HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-11997p
J-99-849
11/16/00 J
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2500
BRICKELL AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND MEDIUM
DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH
DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL; MAKING
FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO
AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of
September 22, 1999, Item No. 1, following an advertised hearing;
adopted Resolution No. PAB 34-99, by a nine to zero (9 - 0) vote,
thus constituting a RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL of an amendment to
the Future Land Use Map of Ordinance No. 10544, as amended, the
Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-2000, as hereinafter
set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, after careful consideration of
this .matter, deems it advisable and in the best interest of the
general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to grant
this Comprehensive Plan change as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the
Preamble to this Ordinance are hereby adopted by reference and
incorporated as if fully set forth in this Section.
Section 2. The Future Land Use Map of Ordinance
No. 10544, as amended, the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
1989-2000, is hereby amended by changing the land use
designations from Single Family Residential and Medium Density
Multifamily Residential to High Density Multifamily Residential,
for the property located at approximately 2500 Brickell Avenue,
Miami, Florida, more particularly described as portions of Lots
36, 37, 38 (excluding the 100 foot frontage of said Lots which
face South Miami Avenue), and all of Lots 47, 48 and 49 in Block
56 of BRICKELL'S FLAGLER SUBDIVISION, Plat Book 5 at Page 44, of
the Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida.
Section 3. It is hereby found that this Comprehensive
Plan designation change:
(a) is necessary due to changed or changing conditions;
(b) involves a land use of more than 10 acres or a density
of more than 10 units per acre or involves other land
use categories, singularly or in combination with
residential use, of more than 10 acres;
(c) is one which involves property that has not been the
specific subject of a Comprehensive Plan change within
the last year;
Page 2 of 4 11,1997
0, 0
(d) is one which does not involve the same owner's property
within 200 feet of property that has been granted a
Comprehensive Plan change within the prior twelve
months;
(e) the proposed amendment does not involve a text change
to goals, policies, and objectives of the local
government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a
land use change to the future land use map; and
(f) is one which is not located within an area of critical
state concern.
Section 4. The City Manager is hereby directed to
instruct the Director of Planning and Development to immediately
transmit a copy of this Ordinance, upon approval on First Reading
and again after its adoption on Second Reading to the Secretary,
Florida Department of Community Affairs; to the Executive
Director, South Florida Regional Planning Council, Hollywood,
Florida; to the Executive Director, South Florida Water
Management District, West Palm Beach, Florida; to the Secretary,
Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, Florida and to the
Executive Director, Department of Environmental Protection,
Tallahassee, Florida.
Section 5. All ordinances or parts of ordinances insofar
as they are inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of
this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Page 3 of 4 11.997
E
Section 6. If any section, part of section, paragraph,
clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is declared invalid,
the remaining provisions of this Ordinance shall not be affected.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective after
second and final reading and adoption thereof pursuant and
subject to §163.3189 Fla. Stat. (1999).'
PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 16th day of
November , 1999.
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY
this 16th day of November , 2000.
JOE CAROLLO, MAYOR
In accordance with Miami Code Sec. 2.36, since the Mayor did not indicate approval of
`` :i legislation by signing it in the designated place provided, said legislf- 71
becomes effective with the elapse of ten (10) days f m the date
regarding same, without the Mayor exercis' o. r
ATTEST:
Waiter J. ity Clerk
WALTER.J. FOEMAN, CITY
AND CORRECTNESS
7TY ATTORNEY
/'' fi am
W774:GMM:eij:BSS
1� This Ordinance shall become effective as specified herein unless vetoed
by the Mayor within ten days from the date it was passed and adopted.
If the Mayor vetoes this Ordinance, it shall become effective
immediately upon override of the veto by the City Commission or upon the
effective date stated herein, whichever is later.
Page 4 of 4
11997
PZ-10
SECOND READING
PLANNING FACT SHEET
APPLICANT Chad Wlliard, Esq.
HEARING DATE September 22, 1999.
REQUEST/LOCATION Amendment to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
Map.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Complete legal description on file at the Hearing Boards Office.
PETITION Consideration of amending Ordinance 10544, as amended, the
Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-2000 (MCNP) by
amending the Future Land Use Map by changing the land use
designation for the property located at approximately 2500 Brickell
Avenue from "Single Family Residential" and "Medium Density
Multi -family Residential" to "High Density Multi -family Residential"
PLANNING
RECOMMENDATION Approval.
BACKGROUND AND Please see attached analysis.
ANALYSIS
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Approval
VOTE: 9-0
CITY COMMISSION Passed First Reading on November 16, 1999.
Continued from CC of October 26, 2000.
APPLICATION NUMBER 99-028 Item #1
CITY OF MIAMI - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
444 SW 2ND AVENUE, 3RO FLOOR - MIAMI, FLORIDA, 33130 , PHONE (305) 416-1400
Date: 09/17/99 Page 1
11997\'
0
ANALYSIS FOR LAND USE CHANGE REQUEST
Approximately 2500 Brickell. Avenue.
Application No. 99-11
DISCUSSION
The proposal has been reviewed for a change to the Future Land Use Map of the Miami
Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-2000 from "Single Family Residential" and
"Medium Density Multifamily Residential" to "High Density Multifamily Residential".
The subject property consists of a 2.9 acre parcel: Lots 36, 37, 38, 47, 48 and 49 in Block
56 BRICKELL'S FLAGLER SUBDIVISION (5 - 44).
Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) Land Use Policy 1.6.1., established
future land use categories according to the Future Land Use Plan Map and the
"Interpretation of the Future Land Use Plan Map". The North half of the subject property
is currently designated "Single Family Residential" and the same designation is
immediately to the east and north; the south half of the subject property is currently
designated "Medium Density Multifamily Residential", and the same designation is
immediately to the east; to the south, the area is designated "High density Multifamily
Residential" and, to the west, there is the Rickenbacker causeway.
The Single Family Residential land use category allows single family structures of one
dwelling units each to a maximum density of 9 dwelling units per acre, subject to the
detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance
of required levels of service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted
concurrency management requirements. Supporting services such as foster homes and
family day care homes for children and/or adults, community based residential facilities
(6 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities also
will be allowed pursuant to applicable state law. Places of worship, primary and
secondary schools, child day care centers and adult day care centers are permissible in
suitable locations within single family residential areas.
The Medium Density Multifamily Residential land use category allows residential
structure of up to a maximum density of 65 dwelling units per acre, subject to the
detailed provisions of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance
of required levels of service. Supporting services such as community -based residential
facilities (14 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation
facilities) will be allowed pursuant to applicable state law; community -based residential
facilities (15-50) clients and day care for children and adults may be permissible in
suitable locations. Permissible uses within medium density multifamily areas also include
commercial activities that intend to serve the retailing and personal services of the
building or building complex; places of worship; and primary and secondary schools, and
accessory post -secondary educational facilities are also permissible in suitable locations
within'this land use designation.
The High Density Multifamily Residential designated areas allow residential structures
to a maximum density of 150 dwelling units per acre, subject to the detailed provisions
of the applicable land development regulations and the maintenance of required levels of
service for facilities and services included in the City's adopted concurrency management
requirements. Supporting services such as offices and commercial services and other
accessory activities that are clearly incidental to principal uses are permitted; community -
based residential facilities (14 clients or less, not including drug, alcohol or correctional
rehabilitation facilities) will be ' allowed pursuant to applicable state law; community -
based residential facilities (15+ clients), places of worship, primary and secondary
schools, and day care centers for children and adults may be permissible in suitable
locations.
