No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-09993i J�85��33 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 UNtPOD 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 2026.15.31 PAO 35-85 by a vote of 7 to 2 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of amendments to the official schedule of District Regulations, Limitation on Signs, CG, paragraph 5i and PAH 36-85 by a vote of 8 to 1 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of amendments to the Official Schedule of District Regulationsi Limitations on Suns, 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 WHERSASi 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 particularscl "Article 20. Section 2026. 2026.15. GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS n 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. Tetal-gar€aee The area of an outdoor advertising sign shall not exceedeven hundred fifty (750) square feet, for each surface, including embellishments, if any (witri sign and embellishment area measured as provided at Section 2025.1.3, Area of Signs). 2026.15.2. Limitations on Location, Or+entat4enr Spacing, Height, Type and Embellish- ments ot outdoor Advertising Signs n' Relation to Limited Access Highways and Expressways. Words and/or f igures stric%en through shall be deleted. Underscored wards and/or fi.qures shall be added, The remaining provisions are now in effect and rer%in unchanged. Asteris%s indicate omitted and unchaAged material. 6 Ne Outdoor advertising sighs ahall ma be eredtedr constructed, altered, maintained or reated within six hundred (600) feet of the tight -of -way lines of any limited access highway, including expressways` as established by the State of Florida or any of its political subdivisions, eelesa-�seels#gn=#s=�paale to or at as eagle of hot greeter then thirty fog} degeeea=a�����rl�e=�eeh�erl#he-e�-�ahy�s�ek����+�te�--assess high way-and-fseed-away-€�e:n�gc�el�=�h�gl�wa�*;.���here �sae1 s�gt�aKa�e�w�t1�#i��e#x=�ist�d�ed� f 6g9-}��eet�e€�me�e=tl�at� sae-��m��ed�aeeessyl���l��vay�-tl�e-���+��at�e�ia�aet�te�tl� above -sh&IIj apply -with -re epeet- to -al �==suer-�t�gl�ways: with City Commission App oval after following the _. standards an _7eview procedures for speo11`al exceptions an s`u je t to the tollowino conditions: 1. An outdoor advert is�ing_ _sign structure approved pursuant to this ordinance shall be _space a minimum of teen hundred (1500) feet from anot er suc outdoor advertising sign structure or an_ appr,6ve8 location tor another such out oor advertise g structure on the same side of a limited access highway, inclu 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 road and in no instance exceed a maxi_mu_m height of sixty- ive (65 set measured from the crown o the nearest adjacent or arteria street. 3. The sign structure shall be of unipod construction with only two (2 ) sign faces back to back and parallel to each other. 4. No flashing, blinking or mechanical devices shall e utilized as part of the out oor advertising sign. 5. Sign area, embellishments and projections shall be as set fortH in section 2026.15.1. 6. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of t is Ordinance, owners of existing sign structures or sign structure permits for any signs located or to be located within six hundre3 (600) feet of the right-of-way lines of any limited access highway, including expressways, shall have the right to seek approval, in accordance with t e procedures set out above, for a new outdoor sign structure or altered sign structure permitte3 un er t is Ordinance, at said location, in the order that the signs or ocations were grants a permit. al ap rova hearings shall be held in advance of any other sign structure a P ieation(s)• A 1 other applicants shall e cons erect on eit er a I st come, first serve his, or Iin the case of concurrent applications lottery con ucte_ y t e Department designatedy e City Manager. In authorizing a general advertising sign tructure under these rov s ons as a special +exception he'FollowiF47actors shall a consi ere a, the im act on any vista or views that may be b. the relationship with other roadwa signs anc uS ve Q irectiona _s Anss d. the irfipact on ariy notable a ].at�dmark d . the _ .mpgct upon s driver safety in, s.k is to be located- and e. iT 20.26,15,3. Limitations on Spading __o.f outdoor Ac7�rertising SYgns in Rev a.t.lon._ to FederaliAid Primary xig way__Sys ems. Outdoor advertising signs shall be spaced_ a minimum of one t ousand (1000) feet from anot er„signs _ _. or an approved ovation, on the same side of a federal= aid primary nignwavb * * * it Section 2. Page 5 of the Official Schedule of District Regulations made a part of said Ordinance 9500 by reference and description in Section 320, Entitled "Schedule of District Regulations for Districts Other than Special Districts; Adop- tion," of Article 3 Entitled "Official Zoning Atlas; Official 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 b-iffi-Itat-iens en 6-igns and except as indicated under Permissible Only by Specia Permit). PERMISSIBLE ONLY BY SPECIAL PERMIT 3. Offsite signs, including outdoor advertising signs, wit in goo feet along limit-e7 access hi hwa s, inc a ing ex resswa s, shall be ermj$S a on:_ City Commission approval a ter following the standards and review procedures for special ex-ceptidns an su 3ect to the provisions LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS ' 1A i7 9 coo O NERAL COMM ACiAb (GENERALLY) 5. Gtound or freestanding signs, onsite, shall be l irttited to one. (1) sign and forty( 40 ) square feet of signface) for each business] or for each fifty (50) feet of street ftontage, whichever shalld 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 ( ZOO ) square feet in area for each face. Maximum height limitation shall be twenty._(20.)feet nc u ing em e.11ishments,_,measured from the crown o the nearest a �acent loca or arteria street, !19t inclu in unite access i ways or expressways_, provided _owever, that t e_Znn ng Administrator at his discretion ma increase the measurement of t e crown y up to t ive (5) Feet to accommodate unusual or un u atin site conditions. .. 6. Ground or freestanding signs, offsite, shall be limited to two (2) for any lot, whether or not occupied by a building. Tetal-stir€eee The area shall not exceed 750 sq.ft. eemelat#vely- or all each surfaces, including embellishments. The total height shall not exceed thirty (30) feet, except as set torth in Section 5.2, in- -Eluding_eMbellishmentst measured tr&F t e crown of the nearest adjacent local or arterial street, not including limited access Highways or expressways, prove e, however, that the Zoning A minis- trator, at his discretion, may increase the measurement of the crown by up to tive (5) feet to accommodate unusual or undulating site con- * * *n 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 ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 18th day of April , 1985. PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY this CI 23rdday of May , 1985. CLERK 17?1- © Maurice A. Ferre 5 ^u Ca. GENERAL COMMERCIAL (O NERALLY) El 5. ground or freestanding signs, onsite, shall be limited to one, (1 ) sign and fort ( 40 ) square feet of sign��: area (for each face) tot each business, or for each fifty (50) feet of street frontage, whichever sha1'``y ;ld 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 height limitation shal1 be twenty (20_) feet nc1 u d ing embellishments, measured from the crown of the nearest a � a c e n t oca or arterial street, not xnclu zng j iMit access ig ways or expressways,, provided howeverp t at the Zoning Administrator at his discretion may�incre_as_e_the measurement of the crown by up to wive ( 5 ) feet 4 to accommodate unusua or un u sting site con itions. 6. Ground or freestanding signs, offsite, shall be limited to two (2) for any lot, whether or not occupied by a building. Tetal-sue€aee The area shall not exceed 750 sq. ft. eefflulat#vely-Moor all each surfaces, including embellishments. The total height shall. not exceed thirty (30) feet, excc t�as set forth i_n Section 2 5.2, in- cludinc embeilishments, measured from the crown of the nearest adjacent local or arterial street, not including limited access highways or expressways, prove e, however, t at the Zoning A minis- trator, at his discretion, max increase the measurement of the crown by_up to five (5) feet to accommodate unusual 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 ON 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, 6 -� j Maurice A, Terre NPURICE A. ME RE, CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROM t3Y 2 MAXW J EL Er ELL St8TANT CtTy ATTOANgY ,J2M/WVC/ab/406 1 + LUCIR A6 DOMRTY CITY ATTOMY ►, of the City of Ntiami, Florida, hercliy certify that ou tht! .,1.7. -day A. i fuil, true wid cUrrxt c I v of 0%; H."(1 att'., fore"o !11' + l"liUulice Was pfistcd at tI:C S.)Iltll i),)t)r t_If the County Court ift)usc at t1w 1)1.!c,: provided tc)t nwie..s ano lAu1).tct11imis by attacitineg said copy to the therdur, WITNLSS my ►land and the official seal of said City this,p ....,day �It'„ A. U. 19..IV4,. ..,.....«,..:...., :....:. .:..... .....: ...its:z�, City, Clerk PREPAM ANb APPROVSb Sy C EL So MAXWELi, 81STANT CITY ATTOF mey JBM/WPC/ab/405 APPROVED, A5 TO V b M ANb COARECTtON t LUC I A i DUL MICRTY CITY A'T'T0MY 1, f the City of ;Miami, Florida, hereby certify that on the.1..7. .day ')f.. A. 1). W.IZ6... a NO, true and correc..t c . y of thv .+h„ k).'e"(1int! old-hi1{ItCe was jltl (Cll at the Smith 'Door tlr: Da,.lt� C twnty Court }blase at tlttr pl,tc:: provided liv nwic..,� and ;,uh-is:oions by atta-6iing Said ek)py to ti)c pkicr therelor. WlYNL:SS my hand and the official seal of said City lhis.4 .....�tuy Of- „t1. D. 19;.�,yj,, City, Clerk I C►tY OP MIAM1. IrWA►DA INT"3-OFFICC MEMORANDUM `- Sergio Pereira DATE- April 5, 1985 VILE. Ci Manager SUVJCCT: ORDINANCE - TEXT AMENDMENT ART 20, SECTION 2026 SIGNS Directory "EFCR�N`ES` COMMISSION AGENDA - APRIL 18, 198` Planning and Zoning Boards ENCLOSURES: PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS Administration Department It is recommended by the Planning Advisory Board that amendments to the text of Zoning Ordinance 00, as amended, by amending Section 2026 Signs, Specif..ic Limitations and Requirements of Article 20 and page 5 of the Official Schedule of District Regulations pertaining to CG General Commercial zoning district be adopted as recommended by the Planning Department. The Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of April 3, 1985, item 1, following an advertised hearing, adopted Resolution PAB 34-85 by a 6 to 3 vote, 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 an 8 to 0 vote, 1 " member absent, recommending approval of amendments to Section 2026.15.1; PAB 33-85 by an 8 to 1 vote,-recommending=approval of amendments to Section 2026.15.3; PAB 35-85 by a 7 to 2.vote, recommending approval of amendments to the Official Schedule of. District Regulations, Limitations on Signs, CG, paragraph 5, and PAB 36-85 by an 8 to 1 vote, recommending approval of amendments to the Official Schedule of District Regulations, Limitations on Signs, CG, paragraph 6, which recommended clarifying area of outdoor advertising signs, recommended spacing of outdoor advertising signs on Federal -Aid Primary Highways, and recommended clarifying the number of surfaces and heights of outdoor advertising signs, Sergio Pereira Page 2 April 51 t089 Seven opponents present at the meeting, three proponents present at the meeti no, Backup information is included for your review. An ORDINANCE to provide for the above has been prepared by the City Attorney's Off -ice and submitted for consideration of the City Commission. AEPL:JWM:111 cc: Law Department NOTE: Planning Department recommends: DENIAL of specific amendments allowing Mertsing signs to be viewed from and located within, 600 ft. of the right-of-way line of any limited access highway (including express- ways), including the related spacing, height, number of faces, and devised proposed for prohibition for aforementioned signs. APPROVAL of general clarifications pertaining to outdoor advertising signs including: area of outdoor advertising signs along Federal -Aid Primary Highways and clarifying the number of surfaces and height of outdoor advertising signs. 