Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-91-0481J-91-569 6/19/91 RESOLUTION NO. 9 1 "' 481 A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING FOR ENFORCEMENT THE ATTACHED DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS PROFFERED BY DE GARMO ESTATES, LTD., AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND APPROPRIATE STAFF TO ENFORCE THE DECLARATION. WHEREAS, De Garmo Estates, Ltd., and Cacciamani Development Company applied to the City of Miami Heritage Conservation Board for certificates of approval on various lots in De Garmo Estates, recorded in Plat Book 139 at Page 34 of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator ruled on September 14, 1990, that such application was incomplete and therefore failed to satisfy the requirements of Zoning Ordinance No. 11000 for treatment under Ordinance No. 9500; and WHEREAS, De Garmo Estates, Ltd., and Cacciamani Development Company appealed the decision of the Zoning Administrator to the Zoning Board which, after public hearing, adopted Resolution ZB-110-90, granting the appeal which was duly before said Board; and WHEREAS, the Coconut Grove Civic Club ("Club") and Mr. and Mrs. Bruce Berckmans, Jr., individually, ("Berckmans") have taken an appeal of the decision of the Zoning Board to the City Commission; and WHEREAS, the parties to this appeal have endeavored to settle this matter, and pursuant to their settlement De Garmo Estates, Ltd., has proffered the attached Declaration of Restrictive Covenants ("Declaration") for acceptance by the City Commission for enforcement by the City; and WHEREAS, the patties to this appeal have indicated that the litigation will be terminated upon adoption of the herein Resolution; and ATTACHMENTS CONTAINED WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of this matter finds that there are sufficient reasons to accept the Declaration and enforce it, - 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 hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Section. Section 2. The City Manager and appropriate City staff shall, and are hereby directed to, enforce the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants attached hereto upon proof submitted to the City Clerk of its recording in the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, notwithstanding the present or future existence of more liberal provisions in the City's Zoning Ordinance or City Code relating to the specific provisions of the Declaration. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of ATTES V.0� 0� - MATT U RAI, CITY -CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: '1� %0\4A G. MIRIAM MAER CHIEF ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: C E-L. POMANDEZ C GMM:ra:M2304 - 2 .. 1991. ZO'd 9140 619 902 8Z: LI 16-51-tor 40A t . DECLi 'fxnVAr hZeTaxCTI" covsNme ZKOW ALL LIEN BY THESE PRESENTS that lie Garmo Estates, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership ("Owner"), being the Owner of the property described as Lots 1 5, block 1, and Lots 1 - 5, Block PA it 2,�T*"e%mol* Estates, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 139, Page 34, of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida (the "Property"), in settlement of an appeal of the Zoning Board's Decision on December 5, 1990 holding that the Property could be developed under zoning Ordinance 9500 based upon that Board's conclusion that a complete application had been submitted to the Historic & Environmental Preservation Board (the "Board") prior to September 4, 1991 (the effective date of Ordinance No. 11,000, the zoning ordinance for the city of Miami), makes the following Declaration of Restrictive covenants covering and running with the Property in favor of the City of Miami, Florida, a municipality of the State of Florida (the "city"), the Coconut Grove Civic Club, Inc., a Florida -not -for -profit corporation (the "Club") and Mr. and Mrs. Bruce Berckmans, Jr., (the "Berckmans") as owners of property adjacent to the Property, specifically described as 3941 Midway Street, Coconut Grove, Florida (collectively the "Appellants"). A. Development Restrictions. The Owner shall develop the Property substantially in accordance with the following criterias This Document Prepared spt Lucia A. Douggher , Esq. Greenberg, Traurig, Roffman, Li ff, Roses i eutel, P.A. 1331 srickell Avenue, Miami, Tlorida 33133 91- 481 101d 9110 629 5bs 6t:di 3hI 16Y81-Ntir 1. Lot 1 (Block 1) West/Midway 5t, North South/De Garmo Lane East Lot 2 (Block 1) North (rear) East/West South (front) Pool to be located at 222. (see footnote ') Lot 3 (Block 1) North (rear) East/West South (front) Lot 4 (Block 1) North (rear) East/West South (front) Lot 6 (aka Lot 5, Block North/De Garmo Lane 15 ft. 20 ft. 11.25 ft. 5 ft. 15 ft. 'S ft. 15 ft. least fifteen 15 ft. feet from tree # 5 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 5 ft. 15 ft. 2) 11.25 ft. East/Douglas Rd./ De Garmo Lane 15 ft. South 20 ft. if garage not placed near Douglas Road; 15 ft. if garage is placed near Douglas Road$ West 5 ft. Additional trees, to be identified by Owner, shall be planted on southwest corner of lot to shield house from adjoining property to the south. Three oak trees, minimum 10 ft. in height with 3 and 1/2 inch caliper, shall be planted on property of adjoining property owner, Mr. Abrams, in locations to be designated by such property owner, prior to Owner's receipt of any building permit for construction on this Lot 6. Letter agreement of April 26, 1990 between Mr. Abrams and Cacciamani Development Co. re: coral rock wall to be complied with (attached as Exhibit A to this covenant.) Lot 7 (aka Lot 4, Block 2) De Garmo mansion (already built) Owner agrees to place no additional structures, except pool, gazebo, patio roofs, wall and or fence, and ' Trees numbered in this Declaration are pursuant to the tree survey dated October 16, 1989 and prepared by Crowder, - Mahoney, Ino., incorporated herein by reference and on file; with the City Building, Planning and Zoning Department or its successor. 91- 48.1 t10'd 9TIO 6Z9 901 LT aMl 1E-81-Nnr. garage or car shelter on this Lot 7. New structures (including all of the foregoing except wall and/or fence) , if any, to be set back 20 ft. from south (rear) property line, and maximum one story in height. Any deviation from this paragraph shall raquire the prior written approval of Mr. i Mrs. Ira Abrams, or their successors in title to property at 3737 E1 Prado Boulevard, Coconut Grove, Florida. Lot 8 (aka Lot 3, Block 2) North (front) 15 ft. South 15 ft. East/blast 5 ft. Lot 9 (aka Lot 2, Block 2) North 15 ft. South 15 ft. East/West 5 ft. Lot 10 (aka Lot 1, Block 2) West/Midway St. 15 ft. North/De Garmo 11.25 ft. South 15 ft. East 5 ft. Pool to be located at least fifteen feet from tree # 383. 2. Walls a* owner shall within 15 days of the recording of this Covenant in the Public Records of Dade County commence completion of the walls on Douglas Road and Midway St., including painting, stucco, and architectural features, and complete such work within 90 days after commencement. b. owner shall within 90 days of the recording, of this Covenant in the Public Records of Dade County commence, and within 120 days after commencement complete (as hereinafter defined), the walls on the north and south perimeters of the property ( from Douglas Road to Midway Street). The north perimeter walls shall be eight feet in height as measured from the crown of Midway Street near the northwest corner of the Property. The south perimeter walls shall be eight feet in height as measured from the 3 91- 481 S4 `d SILO 649 901 0£:1t 3(11 16-01-1•anf crown of Midway Street near the southwest corner of the Property. Completion of such walls within the previously stated time period means the walls roust be constructed to the designated height and be painted and stuccoed on the exterior sides within such time period. Owner shall restore the landscaping on adjacent properties which is damaged as a result of construction to the same standard as before the construction. Owners of such adjacent properties shall give written notice to Owner of such damages restoration shall be completed within 30 days of such notice. Upon determination by Club and Berckmans that Owner has complied with the conditions of this paragraph 2, Club and Berckmans shall execute a release of each obligation stated herein. e. All walls must be constructed to their full eight feet height before commencement of construction on houses (including site preparation and foundations). 