The Planning Department is recommending APPROVAL of the application as
presented based on the following findings:
• It is found . that the subject properties forms an isolated block parallel to ,the
Rickenbacker causeway.
• It is found that the subject property consists of an existing Hampton Inn Hotel and it
is also found that the hotel use on this property has been existing for more than
twenty years.
• It is found. that the purpose of this application is in order to legalize an existing
gransdfathered use.
• It is found that the "High Density', Multifamily Residential" designation on the subject
properties is a logical extension to the north of the already existing land use category
immediately to the south.
k�
• It is found that the requested change to "High Density Multifamily Residential" will
recognize and legalize an existing use and that will increase the possibility of the
subject properties being enhanced in a manner which will directly benefit the. adjacent
area.
It is found that this application is supported by MCNP Objective LU-1.3 which
require the City to encourage commercial development within existing commercial
areas.
These findings support the position that the existing land use pattern in this neighborhood
should be changed.
It also should be stated, that whereas MCNP Land Use Policy 1.1.1. requires
development or redevelopment, that results in an increase in density or intensity of land
use, to be contingent upon availability of public facilities and services that meet or exceed
the minimum LOS standards adopted in the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) (CIE
Policy 1.2.3.). It is found that the attached Concurrency Management Analysis pertaining
to concurrency demonstrates that no levels of service would be reduced below minimum
levels.
11997
RESOLUTION PAB -34-99
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 10544, AS AMENDED, THE CITY OF MIAMI
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY AMENDING THE
FUTURE LAND USE MAP, BY CHANGING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY
2500 BRICKELL AVENUE FROM "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" AND
"MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "HIGH DENSITY
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL".
HEARING DATE: September 22, 1999
ITEM NO. 1
VOTE: 9-0
ATTEST:
Gelabert-San ez, Dir
Planning Department
11997
/.
11997
_ ; � AY �9 �,.a y Y � � _ ,•l '� #`j�. � i � y) t �Y f �.yy�D
f '�• � t' �, rr 10
j::. � �,ti'� •, � •.% qj`" � ,r .; s.� �•': •a "s r��'er4 r Df 1: �- NI a"r , a��'0�.. L 3 �-� t
��h�i{ �' f.. . 4J ; s \� -• . �*� Y ��, `•tZ--ti* n'S. 4? �t s + 4 i ,� Mi ��
s� u
y; w r� { S.. w ��, jr.�• ;L ri s � {}�.}. �L to �, a x � ' Y y� ;
F,
§ � `� 3 �:•, ° ra . ' `� f ' v°�'• i r'`; �„.f� 'y� .. J' ,' • ^ems � \ �` d"`^.R, }�� '�Y
. v.,
fi
'�'�t y - - �'•+ t; .r' +a.: - °... d! .,a�,""i 7 «r.1 fix.*: v`D �,.•�'•;. 'r _ta� i 'C��
a.1 :. ✓',,.• :.": a.� i yam*.•'•!^ , )> [-
V. t •s `rx.`s' .Y .,iri .11{w a . r,
•off 1�"
,may F t .. ` �'� ♦ i 7E..
f7��4,�
k
;9Cr'r��J "Am.:,F ,q�i A 'tii.°.. '- a l�• '27� ', 'j'" t,.r' Vw'.�"�+,
4 1
�
v
�� * �, t� s ; ..... ems. z��►
r
%.
6 ,
• ,. arrtzf
Al �`• � �
� l
i �i6 s
CITY OF MIA.MI
OFFICE OF HEARING BOARDS
APPLICATION TO AMEND THE
MIAMI COMPREHENSWE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
#######wallirwliii#w!i!!!ir*!lrriiilrilirrwrlrlwliiii!!!!lwwiii!!w#!!#rrsli!#was#s#s##s#rsastiss#
SECTION 2-653 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, GENERALLY REQUIRES
ANY PERSON WHO RECEIVES COMPENSATION, REMUNERATION OR EXPENSES FOR CONDUCTING
LOBBYING ACTIVITIES TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE CITY CLERK, PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN
LOBBYING ACTIVITIES BEFORE CITY STAFF, BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND THE CITY COMMISSION. A
COPY OF SAID ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (MIAMI CITY HALL).
LOCATED AT 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, NIIAMI, FLORIDA, 33133.
ass#ww#liswwwi!!##wiwlitrrrrirrrli!#riiwwrrrrwwrlirwirriirrliirrriiarr•ir*rrw!!ia!!!ilww!laswsst
NOTE: THIS APPLICATION MUST BE TYPEWRITTEN AND SIGNED IN BLACK INK.
Section 62-32 of the Code of the City of Miami, Periodic review of the adopted comprehensive plan and adoption of
evaluation and appraisal report reads as follows:
(a) Periodically, but not less often than once in five years or more often than once in two years,
the comprehensive plan shall be reviewed, evaluated and appraised by the planning advisory
board to determine whether changes in the amount, kind or direction of development and growth
of the city or area thereof, or other reasons, make it necessary or beneficial to make additions or
amendments to the comprehensive plan. The building and zoning department shall prepare an
evaluation and appraisal report for the planning advisory board which shall evaluate the
comprehensive plan pertaining to the major problems of development, physical deterioration and
the location of land uses and the social and economic effects of such uses; the status of each
element of the comprehensive plan; the objectives of the comprehensive plan compared to actual
results and the extent to which unanticipated and unforeseen problems and opportunities
occurred; all as compared between the date of adoption and the date of the report. The report
shall suggest that changes needed to update the comprehensive plan including reformulated
objectives, policies and standards.
(b) The planning advisory board may recommend the report as presented, modify the report or
reject the report in duly noticed public hearing pursuant to the procedures in Section 62-3 L
(c) The city commission shall adopt, or adopt with changes, the report or portions thereof by
resolution in public hearing within 90 days after the planning advisory board date of
recommendation. The city commission shall thereafter amend the comprehensive plan based on
the recommendation in the evaluation and appraisal report. Adoption of the report and
recommended amendments to the plan may be made simultaneously pursuant to section 62-31 or
if not simultaneous, the evaluation and appraisal report shall contain a schedule for adoption of
the recommended amendments within one year.
See also Article 22 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Fee of S to apply toward the cost of processing, according to Section 62-156 of the Zoning
Ordinance:
Conservation, recreation, residential single-family duplex ......................$ 300.00
Residential medium density multifamily..................................................$ 450.00
Residential high density multifamily, office,
major public facilities, transportation/utilities ..........................................$ 550.00
Commercial/restricted, commercial/general and industrial ......................S 650.00
Commercial(CBD)......................................................... ...................S1,200.00
Surcharge for adverting each item.......................................................S 1 200.00
Public hearing mail notice fees, including cost of
handling and mailing per notice ...........................
This petition is proposed by:
( ) City Commission
( ) Building and Zoning Department
( } Zoning Board
(aQl} Other (Please specify): Charles Leemon III and Linda Leemon, his wife
The subject property" is located at 2500 Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida
Folio number 0141 '39 001 0560
AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS:
Lot(s) 36,37,38,47,48, and 49
Block(s) 56
"BRICKELL'S FLAGLER" as recorded in Plat Boot: 5 at Page 44
Subdivision
The undersigned being the owner or the representative of the owner, of the subject property do(es) respectfully request
the approval of the City of Miami for the following amendment(s) to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan for
the above -described property as indicated in the Land Use Plan:
FROM: Medium Density Multi -family Residential and Single Family Residential
TO: High Density Multi -family Residential
Please supply a statement indicating why you think the existing plan designation is inappropriate:
—See attached Exhibit "A"
Please supply a statement justifying your request to change the plan to your requested plan designation.
