HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #75 - Discussion Item.?b
CITY OF MIAMI, KLORIbA
INTER-OFFIce MEMORANDUM PZw7
ro The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City -Commission
FROM Cesar H. Odio
City Manager
RECOMMENDATIONS
DATE June 12 , 1987 FILE
SUBJECT Review of Ordinance 9968
SPI-15, SPI-16, 16.1 and 16.2
Text Amendment
REFERENCES
ENCLOSURES,
It is recommended that the City Commission review those portions
of the Zoning Ordinance established by the adoption of Ordinance
9968, since such review was set in the body of this legislation.
BACKGROUND
On March 21, 1985, the City Commission adopted Ordinance 9968,
adding Section 15150 entitled IISPI-15: Southeast Overtown/
Parkwest Overlay District" and Section 15160 entitled IISPI-16,
16.1, 16.2: Southeast Overtown/Parkwest Commercial Residential
Districts" to the Zoning Ordinance 9500, as amended.
Section 2 of this Ordinance states that it is to be returned to
the Commission two years after its adoption. In light of this
stipulation, both a copy of the Ordinance and the minutes of
the City Commission meeting of March 21, 1985 regarding the
discussion of this item are attached for your consideration.
Planning Disk
J-84-1023
3/5/85
ORDINANCE N0. % 9 9 6 S
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ORDINANCE NO.
95001 THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 15 ENTITLED "SPI:
SPECIAL PUBLIC INTEREST DISTRICTS," BY ADDING NEW
SECTIONS 151SO ENTITLED "SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK
WEST OVERLAY DISTRICT" AND 15160 ENTITLED
"SPI 16, 16.1, AND 16.2: SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK
WEST C%11ERCIAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS"; PROVIDING
FOR INTENT, EFFECT, CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS, PERMISSIBLE PRINCIPAL USES AND
STRUCTURES, PERMISSIBLE ACCESSORY USES AND
STRUCTURES, MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS, FLOOR AREA
LIMITATIONS, MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS,
HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, OFF-STREET PARKING AND
LOADING, AND LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS; PROVIDING FOR
REVIEW; AND CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board at its meeting of
September 5, 1984, Item No. 2, following an advertised hearing, adopted
Resolution No. PAB 93-84, by a 6 to 0 vote, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, of Amending
Ordinance No. 9500, as amended, as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of February
20, 1985, Item No. 10, on remand from the City Commission, following an
advertised --hearing, adopted Resolution No. PAB 21-85, by a 6 to 1 vote,
RECOMMENDING DENIAL of increasing Floor Area Ratios in the SPI-16 district, as
hereinafter set forth in subsection 15165.3.1; and
WHEREAS, a separate motion to recommend to the City Commission that
consideration be given to applying SPI-7 type floor area ratios to the SPI-16
District garnered a 4 to 3 vote "for", thus, failing to' obtain the vote
necessary for a recommendation to the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, an additional motion was successfully passed to inform the
Commission of the failure of the Planning Advisory Board to recommend
increasing permissible floor area ratios for SPI-16 to those presently
permitted in the SPI-7: Brickell-Miami River Rapid Transit Commercial
Residential District; and
WHEREAS, the 149SOO Blue Ribbon Committee," appointed by the City
Commission through Commission Resolutions 84-1304 and 84 1321, recommend the
amendments to Ordinance No. 9500, as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, after the consideration of this matter.,
deems'it advisable and in the best interest of the general welfare of the CITY
OF MIAMI and its inhabitants to grant these amendments, as hereinafter set
10
forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE C0� IISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 9500, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Miami, Florida, is hereby amended by adding a new section to Article 15 of
said Ordinance as follows:
"ARTICLE 15. SPI: SPECIAL PUBLIC INTEREST DISTRICTS
.SECTION 15150. SPI-15: SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST OVERLAY DISTRICT
SECTION 15151. INTENT. _
The Southeast Overtown/Park West area is of special and substantial
interest because of its official designation as a residential redevelopment
area with supporting commercial uses that will provide housing and employment
opportunities in close proximity to the Central Business District, Bicenten-
nial Park, expressways, and the rapid transit systen.
In the interest of conservation of energy, maintenance and enrichment of
principal upper and lower level views, noise reduction, safe and convenient
pedestrian movement, the provision of attractively landscaped areas for the
enjoyment of residents, workers and visitors, these special regulations are
intended to provide certain requirements and area -wide standards that will
enhance future public and private development and add to the area's desira-
bility as a place to live and work.
SECTION 15152. EFFECT OF SPI-15 DISTRICT DESIGNATION.
The effect of these SPI-15 regulations shall be to modify regulations,
to the extent indicated herein, within the portions of the existing zoning
districts as shown in the Official Zoning Atlas.
SECTION 15153. CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT.
15153.1 When Required.
No building permit shall be issued within the boundaries of the SPI-15
district affecting the height, bulk, location or exterior configuration with a
value in excess of $10,000 for any existing structure, the construction of any
new structure, or the location or relocation or enlargement of vehicular ways
or parking areas on private property, without authorization by Class C Special
Permit.
15153.2. Materials to be Submitted with Applications.
Materials to be submitted with applications for Class C Special Permits
in this class of cases shall include such site plans, landscaping plans,
building plans and elevations, surveys and reports as are required to make
determinations in the particular case as to conformity with the principles
established below,, and to the Southeast Overtown/Park West Design Standards
and Guidelines.
15153.3. Considerations Generally,__and_om Buffer Zones, Arcades, view
Corridor-, Driveways,_ Parking Structures, Principal BuiIdin1a
Roof Aocearance; 0 fsite Sight Prohibited. AL
15153.3.1. Considerations Generally.
the general purpose of such special permit considerations shall be to
determine conformity of the application as submitted, or with such conditions
and safeguards as may reasonably be attached to assure such conformity, with
the requirements and expressed intent of these and other regulations as apply-
ing generally or specifically in this eistrict and other underlying districts
as well as to any conditions, limitations or requirements specified for par-
ticular uses or locations.
15153.3.2. Landscaped Buffer Zones Required Adjacent to I-95, I-395
e rora g -o - ay.
Adjacent to the I-95, I-395, and Metrorall Right -of -Way, no residential
building shall be erected closer than fifty (50) feet to any structure within
such right-of-way. In addition, the yard between any building and the right-
of-way line shalt be a minimum depth of ten (10) feet. Further, the lot area
between a building and the right-of-way line shall be landscaped with trees,
shrubs, and other plant material to screen and buffer the building from the
adjacent right-of-way.
15153.3.3. Arcades, Mandatory and Optional.
1. Mandatory arcades shall be provided or optional arcades may be
provided at ground level. Arcades are required along Biscayne
Boulevard; the north side of N.W. and N.E. 5th Street; and N.W.
2nd Avenue between Sth Street and 9th Street. Optional arcades
are encouraged along other north -south rights -of -way. Arcades
shall be continuous, accessible to the general public at all
times, adjacent to the public right-of-way and fronting on the
public sidewalk, with the floor of the arcade at the same level as
the public sidewalk. Arcades shall have a minimum clear width of
twelve (12) feet, a minimum height of ten (10) feet, and shall be
unobstructed by building columns, utilities and the like.
15153.3.4. View Corridors.
Orientation and design of principal buildings and related site design
and improvements shall be such as to protect views of Bicentennial Park and
Biscayne Bay from principal public viewpoints and provide visual access
appropriate to public needs and needs of occupants of adjoining or nearby
properties.
Major portions of principal buildings that are above plane II and the
light plane in SPI districts shall be oriented in an east -west direction and
shall be in the form of slender towers with consideration given to the shade
cast by the tower on nearby structures and open spaces. Particular attention
shall be directed toward the need for solar access on the property and adjoin-
ing or nearby properties, and the desirable effect of the prevailing southeast
air carrents.
15153.3.5. Driveways, Pedestrian Loading Areas and Related Parking, as
Affected ocat on of Pedestrian Circulation, Plazas, an
a or u c g is-o - ay.
1. Driveways providing access to parking structures, offstreet load-
ing. or lots shall not cross designated pedestrian ways (arcades
or the like) on north -south public rights -of -way if other access
is reasonably feasible. Where no other access is available, meas-
ures as will minimize interruption of pedestrian flow shall be
required.
2. In general, access driveways to offstreet parking or loading shall
be provided on east -west public rights -of -way, except where such
streets contain designated pedestrian ways (N.W. 7th Street and
N.E. and N.W. 9th Street). The location and number of access
-3- 1
0
points to public rights=of=way, separation of vehicular and pedes.
trian traffic, and the arrangement of parking area shall be safe,
secure, and convenient.
151SMA. Reserved.
15153.3.7. Accessory Park I rig Structures; Pedestrian Open_ Space and/or
Livability Spate Required on Accessory Offstreet Parking Roof
ecks; other Offstreet Parkin* 5tructures.
1. Accessory parking structures shall be low in profile and their top
decks, where exposed to upper level views, shall be improved.
maintained, and used as pedestrian open space and/or livability
space for the enjoyment of residents, workers, or visitors as the
case may be.
2. Above ground accessory parking structures shall be visually com-
patible with the principal structure, and vehicle storage shall be
suitably screened from exterior public view. Offstreet parking
and loading shall be located in the interior of the principal
structure and shall be surrounded by residential and/or commercial
uses, where feasible. Offstreet parking structures shall not
front on N.W. and N.E. 9th Street, but shall be permissibie behind
commercial and/or residential uses which front on the pedestrian
mall.
3. Parking structures shall present an attractive appearance in
accord with design guidelines for the district, and shall be
designed to screen the storage of vehicles from exterior view.
15153.3.8. Principal Building Roof Deck Appearance and Use.
All principle building roof tops shall present an attractive appearance
as viewed from adjacent or nearby buildings. Roof top mechanical equipment.
and utility areas shall be appropriately screened with landscape or architec-
tural materials. Where possible, equipment and utility areas shall be grouped
together, and rooftop areas shall be improved and maintained as pedestrian
open space and/or livability space. ,
15153.3.9. Landscaping, Screening and Open Space.
Landscaping and paving shall be provided for ground level pedestrian
open space Vithin the public right-of-way in accord with applicable require-
ments and standards. All accessory areas which need screening to avoid
adverse effects on adjoining areas shall be adequately concealed by appro-
priate plantings or other screening.
15153.3.10. Offsite Signs Prohibited.
Offsite signs are prohibited in this district.
SECTION 15160. SPI-16, 16.1, 16.2: SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL
SECTION 15161. IN_.
It is of special and substantial public interest to guide redevelopment
in accord with the Southeast Overtown/Park West redevelopment plan in the area
north of the Central Business District, west of Bicentennial Park, south of
I-395, and east of 1-95 by regulations encouraging a quality residential
living environment with direct access to shopping, recreation, transportation
and employment. It is intended that development at appropriate high intensity
will provide a variety of housing opportunities, open character, attractive
and secure pedestrian open space, appropriately located livability space
serving residential uses, adequate retail and service support facilities, and
a safe pedestrian movement system.
•4-
r
�l ' 90
15151.1. Intent Concerning Uses.
.It is intended that multifamily residential occupancy in this area is to
be promoted and encouraged, either in separate buildings or in combination
with office and supporting retail and service uses, and that such supporting
uses shall be scaled and designed to serve the needs of the districts.
15161.2. Characters, Site Planning and Architectural Design.
It is intended that the character of the development shall be moderate
to high intensity that provides an attractive, secure environment for resi.
dents and workers with a variety of forms for spatial interest. Site planning
and orientation shall protect and enhance view corridors, and shall take max-
imum advantage of potential views and prevailing air currents. In general, to
maintain continuity between buildings and adjacent blocks, developments shall
adhere to applicable yard, setback and landscaping standards.
In consideration of the proposed concentration of residential occupancy
and supporting commercial uses and the availability of mass transit, these
regulations are intended to promote pedestrian comfort and convenience.
Developments shall provide barrier -free movement on pedestrian ways, desirable
shade and shelter in pedestrian areas, and solar access where necessary for
the provision of recreation, energy or other purposes. Consideration shall be
given to ground and upper level pedestrian connections to adjacent or nearby
developments.
SECTION 15162. PERMISSIBLE PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES.
15162.1. SPI-16: Permissible Principal Uses and Structures;
Limitations on Nonresidential Uses Within District.
Except as otherwise provided herein for nonresidential uses (Sections
15162.1.1 and .1.2) or for the ground level frontage on N.E. and N.W. 9th
Street (Section 15162.1.3), the following principal uses shall be permissible.
I. As for RG-2.2, for uses permitted or permissible therein, except
for commercial marinas and occupancy of private pleasure craft,
and provided that in this district, regardless of special permits
required in RG-2.2, all uses require a Class C special permit (see
Section 15153).
2. Hotels and other facilities for transient dwelling or lodging.
s
3. Offices.
4. Banks, saving and loan associations, and similar financial
institutions.
S. Retail establishments as follows: Antique stores, art stores and
coaarercial art galleries; book and stationary stores open to the
general public; card and gift shops; china and crockery stores;
drug stores; floor covering, paint, and wallpaper stores; florist;
food stores, including bakeries, confectionaries, delicatessens,
fruit and vegetable markets, and groceries; ice cream stores;
general merchandise and furniture stores; gift shops; hardware
stores; jewelry stores; leather goods and luggage shops; meat and
fish urkets; news stands; plant stores; office supply stores;
package liquor stores (without drive in facilities); pet and pet
supply stores; photographic supply stores; sporting good and
bicycles; T.Y. and radio stores; variety and sundry stores; and
wearing apparel shops. Such establishments may provide incidental
repair, maintenance, alteration, or adjustment services as appro-
priate, but facilities, operation and storage for such services
shall not be visible from any street or pedestrian walkway.
6. Service establishments including barber and beauty shops; custom
tailoring, dressmaking and millinery shops, except where products
are made for off premises sale; coin operated laundry and dry
cleaning facilities with rated capacity limited to 25 pounds per
machine, 500 pounds total for laundry, and 10 pounds per machine,
40 pounds total for dry cleaning; laundry and dry cleaning estab.
lishment with total capacity limited as for coin operated facil.
ities-, duplicating centers including letter and photostating
services (work areas for such services shall not be visible from,
adjacent pedestrian w0kways); photographic studio; shoe repair
stores.
7. Art galleries, museums and libraries.
8. Bars, saloons, and taverns, including those with dancing or live
entertainment.
9. Supper clubs and night clubs.
10. Restaurants, tea rooms, and cafes, including those with dancing,
live entertainment and/or outdoor table service (where
appropriate).
11. Theaters, other than drive in.
12. Health studios and spas.
13. Educational institutions of a business, professional or scientific
nature.
14. Private clubs, lodges, fraternities, and sororities. _
15. Auction galleries for sale of antiques. art objects, jewelry and
the like, but not second hand merchandise generally.
16. Commercial recreation establishments such as pool halls, billiard
parlors and game rooms.
17. Clinics, studios (other than dance), laboratories, travel agencies
and ticket agencies.
18. Parking facilities.
15162.1.1. SPI-16: Nonresidential Uses Permissible Only in
Mixed Use Buildings
Nonresidential uses listed in Section 15162.1. Q through 17) shall be
permissible only in mixed use buildings (see Section 15165.3.1 for floor area
l imi tationi).
15162.1.2 SPI-16: Limitations on Principal Uses Permissible Fronting
onEast-West Rights -of -Way; xcept on.
Except as provided in Section 15162.1.3 below, (N.E. and N.W. 9th
Street) and on the ground level frontage on N.W. 7th Street, only the resi-
dential or office uses listed in Section 15162.1 (1 through 3) shall be
permissible fronting on east -west rights -of -way.
15162.1.3. SPI-16: Limitations on Principal Uses Permissible
on Ground Floor Frontage or N.E. and N.W. 95 Streer.'
Except as provided in Section 15162.1.4 below, only the nonresidential
uses listed in Section 15162.1 (3 through 17) shall be permissible on the
ground floor frontage of N.E. and N.W. 9th Street.
