The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 1988-02-25 Minutes.CITY OF MIAMI %J r * IN OR ►HATED 18 96m I N U T E S �. COMMISSION r' OF FETING HELD ON M"ARY 25, 19§8 (PLANNING & ZONING) PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK !I CITY HALL RATTY HIRAI City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING CITY CONNISSION OF NIANI, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 25, 1988 1. BRIEF DISCUSSION AND TEMPORARY DEFERRAL DISCUSSION 1-4 OF CLAUGHTON ISLAND PROPOSED AFFORDABLE 2/25/88 HOUSING PROJECT (NEAR VIZCAYA METRORAIL STATION) (SEE LABEL 17). 2. URGE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION NOT TO R 88-177 4-5 PLACE PROPOSED DADE COUNTY CHARTER 2/25/88 REVISIONS ON MARCH 8, 1988 BALLOT. 3. COMMEND SENATOR LEHTINEN FOR FILING R 88-178 6-7 INITIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST METROPOLITAN 2/25/88 DADE COUNTY REGARDING PROPOSED CHARTER REVIEW. 4. INSPECT FOR SAFETY BLEACHERS ERECTED M 88-179 7-8 FOR GRAND PRIX EVENT. (SEE LABEL 69) 2/25/88 S. AUTHORIZE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE M 88-180 8-10 WITH HEIRS OF BRICKELL PARK - RESEARCH 2/25/88 POSSIBLE GROUNDS FOR SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE. 6. A) RECONSIDER M-88-165 REGARDING M 88-181 10-27 PREPARATION OF THREE REAL PROPERTY M 88-182 REIMBURSEMENT ALTERATIONS REGARDING 2/25/88 DISPOSITION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. B) DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO PRESENT A REAL PROPERTY REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE TO BE FOLLOWED BY DEVELOPERS IN SAID PROJECTS. 7. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO M 88-183 28 PROCESS CLASS "C" SPECIAL PERMIT AT 2/25/88 APPROXIMATELY 3151-3199 S.W. 27TH AVENUE PROJECT. 8. PRESENTATION OF MANUEL ARTIME COMMUNITY DISCUSSION 29 CENTER SCALE MODEL WHICH WON DESIGN 2/25/88 CONTEST. 9. RATIFY CITY MANAGER'S DESIGNATION OF R 88-184 29 CERTAIN CITY AREAS WHERE VENDOR 2/25/88 LICENSES WILL NOT BE ALLOWED FOR GRAND PRIX EVENT. (SEE LABEL #4) 10. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI ORDINANCE 30-31 COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - 10391 CHANGE PLAN DESIGNATION AT 2/25/88 APPROXIMATELY 2600 N.W. 14TH STREET FROM LOW MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MODERATE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (APPLICANTS: ESCLOFER & OLGA LAZA) (SEE LABEL 11). 11. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE 31-32 ATLAS AT APPROXIMATELY 2600 N.W. 14TH 10392 STREET FROM RG-1/3 TO RG-2/5 2/25/88 (APPLICANTS: ESCLOFER & OLGA LAZA) (SEE LABEL 10). 12. DISCUSS AND CONTINUE PROPOSED DISCUSSION 32-33 RESOLUTION FOR AMENDMENT OF BAYSIDE 2/25/88 SPECIALTY CENTER MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT TO MARCH 10, 1988 AGENDA. 13. A) CONTINUE FIRST READING ORDINANCE TO M 88-185 34-37 CHANGE ZONING AT 2785-2855 TIGERTAIL DISCUSSION _ AVENUE AND 3241-3299 MARY STREET TO 2/25/88 MARCH 24, 1988 MEETING (APPLICANT: JAMES ROBERTSON). B) CONTINUE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO PERMIT AN APARTMENT BUILDING AT 2785- 2855 TIGERTAIL AVENUE AND 3241-3299 r MARY STREET TO MARCH 24, 1988 MEETING (APPLICANT: JAMES ROBERTSON). 1 14. UPHOLD ZONING BOARD'S DECISION TO DENY R 88-186 37-48 APPEAL BY EXXON CORPORATION FOR SPECIAL 2/25/88 r EXCEPTION TO REDUCE TRANSITIONAL AREA AT 6075 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD - (RECONSTRUCTION OF AN EXXON GAS STATION) 15. A) DISCUSSION REGARDING FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 48-62 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ON COCONUT R 88-187 GROVE TRAFFIC STUDY BY DAVID RHINARD 2/25/88 (TRANSPORT ANALYSIS PROFESSIONALS, - INC.). B) EXPRESS INTENT OF CITY COMMISSION NEVER TO EXTEND MCDONALD STREET SOUTHERLY FROM GRAND AVENUE TO CHARLES AVENUE. 16. RECONSIDER PREVIOUSLY PASSED MOTIONS R 88-188 63-71 GRANTING CLASS "C" SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 2/25/88 RENEWAL OF FLAGLER FLEA MARKET AT 401 NW 38TH COURT - SUBJECT TO ONE-YEAR REVIEW. -� 17. (A) CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF CLAUGHTON DISCUSSION 71-89 j ISLAND PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING M 88-189 -t PROJECT (NEAR VIZCAYA METRORAIL 2/25/88 STATION) (SEE LABEL 1) (B) DIRECT PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO STUDY AREA TO DETERMINE WHETHER EXISTING ZONING IS APPROPRIATE. 18. REVERSE ZONING BOARD'S DENIAL AND GRANT R 88-190 89-91 APPEAL BY APPLICANTS (DOMINGO & REBECCA 2/25/88 ERICE) - ALLOW EXISTING ADDITION TO - SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE AT 120 S.W. 66TH AVENUE - SUBJECT TO CONDITION. 19. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI ORDINANCE 92-93 COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - FIRST READING CHANGE LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 2575 2/25/88 ® S.W. 28TH STREET FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE (APPLICANTS: RAMON & CAYETANA FERNANDEZ) (SEE LABEL 20). 20. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE 93 AT LAST AT 2575 S.W. 28TH STREET FROM FIRST READING RS-2/2 TO RO-1/4 (APPLICANTS: RAMON & 2/25/88 CAYETANA FERNANDEZ) (SEE LABEL 19). 21. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI ORDINANCE 94-95 COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - FIRST READING CHANGE DESIGNATION AT 3629-3631 N.W. 2/25/88 24TH AVENUE FROM MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LIBERAL COMMERCIAL - SUBJECT TO CONDITION (APPLICANT: NATALIO ASCAR) (SEE LABEL 22). 22. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE 96 AT LAST AT 2395 N.W. 36TH STREET AND FIRST READING 3629-3621 N.W. 24TH AVENUE FROM RG-2/4 2/25/88 AND CG-1/7 TO CG-2/7 - SUBJECT TO CONDITION (APPLICANT: NATALIO ASCAR) (SEE LABEL 21). 23. A) STIPULATE CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS FROM M 88-191 96-108 APPLICATION OF THE IMPACT FEE FORMULA. FIRST READING B) FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REPEAL 2/25/88 10273, CHAPTER 54.6 - IMPOSE IMPACT FEE TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH DEVELOPMENT. 24. CONTINUE ALL UNHEARD ITEMS ON THIS M 88-192 108-109 AGENDA TO A FUTURE CITY COMMISSION 2/25/88 MEETING. 25. AUTHORIZE COMMISSIONER PLUMMER TO M 88-193 109-110 TRAVEL TO HONDURAS AS CITY'S LIAISON ON 2/25/88 BEHALF OF THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAM. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 25th day of February, 1988, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 4:05 P.M. by Mayor Xavier Suarez with the following members of the Commission found to be present: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Mayor Xavier L. Suarez ABSENT: Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy ALSO PRESENT: Cesar Odio, City Manager Lucia Allen Dougherty, City Attorney Matty Hirai, City Clerk Walter J. Foeman, Assistant City Clerk An invocation was delivered by Mayor Suarez. Commissioner Plummer then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. 1. BRIEF DISCUSSION AND TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CLAUGHTON ISLAND PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT (NEAR VIZCAYA METRORAIL STATION) (SEE LABEL 17). Mayor Suarez: We have two items on this agenda and one, I understand you're going to be requesting that we hold off until 7:00 P.M. Joe, do you want to tell us about that? I think you've sent a letter too, right? Mr. Joe Wilkins: Yes, we requested in writing the other night at the public hearing when they said 4:00 o'clock, everybody just kind of was upset. We got a lot of feedback that people would rather it be at seven. We kind of took a poll, most of the people... Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): What, seven.... Mayor Suarez (Off mike): The Vizcaya site .... Mr. Wilkins: ...our president was not able to be here now and a good number of people, we had a large turnout and they... Mr. Plummer (Off mike): Did we promise for today? Mr. Wilkins: It was said for today, they said Tuesday night, 4:00 o'clock. There was a lot of protest. Mayor Suarez: Yes, I had thought that we were only going to set one item for 4:00 o'clock and that and that was the discussion of the law suit. Mr. Wilkins: Well, we were told 4:00 o'clock, we said 4:00 o'clock. Very few of us could make it out of the number that will make it at seven, so... Mayor Suarez: What are we going to hear from the City? I mean, in case that — we don't even need to deal with this item at 7:00, are we going to have any kind of recommendation from the City on this property at all? Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask just one other question, Mr. Mayor, there was to be a town hall meeting. Did that take place? —� CAS 1 February 25, 1988 Mr. Wilkins: Yes, it did. Mayor Suarez: Oh, did it take place. Mr. Plummer: OK. Mr. Wilkins: And part of what we would like to present is what our reactions were to the information. We're still just really getting the information. We picked up some of the facts just this afternoon. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): At the town hall meeting, was a time decided for 4:00 or 7:00 o'clock? Mr. Wilkins: They said it was tentatively 4:00 o'clock. They said we should request in writing that it be changed to 7:00, which we did. Mayor Suarez: I guess it was... Mr. Plummer: Well, I guess the real question... Mr. Dawkins: No, no, no, no. With everybody, why you got to in writing when we got the whole damn staff there. Why you got to write a letter? Mr. Wilkins: It was their idea, not mine. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I guess the real bottom line is, is there anything to discuss? Mr. Wilkins: We feel there might be. Mr. Plummer: If you don't have a proposal, I have not seen. To this day, I have still not seen anything in writing as to what the proposal of the developer and/or associate people. Now, I don't know how we can argue... Mayor Suarez: No, that's exactly right, there is nothing... Mr. Plummer: I don't know how we can argue for, against, or with you... Mayor Suarez: But I know that you've got something beyond that because you now... UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): Well, it's not a question of us, sir. This item is put on the agenda for discussion. Mayor Suarez: We know that, we know that. Mr. Plummer: Who put it on? Mayor Suarez: We know that eventually we'll have to deal with it, but you've got something other than whether we can contemplate one kind of a deal or a different kind of a deal for that property, you're going to want to tell us the results of the hearing. I have no problem listening to it now. If you want to have your people, you know, your president here and - is Armando the president? Mr. Wilkins: No, that's the thing, he won't... Mayor Suarez: Who's the president, Joe? Mr. Wilkins: Pardon me? Mayor Suarez: Who's the president? Mr. Wilkins: Oh, the president is Mandy... Mayor Suarez: Mandy. Mr. Wilkins: ... yes, and he won't be here till 7:00 and he wants to state our position, yes. Mayor Suarez: Is he more eloquent than you or... CAS 2 February 25, 1988 s • Mr. Wilkins: He's more comfortable behind microphones, I'm sure. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Manager. Mr. Wilkins: And he has his speech already written. I heard it on the phone, it's a good one so... I could present somewhat... Mayor Suarez: A written speech? Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Manager. Mayor Suarez: To your friends on this Commission? Mr. Wilkins: Well, I have to do that too. Not all of us are at ease, OK. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Manager. Mr. Odio: Yes, sir. Mr. Dawkins: Please see that if we ever have another - not if, when we have other town meetings, and it's a majority of the citizens there who work and the citizens decide that it's better and they can get a better crowd of people after working hours, which is 7:00 o'clock, please instruct your people not to have nobody write a damn letter of request that it be moved to 7:00 o'clock. OK? Mr. Odio: Yes, sir. Mr. Dawkins: I mean that's uncalled for. Mr. Odio: Yes, sir. Mr. Dawkins: Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Particularly when it's already on the agenda for 4:30. Mr. Dawkins: And not only that when all you got the people there. You know, then they got to go back home and write a letter, that doesn't make sense. Mr. Odio: I understand what you're saying, Commissioner. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): Not only that, but they told us also just in case to show up at 4:00 o'clock anyway. Mayor Suarez: Well, that part of the advice was good. Mr. Wilkins: They could not give us any certainty, that's why we're here, that's why we're here now. Mayor Suarez: That part of the advice was good. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): That was good advice. Mayor Suarez: Yes. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): Always be safe. Mr. Wilkins: That's why we're here, this is the take no chances crowd. So should we be here at seven? Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: If you recall, you asked us to have a town hall meeting to explain to the residents of the area what were the existing plans for the property in question and the zoning considerations. And we held that town hall meeting with the residents of the area and I think what they want to do in the meeting tonight is, I guess, express their concerns about the project itself. We invited the applicant and the ... Mayor Suarez: The project in very general terms because there is no specific project right now. Mr. Rodriguez: The area, I guess, and the original project that was presented by the original applicant. CAS 3 February 25, 1988 • 0 Mayor Suarez: OK, and the zoning and... mean the original project. I see, OK, you say the project, you Mr. Odio: it's a zoning question, it's a zoning question, that's what... Mr. Rodriguez: Right. But the original applicant did not attend the meeting and I guess the question today will be whether they want to discuss with you what are the concerns they have about the area and about the zoning they have in the area and the original project that was proposed. Mr. Plummer: Well, then what the Manager's saying is that they don't want to speak necessarily to this particular project but to zoning in the area and the zoning application. Mr. Rodriguez: Right, they... Mr. Odio: That is correct. Mr. Rodriguez: Definitely, they want to talk about that particular issue the zoning that this project has now and how it's affecting the area. Mayor Suarez: So what are you going to do with your troops between 4:12 and 7:00 p.m., Joe? INAUDIBLE RESPONSE NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: You're not going to camp outside of our offices or anything like that? Mr. Plummer: They live close by. Mayor Suarez: OK, we'll take up the matter, at your request we'll take it up at 7:00 understanding that once again, there is nothing from the Manager to us indicating what would be built on there, if anything. That doesn't mean that you have to be satisfied with the existing status quo, the zoning and so on and that may be what you'll be arguing at 7:00 p.m. I have a feeling that's what you're going to be arguing about at 7:00 p.m. There's no hidden agenda here... Mr. Plummer (Off mike): They want to come back at 7:00.... Mayor Suarez: ... I've tried to clarify that to you that no one really knows, what, if anything, will be built there because we don't have a package that is viable or that anyone has guaranteed us that they can build there. We thought we had a commitment that somebody was going to build a hundred some units including some affordable housing units there and we approved that a little bit over a year and a half ago. But as of now, we have nothing, at least that this Commission has approved and apparently we don't have anything that will even be recommended today so we'll basically be hearing from you, the neighbors, as to what you'd like to do with that site. Mr. Wilkins: Perhaps before the next project comes along, we can deal with it so we don't have to deal with it when it does. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Wilkins: Thank you. Mayor Suarez: OK, thank you, Joe. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: VICE MAYOR ROSARIO KENNEDY ENTERED THE COMMISSION MEETING AT 4:12 P.M. CAS 4 February 25, 1988 i i i--------------------- --------------------------------------------------- 2. URGE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION NOT TO PLACE PROPOSED DADE COUNTY CHARTER }. REVISIONS ON MARCH 8, 1988 BALLOT. E ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- f t Mayor Suarez: On the matter of the charter amendment. 1 Mrs. Lucia Dougherty: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. -i Mayor Suarez: Do we need to talk about that or is that a dead issue now? t Mrs. Dougherty: As you know, Judge Tanksley has taken the March 8th referendum question on the Dade County Charter off the ballot. That decision is now being appealed to the Third District Court of Appeals and there will be a hearing on Wednesday morning. I'm prepared to go through the items or the charter amendment one by one, if you care to, but there's really no reason to do that unless it gets back on the ballot. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, may I make, I think, what would be the best thing that we could do today not knowing what the Third District Court but thinking that they would uphold the lower court. I would offer a resolution if anybody is ready that this Commission takes the same position as Judge Tanksley that at this particular time that we feel that there is a lot more explanation needed and that the wording needs to be a lot clearer and I don't think we can take any other position at this point if that's the feeling of this Commission. I happen to agree with Judge Tanksley and I think his ruling was good and I would offer that in some form or modified form of a resolution if it's in thinking with this Commission. Mayor Suarez: It sounds good to me. Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): At this point, I don't think there's much we can do today. Mr. Plummer: The only other thing that I had thought about, Rosario, was that I have no problem with, as you know, at any time going to a referendum to let the people speak. But I think what they need to do where this is in nine or ten different facets that they have the wording of 75 words per charter amendment, that what they need to do is to break it down into ten and then use the 75 words to each individual one. And I think in that particular case, they can, in fact, make it clearer to the public but that's yet to be to the future if and when this thing were to come back up. Mayor Suarez: They seem to have packed in way too many changes into one amendment. And they made it sound like it was a pure cleanup, or clean house type amendment and it sure isn't. It seems to be very substantive. Mr. Plummer: The Clerk calls it a scrivener error. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would so move at this time that this Commission goes on record of agreeing with Judge Tanksley's ruling and that in the future, we would like to speak to the issue further. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll. CAS 5 February 25, 1986 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-177 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE DESIRE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION THAT THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION NOT ATTEMPT TO PLACE THE QUESTION OF PROPOSED DADE COUNTY CHARTER REVISIONS ON THE MARCH 8, 1988 BALLOT IN ITS PRESENT FORM AND TO ONLY ATTEMPT FUTURE PLACEMENT AFTER GIVING THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY FOR FULL CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN SAID REVISION; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FORWARD COPIES OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN NAMED OFFICIALS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 3. COMMEND SENATOR LEHTINEN FOR FILING INITIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY REGARDING PROPOSED CHARTER REVIEW. Mr. Dawkins: I also would like to go on record and have this Commission commend Dexter Lehtinen for having taken the front runner and bringing this up. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry? Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): ... I didn't hear... Mayor Suarez: For to commend Senator Lehtinen for having taken the lead on this and so far expressing what all of our concerns have been. Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Suarez: This is an inter party effort on the part of the Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: Yes, more or less. Mr. Dawkins: We are a non partisan group, Commissioners. Mayor Suarez: Very good. Mr. Plummer: You might be but I'm not. Mr. Dawkins: Well, I didn't vote for Reagan so you know I'm not a Republican. Mayor Suarez: Call the roll before we get into... CAS 6 February 25, 1988 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-178 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION OFFICIALLY COMMENDING SENATOR DEXTER LEHTINEN FOR HAVING TAKEN THE LEAD POSITION IN THE FILING OF A LAWSUIT AGAINST METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY ALLEGING THAT THE BALLOT LANGUAGE LANGUAGE USED FOR A PROPOSED CHARTER REVISION WAS VAGUE AND MISLEADING AND FAILED TO STATE THE CHIEF PURPOSES OF THE PROPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATUTORY AND CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mayor Suarez: Thank you. Mr. Dawkins: And he was a good Democrat before he changed over. 6. INSPECT FOR SAFETY BLEACHERS ERECTED FOR GRAND PRIX EVENT. (SEE LABEL #E9 ) Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, may I bring up a quick subject? Last year, as you know, the City of Miami, in conjunction with the Grand Prix, is looking for a tremendous weekend this weekend with a weatherman who has promised cool and crisp weather. Last year, for the safety of both, it was my recommendation that we have the City of Miami go through all of the bleachers and inspect the bleachers and it was done for both of our protections. This year, they've gone back and done it again, but with a City sponsored, cosponsored event, they've also presented a bill. This is as much for our protection so I would ask at this time that a resolution waiving all permit fees associated with inspection and staffing of the Miami Grand Prix be waived and I so move. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): Second. Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-179 A MOTION DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO DIRECT STAFF TO GO AND INSPECT THE BLEACHERS WHICH HAVE BEEN ERECTED FOR THE GRAND PRIX EVENT FOR SAFETY PURPOSES; FURTHER WAIVING ALL FEES AND PERMIT COSTS INVOLVED SINCE IT IS ALSO IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST TO CONDUCT SAID SAFETY INSPECTIONS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: CAS 7 February 25, 1988 i AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 5. AUTHORIZE ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE WITH HEIRS OF BRICKELL PARK - RESEARCH POSSIBLE GROUNDS FOR SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE. Mr. De Yurre: I'd like to take up a couple of things. Mayor Suarez: Commissioner De Yurre. Mr. De Yurre: Now that we're all sitting up here. City Attorney, what is the position that we have right now with the Brickell Park, the sale of Brickell Park. I know you've been working on it. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): We had no bids, right? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, Commissioner De Yurre, at the bid opening, I believe it was a week ago Monday, we received no bids. One of the reasons probably why we received no bids is because the heirs of the Brickells who gave the original donation to the City had sued the City to try to get back the land. In other words, they are claiming that by selling the property, we are violating the reverter provisions in the original grants and, therefore, they are entitled to the property back. They filed that case in Circuit Court and we have removed it to Federal Court because they have also alleged a Federal civil rights cause of action. Right now, we've just filed our motion to dismiss today. Mr. De Yurre: How many of these heirs are involved in this situation? Mrs. Dougherty: There are five heirs involved in this lawsuit and we don't know at this time whether or not any others exist. That's why we had gotten your permission to file a quiet title action which would preclude any other heirs by notice, by paper notice, who may claim the reverter at a later time. Mr. De Yurre: All five of these named heirs of the Brickell family, are they all in the same position or have they just been joined in by one of the members that is fighting this situation? Are all five... Mrs. Dougherty: They're all claiming various interests, depending on how close they are to relationship with the original donor. Mr. De Yurre: Have you met with them at all to see what their position is and what it would take.... Mrs. Dougherty: We have not met with either the heirs or their attorneys since the filing of the lawsuit. Mr. De Yurre: Mr. Mayor, I think it would be appropriate if the City Manager entered some type of negotiation to see exactly what these Brickell heirs want... Mrs. Dougherty (Off mike): He said he solved it. Mr. De Yurre: ... we might be able to work something out. Mayor Suarez: Well absolutely, I thought we were in negotiations with them. Mrs. Dougherty: We're in litigation with them. Mayor Suarez: Or we're just in litigation with them. CAS 8 February 25, 1988 -e i t E Mrs. Dougherty: We have not negotiated with them since we have determined e that they do not want simply a... Mayor Suarez: Since we found out that they wanted money. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): There were no bids. Mrs. Dougherty: Correct. t Mr. Plummer (Off mike): There was no bids. We gave a party and nobody showed t up. Mayor Suarez: And we don't know how much money, there's no demand or... Mrs. Dougherty: No demand whatsoever. Mayor Suarez: ... no price put on that, what is that, reverter right that they have? Mrs. Dougherty: Correct. Mayor Suarez: Isn't there any economic way of evaluating that? Mrs. Dougherty: I'm sure there is, yes. We could get that reverter appraised or that possibility of reverter appraised, certainly. Mayor Suarez: That's what I meant, I guess, is there any sound economic rule that would give us an idea of how much money we're talking about? Mrs. Dougherty: Not really. I can tell you that this project will not go forward, nor will you be able to sell your property until this litigation is disposed of. So if that takes two or three years... Mrs. Kennedy: That's probably why there were no bids. Mayor Suarez (Off mike): How do you want to handle it? Do you want to give instructions to... Mrs. Dougherty: That's correct. Mr. De Yurre: See what we could negotiate. The thing is that we're talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars in man hours by our Legal Department to represent the City of Miami in this action. And if we can talk to these individuals and come to some kind of understanding wherein we can break even and save a couple of years of work and frustration, I think that might be something that should be addressed. Mrs. Dougherty: We'll certainly, at your direction, the Manager and the City Attorney's office will approach them. Mayor Suarez: Yes, because - well, we may have to pay for that reverter might still not be so much that it would not make the swap viable because we still might be able to get more for that land than we have to pay for the other. Also, I want to say that the individual handling that litigation is the one that taught me what little I know about the law and I'm not sure that we ought to be wanting to face him in court. And that law firm is obviously a very good law firm. In any event, without getting into the respective merits of... Mrs. Dougherty: Shutts and Bowen. Mayor Suarez: ... Shutts and Bowen versus Lucia Dougherty, et al. Mrs. Dougherty: Well, you won't let me find out then. Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, that's right. Mayor Suarez: Yes, but not after three years and $300,000 in legal fees was what the Commissioner was worried about. Mrs. Kennedy: I feel very confident. CAS 9 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: If we could decide it tomorrow, you know, in a court hearing. Do you want to make that into - try to frame a motion about that? Mr. De Yurre: Yes, I'd like to make it into a motion for Madam City Attorney to enter into negotiations to see what can be worked out that might be beneficial to the City. Mayor Suarez: And including some sort of a pay out for the reverter clause - for the reverter rights without specifying anything as to amount. Mrs. Dougherty: I'll do it. Mayor Suarez: Moved. Do we have a second? Mr. Plummer: I'll second the motion, Mr. Mayor. You know, all it is at this point is discussion and it might be the easiest route to travel.. Mayor Suarez: Right. Call the roll. I'm sorry, Commissioner. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner De Yurre, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-180 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO SOME TYPE OF DISCUSSIONS AND NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE HEIRS OF BRICKELL PARK TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT AND IF THERE EXISTS ANY POSSIBLE GROUND FOR SETTLEMENT OF THE PRESENT DISPUTE BETWEEN THE HEIRS AND THE CITY OF MIAMI; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITY OF CASH SETTLEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR ALLEGED CITY VIOLATIONS OF THE REVERTER CLAUSE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 6. A) RECONSIDER M-88-165 REGARDING PREPARATION OF THREE REAL PROPERTY REIMBURSEMENT ALTERATIONS REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. B) DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO PRESENT A REAL PROPERTY REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE TO BE FOLLOWED BY DEVELOPERS IN SAID PROJECTS. Mr. De Yurre: Another item, Mr. Mayor, if we can address, I'd like to revisit item 69, last week's agenda, the Codec, Inc. proposal by Mr. Julio de Quesada. Mayor Suarez: Do you want to move to, I guess we're going to have to reconsider since - OK, what do you want to do on that? Mr. Plummer: What was the issue? Mr. De Yurre: That was the issue of low income housing and... Mr. Dawkins: Second for the point of discussion. Mayor Suarez: OK. CAS 10 February 25, 1988 0 Mr. De Yurre: The property that he wanted the City to donate so that he could build low income housing. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): You can't reconsider except at the same meeting, right? Mr. De Yurre (Off mike): Do you have to take a vote on this? Mr. Dawkins: I don't know - do what with it? What are we going to do? Mr. De Yurre: Well, I'd like to... Mrs. Kennedy: Have we voted another... Mr. Dawkins: What are we going to do? I mean, I see him, I see you... Mr. De Yurre: I'd like to open up for discussion again to reconsider it, OK? Mr. Dawkins: I second the motion, now we've got to vote to see if we're going to reconsider it. Mr. De Yurre: OK, that's what we'll do. Mayor Suarez: Well, we may as well vote on the motion to consider the item at this point. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner De Yurre, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-181 A MOTION TO RECONSIDER M-88-165 OF THE FEBRUARY 18, 1988 MEETING WHICH DIRECTED THE ADMINISTRATION TO PREPARE THREE REAL PROPERTY REIMBURSEMENT ALTERNATIVES REGARDING DISPOSITION OF THREE PARCELS OF PUBLICLY OWNED PROPERTY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. De Yurre: You know, Mr. Mayor, I've only been here for three months but yet I see that analyzing... Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, Victor, can we get a copy of item 69? Is that possible so we all are on the same wave length here. Mayor Suarez: Are you concerned, by any chance, and as expectedly you would be, that they are coming up for Surtax Board application and they need something from us, is that what the item's about? Mr. De Yurre: Well, the thing is that this property, as well as the St. John property and then the other one that were here last week, they all seem to have the same problem that is that they can't make a low income housing project feasible if they have to pay or if the owners, potential owners, have to pay additional monies for mortgages to cover the cost of the land value and it seems to me like we're stuck. I don't know how many years that from what I've heard that this property has been owned by the City of Miami for a number of years and nothing has been done with it before because economically it's not feasible to do this type of project and I'd like to see something done where we could just go ahead and preserving our rights, whether we don't just give the property away, but if we can take back a third mortgage to where you CAS 11 February 25, 1988 divide the land cost; that if we're talking about the land cost of $500,000 and you're talking about 50 units, that we get a mortgage - the City of Miami gets a mortgage for $10,000, a prorated amount at no interest. That way, these individuals that are going to be purchasing the property will be able to meet the low income housing standards to be able to move in. Then, if they were to sell, eventually that property then we would get out money back through that third mortgage. You know, this way, we're not just giving it away, but we're facilitating the avenues for going ahead and providing low Income housing for a lot of needy people that are sitting and waiting and this has been dragging on for a number of years. Mayor Suarez: And you prevent speculation by requiring that they pay off the third mortgage if they sell to someone else. Mr. De Yurre: That's it. Yes, I don't want them to make a... Mayor Suarez: Well, but we've been playing around with the idea of how much we're going to get back from these properties... Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mayor Suarez: ... for six months and I think we ought to make up our minds. To me, this is as good a time as any. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, I don't dis... Mayor Suarez: And I think whatever we do ought to be uniform for all three. Mr. De Yurre: That's right. Mr. Plummer: Exactly, and that's what we did at the last meeting was to ask that the department come back and give us alternatives. The problem that I think that we find in a third mortgage that we would be behind the original mortgage and the surtax mortgage... Mayor Suarez: We're going to... Mr. Plummer: ... and as a third mortgage, you might as well whistle Dixie, you'll never... Mayor Suarez: But we're going to be behind them no matter what we do. Mr. De Yurre: Yes. Mr. Plummer: OK, but you'd still have no chance whatsoever of getting your money back as in a third mortgage. Mr. De Yurre: In any near future. Mr. Plummer: Forget it. Now, one of the alternatives which I thought was very fair was that we would get our money back, but we would not charge any interest for the first five years to give them the relief that they needed in the first five years, that was to be, maybe, one of the alternates. Mayor Suarez: Right, you were suggesting ten years, you're suggesting five. There's no difference otherwise. Mr. Plummer: Well, but in other words, we were also looking at a guarantee and if the develop... Mayor Suarez: The mortgage is the guarantee. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me? Mayor Suarez: The mortgage is the guarantee. Just that it's a third mortgage. Mr. Plummer: Well, no, we can go better than that. We can get it from the developer. We can get a guarantee of our money back in some way, shape or form. Mayor Suarez: You mean that they personally it somehow? CAS 12 February 25, 1988 Mr. Plummer: Sure. Sure. Mr. De Yurre: The thing is that for a developer to have to come back ten years down the road and start guaran... you know, coming through on certain guarantees that... Mr. Plummer: It's no different than a 30-year mortgage. Mayor Suarez: The thing is that it's a non profit agency, all of these are and I don't think that they're going to be in a position to guarantee anything, other than what the land, you know. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, my position remains the same. Needless to say that we all are striving to do more housing in this community and it's needed and it's a must. But if you're going to continue these kind of programs, you cannot give away all the land that you have. If you do, the program dries up and there is no more land and no more money. It's... Mayor Suarez: But I thought it was your idea that one way to do it would be to have a moratorium on principle payments of X number of years. Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir. Mayor Suarez: He's enclosing ten, do you have any alternative proposal, like five, six... Mr. Plummer: I think we spoke at five of the last time we were here... Mayor Suarez: Seven years. Mr. Plummer: ... five years, you know. Mr. Dawkins: Do the... Mr. Plummer: And I'm not trying to set the number of years, but I just think that there's got to be money back. If you wait ten years down the road, there would be no money at the present time for continuing the program until ten years from today. Mayor Suarez: I can see between five and ten years somewhere. Commissioner Dawkins. Mr. Dawkins: How does the surtax and the - OK, you have two mortgages, right, primary and the surtax. Mr. Julio de Quesada: You have the first mortgage which is with the regular lender and then the surtax. Mr. Dawkins: All right. Do they both run concurrent or do you pay one out before the other? Are they both 30 year mortgages or is one a fifteen year mortgage and one a twenty year mortgage or how does that work? Mr. de Quesada: The second mortgage kicks in at the tenth year, the eleventh year. Mr. Dawkins: The what? Mr. de Quesada: The second mortgage, the surtax mortgage... Mrs. Kennedy: The surtax mortgage. Mr. de Quesada: ... which is the second mortgage starts being amortized at 3 percent at year eleven. Mr. Plummer: But also remember that on the surtax money, they get back 100 percent of that money. Mr. Dawkins: OK, so it's surtax so if it's a twenty year mortgage on the first mortgage, then the first ten years you're paying the principal and interest only on the first mortgage. CAS 13 February 25, 1988 Mr. de Quesada: You pay $25.00 flat for the second mortgage and for the first ten years and then on the year eleven... Mr. Dawkins: Wait, $25.00 flat or $25.00 per month? Mr. Plummer: Per month. Mr. de Quesada: Twenty-five dollars per month - up front. Mr. Dawkins: OK, what's wrong with paying $25.00 a month on the third mortgage? Mr. Plummer: That's my point. Mr. de Quesada: Well, the reason... Mr. Dawkins: I mean, I'm asking you... Mr. de Quesada: Yes. Mr. Dawkins: ... you know, why not pay $25.000 a month on the second mortgage, on the third mortgage, and it also kick in when the second mortgage kick in, in eleven years. Mr. Plummer: That's fair. Mr. de Quesada: The reason is economic at this level of people you are talking about. Mr. Dawkins: No, $25.00 is not going to make that much difference. Mr. de Quesada: It does make a difference at those levels. It does, Commissioner. Mayor Suarez: We could have a small rate of interest payments for ten years too. Mr. Dawkins: That's when $25.00 a month is nothing but interest. Mayor Suarez: That's all it would... Mr. Plummer: And that immediately puts money back into the fund. Mayor Suarez: How about that, Commissioner De Yurre? Mr. De Yurre: I got no problem with the $25.00. My only concern is that you're putting pressure on an individual if we're going to talk about after ten years having to pay up the third mortgage. You know at that point in time, you know these are people that will probably live there for years and years and if you're putting pressure on them that in the tenth year, at the end of the tenth year, and all of a sudden they got to come up with $6000, $7000, $8000, where ever the breakdown is, they may be hard pressed to meet that prerequisite. Mr. Plummer: No, that's not the way it works, Victor. After the tenth year, they would go to a regular third mortgage payment with interest. The first ten years, they pay a flat $25.00 a month, the same as what they pay the surtax. Mr. De Yurre: Well, you'd amortize the third mortgage over thirty years? Mr. Plummer: Sure, after the tenth year, starting in the eleventh year. Mr. de Quesada: Now, on the figures... Mayor Suarez: OK, wait, wait, wait, Julio... Mr. de Quesada: I'm sorry. Mayor Suarez: ... before you get into this, what has just been said is very significant. He's talking about after ten years not having a full pay off, but just beginning an amortization, let's say a... CAS 14 February 25, 1988 Mr. De Yurre: But then you're going to be amortizing the surtax and our mortgage at the same time, so you've got double payment all of a sudden when you only had one. Mr. Plummer: After the tenth... starting in the eleventh year, correct. Mr. de Quesads: At three percent. Mr. Plummer: At three percent? Mr. de Quesada: At three percent. Mayor Suarez: The surtax is at 3 percent. Mr. de Quesada: The surtax at 3 percent. Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mr. De Yurre: Well, what rate would we place on that? Mrs. Kennedy: What would be the rate that an... Mr. Plummer: What ever's fair. Mayor Suarez: And what is fair? Mr. De Yurre: Can we go ahead with the 3 percent then also? Mr. Plummer: Jerry! Where's Jerry Gereaux? Mr. Manager, through you to Mr. Gereaux, what is the average percentage that is paid on a third mortgage? Mr. De Yurre: Eighteen percent, twenty percent. Mr. Plummer: More or less. Mr. Jerry Gereaux: Yes, that's close, that's close. It depends on the institution. Mr. Plummer: Jerry, you know my idea of keeping this thing alive by a revolving fund. What would be fair, in your estimation, to the City in a return after the tenth year to keep this fund going? I think that's a very important factor. Mr. Gereaux: Well, yes, in fact at the last Commission meeting, you asked us to study this and be back at the first meeting in March and we've been going through the scenarios with... Mayor Suarez: But we're ahead of you on your study. We're trying to decide it right here and now and we need your suggestion... Mr. Gereaux: Two of the groups and I can't, yes - and I can't stand here and give you good advice at the podium when... Mayor Suarez: Yes, you can. Mr. Gereaux: ... I've just heard the question. Mayor Suarez: Yes, you can, now... all the Commissioner's asking, what would make sense? You know the numbers, you've got a computer mind. What would make sense to have the interest payments or the amortization schedule look like after ten years, Jerry? Other than forcing the guy back out in the market to get his own mortgage which is what I thought was the proposal going to... —; Mr. Gereaux: It's a function of two things, every, and let me explain this. When surtax mortgages are placed by the Surtax Advisory Board, incomes of the individuals that occupy that housing, that get that subsidy, are recertified — every year. i Mayor Suarez: But the interest rate is always 3 percent or does it vary? - CAS 15 February 25, 1988 i Mr. Gereaux: Well, no, the interest rate is 3 percent if you're making the second mortgage loans to people who's incomes are low income, 80 percent or less than the median. If you're making them to moderate income folks, it's 6 percent. What would be fair at the end of ten years if we wanted to start amortizing a third mortgage, we would be giving... I would say that we could _ charge, again, it's all related to the income of the individual buyer, but some place between three and seven percent, maybe eight. Mayor Suarez: Why not use the Surtax Board 6 percent? 1 Mr. Gereaux: Pardon me? Mayor Suarez: Why not use the Surtax Board's 6 percent? Mr. Gereaux: We could if that's the Commission's desire; 6 percent would be OK. Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you... Mayor Suarez: Amortized at 6 percent after ten years beginning with the first payment. Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you this question. What guarantee does the Surtax Board have'of recouping 100 percent of the money? What stipulation? Mr. Gereaux: OK... Mr. Plummer: Zero. —� Mr. Gereaux: There are foreclosures in these cases and they happen with some, you know, some amount of frequency. What they normally do is buy out the first mortgage position, that's what they normally do because there's always a first in front of them. So, if the... Mr. Plummer: How can the City, in a third mortgage position, be guaranteed that we'll get our money back? Mr. Gereaux: You can't. Mr. Plummer: Yes, we can take it from the developer. Mr. Gereaux: You could have a deal like that, yes. Mr. Plummer: I mean, is that reasonable? Mrs. Kennedy: Is that the only alternative? Mr. Gereaux: I can't think of another because you're talking for the most part about people who are low income people and it would be very difficult, from a third mortgage position, you know, we would be hanging out there as they say on the third. Mr. Plummer: That ain't what they say, but I understand what you mean. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Well, if a person decides to sell his home and we got an interest, all we do is buy them out. Mr. Gereaux: Yes, in... sure. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but you're standing third in line, Miller, that's the problem. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Plummer: You're standing third in line. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): If he defaulted, as the third in line, then either the second pay me what he owes me or I pay the second what he's owing and take the house. Mr. Plummer: That's the old theory of robbing Peter to pay Paul. CAS 16 February 25, 1988 Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): I can't help it... Mr. Plummer: And you know the next line. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): To keep from losing your money, that's how we have to go. Mr. Gereaux: Yes, on the other hand, if for some reason, the first owner defaulted in this, that would put the surtax people in the first position because they'd buy out the mortgage which would put us then in the second position and we would be secure, but I'm not sure, as I'm standing here, how we could work out the details. Mr. Plummer: Herb Bailey has really got his head revolving on his shoulders back there. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Plummer: Come up here where we can hear you. Mr. Herb Bailey: Under default, if the second position is bought, the third position is lost unless... Mr. Plummer: See, that's what I'm trying to hedge against. Now, is there some way that in these particular cases, the developer can be held liable to the City for the cost of the property? All I'm trying to do is to keep this fund alive so that we can continue to build housing. Mr. Herb Bailey: Well, you could probably make that a condition of the consideration but there's another little matter we probably are overlooking. Mr. Plummer: What is that? Mr. Bailey: The number of mortgages you put on a property has a great impact as to whether or not the property owner can qualify for the first because the first mortgage, or the lending institution, will begin to look at the number of obligations. Now, they quite naturally might be subordinated first payment, second payment and you may have to adjust your third consideration to make sure that they qualify for the first. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but do you feel as what has been proposed here that if we did the same as the surcharge board... Mr. Bailey: Surtax board. Mr. Plummer: Surtax board. That if we got in a third position $25.00 a month with no interest until the starting of the eleventh year, and then we amortized out over 6 percent with a guarantee from the developer, is that fair? Mr. Bailey: It's fair to the extent that it does not disqualify the homebuyer for the first mortgage. Mr. Plummer: Of course. If that... Mr. Bailey: Because that twenty-five... Mr. Plummer: ... were to happen, then we've accomplished nothing. Mr. Bailey: Well, in a lot of cases where you're dealing with low income people and an extra payment on the third mortgage, would probably disqualify them for the first, depending on their income. Mr. Plummer: Well, supposedly, we take a guarantee back from the developer. Mr. Bailey: Well, fine, whatever way you secure it, it will be all right. But, you know, the whole scenario has to be done in such a way that the homebuyer can qualify without what we impose upon him would have no impact on his qualifications. Mr. Plummer: All right, now, the next question has to be where we made a determination, I guess the only thing we really agreed upon that this had to CAS 17 February 25, 1988 be a fair and equitable policy across the board. That's fine with a private developer. How would you do the same with a non profit? Mr. Bailey: Non profit... Mr. Plummer: Would they have to create an escrow account? Mr. Bailey: Well, non profits are selling the properties. They probably are going to get some profit. They have to have some way in which to guarantee the position that you're going to ask them to guarantee. I don't know how they're going to do that. They might have to set aside a certain amount of their profits. Nov, most of them will say, we're not making a profit. Mr. Plummer: But they are. Mr. Bailey: Let's say they may not be making a profit, they have excess money. Mrs. Kennedy: It's all a matter of semantics. Mr. Plummer: Well, I - Mr. Mayor, I will speak for one. I think that is very fair and very equitable that we would follow the same policy on the third mortgage of $25.00 a month, no interest during the first ten years, starting with the ileventh year it would be amortized out over 6 percent with the personal guarantee of the developer. I think that's fair. Mayor Suarez: That 25 months is to reduce principal in the first ten years then. Mr. Plummer: That's - no principal or reduced and not collected until the eleventh year. Mayor Suarez: Well, but you got to apply the $25.00 to something and if you're saying no interest then it's got to be applied to reduce principal. Mr. Plummer: That's fine, sir, I have no problem with that. Mr. De Yurre: The only... I don't have any... Mayor Suarez: You're not going to press for more, are you? Mr. De Yurre: No, I'm not pressing for more than that, but, you know, just what I have a problem with is the developer guarantee. You know, I have a problem with that. I don't think it's - we're talking about low income housing... Mayor Suarez: Oh, that, yes. Mr. De Yurre: ... we have to understand what we're trying to accomplish here. Mayor Suarez: That's not feasible. Mr. De Yurre: And, certainly... Mr. Plummer: Well, who's going to make the guarantee if not the developer? Mr. De Yurre: We have a mortgage. Mayor Suarez: There's not going to be any guarantee except what the property itself guarantees, that's what the mortgage is for. If the mortgage doesn't support - if the property doesn't support the mortgages, we're not going to get paid but we're not going to have somebody sign the dotted line, I don't think, Commissioner, on this kind of venture, it's impossible. Mr. De Yurre: At least we're accomplishing getting low income housing built and finally getting it off the ground and taking care of some of these people that need to be taken care of and addressed. And I'll put it into a motion right now. You know, starting on the eleventh year at 6 percent interest amortized over 30 years... it can't be assigned, I don't want this mortgage to be assigned if it's sold. Mayor Suarez: May I suggest, instead of over 30 years, over 20 years. CAS 18 February 25, 1988 t Mr. De Yurre: Well, it's amortized over 30 pay out and twenty. OK, let it b2ll"n in 20 because if you start bringing it down to 20, then the payments are going to be greater and... Mayor Suarez: It's not much greater, 20 years than 30 and by that time, we'll be 30 years after the beginning of the project. Mrs. Kennedy: It's not that much difference between... for ten years. Mr. De Yurre: Well, they've got to pay it off at the end of 20 years anyway. At the end of... the amortized over 30, pay out in 20. Mr. Plummer: The remaining twenty. Mr. De Yurre: The remaining twenty. So they have it for 30 years. Mayor Suarez: OK, that's a motion then to... Mr. Plummer: Well, let me understand the motion if I may. Mayor Suarez: OK, Commissioner. Mr. Plummet: You're saying that they would pay $25.00 a month for the first ten years. Mr. De Yurre: That's right. Mr. Plummer: Towards principal. Mr. De Yurre: Towards principal. Mr. Plummer: Then, starting with the eleventh year, they would pay whatever the remaining amortization, plus 6 percent over the remaining 20 years. Mr. De Yurre: It's a 30-year amortization but there's going to be a balloon at the end of the 20 years. It's probably going to go $1,500. Mayor Suarez: Make it simpler, really, make it simpler, make it a 20-year amortization. It's going to be about the same amount and we've already waited ten years. Mr. Plummer: So they coincide with the regular first mortgage. Mr. De Yurre: OK, well then, let's do it that way. Mayor Suarez: Amortize the remaining principal plus interest at 6 percent amortized over the remaining 20 years. Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, is there any way that the City can be guaranteed? I'm just concerned that the statement that is made that in a third position that this program might go down and bite the dust and it's all over. Is there any way that you know of that the City can be guaranteed its return to continue the program? Mrs. Dougherty: I can't think of any way. Not unless the developer in some way is on the hook and... Mr. Plummer: Herb. Mr. Bailey: Commissioner, your degree of risk in regard to the third mortgage is only in the case that there is a default. Your default ratio on a percentage here may be somewhere around 10 percent at the most. So you're risking not all of it, but only that... Mr. Plummer: What you're saying is, if we get 90 percent back, we're ahead of the game. Mr. Bailey: Right and what will happen is that if there is ever conveyance or — sale, then you automatically get paid and that's a balloon payment at the time of sale. So you... CAS 19 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: OK, you can't speculate with the property, you've got to pay off the mortgage if you try to sell to somebody. Mr. Plummer: if it's for sale but not in default. Mr. Bailey: Right, so I think, that's just my own calculation, that you might be risking a 10 percent default rate here. Mr. Plummer: One other question, Herb. How does this differ from that as for rentals rather than for sale? Mr. Bailey: On a rental, the non profit seller is the owner of the facility and you have access to the property of the non profit - that particular profit, property. See, these are properties that have been sold to a third party and that's gone out of the non profit's jurisdiction once the sale is made. But if it's a rental property, then you have the same position on the entire building. Mr. Plummer: OK. Mr. de Quesada: I think... Mayor Suarez: At your own risk, I mean, Julio, we've got a motion pending here. Do we have a second on that motion? Let me ascertain that first. Somebody going to second his motion? Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, I'll second. Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Would you want to say something, at your own risk here. Mr. de Quesada: Well, what I think that we're losing the focus of the whole thing. You can't... Mayor Suarez: We're losing the focus? Mr. de Quesada: You can't ask for guarantees. Mayor Suarez: I'm about to throw these two volumes at you. We're not ask for guarantees right now. The motion does not include guarantees. Mr. de Quesada: OK. Mr. De Yurre: OK, I just want to make sure that this mortgage is non assumable. If down the road, the present owner, five years on the road, wants to sell, they got to pay off our mortgage. Mayor Suarez: Absolutely. The moment there's a conveyance, the entire mortgage has to be paid. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): A what? Mayor Suarez: We've clarified that. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): If they what? Mr. Gereaux: The surtax program, who would be in second position, allow theirs to be assumable by a qualified lower income family. Mr. De Yurre: Well, we want to get our money back, we're trying to... Mr. Plummer: What happens if the party who owns it turns around and leases it or rents it? Mr. Gereaux: I don't think that's happened before but I don't know the answer to that question. I would assume that the second mortgage would become due and payable because this is for home ownership housing, it's not for, you know, for income producing purposes. I don't think the surtax has had that happen yet. Mr. Plummer: And we already have a stipulation in all moderate and low income, that only one unit per family. In other words, nobody can go in and buy them up for speculation. CAS 20 February 25, 1988 Mr. Gereaux: That's right, these have to be homebuyers. In fact, you could tie that into the third mortgage +nstr�+ment and I would recommend that. Mr. Plummer: Oh, very definitely. Very definitely. If not, you defeat the purpose of the program. Mr. De Yurre: Right, we incorporate that into the motion? Mrs. Kennedy: And no prepayment penalty, although, again, it probably doesn't happen very often. Mr. Gereaux: I'm sorry? Mrs. Kennedy: Pre -payment. Mr. Gereaux: Yes, with a prepayment penalty, yes. If that's what he said... Mr. De Yurre: You want a prepayment penalty? Mrs. Kennedy: No, I said no prepayment penalty. Mr. De Yurre: No. Mr. Gereaux: Oh, OK, all right. Mr. De Yurre: No, that's automatic. If you don't put anything in, it's automatic, you can prepay without a penalty. Mr. Gereaux: Yes, yes. Mr. Plummer: And that would be at 100 percent of the value, correct? All we're looking for is to get our money back. If they wanted to prepay, I see no reason why they can't prepay without penalty. As long as we got our original cost back. Mr. Gereaux: I would be concerned that once the prepayment took place, they might turn it into rental property and then we would have been subsidizing... Mr. De Yurre: OK. Mr. Plummer: OK. now, in this using only Julio because he's the one standing before us. Has the City entered into any kind of agreement as to what is the value of the property? Mr. Gereaux: We have not yet. We will... Mr. Plummer: So, does this Commission make that determination? Mr. Gereaux: It would have to come back before you, yes, yes, it would. Mr. Plummer: OK. Just asking for for procedures. In other words, the property would be appraised, is that... the property would be appraised. Mr. Gereaux: We would have to have it reappraised to establish the value of the third, yes. Mr. Plummer: Oh, OK. So you would have what, two appraisals done? Mr. Gereaux: Yes. Mr. de Quesada: The property, the county assessor assessed that property for a little under what I offered for it. For practical terms for what I offered for it. It's about 4600,000. That's the assessment presently, the tax assessor. Mr. Plummer: Well, that's the assessment doesn't mean that's the appraisal, we all know that assessments are not a hundred percent of value. So what we are talking, I would assume that this is the normal procedure that any of these parcels would have two appraisals and you'd... CAS 21 February 25, 1988 • • Mr. Gereaux: Yes, for reuse, what the groups were asking for the last time they appeared before you is like to pay back a percentage of our initial acquisition value. Mr. Plummer: No, well that's out now. We're talking more back in a hundred percent. Mr. Gereaux: Yes, but now we're going to have to establish reuse appraisals to determine the value of the individual lots to the ultimate buyer who's giving the third to us essentially. Mr. Plummer: So, in other words, I'm to understand that the parcel will have two appraisals, would come back to this Commission and those appraisals would be incorporated in a contract. Mr. Gereaux: Yes. Mayor Suarez: Yes, well we're talking about recovering the cost that we paid for it, the cost of acquisition. You're going to try to now, establish a whole new amount to put in as a third mortgage, not what we paid for? Mr. Plummer: No, I would say that what we were going to do is if the City were to turn around and sell the property, as Mr. De Yurre has talked about and trying'to get... Mayor Suarez: Oh, OK, you mean if we don't build affordable housing there. Mr. Plummer: No, Mr. Mayor, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about is that that money, whatever the appraisal is, remember that parcel has been off of the tax rolls and accumulating no revenue to the City. I'm saying is that whatever the appraised value of that property is today, on today's market, is, in fact, what they would be using for their formula. How else are you going to do it. Mr. Mayor, are you going to go out and buy another parcel today based on what we paid for this one ten years ago? Mayor Suarez: The way we're going, none of them are going to have anything built on them any time so they're not going to be worth anything. I mean, I think we ought to just recover the cost of what we paid for the property, that's it. We've been sitting on the property for, I don't know how many years, without building anything on it, that's our fault. That's not anybody else's fault. Mr. Plummer: Well, I disagree with you if you're going... Mr. Mayor, here again, I want to see the program continue. You're not going to go out and buy more parcels based on what you paid for it ten years ago. Mayor Suarez: And I also agree with you philosophically that we should try to get back as much as we can, but these are like the Swire properties. These are the first three of these kinds of programs we have. We've got to get these off the ground and in the future, of course, we can be more stringent. Right now, we ought to just get these off the ground any way we can. The cost of acquisition is all I had in mind that we would try to recover by a third mortgage unless the Commission wants to do otherwise. Mr. De Yurre: That's what I had in mind also. Mr. Plummer: Jerry. Mr. Gereaux: Well, let me give you an example of why I'm not sure that would work. In fact, I thought what we were doing before you said you were ahead of us was probably the best way to proceed. But in the case of the Melrose Nursery site when we bought it, it had our R-5 zoning and it would allow for the development of 500 units. So, when we appraised it, we had to accept the appraisal on that build out. Since then, we have all decided that that would not be the best use for the site. In fact, it didn't work financially when somebody tried it, that we would do low density townhomes which would fit in more with the neighborhood and maybe spur opportunities for former home ownership. Mayor Suarez: Oh, so you're saying the price has gone down. -' CAS 22 February 25, 1988 z 0 9 Mr. Gereaux: So if we appraise the property now, we're not appraising at an R-5 value, we're appraising it at a... Mayor Suarez: So you're saying the price is going down. Mr. Gereaux: The price will go down. Mr. Plummer: That's in reverse. Mayor Suarez: But see, that's reverse of what he was expecting and contemplating, Jerry. Mr. Gereaux: Yes, yes. Mayor Suarez: All right, now you're talking about a whole different thing. Mr. Gereaux: Right. Mayor Suarez: What about that, Commissioner De Yurre? Now we've got a situation where Jerry's saying that - and Commissioner Plummer was also implying and heading towards this, I suppose. Mr. De Yurre: How much did it cost, that property? Mr. Gereaux: For that parcel we paid two million four. Mr. De Yurre: Two million four? Mr. Plummer: Is that Melrose or this one? Mr. Gereaux: Melrose, for this property we paid a million two. Mr. Plummer: A million two. Mr. Gereaux: Yes. Mayor Suarez: And you're saying that those figures are too high for us to use in this... Mr. De Yurre: How many units are we talking about in the Melrose? Mayor Suarez: See, we're arguing the opposite way. Mr. De Yurre: In the Melrose property, how many units are we talking about building there? Mr. Gereaux: On the Melrose property, it's now 153 townhomes. Mr. Plummer: So what you're saying is, the cost of acquiring this property was a million two. Mr. Gereaux: Um humor. Mr. Plummer: What would you say the appraisal is today? Would it be more, less? Mr. Gereaux: Well, it's still multi family obviously. It would probably be a little bit less because the market has changed in that area for multi family development. Mr. Plummer: So then, using my theory, he would be better off getting it appraised. Mr. de Quesada: Of course. Mr. Gereaux: Well, yes, it's not him though. It's not him. Mayor Suarez: He was trying to get more money out of it, turns out... Mrs. Kennedy: That it's really worth. Mr. Gereaux: If I can make a statement. CAS 23 February 25, 1988 Mr. Dawkins: You know, let me get rid of this right now. Let me get rid of this. I've been here eight years almost and ever since V ve been here, this Commission has said, it was going to build affordable housing. Mayor Suarez: That's right. Mr. Dawkins: And everytime we get to the point where we're ready to put a shovel in the ground, something happens. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Dawkins: Everytime you look up, it's a - we've got to get the full cost, but yet you turn around and let the Heats have parking lots and you don't think nothing about recuperating fair value. You go over and you let the guys off of Claughton Island come in under the hammer and don't give you fair value. But when it comes to affordable housing, we want fair value. OK? Either we're going to build affordable housing or we're not. Now, this is the time for this Commission to go on record and come up with two units of affordable housing. If you don't intend to build it, then let's say right here and now, we are no longer interested in affordable housing, we want to sell a whole lot of verbiage and want people to think that we're going to build affordable housing and we're not. Now, if somebody's going to make a motion, then let's build some affordable housing, let's make the motion, let's pass it and let's go on with what we're going to do. If you're not, let's say it and let's don't do nothing. Mayor Suarez: Commissioner De Yurre, we had a motion and a second following up on Commissioner Dawkins point which I think is very well taken that we ought to just move on this thing. Mr. De Yurre: Well, as far as... Mayor Suarez: Did you mean to put that the recovery would be the cost of acquisition or what? Mr. De Yurre: Well, can we say then... Mayor Suarez: Or the appraisal of the lesser of the two or whichever? Mr. De Yurre: Well, yes, that's what I'm thinking of. If we're going to make an appraisal then taking the lesser of the cost of purchase or the present appraisal. Mayor Suarez: OK, do you want to incorporate that into your motion? You're not going to get any better from us out of today on this, Julio. Mr. De Yurre: That's it, that's the special of the day. Mr. Dawkins: I'm not interested in him. I'm interested in affordable housing, OK? Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Dawkins: If he happens to be the individual, that's fine. Mayor Suarez: Well, he's... Mr. Dawkins: If he's not, I couldn't care less. Mayor Suarez: He's here in effect on behalf of three different entities. Mr. Dawkins: What my thing is, I need some affordable housing after six years of saying that we were going to come up with affordable housing. Mayor Suarez: And I fully agree with you. Mr. Dawkins: And we have yet to put a shovel in the ground to come up with anything in the line of affordable housing. Mayor Suarez: We're about to take a step that will make it as viable as anything we've done. CAS 24 February 25, 1988 Mr. De Yurre: OK. Yes, we're going to take... this applies to all three properties that we've been dealing with so it will take separate motions, I guess. Mrs. Kennedy: Right. Mayor Suarez: OK, we have a motion, do we have a second as modified? Mrs. Kennedy: Yes. Mayor Suarez: OK, any further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner De Yurre, who moved Its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-182 A MOTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION STIPULATING THAT, IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY'S INTENDED DISPOSITION OF THREE PARCELS OF PUBLICLY OWNED PROPERTY TO (a) AMERICAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL, INC., (b) CODEC, INC., AND (c) ST. JOHN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS, THE ADMINISTRATION IS DIRECTED TO PRESENT A REAL PROPERTY REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE TO BE FOLLOWED BY DEVELOPERS WHICH BASICALLY CAN BE SUMMARIZED AS FOLLOWS: 1) DEVELOPER SHALL PAY BACK TO THE CITY $25 PER MONTH FOR THE FIRST TEN YEARS TOWARD PRINCIPAL, AT NO INTEREST DURING SAID TIME; 2) STARTING WITH THE ELEVENTH YEAR, DEVELOPERS WOULD BEGIN TO AMORTIZE THE REMAINING PRINCIPAL PLUS INTEREST AT 6% OVER THE PERIOD OF 20 YEARS. 3) IN NO EVENT WOULD MORTGAGE BE ASSUMABLE; 4) IF THERE WERE TO BE A CONVEYANCE OF TITLE, THE ENTIRE MORTGAGE WOULD BE PAYABLE; 5) IN ORDER TO ASCERTAIN RECOVERABLE VALUE TO PROPERTY IN QUESTION AND THE CITY SHALL TAKE THE LESSER AMOUNT _ BETWEEN THIS APPRAISAL AND THE ORIGINAL COST PAID AT TIME OF PURCHASE; AND 6) THERE SHALL BE NO PREPAYMENT PENALTY. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL: Mr. Dawkins: If it's going to get affordable housing, yes. If not, no. Mayor Suarez: Yes, with the same condition otherwise because otherwise we're really in trouble. Absolute. COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL: Mr. Dawkins: How long is this going to take for this, Jerry, or Mr. Bailey, or Mr. Manager, anybody? How long will this take now, now that we have taken this step today, how long will it take to start to build some housing? Mr. Gereaux: The next step in the process is this group, Melrose and St. John's on the basis of the motion, will be going to the Surtax Board, they will be requesting surtax financing to make their projects work. That's the next step. Now, that should... CAS 25 February 25, 1988 • 0 Mrs. Kennedy: Excuse me, Jerry, how long is that process? Mr. Dawkins: Wait a minute, Melrose, St. John and Codec, is that what you're saying? Mr. Gereaux: Yes, I'm sorry if I misspoke myself. Mrs. Kennedy: OK, how long is that process? Mr. Dawkins: Now, in the event that only one out of the three gets the surtax, where do I get my affordable housing? Mr. Gereaux: We would have to make the other two projects affordable. We would have to find an alternate source for the second mortgages if we can't get surtax money, it's as simple as that. Mr. Dawkins: Are we looking for the alternate form of... Mr. Gereaux: Yes, we are. Mr. Dawkins: You are? Mr. Gereaux: Yes, we are. Mr. Dawkins: So what you're telling me is that of the three groups that are going to get surtax money, in the event that one, two or none gets surtax money that you have an alternate plan where we can build housing. Mr. Gereaux: Yes. Mr. Dawkins: Is that what you're telling me today? Mr. Gereaux: Yes, I have, I have an alternate proposal. Mr. Dawkins: So, if you've got an alternate proposal, why are we bothering with surtax money? Why don't we go on and build housing? Mr. Gereaux: Because I believe that all three... we don't have enough, first of all, to do all three projects. We need to get the surtax money in order to get at least one of them funded and we should get more than one of them funded because a lot of that surtax money is money that's generated on commercial mortgages in Miami. Mr. Dawkins: OK, well look, I'm with you Jerry, because, you see, it's our tax dollars. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Gereaux: Yes. Mr. Dawkins: The City of Miami is entitled to that money as well as the county so I have no problems with it, but I am tired of us every year, you know, saying we're going to come up with affordable housing and we don't do anything. Mr. Gereaux: I think we're going to go shortly after, let's see, March 15th - we're going to know by April 1st and I may be back to you as early as the first meeting in April with an alternate proposal for a couple of the projects. One or more. Mrs. Kennedy: But I agree with Commissioner Dawkins. Since there's only $8,000,000 in the surtax program and there's so many projects applying we have to have other alternatives. Now, back to my other question, how long is the surtax going to take? Mr. Gereaux: Well, it will take... before the surtax makes their decision, it'll be, let's see, it's February, March, April, May... probably June, probably June before they decide. Mr. Plummer: Well, are you simultaneously going to have the appraisals done so that it won't be a delay? CAS 26 February 25, 1988 n 0 Mr. Gereaux: Yes, because we're going to need them in any event. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think that's important. Mr. Dawkins: That should be a part of the motion, J.L. Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mr. de Quesada: May I interrupt for minute? I just want to call the attention to this Commission that I paid a year ago, the lot across the street from that one, for St. Augustine Building, at $3,500 a unit. If you multiply that by 96 units, that is the appraisal of that lot and that is the fair market price of that area. And the first lender is going to request an appraisal. He is not going to go by what we say here. If you go to the... Mayor Suarez: Julio, by the terms that we have given you, with ten years essentially principal and interest free, that you can get whatever appraisal you want then you still not... you've basically paid a portion of the land costs as it is. Mr. de Quesada: I'm pointing out that if you think... Mayor Suarez: And then after that, having it amortized over twenty years, it's a tiny fraction of money after ten... you know, beginning on the eleventh year. So the appraisal is not going to make or break the project any more. The surtax is and we're trying to figure out when the Surtax Board is going to make that determination. Mr. de Quesada: The Surtax Board will make a determination by March 15th. Mayor Suarez: And we hope that, you know, if the surtax doesn't come through for all three of these - wait a minute, Julio, that we have other alternatives and Jerry is telling us that we do but at this point, the best way to have this is in the posture of going to the Surtax Board and asking for funding for - all three of these that are all key to the City. They're all essential to our affordable housing program and I hope they all get funded. At least a reasonable amount of money and I hope that after the beneficial terms we've given them today, he doesn't come back and say that it's still no doable if he gets some moderate amount of surtax financing because that's as much as we can do. Mr. Gereaux: I think it will be... I think that the surtax people will take what has happened today in a very positive vein. Mayor Suarez: OK, call the roll. Mr. Plummer: We called the roll. Mayor Suarez: We did already. Mr. Plummer: We've already called the roll. Mayor Suarez: We're adjourned for one minute until 5:00 p.m. THEREUPON THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 4:59 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 5:09 P.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT. CAS 27 February 25, 1988 -------------------------- - - — ------------------- - — — — -------------- 7. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO PROCESS CLASS "C" SPECIAL PERMIT AT APPROXIMATELY 3151-3199 S.W. 27TH AVENUE PROJECT. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Suarez: Will the Commission please come to order. I know we have a request for a deferral, item PZ-9 counselor. Mr. Plummer: PZ-97 Peter Weiner, Esq.: Yes, my name is Peter Weiner, 626 N.E. 124 Street, North Miami. The applicant requested deferral of item P-9 for two months so they can meet with staff and revise these site plans. We've sent a letter to Gloria Fox requesting same about seven days ago. Mayor Suarez: Is there anyone here that wishes to be heard against this request to defer action on PZ-9? Let the record reflect that no... Mr. Plummer: Let the record also reflect it is after 5:00 o'clock. Mayor Suarez: That it is after 5:00 and that no one has stepped forward. Mr. Plummer: I so move to grant the deferral. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: And we have no problem with the deferral. Mayor Suarez: OK, staff has no problem. So moved. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Second. Mayor Suarez: Seconded, deferring PZ-9. Mr. Plummer: PZ-9. Mayor Suarez: No opposition. Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-183 A MOTION TO CONTINUE PROPOSED RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO PROCESS CLASS "C" SPECIAL PERMIT (NO. 88-878) PERTAINING TO THE 3151-3199 S.W. 27 AVENUE PROJECT, FOR TWO MONTHS IN ORDER THAT ALL INTERESTED PARTIES MAY MEET WITH STAFF IN AN ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE CERTAIN PENDING ISSUES. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. CAS 28 February 25, 1988 S. PRESENTATION OF MANUEL ARTIME COMMUNITY CENTER SCALE MODEL WHICH WON DESIGN CONTEST. 1. Certificate of Appreciation to Shala Kaynord, Flavio Leite, Tania Monzon Aguirre, Lorin Rand and Jorge R. Pupo in recognition of their important contributions to this community in connection with remodeling - winning design for the Manuel Artime Community Center. --------------------------- _ 9. RATIFY CITY MANAGER'S DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN CITY AREAS WHERE VENDOR LICENSES WILL NOT BE ALLOWED FOR GRAND PRIX EVENT. (SEE LABEL #4) Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry, I have one other thing on the Grand Prix that I've just been handed, the vendors' prohibition if I may. A resolution ratifying and confirming and approve the City Manager's designation pursuant to City Code section 39-13 of certain areas of the City which in vendor licenses are not applicable between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on February 27 and 28, 1988, for the Miami Grand Prix events and I so move, Mr. Mayor. This is the same as last year. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-184 A RESOLUTION RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND APPROVING THE CITY MANAGER'S DESIGNATION, PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 39-13, OF CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY WITHIN WHICH VENDOR LICENSES ARE NOT APPLICABLE BETWEEN 7:00 A.M. AND 7:00 P.M. ON FEBRUARY 27 AND FEBRUARY 28, 1988 FOR THE MIAMI GRAND PRIX EVENTS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. Plummer: Madam City Clerk, I would need this, before I leave here this afternoon with about 25 or 30 copies in the proper form. Would you take care of that, please? Ms. Hirai: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Thank you. CAS 29 February 25, 1988 10. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - CHANGE PLAN DESIGNATION AT APPROXIMATELY 2600 N.W. 14TH STREET FROM LOW MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MODERATE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (APPLICANTS: ESCLOFER & OLGA LAZA) (SEE LABEL 11). Mayor Suarez: PZ-1. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, PZ-1 and PZ-2 are companion items. This is property located on 14th Street, N.W. 14th Street, 26th Avenue. You approved it on first reading. The issues that we had was that these were duplex properties and were changed to a multi family, you're changing in fact something that allows two housing units to about four or five housing units. You did move it for approval on the first hearing. Mr. Plummer: This is second reading, right? Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, sir. Mayor Suarez: And do we hear from the applicant? Where are all the objectors?' If you're here on PZ-1 objecting to this application, would you please raise your hand? Let the record reflect no one has raised their hands or moved forward. And you've got your group that are supporters? You're on second reading. Mrs. Kennedy: Um hummm. Mayor Suarez: Do we need to hear, Commissioners? Mr. Olmedillo: As you know on second reading, we never notice, so... Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, Mr. De Yurre moved it. I second it if he wants to do it... if you want to move it. Second. Mr. Plummer: Just for the record, Mr. Mayor, that the other motion that was tied to this was that the Planning Department would do a study of the entire street. Mr. Olmedillo: That is correct. Mr. Plummer: So I just want that as a matter of record. Mr. De Yurre: That's right. Mayor Suarez: Any discussion? Read the ordinance. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND ADDENDA (SEPTEMBER 1985); FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2600 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) BY CHANGING DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM LOW MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MODERATE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of January 28, 1988, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner De Yurre, seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: r CAS 30 February 25, 1988 0 • AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Victor De Yurre Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy NOES: Commissioner J.L. Plummer Jr. Mayor Xavier L. Suarez ABSENT: None. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10391. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING ATLAS AT APPROXIMATELY 2600 N.W. 14TH STREET FROM RG-1/3 TO RG-2/5 (APPLICANTS: ESCLOFER & OLGA LAZA) (SEE LABEL 10). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Suarez: OK, PZ-2. Mr. Plummer: Which is part of one. Mayor Suarez: Is it a companion item? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That's it? Mr. De Yurre (Off. mike): That's it. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: It's the companion item. PZ-2 is the zoning change, the first one was the plan amendment. Mayor Suarez: I'll entertain a motion on PZ-2. Mr. De Yurre: Move it. Moved. Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): Second. Mayor Suarez: Moved, seconded. Anyone here wishes to be heard against PZ-2? Let the record reflect that no one stepped forward. Call the roll. Is that an ordinance? Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2600 NORTHWEST 14TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM RG- 1/3 ONE AND TWO FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL TO RG-2/5 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 25 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of January 28, 1988, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner De Yurre, seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: CAS 31 February 25, 1988 U • AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Victor De Yurre Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy NOES: Commissioner J.L. Plummer Jr. Mayor Xavier L. Suarez ABSENT: None. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10392. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12. DISCUSS AND CONTINUE PROPOSED RESOLUTION FOR AMENDMENT OF BAYSIDE SPECIALTY CENTER MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT TO MARCH 10, 1988 AGENDA. Mayor Suarez: Sergio, were you telling me something about PZ-7? Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: Yes, PZ-7 is a joint application on Bayside so that we _ don't have to spend too much time waiting on this, I would like to have this item continued to the next possible Commission meeting. - Mr. Dawkins: So move. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Counselor. Debby Orshevsky, Esq.: My name is Debby Orshevsky. I'm an attorney with offices at 1401 Brickell Avenue. I represent the joint applicant on this, the Bayside Center Limited Partnership and we're not in agreement with our co - applicant on the deferral. We would like this matter to be heard this evening. I understand that the issue that remains unresolved relates to... Mayor Suarez: Oh, we're not in agreement on the merits and we're also not in agreement on whether it should be heard or not today. Ms. Orshevsky: We would like to have the matter heard and put the issues before you and get what we thought would be just a minor proceeding, dispensed with. Time is going by, there are commitments in many different directions that somewhat relate to finalizing this major use special permit and we'd like to have it heard. Mr. Rodriguez: If I may, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners... Mayor Suarez: I was sure you would give us your input. Mr. Rodriguez: ... to try to clarify this. We are in agreement with all the items or the issues related to this item. There is an area in which we have a difference. We have been advised by Mr. Gilchrist that we need to have reserved forty parking spaces in conjunction with Miamarina and if we can get a commitment from the co -applicant that they will reserve forty parking spaces in the area for the use of Miamarina, then we'll be able to have this happen today and we will support it completely. Mayor Suarez: Oh, Miamarina, OK, I'm sorry, I thought you were saying Miami Arena. Mr. Rodriguez: Miamarina Mayor Suarez: Right. Ms. Orshevsky: I have just spoken with Mr. Jim Dausch on this particular matter and asked how many spaces we could commit to today. Jim has indicated CAS 32 February 25, 1988 that because of ongoing negotiations for development of restaurants in the pier park location, the maximum he could commit to today would be to provide 12 spaces convenient for the Miamarina operations. He would then be more than happy to cooperate with the operators of the Miamarina to provide as many spaces as possible. Once the negotiations on the leases for the restaurant uses at that location have culminated. He can't dedicate that amount of space today. He also notes that there is space available in the Bayside garage and DOSP could arrange some validation procedure with the Miamarina operators which Bayside Limited Partnership would not object to. So... Mr. Plummer: Well, I don't think that's the question, Debby. At this particular point, Bayside has no right, under the present contract, to expand at all is my understanding. That's why they're here today to ask for a deviation from the original contract to expand to build more space if I understand. Ms. Orshevsky: May I clarify? Mr. Plummer: From 230 to 267. Ms. Orshevsky: The lease agreement between the partnership and the City provides to go up to 267. The major use special permit, however, did not go to 267, it provided for a retail leasable area of 230,000 square feet and is, in fact, in conflict with the lease agreement that was referenced in that permit. So this activity is to bring the major use special permit into conformance with the lease agreement which clearly provides for 267,000 square feet. Mr. Plummer: What's the 397 gross building? Ms. Orshevsky: The 397... there is no gross figure in the lease or in the major use special permit. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I have found that ever since I've been sitting here when I do not listen to the administration and I listen to the attorneys and I do not wait until it's in its final form, I usually do not get what the administration is saying that we deserve. Therefore, the administration has said that they're not prepared to hear this, it has been moved and second that we do not hear it, I call the question. Mayor Suarez: OK, call the roll on the item. Mr. Plummer: This is for deferment, correct? Mayor Suarez: Yes. Ms. Hirai: Yes, sir, continuance. THEREUPON, MOTION DULY MADE BY COMMISSIONER DAWKINS AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KENNEDY THE FOREGOING MATTER WAS CONTINUED TO THE MARCH 10, 1988, CITY COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. Rodriguez: Continued to March 10. Mayor Suarez: Continued to March loth. Ms. Orshevsky: Thank you. We'll try to work it out as quickly as possible. Mayor Suarez: OK, Deb, we just want 40 parking spaces. CAS 33 February 25, 1988 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 13. A) CONTINUE FIRST READING ORDINANCE TO CHANGE ZONING AT 2785-2855 TIGERTAIL AVENUE AND 3241-3299 MARY STREET TO MARCH 24, 1988 MEETING (APPLICANT: JAMES ROBERTSON). B) CONTINUE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO PERMIT AN APARTMENT BUILDING AT 2785- 2855 TIGERTAIL AVENUE AND 3241-3299 MARY STREET TO MARCH 24, 1988 MEETING (APPLICANT: JAMES ROBERTSON). Mayor Suarez: Item PZ-3. Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: PZ-3 and PZ-4 are companion items again. PZ-3 is the zoning change for... Mayor Suarez: Now, don't you two be so friendly now. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): We'll try not. Mayor Suarez: Co -applicants, my foot. Yes. Mr. Plummer: Oh, Sergio. Mayor Suarez: I'm sorry, Guillermo. Mr. Plummer: Co -applicant. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: PZ-3 is the zoning change application for ten lots located on Tigertail and Mary. PZ-4 is a request for a variance for the height limitation on the district. As you remember, you instructed us to meet with neighbors and the applicant to see if we can work out an agreement between the two groups. We attended two meetings with Civic Club and Tigertail Association and the attorney and the applicant. The result of the last meeting, as it was communicated to me, because I was attending the Zoning Board meeting that night, it was that they came to no agreement. The request, as I said, is from RG-2/5 to an RG-2/6 which is a higher intensity. It goes from a .75 to a 1.21 FAR. The change of zoning is for the whole properties, for the ten lots and the application for the variance for the height is for the two lots in which the apartment building that it was shown in the past meeting was supposed to be built. The height limitation there is 40 feet today because of the SPI 3. They would like to go to 59 feet. A covenant which was submitted by the applicant and it reached my offices on February the 24th, they proffer that they're going to hold the FAR for the whole site under 1.0. They proffer a unity of title, they have the building height listed as 59.99 feet and that is 60 feet. The Planning Department is maintaining the same recommendation for denial on both counts both the zoning change because of the impact on the blocks, we feel that this will create a pressure for changes in the rest of the triangular block and we're recommending denial for the height variance because of the buildings that are on either side of this particular proposed building are below 40 feet in height. Mr. Plummer: Well, as I remember, refresh my memory, what they're trying to accomplish here is not necessarily what the zoning change will allow but they're trying to accomplish another situation which they cannot do without under our code, is that correct? Mr. Olmedillo: That is correct. The building for which we have sketches and they submitted these at the neighborhood meetings shows a building which has 42 units of apartment and combined parking of 161 spaces. A height of 51.99 feet, 60 feet, and a total FAR of .97 for the entire site. That is their taking... Mr. Plummer: That's for all ten lots. Mr. Olmedillo: Right, what they're taking is that what's under utilized and the existing buildings, Banyan I and Banyan II and they are getting the FAR for the whole thing and putting it into one but they're not going to the 121 but the .97. Mr. Plummer: Just for my edification, did you do a number which if they put the full utilization of what they're asking for under the zoning change, what would that potential be? CAS 34 February 25, 1988 Mr. Olmedillo: That'll be about - if they have 42 units now, it will be like 60 units. If they go... Mr. Plummer: But they're willing to bind themselves to the 43. Mr. Olmedillo: Forty two. Mr. Plummer: Forty two, in the covenant. Mr. Olmedillo: Not in the covenant and the sketches that they submitted at the meetings. Mayor Suarez: How binding is that? Mr. Olmedillo: Not until we see it as a covenant, as a voluntary covenant from... Mayor Suarez: How binding can we make it if we were disposed to vote for it? Mr. Olmedillo: That depends on the voluntary covenant proffered by the applicant. Mayor Suarez: It has to be a voluntary covenant. Jack Rice, Esq.: Let me say, that I would be, my client would be glad to restrict it to the number of units. You've got to remember that we first started with the 59 and then you directed us to meet with the Tigertail Association and Coconut Grove Association which we did. Mayor Suarez: How did it go with them, I don't see them here. Mr. Rice: Well, they're not... well, somebody's here, I think. Mayor Suarez: Yes, there they are. Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, they're in the back. Mayor Suarez: Spoke too soon. Mr. Rice: Well, what occurred, Mr. McMasters and Mr. Pittance were there at the first meeting. Well, we couldn't arrive at anything at that time, so we then had it set for a subsequent meeting last Monday in which we agreed to come back with some alternate plan because, you know, when you start changing a building, you got to worry about parking, recreation, open space, light and air, you got to have all of these problems that you got to resolve. We could not resolve it at that time. Since we met Monday, we had agreed to remove one floor. Now, at that time, they... Mayor Suarez: Does that further reduce the FAR from the .97 factor? Mr. Rice: No, it didn't really reduce the FAR because we changed the units. Mayor Suarez: You cut out a floor and you didn't reduced the FAR? Oh. Mr. Rice: We changed the location of the units. However, but... Mayor Suarez: You expanded the footprint or... Mr. Rice: ... we changed the footprint. Mrs. Kennedy: You have the same number of units even though you have a floor less? Mr. Rice: We have the same units because we added five feet on one side and 13 foot on the other but it isn't any closer to the building because where we added the space, well, on the Southeast side is closer because we added five feet. But we still have, I believe, nine feet, is that correct, on the southeast side? And on the northeast side, they're no closer to the buildings because we're back behind the buildings now with the addition, so... Mr. Plummer: What did it do to the height? CAS 35 February 25, 1988 Mr. Rice: The height, at the last was 53.99, however, we are even willing to try to get down to 50 feet. However, you can't just say you're going to reduce it 50 feet because you got to know that you can build a building with 50 feet. So, if we're going to try to work out something with the Tigertail Association down to the 50 feet which is the same as permitted along Grapeland or 27th Avenue, we have to have time to review the plans and if they will agree to that, I would like to ask for a continuance so we could revise the plans to see if we could work everything in at that height. Mr. Plummer: I so move. I see the Tigertail Association nodding their head in approval and they're not screaming to the negative. I move that this be continued and give them that opportunity. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mr. Plummer: I will say for the record, I think 50 feet and 42 units is come a long way, a long way. And if you can come to that 50 feet and 42 units and you're willing to bind yourself on that, I think that at least you have made a damn good honest effort. Mr. Rice: That's right. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, you've got a motion to continue this item... Mr. Rodriguez: To March 24th. Mr. Plummer: March the... Mr. Rodriguez: 24th. Mr. Plummer: ... 24th is our next meeting. Mr. Rice: Right. Mayor Suarez: You ascertain that Tigertail... Mr. Plummer: Tigertail nodded their head in approval and that applies to both PZ-3 and 4. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Do we have a second? Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): Yes, I did. Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Call the roll. The following motion was introduced, by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-185 A MOTION TO CONTINUE PROPOSED FIRST READING ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING AT THE CORNER OF TIGERTAIL AND MARY AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO PERMIT AN APARTMENT BUILDING AT APPROXIMATELY 2815 TIGERTAIL TO THE MEETING OF MARCH 24, 1988 IN ORDER THAT APPLICANT MAY REVISE THE PLANS AS TO THE 50 FEET HEIGHT LIMITATION REQUESTED BY THE TIGERTAIL ASSOCIATION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. CAS 36 February 25, 1988 Mr. Rice: Thank you. Thank you very much. Mayor Suarez: Counselor. 14. UPHOLD ZONING BOARD'S DECISION TO DENY APPEAL BY EXXON CORPORATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO REDUCE TRANSITIONAL AREA AT 6075 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD (RECONSTRUCTION OF AN EXXON GAS STATION). Mayor Suarez: PZ-5 then. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: PZ-5 is an appeal to a decision by the Zoning Board to deny the special exception to reduce the transitional area from 50 feet to 20 feet. This is a gas station located on Biscayne Boulevard and between 60th and 61st Street. The Planning Department recommended approval subject to our review. Anyway, this will come for review before the Planning Department because there's a Class C permit that has to be pulled before the building permit. The one comment that we made that we accepted reduction from 50 to 20 feet eliminating the access on 60th Street because that is right next to Morningside and we did not want the traffic to impact the Morningside area. You heard this item partially the last time, the last Planning and Zoning meeting and you wanted the neighbors to present their side of the case and then you were going to rehear it tonight. Jack Finkelman, Esq.: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Jack Finkelman. I'm an attorney with offices at 600 Brickell Avenue. Unless I am mistaken, I don't believe that there is opposition present here - there is? If I could have a minute, then I prepare for my presentation, Mr. Mayor. May I have a minute? Mayor Suarez (Off mike): I don't have PZ-5 either here. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Oh, I guess they thought it was important enough to give it to us. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would once again like to announce I have, if possible, an obligation this evening at 7:30 to represent this City at the Unlimited Racing Commission and if there's any way humanly possible, I would like to leave by 7:30 this evening, if it doesn't inconvenience. If it does, I'll have to reconsider. Mr. Finkelman: Each of you and the Commissioners have before you a number of photographs that are numbered. They correspond to the photographs that I'll be showing you on the podium this evening. As has been stated, the nature of this application is a proposed conversion of a gas station from a combination gas station to a gas station and convenience store. We are seeking a special exception to permit the reduction of the transitional area from 50 feet to 20 feet. The Planning Department... The rendering on top is an artist's rendering of the gas station and convenience store as it will appear when it's completed. The picture on the bottom is the gas station as it appears now. The Planning Department has given its approval to the application as has the Public Works Department, the Zoning Board, first deferred this matter in November then denied the application in December by a 5-3 vote. The applicant Is now before you on an appeal from that decision and the single issue then, as it is now, is the length of the setback, the size of the transitional area. It is very important to point out, Mr. Mayor, that a special exception is not required in this case. The applicant is involved in this process simply by choice. That is because as the ordinance presently stands, the applicant could convert the inside of the existing gas station to a convenience store today and so long as there is no change whatsoever made to the outside configuration of the building, that is perfectly permissible. Mayor Suarez: Is that because you're grandfathered in? Mr. Finkelman: No, sir, that is because the special permit is required only when it is necessary to make changes to the outside of the structure. What we would require to convert that gas station to a convenience store would be an application for an interior building permit which is an application _� CAS 37 February 25, 1988 along with plans and specifications that does not require any administrative hearing. Mayor Suarez: And it would not come before this Commission if you had chosen that route. Mr. Finkelman: No, sir. Mayor Suarez: Why did you not choose that route? Mr. Finkelman: We chose the present route for two reasons. First of all, it Is in the best economic interest of the applicant to do so because it is part of a marketing plan to have all the Exxon gas stations and convenience stores look the same, present the same facade and be run in the same fashion. Mayor Suarez: You want to make it bigger too, I gather. Mr. Finkelman: I believe that the space inside of the bays right now is bigger than the convenience store will be. The convenience store as proposed is 500 square feet. The bays right now are greater than that amount of square footage. The other reason for the conversion to this sample of convenience store is that it allows more control and more crime prevention measures than would be permissible with the existence of the present gas station the way it is today. ' Exxon publishes and distributes to each of its gas stations and convenience store operators, a detailed handbook which is followed up by periodic visits from its representatives to ensure that each and every requirement for the operation of the gas station and convenience store, is complied with. I have researched... Mayor Suarez: They even want them all to look the same even as to dimensions and everything? I mean, I... Mr. Finkelman: Within limitation of square footage, yes, it's the same marketing principle as franchises, that's why all MacDonald's look the same and all Burger King's look the same within certain parameters. Mayor Suarez: We asked for one to look different uithin the Latin Quarter and they complied. And I think as a result of having complied with those requirements, are more successful in their marketing than they would otherwise be. You have to adjust a little bit to the cormuniLles in question. I mean, I shouldn't get into an argument on market:*- with Exxon, but I would suggest that they be flexible. Mr. Finkelman: But that is precisely what Exxon proposes to do in this case, Mr. Mayor. It is important to realize that there is ample precedent for what Exxon proposes to do. I have researched the building and zoning files for the past five years and looked up every gas station conversion to convenience store in those files and there are five of them. It is very interesting to review them briefly for you. There's a gas station at 190 S.W. 8th Street on which there was a hearing on May 4th, 1987, and application for conversion to a convenience store. Fifty foot transitional area required, 10 feet requested by the applicant, the adjoining area being residential on one side and commercial on the other just as it is here. The Planning Department recommended approval with a 20 foot transitional area, the Zoning Board approved, 9-0, in favor of the applicant. There is a gas station at 980 N.W. 36th Street, hearing date, June 16th, 1986, similar application, similar setback requirement, similar adjoining areas. Planning Department recommended approval with a 20 foot transitional area, the Zoning Board again approved unanimously in favor of the applicant with a 10 foot transitional area. Mayor Suarez: Give me the location of that one more time. Mr. Finkelman: 980 N.W. 36th Street. There's a gas station at 5390 N. Miami Avenue, hearing date, November 25th, 1985. Same application for conversion to a gas station and convenience store, same 50 foot transitional area requirement, same adjoining area of residential and commercial. Planning Department approved the transitional area of 10 feet only, Zoning Board approved the... Mayor Suarez: What was the address of that one again? Mr. Finkelman: 5390 N. Miami Avenue. CAS 38 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: 5390 M. Miami, that should be almost 54th and N. Miami, right In the heart of Little Haiti. Mr. Plummer: It is. Mr. Finkelman: Zoning Board approved... Mayor Suarez: And the one you gave us before was right... Mr. Finkelman: 36th Street. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Finkelman: Zoning Board again approved unanimously in favor of the applicant, 7-0... Mayor Suarez: Right north of Wynwood heading into, yes. Mr. Finkelman: A gas station at 3000 S.W. 27th Avenue, hearing date September 9th, 1983. Application for conversion again. That case was for a variance because of a minimum total square footage of site requirements, adjoining area again residential and commercial. The Planning Department recommended approval and in that case, there was discussion as to limitation on the sale of beer and vine. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, so that the record is complete, are you stating for the record that all of these that you are listing individually are, in fact, no more than an expansion for a permit or a Class C permit? Mr. Finkelman: Everyone that I have said so far, was an application for reduction in transitional area. Mr. Plummer: No, no, no - no, no. What you're asking for here is basically to redo an existing station. Are you saying that all of the cases that you're quoting at this particular time are similar in exact the same way? Mr. Finkelman: They are similar as my reading of the file goes in that each _ one was an application for conversion of existing gas station to a gas station and convenience store. Mr. Plummer: It was an existing station. Mr. Finkelman: Yes, sir, every single one. Mayor Suarez: Do we have any bone to pick with that argument, with that summary? Mr. Olmedillo: Just to clarify the record, the original application before the Zoning Board was a special exception to reduce that 50 foot limitation. That was the original application. Mr. Plummer: So, in other words, this is different. Mr. Olmedillo: And the appeal before you is the appeal to the decision of the Zoning Board to deny that reduction of transitional from 50 to 20. It doesn't... Mr. Plummer: So we're not speaking to the conversion here in the appeal. Mr. Olmedillo: We're not speaking to the use, no, sir. Mr. Plummer: What we're speaking to here is the setback. Mr. Olmedillo: The setback. Mr. Finkelman: Exactly. Mr. Plummer: So then this, was this also what he is quoting these other items, are they, in fact, the same or were they just a change of transition? CAS 39 February 25, 1988 Mr. Olmedillo: When he speaks of a variance, it's not the same animal because a variance and a special exception are different. Mr. Plummer: So we're not speaking to a conversion of a filling station in this item as it is before us. It is only a zoning setback situation. Mr. Olmedillo: That is correct, sir. Mr. Plummer: Which does not apply necessarily to this string of others that he has so noted for the record. Mr. Olmedillo: Not necessarily unless he addresses the distance between the residential. Mr. Plummer: OK, fine. Mayor Suarez: Well, but it's the change from a simple gas station to a convenience store, is that also before us in some way for us to even... Mr. Olmedillo: No, when, and this I should clarify... Mayor Suarez: They have to come back later on that? Mr. Olmedillo: No, I should clarify this also. In the CR-2 district which is the underlying district, when you put a gas station, you need a Class C permit to be issued. And also because this is an SPI-9, for certain things you need a Class C permit also to be issued prior to the building permit. So, by that, I just want to clarify because the counsel for the applicant, or for the appellant is saying in case that he would remodel, he would not need any type of a permit. Mr. Plummer: He has that right right now. Mr. Olmedillo: He would, but just so that I can... Mr. Plummer: He can remodel right now and turn it into a convenience store tomorrow. Mr. Olmedillo: Internally, without changing the use or anything, he would. Mr. Plummer: The only thing before us tonight is the setback. Mr. Olmedillo: That is correct. Mr. Plummer: They are asking not to set back the normal... Mr. Olmedillo: Fifty feet. Mr. Plummer: ... and he's asking for less. So this is all rhetoric which he's saying because in those particular cases, he's saying these were Class C which were to allow the transition from a pure filling station to a combination. So I don't see it as material to the issue but go ahead. Mr. Finkelman: On each one of those cases also, the issue was the reduction of the setback requirement. Mayor Suarez: Typically from 50 to 20 or... Mr. Finkelman: From 50 to 20. Mayor Suarez: The last one you gave us was 3000 S.W. 27th Avenue, where is that? Mr. Plummer: Thirtieth Street would be the Amoco Station at the corner of... Mr. Olmedillo: 3000 S.W. 20th - that'll be the Mobil, yes, Bird and 27th. Mr. Plummer: ... Bird and 27th. Mayor Suarez: So right below U.S. 1 in the Grove. Mr. Olmedillo: Right. CAS 40 February 25. 1988 Mr. Finkelman: And it's important... Mrs. Kennedy: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to enter into the record a petition of opposition from the neighbors. Mayor Suarez: Ordered into the record. Thank you, Commissioner. Mr. Finkelman: It's important to note that in each of these applications... Mayor Suarez: When was that last one, by the way, Counselor? Mr. Finkelman: September 9th, 1983 was the earliest one, the most recent one which is... Mayor Suarez: No, I meant last in terms of your listing, not in terms of chronology. The one that 3000 S.W. 27th Avenue? Mr. Finkelman: September 9th, 1983. Mayor Suarez: Yes, I would guess that would not be under this particular Commission because that's a very - to me, that's very stable neighborhood and we should #void anything like that in that neighborhood, but go ahead. Mr. Finkelman: It's important to note that in each one of those applications, the Zoning Board's decision was in each case, unanimous in favor of the applicant to reduce the size of that setback. And as Commissioner Plummer points out, that is critical to understanding the issue before you and that is, what is the size of the setback going to be for this particular gas station and whether or not, depending on the size of the setback that you grant, we can convert to the type of gas station and convenience store you see in the rendering or whether, in fact, we have to convert the bay of the gas station as it presently exists into a convenience store. That is the primary and sole issue before you. Mayor Suarez: Or, just have a gas station there. Mr. Finkelman: Or, just have a gas station, however, you have to understand the realities of the gas station business today are such that the bays that were maintained there for mechanics to repair cars, are simply no longer profitable. As a matter of fact, we've actually closed them down and they are sitting empty. So, the option of converting that presently empty space to a convenience store, is a real one as far as the applicant is concerned. Mayor Suarez: I wonder why that is. I guess people don't trust their cars to gas station mechanics any more, they'd rather... Mr. Finkelman: Because nowadays, it's all diagnostics and you pull your car into a gas station, it's plugged to a computer and it's much more profitable and efficient to analyze it that way. Mr. Dawkins: That's true for repairs, but that's not true for gas up. You have a number of people with heart conditions, you have a number of people with bronchial conditions, you have a number of elderly people who do not desire to pump gas but they are being forced to pump gas because Exxon and the rest of them no longer want to provide a full service gas station, not a full service convenience store, so I would say that's an incorrect statement. (Applause) Mayor Suarez: Please, please. Mr. Finkelman: Outside of the primary issue of the size of the setback, there is a secondary issue as to the use of the property, completely different from the primary one. Although not unimportant, it is secondary to the primary Issue. In connection with the use of the property, the Zoning Board suggested that we get together with the local neighborhood groups and come up with some kind of mutual concession or plan that might satisfy the requirements. We have done that and we have met with the Morningside Civic Association, the Greater Biscayne Boulevard Chamber of Commerce and the Cushman School on several occasions. As a result of those negotiations, we have codified for you the concessions which Exxon is prepared to make in connection with the i' =' CAS 41 February 25, 1968 Interests of the local neighborhood groups. They are set forth in our letter to Gloria Fox of January 20th, 1988, which reads in pertinent part as follows: "In order to satisfy the concerns relating to Morningside as a historic area, Exxon is prepared to undertake the following: a. Contribute the sum of $1,000 to the construction and placement of historic Morningside signage. This sum shall be delivered to the City of Miami Heritage Conservation Officer for application and disbursement at her discretion and in concurrence with local neighborhood representative. b. To blend architecturally with and contribute aesthetically to the historic aspects of the Morningside area, Exxon is prepared to deviate substantially from its standard design for a gas station and convenience store by assuring that this particular site will include barrel tile roof and stucco walls," as you, Mr. Mayor, pointed out as was done on 8th Street. For your information, photo number two and three show you the view from the gas station looking directly east. One on N.E. 60th Street and one on N.E. 61st Street. Photo number four and again you have corresponding ones before you, shows you the view directly in front of the gas station. They say a picture speaks a thousand words and I'll leave it up to each of you to decide how reasonable it was or not of Exxon to go to the length and extent and expense of putting up special stucco walls and barrel tile roof to correspond and blend with the area. But nonetheless, the applicant is prepared to do that to blend in with the pictures you see before you. We were asked to support the efforts of local residents, the closing of — 60th Street and 6th Avenue to vehicular traffic, not a battle with which Exxon was involved, but one in which our assistance was sought, and we are prepared to do that, subject to their being no significant opposition among the neighbors; and finally, the installation of additional landscaping as requested by the Planning Department. In order to satisfy the concerns relating to potential noise, or the attraction of pedestrian traffic of a character unacceptable to the local residents, the applicant is willing to insure the following limitations upon its operation on the premises: (A) No pay phones. (B) No car wash. (C) No bulk groceries. (D) No behind the counter magazine sales, and (E) to extend the buffer which presently exists along the eastern side of the property, along the southern side of the property, as _ well, up to the curb cut for vehicular assess on NE 60th Street. In order to satisfy concerns relating to the security, Exxon is willing to undertake the following: (A) Installation of special 24-hour a day video cameras recording the entrance and exit of all patrons, making video tapes available to police and other authorities to aid in their efforts in the area of crime prevention. This has been shown in other Exxon stations to be a significant affirmative aid to local police authorities in their efforts in that regard. (B) Installation of sufficient direct illumination to keep the property well lit, and free from dark, obscure areas. (C) The bathroom key to be kept inside the convenient store at all times and allow for the use of store customers only. (D) No sales of beer in singles, only in six packs, or packages of greater quantities. In order to provide better access for flow of communication by and between Exxon Corporation and the community, Exxon is prepared to join a local Chamber of Commerce, and lend its efforts to appropriate activities for the benefit of the area. It is important to realize, Mr. Mayor, that this application comes as no surprise to anyone. This property has been there, and in use as a gas station for over 20 years and I dare say that most, if not all, of the local property owners have not been owners of that length of time. That property has been there in such use for 20 years, and most, if not all of the local residents, when they bought their properties, knew as a matter of record, or should have known that the property was zoned commercial and could be put to the use, which the applicant is seeking now. It should therefore, be no surprise to any applicant, what Exxon now seeks to do with the property. Further, there is an element of fundamental unfairness from the applicant's point of view. It is fundamentally unfair for the local residents to seek now to prevent the applicant from exercising its legal rights to the use of the property, which rights the applicant has had for over 20 years, especially so, given the concessions which the applicant is prepared to make, as you have in your file. There are significant benefits to the neighborhood, by the applicant taking such steps, principally, there is the ripple effect, when you have a corporation of the statute of Exxon coming into Biscayne Boulevard, seeking a special exception and making the concessions that it is making now. That is a golden opportunity for an area of Miami, whose efforts we applaud in repairing and restoring its own image to use in the future for any other applicant to walk and say, "Look at the record, if Exxon can give on all these matters, why can't you subsequent applicants who want some further concessions, make the same type of... CAS 42 February 25, 1988 E �I Mayor Suarez: But you are not coming into the area there, you have been there for 20 years, according to your own... Mr. Finkelman: I am speaking of a subsequent applicant, who may want a special exception, and can be induced to make further concessions based upon what Exxon is doing now. That ripple effect is precisely what enhances and benefits an area like Biscayne Boulevard, and that opportunity represented right now to the local residents and to the this board. There would be greater setbacks if we put up the new gas station convenient store, than the setback which exists now. It is now 10 feet, and the new structure would have a 20 foot setback. There is easier access of neighborhood residents to a convenient store. The record will show that at the first and second zoning board hearings, a Mrs. Casado showed up representing 34 local neighborhood residents and affirmatively stated that she and her people wanted a convenient store in the area to be closer to the residents and to allow them that kind of access. There would be the reduction and elimination of noxious fumes from the ceasing of operations of the mechanics and there would of course a better landscape and lighting and crime control then presently exists now. There is significant detriment to the neighborhood, if the application is not granted, because the options are (A) to convert anyway, and have a convenience store with less crime prevention measures, less lighting, less of a setback than presently exists. Alternatively, if it is not a profitable running operation, to have some other entity lease, or run the property, which may well not run as efficiently as Exxon might Either of those options lead only to further deterioration of the neighborhood. In conclusion, the focus of the issue is the size of the transitional area. The Planning Department has given its approval. Public Works Department has given its approval. There is a golden opportunity for the ripple effect presented by an applicant of Exxon stature making concessions for this special exception, which can be used to leverage — further betterment to the area, and it will the losing of a golden opportunity not to do so. It is fundamentally unfair to the applicant to not be allowed to exercise long existing rights of its lawful use of the property, and the major legitimate concerns of the local residents have been listened to, and have been addressed. In short, I would request, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, to grant the appeal from the Zoning Board's decision and allow the applicant a _ special exception and a reduction of the setback requirement to 20 feet, for the placement of a convenient store and gas station, as presently exists. Thank you. Mr. Dawkins: Three questions. Mr. Finkelman: Yes, sir. Mr. Dawkins: Will Exxon have free air, or will you have one of those machines you have to put a coin in to get air? Second question, will there be free water, or will you have to put a coin in a machine to get water? Mr. Finkelman: The simple answer is, I do not know. Mr. Dawkins: OK. ■ Mr. Finkelman: However, I am not aware of any Exxon gas station where air or water are given out at a charge. Mr. Dawkins: If you have got machines in... you don't have? OK, never mind. = Third thing is, will there be a security guard at Exxon, because you do have to get out and take your purse with you inside, to pay for the gas, prior to pumping it, and you have to come back to your car with your purse. Will there be a security guard to prevent purse snatching? Mr. Finkelman: There will be 24 hour videotape security. I... Mr. Dawkins: A videotape? Ain't no way in hell a video machine is going to — stop somebody from snatching a purse, sir. _ Mr. Finkelman: I cannot guarantee there will be a security guard on the premises. _ Mr. Dawkins: OK, thank you, that's my answer, sir. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Thank you, counselor. We are going to hear from the other opponents. I see Jerry Parks out there. Are you representing a neighborhood association? i; 43 February 25, 1988 ➢i Mr. Jerry Parks: I am representing the Greater Biscayne Boulevard Chamber of Commerce, and we want to speak against the petition. Mayor Suarez: What about the Bay Point people? I see Maureen out there, and... Mr. Parks: We have the Bay Point people, the Morningside people, and almost uniformly we are against it, but before I speak, just one thing struck me as this gentlemen was speaking, that they have been there for 20 years, and now when they need the approval of the residents for something, then... Mayor Suarez: Will you give us your name and address before anything else, Jerry? Mr. Parks: Jerry Parks, 8100 Biscayne Boulevard. I am president of the Greater Biscayne Boulevard Chamber of Commerce. Now, they are asking the approval of the residents, and now they are willing to become good citizens of the area. I think they are trying to buy the approval. We are trying real hard, all of us, to improve the quality of life on Biscayne Boulevard. We are making inroads. People on the Commission have been helpful. Police have been helpful. What we don't need, is another area where beer and wine are sold indiscriminately. We don't need a setback that comes right up against Morningside, which is a historic area, one of the most beautiful areas in Miami. We have 11 stores in the area now, selling beer and wine. We don't want to take a step backwards on Biscayne Boulevard. We want to go ahead, beautify it, and make it a more pleasant place to live and work and conduct our business, and on behalf of the Chamber, we want to request that you deny the petition. I met with Jim Angleton this afternoon, and he asked me to convey his feelings. He agrees completely. He has met with these people and his feeling is the same as mine. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: I would think his wife would speak for him. Do we hear from any other objectors? Mr. Oscar Gardner: Yes, my name is Oscar Gardner, and I live 685 NE 59th Street, and I predate the filling station by about five years. The people on the boulevard there, or live in Morningside are victims of creeping sleeze, and I think that this filling station, grocery store combination will do nothing but contribute to that. There are now, within six blocks radius of the applicant's filling station, are three or four Seven -Eleven stores, all of which are people are hanging around, drinking beer out of cans and littering the area up, so I can see where this would do nothing but decrease the quality of life in the area, rather than increase it. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Thank you. We are not going to hear from Cushman? You've got a high powered lawyer to represent a school? Oh my God! Mr. Al Cardenas: Hi, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. For the record, my name is Al Cardenas. I reside at 4305 Lake Road. I'm here in Bay Point, and I am here as a resident of the area, as well as a parent of the Cushman School, and I'm here to speak on behalf of the opponents to the application for the number of good reasons that have been heretofore said in the past, and here this evening. If I may add one aspect that has to do with the rationale and the process involved in your decision making, and that is that obviously in evaluating a special exception, there is a different criteria, more leeway, that you, the Mayor and Commission have, in ascertaining what's right for the public welfare and the community, a compared to the legislative actions, such as the adoption of an ordinance, etc. So in reality, what you are dealing here exclusively is a privilege. Whether or not that privilege was special _ - exception, should be conceded to the applicant. Our opinion is that it = shouldn't, and let me, even though expert witnesses have not here testified this evening, let me, if I can for the record, bring into evidence for future - reference, all of the applicable information that your Police Department, - Legal Department, Planning Department, and other departments have, relative to items which should be of interest to you. One such item, of course, is the additional traffic impact which will be created in the area. That information is easily ascertainable and should be by reference made a part of the record, as well as, let me bring to your attention, the fact that your Police Department has some statistics which are also be made and referenced, a part — of this record, relative to holdups and gas stations vs. convenience stores, and let me add, by implication, that I am sure that record will show to you a 1 y 44 February 25, 1988 i much higher instance of crime activity in convenience stores, vis-a-vis gas stations. Based on the location where this property is also located, I don't think it is a fair premise to assume, as counsel had earlier stated, that the _ property will deteriorate as a result of your denial of this special exception. i think that a good witnesses to that effect, are the Chamber of Commerce and the residents, both entities from a business and residential perspective, should well know what is best for the area, and I think there is _ a unison of feeling that whats is being requested here, and that is that this special exception not be granted, is the correct decision. For all those reasons and many more, those of us who are in love with this part of the City, and are concerned about its proper growth, fee: that this special exception is not in keeping with the public interest and welfare of this community, and urge you to vote against it. Thank you. Mr. Plummer: Madam City Clerk, for the record, would you please note that this is the first time I can ever remember, in 18 years, that Mr. Cardenas has ever come here to oppose anything! (LAUGHTER) Mayor Suarez: That's what happens when you send your kids to that school, right? Anything else from the objectors? Mr. Frank Newton: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Frank Newton, I am a resident of Morningside at 547 NE 58th Avenue, and I'd just like to ask the other residents of Morningside that are here present in opposition to this petition, to please stand up and identify yourselves. Thank you. I'd just like to add our opposition to those eloquent statements that Mr. Cardenas just made. We don't need an additional convenience store on Biscayne Boulevard, at - the location of this Exxon station. I would say that the Exxon station is an excellent neighbor and provides and excellent service, or has, to the community, and I, quite frequently, use that station and would do so more often if they provided the types of automobile repair and services that the bays were constructed to provide. I'd just like to take one brief moment to respond to a few matters that counsel suggested that they had offered to do in negotiations and conversations with the Morningside residents. They said that they would not sell any bulk groceries, no behind the counter magazine sales, and no sales of beer in singles. I am not sure that that obligation or promise on their part is in any way binding and I think our experience lends us to believe that if this petition is granted, and if they do redevelop this _ facility as a convenience store, that these promises will fall by the wayside before long. Thank you very much. Mayor Suarez: What did you say your last name was? Mr. Newton: Newton. Ms. Jean Gomez: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Jean Gomez. I've lived at 645 NE 58th Street in Morningside for 20 years. I recall when they constructed the gas station, and as Mr. Finkelman mentioned, there are many of us who have shopped and gone to that gas station for 20 years. I raised three o children in Morningside and many of my neighbors here have lived in Morningside for more than 20 years, Mr. Finkelman. We are against the conversion of the facility, and hope that you will agree with us tonight. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Thank you. Mr. Neil Robertson: My name is Neil Robertson. I am president of the Morningside Civic Association, and I'll keep my comments very brief, because I did have an opportunity to address you, last month when this was before you. I understand that our petition is already in evidence, and I think that is clear evidence to the fact that we simply do not want this change in the Exxon station in our neighborhood. When this whole thing started off, we had a full service station, which we all felt the community needed and would make use of. Exxon has claimed that they have not been able to make a go of it, as a full service station. We are not sure we really believe that, and we would like them to bring that back. As you have heard from a number of people here, we would be happy to patronize such a station and we will go to bat for them, so they can make a go of it. I was there last night, and under its current operation, it sells gasoline. There are two people out there on the street, who are taking care of the property and are present to protect people, and shoo away other undesirables under its current setup. That is preferable to one person inside a box, who is safe, and does not really care about what is 45 February 25, 1988 going on outside. I Mould urge you on behalf of all of Morningside, Bay Point and the surrounding communities, not to grant this exception, but protect us from yet another purveyor of alcohol on the boulevard. We don't have any full service service stations on the boulevard, not one. We have eleven places where you can get alcohol. Thank you. Ms. Maureen Joseph: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Maureen Joseph. I reside at 665 Buttonwood Lane. I am here as a resident of Bay Point, and also as vice president of the Bay Point property owner's association. In the interest of time, I would just like to briefly say that we support our neighbors in Morningside, in their effort to block this variance. We also would like to add that we are very happy with the current setup at the Exxon station. I would say the majority of our residents are patrons of this gas station, and we lament the lack of mechanic facilities. It is the closest one in our area, and we miss it greatly, and would patronize it definitely. I'd also like to say, that there is a convenience store gas station a couple of blocks south, and we are afraid to go in there because of the undesirable people that hang around there. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Maureen. Anyone else? The applicant? It would seem to me, Counselor, that any reduction of a variance, is inherently going to... any reduction of a setback, rather, is inherently going to create a problem for a community, or for a neighborhood, and could very well work to the detriment of a community, or a neighborhood, and I just want to put that on the record as being my general belief, and something that I think is at play throughout the City, if you can say anything to disprove that notion, in this particular case, that might be useful. Mr. Finkelman: The first answer I would give you, Mr. Mayor, is that this is precisely an increase of the setback. The property as it is now used is ten feet from the adjoining neighborhood. Mayor Suarez: Oh, from the present use, but not from a permitted use. Mr. Finkelman: What the applicant proposes to do, would double that to 20 feet. That's my direct answer to your question. In my comments to you, I am reminded of the words of chairman, Willy Gort, of the Zoning Board, who when we appeared before him, wisely asked us, instead of forcing the board to make a decision on the spot, to delay and defer the matter and meet with the local residents and see if we couldn't come to some accommodation, and the words that he used, were telling then, and are telling today. He turned to me and he said: "Be a good corporate citizen, Exxon, come in there, listen to the local residents and see what you can do to accommodate their legitimate interests." And then he turned to the residents, and he said: "Meet with these people. There are business realities that work here. There are things they can do with the property now if they want to, and talk to them, because one thing is a wish list, and another thing is active listening and negotiating," and those words ring true tonight, because although I can appreciate it as well as my client can, the expressions of concern of the neighbors that they do not want a convenience store there, that is simply not the issue. The convenience store is zoned to be there, can be there, and the issue is simply the size of the setback. And can we do that by listening to the reasonable and legitimate concern of the local residents? Yes, we can, and that letter in your file indicates that we have not met them half way, and we have not met them 75 percent of the way, but we have exceeded well over 90 percent of the items they requested, and I think every reasonable measure has been taken by my client to listen to them, to accommodate those concerns, and to try and do something which is right for the best interest of the client, and right for the best interest of the local residents. Marginal notations, Mr. Cardenas referred intentionally to a record. I might, by the same reference, refer to the record which will show of any Exxon gas station that is set up, that the lighting, the system, the checks and balances, and the 24 hour video cameras will be shown by any local police department to be an affirmative crime preventive measure, and that it is indeed a benefit and reduction of crime in any area in which a station is converted from what you see in these photographs, to the artist rendering. The obligations... Mayor Suarez: But of course, no one prevents you from doing that aspect of the remodeling. We'd like to see that happen. Mr. Finkelman: Correct. The obligations which Exxon is proposing... 46 February 25, 1988 #6 0 Mayor Suarez: Not necessarily with a convenience store, but just the lighting and television monitors and so on. Mr. Finkelman: Then you end up with a halfway measure and not the way it should properly be done. The obligations of Exxon are on the record. They are binding, we are prepared to take the 20 foot setback requirement subject to them as a matter of record, and subject to all of the enforcement remedies of the City of Miami, which should be sufficient to satisfy anyone's concerns as to enforceability. We have gone more than halfway. We have been more than reasonable, there is no legitimate reason why the application should not be granted, and I so request. Thank you. Mrs. Kennedy: Well, Mr. Mayor, if all the testimonies are finished, I am going to make a motion to deny this request. I think that this would be detrimental to the character of the area, and therefore, I move to deny. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Mr. Dawkins: You are moving to uphold the recommendations of the Administration? Mrs. Kennedy: To deny. Mr. Plummer: Of the board. Mr. Dawkins: Yes. Mr. Plummer: Of the board. Mr. Dawkins: Of the Zoning Board? Mrs. Kennedy: Right. Uphold the Zoning Board. Mr. Dawkins: OK, second. Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Mr. De Yurre: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Plummer: Under discussion, Mr. Mayor, very quickly. I just don't think that it's compatible with the neighborhood, and I don't see that this denial in any way denies them any rights to utilize their property that they have today. It doesn't deny them the right to proceed. The only thing is, that we are saying is that we are denying the right to encroach upon a setback which is within the police powers of this Commission. Mayor Suarez: OK, Commissioner De Yurre. Mr. De Yurre: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. I think that for us to decide to vote one way of the another, there has to be reasons that we can live up to down the road and I think it is important to understand that when you have a 50 foot requirement, there are reasons for that 50 foot requirement, and when there are exceptions, there have to be reasons for that exception, and when I consider the individuals that live next to that property, and what they will have to go through, when you have constant business of this type going on, I cannot in good faith say that 20 feet is enough of a setback to where they can enjoy their property, as a residential property, and when you have an ongoing convenience store that goes on into all kinds of hours... Mr. Dawkins: 24 hours. Mr. De Yurre: ... 24 hours, I think you are going to run into problems where they may not even be able to sleep at times because of the noise and the activity - somebody beeping the horn by mistake when they are getting out of the car, closing the automobile, shutting the door, talking, all kinds of activity which I think would be detrimental to the use of a residential property and I think it is important that we state that on the record, because that is one of the reasons why we are denying this motion. Mayor Suarez: Further discussion? Call the roll. 47 February 25, 1986 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-186 A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD AND THEREBY DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, THE SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, PAGE 4 OF 6, CR- T COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL (COMMUNITY), TRANSITIONAL USES, STRUCTURES AND REQUIREMENTS, TO PERMIT A REDUCTION OF THE 50 FOOT TRANSITIONAL AREA TO 20 FEET IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EXXON GAS STATION AND CONVENIENCE SHOP LOCATED AT 6075 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN), AS PER PLANS ON FILE; ZONED CR-2/7 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL (COMMUNITY). (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 15. A) DISCUSSION REGARDING FINDINGS AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ON COCONUT GROVE TRAFFIC STUDY BY DAVID RHINARD (TRANSPORT ANALYSIS PROFESSIONALS, INC.). B) EXPRESS INTENT OF CITY COMMISSION NEVER TO EXTEND MCDONALD STREET SOUTHERLY FROM GRAND AVENUE TO CHARLES AVENUE. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, at the last meeting we set time certain of 6:00 o'clock to hear item 19. May we hear it now, please? Mayor Suarez: Yes, PZ-19. Is this the one you wanted too, J.L.? - that you need to hear before you leave? But, it doesn't guarantee that we get rid of you after we hear it, does it? Mr. Plummer: How long is this going to take? Mr. Dawkins: Five minutes. Can somebody explain to me, in the Administration, what the note at the bottom of the page here says? "Per direction of the Commission on January 28, 1988, the extension of McDonald southerly into the residential area will be deleted from discussion for the lack of support from the Commission." What does that mean? Mr. Rodriguez: That in the last meeting, the meeting of January 28th, you specifically told us that when we get together and discuss this today, there will be no discussion of McDonald, because you already have decided that you were against it, and that you will not support extension of McDonald into the residential area. Mr. Dawkins: Lack of support from the Commission. Mr. Rodriguez: Right, meaning that you will not support extending McDonald into the residential... Mr. Dawkins: No, but we all opposed it. I mean, we opposed it! 48 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: it might have been a little more straight forward to say, "opposition" from the Commission. Mr. Rodriguez: OK. Mr. Dawkins: OK, well, I want to make a motion now that... Madam City Attorney, or Mr. City Attorney, on the last agenda, the reason I brought this back on here, it was a discussion item. How I do pass legislation to insure that this street, the extension does not occur? Mrs. Dougherty: It takes legislation before it can be opened, so right now it is closed and it doesn't... Mr. Dawkins: I want it to remain closed. Mrs. Dougherty: Do you want to vacate your, and the City's interest in the property so it reverts back to the private property owners on either side, is that what it is? Mr. Plummer: No. Mrs. Dougherty: No? It's closed. Mrs. Kennedy: It is dead. Mrs. Dougherty: So no legislation is required. Mr. Dawkins: OK, all right, well, it keeps coming up every five or six years. Mrs. Dougherty: He wants to stop it for ever and ever. You have concluded the item for this issue. What you are trying to do is make sure it doesn't ever come up again? Mr. Dawkins: Well, I want to make sure that when it does come back, it is stated in the record that a majority of the members of the Commission at this time are against it and we would hope that the next Commission, whosoever they may be, would be against it, because we were against it. Mrs. Dougherty: We will prepare a resolution to that effect for your consideration and passage. Mr. Dawkins: OK, will you do that for the next meeting? Mrs. Dougherty: Sure. We can probably get it... no? Mr. Dawkins: You can do it now? Mrs. Dougherty: We can probably get it today if we have a secretary in the building. Mr. Dawkins: Well, I want J.L. to vote on it, but he is going to leave at 7:00 o'clock, so I'll take it at the next meeting. OK, for the next meeting, that's a resolution, Mr. Mayor, please. Mayor Suarez: OK, we'd like to have that in the form of a resolution to give It that much finality to it and formality to it. Mr. Dawkins: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Suarez: All right, what are we going to do with the study, here? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, let me get Mr. Clark Turner from the Planning Department to introduce the consultant, and just to make a few statements on the study. Mayor Suarez: I've got a great idea. Why don't we just post a sign that says we have too much traffic in the Grove - unless you absolutely have to come this way, please stay out! That ends the traffic study, everybody go home now. Mr. Rodriguez: I don't think you want that, you want more than that, I think. 49 February 25, 1988 Mr. Clark Turner: Honorable Mayor and members of the Commission, last year, this Commission... I'm Clark Turner, the transportation planner for the City. Last year this Commission asked the Planning Department to do a comprehensive traffic study of Coconut Grove, with the assistance of the Department of Off - Street Parking, and with a consultant. The City's consultant was asked to find solutions to very difficult problems arising from Coconut Grove's position in the... Mayor Suarez: But, is the basic focus the north -south corridor, 27th Avenue? Or was that just an idea of mine? Mr. Turner: No, we were to study... that was among the arterial thoroughfares that was to be studied. In addition, we were to study the question of traffic Intrusion in residential neighborhoods, and also circulation and parking in the village center. This has now been the subject of the study for several months, the data has been collected and analyzed. We have had a number of community meetings on various aspects of the study, and neighborhood meetings on the question of traffic intrusion and the consultant is now prepared to present the recommendations that they have as a result of the study. With that, I would introduce David Rhinard, of Transport Analysis Professionals, who is going to present a brief overview of the findings and conclusions of the study and answer any questions you may have. Mr. David 'Rhinard: My name is Dave Rhinard with the firm of Transport Analysis Professionals. We and another firm, Traffic Data Corporation, are somewhat pleased to be here today, since we are not going to talk about McDonald Street, I understand. Our study encompassed the entire Coconut Grove area, from all the way up to near Vizcaya, all the way down to basically into the limits of Coral Gables on the south end. It was to look at residential through traffic intrusion, any arterial and collector improvements be made with ease, and also the village center circulation and parking within the village center. Let me, if I can, I'll go fairly fast, first with the area of, through traffic intrusion, in neighborhoods. Mr. Plummer: Would you go to this map first? I'd like to know what that little red dot with the tail on it, because it is sitting on top of my house. Mr. Rhinard: It is very, very close, right? Mr. Plummer: No, it is too damn close for comfort. Mayor Suarez: We're going to demolish everything that is under that red dot? Mr. Plummer: Since my house that has got a red dot on it. I wish you would start there! That's my house. Mr. Rhinard: As you all know, that... Mr. Plummer: You better look out, you live next door! Mrs. Kennedy: Whatever happens to his house affects my house. I want to make sure also. Mr. Rhinard: The McDonald Street extension was a minor element... Mayor Suarez: Kill two birds with one stone. I heard that. Mr. Rhinard: As you probably know, back when 17th Avenue wasn't improved, and Dade County has recently completed that well within the last six months or so, it wasn't a morning problem, again, not to say that it doesn't reoccur occasionally, but certainly, at least in what we've seen up there, it doesn't occur as nearly as much. For folks who will be coming up 17th Avenue, it is not see the from the light, which would have cut back through the neighborhood, OK, in the morning, and come back down Noc-a-tee and around. That has diminished, somewhat. We don't see a need today, OK, to take any other action there. Now, if that does reoccur in the future, we would suggest for only a limited two hour period, 7:00 to 9:00 a.m., something like that, we have a "do not enter" sign facing 17th Avenue. Mr. Plummer: Boy, that would be nice! 50 February 25, 1988 Mr. Rhinard: You certainly want to leave the residents in and out of their own neighborhood, OK? You can continue to have a recurring problem on Alatka, Haliesee, Tigertail, Noc-a-tee. We would strongly suggest that continue to be reinforced and enforced. It is in enforced today, but some days it is there, some days it isn't. We also suggesting to eliminate some of this afternoon problem, people cutting up into the neighborhood and down Tigertail and on up 17th - that we also not only enforce what's there, but reinforce it by making some improvements along this portion of South Bayshore Drive. Mayor Suarez: Is that a bottleneck there, is that...? Mr. Rhinard: Yes, there seems to be a bottleneck there. Mr. Plummer: It is where it reverts down from four lanes to two. Mayor Suarez: That's what I was going to ask. Now, I get the impression that most of South Bayshore, even south of there is still only two lanes, so... Mr. Rhinard: Yes, the two lane section, it gets... it is probably one of the busier two lane pieces of roadway in all of Dade County as far as volumes, but you really don't have the signalization problems down here that interrupt the flow as you do at 17th. We aren't suggesting that you help motorists out all that much, ,it... Mayor Suarez: Or, as you approach 17th Avenue. Presumably, you try to get as many of the people that are turning north to sort of get out of the way of the ones that are going straight forward. Mr. Rhinard: Get out of the way, get them up the hill, or bring two lanes on through the intersection and taper down the far side. Mayor Suarez: You can't turn south there. Mr. Rhinard: Yes, we looked at what might be able to be done on 17th and it is awfully tight, in fact, this scheme is actually awfully tight too. You narrow up the lanes, the pavement is there, to a sufficient lane width, of say 11 feet. You have about 18 foot wide lanes. Mayor Suarez: You are basically talking about providing a turning lane, is that what you... Mr. Rhinard: No, you have a turning lane for northeast to north bound right now. What we are suggesting to do... Mayor Suarez: Southwest. Mr. Rhinard: ... is for only the afternoon volume, you have carry the two lane sections on down to 17th Avenue and through and then taper it down on the far side. Mr. Rodriguez: Would you like to hear comments from the Planning Department in areas in which we have differences right now, so that you can be clear in your mind as we proceed, or do you want to hear after from us? Mayor Suarez: As we proceed, but quickly, I mean I hope we don't... Mr. Rodriguez: OK, specifically, this issue of widening of South Bayshore Drive. Mr. Turner: The Planning Department doesn't support the added lanes on South Bayshore Drive, not because we... I feel it isn't a solution to a local traffic problem there, but because the precedent that would be set by any widening of Bayshore Drive in that location. Mayor Suarez: Not even just at the intersection? Mr. Turner: Right, I... there is a potential modification of this particular recommendation that needs a little bit more study. I would just suggest that interestingly, in one of our citizen meetings, the input was to consider having the additional southbound lane be a right turn only lane for 17th Avenue, thus separating the traffic that could turn on 17th from the traffic that was continuing on on Bayshore Drive. 51 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: I thought that is what the widening would do? Mr. Turner: It would, except that what's called for in this recommendation is the taper back after 17th Avenue, rather than a termination of the additional lanes at 17th Avenue. It is a minor difference, but it bears some more study. In general, we are... Mayor Suarez: Well, I'd go with Planing's suggestion there, for sure, for myself. Mr. Turner: OK, we leery of any widening of South Bayshore Drive, anywhere... Mayor Suarez: Just widen it enough to get through the intersection and... Mr. Turner: ... between Aviation and up to Mercy Hospital. Mayor Suarez: Right, widen it enough to get through the intersection, turn up north and that's itl End-o. Mr. Turner: Yes, I think that bears some more study. Mr. Rhinard: Just Tuesday night we learned of some other difficulties in the area between 17th and 22nd. We didn't observe any. There is a bit of speeding, we've been told, in this particular area. We are looking into that. There will probably be some minor change in our recommendation. In fact, in this area we didn't have any recommendations. There won't be anything substantial in here, but it will help. In the area from 22nd to 27th Avenue, we detected a lot of speeding on 26th. We've also suggested that 27th Avenue improvements be made, OK, that are already planned, somewhat programed by the County. You have certain streets in here closed already. The residents, we have been informed, would like very much for all streets running northeast to southwest, that are lying northeast of Aviation Avenue to be barricaded off. We would suggest an alternate scheme be taken there - not to barricade all of them, to first close Inagua, close the remaining street to the north here, but for all others like Swanson, Trapp, Lincoln, so forth, that you put in a series of alternating stop signs every other block. Mr. Plummer: It is not worth a damn. Mr. Rhinard: Well, we didn't see that much through traffic out there either. Mr. Plummer: What time of day did you go out there? Mr. Rhinard: We went out... it wasn't so much in the morning, but it was late morning, noon time, middle of the afternoon, 4:00 to 6:00 o'clock, and also in the late evenings. Mr. Plummer: But, the streets were already barricaded when you were there, so there is no problem, it can't be a problem if the barricades are already in place. ® Mr. Rhinard: There are just these two that are barricaded right now, OK, up at Jefferson and down here at Avaco. The only real section that we saw any through traffic is only about six to twelve vehicles an hour, was on Swanson itself. It is not to say that occasionally, there might be some others that sneaked through the neighborhood. You've got to understand there is about 350 odd homes in there. They are generating a considerable amount of traffic themselves. Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you a question... Mr. Campbell: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: ... just so I will know what time of day you were there. On Tigertail from Alatka to 17th Avenue in the afternoon, what did you observe in the way of numbers of cars? Mr. Rhinard: We weren't looking so much at the numbers as we were looking at how many violated the no left turns, OK? Mr. Plummer: And how many did you find? 8 52 February 25, 1988 a 40 0 Mr. Rhinard: There is a substantial number, I would say close to 50 percent. Mr. Plummer: Now, you are talking about putting stop signs. I don't know of an area in the City of Miami that has more stop signs in that area. It doesn't mean a damn thing! We are still, and these numbers, I'm sure, are even greater than the last traffic count that was done at the intersection of Tigertail and Halissee. A residential street, I am told, is designed to carry 400 to 600 cars a day. Is that... Mr. Rhinard: They usually do, yes. Mr. Plummer: OK. The last traffic count was done, was about three years ago, and there were three cars shy of 3,000 a dayl... 2,997 cars in a 24-hour period. Now, your only recommendation is to monitor? Monitoring hasn't done anything. _ Mr. Rhinard: To enforce, OK?... the four to six restrictions, and also to make the improvements on South Bayshore, that would eliminate some of what's coming up the hill right now, to avoid that intersection. Mr. Plummer: If you didn't take any kind of a count,'and realize the amount of the traffic that that street is carrying, I really don't know how you came to any kind of a basic conclusion, because the traffic there is just horrendous! Mrs. Kennedy: Let me ask you something else. If we could have the light on 27th Avenue, 37th and Bird, and Dixie Highway longer, we can get the people out faster also. You wait forever in those intersections. Mr. Rhinard: Sure you do, and you wait forever to get onto Dixie Highway and sometimes when you are on it, you wait to get off of it in the afternoon. If I may continue, we are suggesting again, enforcement of the existing 30 mile an hour speed limit on 26th, the widening of 27th Avenue, with the landscaped median, sidewalks, the whole nine yards; improvements, some way down the road, on Bird Road, to be... you still have the parking, but you also put in some landscaping and continuity to the sidewalks. On McDonald Street, we are not suggesting extensive widening at all on McDonald, but we are suggesting sidewalks, some landscaping, and left turn lanes only at two or three of the major intersections, Day, and so forth. We are, down in the south end of the Grove, suggesting that this small portion of Charles Street, next to the Playhouse be restricted to no west -bound traffic. What we saw down there was quite a few folks from the Grove Center sliding out Charles Street to get out into the Gables, so we are suggesting that that be a "no outlet" posted, right at Main, and then right behind the Playhouse, on Charles, that it be "do not enter." We didn't see too many problems in the south end. I know they have been down there before, but when we were out there, we didn't observe that many, OK? That is not to say that there aren't some people speeding, OK, along Hardie - not to say that there isn't any through traffic at all, because there is. We do have one recommendation in this area that was brought to us on Tuesday night, we went down so we will be making some minor changes, that was just cutting off one small piece of a street down the south Grove. Some other intersection improvements and roadway links, we did talk about 27th, McDonald and Bird. We would suggest no major change be made to this portion of Douglas Road, certainly their striping right now in there is horrendous right now, just to re -stripe it, to dress up, OK, not to widen, but just to dress up this lower portion of Douglas Road. Within the village center - I have a blowup of some of those intersections, we'll get to those later. Signalization at Oak, Mary and the modification at Tigertail and 27th Avenue... I'm sorry, Aviation and Tigertail, and Aviation and South Bayshore, so just some paint, you can improve the Kirk Street situation, and we are suggesting some turn lanes at 22nd Avenue on Tigertail. Signalization potential down on Hardie, not so much because of the volume, but because both a combination of volume and visibility obstruction. On some other, before we get into the Grove center, there are some other general areas. On this portion of South Bayshore, we are suggesting that the room there, why not use it to better separate the bike path from the through traffic lanes. We are not suggesting any widening in this portion, however. In this general area of the Grove, we are just... Mayor Suarez: Just clarify the jurisdictions there. Who rides where, A.K. 53 February 25, 1988 Mr. Rhinard: Get better separation between the bike lane and the through traffic lane, vehicular lanes. In this section we are suggesting continuity of sidewalk space, OK? There are spots that have it, spots that don't. There seems to be quite a bit of activity in general in this area, compared to some of the other residential areas, but there does seem to be a need for improved sidewalks where there are none in some spots right now. All the green lines down here, we are not suggesting that you take out the banyons and all the beautiful trees in that area, but there seems to be a lot of overgrowth, some hedges and things like that. Some good trimming, OK, could really improve, certainly help, OK, the visibility obstructions coming into Main... Mayor Suarez: Let me ask our staff, maybe Clark knows the answer to this, or someone else. Why do we prohibit parking on the shoulders right adjoining David Kennedy Park? And specifically, why do we not allow that at least in some selected hours?... weekends, for example, when there is no rush hour? That's been requested. Mr. Plummer: Well, I can tell you, Mr. Mayor, that I was around back in the days when Kennedy Park was put in. It was the concern of the neighbors and the concern of the Commission at that time, that you were not trying to open up Kennedy Park as a regional facility, and that too much parking would encourage tremendous amount of people and crowds in that area, and that's why you have the small parking area that you have presently, to hopefully keep Kennedy as' a residential park for the people of that area, more so than for the entire city-wide. That was the concern at the time. Mayor Suarez: What would it take to change that, if the people in question wanted to petition the Commission, just Commission action, an ordinance of ours? Mr. Turner: The Commission could... Mayor Suarez: The County is not involved in that, are they? Mr. Plummer: No. Mr. Campbell: Yes. Mayor Suarez: They are? Mr. Plummer: No, not the signs. He is talking about making a depth further back to allow parking is what he is talking about. The County wouldn't be involved in that. Mr. Campbell: Oh, the County wouldn't be involved... well, the County would be involved in the removal of any signs there, to move the existing... I believe there is a split rail fence along there, isn't there? Mayor Suarez: No, I think there is plenty enough space for people to park there, the way it is. It is just that they are not allowed to, because it is illegal, and we are towing them. Mr. Campbell: It would be safer to move it back a little bit. Mayor Suarez: We are ticketing them. Mr. Campbell: It is safer to move it back, so you can have clearance between the moving traffic and the parking lanes. Mr. Rhinhard: Another aspect of the study has to do with parking in the Grove center. There certainly is a parking problem. We didn't find it so much to be a problem of the number of spaces, but really, the Off -Street trying to find where the Off -Street spaces are. This chart, anything you see in red, is a premium space. Over 95 percent of the time, when you go out there, you will find all these curb spaces in use, people want to use them. We are encouraging the high turnover of this space, by maintaining the two hour limits that you now have on the old on street parking. The other shades here, from 75 to 95 percent of the time, you will find the post office, you can't find a space in there. Anything else is less than 50 percent occupied, for a typical kind of a Saturday. We only ran the survey through 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, however. In the Grove center itself, just to let you know that we did have charts and some other exhibits that I won't drag out now, because we 54 February 25, 1988 40 9 don't want to talk about this potential extension, but with that extension it allowed us to really correct this intersection, not so much just in moving vehicular traffic, but also to ease the pedestrian flow from east to west, from this end of downtown to the other end. That is now been eliminated. We are looking at some minor signal modifications and that's about all we can really tell you is going to happen here. You are not going to see any drastic improvement. You'll probably see a deterioration of already a bad situation as traffic increases. The other thing that we show on here is just a series of standard parking signs, OK? - the standard parking signs leading folks to where there are available public spaces. It doesn't mean it has to operated by the Off -Street Parking Department, but it is spaces off street that are available to the general public, and that's what... Mayor Suarez: All of those are off-street parking spaces available to general _ public? Mr. Rhinhard: There are lots near all these signs, at least guiding you to the existing parking. Mayor Suarez: But, there will be signs that tell you that there are some off- street parking available in all of those areas? Mr. Rhinhard: Parking guide signs to the lot itself. Others are at the lot, taking you right in. For instance, like up at Mayfair. Mayor Suarez: Like... Mr. Rhinhard: The garages are very, very lightly used. Even over the weekend when we had the art festival. You could still find space in the Mayfair. And that's... Mayor Suarez: Well, as long as they are there, may as well tell them if they are there. Mr. Rhinhard: That is what we are suggesting be done. In a nutshell, that's where we are today. Mayor Suarez: Anything else? The Commission? Interested parties? Citizens? Mrs. Kennedy: Is there anybody here in opposition to this item? Mayor Suarez: Bob? I guess you can't really be in opposition to a study per se. Mrs. Kennedy: To the parts of the study? Mayor Suarez: As long as it doesn't have any particular recommendation attached to it. Mr. Bob Fitzsimmons: The only thing I would ask the Commission is what... Mayor Suarez: Give us your name and address, please, Bob. Mr. Fitzsimmons: My name is Bob Fitzsimmons, I live at 2512 Abaco Avenue, which is in Coconut Grove. I just asked the Commission what would be next? What happens next? We have a traffic study, we have certain recommendations. You have heard... I live in one particular neighborhood where we have a petition going to close our streets off, at least temporarily. Is that a necessity? Mayor Suarez: Why do you have to ask embarrassing questions? - like what do we do next? I don't know what we do next. 17th Avenue and South Bayshore, that particular recommendation makes some sense to me. I'd be interested in knowing if there is any citizen opposition to the Planning Department's version of that modification there? Mr. Rodriguez: What you can do is, approve in principle the plan, except for those areas in which you have problems, and then with that, we will try to follow up... Mayor Suarez: Bring back specific things. 