4b Ir PLANNINO FACT SNt�T APPLICANT city of " ii ami Planning oeparthent: March 1p" 1985 PETITION 1, per referral of the City Cormiission by Motions 85=181, 85-182, 85-185 and 88-184 February 28, 15854 for the purpose of considering text amendmOhts to Zoning Ordinance 9500 by amt?nMi nq Section 2026 Signs, Specific Limitations and Requirements of Article 20, Oeneral and Supplementary Regulations to clarify outdoor advertising sign height, establish methods of sign construction including the prohibition of flashing lights and moving parts and requiring all signs to be of a unipod construction and no more than two sign faces, introduce a sign spacing requirement along limited access highways, including expressways, allowing outdoor advertising signs to be viewed from and allowed within 600' of limited access highways, including expressways, clarify applicable sign area of outdoor advertising signs, by providing appropriate review standards and conditions, and by establishing spacing requirements for outdoor advertising signs along Federal -Aid Primary Highway Systems; further amending sheet 5 of the Official Schedule of District Regulations ,made a part of said Ordinance 9500 by reference and description in Section 320 thereof, pertaining to CG General Com. ercial zoning districts, requiring Special Exception with City Commission approval for certain outdoor advertising signs; and containing a repealer provision and a severability clause. REQUEST To revise sign limitations of Zoning Ordinance 9500; as amended. BACKGROUND Attempts to amend Zoning Ordinance 9500 were initiated approximately one year ago. At the April 4, 1984, meeting of the Planning A visory Board, a a.nning,Depar men recommendeda eig t limit that had been inadvertently omitted in the printing of the new ordinance. The Planning Advisory Board voted 3-3 for the height limitation (with two members absent), thereby constituting a denial of the motion. A recommendation of an amendment to the Planning Department recommendation,. which specified a limit of "30 feet in height from the grade of PAB 4/3/35 _ Item #1 Page 1 Aft ilk the road''to which the sigh faces" also failed 3=3 (2 mwibers absent), cbnstituting a denial of the Mti on. 1 On April 271 in 4, the City Commission, on first rea 1ng, continued a item w1_ re erral to the Planning visory - oar or u_n per consi era ion. Oh Jung 5, 1984, the item was withdrawn from the nn ainj visory oar agPn.a or lack of proper advertisement. At the June 20 i n0A MA:;*4 V%A A0 4•1ix 65 sctiw; w�a recoriimen a approval of draft legislation which limited sign height to 30 feet, introduced a sign spacing formula in the CG districts and recommended denial of any change in the angle of billboards for expressways. At that meeting, the Planning Advisory Board recommended (as per PAB Resolution 54-84) a 50' height limit and a spacing of 1500' between billboards. The Planning Advisory Board also asked the Commission for clarification of considerations regarding facing, angle, and distance from expressway. On June 28, 1984, the City Commission continued e item on i rs reading with referral to the' anning Advisory Board for turter consideration to ins u e acing, angle, and distance of billboards from expressways. At the July 18, 1984, meeting of the Planning visory board, the Planning D e p a r men recommended a general outdoor advertising structures (bi'l l boards) not be permitted within 600 feet of the expressway except for billboards facing away from the expressway, and that the height of signs be limited to 30 feet above the crown of the road as defined therein. The Planning Department also recormended clarification of sign area and that billboard spacing be considered only in the event that billboards are permitted along expressways. The Planning Advisory Board adopted Resolution PAB 75-84 which would allow signs to face expressways, Resolution PAB. 76-94 which would permit the erection of signs within 600 feet of PAB 4/3/85 Item .-1 Page 2 9 a any 1 1 Hi tyd access hi ghway (including expre>sways, but excluding the Oubl i c ri ght�3f way), Resolution PAEI 17=84 which would perMit a mi nimurr," 1, 500 fcet spacing between si pt on the same side Of an interstate highway and 1000 fleet between signs on the same side of the highway of the federal aid primary highway, and P?esolution pA0 78-84 which would clarify billboard height to be 50 feet from the crown of the t"ain traveled road with a maximum height of 55 feet from the crown of the dearest ad3acent locAl or arterial street and clarify the sign area as one sign face, At the duly 31, 19841 City Commission meeting, e'item, was continued on first reading.' At the September 20, 1984, meeting, the City ommission continued e item on first reading. At the October 25; 1984, meeting, the City .......... .... ommission Eontinuea Ene item, on first reading. At the November 15, 1984, meeting, the City Commission passed th e item on firit reading wi referral acc to the Planning Advisory oar o`r further comments. At its meeting of January 2, 1585, the Planning Advisory Uoard's motion to recommena approval or eir previous mot -ions failed by a vote of a to therefore Eonstituting a recommendation of denial. At the January 24, 1985, meeting, the City om;mission continued action on -the above. At the February 28, 1985, meeting, the Commission requested the Planning Department to amend the ordinance to prohibit flashing lights or moving parts and to limit construction o i oars to no more than two faces (M-85-181). The Commission also instructed e Planning Department (per Motion M-85-182) to .amend the ordinance to indicate that all future applications for billboard construction permits shall require a special exception with City onni ssi on approval. Furt iermore, tne ommission a so instructed the Planning Department to amend the ordinance to require all PAa 4/3/85 Item #1 Page 3 bi 11 bqa'r&. c(smStrutti on to be of A Zons*E-r I Me L; 1 ty (. ornmi s s i on referyen d the item back to the Planning Advisor, rV "c5n6F, '��FEMM rlade durihq the Commission meeting ANALYSIS With e6tpeft to billboard faqi,01, angle and distance from _expressways an cl limitep access "I -­ - ,W'a­y ; 7 1 n e Planning Departmen Eron­no _­_' recommend any change. Section 2026.15.2 expressly prohibits billboards. within 600, expressway right-of-way except for, signs angled (300) in such a manner to as not to be viewed from the expressway. This exception is to allow signs within 600' that -are not intended to face expressways, but which could face intersecting streets. Therefore the angle of the sion is of no import with allowingqhs to face the expressway and need not be changed if ,igns are not going to be allowed to face expressways. The prohibition of billboards a*10hg the expressway is to eliminate visual intriisions to residents, tourists and visitors traveling along esi the expressway system in the City of Miami. The lack of aesthetics associated with this type of development is not in keeping with the views and vistas associated with our area, and the amenities enjoyed by all who live, work and play in our subtropical community. Billbcar6 most definitely vie for the traveler's attention which promotes a potential hazard with respect to traffic accidents on the already congested expressway system. Spacing of billboards along expressways, if permiTfed has limited merit but should not be thought of as an alternate solution to the problem of billboards along expressweys as indicated above. Spacing limits the number of signs per distance which basically corresponds to the ability of a viewer to assimilate the messages at 55-60 miles per hour. It also prohibits blockage of signs by other sign companies which is a potential problem within the industry. With respect to sign height, in Ordinance 01500 the limitation of sign neig t was inadvertently left out, thereby necessitating this PAB 4/3/85 Item K Page 4 �: .i..� :.. ca .•+�.'$�i�'i+�-... - � 1 - ..�1e..-.�.'le.'i...�,..t�.:J'�.+a.�s� .171I4ta...�;. . �.ks .. i,.yr.• ,:,`:r�:i,�t`a. ;;r„-�y�.. .y4?. .yid:'�D',��in�t�{k•:.yNr.�il'r"�.:2...�ic..... :a:z.ks:Y�::,�.(ti` .�� .s, ri6+�+aiJC.+ii.��'aF•°=!�.5� t.�''tie+�`:. '. .. .� ' ..'�._. �°' clarification as to the permitted heights of signs. In Zoning Ordinance #6871, detached signs, now referred to as ground and free standing signs, were limited in height to twenty (20) feet above grade for residential districts and thirty feet for commercial and industrial districts. This limitation has proven to be reasonable and proper. By way of clarification, the Planning Department is proposing language that would establish the height . of signs commencing at the crown of the adjacent local or arterial street, not including limited access highways or expressways; such crown may be varied by up to 5+ feet at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator to accommodate unusual or undulating site conditions. RECOMMENDATIONS PLANNING DEPT. Denial of specific amendments allowing outdoor aadveF i s.i ng signsTo be viewed from, and located within, 600 feet of the right-of-way line of any limited access highway (including expressways), including the related spacing, height, number of faces, and devices proposed for prohibition for the aforementioned, signs. All of these items are addressed as amendments to Section 2026.15.2 of the text and CG-1 Uses Permitted Generally paragraph 16 and Permissible Only by Special Permit, paragraph 3 of the Official Schedule of District Regulations. Approval of general clarifications pertaining to outdoor adver i si ng signs including: area of outdoor advertising signs, establishing spacing of outdoor advertising signs along Federal -Aid Primary Highways and clarifying the number of surfaces and height of outdoor advertising signs. All of these items are addressed as amendments to Sections 2026.15.1 and 2026.15.3 of the Text and Limitations on Signs, DG, paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Official Schedule of District Regulations. PLANNING ADVISORY SHARD Denial of specific amendments to Section ?Vzo-.15.2 of the text and Official Schedule of District Regulations DO-1 Uses Permitted Generally, paragraph 16 and permissible Only by Special Permit, paragraph 3, pertaining to .: .. .. .., k.F a.. tY%'.t ?'1: ..