HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-86-0164J-86-164(a)
2/11/86
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE
ZONING BOARD AND THUS QUASHING THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR'S INTERPRETATION NO. ZI-85-3,
"BILLBOARD SIGN FACES UNDER SECTION 2026 OF
THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF M.IAMI, AS
AMENDED" AND FURTHER DIRECTING THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT TO INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 9500 WHICH CONFORMS TO THE
COMMISSION'S INTENT AND INTERPRETATION OF
SECTION 2026 OF SAID ORDINANCE BY PERMITTING
ANGLED SIGN FACES ON ONE POLE.
WHEREAS, the Miami Zoning Board at its meeting of
January 27, 1986, Item 6, following an advertised hearing,
adopted Resolution ZB 18-86 by a eight to zero (8-0) vote denying
the appeal and upholding Zoning Administrator's Interpretation
No. ZI-85-3, "Billboard sign faces under Section 2026 of the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, as amended"; and
WHEREAS, the appellant, E.A. Hancock Advertising, Inc., has
taken an appeal to the City Commission from the decision of the
Zoning Board; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission after careful consideration of
this matter finds that Zoning Interpretation ZI-85-3 does not
conform to the requirements of Zoning Ordinance 9500, as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Zoning Board Resolution ZB 18-86 affirming
Zoning Administrator's Interpretation No. ZI-85-3, "Billboard
sign faces under Section 2026 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City
of Miami, as amended" is hereby reversed and Zoning
Administrator's Interpretation No. ZI-85-3, "Billboard sign faces
under Section 2026 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami,
as amended", is hereby quashed.
Section 2. The City Commission directs the Planning
Department to initiate an amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 9500
which conforms to the Commission's intent and interpretation of
Section 2026 of said Ordinance by permitting angled sign faces on
one pole.
24'EE`i'il+f:' C'X'
FEB 27 1966
. _l. .
ion c,. ...
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th _ day of FEBRUARY , 1986.
X VIER L. SUARWZ, MAYOR
ATTE
MATTY HIRAI
CITY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
G. MRIAM MAER
ASSISTANT CIT�ORNEY
APPROVED , AS T FO•RMl AND CORRECTNESS:
LUCIA A. DOUGHE
r CITY ATTORNEY
GMM:bss:P069a
SE;--1f 4,
i
4
0
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO The Honorable Mayor and Members DATE
of the City Commission
SUBJECT
FROM Cesar H. Odio REFERENCES
V
City Manager
ENCLOSURES
February 18, 1986 FILE
7
RESOLUTION - APPEAL BY APPELLANT
ZI-85-3 UPHELD BY ZONING BOARD
COMMISSION AGENDA - FEBRUARY 27, 198
PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS
It is requested that a review be
made of the appeal of the Zoning
Administration Interpretation Imo.
ZI -85-3 -5m boars sign Laces
under Section 2026 of the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Miami,
as amended" denied by the Zoning
Board.
The Zoning Board, at its meeting of January 27, 1986, Item 6, following an
advertised hearing, adopted Resolution ZB 18-86 by an 8 to 0 vote, denying the
appeal and upholding the Zoning Administration Interpretation No. ZI-85-3
"Billboard sign faces under Section 2026 of the Zoning Ordinance of the C i ty
of Miami, as amended."
Backup information is included for your review.
A RESOLUTION to provide for the above has been prepared by the City Attorney's
Office and submitted for consideration by the City Commission.
AEPL:111
cc: Law Department
'
APPEAL OF ZONING INTERPRETATION
December 10,
E.A. Hancock Advertising, Inc.
3856 Douglas Road
Miami, FL 33125 Phone # 887-8205
Long and Knox (Attorney for Appellant)
Attn: George Knox
4770 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 970
Miami, FL 33137 Phone # 576-7777
Schedule for hearing Appeal of the Zoning
Administration Interpretation No. ZI-85-3,
"Billboard sign faces under Section 2026 of the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, as
amended."
The Zoning Board shall set a date prior
to January 27, 1986, in which this appeal
must be heard.
ZONING BOARD January 27, 1986 hearing date established at the
Zoning Board meeting of January 6, 1986.
At its meeting of January 27, 1986, the Zoning
Board adopted Resolution ZB 18-86 by an 8 to 0
vote, denying the appeal and upholding the
Zoning Administration Interpretation No.
ZI-85-3.
Notice of Appeal dated February 3,
8�-idly
Subject:
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Billboard sign faces unde:
Section 2026
Zoning Interpretation
ZI-85-3
Zoning Board's Decision
of January 27, 1986
THE APPELLANT, E. A. HANCOCK ADVERTISING, INC., by and
through undersigned counsel files this Notice of Appeal from
Zoning Interpretation ZI-85-3 and the decison of the Zoning
Board at its meeting held on January 27, 1986, wherein the
Zoning Board of the City of Miami construed the provisions
of §2026.15.2.1(c), of the City of Miami Zoning Ordinance,
to prohibit outdoor advertising sign faces to be erected
at angles at 200 from each other. Appellant states the
following grounds for its appeal:
1. The interpretation by the Zoning Administrator is
at variance with the legislative intent of the
foregoing §2026.15.2.1(c).
2. The erection of sign faces at angles at 200 from
each other serves the public interest.
3. A literal requirement that sign faces be erected
"back-to-back", by the Zoning Administrator's
interpretation, does not serve the public interest.
WHEREFORE, Appellant E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc.,
respectfully requests that this matter brought before the
Miami City Commission at the earliest possible date, pursuant
to Article 32 of the Zoning Code.
Respectfully submitted,
LONG & KNOX
4770 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 970
Miami, Florida 33137
By : IV
GEORG F. KN
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a Xrue and correct copy of the
foregoing was mailed this S ~ day of February, 1986 to
Chief D. H. Teems, A. Perez-Lugones, S. Rodriguez, Juan
Gonzalez, Zoning Division, Fire, Rescue & Inspection
Department, 275 N.W. 2nd Avenue, P.O. Box 330708, Miami,
Florida 33233-0708, Joel Maxwell, Esq., Assistant City
Attorney, City of Miami Law Department, 169 E. Flagler Street,
Miami, Florida 33131, and E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc.,
3856 Douglas Road, Miami, Florida 33133
0
By.
GEOR E F. KNOX
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To G. Miriam Maer DATE
Assistant City Attorney
/ sueJECT
FROM =wi
0e5REFERENCES:
Planning and Zoning Boards
ENCLOSURES:
January 31, 1986 FILE:
Letter of 1/30/86 from C.C. Papy III
re: Hancock Advertisng Request for
Withdrawal of Zoning Administration
Interpretation Appeal
Administration Department Copies of letters (3)
We are enclosing herewith copy of letter dated January 30, 1986
from Charles C. Papy, III, Esq. on behalf of Hancock Advertising
requesting that the issue of the Zoning Administrator Appeal
regarding the word "parallel" be brought back to the Zoning Board.
In my opinion; this request involves a legal issue and through
this memorandum I am asking for advice from the Law Department on
this matter.
I am enclosing for your information a copy of letter dated 1/24/86
to Mr. Juan Gonzalez and a copy of his reply.
U
I
8C-1kii4.
a
0
PAPY, POOLE, W EISSENBORN. �C PAPY
INOT A QAPTNEQS-01
----,ES - MAP „Q
--% > OOC,E _Q
j-EQIOAI " hE SSEti80-N
C-�QLES _ P.P♦ li
-CBE-- _ _CQ7
c-E--EN A ;=.P�
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
January 30, 1986
Mr. Aurelio Perez
Building and Zoning Administrator
City of Miami
275 N.W. Second Street
Miami, FL 33233
Re: E. A. Hancock Advertising Request for Withdrawal
of Zoning Board Application
Dear Mr. Perez:
20, ALA AMeRA C'PCLE
5U E 5C2
„CPA,. GABLES "'_'�RIOA 33134
3C5 446 5,00
HAND DELIVERY
I represent E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc. However, Attorney
George Knox, who is presently out of the country, would normally
represent the Hancock company before the City of Miami.
The Hancock company has requested that I write you in regard to
the Zoning Board hearing of last Monday, January 27th. Prior to
that Zoning Board hearing, Attorney George Knox delivered a
letter requesting withdrawal of the E. A. Hancock Advertising
application which was before you. Unfortunately, that letter was
addressed to Juan C. Gonzalez, Chief Zoning Inspector for the
City of Miami, with copies delivered to the City Attorney and to
the City Manager. We apologize for not having directed that
letter specifically to you, but we can't understand why Mr.
Gonzalez didn't inform you of our request. As you well know, the
matter was on your hearing agenda as a result of the request of
my client and not of the City. It is my understanding that at
any time a person who seeks to have a determination made by the
Zoning Board may revoke or rescind its request. I again apolo-
gize for the letter requesting revocation not having been
directed to you.
At this time we would respectfully request that you take any
steps necessary to put this matter back on the earliest available
agenda of the Zoning Board as the position taken by your Board at
the hearing is in complete contradiction to the position of the
City Commission of Miami as of last Thursday, January 23rd. At
SC-1ti4
i
0
6
Mr. Aurelio Perez
Building and Zoning
January 30, 1986
Page Two
Administrator
the City Commission meeting, the exact same issue that was before
your Board was raised, and the intention of the ordinance was
discussed in detail. A transcript of that hearing will be pre-
sented to you by my office within the next few days. It clearly
indicates that the intention of the ordinance was not so much to
adhere to a strict requirement of parallel lines, but rather that
there not be the availability to build three signs on the outdoor
advertising structures. As soon as that transcript is available,
I will will send it to you for your consideration.
I look forward to hearing from you in the very near future, and I
would appreciate an opportunity to be heard on the merits of the
issues which are before you.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to con-
tact me at your very earliest convenience.