3. sca a. Trees i. This Covenant does not affect City Commission Resolution no. 30-0222, which shall remain in full force and effect. i.i. Owner shall save certain designated trees (identified in Exhibit B hereto) and not apply in the future for tree removal permits for them (even if they cause problems with pools and structures in the future) . If said trees die as a result of the construction activities, or are removed for any other reason, the Owner shall replace said trees according to standards 4 91- 481 901d 91LO 6Z9 901 t£ L1 fll 76-el-Ntlf established by City Director of Planning, Building and Zoning or its successor for replacement of canopy. iii. X.1 Owner establishes the necessity of pruning or trimming of the trees described in Exhibit B above to the satisfaction of Environmental Mitigation Planning Associates, Inc., or such other expert appointed as herein provided at Owner`s expense, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, Owner agrees to have said trees described in Exhibit 8 hereto pruned by an appropriate expert according to the highest landscaping or arbortorial standards. All tree pruning, trimming, and replacement shall be supervised and approved by Environmental Mitigation Planning Associates, Inc., or such other expert appointed by City, and the Club, at Owner's expense, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the event of a dispute, Environmental Mitigation Planning Associates, Inc.'s decision shall be binding. In the event Environmental Mitigation Planning Associates, Inc., is no longer the City's expert, a new independent expert shall be selected by City with the concurrence of owner and Club. Owner shall provide graphics, photographs or drawings to Appellants to enable them to evaluate the proposed pruning in relation to adjacent structures. Owner shall maintain such trees as agreed in this subparagraph (iii) for so long as it owns the Property. This subparagraph (iii) shall not be applicable to successors in interest or assigns of owner who are individual homeowners and not developers of the Property (except an individual who develops the house in which he intends to reside). 5 91- 481 �4 �Nnf b. General Tree and .t,andscaping Matters i. Owner, not successors or assigns of Owner who are individual homeowners and not developers of the Property (except an individual who develops the house in which he intends to reside) , will consult With Club before proceeding with redesign, removal and installation of other landscaping or tree removal and pruning, and allow Club representatives on site inspection of landscaping and development activity upon reasonable notice to the Owner. ii. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for each residence on the Property, the landscaping required by this covenant and the landscaping required by Historic & Environmental Preservation Board shall be installed and maintained. Such landscaping shall be substantially in accordance with plans entitled The De Garmo Estate Planting Plan, Lots 1-4, 6, 8, 9 & 10, dated 8/30/90 and prepared by Savino & Miller Design Studio. Where increased setback areas are required by this Declaration, the landscaping theme depicted on these plans shall be extended into the expanded setback area. 4. Owner shall not replat the Property to subdivide it into more lots than the ten lots that presently exist as platted. Furthermore no more than ten single family homer shall be permitted on the Property. S. Owner shall keep all areas external to the Property clean of construction debris and equipment. 6 91-- 481 80'd' stz0 619 GOT :4t nni 16-81-NIA! 6. Owner, its successor and assigna, shall not apply for variances for any development on or adjacent to the Property without the prior written content of the club, or its successor. 7. Owner shall not conduct construction activity (can come onto Property but cannot commence construction or operate equipment) earlier than 8 a.m. nor later than 6 p.m. weekdays, nor earlier than 9 a.m. nor later than 6 p.m. Saturdays. No Construction activity of any type (including bringing equipment onto or off of, or moving equipment around the site) shall be per- mitted on Sundays. The Douglas Road entrance shall be the primary entrance and exit for construction vehicles. 8. No screened enclosures for pool areas shall be permitted on the Property unless incorporated architecturally into the structure of the house and approved in writing by the Club or its successor. 9. owner must submit its plans in compliance with this covenant to the Board. Recognizing the times necessary to prepare such plans, Owner must submit for review by the Board complete applications for certificates of approval of not less than two lots every two months starting from the date of recording of this Covenant in the'Public Records of Dade county, Florida. 10. Effective Date. This Declaration shall constitute a covenant running with the title to the Property, binding upon Owner, its successors and assigns (except where specifically stated otherwise in this Declaration), upon its recording in the Public 7 91- 481 60 `d 9140 649 901 t£: 1 t NMI t 6-8 t -Nnf, Records of Dade County, Florida. These restrictions shall be a limitation upon all present and future owners of the Property. 1;.. Amendment _ nd__Modifications. This instrument may be modified, amended or released as to any portion of the property by a written instrument executed by the then owner of the fee simple title to the Property to be affected by such modification, amendment or release, with the prior written consent of the Coconut Grove Civic Club, and Mr. and Mrs. Bruce Berckmans, Jr., or their successors (as to the berckmans this means successor in title to their property, described above). Prior to any such modification or release, owner shall apply to the City Commission of the City of Miami at a scheduled public hearing for approval of such modifi- cation, amendment or release, which approval shall not be given without the prior written consent of the Club and Mr. and Mrs. Bruce Berckmans, Jr., or their successors, as described above. Should this instrument be so modified, amended or released, the owner or its successor shall execute and record in the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, a written instrument effectuating and acknowledging such modification, amendment or release. 12. Term of -Covenant. This Covenant shall remain in full force and effect and shall be binding upon the owner, its successors and assigns for an initial period of thirty years from the date this instrument is recorded in the Public Records of Dade County, Florida and shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten years each thereafter unless provisions of any 6 91- 481 i modification, amendment or release as set forth above provides otherwise. 