See attached Exhibit 'B"
What is the acreage of the property being requested for a change in plan designation?
Gross acreage = 2.9 acres
Net acreage = 1.2 acres
Has the designation of this property been changed in the last year? No
Do you own any other property within 200 feet of the subject property? No If yes, has this other
property been granted a change in plan designation within the last twelve months? NIA
Have you made a companion application for a change of zoning for the subject property with the Planning and Zoning
3oards Administration Department? Yes
11997
Have you filed with the Planning and Zoning Boards Administration Department: Affidavit of ownership? Yes
List of owners of property within 375 feet of the subject property? Yes Disclosure of ownership
form? Yes If not, please supply them.
.. Signature
W. Chad Williard, Attorney for
Name property owner/applicant
Address 999 Ponce de,Leon Blvd., #1000
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone 305-444-1500
Date
1199
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE
The forego'n instrument was acknowledged before me this �__ day of .�
19, byte t 1--1—f +�-Q.�7 who is personall or who has
produced aA as identification an who did (did not) take an oath.
Name: Al..j �JA t tr3 y, v
Notary Public -State of F ri a
OFFICIAL \UTARY Si Ai.
Commission No.: ALINA CARVAJAL
My Commission Expires NOTARY PLBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA
COMWSSION NO. CC597426
MY COMMISSION M OCr. 3�-'�L'0
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF NUAMI-DADE
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
19 , by of
a corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
He/She is personally known to me or has produced as identification
and who did.(did not) take an oath.
Name:
Notary Public -State of Florida
Commission No.:
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF NIIAMI-DARE
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
19 , by partner (or agent) on behalf of
a partnership. He/She is personally known to me or who has
produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath.
Name:
Notary Public -State of Florida
Commission No.:
My Commission Expires:
11997
0
E,
Exhibit "A"
Inappropriateness of Existing Plan Designation:
The property at 2500 Brickell Avenue (the "Property") is currently designated for
Medium Density Multi -Family Residential and Single Family Residential. The existing
hotel (and proposed expansion) is located entirely on the Medium Density Multi -Family
Residential (which permits a maximum density .of 65 dwelling units per acre) portion of
the Property. The existing designations are inappropriate for the Property because the
density limitations prohibit the proposed expansion to the Property's existing hotel (i.e.,
this plan amendment application is being filed as a companion application to a change
of zoning request to permit a two-story expansion to the existing hotel located on the
Property) — an expansion which, for the reasons stated in Exhibit "A" attached hereto
(and hereby incorporated by, reference), is appropriate for the Property and compatible
with the surrounding area.
For more than thirty (30) years, a hotel has existed on the Property. In fact, prior
to the implementation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (the "Plan"), the
proposed two-story expansion to the *hotel would have been permitted as a. matter of
right.' Approval of this application will acknowledge and ratify that the Property's .
location warrants the requested hotel expansion, which requires a High Density Multi -
Family Residential designation. Moreover, the isolation of the Property (as discussed in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto) from other Single Family Residential parcels further
demonstrates the inappropriateness of the Property's Single Family Residential
designation. Accordingly, the existing Plan designation, with its density limitations, is
inappropriate for the. Property and should be amended to reflect the appropriate, High
Density Multi -Family Residential designation.
F..IAPPS%WORK1 AWMampM&COMP.Ooc
' As stated in the companion zoning application, by filing this application the Property owner: does not
waive its assertion that Tollius v. City of Miami, 96 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 1957), entitles it to the proposed hotel
expansion as a matter of right; and acknowledges that this plan amendment application and zoning
application constitute the most efficient and expeditious method for obtaining City of Miami authorization
to construct the hotel eXpansion.
t 11997
Exhibit "B"
Justification for the Proposed Plan Designation:
The subject property, 2500 Brickell Avenue (the "Property"), is currently
designated for Medium Density Multi -Family Residential and Single Family Residential
by the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (the "Plan"). However, for the
reasons discussed herein, the High Density Multi -Family designation requested for the
Property (which will allow the proposed expansion to the existing hotel) is appropriate.
With respect to compatibility, a review of the Property illustrates that it is
separated from Medium Density Multi -Family Residential properties by SE 25th Road
and South Miami Avenue — heavily traveled, 4-5 lane roadways. In fact, the Property is
essentially an island, surrounded on four sides by major roadways (i.e., in addition to
SE 25t' Road and South Miami Avenue, it is bordered by the I-95 flyover and Brickell
Avenue to its west and south, respectively). As such, it is perfectly suited for the hotel
use which has existed on the Property for over thirty (30) years, as well as the
proposed, two-story expansion which necessitates this request to amend the Plan's
designation.
Further justification for the proposed designation is found in the designations of
neighboring properties to the south (High Density Multi -Family Residential) and west
(Office designation which permits residential uses to a maximum density equivalent to
High Density Multi -Family Residential). The Property's separation from the Medium
Density Multi -Family Residential and Single Family Residential properties, its close
proximity to the 1-95 flyover and its unique location at the convergence of major
roadways leading to the Brickell Avenue corridor and Key Biscayne, clearly
demonstrates the appropriateness of the proposed High Density Multi -Family
Residential designation.
F:WPPSIWORKIMISCU/anVME cCOMP.d=
1199'7
iltt Ulf fflilano-
V of
,
JACK L. LUFT
Director ,.,,,, ,,,,,,
Jc
�Q.FA,
April21, 1997
Mr. David Jay Feinberg, AIA
4960 Southwest 72"d Avenue, Suite 306
Miami, Fl. 33155
Re: Zoning for Hampton Inn at 2500 Brickell Avenue
Dear Mr. Feinberg:
EDWARD MARQL EZ
City ,~tanager
Pursuant to your letter of December 19, 1996, and our subsequent meetings regarding your client's desire
to expand the existing Hampton Inn at 2500 Brickell Avenue, please be advised that the Department of
Planning and Development contends that the zoning on the subject property was amended sometime in the
late 1950's (as demonstrated by our research of the historical zoning atlas in this department). It is also
evident upon our research that the text of the Zoning Ordinance was amended sometime in the late 1960's
or 70's to delete hotel uses from R-3 zoning districts.
Pursuant to the above referenced amendment having been approved by the City Commission without an
objection or appeal by your client at that time, this department would argue that the amendment is valid
and that it cannot be objected to at this time.
As we discussed, a more appropriate way for your client to be able to expand his hotel would be to apply
for a change of zoning on his property from R-3 to R-4 (which is the first district that permits hotels). One
of the criteria this department uses to evaluate a request for change of zoning is whether there are changing
conditions in a particular area that warrant such a need for a change of zoning, another is compatibility. It
appears, upon a preliminary review of the existing conditions surrounding the subject property, that such a
request may be appropriate, however, the final staff recommendation for such a change would have to be
evaluated by the Director of this department at the time of the application.
Please advise if you have any further questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
6� urdes Slazyk
Assistant Director
cc: Joel Edward Maxwell, Deputy City Attorney
Jack L. Luk Director, Planning and Development
Santiago Jorge -Ventura, Interim Director, Building and Zoning
Juan Gonzalez, Acting Zoning Administrator
Rafael Rodriguez, Coral Way NET Administrator
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND REVITALIZATION r�
444 S.W. 2nd Avenue(Miami, Florida 33130/(305) 416-1400/Telecopier (305) 416-2156
Mailing Address: P.O. BOX 330708/Miami, Florida 3323.3-0708
U
AFFIDAVIT•
STATE OF FLORIDA }
} SS
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE : }
Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared
Chad lVilliard
who being by me first duly sworn, upon oath, 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 Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, affecting the real property located
in the City of Miami, as described and listed on the pages attached to this affidavit and made apart thereof.