Sincere
CHARLES C. PAPY, I
CCPIII:pg
PAPY, POOLE, WEIS9ENDOB14 No; PAPY • 20, ALMIw41OR A CIRCLE • SUITE 502 . CORA.L 0AO6ES. FL. 33134
1305) 446.5100 SC 16
L#
0
4
c C
Mr. Ceorge F. Knc, :
Attor-je%, zC _aV
I 0:_.CE at ::__..
4770 Biscayne BIvc.
Suite 970
Miami, Florida 33..;i
Re: Zoning interpretation
ZI-85-3
Dear fir. Knox:
Your letter to withdraw the appeal for the above listed interpretation
was received by --y secretary on Tuesday, January 28, 1986. Prior to
t„at date on Monday, January 27, 1986 the Zoning Board upheld the
interpretation made by Zoning Administrator Joseph Genuardi. As
provided by ordinance you have the right to appeal to the City Com-
mission the decision rendered by the Zoning Board. The interpretation
made by Administrator Genuardi is still valid and in effect,and will
be enforced by the Zoning Division.
If you have any further questions please feel free to call me at
350-7852.
Very truly yours,
dChiefiZoning
an CGonzalez
Inspect 7IX
JCG:ga
cc: Joseph A. Genuardi
Zoning Division File
Reading File
Zoning Board ✓
FIRE, RESCUE 3 INSPfCTiON SERVICES DEPARTMENT
TECHNICAL SERVICES / �75 N.W. end Street / P.O Box 330708 / Miami, FL 332334-: 05. -:CS 350-7y5'
Chief K E. McCullough, Director / Deputy Chiefs: C D. Fob�an, O.H Trerms. F )c,vanSC
-164
I
a Z�=3t r -PICA
w 6.E C.-A -.,:P-E
January 24, 1986
Juan C. Gonzalez
Cl,ie-C Zoning inspector
City of MIami
Fire, Rescue 5 Inspection Services Dept.
275 N.W. 2nd Street
P.O. Box 330708
Miami, Florida 33233-0708
Dear Mr. Gonzalez:
'E_F=- -Z%E
-g. , -
toe hereby withdraw our request to appeal from your
Zoning Interpretation ZI-65-3, and respectfully request
that you reconsider your opinion in light of the City
Commission's renewed articulation of its legislative intent,
during its discussion of this matter on January 23, 1986.
Respectfully sul�mitted,
LONG & KNOX
YecrgeF. Knox
GFK:sec
cc: City Manager, City of Miami
City Attorney, City of Miami
E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc.
Received Tuesday, January 28, 1986
Zoning Division
_/ C
BE-1n4 Ct
1% M
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIOA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
'O Aurelio E. Perez-Lugones DATE December 17, 1985 FILE
Director
Planning and Zoning Boards SUBJECT Appeals on ZI-85-3
Lse
is a o Department
FROM,
A. Genuardi P. E • , REFERENCES
i Administrator
Fire, Rescue & Inspection ENCLOSURES
Services Department
In reference to your memo of December lb, 1985 regarding the appeal
of Zoning Interpretation ZI-85-3, attached herein are all records
pertaining to my interpretation. Also, be advised that to date, no
one has contacted this department or expressed any interest in this
appeal.
cc: Zoning Division
-- 1
Subject:
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Billboard sign faces under
Section 2026
Zoning Interpretation
ZI-85-3
THE APPELLANT, E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc., by and
through undersigned counsel files this Notice of Appeal from
Zoning Interpretation ZI-85-3, wherein the Zoning Administrator
construed the provisions of §2026.15.21(c), of the City of
Miami Zoning Ordiance, to prohibit outdoor advertising sign
faces to be erected at angles of 200 from each other.
Appellant states the following grounds for its appeal:
1. The interpretation by the Zoning Administrator is
at variance with the legislative intent of the
foregoing §2026.15.2.1(c).
2. The erection of sign faces at angles of 200 from
each other serves the public interest.
3. A literal requirement that sign faces be erected
"back-to-back", by the Zoning Administrator's
interpretation, does not serve the public interest.
WHEREFORE, Appellant E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc.,
respectfully requests that thhis mmatter be brought before
the City of Miami Zoning Board at the earliest possible date,
pursuant to §3004 of the Zoning Code.
Respectfully submitted,
LONG & KNOX
4770 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 970
Miami, Florida 33137
B
GEOR E F. KNOX
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a tLue and correct copy of the
foregoing was mailed this /0"t day of December, 1985 to,
Chief D. H. Teems,' A. Perez-Lugones, S. Rodriguez, Juan
Gonzalez, Zoning Division, Fire, Rescue & Inspection
Department, 275 N.W. 2nd Street, P.O. Box 330708, Miami,
Florida 33233-0708, Joel Maxwell, Esq., Assistant Attorney,
City of Miami Law Department, 169 E,Flagler Street, Miami,
Florida 33131, and E. A. Hancock 4. % rtInc., 3856
Douglas Road, Miami, Florida 33133. !;� ising, _
LONG & F
M
SC-10"I
col
Subject:
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Billboard sign faces under
Section 2026
Zoning Interpretation
ZI-85-3
THE APPELLANT, E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc., by and
through undersigned counsel files this Notice of Appeal from
Zoning Interpretation ZI-85-3, wherein the Zoning Administrator
construed the provisions of §2026.15.21(c), of the City of
Miami Zoning Ordiance, to prohibit outdoor advertising sign
faces to be erected at angles of 200 from each other.
Appellant states the following grounds for its appeal:
1. The interpretation by the Zoning Administrator is
at variance with the legislative intent of the
foregoing 52026.15.2.1(c).
2. The erection of sign faces at angles of 200 from
each other serves the public interest.
3. A literal requirement that sign faces be erected
"back-to-back", by the Zoning Administrator's
interpretation, does not serve the public interest.
WHEREFORE, Appellant E. A. Hancock Advertising, Inc.,
respectfully requests that this matter be brought before
the City of Miami Zoning Board at the earliest possible date,
pursuant to §3004 of the Zoning Code.
Respectfully submitted,
LONG KNOX
4770 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 970
Miami, Florida 33137
B .
GEOMEFF. KNOX
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a txae and correct copy of the
foregoing was mailed this /0 day of December, 1985 to,
Chief D. H. Teems," A. Perez-Lugones, S. Rodriguez, Juan
Gonzalez, Zoning Division, Fire, Rescue 6 Inspection
Department, 275 N.W. 2nd Street, P.O. Box 330708, Miami,
Florida 33233-0708, Joel Maxwell, Esq., Assistant Attorney,
City of Miami Law Department, 169 E. / ising, FFllagler Street, Miami,
Florida 33131, and E. A. Hancock 4 rtInc., 3856
Douglas Road, -Miami, Florida 33133. !;/
LONG & I
It
December 5, 1985
George F. Knox, Esquire
Long & Knox
4770 Biscayne Boulevard (suite 970)
Miami, F1 33137
Dear Mr. FCnox:
SERGIO PEREIPA
City Manager
ROL _
No.
Subject: Billboard sign faces under
Section 2026
Re: Zoning Interpretation
ZI-85-3
In response to your request For a Zoning Interpretation in letter
dated December 4, 1�85, the Following is my interpretation of
subsection 2026.15.2.1 (c).
The wording back-to-back and parallel does not allow the sign
faces to be at any angle to each other than 00.
The definition in Webster's Dictionary of parallel is "extended
in the same direction and equidistant at all points,..... a line
equidistant at all points Mm another line".
Therefor my response to you is No, the sign cannct be erected
at a 20° angle to each other.
:his interpretation may be appealed to the Zoninc Board by any
aggrieved person or any officer, department, board or agency
of the City of Miami in acc3rdance with r►rticle 30 of the City
of Miami Zoning Ordinance.
jteA
rs,
enuardi P.E.,
nministrator
JAG/lc
cc: Chief Teemsd A. Perez-Lugones
S. Rodriguez
Joel t:axwell
Juan Con2n1cz
Zoning Uivisiu,:
F!RF. K.L,,L'i & ,'•5r:. ;ic C. SLR, IC t5 DLYAKTMEhI
TFCHNICAL SFRV!�FS ' :—S'. W :nd .,,,tee F O Rni 310708 ' Miami, FL 33213.0708 ! (1051 350-79S^C,,,.„16Li
Chief K F P 1rC,i;'r„ o, n rrrUr r ... .,.. ' ,,, r f) F, ht.in n H Teems Jcrd.in C(2_
x
---- prabit rper'!-hD, a an slleronnl methoJ :f
N,M,% fr^m ■r. :..- -•
-. .•..
Wns hint[ Irs V•JC:on by mitt-.s of a !able
fr•emhlamCe
Of Shun Tmt.ea•a rarrtiie_
U,Irg c.,cesr- •-'; �.r3^ ^•-
- _ .
p-M o•la Ir J•nr '••UI. a one of the conic
Mary i,ne -
gecuom formed by the In:rrwct•or, or :^e
e-fil,nc a :recr !
r
err -
eo^.e b. l paral l Pi to ere of :u udei
•kikd• -W Ir4 • .Ir'
Crane
-Par bbol r ror l.NJl ,.I. J.:,
Iei. :. •o rira .-
per•a"cbwe er S•sn.vi). n ah aroarsnn inn•
to; tr6a! a •; ctar •-
- :<
u•: rg ofr a 'arre T^re.;a•sAasrl
Pv of lei lam _- a
,ar•r�•+
wren oprn (,r dr'cr :,;.-a•'—n an air.
