPMDPII AICA +� MDPOSID►ADDOCP AMA MCI RIIY ILII FrAW OM'"WIARWRWAIL MIDPOWD II' "nH p11 MALI (1 BISCA E BLVD � W > t a,` _ N E JN AVE �__) I _ J ui to iAO L.L..�..J I ---- -_ ^--- -- J OC _ _ _ _ S E Jrd AVE '^ 0A x 111 _ _ .. z w z w w ui — __ -- =; tn N E 2nd AVE 0 100?w 400 on .....,.. .. American Le Mans Series Course - Race Perimeter -- — Sine I': IW O' Exhibit D (Modifications) 03- 292 —•-+ z a , I I : U . , 1\ II 1 , ... . 11 ,.. I. ,, 1 . I w, u l ull n. .,•I d„�� u�l 111 )IM11 lu i 1 , 1 \\I I I ISI (s5 MACK JMOTM - LN IAVO APM L M LMI M - AM 61M APIMIL MAMOLO• MAr A AAO11rAf•MO O AwIrCAM �wMM ASO OOIMM r w �I•-11 y1 M Yr M•/I• r� R �+• 11-1 MOPOMO COUP" LA/OW +C-1 { 111 11.4 w a."= ...MTn ..o a.wtgll ►rr so1r1. 104." rlrM rm.c•.0411 ..0101 CO." ..valgt O 1 a -M .w11..1- a*tiro� R) 0.0114t w r.".r I ►rwM p) VJM Vmft I r.rrr M.t.4 :l l !,n-4 4 . ►.not MtMr..0 � F u/1M ". d.ral0k .+.a"u ► 1001.rI ttaM .t 01t. we "da $MAN .r 0,10111 "troll0% .1 Y" a "Abdo.66"U0.0 ."toln.e t.r}* � M•.twt ►..+e �n� t►o .e ." ft .1 OK.uK It* ..0 rt .r f1"a robs ..0 rr Lt aan.a t.;e +wtwr..alfi It too.1R 1e.Mffr 1t c00.a0.0."e. ",e.i.•x.• f) mw ...sola..". .sw ADWS) .nr1c..O41F Mi�r..w to '• a• rs Alli t." t0 VIC. wr Cloud na -0 IN_. wen:; Qttr..1! potru. .Ow Mea A of +! IF 0111. 0.0 .u..", ..r. 'iW[•:. W I ta:.M !'b' m..w Vis.• .ua M:•.,: . sun .w. r.rr4 "Alp ;. to. loop 111.0, i 11 •..011 of ". w1o.r ►.r" +i .11..1 I a.+rub:.r I90 O^0-4 l0lAba dN1 Ono RAW" t.o"M 1161►• .rm/k."s) rmr¢.a/yf • rtet.4 "orM.r, 11011mart 1.11 CO N4 R.R d/ "t drag nous 'I, .� o1rOKd .1 rm\Rdr COM". tAr+[ N..IUI I AICA" we (0rdr0ae W. 00ofroll n.m 'R ¢ uOb11 ►A..r rowrr 1001.ti ... 0.0. .} ►.a. N OMat. A bd. w4 SwIll • AOa1s /y Ir wepwa042, r.1Rldal 00.0• MAW .1 R CY"c /MIA .0 cofr1K1 rr dart /m Illoolballows fO.M 4, ralt allowsI rlorr ` rn.ad.drM rut Col. ROM I.I.I tl10M lava roar {fR} 4."011 ►..b az t 1 c + loofa IIOeM !0410- 1►" N N Air M 0-0-K r. .. 00.4 .1 ►.1. It~ n .�.1.1 .r ,. babe.." .. :. MI a•ww.e sr. .: b0.tw r.+*< :fR� ...rt.r, Aar u wn. r4•S.+e :.. :ti; - K a1atM ,4 a4.. b..Ft� l0o.trC fWM N 04r Me11« 1i 00. q.3a ca0r4 .e,!ee r'.r.b61a1 ati Mntt rnr/pbM14n, a. �: .."..}1 of aT ^"a.R .iw rs ba 11." ♦Albs .rr.I �i t.■ ►..Arta ael'f♦ 00. •t.F �. oabl..a w./t 4I 00.. A.!* .ao.+.0 tM^' . t.rt01Y! °.LO.S. M1•wK K.O .fC..K •M ^A. •DCII '•1'a..r>1./b.{i¢ °ryaQ4 Irftr} !'d1a14.16MI .R,/�/1A1tb ae9' [SM.Y4M n.l+• - Y0bI1/rO(. cyn ta.tCR YC 9� '+.'YMM (. xi ,..rx •.:�. •a1E/ .u"" .O (ll1M to M 1rf1 M.b1..R �a .." Qtr[ IO ./ !!ft r1Sat►w.-,:: =t A"0.r Rn f.Y F++M*«: ..... ..:..«. w+,... + mms.x .. "-+.R: AN...6 qp 9+ *.# +, -r .tllCt l..f 11be 'Illi .N 1rt.n.: .o.51K •trf. 1-1 .trot we 1tl.:1, '•r+A..t "M b ue9 tr►n ''^'tH,M '" + 4 YY^e R,4,MIR?s ter. t • - :I .A...P' 'a/I'M S x ?^ . - .n 11M}..t r.;... ►.I.ArYJ ,...e«... r. r".rb." ,t, ,. /1b}e'n «Y " .0 .�:<r:.. a n.... tt rza• rt o.Yu� Ort. •c . ^aM.M • / ... MARKLl0 UAB � �AATI��tMC IM tes.1 a• •1 rl .. U IOO.IK ,411 (/n OK.1 a» .1 .1 1.. a, (tib OK...a at*err i M .1 .I f Ntt1w,4 alt1 aK.1 aa*.11 Mao 11 140.4 .911 l41Owy UNS- 61 N to I.. to eMetn[.•ogfl waw•M.MIq WWCA%aelt7 rOrR.41apl .KI. fNl I.y [u•,4 /tr11..r. WW/ two/ 1.,441 DAMI tlrwl WWI IMI I.,441 Oast rwI twat I•42 Oav4AWwr. mr ■ey,4 • tlK•Rraw 1.1 f.11 M qrM M ralm"ll ban R 41,11 b"I 0+ .I r r /Owrw at OK.1 alw 1 ..a 41Ueait M 41aaL.R 41wI1 171 Illte OWN" farwRl ra 141 10 /l afll .f r. 10b.41 O fMr 11 •eO net$ •f rw CSOWS I aK.w,4 ar wRt1 .t 0 41414[. M OK.1 arw nets tl fw tAw•f41 O 0141 wb• fa.al .� .r rI tl 1-0 empol "oft *4 f/ 1a wt w. wlr Gat me 1wf IM U Iw wl w• Ir twf r/ r wl a• Iaa1M O/N 1•e� It toot k sr•.. ft .`.v e,, r, r e.r..r ,aeew hp wl ,. It e. ago.— .110 w .K... a••»OOIRwf .A. I bwaw• l , awerleo �b» I•a41.•a.w $I.wi.I*— .fn sr._ � moo m. ePO... Yr.er.. <.+,e.;- -^NReT .,�»•; ..r. •°•eM 11 . r+.ra .wwtA M1-eO,4. f.. e..41I. t.te e•y! CeaM flp e... vaelet.byll qa *c . ni axw v> �.. r4111t te.11 M• rr -Dal-a,4 a Otim-R bm l rm A-0 M -Pa o McCaw am( Ol iax e.ar .P+*/'z x.wt.d+s.... iYP( tlfll �.K.e w. wi,M ` .1 r. 1.41141 s fK..r aMa[I ata. twr41 I bK..4 Rrr ft .A Rtac.0 , wM w•wl •41 •1 -.91 w1•. waM) -0 w/ !eM 1t .•/1 +eR ewe OMI ..In seer,:. 11,11 •qr e+lt Oral/ eee.. laoal 101 t.f ads Ae Ia lrl w• ..MW wK.... a enedt +.lwMl ►K..r R• 01011-...•4141., IV u 19 Y/ 1x•1,1 R• ..v •.O f1 s. f1 reae.c racer. eKvc • qy I I ■.p pae..p ern In 141 1111 ••rrM NI nm/. am ..e41 wer. .•w rroMy Old Rvx.ae 14141 1.11 Ierwwf 141 eI OK.1 OR» ..r W �lVwt lV Da" to a.nrl reMe,4 wl++J a Mw.M, 0— OORI. lemma ■11 .COW.C. oe1/1 ' I.O.Q x.411 mt_q .eee •. f\R s' + WWI "—.K 1� MIYl&0 AJAhW � �AIIM�R•MC WAN, ,41100" ".ey tlr nen' AREA I Location A: • Drainage survey must be obtained, catch basin must be capped and valley gutter to be removed • Regrade intersection and low points will be along existing curb inlets • Front portion of traffic island to be removed and asphalted if this area is to be made wider. Location B: • Concrete curb and sidewalk area may have to be cut-back due to narrow width of this area. • Large tree in this area must be maintained — this is a critical area for track width. Location C: • Entire traffic curb island to be removed, reconstruct curb and gutter and asphalt entire area. • Width of track in this arra critical as well at this location. Location D: • Barrier wall placement will delineate track. • Replace valley gutter and regrade outside lane to curb and gutter. Place drainage inlet at low point and connect to existing box. Location E: ' Possible milling and resin t cing due to manhole top lip above existing ground. Location F: • Area must be regraded and low point relocated due to severe grade change between areas. • Decision on either clipping planter or flag stand 03-' 292 and late payments due hereunder have been received by the Cite. The City shall not be obligated to complete a Phase while Licensee is in default of this Agreement. 14. Subsequent Improvements to the Race Course After the initial Race Event. if Licensee is required to make or undertake Subsequent Improvements the Race Course to comply with the requirements of racing series or sanction organizations or for any other reason, Licensee shall notify the City Manager and the Trust a minimum of ten (10) months prior to the Race Event. Licensee shall submit the proposed alternate Race Course design to the City Manager at least six (6) months prior to the Race Event for the City Manager's approval. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Should Subsequent Improvements to the Race Course be required. the parties will cooperate in good faith to: (i) adjust to any development constraints in the City; (ii) accommodate the special needs of the Race Events; (iii) cooperate with each other in good faith to develop an alternative, cost effective race course design modification which continues to satisfy the requirements of the Race Events and Support Events as scheduled: and (iv) which continues to enable Licensee to stage the Race Events in a first class manner similar to the presentation of the original "Miami Grand Prix" in Downtown Miami. In any year in which Licensee requests Subsequent Improvements and the City approves of the Subsequent Improvements, the Licensee shall be financially responsible for the cost of such improvements. Payments for the costs of Subsequent Improvements shall be trade in accordance with Paragraph 15. entitled "Payments for the Costs of Subsequent Improvements." The City shall not make additional modifications to the Race Course if Licensee is in default of this Agreement, or any extension thereof. 15. Pavment of the Costs of Subsequent Improvements Licensee shall prepay the City or provide to the City an Instrument securing the costs of the Subsequent Improvements, which shall be constructed by the City in phases ("Phases") to be determined by the City Manager in his/her sole discretion. Prior to the City making Subsequent Improvements, the City shall provide Licensee with an invoice determining the amount of the costs for the initial Phase to be constructed. A minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the City commencing construction of the said Phase. Licensee shall either: 1) present an Instrument to the City Manager to secure the costs of said Phase or 2) prepay the costs of said Phase. The City shall not be obligated to commence construction of any Improvements, until it receives and approves the Instrument or receives pre -payment for the cost of each Phase. In the event that Licensee elects to provide an Instrument to secure the costs of a Phase and does not prepay the costs of such Phase, Licensee shall provide such Instrument a minimum 12 03- 292 of thirty (30) days prior to the first date that the City will commence construction of said Phase. The City shall have the right to draw upon or exercise its rights ander the Instrument immediately upon completion of construction of any Phase. For subsequent Phases. the Cite shall invoice Licensee for the costs of the next Phase in the same manner as with the initial Phase. Licensee shall provide an Instrument to the City Manager a minimum of thing (30) days prior to the first date that the City will commence construction of the each Phase subsequent to the initial Phase. until all Phases have been completed. In the event of a default by the Licensee. the City shall have the immediate right to draw upon or exercise its rights under the Instrument. In the event that Licensee does not elect to provide an Instrument to secure the costs of a Phase, Licensee shall pay the City for all costs associated with a Phase a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to first date that the City commences construction of the initial Phase. For subsequent Phases, Licensee shall pay all costs to the City a minimum of thirty (30) daysprior to the date when the City will commence construction of the next Phase, until all Phases have been completed. If Licensee fails to provide an Instrument or fails to prepay the costs for a Phase, as the case may be. then Licensee will be in default and the City will cease making further Subsequent Improvements. The City will not begin a new Phase until all payments and late payments due hereunder have been received by the City. The City shall not be obligated to complete a Phase while Licensee is in default of this Agreement. In the event that third parties are licensed to conduct Race Events on the Race Course. the City shall reimburse Licensee $75.000 per Race Event for the costs that Licensee has paid for the Improvements. 16. Modifications to the Race Perimeter Licensee shall not make any modifications or improvements to the Public Property without prior approval from the City and the Trust. 17. Storage The City will use its best efforts to locate and provide property for the storage of the Race Course safety systems. equipment and barricades. In the event that the City is able to locate a storage facility for Licensee to store the Race Course safety systems, equipment and barricades, the City shall issue to Licensee a thirty (30) day revocable permit for storage of said equipment. This in-kind service has a present approximate value of $50,000. The value shall increase annually in accordance with the Consumer Price Index, published by the U.S. Department of Labor. however the annual increase shall not exceed four percent (4%). The Licensee shall, however, be solely responsible for any transportation or other costs associated with such storage. 13 03— 292 �s stir The City and the Trust shall use their best efforts to provide Licensee at no charge with appropriate City or Trust facilities near the Race Course to assist Licensee in the construction of the Race Course and Race Perimeter. and the set up and tear down activities. However. all costs associated with all such activities shall be the sole responsibility of the Licensee. Licensee shall bear the risk of loss for the use of such storage and agrees to indemnify. hold and save harmless. and defend the City and the Trust. their directors, officers. employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims. demands. liens. judgments. liability, losses or damages. including but not limited to cost. expenses and attomey's fees that occur as a result of the Licensee's use of the storage facility. 18. Licenses, Authorizations and Permits The City shall obtain licenses, authorizations and permits from the applicable county, state and federal agencies for the improvements, modifications and maintenance that it shall perform on the Public Property that comprises the Race Course. Licensee shall pay for such costs. Licensee shall obtain. or cause to be obtained, and maintain in full force and effect throughout the term of this Agreement or any extension thereof. at its sole expense. all other licenses. authorizations and permits that are necessary for Licensee to conduct the Raceworks Events. In the event that it is necessary for the City or the Trust to be a co -applicant or co- sponsor of Licensee's applications for these licenses, authorizations and permits, then the CitN and Trust agree to be co-sponsors and co -applicants for any licenses. authorizations and permits necessary to stage Raceworks Events. However. Licensee shall be responsible for paying the cost of said applications and obtaining said licenses, authorizations and permits. To the extent not prohibited by law, the City agrees to waive the fees for any licenses. authorizations and permits that Licensee is required to obtain from the City. Prior to issuance of a permit for a Race Event. Licensee shall provide the City Manager with sufficient information, as determined by the City Manager, to demonstrate that Licensee is, and that the Race Event shall be. in compliance with all of the provisions of Section 549.08, Florida Statutes (2000), as amended, which is hereby incorporated by reference. The City shall not issue a permit for a Race Event if either the Licensee or the Race Event is not incompliance with this section. Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, apply for all necessary national and international sanctions to allow each Race Event to be qualified as a professional motorsports sanctioned automobile race. A copy of the written confirmation of such sanctions from the sanction organizations shall be forwarded by Licensee to the City Manager and Executive Director of the Trust upon receipt by Licensee. but in any event no later than ninety (90) days —before the scheduled date of any Race Event. In the event such confirmation is not received the Licensee shall be in default hereunder. 