2.1 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 asset out in the
accompanying petition.
3. That the pages attached hereto and made apart 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.
AppYicanf s Signature
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE
.The foregoin instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
19 ` I.
, by ` + ' + ` l ► -; . ' > , who is personally known to me or who has
produced { • 44_ as identification and who did (did not) take'an oath.
Name: f
Notary Public -State of Florida
Commission No.:
My Commission Expires:
It99 17
11
Owner's Name
Mailing Address
Telephone Number
OWNER'S LIST
Charles Leemon III and Linda Leemon, his wife
3640 Fairlane Farms Road, Suite 2 , Wellington, FL
Zip Code �3414
Legal Description:
Lots 36,37,38,47,48 and 49, Block 56 "Bricke's Flagseof accordingDade to Floridat thlreSof
as recorded in P.B. S at Page 44 of the Public
right-of-way for Brickell Avenue.
Owner's Name
Mailing Address Zip Code
Telephone Number
Legal Description:
Owner's Name
Mailing Address Zip Code
Telephone Number s,
Legal Description:
Anv other real estate property owned individually, jointly, or severally (by corporation, partnership or privately) within
375 feet of the subject site is listed as follows:
Street Address Legal Description
NONE
Street Address
Street Address
Legal Description
Legal Description
DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP
1. Legal description and street address of subject real property:
Lots 36,37.,38,47,48 and 49, Block 56 'Brickell's Flagler"_according to the Plat thereof
as recorded in P.B. 5 at Page 44 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida. - less
right-of-way for Brickell Avenue.
2.. Owner(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: Section 2-618 of 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. Charles Leemon III and Linda Leemon, his wife = .100 0
3460 Fairlane Farms Road,; Suite 2
Wellington, FL 33414
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 375 feet of the subject real property. NSA
Owner or Attorney for Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADS
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1., day of;
19 ° ` ` , by r t ,; who is personally known to me or who has
produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath.
r
I -
Name: f
Notary Public -State of Florida
Commission No.:
My Commission. Expires:
Jun-28-99 03:53P Charles Leemon
.ter 0 or
305-232-3325 P.O2
•
nis TrIstrument Prepared by:
Idnie. H Sweeny.
44 West Fla-ler Street, 180t floor
Nti;trtri. 1*-*lorrda 33130-1808
Parcel l.D No. 01 4139 001 0560
WARRANTY DIKED
9�1R3Cr�eS97 1995 JUL 31 12=15
DOCSTPDEE 4,300.00 SURTX 3,600.00
HARVEY RUvIN, CLERK DADE COUWTT, FL
THIS LVDL FURE. made this 3i day of ]u)y, 1995. hetN-ccn Margareta M:
Tollius and 'nioruas G. Tolhus, as trustee: under the trust created wider the last will and
i;:.camwni of Goan A- Tollius, deceased. (the " G Ton-), of the Cot.tnry of a r S cr
.ri Florida, whose address is ��? SI.iL_ �._ 1 1 ---5-" f-��`�-�� �/�r� itttLl�Lirivs Leeman
ITI and Linda Leemon, his wife (the "Grantees"), of the County of Wilt ire the St;trr of
Homia_ whosc ru,sr affect address is c/o Holiday lrtn, 10/'/5 Ciitihbcan Blvd- Mi:,rtii, Flond
31189.
WITNI.SSETH.
That Grantors, for attd in consideration of the !unt of Ten and No/100 Doll;w,
{clfl.rlU}, to Granrors in hand paid by Grantees, the receipt whereof 1., hereby acknowi,%jPca,
havc zra lod. hare::med and sold to Gr;irtte-es, their heirs and assir;tls f�'re%cr, lane. litiatod in
Dade C'otwur•. Horida, described a>:
I-oi, 36. 37. 39. 47. 48. find 49. Block 56. of BRICKET_L'S M -,V;LK)z
SUNDrVT`ION, according to the: Plat thereof ntccrded At Plat Book 5, at p;ige
44, public rccords of Dade. County. Florida
Subject to: Tuxes for 1995 and clrbsequent years; zoning and other regulatory restrictions
imposed bv I-oveinmental authority, and easements, restrictions anJ agreements of iecord. and
Iluh}ect to the 99-year lease recorded in O.R. Book 2286 at Pagc. 563. and %t,ppleirietttal tc;+ae
.,geement recorded in O.R. Book 3853.at Page 649 of the public records of Dade C•���rtt�.
rlirich, none cif w1uch are. intendctt to be reirnpoacd hereby.
And (;ranwt dues hereby ,pecially waryant t.tic brie to x:tid land, anti will doc:t,d ib,%.
:erne ac:arrtst the lawful Clairlis of all persons whomsoevct.
-1-
11991
Jun-28-99 03:53P Charles Laamon 305-232-3325
ryfr•.1 �j�of`��
P.03
[N wi'rNi:ISs wifFRL•OF, G!antor has hcrcurtru .rrl lti• hind Acid xc;41 on ilit :!-,IC
tri rh abovC.
$i>-.ned. Scale and D livered
to
f.W,ir,c...,ipn:iturr`; TvIlius_ (IIJIv)dtr:,lic ,:i
a9,.z_ tru-stee uncle, tl,c: rrugr crearcd, waicr t}u:
(Print witness n:,,nc) - - iasi w111 and is>,iarriont of Goo oa
'}j,ut�c, si�ttaturc) Thomas G. Tolliu_, individually sind al,
r /tee. LC__L,�.�.!�'l_Z— 1�1%(/��I/G iru:wc undCr the. irusi. Groated m,4l,.:r
(Print w•„lic',,n;unc) last will and testarnerii of A
dece.a-,cct
COUNTY Of- bADL )
'lire torc:,:c,m.c,. m,;an,rncm \vw; rcknow-)edged before t,-e., the uncicr>ioncd not;t-y
ri:: ' / iia• ui' 199,;. by hlargareta IvI TtAljw, anJ I7,VnI3c G To11tus,,nditi
.,} tri:,acc:c itndc,r Oic iru�t crcatc,d, undcr the lass will 5Ivfl Tesiarnent or 6csla .A
ce;lsed, vrhn nersonallY :sppeared betore me at Ow :ttnc of acknowled}ink
.chc� mc. PcTrz n alk known to me, or who produced and t:xhimtre(I i(.) me ;)'currl:ni
driver's liceitee As evidence that they are the persons who arc dc'acrihtd in an.i u-ho cxc-ctiicd
thr fOTCS•.Oing instruincrit. and who did not ti,.kc an nath.
(Stgnat,Ate of Novara. Nublic) �.
f !! 16
E•'LC �Ielei5 I�2f�N 1/C:
(Taped ctr Printed Natuc cif Notzw% ('ubl:c
Notar.•. I'ulilic. Statc of Fic%rida
:: L• t E CO►a,S •r�N•a,vG
•/r C e�.wi•�ow CC7Jr.Ol4
- ROO-a?[•47b5
•
E
Is
This instrument prepared by
and when recorded returned to:
W. Chad Williard, Esq.
Carlos Williard & Flanagan, P.A.