Pw;@JArl•r-Pl ta'o
p anC r f d r • -clan [•o• �Mn ,off„ to d:M
! cure �•,vrJ •.] '.v z.t
- ._ [�-•
{' r3rac lust -qv a chur tit• n
ae P•al lei rr P.p
pari 'cline Iptr 7.. 1 ! are whn act1. on
pv ai•iebo-[[as I-e
beball o anetLer _ 'P' !-e Ilaly (7hrnt
'I
. ^ur uaed hrrr
,
Parsee-fl-rad'). rt "r-J:,ouj dar,tt;
r,tri:'t::r,J
shoe, A m,it'3'V : .• j a PIa CC of J►
Pa•ral O•[iam ICA.r-; - -
-e•
aembfV for etcrc.s..^c ..•m, a a mirth or
,a C, of .CauM,'-
Procesalon: r 1.-rad ed. -red lrtg• 1. to rrar.
p•ral r•sts IN-ra ' vs . r
aha) rn trabiary order. ' :.a mane a disp.av
loss of the po'.er '
of. 3. to trurch tWt icn- •,. 1. to wa:k
cne or more .arts ! .tc J
era,-• r„
&Bout allenuuously; 1,C_a off. o to CLMb
-
being unar'e'- act.
_
In a procirasnn
p@r-*-lY1 c ,p -A : a1, '_
Par
p -s•dip Iper'f.Ln..fml, a 1. an example
affected env. cr M, me--
or mWel. :n 4rOnYrW/, an eumple of the
rho la affected -itl -a;3
M,
Mnectiona +f a w, r_
part isle inter 1-,.a1. . C •1. ;.� +^
psr•rdim per A 21. It I. P-' the garden of
talCo. S.
affect nui
game as besstta any piace of
great harr4me•1.
act
Pere Mal -Is iper-11-21,11 + t
r ^rs 'C
prrdoa 'frr'f4rksl, it I something aroar•
nc of C: n a-1 r'•••1
enu'• ati,ard or Incntd.t.e Jtai may be tr c
pv-a•esrd ioi Ire- l.T:: , .
- -• • -
ie fact i. a 1Y!emend 'trial V false beaux
Ylriire w gum! :n•v ^ , .3 . ,
f'O rae
It goea agavut nsrif in !4CL-pr•[•6u['1•esl,
p•rnes•e•wr '; f n^ k.' ,.
adr -}r a•dna'I•d lf. n.7r
var,n wiln tur_• -s
p1•af•na ffsgf A -fin), it a *mitt cawsillime tui�
pr•s-eau-i•tary j�r,rrf ^
aYncle of a Nav r.nns:sitncV. JaiiaflY OP
rrrummg to a^ 4, '1.
tamed from prtroieum srJ -ed to nuL.1I
often operaung ,n to •r
tandln. sealing rnernr., far; e:e: aus3
aJ•nse nfY, •remit
p► @-Mw.PAav per J• -�-
r
pram gee•e-sla Ipef-1•Icn 1•s'•i. m. formstioe rf
of one miner! P.-V
game Chemical ct
Me
mfnefais In centici .n S.:.-I A way as to af•
m.r•ecti:ar stnicltrc.
.
feel their deveinp-CM
Pera•moaw 'ls.� A mou• .• ..,. _�
i to rt
prI[l•a•go•ge 'per 1.1rVl,l it the add,unn of a
othen. CR"ne/il cr c• •'
or syllable to the rnJ of a wnr J.
por•s-mags iper /•mn" n a^
[ter
pi'a.gr 1per'f•gonl. a wme•r:mg of extraor•
pang tpa•rang'), R
rr.
denary excellence; mtxfta or pal Rn of per.
Malass.
fecunn.
pr•arsoi•a frier-1-ni-I1, a -
•.
pers'grsp iM 11-graft, it I. a amen subdivs•
characwnacd by drisi,,
to
direr
son of a wntttn pare, often m:entW on a
cwmn
new Sne. = a mart shor,rg the beginning
Pw'a•at3W fpee /-nmi i. a - _ • •
W
-- tiK,
of a nets rarsgisph t•, ! a Iron item In s
nJJ,. nor-3 ^
nenpapn. rragaa.nc eIr or to orasnee
rsrano,s A. , (sO a
'rra ac
p'
,n pa rarnpM -yv a gnp►-e, pip agrssp►
par a MISILr• L; •
.
lair;,
�r_
.,
page a-IM Iper f g.r" n a iTa•;, than part*
':.t a .l •_ ..
- I u.•.
MI^ a ,C f.F nJ R.•r' tJ
Par -ph 'r,rr fl'
Per . a.ky..a ,per.J-'p n•, n a ;-urnded surr
I.
prt•tu ❑ nl Thai •,nc r ,; rT• ^ i•,•0.
Iw a r.•'rI-
w�
aa -1 000l n.rl
and Jecert-n ". fc,cnra '- ., n
t
Pat 'e•ibP,lm'e am iwr J), It
i. ><t n
pr as lµ"-crf",.[•, n I ::[aT-v^,I a•-�•
;qr [' nr er1 -
In
tar sm,t,mc of in .,' r.: ... -v c
in :he Ph't•Gan of ir.t '-Hr
a• ... rr:.m:, I .:s r i
..,
e i• ^.
-o+ rem
n
4 0
NAROLD LONG..R
3EOPGE c KNOL
STEP.AN ♦ LE CLAINCI E
LONG & K OZ
A PROF'ESSIONAL ASSOCtATtON
CrrICES AT BAY POINT. SUITE 970
4770 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
MIAMI. rLORIDA 33137
December 4, 1985
Mr. Joseph Genaurdi
Building & Zoning Inspections Department
275 N.W. 2nd Street
Miami, Florida 33128
Re: Request for interpretation of
Outdoor Advertising Ordinance
Dear Mr. Genuardi:
?ELEP"ONE
3031 576-7777 _
I am writing you on behalf of E. A. Hancock Advertising,
Inc. I have been asked to request that you interpret the
provisions of Ordinance No. 9500 at Section 2026.15, which
reads in pertinent part:
The sign structure shall be of unipod construction
with only two sign faces back-to-back and parallel
to each other.
We have reviewed the record of the various proceedings
and we believe that the intent of the foregoing provision
was to ensure to no more than two sign faces are permitted
on a sign structure. We do not believe that the term
"back-to-back" was intended to be given a strict and literal
interpretation. Accordingly, structures have been erected
with sign faces at a 200 angle from each other in
consideration of motorist convenience, and consistent with
our original plans on file.
Would you please render your interpretation of the
provision and advise us of your conclusion at your earliest
opportunity.
Thank you so much for your consideration of this matter.
We await your reply.
Respectfully submitted,
& KNOX
Georg F. Knox
GFK:sec
cc: Andy Hancock
HAND DELIVERED
SCI -VA
ki
11
Qvi- (:O��Ir mum
December 4, 1985
George F. Knox, Esquire
4770 Biscayne Blvd. , Suite 970
Miami, Florida 33137
Re: Your letter of November 18, 1985 to
Juan C. Gonzalez, Chief Zoning Inspector
Dear Mr. Knox:
LLCI&, A, DOL.CHERT,
cit" ktiotr.•.
I have reviewed the referenced letter and have spoken with Mr.
Gonzalez.
The Zoning Administrator, Joe Genuardi, is responsible for
administration and enforcement of the Zoning Code. Appeals from
decisions or interpretation of the Zoning Administrator may be
made to the Zoning Board provided a Notice of Appeal is filed
within fifteen (15) days of the date such decision was rendered.
This applies to matters of interpretation as well.
Your position is well -taken and it is possible that such an
interpretation could apply. However, it is beyond the authority
of this office to do more than give its opinion regarding
possible ambiguities.
I
Sincerely,
(eiE.Maxwell
stant City Attorney
JEM/md/B094
Attachments
cc: Lucia A. Dougherty
City Attorney
Joe Genuardi
Zoning Administrator
Juan C. Gonzalez
Chief Zoning Administrator
A it lit'_ t . . i�' t pit III i W Vl/�r�V
•+ a � �'i i'9-o''10
HAROLD LONG,JR.
GEORGE /. KNOX
STCPMAN A. LE CLAfNCME
LONG & KNOX
A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
OtFICES AT BAY POINT, SUITE 970
4770 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
MIAMI,FLORIDA 33137
November 18, 1985
Juan C. Gonzalez
Chief Zoning Inspector
City of Miami
Fire, Rescue & Inspection
275 N.W. 2nd Street
P.O. Box 330708
Miami, Florida 33233-0708
Dear Mr. Gonzalez:
Services Dept.
L
TELEPHONE
1305) 576-7777
I received a, copy of your letter addressed to Mr.
Charles Hancock, dated November 6, 1985, and Mr. Hancock
has directed me to respond.
We believe that you have ordered the suspension of
work on outdoor advertising signs because of your contention
that the signs, a-s constructgd, have faces which are at
an angle of approximately 20 , and you assert that this
configuration is in violation of the amended sign ordinance
which indicates that sign faces shall be "parallel" to
each other. -
We have reviewed all of the public records pertaining
to the ordinance and we respectfully urge you that the
term "parallel" as used in the ordinance is a term of art
and that the City Commission never intended that the signs
be constructed in a "back-to-back" configuration.
We believe that the City Commission merely intended
that no more than two sign faces should be constructed
per sign. I refer you to Motion. No. 85-181, which was
adopted by the City Commission on February 28, 19,85, wherein
the limitations attendant to the construction Qf outdoor
advertising signs were articulated by the Commission. The
discussion preceding the introduction of the Motion would
also be instructive.
Tie reason that the signs were constructed with faces
at 20 angles from each other was simply to provide a
8C-104
Juan C.
Page Two
November
Gonzalez
18► 1985
convenience to motorists along the highways that the signs
face. With the angle, the signs fall naturally within
the field of vision of motorists from a distance of 300
feet, and the signs pass through a motorist's field of
vision without the necessity of diverting the motorist
eyes from the road. In this connection, we believe that
the benefit sought to be achieved by this configuration
far outweighs any evil sought to be prevented by restrictive
interpretation of the provisions of the ordinance.