14 03 252 19. Citi• Police, Fire and Sanitation Services Licensee shall be responsible for payment of the police. fire rescue and sanitation services ("Services") that are required for each Raceworks Event. Six (6) months prior to a Raceworks Event. Licensee will meet with the City Manager or designee to discuss the level of Services that are necessary for a Raceworks Event. The City Manager or designee will contact the City's Police. Fire and Solid Waste Departments to ascertain the level of Services that are necessary prior to, during and after a Raceworks Event. Thereafter, the City Manager or designee shall advise Licensee of the cost of the Services, including an estimate of the number of police, fire and sanitation personnel required, the estimated hours of work and applicable rates of pay. A minimum of seven (7) days prior to the Use Period, Licensee shall provide the City with an Instrument to secure the costs of the Services. The Instrument shall also secure the added costs of removal of the barricades. If Licensee fails to do so, then Licensee shall be in default. If Licensee does not cure this default by delivering an Instrument to the City within twenty-one (2 1) days from the date of its default, the City shall have the right to immediately terminate this Agreement. The City shall not have any duty to provide any Services while the Licensee is in default hereinafter. The City shall use its best efforts to limit the cost of the Services for the Initial Race Event to an amount not to exceed $300,000. After the Initial Race Event, the City and the Licensee will meet to evaluate the cost of Services for the Initial Race Event in order to determine whether Services will exceed $300,000 in the future. However, in any event, the Licensee shall be responsible for payment of the cost of the Services rendered. If. during a Raceworks Event, the City, in its sole discretion, determines that security for the Raceworks Events is insufficient to ensure the safety and welfare of the public, then the City or Trust may summon such additional personnel as is deemed necessary. Licensee shall be responsible for payment of such additional personnel at the applicable rate, which shall be the rate normallv charged for such personnel, depending on factors such as whether the personnel is off-duty or working overtime. In the event that off-duty police officers are summoned, then the compensation shall be based on the greater of four (4) hours or the actual time devoted to the Race Event, including "administrative" time, such as time devoted to booking prisoners, etc. No later than two (2) months prior to the commencement of the Use Period, Licensee shall provide two (2) copies of a diagram/floor plan of the proosed Raceworks Events layout to the Office of Fire Department Plans Examiner, 444 S.W. 2 Avenue, 10th Floor, Miami, FL 33130. Similarly, not later than ten (10) days prior to the commencement of the Use Period, Licensee shall obtain and deliver to the Executive Director an Assembly Permit, and such other permits as may be required by the City relative to a Raceworks Event. Fire department manpower requirements for the Event shall be as stipulated by the Fire Marshall and approved by the City Manager. 15 03- 292 Licensee shall ensure compliance with all necessary police. fire, and sanitation union requirements (if applicable) in connection with the personnel and senices engaged for presentation of a Raceworks Event. The City shall use its best efforts to inform Licensee of the terms of any police. fire. sanitation union agreement. written or oral. affecting all relevant personnel or services used in connection with any Raceworks Event. 20. Traffic Plans for Race Events Licensee agrees in good faith to work with the City, the Trust and the Dowrtto%%m Development Authority well in advance of any Race Event to devise a plan of traffic and pedestrian control which minimizes unjustified interference with business and individual activity in and about the Race Perimeter. It is not anticipated that any street closures will be required for more than a total of three (3) days during any Race Event and such closures shall be over an Event Weekend. 21. Set Up and Tear Down of the Race Perimeter During the Use Period Licensee shall have access to the Public Property during the Use Period for the set up and dismantling of the Race Perimeter. During the Use Period, subject to the City's and the Trust's reasonable approval and subject to applicable laws and any agreements of the City or the Trust. respectively, with other governmental or private entities, Licensee may temporarily move or remove light posts. statues, benches or other items located on Public Property. may construct a temporary Race Perimeter, including but not Iimited to, placing barriers, blockades. temporary cable (electrical and other), safety equipment safety devices, spectator control line fencing, fence covering material. portable toilets, signage, tents and hospitality facilities, cranes, forklifts, vehicles, fire protection equipment and apparatus, temporary fuel dispensing, medical equipment and apparatus, park and display participant vehicles, set up bleachers, seats, temporary wiring. banners. structures. spectator control line and components thereof within the Race Perimeter and any such other structures to ensure the safety, security, and necessary facilities to properly conduct a Rac:works Event. Immediately after the Race Event, Licensee must relocate and/or return any items moved to their original location. The set up and tear down activities shall be effectuated so as to minimize any negative impact upon the routine activities of the City or the Park. Licensee may request additional time to effectuate the set up and dismantling of the Race Perimeter and approval of such request to the City or Trust shall not be unreasonably withheld. The parties shall cooperate in good faith to plan the set up and the tear down activities of the Raceworks Event in such a manner as to minimize. where reasonably practical, the disruption to local businesses adjacent to the Race Course, yet in a manner consistent with Licensee's reasonable ability to stage a Raceworks Events as planned and scheduled without undue expense or burden to Licensee. Licensee shall give the City and the Trust a proposed schedule ("Schedule') showing the dates for installation and removal of grandstands, bleachers, safety devices, and any other 16 o3_ 29z - apparatus or equipment to be utilized in connection with a Raceworks Event at least nines%' (90 days prior to the Race Event. The City Manager and the Executive Director shall have fifteen (15) business days to approve or disapprove the Schedule. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If no response is given in such fifteen (15) dad- period. the Schedule shall be deemed to have been approved by the City Manager and the Executive Director. If the Schedule is disapproved. the Licensee shall submit a revised Schedule for approval by the Cite Manager and the Executive Director within ten (10) days of receipt of the City Manager's or Executive Director's disapproval of the original Schedule. After the conclusion of the staging of each Race Event. Licensee shall reasonable promptly remove all grandstands, bleachers, barricades, safety devices and any other safete equipment and apparatus. The City may remove any temporary devices not removed on a timely basis, or the Trust and the City, respectively, shall be reimbursed for the charges for such removal by drawing upon or exercising its rights under the Instrument that Licensee provided for the Services and for barricade removal. The charges will be the amount of such removal costs the City. Licensee shall set up for the Raceworks Events in the Park no more than seven (7) days prior to the Race Events and tear down two (2) days after the Race Events. 22. Licensee's Operations of Race Events (a) Licensee agrees to furnish, at its own cost and expense. all personal property and equipment necessary for the successful and professional operation of the Raceworks Events. (b) Neither the City nor the Trust shall be responsible for any goods, merchandise or equipment stored on the City's or Trust's property, or be responsible for damage to Licensee's property resulting from a power failure, hurricane, tornado, flood, fire, explosion, and or any other causes. (c) Licensee shall ensure that its employees shall at all times be neatly dressed attired in clean uniforms and wear an identification badge. (d) Licensee shall provide adequate personnel to provide quality service at all times. Licensee shall be notified of any employees of Licensee that are not deemed to be performing in the best interest of the City and/or the Trust. (e) Licensee shall designate a management representative ("Management Representative") who shall be present at the Raceworks Events. The Management Representative shall be given the full authority by the Licensee to make on-site decisions on behalf of or for the Licensee, but not of the City or the Trust. The Management Representative shall ensure strict compliance with all terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The 17 03 292 Management Representative shall serve as a liaison between the City. the Trust and the Licensee. Said Management Representative she remain on call on a twenty-four (24) hour basis during a Raceworks Event should he/she need to be contacted by the Citi- or the Trust. In addition. the City and Trust shall be provided with a telephone number and beeper where said individual can be reached at all times twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven days a week. It is expected that the Management Representative shall respond to any request and/or concerns by the City or Trust within a maximum of twenty-four hours. or immediately on the day of a Raceworks Event. The City and the Trust shall designate a representative who will be similarly available to the Licensee. (f) Licensee shall provide sufficient personnel to professionally and safely conduct the promotion related activities to stage the Raceworks Events. (g) Licensee agrees to display, in plain view, any reasonable rules established by this Agreement and established by the City and the Trust in relation to the Raceworks Events and the operations of the Raceworks Events. No such rule shall be inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement. (h) Except when otherwise mutually agreed upon by the parties. Licensee agrees to store all equipment away from the Public Property. (i) The City shall be entitled, on a complimentary basis, to one hospitality suite for forty (40) persons and forty (40) complimentary tickets for said suite for each Raceworks Event. The City shall be solely responsible for all food and beverage charges for said suite. The Trust shall be entitled to receive fifty (50) complimentary preferred seating tickets to any Raceworks Event. 0) Licensee shall have the right to establish and charge rates, provided, however, that Licensee shall not charge different rates to different persons admitted to the Race Perimeter. All charges shall be posted in clearly readable signs that are posted in accordance with all applicable laws. (k.) Any release that Licensee obtains from a spectator or participant in a Raceworks Event shalt also release the City and the Trust from liability. Licensee shall print language on the Raceworks Event tickets which release the City and the Trust from any liability for personal injury and property damage relating to the Raceworks Events. 23. Risk of Loss Licensee agrees that neither the City nor the Trust shall be liable for any loss, injury or damage to any personal property or equipment brought into the Race Perimeter by Licensee or anyone whomsoever during the Use Period. All personal property placed or moved into the Race Perimeter shall be at the risk of Licensee or the owner thereof. Licensee further agrees that it shall be responsible to provide security whenever personal property either owned or used by the 18 03- 292 fX Licensee. its employees. agents or subcontractors is placed in the Race Course site. including property necessary for set-up and dismantling the Race Perimeter. regardless of whether or not the Race Perimeter is open to the general public. 24. Sianaze Licensee. or its authorized agent. shall post signage in the City. Park. and outside of the City limits in conformity with existing laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of any applicable government agency. The location of signage in Bayfront Park shall be subject to the reasonable approval of the Executive Director. Neither the Citv nor the Trust shall implement any ordinances, rules and regulations which will limit Licensee's right to display and/or locate temporary signage on the Race Course or within the Race Perimeter. 25. Financial Obligations Each party shall only be entitled to the financial assistance, compensation or remuneration specifically set forth herein. and no party shall be entitled to or shall charge any other partyany fees. assessments, surcharges, or taxes or any other thing of value other than as specifically provided herein. 26. No Claim to Assets or Rights of Licensee By entering into this Agreement. none of the parties are granted any assets, rights. titles or interest to the other's assets, rights, title or interests. except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement. 27. Bayside Marketplace and Concorde Cruises The license granted herein is subject to the existing rights and agreements between the Trust and Concorde Cruises, Inc. and the City and Bayside Marketplace Limited Partnership. 28. Non -Interference and First Right of Refusal Neither the City nor the Trust shall permit the staging of any Race Event within forty-five (45) days before or thirty (30) days after a Race Event. Subject to the conditions herein and any applicable laws. Licensee shall have the first right of refusal to stage any Race Event on the Race Course (in its present or future form) subject to further good faith negotiations with the City and the Trust. 19 03- 292 29. Licensee's Records and Financial Statement No later than sixty (60) days prior to the Use Period. Licensee shall submit to the Citi Manager. for approval, a report of projected expenses. revenues. equity and bank financing to demonstrate whether the Licensee has the financial wherewithal to stage Race Event(s). Such report shall be prepared by a certified public accountant. In the event the City Manager does not approve the report and determines that the Licensee does not have the financial wherewithal to stage a Race Event. then the City Manager shall submit such report to the City Commission who shall make the final determination of the Licensee's financial ability to stage the Race Event. 30. Compliance with Municipal Motor Vehicle Racing Act The staging of the Race Events and temporary construction of the Race Course which is performed under this Agreement shall be in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations applying thereto. including all of the provisions of the Municipal Motor Vehicle Racing Act as set forth in Section 549.08, Florida Statues (2000). 31. Promotion by City and Trust The City and the Trust, respectively, through their normal operations. will cooperate in good faith with Licensee to promote Race Events through the City's departments or offices. 32. Quality of Events Licensee agrees that its operation and promotion of the Race Events shall provide a quality of service commensurate with and equal to a professional motorsports event of comparable nature. 33. Taxes Other than the ones contemplated herein, during the term of this Agreement and any extensions thereof, the City and the Trust shall not levy any assessments, charges, taxes. penalties. or fees that is applicable solely against Licensee, its operations, sales, tangible or intangible property, revenues, profits, or any vendors, sponsors, racing series, sanctioning —organization contracting with Licensee or any customers in relation to ownership, management. promotions, operation or staging of the Race Events. Throughout the term of this Agreement and any extension thereof, Licensee shall pay, whether assessed against the Licensee, the City or the Trust. all taxes, assessments and other governmental charges that may be levied upon the 20 U3 _ 292 promotions. operations and any other use granted to Licensee under this Agreement. with exception to any taxes. assessments and other governmental charges may be levied upon an- payment made by Licensee to City or the Trust pursuant to this Agreement. 34. Compliance With Laws Licensee and/or its authorized agents agree to comply with applicable laws. codes ordinances and regulations enacted or promulgated by federal, state, county. and Cit, government including the provisions of the Charter and Code of the City. Licensee and/or its authorized agents shall also comply with reasonable directives of the City Manager. 35. Additional Expenses Under no circumstances will the City be liable for any costs or expenses incurred by Licensee under. this Agreement or as a result of the Race Events, Support Events or related activities beyond those that are specifically set forth in this Agreement. 36. No Discrimination in Hiring. In the performance of this Agreement or any extension thereof, Licensee and/or its authorized agents shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex. age, race. color, religion, ancestry or national origin. License and/or and its authorized agents will take affirmative action to insure that minority applicants are employed and that employees are fairly treated during employment without regard to their sex. age, race, color, religion. ancestry. or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation. 