13. rngnection and Lnforcemont by City and others. it is understood and agreed that any official inspector of the City of Miami may have the right at any time during normal working hours, to renter upon the Property to determine whether the conditions of this Declaration are being complied with. An enforcement action may be brought by the City, Appellants, Mr. & Mrs. Ira Abrams, and their successors and assigns (which as to Mr. & Mrs. Abrams and uerckmans are limited to their successors in title as previously described in this covenant) and shall be by action at law or in equity against any party or person violating or attempting to violate any covenants, either to restrain restrictions or to recover damages. If this Declaration is so enforced by City, Appellants, Abrams, or their successors, such persons or entities shall be entitled to their costs and attorneys' fees at all levels of litigation and appeal. Acceptance of this covenant by the City Commission shall not limit the City's ability to impose any additional or more restrictive conditions as permitted by law. owner, its successors and assigns, waive any argument that more liberal provisions of the zoning ordinance or City Code enacted after the recording of this Declaration relieves them from the obligations of this Declaration, unless the Declaration is amended to so provide. 14. sexgrab lity. Invalidation of any of these covenants by judgment of Court shall not affect any of the other Pil 91- 481 it'd 9110 6L9 901 • 41 of 1-6-8 1 -Nrif provisions of this Deolaratfon, which ahall remain in full force and effect, provided, however, that such invalidation may be grounds for the City to amend the toning and/or land -use regulations applicable to the Property. 15. Recordinar. This Declaration shall be filed of record among the Public Records of Dade County, Florida at the oost of the Owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands and weals this Ib day of __ '�VNM , 1991. WITNESSM STATE OF FLOPIDA De Garmo Estates, Ltd., a Florida lim ted partnership By. Lvu ,�,.,.�✓o ��l.�vscc�.. ) SS: COUNTY OF DADE ) BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, this day personally �Kt11J►p �s,esi�►�w+r+� �isiid� (,.4�s is�+s,.y' �.rw.���,...,,...� t�ix�9�_. appeared , to me well known and known to me to be the General Partner of �+� 6"'�"•`�+, ��. , a Florida Limited Partnership under the laws of the State of Florida, and which person is known by me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, the said ra tbeing likewise known by me to be the General Partner thereof who, in his Official capacity as such General Partner executed, signed, and 10 91- 481 Zt.d 91113 6ZS 901 tb£:Lt 3ni t6-8t=Nnc delivered the said instrument as the act and deed of said Limited Partnerships and he then and there acknowledged to and before be that ho executed the said instrument, acting in his said official oapaoity, for and as the act and deed of the said Limited Partnership and in its name, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and after being thereunto by the said Limited Partnership duly authorized and directed. WITNESS my hand and official seal at Miami, Dade County,,,, i Florida on this, the :'day of , 1491. OTAR PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA AT LARGE .� My Commission Expires: ► `��,�```.:`:,---� NOTARY PUBLIC STATE Or FLORIDA NY "WISSI08 EXP. = •:; - �' - APR.30.1943 BONDED T '' •• :• `` NRU GENERAL INS. [Abrams agroomant rot wsll l , iW d 9140 649 901 u�1 TREES TO BE SAVED AND PRUNED My 'T TO THE DEOL&WION OF MTLUTIONS cation Lot 1 Trees 118v122,123 Lot 2 222, 260 Lot 3 273 Lot 4 72 Lot 5 30, 32, 27 Lot 6 17, 190 22, 23 Lot 7 2781 280 Lot $ 377 (shown on original tree survey on Lot 7: on site plans submitted for Board approval shown as tree #198 on Lot 8) Lot 9 162 Lot 10 383, 142, 390 Right-of-way or common area 77, 78, 80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89, 91, 114, 120, 125, 1930 391, 394, and the Monstera Deliciosas to be preserved between trees 120 and 125. Exhibit B 91- 481 i4r ` Gild 9110 649 901 9£: tT 3111 16-8t -t4 The undersigned _ , a Florida corporation# Mortgagee, under that certain mortgage from dated the day of , 19_ _, and recorded in Off ioial Records Book , page _, of the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, in the original amount of $ covering all/or a portion of the property described in the foregoing Declaration of Restrictive Covenants, do hereby acknowledge that the terms of this Declaration of Restrictive Covenants are and shall be binding upon the undersigned and its successors in title. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, these presents have been executed this day of A.D., 19— Name of Corporation BY: - - President Attest: (SEAL) Secretary - STATE OF ) SS: COUNTY OF ) BEFORE mE, the undersigned authority, this day appeared and , both being to me well known and known to me to be the and �� under the laws of 91"d ST40 649 901 3ni 1 6-0 t -Nnf the State of , and which said Corporation is known by me to be the persons described in and which executed the foregoing instrument, the said officers of the said Corporation being likewise known by to to be the officers thereof who, in their official Capacities as such officers of said Corporation executed, signed and delivered the said instrument as the act and dead of said Corporation, and the said officers of said Corporation then and there severally acknowledged to and before me that they executed the said instrument, acting in their said official capacities, for and as to the act and dewed of said Corporation and in its name, and impressed thereon its corporate Seal for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and after being duly authorized and directed. WITNESS my hand and official Seal at in the County and State aforesaid, on this, the day of A.D. 1991. My Commission Expires: u/1rM1%v*W-w..9w 15 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA AT LARGE 91- 481 CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO : Matty Hirai, City Clerk DATE : June 21, 1991 FILEA-go_812 Gloria Fox, Chief Hearing Boards Divisions SUBJECT: De Garmo Estates, PZ-16, Cit3 Commission Meeting of June 20, 1991 FROM i iam aer REFERENCES: Chief Assistant ity Attorney Zoning/Development Division ENCLOSURES: As you know, on June 20, 1991, the City Commission adopted a resolution accepting a covenant and instructing the Administration to enforce the terms of said covenant. This will confirm to you that said action by the City Commission was not action resolving the pending appeal advertised as PZ-16 on referenced agenda. As the City Commission has not yet acted on the substantive issues of PZ-18, this item should be rescheduled in your usual fashion. GMM:ra:P1018 oo: Sergio Rodriguez, Director Planning, Building & Zoning Dept. Guillermo Olmedillo, Deputy Director Planning, Building & Zoning Dept. Z:5 off'- 9/— 1;? 8/ ok PZ 16 ZONING FACT SM ET LOCATION/LEGAL 3952 0ouglas Road DE6ARMNSTATES (139-34) P.R.O.C. APPELLANT Do Gana Partnership Ltd. 3326 Mary Street Mimi, FL 33133 442-IM LuCia A. t�hertyl ES4. 1221 Brickel Avenue MH mi , FL 33131 Phone 5794O603 REQUEST PLANING CITT COIGUSSION 4. The Planning division applied the same standards to all applications received on September 4 for Heritage Conservation Board review. 5. The applicant was informed by letter of September 5 that his applications had been received for scheduling purposes and had been scheduled for Heritage Conservation Board public hearing. 6. Equity, fairness and due process require that these applications, like all applications, meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. (See attached analysis for a more complete review of the appellant's claims.) At,its meeting of December 3, 1990, the Zoning Board adopted Resolution ZB 110-90, by a 8 to 0 vote, granting the Appeal. Seventy-three. OPPONENTS and fourteen PROPOMMS were present at the meeting. Letter dated December IS, 1990, from Gary M. geld. At its meeting of January 24, 1991, the City Commission continued the above. At its meeting of February 28, 199I0 the City Commission continued the above. At its meeting of March 28, 1991, the City Commission continued the above. At its meeting of April 250 19910 the City Commission continued the above. At its meeting of May 23, 1991, the City Commission continued the above. `2A N t J d J 91- 481 {kid .li. � i� � � t 'lr F�. .'