°-..-':x... :. ;r.'�r._• f.. ....: .+.. -c i,,._w, �i •F '?Kl.•h <... 1., ... wc- '. ^r, 5':�, .:x., h=�i`ej� ., c,i�.:.:. �i�.. y� 1�.�.. �. �4 � e. :s'... iy...+:.11►. '.: r � �:;1t�':,a is t�.yr :. viewed from, and located within, 600 feet of a limited access highways including expressways and the related spacing, height, number of faces and devices by a 6-3 vote April 3, 1985. And Approval of general amendments to Sections Viand 2026.15.3 and the Official Schedule of District Regulations, Limitations in Signs CG, paragraph 5 and 6 pertaining to area, spacing along Federal Aid Primary Highways and clarifying the number of surfaces and heights of outdoor advertising signs, by a series of resolutions April 3, 1985.as outlined below: 1) Resolution PAB 32-85, recommending approval of amendments to Section 2026.15.1 - 8-0 2) Resolution PAB 33-85, recommending approval of amendments to Section 2026.15.3 - 8-1 3) Resolution PAB 35-85, recommending approval of amendments to the Official Schedule of . District Regulations, Limitations on Signs, CG, paragraph 5 - 7-2' 4) Resolution PAB 36-85, recommending approval of amendments to the Official Schedule of District Regulations, Limitations on Signs, CG, paragraph 6 - 8-1 A& s mo d . Secti6n 1. The taxt 0f Ordi nan6d 9900 at Mended, the 2oMi o9 Ordi MAMCn Of the City of W 6M , E'1 on da, is hereby afendod as fol 1 ow5. 1 ARTICLE 20, GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY gEGULATIONS SECTION 2026. SIGNS, SPECIrIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIR CMENTS 2026.15. Outdoor Advertising Sighs. Signs used in the conduct of the outdoor advertising 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 Projections of Embellishments. Tlcal stir €a The area of an outdoor advertising sign shall not exceed oMbL%lli9hM-eMt9j if any (with sign and eM.bdllithM.4nt area Measured at Pt6vidtd at Section 2025.1.11 Area of 2026,15.21 LimitatiOhg on Locatiom, ot.4,emtati- Cmbellithmws of Outdoor Advertising Signs in Relation to Limited Accost Highways and 8xprttsways. 4& Outdoor advertising signs shall Ibe erected, constructed, altertd, 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 suej!-.-q4gM 4s- parallel to, er et am angle of not greater thamth4pty (80) degi-ees w4th the eemteelime ef any sueh limited aeeess h4ghway and faeed away feem sueh h 4 ghway Where sueh 949ns are w4th4m s4m hundred (600) feet ef f9ere tham eme 44mited aeeess h4ghway, the 14m4at4ems set ferth abeye shall apply w4th respeet to all stieh Highways. as a. special exception with City Commission review and approval and subject' to the following conditions: 1. An outdoor advertising structure shall be spaced ;.-- ninimum of fifteen hundred (1500) feet from another outdoor advertising structure or an approved location for a general advertising sign on the same side of a limited access highway, including expressways. 2. The height of the sign shall not exceed a height of fifty (50) feet measured from the crown of the main -traveled road and in no instance exceed a maximum height of sixty-five (65) feet measured from the crown of the nearest adjacent or arterial street. -2- k 5, 1`he sign ructure thA11 bps 6f 'uh po „ 0nstructi0n „wj th 0niy Lo f )sigh faces back to back ant pg,na i l.g.. tb each ottior.... 4. io devices shall bL utilied as art of the outdoor advertising sign. 5. Si gn area, embel l i shmnnts and prajecti ons_ shall be as set forth in Section 2026.15.1. In authorizing a general adverti sing sign under these provisions as a special exception the followings factors shall be considered: - the impact on any vista or views that may be affected. - the relationship with other roadway signs, inclusive of directional signs. 1 1 the impact on any notable structure or landmark. - the impact upon driver safety in the area the sign is to be located. - the appropriateness of the location in relation to the surrounding neighborhood and adjacent uses. 2026.15.3. Limitations on Spacing of General Advertising Signs in Relation to Federal -Aid Primary Highway Systems. Outdoor advertising signs shall be spaced a minimum of one thousand (1000) feet from another sign, or an approved location, on the same side of a federal -aid primary highway. -3- Section 2. Page 5 of the Official Sdhedule Of district ReWatiOMS Made Part of said Ordihamdt 9500 it hereby amended at follows: PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES CG-1- GENERAL COMMERCIAL Permitted Generally 16. Offsite signs, including outdoor advertising signs (subject to the Off sito i n5, includin butd adv�rLti ing signu, within 600 fopt alone) limited acb htihwys, ncludingx rsswys, sh4ll.bdrmissihl only by S pci 1 EX�ej tion oMi ssion rev ��rip app►�bva1 and �ub�oct wbvi si Ohs Of Seoti on 2026, LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS CG GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GENERALLY) i . 5. Ground or freestanding signs, onsi te, shall be limited to one (1) sign and forty (40) square feet of sign area (for each face) for each business, or for each fifty (50) feet of street frontage, whichever shall yield 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. Maxir,!um height limitation shall be twenty (20) feet including embellishments, measured from the crown of the nearest adjacent local or arterial street, not including limited access highways or expressways, provided however, j that the Zoning Administrator at his discretion may increase the -5- Meaturtmtht of the VP�n'-.bY-A,U ACC6MOdatt UMUSUAI or 6rOUhd Or freestanding 0011t, o'ffsite, shall be limiteal to two (20) for any lot, whether or not Occupied by a building, Te t a 4- -s u i- The area shall not exceed 75O Sq,ft, dUMU!idti-ve4j- for +4 each tUrfaCe+, imCluding embellishments. The total height shall not exceed thirty (30) feet' except as set forth in Section measured from the crown of the nearest adjacent local or arterial street, not including limited accoss"hi_ghwayt or expressways, provided, however, that the Zoning Administrator, at his discretion, may increase the measurement -of the crown by up to five (5) feet to Accommodate unusual or undulating site conditions. -6- R-Z 1 . {9 --C .55 em�, 7, A j t 411, 1 -AP �iR1t� , w «! p`I« it♦, Vi . t'i ANALYSIS AND MODELING OF RELATIONSHIPS RESEARCH DEVE-LOPMENt• DETWEEN ACCIDENTS i DEPORT A AND THE ,. ; R :. i. ; GEOMETRIC AND TRAFFIC CIIARACTERISTICS �� �� :�� =- � �Of THE INTERSTATE SYSTEM A U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION/Federal Highway Administration/Bureau of Public Roa& roo, _._ _ .. .... _. .. - ti:. ... ..... w_.. Y F r .Table S. (continued) - Table S. (continued) ` Geometric Effect Geometric " Effect Presence of A consistent safety contribution of delineators is found for 2 Delineators three models: Type of The results suggest that divided, crossroads increase~ the: v, Nearest safety of mainline roadway between speed change lane - Change in accidents Crossroad But divided crossroads seem tau increase accidents for e€ due to presence of Underpass or Outer Connection models., These commits delineators Model are hard to interpret or explain. -°.22 Ramp of Diamond - .02 Deceleration Lane Change in: accidents a - .01 Between Interchange Units- for divided rather than undivided cross - Presence of Mixed results were obtained as shown below. The road Modet e Pavement Edge results are particularly suspicious based on contradictory - .038 Roadways Between; Speed 6 Markings results for the two deceleration type of units. Change Lane Change to accidents +.025 underpass + .Oil Outer Conneetistt T l due to the presence of edge markings Model k - .» Outer Connection - • 04 Deceleration Half of Number of The results indicate that in the middle of an Interchange Combined information Information signs are reducing; accidents. but toe an + .02 Deceleration Lane Signs Readable underpass information signs increase aecldentw. _ 14 Loop from Roadway Change in accidents •- Surface Type Surface type appeared as a significant variable In only for each. additional S of the'13 models considered. Bituminous surface ap- information sign Model pears water than concrete in the 4 out of S models in which - .024 Roadway Between; Spot* this variable appears. This result is hard to reconcile Change Lane with engineering judgment. + .025 Underpass The contrast in results for acceleration and deceleration / further doubt Numbei off' '"'' The results'indlcate thatcolflmeretaL si s tm cove hues sots on these results. Advertising safety. Even,more astonishing is the result four the Signs Resdabls:k r7 Underpass model where commercial signs help„ but Change In accidents from Roadway-.:•.i information signs hurt.- It nothing else. this result for bituminous surface . illustrates the llinifs larregressios models as discus d rather than concrete Model earlie - .54 Direct and Semi -direct Change in accidents Connection for each. additional - .41 Loop commercial sign Modet - .05 Acceleration Lane - .03 Between Interchange Units - .017 Underpass ♦ .02 Deceleration Lane - .011 Overpass ,Distance to The results suggest that an overpass is safer when close Nearest to an interchange while an underpass is safer it for from 3. Analysis of Units with Excepitonal! .High Accident Fre4uene - Y >« � Interchange an Interchange. The second result seems reasonable but A. Introduction the first does not. "Failure Analysts" is s technique commonly used In, thr Change to accidents evaluation and improvement of operational systems- This technique has beets per I mile increase applied to the Interstate accident data base (Study III for each of the thistesta In distance to inter- change Model unit types studied in this report.. Essentially,, this method. eonsiste of isolating; -..at Overpass study units which had an unusually large: number of accidents per year whit, + . 007 Underpass respect to other units of the same type and then examining all of the blalsatr 1 .. .:� 5�.� - .. •j • N • { .w _{{ , i-i i��«lam. •�:.�:• . ... 'door advertising devices? +, i A I made three studies of accidents an three high speed limited access expressways in bade County, Florida. q And over ghat peridd of time was data gathered to that and utilized for that study? • •' • A I had the accident- locations for all accidents for tine •, . year 1964 for 'the Palmetto Expressway, -fOr •the.itrth-South Express way and for the East-West Fxpreasway, some tines "'reFerzed' tc as, the Airport Expressway. A Q Nov, ws this study done using the same approaches and ' techniques you.had done with respect to the New York thiuway sad ' - the Carden State Parkway studies? . • A Yes. .. ; z:: ,• .•• :, •',. .. Q And you 'gathered the same kited of 'information in the same � • basic form? . A Yes. q • You performed correlation analysis and partial c6rrelatiol ; analysis with respect to. this? ' A Yes. Q Bised' on the study of the three expressways i-a* xiami, ..• Were you able to reach any opinion as to vhether there, was any �; •• statistical correlation between craffis accidents and locatiou'of ? i outdoor advcrt sing devices? A Yes* M. STCFFEL: Itm apin going to rgSister- for, the record the same objection to this' conclusion as Z have to the others: ; E COLEY: Overruled. i �Y�C ,•3i1 ,p I.Y•+;�: +', i I' Ai i�•,.j','ii'il• .. ••, ..