15162.1.4. SPI-16: Special Rules Concerning Extent and Location of
erta n Uses on Ground Floor Frontage of N.E. and N.W.
9th Street.
At least 85% of the lot width ground floor frontage shalt be occupied by
principal uses permissible in Section 15162.1.3 and the remaining frontage may
be occupied by other uses in Section 15162.1. At least 85% of the required
85% frontage shall have transparent window or door openings and such openings
shall be maintained in such a manner as to permit full and clear view of the
interior. Each use shall have convenient direct access from the adjacent
public walkway.
0
f
15162.2.
SPI.16.1: Permissible Principal Uses and Structures;
Limitations on Principal Uses Permissible on Ground
Floor Frontaqe of Biscayne Boulevard.
Except as otherwise provided herein for the ground floor frontage on
Biscayne Boulevard (Section 15162.2.1% permissible uses and structures shall
be as for Section 15162.1 without limitations for mixed use, and in addition:
1. Retail establishments for sale of motorcycles and or parts,
equipment and accessories.
15162.2.1. SPI-16.1: Principal Uses Permissible on the Ground Floor
ron aae or Eliscayne Boulevarde
Permissible principal uses on the ground floor frontage of Biscayne
Boulevard shall be as listed in Section 15162.1 (3 through 17) and in Section
15162.2 above.
15162.2.2. SPI-16.1: Special Rules Concernin Extent and Location of
Certain Uses on Ground Floor Frontage of Biscayne Boulevard.
At least 85% of the lot width ground floor frontage shall be occupied by
principal uses permissible in Section 15162.2.1 and the remaining frontage may
be occupied by other uses in Section 15162.1. At least 85% of the required
85% frontage shall have transparent window or door openings and such openings
shall be maintained in such a manner as to permit full and clear view of the
interior. Each use shall have convenient direct access from the adjacent
public walkway.
15162.3. SPI-16.2: Permissible Principal Uses and Structures.
Permissible principal uses and structures shall be as for Section
15162.2 without limitations on location and in addition:
1. Sports arenas and exhibition halls.
2. Repair service establishments including appliance and office
equipment, but not repair garages, repair of heavy equipment or
paint and body shops.
15162.4. SPI-16, 16.1, 16.2: Limitations on Uses.
1. ' Except for outdoor dining places, exhibits of arts and crafts,
flowers and plants, interim parking lots, parking garages, and
other uses as authorized by special permit, all activities shall
be conducted within completely enclosed buildings.
2. Aside from antique stores, art galleries, jewelry, and book
stores, no establishment shall deal in second hand merchandise.
3. All products shall be sold at retail on the premises. No whole-
saling or jobbing shall be conducted from within the district.
SECTION 15163. PERMISSIBLE ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
Uses and structures which are customarily accessory and clearly inci-
dental to permissible principal uses and structures, approved in the same
special permit proceedings, and initiated or completed within any time limits
established generally or in relation to the special permit, shall be permitted
subject to limitations established by these or generally applicable regula-
tions. The following special limitations or exceptions shall apply to
accessory uses and structures in this district:
1. Outdoor displays, exhibits, sales, service of food and drinks,
or other activities may be conducted in pedestrian open spaces,
including required plaza area, whether or not such activities
are customarily accessory to the adjacent principal use. Areas,
activities, and facilities so approved may be used for regular,
intermittent, or temporary special events without further permit-
ting which might otherwise be required under these zoning regula-
-7- 9
6
0
tions, but shall not be exempted from requirements for other
permi ts.
2. Temporary shelters, bulletin boards, kiosks, signs, exhibit and
display stands, and facilities for service of food and drink may
be permitted in appropriate locations in pedestrian open space or
in required plazas. If so approved, such structures shall be
exempted from limitations generally applying to yards, pedestrian
open space, and floor area.
SECTION 15164. RESERVED.
SECTION 15165. MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS; FLOOR AREA LIHITATION5.
15165.1. SPI-16: Minimum Lot Requirements.
Minimum lot requirements for all uses shall be a minimum gross tot area
of 15,000 square feet, and a minimum lot width of 90 feet.
15165.2. SPI-16.1, 16.2: Minimum Lot Requirements.
There shall be no specific dimensional requirements, but lots shall be
of sufficient size to conform with other requirements and limitations of these
and other lawful regulations.
15165.3. SPI-16, 16.1. 16.2: Floor Area Limitations.
Floor area limitations for SPI-16, 16.1. 16.2 shall be as follows
subject to the limitations and requirements of Section 2000.1.
15165.3.1. SPI-16: Floor Area Limitations, Restrictions on Nonresidential
Floor rea.
1. The maximum floor area for a mixed use building shall not exceed
4.32 times gross land area.
2. The maximum floor area for a residential building shall not exceed
4.32 times gross land area.
3. The maximum floor area for nonresidential use shall not exceed
1.72 times gross land area, provided however, that nonresidential
use shall be permissible only in a mixed use building where at
- least one -and -one-half square feet of residential use shall be
provided for every one square foot of nonresidential use.
15165.3.2. SPI-16.1: Floor Area Limitations, Exceptions.
1. The maximum floor area for a mixed use building shall not exceed
5.0 times gross land area.
2. The maximum floor area for a residential use shall not exceed 6.0
times gross land area.
3. Except as modified by Section 15165.3.2.1 below, nonresidential
use shall not exceed 2.0 times the gross land area.
15165.3.2.1.SPI-16.1: Allowable Increase in Nonresidential Floor Area
for the Provision of Onslte or Offsite Residential Use.
i. For every square foot of residential use provided either onsi to in
a mixed use building or offsite within the boundaries of the SPI-
15 district and provided concurrently with nonresidential use, the
nonresidential floor area shall be increased by one square foot,
provided, however, that the maximum increase in floor area shall
not exceed 3.0 times gross land area. Maximum total nonresiden-
tial Floor Area Ratio shall not exceed 5.0 of the SPI-16.1 site.
-8-
S7- ° "D P 9
15165.3.3. SPI=16.2: Floor Area Limitations.
1. The maximum floor area in a mixed use b0 lding shall not exceed
4.0 times gross land area.
2. The maximum floor area for a residential building shall not exceed
2.0 times gross land area.
3. The maximum floor area for nonresidential use shall not exceed 2.0
times gross land area.
15165.4. LUI Ratings and Ratios Applying Within District.
The LUI tables as shown in Section 2011.1.1 shall apply to residential,
nonresidential and mixed use buildings within these districts. The tables are
based on gross lot area and all computations concerning increases in floor
area as allowed in Section 15165.3.2.1 shall be converted into floor area
ratio, as derived from gross lot area, to apply the correct LUI number and its
related ratios. For example, assume a gross lot area of 20,000 sq.ft., an FAR
of 2.25, and an allowed increase of- 5,000 sq.ft.; the computation would be
20,000 x 2.25 + 5,000 a 459000 + 59000 = 50,000 j. 20,000 • 2.5 times gross
lot area with a LUI rating number of 76 (the closest number).
SECTION 15166. MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS.
15166.1. SPI-16, 16.2: Yards; Setbacks; Arcades; Gateway Features;
Special equ rements and L m tat ons.
15166.1.1. Front and Street Side Yards; Other Yards.
1. Adjacent to N.E. and N.W. 9th Street, the yard shall be a minimum
of twenty-five US) feet in depth.
2. Except for N.E. and N.W. 9th Street, or as greater dimensions are
required for building spacing, there are no minimum yard require-
ments (front, street side, interior and rear).
15166.1.2. Setbacks; Arcades; Special Requirements and Limitations.
Except as modified by Section 15166.3. following are the setback
requirements and limitations:
I. Except: (1) adjacent to N.W. 2nd Avenue, N. Miami Avenue, and
N.E. 1 and'2 Avenues where a gateway feature is required; and (2) for manda-
tory and optional arcades (see Sections 15153.3.3. and 15166.6.2.), adjacent
to public rights -of -way, setbacks shall not be permissible for the first forty
(40) feet of height above ground level.
15166.2. SPI-16.1: Yards; Setbacks; Arcades; Special Requirements
and Limitations.
15166.2..1. Front and Street Side Yards; Other Yards.
1. Adjacent to Biscayne Boulevard, all yards shall be a minimum of
ten (10) feet in depth.
2. Except for Biscayne Boulevard, or as greater dimensions are
required for building spacing, there are no minimum requirements
for all other yards (front, street side, interior and rear).
15166.2.2. Setbacks; Arcades; Requirements and Limitations on Location.
Except as modified by Section 15166.3, following are the setback
requirements and limitations:
1. Except for mandatory and optional arcades (see Section 15153.3.3),
adjacent to public rights -of -way, setbacks shall not be permis-
sible for the first forty (40) feet in height above ground level.
-9-
or99Rg --
87- 753'• I �L
15166.3. SPI-160__16.1, 1E.2• E
Requirements.
ions from Yard and Setback
Where approved by Class C Special Permit in connection with original
development or in subsequent Class C action, intrusions into the N.W. and
N.E. 9th Street Pedestrian Mall yard requirement, or other exemption from set.
back requirements, may be granted provided that such exemptions meet the gen-
eral objectives as stated in the SPI=1S, 169 16.1 and 16.2 Intent sections or
in the Southeast Overtown/Park West Design Standards and Guidelines.
15166.4. Parkin Prohibited in Required Yards and Setbacks
Adjacent to Public R 9hts-o -Way: Landscap ng Required.
1. Required yards and setbacks adjacent to public rights -of -way shall
not be used for offstreet parking or loading. Except for portions
authorized for vehicular access, all required yards, setbacks,
arcades, and sidewalk area within the public right-of-way shall be
appropriately landscaped and provided with pedestrian ways. See
Section 16153.3.5 for permissible vehicular access.
15165.5. Reserved.
15166.6. SPI-16, 16.1, 16.2: Open Space, Pedestrian Open Space,
Livability Space; Gateway Features, Special Requirements
and Limitations.
15166.6.1. Pedestrian Open Space, Livability Space; Gateway Features,
Special equ rements and Limitations.
Pedestrian open space and livability space shall be provided, improved
and maintained as generally or especially required in these districts and in
addition:
1. All improvements shall be in accord with City of Miami Standards
and Guidelines.
2. Where the top decks of accessory parking structures are exposed to
view from above they shad 1 be improved and maintained as pedes-
trian open space or livability space. See Section 15153.7.
3. The yard adjacent to N.E. and N.W. 9th Street shall be improved
and maintained as pedestrian open space. Landscaping, sculpture,
fountains, street furniture, and the like shall be provided as
appropriate to the overall design of the pedestrian mall. All
improvements are subject to approval in connection with class C
Special Permit actions.
4. Street trees and street furniture shall be provided in the side-
walk area of the public rights -of -way. Street furniture shall be
so arranged as to not impede pedestrian flow.
S. Pedestrian open space and livability space shall be located to
take maximum advantage of desirable views, especially as they
relate to view corridors.
6. Where feasible, roof tops (other than mandatory improvement of
parking deck roof tops) shall be improved and maintained as
pedestrian open space and/or livability space (see Section
15153.8).
15166.6.2. Gateway Features; Special Requirements.
Adjacent to N.W. 2 Avenue, N. Miami Avenue, and N.E. 1 and 2 Avenues, on
N.E. and N.W. 5 Street frontages, gateway features shall be provided, improved
and maintained as a portion of pedestrian open space. Such features shall be
in accord with the Southeast Overtown/Park West Design Standards and
Guidelines.
-10- 9969
11
4
15166.6.3. Viers Corri_dors;__Spetial Requirements for _Open Spaces.
Where building towers are provided above the 30 degree light plane, the
tower shall be oriented in an east -west direction and shall provide ample
upper level open space to enhance -and preserve view corridors as they relate
to other developments in the districts. See Section 15153.3.4 and the
Southeast Overtown/Park West Design Standards and Guidelines.
15166.6.4. Pedestrian Through Block Connections; Requiremen
and Limitations.
Whenever a development includes a pedestrian through block connection,
It shall be open and accessible to the public durin?20)
normal business hours.
The walkway shall have a minimum width of twenty feet and a minimum
height of ten (10) feet. The walkway shall be appropriately improved and
maintained for pedestrian comfort and convenience.
SECTION 15167. HEIGHT LIMITATIONS.
15167.1. SPI-16; 16.2: Height Limitations; Special Requirements.
Adjacent to north -south public rights -of -way there are no height
limitations.
15167.1.1 Special Height Limitations Adjacent to East-West Public
Adjacent to east -west public rights -of -way, plane II shall be forty (40)
feet; from that point a thirty(30) degree light plane shall extend inward and
upward for a distance of fifty (50) feet as measured in a horizontal direc-
tion. Above that point there are no height limitations; however, no portion
of a building shall be closer than fifty (50) feet to the base building line.
15167.2. SPI-16.1: Height Limitations; Special Requirements.
Adjacent to north -south public rights -of -way, there are no height
limitations.
15167.2.1. Special Height Limitations Adjacent to East-West Public
Adjacent to east -west public rights -of -way, plane II shall be fifty (50)
feet; frogs that point, a thirty (30) degree light plane shall extend inward
and upward for a distance of fifty (50) feet as measured in a horizontal
direction. Above that point, there are no height limitations, provided how-
ever, no portion of a building shall be closer than fifty (50) feet to the
base building line.
SECTION 15168. OFFSTREET PARKING AND LOADING.
Since it is intended that automobile traffic be minimized in these dis-
tricts because of the districts close proximity to Metrorail and the downtown
Metroeover, except for particular uses indicated in the Schedule of District
Regulations that are not modified below, special offstreet parking require-
ments and limitations are as follows, and in addition: offstreet parking and
loading and offsite parking shall be as required in Sections 2017, 2018, 2022
and 2023, except as modified below.
15168.1. SPI-16: Offstreet Parking.
1. For office, retail and service establishments and other nonres-
idential uses permissible in this district, there shall be a min-
imum of 1 parking space per 800 square feet of floor area.
2. For dwelling units, there shall be a minimum of .9 parking space
per duelling unit.
-11-
t t
15168.2. SPI-16.1: Offstreet Parking.
1. For office, retail and service establishments and other nonresi-
dential uses permissible in this district, there shall be a min-
imum of 1 parking space per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
2. For dwelling units, there shall be a minimum of .7 parking space
per dwelling unit.
3. Offsite parking shall be permissible in this district as provided
in Section 2018, but without any demonstration or required find-
ings as to the practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship in
providing required parking onsite, further provided that in this
district Class C Special Permit may cover matters requiring other
special permits as in the case of offstreet loading.
15168.3. SPI-16.2: Offstreet Parking.
1. For office, retail and service establishments and other nonresi-
dential uses permissible in this district, there shall be a min-
imum of 1 parking space p-er 1,000 square feet of floor area.
2. For dwelling units, there shall be a minimum of .6 parking space
per dwelling unit.
15168.4. Special Offstreet Parking Requirements; Limitations.
Except for offstreet interim parking facilities or parking lots, all
offstreet parking and loading as related to a principal use, required or
other, shall be in an enclosed structure so designed to screen automobiles
from public view. See Section 15153.7.
SECTION 15169. LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS.
Sign limitations shall be as set forth in Section 1529, except in SPI-16
and 16.1, animated and flashing signs and banners shall be permissible for
ground level nonresidential uses fronting on N.E. and N.W. 9 Street."
.Section 2. This Ordinance shall be returned to this Commission two (2)
years subsequent to its adoption.
Sectijon 3. All Ordinance, Code Sections, or parts thereof in conflict
herewith are hereby repealed insofar as they are in conflict.
Section 4. Should any part or provision of this Ordinance be declared
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect
the validity of the Ordinance as a whole.
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this--28th day of
February , 1985.
-12-
f
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND READING 9Y TITLE ONLY this _2— 1st . day of
Match________, 1985.