}• �° f �`'. r . * - L r # r { :���,a��. r.�t�t+t+ ;� I •} aw 43, t` ` t 7�i .,y' - r y:•.,._ ,,y ..r . n r..7". � � re • ' . `� :'�- y6 t P..; i tr w' i I s ✓td r " '� 7 ..`, ., e. I � . •( •.al i r t J • yap; i ry � ^c t � / I � 9 E o�"��;7 ��-y#r''''� A i r-' r �a •o � �s Y�,k 1. i+7' Ar r,� +ji� - 1 � � I yl�'. -� � `�•!. ��''� { r b�' 1 � -. � •,.. «fir a /•,/ / / .. r4 t � J :w ar f '•3�' .r 'rf 2 i�r �`�`'# -Y �y'�. *. Y F St t'�v.%,+ � it - . lr j• C f `r � �t 1 ••� �r ` ' j.. r •°\"Jk ,.;t�...y.,�,�'^J J .� J �_'. / r J / / J / / /_�r.It/ / J / / ,TM( t ;":-♦. '. •��■y� •�■''`7�/ ,/ Ka h �4�M-,�•,;`�� 1. {�.— "i� �j'� _ IF'*' t1 r5�ri 1 �}�ir e. xo ,�4�y`Atd����Y�rl�I' . �4�'�"{� } ,. ..�}'a�i '1ftk, M,L''� • I+1 F/ a r�• '2 F .F • -K ,.,r � '} t y rw�y"-f _„er r,. i.:.. •.a - ,Cy �M ••4 _ •. - K ti. '.•r Trl�r• ` fir-, � a y ""L, } t 1 � 0 E" MiKedge & Iden A T' T o A M t r s A 6• w Gary M. Held Decembor 18, 1990 The Honorable Mayor Xavier Suarez and Members of the City Commission c/o Hearing Boards Division planning, Building and Zoning Department City of Miami 273 N.M. second street - 2nd Floor Miami, Florida 33128 of Zoning Board .Decision on December 3, 1990 Dear Mayor Suarez and City Commissioners: The Coconut Grow Civic Club and Lee and Bruce Berckmans, Jr., individually, sereby appeal the Zoning Board decision on December 3, 1990 reversing the decision of the Zoning Administrator on the above sub Oct. no decision concerns the applicability of Zoning Ord 9500 or 11000 t© Applications for the Certificates of Approval to develop the Deoarmo Zstates property located at Douglas (toad and Main Highway, Coconut -Grove (the "Propertye). The _Zoning Ad- ministrator•s decision originally appealed from, dated. September 14, 1990, is attached as fthibit "h•. The Zoning Administrator correctly ruled that Ordinance 11000 controls development of the Property because no complete application -was tiled prior to the effective "to of Ordinance 11000 as required by suction 2105.1.1, para. A. of that Ordinance. The application rapirrsents are not forth is section 17-6(3), Miami City Cede. h copy of section 17-S(3) is attached as fthibit "s". no Zoning Pact Shut (Msit "C") and Analysis of Notice of Appeal to the Zoning Board (inhibit "D") prepared by the Department confirm that no copplote application was filed as required. The property owner submitted testimony to the Zoning Board that an attempt was made to file the ap- plications,, but that the appropriate officials were engaged in other City business and ovoid not accommodate the repro- santetive of the property owner. The representative of the owner testified that she first visited the City offices Nednesday before the Friday deadline to determine the requirements for filing, and returned Friday August 310 1990 to attempt to file. The applications bad to be filed before ; �yiT; �00 • �►oo �oNCi Do 6goN •ovbWVARD . "I&M1. 0%4*10A 3.312a • T96OP"NS 0951, 446.1690 • rm (406)`04* 99it 91, 481 _ i . The Honorable mayor Xavier Suares and Members of the City Commission December 19, 1990 45� i'F' 18 Page 2 the effective date of Ordinance 11000, September 40 1990. Even on August 31, the last day, the representative did not have all of the required signatures indicating City review of the plans- was accomplished, nor all required submittals for the application. The Zoning Administrator ruled the applications were incomplete, and therefore not timely filed in order to vest the development for review under Ordumume 9500. 8e had no authority to waive the City Code requirements, in part because of limitations on his power (Section 2102.2, Or- dinance 11000). Such limitations prohibited the Zoning Administrator from vaivinq, varying or modifying the require- sents of Ordinance 11000, including the grandfather provi- sions of section 2105.1.1. The Zoning Board, sitting with the pow" - of the Zoning Administrator (Section 1604, Ordinance 11000), was also subject to the saga limitations. Accordingly, upon a finding that a complete application vas not filed in accor- dance with those sections, both the Zoning Administrator (who did so hold) and the Zoning Board (which did not so -hold) were obliged to hold that Ordinance 9500 no longer applied to the Property under the circumstances upon which the Zoning Administrator ruled. Additional arguments were made to the Zoning Board. These included the possible grandfatherinq of the Property under the recording of a plat, and that a City official miqht have told the DeGarso representative to rdtvrn the follovinq week -- too late Hader Ordinance 11000 for vesting purpos". Neither of these arguments could vaary the result that ordinance 9500 no longer applied under the circumstances. -The City Commission is usged to follow its own Ordinance 11000 which required tee filing of a complot* application to vest rights to deveiaopp under Ordinance 9500. Accompanying this letter is the required filing fee of $550 for this appeal. The appellants request a time certain after 5:00 p.m. for the Dearing on this appeal. Sincerely, U. sold Attorney for Appellants Attachments Mille+d�e C7 Iden �► 0tT6 AT 6 A W x CITY Of MIAAA. FLOOW !ri' ER-OPPICE MEMORANDUM Joseph W. McManus, A last . Director oat ' ' September 149 1990 •tt . Planning, Building i Zoning Dept. ' MAWW DeGarmo Estates ` 3952 Douglas Road . (Lots 1 • Z, 30 49 59 8, 9 and 10 ) sop Genuardi. P.E. Z ning dainistrator e+aota This is in reply to your memo of September 149 14909 in reference to an application for Heritage Conversation Board review under Zoning Ordinance 9500. I reviewed Section 2109.1.1 of Zoning Ordinance 110009 and based on the facts you submitted have determined that the application did not meet the requirements for filing prior to the effective date, and therefore, must meet and to reviewed in accordance with Ordinance 11000. The reason it did not meet the deadline was as follows: A complete application as defined by the Zoning Ordinance 11000, under Art. 29, oerrtITIONS, was not received prior to the effective date, -September 4, 1990. In particular, required forms were not submitted, plans were not reviewed and signed by the appropriate official and all required fees were not paid as of August 11, 1990, the last working day orior to ttie rffoctiv* date. JAG/j9 cc: Cuillerma Olmedillo Sarah Eatar. File Exhibit "A" 9i- 117d ouch a review, the dedaien of *0 hw"P a wservatim board eha11 snpereeds AZT sc- tian of the department of flm rosaw arid (b) inspection ow,rioee and ooastto-te a final de• cisim eubiect to a snheaeinent appeal to the aiw aommisslau. (e) Iffective data All permit+ fw removal d trap oat located is an environmental peee s"S tion district shall not become efSectire until at leeet tea (10) days saw the date of appravalt cad no removal of a tree or development activity sha11 commeaoe on the nits prior tharets. (f) Pio-m t cards. Within tweaty4bw (24) boars of the approval at a tees removet permit uadsr this section. a weatherproof aapyW of each permit W" be erected in ft U dew Of the psbiic. within fire (6) feet of sock etresI side ar side saareet a smart of the property for which the permit has been issued. Thep OW 0 owner shall be ra WOW Ole for MMiag that snch I>W=it 19 so displayed undi the authorised work is asmplstad. (Code IM, ! G&T; Ord. No, t17i1s, if 1, Z. 5-1i -78. Ord, No. 8427, ! 