999 Ponce de Leon Blvd.
Suite 1000
Coral Gables, FL 33134
(Space Above For Recorder's Use Only)
DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS
The undersigned, as Owners of the following described real property (the "Property"),
lying, being and situated in the City of Miami, Miami -Dade County, Florida, and legally described
as:
Lots 36, 37, 38, 47, 48, 49, Block 56 of "Brickell's Flagler Subdivision," according to the
Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 44 of the Public Records of Miami -Dade
County, Florida.
Street Address: 2500 Brickell Avenue
IN ORDER TO ASSURE the City of Miami and the Brickell Homeowners
Association, Inc: ("BHA") that the representations made to them by the Owners will
be abided by the Owners, their successors or assigns, freely, voluntarily and without
duress make the following Declaration of Restrictions (the "Declaration") covering and
running with the Property:
(1) That this Declaration shall become final and shall be recorded in the
Public Records of Miami -Dade County, Florida and is conditioned upon
the approval of the change of zoning and amendment to the City of Miami
Future Land Use Map, as requested in the 1999 Public Hearing
Applications on the Property, by the City of Miami, Florida and expiration
of all applicable appeal periods.
(2) That the height of any structure on the Property shall be limited to a
maximum of five (5) stories (each story to be twelve (12) feet or less in
height); including accessory structures, decorative structures and signs;
provided, however, that mansards and/or parapets extending no more
than ten (10) feet above the fifth (5th) floor shall be permitted.
Pco
ik
i„ �4�
Declaration of Restrictions
Page 2 of 4
(3) Covenant Running with the Land. This Declaration on the part of the
Owners shall constitute a covenant running with the land and shall be
recorded in the Public Records of Miami - Dade County, Florida and shall
remain in full force and effect and be binding upon the Owners, their heirs,
successors and assigns until such time as the same is modified or
released. These restrictions shall be for the benefit of, and the limitation
upon, all present and future owners of the Property and for the public
welfare, and for the benefit of the BHA.
(4) Modification, Amendment, Release. This Declaration of Restrictions
may be modified, amended or released as to the land herein described, or
any portion thereof, by a written instrument executed by the, then,
owner(s) of the Property, provided that the same is also approved by the
City of Miami, Florida, after public hearing. Prior to seeking such
modification, amendment or release, Owners shall first provide the BHA
with written notice as set forth below.
(5) Enforcement. Enforcement shall be by action against any parties or
person violating, or attempting to violate, any covenants. The prevailing
party in any action or suit pertaining to or arising out of this Declaration,
shall be entitled to recover, in addition to costs and disbursements allowed
by law, such sum as the Court may adjudge to be reasonable for the
services of his/her attorney. This enforcement provision shall be in
addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity or both.
(6) Election of Remedies. All rights, remedies and privileges granted herein
shall be deemed to be cumulative and the exercise of any one or more
shall neither be deemed to constitute an election of remedies, nor shall it
preclude the party exercising the same from exercising such other
additional rights, remedies of privileges.
(7) Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants, by judgment of
court, in no way shall affect any of the other provisions which shall remain
in full force and effect.
(8) Recording. This Declaration shall be filed of record in the public records
of Miami -Dade County, Florida at the cost of the Owners following the
acceptance by the City of Miami.
-2-
11991
Declaration of Restrictions
Page 3 of 4
(9) Notice. Notice to the BHA should be provided to:
T. Sinclair Jacobs
195 SW 15th Road
Suite 203
Miami, FL 33129
In the event that the BHA should cease to exist, these restrictions should run to the
benefit of the BHA's successors and/or assigns. if this event should occur, the BHA
shall provide the Owners forthwith, with written notice of said dissolution / termination.
Notice to the Owners should be provided. to:
Mr. Charles Leemon III
3380 Fairlane Farms Road
Suite 1
Wellington, FL 33414
Signed, witnessed, executed and acknowledged this 10 day of November 1999.
S' ,er Seal and Delivered
Ze re ce of:
7ftness)
(Witness)
ZtLl
(Witness)
(Witness)
-3-
Lind& Leemon
11997
Declaration of Restrictions
Page 4 of 4
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE
The foregoing i trument was acknowledged before me, the undersigned notary public,
this (o!day of oV , 1999, by Charles Leemon III and Linda Leemon, his wife, who
personally appeared before me at the time of acknowledging and notarization who are
personally known to me, or who produced and exhibited to me a current Florida Driver's License
as evidence that they are the persons who are described iry and who executed the foregoing
instrument. I _
(Official Seal)
,�.PyPUB KIMBERLY A. WEIR
0 COMMISSION # CC 706499
o EXPIRES JAN 5, 2002"
BONDED THRU
�OF F��Q ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC.
-4-
of N
ublic)
10 m Off IV W e-, K
(Typed or printed name of Notary Public)
Notary Public State of Florida
C,
•
OPINION OF TITLE
CITY OF MIAMI
With the understanding that this Opinion of Title is furnished to city of Miami, Florida, as
inducement for the acceptance of a Declaration of Restrictions respecting the property (as
hereinafter defined), it is hereby certified that 1 have examined, as to the following described
parcel of real property (the "Property"):
Lots 36, 37, 38, 47, 48, 49, Block 56 of Brickells's Flakier Subdivision, according to the
Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 5, at page 44 of the public records of Miami -Dade County,
Florida.
Owner's Policy of title insurance No. OPM-927280 issued by Attorney's Title Insurance
Company, bearing Effective Date of July 31, 1995 at 12:15 R.M., together with; Chain of'fit.le
Report:, with an effective date from July 31, 1995 to October 31, 1999, at 11:000 P.M.
Based solely upon a review of the foregoing title evidence, I a.m of the opinion that as of
October 31, 1999 at 11:00 P.M., record fee simple title to the Property was vested in Charles
Leemon IIl and Linda Leemon, his wife ,subject to the following encumbrances, liens and other
exceptions:
1, RECORDED MORTGAGES: None.
2, RECORDED MECHANICS LIENS, CONTRACT LIENS, LIS PENDENS AND
JUDGMENTS: None.
3. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS:
a. Real estate taxes for the year 1999 and subsequent years
4. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS:
a. Restrictions, conditions, reservations, easements, and other matters contained on
the Plat of Brick.eWs Flagler as recorded in Plat Book 5, at page 44, public records of
Miami -Dade County.
b. Covenants, conditions, and restrictions contained in Agreement dated May 10,
1963, and recorded in ORB 3653, at page 642, Public Records of Mianli-Dade
County, Florida.
Therefore, based solely on a review of the foregoing title evidence, I certify that the following
parties are the only parties holding record fee title to the Property or holding a mortgage interest
in the Property of record:
NAME INTEREST
Charles Leemon III and Linda Leemon Owners
11997
•
1, the undersigned, further certify that I am an Attorney -at -Law duty admitted to practice in the
state of Florida and a member in good standing of the Florida Bar.
Respectfully submitted this[ , day of November, 1999.
By: L lk_
James H. Sweeny III
Florida Bar No. 079673
Address: 44 W. Flagler St. Suite 1050
Miami, FL 33130
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTYOF MIAMI-DADE
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this f day ove be 199 ,
James H. Sweeny I11, who is personally known to Ze.
JORGE AVERHOrf
NOTARY o My Comm Exp. 6/16/2003
�' PUBLIC n No. CC 847230
%Wersonlly Known f I Other I.D.