37. Indemnification. Licensee shall indemnify, hold and save harmless, and defend the City, the Corps, and the Trust, their directors, officers, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, liens. judgments, liability, losses or damages, including but not limited to cost, expenses and attorney's fees caused by the actual or claimed negligence (active or passive) or omission of Licensee, its agents, employees, contractors, or concessionaires, or either of them, either as a sole or contributory cause, for loss of, use of, injury to or destruction of any property and/or bodily or personal or other injuries, including death, at any time resulting therefrom, sustained by any person or persons, including officers and employees of the City, the Corps. or the Trust. or in any manner attributable to any and all actions, representations, or performance of the provisions of this Agreement. 21 os- 292 Gg Licensee shall further indemnify, hold and save harmless. and defend the City. the Corps. and the Trust, their directors. officers and employees. from and against any and all claims, liens. IiabiIin. losses or damages, including but not limited to cost. expenses and attorneys' fees arising out of the City's statutory obligations pertaining to defective conditions in the Race Course and appurtenances thereto. including obligations under the Florida Statutes relating to dangerous condition of public property. Notwithstanding the foregoing. it is specifically understood and agreed that Licensee shall not indemnify nor agree to hold free and harmless and defend the Cite or the Trust. its officers and employees, or any of them of and from and against any and all claims, demands, liens, judgments, or otherwise, for death of or injury to any person or damage to any property whatsoever that may happen or occur as the sole result of any act or activity of the City or the Trust or any person acting for the City or the Trust or under their separate control or direction in failing to perform any act or duty imposed upon the City or the Trust by the terms of this Agreement, or as the sole result of any act or non -action by the City permitted or required pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. As between the parties to this Agreement. such liability shall be solely borne by the City and/or the Trust. In the event that the City or Trust is a defendant in or party to litigation as a result of negotiating or entering into this Agreement, or any extension thereof. Licensee shall indemnify the Citv and the Trust, their directors, officers. employees and volunteers from and against any and all monetary judgments (including related attorney's fees and costs awards). The City Attorney's Office shall vigorously defend, at its own expense, any litigation as a result of negotiating or entering into this Agreement, or any extension thereof, and the City shall bear its costs of such litigation. Licensee also agrees not to sue the City, the Corps, or the Trust. their directors. officers, employees and volunteers in the event that a third party sues the City, the Corps, the Trust, their directors. officers, employees and volunteers, for injunctive relief preventing performance of this Agreement and such injunctive release is granted. 38. Insurance Licensee shall obtain and keep in force at all times during the term of this Agreement, a policy of public liability and property damage insurance, in a form acceptable to the City's Risk Administrator, protecting the City, the Trust, and their officers and employees, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers and its officers and employees against any and all liability due to the death. injury, loss or damage to persons or property arising out of, or in any way incident to Licensee's operations of the Race Events. The policies described herein shall be provided to the City prior to the City commencing the initial improvements contemplated herein. 22 03-' 292 Exhibit A (Public Property) 03. 292 1 , C LEGEND - RACE E"!AI A1011 I 1 Se I.R 1 S1 hi AREA - eA000CK ANA RACE MARL IFR N' Mfji NRII[ A WAI I j1wl"nI WAIT M A" VIA FIWA � V -""q 0�' BISCAYNE BAY n �r SpUiN — _ BISCAYNE - N F11 _- t Ui Uj NE WAVE _ I— - —_, --- 1 "' SE A AVELJ _ ve-i ul in •- - - S - _ - Ln 3 : u, -- w Iu w - - w - - - �z�__ n►--lHM. N E 2nd AVE I 1 , \ �.a.YlOI American Le Mans Series Course - Public Property IT u- ILI 0 row 200 400 e00 Scree 1' . 100 0 r. P., Exhibit B (Course Layout) Exhibit C (Race Perimeter) 03- 292 C vle LEGEND COLFRM I AVOL" 11 $6 US V4 PROPOSID At An" PROPOWD PADDOCK AREA GOIX0. it =KAI$ POOOMMOEMINTIEVIOAR (MITCIIFCkpfwfn 00 PF"xw0v4Pllwx&"wtI6 BISCAYNE BAY kMAI X 1111-3 W C, it POOM(O III, etGoi 6AIM A WAR PWlPOS*O III twA.Al "ll PPOPOU0116" *41090" P"OrOW 0 V I P CfKIAAnM PROP40M : WHIM Ka IC C Wil A I M P%oPOU ww"iCONUUMMMIS POOPMOINIKOISIA4.10GA14A PALUXII Lillillm y; f - �;;�;;rj-:. Ul N.E. W AVE. JF, E3Ll P. Ild AVE, cc ; ILI 6 t; I —*------ 0039 x A W ! -- - --- z - >- Ui 14 U Ic all N E. Znd AVE 0 I'D xrr IDI en/ Mom American Lemans Series Course - Course Layout S"Of 1, Oleo' EXHIBIT B i� If►a`J ;���� LEGEND MC( C"U I AVOW 1t N u1l SI POoros:PII AI*A PIIOPOSl O PAaoOCKAINE A MCL P(OY 11 It POO OSP: M' � BwrEA wN t flgPOW ""CHF4IMWl POOPOftON"M BISUA E END SW NE Mrd AVE --1 I_ � y Ill S E Jed AVE lu ® w I�Ui Z uj z li -- — z < m__ NO�,� ,,....•......, American Le Mans Series Course -Race Perimeter 0 '0''0�400- - -- - Suk 1' : no 0' A . G*2 1 BISUA E END SW NE Mrd AVE --1 I_ � y Ill S E Jed AVE lu ® w I�Ui Z uj z li -- — z < m__ NO�,� ,,....•......, American Le Mans Series Course -Race Perimeter 0 '0''0�400- - -- - Suk 1' : no 0' A Exhibit D (Modifications) MMKIIO•AJAAK 1 ►AO�00•MO rrM�ir�.. 1� SO»ww) MACH LBOM • LN WIN ANOOL M • &AM W.0 APVML 1 1 1n... I\11 1.... It... I.nl. 1 ul. nl ull n..n1.ha 1. a•1 III YM11 lu II,% \\1 1 11-IISS l—, r POOPOM cow" WOW ... rC.' aq AREA I Location A: • Drainage survey must be obtained, catch basin must be capped and valley gutter to be removed • Regrade intersection and low points will be along existing curb inlets • Front portion of traffic island to be removed and asphalted if this area is to be made wider. Location B: • Concrete curb and sidewalk arras may have to be cut-back due to narrow width of this area. • Large tree in this area must be maintained — this is a critical area for track width. Location C: • Entire traffic curb island to be removed, reconstruct curb and gutter and asphalt enure area. • Width of track in this area critical as well at this location. Location D: • Barrier wall placement will delineate track. • Replace valley gutter and regrade outside lane to curb and gutter. Place drainage inlet at low point and connect to existing box. Location E: • Possible milling and resurfacing due to manhole top lip above existing ground - Location F: • Area must be regraded and low point relocated due to severe grade change between areas. • Decision on either clipping planter or flag stand AREA II Location G: • Existing width is 34' (concrete surface) but may be widened to the east Location H: • 1 light pole, 1 tree, l concrete bench and concrete trash container must be removed or relocated. • Turn into fountain must be prepared by laying base and concrete in one corner. • ]Must remove surface of fountain walkway and pave with appropriate surface (concrete). Location I: • New areas of concrete to be placed / Widen road surface. • Light pole relocation necessary. � Location J: • Remove trees and shrubs and traffic island and repave entire area. • Transition area from concrete to asphalt and parlang lot. • Concrete tra$zc curb "fingers" to be removed and paved over. Location K. • Remove curb and pavers from island and tip of north comer — Island area to be removed as well — Pave and stripe out area. • Relocate sign in island. AREA IV Location L: • Mill and repave private paricng lot • Provide transitions to Biscayne Boulevard. • Adjust / protect utility covers at Biscayne Blvd. o Y� 03 292 r_ AREA V Location M: • Alt. 2 concept — this area must be verified further due to possible utility issues under metromover. • Area under metromover must be removed and paved. • Mast arm relocation is necessary — base and permitting. AREA VI Location. N (Pit -out): • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grates. • Relocate 3 trees (location to be determined). • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. Location O: • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grate. • Remove canopy. • Adjust manhole top. Utility owner to be determined. • Relocate 1 tree (location to be determined). • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. Location P: • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grates. • Relocate "Juan Pablo Duarte" Monument to center of traffic island. • • Adjust manhole top. Utility owner to be determined • Relocate 2-3 trees (location to be determined). • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. Location Q: • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grate. • Relocate 1 tree (location to be determined). • Once area is cleared, -lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. • May require removal of island nose nearest to NB Biscayne Boulevard if pit - out location is placed here. 03- 292 Location R: • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grates. • Adjust manhole top. Utility owner to be determined. • Relocate 2-3 trees (location to be determined). • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. Location S: (Pit in) • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grate. • Adjust gas main valve location. • East curb may have to be removed if pit -out is located at this location. • Relocate 1 tree. (Location to be determined.) • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt r t rte-, o3- 292 Exhibit E (Commitment letter from American LeMans Series) 03- 292 SCOT ATKERTON encs -Irmy Af%c COO July 3, 2001 VIA FACSINULE 1-305-37a7444 Mr. Peter Yaaowitch Yanowitch Law Center 800 Brickell Avenue, Suite 550 Miami, FL 33131 Dear Mr. Yanowrtch: As a result of our lengthy negotiations. I am pleased to inform you that the American Le Mans Series is now ready to confirm a 1002 event in Miami. FL- Please consider this loner as a good faith indication of our commitment w comfm a formal sanctioa agreement contingent upon the :iry of :Miami executing an agreement with Raeeworks. Inc. Obviously there arc many details that remain to be confirmed. however we look forward to working With you and your team to farmalize this agreement in the near future. If you have any Questions regarding this documen4 piease do not hesitate to call me directly. Sincerely, c A/cah c Don Panoz Dennis Huth "%44 Anpunw.v avr.,,•r aosert *r"4 re :r•=» - 7rW-r-M•i.AO04 c•. 7nr.�ee�.�n•o Exhibit E 03- 292 Exhibit F (Mitigation Plan) 03- 292 Raceworks, LLC American Lemans Series Course: Site impact Assessment and Mitigation Plan The existing site for the proposed racecourse includes portions of Biscayne Boulevard, the service road for Bayside Marketplace. the waterfront promenade in Bayfront Park and Chopin Plaza between Bayfront Paris and the Intercontinental Hotel. The racecourse has been designed specifically to utilize the existing roadways in all of these areas as well as the parking lot area between northbound and southbound Biscayne Boulevard. The racecourse will have minimal impacts to each of these sites and we have carefully analyzed the details of these impacts as part of the planning process. We have determined that there will be four area of impact; those include vegetation, landmarks, infrastructure and post race restoration of the site. 1. Vegetation The racecourse begins on Biscayne Boulevard and continues south to a private parking lot traveling past Chopin Plaza weaving through Bayfront Park and passing by Bayside Marketplace. Through careful planning and configuration of the racecourse the impacts are minimal to the existing vegetation in the site. All of the trees or palms that are impacted by the racecourse will be transplanted within Bayfront Park. • Biscayne Boulevard- 200 existing trees ano palms only 21 will be impactelb by the racecourse. • Chopin Plaza — 8 palms will be impacted by the racecourse. • Bayfront Park- 500 existing trees and palms less than 1 % or a total of 5 palms will be impacted by the racecourse. • Bayside Marketplace- 100 existing trees and palms along the side of Bayside Marketplace only 2% or a total of 2 trees will be impacted by the racecourse. We have provided a detailed tree disposition pian. plant fist and site photos that include the botanical name, common name. height. spread. canopy and trunk diameter at breast height for each tree/Palm impacted as part of this submittal. Detailed plans of the proposed relocation site for the vegetation will be provided to the City of Miami Parks and Recreation Department for approval prior to installation. ff for any reason any of the Vow or palms do not survive the transplanting process they will be replaced on a 2:1 basis with the same species and same size tree/palm. If for any reason the same size treefpaim is not available in the commercial market they will be replaced with the same species in a smaller size on a 3:1 basis. Shrubs will be replaced with new three gallon plant material and groundcover will be replaced with one gallon plant material. EXHIBIT F 03-* 292 Tree Transplanting Process All of the trees proposed for transplanting will be relocated under the supervision of a certified arborist according to standards established by the American Society of Consulting Arbonsts. This will include root priming 8 weeks prior to transplanting to establish proper root growth. These trees will also have some canopy pruning during this time to prepare them for the transplanting process. Any trees that are not currently watered with an irrigation system will be hand watered with a water truck during the root pruning process. The trees will be relocated to a new location within Bayfront Park utilizing heavy equipment: -Any damage to the park site or irrigation system during the transplanting process will be repaired as part of this process. If necessary the existing imgation within Bayfront Paris will be expanded to provide adequate irrigation for the transplants. All trees will be braced to prevent any injury to the trees and the public due to the strong winds from Biscayne Bay. Transplanted trees will be monitored on a monthly basis for a period of one year to assess the condition. Any trees that do not survive the transplanting process will be replaced at the end of one year. Palm Transplanting Process All of the palms proposed for transplanting will be relocated under the supervision of a certified arborist according to the standards established by the American Society of Consulting Arbonsts. The palms do not require root pruning and can be relocated prior to the trees. The palms will be relocated to a new location within Bayfront Park utfiiang heavy equipment. Any damage to the park site or the existing irrigation system during the transplanting process will be repaired as part of this process. If necessary the existing irrigation within Bayfront Park will be expanded to provide adequate irrigation for the transplanted palms. All palms will be braced to prevent any injury to the palms and the public due to the strong winds from Biscayne Bay. Transplanted palms will be monitored on a monthly basis for a period of one year to assess the condition. Any palms that do not survive the transplanting process will be replaced at the end of one year. 2. Landmarks Bayfront Park • The large fountain by the waterfront in Bayfront Park will not be impacted by the location of the racecourse. Structural barriers will be placed in front of the existing fencing during races to avoid any potential impacts to this landmark. • The Claude Pepper statue on axis with the fountain will not need to be relocated. The walkways parallel to the bay are lined with concrete benches that will be temporarily removed and replaced immediately after the event 03- 292 Biscayne Boulevard _ • There are two existing small sculptures that will be relocates wrtn the city s permission. Bayside Marketplace There are three existing flagpoles by the Casmo Princess docking station that will be upgraded to removable poles that will facilitate relocating during each race. There are also five decorative concrete planters adjacent to the flagpoles that will be relocated during races. Both the flagpoles and the planters will be replaced in their original position after each race. Directly south of this location there are six concrete planters that will also need to be relocated. I Infrastructure The racecourse has been planned to minimally impact the city streetscape and infrastructure. The course utilizes the existing roadways m all locations of the site and therefore does not require the construction of any new roadbeds. With regard to the specific stmetscape components within this area, the racecourse has no impacts to the Metro Mover structure and no imparts on pedestrian access to the Metro Mover other than during race day. The surface parking areas located between northbound and southbound Biscayne Boulevard are not impacted by the racecourse. 