1(Cl, 3.2743 Ord. No, OM, f L M1540 See. 17d llemlawat at is and dwrislapasook avadoa didrlat••iraamrntai prae� No agent or representative thaao4 dheeCtTar m& Beatty, :hall act down, dasEtay. llo or cdvUsuoy Other Ti- sati�y dpilfaat festo:e within an enri. ronmeeatal preservation disft*% wlthosa &* ob- taiatng a cerddats of approvaL No pwno. agaat . ar representative thesed"mummem my do- sctivw pways within smvEihtnIn. am visible 6M a eont .- ," , , at PUW-ration sp sdal. se bsnrins I rwwida i1) Standard 01% -- ae� � e iw w� sold by the bsritegs ant reviser and approval by do bra 1, -, con- aervatios. board. far the hGowiag alessilSca- dam of apt W. Applications far dsvelopmeent scdrity wbw all ealsdng tsar (other than than SOMN&u (sal (all W 117.6 ocii by Nbperagraph (b) and (a) below) are is be prosery or relocated en-edts. Appllcadoae far, ramovel of taeea which are disssaed. inin danger of Bell' ing. ar isterEere with utility senior, are - ate unite vision dowfina, or coatllct , -Woe remwftMm ar al s deovof - wk&h are Bstsd is sadiron 17-=& r rmdrrbabia, Applioadom involving tree removal cad ad Mum or m edgkokloss to astir WI& fa& esmept where sorb additien enoeeds aft (50) poreent of the existing lot Ap ins iovoiving tree removal and sibs ink fw m t e butWuP > �+to tenter, wail. eta. (� 4seiel Mutes of sppeovsl ro*dn the eppravel of the bw tagn aomervation board. cad fadade the Mowtog olessifimdOm Of appOwdo w {v Appiiortiane fw new development invely ing ressond at esietleg treae bom the sits or altrradve, of other enrironman- �) llppiiadom flor deveiopmae+t actMty or ads of approval. W Ayplfosdo s raw: to the beritagr cow eeeveetioa board an appeat Erom decisions dike heritegs wwrration afi'lesr. A sppwithin dec al preear vstioa disirtets shall be taitiaily merle to the bsrtta;e asMevedon aflssrr, Appliodinm shall bwlsds tbs haffe,hg and rival" remain as Me with the city W . As► effietal apidlcetiw farm. iaei Wb an M qss"d h&rmatim, efpeed by the propwtT . earare MW tend lead m eyor w l a (8000 that fbrdevowpod sinfo Eelsil7 anal dopw dwoyag unite Sorb earveT may be peop,I by** home-ewuw)- Sash enrvry IUK Exhibit "B" 91- 481 9 ar U 6174 *NVMONW2ZfrAL VATtON shalt show the loostioa of all adotiap treat, upon the buildable am and the yard area at the satire site as wail as all shnictarsa. paved areas, and natural hat nes. Tows informs- tson shall be summarised in legrmd farm and shad aottaia the botanical and common tams. trtak diametst, appra dzu hrishi. sad ap- proximate spread at all trace sad landscape features an the sits. Group at tram lace than three (3) feet apart may be designated as .clumps, with the asoeptian that any tres wish a trunk diameter six (6) inches or sore m,mt be VociScaiiy designated. For large site areas an wistch dndopmsnt activity or tree removal Is IN meant an only a pasrtia& at the site, the req= troy survey Shall exclu b those pan tione of the ells whirl, will not be sffiheMd by the development ar the ressof Sedwhy- T e bertt " aomnsvatiaa assort shall dmbemirse the proper c"M at the tree sarvery. (M A dtwo(Mphotolrephsadowasly shaving the p owl landscape eharmet r of thaaite and at lent see (1) pb000praph dearly showing sech tees prepared to be removed. Each photograph e3ra11 be dearly Inhaled and kwpd to the rib ph= (4) In arms of applications; involving =IT tree removal Sad no other development activity, the following inf onattian shall be indiostd directly upon the tras smevey: (a) Fsietlap tress to be removed !ram the Sits. (b) Fsiatiap tress to be Mounted, intiadins poidoas tease and alter reioe don& (e) 2xisanp tow to numis in pSation. (d) Location. aomma& and botanical tame. 'ad%w. haspht sad sprsmd d all pe+o, , I new tren a Sorer pbst meteciaL (6) AppBoadoce involving drvsiopment adivity which require a boiidiop permit shall sub - nit a aits plan drawn as a miniawsa wale at We (1) inch to tweaty (IM list tocinding the (a) Loassa&6 shape sad 401W errs:tpmemt of all aarirttap and peopwmsd buildinps. wait. stuveaas and natural fiatatae. (b) General loatiom and description at sur- rounding buildings and land araaa. skim N . u 1114 (d I.00stlon. shape and spatial ar ranpmaat at all paridap areas and seam mad, (d) F,ststiap and proposal p sdiap. (a) PropwSsd utility services. 0 9admic and yard requirement. (0 Foisting trees to be removes ilramr the unto. (b) Esisting is b be raioaated. induding positions] Om and altar raimtetion. (D Fzjmeinp trews to remain in position. i11 Prupaerd landeospe play k diaimiap loan. time. mammon and botatiesl name. call• pee', height. and spend of all proposed new tress and other pia& mateciaL (k) 9ipnnpnw of a soaing impaatiaw oM.-w bd eft musph000s With applicable son. ing rasatatloms or WOW" vainness Season" foe paemittiap. (p) AppHUMM firs. (0 AppRosdon Borlsae. The heritage couserva- Lisa adl sr Won revise the appiiatiat. which =W isrdda a sib impaction or rdwral to other depeetmeels. and damemine wb tbar the type and select of do proposed went !fella Within the ju. Annation of a samsdard assti!lae1 d approval or a spneiai esetiseear of approval. Whew as application is angwo for a soon- lord asrtiiiacts at approval. the heritage con- Is- 0 amour WM& witbia Erases W days at resign at a completed application. isms aosis standard aetiseate at approval. with or wilhsat madido■& ar dray such atandard ter• d&uu at approval with nodded reasons 1,21 01 m Whose tlra aamrre ad aslr&t dpcoposed 'vat regairw a we" oeetisata at approval. the beribp aanesrvado& board shall hold a pub. lie hreriag and. Latta action within tarty -five (4p days at receipt d a sempbtad appiiea. t3aL The board ShalLsilhsr sntharms a spa dsL sertisweb of appseva4 with or without 00iidOW6 er daisy ands 1941" ae:asnte of approval with men" reasons theretar. ILM CM P+arnise No permit far dsrulspmeat sativ icy or arse removal within as asviraamsntud prey sevatioo disrsiaa Stall be issued by the depart: wont of fire, rSsane sad inspection sartime antis a aardllaatfs of approval has base issued pursuant MMINC Pa -T IMEF"r' LOCATIONAEGAL 3952 Douglas Road OEGARMO ESTATES (139.34) P.R.D.C. APPELLANT De Gana Partnership Ltd. 3326 Mary Street Niami. FL 33133 "2.1783 Lucia ADougherty, Esq. 1221 Brickell Avenue Niamiv FL 33131 Phone 579-0603 REQUEST Appeal by applicant of the Zoning Administrator's decision that a complete application for hearing before the Heritage Conservation Board did not not the requirements for review under Zoning Ordinance 9500. PLANNING 1. An administrator was available August 30 and 31, 1990 to accept a complete application; the applicant had been previously advised of the requirements. 2. Plans left with the city August 31 were incomplete; application fors and fees submitted September 4 were late; the signature of a zoning official obtained September 6 was late. 3. Applications were accepted. as a courtesy to the applicant for scheduling purposes only, on September 4 to wet the deadline for the Heritage Conservation Board meeting of September 18; and the applicant was so notified, Exhibit "C" 4. The Planning Division applied the saeM standards to all applications received on Septemoer 4 for Heritage Conservation Board review. S. The applicant was inforned by letter of Septmber 5 that his applications had been received for scheduling purposes and had been scheduled for Heritage conservation Board public hearing. 6. Equity, fairness and due process require that these applications, like all applications, eeet the requiremats of the Zoning Ordinance. (See attached analysis for a mre caplete review of the Appellant's claim.) 