✓. . - Y,.:14 •.f. ...i. i • . `:1 a s...;ari,. ,...t ... . f Igns for any one of the three bad& County expresWays. • Have there been any other studies done to ascertain �hethet there's any correlation between location, of ec=erclal or billboard' devices, and traffic accidents? advertising, _ . A Of this same type? • Q Yes? , A I don't Imoa of nay. . Q AIL right, have there' been any federal studies on this issue? ' A iTell, there has been a study by -the Federal Higbway .ublished in 1969 covering data •supplied by twenty Adminis t=a t3.on p _ , , , • . states covering sixty-nine hundred miles of interstate highway ears With respect to the.- over a period of approxiaatelq six y P locations of aeeidettts and 'Highway characteristics. • Q All right, and' do you recall approximately hcw many accidents were studied in that study? A ?here were approximately forty-five thousand accidents ist the total study. , Q Was ,correlation aralysis perfor.�.ed i.•� the same fashion as you described? A Yes, they performed a multiple correlation and partial_'., correlation in the same manner Which I perforeed the . WR . I am goingto Laterpose an objection hera the •sams a$ 0--1 oti•.er•,;�t, �„ add�,to^� thisis sdy a.ga�, i as to the earlier* one he had no thing to do vi th, , 1/4 TRZ COURT; Sustained as to ivc had nothing to• do with it' t , 2 R. IIOUZV. your Honor, may 1 ask one atQte v+es tioc► i h±e Simi twig of an offer of proof? 7119 COURT: You may. 'oil A.. "r (By Mr. He a TesPtct: to the What was the results wt rederal Highway study at to any correlation between outdoor ad. • vertLsitig devices and other devices? A A tobelusion? 6 And traffic accidents? M STOML06. So the record 13 clear, you noted our ob- TM COURT: He's making an offer.. • M; HOLM That. is an offer of proof. �ltt'_ �,��iD' are. -THE COMT: Yes. L A conclusion of the_ Federal Highway Administration study was that thire was no relationship betweew accidents and advertisiig signs- and .that in certain locations -accidint* signs ,*V'eire actually beneficial advertising signs were actually beneficial. MR. ROLIC: Ail right-, that's the end of the offer of proof. MM =RT-0 Offer of proof will be -rejected. .Q., (By Mr. Rolme) With• respect to - excuse me,. strike that. Were you asked to prepare a correlation study with respect to the relationship between traffic accidents And billboard locations on an urban city street with normal traffic- speeds? A Yes. q And where were you asked to oerform, that study? A Denver. Were'you able to perform such a study? • A No. Q Would you please state why? • A There are several reasons why-swch a study cannoc be per - Caroled, Humber one is you must have the precise lowitibn of each 09 Alm :Oh- L3 /jv-1 IMM3 rn] E031KC3 b:3 C ESO �� �:. I � � � -� _ I��•� � G � `�� �� �J ��� � ��!�1� h] v rr E-1 HL r71-11 �l�l�l D�J�1� DL1D'�� ������ F/ D F -1 F;_0 [U' t DDD_.�.�D FID ICA W., R- •w. 5 aDDD PL. -DDDDDD `// N.W. .�=,„-,.._ _� _ .-_ _rD / 1• . I . - o0DINGail MM fl 91 fl 50 F-1 ED HUE no HflFUJ00nn 1A _UMOIAL' PLAN,1.0 EEL . Nam I i WC-1 II � HE1111. WAPD DOO�o�DDoD� L . r__n � Fry 17­1 MIn [JUL) U, Ou E3F�3ESrjrj , CZ K3= 3 -1 F= NE Fja Fj 01� �•�.a[II� 0au W-3 UL a UEBd :g HE. 9L • a � � ��.�0 I C�3t� D�IU�� INV l�Cl _. DD°� Lop LIP AC41 C-X 14 6 // ALL OF INTERSTATE 95 IN UIE CITY OF MIM11. wr--... •,r ,a ..- •�tTs-,s�.w ?�.zT'"'+;� 4'_^ `s _t"'-II..*M•-)..:,,.,+r::- T`.y",'t ^.•?.;, �i.'i:� f'v •"• '-r •a::b, • xw_`-`Tr•'T r s ?.a1'�• , tP .t', tr.,_Y,;: F �,�- 1. t..Cs u.. •...i.�.} �y " aTi%.a.; Srws!tX'}" r �' A. �'•Gtz. �xPrP lsB.Y�iI?°«•r. —�,s:t > -�. •}fir...., �r". t..�1 zY i�,r:�",�,Sr-7 c+.i „ v.• -{'� -S q�`'::'•�r i:c*(t _ _ ✓- zy +. :lia "3_' 'i-' •,n as s,. �-tss.� x, n ' I ••" :ji' r `F'% .i ..> z i.: •nr'�.` '4 ""' _ �'"e fz '�„� �r .� •�-xi.,e: � fir--/. t--^r_'i': , �•-�—�i'��`�r` t: ...1,r•. �(L�+� -�.,. ,r � 1.i '',x' j-•L. t ,�L �.• �` k��r r,= v_ .�a.• ctr,•�47. �`- .'trli` :.'��:i F•Z.'•• a;F g,,s... �,n�i�aySa.aH,"n�r`sh':. += '3 ''•s �,-t, aJZ)'7s.�yiy".� It .Yz1S of«t l—IRK �I+._`�.%.,. :/ ja-l{ '�✓r �"'r r•• r . .n+-{ ; o'tw.:1.1'ti-'.."•, • F . _ _`q,• tit_ " �MM SFa�ji•`%L=-4_*•\ s+...►:-.s ^<iC� r : :.e. .:•.....Mu, "'iYif_a .r3._.{.,, •^i,. -a - / q�^: : '• i ?s•Z -i r - Tom' C„-, "^w? -'!,•'.'C .,.a,i.� :..:��! •rv`j, •r... is. ��,�"�1 `� 3i+7frS'.�!�,,.•.:4 i�rtl+"7:_ Y1�7 W:' �nn� :L..•'' 9.:i.-�±�w✓!-�. "'S:•L .f Y"?2-? �:'�...,. ,•: _va).=.;. s�`�.. •� �1'. e Y� -N :_ $' .�,[`F r�l:• -�: �`'; c.:: s.t�...� .-'�J`b:at. � .y «�s,• �,� '"zi �� =-�,A=`iw• C�r�- ,�y, �r7 i.•• s- •x. �: f t h.ti•„ x�t a3= c-- � ``•-. �s4:'.".tr-V^ •� ', I 1'�t..�tn i,•r,a'n..i-.l.�rl..i�..:��I", i%�?^.iF�.3r�tY',t'}. 1ti'.C•..: ...:arst.Y ., Y..,Y+e"Z�.. Y j-e..►.. x.•M-y/• ' - � .r..r �_��V.• -tom' � r�_ f" -�.+. A,<r• •'� y. .h ire-',i«.n•�: l' - 1r• LCf�:x; $.i.��. ._ .+� »Tr'T:� �y 4 � r `,•..,, w,>r "rl.w- .:_'.;,is •-»_-:,7i.::•a'F.`_-i't•. }ts1� '.t��}it 54' t:••;p.,? :3i r`� ii:.l.:tt�4t �� ;,r1•••y�z •'tx "„ t ' 3i x« �+ "-ems r•� "..."i'r"-,�tr-4• wt:.•y- c- r, yi }� , t sr +..� an Lr £ �� A r ~-ter ^r 3..)..-_.-.. -: - .:_...✓.. .at o• S: 1,.) •- wig r-U: :. N' v .6te.r.-i t�S, C'• '�_ 4c,�4. �t....'_�"re.}:T �J•r e x :`s I''a. s`j rti -'y' a % '- ' a'`.��,�"n•. •+." .i7t :! at+l u7li .' . ;..r ` t"�•"' ' K7, OC, -[ a �,•-- "'•:"Li'r '^".,-:y• .-x, r.tr :^rt ...r:» r.:coy_.,,,?�t-•:?,c,.�.•�c.:'►-.:��c •.••:Y-; .l Liwy'M ,+-#fit -IZ�-..-w..•f 1:--S' ,.'•- :�t i tj.,.- i -7 .. .n •, �: �.3; �• •.� •�`'-. ,: T= (7x+Yi Y' �i=r1sJ •L'.w.ro.'f,,....t. t'r.- "`.e 7•• T ik' •M-'.as •.,•`4... .x fie... 1 .5;'C- i'. l,!: {• "•v ''•cr +�.i t�•ta •� i ,{ ::,[`�j,.^ �'tls..,=1.e. s 8':'•s�"M•• �..y.���_r"'1-"�,,, L�tirr ^�_. � �•-•z :...��w�.'.e'y .:�i'�% ,�e.ei ��?YTi niy.ti; {CTS:c::�1Z• �•�[•'{�',,',��.'rw fir' �,c „•r=-r•�c. (-fns�4. �1_zrA k,.•,r: 'a. ,•:._ � �. &s-• ,.,i '+:.. cvfi. � _t.,,� rem': .� t �:..•7 �. ����.. [..---...�.�• -- . �--. ::3-;r - :tiM ;ar �a.Lii.�/ : L' �z =3.'. i.•- :i,. a. g�. .a. �'r � K-'.}:�. s� • _ k.:-+S_ '_ .t. x.✓-+ _a�` ,a;."rna....�. .._�.;. _ t-_. .i�+ .'{. :`�a. �;•.It 11 �,7"':; T•=• .•tri r� Aix: 1• _ t`;};; •.. 9s,... r^' .;. •.» _.a.^ -...• ++':X� t.•�!w fi.x..,.. . a.. - 7,,-I-:i j•,f.=-: ,. j- 4, +..--�,�'.,�''}.' M. +t''`' . :lam a,�� ... _.a.r. •:,,f. ..i">:A..••� = ..ti. •':F"d 'tea k_'.: ■, ...,: .a���'3. v„ f T,ai _ �' r. fit'•-7 ,` !,'},.f.-^`•&. •'. -' �' i s� -i tY...;. '�•n i• . �t'*T3:zx... 1::�°''i_cL-' ��J.L 2�.•- _.. eY-r:r�?. ':^ "� - t ex-_:d.r^S:i.'„ =:'i" f'^y,,�1 Rn ttrj`..''s-' fn�i.' _ .•; v'C,•�"t'3:, _-.-;-�tr•' -..:s):..r,..,�'.4,._�w•,;�t', zt •vim �: it= .:,.. s �t •'� «�f r.'�<<7t '�`7.„"., •�••.• o- '"='•--r•.1 ti ,-� s„�: �-i�'"_'•-.. ). �'" + ta: : f �". ) 7.,.if �..t ,: ,� c,.i T }' � - _ t�'•.,� _ :� '� _ _.r •'J a, R., yam.- "V". �Y.3i��. 5i•. fir. !c.. w�- .x i"' s'. '?n's'.'^"` +x�_-''fis' w.,� 1e�'+�:�) �*-.>. �2..�i"�`{i', _'t 'A==-i'`�`�=-Sa.. e.� �r.�' '�.z �=�.�.'^_'`•s'r= _a.�.c.r r"t tTs c��r...'� �.�,t .ma's �.F �.;�,;•,.�z'Sy"� �«r�'•:'i-+'!.i'.a7��:�G✓.,�`+•-t .'il�'7 r R�.n��4 •`J'i..1� :�� ..::yc�;�ts: i;;.`-�•:-"•.�Lw•�:N f"_'. '�T��•e'.�,+.:�y rt •,. ".f' C3 i : "a"r '�. x��'`•'- -..-r . ..1 s d; , r +�.. 7 ,ir.• .2. .: Z' ^ ,F _'-,-� "ti..- _::l +� .Z,.�"ra• �a 'v-v„•-•�_T..-r{ �:. L•;'.]. ";,^�!"'.y;T. lj('�..9 �la.li•w� '\.r., ^-r.� K.,ri 53 t• :y' S+C..-.' - '^i T T •6 a=� �i 7i�U-r' •i:#�j_�� ,...��-t..:r�}!. F.�:�:Gti�ft,n...�,�.+.,; w...l.. 1. ,�rti: i^ � 7_ •.-� .•N !.► T.c•'•'�.;7 �47,:•�S'• ��-, I.+.f da�;.�.,j.,,, $:'`t ram: yyr� 4•:•!� �•C:.:lt;s��•)_:yj'.pqns�L`[i:,=*�.-';,,ti�'"t•si;'•.,•^...'^',,.7ti `�•tir 1 �. -'ri•:'t�% �rw�::i•1z.-rrpii? vao'��y fit_ �.:� .r,.-.=y �t �� -� :ti ' � _ a`3`:+_.,�-,.� '"'zc•:' � F : >:�.... - � y _ C� �. �.:F ' rF"�'- � { -� :-n-t. iL . ,a.x? � ~ . Il`rL. n'� � r S' � � • 1c- y rq F-"r, =cam .d:3 �lY'r xi-? u r� Zw. iza•_a :ej,- � t� '� si �z) st•.yr r•-p �" •-a-"" $.'"r wti,,c !ii' y �v '� ���s���l�__.��,+ .+ ,•r __. �t=i,',. ��� f'�•s) .i,> � r•.s r.'�-+',�#3':41'tLr'r �_� n�' ( ,•-....1'�'z4�'�,t-:r..nrer. '4'`S'T•�, `a' z«J:.,1�.�-tPc..z��"s=`L yit-r�•.. ln� -�_.. t °}.;]�£`)•,.�. Bi-°"#�'c�._�.""' ��%' lY.r�cT•�:�a.,,.. 'ka�]Tr� ��� .�� � s. .ic�'+�"``�.�wza�"Gt{rC s..L�:.Y...z- �`� r y cV OD What the ordinance would do 40t,anges to Miami's signordinance would keep signs confined to heavily industrial and commercial areas, Red indicates �.tlt ce si3cts are and. not allowed. 1) A11uw them to face expressways with 600 feet of ' - Yellow where signs are allowed. the right-of-way; 2) Increase their triaxinttun he from 3Q to 50 'feet Spacing, Zoning, Existing Signs, SE erely as -measured from the crown of the expressways or Limited Buildable Sign a'iahts: 65 feet as measured from the nearest adjacent local' road;> Signs will be allowed on only 3.1 miles ••f 3) Require 1,500 feet of space between expressway sign; 1-95, Scale 1j2r« _ 12tO Et• and 1,000 feet bawc-en those on federal -aid Primary highways, su-n as South Dixie Highway and Tainiam'. Trail; 4) Maintain the 750-square-400t size limit on all signs, e INTE14—OPPICE MitM RANDUM r� MAYOR MAURICE A. FERPt Wit: March $, 1985 wit Special Tranagr pt ALP H G. ONCIE raa+ ty Clerk RtrRNte:: ENCLOSURES. Enclosed herein please find an excerpt from the minutes of the City Commission meeting of February•28, 1985, which this office has completed upon your request. you have any questions, please call. RG0:sl ENC: a/s cc: Honorable Members of the City Commission r pRGpOSgD ORDINANCE: AMEND SEC. 2026 ORD. 9500 StCH30 BILLSCARDSo SPACINC, NgICNT5, HTC. AL6N0 LIMITED ACCESS :w.w.r.+.�a.+rws�saaca��r+wrc«.wu+crr.�s..rays+r.ww�cmawrirra+..r.wrrwswww+rrrw+r.aarc�w.rwwwrs+�wwrr�r+wa Mayor perre. Now we're on item number 1, which is properly before us. Mrs. Manager, I think the proper procedure here is for the administration to present this case and the proponents make a statement and the opponents will then slake a statement. Just to we can get time frames here) how many of you are here on this item 1? please raise your hand. How many of you wish to speak on this first reading? I'm sorry, on the second reading. How many wish to speak, raise your hands please. MAYOR COUNTS HANDS. I see twelve speakers. Let's proceed then. Will the administration present its position? Mr. George Knox: Mr. Mayor, if I may for one second. My name is George Knox. May I respectfully request that the staff check with Commissioner Carollo's office. It's my understanding that this is a matter about which he has sufficient interest to want to cast his vote. Would it be possible to check his office? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Knox, as I understand it, Commissioner Carollo will be here at 11:00 and we will defer final conclusion if he is not here by the time we get to vote. My guess is that with twelve speakers, you have well over an hour and a half of discussion going on before we come to a vote. As I understand it, Commissioner Carollo will be here _ by that time. If he's not here, out of courtesy to him, we will then hold it up until he is here this afternoon for a final vote. Mr. Knox: Thank you, sir. Mr. Plummer: Let's hear from the staff first. Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: Just to refresh your memory. As you know, this item has been before the Commission on different occasions. It has been going back to the Planning Advisory Board for recommendations. There are three major issues that we're going to bring today that we believe are important, and Mr. Whipple, from the Planning Department, will go over the presentation. The three major points that we want to impress on you today is first, we believe that having billboards on expressways, as proposed by the people.._.. representing the billboard industry, will have a very negative effect on the area. First, because it will have an effect on the safety of people traveling in those areas. As you know, billboards are designed to attract attention. That's the main purpose for them. We're proposing, through this amendment from the billboard industry to have them placed in roads that are very congested and in which people travel at very high speed. The second item that I want to bring to your attention in the discussion is that the billboards, if placed as proposed, will have a very detrimental effect on the image of the City, These are the roads taken by people that come to the City for the first time. These are the roads taken by people coming through the City_ every day: and they will be placed in areas where we have a beautiful skyline or a view of the waterfront, The item that We want to bring to your attention is that by placing these billboards in the areas being proposed, they $I Fe0ruary 28, will have a Specific iMpact on tnd dommunity in which they are placed. With that, Mr. Whipple will Make the presentati0h now in Mbre detail. Mr. Richard Whipple! Mayor and menbers of the C=tiss oh, Richard Whipple, Chief of the Land Development Divitioh, Planning Department. 1'd like to start by briefly giving a little bit of the history, so that you understand how we got to this point today. As the Commission night remember, the Planning Department has been amending the new Zoning ordinance, as necessary to cover things that we hissed or tc readjust things that should have been readjusted, one of these items was an oversight in the drafting of the ordinance and that it did not set forth a maximum helgh' limit for signs. it also there was COnfusion in the writing with respect to the number of faces of billboards that could be on a site. We, therefore, processed amendment before this Commission by which to correct these oversights in ordinance number 9500. In doing so, however, each time that these items came to the Commission for their consideration, there were some questions raised by the billboard industry and this Commission saw fit to refer the item back for the department to consider those items that the industry brought forward. These were done in a various manner. Finally, it was admitted that the billboard industry, although they had talked about angles and facings and things like that, what the industry wanted was permission to allow billboards along I-95 and other expressways in the City that have been prohibited since 1965. Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, Dick, I see that the television cameras are not taking any of this. Would you mind terribly \ if you take these television lights off? Mr. Manager, can you help us please? Can somebody help us? Mr. Whipple: In 1965 we passed a very comprehensive set of sign regulations of which there's prohibition within 600 feet of an expressway was incorporated. What is being asked today through this amendment is that they now be permitted and that they be permitted with spacing. Needless to say, as Mr. Rodriguez has indicated, the department is opposed to this changing of the law. We feel it is inappropriate. Mr. Dawkins: What's inappropriate? Mr. Whipple: That's what I'm getting into, Commissioner Dawkins. As Mr. Rodriguez has indicated, the signs along the interstate with the speeds and the congestion that exists, is a potential hazard. The signs are intended to distract drivers and when a driver takes his eyes off the road, there is a potential danger and possible accident that could happen in that instance. I don't believe there needs to be too much detail on that. As to the amenities or the esthetics of the community and the image of the community,'" we have a few slides, which I'd like to show you. They'll be fairly quick._ I'll not comment on each individual one. They're in two sections. The first series is a number of slides, which are taken from the expressway of the views around the City. These are selected areas where billboards would be permitted, In other words, as you look at the slides and you see that say, downtown in the background, you can imagine that right in front of the position of the camera, there could be a billboard, if this ordinance is passed. The second part is a number of slides which show the types of billboards which is now the type that is being erected around the country and elsewhere in Dade County. Most of these slides were taken along the Palmetto Expressway in the incorporated areas of Hialeah, Hialeah Gardens, Medley, on the northern end of the Palmetto and the point of all this to show you that we do not believe the City of M am needs this image, We believe that we are looked at as a very clean, as a very beautiful., as a very era ' + open City► To ihtrod uce this kind of activity along our expresswaya and our entrandeway5 to the City, we feel can only be damagingt Mr. Dawkins: Before you start your slides, 1 need some informations please- When you wane preparing for thin, did you do a research to find out the number Of accidents that were caused on 1.40 between Tampa and Orlando to show me that it was dangerous and compare it against the numbers than were on 1-95 here. Did you do a study determining how many accidents occurred on 75 between Tampa and Ocala, therefore giving me some data on which to base your theory that it's unsafe. bid you also do a study of the number of accidents that occurred on 95 going from Jacksonville to Georgia, so therefore, when you tell me that it's unsafe, that these sign boards are unsafe, that you have some empirical data for me to look at and then tell me how many accidents have occurred on -what is it that goes by the Miami Herald? 1- 12 or 3-1 Mr. Whipple: 395- Mr. Dawkins: 395, tell me how many accidents occur at 395 right there by Biscayne Boulevard where you have four signs 'sticking right up by the expressway over the building where the Urban League is. Mr. Whipple: Point number one, we did not make a statement of unsafe. We pointed out that there was a potential hazard involved because of the distraction. To answer your question specifically about 1-4 and I-95 and I-10 in Jacksonville and things like that, to my knowledge there has been no studies done on that since late 1960's where there was a study done on the New York throughway. We didn't elect to bring that up and we only elect to suggest that the mere idea of outdoor advertising is to attract somebody's attention. That's their-, business; that's the product they're selling. For you or I going along I-95 at 55 miles per hour, take our eyes off the road, which we shouldn't; I'm suggesting that constitutes a potential hazard. I do not have any specific numbers as you have suggested. Mr. Dawkins: Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Are you going to give us the slide presentation now? Could we cut off the lights please? Is that a sign? Mr. Whipple: No, sir, as I indicated, I just want to take us through a series of views of the City. Of course, this is the one slide that you could not put a`billboard in front of, I believe, they wouldn't float on the river. They would probably sink. But as we drive along our expressways, and ­ if if you want the location of any of these signs, I'd be glad'` to give you an indication where they're at. For instance, this I believe is along I-395, looking toward the downtown. These are again random shots going around the ranch. You could see where the signs could be placed over in the left hand side, blocking some of the view and also signs beyond the expressway, which would block some of the views and' vistas in the City_. This is 195, heading toward the Julia Tuttle Causeway and our new apartment development that exists in that area. As you may remember the south side of the expressway at this location is zoned commercial and would allow billboards which could have shut these views and vistas of the City. I'm running through these quickly, because they are in a way repetitious as we get in closer downtown, you'll find a vast area that also :has a potential between 1-95 and the downtown before you get to the'downtpwn turn-off in the industrial areas there, which billboards Could be erected. Next to the ramp in front of 0P new parXing garage and the cultural center. Coming. to a position here that 1'd like to call your attention to Just as a way of illustratingo this is a Shot -1111 get to it yet- this is a shot from 1-95 from a northbound dirtot 6m looking toward 8th Street. On the left hand aide of the slide in the way far background you'll see the Cult Station at the Trail and 1-55. This is a aouthbound direction of the sable location showing the Cult Station at the Trail, You canna see some of the buildings of the 8rickell Avenue area and some of the 'buildings dawn along South 8ayshore Drive and Coral Way. This is what we might see at a location such as that. Mayor Ferre: Where is that photograph? Mr. Plummer., 8th Street. Mayor Ferre: No, the previous one. Do you want to go back to the previous one? Where is that? Mr. Whipple: This is one of the signs out on the Palmetto expressway. Mayor Ferre: This is in Dade County? Mr. Whipple: Dade County, Hialeah, Hialeah Gardens, Medley area, not in the unincorporated area of Dade County. Mayor Ferre: Does the unincorporated area of have similar restrictions to what we have? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: So, this is only in Hialeah, because Hialeah obviously permits this. Is that it? Mr. Whipple: Yes. Mr. Pierce: Mr. Mayor, just for the record, up until July, I believe, of 1983, Dade County had an ordinance on its books that prohibited the expressway signs in both the municipalities and in the unincorporated areas. They amended that ordinance at -that time removing the restriction within the municipalities. Mr. Whipple: Here are a couple of slides- that show some of our non -conforming billboards that are located in the City that have not been removed. You can see how they mar the entrances and the landscape of our City. The next picture is just to show the proliferation and the impact of the signs if erected in Miami, such as they have been out in Hialeah, Medley and that area. You see the signs are quite ingenious, quite large, quite high, quite distracting. if there isn't sufficient land area to put up four poles, they..,.. �T put up one pole and hang it over the top of another building,, a triangle, three sided billboard. Point being, we do not believe that the City of Miami needs this. We believe this is a poor image to set before the public and before our tourists and our visitors. That's why we are very much opposed to the inclusion of additional billboards in the City. That is not to say, however, that we are. opposed to billboards. Part of the comprehensive sign reguations that Were prepared in 145 and which we've been using since that time, which- seem to be quite workable and reasoniaole, was to establish billboards as a commercial use. DiX e we do with any use in a zoning ordinance, we recommended and adopted where these uses should go, These uses do have a proper pla-ce in the City of Miami in. a properly zoned districts, those being the liberal commercial districts or the industrial districts, not the commercial residential districts, which .might have an adverse impact when residential development did occur on those districts, or where there is so much residential deveiepmont abutting, those CP districts. So we are not opposed to billboards There's places forK thee. As you've reed, there are a number of signs in this City. We don't have an ekadt Number, but we imagine it's around 600 of the large boards, We believe that's sufficient toning, suf fiCient use, reasonable use, properly regulated Arid that the ordinance should not be amended to allow more. Mr. Plummer,. Mr. Whipple, let me ask you this question. Understanding your last statement that you are not opposed to billboards, that there is a place for them and we do have rhea, I have to question the validity of your prior statement of saying that it was a blight. A blight is a blight wherever it exists. If you have them, for ekarmple, on U8-1. There are a number of billboards on US-1, which is a main arterial. It carries as much or more traffic than I. 95 through the City. So I find a conflict in your two statementsb one, that they are a blight, yet you feel that you are not opposed to billboards; there is a place for them, which I assume to think you do approve them. I find a conflict in your statement. Would you speak to that? Mr. Whipple: Is that the first time I've ever had a conflicting statement? Mr. Plummer: No, sir, it's not the first, but it's the first time I've reminded you. Mr. Whipple: I don't believe there is any conflict there. The way you stated it sounds like there is, but there really isn't. The point is we, a number of people may dislike billboards completely. Perhaps I'm even one of them, but as a Planner or as an administrator to the zoning ordinance, we feel, unless told otherwise by the legislative body that we work for, that there is a place for billboards in the community and we find, we locate them in places where we feel that they will be !least objectionable and least burdensome on the community. That's what we have done. So, I really don't see that there is a conflict. Mr. Plummer: O.K., I understand what you're saying, but I also have to as far as the visual blight or to the i environmental bright, but doesn't the same thing exist in reference to safety? Mr. Whipple: To some degree, yes, this is a fact. However, you had ample different opportunities with respect to billboards when you're talking about the build up of urban cities. You have stop signs, you have traffic lights, you have slower traffic, you have the visual aspect of the pedestrians ability to see signs and therefore, yes, it applies, but not to. the degree it would along an interstate highway going 55 or 65 miles an hour. _ Mr. Plummer: 65 miles an hour, I think, is illegal. I'm not sure of that". Mr. Whipple: I thought I'd throw it in. Mr. Plummer: Knowing you, I understand. Mayor Ferre: Are we ready for the presentation by the .... Mr, Whipple; I was just going to say I believe there's other people that would like to speak; if you have any questiQn3 or I'll return. Mayor Ferrell , I know that. Are there other department people that want to speak'' Is that what you said? Mr, Plummer. have some questions of the department, Mr, Mayor, I'll do them now, or I'll do them afterwards; whatever you wish, Mayor Ferret You do what you watt. Mr. Mummer; Let me try to Make it brief. Mr. Whipple, as it stands this ordinande before us today, am I dorredt in assuming this would establish whetter regardlesa of the numbera that are applied in this ordinance today, wouldn't thia establish some regulation that doesn't eatist today such as spading, eueyh as distance, such as height that our ordinance doea not speak to today? Is that correct? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Sasically, Mr. Mayor, that's the basis of the questions. I can go into them later. Mayor Ferret All right, we will now hear froth t he proponents, Mr. Knox. Mr. George Knox: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my name is George F. Knox. I am attorney and member of the law firm of Long, Knox, and Mays located at 4770 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 970, 576-77770 'Mr. Plummer: You are no briefer than when you were City Attorney. Mr. Knox: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, the issue, while emotional is relatively simple. Our presentation is not going to be much longer than the Gettysberg Address, which I believe is twelve minutes. The issue is as simple \ as the constitution of the United States of America and the policy of the State of Florida. The question before this Commission involves fundamental fairness, the consistent application of both City of Miami and State policy, and the _ question of equal protection of the laws. There is a phenomenon that exists throughout our country that has. led to, for example, the establishment in some folks' opinicn that the City of Pittsburgh is among the most livable cities in the United States of America. The fact is tha. Pittsburgh, in spite of that characterization, its citizens have to live with soot and smoke and all of the incidents that are required to support and sustain the major industry in Pittsburgh. Jacksonville, I believe, enjoyed in this same survey, a ranking of 48, which was about four positions ahead of Miami, and for those of you who know and love Jacksonville, the citizens of Jacksonville must contend with smoke and paper mills and the foul odor that the ma_n industries in Florida, in Jacksonville must provide to the citizens. In South Florida the major industry is. tourism. It's attitude of my clients that tourism must be supported by its citizens. In our great cities, there is a cooperation between the government and the private sector,.- which is designed to support the major industry. The legislature of the State of Florida, in its wisdor, announced its policy concerning outdoor advertising. I will read from the legislative intent of the State of Florida, when the new act was adopted in 1984. That intent was to enhance the economic well being of the State by promoting tourist oriented businesses, such as public accommodations, vehicle services, attractions, camp grounds, parks and recreational areas, and to promote points of scenic,' historic, cultural, and educational interests. We dare say further that the policy of the City of Miami is that there is an ability to place outdoor advertising along I-95 and. the other limited access highways because they are there. There is no evidence that the City has :trade any attempts tv remove them. . Therefore, the question is whether or nog those incumbent privileged persons who are now perMitted. to advertise along I-95', gain some unfair advantage without an• rational basis against those who would 5veR to do that, There has peen, some discuss cn about the question of safety. The facts do mot bear out AMY assertion that the PlAdeWt of outdoor advertising iffiPadtg Upon safety. `here was a major trial in California three YeAP8 ago, where the question of safety arose. An expert witness by the name of Dr. E r n a S t f3landhe testified. He testified about expressways in Miami. I will read from the official record his comments. First, the witness testified that he Made three studies of accidents On three high speed, limited Access highways in Dade County, Florida, the Palftetto Expressway, the so-called north/south expresswayo and the east/west expressway, sometimes referred to as the airport expressway. This expert's conclusion was that there was no relationship between accidents and advertising along those highway$- That witness also pointed out that there was a federal highway administration study covering 6t90o miles and 45#000 accidents, The conclusion of the federal highway administration study was that there was no relationship between accidents and advertising signs and that in certain locations, advertising signs were actually beneficial. That witness was quoting from a study which was done in the form of a research and development report by the Federal Highway Administration Bureau of Public Records, both divisions of the United States Department of Transportation. Tha-t finding was, and 1 quote: "The results indicate that commercial signs improve safety." And I close my quote. There is no essential difference between outdoor advertising signs along thoroughfares and those along interstate highways. Therefore,, there is no rational basis in the law to deprive individuals of the opportunity for so long as that activity is permitted from placing sings in an industrial zone with proper regulation pursuant to the policy of the State of Florida and the policy of the City of Miami. There is a distinct, legal, and practical difference between a prohibition, a ban, and regulation, if in fact there are overwhelming aesthetic considerations associated with the placement of outdoor advertising, then this Commission may adopt a policy of prohibiting them. Absent such a policy, then there may be some serious question about whether there may be the selective classification which could result in sore discriminations of persons being deprived of a privilege that others enjoy. Finally, the proposed ordinance is sensitive to questions of aesthetics. It is sensitive to questions of proliferation, and represents a reasonable regulation of a permissible activity within the City of Miami. Finally, we urge that this Commission look at this whole question as an opportunity to once again occupy the vanguard and the cutting edge of promoting tourism and between the government and the private sector, there may be creative constructive, productive, and perhaps even economically beneficial ways in order to carry out the objective of the ordinance. Finally, we urge the Commission to conform to the policy of the State of Florida to use outdoor advertising as a legitimate tool to promote our attractions, to_ -provide information to strangers to our community and to otherwise be consistent with promoting tourism in our community and unless, there are some questions we thank you very much and we would respectfully reserve some time for our rebuttal if necessary or appropriate. Mayor Ferre; Mr. Knox, I thank you and you of course, wi'l have the right to rebut and we will give you ample timer How much time has elap3ed? Mrs. Matty Hirai; Eight minutes, Mayor Ferre; Bight minutes, iQ yQu are four minutes short of the Gettysberg AdOreost even though I don't thinly the Gettysterg Addre3; was twelve minutes, You will have ample time, because I'm giure the oppqzition will taXe more than eight minutes. As I remember countings there were at least a d62en people who wanted to speak• is there any particular ordetA or is there anybody who has established.,,? Mr,. Freeman, the Chair recognizes you. . Mr. ( yLetter y pPreyetbatl:i 'Thank yoqur�(t Mayor and Commissioners, i+m Letter Freeman, I live at 2 1 80 i 6 t Mayor