ATTEST:
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
axwel 1 7
sistant City Attorney
APPRUM AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
V Yb 1 s n. YVY v
Ci ty Attorney
e A. Ferre
-13- _ �� f� 8 I l
# 0
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the motion
was passed and adopted by the following vote"
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J-. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mr. Carollo: Mr. Manager,.tf is my understanding from what
one of your staff peoplW'gave me that we have allocated
$50,000 this year thro3agh Federal Revenue Sharing to the
Youth Cop Up Group.
Mr. Rosencrantz: Yes, I think that is correct.
Mr. Carollo: What I would like to get, as soon as I
Possibly can - what I mean is by next meeting, what is this
money being ed for. I would like to get a list of all the
employees ey have there, how many hours a week they are
working, at they're making and a list of the individuals
that th ace serving with this money and an aceountaL•ility
of ev y penny that we have given them.
�--
65. PUBLIC HEARING: AMEND ARTICLE 15 SPECIAL PUBLIC
INTEREST DISTRICTS OVERTOWN PAR[ WEST - DISCUSSED AND
TEMPORARILY DEFERRED.
N-N� -CNN--�NNNNMN�-NNM-NN
Mayor Ferro: We are now on Agenda Item 95. All right, Mr.
Traurig, did you want to say something about 95?
Mr. Robert H. Traurig: Mr. Mayor and members of the
Commission, my name is Robert H. Traurig. I am attorney
with offices at 1401 Brickell Avenue. The first thing I
would like to say is a memorandum in my file and a
memorandum in the file of the law firm of Fine,. Jacobson,
both indicate that this hearing was supposed to be held on
28th of March, and not the 213t, and it was only accidental
that I bumped into both Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Bailey the day
before yesterday and asked why is it on the 28th of March
and they say it is on the 21st, so we are not fully
prepared, but I would like to, not withstanding that, since
everybody is here for this hearing ...
Mayor Ferre: So what is your point? Do you want this
deferred to the 28th?
Mr. Traurig: That would be my preference, but I am also
prepared, since the hour is only 4:10 P.M., and I don't have
another appointment elsewhere until 4:45 P.M., I can make my
statement right now. I would like to call your attention to
the fact that I believe that there is still some unfinished
business that ought to be concluded before this ordinance is
considered, and let me explain to you what it is. Just a
few minutes ago, I asked Mr. Bailey and also Mr. Schwartz
about how this ordinance would be implemented. I asked them
questions, for example, and I would call your attention to
the provisions of this ordinance under 15165.3.2.1, which
relates to the allowable increase in non-residential floor
HT 108 March 21, 1985
r-
8►""7`
•...►"J'" � .. � 1, �'
9
area for the provision of on -site or off -site residential
use, and I would call your attention to the fact that he
says that if we build concurrently with the construction in
the 16.1 district, which is the Biscayne Boulevard area - if
we build residential concurrently within the other portions
of the Park West Overtown regions, we would be entitled to
additional square footage. But, my first question is, what
is it concurrently, and they said that Means simultaneously
and then I said, "Well suppose we build the residential
first - would we be entitled to credits that we could then
utilize on the boulevard frontage?" They said "Yes, we are
going to have regulations that provide for that". I said
"Well, shouldn't we consider the regulations simultaneously
with the ordinance so that we know exactly what they
contain? Then I asked the question, "Suppose we buy into a
project being developed by a residential builder because our
client is an office building developer and wants to build on
the boulevard frontage across from the seaport and we are
not at the present time - we don't have the capability of
building' residential. Can we into that residential
builder's project", and they said yes. I said "How much do
we have to invest? Can we invest one percent of the
capital, fifty percent of the capital, one hundred percent
of the capital - what is the amount that we have to invest
in order to be entitled to transfer those credits?" The
answer was the regulations will deal with that, and we are
going to come up with fair regulations.
Mr. Bill Freixas: Mr. Mayor, please, I hate to interrupt
Mr. Traurig. My name is Bill Freixas, I am Chairman of the
Blue Ribbon Committee. And•I think that if you listen to
the recommendations of Mr. Traurig, most of those questions
are going to be answered. It is simple. It deals with all
footage for footage funds - one, for one. If you buy in
your venture 20% of the deal and it is 20,000 square feet of
residential and you bought it for 20% of that, you get 20%
of the footage, that is the bonus you are going to get in
this case. It is just like that. You build first the
house, and then you get the bonus.
Mr. Dawkins: But will these bonuses be stored? I've got a
problem with this.
Mr. Herbert Bailey: Commissioner, I think we started out
discussing a matter that the staff or the Administration has
not even presented to the City Manager or to this Commission
for consideration. I for one, and I guess you have known
for the past few years since I have been here, and I know
regulations that have not been approved before this
Commission. The discussion that I had with Mr. Traurig, and
when he asked me a question about the transferability, and
transferred development rights, and the response to that was
a matter of a professional consideration regarding what the
Possibilities may be, but we have not, in this particuldr
zoning ordinance that we are bringing before you today, does
not deal with transfer rights, or transfer abilities of
bonuses. Now, I can assure you that at some time, when we
start with the implementation process of this ordinance and
we come back before this Commission, those questions can be
answered and those concerns of the attorney, of Robert
Traurig, can be brought before this Commission and we can
come up with a procedure, but the matter before you today is
establishing a base zoning ordinance that will permit us to
continue with this project.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, when you come back, don't come back with
no stored bonuses, for my vote.
Mr. Bailey: Well, whatever this Commission ...
RT 109 March 21, 1985 /,,
�"i " i�.J.`�i ' 1 1
0 0
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, no! I am not interested - that is me!
You know, you can come back with this to the rest of the
Commission, you see, but I am not going to I am already
disturbed about this. And then for me to allow speculators
to come along and store something to use 10 or 15 years from
now, I've got a problem with it, Mr. Bailey, and I am going
to tell you now!
Mr. Bailey: That is not the position that we are coming
with to you today and terms of this zoning ordinance. It
has been before the Commission four times. We have been
through the P.A.B. with this at least three times and at the
January meeting ... the December 20th meeting was when the
Commission approved at first reading and then appointed a
Blue Ribbon Committee, we worked with that committee that
met on three occasions and adjusted to some of the
recommendations that were suggested by that committee on
behalf of this Commission. We thought those recommendations
were in order and that the cost of the substantial change
and the nature of the zoning ordinance that was being
presented, we went back before the Blue Ribbon Committee and
it was then passed, so we are back here again with our
recommendations and we are supporting the recommendations of
the Blue Ribbon Committee which you appointed, and Mr.
Freixas here, who is the Chairman of that Blue Ribbon
Committee, I think it would be appropriate at this time to
have him report to you the results of that Blue Ribbon
Committee that was appointed by this Commission.
Mayor Ferre: I think that is appropriate, myself. Go
ahead. Counselor, do you have a problem with that?
Mr. Traurig: Well, I tried to follow exactly what Mr.
Bailey was saying. He is saying - let's pass the ordinance
and then come back later on with the regulations, and I am
saying that the comfort which a prospective developer would
like, is to know specifically what he has got and until he
sees the regulations and how they would be applied to the
ordinance, we can't ... no, I would like to make some
substantive changes in the ordinance and suggest them
rather, to you for consideration, which I would be happy to
comment after Mr. Freixas as spoken, but I do think that it
is inappropriate to pass the ordinance without you having
any real feeling as to what these regulations will be, and
how this whole question of transfer of development rights
will work. For example, and I just want to throw out a
couple of other things for your consideration at this point.
Suppose a developer were to go into the Park West/Overtown
area and a build a 100,000 square feet of residential. Had
he been an owner of property at that moment along Biscayne
Boulevard or within the SPI-16 area, he would of course, be
entitled to transfer that 100,000 square feet, or be
entitled to a credit of 100,000 square feet to supplement
whatever else he would be entitled to within the property
that he already owns. Supposed however, after he has built
1009000 square feet, we go to him and say "You are entitled
to build 100,00 extra square feet. Can we buy it from
you?" Now, Mr. Dawkins is shaking his head.
Mr. Dawkins: No way. No. I wouldn't vote for that, is
what I am saying.
Mr. Traurig: Well, I am not saying that that ought to be in
the ordinance. I am saying that the ordinance ought to be
clear as to what we are getting so we will know what
position to take.
Mr. Dawkins: It also should -be clear to what you don't getd
Mr. Traurig: That's true.
HT 110 March 21, 1985
8 _
0 0
Mr. Dawkins: Okay, all right.
Mr. Traurig: Let me make one other suggestion to you. The
whole objective here, is to give an incentive to the
commercial developers to -go into that area and build. A one
to one covenant, let's call it, is not an adequate
incentive. If it was three to one, so that if we went to
the residential area and we built 1000000 square feet or
359000 square feet, we could be entitled to an extra
10000000 105,000 square feet in the commercial, I think that
a lot of developers of the commercial would rush in there
and build. You should be encouraging building by creating
an adequate incentive. I would ask you to consider that.
Mr. Dawkins: The only way I would consider that, Mr.
Traurig, is if you went to HC-1, SPI-16.2, and went to the
inner core of this development and then, I would consider
it, but to start out that with SPI-16.1 in that yellow and
move in, no. Anything in that black area there, I.would be
willing for that, but nothing outside of that.
Mr. Traurig: Well, at the present time it says that we can
only be entitled to the credits if we are in the SPI-16. We
would do, in the area that is targeted as the most critical
area. The whole question is, can we buy those credits from
somebody?
Mr. Dawkins: No.
Mr. Traurig: And a three to one basis might be a ...
Mr. Freixas: But, see, he is asking ... let me explain what
the problem ...
Mayor Ferro: Wait a minute. Hold on. I think Bob, we are
putting this thing in reverse, and it is my fault, I
apologize. I out of courtesy to you, called you up, but I
didn't intend for you to take over the whole thing and I
think we really need to let the Administration present its
side and let the Chairman say his piece and then we will
come back to you. All right.
Mr. Freixas: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My name is Bill
Freixas. I am Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Committee in
Southwest Overtown. I think the first problem that we have
with Mr. Traurig, for which I have a great respect as an
attorney, is that we met on four different occasions and he
did not attend those meetings. Every single attorney for
every single property owner in the area went there to speak
their minds, and this is how we came up with this after four
meetings where we agreed and the architects made
presentations to us on what could be a workable solution to
the area. What we were mainly concerned was we create a
residential community in that target area, as you
established in the ordinance. The whole district, as you
know is SPI-16. That is with the overlay district. On
those precincts you are going to have two - SPI-16, and then
you have SPI-16.1 SPI-16.1 is the one he was addressing to,
that is along fronting on Biscayne Boulevard. Our
recommendation is very simple. That if we create a
commercial base for a F.A.R. of 2, you have to take into
consideration that they are picking up, in the new
calculations of the factor, 80 feet in gross area to the
middle of Biscayne Boulevard which is a very wide boulevard,
so actually, if you go and take into consideration those 80
feet they are getting a net 3 F.A.R All we are saying, that
if they want to go to a maximum of five, five believe me, it
would be in every block a Southeast Tower, in every block
between 5th and the Expressway. There is no way there could
RT 111 March 21, 1985
0 0
be five, but if you want to go to five, all we are saying is
that concurrently with the starting of the building, we are
not precluding that they could build residential first. We
understand that. That is our intention and that is our
ideas and that is what the Department wants to get going,
which is the private sector involved in the building of
residential units and the area. If they want to go to five,
they have to match, foot by foot, in the target areal How
do they accomplish it? Well, now we go to the guidelines.
Those guidelines are to be worked out in the Department.
There is many Ways to accomplish that. You could do it by
joint venturing. You could do it by buying a percentage but
what they have to net is foot by foot the amount of the
bonuses that they want to get. If they want to get a bonus
of one, they only want to go to three, that is fine. You
have to go and produce that in target area.. They are not
precluded from building the first, but they must do it
concurrently if they are going to build commercial at the
same time. It is that simple. Now, the guidelines, they
have just got to be worked outl
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Freixas, we have been dealing with this
issue now for how long, Mr. Bailey?
Mr. Bailey: December cof 1984.
Mayor Ferre: Since December of 1984 and we are now in March
of 1985. This matter has been postponed, what, four times?
Mr. Freixas: Four times.
Mayor Ferre: It went to the Planning Board ...
Mr. Freixas: Twice.
Mayor Ferre: Twice? We have had public hearings for a
year.
Mr. Freixas: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Demetrio Perez is not satisfied. He wanted a
special Blue Ribbon Committee. We appointed a Blue Ribbon
Committee.
Mr. Freixas: The Blue Ribbon Committee, by the way, Mr.
Mayor, met four times at public hearings too.
Mayor Ferre: At public hearings. Janet, you were my
appointee, if I recall.
Mr. Freixas: Ron Fraizer is here too. He was Miller's
appointee and Hines Reed could not be here tonight, or Tony
Marina could not be here today.
Mayor Ferre: And you met and you have now come back with
these recommendations. I am ready to vote on it., because
otherwise, what do we appoint these committees for, and what
do appoint ... and what do we have - Mr. Bailey is making
too much money for us not to ... for us to disregard him for
a year. I mean, if he is that wrong, then you know ...
Bailey has been working for nothing and he has got staff -
we have had public hearings. We have had boards. We have a
special Blue Ribbon Committee. They had four meetings. We
have been putting this thing off. Now this is the fourth
time we have put this thing off. What else is there to do on
this thing?
Mr. Perez: Did you meet in your Blue Ribbon Committee - did
you have opportunity to meet with business community of the
area, with all interested and with all the people involved
in the area?
RT 112 March 21, 1985
4 q
Mr. Freixas: Yes, sir. We met with their attorneys and
their architects. In fact, SPI-16, I am going to mention
now, was a combination of recommendations from them that we
took at the public hearings. Their basic concern, on the
SPI-16, was that they -have taken away from them the 1.72
with commercial F.A.R. that they had now. What we did is,
we maintained the 1.72 of commercial, but the requirement -
if they want to build the 1.72. They have to go with 2.16
of residential on top of that, or there can be the 4.32
F.A.R. for residential alone if they want it to. That was a
good compromise. It accomplished both things. We know and
you know that I am also a developer, developer, that if you
are going to be residential, and you want to build ownership
you have to get money in commercial. This getting the
commercial F.A.R. and they have incentive to build the
residential F.A.R. I think it is a good ordinance. I think
it has been worked out from every angle, everybody is
positive, Mr. Mayor, and I think you have the best possible
solution for everybody.
Mr. Perez: Does that satisfies all the parties involved in
this?
Mr. Freixas: Commission, you don't ask that! To satisfy
all parties, that is impossible! I think this is the best
solution that we could come along with.
Mr. Plummer: Address the problems that Mr. Traurig brought
up with the regulations, or the rules are coming after the
zoning.
Mr. Freixas: Well, Mr. Plummer, the basic bonus laid out is
foot for foot. It is there. Now, there are many ways to
accomplish that and I suggest to you that you have a very
capable staff that could do it, given flexibility and the
power to do it, but it is food for thought. If you build
one foot of commercial as a bonus, you got to build one foot
of residential in the target area.
Mayor Ferre: And you know, the point is, that this
Commission meets once a month, and I am sure that we can
deal with the regulations as they come up in the future, and
we can amend something that doesn't work. You know, we can
make it work!
Mr. Freixas: I think you have the guidelines well
established. It is just a matter of ...
Mayor Ferre: This is not a static thing. It is a flexible
thing, relatively speaking.
Mr. Plummer: Let's hear from the public.
Mayor Ferre: Anybody wish to speak from the public on this
issue? I wanted to go back to Mr. Traurig, actually. Wait
a minute, because this is overwhelming now. I thought that
would be ...
Mr. Ernie Fannatto: Ernie Fannatto is my name and I am
President of the Taxpayer's League, Miami and Dade County.
Mayor Ferre: Well, Good Afternoon, Ernie.
Mr. Fannatto: I don't think one for one is enough bonus
with the cost of building today, and I will tell you one
thing, we are pinched for money for taxes. We have got to
be a little more liberal, and let's swallow our pride and
let's try to keep the taxes down. You are not going to do
it unless you build. Thank you.