Ntfy P'ubllQSt� of Florida
Print Name__Z Z6,e
My Commission Expires: 6 f 1,& 1 aaD3
.L.199
IN THE CIRCUIT CWU OF TYE 11TH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA IN CHANCERY
GUSTO TOLLIUS'
Plaintiff, )
1
vs. )
CITY OF ML*a, a municipal )
corporation of the -State of )
Florida, and BRICKELL HAMHOCK )
CIVIC ASSOCIATION, a non-profit )
corporation organized under the )
laws of the State of Florida, )
Defendants.
NO 159883
FIX" DECREE
PURSUANT TO MANDATE
THIS CAUSE came on duly for hearing this day after
notice upon Plaintiff's Motion to Fix Order on Mandata and Motion
to Tax Costs herein and counsel for the respective parties having
appeared and argued the same, and the Court uponn.consideration
and being fully advised in the premises,
IT IS ORDERED as follows;
1., That the present zoning cla3sification of R-1
(single family residences) and the zoning ordinance'of the City
of Miami so providing be and the same is hereby declared and decreed
to be unreasonable, arbitrary, oppressive, unconstitutional and
void as applied to and regarding the lands owned by the Plaintiff
and set forth in this cause as follows:
Lots 4-7, 48 and 49 of Block 56,
FLAGLLR SUBDIVISION , according to
the Plat thereof recorded in
Plat Book 5, at Page 44 of the
Public Records of made County,
Florida.
uewerd in
u e6 e -/o O
11997 c�� C4sf'(
2. That the City of Miami., its officers, agents aau�d
employees and the Defendant TRICK HAM= CIVIC ASSOCL4XION3, i
officers, hers, agents, employees, representatives, successors
and assigns and each of. the= be and they are hereby permanently
restrained and enjoined from interfering with the usd or construc
Lion upon said property for the purposes and under the conditions
permitted and classified under an R-3 zoning di.stxict, as provide
and in effect at the time of the original Final Becrea in this
cause, to -wit: on (>.-tobe r 1.8, 1955, under the provisions o£ Crdin
arcs No. 15$2 of the City of Mid:
3. TThait the City ®g Miami., its officers-, agents and
employo4m be and they are hereby ma ndatorily enjoined to change
upon its recorda and by approprUto Ordinance the zoning clasasili
catlon of the aforesaid property as set forth in. Paragraph 2. abov
4. That Plaintiff ° s costs herein be and they era
hereby taxed in they sure of
wr�� W s �aiaaram,z �srms+ w��a oaef/ori�aassw �.v�aur
against the. Dafend=ts and each of them and that Plaintiff. do.
have aad recov= his said costs from eaid Defendants- and for
Which Ln. LXECti CM ISSUE.
D= A.'� ORS in Chaffers in 111mi,, Dade County,
Florida, this day of July, 1957.
a /o
CiRCurr juxz
-2-
11997
IN TILE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
JANUARY TERM, A. D. 1957
DIVISION A
GUSTO TOLLIUS, **
Appellant, **
vs. ** CASE NO. 28,513
CITY OF M?AMI, a municipal*
corporation, of the State of
Ffor Ida, and BRICKELL HAMMOCK **
CIVIC ASSOCIATION, a non-profit
corporation organized under the **
laws of the State of Florida,
Appellees.
Opinion filed June 7, 1957
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Robert L. Floyd,
Judge
Hail, Hedrick 8; Dekle; for Appellant
Olavi M. Hendrickson for City of Miami; Pallot, Silver & Mulloy for.
Brickell Hammock Civic Association, Appellees
THOMAS, J.:
In his decree the chancellor denied the relief sought by
the plaintiff, that is, the re -zoning of three lots located at the
southwest corner of 25th Road and Brickell Avenue so as to permit its
use for buildings other than single-family dwellings. The plaint.iff's
11.99"7
-2 -
effort to secure re -zoning had been rejected by the - P1anr, _c.g 2— oz.:.?c,
and the Board's decision had been sustained by the City Commission.
The c;:ancellor, observed that although his "personal opinion
might be such that he] would favorably vote to re -zone the plain-
tiff'.s property administratively, nevertheless, [he Was] of the opan--
ion, that the plaintiff Chad] not sustained the extraordinary burden
required" of him to "overcome the principle that before a Court can
grant re -zoning the case presented must show that the matter is not
fairly debatable." The Miami Beach United Lutheran Church of the
Epiphany v. The City of Miami Beach, Fla., 82 So..2d 88o,
In order clearly to understand the prime issue in this
case it seems fitting now to record a sketch showing the location of
the property in question, the nature of the neighboring property
and, especially, the system of streets and highways nearby.
In this sketch the numerals l to 9 will be used. The
number "1" indicates the property involved, number 1'2" a motel
situated diagonally across Brickell Avenue, which is also highway
U..S. 1 leading from Miami to Key West, number "3" the future lo-
cation of a Howard Johnson restaurant, number "%" the entrance of
Rickenbacker Causeway, number "5" a four --lane street adjoining the
property on the north, number "6" a four -lane street adjacent to the.
west side of the block in which the property is located, number 117"
a five --lane street along the south side of the block, and number "8"
the intersection of Brickell Avenue, highway U. S. 1, and the wide
street leading to the causeway. The number "9" is used'to designate
tracts on which there are few, or no, improvements.
11,997
m
L -A
.. ......................
..............
...................
Kz
............
MA S, C.I ..............
---- ..........
............. ...... ..
WO
•l
There is extremely heavy vehicular traffic on Erickell
Avenue, highway U. S. 1, and particularly at the point where it crosses
26th Road, number "7", near the entrance to Rickenbacker Causeway lead-
ing to Crandon Park, a popular recreation spot.
The plaintiff charged that the zoning regulation of 1936
placing the property in question in an area limited to use for single-
family residences, designated Zone R-1, had become unconstitutional
and void as applied to his parcel because of changed conditions and
that the regulations should be modified to permit use of the land as
a location for an apartment -motel.
The limitation fastened on the use of the tract designated
number "2" was removed by a decree of the circuit court of the Eleventh
Judicial Circuit 6 July 1951 in which the chancellor declared that
the restriction to use for single-family residences was "unreasonable,
oppressive, unconstitutional and void." The city appealed and the
decree was affirmed. City of Miami v. Hammock Homes, Inc., Fla.*, 57
So. 2d 459.
We repeat that this property is located at the northeast
corner of the intersection of highway U. S. 1 and a street running
east and west, while the property in litigation is situated at the
southwest corner of the same intersection.
We are well aware of the position we have taken that lines
of demarcation between zones must be placed somewhere and that there
is no force to the argument that property situated on one side of a
street need by proximityalone be . put in the same zone with property
on the other side. City of Miami Beach v. Ocean and Inland Co., 147
Fla. 480, 3 So. 2d 364. But we find no conditions in the present
litigation calling for application of the rule because in the setting
we have undertaken to depict by the sketch there is too much similarity
between the parcel on which an apartment -motel now exists and the pro-
perty on which the appellant proposes to build one, and between appel -
lantfs property and that which a restaurant will occupy.
The decision of this court in City of Miami v. Ross, Fla.,
76 So.. 2d 152, casts some light on the present controversy. We state
11997
at the outset of an analysis of the opinion that it appears frorl he
record in this court the property then involved was located about
eleven blocks nearer the center of the city, but through traffic on
Bricke-11 Avenue and traffic between the center of the city and Fickan-
backer Causeway are common to both and there were other circumstances,
in the cited case that are relevant to the present one.