Ferret Mr. Freeman, before we, I need to establish time perimeters before anybody speaks. So, have you marshaled all of the speakers that are in opposition or some of them? Mr. Freeman: It would be impossible to marshal all the speakers that are in opposition, Mayor, but we've done our, best, � Mayor Ferre: How many speakers do you have? Mr. Freeman: I have about eight, I think, and I'm not sure they are all here. Mayor Ferret I counted twelve, so that means that there are other people that are not. Let's have a show of hands again of people who wish to speak on this issue to address the Commission. MAYOR COUNTS HANDS. Sixteen, how many of the sixteen are for the ordinance in the public. No, no, people who raised their hands to be a speaker, how many of the speakers that are for the ordinance, would like to speak. . MAYOR COUNTS HANDS. Three proponents, so I assume the other thirteen are opponents. Now, let me ask you this question. Does anybody need more than three minutes? Mr. Freeman: I don't think so in our group, Mayor. Mayor Ferre: O.K., so we'll go on a three minute basis and you can proceed. Mr. Freeman: Thank you, Mayor and Commissioners, I'm Lester Freeman. I live at 2180 Brickell in Miami. I'm here today with an informal coalition of Miamians to support the recommendations of the Planning Department. We are not here to ban billboards. We are here simply to reinforce the support of fair regulations of Dillboards, which this City put into place almost twenty years ago. This regulation has been consistent with the goals for all elements of our community, economic progress, neighborhood tranquility, and environmental protection. The potential conflicts between the interests in our community were worked out at that time. All the various community assets have been enhanced in this regulatory climate in the ensuing years. In our view there's simply is no justification for relaxation of the regulations. There doesn't seem to be any broad demand for: - relaxation. There doesn't seem to be any demonstration of great need in the community for relaxation, nor does there in fact seem to: be any great potential value in it for the entire community. Therefore, we urge you to let this proposal die today. The citizens of Miami have indicated absolutely no mandate for change. Our coalition includes a mixture of interests. Several of them are going to speak briefly for three minutes from variant points of view. Most of our group, however, will not speak. But I would like to, just once again, ask them, those that are in favor of letting this proposition die today, to rare their hands so you will see that they are here. Our first speaker s' a gentleman well known to all of you, one of our great civic leaders: one of these who believes in this community' as great as anyone we know because he has a long family heritage here and that's Lester Pancoast, Mayor Ferre: 4e5ter-, there is a Question hare. As recall, you do live in Coconut Grove. 2 Mr. Freeman! I live in the City of Miami on grickell. Mr. Lester Pant-6aSt! Mrs. ' Mayor and Commisaioners, twenty years ago a man created An eXpre$sway system, Which for the first time gave us a high level view of the City of Miami Mr. Carollo: ftcuse me, Mr. panC oast, please, if I may ask all the speakers Vhen they come up if they can give their, address also besides their games, and give their home address So we can know who live in the City of Miami and who do Moto please? Mr. Pancoast: My place of work and my place of residence are bath in the City of Miami. We got a high level view of the City of Miami for the first time. I shocked a lot of us and thrilled a lot of us because we found out even the west side of our downtown skyline was quite fascinating and has grown enormously since. Ten years ago nature dealt us s terrible blow. Nature took away the coconut palms, which were a major symbol of this City. Now man is considering selling out the clarity of that view, even without its symbols. I question whether it's intelligent to worry about the look of a garbage pile in our communities and our neighborhoods if we are going to allow another kind of garbage to be thrown up high above everybody. Neighborhoods affect small numbers of people, but these expressways affect absolutely all of us. The voters of Miami put their trust in your intelligence and we do not understand why this is even coming up for consideration today. U.S.-1 mentioned earlier by you,' J.L., has long been a sad failure in the -� City of Miami, largely because of the outburst of signs upon \ it. Biscayne Boulevard staggers under the weight of enormous signs which really sap it of any quality it might claim in certain areas. The clarity of this view is worth much more than the effect of Miss America or "Miami Vice," the positive side of that. The cities that have had this problem are desperately trying to get out from under it, and we're considering taking it on as a yoke. Houston, Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Little Rock, which has gotten a lot bigger than you may remember, the rock is bigger now; San Diego, Seattle, all of these cities are desperately trying to undo what you gentlemen are considering doing today. Mr. Freeman: Mrs. Alice Wainwright, former Commissioner, who introduced the existing regulations. Mayor Ferre: While Mrs. Wainwright is walking up, let me say that the time mechanism, the lights_ are not working, but the time clock is working and we're keeping a record. I would ask the Clerk to let me know by waiving at me or otherwise when the three minutes are up. Mrs. Wainwright, we are always honored with your presence. I can think of no other person that has served with more courage and dignity, and diligence than you did this City in the years that you were a City of -Miami Commissioner. We are always honored with anything th'at you are involved in. Mrs. Alice Wainwright: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for your,very gracious remarWs. For the record, my name is Alice '0anwright. My address is 3601 Bay View Road, Coconut Grove. Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, I wish to speak briefly why I'm opposed to the amendment before you today. I want to very briefly rebut a remark my distinguished attorney eolleague, Mr. Knox, He spoke about fairness. He mentioned that signs, billboards are visible from the present 1-95 expressway, but I'm not sure he's familiar with the ordinance. Those signs do not face I-95, They Face the side streets upon which they are located, Az t has been said, I had the pleasure of introducing this Present ordinance in 1965. We believe that it has served khe City well; that it was In the public interest- I thi-I;; it is worth cotbMenting that ordinance passed the Cortmittlon by unahilOus vote, Two factors brought us into consideration about banning billboards al6hg the expressway. First was safety. I also want to say that the Atteridan Association of Ardhtects did a domplete study on the entire billboard issue nationally. Safety was one of the factors which they felt was an element in regulating sighs. Ihenw of courses a very important consideration was esthetics. We believe that there should be an unobstructed view of the City's skyline. It was impressive then; it is more impressive now. Many of you on the Commission have added to the dignity and the site and the view of that skyline. We don't want to see you undo that. We felt that wherever was appropriate, Miami's tropical atmosphere should be preserved to promote tourism. Heaven knows we need tourists, Mr. pancoast has referred to regulations in cities such as San Francisco, Honolulu, and the State.of Vermont. Those places have a booming tourist industry, one that we would do well to emulate. Miami's present sign ordinance is not an arbitrary ordinance. The planning Department held many workshops attended by members of the outdoor advertising industry as well as planners, architects, and members of the business community. Some of those people are here today who participated in those workshops. On the Commissionlevel, .we had two special evening meetings devoted entirely to the ordinance, and we hammered out agreements that the industry was happy with then, and which we felt were reasonable. Under the ordinance that we adopted in 1965 and as Mr. Whipple mentioned, there are hundreds of sign locations now in the City of Miami that give an opportunity to advertise goods and services. I'm not sure that everybody here is aware of the broad base of the opposition to having billboards on the expressway. Yesterday, I had a great many telephone calls from strangers, people that I don't know at all, people that had read the articles in the press, and people that had seen the television coverage. They care about Miami. Some of those people I believe are here today. I shall give you a brief sampling of some of their comments. A realtor, who is a native Miamian, said that he. was indignant that this issue would be seriously considered at this time. He said if the Commission permits billboards in the expressway, those Commissioners who vote for it should be tarred and feathered. An old lady neighbor of mine, who is 91 years old, said as I left today, "Alice, give them hell." I want to finally conclude by saying that you can't argue with success. We believe that the present ordinance on the books is a success. We feel that it would be against the public interest of the City of Miami on its image to the touring community and to our visitors people that have traveled all around the world, and who are sensitive to beauty to change the gateway to Miami, which I- 95 is. Therefore, I do hope that this amendment is not passed today because in my own view, it would be a giant step backwards and the results would be an irreparable — damage to the City of Miami. Thank you. APPLAUSE. _ Mr. Freeman: Mr. Seth Gordon, Director of Public Affairs, Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Seth Gordon: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Seth Gordon, Director of Public Affairs, Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber generally, and almost always really, supports the outdoor advertising industry, mainly for al. the good reasons that George Knox listed earlier this corning. fast ' year, when there was a proposal in Tallahassee to drastically limit the outdoor advertising industry in Florida, we Worked with the industry to protect their ability to operate and perform the good public service that they generally perform, Local billboard cocpanies are honored members of the Chamber of Commerce We don't like to be in a pcsiYicn Qf not supporting our gcod ;embers, but this is one or those rare tines, a"A l told 5ne of th4 fellows frore one of the companies in ;.he lobby earilLsr said "i think that 9q% of the tide, we'i always to with your but every now and then, -there'd going to be a tm'me wheal 'Oe think that we can't, and this is one those ties.�� die would just ask you not to lift the restridti6ha on that ver=, limited portion of our community along interstate 05, whe.