We respectfully urge you to rescind your order
suspending the construction work on our signs and to allow
us to proceed at our own risk until this matter is clarified.
We further urge that you take the necessary steps
to place this matter on the agenda of the City of Miami's
Zoning Board, for purposes of clarifying the manner of
implementation of the ordinance as it relates to the
configuration of faces on the recently approved outdoor
advertising signs.
Thank you so much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
LONG & KNOX
4
George F. Knox
GFK:sec
cc: Joseph A. Genuardi
Lucia A. Dougherty /
Aurelio E. Perez-Lugones el
8C"la"j
ot�
1 4
THOMSON ZEDER BOHRER WERTH ADORNO 8& RAZOOK
sr-OPNEYS •r I-AW
4900 SOUT.EASr r-NANC!Ak. CENTEP
200 SOurm 81SCA'4E 80UI.EVA00
MIAMI, rLOPIO. 33131.23e3
'305) 350 ''CC
'ELECOs'E•
PAPI4EP O. TMOMSON •305) 3?A005
October 22, 1985 •A1371 00^
HAND DELIVER
Robert A. Ginsburg
County Attorney
Metropolitan Dade County
111 N.W. First Street
Miami, Florida 33130
Dear Bob:
I have read the outdoor advertising sign (billboard)
ordinances and resolutions adopted over the past several months
by the County and City of Miami Commissions. I would like to
share with you some thoughts I have on the City Commission's
legislative and permitting actions, which were purportedly in
compliance with the County's conditional exemption allowing the
City to permit ten billboards to be placed west of Interstate
Highway I-95.
Although there may be additional facts of which I am
unaware, it appears that the City has taken a number of actions
which do not comply with the applicable provisions of the condi-
tional exemption for the City found in the repeal clause of
County Ordinance No. 85-36, adopted June 6, 1985, codified at
Section 33-121.17(b), Dade County Code. Specifical y, I do not
believe the City has met the conditions precedent imposed by the
County for the City's special exemption from the County's ban
against outdoor advertising signs within 600 feet of expressways
in Dade County (including incorporated areas). Consequently, I
believe the City, no less than other incorporated areas of Dade
County, remains subject to the County's billboard ban.
I. Background "
On July 5, 1983 the County Commission adopted Ordi-
nance 83-53 which removed the ban against municipalities per-
mitting outdoor advertising signs for the purpose of serving any
expressway in the incorporated areas of Dade County.
On April 18 and May 23, 1985 the City Commission passed
on first and second reading City Ordinance No. 9993, which per-
mitted outdoor advertising signs within 600 feet of the right-of-
way lines of any limited access highways, including expressways,
U
TNOMSON ZEDER BOHRER WERTM AoORNo 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 2
subject to certain enumerated conditions. Also on May 23, 1985
(i.e., the same date as the second reading of City Ordinance No.
9TM, the City Commission adopted City Resolution No. 85-540,
directing the City Planning Department to initiate amendments to
City Ordinance No. 9993, providing as follows:
a. The maximum number of new sign struc-
tures approved pursuant to said Ordi-
nance No. 9993 shall not exceed ten (10)
in number;
b. The Ordinance shall provide for sub-
mittal of lin—ds—cape plans and a roval
�the��p�ision amoFsame�it�ms?urt-Mer, provide that any sign permit
issued under Ordinance No. 9993 shall be
subject to revocation, subsequent to a
Public Hearing by the City Commission,
should City inspectors find that the
subject site is not being maintained
according to approved landscaping plans
or is being kept in an unclean or un-
sightly manner;
C. The designation of the eligible area for
new sign structure erection, which
presently extends 600 feet from express-
way rights -of -way, shall be reduced to
200 feet; and
d. No such new sign structures shall be
located east of Interstate Highway I-95.
On June 6, 1985 the County Commission adopted Ordinance
No. 85-36 to include again„ the incorporated areas in the ban
against outdoor advertising signs within 600 feet of expressways
in Dade County, with the following limited and conditional excep-
tion in the repeal clause, codified as Section 33-121.11(b), Dade
County Code:
Provisions of 'this ordinance shall not apply
to signs authorized by the City of Miami
pursuant to City of Miami Ordinance No., 9993
only when said ordinance has been amended'tv
the City of Miami in accor3ance witTt a ^Cif
oT-Miami R'esoo- ti uon No.85-5407
(Emphasis added).
b4.
-J
THOMSON ZEDER 80NRER WERTN AoORNo 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 2
subject to certain enumerated conditions. Also on May 23, 1985
(i.e., the same date as the second reading of City Ordinance No.
99M, the City Commission adopted City Resolution No. 85-540,
directing the City Planning Department to initiate amendments to
City Ordinance No. 9993, providing as follows:
a. The maximum number of new sign struc-
tures approved pursuant to said Ordi-
nance No. 9993 shall not exceed ten (10)
in number;
b. The Ordinance shall provide for sub-
mittal of landsca a an�s and a roval
of same7l t e it ommmission and,
Turt sFer, provi-cTe t at any sign permit
issued under Ordinance No. 9993 shall be
subject to revocation, subsequent to a
Public Hearing by the City Commission,
should City inspectors find that the
subject site is not being maintained
according to approved landscaping plans
or is being kept in an unclean or un-
sightly manner;
C. The designation of the eligible area for
new sign structure erection, which
presently extends 600 feet from express-
way rights -of -way, shall be reduced to
200 feet; and
d. No such new sign structures shall be
located east of Interstate Highway I-95.
On June 6, 1985 the County Commission adopted Ordinance
No. 85-36 to include agaiR. the incorporated areas in the ban
against outdoor advertising signs within 600 feet of expressways
in Dade County, with the following limited and conditional excep-
tion in the repeal clause, codified as Section 33-121.17(b), Dade
County Code:
Provisions of 'this ordinance shall not apply
to signs authorized by the City of Miami
pursuant to City of Miami Ordinance No.- 9993
only when said ordinance has been amended'ty
the City o f -Miami in accor-aance witT—TEe City
o7'Miami R'eso—T`ution No. .
(Emphasis added).
P
SC- 106
i
I
E
TN0k50N ZEDER BONRER WERTH AOORNO 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 3
On July 25 and September 12, 1985 the City Commission
passed on first and second reading City Ordinance No. 10037 (a
copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A"), which purportedly
amended City Ordinance No. 9993 in accordance with City Resolu-
tion No. 85-540. Also on September 12, 1985 the City Commission
approved eight applications for outdoor advertising signs under
this ordinance amendment adopted that same day.
11. City's Non -Compliance with County's Precondi-
tions: Non -Conformity of City Ordinance No.
10037 with City Resolution No. 85-540 and the
exemption in County Code Section 33-121.17(b).
City Ordinance No. 10037 does not conform to City
Resolution No. 85-540, and therefore the City Ordinance, as
amended, does not qualify for the exemption from the repeal
clause in Section 33-121.17(b), Dade County Code. Specifically,
contrary to Section 33-121.17(b), Dade County Code, City Ordinance
No. 10037 does not require, as did City Resolution No. 85-540,
for "submittal of landscape plans and approval of same by. the
City Commission." City Ordinance No. 10037 instead includes
landscape criteria, and contains a vague reference to "approved
landscaping plans," which provides only that City billboard
permits shall be subject to revocation by the City Commission
should City inspectors (subsequently) find that a site is not
being maintained according to such (undefined) "approved land-
scaping plans." 2/
1/ 206.15.4. All outdoor advertising sites
(sic] shall be appropriately landscaped as
follows: one shade tree for the first
500 square feet of site area and one
shade tree for each additional 1,000
sgpere feet or portion thereof, of site
area; the remainder of the site area
.shall be landscaped with equal portions
of hedges and/or shrubs and lining ground
cover. Said landscaping shall be pro-
vided with irrigation and be maintained
in perpetuity.
2026.15.4.1 Any sign permit issued pursuant to Sec-
tion 2026, et seg_, shall be subject to
revocation, subsequent to a public Hearing
by the, City Commission, should City in-
spectors find that the subject site is
not being maintained according to approved
laadscaping plans or is being kept is an
unclean or unsightly manner. ._
g Y
THOMSON ZEDER BOHRER WERTH ADORNO 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 4
Consequently, for the foregoing reason, to date City
Ordinance No. 9993 has never been amended by the City in accord-
ance with City Resolution No. 85-540, and therefore the City
Ordinance, as amended, does not qualify for the conditional
exception or exemption afforded to the City by Section 33-121.17(b)
Dade County Code.
III. City's Premature Approvals of Billboard Appli-
cations: Non -Conformity of City's Billboard
Application Review and Approval Process With
Ordinance Adoption Procedure and City Zoning
Ordinance 9500.
It follows from the foregoing that the City's approvals
of billboard applications under the City's non -conforming Ordi-
nance were not valid or binding on the County. But, in addition,
the City's hasty approval of those applications was also prema-
ture and void under the City's own Charter and Zoning Ordinance.
The private sector's billboard applications were'filed
with the City prior to the final adoption of City Ordinance
No. 10037, and were approved by the City Zoning Board and City
Commission prior to the effective date of City Ordinance No. 10037
These billboard applications were filed without consideration to
other applicants who might have qualified under the City Ordi-
nance. Section 2026.15.2.1(f) of City Ordinance No. 10037,
adopted September 12, 1985, provided:
(f) Within thirty (30) days of the effective
date of this Ordinance #9993 (June 22,
19851, owners of existing sign struc-
tures or sign structure permits for any
signs located or to be located within
six hundred two hundred E6884 (200) feet
of the westerly right-of-way lines of
I-95 and any limited access highway,
including expressways west of I-95,
shall have the right to seek approval,
in accordance with the procedures set
out above, for a new outdoor sign struc-
ture or altered sign structure permitted
under this Ordinance, at said location,
in the order that the signs or locations
were granted a permit. Said approval
hearings shall be held in advance of any
other sign structure application(s).