The plaintiffs had assailed the zoning ordinance as. a vio-
lation of their constitutional rights because it restricted their land
to use for single-family dwellings, and they had prevailed. The city
had admitted that the character of the area had changed making the.
restriction too severe but. assumed the position that construction of
buildings allowed in an R-3 zone would be detrimental, and represented
that the city was then engaged in developing a plan for -the entire
district which would allow multiple family residences but ?mould differ
in important respects from an area then given an R-3 classification.
The author of the opinion remarked that in view of such
change of circumstances and the attitude of the•city itself that re-
strictions should be relaxed, the decision whether or not to re -zone
was no longer a matter of discretion but had become one of duty. `J.'he
court after first deciding that the city should accomplish general re-
zoning because property in the whole neighborhood had been affected by
change of conditions held that this operation on the part of the City
should not be interrupted in behalf of owners who suffered no hardship
peculiar to them.
Upon rehearing, however, the court concluded that the
principles embraced in the main opinion should not be abandoned, but
that the complaining property owners were, after all, entitled to re-
lief, citing City of Miami Beach v. Kay, Fla., jl So. 2d ;25; City of
Miami Beach v. First Trust Co., Fla., 45 So. 2d 681; and Lippovi v. City
of Miami Beach, Fla., 66 So. 2d 827.
We cannot agree with the chancellor that the question
whether or not the propriety of the restrictions on the use of the
appellant's property can be said to be "fairly debatable." The position
11997
- we fully understand the chancellor's inclination to aol.: ot;;c: :l=.:e
were he acting in an administrative instead of a judicial capacity
seems to us refuted by the affirmance of the decree in City of Nliami
v. Hammock Homes, Inc., supra; it"seems refuted by the existence of
the four --lane street to the north, and by the existence of the five -
lane street to the south through which vehicles flow.to and from the
causeway; it seems refuted by the nearnessofthe entrance to the
causeway and by highway U. S. 1 passing in front of the very property.
The block in which appellant's property lies is a "verit-
able island," to borrow a term from appellant's brief. It is surround-
ed by highways or streets of four or more lanes in width. The south
half of the block is. owned by the county while that part ofthe north -
half lyingwest of the property in .question is also owned by the
appellant.
Aside from the characteristics of the land, and the land
around it, apparent from the sketch, there was abundant testimony that
the property in litigation no longer retained the features which at
the time of passage of the zoning ordinance justified classifying it
as a site usable only for one purpose. Four witnesses produced by the
appellant, and evidently qualified to testify as expects on the sub: jest,
agreed that the parcel was no longer suitable for such use. In re-
buttal the.city offered one expert who stated on direct examination
that the property was still properly classified, but weakened the posit-
ion of the appellees by admitting on cross examination that -there were.
"more people who like to live off a main thoroughfare than on" although
some people "like to sit on the front porch and watch the traffic
3o by This seemed to be as strong an answer as he could give
to the question whether or not the witness would advise a client to buy
the property in question for use as a place for a private residence.
The Director and Secretary of the City Planning and Zoning
Board conceded that the change in zoning regulations permitting the
construction of the apartment -motel designated on the sketch as 112"
and the change of the regulations affecting the Howard Johnson property,
Shown on the sketch as 113" had."possibly * * * made Lfthe property in
11997
litigation] a little less desirable * for strictly residentiay
use."
Arrayed against the faint showing of the city are the
.hysical facts obvious from the sketch, the overwhelming testimony
introduced by the appellant and th additional circumstances that the
parcel directly across the street had been purchased by a corporation
for the operation of a Howard Johnson restaurant because of its suit-
ability as a site for such a commercial enterprise and that the regu-
lations had been relaxed to permit its use for that purpose.
It appears from evidence in the record that but three
dwellings have been built on either side of Brickell Avenue between.
25th Road, the street leading to the causeway, and 15th Road since 27
June 1949, and the nearest of these.to the property in question is
located between 21st Road and 22nd Road. This area extending to 15th
Road comes within the territory considered in City of.Miami V. Ross,.
supra.
There must be a substantial -and reasonable relationship
between the need for zoning restrictions and the public health, morals,
safety or welfare to justify interference, by exercise of the police
power, with an owner's right to the enjoyment of his property. Only
.,,-in the presence of such necessity will he be required to make a per-
sonal sacrifice for the good of the people. City of Miami Beach V.
Lachman, 71 So. 2d 148.
It may be that when the zoning ordinance was passed this
need existed and the legislative act could not have been.defeated or
thwarted because then it could have been fairly debated. But the need
twenty years later seems to have been so dissipated by the intervening
phenomenal growth of the City of Miami, that it is now so out of pro- -
portion to the interference with the use of the appellant's property
that the exercise of the police power cannot be upheld. Fo-rde v. City
of Miami Beach, 146 Fla. 676, 1 So. 2d 642.
We are impelled to the view that the decree should be re-
versed with directions to grant appellant the relief he sought.
Reversed.
TERRELL, C.J., ROBERTS & THORNAL, JJ., CONCUR
11997
1
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE PROPER DEPART-
MENT HEADS TO COMPLY WITH THE FINAL DECREE
OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR DA.DE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
PURSUANT TO MANDATE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF
FLORIDA IN THE CASE OF GUSTO TOLLIUS VS. CITY
OF MIAMI, ET AL., TO PERMIT THE USE AND CON-
STRUCTION FOR THE PURPOSES AND UNDER THE CON-
DITIONS PERMITTED AND CLASSIFIED UNDER AN
R-3 ZONING DISTRICT AS PROVIDED AND IN EFFECT
ON OCTOBER 182 1955, UNDER PROVISIONS OF ORDI-
NANCE NO. 1682 OF THE CITY OF MIAMI UPON
LOTS 47, 48 and 49 of BLOCK 56, FLAGLER
SUBDIVISION.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA:
That the City Manager be, and he is, hereby- authorize(
and directed to instruct the proper department heads to comply
with the Final Decree of the Circuit Court for Dade County,
Florida, pursuant to mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida
in the case of Gusto Tollius vs. City of Miami, et al., io.
permit the use and construction for the purposes and under the
conditions permitted and classified- under an R-3 zoning district -
as provided and in effect on October 18, 1955, under provisions
of Ordinance No. 1682 of the City of Miami upon Lots 47, 48 and
r�
49 of Block 56, Flagler Subdivision.
J PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS day of ,1958.
I
r
I
11.997
MIAMI DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW
Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays
Miami, Miami -Dade County, Florida.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
Sookie Williams, who on oath says that she is the. Vice
President of Legal Advertising of the Miami Daily Business
Review f/k/a Miami Review, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday
and Legal Holidays) newspaper, published at Miami in Miami -
Dade County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertise-
ment, being a Legal Advertisement of Notice in the matter of
CITY OF MIAMI
ORDINANCE NO, 11993
in the............XXXXX...................... Court,
was published in said newspaper in the issues of
Nov 27, 2000
Affiant further says that the said Miami Daily Business
Review is a newspaper published at Miami in said Miami -
Dade County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has
heretofore been continuously published in said Miami -Dade
County, Florida, each day (except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays) and has been entered as second class mail
matter at the post office in Miami in said Miami -Dade
Cou ida, for a period of one year next preceding the
fir puVurbficationn
ion of the attached copy of advertisement; and
a ant r says that she has neither paid nor promised
a pefirm or corporation any discount, rebate, com-
mi sionfund fohe purpose of seFuring this advertise -
me fothe said newsoa r.