4. Post Race Site Restoration After all race events the site will be restored to the pre -race conditions. The restoration techniques will include: • All tire and skid marks from vehicles will be removed from sidewalks and mads with a combination of pressure cleaning andenvironmentally acceptable solvents. • All event debris and trash will be containerized and nunoved from the site. • All temporary site furniture such as bleachers, trash receptacles. portable restrooms, temporary fencing. traffic bollards and safety banners will be removed from the site. • All turf areas that are damaged by race vehicles, pedestrian traffic. or service vehicles will be resodded. • All ground cover or shrubs that are damaged by race vehicles. pedestrian traffic, or service vehicles will be replaced. • Any age to signage• lighting or utilities will be repaired. 03- 292 Exhibit G (Tree Disposition Plan) 03- 292 --iJ Z -CM '11 I11•.i l\II I.. i,. 11 •„ I1 i�41 I1\Nil\1 11'1 .1•vl II'111/!INII III ?7 !\ \AI 111.1 IAA C> MA�Ip/0•AJAYI � �AA11�A�•NG iiiwi�wTiir r r L1 •,4 Q AI�ICAM L�IAIN X M� cam" Y TRANSPLANT (5) COCONUT PAWS RELOCATE LIGHTS )A, 18 1(- Ill & TRANSPLANT (3) SABA[ PA(MS & REMOVE MISC SHRUBS 3A, 38 3C � 2) TRANSPLANT (5) SABAI Pdli REMOVE MISC SHRI jF" A TRANSPLANT (7) THATCH PALMS (SOUT14 SLOE, Slifff I I jCjIT Poll F X. CROSSWAI K WJ1 q) 4( *f ,& 4c =4 Cc~ TRANSPLANT (2) PIGEON PLUM TREES & li?ANSPLANT (1) PINK TRUMPET TREE (500W ' NP (1) PINK TRUMPET TREE (NORTH END) PINK TRUMPET TREES (NOR44 END' EOR EXIT OUT OF PIT AREA 6 11 Ar 5A 5B & 5C IRANSPLANT (2) SII-VLR BUTIONWOOD IRWi (2) PINK IROMPIET TREES & (I) fll(;fON PI4PV TREE (NOR IN END) REMOVE (1) STUMP (SOWH [N0 UNSET AN 0 PINIr' TRUMPET TRE! SOI �sal "WPAN` ,' AW -A WIMINC&A UWAIN same WAX @=Two ?D, 7L if 7r UNSET AN 0 PINIr' TRUMPET TRE! SOI �sal "WPAN` ,' AW -A WIMINC&A UWAIN same WAX @=Two IRANSRANI (2'} GIWHC; d;OA3 REMOVE MISC 504RII(y 9A & 9b tv, A RFIOCAIE (3) FLAG POICS, Pi ANIERS & (2) PAYPHONES m (10 REVOVF PtAra IER A, SHPUPF' a1` PitK@�t;Aip '.61 ARL,,. -A OAtMS AV PtAN4W F 'R l2n 12F & 3 'F MMS OOMIIIN #nor"* U-4 Cit I 1 n1. 1 1 11 1—. . 14 — 11.x.1 1 %I ANIIM \I'1 dwF. IP1ll! 21M11 11121 )!,%,\I I 1111'1'1 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Raceworks LLC desire to enter into an agreement with the City Of Miami for the licensing of motor Sporn race event; and WHEREAS, the Members of the Limited Liability Company have considered the matter in accordance with the operating agreement of the Limited Liability Company, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MEMBERS that Peter Yanowiteh, Manager of Raceworks LLC is herby authorized and instructed to crater imo a contract, in the name and on behalf of Racewotim LLC, with the City of Miami upon the terms contained in the proposed comract to which this resolution is attached. Dated this r- day of, 2001. Willy A. Berinello' Member (CORPORATE SEAL) 03- 292 OOLI- gog 50-1 - x ... iA •:c, .cp AMENDMENT NO.1 TO REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT (hereinafter referred to as "Amendment") to the Revocable License Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "Agreement") made as of this /s day of -, I, 20022,;.by and between Raceworks, LLC, a limited Iiability corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and licensed as a foreign corporation in the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as "Licensee"). the CITY OF MIAMI, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and Bayfront Park Management Trust, a limited agency and instrumentality of the City of Miami (hereinafter referred to as "Trust"). WITNESSETH: On October 23, 2001, the parties hereto entered into the Agreement for Licensee to promote and stage Raceworks Events on Public Property. The City, Trust and Licensee desire to amend the Agreement so that the Licensee shall have the responsibility for making the Initial Improvements, to provide for additional improvements, modify the Mitigation Plan and modify the Tree Disposition Plan. In consideration of ten dollars ($10.00) paid by Licensee to City and Trust and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Amendment to Agreement. The Agreement is hereby amended in the following respects: A. Provision 12 entitled "Initial Improvements to the Race Course" is amended to authorize the Licensee to be the party responsible to make the necessary Initial Improvements to the Public Property. This provision is hereby amended by deleting it in its entirety and inserting the following in lieu thereof- "Licensee hereof "Licensee has designed the Race Course which requires Initial Improvements. Based upon modifications to Public Property that is depicted as Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated as part of this Agreement, subject to obtaining approvals from the applicable government entities, the Licensee will make the necessary Initial Improvements to the Public Property. Licensee shall be financially responsible for the costs of the Initial improvements contemplated herein. Payment for the costs of the Initial Improvements shall be made in accordance with Paragraph 13 below, entitled "Payments for the Costs of Initial Improvements." Some of the Initial Improvements may require approval by the Army Corps of Engineers, State of Florida Department of Transportation, Miami -Dade County, the Water and Sewer Authority, other federal, state and local government agencies, and any other entity which has the right to permit or provide approval for access to Public 03- 292 __; Property. The City makes no representation to the Licensee concerning such approval. The Licensee shall take the steps necessary to obtain the requisite approval and/or permits to make said Initial Improvements. The Licensee will make Initial Improvements on a timely basis so as to facilitate the timely promotion and stagging of the initial Race Event that is scheduled April 5-7, 2002, subject to the force majeure provisions contained herein. In the event that additional design and construction is required. the parties will cooperate in good faith to complete such design and construction, respectively, on an expedited basis so as to facilitate the initial Race Event to be conducted as scheduled." B. Provision 13 entitled "Pavment of the Costs of the Initial Imvrovements" is amended to reflect that at the time of this Amendment, it is the Licensee's intent to do the Initial Improvements. This provision is hereby amended by deleting the provision in its entirety and inserting the following in lieu thereof- "Licensee hereof"Licensee shall pay for the initial Improvements, which shall be constructed by the Licensee in phases ("Phases") to be determined by the Licensee in its sole discretion. Prior to the commencement of the Initial Improvements, Licensee shall execute, deliver to the City Manager, or designee, and record in the public records of Miami-Dade County, a payment and performance bond with a surety insurer authorized to do business in this state as surety. The bond, which shall be in the full amount of the costs of each phase of the Initial Improvements, must state on its front page: the name, principal business address, and phone number of the contractor, the surety, the owner of the property being improved, and, if different from the owner, the contracting public entity; the contract number assigned by the contracting public entity, if any; and a description of the project sufficient to identify it, such as a legal description or the street address of the property being improved, and a general description of the improvement. Such bond shall be conditioned upon the contractor's performance of the construction work in the time and manner prescribed in the contract and promptly making payments to all persons who furnish labor, services, or materials for the prosecution of the work provided for in the contract. The Licensee shall provide the City Manager, or designee, with a copy of its agreement with its contractor. No claim against the bond or action against the contractor shall involve the City or Trust in any expense. The requirements of this paragraph shall be in compliance with the provisions of Fla. Stat. § 255.05 (2001). " C. In addition, the following language is inserted as provision 13.5: 13.5- Mechanics' Liens. The Licensee shall not knowingly suffer or permit any mechanics liens to be filed against the title to the Public Property by reason of work, labor, services or materials supplied to the Licensee or anyone having a right to possession of the Public Property as a result of an agreement with or without the consent of the Licensee. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as constituting the consent or request of the City or the Trust, expressed or implied, by inference or otherwise, to any contractor, subcontractor, laborer or materialman for the performance of any labor or the furnishing of any materials, for any specific work on the Public Property nor as giving the 2 03- 292 Licensee the right, power or City or the Trust to contract for or permit the rendering of any services or the famishing of any materials that would give rise to the filing of any mechanics liens against the City or the Trust's interest in the Public Property if any mechanics lien shall at any time be filed against the Public Property, the Licensee shall cause it to be discharged of record within thirty (30) days after the date that it has notice of its filing. The Licensee shall not be required to pay or discharge any mechanics' lien within the thirty (30) day period, so long as the Licensee shall in good faith proceed to contest the lien by appropriate proceedings. It shall famish reasonably satisfactory evidence that funds are or will be available to pay the amount of the contested lien claim with all interest on it and costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees to be incurred in connection with it. If Licensee does not 1) cause a mechanics lien to be discharged of record within thirty (30) days after the date the Licensee has notice of the filing of a lien or 2) Licensee does not in good faith proceed to contest the lien by appropriate proceedings within the thirty (30) day period, then Licensee shall be in default of the Agreement." D. Provision 18 entitled "Licenses. Authorizations and Permits" is amended by deleting in its entirety the first sentence of the second paragraph and inserting the following language in lieu thereof: "The Licensee shall obtain licenses, authorizations and permits from the applicable county, state and federal agencies for Initial or Subsequent Improvements, modifications and maintenance that it shall perform on the Public Property. Licensee shall pay for such costs. Additionally, Licensee shall obtain, or cause to be obtained, and maintain in full force and effect throughout the term of this Agreement or any extension thereof, at its sole expense, all other licenses, authorizations and permits that are necessary for Licensee to conduct the Raceworks Events." In addition, the remaining language after the first sentence in the second paragraph is turned into anew paragraph in this provision. E. Provision 23 entitled "Risk of Loss" is amended by deleting the first sentence in its entirety and inserting the following in lieu thereof: "Licensee agrees that neither the City nor the Trust shall be liable for any loss, injury or damage to any personal property or equipment brought into the Race Perimeter by Licensee or anyone whomsoever while making Initial or Subsequent Improvements or during Use Period." F. Provision 34 entitled "Compliance With Laws" is amended by deleting the first sentence in its entirety and inserting the following in lieu thereof. "Licensee and/or its authorized agents agree to comply with applicable laws, codes (including, but not limited to, the South Florida Building Code as it may be amended), ordinances and regulations enacted or promulgated by federal, state, county, and City government including the provisions of the Charter and Code of the City. 3 03- 292 _ G. Provision 38 entitled "Insurance" is amended by deleting it in its entirety and the following language is inserted in lieu thereof: "For Raceworks Events, Licensee shall obtain a policy of public liability and property damage insurance, in a form acceptable to the City's Risk Management Administrator, protecting the City and the Trust, and their officers and employees. against any and all liability due to the death, injury, loss or damage to persons or property arising out of, or in any way incident to Licensee's operations during the Raceworks Events. Licensee agrees to provide such liability policy in comprehensive form, including pollution liability coverage and products and completed operations coverage, in a form acceptable to the City's Risk Management Administrator, in the amount of not less than $20 million dollars combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage and Workers Compensation insurance for its employees and contractors performing any work during Raceworks Events. The City and Trust shall be named insureds under these policies and name AT&T, or any other subsequent sponsor(s) of the Park, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers as additional insureds. For all other times of the Use Period, Licensee shall obtain a policy of public liability and property damage insurance, in a form acceptable to the City's Risk Management Administrator, protecting the City and the Trust, and their officers and employees, against any and all liability due to the death, injury, loss or damage to persons or property arising out of, or in any way incident to Licensee's operations during all other times of the Use Period. Licensee agrees to provide a liability policy in comprehensive form, including pollution liability coverage products and completed operations coverage, in a form acceptable to the City's Risk Management Administrator with combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage and Workers Compensation insurance for its employees and contractors performing any work during this period. The City and Trust shall be named insureds under these policies and name AT&T, or any other subsequent sponsor(s) of the Park, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers as additional insureds. The limits of such coverage shall be an amount acceptable to the Risk Management Administrator, within his/her reasonable discretion. For any Initial or Subsequent Improvements made by the Licensee, Licensee agrees to provide evidence of the General Contractor's general liability and Workers Compensation insurance with combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage. The limits of such coverage shall be an amount acceptable to the Risk Management Administrator, within his/her reasonable discretion. The City, Trust