55 February 25, 1988 E Mr. Rodriguez: ... come back, we'll follow up on each one of those actions, you know. Mayor Suarez: Do you have any objections to the general outlines of the study? It doesn't really recommend anything too radical, that I can see. We never got to how much 27th Avenue is going to be widened. That could be an issue here, you never know. Mr. Tucker Gibbs: My name is Tucker Gibbs, I'm president of the Coconut Grove Civic Club. I live at 3820 Bayside Court. Dave Rhinard and Clark Turner know of the Civic Club's position on most of it. We have some general problems _ with the study, primarily in the downtown Coconut Grove area, and the main objection we have is the off -site parking recommendations that this proposer has made. I don't think he made them here tonight, but it has been made... Mayor Suarez: Well, they just talked about signage, as far as I could tell. I didn't hear any specific recommendations on off-street parking. _ Mr. Rhinard: There is one recommendation that we failed to mention to you. We are... Mayor Suarez: Get a little closer to the mike, we are having a hard time. Mr. Rhinard: We are suggesting that the off-street ratios, OK, of parking, OK, be maintained, whether it is done on -site or off -site, as different smaller, or even larger parcels within the downtown core area redevelop. - Mayor Suarez: Now you really confused me. The off-street... Mr. Rhinard: The off-street parking requirements... Mayor Suarez: ... ratio be maintained whether it be done off -site or on -site? Wow! Mr. Rodriguez: Parking requirement per square footage. Mr. Rhinard: With the land uses you have... Mayor Suarez: You mean under our zoning code? Mr. Rhinard: Right. We are suggesting that not be altered, not be changed. Mayor Suarez: OK, I don't think Tucker disagrees with that. Mr. Rhinard: Also that developers have the option, OK, particularly for the smaller parcels, to use other sites to make their requirements, as you may have the small sites might make four or five parking spaces off-street, not to do it on your own site, but to do it off -site, OK. _i Mayor Suarez: We're going to have a tough time with that concept anyhow, because how do you enforce something like that? I mean, they come in and they make a presentation and they have some sort of a contract, God knows for how ® long. Two years down the road, you don't know if they still have that right or not, so... Mr. Rhinard: What we are suggesting is, it be formalized considerably from what the current situation is in there. Mayor Suarez: Well, the alternative is to just to follow what we have got in the code and not allow any deviation from it, whether that... Mr. Rhinard: But these off -site spaces, OK, they would be purchased, if you will, in a fee, or a long term lease arrangement with Off -Street Parking, unless there are some other substantial other mechanisms that have some permanency to them that the developer could demonstrate he can have his space for an extended period of time at some off -site location, not just for two months, six months, or... Mayor Suarez: What does Planning have to say with this concept of developer coming in and not being able to meet his own parking requirements - as a generic concept, in using some off -site arrangement, isn't that going to create havoc? I mean... 56 February 25, 1988 Mr. Rodriguez: The zoning ordinance allows that now. The problem that we have with the way it is implemented, is that the agreements that we have are not permanent agreements. We allow in the zoning ordinance that you can provide off -site parking, not in your site, but in a site in proximity to your area, where you have situations like the Grove, where parking is at a prime. Mayor Suarez: But, we do it on a case by case basis. Mr. Rodriguez: Right. The problem that we are having with this, is that this Is being provided, but it is based on an agreement between the owner and another owner that is difficult to enforce. Mayor Suarez: Sure, and we don't know how long it will last, or anything, but we are not going to move from a case by case analysis to anything more comprehensive, I mean that... Mr. Rodriguez: Well, what I think is being suggested by the consultant is that the provision be made one way or another, that it will be a permanent agreement, by providing a certain amount of fee, so that the Off -Street Parking Department can make sure that the parking will be available, or that the arrangement be permanent in such a way that can be enforced. Mayor Suarez: We've no problem with this. Mr. Rodriguez: What is happening now is sometimes it is not clear what happened to that parking that was promised in another place. Mr. Gibbs: Our concern about all that is, that now with parking generally required on -site, it limits the amount of square footage that a developer can use on his site for retail use, which is a much more intense use than the parking. With this proposal, developers can now... will then be able to assemble property, use it all for retail, purchase garage space, or parking space somewhere else, perhaps a cheaper site. It intensifies the use in central Grove, which creates a bigger traffic problem. Mayor Suarez: Sure, bifurcated use is what you end up doing. With what we've got now, and with this Commission at least, we've only allowed that in a couple of cases, just where it was like, you know, the difference between 28 parking spaces and 32, or something. I mean, it was like four or five that they needed. You could try for an ordinance that would make that totally unavailable to the developers. I'd have no problem with voting for that. Mr. Rodriguez: If I might remind you... Mayor Suarez: Off -site parking. Mr. Rodriguez: ... there are some cases in which the lot is so small, and I have been before you before... Mayor Suarez: Right, there has been occasionally, right. Mr. Rodriguez: ... that it was impossible to put the parking... Mayor Suarez: Or a strange configuration, but other then that, we haven't even contemplated any off -site parking. Mr. Gibbs: Mo, we are looking for protection in the future also, and that is what our concern is, from our history in the past in the Grove. Mayor Suarez: You don't think we are going to be around for very long, I know. Mr. Gibbs: Well, I think some people are ambitious, maybe they will move up. Mr. Turner: Mr. Mayor, the essence of this proposal acknowledges that the supply of parking spaces is only one part of the problem. Management is the other part of it. In the cases, and finally, there is the overriding question of what the zoning is, and what the land use intensities are that are governed by that zoning. In detailing this proposal, should you wish us to pursue it, we would be looking at the conditions under which any kind of off -site parking would be permitted. It would be the... 57 February 25, 1988 1% 9 Mayor Suarez: But you are looking at tightening the requirements and make the commitments more enforceable, and possibly transfer over to an authority or some other entity the guarantee of that. Mr. Turner: Exactly, we would like them to be permanent and we would like to have it used only where there is no possible..... Mayor Suarez: Just don't make it sound like it is going to be come a widespread thing at all. I mean, it is something that maybe we ought to just eliminate from consideration altogether. Does that take care of all your concerns? Mr. Gibbs: No, we have about three more concerns that we have expressed... Mayor Suarez: OK, please tell us quickly. Mr. Gibbs: ... and very briefly, the central Grove issue sidewalks, and I think Commissioner Plummer will attest to this - sidewalks in Coconut Grove historically had been a real problem. Public Works likes sidewalks, a lot of the residents in Coconut Grove do not like sidewalks, and the issue in central Grove is one where they said we wanted increased. I don't think the neighbors are too thrilled about that. Other ones, I think Mr. Stahl is going to talk about this, but I am going to touch on it, because the Civic Club is concerned about it also. Mayor Suarez: See if you can preempt anything he is going to say, that will make him a lot briefer. Mr. Gibbs: Ted will appreciate that. Alley protection - the alleys behind Commodore Plaza, the development that has been allowed in Coconut Grove for the size of those buildings, have caused the alley on the north side of Commodore Plaza to be so narrow that it is virtually useless, which causes the trucks to come in and double park on Commodore Plaza, blocking Commodore Plaza. What we are asking for is some kind of protection and some kind of recognition of protecting those alleys. In addition, we also would like to see a light at Commodore Plaza and Main Highway, which would help to alleviate some of the problem in left turns off of Commodore. Mayor Suarez: I see a lot of nodding of heads. Does that make sense for us to explore further? Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, absolutely. Mr. Plummer: I agree. Mr. Rhinard: Once we drop the McDonald Street, yes. Mayor Suarez: OK, the Vice Mayor said yes, that is all we need to hear. The hell with the planning study! Mrs. Kennedy: That's a real problem. Mr. Gibbs: Thank you very much. Ms. Esther Mae Armbruster: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Esther Mae Armbruster, I live at 3350 Charles Avenue, and I have been there for the past 41 years. I don't intend to leave until move me. They have quite a few problems on Charles Avenue as well as other places in Coconut Grove. One of the main problems at night is parking, and we need lights at the corner of Charles Avenue and Main Highway. We need lights on the corner of Hibiscus and Charles Avenue where there is the four lanes there, and nobody very seldom ever respects the rules stopping and starting again. In the meantime, the off-street parking has already begun on Charles Avenue and I've been calling everybody downtown to find out whose responsibility it is to see that it be changed. There are four houses being built on Charles Avenue, and the sidewalks have been taken up. They intend to set back further, I think by 10 feet into the property, so they can have that double parking like on Charles Avenue between Hibiscus and Douglas Road. Charles Avenue is too narrow for them to do this kind of thing. I don't know whose responsibility it is, but it needs to be corrected, because what you will have there, is a turnaround. You have a turnaround, diagonal across from my house now. The people from any 56 February 25, 1988 10 0 direction they want to come to Coconut Grove and Charles Avenue, they turn around. If they find themselves going the wrong way, they turn around in the yard, they could care less about it! This is what they have been doing for the past - ever since you allowed them to put scatter houses. This is what you allowed them to do, off-street parking. Now, since the other four houses are being built, they have already dug up the sidewalks. Something needs to be done. We are also in the process of... when I say "we," I mean, CAACED, in the process of trying to put Charles Avenue and the historic preservation, so we do not need any other distraction on Charles Avenue, and no other place in Coconut Grove. We also need some stop signs saying, "drive carefully, slowly, there are children at play," because you do not have any parks in that particular area. The only park we have is the mini park on Grand Avenue and Elizabeth Street, and I do not believe that is the correct place for... Mayor Suarez: That is a simple enough request. Does that need County approval too? - any time we want to just tell people to drive slowly, or what specific conditions they are going to meet in that area? Mr. Campbell: That would be Dade County Public Works, yes. Mayor Suarez: But, we basically tell them, they provide the signs, but we tell them we would like to... they don't really... Mr. Campbell: Right. Ms. Armbruster: And I'm back to Commissioner Dawkins when he said, "Please wrap this up and sign and seal." I'm not going to be here for the next fifty years and don't want to see our street added... Mayor Suarez: No problem there. Ms. Armbruster: You think you can do that? Mayor Suarez: Yes, we are going to prepare a resolution in black and white. Ms. Armbruster: In black and white? Mayor Suarez: Right. Ms. Armbruster: All right, for the record, that is all... Mayor Suarez: We can do one different from most of them that are just signed by the Mayor. We can have it signed by all the Commissioners. How is that? Ms. Armbruster: That's better. Like yesterday? Mr. Dawkins: It is prepared now, Mrs. Armbruster. Mayor Suarez: We are going to have it today, Mrs. Armbruster. Ms. Armbruster: All right, and the stop sign. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Ma'am. Go ahead, make the... you again? Mr. Fitzsimmons: Yes, I've decided what we can do. I mean, can we ask the Commission - tonight I represent a group with Howard standing at the other podium - my name is Bob Fitzsimmons - that live, between Aviation and 22nd Avenue and Tigertail and 28th Street. We've gone through and we probably have signatures from 80% to 90Z of the people in the neighborhood, who want the streets closed off where they meet Aviation. That would be the eastern border of Aviation, and while the traffic consultant doesn't recommend doing it, they also do not oppose doing it. There is not enough true traffic or justification that it would be a problem to close the streets, so can we ask the Commission tonight to start the process rolling to get those streets closed, at least temporarily to see what happens. Mrs. Kennedy; Bob, what is again that you want closed? s Mr. Fitzsimmons: The streets are Lincoln, Trapp, Swanson, Inagua, Abaco and Andros. They run essentially from Aviation diagonally to 28th Street, so they are kind of a cut through from Bird Road to U.S. 1. s 59 February 25, 1968 y 1% 0 Mayor Suarez: Because we have taken this item out of order and because we have got so many other planning and zoning items to hear tonight, why don't we have staff recommend to us to study that recommendation and come back to us. If the neighbors favor by the percentage you are saying, it sounds to me like something worth doing, but I'd like to get some staff input before we take action on that. Mr. Fitzsimmons: Can we schedule it for the next planning and zoning meeting? - which will be next month, I guess. Mayor Suarez: It would be fine with me. Mr. Fitzsimmons: Are you going to take any Commission action? Mayor Suarez: It's OK with the Commission. Mr. Plummer: Make sure you make it a public hearing. Mr. Rodriguez: So, you want to schedule for March 24th? Mr. Plummer: Fine with me. Mr. Rodriguez: That is 6:00 o'clock, we will schedule. Mr. Plummer: Hey, I am all in favor of what they want, after a public hearing, because I'll tell you something, I'd love to have it for my neighborhood also. Mayor Suarez: Do we need a motion for that, Sergio? Mr. Plummer: No, just schedule for public hearing. Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, we'll schedule it for public hearing. Mr. Plummer: It is certainly the Commission's consensus to do that. Go ahead, air. Mr. Howard Weisberg: Just for the record, I'd like to submit the petitions of 80 percent of the residents in that neighborhood that would like all the streets blocked. Mayor Suarez: Please. So ordered into the record. Give it to the City Clerk. That's it. We preempted Ted all together? Mrs. Kennedy: There is Fred There's Fred also. Mr. Ted Stahl: No! Ted Stahl, resident and merchant of Coconut Grove, 3171 Royal Road is my residence. 3121 Commodore Plaza is my business address. I've lived in the Grove 45 years, or more, and I don't know who spent $65,000 for this study, but as you must admit, it has not achieved anything and I think that $63,000, if the developers want to spend it, could spend it on some very, very, important needs to this community instead of a traffic study, because a traffic study is not going to... anything in this Grove, as far as Ingraham Highway, Main Highway, Bayshore Drive, is going to stay the way it is. It cannot be expanded and all these businessmen that get up in the morning and go to work are just going to have to enjoy the birds and the squirrels, because that's what it's all about. Ingraham Highway is a historic drive, you cannot widen it. There are other routes to get from Coco Plum and the southwest section. If you want to take a drive in the morning and go to work, you can get to US 1, which also is totally obstructed with traffic and that is... you can go down LeJeune Road, you can go down Bird Road - there is lots of roads, you don't have to go through the Grove if you don't want to, but if you want that lovely historic drive in the morning to go to work and get yourself ready for work, that's the street you take, and that's what you are going to have to go through. Mayor Suarez: The only expansion that we have even contemplated is just tiny little segment of South Bayshore leading up to 17th Avenue to have just the north bound lane as you take the turn, that's the only enlargement. Mr. Stahl: All right, on Commodore Plaza, if it is at all possible, which is possibly been mentioned, but we have been after this for a very many, many 60 February 25, 1988 14 4 years, why can we not have a stop light on the corner of Main Highway and Commodore Plaza, where all the traffic congests constantly? No one on Main Highway coming home will let you turn left or right off of Commodore Plaza. Now, we have been asking for a traffic light there for many, many years, giving the Main Highway right-of-way much more longer on the turn of the light than on Commodore, but you cannot get off of Commodore Plaza in the evening hours. Mr. Plummer, Ted. Mr. Stahl: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Ted, you know, and I know that that has been a request on at least three different occasions. Mr. Stahl: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: And the same answer keeps coming back from Metropolitan Dade - County, and that if you do that, and hey, I agree with you, I would like to see it, trying to turn there is ridiculous, but there answer is that they cannot eliminate and further congest McFarland and Main if they have another traffic light in there. That's their answer. Now, we can disagree with it, but hey, we have made three separate occasions while I've been on this — Commission'and each time they come back with the same answer, that if you put a light there, you will further congest an already impossible situation at McFarland and Main. Mr. Stahl: Well, two more items, and I'll get off, because I know you are tired and you are busy, and there's lots of things to go. Number one, several of the problems that have been caused in our City are problems that have been caused by the Planning Department. We have a terrible, terrible congestion on the Commodore Plaza now, since these large buildings have been built, as — Tucker Gibbs has mentioned, is that the access alleys for delivery of produce, beer, and so forth, to the Village Inn and these other restaurants is totally blocked. This alley cannot even be used by small station wagons to get in. Mayor Suarez: Past history) Mr. Stahl: Past history, well let's go across the street now into the other alley, which Mayor Suarez, is not past history, but will be. I feel that somewhere along the line, it should be put into the record, that if and when this playhouse is built, that the City demand, or request and demand that two feet be dedicated, running parallel, that in the future, when the playhouse is built, that this alley will not be cut off, because that's what's going to happen. And the other thing is, that since we are allowing all these restaurants to be built on Commodore Plaza that need servicing with beer and produce every single morning, is there not any single way that we can draw up an ordinance to where deliveries must be made before 12:00 o'clock ? Mayor Suarez: I'm sure we could, if it makes sense to do so. Mr. Stahl: And since there has been several parking meters... I know parking meters are very important to this community, but there is "no loading zone" on the right aide of Commodore Plaza, and when the building was built for the real estate office on the corner of Commodore, they took out three meters. Those three meters have never been placed back, and anybody that gets there in the morning can park there all day. Either they be capped again, as parking meters, or that would be a prime place to make the loading zone, but that's - important, as a loading zone. Mayor Suarez: Sounds like it would make more sense for a loading zone. Mr. Stahl: All right, sir, thank you. Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Ted. Ms. Frankie Rolle: My name is Frankie Rolle and my address is 3430 Williams Avenue. I'd like to thank the Commission for a resolution, but I'd like to see all of the Commissioners sign it, Mayor Suarez. Your name is on that. Is that just...? 61 February 25, 1988 1% 0 Mr. Dawkins: We can't sign it until we read it, Frankie. We're getting read to read it. Ms. Rolle: Oh, you are getting ready to read it? Mayor Suarez: We've got to read it. Mr. Dawkins: We've got have an order. Take it easy. Ms. Rolle: But, there wasn't a place on there for all the signatures. Mayor Suarez: We are going to put them all on, with or without a place. Mr. Dawkins: Let's do that. May I move this resolution now. THEREUPON, COMMISSIONER DAWKINS READS TITLE OF RESOLUTION INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. SEE HEREINBELOW. "WHEREAS, the area between Grand Avenue and Charles Avenue in the Coconut Grove area of the City is an area which has historical and cultural significance to the citizens of the City of Miami; and WHEREAS extension of McDonald Street southerly from Grand Avenue to Charles Avenue would destroy the ambiance of the entire Coconut Grove community; NOW THEREFORE be it resolved by the Commission of the City of Miami, Florida: Section 1. It is the intent of the Miami City Commission that there shall never be an extension of McDonald Street southerly from Grand Avenue to Charles Avenue in the Coconut Grove area of the City of Miami, Florida. Signed by Xavier Suarez, and 300 years from the today they will want to know who Xavier is. Mayor Suarez: It says "never" on it, but... Mr. Dawkins: And I so move it. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mayor Suarez: Well, the only signature we are missing is Miller Dawkins and 300 years from now, they are going to wonder who the hell Miller Dawkins is! I OK, next item, PZ, whatever it is. Mr. Dawkins: No, no, call the roll on the resolution! Mayor Suarez: All right, call the roll on the resolution. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-187 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE INTENT OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION THAT THERE SHALL NEVER BE AN EXTENSION OF MCDONALD STREET SOUTHERLY FROM GRAND AVENUE TO CHARLES AVENUE IN THE COCONUT GROVE AREA OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: Well, hell, why not! a 62 February 25, 1988 1% 0 --------------------------- - --- - ---- 16. RECONSIDER PREVIOUSLY PASSED MOTIONS GRANTING CLASS "C" SPECIAL PERMIT FOR RENEWAL OF FLAGLER FLEA MARKET AT 401 NW 38TH COURT - SUBJECT TO ONE-YEAR REVIEW. Mayor Suarez: PZ-6. Mr. Olmedillo: PZ-6, the flea market. Mayor Suarez: What is this about? Mr. Olmedillo: You may remember that Commissioner De Yurre and Commissioner Plummer asked for this item to be brought back to you to address the issue of the fish vendors and the access points on 37th Avenue, and at that, I defer to the applicants of both issues. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, if we could address first the traffic. Lt. Bradford, _ do you have the chart there? Mr. Mayor, I went out to the flea market after we had passed and implemented the new traffic. There is an impossible situation 'which then addresses the safety issue. They have come up with another plan that does not violate the neighbors concern. The neighbors were concerned, and rightfully so, about ingress and egress on NW 7th Street. What they have proposed here now is to make the opening on 2nd Terrace... 5th i Terrace, OK, and they would have the opening moved from where we originally made it, over to the other side. Lt. Bradford: Originally, we only had this one entrance that is allowed for entrance and exit of vehicles. The problem out there is just prior to the Christmas holidays, we'll have any many as 20,000 walk up pedestrians trying to get in. We found it necessary to open up a small pedestrian gate which is pedestrian traffic only, so where we don't mixed those pedestrians in with our vehicular traffic. The problem is, is this is the most desired parking area out there, which is closest to the flea market itself. What we are requesting is opening up this north artery where it will be entrance only, two lanes, allowing us to move more vehicles in and out of that lot with a two lane exit, _ where we now currently have an entry -exit. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think basically what is trying to be said, it sets up a normal flow of traffic to the neighbors of the flea market. Would you turn _ that around? I want you to understand that in no way, shape, or form, is there any difference, or opening on 7th Street. This is strictly for a flow safety precaution, and I am going to recommend this to the Commission, based on the recommendation of our traffic expert, in house, and the traffic expert out of house. David Plummer is not related to me, so Mr. Mayor, if I could handle that situation, I would like to at this time, I guess, change the previous resolution, to adopt this plan, which has been submitted by our in-house expert and the traffic planner, Mr. David Plummer, and let this be reviewed in a one year period. But, I want to once again reiterate this plan does not and will not open up NW 7th Street, I want to make sure of that, OK? INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry? Mayor Suarez: Come up to the mike and pick whatever clarification you need and give us first your name and address, please. Ms. Dorothy Kitchner: I'm trying to understand... Mr. Plummer: Yes, Ma'am. Ms. Kitchner: Are you saying that they are going to go in on 38th Court and Sth Terrace? Mr. Plummer: No, Ma'am. Once again, look at the thing, it's only... Ms. Kitchner: We can see it. 63 February 25, 1988 1% 0 Mr. Plummer: OK, I'm sorry, it addresses only... Ms. Kitchner: I don't know if anybody else saw it. Mr. Plummer: ... no, there is going to be a wall over there. Me. Kitchner: The wall is there. Mr. Plummer: Yes, Ma'am. This is only on 37th Avenue. As it stands right now, the problem existing, you probably know as well as I do. Ms. Kitchner: OK. Mr. Plummer: The problem is, trying to use one gate for ingress and egress, doesn't work, OK? They are opening up one to go in and one to come out. It does not address any of the area, except on 37th Avenue, and it does not alter 7th Street. Mr. Mayor, at this time, I move that we adopt that which is recommended by the Police Department and by the traffic study, I so move. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Mrs. Kennedy: Second Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Mr. Plummer: With a one year review, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Alfredo Kouri: My name is Alfredo Kouri from 3807 NW 7th Street, Miami, Florida. I am president of the Central Shopping Plaza Merchant's Association, and also owner of of in the Central Shopping Plaza. What I am afraid is that... it is not my concern about the trouble that you have in the flea market. We have been in this war for over three years, and I don't want to push the button that starts the war again, my God. We have a better relationship then we have ever had with the landlord. That is a pleasure now to go there, because all of the problems have been solved. We are talking almost every week with the Manager of the shopping center, Mr. Brad. Everything is going smoothly and I don't want to break anything that is on record that you have agreed. We have to live with the flea market. We accepted it, we don't want it, but we accept it. Now we are in a peaceful, a smooth relationship, and I don't... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Kouri. Mr. Kouri: No, no, let me finish, because there is something, Mr. Plummer - we are getting closer to 7th Street, and if we are getting closer to 7th Street, we are getting closer to the parking spaces of the Central Shopping Plaza, and right now, we are having only one third of the people that were parking in the flea market. If we get closer to the Central Shopping Plaza, we will have at least half, because it is much better to walk from the Central Shopping Plaza to cross 7th Street and to get into the flea market, because now they don't have 7th Street, but this is going to get closer and why don't we get on the other way, instead of getting closer to 7th Street? Open the... we are not against the gate, let's be very clear with that. Why don't we open that gate further 7th Street? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Kouri, I will let the experts answer that. We are talking about presently, a safety feature, that's all I'm speaking to, and the experts, I'm not the experts, sir. The experts are saying... the one thing I said when they came to me, do not violate the trust of the people that we have already made the thing for. Speak to safety and I will listen. This is their best recommendation as to the safe travel of vehicles in, on the location and out. It does not violate any of the entrances or reopen any of the entrances on 7th Street, it merely makes a flow of traffic which does not exist today. Now, if lieutenant wants to speak to it further, that's fine, I think I've tried to answer your questions. Lt. Bradford: We'll be watching the shopping center closely. We are going to make sure that they don't fill up Central. That entrance we are asking for closest to 7th Street will be for vehicular access only. The pet gate will remain in the middle, furthest away from Central Shopping Center. 64 February 25, 1988 J4 0 Mr. Plummer: As it is now, the pedestrian. The pedestrian gate remains where it is. I question whether or not they could stop people from walking in where the cars go in. I didn't think they could, I went there, and they were doing it very successfully. Mr. Kouri: My only concern is about the parking spaces of our Central Shopping Plaza. Mr. Plummer: I understand that, sir. Mr. Kouri: And it was before the closing of 7th Street, was a mess, our parking spaces. Mr. Plummer: You have to be concerned, and rightfully so, in your spaces in the shopping center. As a Commissioner, sir, I have to be concerned about your shopping center as well as the flea market and paramount, the safety of the people involved. Mr. Kouri: How long are going to be the this kind of project open? I mean, when will we know that this is not going to ruin, our... Mr. Plummer: Lieutenant, when will you implement this plan? Lt. Bradford: In two weeks. Mr. Plummer: In two weeks, sir. Mr. Kouri: How long do we have... I mean, if we have any complaints? Lt. Bradford: One year. Mr. Plummer: You can come back at any time, sir, if you have a complaint. Mayor Suarez: If they are violating the terms of the agreement, you can come back any time. OK, let's call the roll on that motion. Mr. Kouri: Fair enough. Thank you very much. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-188 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TRAFFIC FLOW CONTROL PLAN SUBMITTED THIS DATE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT AS PRESENTED AND DESCRIBED BY EXHIBIT ENTITLED "NORTHWEST 37TH AVENUE VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS", PREPARED BY DAVID PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES, DATED NOVEMBER 4, 1987, REVISED ON DECEMBER 2, 1987 AND AGAIN ON DECEMBER 7, 1987, IN CONNECTION WITH THE CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE RENEWAL OF A FLEA MARKET (FLAGLER FLEA MARKET) AT 401 NORTHWEST 38TH COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA; FURTHER PROVIDING THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF BE INCORPORATED AS AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF THE CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED DECEMBER 2, 1987. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 65 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: Do you want to do anything on the .... Mr. Olmedillo: Fish vendors. Mayor Suarez: Right, the ban on fish. Mr. Olmedillo: Was the other issue. Mr. Al Cardenas: Just a point of clarification, if I may. For the record, my name is Al Cardenas with law offices at 1401 Brickell Avenue, and we represent the owners and operators of Flagler Flea Market. There is a point of clarification which I have checked with your legal counsel, the City Attorney, as to the propriety of bringing it in a matter up heretofore. It has to do primarily with a clarification, Commissioner Plummer, as to one of the conditions and safeguards which you suggested. That was, as you recall at the time that we concluded the last hearing, one of your concerns was that the place be kept clean, be cleaned up in a hurry, and the cleanup be concluded at an early enough time in the evening. Because of that, you set some parameters that were agreed upon and that are incorporated as conditions and safeguards. One of the parameters was that we have a cleaning crew of at least 25 people and the gentlemen was here, if you recall, to clean up - it was my understanding, immediately after the flea market ceased its operations at 6:00 o'clock, and to do so until 9:00 o'clock, and ... Mr. Plummer: They'll be finished by 9:00. Mr. Cardenas: He'll finish by 9:00. Now, after I reviewed the transcript with the City Attorney, it was obvious from the transcript itself, that it was unclear that that was the time within which the 25 people would be necessary. Frankly, the flea market operates with a cleaning crew from the time the gates opens to the vendors. However, that cleaning crew is at a level from six to eight people, because they are constantly picking up, emptying trash bins and so forth at that time. Mr. Plummer: Has no bearing on it. Al, let me refresh your memory as I remember it. The concern was that once that place closed, that your cleaning crew would be out in a reasonable time. The indication was that you had 20 people and you did not know if you could be out by 9:00 I said put on 25 people between 6:00 and 9:00, and you could get it finished. There was not to be 25 people all during the day, that was never the intent. The extra help was supposed to be after it closed, to make sure that they were finished and out of there by 9:00. Mr. Cardenas: I understand. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: Anything else, flea market? Mr. De Yurre: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Another issue has to do with the flea market is the fish vendors. As you may recall when we first heard this issue a couple of months ago, there was some confusion towards the end, somehow the fish vendors were left out of the recommendation that was made and the motion that was voted upon here that evening. Fish vendors, I know traditionally had a problem with the neighborhoods because of the smell and it seem like they were dumping water on the side, which smelled, and that carried over to the neighborhood and certainly that was a problem area. I have visited the flea market on numerous occasions when the fish vendors were operating there recently. I'm talking about the latter part of the year and during that period of time, I can say from personal knowledge that there was no fish odor in the area unless you were right on top of the fish, talking to the vendor right then and there. I feel that it is important that these individuals, we are talking about eight families, get the opportunity to continue to sell their seafood at the flea market. Not only does it affect them directly, it also affects the produce vendors there, because it slacks off on their sales. I see nothing detrimental with the sale of the seafood, of the fish. I would recommend that it be placed in an area as far away from the residential area on the west side of the dog tracks. In other words, get it as close to 37th Avenue and 7th Street as possible, within the realm of what we are talking about here, making sure that it doesn't create additional parking problems to the Central Shopping Plaza, and that is my recommendation and I am sure there is some people that want to speak on it, if they want to go ahead at this point in time. 66 February 25, 1988 1% 9 Mr. John Fletcher: John Fletcher, 7600 Red Road. As you know, I have been representing the neighborhood as well as Mr. Kouri and the people at the shopping center. There are people here who would like to talk to you about that. What has happened, is since you put the conditions on, things have really gotten a lot better for the neighborhood, and they appreciate that very much. They are going to try to live with this for the three year period you set up and do the best they can. But, one of their major concerns was the amelI of the fish. Living in the neighborhood, they get it all during the period of time that the flea market is open, so they wanted me to convey to you their great concern that this will be something that will just again make - their lives not happy in their homes, as they should be, which you have tried - the last time we were here, you tried to do that for them and at the same time accommodate the flea market as best you could. Their request remains again, please keep that prohibition there. There may be some people from the audience who wanted to come forward and speak as well, if I may ask them to. Ms. Shirley Kaplan: My name is Shirley Kaplan, and I reside at 3895 NW Sth Street, and I have lived there for 39 years, and this is really the first time I've made an issue of anything going on over there. I represent some... do you mind if I read this? Mr. De Yurre: Excuse me a second. Let me ask you something. Is there some - issue here about cooking the fish, as opposed to just selling it? Ms. Kaplan: I consider it a filthy thing to be out there. It attracts rats, that's number one. I don't believe it should be out in the open. I am representing the people that live at 38th Court, and KW 5th Street, on both sides. Several people could not come tonight, and they are very adamant about the fish odors. You were there while the weather was cool. Have you ever been there in the summertime? - and it depends upon which way the wind blows. I've had people on NW 7th Street in the apartment buildings complain about it when their apartment windows were open. It is not a proper thing to be over there in a residential area. It belongs in a store, under refrigeration in a case. That's where I buy my fish and I have this... Mayor Suarez: Well, let me say this, Ma'am, because we are going to... we can't get involved in this as a protracted discussion today, it is not on the agenda, and... Ms. Kaplan: I'm asking you to uphold your decision. Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait, please, please, I'm talking now. What I am - proposing, Commissioner De Yurre, is that we... if you are going to make this modification, to get my vote, at least, that we take this up after complete notice and a hearing on this subject, because I thought that your clients were In agreement. Mr. De Yurre: Well, there should have been notice of this. Mr. Plummer: It is on the agenda. Mayor Suarez: This item also? Mr. Plummer: Item 6. Mayor Suarez: I'm sorry. But this particular modification is on it? Mr. De Yurre: Certainly. Mr. Plummer: Yes. Ms. Kaplan: It is here. Mayor Suarez: I'm sorry, go ahead. Ms. Kaplan: It is very interesting to note also that Mr. Cardenas is concerned about what goes on in his neighborhood. Well, we feel the same way in a different manner, but living in a residential area, if you have to have a flea market, which we have always been opposed to, we are trying to live with it, with the wall land everything that's up. I see no reason why you should 67 February 25, 1988 • 9 subject us to this situation with fish. The stench is disgusting in the summertime, it really is, and I ask that you please consider leaving it the way it was as of October 28th. I'd appreciate it very much. This is not a personal thing with people. It is just a matter of it doesn't belong there. Thank you. Mrs. Kennedy: How many fish vendors are there? Mayor Suarez: I think you said eight? Mr. Plummer: It varies, but eight or nine. Mayor Suarez: The Vice Mayor asked for all of the existing or potential fish vendors to raise their hands. (COMMENTS IN SPANISH) OK. Just raise your hand, that's fine. Go ahead, sir. Mr. Roy Levi: I'm Roy Levi, I live at 3889 NW 6th Street. Seems like this is almost like an open sore with a scab on it, and they keep picking at it a little bit at a time. We've made concessions. We've seen the neighborhood change, of course, in the last four years from residential to almost commercial, and now we've made these concessions to go along with the flea market, in hopes that we could probably live in a compatible basis with them. Of course, it is, maybe the day that you were over there, Commissioner, that the wind wasn't right, or the odor wasn't right, but the odor from the fish is offensive to the neighborhood, and it is not compatible to our residential neighborhood. Now, perhaps if you put it downtown in an industrial area, a heavy industrial area, then this would probably be compatible industry that you can have, but for a residential neighborhood, this is what we have, single family dwellings, nice people, nice neighborhood, compatible neighborhood, we seem to get along excellent. The most of the neighbors as I know, we are integrated in the fact that the flea market... the fish market, the fish smell, is offensive to us, and we hope that perhaps you all, in your wisdom, and in your knowledge, that you can go along with the neighborhood and give us a little face that we can keep, that we can have something to say. Well, we've got the flea market, but let's... you are still invited to come to the house, but you don't have to put up with the odor from the flea market. You get a nice easterly breeze, you don't want to smell fish. If it comes from the west, then it is not too bad. Thank you for your consideration. Mayor Suarez: Thank you for your statement. Anyone else? Ms. Dorothy Kitchner: As I said, my name is Dorothy Kitchner. I live at 3888 NW 6th Street. I've lived there for over 30 years. I have a letter that goes back to April 4, 1985. This is not a one day issue. I've been in constant contact with Mr. Rodriguez and they had a meeting with Mr. Sergio Rodriguez, Joe Guardina, Juan Gonzales, Richard Whipple, when he was there, and Judith Miller. We have not asked, we have begged, we have pleaded for certain things that have happened in our neighborhood, and one of the things that has happened is, which, I don't know where the fault lies in this, but when this started in 1985, there was just one or two fish vendors there, and we were still asking for help. They had them over on the west side, and at that time they said: "We can't have it over there, as we can't move it because we don't have the right sanitary facilities." And I'm saying they moved them to the east side. You are talking about moving them to the northeast side, that's where they are. Evidently they still don't have the right sanitary facilities. Something is wrong if after three and one/half or four years, we are still complaining about the same thing and asking for help. I'm not against anybody making a living or doing what they have to do. I also notice that they are all over town, but when you get six or eight people that sell fish, and it drips constantly, and the fish scales and everything, are down on the floor, something is wrong. You let too many people get in there, you don't have the right sanitary facilities. Something is wrong. We happen to live on 6th Street, and when that wind blows from the east, I cannot open my windows. My whole house reeks of that smell, and you cannot tell me that you have been there on the days that when this happens, I'm sorry, air. You haven't been there when this happens, because we can't live with it. It's a terrible thing! I mean, naturally these people want to make a living. I worked hard and wanted to make a living, that's all I am, a working person, but I would also like to live and enjoy my little house, for whatever time we have this. Thank you very much. 68 February 25, 1988 10 0 Mr. De Yurre: Mr. Mayor, I think what may be appropriate at this time, and I see the concern that these residents have, and that is that basically what they are saying is in the summertime when the heat is on, that that is when they have that foul smell, and what I would like to do to be equitable to everybody here is, if we can do the following - if we can grant a six months period for the fish to go into, and that carries into the summer. If there is any foul smell like they are saying, I will be the first one to bring it back, and to make the motion to get them... Mayor Suarez: Please! Everybody has had their say! Mr. De Yurre: ... to get them out, but I think that from my experience, and I _ don't know if you all have been there or not, my experience has been that that is kept very clean, and I think that we should put it to the test. We are not... I'm just talking about a six month period, to be reviewed in six months. We'll see what the situation is. That would be my recommendation at this point in time. Mayor Suarez: No, no, no, we've heard from opponents. Are we going to hear form proponents? - and if so, can you limit, is there any one person representing the whole group? INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: Well, come up to the mike, we will have get somebody to _ translate, but you had better figure out some system so we don't have to hear from everybody now. Can you assign one or two representatives of the group? You can be able to translate. Mr. Rodriguez: Go slowly. Mr. Enrique Rebodero: (TRANSLATED BY SERGIO RODRIGUEZ) The situation is, that they will be discussing all these issues, but what is interesting to us that sell seafood over there, we have had an economic loss, because we have had months without being able to sell seafood. We compromise ourselves, we commit ourselves, there will be a complete cleaning and if necessary to an inspection, they detect bad odor, or a product that will not be adequate for the public, or any situation, then it will be OK for us that they not permit any seafood selling over there. We would like both the Mayor and the Commissioners to analyze the situation, the economic situation, because they also have families and houses and they want to work honestly. They will make an analysis of this and they will commit themselves to the cleaning even to the extent of paying more to the company that cleans over there, so that at 5:00 o'clock when they close the flea market, there will be no leftovers of seafood over there. - Mrs. Kennedy: Excuse me a second for interrupting. Talking about leftovers, what do you do physically, with the leftovers at the end of the day. Mr. Rodriguez: (TRANSLATES IN SPANISH FOR MR. REBODERO) Mr. Plummer: They take them home and eat them. Mrs. Kennedy: No, I am talking about the water where the fish were. Mr. Rebodero: (TRANSALATED BY SERGIO RODRIGUEZ) All the leftovers from the fish are picked up in plastic bags. In the afternoon, a company that is in charge of cleaning up of the place, take them with them. Mayor Suarez: Should also ask about the water. Mr. Rodriguez: (TRANSLATES INTO SPANISH FOR MR. REBODERO) Mr. Rebodero: (TRANSLATED BY MR. RODRIGUEZ): In the afternoon, they take the water from the fishes in tanks with them. Their proposal was for them to pay even more to the cleaning company to take care of this, so it will be a clear assurance and the pickup of those leftovers. I am waiting for your answer! Mayor Suarez: No, we are waiting to see from the rest of the group that is proposing this. 69 February 25, 1988 Mr. Juan Sigenjid: (TRANSLATED BY MR. RODRIGUEZ) Basically he is going to say the same thing he said before. He talked to the person in charge of cleaning on Flagler Race Track, and we are aware that one of the problems that the leftovers from the fish was mixed up with the papers that were picked up at the end of the cleanup in the flea market, and we talked to the person in charge of cleaning up to see what way they could guarantee the pickup of the leftovers from the fish at 5:00 o'clock at the latest and that every two hours they will be picking up all the leftovers so that they will not be damaged, he was saying it is suppose to damage after three hours, and also that the persons who sell fish will commit themselves to buy the disinfectants that exist nowadays to try to take care of the odor. That's it. Mr. Alberto Ready for chicken? Mr. Plummer: Why not? Mr. Alberto My name is Alberto The Commission wants not take out is the fish in the flea. They clean it outside on the river and sell it - clean, you know what I mean? They sell shrimp, fillet, lobster meat, _ something like this. That's it! Mr. Plummer: I think we have come to amen! Mr. De Yurre: Mr. Mayor, I am ready to make a motion. Mr. Fletcher: Mr. Mayor, may we say a few more words before you move along to a motion? Mayor Suarez: Very briefly, counselor. Are you going to rebut anything specific? Mr. Fletcher: Just the people have asked me to remind you that the problem is not just with the cleanup, but it is all day long, as the water drips, as the fish are there all day long, and it is truly offensive to them. We have... I don't want to see unraveled what appeared to be a reasonable basis for a resolution. Thank you. Mr. De Yurre: Mr. Mayor, 1'd like to make a motion, taking into consideration all that we have heard here at this time, I'd like to move that we grant a six month period for the sale of seafood at the flea market, and that in six months from now, that we return here and see what the conditions are at that point in time, whether they are conducting in a way that it is not offensive to the neighborhood, or whether they are doing it properly or not, and then we can take definitive action at that point in time, one way or another. I just feel that it is important for us as Commissioners and Mayor of this City of Miami, that we take into consideration the livelihood of these individuals, while at the same time, taking into consideration the residents of the area, and I certainly feel that it is proper at this time to grant them a six period as a trial period to see if they are doing their job of maintaining the cleanliness that they should have, and whether they are not being offensive odor -wise to the residents of the area. Mayor Suarez: OK, that is in the form of a motion? Mr. De Yurre: Yes, sir. Mayor Suarez: Do we have a second? We have a motion, do we have a second? Going for the third time, for a second. I guess I am persuaded by your statement, counselor. Just now, I don't want to see unraveled what appeared to be a reasonable resolution last time around. It was a very difficult set of hearings that led us to what seemed to be as reasonable a resolution of as difficult an issue as we have had here and I just can't see unraveling that. It is not to say that in the future maybe we shouldn't take this up again, but certainly not at this point. I haven't heard any evidence that would convince me to unravel that very difficult determination reached. Mr. Dawkins: How many fish vendors are out there? Unidentified Speaker: About nine. Mr. Dawkins: Nine? I have difficulty with it in that I think if you were to come up with some cleaning tanks of some kind, with some... and I am using 70 February 25, 1988 1% 9 this and the word, "stainless steel" sort of cleaning facility, and with a storage tank with which to flush the water into. I think the citizens could live with it, because regardless of what is said here, we can leave here right now and go over there by the heliport, the helicopter port, where the fish boats come in and where you've got water running constantly and I don't... it is impossible not to have the smell of fish when you are dealing with fish. You can't get rid of it, because it In fish, but I think that some kind of a way, because you are earning an honest living and therefore, so I think that what we need to do is attempt to find a way that we can allow you to earn a living and not be offensive to the neighbors. I don't know how we can do that, but I'm certainly willing to sit down and see what we can come up with. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Dawkins: Yes, by all means, it is a public meeting. Mr. Manuel Roche: My name is Manuel Roche and I'm not a fish vendor, I am a produce vendor. My sales have decreased half of what I was selling when these guys were there. Mr. Dawkins: If you don't sell the fish, you don't sell the lemons, right? Mr. Roche: Right. Mr. Dawkins: OK, no problem, we are in business. Mr. Roche: You got it. OK, now, I've been there for about two and one-half years dealing with these people, with the fish and the produce. What you said was true, but what you said, they had that over there. They had those plastic tanks where they put the bowl in the top with a hole in the middle and when they scale the fishes, that is the main point. They scale the fish, and they throw the scales in the water, right? And what they do, what they are trying to do - they did it before, but what I am trying to say now, is they want to put some deodorants in the water so it doesn't smell. I guess if you go, like you said, to the seashore, and you buy a house over there, you are going to smell fish there, and you are probably a $200,000 house, right? So, I think this is convenient for everybody. This is convenient for the people going there, because since these people left, I have got a lot of people go over there and asking me, "Where the fish is, where the fish is?" I say: "They are gone." And I think that is up to you guys. Thank you, sir. Mayor Suarez: We all agree on that. Anything further on this item, Commissioners? Do we need to do anything if we've had a motion that didn't get a second? Just go on to the next item. 17. (A) CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF CLAUGHTON ISLAND PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT (NEAR VIZCAYA METRORAIL STATION) (See label 1). (B) DIRECT PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO STUDY AREA TO DETERMINE WHETHER EXISTING ZONING IS APPROPRIATE. Mayor Suarez: Let's do Vizcaya site, which was left over from the prior agenda? Mr. Plummer: Correct. Mayor Suarez: Vizcatran. Mr. Olmedillo: Item number two. Mayor Suarez: And that was scheduled for 7:00 p.m.? Where is Mandy? The City, we made a report before and we got a report from staff to the effect that there is nothing at this point proposed for that site, that we are about to act on, but I gather after the public hearing that you want to tell us what conclusions came out of that from the perspective of the citizens of the area. Mr. Armando Framil: The problem, as I saw it, with that particular meeting... OK, my name is Armando Framil, I live at 45 SW 28th Road, also the president of Miami Road Neighborhood Civic Association. At the last meeting, the 71 February 25, 1986 Commission requested that we meet at a townhall meeting, this past Tuesday, which we did, and the purpose of that meeting was to hear from City officials and give information as to what was being projected, scheduled, or what was going to happen at the Yizcatran site. To answer your question, Mr. Mayor, the information was still very scant. It was rather confusing. We really gleaned very little information out from it, except, as we understood Mr. Olmedillo, there was no proposal for that site at that time, but we had other incidents going on at the same time. We had the attorney from the owners coming and gave an explanation and halfway through his presentation, two gentlemen showed up, and they had a shouting match outside, calling the attorney an impostor, so we had all sorts of issues going on here and we are still ill informed, unless we are going to believe that nothing will happen on that site, and we don't know that. _ Mayor Suarez: We are not saying that nothing will happen on that site, Mandy, we are just saying that there is nothing concrete that the Commission is ready to act on for that site. We had hoped to build certain units under a prior plan. That to obviously not been done. That's where we are, but what what are the residents... I mean, I know what the residents want, but what do you want to propose to us today? Mr. Framil: We would like to take a position. Now, we don't know exactly what anybody is going to build there. We would like to know... Mayor Suarez: We don't either! We want you to know that. Mr. Framil: We would like you to know where are our limits are. I think that is, you know, rather than engaging in a... Mayor Suarez: There has been proposals, there have been ideas, they are all very vague, and as I mentioned to you before, the office of the Assistant City Manager was most knowledgeable on the different ideas that have been proposed. It is right next to mine and you have access to mine as you do to the other Commissioners, so any time you want, you go by there and go see Mr. Bailey. The point is that we don't have anything concrete to act on right now. Mr. Framil: I know, but just theoretically... Mayor Suarez: Yes. Mr. Framil: ... it seems that a lot of things can go in there that would probably go against the type of neighborhood that we have, and theoretically, it would be a reality real quick, as soon as you know, somebody comes forth with the money, they'll have a project there, including publicly subsidized programs in there, and that, you know, we do have a single family residential neighborhood. We do have some higher density areas immediately adjacent to that area, and what we have heard in terms of plans that could go in there, is considerably beyond what is already in there. Mayor Suarez: Well, now what could go in there, under existing zoning, is what? - is a basically, what, a thirteen story? Mr. Rodriguez: No. Maybe, since there were some people that were not here at 4:00 p.m., do you mind if we go over the issues that we have at that meeting, and maybe that will clarify some of the... Olmedillo... Mayor Suarez: Right, OK, from the perspective of staff. Mr. Olmedillo: At the meeting that we held with about 125 residents, we went through a brief history of how the Claughton Island development order developed and how this impacted... Mayor Suarez: You are not going to do that today. We all know that. Mr. Olmedillo: No, I am not going to... I am just briefly... Mayor Suarez: You gave the history, fine. What else happened? Mr. Olmedillo: And I told them about the rezoning, that it has been properly advertised and it was subject of hearings before the Zoning Board and this City Commission, the decision that was made, to an RG-3/7 district, which has certain characteristics by the ordinance. It establishes an FAR of 1.72 for the site. I told them... 72 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: What was the prior FAR, Guillermo? Mr. Olmedillo: It was an RG-1/3, which is a duplex zoning, so it went from a duplex zoning to the RG-3/7. Mayor Suarez: OK, now assuming the City had not had a mind to build an affordable housing project that was part of a three project group, assuming it was simply a zoning question when it came before us - what discretion did we have to approve, or disapprove the rezoning that took place? Mr. Olmedillo: The same, but you were... before you took some action, or City Commission... Mayor Suarez: Well, the reason I ask that, is I know it is part of a master plan that is... Mr. Olmedillo: Right. Mayor Suarez: ... close to a Metrorail station, and that was presented to us at the time, as leaving us not a lot of discretion, in approving or disapproving that increase. Mr. Olmedillo: Right. Yes, the station area design plan was approved by the City Commission, September, 179. That was as an ancillary part of the comprehensive neighborhood plan, and it... Mayor Suarez: Of the entire County. Mr. Olmedillo: Of the entire area, particularly, we did one plan for each station, and at that time... Mayor Suarez: And that was in conjunction with the County's own rezoning of all of the Metrorail stations. Mr. Olmedillo: That is correct. That is correct. Mayor Suarez: And when... did we have the usual discretion to agree or not agree to a rezoning under that? Mr. Olmedillo: You always do. Mayor Suarez: It is just the fact that it accorded with the master plan, that's... Mr. Olmedillo: Right, that is correct, sir. Mayor Suarez: But otherwise, we had the usual discretion and the usual criteria applied and everything else. Mr. Olmedillo: Right. At the time of the meeting Tuesday night, we had... the City had not approved building plans for anyone building. We had seen a site plan which did not show elevations or the size of the building. I had asked the supposed developer for the site to bring us copies over then and unfortunately, they were not delivered on time to be brought to that meeting. They were delivered to be brought to this meeting. I have them with me now. Mayor Suarez: You have with you... whoa, we are going to clarify something here. You have with you what today? I thought you were talking about when it was rezoned way back, a year ago. Mr. Olmedillo: No, ones that were rezoned, they... Mr. Framil: These are new developments, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Olmedillo: The rezoning is... Mayor Suarez: You have now plans for new development on this site? Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, but these are not official plans. When I called the developer, I said: "Do you have any plans drawn up, architectural plans drawn up for that particular building?" and they said: "We have preliminary plans that we drew up..." 73 February 25, 1986 1% 7 Mayor Suarez: Would this be for a project to be built in any way in relation to the City using funds or commitments from the Swire properties, or just the owner wanting to build on his own property? Mr. Olmedillo: Right, that is correct. Mayor Suarez: And can we see those plans, as long as you have got them? Do you have it so that you can put it on an overhead, or...? Mr. Olmedillo: No. Sorry, this cannot be reduced to that format. Mayor Suarez: OK, well the plans are available for anybody who wants to see them. What do they basically show? How many units, and how many stories, and... Mr. Olmedillo: They show... I have to again give you a little story. Mayor Suarez: I asked two very simple questions, how many units and how many stories, if you can tell me that. Mr. Olmedillo: There is one plan that shows eight stories 104 units, and there In a plan that shows 13 stories with 104 units. Mr. Framil: We have prepared statements that we would like to enter into the record. Mayor Suarez: We would be happy to take your prepared statement, Mandy, but we are making a lot of progress here, you have to admit! At least we have an idea there is some kind of a project here for this site. Mr. Olmedillo: Right, but remember, these projects have not been approved. They don't have a building permit. This is the project as it was drawn_ by the then promoter of the project, or... Mayor Suarez: Well, but supposing these projects came to us now, or these plans came to us now, not as part of a City affordable housing program, which Included three sites and this was one of the three, but simply as something the builder wants to put on his own property with his own resources. Do we have any say at this point, or any discretion to approve or disapprove of these plans? Mr. Olmedillo: They do comply with the ordinance under the RG-3/7, so I would say that we have very little discretion at that point. Mr. Rodriguez: My understanding, and this is from what I heard before, is that one of them might require a variance of setback. Mayor Suarez: One of them does require a setback variance? Mr. Olmedillo: The eight story one. Mr. Rodriguez: And if that is the case, we have to... it could come probably before you through appeals. Mayor Suarez: You all can assume how we would vote on any kind of a variance at this point, after having gone through all of this before, at least for myself, I'd certainly vote against it, but Commissioner... Mr. Plummer: The question that I have and keeps recurring. Even though I —i voted against this project in the inception, it was clearly stated before this Commission that that was to be a maximum of eight floors. That was clear. Nov, somewhere along the line, without this Commission's knowledge, it suddenly became a thirteen story building. And how did that come about, i because what was presented to this Commission is in direct opposition. I don't know that my colleagues who voted for it would have ever voted for a thirteen story building, most likely they would not have. Nov, the question, I still keep going back and forth, in my mind, is how did we go from and eight to a thirteen story building, when the matter put here before this Commission was eight floors. 74 February 25, 1988 Mr. Olmedillo: Initially, when the applicant went for the rezoning, they had their attorney state on the record, that they would do something like eight stories high. That was not made part of a covenant. This is, as I reviewed the minutes, the attorney for the applicant expressed that they would do something like eight stories, but not being part of a covenant, as we know it. I don't know, I would have to defer to the legal department to see if that is enforceable. Mayor Suarez: The concept that we approved, we thought it was eight stories and it sort of evolved into thirteen stories, huh? Mr. Olmedillo: That was represented to all of us during the public hearings. Mayor Suarez: And that was also within the approved zoning envelope with the FAR and the category. Mr. Olmedillo: When you approve zoning, you don't approve anything other than the zoning, unless there is a covenant to limit what you are proposing, you know, what you are approving. What we understand happened after that is, that the applicant couldn't fit the building in that site, according to them, with the design that they have unless they were to get variances. And for that reason, they claim they have to go to a 13 story high building of which we found out the plans for the first time we see them this week on... UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): Tuesday. Mr. Olmedillo: ... Tuesday. Mr. Plummer: Their contention was that your in requirements to do the same amount of units they had to go up an additional five floors. Now, I guess what I find strange is your department didn't come back to this Commission and say to this Commission, hey, what they presented to you at a meeting is not what is possible. I have never heard that said from the Planning Department. _ Mr. Olmedillo: As I stated before, Mr. Plummer, the plans were not presented to us for approval for a 13 story building. Mr. Plummer: No, you know that when they made their presentation before this Commission, they said 8 floors. That's what they said and I think they even gave us a rendering showing the eight floors and what they were going to do... Mr. Olmedillo: Right. Mr. Plummer: Now, why didn't the Planning Department ever come back to this Commission and say, hey, guys what you all approved is impossible to do. You never came or you never notified us by memo. You never notified us in any way that that which was passed which was presented was impossible to do. Mr. Rodriguez: I cannot tell you it's impossible at this point yet. We received a set a plans this week. It depends on the design that they have and number of or the size of the apartments... Mayor Suarez: But that's their recent plan, but we get the impression that at some point they went from 8 to 13 under the old concept. Mr. Rodriguez: We never received that officially until... Mayor Suarez: Oh. Mr. Rodriguez: ... this week. 5 Mayor Suarez: All right. _ Mr. Rodriguez: Because we asked them again to be at the meeting and they didn't attend the meeting. So how could we advise you of something that we don't know until we receive copies of? - Mayor Suarez: All right, we've made some progress on what would be contemplated there according to the... that's provided by the owner, right, . not middle third parties, fourth parties, fifth parties? �� p � p � P � r � 1 75 February 25, 1988 1. Mr. Olmedillo: No, this is, as far as we know, this was accompanying a letter from Hernando Carrillo who appears as one of the interested parties in Vizcatran Unlimited who was the original applicant for the rezoning actions. Mayor Suarez: Even though they're not the owners of the property. Mr. Joe Wilkins: It's a three ring circus, Mr. Mayor, we went through that last Tuesday. Mr. Plummer: Wait, wait, wait. My recollection is that Mr. Carrillo, standing before this Commission, absolutely denying at the time that he could not build it for what the stated price was said, hey, City, I'll give you all of the drawings that I have for the project. And I think that's what you have, that's not necessarily what is going to be done. These are - well, I think you've got to make that clear for the record. Mayor Suarez: And also the applicant must have been the property owner or someone with a property right, it couldn't be just... Mr. Plummer: No, he had the option at the time. Mayor Suarez: It couldn't have been just the developer, he must have some property right. Mr. Rodriguez: That's a legal issue that we cannot address ourself, you know, In the Planning Department because there has been some discussion... Mayor Suarez: That's not an issue, that's just a question, who was the applicant before? It had to be the owner or someone who had an interest in the property to build on it. Mr. Olmedillo: If you bear with me, I will locate the original application. Mayor Suarez: That's OK, that's OK, it's just the way it has to be, it really doesn't matter what you... Mr. Plummer: Well, for the record, these are plans which you have now on the podium which were given to you by Mr. Carrillo. Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, sir, with... Mr. Plummer: OK. Mayor Suarez: Not by the owner of the property. Mr. Olmedillo: ... with a letter. Mr. Plummer: Who has withdrawn, by virtue of his statement before this Commission at the last meeting, has withdrawn from the project. So these are not necessarily the plans from this day forward. Mayor Suarez: OK, you're holding up something, Guillermo. Mr. Olmedillo: This is a letter that accompanied these plans. Mayor Suarez: OK, who was it from? Mr. Olmedillo: Signed by Hernando Carrillo. Mayor Suarez: Do we have any indication that Mr. Carrillo has any interest in this property? Mr. Olmedillo: From the last meeting that we heard, he has stated on the record, apparently, that he was not part of Vizcatran Unlimited. Mr. Plummer (Off mike): He was withdrawn. Mayor Suarez: Do we have any copies of any sales agreement or option agreement or anything that shows that he has an interest in this property? Or deed, or anything? OK, I'm not sure that... Mr. Olmedillo: Not in our files. CAS 76 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: OK, I'm not sure that whatever he says would go on this property is particularly relevant, but if you wanted to know what some of the ideas are for this property, there's an interested party, presumably. I don't know what interest he has who claims that he would be wanting to do something like that there, only he doesn't own the property, I can guarantee you that and so there's really no formal application to the City at this point that I can tell. Mr. Framil: Can we give you some of our ideas? Mayor Suarez: That's what we'd like to hear from now. Mr. Framil: OK. Mayor Suarez: I know you have a great speech because Joe told us you have one. Mr. Framil: Good. He's got a wonderful one too, to follow up mine. Mayor Suarez: You can paraphrase it. You don't have to necessarily read it, you can paraphrase it if you... Mr. Framil. I was just going into the second page. We'd like to expect at least three things from the Commission and this is just based on fairness and common sense. One, to safeguard the quality of life in the area, by insisting that property owners adequately maintain the existing houses - some of them are now looking like flop houses - and either maintain them or clear the property and make it look nicer. I think Mr. Delgado, who seems to be the owner of that property is just letting it go. Also, to impose some kind of rational limits restricting the maximum density on any given site comparable to what already exists along lst Avenue. That's reasonable; we can't have a 13 story high... when everything else around it is considerably lower than that. And also, I think you should do whatever is necessary to obtain a balance between density, the stability of our neighborhood and the quality of life of the homeowners. Whenever you're going to make a decision, please keep that in mind. We would also like you, as our representatives, to discourage anyone from building tacky, low quality, high density projects in our - neighborhood. It's a little bit repetitive, but I think we want to carry that message through. We would welcome any high quality condominium of moderate height, medium density and attractive architecture and landscaping. We need _ your help in making sure that some of the projects that we have underway do happen, like the beautification projects that we want. We'd like to do some - tree planting and we'll need your help on that. Our crime prevention activities, our code enforcement and removing some of the commercial trucks in our area. Also, limit some of the legal subdivision of single family residences. That's what we need in there and we ask you for your help in accomplishing these goals. We need to keep that as a residential _ neighborhood. We know there's going to be some changes. We need some limits and they must be fair and they must be based on common sense, not a 13 story ' high project. What does that mean? You know, that's block busting. That's how we see it, that's how we perceive it, that's why we're here. We don't want our neighborhood busted up. Thank you. Joe. - (Applause) Mayor Suarez: We knew we were going to... please. We knew we were going to hear this speech and I guess that was it. OK, Joe, what are you going to tell us additionally? Mr. Wilkins: I'm going to try and just make a couple of quick points here. The only thing I can say about the past of the project would be again to point out that everything, the placement of the Metrorail Station, the rezoning of the property occurred prior to the formation of our association and we really don't feel that full citizen participation was present at that time. The past of this project is.... Mayor Suarez: Not as full as this, I guarantee you. Mr. Wilkins: Not as full as it's going to be. We're working on it. I'd like to address... —41 — CAS 77 February 25, 1988 7 (Applause) Mayor Suarez: Pleasz. Mr. Wilkins: I want to try to make some brief points about the future of the area. One thing that needs to be considered is that the only access road into this area is Coral Way and Coral Way has been designated by the State of Florida as a scenic and historic highway. There are severe limitations on what can be done on Coral Way. The statute that designates it reads: "that the preservation of Coral Way takes precedent over everything," and that Includes more restrictive traffic patterns and this has to be considered in the planning of any project in this area in the future. Mayor Suarez: I guess the idea was that people would not use the automobile at all but would use Metrorail. Mr. Wilkins: We'll get to that... well... Mayor Suarez: The only problem this doesn't go anywhere. Mr. Wilkins: I'm going to get to that point, hopefully. We know that the area serves as a gateway to Vizcaya, the Museum of Science, the Miami Avenue area, Miami Avenue has been designated as a scenic area or as a scenic transportation corridor. Mayor Suarez: Mayor's home. Mr. Wilkins: That's right. It's also the... Mayor Suarez: Designated as a historic area too? Mr. Wilkins: Soon. We also have the Roads neighborhood, the Shenendoah neighborhood, Bay Heights, Brickell, Vizcaya sits right at the focal point of this entire area. We feel it's unique, beautiful and needs to be preserved and maintained. We realize that the existence of the Metrorail station is intended to lead to expanded residential and commercial development and that such development is needed on many areas where Metrorail serves. It also has to be considered that what is equally necessary is a place for the resident and tourist riders of Metrorail to get off the train and enjoy an area of beauty and tranquility. There has been considerable support for the idea of roll -back zoning for the property in question. We realize this could be a difficult and unprecedented initiative and would not address the possibility of future unacceptable projects allowed under the current station development plan. We would like to propose that the City study this area with some consideration of establishing some kind of regulations, and I'm not that familiar with these processes, but I know they have been done in other areas, special permit areas where you have to maintain a certain consistency in the area if you're going to develop in the area. If you're going to build near Vizcaya, let's keep in mind, make it look like Vizcaya. If it is necessary to maximize the ridership and utilization of the Vizcaya Station, let the City put pressure on the County to provide the public transportation access for the existing residents along Coral Way, a service which was promised to our residents as a condition for establishing Metrorail and was never delivered. We are willing to work with the City to help further our efforts and best protect our area and neighborhood. Thank you. (Applause) Mr. Jose Luis Sierra: Good evening, my name is Jose Luis Sierra. I'm an architect and I live at 2920 S.W. let Avenue. I've been a resident of that area, Mr. Commissioner and Mrs. Commission, for the past 20 years. I am not opposed and I said it here the other day because I am an architect, I know those areas were targeted, they were studied for high densities to a certain -� point. We came here eighteen months ago, whenever it was, under the guides of those plans, I admitted, although I was opposed at that time to certain things in the project, I admitted that those areas were targeted for that and like you say, Mr. Mayor, they show me a plan at the time and they talked about 8 stories and they talked about I don't know how many units. What I'm afraid of, and this is what is now emerging out of all of this, is that that plan and s those statements that were made then were not really the truth and what was happening here. As you have found out yourselves and now we are thinking of variances, we are thinking about 13 stories instead of 8 and I CAS 78 February 25, 1988 do not oppose, as an architect, good planning and progress under good planning but I do oppose shoddy planning. If we allow any variances whatsoever under what was granted, I think we are going to do a bad job and you're going to be doing a bad job as far as permitting that to be done. what I want to make it clear here and I think that I can talk to my neighbors and I think we can come up to some kind of a solution, that you have a very special situation in this place. We can have this place and make this place an example of how can these areas can be transformed in what the original plan intended them to be. I as an architect, and I have many fellow architects in the area that can work with me, can work with whatever developer comes in there if they want to develop that site and do it in the proper manner. What I'm hearing here today and what I'm heard Mr. Olmedillo right now about this plan of 13 stories, I don't know, did you say the same number of units, 104 of the other plan, 104 this one? Mr. Olmedillo: That is correct, sir. Mr. Sierra: I wish, I don't know, I have... they seem to have found a magical formula there because if it didn't work for the eight stories under the new zoning laws with the envelopes and everything that we have, the restrictions that we have, I don't know how they can make it work unless they go completely to variances. Mr. Plummer: You see, the point I'm trying to make and I can't pin anybody down, these plans have no bearing on today and that's my feeling. I could be wrong but I'm still trying to pin down. These plans were the original set of plans for 8 floors which the building department says you can't build and then they went with a new set of plans to 13 floors which it didn't become financially feasible. Now, I don't think these plans which he has here in front of him right now have any bearing whatsoever from today forward. These are nothing more than a set of plans that were supplied by the previous hopeful developer that didn't materialize. So to propose that these plans are, in fact, anything what is going to develop tomorrow, have no bearing on It. May I see that letter, please? And you can... INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: Yes, we'll find, we'll... Mr. Plummer: I'll be glad to give it to you, ma'am. Mayor Suarez: Give the date. Can he... Mr. Plummer: The date of this letter is February the 23rd and it... INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: Please ma'am, please. Mr. Plummer: It was also received on the 23rd. You go ahead, let me... Mr. Wilkins: OK. Mr. Plummer: Let me read this letter. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Rodriguez: To clarify for the record... Mr. Plummer: I don't think he does. Mayor Suarez: Nobody's trying to hide anything from anybody, believe me. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Sierra: What I'm trying to say here is like you said, you don't have a set of plans, you don't have anything that you can really comment on. But I do think that we, as citizens of this area, since I am hearing different things, I really don't know because other time I've heard so many things I confuse myself. But I've heard so many things, we can come here to you and express to you our concern that if this is going to be one of first - probably the first of the rezonings being done in the areas of the Rapid Transit CAS 79 February 25, 1989 Station, especially the Vizcaya Station which is an important station, at least give us a chance when you do have something to come in here, discuss it or have the developer come to us and we'll discuss it with them, or the Planning Department. We can work with the Planning Department, no problem. Mayor Suarez: Let's get to that, let's get to that because we've been going around and around here and we're not getting anywhere. Mr. Sierra: I'll finish right away, Mr. Mayor, because that's... Mayor Suarez: Well, you don't want me to resolve it? Mr. Sierra: No, beg your pardon? Mayor Suarez: You don't want me to resolve it, you want to... Mr. Sierra: No, no, no. Yes, I want to resolve it, I just want to say one thing more so I won't have to talk any more. That's the only thing that we are. The citizens here are worried and that's all they are worried that this thing might become completely out of control and what we had thought that the rezoning was done for, is not there anymore. It's evolving into a new monster. OK, and this is why we're here today. Good planning, good development, yes. Thank you very much. (Applause) Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me see those back if you would. Just for the record... Mayor Suarez: Let me make a clarification, although we have... go ahead, Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: Just for the record, these are three set of plans. One was submitted early one, the second submittal was in September of 186 and the third submittal was in September of 186. These plans are a year and a half old. Now, who is Rafael Rodriguez? Mr. Olmedillo: He's one of the plan checkers for the City. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Rafael Rodriguez supposedly indicated in September 19th of 186, that there was no way they could build which was proposed before this _ Commission at 8 floors. Doesn't Mr. Rafael Rodriguez, I shouldn't speak to him individually, but his boss or his superiors have an obligation to come back to this Commission and say, gentlemen, what you approved cannot be done. - Mayor Suarez: Why don't you ask his relative, Sergio? Mr. Rodriguez: No, no relation with like Commissioner Plummer. At that point, I believe that the role that he had was to tell him that the plans he was proposing didn't work. Doesn't it stop him from redesigning the project and trying to fit it within the ordinance and the code, which is a different Issue altogether. Mayor Suarez: Let me see if we can get somewhere on this. Let me make one statement because although we have nothing presently staring us in the face by way of a plan, that doesn't mean that the status quo does not include the building there of many units which you don't want. In fact, we're now in a - please... (Applause) Mayor Suarez: ... as of now, this Commission, you know, I don't need to repeat this every time, but just to clarify although we have nothing specific that anybody's proposing to build on there, has been committed to building a large number of units. I think no less than 104 or so on that site. Now, to try to get us out of that status quo, what makes sense, I'm told by staff and r we're not just wasting our time as we walk around here we're trying to find out solutions to your concerns which are our concerns also because well, for all the reasons we know. Now, what I'm told is that we ought to refer this back to planning with a recommendation on what the proper zoning should be for this property and what limitations we can or should impose on this property. s We could not, today, even if we wanted to, say, we want to build something CAS 80 February 25, 1988 09 0 there no higher than 8 stories. Particularly if the builder was going to do it with his own financing, now if he wanted us to as was the original plan, to involve the builder, the owner of the property wanted to be involved in our affordable housing program, then we could impose certain conditions on him because our subsidy allows us to do that. At this particular juncture, I think you're concerned about anything that might be built on that property with the existing zoning that it has. And, therefore, I think we ought to entertain a motion to refer back to planning for a study that will recommend to us what the proper zoning would be for this area. You will have plenty of opportunity to make complete presentations on what makes sense in that area, what the height limitation should be, what the FAR should be, which is the density index, whether it should go back to duplex zoning or whatever, you know, it is that you're going to be proposing. Please. (Applause) Mayor Suarez: If down zoning takes place, or if its recommended, that's something that has not been done since I've been here and God knows what it will take to do it, but we ought to at least have our Planning Department be making a study and coming back to this Commission so it'll be in the posture that we can do something to impose limitations on what would be built on that property and quit having hearings on something that is not before us. We don't have anything before us right now, but we do have a rezoning that was done over i year and a half ago which is what's concerning you, I believe. Mr. Sierra: Mr. Mayor, can I make one more point, please? Mayor Suarez: At your own risk. Mr. Sierra: The person, Mr. Rodriguez, that came back with a report probably saying that that couldn't be done. Of course it can. If you figure it out and study the site a little bit of what we have right now, it is impossible to do it. It is impossible to put that many units in that site. Unless, like I said, you get at list of variances in there in order to do it. OK? Thank you very much. Mayor Suarez: OK, thank you. (Applause) Mr. Rodriguez: Since you asked me before for the record, the disclosure of ownership and the type of zoning when this was granted was Vizcatran Limited, a Florida limited partnership and Juan Delgado shows 66 2/3 percent as a general partner and Jose N. Alvarez, 33 1/3 percent as limited partner. Mayor Suarez: So Mr. Carrillo was not a partner. So we don't know exactly what his role was. OK. Yes ma'am, at your own risk again. You can use that mike if you... Ms. Marta Echevary: OK, my name is Marta Echevary, I live at 1104 S.W. 12th Avenue and I am a newcomer to the Roads section. I have lived near the Roads for a long time, but I have brought a property there last month. As a matter of fact, the day of the closing was the day that I read about the low income housing project. But one thing that concerns me, I came last Thursday to the meeting, I came last Tuesday and I'm here tonight and because there are no plans, somewhere along the line we're going to get tired of coming to the meetings and I'm afraid that something will be done without us knowing what is going to get in there. (Applause) Ms. Echevary: I was really surprised to find out the other night, last Tuesday, that the City of Miami gave these developers the street to build in there because they only have three lots available at this point in time. So It really hurt me to know that our Commissioners had given those developers the street, and another thing that I found out was that the original project was from Swire and Swire was going to build on Claughton Island, at least that is what we were told and then they said they couldn't build there, they were going to build in three other sites. About three weeks ago we were told that Swire came back and said that they could not afford to build any more so... Mayor Suarez: On this particular site... CAS el February 25, 1988 Ms. Echevary: Right. Mayor Suarez: ... the other two, we extracted cash from them and those projects are being completed, thank God. Ms. Echevary: Right, Rio Plaza, or whatever. I go by it and I see it, but what is happening then is just that we have developers who are playing with a piece of land that was granted a certain type of rezoning for some type of housing. But these people now have this zoning and they might do anything they want to with it to a certain point, and that really concerns me because I chose the Roads section because it's quiet, it's a nice place to live and I hope it continues to be that way. Thank you. Mayor Suarez: OK, thank you for your statement. Mr. Luis Herrera: I'd like to say one more thing, Mr. Suarez. I find it pretty funny because... Mr. Plummer: Your name for the record. Mr. Herrera: My name is Luis Herrera. I live at 1181 S.W. 22nd Terrace. That's just right on the corner where it's going to be built. I find it funny because last time that we came here and we voted on this, we tried to explain to you that that building there could not be built there. There wasn't sufficient room, 8 stories was too high and everybody was opposed. I thought there was only like three people that were for it and the reason why they were for it is because they were buying their property. And what I find funny is, if everybody was opposed to it, why did you vote on rezoning the area so easy? And you say it's hard to rezone it back to where it was, I think it's easy because from the beginning, we didn't want anything done there and I thought you just should have listened to us because 8 stories is just too high. Mr. Plummer voted against it and I thought he did a good thing because there was just no way it could be built there. (Applause) Mr. Herrera: And I don't think it's that hard to rezone it back the way it was because we didn't want it to begin with so I don't see the problem. I just think that it was pretty unfair to us, the neighbors, and I think it shouldn't be done, I think you should use better judgment next time you do this. Thank you. (Applause) Mayor Suarez: Anybody else? OK. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: You've been saying something all night. You might as well do It the right way. Ms. Barbara Sammit: My name is Barbara Sammit and I live on 1st Avenue and I work for another municipality. And I'm not a building expert and I'm not a zoning expert. The town hall meeting was not advertised, we came in here the other night it took them twenty minutes to find the switch for the microphone and they finally got the microphone on and nobody knew anything and they didn't have any plans and they didn't have any letters and I said, do you have a site plan and he handed around an 8 x 11 piece of paper. And what I'm worried about to we're not being informed, Mayor. We spread the word by telephone. There were more than 12.5 people here the other night, it was nearer to 200 and it was done on the telephone. And all that we ask is that you put a notice in the paper, in the Neighbors, if you're going to take some action or if there's going to be a discussion so we can attend. Mayor Suarez: That's why there was nothing to advertise because we don't intend to take any action. We called a town home meeting to hear of your concerns. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: Right. OK, Joe. CAS 82 February 25, Igoe Mr. Wilkins: I just wanted to ask, you said there was going to be a planning department study done, when, where? Mayor Suarez: Yes, well we haven't voted on it yet but you're not allowing me to take s vote on that. Mr. Juan Isidro: My name is Juan Isidro, I live in 228 S.W. 31st Road. I think we should get a little bit serious in this matter here. I haven't seen one of the owners of this property step forward and they're around here defending their plan, while at least telling us and you guys sitting in there that you don't know what you're doing. You say, I don't know, I don't know. Who put this in here? I don't know. This guys in the City Planning are confused. You guys are confused. They're walking around here. They're talking in there. They brought an attorney the other day here and they made that poor guy ashamed of himself. (Applause) Mr. Isidro: Come on, listen, I don't have to say anything else. Let's put it clear. Mr. Jay Smith: My name is Jay Smith, 100 S.W. 29th Road. The Commission says we have no'plan, but what the Commission has not said tonight is the City of Miami Commission has been pushing hard for a plan. Mayor Suarez: We've had a plan. We had a plan a year and a half ago, we've admitted that. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: Because you asked for it to keep coming back. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): How come? Mayor Suarez: Because we have to extend the deadline for them to complete the units, that's the only reason it was on before. But the deadline has been passed and they haven't completed their commitment and from our perspective, we don't know whether Swire has... we don't know what their rights are. Anyhow... INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. - Mayor Suarez: Please, please, we've heard from everybody on all aspects of _ this issue. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): One more question, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Suarez: And we're going to take a vote pretty soon. Ms. Lucy Seville: My name is Lucy Seville, I live at 2601 S.W. 9th Avenue. I just want to know, one question in my mind, can this rezoning be rolled back? That's all I want to know. Can this be proposed? Mayor Suarez: What would be the legal implications of down zoning? Joel Maxwell, Esq.: Mr. Mayor, as you indicated a few moments ago, the proper way is to... Mayor Suarez: No, that's a procedure, but supposing we went through all the procedure and did it, what would be the legal implications? Does it create a problem for us? Mr. Maxwell: If there's a strong "rational basis" for your actions, it would be legally defensible. Mayor Suarez: Yes, we'd have to go through the procedures and state those, Joe, please, I interrupted you when you were about to tell us. CAS 83 February 25, 1988 10 a Mr. Maxwell: Direct the Planning Department to undergo a study of the area to determine whether or not that would be proper to leave the zoning as it is, to up zone, if necessary, or to down zone. Mayor Suarez: And then come back directly to this Commission? Mr. Rodriguez: No. Mr. Maxwell: That's correct, but you come back to the Commission... Mayor Suarez: Right? Mr. Maxwell: ... with their recommendation but to undergo the process, you would have to go first to the Planning Advisory Board and then to this Commission. Mayor Suarez: First, Planning Advisory Board and then this Commission. Mr. Maxwell: That's correct. Ms. Seville: Now who would propose this that it go to the Planning Advisory Board? Mayor Suarez: We're about to do it, if you give us a chance. Ms. Seville: All right, go to it. (Applause) Mayor Suarez: Sir. Mr. Alvin Ray: Mr. Mayor, about two years... I live at 72 and my name's Alvin Roy, I live at 720 S.W. 24th Road. Approximately two years ago, I was living In what we call Little Havana, the heart of it. I moved my family to the Roads area which is not very far from where I used to live, it's only like 15 blocks, but I moved my family there for the simple reason that I wanted my wife to have some kind of safety when I go to work at night. Like I said, in less than five years, I've had to buy two properties for that. What will mean if you have some kind of low income housing next to my house practically, will mean that basically my wife may not be as safe as she is now. I may have to move my family again to an area which I consider to be safe. Mind you, I myself, come from a low income house. My dad used to work at night in a factory. He used to work as a salesman in the day time so I know how difficult it is for people that are trying to make a living. But, coming from a low income home, I also know how easy it is for the youngsters, the sons especially like I am, to grow up in a gang type environment because I came from there and what I don't want is for the Roads area of town, which is at least, at this time, identified as a real nice area of town to live in, to turn into a basically less than satisfactory area to live. It is my understanding that X amount of time ago an 8 story structure was approved. Well, whether it's an 8 story structure or a 13 story structure, if it's a low income structure for families, there is a big possibility of families that cannot really supervise their kids having to live in that area and I really fear for the crime of that area to increase. Everyone that lives in that area basically pays a certain amount of taxes in order to keep that area looking nice and it seems to me that if there is no owner that can defend that structure that they're trying to put together and if we have a full Commission here, I think that a full Commission can say this area should be rezoned to whatever it was before. Mayor Suarez: We just went through the procedures that we'll have to go through on that. Mr. Roy: Thank you very much. Mayor Suarez: Thank you for your statement. You made some good points. (Applause) Mr. Framil: Let's let the Mayor make the motion, please! AK? CAS 84 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: Yes, I would either entertain or make the motion, either way that we send this to Planning with instructions to study the possibility that we would either apply limitations or down zone the property to something that makes sense in that community. (Applause) Mayor Suarez: Please. Mr. Dawkins: Before you do anything, let me make a statement. Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Dawkins. Mr. Dawkins: All of this would have never happened if this Commission had done its job. (Applause) Mr. Dawkins: OK? We sat here, a majority of us and allowed Swire Builders, who were supposed to have given something to the City, and gave us nothing and you had some Commissioners here who allowed them to get off the hook. So, in order for us to look good, the public, we said that we would accept tokenism from them for allowing them the zoning variances that they needed to make a pile of money. (Applause) Mr. Dawkins: So, in order to cover our backs and make us look good, we said, you build "X" units in Little Havana, you build "X" number of units in Liberty City, and you put "X" number of units in your area and we will be glad and let you off the hook and our consciences will be satisfied. That's what happened. If you had come here then, we might not be where we are now. I said then, I'm going to say now and I will say it as long as I sit up here, it's no way in the world that we, as Commissioners, should have allowed Swire Builders, who owed us $15,000,000 worth of housing off the hook for 3.2 million dollars and when we allowed them off the hook, they gave 1.2 million dollars to Liberty City, 1.2 million dollars to Little Havana and then they threw in, knowing that they would never build the units in your neighborhood, some more affordable housing and we accepted it. So you have to blame those - this Commissioner was not here, that Commissioner was not here. You have to blame me, J.L. Plummer, the Mayor, Carollo and the rest of us because we are the ones who got you in this fix. (Applause) Mr. Framil: One question, Mr. Dawkins. May I, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Suarez: Mandy, really. Mr. Framil: Is that in writing? We'd like to get a copy because we don't know of any contract. We haven't seen it. Mayor Suarez: What? Mr. Framil: Between Swire, or Squire, whatever the name is... Mayor Suarez: Oh, I'll give you all the documentation on the initial deal, absolutely. It was a very important deal for the City and... Mr. Dawkins: It was not an important deal for the City, the City got hooked, OK? Mayor Suarez: I think it was a very important deal for the City. Mr. Dawkins: It was not an important... there's no way in the world you can sit here and me tell you that a guy was supposed to build two hundred units of ' low rent housing on Claughton Island and you know good and well you wasn't { going to put no low rent housing where you're selling houses for $200,000 a } unit. And you allow him off the hook for 3.2 million dollars and you tell me the City got a good deal? We got had. i F i CAS 85 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: We'll be happy to supply you with all the information on all of those agreements. Any disc... do we have a motion to that effect? Do you need for me to make the motion? INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: Do I have a second? Mr. Plummer: Second. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): What is the motion? Ms. Hirai: We don't have the motion or the second, just the sense of the motion. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): What is the motion? Mayor Suarez: To refer to planning with instructions to study and come back with recommendations on the zoning of this property including the possibility of down zoning. Mr. Plummer: I second it. Mayor Suarez: We have a motion. Mr. Dawkins: What will that accomplish? Under discussion, what will that accomplish? Mayor Suarez: Being able to entertain all the neighbors concerns about what the zoning should be for that property. We can't act on it unless we go through that procedure. That is what staff tells us. Mrs. Kennedy: And come back to us. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. City Attorney, if this Commission is desirous of not doing anything on that property, is it necessary to have a zoning hearing? Mr. Framil: Yes. Mr. Maxwell: If you don't want anything at all to occur? Mr. Dawkins: How many attorneys over there? Mr. Maxwell: If you don't... Mr. Dawkins: I got one attorney over there, OK? Go ahead, Mr. City Attorney. — Mr. Maxwell: As it stands right now, the zoning will allow them to construct a project of magnitude that would not be desired there. e Mr. Dawkins: Will allow who? p Mr. Maxwell: It will allow anyone who owns the property to do it. Mr. Dawkins: Only if we give them a building permit. ■ ss, ■ Mr. Maxwell: Well, there's not much you could do at this point to withhold =_ their building permit because they satisfy all the zoning requirements. If you do not want anything to occur on that property, you would have to go through the steps that we've outlined. Mr. Dawkins: But if it's already zoned for something less than 8 stories, what? ' Mr. Wilkins: It's zoned for much more. Mr. Maxwell: Well, that's the problem right now, the zoning will allow the 8 tstory building. The present zoning will allow that. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. 4 CAS 86 February 25, 1988 fl Mayor Suarez: Please, please, please, please, we're just trying to clarify so we can make the motion and get on with this. Mr. Dawkins: OK, so the motion... OK, make your motion. Go ahead. Mr. Maxwell: So you would have to do that. Mayor Suarez: That's what the motion will do. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any further discussion? Ms. Hirai: But who moved it, Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry? Mr. Dawkins: The Mayor made the motion. Ms. Hirai: Who moves it? Mayor Suarez: I moved it. Mr. Dawkins: The Mayor. Ms. Hirai: Oh. Mayor Suarez: Do we have a second? Two seconds. Mrs. Kennedy: OK, we have a second. Any discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Mayor Suarez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-189 A MOTION DIRECTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO UNDERGO A STUDY OF THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY 3200-3202 S.W. 1 AVENUE, 168 S.W. 32 ROAD, AND 200 S.W. 32 ROAD IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER EXISTING ZONING AY THIS AREA IS APPROPRIATE OR WHETHER IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO EITHER APPLY ZONING LIMITATIONS OR TO ENTIRELY DOWNZONE SAID AREA TO A CLASSIFICATION THAT WOULD MAKE MORE SLATE FOR THIS COMMUNITY. - Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mrs. Kennedy: Whatever the recommendation, the upzoning, downzoning, it could be anything. Mr. Sierra: Mayor, could you please clarify something for the good people here. They think that what you're doing means automatic downzoning. Mayor Suarez: No, it's not automatic downzoning. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): No, it's just the first step. Mr. Sierra: It's just the study of zoning. I wanted to make it... Mayor Suarez: Right, it's what would be required if we're going to do downzoning. Mr. Sierra: As a matter of fact, you might come back with something higher. Mayor Suarez: Conceivably. Conceivably. I think they understand clearly. CAS 87 February 25, 1988 J0 a INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: OK, PZ-8. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, as it's already beyond the time that I was going to leave, and we do... Mayor Suarez: You had another item you wanted to hear? Mr. Plummer: Well, the thing, I think that this Commission definitely must hear this evening is the impact fees. And I... Mayor Suarez: OK, I do want to make sure that PZ-8 gets heard first and then we can go to that if you like. Mr. Plummer: Well, OK, but I just feel we cannot let it go on any further. We've got to address the impact fees. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: PZ-8 is an appeal to a variance denial by the Zoning Board. The applicant built without the benefit of a building permit. He encroached in the side setback. The building goes up to the property line. The Zoning Board recommended denial on 6-3 basis and the Planning Department is recommending denial because this... Ms. Julia E. Jelke: Ladies and gentlemen, would you please wait a second. I would like to ask a question to the Mayor and the rest of the Commissioners. I've been raising my hands for about 15 minutes and maybe... Mayor Suarez: What item are you on? Ms. Jelke: I didn't know I have to come here so I want you to excuse me. Mayor Suarez: What item are you on? Ms. Jelke: Excuse me because I have interrupted you, Mr. De Yurre, but everybody's leaving. First of all, I would like to ask you to pardon me because my English is not so fluently but I try to communicate with all of you. I would like to know... My name is Julia E. Jelke. My residence, 635 S.W. 22nd Road. I'm living there for 27 years so I'm not here to be against anybody because the people who knows me knows that I'm not against those persons who need. The needies I don't, I , but what I really would like to know, what I'm here tonight, on what basis we are leaving tonight, I don't know, I would like to be informed. Mayor Suarez: OK, I presume that she was, wait... Ms. Jelke: As a resident, I think, OK... as a residence, I would... Mayor Suarez: I presume that you were here on the item having to do with the project of affordable housing, etc. and can you get... Sergio, can you get somebody... Guillermo, can you, somebody explain to her what action we took on it so that we can go on with the next item? Mr. Dawkins: If that is... Is that what you want? Mr. Olmedillo: Sure. Ms. Jelke: Could you please excuse me, Mr. Mayor... Mayor Suarez: And probably in Spanish would be better. Ms. Jelke: Could you please, Mayor, excuse me. I would like to be informed because I've been asking different persons... Mayor Suarez: Well, you're going to have somebody from the City staff explain to you and in Spanish, if necessary, because... Ms. Jelke: I really appreciate it because of my English is not good. Mayor Suarez: Right, exactly. Ms. Jelke: I haven't understand, I didn't understand it. Right. CAS 88 February 25, 1988 10 a Mayor Suarez: And we have many other items we're trying to get to. OK, Julio, thank you. Ms. Jelke: Thank you. Mayor Suarez: They're going to explain it to you. The gentleman is going to explain it to you. Ms. Jelke: Thank you to everybody. Thank you everybody. 18. REVERSE ZONING BOARD'S DENIAL AND GRANT APPEAL BY APPLICANTS (DOMINGO & REBECCA ERICE) - ALLOW EXISTING ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE AT 120 S.W. 66TH AVENUE - SUBJECT TO CONDITION. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: Back to PZ-8, the denial... Mr. Dawkins: PZ-8. Mr. Olmedillo: ...for condemnation of denial by the Planning Department is based on the fact that when you have no aide setbacks, you are approaching the zero lot line concept which is not in the City and it's not part of our ordinance and the neighbor would have the same right to be allowed to the property line. Therefore, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the variance for the setback. Raul Casillo, Esq.: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, good evening. My name is Raul Casillo, I'm an attorney. My address is at 2542 S.W. 6th St. and I represent Mr. & Mrs. Erice who are the owners of the property in question here. Unfortunately, my clients have made numerous mistakes. First was building the fence and we're talking here about a fence and a barbecue. They built a fence two feet into the boundary, not in front of their house but on the side and their second mistake was that when the enforcement people came in - they thought that they complied by sending plans from an architect into the City and they thought they didn't have to go and they forgot to go and then the enforcement p... Mayor Suarez: Just a barbecue that everybody in the neighborhood is in favor of because everybody goes to eat what they cook? Mr. Casillo: Everybody, everybody, Mr. Mayor is in favor of it. I have letters from 40 people in the neighborhood and both of the neighbors on both sides and they don't have any objections to the barbecue other than the fact that Mr. Erice doesn't invite them often now to barbecues. Mayor Suarez: Well, you haven't invited any of this Commission to any of his barbecues over there. Mr. Casillo: I'm sure that you will all be more than welcome in that barbecue. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Rodriguez, the only encroachment in the setback is a barbecue? Mr. Rodriguez: The barbecue is part of a structure and the structure includes a wall and all that is in the setback. Mr. Plummer: Is it just a wall without a living structure? Mr. Rodriguez: Without a living structure. It has a roof on it. Mayor Suarez: Without enclosed, nothing enclosed? Mr. Plummer: No. Mr. Rodriguez: It is a roof area. It's like a carport that encroaches in the setback and they have in that area the barbecue and two or three sinks to work with the barbecue. And you can see a picture over there of the property. CAS 89 February 25, 1988 Mr. Casillo: The neighbor... Mr. Plummer: You're taking up my time with something like this? You went through a whole damn process just to fight a barbecue? Mr. Rodriguez: I'm not just fighting a barbecue. It went to the Code Enforcement Board and the Code Enforcement Board fined him $250 per day. So they tried to get relief from that by going to the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board recommended against it like we did because it was no hardship on a variance. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): Denied it. Mr. Rodriguez: It was denied so it has to come to you for your approval to see if you will agree with that or not. Mr. Plummer: You know, with all of the problems that we have in this City, for Code Enforcement Board to take their damn time to go and go against... you got to see this to understand it, it's a carport with a barbecue. Mr. Rodriguez: If I may, there was a complaint from the neighbor that precipitated the whole thing and there have been some disagreement between them that has forced the whole thing. And so we had to follow the complaint from the neighbor and that was the proper follow up required. And it has _ taken you to this point so you have to make a decision on the barbecue and the sinks encroaching in the setback. Mr. Casillo: So at this time, I would request Commissioners to please take a vote on the request of variance. Mayor Suarez: Is anyone here in opposition to this request, PZ-8? Let the record reflect, no one has stepped forward. Mr. Plummer: OK, I'll tell you what I'm going to do. Mr. Dawkins: I second. Mr. Plummer: You better listen. I'm going to move to approve this very, very serious violation. Mr. Casillo: Thank you very much. Mr. Plummer: Shut up, you'd better listen. Mr. Casillo: OK. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): There's some more to it... Mrs. Kennedy: However... Mr. Plummer: And they must put on a barbecue for a minimum of 50 underprivileged children. Mr. Casillo: I'm sure that they wouldn't have any problem. Mr. Plummer: At their full expense. Mr. Casillo: I'm getting a yes from them. Mr. Dawkins: And bring up the names of the youngsters. Mr. Plummer: And I'm not talking about - I want to tell you, you better serve lechon. I'm not talking about hamburgers and hot dogs. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Ribs, we don't know about no lechon. Mr. Plummer: I'm talking about lechon, I'm talking about congris, for 50 kids and Miller Dawkins is the chaperone. Mr. Casillo: Certainly. CAS 90 February 25, 1988 Mr. Dawkins: 1 second. Mr. Casillo: And the whole Commission... Mr. Plummer: And for my friend, Miller Dawkins, you can serve him a Coca Cola with a head on it. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Yes. I would not dare to say you bribed me with a barbecue class. Mrs. Kennedy: When they asked W.C. Fields how he liked children, he said, broiled. That's what you mean, Commissioner Plummer? In the barbecue? Mr. Casillo: I'm sure he'll be more than delighted to do that, Commissioner. It's a terrific suggestion. Mayor Suarez: We have a second on the motion? Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): I second. Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Read the ordinance. Mrs. Dougherty: This is variance. Mayor Suarez: I'm sorry, call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88-190 A RESOLUTION REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD AND GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, PAGE ONE OF SIX, RS-2/2, ONE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL, MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, TO ALLOW AN EXISTING ADDITION TO THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 SOUTHWEST 66TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN), SUBJECT TO PROPERTY OWNER HOSTING A BARBECUE FOR FIFTY DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN WITHIN SIXTY DAYS FROM THE DATE HEREOF, AS PER PLANS ON FILE; ZONED RS-2/2 ONE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: Let's put a stipulation that that must take place within 60 days - and I vote yes. COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL: Mr. Casillo: Thank you very much. CAS 91 February 25, 1988 19. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - CHANGE LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 2575 S.W. 28TH STREET FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE (APPLICANTS: RAMON 6c CAYETANA FERNANDEZ) (SEE LABEL 20). Mayor Suarez: What other private matters do we have before we take up... is PZ-10 a private application? Mr. Plummer: No, all I want to do is get to the impact fees. That's what I'd like to do and... Mayor Suarez: I just want to see if there's any private ones, most of these are Planning Department items except for 10 and 11, 12 and 13, I think. Mark Valentine, Esq.: Twelve and 13 are private applicants. Mayor Suarez: What happened to 10 and 11? Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: Ten, eleven, it's an application for a Comp. Plan amendment and a zoning change from an RS... Mayor Suarez: They're not here? The applicants are not here? Mr. Plummer: Which item is this? Mr. Olmedillo: Ten and eleven. Mayor Suarez: Do we have anyone here to oppose the application of 10, PZ-10? Mr. Plummer: They're both for approval. You're in opposition? Mayor Suarez: Tucker. Mr. Tucker Gibbs (Off and on mike): No, we're not in opposition, we've spoken with the applicant about a one foot buffer on the side that would not be rezoned and the applicant's agreed to that. I think there's one issue... Mr. Plummer: He'll give a covenant before the second reading to that effect? Mrs. Dougherty: We just won't rezone it. They don't have to have a covenant, we just... Mr. Plummer: We'll just rezone it with that provision in it. City Attorney said that's all legal. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): OK. So that's - Move it. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mr. Plummer: Ten and eleven. Mr. Dawkins: Ten, OK. Mayor Suarez: Any further discussion? Read the ordinance. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND ADDENDA (SEPTEMBER 1985); FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2575 S.W. 28TH STREET (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL OFFICE; MAKING FINDINGS; AND CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner Kennedy and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: CAS 92 February 25, 1988 AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 20. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING AT LAST AT 2575 S.W. 28TH STREET FROM RS-2/2 TO RO-1/4 (APPLICANTS: RAMON & CAYETANA FERNANDEZ) (SEE LABEL 19). Mr. Dawkins: Move eleven. Mayor Suarez: Moved. Do we have a second on eleven? Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mayor Suarez: It's a companion item. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Read the ordinance. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2575 SOUTHWEST 28TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MINUS THE ONE FOOT OF SUBJECT SITE, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM RS-2/2 ONE -FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL TO R-1/4 RESIDENTIAL -OFFICE BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 43 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner Kennedy and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. CAS 93 February 25, 1988 10 0 21. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - CHANGE DESIGNATION AT 3629-3631 N.W. 24TH AVENUE FROM MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LIBERAL COMMERCIAL - SUBJECT TO CONDITION (APPLICANT: NATALIO ASCAR) (SEE LABEL 22). Mayor Suarez: Item 12. Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: Twelve and thirteen are again companion items, plan amendment and zoning change from RG-2/4 to CG-2/7. The main problem that we see with this is that we are creating an island made up of only five parcels. You will see in your maps and the transparency that it is surrounded by either CG-1 or RG-2/4. The five lots which are subject of the application will create an island there and you will find that there are substantial differences between the CG-1 and CG-2. CG-1, it's a liberal district, commercial district, but CG-2 allows wholesaling, warehousing, allows manufacturing and that will be right abutting the RG-2/4 area you see to the northeast of the particular property. So, if it were to be approved, you would see that the parcels in yellow will constitute an island of CG-2 surrounded by different uses so the use is unrelated to the area, therefore, the Planning Department is recommending denial of the application. Mr. Mark Valentine: Are you finished? Mr. Plummer: Go ahead. Mr. Valentine: Mark Valentine on behalf of the applicant, 3050 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1000. This is a joint application. The applicant who's on 36th Street currently operates a automobile used sales car lot and the adjoining applicant just north of that one operates a mechanics shop, a very small mechanics shop. What's interesting is that I think the owner who's on 36th Street is operated the business for 17 years. The adjoining owner has been there approximately 8-11 years. The City has both given each owner licenses to operate the two items that are in question right now. The applicant who has the auto repair shop has a license for the same and the owner for the body shop also has a license for the same. Basically, we were here about a month ago for a very similar application on lot - it was one block east of the existing light. There has been no opposition from anyone in the neighborhood. We've had unanimous approval by both the Zoning and Planning Board and the residential character of the neighborhood is extremely poor. All my clients intend to do is basically continue to operate the business the way its been operating for sometime and, again, with the permit, with the appropriate licenses from the City. There's been no violations by the City, these guys have continuously obtained the correct license and we don't feel that a change of zoning would result in any adverse impact on the community. We just want to continue to use the property the way it's been used for a long period of time. Mr. Plummer: Is there anybody here in opposition? Mr. Olmedillo: May I state something for the record? Counsel for the applicant stated that the other rezoning was similar to this. Again, I should point out the difference. The other one was a CG-1, this is a CG-2 district. Mr. Valentine: The point I was raising is that one of the issues raised by the department is that it's an intrusion on the commercial district into a -I residential district and that's the only similarity between the two =� applications. Again, the entire area is basically auto related type industry and residential sections, unfortunately, has a nominal impact on the commercial aspect of the neighborhood. Even the - just above the city limits which is 36th Street, that also which is Dade County, is primarily commercial. =j In addition to that, it's a step higher, it's also a portion of that property —; is IU-1 zoning as well. If there is an island created, it's the residential —j section. The residential section is squeezed in and the entire neighborhood, the character - most of the neighborhood is that of commercial. Mayor Suarez: I'll entertain a motion on this item. Are you negotiating something with interested neighbors, no? —i t CAS 94 February 25, 1988 _t r Mr. Valentine: Well, fortunately, we don't have any neighbors who have expressed... Mayor Suarez: Interested or disinterested. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I think we all know 36th Street well. We know what It is and I think any improvements to this area would be in favor. I think what we did do, Mark, on the last one, we asked for some landscaping and I think it would be appropriate at the same time this time and I would leave it up to the discretion of the department to approve a landscaping site plan and with that provision, I would... — Mr. Rodriguez: Maybe they would like to limit the use of the property somewhat because... and we can dis... Mr. Plummer: To what extent? Mr. Rodriguez: Well, we could discuss it with them so certain uses will not be allowed. Maybe they will do that. Mr. Plummer: OK, fine, fine. Mr. Valentine: We have no problems giving the City a covenant to limit the uses to the existing use. Mr. Plummer: Do you want to talk or do you want me to talk? Mr. Valentine: No, I'm ahead, let me shut up. Mr. Plummer: I move it on first reading subject to a site plan before second reading with the Planning Department's recommendation on the limited use of the properties. Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mr. Plummer: I so move. Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll. That's very important because you were just saying liberal commercial allows all kinds of uses we wouldn't want to have there. Call the roll, Madam City Clerk. Read the ordinance, I'm sorry. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND ADDENDA (SEPTEMBER 1985); FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3629-3631 NORTHWEST 24TH AVENUE (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) BY CHANGING DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LIBERAL COMMERCIAL; MAKING FINDINGS; AND CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Dawkins and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. CAS 95 February 25, 1988 22. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING AT LAST AT 2395 N.W. 36TH STREET AND 3629-3621 N.W. 24TH AVENUE FROM RG-2/4 AND CG-1/7 TO CG-2/7 - SUBJECT TO CONDITION (APPLICANT: NATALIO ASCAR) (SEE LABEL 21). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Plummer: I move the companion item with the same stipulations, 13. Mr. Dawkins: Second. Call the roll. I mean read it. Mr. Plummer: And just to my good friend, Sergio, that is not to be turned into Fairchild Gardens, bring back something reasonable. Mr. Rodriguez: I'm glad you don't mention it. Mayor Suarez: Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2395 NORTHWEST 36TH STREET AND 3629-3631 NORTHWEST 24TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM RG-2/4 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL FOR LOTS 18, 19 AND 20 AND CG-1/7 GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR LOTS 16 AND 17 TO CG-2/7 GENERAL COMMERCIAL BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 19 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Dawkins and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 23. A) STIPULATE CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS FROM APPLICATION OF THE IMPACT FEE FORMULA. B) FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REPEAL 10273, CHAPTER 54.6 - i IMPOSE IMPACT FEE TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY ON f ACCOUNT OF SUCH DEVELOPMENT. Mr. Plummer: Can we do the impact fees because I'm going home shortly after that. Mr. Rodriguez: That's PZ-18. Mr. Plummer: Do we really need a lot of discussion or... Mr. Dawkins: Make your motion, J.L. CAS 96 February 25, 1966 Mr. Plummer: No, well, I can't make the motion, my colleague. I am opposed to the ordinance. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): I'll vote to approve it since you're against it. Mr. Plummer: All right, I want to move... Mrs. Dougherty: Where's the ordinance? Mr. Plummer: ... not move, but I want to discuss very briefly... Mrs. Kennedy: What are the... Mr. Plummer: ... this - on impact fees. Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, but what are the problems with it? Mr. Plummer: OK, my problems are the completely watered down ordinance that is before us this evening. I want to bring to the attention of my colleagues that what was proposed in the first impact fee ordinance and this one, will show a reduction in the period of time, I think, to the year 2000 of a 50 percent reduction; 50 percent from $40,000,000 to improve our community down to less than $20,000,000. Now, we all want those improvements and what you don't get back in impact fees, you're going to have to come up with tax dollars or bonds. To me, it is only fair that those people who are making a profit out of development should pay their proportionate share. I have stated before and I will state again, I am very much in favor of single family residences being exempt. I'm a true believer that a man's home is his castle. Anything above single family to me is for profit. I think that it is only fair in what this Commission has done in the past in trying to develop moderate and low income housing, should be exempt if it qualifies under those two categories. I also feel that the charitable organizations should be exempt from an impact fee, but beyond that, I am totally, totally opposed to any further exemptions. Those exemptions do not greatly alter the original ordinance. The only reason that I agreed to bring back and relive this which had been in effect, was based on we did not include the charitable organizations in the first one. I just beg of my fellow Commissioners to realize the impact that the impact fee watered down will have on this community in the year 2000 when we have before us here an ordinance this evening which will reduce the amount of money this City will have to work with by better than 50 percent. For that reason, Commissioner Dawkins, I cannot vote for that which is before us. I would hope... Mr. Dawkins: OK, well, the only way that I'm going to vote for it is that it's only single family homes. I'm not voting to lift it off of - I would not vote... Mrs. Kennedy: Not excluding charitable organizations or low or moderate income... Mr. Dawkins: No charitable organizations, no, no, no, no, I would not. As you say, the charitable organizations going to flush their toilets and they're going to drive on the streets, they're going to walk on the sidewalks. Mrs. Kennedy: Well, I can understand that the impact is going to be created. Mr. Dawkins: I mean, that's just my personal... Mrs. Kennedy: But I don't know, at least with this ordinance, when we move ahead we can collect the $19,000,000. Otherwise, what are... Sergio, again, how long will it take then? Mr. Dawkina: But you see, Commissioner, I agree with you... Mrs. Kennedy: To have the new proposal? Mr. Dawkins: But we're in the same bag now that we are in with the school board. We got a $980,000,000 school bond issue, nobody wants to pass it and in the year 2000 you're going to have no damn place to put no children in school. Mr. Plummer: That's right. CAS 97 February 25, 1968 Mr. Dawkins: Now, nobody wants to face up to it that we got to pass a $980, 000, 000 bond issue to have schooling so in the year 2000, you won't be able to flush your toilet and then you're going to run... I won't care, I'll be in a Veterans Administration home somewhere. It won't make any difference to me. But... Mr. Plummer: Commissioner Dawkins, as much as it hurts, I can accept your thinking and I would be in that violent opposition, I only ask... Mr. Dawkins: I didn't ask you, I said how I was going to vote, I didn't ask you to vote with me. Thank you. Mr. Plummer: Your momma. Mr. De Yurre: Sergio. Sergio. Mayor Suarez: Your collective mammas. Mr. De Yurre: What fees, if any, that would be included in this impact fee are being paid already by developers? Mr. Rodriguez: None of this. Mayor Suarez: That's a good thing. Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): Let's get it over with now and... Mr. De Yurre: What do they pay nowadays? Mr. Rodriguez: We have at present a moratorium on impact fees that will last until, I believe, April. Mayor Suarez: Strike from the record. Madam City Clerk, all references to all mothers stricken from the record. Mr. De Yurre: Don't the developers pay for sewer connection and... Mr. Rodriguez: I'm sorry, Commissioner. Mr. De Yurre: Don't they pay for any sewer connection or anything along those lines? Mr. Rodriguez: Remember in the City, we don't take care of sanitary sewer. That is with the County so they pay that to the County. Mr. Dawkins: Beg your pardon? Run that by me again. Mr. De Yurre: OK. Mr. Rodriguez: In the City, developers don't pay for sanitary sewer, that is paid to Dade County in... Mr. Dawkins: All right, well why are you making me pay a charge my people $25.00 to tack on to the sewer for storm sewers? Mr. Rodriguez: That's different, storm sewer is within the City. He was asking me about sanitary sewer, I believe. In sanitary sewers, the applicant pay to the County and storm sewers are within the City jurisdiction and you pay to the City. j Mr. De Yurre: How many municipalities here in Dade County have an impact fee? i Mr. Rodriguez: As far as I know, none. -i Mr. Plummer: Well, yes, but... Mr. Rodriguez: Dade County is preparing one for a long time now. Mr. Plummer: They've been waiting for us. Mr. Rodriguez: They're waiting for us I think to do it. CAS 98 February 25, 1988 Mrs. Kennedy: Everybody's waiting for us. Mr. Plummer: but, please answer the question fully, you know, because you have to be fair with Victor. Victor, in the last legislative session, you better have your own impact fees in by, what, July? Mr. Rodriguez: July 1st of 1987, last year. Mr. Plummer: OK. You better have your impact fees in place because if you don't, then you're going to be governed by state impact fees. Every municipality... Mayor Suarez: But we're past that deadline. Mr. Plummer: ... in the State of Florida is going to have impact fees. Mayor Suarez: But we're past that deadline is what he... Mr. Plummer: Yes, I understand that, OK? Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Yes, but we passed it but they're watering it down. Mr. Plummer: So it's not a matter that we are the only one right now. All of them are going to have to have impact fees. Mr. De Yurre: Well, my concern is that we don't know if they're already delayed almost a year now, it could take a few more years and then, you know, my concern is that developers are going to shy away from Miami because they can go somewhere else right across the street and develop a lot cheaper and that... Mr. Dawkins: They're not making no more land, Commissioner. Mayor Suarez: And let me add this to what the Commissioner is saying, if we don't pass our own by July of last year, presumably the state will pass one that is applicable throughout. Mr. Rodriguez: I don't say that, that's Commissioner Plummer. Mayor Suarez: OK. Well, what is before the legislature in this coming term? Mr. Rodriguez: What has happened before, there was an amendment to the impact fee ordinance by which we will not be able to exact from developments of original impact sites any exactions unless they will... that's it. Mayor Suarez: Right, well the state legislation came down and said unless you have a universal or broad impact fee ordinance, you could not exact from the large projects the DRI exactions. OK, no one has moved on that so far and everyone, somehow, manages to get their large projects to make contributions. Mr. Rodriguez: You mean the City? Mayor Suarez: Well, we have the voluntary ordinance that we passed a year ago and so on, that was quite a tricky one. Mr. Rodriguez: In other municipalities in the state, there have been, I believe, about forty, that has passed impact fee ordinances already, you know. Mayor Suarez: OK, but most of those are presumably municipalities that are not as developed as the City of Miami, I guess. Mr. Rodriguez: That's true, this is the largest one in the whole state. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think... Mayor Suarez: So we're really required, in a sense, by state law to even be where we are because if it had not been for state law, you probably wouldn't have presented us with an impact fee ordinance. It wasn't originated in this Commission, the idea. Mr. Rodriguez: It was originated in this Commission, yes. 7 i -s CAS 99 February 25, 1988 t Mr. Plummer: Oh yes. Mayor Suarez: It was? Mr. Rodriguez: Before even I came here, it was originated. Mr. Plummer: Yes, we talked about it. Mr. Rodriguez: 1982 to be exact. Mr. Plummer: You know, I think the bottom... Mayor Suarez: And the idea was to make new developers pay for... Mr. Rodriguez: The impact they create. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, that came about when we redid, for example, Brickell and we redid Omni, we upzoned and we made many, many instant millionaires overnight. And we said, hey, guys you have got to assume some of the obligations of water and sewage and traffic and all of that. Mayor Suarez: Yes, but I think of that as a linkage ordinance. In other words, if you're going to give a concession to a developer, the developer ought to turn around and help the community in some way by building infrastructure or by building the particular need of that community. It could be affordable housing or whatever. But we don't have that situation now, we're not granting any FAR increases to anybody here, we're talking here about shifting a tax burden for capital projects from the G.O. bond mode to - it's always the taxpayers, we're always going to have to pay for it if you're going to live in the City of Miami because if you put an impact fee, the taxpayer has to pay for the new housing he's going to live in if it's housing or the office building, if it's office building. But you're saying it's shifted somehow to the builder at the moment of where he builds. And what I've always wondered for my vote is how can we exempt - I understand that we have the developments of regional impact. There are certain thresholds, typically 300,000 square feet? Mr. Rodriguez: 300,000, yes. Mayor Suarez: And I understand that we don't want to affect the small builder, at least I wouldn't want to. We're exempting certain neighborhoods, are we not? Nov under the new one or did I misread the... Mr. Rodriguez: In the proposal that we have we're exempting low income housing. And we had defined low income housing as that one... or affordable housing, that one that occurs in a target area, community development target area.. Mayor Suarez: Oh, I see, that's how we tried to... Mr. Rodriguez: ... and also anyone that could be certified as being affordable housing by the housing... Mayor Suarez: I guess that an effort to try to make the whole thing constitutional. Mr. Rodriguez: In reference to what you were... Mr. Plummer: Well, it's also an effort to try to get it so we get more housing. Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, and not to stop development. Mayor Suarez: No, but I mean, the definition of using the neighborhoods as opposed to using the definition of affordable housing. Mr. Rodriguez: What you were mentioning about the possibility of exempting, as you asked us before, we also prepared on page 6b of your package, a minor use permit approach that in reality what it does, accomplishes what I believe Commissioner Plummer was saying before of trying to be able to exact from developers certain points in the negotiations when they come before the f CAS 100 February 25, 1988 I Commission or before the zoning board or before the staff some of the contributions that they should make as part of the impact they create. I don't know if you remember it what we discussed before but that was another option that you have. Mr. Plummer: Well, that's - to me, that's not fair and equitable across the board. I just say, look... Mayor Suarez: But before you conclude that, what projects does that apply to? Mr. Rodriguez: The way that we're proposing it over here as a draft, it would apply to any project that would be between twenty thousand and less than two hundred thousand. From 200,000 and up, you are covered by major use permits already. Mrs. Kennedy: Twenty thousand to 50,000, the Planning Department renders a decision. Mayor Suarez: Determination on that specific case. Mrs. Kennedy: Right. Mr. Rodriguez: Yes. Mr. Plummer: And, to me, that's not defendable in court because it's not uniform. Mayor Suarez: OK. Mr. Plummer: With an impact fee, you have a formula, the same formula applies to everyone across the board and that's defendable. Mayor Suarez: Now... Mr. Plummer: When you go and you have one doing this and one doing that and one says this one costs more and this one costs less, to me, that's not defendable. The bottom line still is the same. This City is obligated, between now and the year 2000, to make certain infrastructure changes. Are you going to do it from those who are profiting today and during that period of time or are you going to saddle the poor old taxpayer in a G.O. bond? And that's where I say it's inequitable. These people who are making a profit should pay the gaff for the impact that they're creating. With no future development in this community, there's no more impact. Mayor Suarez: Without future development, there's also no more taxes. Mr. Plummer: I understand that, Mr. Mayor, but you don't think for one minute that they're not going to build on Brickell Avenue. Mayor Suarez: But those big projects are going to come under the DRI process anyhow. The problem is that we have this state requirement. Mr. Plummer: No, not now. Mayor Suarez: And to answer Commissioner Plummer's concern of the legality of it and to clarify what Vice Mayor Kennedy was saying, we're proposing to exempt those from twenty to fifty thousand square feet or to simply give you the ability to look at the impact on a case by case basis and report back to us as to what the exaction would be there. Mr. Rodriguez: The process as we have shown over here... we had three different categories, a project between 20,000 and 50,000 would be handled like a Class C permit at the Planning Department level that can be appealed to the Zoning Board and to the City Commission ultimately. A project between 50,000 and 100,000 will be handled as a Class D or before the Zoning Board can be appealed to the City Commission and a project between... what we do is lower the threshold of the major use permit to actually to to 100,000 and to require any project 100,000 or above to come before you for approval. Mrs. Kennedy: Then, if you build downtown, then there's another different set of rules. i _t j CSK 101 February 25, 1988 Mr. Rodriguez: Additional. Mrs. Kennedy: Yes. Mayor Suarez: But 20,000 to 50,000, the small developer, the small builder, what... I don't mean what boards he goes to or what names the procedures have, I mean what exaction are we going to make, is it discretionary to you or Is there a formula or how? Mr. Rodriguez: It would be discretionary under the approach that we have. Mayor Suarez: Totally discretionary to you, to make a recommendation or... to us, or does it not necessarily come before us? Mr. Rodriguez: It could go before you if it is appealed by the applicant. Mayor Suarez: If it's appeal only. Mr. Rodriguez: It's similar to a Class C except that we're getting to a new area of exaction and... Mayor Suarez: And you think that's defensible in court? Joel Maxwell, Esq.: Well, Mr. Mayor, you used the expression, totally discretionary. No, that would be a problem. That... Mayor Suarez: Well, I didn't mean discretionary, that there is some element of subjective judgment or evaluation here... ! Mr. Maxwell: If such an ordinance is passed and it has the necessary standards and criteria in it to remove the discretionary element, that will probably be defensible. j Mr. Plummer: Twenty thousand square feet would be approximately how many units under normal circumstances? Mr. Rodriguez: It would be about - more than say fifteen units or so. Mayor Suarez: Fifteen units. Mr. Plummer: Fifteen units. That man is making a profit off those 15 units. Mrs. Kennedy: sure. Mr. Plummer: He is creating an impact with 15 units. Mr. Rodriguez: You're right. Mr. Plummer: And you're going to exempt him? That's unfair. Mr. Rodriguez: You can lower the threshold. Mr. Plummer: That's unfair. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I know. Mr. Plummer: Now, you know, I'm just... you've got to be fair and equal across the board. The proposal of an impact fee establishes a formula. It takes it out of anybody's discretionary mode and it basically and more so and I keep repeating, addresses the problem that this City is going to be facing in the year 2000. Where in the hell is the money coming from? We are at our millage cap, are you going to continue to try to pass bonds? I think that's unfair. Mr. Rodriguez: Well, we're providing you the two choices because you asked i for it. Mr. Plummer: Well, OK, I'll tell you what, I'll try to make a motion and it can either fly or it doesn't. I make a motion that the impact fee, as originally proposed, before this Commission with the exemption of only single family residences and low or moderate income housing as per the federal guidelines, that the formula be applied to all other new construction. i CSK 102 February 25, 1988 Mayor Suarez: That's basically the original impact fee ordinance that was passed with the additional modification of affordable housing, I think, as an exemption. Mr. Rodriguez: No, the original was single family. It didn't exclude low and moderate income housing. Mayor Suarez: Right, so he's saying... Mr. Rodriguez: He's adding now low and moderate income housing. Mayor Suarez: That's what I'm saying. Mr. Plummer: I thought that was included in the first. Mr. Rodriguez: I'm sorry, I didn't understand you. No, the first one was single family exemption. Mr. Plummer: OK. Mayor Suarez: Right, it always exempted. OK, we have a motion, do we have a second? Mr. Dawkins: Yes, I second it. Mayor Suarez: We have a second. Any discussion on that? Mr. Plummer: Just for discussion on my own motion. Mr. Dawkins: Well, make up your mind. Mr. Plummer: OK, one other thing, let me discuss out. We had originally talked about exempting City projects and I think that's very important. And with the consent of the seconder of the motion, I would like to also exempt City projects, Commissioner. Do you accept that? Mrs. Kennedy: Sergio, what page of your backup material are exemptions? Mr. Dawkins: Yes, no sense in our paying our ownself a fee, J.L. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Maxwell: You mean joint venture projects, not just City, City's wouldn't be any.... Mr. Plummer: City and joint venture. Mr. Rodriguez: Page nine. Commissioner Plummer, to clarify the record, do you mind going through the exceptions which are on page nine because it covers other things that you did before to make sure that you are eliminating certain things. Mr. Plummer: You go to page nine. You heard what I said. I've exempted single family residence... Mayor Suarez: It's not a complicated motion, Sergio. It's very simple. Mr. Plummer: ... I'm exempting moderate and low income housing as defined by the federal guidelines. I am exempting... Mr. Rodriguez: Excuse me, one second, let me clarify something there. We are defining it, the low moderate income housing as that that will be built in a i� community development area because it's an easy standard to apply. i Mayor Suarez: You're going back to the actual definition of affordable housing as opposed to an area definition. Mr. Rodriguez: And also that, if I may, that that will be certified by the City of Miami Community Development Housing Division. Mr. Plummer: That's fine, I have no problem with that. CSK 103 February 25, 1980 LIP Mr. Rodriguez: both of them. Mr. Plummer: I have no problem with that. And the other area is any City or joint City project. Mr. Rodriguez: OK. Mayor Suarez: If that's the motion and a second, are you going to address the motion? Mr. Albio Castillo: One minute. - Mr. Rodriguez: Sorry. Mayor Suarez: But, you're sure it's to this motion, right? Mr. Castillo: Yes, sir. It only takes me one minute. Mr. Rodriguez: And that means... Mayor Suarez: Wait, OK, we're going to get to you. Mr. Castillo: OK. Mr. Rodriguez: You also included before the grace period. That I don't think you want to include again. Mr. Plummer: A grace period of what? A period of time... Mr. Rodriguez: For projects that have a DRI approval. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think if they already have DRI approval, you can't go back and change that. Mr. Rodriguez: Well, they have DRI approval and they could be applied the impact fee if they don't get a building permit within a certain period of time. Before you say fifteen... Mayor Suarez: You know, that... Mr. Rodriguez: I want to make sure... this is important, we got to clear though. - Mayor Suarez: The last time we went through this, I don't know that I ever clarified but that really doesn't make any sense theoretically. If they are DRI approved projects, there has been a determination made, they already have _ gone through the whole concept of an exaction for the impact they create. That already has happened. They have already been required to either prospectively or at some point or retroactively, or at some point in the development, pay that exaction for the infrastructure needs they're going to create, so why are they an issue? I don't understand. Mr. Rodriguez: Because those projects before have to deal with impacts of a regional nature... Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Rodriguez: ... they are development of regional impact and we're dealing with Citywide impacts. Mayor Suarez: Right. Mr. Plummer: Local. Mr. Rodriguez: Which is different. Mr. Plummer: What is fair? Mr. Rodriguez: Do the same, like you did before, I think, that was a good exception. CSK 104 February 25, 1988 Mr. Plummer: OK, give me the wording. Mr. Rodriguez: The wording is, "any development of regional impact for which a development order has been approved by the City before the effective date of this ordinance providing that the building permit is obtained within 15 months of the effective day of this ordinance." Mr. Plummer: That's fine. I'll accept that. Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Mayor, I think you need to clarify that just a bit further to see if you intend to apply that to downtown DRIs or area wide DRIs? Remember, the Commission has approved both of those and they apply to very large areas so in the definition of development under chapter 380, any building permit will be subject to the DRI process; they're in there. Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mrs. Kennedy: And the downtown anything between ten and two hundred thousand, correct, will be subject to both DRI and this ordinance. Mr. Plummer: No, not any more. Mr. Maxwell: No, no, the downtown DRI has its own set of exactions. Mr. Plummer: Well, which is being appealed. Mr. Maxwell: Yes. It's being appealed. What I would suggest to you... Mayor Suarez: That's why I asked the question. I mean, you're not going to pretend to put through the impact fee ordinance projects that have gone through DRI. Don't tell me that's because one has a regional impact that the impact, it's the same, we're talking about bridges parks, we're talking about infrastructure, what the hell would he mean regional? Mr. Plummer: No, no, no. Mr. Rodriguez: No. Mayor Suarez: None of this has anything to do with pollution of other areas of the country or of the state. I don't what you... you've totally confused me. Mr. Rodriguez: May I? _ Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, one is not the other. That which is approved in the DRI blanket for downtown addresses the regional impact. Our ordinance addresses the local impact. For example, storm sewers do not, outside of the City of Miami, come into play. Here in the City of Miami, storm sewers are very important and because of that... r Mayor Suarez: OK, so this state law was not a way of moving from, as you've been telling me all along, moving from developments of regional impact, which are a certain size, to the smaller and intermediate development. It's a whole different concept. OK? Mr. Rodriguez: I don't know what you're saying, sir. Mrs. Kennedy: Now we're in trouble. Mr. Rodriguez: I think you lost me this time, I really don't fully follow it. Mr. Castillo: Let me... give me a minute. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): You better go to work for Hialeah. Mayor Suarez: You've been telling me all along that we had a state imposed legislation for developments of a certain size and the impact that they created for infrastructure needs in the community, which is now being in a compulsory way, extended to all types of projects in the City and you're telling me no, that they're two whole different concepts. The DRI process and the impact fee... CSK 105 February 25, 1988 6 �i Mr. Rodriguez: Right, the impact... Mayor Suarez: ... process for smaller projects. For all types of projects. Mr. Rodriguez: The impact fee that is before you tonight is an impact fee for City impacts, of City size impact. The development of regional impact only deals with the development of regional impact size, with impact which are regional in nature. Mayor Suarez: But they define developments of regional impact size as those over 300,000 square feet which are the ones that impact the City. They don't Impact any region. Mr. Rodriguez: But it's conceivable that you can have a project with a development of regional impact to have a regional impact and, at the same time, has a local impact. Right? Mayor Suarez: In fact, I believe it's the same thing, the regional and the local. In the case of the City of Miami it's the same thing, I don't see any difference. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): It's not going to pass no way, call the roll. Mr. Maxwell: If you look at... Mr. Mayor. Mayor Suarez: Yes, this is not going to be heading towards a positive vote necessarily, maybe we ought to take a vote on it. Do you want it? Mr. Castillo: Yes, only a minute. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Well, go ahead, you got your minute. Mayor Suarez: Go ahead. Mr. Castillo: On your opening statement, you forgot about one, developers do not use the City trash to pick up their trash. It's private. Mr. Plummer: Right. Mr. Castillo: Nobody mentioned that and I know I'm correct because most developers build those big giant buildings and the City don't pick up their trash. They're private. Mayor Suarez: No, but we have to pick up all around them and that's the... that's all. Mr. Castillo: Well, I'm just saying, compared if you asked me if it was said on the... yes, it is. Also, nobody mentioned that. Mayor Suarez: Great. Thank you, that's a good clarification. OK, call the roll. Mr. Castillo: Thank you. CSK 106 February 25, 1988 1], 6 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved Its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-191 A MOTION STIPULATING CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL OF THE IMPACT FEE PROPOSAL AS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION WITH ONLY THE FOLLOWING EXEMPTIONS: a) SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES; b) LOW OR MODERATE INCOME HOUSING (AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL GUIDELINES AND AS FURTHER CERTIFIED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT). c) ALL CITY PROJECTS AND JOINT CITY VENTURES; d) ALL PROJECTS WHICH ALREADY HAVE D.R.I. APPROVAL AND FOR WHICH A DEVELOPMENT ORDER HAS BEEN ISSUED, PROVIDED THAT A BUILDING PERMIT IS OBTAINED BY APPLICANT WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIFTEEN MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE; FURTHER STIPULATING THAT EXEMPTING THE ABOVE, THE IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL OTHER NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE CITY. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy NOES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Mayor Xavier L. Suarez ABSENT: None. Mayor Suarez: OK, it did pass. Mr. Maxwell: We didn't read the ordinance. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Well, read it, sir. Mayor Suarez: Call the roll. CSK 107 February 25, 1988 s AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 10273 SUBSTITUTING THEREFORE, A NEW CHAPTER 54.6 IMPOSING AN "IMPACT FEE" ON ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS HEREIN DETERMINED IN ORDER TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, THE DEMAND FOR WHICH IS CREATED BY SUCH DEVELOPMENT; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AND INTENT; PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY THEREFOR; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF THE IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SUBAREAS; PROVIDING FOR DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN IMPACT FEE -RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS; PROVIDNG FOR CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR BONDING IMPACT FEE -RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN APPELLATE BOARD AND APPELLAGE PROCEDURES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Dawkins and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy NOES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Mayor Xavier L. Suarez ABSENT: None. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 24. CONTINUE ALL UNHEARD ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA TO A FUTURE CITY COMMISSION MEETING. Mayor Suarez: OK, do we need a motion on the rest of the items? Mr. Plummer (Off mike): Yes, I'll move to continue the other in house items until the next meeting. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Mr. Dawkins (Off mike): Second. Mrs. Kennedy (Off mike): Second. Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-192 A MOTION TO CONTINUE ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT TAKEN UP ON THIS DATE TO THE NEXT PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING OF MARCH 24, 1988. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: CSK 108 February 25, 1988 AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 25. AUTHORIZE COMMISSIONER PLUMMER TO TRAVEL TO HONDURAS AS CITY'S LIAISON ON BEHALF OF THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAM. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I am traveling next week to Honduras, and I would like to pass a resolution at this time, authorizing me in behalf of the Sister City program to make such trip. Mrs. Kennedy: Second. Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 88-193 A MOTION AUTHORIZING COMMISSIONER J.L. PLUMMER, JR. TO TRAVEL TO HONDURAS AS THE CITY'S LIAISON ON BEHALF OF THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAM. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. De Yurre: Don't drink the water. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Plummer: Drink beer, right? INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. CSK 109 February 25, 1988 TMM Ulna NO !'ORliLBR AOSDMSS TO COM MORE THE CITT f w ISSION, TM K=TDOG WAS AWOUMM AT 9:15 P.M. Xavier L. Suarez 11ATOR ATTBSTa Natty Birai CITT CLERK Palter J. roman ASSISTANT CM CLERK CSK 110 February 25, 1988 CITY OF MIAMI DOCUMENT INDEX maim am. FEBRUARY 25, 1988 URGE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION NOT TO PLACE PROPOSED DADE COUNTY CHARTER REVISIONS ON MARCH 8, 1988 BALLOT. COMMEND SENATOR LEHTINEN FOR FILING INITIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY REGARDING PROPOSED CHARTER REVIEW. RATIFY CITY MANAGER'S DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN CITY AREAS WHERE 'VENDOR LICENSES WILL NOT BE ALLOWED FOR GRAND PRIX EVENT. UPHOLD ZONING BOARD'S DECISION TO DENY APPEAL BY EXXON CORPORATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO REDUCE TRANSITIONAL AREA AT 6075 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD (RECONSTRUCTION FO AN EXXON GAS STATION). FINDINGS AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ON COCONUT GROVE TRAFFIC STUDY BY DAVID RHINARD (TRANSPORT ANALYSIS OF PROFESSIONALS INC./ INTENT OF CITY COMMISSION NEVER TO EXTEND MCDONALD STREET SOUTHERLY FROM GRAND AVENUE TO CHARLES AVENUE. RECONSIDER PREVIOUSLY PASSED MOTIONS GRANTING CLASS "C" SPECIAL PERMIT FOR RENEWAL OF FLAGLER FLEA MARKET AT 401 NW 38TH COURT -SUBJECT TO ONE- YEAR REVIEW. REVERSE ZONING BOARD'S DENIAL AND GRANT APPEAL BY APPLICANTS (DOMINGO AND REBECCA ERICE)-ALLOW EXISTING ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE AT 120 SW. 66TH AVENUE -SUBJECT TO CONDITION. PAW 1 CW RE'TAEYAL MODE N 88-177 88-178 88-184 88-186 88-187 88-188 88-190