00
SItV,UamZber
s rib before me this
2000
...I/04Y of -11 .... k - - I/ ..........I -U., A.A.........
........ .r ... ww . 4� , ./.... .I/ ................. .
(SEAL): 4 ry",,, MARIA I. MESA
Sookie Williams ly *WftW1SSI0N # CC 885640
c o EXPIRES: March 4 2004
4,,,-F 1,01 Bonded ThruNoUqPublic UndenMers
q / NOVICE OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES
Il mierested persons will {take notice that.on�lheMl6t Hof November,
2000 the City Commission of Miami, Flond"a'addpt�ed the followtrigtitlec
cr.. r ...q „l=1 n;c• .., Y'v-3 Er.! c!_r-31. ;7;� .a:t ^,1.1 vir uG,
ordinances:
ORDINANCE-NO.11991 =
AN'EMERGENCY ORDINANCE'OF THE'MIAMI-CITY COM-
MISSION ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND -ENTI-
TLED: "WORKFORCE/WELFARE TRANSITION -PROGRAM: '
(PY 2000-2001)"; APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ITS OPERA:
TION IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $758,070 FROM THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT'OF LABOR THROUGH THE SOUTH
FLORIDA EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING CONSORTIUM; AU- .
THORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID GRANT,,
AND TO -EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A'
FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY'ATTORNEY,, FOR.SAID
PURPOSE; CONTAINING A,REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY-CLAUSE.; -
ORDINANCE NO:' 11992
AN EMERGENCY, ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI.CITY"COM-
MISSION ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTI-
TLED: "REFUGEE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ("RET"):
_PROGRAM (PY-2000-2001')"; APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR
.ITS -OPERATION IN THE:AMOUNT OF $90,594 FROM THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ,CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
THROUGH THE OFFICE OF -REFUGEE -RESETTLEMENT,
U.S. DEPARTMENT'OF. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY _MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID
GRANT, AND TO EXECUTE;THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS,
IN A FORM ACCEPTABL'ETO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR
SAID PURPOSE; CONTAINING A REPEALER -PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
ORDINANCE NO.11993
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COM-
MISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO: 11970, THE ANNUAL
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR' ENDING SEPTEM-
BER 36, 2001 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUSTING'SAID AP
PROPRIATIONS RELATING TO OPERATIONAL AND BUDGE-
TARY REQUIREMENTS OF CERTAIN -CITY DEPARTMENTS
AS MORE PARTICULARLY -SET FORTH HEREIN; REVISING
ONGOING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS; CONTAIN-
ING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE:
ORDINANCE NO:' 11994
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI-CITY COMMISSION'AMEND:
ING ORDINANCE NO. 10021, ADOPTED JULY 18, 1985, AS
.AMENDED, WHICH ESTABLISHED INITIAL =RESOURCES
AND.INITIAI 'APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LAW ENFORCE-
MENT TRUST FUND, RECEIVED AND DEPOSITED PURSU-
ANT TO.ORDINANCE NO. 9257, ADOPTED APRIL 9, 1981, '
THEREBY PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT
OF $3,000,000, AS A RESULT OF ADDITIONAL MONIES,DE- .
POSITED IN SAID. FUND DUE TO SUCCESSFUL FORFEI-
TURE ACTIONS; CONTAINING ,A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PRO.VIDING,•FOR AN
•
0
ORDINANCE NO.,11995
N ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMEND-
NG CHAPTER 2/ARTICLES VII AND XI OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, TO CHANGE
THE NAME -OF_ THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVISORY
BOARD ("AAAB") TO THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ADVISORY
BOARD TO ACCURATELY EXPRESS THE PURPOSE AND
FUNCTIONS FOR WHICH THE AAAB WAS ESTABLISHED;
MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2-694, 2-,
887, 2-892, AND 2-976 AND THE TITLE NAME OF ARTICLE XI, .
DIVISION 5; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
ORDINANCE NO..11996
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMEND- .
�. ING CHAPTER 18/ARTICLE VIII, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY
j OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "FINANCE/
' STORMWATER UTILITY. FEES AND FUND" TO CHANGE
REFERENCES THEREIN FROM "MIAMI RIVER COORDINAT-
,ING COMMITTEE" TO "MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION," MORE
PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 18-298(6); CON-
TAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
l j CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ORDINANCE NO. 1199
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CI ISSION AMEND-
ING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE COMPREHEN-
SIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND 'USE -
DESIGNATION OF THE`PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXI=
MATELY 2500 BRICKELL AVENUE,- MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM
I SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND MEDIUM DENSITY MUL-
TIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMIT-
TALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND:PROVID-
ING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
ORDINANCE NO. 11998 a
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COM-
MISSION AMENDING CHAPTERS'2 AND 53 OF THE CODE
OF THE CITY OF-MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, TO (1) DE- 1
LETS ALL REFERENCES TO THE BOBBY MADURO STADI- I
I UM; AND (2)-CREATE AND ESTABLISH THE ORANGE BOWL
AD.V.ISORY BOARD ("BOARD"); SETTING .FORTH THE �
I BOARD'S,PURPOSE, POWERS, AND DUTIES; AND TOPRO=
VIDE. FOR "SUNSET" REVIEW, MEMBERSHIP, TERMS OF`
OFFICE, .VACANCIES,,OFFICERS, RULES OF PROCEDURE,
MEETINGS, VOTING AND QUORUM, ATTENDANCE RE-
QUIREMENTS, ASSIGNMENT OF PERSONNEL, AND COUN-
SEL;- SUNSETTING THE ORANGE BOWL STEERING COM-
MITTEE AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 99-802 IN ITS
ENTIRETY;" AND MORE PARTICULARLY BY DELETING ALL i
REFERENCES TO. THE 8066Y MADURO STADIUM CON- -
... TAINED IN SECTIONS_2.358 53;1 53-26;--53 86 yAND 53;�121' T— I
t ~ AMENDING -SECTION 2-692 .AND'`CREATING'INEW DIVISION
4 ,IN ., CHAPTER ; 53.; CONTAINING SECTIONS 53-121
THROUGH 53-128 TO, SAID CODE; AND CONTAINING A_ RE-
PEALER'•PROVISIONrAND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE:
ORDINANCE NO. 11999
`AN,.EF1,MERGENCN.ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COM-'
-,MISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE � _ XI, DIVISION 10,
I OF THE CODE, OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS
AMENDED, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION, BOARDS, COM-
MITTEES,= COMMISSIONS, THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS
BOARD; TO. ,PROVIDE THAT THE STEERING COMMITTEE
'OF THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD SHALL BE DIS
c CONTINUED. EFFECTIVE NO VEMBER 30, 2000; MORE PAR-
TICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 2-1152(a)(3) OF SAID I
CODE. CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEV-
- : •EFABILITY CLAUSE.
Said.ordinances maybe inspected by the public -at the Office of-
"_dCi y:Clerk, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, Monday
41hrough Friday, excluding holidays, between the hours of 8 a.m.
and 5_p.m.
All iriterested-persons may appear, at the meeting and may heard "
with respect to the proposed ordinances. Should any person desire to ap-
peal any decision of the City Commission with respect to any matter to be
I considered at this meeting, that person shall ensure that a verbatim
record of the.proceedin,gs is made including all testimony and evidence
upon Which any appeal may based.
WALTER J. FOEMAN
OWED � CITY CLERK
i6 96. _ -
I
4 �#9362)
L!11 /27 00 4-24/111010M