RT 113 March 21, 1985
8_5 .Ia.0
V V
Mayor Ferre: All right, sir. Thank you. Be careful how you
use that word ''liberal". That's ...
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Carollo: Ernie, you -didn't mean liberal, you mean being
conservative and not spend taxes.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mayor Ferre: All right, next speaker.
Mr. Richard Weiss: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission,
my name is Richard Weiss. I am here from the law firm of
Fine, Jacobson, Schwartz, et. al. I am here on behalf of
Ted Aronson and the properties of Hamilton, who own a block
of properties on Biscayne Boulevard here between 8th and
9th. We believe that the proposed F.A.R. of two, for the
yellow area is contrary to what is trying to be accomplished
by the Southeast Overtown/Parkwest District. The purpose of
that district is th encourage the ...(INAUDIBLE, OFF
MICROPHONE) ...
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Weiss, excuse me for interrupting you, but
I want to see how many speakers are going to be on this
issue, so we can allocate time and plan properly. Would
you raise you hands, those who wish to address the
Commission? All right Mr. Fraizer, you are one.. Mr. Teale,
you are two.
Mr. Carollo: Raul Rodriguez.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Rolle. Tony, do you want to
speak? That is four. Janet is five. Is that it? All
right, now, does anybody need more than three minutes?
Three to five, all right.
Unidentified Speaker: Mr. Rodriguez will need five to seven
minutes and I will take three.
Mayor Ferre: That is fine. Anybody else? Okay, so with
the exception of Janet, who wants three to five, and you who
want five, Mr. Rodriguez will want seven, and you want
three. I will give each of you five minutes and you can
allocate to him three of your five, or two of your five, and
now we will proceed, okay?
Mr. Weiss: (INAUDIBLE, OFF MIKE) ... seems to me that in -an
_ area that you are trying to encourage development, to put
such a low F.A.R., is contrary to the purpose you are trying
to do. The people mover station, which will be one block
from this property, all planning and good zoning studies say
that it should be intense development around that area. To
put an F.A.R. of two there, sandwiched between a six and
unlimited, just doesn't seem to make sense. We originally
asked for a F.A.R. of six for that area and we would like to
propose a three, which will give us enough F.A.R. to develop
appropriately in that area, but will address some of the
concerns of staff. One other problem that we think the
current ordinance has, and that's ...
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Weiss, perhaps we can get to ... I want to
state ... Billy, where did you go? Mr. Freixas? I just
want to state one person's opinion - to you as Chairman of
the Blue Ribbon Committee. I think what Rick is saying is
totally logical. I cannot frankly believe that with all
that green area in the Omni area where we went to a six
F.A.R., where we have unlimited F.A.R. a couple of blocks
down, that we go to two F.A.R. on the Boulevard. I am only
RT 114 March 21, 1985
$7-7 J3.• 1 a,►
.. q f
talking about the Boulevard and I think in the Boulevard
area, F.A.R. is totally reasonable.
Mr. Freixas: Mr. Mayor, let me ... it is five, it is not
two, it is not three, it is five! It is five! He can go to
five.
Mayor Ferre: Are you talking about five with all the
bonuses?
Mr. Freixas: But the point is, that your guidelines, the
guidelines that this Commission gave the Blue Ribbon
Committee is to create a primarily residential community in
the target area. The only way we can do that, to get the
private sector to build residential buildings is to give
these types of bonuses and besides that, Mr. Mayor, when
they go to three, you are taking into consideration that the
new 9500 ordinance gives it - the gross land of all
Biscayne. Boulevard, which is 80 feet. Two is a three! So,
I don't understand the Counselor, why he is arguing.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you.
Mr. Weiss: (OFF MICROPHONE) ... the other problem that we
have with the proposed ordinance is the residential
requirements discourage developers like our client, not a
residential developer, but a commercial developer, from
developing in that area. What we would like to propose is
that a sum be paid to the City the same way that it is along
Brickell Avenue. This way, it lets the City closely control
the types of residential developments put into that area and
removes the roadblocks for developers who want to do exactly
what the City would like it to do, and. that is come into
this area to build high quality commercial space.
Mayor Ferre: All right, next speaker? Are there any other
speakers? Hearing and seeing none, then we will proceed ...
Unidentified Speaker: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Well, that is what I am asking - are there any
other speakers?
Mr. Tony Alonzo: On Park West/Overtown.
Mayor Ferre: Well that is what we have been on for the last
half hour.
Mr. Alonzo: My name is Tony Alonzo and I represent the Park
West Association. I am Vice -President. Normally Mr. Ruwitz
would be here, but he is out of town, and I will take less
than one minute. We have been here since October, not
because we are requesting a zoning change, but the City
wants to request a zoning change that we feel.will take away
property rights, the way it has been presented. It has been
a long battle, and as Raul Rodriguez, the architect, and our -
attorney, Arthur Teale will further explain in detail what
we mean. The ordinance as presented right now, with the
limitation language still takes away property rights and we
are here to propose an alternative, so I will turn it over
to Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Raul Rodriguez: Mr. Mayor and Mr. Commissioners, my
name is Raul Rodriguez and I am with Rodriguez, Kelly,
Quiroga in Coral Gables.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Rodriguez has seven minutes.
Mr. Rodriguez: I don't think I will take that long. Let me
Just start by saying that back in October when we were
RT 115 MarCAe?. i° J"•� i
C f
retained, we were asked to look at the toning changes that
the City is proposing and analyze them and come back to the
association with a recommendation. When we did that, we
looked at the entire existing zoning, all the way from 15th
Road to the Omni area. It just so happens that the area in
question is the one than is proposed as the lowest zoning.
This plan here shows the area in question. What we decided
to do was to focus on the area marked CG-2.7 and see what it
was that it was currently zoned for and what it was proposed
to be zoned for. The existing zoning for CG-2.7 allows an
F.A.R. of commercial of 1.720 totaling about 333400 square
feet per block.
Mr. Rodriguez: My seven minutes! Okay, the plan that I am
showing to you now is the proposed zoning. Most of the area
shown as CG-2.7 is now SPI-16, so we took a look at what
SPI-16.prop03ed. Now, SPI-16 proposed to take a residential
zoning and up it to 2.6, which was zero, and to lower the
commercial to .4, and that was the situation when we looked
first at this project. * We looked at this project in two
ways. We looked at it what would happen if indeed the City
could continue to participate in the funding of this
project, although we believe that that is, at this point,
seriously in question, but we looked at it both ways. We
came back with a recommendation that if in fact, the City
were ... the Board is not here, but it is what is before you
today. Basically, that the City would go on and put its
2.60 residential and they would keep their 1.72 commercial,
so that the City would get their way, and the property
rights would not be reduced. Now, there was one language of
limitations in that particular recommendation that the Blue
Ribbon Committee made, and that is that they be tied
together. Again, if you are confident that we can.continue
to count on the City's subsidy, in a way, to acquire this
property, it is really ... you will be the ones that will be
acquiring the property, but we also wanted to look at a
different scenario. What happens if these bond issues are
not approved? Or what happens if money is not available to
continue the land acquisition process? Now, you have, not
completed, but you are going to the land acquisition process
on the first nine blocks and you have developers that have
come in and shown interest, but what happens if there is no
mote dollars to buy the rest of the land? Well, what
happens is then you have down -zoned these people's property
have zoned it primarily residential, and we believe that
that might be a problem for them in utilizing that land, not
only selling it, but actually utilizing it, so we looked at
strictly from the private sector side and said, what would
be the most adequate zoning, if indeed there were no more
city funds or any other Federal funded available to
subsidize this, and Matthew will tell you that from the
beginning this project's success rides on that ability to
bring in the public sector financing through tax increment
financing, and we focused on the same zoning that is west of
Brickell, on the area around the rapid transit station, and
What SPI-7 does is it allows you a 1.5 FAR residential,
but it also allows you up to a 3.0 commercial for a total of
4.50. It also allows you for this, it allows you for
commercial only of 2.25 if that is what the market bears and
it allows you for residential only as well of 3.75. I say
to you today and I have had six months to think it over
because this keeps on being postponed, that if you can
pledge to the property owners that you will continue to
provide financing to this project... I believe in bringing
housing Downtown and I think that it will come and that it's
a noble effort on your part. But if you have any doubts
AT 116 March 21, 1985
S - 31 �;3
f f
about this I urge you not to down toning their property
before those dollars are in place, because again, what you
will be doing is you will be placing a toning that will make
it very difficult for that area to be developed by the
private sector. That is and it's been used and -A don't want
to get. into demamoguery` but something of what .iappened to
South Beach. The fact that it's reserved for a certain type
of project that never happens and then the whole thing sits
their die for ten years. So, that's my presentation and I
will entertain any questions.
Mayor Ferro: I just want to correct in the record .my good
friend Tony, so that we understand. The property owners
have no God given right in the senses that I think you are
projecting. The Supreme Court of the United States hras
ruled on many many occasions that governments have in their
policing rights, the right to decide what gets built on a
piece of property, because the welfare of a community is at
stake. And so therefore, this Commission as past
Commissions or future Commissions have a right to decrease
the floor area ratio. Now, the problem, of course, is that
when we increase it from 1.2 to 6 like we did in Omni, of
course, nobody complains except the newspapers. In this
case when we want to do something different and innovative,
then of course, I understand your concern, but I just... and
I'm not saying that I'm for or against, because my history
in this Commission is as the Herald continually points Out
has long been for increased floor area ration everywhere,
because I believe that the only way Miami will survive, not
grow, survive is by continually pumping into it the economic
flow that Ernie keeps talking about. I know people have a
tendency to forget, but it is no small coincidence that why
Miami Beach was sinking Miami was doubling and tripling its
size. It is no small coincidence that during these past ten
years we have built five thousand hotel rooms. It is no
small coincidence that we have built millions of square feet
of office space in Briekell Avenue and in Downtown and
that's why I always find it very funny stu that when the
Miami Herald was printing on Front pages, about the federal
government investigating my taking a bribe for the food fair
property rezoning. I made a very simple statement. I said
"If you will check the record, I have voted for every single
major rezoning where somebody wants to build a major
building. Now, if Mr. Babylon or whatever his name is,
indeed, or whoever it was that bribed me bribed me, they had
to be the dumbest people in the world, because they could
have gotten my vote without paying me anything. Since I
have a very clear record of voting for in every single
occasion without any exception in the eleven years I have
been Mayor and in the three and a half years I was a
Commissioner for major development. Because I'm a firm and
strong and deep believer in that kind of a process. I might
point out that in the Omni area much to the surprise of your
partner, Mr. Martin Fine who made the presentation, I was
the one who pushed for a six FAR. They never expected to go
that high. They would have been happy with the three and a
half and I went to six, because it's my opinion that it is
essential to stimulate. That was a depressed area and it
Was essential for us in the City to induce Mr. Hollo
financiers, Equitable and others and the Marriott
Corporation and others to build large projects to increase
the value of that area and that has increased in value.
Now, the case of Overtown is very different and I want to
tell you that the position that has been taken by the Blue
Ribbon Committee Chaired by Billy Frexias and that others...
Ron Frazier, I think is on it and Janet and others, weighs a
get deal on me, because I think these are practical people
who have looked very, very carefully at the objectives that
we have and we have an objective. Now, we have a difference
of opinion as to how we best serve that objective. You
HT 117 March
o�2l, 1985
7—�J�
Q�
V t
think that that objective is best served by increasing the
commercial portion of the FAR. Tony you think that you have
some kind of a right to keep that. I disagree. Raul thinks
that we can best achieve housing in another way. That's
what the crux of the matter is and the crux of the matter is
that we do want to get housing into the Downtown area. It's
one of the most important missing links. Now can it be
induced? I don't know. I don't know and I don't think
anybody else does either, by the way. I think it's a risky
business, but that's what this is all about.
Billy Frexias: Mr. Mayor, if you let me add two things for
the tranquility of Tony Alonso. These recommendations to
you and this ordinance states very clear that it... See
right now there is no project. Nobody is coming forward
with anything. You are not taking away the 1.72 from them
it's there. I am sure that if... and it says so in the
ordinance that you are going to pass today, that it has to
be reviews in three years. In three years this thing don't
fly members of this Commission and you, Mr. Mayor, that you
always have taken the leadership for development and as you
know, I'm a member of the Zoning Board of the City of Miami
and Janet is here to attest to you that I'm pro development.
So, you know, I'm sure that this thing is going to be review
then and...
Mayor Ferre: I would say that the only person that has
voted more than me for variances and development is you.
Mr. Billy Frexias: So, I'm saying to you that you have a
good project in front of you. If it's another project that
comes along, I'm pretty sure that you guys are willing to
listen to it.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That's great Billy, but why don't you
go ahead and buy the whole thing right now and then wait the
three years. You know, I mean that's the issue. You know,
there may not be a project, but there is some property there
and you are zoning it a certain way hoping that this project
moves forward and I love to see this project move forward.
I have a very great vested interest in seeing this project
move forward, but I'm concerned that it may not move forward
beyond the the nine blocks unless the City can secure the
financing to buy the rest of the property. That's what I'm
concerned. And then if you do that and you can't secure the
financing, then what happens is that they are stock with
land that's zoned for you to buy and there are no buyers.
So, I'm trying to give some flexibility to the thing.
Mr. Frexias: All we are saying to you Mr. Mayor, we
understand that project, but the fact is that those pieces
of land have been zoned commercial with 1.72 for a long time
now and nobody has taken the leadership to do anything.
Mayor Ferre: All right, ok. Art.
Mr. Arthur Teale: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the
Commission. I saw the gleam in your eye when someone said
only a minute, so I won't use my full five minutes, but Mr.
Mayor, this matter... the summary of my statement is being
put before you now and of course, in January we wrote you
and a copy of that letter is attached for your convenience.
In essence in summary there are really four issues here that
I would like to present before you. The first one, Mr.
Mayor and members of the Commission is that you rely very
heavily on the Blue Ribbon Committee and we had the
opportunity to work closely with them and I can tell you
that that was a very satisfying experience from the
prospective of having an opportunity to make the input, but
I would also ask the Commission to note that your PAB Board
RT 118 March 21, 1985
it f
voted in favor of an SPIN-7 on the same issue after the Blue
Ribbon Committee had met and voted upon the proposal that is
now before you and when we appeared before you a month or so
ago and you returned that action to the PAB Board the vote
was four to three in favor of as SPI-7 and I think five to
two against the recommendation that is currently before you.
I would also note as has been brought before you earlier,
the notion that the private sector initiatives would be
greatly enhanced in effective development of this inner city
project with the SPI-T. Additionally, a matter that I have
some personal interest and involvement in, when- you
requested the UMPTA grant and the federal funding for this
the EIS, the federal grant request all made repeated
references to high density. Extremely high density in this
corridor area. In fact, the state of the art and the
accepted principles of modern urban planning adjacent to and
contiguous with transit stations indicates that these
developments, these mixed use developments don't work unless
you have the highest possible density and so I would also
urge that you would give some recognition to the previous
statements, the statements in fact that supported the
federal application which in fact justified the funding
would be the higher density. The other point is that the
higher commercial FAR component is the component that is in
place right now at the Brickell Station area and the higher
density area, I think, should be good for the Overtown area
as well.
Mayor Ferre: That's your best argument.
Mr. Teale: That is. I will make it again. I would also
note members of the Commission that the current RFPs that
are out right now that are under evaluation by the Manager
contain several proposals for the development of this area.