and the United States Army Corps of Engineers shall be named as additional insureds of the policies." H. Provision 39 entitled "Risk Review" is amended by deleting it in its entirety and the following language is inserted in lieu thereof: "A copy of the certificates of insurance covering any Initial or Subsequent Improvements made by the Licensee shall be filed with the City's Risk Management Division not less than five (5) business days prior to the Licensee commencing any Initial or Subsequent Improvements. Within thirty (30) days thereafter. Licensee shall submit to the City's Risk Management Administrator copies of the policies described in this paragraph for his/her approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. A copy of the insurance policies evidencing coverage for Raceworks Events and other insurance required during a Use Period shall be filed with the City's Risk Management Division not less than thirty (30) days prior to the commencement of any Use Period. All policies required under this agreement shall provide that such insurance coverage will not be cancelled or modified without at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City or Trust. At least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of any such policy a renewal policy showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed shall be filed with the City's Risk Management Division, attention to the Risk Administrator, 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 9`h Floor, Miami, FL 33130. The City reserves the right to periodically review the sufficiency of any insurance policy required under this agreement and to request Licensee to change the insurance coverage of any such policy. Licensee shall, upon receipt of such request, increase the limits of such insurance to any amount reasonably satisfactory to City. Any such additional amount of coverage shall be commensurate with other events of this nature and shall in no event exceed $25 million in coverage or cause Licensee more than ten percent of additional insurance premium charges in any two-year period." I. Provision 56 entitled "Restoration of Public Propertv" is amended by substituting the number 13 with the number 14 at the end of the next to last sentence in the first paragraph. J. Exhibit "D" (Modifications) is amended by deleting the course layout labeled "C- 1" at the bottom right hand corner and supplementing it with Exhibit "1," the new course layout attached hereto and incorporated as part of the Agreement. The last page of Exhibit "D" is supplemented with Exhibit "I" the Engineering Narrative Supplement, attached hereto and incorporated as part of the Agreement as Exhibit "2." K. Exhibit "F" (Mitigation Plan) is amended by deleting the first page of the Site Impact Assessment and Mitigation Plan and inserting a new first page as Exhibit "3," attached hereto and incorporated as part of the Agreement. It describes the relocation of sixteen (16) additional trees within Bayfront Park along Biscayne Boulevard. L. Exhibit "G" (Tree Disposition Plan) is amended by deleting two pages labeled M- 1 and M-5 in the bottom right hand comer and inserting Exhibit "4," which consists of two new M-1 and M-5 pages and adds two additional pages labeled M-6 and M-7 thereafter, attached hereto and incorporated as part of the Agreement as a composite Exhibit "4." These exhibits describe the relocation of sixteen (16) additional trees within Bayfront Park along Biscayne Boulevard. 5 03- 29� ; Y 2. Effect of this Amendment. All remaining terms of the Agreement. not specifically amended herein, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly executed and delivered by their respective officers and hereunto duly authorized as of the date first above written. ATTEST: p`rin ame - ATTEST: Walter Foeman City Clerk CITY OF MIAMI, a municipal City of the WITNESS BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST, 'ted agency and in eno ity of the Ci0f Mi APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE ,C Mario Soldevilla Risk Management Administrator VxeC . nstantzcu veDirector- ; i APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNtSS"' Al&ndro Vttarello City Attorney 6 a=<292 FIM Exhibit "1" (New Course Layout) 03- 292 " LEGEND SeSTi PROPOSED COURSE LAYOUT STREETS AND AREAS TO BE CLOSED AREA 11 TRACE LENGTH • 1,51 MIIES APPROX. PIT LENGTH • 0. to MILES APPROX. 0 i eESMELLO•AJAMR 6 PARINERS•INC 1�1 w�w�ir alilrr AMERICAN MARS SERIES COURSE rrr. •• PROPOSED COURSE LATOUT C-1 Exhibit "2" (Engineering Narrative Supplement) 03- 292 Location R: • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grates. • Adjust manhole top. Utility owner to be determined. • Relocate 2-3 trees (location to be determined). • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. Location S: (Pit in) • Removal of concrete curb and gutter, pavers and tree grate. • Adjust gas main valve location. • East curb may have to be removed if pit -out is located at this location. • Relocate 1 tree. (Location to be determined.) • Once area is cleared, lay down limerock base, compact and asphalt. Location T: • Relocate 9 royal palm trees. (Location to be determined.) Location U: • Relocate 7 royal palm trees. (Location to be determined.) 03- 292 Exhibit "3" (New First Page of the Site Impact Assessment and Mitigation Plan) 03- 292 Raceworks, LLC American Lemans Series Course: Site Impact Assessment and Mitigation Plan The existing site for the proposed racecourse includes portions of Biscayne Boulevard, the service road for Bayside Marketplace, the waterfront promenade in Bayfront Park and Chapin Plaza between Bayfront Park and the Intercontinental Hotel. The racecourse has been designed specifically to utilize the existing roadways in all of these areas as well as the parking lot area between northbound and southbound Biscayne Boulevard. The racecourse will have minimal impacts to each of these sites and we have carefully analyzed the details of these impacts as part of the planning process. We have determined that there will be four areas of impact; those include vegetation, landmarks, infrastructure and post race restoration of the site. 1. Vegetation The racecourse begins on Biscayne Boulevard and continues south to a private parking lot traveling past Chopin Plaza weaving through Bayfront Park and passing by Bayside Marketplace. Through careful planning and configuration of the racecourse the impacts are minimal to the existing vegetation in the site. All of the trees or palms that are impacted by the racecourse will be transplanted within Bayfront Park. • Biscayne Boulevard- 200 existing trees and palms only 21 will be impacted by the racecourse. • Chopin Plaza- 8 palms will be impacted by the racecourse. • Bayfront Park- 500 existing trees and palms, approximately 4% (4.2%) or a total of 21 palms will be impacted by the racecourse. • Bayside Marketplace- 100 existing trees and palms along the side of Bayside Marketplace only 2% or a total of 2 trees will be impacted by the racecourse. We have provided a detailed tree disposition plan, plant list and site photos that include the botanical name, common name, height, spread, canopy and trunk diameter at breast height for each tree/palm impacted as part of this submittal. Detailed pians of the proposed relocation site for the vegetation will be provided to the City of Miami Parks and Recreation Department for approval prior to installation. If for any reason any of the trees or palms do not survive the transplanting process they will be replaced on a 2:1 basis with the same species and same size tree/palm. If for any reason the same size tree/palm is not available in the commercial market they will be replaced with the same species in a smaller size on a 3:1 basis. Shrubs will be replaced with new three gallon plant material and groundcover will be replaced with one gallon plant material. EXHIBIT i= Revised Page 1 03- 292 Exhibit "4" (Tree Disposition Plan Supplement) 03-- 292 �u to ZNZ SERMEILO-AJAMI 6 PARTNERS -INC �Y hw Nwr Mw IMI X11 rw�i IY � � 1� rnF�w AMERI AN IEMAN$ SERIES COURSE F Mew E%ISTINO TREE 013FOSITION Pi AN .. .M-1 tog -- IA ' 1S IC 10 q fblonicd Name Cocos nucilno _ — Common Nan Coconut Palm hunk via (01) ( in reel) Ifdghl ( ;n feel) Spread ( in feel) Canopy ConA.lion Slalus faq RA ---9A 90 12A Rolankal Name Common Nom Trunk Ota (OBIT) ( in feel) Ik;ghl ( in reel) Spread ( in feel ) —10' _ Canopy 79'___ Condhon Sloluf 1' 1' - -/0' - 30' - IS' 17T Good honsplonf robebuio helerophylPo Pink frumpel 1' _- 16' Good Good fronsplont fransplanl honsplonl Cocos nucifera - -- Cocos nuNlero_- Cocos nucifero Coro$ nuc;lele — Coconut POM -- 15' - 15' 177' Iff 177' 17T- Good Good Poo -Go - Good Imnsplanl fromplanl Remove Bursero s;marubo Gumbo limbo IS 25' 20' JIT' -- Coconut Pal 1' —_IO' - Bursero s;morubo Gumbo limbo 1.5' _ 25' 20' JIT' Good Coconut Paine Coconut Pok" — 1 —1' -_ 30' —J0' is, - 15' Chryfa6docorpus lulescens keco Palm .5' 6' S' S' - 20' - 20' Polled Polled Rebcole Relocole honsp10nl 120 Chrysa6docarpus lulescens keco Palm .5' 6' 7A 29 Sabot palmetto Sabel 1'ak" .67' 6T 20' 10' 79' transplant 12C 12C Chrysakdocorpus lulescens keco Palm .5' 6' S' 20' 20' - Polled Polled Relocate Relocate Sobal polneilo Sobel Palm 20' 10' - - 79' Good honsplont Chrysol;docapus lulescens keco Pak" 5' 6' S' 7C Sobel polmello Sobel Pal 67' M. 10' 79' Good rronsplarel 120 ChryfaFdocoriew lulescens keco Palm .5' 6' S' 20' Polled Relocate Y0 -2ff ,kl JR ,1C IA Sobel patello Sobel Palm 67' 20' 10' 79' Good transplant 12f Chryfokdocorpus lulescens keco Palm .5' 6' S' 20' Polled Relocate —_- Sobol pok"rlto Sabel Pol J.67, 67' `.67' 20' 10' 19' Good fronsplonl --- _ - Sabel polmello Sabal Palm -_ is. - 15' - _ 10' 79' Good fronsplonl IJA Roysloneo [Iola Royal Palm 1' 10' S' ?0' - Good Relocate Sobof polmello Sobal Palm 10' 79' 79' IJ' Good Good Cool Ganfplool 1J0 Roysloneo Fiala Royal Palm 1' JS' S' 70' Good Relocate S0bo1 Pok"elio Sobol Palm _ .67' 15' 6' - 10' —1— fronsplonl hansplanl 13C Roysloneo [Iola Royal Pal 1' 25' S' 20' Good Relocate IM roe rodolo thatch Pal .5' IJp Roysloneo [Polo Royal Pal I' 15' S 20 Good Relocate IB IC 10 Ihonot rodialo thatch Pal .5' — 6' -- -- 1' IJ' Good fronsplonl 1,1E Roysloneo Fiala Royal Palm 1' 25' S' 20' Good Relocate lhr;nos radido _-- IhotCA Poke .5' 1' i]' Good transplant IIA Ropnto la1101e Royal Pal 1' JS' S' Coad Refacole iM;ras radicle thatch Pal 5' S' 1' IJ' Good fronsplonl 14R Roysloneo Fiala Royal Pal 1' 35' S' 70' Good Relocate I[ IArinos rodiato llalch Pok" .5' - — 6— 1 IJ' Good Ifonsp10nl 1/C Roysloneo 11010 Royal Palm 1' JS' S' 20' Good Relocate 1f lhrinor rodiolo thatch Pal .5' 6' /' IJ' Good fronsplonl 110 ISA Roysloneo [Iola Royal Palm I' JO' S' 20' 20' Good Good Relocate Re10cole /C fMinar rod;afo flalch Pok" .5' 8' 1' IJ' Good transplant Roytlonto [Iola Royal Palm 1' 25' S' M Caccolobo dives;fol;o P;geon Plum .S' 16' 10' 79' Cood fronsplonl 150 Roysloneo [Iota Royal Pok" I' J5' S' 20' Good Refaale SR Coccalobo divesifo6o P;gean Plum .5' 10' 6' 50' Goad transplant 15C Roystoreea [Iola Royal Palm 1' 30' S' 20' Good Relocaft SC fobtbu;o helerophyt6 P;nk h compel 1' 10' 6' 30' Good transplant 150 Roysloneo [Polo Royal Palm 1' S. 20' Good Relocate - 6A - tobebuio helerophyYa Pink trumpet 1' 16' 10' 79' Good honsplod 161 Royslan O [Iola Royal Pill 1' 25' S. 20' Good Rekxote 611 6C tobebrio fseferaphyao Pink frumpet 75' 12' 6' 26' Good Ironsplont 160 Roystunto [Iola Royal Pal 1' 25' S' 20' Good Relocate robebio hefereplly6o Pink trumpet .75' 12' 6' 26' Good fronsplonl 16C Roysloneo [Iola Royal Pok" 1' 25' S' 20' Good Relocate -- �— -- - -- - - 60 fabebw0 helerop" Pink trumpet I' 16' 10' 79' Good hansplanl 6[ fabtbu;o helerophy6a Pink frunpeft I' IS' 10' 79' Good fronsplonl lA Conoco" erectus stfi[tus Sever 1111110" 011 .75' 12' 6' 26' Good transplant 79 Conocaput erectus senceuf Sam AAlonmod .15' 12' 6' 26' Good fronsplonl 7C Itbebu;a helerophyla Pink frumpel 1' 16' 10' 79' Good Ironsplonl 7D fobebu;o heltrophyllo Pink trumpet 1' 16' 10' 79' Good rronsploni 7[ Stump Remove 1f CafcaPoba 6res;lo6o Pgton Plum 75' 11' 10' 79' Cool bonsplonl i OFOMELLO•AJAWL B PANTNERS•INC O AMERICAN LEMANS SERIES COURSE to FLW- r... •. aeen til «.r lire /rove, M..I 1 • eY1e EXISTING TREE 01SPOSITION TAW Pov 1 `,(�d FI le 13 TRANSPLANT (5) ROYAL PAI MS 13A, 138, 13C, 13D, & 13E BAYFRONT PARK AT BISCAYNE BLV VIEW FACING NORTH-EAST 14 1RANSPLANI (4) ROYAI PAI W) 14A, 148, 14C & 141) 1� BFRMElLO•AJ^P^ jM��•r�ru �«, ...0 9 R 4 AMERICAN IEMANS +. SERIES COURSE ElfllTlNO VEOEiATION 1r� i6 TRANSPLANT (7) ROYAL PALMS 88 15A, 158, 15C &15D 16A, 16B & 16C OF RMELLO•AJAMII & PARINFRR INC i i S 6 C { r s AMERICAN LEMAN$ SERIES COURSE -- - —— 15 16 TRANSPLANT (7) ROYAL PALMS 15A, 15B, 15C &15D 16A, 168 & 16C EXISTING VVGFTATION M-7 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Raceworks LLC desires to enter into the attached amendment to the agreement with the City of Miami and Bayfront Park Management. Trust for the licensing of motor sports race events; and WHEREAS, the Members of the Limited Liability Company have considered the matter in accordance with the operating agreement of the Limited Liability Company; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MEMBERS that Peter Yanowitch, Manager of Raceworks LLC is hereby authorized and instructed to enter into an Amendment, in the name and on behalf of Raceworks LLC, with the City of Miami upon the terms contained in the proposed amendment to which this resolution is attached. Dated this %-Kday o, 2001. �WZ'41CY4- )rilly'A. bermello Member (CORPORATE SEAL) 03- 292 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11 rx JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI -DARE COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION CASE NO. 01-17514 CA 24 HOMESTEAD -MIAMI SPEEDWAY LLC, 91014�.�-���" a Delaware limited liability company, © cpm 4 Plaintiff, 6 `,;too" " c;Roos vs. CITY OF MIAMI, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Defendant. 10 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiff, Homestead -Miami Speedway LLC ("Speedway") sues Defendant, City of Miami ("City"), and states as follows: Nature of this Action 1. Speedway is suing for relief to which it is entitled by reason of the City's non-public contracting with an private entity, Raceworks LLC ("Raceworks"), giving that private entity use of City -owned waterfront property in downtown Miami to conduct a motor car race. The non-public contracting process violated the Sunshine Law, Fla. Stat. § 286.011, violated the requirement of prior publication of proposed resolutions on such matters, and violated the requirement that the City obtain competing bids. The violations 10 imposed particular injury on Speedway. Had the City complied with the Sunshine Law, P � publication requirements, P and the open bidding process, Speedway could have submitted KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR O 292 r a competing bid to conduct the motor car race (depending, of course, on the particular bid specifications that were never released by the City). Speedway has lost the potential economic benefit of being selected in an open and lawful process. The Parties 2. Speedway is a Delaware limited liability company authorized and doing business in the State of Florida and in Miami -Dade County, Florida. Speedway has demonstrated success in conducting motor car racing in Miami -Dade County, Florida, by agreement with a municipal government (the City of Homestead). And, at all relevant times, Speedway had the resources and experience to submit a bid to the City for the right to conduct the motor car race, had the City sought to obtain competing bids as required. Additionally, as a citizen taxpayer of Miami -Dade County, Florida, Speedway has a legally recognized interest in seeing that the City complies with the Sunshine Law. 3. The City is a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and subject to the jurisdiction of this Court for each of the following causes of action by Speedway. Factual Allegations 4. Earlier this year, the City began negotiations with Raceworks to hold a motor car race on City -owned waterfront property in downtown Miami in April 2002. 