THOMSON ZEDER SOHRER WERTH AOORNO 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 5
All other appiieants applications shall
be considered on either a first come,
first serve basis, or in the case of
concurrent applications, a lottery
conducted by the Department designated
by the City Manager.
Further, neither the City Zoning Board nor the City
Commission could have properly considered and approved the appli-
cations pursuant to the criteria set forth in City Ordinance
No. 9993, as amended by City Ordinance No. 10037, until the City
Ordinance, as amended, was complete and effective. As a matter
of law, in the absence of an emergency, City Ordinance No. 10037
did not take effect, and could not have take effect, until 30 days
after its enactment. See Section 6(b), Charter of the City of
Miami. Inasmuch as the second reading of City Ordinance No. 10037
took place on September 12, 1985, its effective date would be
October 12, 1985. Thus on September 12, 1985 neither the City
Zoning Board nor the City Commission could have lawfully made the
proper "written findings that the applicable requirements of
(City Ordinance 9500, as amended] have or have not been "met."
Section 2606.1, City Zoning Ordinance No. 9500, as amended. The
City Zoning Ordinance expressly requires that "(s]pecial permits
in relation to zoning shall be issued or denied only in accor-
dance with the procedures, standards, and requirements of this
zoning ordinance." Section 2303, City Zoning Ordinance No. 9500.
The City Zoning Board's actions on August 9, 1985, and the City
Commission's actions on September 12, 1985 in approving those
applications under the amended City Ordinance, were defective due
to the City Commission's (and City Zoning Board's) legal inabi-
lity on those dates to consider whether the criteria contained in
the final adopted, but not then yet effective, version of the
City Ordinance, as amended, had in fact been met in the billboard
applications.
Moreover, for purposes of determining the City's com-
pliance with the County's pre -conditions, the City's actions (in
hastily approving the billboard applications under the criteria
actually adopted but not yet effective) were defective under
Section 33-121.17(b), Dade County Code, because the City Commis-
sion's ostensible review and approval, if any, did not consider,
and could not have lawfully considered, the specified criteria
set forth in City Resolution No. 85-540, as required by the
County.
THOMSON ZEDER BOHRER WERTH ADORNO 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 6
I would appreciate any comments you may have on the
foregoing. I would also welcome the opportunity to discuss with
you further, at your convenience, this matter and appropriate ac-
tions which might be taken by the County to remedy this situa-
tion. I look forward to hearing from you.
PDT:ms
Enclosure
cc: Lucia
1032-F
Dougherty
Sincerely,
wrr
lip
THOMSON ZEDER BOHRER WERTH ADORNo 6 RAZOOK
Robert A. Ginsburg
October 22, 1985
Page 6
I would appreciate any comments you may have on the
foregoing. I would also welcome the opportunity to discuss with
you further, at your convenience, this matter and appropriate ac-
tions which might be taken by the County to remedy this situa-
tion. I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards.
Sincerely,
PDT:ms
Enclosure
cc: Lucia Allen Dougherty (w/enc.)
1032-F
" EXHIBIT A
J-85-751
7/15/85 10037
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ORDINANCE
NO. 95001 TBE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA* BY AMENDING SECTION 2026
ENTITLED 'SIGNS, SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS, AND
REQUIREMENTS' BY: PLACING RESTRICTIONS ON
OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS LOCATED WITHIN 600
FEET OF LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS AND EXPRESS-
WAYS; RESTRICTING THE NUMBER OF SUCH SIGNS
WHICH MAY FACE SAID HIGHWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS
TO 10 IN NUMBER, PROVIDED THEY ARE LOCATED
WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID
HIGHWAYS AND WEST OF INTERSTATE 95; PROVIDING
FOR LANDSCAPING AND PERMIT REVOCATIONS; AND
ESTABLISHING PRIORITY OF APPLICATIONS FOR
PUBLIC HEARINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City Commission to protect
and promote the economy of the City of Miami which is strongly
tourist oriented with a heavy emphasis on the visual and physical
environment; and
WHEREAS, Interstate 95 and the Limited Access Expressways
and Highways which flow from it are some of the most heavily
traveled traffic arteries within the City of Miami; and
WHEREAS, the placement of large numbers of outdoor adver-
tising signs along thoroughfares within the City pose a threat
to the motoring public inasmuch as they distract from the
operation of motor vehicles thereby increasing the hazards from
such operation to the general public; and
WHEREAS, restrictions contained herein are designed to
control the number of such outdoor advertising signs thereby
reducing the amount of distraction and probability of accidents
caused by such distraction; and
WHEREAS, the skyline and the bay view of the City of Miami
East of I-95 is an integral part of the aesthetics package which
attracts tourists and promotes domestic tranquility; and
WHEREAS# it is the intent of the City Commission to protect
the vier of tine skyli! Biscayne Bay, and other features within
8(;-16"
and withoi•,- Cl-.;,) i,�n" •_;..�: c- v`--,.hin the view of
WHEREAS, a proliferation of outdoor advertising signs poses
a threat to the visual senses, negatively affects the environ-
ment and by their nature, are generally not aesthetically
pleasing to the eye; and
WHEREAS, the restrictions contained herein will serve to
reduce the negative aesthetic impact and the visual blight of
such signs by limiting the size, number and location of outdoor
advertising signs thus reducing the probability of their
proliferation; and
WHEREAS, the regulations contained herein are not intended
or designed to regulate or affect any specific category of
communication in any form or manner; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding their propensity toward
proliferation and possible visual blight, outdoor advertising
signs, in limited number and highly regulated size and location,
can serve a useful purpose through the display of public service
messages and the promotion and maintenance of a healthy
commercial and tourist economy; and
WHEREAS, a certain number of outdoor advertising signs
already exist in certain areas of the City, and the City
Commission wishes to protect its neighborhoods from an unregu-
lated increase in number, size, and location of such signs; and
WHEREAS# the priority hearing schedule set forth herein is
designed to alleviate confusion and provide for the possible
distribution of no more than ten new permissible signs by
prioritizing the hearings for existing signs, existing permits,
and expected new applications, thus providing the public the
opportunity of observing public messages on signs which are more
visible, while at the same time increasing the possibility that
no new sign structure locations would be established; and
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting
of July 2, 1985, Item No. 4, following an advertised hearing,
adopted Resolution No. PAB 45-85, by a vote of 5-2, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of amending'the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami as
fiereOto r set , tht and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, after careful consideration of
this matter, deems it advisable and in the best interest of the
general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to grant
these amendments, as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The text of Ordinance No. 9500, as amended,
the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, is hereby
amended in the following particulars:l
'Article 20.
•
GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS
•
M
Section 2026. SIGNS, SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIRE-
MENTS.
2026.15. Outdoor Advertising Signs.
2026.15.1. Limitations on Sign Area, Including
Embellishments; Limitations on Projec-
tions of Embellishments.
•
2026.15.2. Limitations on Location, Orientation,
Spacing, Height, Type and Embellishiients
of Outdoor Advertising Signs in Relation
to Limited Access Highways and Express-
ways.-
-Except as otherwise provided in Section
2026.15.1 Outdoor advertising si ns maX be
erected, constructe , a tere , maintained or
relocated wit in eet of `5_n_y=imited access
highway incluaing expressways as esta is e y
.the state of -Florida or any o its po itical.
subdivisions, provided that such sign faces are
garallel to or at an angle of not greater t an
degrees with the center line Ot any such limited
access highway and facedaway _ from such"h iqhway .
Outdoor advertising signs may be
ereetedT eenstractedT eitered-y maintained of
eeieeated within sire hundred F600f feet of the
eight -ef -war-trines-ef-any-limited-aeeens-highwayT
ineiuding-expeessweYsr-as-established-by-the-State
Of-P*eeida-ee-anY-Of-its-pekit*ea6-subdivisiensT
with-Eity-eammissien-Appeevei-aftee-following-the
standards and review procedures fee specie*
exceptions and subject to the feilawfn' can-
ditiens
2026.15.2.1. No outdoor advertisia sign which faces
any such Mitea access i wa to agreater
degree than permitted in 2026 . Shall e
erecter, constructe , aitereat
mainline`—" or
1
Words and/or figures stricken through shall be deleted.
Underscored wordy and/or figures shall be added. The
R Cemaining provis+ i are now ir: effect and remain unchanged.
Asterisk 4 ndic via- ed an ; uncha,•ned material.
c
.i
relocated within 600 feet of any _such highways,
inC U iR�ex resswa 9 easterl o 1-y5. Uutdoor
a vertisin signs a maximum of ten () in number
w is ace such mite access i wa s, may be
erected, constructedt alteredr maintained or
relocate wit in two hundred () f e e t o t e
wester side of 1-95 right--6-f-way lines, or o
anlimited access h5hway including _e_*_pressway s
wester of I-95p as established by the state o
'Florida or any of its political subdivisions,
after Cit Commission approval utilizing standards
ind review procedures for special exceptions, an
subject to the following conditions:
(a) An outdoor advertising sign structure
approved pursuant to this ordinance shall be
s aced a minimum of fifteen hun re ( 500)
set from another such outdoor a vertisin
sign structure facing the samedirection? or
an approved location for another such outdoor
ag—vertising structure on the same side of a
1imitPA access hway, including expressways
acing t e same direction.
(b) The height of the structure shall not exceed
a hei ht of fifty (50) feet measured from the
crown of the main -traveled road ind in no
instance shall exceed a maximum height of
sixty-five (feet measured from the crown
of the nearest a lacent or arterial street.
(c) The sign structure shall be of uni od
construction with only two () sign faces
back to back and parallel to each other.