91,- 481 #3952 DOUGLAS ROAD, OEGARMO 90M ANALYSIS OF NOTICE OF APPEAL tO THE 16NING BOARD 1. the appeal claim that the app 1 i cant Sought to file his application on August 30 and-31 but no administrators were available to accept the complete application or to advise as to •.the, ,cl"It ems of the application. Joseph W. Mdianus, the Heritage Conservation Officer, was in the office both days to accept any application. His time sheets and the Daily Attendance Register verify this. On several occasions prior to leaving for vacation on August 30, Sarah Eaton, Planner II, advised the applicant as to what a complete application must contain. She had previously provided a three page handout which clearly states the application requirements. In addition, the appellant had previously submitted :plications for Heritage Conservation Board review and was familiar with . requirements. 2. The appeal claims that the plans which were left with the City on August 31 constitute a compiete application. The plans 'left with the City were far from complete. Per the provisions of Section 174(B) of the Miami City Codet applications for Certificates of Approval mast include an application form, tree survey, aphs, site plan signed by a zoning inspection official. am appi eatioe tee. The Official hits of Procedrre of the HmriConservative Board, adopted pursuant to Sections 6Z•7Z(16) and 6Z•73 `b) of the Mimi City Code, set forth in Section Vt11 additional items which most be submitted is order for applications to be considered complete. The applicant submitted tree surveys and unsigned site plans an August 31, 1W. T lication forms were submitted an September 4, 1990.. aad the fees were n paid on that date. The signature of a zoning inspection official was not obtained until September 6, 1990. Photographs were not subm�f tted. The applicant attempted to have the Zoning Oivision review the plans on August 31. Rafael Rodriguez, Zoning' Plans Examiner, explained to the applicant on August 31 that no zoning information had been provided On the plans. He further explained what what would be required for him to review the plans. (It should be noted that the aforementioned handout supplied to the applicant cautions him that review by the Zoning Division may take approximateiy five days.) 3. The appeal claims that the Heritage Conservation Officer has very often determined that applications are complete, although the technical submission requirements of the Code have not been met. Deadlines for Heritage Conservation Board submittal are 15 days in advance of the meeting. Because of the Labor Oar holiday, the deadline for the September le, IM hearing was moved to September 4, 1990. The Heritage Conservation Officer will not schedule an item on the next Board Exhibit "D" 91- 481 OP 0 agenda until an application is submitted and the fee is paid. The applications for the OaGarmo Estates were received on September 4, and the fee was paid 'at that time. The Heritage Conservation Officer determined that the applications were acceptable for scheduling purposes. pending review by the Zoning Division. On September 4, the applicant submitted to the Zoning Division Plan& with 44 4Whed short showinq calculations for lot coverage, livability space. and parking spaces. The Zoning Division signed off on the plans on September S. Because the applications were judged to be acceptable for scheduling purposes as of Septemkr 4, they were placed on the Heritage Conservation Board meeting of September 18, and notices were sent out. It was brought to the attention of the Planning Division the following week that the applications might not have met the requirements of Section 2105.1.1 of Zoning Ordinance 11000. The Planning Division subsequently requested a determination from the Zoning Administrator (see attached memorandum) as whe ther ether the Odarmo applications, as well as am application for another project, met the requirements of the above referenced section of the Zoning Ordinance. *An the Zoning Administrator determined that the applications did not meet the requirements for review under previous Zoning Ordinance 9500, the DeGarma applications were returned. 4. The appeal claims that if this application is found to be incomplete, the applicant would be forced to redesign his project. The appeal further claims that it would be inequitable to apply a different and more onerous standard for the determination of a complete application than the department has for other applicants. The Planning Oivision applied the same standards to all applications received on September 4 for Heritage Conservation Board rev i oar. The application for another project was also found not to meet the requirements of Section 2105.1.1 of Ordinance 11000. However, although that other project did not meet the filing deadline, it did comply with the more stringent toning requirements of Ordinance 11000 and therefore could be reviewed by the Heritage Conservation Board on September 18. S. The appeal clain. that the letter from the Heritage Conservation Officer indicates that the application was complete. The letter only states that the applications for Certificates of Approval had been scheduled for a public hearing. 6. The appeal claims that equity, fairness, and due process require this application to be found complete. On the contrary, equity, fairness, and due process require that these applications, like all other applications, comply with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 91-- 481 C ,i•/ C•� f ( I g Notice of Appeal to Zoning Board F11* �e AppaaZe to thw WFd-V Ned al be *Am by w V Ps:'�oR � or b!I ow of�a', board of a w." of the Ctttp affaetad by (2)• = dWi4KOR of ties Uni-M A&K tietrator, iReZ�Rp, bed Rot tinitad to, daaiaiona inao ZvOw intsrprat�at�art of th4a ?oninp Ord£ wwo and doeiei w on Ciaaa A and d. SY wkt pa miu, or (2) any daeiaioR of the direotar of the of Mawki- v, * Madad, but not Z"tod to, daos*i i"WzVoep Owe C spa" Pasta (Swoon 3000). To: Director. Depair am t of Adeinis:ratson for the Planning and Zoning Boards From: I, A__t hereby appeal the decision of the enr1: Zoning Admi ni strator Oirector of Department of Planning _ taken on (date) 14• 1990 to the canter of (sPeail a+a's of dwleian) the dataaointtim that the !MIi 4tion -,� •,M= *•* M did not mart the flung Fri= to to the Jtictive dab of fttiewma NO. 11000 for property located at 3952 Do al m Aoad Uu 1.2.3.4.6.8.9 i.10 0, Mi ami . The basis for this appeal is as follows: l8a apadr'lo a�sd attaole Qdd{t�onaZ paQaa, zf naoaaaary)._ i Fof" 32•83* 1 •122- 91- 481 No . 30Sdd22705 40 ,t►,,,r 4, / �� �A►r'�, Company$ Vents Corporation 7467 S.M. L01 Place Miami, Florida 3303 Officers$ Natalia Malave(rrasident) Stocks owned$ SO% lndividualsi bt :►90 G:ig N0.006 Z.01 rr 1 Marcos Malave(vice Presidant) Stocks Owned• 30% Alberto Trelles (Secretary/Treasurer) Names turner Sraschi• Final Andres Delia Gltinta Delia La Florida "Frente A la 191es14 Chiquinquira Caracas 10509 Vemesuala gram" Di Falco Call* Los Chaquarasos idificio Centro de Nuo Carecasg Venezuela Vittoria CacCiasani only owns 2% of the stock but if you are interested her address is 1 ISM S.M. 61 Puce Miami, Florida 33143 C40kw w c6aww d" CkMq ACCi'"^MANI :ONST 13ROUP 'EL N0,30544227:5 Sep 27.90 5t3a Nn.0:4 5.04 L j2& DIVA i PT I ON A parcel of land located In the NE 1/4 of $** U on 29, TOwlahip 64 South, Range 41 last, Cade County, florid& being more particularly described as follow$: Commence at the Southeast corner of the NE 1/4 of said Section 29 thence running North 0 degrees, 36 minute#, OS seconds West along the East line of said WE 1/4 of Section 29, a distance of I.M.SO feet$ thence running South 69 degrees 4/ minutes, 34 aeoondS, West 20,0 feet. to the Point of Aeglnning of a parcel of land horelnefter described: thence continue South SS degrees 41 minutes 34 seconds Wiest along the South iIn& of W. C. DeUrsa tract according to the plat of last Utopia recorded In plat. look 1d at Fps 7 of the public Records of Dads County, Florida for 676.64 rest& thence runnlnO North 0 degrees 44 minutes 08 seconds west for a distance of 221.74 feet, to the Intersection of tots South line of the Plat of NORTH MIDWAY according to the plat thereof as recorded In plat cook 61 at Page 81 of the Public Records Of Dade County, Florldai thence running North 49 degrees I1 minutes 38 seconde East along the South line of sale plat NORTH MIDWAY And the North Line of Walter Dearmo Tract for $76.20 feat to a point, that Iles 20 loet Wiest of the last 1 Inc Of the NE 1/4 $sot ion pi thence running South 0 dogress 33 minutes. 