5. Raceworks first disclosed the terms of its proposed agreement with the City at a City Commission meeting on July 10, 2001. Raceworks' first publicly disclosed proposal included a no -bid, exclusive agreement with a 15 -year term (and 10 -year option exercisable at Raceworks' election), gave Raceworks exclusive use of City -owned waterfront property as a grand prix racing facility and the right to re-route daily traffic, and required the City to: (1) perform $850,000 of street improvements for the race, (2) provide fire, police and sold waste services totaling $320,000 per year for the term of the r 2 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03-' 3 292 agreement, and (3) provide storage facilities for the race -track equipment at an 10 approximate value of $100,000 per year for the term of the agreement. 6. In return, Raceworks first publicly disclosed proposal provided for Raceworks to pay the City 1 % of gross revenues for years 1 and 2, 2% of gross revenues for years 3 and 4, and 3% of gross revenues for year 5 through and until the duration of the agreement. The City would also have been entitled to certain proceeds in the event that Raceworks sold its rights under the agreement to conduct the race. The Bayfront Park Trust was also to receive $50,000 in rent, plus a CPI cap at 4% and a 1% ticket surcharge on all tickets sold. Payments would be due 30 days after each race event. 7. At the July 10, 2001 City Commission meeting numerous persons representing various public and private interests stated their objections to the proposed agreement as disclosed by Raceworks, which had been privately negotiated by the City and Raceworks. The public and private parties represented at the July 10, 2001 City Commission meeting included the City of Homestead, Speedway and other community activists. The issues raised at that City Commission meeting, which are now a matter of public record, included environmental, traffic and other public safety concerns, issues regarding the resulting negative financial impact on downtown businesses, as well as the neighboring City of Homestead, and issues regarding whether the proposed agreement was in the City's best financial interest. Speedway also questioned the legal sufficiency of a no -bid, exclusive agreement providing for use of City -owned waterfront property by a private entity, and the City's related expenditures of tax dollars and obligation to provide costly in-kind services, storage facilities and the like for a private entity's benefit. 8. Afterpublic statements at the July 10, 2001 City Commission meeting were completed, a motion was made by City Commissioner Joe Sanchez authorizing the City SManager and Bayfront Park Trust to continue negotiations with Raceworks and present 3 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 0 to the City Commission on July 26, 2001 a different proposed agreement for consideration by the City Commission. The motion was amended to require that the details of the revised proposed agreement be publicly disclosed at least 5 days prior to the July 26, 2001 City Commission meeting. As so amended, this motion was approved and adopted by a vote of the City Commission. 9. Upon information and belief, the City Manager, Carlos A. Jimenez, and/or City employees acting under his direction and control, engaged in further negotiations with Raceworks after the July 10, 2001 City Commission meeting. The negotiations continued to be conducted entirely in private and to the exclusive of Speedway and any other members of the public. 10. Contrary to the City Commission's motion passed at the July 10, 2001 City. Commission meeting and applicable provisions of the City Code, including Section 2-33 of the Code, the City first made publicly available the terms of the revised proposed agreement with Raceworks after the close of business on July 24; 2001, i.e., just 1 day prior to the July 26, 2001 City Commission meeting. Further, the Term Sheet made available at that time failed to disclose material terms that were reasonably necessary to understand the workings of the revised proposed agreement and, for example, whether the proposed agreement complied with Miami's Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (1989-2000). The Term Sheet was also materially different from the terms proposed at the July 10, 2001 City Commission meeting. In addition, the Term Sheet was materially different than the terms contained in the most current version of the proposed written agreement that had been distributed by the City in response to a Public Records Request. These material differences included, but were not limited to, critical terms regarding City expenditures required under the agreement and the payment of monies to the City in the event Raceworks were to sell the right to conduct the race to third parties. C! KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 11. At the July 26, 2001 City Commission meeting, the City Commission conditionally approved the revised proposed agreement with Raceworks subject to final ratification by the City Commission at its August 9, 2001 meeting, apparently after more remaining issues were negotiated. The resolution to authorize the City Commission to conditionally approve the revised proposed agreement with Raceworks was not published as required by the City Code. In fact, the public notice of the July 26, 2001 City Commission meeting did not state that the City Commission would vote on whether to approve a final agreement with Raceworks, conditionally or otherwise. 12. At the August 9, 2001 City Commission meeting, the City Commission voted to ratify a further modified version of the proposed agreement with Raceworks. The City posted a version of the proposed agreement with Raceworks 5 days before the August 9, 2001 City Commission meeting, but that version was superseded and materially different from the version that in fact was ratified on August 9, 2001. Accordingly, the City failed to abide by the City Code requirement and City Commission directive requiring at least 5 days advance public notice of the agreement to be voted on. The public also was prohibited from commenting at the August 9, 2001 City Commission meeting, on either the earlier posted version or the version actually ratified, contrary to Section (A) 5 of the Home Rule Charter of Miami -Dade County, Florida, as well as in violation of the Sunshine Law. 13. The agreement between the City and Raceworks is incorporated herein by reference rather than attached, as permitted by Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.130, because the version of the agreement posted and made available to Speedway and the rest of the public is not in fact the version that was subsequently ratified — which further highlights the secretive manner in which the agreement between the City and Raceworks was concluded. W KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 wy 14. Speedway has retained the law firm of Kenny Nachwalter Seymour Arnold Critchlow & Spector, P.A., to prosecute this action and is required to pay its attorneys a reasonable fee for their services. 15. All conditions precedent to the bringing of this action have been satisfied, complied with, adhered to or waived. Count I (Declaratory Relief for Sunshine Law Violation) 16. Speedway realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 15 above, as though fully set forth herein. 17. The City violated the Sunshine Law by engaging in non-public discussions and negotiations with Raceworks regarding a proposed agreement to have a private entity conduct a motor car race on City -owned waterfront property in downtown Miami. These . discussions and negotiations were not open to the general public, contrary to Florida law.. 18. Further, Speedway and other members of the public were denied even minimum required details of the ongoing negotiations and proposals in order to be able to participate in what should have been, but was not, an open and lawful process. 19. At the time the substantially modified version of the agreement was presented to the City Commission for ratification at the August 9, 2001 City Commission meeting, Speedway and the rest of the public were denied the opportunity to comment in violation of the Sunshine Law and the Home Rule Charter of Miami -Dade County. 20. Any contract awarded by the City to Raceworks as a result of the aforementioned non-public contracting process is null and void as a matter of law. 21. Pursuant to Chapter 86, Florida Statutes, Speedway is entitled to a declaration of rights because there is actual doubt and existing controversy as to the effect 2 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 on Speedway's rights as they pertain to the actions of the City, including the actions of itthe City Commission and City staff, regarding the City's agreement with Raceworks. 22. Fla. Stat. § 286.011(4) authorizes an award of reasonable attorney's fees to Speedway for bringing this action to enforce the Sunshine Law in the event that this Court declares the actions of the City to constitute a violation of Fla. Stat. § 286.011(2). Count II (Injunctive Relief for Sunshine Law Violations) 23. Speedway realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 15 above, as though fully set forth herein. 24. The City's violation of the Sunshine Law, Fla. Stat. § 286.011, entitles Speedway to an injunction prohibiting the City from performing under its agreement with Raceworks that was approved by the City Commission in violation of the Sunshine Law. 25. Fla. Stat. § 286.011(2) expressly provides that: "the, circuit courts of the state shall have the jurisdiction to issue injunctions to enforce the purposes of this section upon the application of any citizen of the state." Count Ell (Declaratory Relief for Failure to Disclose) 26. Speedway realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 15 above, as though fully set forth herein. 27. The City has violated Section 2-33 of the City Code by failing to timely disclose to designated persons and the general public a copy of resolutions seeking to approve and/or ratify all or any part of the agreement between the City and Raceworks. 28. The City has also failed to follow the directive of the City Commission, by motion passed at its July 10, 2001 meeting, expressly requiring that the specific details 10 of the revised proposed agreement with Raceworks be disclosed at least 5 days prior to FA KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 F�, 0 0 the City Commission meeting during which the agreement was to be presented for consideration and approval and/or ratification by the City Commission. 29. As a result of the City's failure to publicly disclose the details of the agreement with Raceworks prior to the City Commission meetings, and its violations of both the City Code and the directive of the City Commission, any legislative action by the City Commission at its July 26, 2001 and August 9, 2001 meetings to approve and/or ratify the City's agreement with Raceworks is null and void as a matter of law. 30. Pursuant to Chapter 86, Florida Statutes, Speedway is entitled to a declaration of rights because there is actual doubt and existing controversy as to the effect on Speedway's rights as they pertain to the actions of the City, including the actions of the City Commission and City staff, regarding the City's agreement with Raceworks. Count IV (Injunctive Relief for Failure to Disclose) . 31. Speedway realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 15 above, as though fully set forth herein. 32. The City failed to comply with the disclosure obligations imposed by the City Code and by the directive of the City Commission at its July 10, 2001 meeting. 33. The City's failure to comply with these disclosure obligations prevented Speedway from exercising its rights to comment upon the proposed agreement between the City and Raceworks and/or to submit a bid of its own as an alternative to Raceworks. 34. Speedway has suffered irreparable injury, both in damage to its current racing business and the loss of potential future racing business, as a result of having been prevented from exercising its rights to comment and/or to submit a competing bid. 35. Speedway has no adequate remedy at law. M KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03 - 292 11 36. Enjoining the City from performing under its agreement with Raceworks entered into after the City, including the City Commission and City staff, failed to comply with mandatory disclosure obligations serves the public interest. Such an injunction enforces and promotes compliance with mandatory disclosure obligations, which are designed to protect Speedway and the rest of the public from secretive dealings and the appearance of secretive dealings. Count V (Declaratory Relief for Failure to Ensure Competitive Bids) 37. Speedway realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 15 above, as though fully set forth herein. 38. The City failed to solicit or ensure competitive bids for the right to use City -owned waterfront property to conduct a motor car race. The City was required to solicit and ensure competitive bids under each of the following City Charter provisions: (A) Section 29-A, subparagraph (d), whichprovides in pertinent part that "... there shall be no sale, conveyance, or disposition of any interest, including any leasehold, in real property owned by the city, ...., unless there has been prior public notice and a prior opportunity given to the public to compete for said real property or interest." (Emphasis supplied). (B) Section 29-B, which provides in pertinent part that "The city commission is also hereby prohibited from favorably considering any sale or lease of city - owned property unless (a) there shall have been, prior to the date of the city commission's consideration of such sale or lease, an advertisement soliciting proposals for said sale or lease published in a daily newspaper of general paid circulation in the city, allowing not less than ninety (90) days for the city's receipt of proposals from prospective purchasers or lessees, .... (b) there shall have been at least three (3) written proposals received from G7 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 10 prospective purchasers or lessees; however, if there are less than three (3) such proposals received ..., subject to the approval of a majority of the votes cast by the electorate at a referendum, the sale or lease may be consummated." 39. Additionally, the City failed to obtain two independent appraisals of the net value to the City of the proposed agreement between the City and Raceworks, to ensure that the City stood to realize a fair return under that proposed agreement, as required by Section 3, subparagraph (f)(iii), of the City Charter, which provides in pertinent part that; The City shall have power ... [tJo lease to or contract with private firms or persons for the commercial use or management of any of the city's waterfront property, but only in compliance with the other requirements of this charter and on condition that:... (B) the terms of the contract result in a fair return to the city based on two independent appraisals; and . . . (D) the procurement methods prescribed by ordinances are observed. Any such lease or management agreement or proposed extension or modification of an existing such lease or management agreement which does not comply with each of the above conditions shall not be valid unless it has first been approved by a majority of the voters of the city." 40. As a result of the City's failure to advertise and procure three competitive proposals, or to submit the matter for voter approval, or to obtain two independent appraisals showing that the proposed agreement resulted in a fair return to the City, or to otherwise comply with the requirements of the City Charter, Sections 3 and 29-A and 29- B, the actions taken at the July 26, 2001 and August 9, 2001 City Commission meetings to approve and/or ratify the proposed agreement between the City and Raceworks are null and void as a matter of law. 41. Pursuant to Chapter 86, Florida Statutes, Speedway is entitled to a declaration ofrights because there is actual doubt and existing controversy as to the effect 10 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 2 " 0 C on Speedway's rights as they pertain to the actions of the City, including the City Commission and City staff, regarding the agreement between the City and Raceworks. Count VI (Injunctive Relief for Failure to Ensure Competitive Bids) 42. Speedway realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 15 and 38 through 41 as though fully set forth herein. 