The one proposal that comes from a community based
organization, the one proposal that is currently before the
Commission is a hotel development in the area that we are
talking about. That development would be an inpermissible
use without further action if in fact you approve the
recommendation that is currently before you. At least in my
judgment. The final point that I would make in this area
which... well, the final point I will save for a moment and
go to this other issue, matter that has been of great
concern to this Commission which is the extension... the
nofthern leg to the Downtown People Mover. I believe that
in the benefits assessment district that we are trying to...
that some of us are certainly supporting and trying to
encourage will be greatly enhanced if both the Brickell area
and particularly the Park West area which is adjacent to
along that corridor has a higher FAR, that in fact can
provide for the higher benefit on the additional commercial
space. Obviously, the space would not be benefited under
this type of assessment if in fact it is a residential area
and finally, I do agree that you have said repeatedly, other
members of the Commission, Commissioner Plummer have said
it, that no matter what you do in your instructions to the
City staff that you don't want to lower the commercial use
that the current property owners have. The limitation
provision of the proposal clearly does that. It lowers
their use and while it does not constitute an unlawful
taking in one sense, it is a taking of a right that they
have in terms of the transfer ability for a commercial use
of that property. Thank you, for an opportunity to appear
before you.
Mayor Ferre: Art, I think the proponents will tell you that
in their opinion they may be taking something away, but what
they are giving to you is worth more than what they are
taking and that's what the issue... and see, you disagree
with that, but that's what they feel and that's what we have
RT 119 March 219 1985
87- 1 7-
p Ja
T V
to decide here. Now, if the present commercial FAR that you
have is 2. what?
Mr. Teale: The current commercial is 1.72.
Mayor Ferre: Ok. Now,..._
(BACKGROUND COMMENT INAUDIBLE)
Mayor Ferre: I'm confused with that. Explain that to me
please.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The problem is that there is a
language of limit which means that they must do it in the
ratio that they build the residential. So, it's tied
together.
Mayor Ferre: I remember now. All right, next speaker.
Mr. Frexias: Mr. Mayor, point to clear Mr. Teale's comment.
The PAD did not recommend the SPI-16 and did not recommend
the SPI-7. It failed both motions to carry either one of
the recommendations.
Mr. Teale: Mr. Mayor, I said that they voted in favor of
it. To get a recommendation before they have to have a five
person vote. The vote was four to three and therefore, that
recommendation does not come before, but there there an
affirmative vote in support of the SPI-7.
Mayor Ferre: I understand. All right, Mr. Frazier.
Mr. Ron Frazier. My name is Ron Frazier and I was apart of
the Blue Ribbon Committee. I have watched -the Overtown/Park
Nest area you know, develop different scenarios over the
last five or six years and I contend that the issue that you
are dealing with right now has nothing to do with FAR and
has nothing to do with zoning. This City Commission made a
commitment in terms of a redevelopment policy that the Park
West/Overtown area would be redeveloped primarily as a
residential based community with supporting commercial,
auxiliary type commercial and that's what the charge of this
committee was about. I think that in terms of the SPI-7,
this committee reviewed the analysis that Rodriguez made as
well as the lawyers from different property owners as it
relates to that. This property has no relationship to the
same kind of transit zoning. There is no way you can
compare the two. I'm also on the Urban Development Review
Board and we just reviewed a project near Western Union
Building which had an FAR of 2.5 which. gave a you an
enormous project right on Southwest 8th and what have you.
You can get more on this property than you can get around
that Brickell Station in certain instances. I think the
SPI-79 its intent is mixed use and not residentially based.
So, it wouldn't be appropriate if you are going to follow
your overall policy. If you want to change your policy then
you got a new set of ground rules. Ok.
Mayor Ferre: That's a good argument.
Mr. Frazier: If you want to change your policy you need to
change the ground rules. The second thing is and I'll...
Talking about transit development around stations. I just
finished doing a study for the Model Cities corridor and
based on that we had Hammer, Siler and George which was the
economic consultants and we looked at four major cities just
see what had been happening around those stations that have
already been built. In Atlanta, Baltimore, Washington,
Boston and we find that the transit station doesn't
necessarily guarantee there is going to be any
RT 120 March 21, 1985
87-753's 4P-9
V 4
redevelopment. That's a myth. A lot of the redevelopment
comes on it's on because of other merits. The transit
facility may facilitate it, but it doesn't promote it and
you can go into these cities right now and you can go in
everyone of those urban areas you will find out there is
nothing that has happened. Nothing. Around those station
that happened to be located in majority Black areas. So,
there are some other concerns that deal with that. I can
understand Mr. Traurig's concern about the strip along
Biscayne Boulevard. But that strip is not an island to
itself, it has to relate back into the Park West/Overtown
side. The amount of zoning and the FAR that's here will
allow them still to get the magnitude that want. The kicker
in this whole process is that do you want the residential
area built? If so, then these developers have to be apart
of that process and they can't do it with just paying cash,
they got to be committed to do it simultaneously.
Otherwise, it won't get done. I think the last item and I
think this Commission needs to deal with this first hand.
Are we dealing with a question of greed at public expense.
We met with what the property owners had. We looked at all
of the zoning classifications. We did not down grade what
they currently have. They can still build the necessary
c:immercial that they need. All we put in is that we would
like to see some residential development. You can still do
what you want to do, but if you go beyond that you will have
to give us some bonus points. So, it goes back to whether
or not you are going to deal with the primary policy
decision for redevelopment as a residential area or you
change the policy decision, then you can change the rest of
it. I think the ordinance has the flexibility that you can
build into it the regulations that you need to deal with
transfer development rights and all the rest of it. It has
that amount of flexibility and you have just as much time as
it took you to get to this point to deal with those issues.
But if you don't vote on this now, you know, why have all
these committees. It's just a waste of public time. Thank
you.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Jackie.
Ms. Jackie Bell: Mr. Mayor, fellow Commissioners, it
certainly is good this afternoon to see all of these people
here talking about Overtown since it took us ten years to
ge£ here and I think I'm the first one who caused
redevelopment or talked about redevelopment, but that
community never did talk about a complete residential
community. We talked about a mixed use community because we
needed jobs and we needed development. We have enough low
income housing in Overtown and we have told you that since
1974. When we looked at all of the economic pieces,
Community Development, the UMPTA grant for those four blocks
that was for commercial development. That was not for
housing and it seems mighty strange that all. of the people
who had been apart of that community is not here this
afternoon. They think you are having this at 7 o'clock
tonight and it seems mighty strange that the people worked
so hard are now being thrown out. If you go a complete
residential community you and I both know who is going to be
there. It is not going to be any of us. And New Washington
Heights have proposed a hotel. We were the first ones to
make any proposals of any development and if you go with the
zoning you have now you are talking about throwing us out.
But I think that surely people who are interested in
building housing now that we have that doe. stamp tax, now
that we have the twenty-five million dollar housing bill
that I too, probably would look that way, but you all have
to look at where are the jobs going to come Prom. We the
community needs some employment. We don't have employment
after you finish with building the housing. Yes, you do
RT 121 March 219 1985
87— 7Jj '• 1cPS
have some temporary jobs and yes the people who want to
build the houses are not Dade Countians. They are coming
in. They are bidding. They are walking away with what we
the taxpayers and the residents and the citizens of this
community have paid for and will continue to pay for. 1
think What you all need to do is look at what you agreed on
way back in 1975 for development and zoning. The people who
own the land are not being in any position in the new
development and if you go all housing, you still are not
going to have us there and you are still going to have a
community of nothing and we want a community that will
perpetuate jobs for us.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Rolle.
Mr. Wellington Rolle: Mr. Mayor, my name is Wellington
Rolle and I live in J. L. Plummer's Miami. I have lived
here for a life time and one of the things that really and
truly disturbed me about all of what I have heard on this
subject today is that the City of Miami has many many
resolutions that are in the files in the Clerk's Office that
talked about when any development took place in the central
negro district and we are talking about the district that is
bounded by 23rd Street on the North, 5th Street on the
South, about 7th Avenue on the West and maybe the railroad
track or Biscayne Boulevard on the East. Now, part of the
problem when I heard the gentleman talk about property
rights. We are talking about a lot of people who have be
displaced and dispossessed. We are talking abou-t land that
has laid foul for twenty-five years. We are taking about
73. We are talking back to the beginning of the decades of
the sixties that the City of Miami and Dade County in
concert removed a lot of people from this land and everybody
is trying to deliberate on what they feel is the best use of
this particular land. Never mind the displaces. Never mind
the fact that you have destabilized an entire community.
Now, I have served on the Zoning Board at least a couple of
terms with Billy Frexias and the other people here, but I'm
not talking from the view point of a person who has served
on the Zoning Board or any of that. What I'm saying to you
is that we have simply sat here and we have destabilized and
entire community and this Commission has made the policy
statement not once, not twice, not three times, but about
four times that any kind if development that takes place in
this area, they would develop this area as one single parcel
of hand granted the interchange that sits in that area takes
up fifty-one acres of land. During this delay in the
development that should have taken place many moons ago in
this particular area the Florida Legislature in its wisdom
sort to amend the legislation and change the definition of
what a blighted area is and they added an "or" in that
particular passage in the definition and they included these
gentlemen here who were talking about the property rights of
his particular clients. And we are talking about an area of
warehouses from Miami East to the Bay. So, what I'm simply
saying to you, sir is that there is a golden opportunity to
exhibit a class of leadership that it has talked about in
many of its resolutions and has paid lip service to some
causes that I believe that the Black citizens in the City of
Miami would like to see this Commission address for one time
since for the last twenty-five years and that is solve the
problem of why tourist don't come back to Florida, to Miami
and at the same time solve the problem of saying that there
are different kinds of activities that are available within
the boundaries of the City of Miami whether you go in the
Hispanic area, in the Black area or in the Downtown area.
Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Wellington and please don't take this. I don't
mean this offensively. Are you for or against 95?
HT 122 March 21, 1985
00 �
411, or
Mr. Rolle: Pardon me.
Mayor Ferre: Are you for or against 95? The issue that we
are talking about. Are you for it?
Mr. Rolle: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: Ok. I didn't understand it from your
statement. Thank you.
Mr. Daniel Crumer: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is
Daniel Crumer. I operate the Crumer Company in Tth Street
in Miami that happens to be in the middle of Park West. We
have operated a business in Miami since 1913 and with that
kind of longevity we ought to know a little bit about the
Park West/Overtown redevelopment area.
Mayor Ferre: I will tell you, you are lucky Plummer isn't
here. If you have here since 19 when?
Mr. Crumer: 13. I haven't personally, Obviously.
Mayor Ferre: And you call it Miami, you got bad problems.
Mr. Crumer: I just don't talk with a southern accent.
Mayor Ferre: You got to say Miama. Didn't you hear
Wellington and J. L.?
Mr. Crumer: I would like to know one thing. I think...
sitting back listening to the Commission the presentation
that's in front of the Commission today, I don't think one
point has been clearly made. The first phase of the Park
West redevelopment area, the six blocks have been funded.
You are now about to zone this area that's going to be in
the second phase, but as of today, there is not one dollar
allocated for the development of phase two and since the
inception of this Park West redevelopment area has taken
place the federal government as well as the state and local
government have less money available for redevelopment than
they originally had. Unfortunately our government in
Washington is not throwing money down towards Miami as well
as any other city and there is no money available. So, I
would like the Commission to tell us property owners and
citizens where is the money going to come Prom before you
change the zoning to tie residential to commercial where
there is no money for the residential development. Thank
you.
Mr. Bailey: Mr. Crumer and members of the Commission, I
would just like to state for the record and in fact remind
quite a few of us that this redevelopment plan has never
been predicated upon federal funding. And I think if you
look at the plan that has been approved, the entire public
cost that is to be born through the use of tax increment
financing and what that simply means is that the increased
tax revenues generated as a result of development activity
taken place, those increased funds will go into a trust fund
and those monies will be used to further pay the public
cost. Now, making that work here in Florida or making that
work in the City of Miami. I think this Commission has
taken a step that perhaps no other redevelopment agency for
tax increment financing has done. They have already primed
the pump with thirty-two million dollars to get development
started and as that development starts tax assessments
increase. In fact for the first time the last year when I
came here we didn't get any money because the tax
assessments went down. This year we will get a few dollars.
As development continues to take place either on Biscayne
RT 123 March 211 1985
8
_N
41, or
Boulevard or any where within that area revenues will
increase. We then be able to float tax increment revenue
bonds and just like we found the money to do the first phase
I can assure you we will find the money during the
subsequent phases if this Commission so desires.
Mr. Crumer: Mr. Bailey-, I simply say that when that occurs
then change the zoning. But don't change the zoning now on
the hypothesis that that might occur in the future...that is
Mr. Crumer: .... (INAUDIBLE), and I don't think the
Commission should do such.
Mayor Ferre: All right, are there any other speakers?
Janet.
Ms. Janet Cooper: I'm confused. I'm upset and I'm afraid
from what I hear here tonight. Mr. Crumer has said to you
don't change the zoning. We had a discussion a few minutes
ago. What terrible, terrible thing are you trying to do to
their zoning. You are trying to take the 1.T2 FAR for
commercial that they already have and give them an
additional what? Is it 2.6 for residential. Terrible.
Don't do !t. Don't give them the additional 2.6 they are
saying to you. Why? Why are they saying giving them
additional FAR. It's such a horrible thing you don't hoar
this from developers. There is one...
Mr. Crumer: Because you are tying into the commercial
that's why.
Ms. Cooper: I can answer my own questions. Thank you. I
didn't interrupt you. Please let me make my presentation.
Mr. Crumer: Yes, it's just rhetorical.
Mayor Ferre: No, it's not reehorical.
Ms. Cooper: It really was.
Mayor Ferre: No, she has the right to speak.
Ms. Cooper: And that's exactly it. Even though I don't
want him to tell you. I would rather tell you he is exactly
right, because they don't want to tie it to residential.
They don't want to build residential. What is the purpose
of Park West/Overtown? What is Mr. Bailey working for?
What has this Commission spent so many days worth of time on
and so much money. What have I personally been serving on
various committees for over a year to try to promote
residential development in Park West/Overtown? Why don't
they want to give them the added FAR now? because they want
to try perhaps to rush a head and build exclusively
commercial and office buildings before you change the
zoning. You know what's going to happen if that occurs, you
are never going to have a residential development. Now,
there is a bit of deja vue going on here. A copy years ago
we had and SPI-5 district between the river and 15th Road
and this was supposed to be the great mixed use district in
the City of Miami bordering Downtown Miami that was going to
provide housing for the workers who were going to go up
Brickell Avenue and go to work in Downtown. We were going
to have an active twenty-four hour vibrant living community
in the Northern part of Brickell Avenue. We are going to
have this by encouraging residential development, requiring
residential development and what do we have today. Not one
residential unit that has been developed since the inception
of that ordinance. Not one. All we have is office and we
have more of what happened Downtown, which is that it closes
RT 124 March 21, 1985
a _ iiJ 131
7
�. N
4 Ot
up after dark and there is no life, there is no activity.
There is nothing going on Downtown. So, then the discussion
was when we decided not to require residential in the SPI-5
district. Well, we are going to collect money from those
developers who are building all commercial projects and we
are going to allow them -to use that money. We are going to
use that money towards housing within a one mile radius and
we increased it so that it would include Park West/Overtown,
because this Commission wanted to encourage residential
development in Park West/Overtown, which is now the only
area left that can provide any housing in the Downtown area,
in the Greater Downtown area. And now what's happening is
you are hearing requests and demands from developers, don't
make us build residential or from Mr. Traurig. If you make
us build residential let's make it be so little only one
foot of residential for every three feet of commercial. So,
insignificant residential that you want make a dent and I'm
going to put this diagram up here. Basically, you are
hearing to disagreements. Number one, is with Biscayne
Boulevard. They are saying, we have no problem with you
letting us build a five FAR of commercial. We are not...
this committee, the Blue Ribbon Committee and the Commission
and the Planning Department and everybody else, nobody is
asking them to build as a requirement housing on that
property. They are just saying they don't want to do their
fair share to provide the housing else where in the Park
West/Overtown, that everybody else seems to think -is
reasonable in order to put that commercial on that property.
They are saying let us get away with it. Let us put up the
commercial and not accept any of the responsibility and I
say that's not fair. A foot for a foot is fair. The other
thing is in SPI-16, they don't want to build any
residential.
Mr. Crumer: That's not true.
Ms. Cooper: Excuse me.