(d) No flashing, blinking or mechanical devices
shall be utilized as part of the outdoor
advertising sign.
(e) Sign area, embellishments and projections
shall be -as -set forth in Section 202 .15.1.
(f) Withift thirty (30) days of the effective
date of this Ordinance i9993, owners of
existin sign structures or sign structure
ermits for any signs located or to be
located within gin -hundred two hundred +669T
(200) feet of the westerly ri ht-of-wa lines
of I-95 and any limited access hniclhway
inc u ing exeressways west of I-95, shall
have the right to seek a2proval, in
accordance with the proce ures set out above,
or a new outdoor sign structure or a tore
sign structure permitted under this
Ordinance, at said location, in the order
that the si ns or locations were granted a
ermit. Said approval ear n s shall e
held in advance of any other sign structure
a ication(s). All other epp :eanes
applications shall a considered on either a
first comefirst serve basisP or in t e case
o concurrent applications# a lotter con-
ducted by the Department designated by the
City Manager.
In authorizing a general advertising sign
structure under these rovis ons as a s ecia
exec t on the rollowingactors shall be
considered:
(l' the impact on any vista or views that
may 1-i of ecte i
t-3k.. :11 2
_-;_
(2) the relationshiR with other roadwa
signs, inclusive o airectionat
si ` si
(3) the im act onany notable structure or
an d mar k t
(4) the impact upon driver safety in the
area t e si n is to a ocated; and
(5) the a ro riateness of the location in
relation to the surround —in nei r oo
and adjacent uses.
2026.15.3. Limitations on Spacing of outdoor
vertisin Signs in Relation to
Pederal-Aid Primary Hig way ystems.
Outdoor advertisin2 signs shall be spaced a
minimum of one thousand feet rom anot er sign,
or an approved ocation, on the same si e of a =ede -
aid primary highway.
206.15.4. All outdoor advertising sites shall be
aRpropriately landscapedas follows: one
L shade tree for the first 500 square feet
of site area and one shade tree for each
a3ditional 1#0aU_square feet or portion
t ereo , of —site area; t e remainder of
the site area shall a landscaped wit
ue a portions of he3ges and/or shrubs
and liningground cover. balo ianT--
sca ing snail e provided wit
irrigation an a maintains in per-
_._. -
pet
2026.15.4.1 An si n jermit issued pursuant to
Section ku2b , et seq. , shal be subject
to revocation, subsequent to a Public
sari. the City Commission, s ou
City inspectors find t at the su ect
site is not bein2 ma inta inea accor in
to aperoved landscaeing plans or is
Ee'ing kept in an unclean or unsig t y
manner. ,
Section 2. All ordinances, Code Sections, or parts
thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed insofar as they
are in conflict.
Section 3. 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 25th-
day of Jules- !0 1985.
(2) the relationshiR with other roadway
signs, inclusive of directional
signs; '
(3) the impact on any notable structure or
an mar i
(4) the impact upon driver safety in the
area t e sign is to -be located; an
(5_he
appropriateness of the location in
�
relation to the surrounding ne igor o0
an a jacent uses.
2026.15.3.
Limitations on Spacing of Outdoor
vertisin��__signs in Relation to
Federal -Aid Primary Highway S7stems.
Outdoor
advertisin2 signs shall be spaced a
minimum of one thousand eet rom anot er sign,
or an a rove
location, on the same side o a e era -
=51 primary highway:
206.15.4.
All outdoor advertisinq sites shall be
Z
SEpropr ate y landscape as o ows: one
shade tree for the first 500 square eet
of site area and one s a e tree for each
aaditional 1POOO squire feet or portion
thereof, of site area; the remainder o
the site area shall a landscaped with
equal ---portions of he es -an or shrubs
an liningground-cover. Saidan -
s ing_ shall a provided wit?
irrigation And be-maintain-eW—in per-
petuity.
2026.15.4.1
Any sign permit issued pursuant to
Section icOZbp et seg., shall e su 'ect
to revocation, su se uent to a Public
earin y t e City Commission, s ou
�i inspectors find that the subject
s to is not bein2 maintain -TT --according
to a Rroved landscaping plans or is
being kept in an unclean or�'uns gh�'!y
manner.
Section 2. All ordinances, Code SL6ctions, or parts
thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed insofar as they
are in conflict.
Section 3.
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 25t
day of July , 1985.
6
4
7
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY this
day of September , 1985.
ATT ST /� Maurice A Ferre
MAURI E A. .FERRE, MAYOR
CIT CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
0%4 Viso alo(
E . MAXW E L
ISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROV AS O FORD AND CORRECTNESS
/�
Le
JEM/wpc/ab/4I8
„. ,:,...,y r'15.�3`�tae,,h '✓ C�";.�a ���+r;.t 1 r���ti'_n r;xAil
J-85-333
51/21/85=.9y93_
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING
SECTION 2026 ENTITLED "SIGNS, SPECIFIC
LIMITATIONS, AND REQUIREMENTS” TO CLARIFY
OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGN HEIGHT, ESTABLISH
METHODS OF SIGN CONSTRUCTION, PROHIBIT
FLASHING LIGHTS AND MOVING PARTS, REQUIRE ALL
SIGNS TO BE OF UNIPOD CONSTRUCTION WITH NO
MORE THAN TWO SIGN FACES, INTRODUCE A SIGN
SPACING REQUIREMENT ALONG LIMITED ACCESS
HIGHWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS, ALLOW OUTDOOR
ADVERTISING SIGNS TO BE VIEWED FROM AND
LOCATED WITHIN 600 FEET OF LIMITED ACCESS
HIGHWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS; AND CLARIFYING
APPLICABLE SIGN AREA OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING
SIGNS BY PROVIDING APPROPRIATE REVIEW
STANDARDS, PROCEDURES AND CONDITIONS, AND
ESTABLISHING SPACING REQUIREMENTS FOR OUTDOOR
ADVERTISING SIGNS ALONG FEDERAL -AID PRIMARY
HIGHWAY SYSTEMS; FURTHER, AMENDING PAGE 5 OF
THE OFFICIAL SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULA-
TIONS, CG GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS, BY REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH
STANDARDS AND REVIEW PROCEDURE OF SPECIAL
EXCEPTIONS, WITH CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL,
FOR CERTAIN OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting
of April 3, 1985, Item No. 1, following an advertised hearing at
which the amendments as hereinafter set forth were evaluated,
adopted Resolution No. PAB 34-85 by a vote of 6 to 3
RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the amendments to Section 2026.15.2 and
the Official Schedule of District Regulations, CG-1, Uses
Permitted Generally, paragraph 16 and Permissible Only by Special
Permit, paragraph 3, which recommended allowing signs to be
viewed from and located within 600 ft. of limited access
highways, including expressways, and of related spacing, height,
number of faces, and devices proposed for prohibition for the
aforementioned signs; adopted Resolutions PAB 32-85 by a vote of
8 to 0 (1 member absent) RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of amendments to
Section 2026.15.1; PAB 33-85 by a vote of 8 to 1 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of amendments to Section 2026.15.3; PAB 35-85 by a vote
of 7 to 2 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of amendments to the Official
Schedule of District Regulations, Limitation on Signs, CG,
fOP
ti
r-
paragraph 5, and PAB 36-85 by a vote of 8 to 1 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of amendments to the Official Schedule of District
Regulations, Limitations on Signs? CG, paragraph 6, which
clarified surface area of outdoor advertising signs, recommended
spacing of outdoor advertising signs on Federal -Aid Primary
Highways, and clarified the number of surfaces and height for
outdoor advertising signs; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission, after careful consideration of
this matter, deems it advisable and in the best interest of the
general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to grant
these amendments, hereinafter set forth;,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The text of Ordinance No. 9500, as amended,
the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, is hereby
amended in the following particulars:)
"Article 20.
Section 2026.
t
2026.15.
GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS
SIGNS, SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIRE-
MENTS. -
Outdoor Advertising Signs.
Signs used in the conduct of the outdoor adver-
tising business shall be regulated and restricted as
follows in districts in which they are permitted.
2026.15.1. Limitations on Sign Area, Including
Embellishments; Limitations on Projec-
tions of Embellishments.
cpetei-serf eee The area of an outdoor advertising sign
shall not exceed seven hundred fifty (750) square feet,
for each surface, including embellishments, if any
(wit sign and embellishment area measured as provided
at Section 2025.1.31 Area of Signs).
2026.15.2. Limitations on Location, Atientetien,
Spacing, Height, Type and Embellish-
ments ot Outdoor Advertising Signs in
RTion to Limited Access Highways and
Expressways.
1
Words and/or figures stricken through shall be deleted.
Underscored words and/or figures shall be added. The remaining
provisions are now in effect and remain unchanged. Asterisks
indicate omitted and unchanged material.
41 4
No Outdoor advertising signs eha}1 may be
erected, constructed, altered, maintained or relocated
within six hundred (600) feet of the right-of-way lines
of any limited access highway, including expressways,
as established by the State of Florida or any of its
political subdivisions, dn�eas-saeh-sign-ts-pare}}.}
teT or at an angle of net greater then thirty {36}
degrees-w=th-the-center}3ne-ef-any-eneh-litn#tad-access
h4ghwny-end-fneed-ewer-frem- sdeh-htghwey:--Where-sdeh
e3gne-are-w#thin-9tx-hundred-{b8A{-feet-ef-mere-them
one-lim#tad-access-h3ghwnyT-thc-l3n�itntiens-eat-forth
nbeve-shn}}-epp�y-with-re�peet-to-nl�-sdeh-htghwnye:
with City Commission Approval after following the
standards and review procedures Eor specia el�xce Lions
and su Ject to the toilowing conditions:
1. An outdoor advertising sign structure approved
pursuant to this ordinance shall e space a
minimum o i teen u� n r`ed' M06 ) eet from
another suc outdoor advertising sign structure or
an approved location- for another such out oor
advertising structure on the same side of a
invited access highway, including expressways.