43. The City failed to comply with the requirements of the City Charter regarding the transfer of any interest in City -owned real property, and the additional requirements in the Charter for contracts allowing use of City -owned waterfront property. 44. The City's failure to comply with these requirements, and thereby to ensure competitive bids, effectively prevented Speedway from exercising its rights to comment upon the proposed agreement between the City and Raceworks and/or to submit a bid of its own as an alternative to Raceworks. 45. Speedway has suffered irreparable injury, both in damage to its current racing business and the loss of potential future racing business, as a result of the City's failure to abide by the requirements of the City Charter to ensure competitive bids. 46. Speedway has no adequate remedy at law. 47. Enjoining the City from performing under its agreement with Raceworks entered into after the City, including the City Commission and City staff, failed to comply with the requirements of the City Charter to ensure competitive bids serves the public interest. Such an injunction enforces and promotes compliance with the City Charter requirements that protect one of the public's most precious resources, namely publicly - owned real property, and in particular publicly -owned waterfront property. WHEREFORE, Speedway respectfully requests that the Court: (A) Accept jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of this action; 11 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 (B) Enter a declaratory judgment that any decision of the City Commission approving and/or ratifying the agreement between the City and Raceworks does not comply with applicable Florida law — including the Sunshine Law, the City Charter, motions passed by the City Commission, and the Home Rule Charter of Miami -Dade County — and, therefore, is null and void and unenforceable; (C) Enter a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting the City from performing under its agreement with Raceworks; (D) Enter a further judgment directing the City and the City Commission to rescind all actions relating to the approval and/or ratification of the agreement between the City and Raceworks; and (E) Awarding Speedway its costs and attorneys fees, and any and all other supplemental relief that is authorized under Fla. Stat. § 86.061, and any and all other 10 relief that is authorized under applicable law or in equity. Respectfully submitted, KENNY NACHWALTER SEYmOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR, P. A. 201 South Biscayne Boulevard Suite 1100 Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: (305) 373-1000 Facsimile: (305) 372-1861 By: v Kevin J. Murray Fla. Bar No. 290602 12 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- 292 Certificate of Service I certify that a copy hereof has been furnished to Alejandro Vilarello, Esq., City Attorney, and Henry J. Hunnefeld, Esq., Assistant City Attorney, 945 Miami Riverside Center, 444 Southwest 2"d Avenue, Miami, Florida 33130 by mail on October 22.2001. 141)43,1 El 5 By. (J",AJ Obert D. W. Landon, III Fla. Bar No. 961272 13 KENNY NACHWALTER SEYMOUR ARNOLD CRITCHLOW & SPECTOR 03- " 9 2 s IN TIM CIItCM COuxrr OF TELL i1T" JUDICIAL CDLCIIIT IN AND FOR 1VIIAMI DADS COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION Ar CASE NO. 01-17514 CA 24 HOMSTEAD-MAM WEEDWAY LLC, a Delaware limit W- liab0ity company, Plaintiff, Vs. CITY OF M[AMI, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Defendant, and RACEWORKS, LLC, a Delaware limited ltabillty company, Intervener -Defendant ORDF,X G RANTIIgG PLAngTIFF SUMTVIARY .TTMC:MiCNT ON COUNTS V AND Vl OF THF SECOND AMS U10) C.OWM,ATNT THIS CAUSE owns before the Court for hearing on February 22, 2002, on flu motion for summary judgment by p ' Homestead -Miami Speedway, LLC ("Speedway'), and the cross-motions forsummaryjudgment by defendant, City ofNriami ("City"), and iutcivcncr-defendant, Raccworks, LLC ("Raccworks'j, on Counts V and VI of the Second Amended Complaint. Count V secla a declaration that a no -bid contract glycn to Raceworlcs to use the City's waterfront property for the next IS to 25 yearn to c induct motor car races is void bcuausc the City failed to fbIlaw competitive bid prout:dures. Count VI stmks a currespunding injunction. Ross ivod Mar -04-42 02s40pm From- To-sw a D Pap 002 03- 292 The Court has received, reviewed, and fully considered the written submissions by cath of the parties, the entire record in this owe, and the oral argument that counsel fur each of the parties made at the Fcbruary 22, 2002 hearing. And, after duo r consideration of all the foregoing, it is ORDERED that, for Llw reasdu that follow, the Court grants suunmary judgment in favor of Speedway on Counts V and VI of the S=wd Azneuded Complaint, and denies the cross-motions for summary judgment riled by tht City and Racaworks. The Parries agree that the ultimate question is whWic.-r flit no -bid contract that the City gave tn Raceworks is of a kind thz was subject to competitive bid procedures. Aird therefore had to be put out for bid. The parties agree this is a question of law appropriate for the Court to decide by summary judgment based upon a review of the contract terms. -E.g., Peacock Constr. Co., Inc. v. Modern Air Condiiinnipe Inc., 353 So.2d 840, 842 (Fla. 1977); C'lasby v. University ofMiami, 356 Sold 9150 918 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The City and Raceworks also raise arguments that the Courtt shnnid not reach the Ultimate question whether the contract had to be competitively bid. 71sey argue, for I example, that a provision in the City Charter relied upon by Speedway (Section §3 (f)(iii)) was amended by referendum vote in November 2001 to delete the reference to contracts for "commercial use" of the City's waterfrontproperty. They argue that Speedway lacks standiag to sue. And, they argue that it is the Municipal Motor Vehicle Racing Act of 1984 (Plc. Stat. § 549.08) that gives Raceworks the right to exclude people from the Public property that Raceworks is permitted to use, tinder the contract, not the contract -2- Racaivad Wr-04-02 02:40am From- TO -SR t t Pap 008 �uf u . 03- 292 A itself. Tic Cuurt has carefully considered each of these Argmmeats, and has determined thnl none of them raises a genuine iccete of material fact or prevents the Court from reaching the ultimate cpiegtion in this case. Und" tie r The fact that the City and ltaceworks entered into the contract is not in dispute, and the terms ofthe contract that the Court must considerto resolve whether the contract was required to be competitively bid are clear and unambiguous in their meaning. it is undisputed that the City never made any as 1 1 to solicit bids or prupusals nr to inform itself otherwise whether anyone other than Raccworks would be interested in submitting a competing bid or proposal for the contract given to Raceworks. The City and Raceworks willingly concede this point since thcirpositiou is that it does not matter. They contend that competitive bid procedures do not apply to this type: of contract. It is undisputed that Spccdway is an established business that puts on motorspnm; events, is a competitor of Raceworks, and was at,all relevaut times mud remains qualified to submit a competing bid for the no -bid conimut that the City gave to Raceworks. As a separate matter rclatiug to slnnding, the City and Racewaft arg:te that Speedway was precluded from subnfitdng a c umpeting bid by the terms of Speedway's contract with the City of Homestead iu uprrate the Homestead Mntcncpnrts Complex and that Speedway, althoupll Waiilied. would neverhave quhmitted a competing bid even if given the chance. It is undisputed that the City Commission an August 9, 2001 approved of and awhurixed the City Manager to exemne the contract with Rsaeworlm pu=uant to City Conuuission Resolution No. 01-845, which provided in relevant pati: -3- Received IWr-04-02 02i40ve Front- TO -SH i D Pap 004 03- 292y BE TT RESOLVED BY 71M COhMSSION OF 71M CITY OF bRAM FLORIDA: Section I. The City Manager is authorized to execute an Agreement, in snbsftntially the attached hfrm, ..., cnhject to the lease between the City of Miami and the United States of America, dated August 2, 1990, and subject to the approval r of the District Engineer of the United States Department of tic Army [i.e., the U.S. Army Corps of nagincers], prior to the City of Miami executing this Agmctueul. Thus, the City Manager's authority to execute the contract was made subjerx only tn the. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers first approving the contract. The U.S. Army Corps of L• ngineem approved the contract in writingno later than October 9,200 1, and the contract was executed by all parties no later than October 23, 2001. The amendment of City Charter §3(1)(iii) relied on by the City and Raceworks occurred subsequently, on November 7, 2001, after it was approved by voter referendum on November 6, 2001. Since the City Commission's August 9, 2001 Resolution No. 01-94S gave the City Manager full authority to execute the contract subject only fo prior approval of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — which was obtained no later than October 9, 2001 the subsequent execution of the contract by all parties no later than October 23, 2001 created a legally binding and enforceable contract. Tb= was no condition subsequent that had to be satisfied following execution. Nor was there any need for City Comrnission Resolutiou No. 0 1- 1229 on November 15, 2001, which merely repeats the same authorization to ex=utc the can mum already given by Rmulutivu No. O1-845. Micro is nuthing in RauiutiunNu. 01-1229 that speaks to adopliug urratifying dratwhirhthe City Manager had previously executed as authorized by Resolution No. 01-845. -4. Race ivad Mar -U-82 02:1an From- To -SM I D pats 805 03- 292 The City and Raceworks raise a threshold argument whether Speedway is a party with legal standing to bring this lawsuit to enforce competitive bid procedures. The City and Racoworka rely on two Florida cases in which it was determined that the plaintiff lacked standing to complain about the award of a gov=uucat wutrwi W anuthiz bidder. Brasfield & Gorrie General Contractor, Inc. v. Naz Cunstructivn Company, Inc.. 627 Sa.2d 1200 (Fla. 1" DCA 1994); Westinghouse Electric Corporation v. Jacksonville TranrportationAuthorlp+. 491 So.2d 1238 (Fla. 1" DCA 1986). Those cases are readily distinguishable because in both ofthose cases, unlike in this one, the governmental entity had opened the contract to competitive bidding and received and reviewrA hills. This case involves a no -hid contract that was newer pin out to bid. The City and Raceworks candidly concede the Clty did nothing to aniicit competing bids or proposals, or otherwise to infirm itself whether anyone besides Raceworks would be interested in submitting a competing bid or proposal for the contract given to Raceworks. 'lbe failure to invite Speedway, or anyone else, to compete for this contract is especially significant on this record, which shows that the City and Raceworks were aware that Speedway and anynurnber of other established motorsports businesses were likelyto be interested in the opportunitypresented by this contract. Indeed, the City and Raceworks madethe contract fully saleable and Mignablo by Raceworks to other established motorsports businesses that were not invited to bid, and included in drags of the contract specific reference to a number ofthosc motorsports busiacsscs, including hg=ational Speedway Corporation or any of its affiliates, which were known to include Speedway. Although thud specific reference was deleted from the final contract, the City Manager who negottated the -5- Received Mar-Ol-02 02:10m From- TO -SM a 0 Pap 006 03- 292 tai contract for the City has testified "that the feat that that language was deleted ... in no way, shape or form prejudiczs [Spee way] from being assigned this contract." Ginn nes Depo. at pp. 104:2-7; 114:9-14. Florida courts flint haw considered standing in the context of a no -bid eonteact hsve explained that the iDjury suppurtiug standing in such cases is the denial of the opportunity to submit a cmMe img bid fur the contract. See, e.g., Randalllndustries, Inc. v. Lee County, 307 Sn-2d 499,501 (Fla. 2dDCA 1975) ("[Lee County's] eontcadon that appellant has no standing .._ is without mmit.- Mcording to UM complaint, Lee County leased its property ... withmit taking bids. As a potential compctiuu•, appellant had a right to submit a bid, and this right was effectively denied him.'): CtAy ofLynn Huven v. Buy County Council of"Registered Architecrs, 529 Sn.2d 1244, 1246 (Fla, V DCA 1988) (plaintiff association, which represented qualitted architects who cquld have buiuuitted bids for no -bid contract, had standing)_ FlaintiM in the cma; of a no -bid contract der not have to prove anything more than they were potential competitors qualified to submit a competing bid, if competing bids had been invited. it is undislnnted on this record that Speedway was a potential competitor and gtsslitied to submit a competing bid. and that the City never issued bid specifications to which Speedway could hnve r Tanded. See Glatstein Y. City of Miami, 399 So.2d 1005, 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (appellate cotnt autcd lliat "f a)vscnt specific plans, no bidding could take place," and remanded to the trial court for entry of declaratory judgment that no -bid eont:act in that case was void)- Mic City and Raceworio argue that certain advertisements and comments by Sp000dway arc equivalent to a statement by Speedway that it never would have submitted a competing bid fur flits contract even if it had been given the opportunity. In fact, they we Raaaived Yar•04-02 02:1Opm Prom- 70 -SH t D Pap OOT 03- 292 r aro not equivalent, 7ben is no statement in any of the advertisements or coauaeuts presented to the Court in which Speedway says it never would submit a competing bid. To the contrary, the uneontradiatod testimony of Speodway's president is that Speedway would have submitted a competing bid if the City had opened the contract to bidding. Gray Affidavit at 15; Gray Depo. at -pp. 41:3-9, 73:22-74:3, 120:4-9. If the City wanted to rely an an argument that Speedway never would have submitted a competing bid, it was ulc:ulubeut upuu tic city to have issued a requtsL fur bids. aud lhLxuby to have Wvun Speudway the chance to submit a bid, as bappaned in the Brasfield and Westinghouse earn which the City and Rtw wurks chu. Speedway's contract with the City of homestead is not an impediment to Speedway having standing in this case either. That contract does not contain a Provision that pmuports to preclude Speedway either from submitting a bid for or from carrying out the turns of the contract given to Racewnrkc` F.ven if there were such A Provision, moreover, that would be a Private macer of contract rights het c= Speedway And the city of Homestead. The City of Homestead, through its t:ity Manager, has testified that it has not asserted any right to prevent Speedway Rom bidding for or conducting the motorsports events in downtown Miami contemplated by the contract at issue. See Ivy Depo. at 33:6-35:12. Because it is at most a matter of private contract rights that could not have been retied upon by the City, it is not a basis for this Court to invoke judicial estoppel either. C}.' Yining v. Segal, 773 So.?d 1243 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Speedway has standing to bring the claims in Counts V and VI of the Second Amended Complaint. Received Mar -U-02 02:40oa -7- Fran- TO-sm a D Pap coo 03- 292 RaVe33jorks' Qj&aet Is A Losse The contract at issue is caddcd "Revocable License Agrcczncat." However, as the City's enunsel acimowladgcl during oral argument, the label that the parties choose to plit cm their contract is not deterr bolive of whether it is a lease or a license. H,rg. Transcript at pp. 197.:2-19. Instead, the Court trust review the terms of the contract and determine whether three terms reveal it in fact, to bG u least or a liccnse. The parties agree thAt rxclusive possession and control of a spcciFcnlly bounded area, and the corresponding right to keep others out, is a dC.GuiuE mature of a Icue. E.g., Outdoor Medio ofPenraeola, Inc. v. ,Santa Rosa County, 554 So.2d 613. 