Mayor Ferro: Conclude your statement Janet.
Ms. Cooper: They are asking for permission to not only keep
the same commercial FAR that they are now, but to increase
it and to not have it tied into residential development.
SPI-16 is the core of Park West/Overtown. If you do what
they are asking you will completely kill the project. It
will not be a residential project. You will have another
Brickell in Park West/Overtown and you really have not
thought to do that.
Mayor Ferre: Ok. Go ahead, quickly.
Mr. Crumer: We want housing Downtown. It's the method by
which we bring it. The method that is being proposed is a
method that was tried in the sixties. It was proposed here
in the seventies and we are now in the eighties. We would
like an opportunity to bring housing Downtown by giving the
private sector an incentive and you know that it's not
feasible right now to bring it when it's exclusively
housing. We are not saying we want exclusively commercial,
but they are saying that they want exclusively housing.
Ms. Cooper: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. It's two feet
commercial for three feet residential in an area that is
supposed to be residentially oriented. Anything more than
that is not going to fly and if you don't make them build
the residential you are just not going to get it.
Mayor Ferro: What w
the same statements
the issue is clear.
e are doing is is we are being to repeat
over and over and over again. I think
I permit these things to ramble on
ld
125
March 21, 1985
A
4
because most of us don't pay
So, it takes about four or
understand what's being sai
repeated five or six times,
issues are very clear on both
you not repeat... I think we
or five times and...
Mr. Teale: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, yes.
d
attention half of the time.
five repetitions for us to
and now that's it's been
I understand... I think the
sides. Now, I would ask that
have now heard each side four
Mr. Teale: Mr. Mayor, people are getting upset, but let's
be very clear about one thing and so that the public is not
fooled. The residential areas that we are talking about are
not rebuilding what was there or for the people that was
there. We are talking about seventy-five, eighty thousand,
ninety thousand, a hundred ten thousand dollars condominiums
as the literature by the City says, for the yuppies, the
upward mobility people that are there. I think that that
issue really needs to be before you, because we are not
talking about residential in the vein that has been
portrayed. We are talking about a completely different kind
of residential and all that we are saying is that a mixed
use, a residential with commercial is a much better use. The
people...
Mayor Ferre: I got the message.
Ms. Cooper: I just want to say, one other thing I should
point out to you. The Blue Ribbon Committee addressed this
issue in SPI-16, the commercial zoning was 0.4. Mr.
Rodriguez came to us with a proposed compromise that was
adopted by the Blue Ribbon Committee. Now, he... Mr.
Rodriguez...
Mr. Rodriguez: That is not true.
Mayor Ferre: No, wait, your turn will come up next.
Ms. Cooper: This is my recollection of it and I think it's
correct and I'm sure that people standing behind me will
tell me if I'm wrong. Now, he is coming to you and saying
what he proposed to use and recommended as an acceptable
compromise is not acceptable. He wants more.
Mr. Rodriguez: That is not true and Matthew that was there
can tell you. What we said and I think that Janet is...
like she said at the beginning, she is confused and she is
upset, but that's not what we said. We said that if you are
confident and we will still say it today, that you can
finance this project. If the Commission is confident, not
the Blue Ribbon Committee, because it's going to come from
these folks, that you can finance this project the way that
Herb has described, through tax increment financing, then
that is fair and I said that then and I say it now. But
what I said was that when I was hired I looked at it both
ways and if you want the private sector to be the one
involved in this, because you may not have those dollars in
the coffer and you don't have them today, I think that you
should consider SPI-7 for this. That's it.
Mayor Ferre: All right, do we have any fresh speakers?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, I don't know whether you call
me fresh or not Mr. Mayor, but...
Mayor Ferre: Well, you have spoken before. I'm trying to
see if anybody who has not spoken Wishes to speak from the
public. You are part of the family. We are not talking
ld
126
March 21, 1985
► -7,) . ,•
4 O
about you. Anybody else from the public wishes to speak at
this time. I will give both sides a one minute summary to
tell us the story over again.
Ms. Cooper: Not to summarize, one more point of information
if I may.
Mayor Ferre: Quickly. Quickly, Janet.
Ms. Cooper: I just checked with Mr. Sergio Rodriguez. He
tells me that not one residential unit has been proposed
under the SPI-7 district. It's all commercial..
Mayor Ferre: You already said that. Yes, you already said
that. All right, now. Ron, I'm going to let you be the
anchorman and finish the whole thing up, but let... I don't
know whether Herb or Billy wants to...
Mr. Rodriguez: Let him summarize.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, no, no I got the last one. Go
ahead.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Mayor, all the things that have
been in front of you is we are trying to address housing for
the moderate income. We have come up and we have sat down
with Mr. Rodriguez and one of his recommendations that was
not to take away the commercial floor area ratio and all we
did that is different from what they want to do is that we
tied down, because the mandate of this Commission was very
clearly to create a permanent residential neighborhood and
that was the trust and the guidelines that you gave us. All
we are saying to you is that I think it's a... we think it's
a good ordinance. The one that's in front of you. Let's
approve it today. It also has safeguards in there that says
that it can come back to you in three years for review.
That land has been sitting there for twenty years, only
these warehouses. They are all run down, most of them and
nothing is happening. Besides that you have Bayside Project
going up that is talk and also, the committee took into
consideration the site for the sports arena and you need
people living in that area and the only way you are going to
get this done is just by, not forcing the developer, but I
think you are giving them a good use of the land. You are
not. depriving them from the reasonable use of the land and
all basis of zoning is that you allow the property owners to
have reasonable use of the land. Thank you very much, Mr.
Mayor and members of the Commission.
Mr. Rodriguez: Ok. One last message. I agree with my
cousin Freixas here. All right.
Mayor Ferro: Cousin?
Mr. Rodriguez: Absolutely. That's what he calls me right.
Now, if, indeed, you are confident that you can continue to
fund this the way Herb Bailey has said, all right, this is a
good zoning. The only problem is... again, the only problem
is that you have to buy the land. Now, I am saying to you
because of Bayside and all the other things that he has said
you should consider the fact that there might be some wisdom
in introducing the private sector at some point in this in
the actual purchasing development of the property without
having to have to go and take it away from people and then
give it to the private sector. Ok. And if you do that I
think that the most reasonable zoning is SPI-T because it
allows the private sector an incentive to build housing. In
order to build office space they will have to build housing,
but if you do it the way they have it right now the only
problem is that you... the ratio that you have doesn't pay.
ld 127 March 21, 1985
4 �.
So, people will not develop it unless you buy the land and
give it to them, which is what you have been doing.
Mayor Ferre: You know, I thought you were an architect. I
now see that you are a lawyer.
Mr. Rodrigues: No, unfortunately, I'm not. I will show you
my IRS and you will see that I am an architect.
Mayor Ferre: You are also very clever. Ok. Anything else?
Are there any other statements? Now, is there a motion to
close off the public hearing?
Mr. Plummer: So, move.
Mr. Perez: Second
Mayor Ferre: Further discussion, call the roll, quickly.
THE FOREGOING MOTION was introduced by Commissioner Plummer
and seconded by Commissioner Perez and passed by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Demetrio J. Perez, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Ferre: Now, questions and statements from the City
Commission.
Mr. Plummer: I will start it off Mr. Mayor. I have said
from day one and I will continue to say today and tomorrow
that basically, what is being proposed is a wish list and we
know what happens with wishes they don't materialize. I
have said before and I will say again, the only chance of
success that I feel that this project has is with the public
money being involved. Unfortunately, when we proposed the
bond issue for whatever reasons you want to interject as to
the reasons why, it did not pass. It went down the drain.
I fail to see what incentive that you are giving a property
owner presently. When he owns a piece of property he is
going to retain the same zoning that he had yesterday, but
that you are giving him an incentive to build residential
tomorrow and tie into it.
Mayor Ferre: Is that a question or a statement?
Mr. Plummer: No, it's a statement.
Mayor Ferre: Hold on J. L. Wait a minute, because you
know, we got to go through the question period first. There
may not be any questions.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, I'm sorry. Ok. Well, my question is...
let me ask it in the form...
Mayor Ferre: Does anybody have any questions before we get
into statements and I will open it for a motion?
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask this in the form of a
question to the department. If in fact these people who
presently own property have a 1.72 classification FAR and
you are proposing that tomorrow they would have a 1.72.
What incentive is there there for them to building
residential? What goody have you given them?
ld 128 March 21, 1985
IN
4
Mr. Herb Bailey: Commissioner, the incentive... first of
all let me say that they currently have 1.72 and that is
commercial.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Herb Bailey: At the moment there is no residential
zoning for Park West.
Mr. Plummer: We are adding on to that at the conclusion of
our negotiation with the property owners another 2.6
residential. Now, the incentives for developers which would
include property owners if they so desire to become
developers are the same ones that we are providing...
Mr. Plummer: No, you are not giving them the option of if
they desire, you are binding it. You are making it
mandatory. That's the difference.
Mr. Bailey: No, no, no, we are not.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Plummer: But what I'm saying is, if they enjoy a 1.72
FAR today...
Mr. Bailey: Commercial only
Mr. Plummer: Commercial... well, that's all that's there
today.
Mr. Bailey: Yes, right.
Mr. Plummer: All right, tomorrow they still have the 1.72.
Mr. Bailey: Plus 2.6.
Mr. Plummer: But that 2.6 is if only... let me finish.
Mr. Freixas: Commissioner Plummer, they can build... just
forget about the 1.72...
Mr. Plummer: How can you answer my question when I haven't
fipished yet.
Mr. Freixas: Ok. I'm sorry.
Mr. Plummer: If they can build a 1.72 commercial tomorrow
as they could yesterday, what is the incentive to them
because of tying it to a residential?
Mr. Rodriguez: Let me answer it in two ways Commissioner
Plummer. First the ordinance that was in front of you
December 20th only allowed them to build 0.40 commercial.
Mr. Plummer: Well, that's ridiculous.
Mr. Rodriguez: Please let me answer you. I'm trying to
back track to the accomplishment that the Blue Ribbon
Committee that you inpanel and the discussions I had with
them. We said that's ridiculous. That's crazy. Ok. So,
we went and said you keep the 1.72 commercial that you have
now. You want to go and build 2.6 residential, but you
don't have to build the commercial. You can go and build
all residential which give you a 4.32 floor area ratio. But
now you have to understand that the mandate of the
Commission and we were... we had... those were the
guidelines given to us, was to create a residential
community of moderate income in that area. But they can
build 4.32 residential only tied to nothing.
ld 129 March 21, 1985
8 - 53-o W.'
414 40
Mr. Plummer: You consider a hundred ten thousand unit to be
middle income?
Mr.Freixas: I don't think those units should cost a hundred
ten thousand dollars and I will leave Mr. Bailey to talk
about the .......... -
Mr. Bailey: I think that's a price and structure our
opponents have designed. That is not the price and
structure that we have determined that will be the case.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but you will not be the final answer any
how.
Mr. Bailey: Well, in terms of... well, we do have a lot to
say in terms of what goes in and the public and this City
has the right to police the type of development that will
occur, but due to the fact that we are providing at the top
a considerable amount of incentive to developers to reduce
their cost and I know.. we know and most of the developer
around here understand that when you begin to reduce the
total cost of development, you can still maintain a high
level quality of unit and transfer that benefit to the
public a moderate price. It is only when you hav,* to pay
the cost of land on a variety of other kinds of Costs on a
conventional development that you go up to hundred, hundred
ten thousand, hundred twenty thousand. Now, listened - to
Charlie Chisholm on the radio the other day about South
Point and when you tell me that a hundred thousand dollar a
year income is for moderate income people, then I sometimes
get lost. But we are designing and we have stated publicly
that the initial units in this phase will go between forty-
five to sixty-five thousand dollars. Now, that doesn't say
you are getting a real cheap shotty unit, but when you look
at the amount of right down that we are providing and the
amount of low cost financing, we can get built a good
seventy-five thousand dollar unit and pass it on to the
public at a moderate level and that is what we are doing.
You know, you say you project and you pipe dream and. what
not, but you know, a lot of this is based our experiences
doing this type of development. We have a considerable
amount of professional back up. We have account firms
looking at our numbers. We have developers who come in and
talk with us and we go through a process for which we can
try to deliver what the city has required us to do. I know
and believe that we can do it.
Mr. Plummer: Have you given any consideration to being what
I would consider a true incentive that if they had just used
ones, since that's what we have been talking about, of a
1.72 that you give a developer the right to go to a two if
he puts in "X" footage of residential. That to me is an
incentive. That is a bonus and that is the very system that
we used in the Omni area and the very system.we used in the
Brickell area.
Mr. Bailey: Commissioner, I guess we have been saying this
and I guess I have to repeat it again. First of all, let me
say that the zoning that we are permitting or we are
requesting you to permit us to use today is much more
liberal than the original zoning that was proposed for the
original Park West/Overtown Plan, because if we had gone by
the original one it would be .4 commercial, .3 residential
and on Brickell Avenue, and on Biscayne Boulevard it would
have been 1.0 for commercial. So, we have... we think in
order to maintain a residential complexion for this
community and to deliver the kind of development that the
plan that has been approved by this Commission in July and
subsequently approved by the County Commission in December,
ld 130 March 21, 1985
.1
i
that the zoning that we are permitting and which your Blue
Ribbon Committee has reviewed and agrees to is perhaps the
best type of zoning that we can recommend as professionals.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Bailey, Let me say that I think
that in my opinion at this stage of the game everybody on
this Commission has made up his mind as to how he is going
to vote on it and I think we ought to get along with the
voting and I would like to one way or the other, you know,
get everybody to make their statements quickly and let's get
a vote. I am for your proposal. I think it is carefully
thought out. I think it has been deliberated upon for well
over a year. It has gone through many, many public
hearings, scrutiny. It has been debated, redebated,
debated, changed. We have modified. We have accommodated.
We have improved. We have changed. We have done everything
to get thing... we have a dream here. Ron Frazier is right.
We have an approach. It is an opportunity. This is a
commitment that this City has made. It is an important
commitment. If we cannot conclude on this commitment I
think it is a bad step backwards. I think it is after a lot
of work on Overtown, it is a definitive statement that it is
our intention to meander and wander again. This is very
different from South Beach. South Beach was a multi-
billion, billion, billion dollar thing with all kinds of
dreams of bringing down with Steven Suakin dreaming and
bringing in the Rouse Company and the other... and Equitable
and Prudential and it was Steven Moss and Norman Braman
dealing with billions of dollars and it was a monopoly game
that was being played on Miami Beach about it and it was a
dream. It was a real dream. That was a real dream. It
never had any chances of... a modern Venice in America.
Come on. I mean, it was nothing but... it was great, but it
was a dream of Steve Suakin that he sold to Steve Moss and
to Norman Braman and to other people who bought into it and
they convinced the Miami Herald and the Miami News that this
was a terrific dream and then they started... it started
falling a part. This is nothing like that. This is a
relatively small, modest, reasonable project, in proportion
to the totality and there is one other important issue.
Thanks to you Art we got 6.T million dollars and thanks to
this Commission in the past we have eleven million dollars
committed from bonds. And thanks to the tremendous work
that Herb Bailey has done over how many years now Herb?
Mr. Bailey: Twenty-nine months.
Mayor Ferre: Twenty-nine months. How many days and hours.