2.
or the main-tr
exceed a maximu
measured from t
arteria street.
structure
3. The sign structure shall be of uni od construction
with only two () sign faces back to back and
Para a to each other.
4. No flashing, blinking or mechanical devices shall
be utilized as part of the outdoor advertising
sign.
5. Sign area, embellishments and projections shall be
as set forth in Section .
6. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of
Ms-ra'inance, owners of existing sign structures
or sign structure permits or any signs located or
to be located wit in six nun dred ( eet of t e
right-of-way lines of any _limited access ig way,
includin expressways, shall have trie right to
seek approva , in accordance with the proce ores
set out above, for a new out oor sign structure or
a tere si n structure permitted un er this
Or finance, at said oration, in the order that the
signs or locations were granted a permit. Sala
approval hearings shall e held in advance ojan
other sign structure a ication s A11 other
applicants shall be considered on -either a first
come, first serve basis, or in the case =o
concurrent app ications a lottery conducted
cue Department designated by the City Manager.
In authorizinga general advertisin si n
structure un er these provisions as a spec exception
the following factors shall a considered:
a. the impact on any vista or views that may be
r«
arrected;
b. the relationship with other roadway signs,
'inc u'sive of directional signs;
3
I
I
99A
a
He Outdoor advertising signs ehe}1 mma� be
erected, constructed, altered, maintained or relocated
within six hundred (600) feet of the right-of-way lines
of any limited access highway, including expressways,
as established by the State of Florida or any of its
Political subdivisions, unless-each-sign-is-pnra�}e}
teT er at an angle of net greeter then thirty 439}
deg rees-with-the-eenterline-ef-any-sdeh-limited-eeeess
highway-and-fseed -away-Trent-eneh-highway:--Where-sdeh
signs-are-within-9ix-hundred-{bAA}-feet-of-n+ere-than
ens-lin+itad-access-highwny�-the-lin+itetiens-eat-Earth
abe�e-shn�l-apply-with-reepeet-to-alb-such-highweye-
with City Commission Approval after following the
standards and review procedures for specia exce tions
an su 7ect to the o owing con itions:
1. An outdoor advertising sign structure approved
pursuant to this ordinance shall a space a
minimum o i teen hundred—(M0) feet fr3m
another sucS outdoor a vertising sign structure or
an app oved location or another suchout oor
advert Esing structure on t e same side of a
limited access highway, inc u ing expressways.
2.
The height of the structure shall not exceed a
height of fifty (50)_feet measured from the crown
of the main -traveled" Troaa an in no instance
exceed a maximum height of sixty-fivefeet
measured from t o crown of the nearest a iacent or
arterial street.
3. The sign structure shall be of uni od construction
with only two () sign faces back to back an
parallel to each other.
4. No flashing, blinking or mechanical devices shall
be tilize as part of the outdoor a vd ertising
sign.
5. Sign area, embellishments and projections shall be
-` as set forth in Section .
6. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of
this Ordinance-, owners of existing sign structures
or sign structure permits for any signs located or -
to be located within six hundred (feet of t e
right-of-way Ines of any rimite2 access higHway,
including expressways, shall ave the right to
seek approva , in accordance ith the procedures
set out above, for a new outdoor sign structure or
altered -sign structure permitted un er t is
Or finance, at said ocation, in the order that the
signs or ocations were granted a permit. SaM
approval hearings -snail e tield. in_a vance of -an
other sign structure application(s).—All other
applicants shall be considered_ on eit er a first
come, first serve basis, or in the case of
concurrent app ications a lottery con ucte �+
cn�Depar' tme`nt designate _ y the City Manaqer.
In authorizing- a general advertising sign
structure under these provisions as -a special exception
the following -factors shall be considered:
a. the impact on any vista or views that may be
a ecte ; —'
b. the relationship with other roadway signs,
in�veof 31rectionT l signs;
31rectionTigns;
3
8C.-,.1611i
99q � ll
c. the impact on any notable structure or
landmark;
d. the im act upon driver safety in the area the
sign is to be located; an
e. the appropriateness of the location in
relation to the surroun in nei Drhood an
adjacent uses.
2026.15.3. Limitations on Spacing of Outdoor
Advertising Signs in Relation to
Fe3eral-Aid Primary Higl7way Systems.
Outdoor advertising signs shall be spaced a
minimum of one thousand ( 0 _ ) feet from snot er sign*
or an approved location, on t e same side o a ederal-
ai primary ig way.
Section 2. Page 5 of the Official Schedule of District
Regulations made a part of said Ordinance 9500 by reference and
description in Section 3200 Entitled "Schedule of District
Regulations for Districts Other than Special Districts; Adop-
tion," of Article 3 Entitled "Official Zoning Atlas; Official
E Schedule of District Regulations," is hereby amended in the
following particulars:
"USES AND STRUCTURES
PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES
CG-1. GENERAL COMMERCIAL
*
Permitted Generally
* * *
16. offsite signs, including outdoor advertising signs
(subject to the provisions of Section 2026
h4mitettens an signs and except as indicated
under Permissible Only by Special Permit).
PERMISSIBLE ONLY BY SPECIAL PERMIT
3. Offsite si
ns, including
outdoor advertising
` signs, within
600 teet_
along
imite access
ignways,
includingexpressways,
shall be
eermissible
only C1tXCommission
approval after
following the
standards and
review
procedures tor
s ecia exce tTons and su6ject
to
the provisions
ot Section ZU26.
LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS
*
4 t
CG. GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GENERALLY)
5. Ground or freestanding signs, onsite, shall be
limited to one (1) sign and forty (40) square
feet of sign area (for each face) for each
business, or for each f i��ft_yy ( 50 ) feet of street
frontage, whichever shall the largest number
of area. Permitted sign area may be used in less
than the maximum permitted number of such signs,
but no sign shall exceed two hundred (200) square
feet in area for each face. maximum hei ht
limitation shall be twent (20) teet-'inc u in
embellisSments, measured From t o crown of the
nearest a Jacent local or arterial street, not
inc u in imited access i ways or ex ressways,
provided owever, that ttie Zoning Administrator at
his discretion may increase the measurement of t e
crown _y up_ to tive ) teet to accommodate
unusual or or undTing site conditions.
o. Ground or freestanding signs, offsite, shall be
limited to two (2) for any lot, whether or not
occupied by a building . Tetel-serfeee The area
shall not exceed 750 sq.ft. eumeletive}Y'T—or ali
each surfaces, including embellishments. The
total height shall not exceed thirty (30) feet,
except as set torth in Section , in-
cluding embellishments, measured From the crown o
the nearest adjacent local or arteria street, not
inc ud ng limitedaccess hrqhways or expressways,
provided, however, that the Zonin -Adminis-
trator,at' his dirscr9tion, MaX increase the
measurement of the crown by up o Five (5 eet to
accommodate unusua or undulating site con-
ditions.
Section 3. , All ordinances, 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 Od FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 18th
day of April , 1985.
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY this
23rdday of May , 1985.
JA
�C G . ONG I E
CITY CLERK
5
Maurice A. Ferre
,URICE A. FERRE,
OQC
01f
�a
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
4� � 4 aool tz--�
EL E. MAXWELL
SISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
JEM/wpc/ab/406
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTION:
LUCI A. DOUGH&RTY
CITY ATTORNEY
8c-1rbi4
6
9 q ° 5
Ilk
J-85-518
RESOLUTION NO. 85-540
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY'S PLANNING
DEPARTMENT TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE NEW
"BILLBOARD ORDINANCE" (ORDINANCE NO. 9993) THAT
WAS ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING MAY
23, 1985, WHICH ORDINANCE AUTHORIZES,SUBJECT
TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE PROVI:;IONS,
THE ERECTION OF NEW OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGN
STRUCTURES, SAID AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE THE
FOLLOWING INTENTIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS: (a)
THE ALLOWABLE NUMBER OF NEW SUCH SIGN STRUC-
TURES SHALL BE LIMITED TO 10; (b) SHALL BE
SUBJECT TO PERMIT REVOCATT�N IF APPROVED LAND-
SCAPING PLANS ARE NOT FOLLOWED OR SITE IS NOT
PROPERLY MAINTAINED; (c) THE DESIGNATION OF
THE ELIGIBLE AREA FOR NEW SIGN STRUCTURE EREC-
TION EXTENDING 600 FEET FROM EXPRESSWAY RIGHTS -
OF -WAY SHALL BE REDUCED TO 200 FEET; (d) NO
NEW SUCH SIGN STRUCTURES SHALL BE LOCATED EAST
OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY I-95.
WHEREAS, a question has arisen as to the number of new outdoor
advertising sign structures that may be erected in the City in the area
extending 600 feet from expressway rights -of -way pursuant to a proposed
zoning ordinance which has been approved on first reading; and
WHEREAS, the limitation that not more than 10 new such sign
structures (including existing sign structures which may be altered pursuant
to approval under this ordinance) be allowed under the provisions of the
aforesaid proposed ordinance is deemed to be in the best interests of the
City; and
WHEREAS, it is the judgment of the City Commission that aesthetics
require that the recently approved ordinance continue to restrict any new
outdoor advertising sign structures from being erected East of Interstate
Highway 1-95 from the South side of Northwest 36th Street to U. S. 1; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission considers it necessary to lessen and
diminish the total area within which new outdoor advertising sign structures
may be erected by decreasing the eligible area bordering and adjacent to
an expressway right-of-way from the presently designated 600 feet to 200 feet,
thereby reducing the Coal amount of eligible area in the City for erection
of new such sign structures;
WHEREAS, the effect on the appearance and quality of life in the
CITY CC!