00 seconds last. &tong & line 20 lost west of and parallel to, the Bast line Of said NE 1/4 Section 29 for 221.72 feat to the ►oint Of S"Inning. The AbOVO legal description is of the subject property repressisted as the ueGarmo Estate, 3062 Douglas Road, Miami, Florida. This legal description Is for the entire 06"rmo Estate v^lcA Is proposed to be subdlvlded.into ten Individual residential sites. Exhibit "A" WARONKU AND ASSOCIATU, INC. IM.ALIXIAT1 M444A0 -W'%ANUUUhWA1Milti It 91- 481 _nNS` :RRM P -EL .'Sb5ddC2?„ sea 38NO .OV'd " .02Aloft -_ :iNl)t Ember 27. IS04V (att: t_ueta Dougherty Dear Lucial Mere i5 thw information requested: Ownership of Property: Srm"r a l I-ar tner: OfIicersa Stocks: Stoekholdters t De Oarmo P#r*nership Ltd. uAcciamani Developanent Cnmpany Franco Cacoismani (President) Luciano Caccl.amanl(Via• President) Carlos Lacciamani (Secretary) 60% i-- Laronte Enterprises Stocbst 14% Directorut Aldo brunwtta, Osvaldo Soto «- Venim Corporation `3toeks: ibY. Directors: Maoros Malaya Exhibit "8" c a k"M coeeaw tko CROW M �t. WMAht ,ONIST %ROMP "EL 40 . 3034142 7:5 3e0 7 t:38 No.,L:, .-CAC -IAMANI Individual Stockholders individtialst 1- warner Draschia, Erasma Dt Falco :1toCk.�r i 14% IndividUalst 5toGkst 2-- Vi ttarla Lacctsmanl 2% G,uwenwn f.��►atnkt�alt Groap :"Nc i VROUP ;EL No 60544jjrU5 Uct logo .NO. - v;" oc October it 1"* Res De varmo Estates Dear Adriennel Here is the root of the information requestedi Companys Cacciameni Devalopwent Company 3i39 Cotamodore Plaza Bts. 31E Coconut Orovep Florida 33133 Officerse Franco Cacciamani (President) Stocks owned s 40% Company$ Officers - - Yna. lens. MIMI i Luciano Cacciaoani (Vice President) Stocks owned: 40% Carlos Cacciaeahi (.secretary) Stocks Owned 20% "'-Carante Enterprises in care of Osvaldo Bate, Esq.Zisi Le Jeune Road ste. UO _=- Coral Sables, Florida 33134 4 Aldo Brunetta (President) $tacks owneds 100% C�OCItlILfiti c�•.+�:iOA Gip 91- 481 AFFIDAVIT STATE OF F=DA) S$. COUNTY OF DADS ) Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared Lucia A. Dougherty , who being by me first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and says: 1. That he is the owner, or the legal representative of the owner, submitting the accompiwwirg application for a public hearing as required by Ordinance No. 9500 of the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, effecting the real property located in the City of May' as described and Listed on the pages attached to this affidavit and made a pert thereof. 2. That all owners which he represents. if wW, have given their full and complete permission for him to act in their behalf for the change or modification of a classification or regulation of zoning as set out in the accamlpanying petition. 3. That the pages attached hereto and made a part of this affidavit ccrstain the current names, mriling addresses, *�= razabers and legal descriptions for the real property which he is the owner or legal xapaaaatutive. 4. The facts as represented in the application and docunm= submitted in conjunction with this affidavit are true and correct. IRuther Affiant sayeth not. (SEAL) Sworn to and Subscribed before me this Z day of .% � ,19.gL. VY-" Notary Public. State of Pdrida at Large My Ccmmi3sian Expires: NOt►�r PUILIt STATE of FLORIDA N� COMMISSION EAf• :E/.10.1992 IONOEO TNIIU GENERAL lose VND• 9 1— 481 OWNER'S LIST -. Mor's Naw by Gar:no Partner'ship. Ltd. - r Mailing Address—__ 3952._ _Douglas Road, Coconut Grove Telephone Number _ 442-1783 Legal Description: See attached Exhibit A Owner's Name Mailing Address Telephone Number Legal Description: Owner's Name Mailing Address Telephone Number Legal Description: Any at:. - real estate property owned individually, jointly, or severally (by corporation, partnership or privately) within 375' of the subject site is listed as follows: Street Address Legal Description None Street Address Street Address Legal Description Legal Description DISCLG5(JpE Gr W16E HtP 1. Legal description and street addr0521 of subject reai property: See attached Exhibit "A". 2. Ownsc(s) of subject real property and percentage of ownership. Note: City of Miami Ordinance No. $419 requires disclosure of all parties 5"W nq a financial interests either direct or indirect# in the subject natter of a presentation, request or petition to the City Coasission. Accordingly, question 02 requires disclosure of all shareholders of wor.l rations, beneficiaries of trustsa and/or any other interested partiese together vith their addresses and proportionate interest. See attached Exhibit "H". 3. Legal description and street address of owned by any patty listed in answer to question 02, 375 feet of the subject rue property. ' N o n e any real property (a) and M located within LUCIA A. DOUGHERTY, ESQ. Lucia A. Dougherty , duly smote, deposes and says Me is • etorney or O+Wr) of the real property described in answer to question fl, abover Heard* has read the foregoing ans m and that the saes are true atd co Wletes and (if acting a• attomwey !or Mme) tbatshe has authority to execute this Oiselosyz+e o! Ownership fain an behalf of the cwewr. /? SWW I* AND before taws day of • %I.Q, Lee DMO ?loci" at Lugt 10��fT N�1tlt suff OF ro'p:CA Ar C01113MI lip, rep 're., �. k MAW 9 1 _. 3952 OOUGLAS.ROAD, DEGARMO ESTATES ANALYSIS OF NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE ZONING BOARD 1. The appeal claims that August 30 and 31 but complete application application. the applicant sought to no administrators were or to advise as to t file his application on available to accept the ie completeness of the Joseph W. McManus, the Heritage/Conservation Officer, was in the office both days to accept any application. His time sheets and the Daily Attendance Register verify this. On several occasions prior to leaving for vacation on August 30, Sarah Eaton, Planner 11, advised the applicant as to what a complete application must contain. She had previously provided a three -page handout which clearly states the application requirements. In addition, the appellant had previously submitted applications for Heritage Conservation Board review and was familiar with the requirements. 2. The appeal claims that the plans which were left with the City on August 31 constitute a complete application. The plans left with the City wen far from complete. Per the provisions of Section 17-8(9) of the Miami City Code, applications for Certificates of Approval must include an application forte, tree survey, photographs, site plan signed by a zoning inspection official, and application fee. The Official Rules of Procedure of the Heritage Conservation Board, adopted pursuant to Sections 62-72(15) and 62-73(b) of the Miami City Code, set forth in Section YIII additional items which must be submitted in order for applications to be considered complete. The applicant submitted tree surveys and unsigned site plans on August 311 1990. Application fonts were submitted on September 4, 1990, and the fees were also paid on that date. The signature of a zoning inspection official was not obtained until September 4, 1990. Photographs were not submitted. The applicant attempted to have the Zoning Division review the plans on August 31. Rafael Rodriguez, Zoning Plans Examiner, explained to the applicant on August 31 that no zoning information had been provided on the plans. He further explained what what would be required for his to review the plans. (It should be noted that the aforementioned handout supplied