Well, whatever it is it's over two years of work of Herb
Bailey. We brought him down here. One of the best things
that Howard Gary did is reach for this man up in
Philadelphia, brought him down here. He is a specialist in
this. He is a realistic man. I don't always understand
him. He takes to long to make the point, but he makes a
point and he makes a good point and he is 'a man who has
carefully guided this thing through a very, very complex
maze. I got to tell you I don't understand what the hell he
is doing, but the bottom figure is there and the bottom
figure is that realistically we have committed ---close to
what?--- over thirty million dollars. Hopefully, forty, but
thirty for sure. We are committed to this. We have gone
too far. This has been too painful. It's too important for
us to abandon it now. In my opinion a negative vote today
abandons it. Now, Tony to you, to Gee Ruwitch to property
owners I know you guys are upset, but I want to tell you
something. You are going to make a lot of money. You are
going to make a lot of money and this is a good positive
step. It could be adjusted. We are going to adjust it. It
will change. Oh, yes, we can adjust it. The rules will
move along. We do a lot of things to improve it as it goes
ld
131 March 21, 1985
8 7 - I� J 14 I ��
along. If it doesn't work in the next six months or twelve
months or we see it getting stuck, we will unstick it. We
will move and we will change it. It's flexibility. But I
think it's time for us to bite the bullet. I know that this
is going to get all kinds of opposition for me. That's
never been a problem in the past and 1 want you to know it's
not a problem today and I'm ready to vote my conviction.
Anybody else want to make a speech. I'm open for motions
one way or the other.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I will make you a motion if you want a
motion.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, one way or the other. I think it's time
to vote one way or the other.
Mr. Plummer: I make a motion that this be sent back to the
Planning Advisory Board to make it realistic to provide true
incentives so that we can accomplish something through the
private sector and give these people the incentive to go and
to build the housing which they will do if you give the true
incentives and I think that's what's needed.
Mayor Ferre: Fall back and punt. Is there a second?
Mr. Carollo: I will second that motion.
Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by
Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 85-303
A MOTION REFERRING THE AMENDMENT OF
ARTICLE 15 SPI - SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK
WEST OVERLAY DISTRICT; SPI-16, 16.1 16.2
BACK TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD.
(This action was canceled by the passage
of Second Reading Ordinance 9968; later
same meeting. This motion is shown for
record purposes only)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion
was passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Demetrio J. Perez, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
NOES: Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
ABSENT: None.
Mayor Ferre: All right, so back to the drawing board for
another twenty-nine months.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, if that goes back to the drawing
board for twenty-nine months I would change my vote right
now. I want to tell you that.
Mayor Ferre: Oh, yes. Well, I will remind you of that
twenty-nine months from now.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I hope that you will be around to do
that.
Mayor Ferre: I will be around. You may not be in agreement
with that as you haven't been in the past, but I will be
there.
ld 132 March 21, 1985
8 � ��% ~ - � 1
i J... '
IN i
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I think that it would be wrong to
make such a motion without this Commission giving some
guidelines. I expressed my opinion before and I will
express it again. I think if in fact you can get tax
incentives that's great --and that would be a bonus. I think
that if you come forth with incentives of bonus type of
zoning to encourage the developers to come forth and do the
private sector, I think you have a good shot. I am willing
if the rest of this Commission is to go back out on a bond
issue to at least proffer it. It might not win, but I think
it's going to take an infusion of public money to accomplish
what we are trying to accomplish. I think without it is
foolhardy. So, I would hope that the Planning Department
can come up with some kind of true incentives for the
private sector.
Ms. Cooper: Mr. Plummer, I encourage attempting again to
place the bond issue on the ballot and I would be willing to
serve again on a committee of citizens to try to encourage
its approval as I did last year. I would also like to point
out something which is there is nothing wrong with bonuses.
It's a terrific system. Incentive bonuses. Where It has
fallen apart in the City of Miami in the past has been that
the ground level, the base level, has been so high that
there has really been no desire on the part of the
developers to seek the bonus and so I would caution this
Commission and the Planning Advisory Board and the Planning
Department and the Park West/Overtown Department to make
sure that when they are devising these incentive bonuses to
make the bases that they can build small enough.
Mayor Ferre: Janet, let me interrupt you, because I think
it's important that we try to figure out a compromise.
Obviously, the Commission is not satisfied with where it is
and I may have a recommendation that might satisfy everybody
and I would like for... I see Ron. Did Tony leave? I see
Ron is here. Billy is here. No, Tony Marina.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, Tony left.
Mayor Ferre: But of the Blue Ribbon Committee. You are the
Chairman and I would like for you to consider the following;
"The maximum floor area for a mixed use building shall not
exceed 4.32 times gross land area".
Ms. Cooper: This is for SPI-16?
Mayor Ferro: Yes.
Mr. Freixas: Yes, that's what it is.
Mayor Ferre: That's what it is now.
Mr. Freixas: But that was our recommendation.
Mayor Ferro: I understand that, but follow me I'm reading
the whole thing. "Two, the Maximum floor area for a
residential building shall not exceed 4.32 times gross land
area. Ok. Residential building. The maximum floor area
for non-residential use shall not exceed 1.T2 times gross
land area provided, however, that for every square foot of
residential use provided either on site in a mixed use
building or off site within the boundaries of the SPI-15
district and provided concurrently with the non-residential
use, the non-residential floor area may be increased by one
square foot, but the maximum increase in non-residential
floor area shall not exceed 2.25 times gross land area.
Now,...
ld 133 March 21, 1985
8 7 7J.,
IN
Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor, we considered that. We considered
that.
Mr. Plummer: That's an incentive.
Mayor Ferro: Would you accept that?
Mr. Plummer: That's an incentive.
Ms. Cooper: Let me first of all tell you when we considered
that at the Blue Ribbon Committee the problem that we had
with that was...
Mayor Ferre: That passed four to three even though it
didn't get the five votes right?
Ms. Cooper: I'm not talking about Planning Advisory Board.
I'm talking about the Blue Ribbon Committee.
Mayor Ferre: Oh, the Blue Ribbon... I'm sorry.
Ms. Cooper: The problem that we saw with that and we felt
at that time that it was a major problem, was that that
would tend to take the residential development out of the
core. The SPI-16 as I tried to show you earlier is really
the core of tbe. development.
Mayor Ferre: Janet, the thing has died. It went down four
to one. I'm trying to save it. Ok. -
Mr.Freixas: Ok. Let me see if I can convince you anyway.
Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute, hold on now.
Ms.' Cooper: Well, I'm just pointing out the problem. I'm
not suggesting you vote against...
Mayor Ferre: Yes, I realize the problem, but the point
is... you know what's going to happen? This thing is going
to meander... This is going to be like Moses looking for the
promised land. Ok. And -by the time he gets on top of that
hill to look at the promise land it's going to be very late.
Ok. And it's time for us to move. The promise land is now.
We need to move now and if this is what does it now let's
get.it off...
Mr. Plummer: Let me understand Mr. Mayor. You are talking
about 4.3 maximum.
Mr. Freixas: Mr. Mayor, if that satisfies the Commission...I
Just checked with Ron and with Janet and we are in agreement
to recommend that if that pleases the Commission.
Mayor Ferre: All right, if that's the case and let me read
into it the rationality for the bonus incentive. Ok. Into
the record "The bonus incentive proposed for 15165.3 was
drafted in order to set the current and presently existing
FAR to 1.72 as bottom line and to create private incentives
for development of residential and non-residential uses.
The maximum FAR of 2.25 is the same intensity as the
development permitted in SPI-7 in the Brickell station area.
The Southeast Overtown Park West Redevelopment Project and
the Brickell Station area share significant urban and
transit characteristics. It is in the best interest of the
City of Miami to adopt development intensity standards with
appeal to private sector development initiative" and based
on that rational I propose that we ---if you will accept it
and Herb, if you will--- move on that, because that's...
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
All you are
saying Mr.
Mayor...
gl
134
March
21, 1985
8 -".�J� • I�'
I
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Freixas: No, no, that's
Janet. As I No,
you,
read that one more time,
not what he is saying. No,
Mr. Mayor, may be you should
Mayor Ferre: J. L., you got the copy of it?
Mr. Freixas: It's going to be on the target area. He
doesn't have to build it on that particular site...
Mayor Ferre: That's precisely right.
Mr. Freixas: ... but on the target area he has to provide
it.
Mayor Ferre: That's right. Now, I would like to ask the
develop... Where did Art Teale go? Mr. Teale, would you
and Mr. 'Rodriguez and who... Tony I don't mean to offend
you, but I'm talking about professionals now. Who are the
professionals who want to react to this? Do you have any of
objections to this?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: All right, let's take a ten minute break -so
everybody can look at it.
Mr. Plummer: Well, no, we can go on to another item.
Mayor Ferre: All right, we will go on to another item and
come back to...
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute, let me understand. The
maximum total would be 4. what?
Mayor Ferre: Well, it's on the thing there.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, well they... the department.
Mayor Ferre: Well, have copies of it made. Here. What's
the maximum 4.4 what?(Temporarily Deferred)
(BA.CKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
66. AUTHORIZE CONTRACT: S.M. DIX A ASSOCIATES FOR
APPRAISALS OF IMMOVABLE FIXTURES FOR COMMERCIAL PARCELS
WITHIN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARS WEST -PROJECT
�N��N����MNN��N�N�NN�M��MNN�N N�N�NM�N NN
Mayor Ferre: Miller Dawkins moves Item 54. That's the S.M.
Dixon Company? i
Mr. Plummer: Yes. f
Mayor Ferre: All right, and seconded by Plummer, further
gl 135 March 21, 1985
N
137 5341
11 1
discussion, call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner
Dawkins, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 85-304
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM ATTACHED BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MIAMI S. M. DIX AND
ASSOCIATES, INC., AT A COST NOT TO
EXCEED $339000.00, TO PREPARE AN
APPRAISAL OF IMMOVABLE FIXTURES FOR EACH
OF THE COMMERCIAL PARCELS WITHIN THE
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST PROJECT
AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY
NORTHWEST 10TH STREET; WEST BY NORTHWEST
1ST AVENUE; SOUTH BY NORTHWEST TTH
STREET, AND EAST BY NORTH MIAMI AVENUE
AND NORTHEAST 1ST AVENUE; TO COMPENSATE
CONSULTANT FOR. EXPENSES INCURRED FOR
COURT PREPARATION AND TESTIMONY.
(Here follows body of resolution,
omitted here and on file in the Office
of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the
resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
6T. ACCEPT RECOMMENDATION FOR SELECTION OF LADDER COMPANY
-NO. h, LTD. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT - REUSE OF FIRE
STATION NO. 4.
.Mayor Ferre: All right, now we are taking up ST.
Mr. Dawkins: 57.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, this is the City Manager's recommendation
for the Ladder Company No. 4 LTD. proposal for unified
development project known as the adaptive reuse of the
historic Fire Station No. 4. All right, we will begin with
the administration.
Mr. Dawkins: Before I go into this Mr. Manager, or whoever
this is, twelve lines up from the bottom it says here...
now, we have already had an appraisal. It says something
here about "two independent appraisals requiring contract to
reflect and comply with minority procurement". What does
that mean?
Ms. Dougherty: Commissioner Dawkins, you have found a
mistake in both the resolution... in the title to the
resolution and the body of the resolution. That was an
gl
136 March 21, 1985
8 -5
k]
It
which they have, but I don't think it is fair for me to dis.
cuss these now without having discussed them with Southern
Bell, so I would move that this be continued until the next
meeting, please.
Mr. Carollo: Unless you feel really strongly about it, I'I1
go with you, but I am ready to make a motion to vote against
the 10% tax increase on long distance telephone calls.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I'll withdraw my motion!
Mr. Carollo: I don't know if I will get a second for it, or
even a third, but ...
Mayor Ferro: Well, I haven't put 45 on the table, but if
you ... and I will do it as soon as we finish with the un-
finished business before us with our Blue Ribbon Committee
and then I will recognize your motion at that time, okay?
68. CONTINUED DISCUSSION: AMEND ARTICLE 15 SPECIAL PUBLIC
INTEREST DIETS. OYERTOWN/PARK WEST. MOTION TO BEGIN
AREA OF 9 BLOCKS AS DELENIATBD IN BLACK ON MAP.
Unidentified Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We made
proposal and I will just let Mr. Bailey explain to you what
the problems that we have with that and the deadlines that
you also have to meet in order not to lose your application
with C. R. and the monies that you have already paid.
Mr. Herbert Bailey:. Mr. Mayor and members of the Commis-
sion, we caucused in the C.O.W. Room and we went through the
recommendation that was submitted by representatives of the
property owners and we think we gave it a very fair observa-
tion, but I would be remiss if I did not advise this Commis-
sion as a representative of the City of the adverse impact
that this recommendation would have in regard to this pro-
ject and thefinancial and the legal impact that would be a-
gainst the City. First of all, the proposal is drastically
dirferent and counter to the redevelopment plan that the
City and County Commission have approved. The D.R.I. for
which we have been working on for the past two years would
have to be completely redone and would take us another 18
months to 24 months to get completed. The development se-
lection, and I think this is probably very key - we have
coming before this Commission hopefully next month a solid
commitment, an absolute commitment to develop $2,200,000
worth of private investment in the Overtown/Park West areas.
These developers have responded to R.F.P.'s based on what
they considered to be the proposed zoning to compliment the
investment that they are going to make and I haven't been
here that long and I kc,ow I am lengthy and I want to get
right to the point, is that I would just like to know, and I
am new here, when is•the last time that you have had anybody
and let's talk about the property owners, to come in with an
absolute commitment that has been verified by one of the Big
Eight firms to invest $200,000,000 in the project area.
Okay, I am going to get to the point, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute. Let's be Pair, okay? You know
Herb, I appreciate you trying to make your point, but let me
tell you what I don't appreciate, that died. Obviously you
didn't understand. What we sent back to you and to the Ad-
ministration was to consider this other plan.
Mr. Bailey: I am getting to that, Commissioner. We are.
gl
159 March 21, 1985 4;
r
1
Mr. Plummer: Well, but the rest of it is dead weight. It
is history.
Mr. Bailey: Well, if I - can just make my point as to what I
am getting to, you will understand how it fits in.
Mayor Ferro: Hey, let me add my voice to Plummer's. You
have got a four to one vote, okay?
Mr. Bailey: I understand that, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Now, this whole thing is dead!
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, as far as I am concerned, it is a
dead issue. We tried to do something. Obviously they don't
want to listen.
Mayor Ferre: Let him finish, J. L.I
Mr. Plummer: No, no, what for?
Mayor Ferre: Because you don't know what hie statement is
going to do.
Mr. Plummer: I've heard itl
Mr. Bailey: No, you haven't!
Mr. Plummer: You are beating a dead horse!
Mayor Ferre: He hasn't made it yet. Let him finish.
Mr. Bailey: I would just like to recommend and we get to
the point ...
Mayor Ferre: Well, get to the point, Herb.
Mr. Bailey: ... that we would like to come back before this
Commission, and only ask for the zoning for the property
that the City and the County own that is under redevelopment
and that any developer or any investor has a desire to come
in and make any investment or development within the area
thtt they too will come before this Commission and ask foh
the zoning changes as we are asking for the zoning changes
on property we own. We only want to ask for - we are going
to withdraw, we want to withdraw the zoning ordinance and we
only want to come back and ask for the zoning only on the
property that we own and want to develop.
Mayor Ferre: J. L., I don't see how we can do anything but
go along with that. If we don't go along with it, we are in
effect killing the potential of the bid document that we
have in our hands, and I think that is a heavy duty respon-
sibility.
Mr. Plummer: Show me on that chart.
Mayor Ferre: The black area.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mayor Ferre: Just say the black area.
Mr. Plummer: Do we own all of that property?
Mr. Bailey: We have five blocks under ownership and am in
the proce33 of_acquiring another four.
1
160 March 21, 1985 �'
I
Mayor Ferre: We have got the money for that. Nobody can
complain ...
Mr. Bailey: Absolutely, we have the money.
Mayor Ferre: Now, do you have any problem with that?
Mr. Bailey: That will be coming before this Commission on
April 11th, indicating how we intend to purchase that and
the funda are available to do that.
Mayor Fevre: Bob, do you have any problem with that? What
he is saying is, forget everything else. We are just going
to do what we have money to do.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask you this question. Now, I've
got to go into a legal aspect.
Mr. Robert Traurig: Yes, I would rather lose on the issue
that you previously heard, then to see the whole thing go
down the tubes, but I am not sure that is the only alterna-
tive.
Mayor Ferre: You would rather what?