MEETIN �D^
MAY 23 1985
R:SOLUUG195f-1540
. . .1 . 4 � 't, (
neighborhoods and along the thoroughfares of the City of Miami by such
sign structures is of paramount concern to the City Commission;
NOT4, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, 1LORIDA:
Section 1. The City's Planning Department is hereby requested
to initiate amendments to the "New Billboard Ordinance" (Ordinance No.
9993) adopted on second and final reading May 23rd, 1985, which provides
for the following:
a. The maximum number of new sign structures approved pursuant to said
Ordinance No. 9993 shall not exceed ten (10) in number;
b. The Ordinance shall provide for submittal of landscape plans and
approval of same by the City Commission and, further, provide
that any sign permit issued under Ordinance No. 9993 shall be subject
to revocation, subsequent to a Public Hearing by the City Commission,
should City inspectors find that the subject site is not being
maintained according to approved landscaping plans or is being
kept in an unclean or unsightly manner;
C. The designation of the eligible area for new sign structure
erection, which presently extends 600 feet from expressway
rights -of -way, shall be reduced to 200 feet; and
d. No such new sign structures shall be located east of Interstate
Highway I-95.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23 day of May ,1985.
ATTEST:
7
RALPH G. ONGIE v
CITY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
ROBERT F. CLERK
CHIEF DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
APP
LUCIA A. DOUG
CITY ATTORNEY
RFC/rr/{a
i
Maurice A. Ferre
MAURICE A. FERRE, MAYOR
AND CORRECTNESS:
'Ir.
Perez-Lugones:
Mr.
Gort
Mr.
Perez-Lugones:
Mr.
Gort:
Mr.
Perez-Lugones:
Mr.
Gort:
t
Item e, Mr. Chairman.
Six.
I don't see the.. .
Call it.
...appellants present.
Call it.
(Mr. Perez-Lugones read the item into the record.)
Appeal by an aggrieved party of the Zoning Administration
Interpretation No. ZI-85-3, "Billboard sign faces under Section
2026 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, as amended."
Mr. Perez-Lugones: That's itl
Mr. Gort: Okay. Is the appellant here?
Mr. Perez-Lugones: We are going to address the ruling
that applies in this case. I'll let our legal wizard...
Mr. Gort-
what's...
Ms . Maer:
not here, is that correct?
Mr. Gort:
around.
Ms. Basila:
this date.
Madam Attorney, could you tell us
I understand that the appellant is
That's correct. We don't see him
We called a special meeting to set
Ms. Maer: Of the...that's correct, we did,
at the request of the appellant from what I understand. As set
forth in the rules that this Board adopted, and I believe it was
at our last meeting# rule number 13 states as follows: "The
applicant failing to appear at his hearing shall not be entitled
to favorable recommendation on his petition. The petition may be
deferred or dismissed without prejudice." That means that this
Board tonight can either defer it or the Board could dismiss it.
Now if you dismiss it, it's without prejudice which means that he
has a right to reapply. It's up to this Board. The prohibition
in the rule you adopted is that in his absence you can not vote
favorably on his application.
Mr. Gort: That's correct. Okay, I'll tell
you what. Why don't we take a five minute break and let's come
back at 8: 22 . Okay? We'll give him all the benefit of the doubt
so they won't say we're bad guys, we'll give them five minutes
and make a decision on this. Does everybody agree with that? Is
that all right with the rest of the Board members?
break.
Mr. Moran-R ibeaux:
Mr. Perez-Lugones:
Mr. Gort
Yeah.
What about it, Mr. Chairman?
We're going to take a five minute
(After returning from five minute break.)
Mr. Gort-- Okay, it's 25 after, we've waited
7 minutes and the applicant... what's the wish of this Board?
Ms. Maer:
Mr. Gort?
1
January 27, 1986, Item 6
Zoning Board
C3i,)
Mr. Gort: Yes.
Ms. Maer: Mr. Chairman, if I could beg just
a couple of moments, a couple of minutes of your time. They're
trying to track somebody down.
Mr. Gort: You're trying to trace him?
Ms. Maer: Yeah. There was some kind of
misunderstanding. Apparently his office understood that this
matter was deferred. Now it's impossible that it be deferred
because today is the last day under our Zoning Ordinance that
this item can be heard.
Mr. Gort:
what happens?
And if it's not heard tonight,
Ms. Maer: If it's not heard tonight the
application lapses. In this case, the appeal dies. Now whether
he can go to court and attack it on that basis would take some
research.
Mr. Gort:
Ms. Basila:
Okay.
Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Basila: Did the Commission do any action
on this at their last meeting? Was there anything brought up
about this at all?
Ms. Maer: The Commission... well I was
present last Thursday evening, the item was brought up, the
Commission was advised by the City Attorney that the item was
properly before the Zoning Board and that the City Commission
could not act on it. The Commission merely made some comments at
that time but took no action; there was no motion and no
resolution at that time.
Ms. Basila:
Why was anything brought up?
Mr. Gort: Well we were asked by the
attorney... it seems that somebody from our staff got a hold of
their office and what did they say? Are they coming?
Ms. Maer: They asked if we could give them
about two minutes so that they could tell us exactly what the
situation is.
Mr. Gort: He's got three minutes.
Ms. Maer: Thank you.
(During the break, Ms. Wainwright asked if she could
address the Board.)
Mr. Gort: If it's referred to the procedure
that we're using, yes ma'am, if it's not, if it's on the item
itself, no ma'am.
Ms. Wainwright: No, I'm just speaking about the
procedure.
Mr. Gort: Yes, ma' am.
2 January 27, 1986,
Zoning Board
Item 6
8C', -IL0-4 �%�
P
1
Ms. Wainwright: My name is Alice Wainwright. My
address is 3601 Bay View Road in Miami. I was present at the
last Commission meeting and one commissioner for sure, LMr.
Plummer, stated that it would be heard tonight and as I recall,
think the Mayor repeated that statement. So our understanding
was it would be heard tonight and that is why I am here.
Mr. Gort: Yes, ma'am, we understand. If
it's not heard tonight, it's dropped.
Mr. Milian: What I can not understand is how
the applicant got confused. What kind of misunderstanding? I
mean there...
Ms. Maer: Mr. Knox was present at the
Commission meeting that night. I believe Ms. Wainwright was at
this microphone and Mr. Knox was standing over there...
Mr. Perez-Lugones:
over there also.
Ms . Maer:
expressed the...
Mr. Hancock ... and Mr. Hancock was
And the Mayor and J.L. both
I
Mr. Gort: Okay, we'll wait until 8:30. If
by 8:30 we have not received any reply by phone or something like
that, we'll take some action ourself. There's no problem. if we
defer this item, it's automatically dropped. That's my
understanding.
(Board returned from the break.)
Mr. Gort It's 8: 31, we have not received
any reply ... have we received 'any reply from their office?
Ms. Maer: I spoke with their office and Mr.
Knox is unavailable. There would be no way to get him here at
this time.
Mr. Gort.-
defer this item.
Okay. Can I hear a motion to
Mr. Fleming: Could we respectfully request that
it be denied in view of the procedure because your letters in
your file say...
Mr. Gort: Sir, by deferring this, it's
automatically denied. It was not heard within the period, that's
there problem.
Ms. Basila: Did you hear the attorney? Sir,
did you hear her comment a moment ago?
Mr. Gort By deferring this item... tonight
was the last time that this item could have been heard. If it's
not heard today, it dies.
Mr. Fleming: Well, then couldn't we just have
it reflected that it was denied because a deferral might be
interpreted by someone to think that they've got another chance.
Certainly if parallel can be interpreted to mean bent.
Mr. Gort Your name and address please,
sir...your name and address sir.
Mr. Fleming: Joseph Z. Fleming, 620 Ingraham
Building, 25 SE 2 Avenue, Miami, Florida, 33131...
3 January 27, 1986, Item 6
Zoning Board
Mr. Gort: That's fine. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Fleming: ...representing the Tropical
Audubon Society.
Mr. Gort Okay. What is the.. -what is the
wish of this Board? You've heard the alternatives that we
have...
Mr. Moran-R ibeaux:
Mr. Gort:
Mr. Moran-Ribeaux:
Ms. Morales:
I'd like to deny it.
You'd like to deny it?
Yes.
Second.
Mr. Gort: Okay, wait a minute! Wait a
minute! The motion ... how does the motion have to be filed?
Ms. Maer: I beg your pardon, how does it
have to filed?
Mr. Gort: What's in front of us is an appeal
to the decision...do we deny the appeal? Is that what the
correct motion do you need in this?
Ms. Maer: The motion is to deny the appeal
and thus by denying the appeal you're upholding the decision of
the Zoning Administrator.
Mr. Gort: Okay, there's a motion by Mr.
Moran to deny the appeal, there's a second by ... Ms. Morales
seconded it. Is there any discussion on the motion? Being none,
call the question.
Mr. Perez-Lugones: Mr. Chairman, we have a motion to
deny the appeal, upholding the decision of the Zoning
Administrator. Motion by Mr. Moran, seconded by Ms. Morales.
I'll call roll.
AYES: Ms. Basila and Morales
Messrs. Gort, Channing, Moran-R ibeaux, Milian,
Romero and Sands
NAYES: None.
ABSENT: Messr. Luaces
Mr. Perez-Lugones:
the appeal.
evening.
Mr. Gort:
The motion is unanimous denying
Thank you all for being here this
RESOLUTION ZB 18-86
RESOLUTION TO DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD
ZONING ADMINISTRATION INTERPRETATION NO. ZI-
85-3, "BILLBOARD SIGN FACES UNDER SECTION
2026 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, AS AMENDED."
+ 4 January 27, 1986, Item 6
Zoning Board SE-10�4• . D4(