616 (Fla. I" DCA 1989) (contract held to be a lease, not a licence). The contract at issue gives Raeeworixa for the next 15 to 25 years exclusive, pagseceion and control of a specifically bounded arca including all of Bayfront Park for a period of 7A days a year. The specific arca, including the fencing, is shown on F-%Ju'bit A to the contract. Tmring these 24 days a year Raceworks, among other things, has =elusive possession Rnd the right to (1) control admission to the area, (2) charge admission to the area, (3) sell concessions and merchandise within the area, (4) sell and place advertising throughout the area, (5) sell media access to the area, and (6) sent boat moorings in the adjacent waV-wny.0 Racaworks suggests in its papers flWthe exelusivo posseesionmustbe continuous. ur at least lonscr than the 24 days a year of exclusive possession that this contract gives 1 The fact drat the lessor is allowed to cater the property for limited purposes and retains some zrnasura of cvau of a V cr the Imec's activities on &a propwly does not ebange the feet that the cxu:tr.WL is a Icasc. See, e.g., Outdoor Media, S54 So.2d at 614; Ragan, 458 P.2d at 1415; Quarau m Corp., 9S6 P.2d at 852-853; see also Poopk v Chicago Mr&o Car.RextQl; Inc.. 391 N.E.2d 42,45 (Ill: App.1979) (purported "eoncamion agreement" gave exclusive use of counter space in terminal and, notwithstaadia8 city's rewind right of entry to inspect, was a lease). -8- Received NU -04-02 02:ADw Frae- Tc -SM i D Pap 000 03- 292 to Raceworks. That suggestion is not supported by the legal authority, however, which includes cases in which courts have held contracts were leaser. even where the exeinsive possession was of chem duration or not enntinumn. over the term of the contract. .See Regan v City of.4vartlr., 459 P.2d 12, 14 (Wash. 1969) (contract gave go-cart racing promoter use of civic center for one night and was a lease); Quantum Corp. v. State of New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Dept, 956 Ptd 848, $51 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998) (contracts for use of bingo halls for several four-hour sessions per week were leases). In addition, when pointedly asked, the City's counsel frankly conceded that duration of the exclusive possession is not the issna, or at least not among the major determinative factors dist resolve whether a contract is a ieosc. Hrg. Transcript at pp. 114:20-116,4. Other defining features of leases are that, tmlik licenses, they arc irrevocable and assignable. When drafting the provisions of this contract, the City and Raccworks' representatives corresponded on the issues of irrcvocabilHty and assignability, and Raccworks' counsel suggested ways of "manipulating" the, contract to make It appear =vocable at will and non -assignable. See PX64, in fact, the contract iu iv final rum is irrevocable cxccpt for cause, and only atkr cxiiausticm ofd substantial period of time in which the defaulting party can cure, and is assignable. These features of the eonu= wake-. all the more clear that it is conveying an interest in property, and not a mere license to eutcr untu the pruperty. See, e.g.. Devltn v. The Phoenix, Inc., 471 .Sn.2d 93, 9.5 (Fla. 5'h DCA 1985)("Thc distinctive characteristic of a license is ... that it is, in tm very natcne, neeessarilyrevocable atwilr'); Doram a Wnyr., 391 Sold 757,759 (Fla. 5* DCA 1980) ("A license is distinguishable from an easement in that a license ... is not an interest in land and, themfnre, may not be assigned or conveyed"); Kapiolani Park Preservation -9- Received Mar -04-02 02e40pe Free - 70 -SH i D Pose 010 �!-i Y 3 a^, yy ayy� i V 3 ... 2 9 2 j. . Soc. v. City and C.owity of Honolulu, 751 P.2d 1022, 1028 (Hawaii 1988) (listing assignable nature of contract among featurac supporting the court's deietminatlon that a purported "concession" contract was in fact it lease). DefenciAnts' counsel candidly conceded at oral argument that this contract is not revocable at will, and thRt the faAt a contract is not revocable at will is an'moportant factor in resolving that the contract in fact is a lease. Hrg. Transcript at pp. 109:14.111:21. The fact that the contract requires the City to consent in writing to Raceworks' assignrncnt of the contract docs not make the eontruct any less assignable. The contract states that the City's consent cannot be "unreasonably withheld" and, even if the contract did not expressly so state, Florida courts have recognized for at least twenty years that a IcSsor nay not arbitrarily withhold its written conscat to an assignment of the lease. See Fernay:dea v. Yeaquez, 397 So.2d 1171, 1172, 1174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) ("Me law gcucrally favors free alienation of property and under common law a tenant has the right to assign his leasehold interest without the consent of the ' lessor .... Mc hold that a lessor may not arbitrarily rurusc conscat to as assignmcnt of a commercial lease which provides, even without limiting ignSW that a Icxscc Sian ttat assign or sublease the premises without the written consent of the lessor.") (umphuds supplied)." A. alluded to above, the fact that the City and Raceworks made This wnu=L Assignable makes it All thr mnre clear that the contract should have been put out for 2 The court in Devlin, 471 Sv.2d at 95, stated in dicta that "A licame, ... , is no a right WE is a Pctsu101 Wivilage, not assignable without express pnrmis n." Nesuwably that court was alludiaa to contracts that truly restrict assignability and not the marc sequ irameat of vinritmn coMMA to an assigament, which is a requiroment typically found in leases. See, e.g., patron v Wilder, 537 So.2d 617, 618 M& 4a' DCA 1990) (t 1*S on Faim dar, 397 So.2d 1171). -10- Received Mar -04-02 02.40m From- TO -SN S D pap 011 03- 292 —because it was tantamountto an ackaowledgmemt by the City And Racewnrks that ether motorsports businesses would be interested in the opportimitypresented by this contract. Other Clements of the contract, although not necessarily exclusive to leases, are most consistent with and are further support for the determination that the contradt at issue is a lease, and thus had to be put out for bid. For example, the City receives a foxed Ice for the "use" of the property. The contract specifically requires Raeeworks to indemnify the City for any claims in connection withRaccworks' use of the property, and to obtain insurance to cover any such claims, so that the City effectively seeks to have no liability for any injuries which could occur while Raceworks has exclusive possession. The cutitrduL sp=ilieally disclaims that any agency relationship is being created betwccn the City and Raceworks. And, not only does Raeeworks have the exclusive right under Uia uulitraut w cuii,uuct iuipiovCWW%s, it also has the exclusive right to maintain or modify the improvements as needed. All totaled. the plain mid uudisputed cairns of the contract reveal as a master of law that the cunu=t is a lmso. This wuclusiou that the contract is a lease does not change if the City holds along -term leasehold instriicl of a fc-c interest in the property including Rayfrow Park. In either case, leasehold or fee, the City bas an interest that Rllowss, it W give a lease interest to Racmarks. 'This conclusion also does not change because of the Municipal Motor Vehicle Raring Act nf 1994. That Act, which deals with the issuance of a non -assignable permit to persons conducting racing events, does not purport to create any interest in the property including Bayfront Park. It is the contract alone that gives Raceworks an interest in and exclusive use of all the specifically bounded property. -11- Roca►vod Mar -04-02 02:40ae Free- To -SH i D Pan Ott 03- 292 WO -P, . Because the contract is a lease and conveys an interest in real property owned by the City, the City had to follow compctidw bid procedures before awarding the contract to Raeeworks purswsut to City Charter §29-A(d), which states in relevant part as follows (d) &dwY avid leans of re4l property; prohibition. Fxcept as otherwise provided in this charter section, there shall be no sale, conveyance, or disposition of any interest, including any leasehold, in real pnnwny nwned by the city,..., unless them has been prior public notice and a prior opportunity given to the public to compete for said real ,property or interest.' The failure of the City to follow eomprlitivo bidding procedures renders the contract void. See, e_g , Miami Marinas Association, Inc v. Cuy gtfMiazni. 408 So.2d 615 (FIa. 3d DCA 1991.) (enntraet held to be void for fa u= to comply with competitive: bidding proccdures); Ulatstein, 399 .Sn.2d at 1009. The ('nntract is for Commercial Use Of the City's WAtlMrnnt Pmne , Speedway makes the alternative argument that the City was required to follow cosapctitivc bid procedures since the contract is one for "cot - F - ial use or management of any of the City's watcrfront property," and thus encompassed by City Charter §3(i)(iii). The City and Raccworks argue in opposition to this part of Speedway's motion that a subsequent acncadment to the City Charter, approved by voter referendum in Nuvciubcr 2001, dcicted the reference to "commercial use and Should be applied retroactively and prcUude the claim that Speedway already had pled in this ewe that the contract had to be competitively bird biwvd upon City Charter §3(f)CW). 3 The plain IMVWSe of City Charter §29-A(d) makes competitive bid procedures applicable to "disposition of ,= interest ... in real property owned by the city." Actorciinely, it makes no difference that the interest the City owns in Bayfront Park is a 1nnp,-term leasehold. -12- Received liar -U-02 02:lbam From- To -SN t D Pan 018 03- 292 The Court declines to accept the City and Itaceworks' argument on tach of two independent grounds. First, it is not the case that deleting the words "cvmmcrcial use" should result in a more limited application ofthe competitive bidding requirements of iii s Charter section. Florida courts have recognised when called upon to interpret the sdope or wuipudLivc biddiug laws awL; - In so far as they thus serve the object ofprotectingthe public aEaincr collusive entracte and prevent favoritism toward contrantors by public officials and tend to secure fair competition upon equal terms to all bidders, they remove temptation on the part of public offioars to seek private gain at the teVeyer's expense, we of highly remedial character, and should receive a construction always which will fatty effectuate and advance their true Intent and purpose and which will avoid the likelihood ofsame being circumvented, evaded or defeate& Wester v. Belote, 138 So, 721, 724 (FIs. 1931); Marriott Corp. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 383 So?d 662, 665 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Even as amended in November 2001, City Charter §3(f)(iii) can and should be read to encompass the contmet at issue here. Secondly, even if removing the words "commercial user could be interpreted as narrowing the scope of City Charter §3(f)(iii), courts are not allowed to apply changes in statutory law that affect vested rights — and especially not in a case such ea this one when the legislative body has not stated that the change is to have retroactive effect. Young v Altenhaus, 472 So.2d 1152, 1154 (Fla. 1985). In this cast, for the City and Raceworks' argument to have merit, there would have to be re ru live applivatiuu of !lac rant change iu City Charter §3(1)(iii). ?bc no -bid contract was negotiated between the City and Racewurks, tilt City Ulwwgcr was authorized by the City Commission to execute the. contract, and everyone did execute the contract, wbich thereby became a legally binding -13- Received Mar -M-02 02:40PO Pray TO -SM t 0 Pap 014 03— 292 ff� and enforceable agreement, all before City ( :hatter §3(txiii) was amended effective November 7, 2001, only atter the amendment to the Charier had been approved by voter referendum. This chronologywag confirmed at oral argument as correct. Hrg. Transcript at pp. 100:12-101:2; 231:24-232:3. Prior to the time that the aulandro was efPeotive, and indeed no later than August 9, 2001,` Speedway already had a vested right to an opportunity to submit a bid for the contract under City Charter §3(f)(W) as it read prior to the voter referendum in November 2001. That vested right already was pled in counts V and VI of the. Second Amended Complaint, which refcrcnec City Charter §3(f)(iii). Speedway cannot be stripped of its vested rights by retroactive applieatiou of u subsceleu ni amun ltntmt to the City Chart.ar. Evcu if the cvntrdut wav not a lease. It still was required to be competitively bid puLsuaut to City Charter §3(t)(iii) as it maid when Speedway's rights had v=umc vcstctl, and the: failure of the City to do so is another independent ground on which tlic uva rrw is void ns a macicr of law. See, e.g., Munni Marinas A sneiation, 408 So.2d 615; Matstein, 399 Sold at 1009. Based upon the foregning, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that I. SpeMWAy has standing to assert its claims and the contract is a lease. Speedway's right to compel tine City to follow applicable competitive bid procedures for this contract had acctued and was vested no lairs thanAugust 9, 2001, on which date tbs City committed to entering into the enact on a non -bid basis after o xelading Speedway and all otiter potential bidders. Speedway's right was further confiraaed at vested no layer ter October 23, 7001, by which date the contract was fnUy-executed and binding on all parties. And, the City and Raceworks obviously could not divest Speedway of its already vested rights by entaing into an Rmenriraent in December 2001 to what was an already fully executed and binding contract 14- Raceivad Isar -04-02 02:40aa Fran- TO -SM i D Pap 016 03- 292 2. Beuause the contract is a lease, tilt City was and is required to fulluw competitive bid proceftes applicable to leases, and the City's faihn a to do so renders the enntract void as a matter of law. 3. Alternatively, even if the contract were not a lease. the City was requireV to follow competitive bid procedw= pumiant to the provisions of City Charter .§3 (f)(iii). 'the city's admitted failure to follow any competitive bid procedures renders the contract void as a :ratter of law. 4. The contract between the City and Raceworke, which is acknowledged to have been entered into without the City having complied with any of the applicable competitive bid procedures, is hereby declared null, void and of no further legal effect 5, The City is hereby directed to comply with all applicablo competitive bid procedures, and thereby to give Speedway' a full and equal opportunity to submit a competing bid, and to have its bid fully and equally considered, before entering into any lease, or any contract for use of the City's watcrfroat property, for motor car races. 6. The City and Raceworks' cross-motions for sue =ary judppneut on Counts V and VI of the SccvadAmended Complain DONE AND ORDERED this J� day County, Floricd& Copies furnished to: Robcrt D. W. Landon, III; Mq. Henry J. Hunuefeld, Esq. Alan T. Dimond, Esq. Received Mar -04-02 0240om Free - -15- TO -SH a 0 14MLI Pap 016 03- 292 ::