Mr. Traurig: Mr. Mayor, I think I not only speak for myself
and my clients, but for others that a valiant effort has al-
ready occurred to try to develop an overall conceptual plan
for this area. Rather than to lose all of that effort, I
think that if it went back to the Planning Advisory Board
for one last stab, so that you won't lose the time and so it
won't expire, that maybe we can thrash out something in the
way of compromise so that everything can go forward.
Mayor Ferre: Bob, this is a ...
Mr. Traurig: I hear what Commissioner Plummer says. I
think it would be a disservice for the community to lose the
effort that is already incurred.
ft
Mayor Ferre: We are at a major crossroads. I mean, this is
a junction that once we pass it - once that train rolls by,
there is no way to go back to it I mean, if we lose the
initiative and the work of two years that we have done on
this thing, we are in serious trouble!
Mr. Plummer: That same set of criteria applies to the are
you designated in black, is that correct? ... where you have
tied the commercial to the residential. Is that the way it
was bid?
Mr. Bailey: No, that criteria ... I misunderstood your
question, Commissioner. Try it again.
Mr. Plummer: As the area designated in black which you have
indicated we presently own.
Mr.Bailey: Yes.
Mr. Dawkins: Whatever you said, I move it.
Mayor Ferre: Is there a second?
Mr. Perez: Second to what?
Mayor Ferre: In other words, we do it just for the black
outlined area.
Mr. Plummer: Wait, let me ask a question, because I think
this is a very important question. Is that area, if in fact
is a commercial tied to the residential?
gl 161 March 21, 1985
Mr. Bailey: Absolutely.
Mr. Plummer: All right, what happens if we pass it there
and we change it to the. other, what happens to the develop•
ers that have already made a commitment there?
Mr. Bailey: Then they will change it.
Mayor Ferret,. We are not dealing with the others.
Mr. Plummer: But, what if you change it from the others? If
you change it from the others, are they going to have the
right to come back and say ...
Mayor Ferro: Wait a minute, I have got to make a statement
to you, Herb. Sometimes you and I don't communicate. As
you say, you take a long time to make your point, but I want
to tell you this is one of the smartest moves I've seen you
make, because, I want to tell you what it is going to do.
You see, what you are doing is, you are falling back to your
bottom line retrench position and what you are saying is,
let me prove my point here. If I prove my point there, then
we will come back and we will say, " Tony, you see; it works
here, it isn't bad. Raul, it can work" and then we will do
Mr. Rodriguez: If you buy the property it can work. We
always said it could.
Mayor Ferre: Right, okay, but that goes back to your origi-
nal statement. "Don't do this unless you buy my property"
and that is what Tony said and I think this solves both your
concerns and your client's concerns and it also does not
kill the progress of two years of hard work by this City and
the amount of money we spent in getting these bidders to
this point. I thank you for doing that. My only criticism
is you should have done it before, but you damn near lost
the whole thing.
Mr. Rodriguez: But I accomplished another thing.
Mr. Plummer: The question I am still asking, okay - Madam
City Attorney, what position are we in that we approve this
here tonight and then we go and we address the other areas
and we make that more liberal through an incentive and bonus
program. Do those people who have a bid in presently and a
commitment to build - can they come back to this City and
say "Well now wait a minute - it was a different set of cri-
teria. We want the same criteria that you are going to give
the others if there is a bonus given and more liberal zon-
ing and more liberal F.A.R.".
Mrs. Dougherty: Outside of the City owned.
Mr. Plummer: No, outside of that black area, still in the
Parkwest/Overtown project. Are we opening the door for
Pandora's box for the original bidders ...
Mr. Freixas: Commissioner ...
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, you are not the City Attorney -
not half as pretty! Do we open the door to the original
bidders to say,"Well now, what is fair is fair, you are go-
ing to give a better program to the outside of that Black
area, we bid on the inside predicated on the whole project".
Mrs.- Dougherty: No, Mr. Commissioner. They have bid on
what we proposed. I mean, they proposed on what we bid, so
they are bound by that document.
gl 162 March 21, 1985
87.E 5 9'• ' r
Mr. Plummer: By that area.
Mrs. Dougherty: In that area.
Mr. Freixas: Commissioner, let me make a point now. What
we tried to do now is just apply it to the nine blocks of
what the City owes or is in the process of owning. I would
suggest to you that you nothing further now. If you do
that, and you liberalize it and you start giving bonuses on
the thing. Until they can prove this thing can work, under
the guidelines, all you are doing now is making their land
more valuable on terms of you purchasing at a later date so
it is our recommendation that you choose to do nothing at
this point, just zone the nine blocks, stop there, and see
how it goes. Don't do anything else. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: All right, are we ready to vote? Are you
okay, J. L.?
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mayor Ferro: All right, call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner
Plummer, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 85-306
A MOTION ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF
THE ADMINISTRATION CONCERNING SPI DIS-
TRICT AND SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST
TO ACCOMPLISH THE CONSTRUCTION IN THE
AREAS THAT WE PRESENTLY HAVE DELINEATED
BY A BLACK STRIPE OUTLINE OF A NINE -
BLOCK AREA ON A DRAWING PRESENTED TO THE
CITY COMMISSION ON THIS DATE. (See Ordi-
nance 9968, later same meeting)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the motion
was passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferro
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: Let me say in voting yes, that I also want to
add one comment. I still want to add the comment Mr. Mayor,
that I still want to go forth and try with the bond issue.
I think it is vital for the bond issue to be passed. There
has got to be an infusion of public money. If not, you are
misleading the people.
Mayor Ferro: Mr. Bailey, you live dangerously and you must
have a very good guardian angel who worries about you, be-
cause you almost ... I mean, you are making this by the skin
of your teeth. This is much too an important a thing for us
to live so dangerously and I thank you for having come up
with a solution and I hope the next time you don't hang in
so tough so long, and I vote yes.
Mr. Carollo: He might end up being the best Assistant City
Manager this City ever had, hey, Mayor?
gl 163 March 21, 1985
87_ ♦ 534 1
It I
is i►—..�r—ai+iil+ia�iNrrr►-iir�r��ra...rirrr��.�i.�.r rir+..fiii rii.r...rr.riir i��riara.��.r� �.rir.
69. GRANT VAIVEB M USE OF ORANGE BOWL STADIUM • NOVEMBER
270 19869 FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION IF
STADIUM 23 AVAILABLE.
Mayor Ferro: All right Frank, what can we do for you?
Mr. Frank Cobo: Mr. Mayor, fellow members of the Commis-
sion, Mr. Manager, this year begins the Centennial Celebra-
tion of the Dade County Public Schools. We have already
kicked it off. I have included a brochure in the packet.
The reason for my being here tonight is to request that the
City of Miami allow us to use the Orange Bowl November 27,
1986.
Mayor Ferre: November 27th?
Mr. Cobo: November 27, 1986. This is the official year ....
Mr. Carollo: November ...
Mr. Cobo: November 27th, 1986. In fact, you all might not
be here!
Mayor Ferro: The Dolphins will be still be playing.
Mr. Cobo: That is right, but we -have already checked this
date out and this date is available.
Mayor Ferro: Frank, I wish you would not make political
predictions. They don't usually come true!
Mr. Cobo: Hut, Mr. Odio, before you object to it - this is
a once in a lifetime, needless to say, the centennial cele-
bration. It is a very important part ...
Mayor Ferro: Well, speak for yourself.
Mr. Cobo: As a product of the Dade County Public Schools, I
will speak for myself. We intend to have a real jamboree in
the Orange Bowl. It might be the only time it used in 1986,
so it might be worth our while to have it.
Mayor Ferre: Now Frank, that is twice you have done that.
Now, don't strike outl
Mr. Cobo: I better leave while I am ahead. I really need
.•. re ahead, Mayor Ferre: I don't know it you a a , but go on!
Mr. Cobo: Okay, I really need your support for this.
Mayor Ferro: All right, Cesar?
Mr. Cesar Odio: I have no objections to him doing that, but
*as
Mr. Cobo: Thank you.
Mr. Odio: ... we do not have the schedule from the N.F.L.
and the University of Miami and the high school and tell him
now that he can use the Orange Bowl...
Mayor Ferre: Well, obviously it is assuming ...
gl 164 March 21, 1 ��r.�
1
Mr. Plummer: On Item 77, I have been asked to reconsider
that as in reference to the bond issue. I have agreed that
if in fact that we Would approve it here today subject to
the administration giving to us within seventy-two hours a
complete line item budget for our approval and that any one
Commissioner would have the right of veto over that and
predicated on that agreement Mr. Mayor, I would move Item
77.
Mr. Dawkins: Second it.
Mr. Carollo: Seventy what?
Mr. Plummer: 77, Jie.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion and a second,
call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner
Plummer, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 85-312
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE
OF NOT EXCEEDING $2090009000 POLICE
HEADQUARTERS AND CRIME PREVENTION -
FACILITIES BONDS 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 Dawkins, the
resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
74. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: SPI-16 SPECIAL PUBLIC
INTEREST DISTRICTS 3OUT8EAST OVERTOWN/PARS WEST
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
Mayor Ferre: I'm now on Item 95, you have it before you as
amended. Is there a motion?
Mr. Plummer: Move it. That's as...
Mayor Ferre: As amended.
Mr. Plummer: Let's understand. As amended means only on
those parcels that we presently already own.
Mayor Ferre: In the black outlined area in the map.
Plummer moves. Who seconds?
Mr. Perez: Second.
ld 189 Marc ,, 1 '.),L915
f�fJ �
Mayor Ferre: Perez seconds, read the ordinance.
roll.
AN ORDINANCE -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF
ORDINANCE NO. 95009 THE ZONING ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY
AMENDING ARTICLE 15 ENTITLED "SPI:
SPECIAL PUBLIC INTEREST DISTRICTS, " BY
ADDING NEW SECTIONS 15150 ENTITLED
"SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST OVERLAY
DISTRICT" AND 15160 ENTITLED "SPI 16,
16.1, AND 16.2: SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN PARK
WEST COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS";
PROVIDING FOR INTENT, EFFECT, CLASS C
SPECIAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, PERMISSIBLE
PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES,
PERMISSIBLE . ACCESSORY USES AND
STRUCTURES, PERMISSIBLE ACCESSORY USES
AND STRUCTURES, MINIMUM LOT
REQUIREMENTS! FLOOR AREA LIMITATIONS,
MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, HEIGHT
LIMITATIONS, OFF—STREET PARKING AND
LOADING, AND LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS;
PROVIDING FOR REVIEW; AND CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Call the
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of
February 28, 1985, was taken up for its second and final
reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner
Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Perez, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted -by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9968.
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.
Id
190/191
Mar,,1,4106 ,1g�85'
rrrrr rrrrrrirrii.i Y.i i..i ii "I - it ri rr it irr rr rrr r rrr rrr
75. 5EC��..D REAbING ORbYrTANCE: APPLY SPI 16 SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN PARK WEST OVERLAY bISTRICT.
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r .. r r r r r r r= r r r r rrrrr r Mayor Ferre: Item 96• Plummer moves, Perez seconds.
Related item. Read the ordinance. Call the rill.
AN ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
95009 THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY APPLYING THE SPI-
15: SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST OVERLAY
DISTRICT TO THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED
BY NORTHWEST 10TH STREET, NORTHWEST 1ST
AVENUE, NORTHWEST 'TTH STREET, NORTHWEST
3RD AVENUE, NORTHWEST 8TH STREET, AND
NORTHWEST 2ND AVENUE (MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED HEREIN), MAKING FINDINGS; AND
BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON
PAGES NO. 23 AND 36 OF THE ZONING ATLAS
MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 9500
BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE
3t SECTION 300 THEREOF; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVEHABILITY
CLAUSE.
Passed on its .first reading by title at the meeting of
December 20, 1984, was taken up for its second and final
reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner
Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Perez, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Hiller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9969.
Jr 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.
N N1-�-��-N-�NNNNNN N-NN�NN-�--NN NNiNN
T6. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT -
DESCRIBED AREA SOUTHEAST PARK WEST
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
Mayor Ferre: We are on 97. Perez moves, Plummer ae6ond3,
read the ordinance on 97. Call the roll. or,
'yam
192 MarcA;1 _A91 Ild
AN ORDINANCE -
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
THE AREAS GENERALLY BOUNDED BY NORTHWEST
10TH STREET, NORTH MIAMI AVENUE,
NORTHWEST 8TH STREET, NORTHWEST 2ND
AVENUE, NORTHWEST 3RD AVENUE AND
NORTHWEST TTH STREET (MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED HEREIN), FROM CG-2/7 GENERAL
COMMERCIAL, RG-3/6 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL,
RG-3/7 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL, AND CR-3/7
COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL TO SPI-16:
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, EXCLUDING THE
EXISTING PAR ZONING; MAKING FINDINGS;
AND BY MAKING- ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES
ON PAGES NO. 23 AND 36 OF SAID ZONING
ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500,
BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE
39 SECTION 300 THEREOF; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of
December 20, 1984, was taken up for its second and final
reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner
Perez, seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 99TO.
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.
NON-NN��N�-�-NNMI�-MN-NNNNN-N�-�
TT. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
DESCRIBED AREA S.B. OVERTOWN/PARR WEST ETC.
Mayor Ferro: 99 is the next one. Plummer moves, Perez
seconds, further discussion? Read the ordinance.
Id 193 Marc§41 iA J9�,5'
AN ORDINANCE -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS
OF ORDINANCE NO. 95009 THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA,
BY CHANGING TBE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY NORTHWEST
8TH STREET, NORTR MIAMI AVENUE,
NORTHWEST ITH STREET, NORTHWEST 1ST
COURT, NORTHWEST 1ST AVENUE, NORTHWEST
6TH STREET, NORTHWEST 3RD AVENUE,
NORTHWEST 2ND AVENUE (MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED HEREIN), FROM CG-2/T GENERAL
COMMERCIAL AND CR-3/T COMMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL TO SPI-16.2 SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; MAKING FINDINGS;
AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES
ON PAGES NO. 23 AND 36 OF SAID ZONING
ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 95009
BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE
39 SECTION 300 THEREOF; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of
December 20, 1984, was taken up for its second and final
reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner
Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Perez, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner'Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferro
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 99T1.
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.
T8. ADOPT IN PRINCIPLE, •DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDA -
SOOTHEAST OVENTOWN/PARK WEST• JULY 1988 AS REFENENCED IN
PROJECT AREA.
Mayor Ferro: Take up a 100, resolution. Perez moves,
Plummer seconds. Is that right? This deals with the same
Overtown/Park West situation. Is that the last one Herb?
Mr. Bailey: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: All right, call the roll on a 100.
ld 194 MaccQ't»� S5
4
4
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner
Perez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION U0. 85-313
A RESOLUTION APPROVING, IN PRINCIPLE,
"THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS -
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST," DATED
JULY, 19849 IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM
ATTACHED HERETO, AS THE DESIGN
GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR THE
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST PROJECT
AREA.
(Here follows body of resolution,
omitted here and on file in the Office
of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the
resolution �,!as passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr.
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. -
Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
-N�NN NMNNN� N���NNwww��
79. SECOND READIIG ORDINANCE: PROVIDE FOR RESTRICTIONS 05
[EEPING OF WILD ANIMALS i REPTILES.
����MNN NMN-NN NN�NNN NNNN�� � NNN NN��� N��
Mayor Ferro: 101. Now, what's 101.
Mr. Rodriguez: Wild have three days and will expire.
Second reading.
Mayor Ferro: Oh, that's the wild animal. Carollo. Joe,
that the wild animal thing.
Mr. Carollo: This is Scarface?
Mayor Ferro: Well, whatever. The one in Coconut Grove. You
moved it last time. Are you going to move it again?
Mr. Carollo: Demetrio, no offense with you. This is
somebody else.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Carollo moves, Plummer Seconds,
further discussion? Read the ordinance. Read 101 please.
ld 195 Marc67"719115k ���