to the applicant cautions him that review by the Zoning Division may take approximately five days.) 3. The appeal claims that .the Heritage Conservation Officer has very often determined that applications are complete, although the technical submission requirements of the Code have not been met. Deadlines for Heritage Conservation Board submittal are 15 days in advance of the meeting. Because of the Labor Day holiday, the deadline for the September 18, 1990 hearing was moved to September 4, 1990. The Heritage Conservation Officer will not schedule an item on the next Board 91- 481 agenda until an application is submitted and the fee is paid. The applications for the DeGarmo Estates were received on September 4, and the fee was paid at that ties. The Heritage Conservation Officer determined that the applications were acceptable for scheduling purposes, pending review by the Zoning Division. On September 4, the applicant submitted to the Zoning Division plans with an attached sheet showing calculations for lot coverage, livability space, and parking spaces. The Zoning Division signed off on the plans on September 6. Because the applications were judged to be acceptable for scheduling purposes as of September 4, they were placed on the Heritage Conservation Board meeting of September 18, and notices were sent out. It was brought to the attention of the Planning Division the following week that the applications might not have met the requirements of Section 2105.1.1 of Zoning Ordinance 11000. The Planning Division subsequently requested a determination from the Zoning mo Administrator (set attached memorandum) as to whether the DeGarapplications, as well as an application for another project, met the requirements of the above referenced section of the Zoning Ordinance. When the Zoning Administrator determined that the applications did not meet the requirements for review under previous Zoning Ordinance 9500, the DeGarmo applications were returned. 4. The appeal claims that if this application is found to be incomplete, the applicant would be forced to redesign his project. The appeal further claims that it would be inequitable to apply a different and more onerous standard for the determination of a complete application than the department has for other applicants. The Planning Division applied the some standards to all applications received on September 4 for Heritage Conservation Board review. The application for another project was also found not to not the requirements of Section 2105.1.1 of Ordinance 11000. However, although that other project did not meet the filing deadline, it did comply with the more stringent zoning requirements -of Ordinance 11000 and therefore could be reviewed by the Heritage Conservation Board on September 18. 5. The appeal claims that the letter from the Heritage Conservation Officer indicates that the application was complete. The letter only states that the applications for Certificates of Approval had been scheduled for a public hearing. 6. The appeal claims that equity, fairness, and due process require this application to be found complete. On the contrary, equity, fairness, and due process require that these applications, like all other applications, comply with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 91- 481 Sec. 2105. Status of building permits or certificates of use issued prior to 4"ptioA or amendment of ordinance. Where lawful building permits or certificates of use (or certificates having tree sane purpose and effect) have been issued prior to the effective date of adoption or amandlnent of this ordinance establishing now requiroments as to constnretion, location, or use to which such permit or certificate and applications and plans related thereto do .not conform, the following rules shall govern: 2105.1. Cbnpletion of laq'W oeticou initiated prior to adoption or a n ubunt of ordinance; tiro lirsta for covietiaR of a:tiaru. M05.1.1. Cbnttraeticn and aompiM. More building permits have been issued or certificates of use applied for in relation thereto, for construction of buildings or structures, or additions or alterations, nothing in this ordinance shall be doomed to require a Change in the plans, caatruction. er designated use of a building or structure or portion thereof under actual construction, provided such construction is carried an without interruption (except for just cause). If actual construction is not under wady, new building permits or certificates of use shall be required where Previous documents have beeuum void, and shall be in acto, with amp new regulations established by adoption or amendment of this ordinance. Application for building permits shall be considered in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 9900 for a PoMod of an MMMd eighty (180) days from the effective date of Ordinance No. 11000, Provided that complete applications (including all building plans, drawings, swaMs and legal Oecum�ents required by applicable law, ordinance. statute or regulation) have been filed with the appropriate city department. prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. 11000. Applicants for building permits shalt be permitted to mks changes in the building plans and drawings only when so required by the city a a suit of its review of the applications, but no building permit shall be issued pursuant to this paragraph after ono hundred eighty (180) days from the effective date of Ordinance No. 11000 unless an appeal from the decision of the Director of the Department of Planning, Wilding and Zoning has boon filed with the City llanagor. Arlicatiaas for atatlic hwrines for Wrier of vaMances, conditional uses or other r_emuests which require review and aeoraval by the City Commission, Zoning board, Planning Advisory 9oard, NoMtoge Conservation Be". the Latin Quarter Review board, or Urban Development Review hoard shalt be reviewed in accordance with the mrevisiaes of ordinance No. 9500, provided that complete applications have been filed prier to the effective date of Ordinance No. 11000. Applicants for public hearings shall M permitted to sake 'danger in the applications only when so required by the city as a result of its review of the applications. The negessarn building pormit(s) or certificates of use. whichever is first required. shall be within ninety rem M IM of I imaltic h"Mng approval (and. is the ovens an appeal is taken to the courts, within ninety ) calendar daps free the date the final decision is rendered) or within aao hnrnM ei bil (110) eaiendar dues from the effective "to of ordinance Na. 110M,-whichevor Phased development Projects which have boon reviewed and approved in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 9500 shall be entitled to building pormit(s) pursuant to Ordinance No. 9S0O, provided the entire Prajoct has been reviewed and - approved prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. 11000. The building perolif for the initial stage of construction shall be applied for and obtained witJhiL ninety (90) days from the effective dat0 of ordinances Ile. 11000. Approval of building permits in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 9SOD far subsequent stages of construction shall remain valid only if development of thf. entire or overall Project is continuous Pursuant to the South Florida iuilding Code. 2105•1.2. Actual amtruction, defied for the purposes of this toning ordinance actual construction is defined to include the placing of construction materials iw Pormanent position and fastened in a poevonent aanher; except that demolition, excavation, or removal of an existing striuctur! has Men shdsitantiallr' begun Preparatory to new construction, such excavation, dw4lition, or reslar- shall be deireil to be actual construction, provided that rework shall be continuoWl 236 57