- we think: it's not appropriate for that kind of operation. We think it's true of so Many other types of businesses, No matter how valid a business night tes it Can't operate -everywhere. We don't let people operate on tl;e beach iw Miatli Beach. We don't let airports exist in suburban neighborhoods, there are all sorts of* instances where a legitimate, valid, honorable producti•:e business shouldn't be allowed to operate; and, we think this is one of those times. Mayor Ferret, Mr. Goruon, let me ask you. Are you here - representing yourself or the Chamber of Commerce? Me. Gordon: The Chamber of Commerce. Mayor Ferre: So the Chamber on this? Mr. Gordon: Yes, sir. Mr. Freeman: Mr. Dan Paul, Places. has taken an official position representing Arts in Public Mr. Dan Paul: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my nace is Dan Paul. My office address is 100 S. Biscayne Boulevard; my home address is 19 Star :sland, Miami Beach:. I too can't believe that the City of Miami is really serious about relaxing billboard restrictions. I re=ember the original fight, which Mrs. Wainwrignt led to get the Boulevard clear of billboards. In fact, one of the big arguments for passing the $39,000,000 ;arks for people bond issue was to get rid of that great sea of billboards that went along Biscayne Boulevard over or. the port side. In fact, if the Commission will remember, he campaign theme as a matter of fact of that bond issue, showed all of the citizens committee lined 'up in front cf that billboard and said "To remove this, pass the parks for people bond issue." The idea of thinking now about having a proliferation of billboards on the expressways and major- exits into Miami, I think is unthinkable. Miami doesn't nerd to be ugly. We're doing every effort we can to improve the looks of this City. This would be a great step bankward. one other th4 ng I war;, to call to your attention, mentioned y you, Cc=missioner Plummer. That is these restrictions in this supposez ordinance of 1500 feet on either silo will nct prevent proliferation. I doubt seriously the: if you pass this ordinance, that those restrictions wi:: hold up, in court.,. It will just be the second step for the billboart companies to go to court and say that this discri=inates, and in fact, Mr. Knox has- already alluded to that, that this discriminates in favor of one billboar: company as against another, who may have property tied up. If you are going to permit billboards, you don't have any j:;stifiable reason, for making them 1500 feet apart. So ypu w_tl have them gust as thick as they can erect them along to expressway in the next five or six years you are very lik:.y to ha, the.. think that's, something you ought to seriously consider, because once you open the door and permit billboards to be erected, limiting them is almost an imTossibilit,:.. 1 cite no better authority than that from Me, Knox. ,In fact, I think What we ought to be doing, is locr:i,ng at the -existing ordinances that we have that permit billboards anywhere i; this City of Miami and deter-.;*ning ,-,thether ornot we shouldn't be adopting a program to phaa- those Pk; like the program we adopted along Biscayne 5owlovrd which :ire frage FM Id keeps getting extended and eXteCded and extended. I hope I live in this area long enough to finally see the ordinance that !firs+ Wainwright put into effect actually cotee in fruition in those time teaches not tc be eXt=tided. I strongly urge you not to open the door for any further billboards in the City of Miami, 'Thank you, Mayas; Ferre! Mr. Paul, I'd like to give you this photograph. You will notioe that one of your favorite clients, the Miami Herald doesn't agree with you in using billboard advertising. Mr. Paul: I'm in favor of (INAUDIBLE). Mr. Carollo: Wait a minute. Did I understand you correctly, Mr, Paul, that you are going 'to endorse- one of the motions that I'm going to make very soon to apply the same rules and regulations that we do to some other industries to this one here that I passed to my colleagues, the newspaper ads. Mr. Paul: Absolutely! Mr. Carollo: O.K., then I'll call on you at the appropriate time to support it. Mr. Freeman: The next speaker is well known to you, past president of the Miami Board of Realtcrs, past member of this Commission, Ms. Rose Gordon. Mayor Ferre: Let me say also that we're always honored to have our former colleague, Rose Gordon. Sometimes she and I were on opposite sides of the fence on issues, but I must say that I've never served with anybody with more intensity and with someone who expouses noble causes with stronger vigor than Rose, and Rose, we're always honored to have you here. Ms. Rose Gordon: Thank you, Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Rose Gordon. I live at 1890 South Bayshorte Drive. I have a real estate office at 2902 Biscayne Boulevard. I'm really pleased that I have the opportunity to address you today with regard to the history of the ordinance, because I also played a part when Alice Wainwright was Commissioner, I was on the Zoning and Planning Board that reviewed the ordinance that was adopted in 1965, at which time we felt then that it was a good ordinance. I feel now that it is a good ordinance and it does not need amending to permit more billboards on the expressways. The expressways are no going to benefit from the view of the billboards. The people aren't going to benefit from viewing billboards. We do like the greenery that we can see as we drive along I-95 and on the other expressways in the City. I'm simply hers}_: to reiterate that the comments that were made by the previous speakers were all very well spoken and the point that was made-- on the spacing that could be overruled, I would remind you that the ,gasoline station ordinance was amended to remove this spacing requirements some years ago, because it was considered unconstitutional to regulate the spacing between private industries. So, again, I ask you to remember that if you permit this, it's going to be a proliferation. It's something we don't need. There is no reason why we need to have billboards. I can't find one reason. If somebody could give me just' one reason why we need billboards on the expressways, I would perhaps soften my view, but I cannot find any, and I hope that you dor,' find any that you will uphold the ordinance. Than% you, Mr. Freeman; Society. Dr. Kelley, the head of the Tropical Au d bQn Dr. Robert L— Kelley: I'm fi r. Robert L, kelley;. I I t president of `tropical Audibon Society. Our headquArters arse located 54-0 Sunset Drive, Miarti, Florida �314y. Ih,at xs - located in unincorporated Dade County. I hope thae tr+ Commissioners have received the letter from our Attcrneyj Joseph C. ple=ing, opposing any changes in this or"dl-.Ance. I authorized hire to send you a letter on our behalf. Mayor Perre; Mr. Kelley, just for the record. I do ha` t that letter and others and I will be placing all of t ;am on the record. We do, for the record, have Mr. Plem-"in gIs letter. Dr. Kelley: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am here to reiterate our opposition to any change in this billboard ordinance. The Tropical Audibon Society has almost 3,600 members living in bade County and according to our survey, more that-, half of them either live or work in the City of Miami. Wo support the objections trade by Mr. Pancoast, Mrs. Wainwright, and the other speakers. We really wish that you would keep these ugly structures off our expressways. I have lived in the City and in bade County for 24 of the last 27 years. I'm a professor at the University of Mia=: and have been for twenty years. I visit downtown Miami very 'often on business. I drive I-95 and the other expressways very often. 1 hope that you can keep them looking the way that they do now. Thank you. Mr. Freeman: I'm not sure Mr. Robert Worsham. ..Miami Civic Club, a coalition of civic interest groups for better government. Mr. Robert Worsham: Good morning, thank you, Mr. Fayor, Commissioners. I'm president of the Miami Civic League. Our address is 859 N.W. 15th Avenue. The Civic Association.... Mayor Ferrer I don't think you're stating your name fcr the record. Mr. Worsham: Robert Worsham. :he Miami Civic Lea`.e is composed of various and several civic organiza.ior,s throughout the City of Miami. This issue was brought before our last meeting in conference with some -of your other opponents here to the ordinance. We had a unanimous vote from all organizations in opposition to changing the ordinance. We strongly urge you to consider the views ant the interests of the populace, the people. Thank you ver. much. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Worsham, just for the record, so ycs can clarify, you say that you represent the Miami Civic Clubs. The last time I looked, some times it existed and soce.imes: it doesn't, with all due respects. There were fifteen or twenty different organizations that were a par, of that. How many organizations does the Miami Civic Association represent? Mr. Worsham: The Miami Civic Association, and l a_ the president of the association, as recent office, we represent in excess of ten paid community organizations. There are others that contemplating membership that do attent our - meetings. Mayor Ferre; I'm not asking you about the future. Mr. Worsham; yes, sir, I understand. Mayor Ferre; of the ten that you do have now. how Many web.,. present9 You said you were repregen ing the or ganiz rticp.. How many were there to vote for this? fl P �— Mr. Worsham: We had a vote of ax present; the other members there were communicated with by myself, Mayor Terre. in other words, you are saying you do speak for all ten' Mr. VorshaM: That is dof rect, air. Mayor Fevre: Thank you, sir. Mr. Freeman: Mrs. bilette, president of the Sierra Club, Ms. Mary Teresa Di ette: My name is Mary Teresa Dilette. I'm a board member for the Miami Sierra Club. On behalf.bf the 1500 members of the Sierra Club, we gould like to not rescind the ordinance as it stands on the books and take the recommendations of the Planning Department. We see across the Country how the more enlightened states, shall we say, have chosen to take the billboards down from their highways and we feel that this is the way that Miami should also conduct their business. Thank you very ouch. Mr. Freeman: I apologize, I was afraid I would mispronounce her name. David Perez, president of the South Florida -Chapter of the A.I.A. Mr. David Perez: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my name is David Perez. I'm the president of the Florida South Chapter of the American Institute of Architects and have our headquarters at 1150 S.W. 22nd Street in Miami. I come here today to stress the official position of our chapter in an area in which we believe that we have professional_ expertise and it is the visual integrity of the built environment. Our chapter would like to voice its concerns regarding the amendment to the sign regulation. The regulation, under the existing ordinance, were endorsed by our chapter as a reasonable and proper sign legislation. We have been very disturbed with the fact that through the times there would be a billboard removal and not being effectuated and at this point we believe have little priority within the City agenda. The amendments presently before this Commission are deemed to be further relaxation of the existing billboard regulations. Our chapter opposes strongly this amendment. The proposed sign height is excessive and we believe is not in scale with out urban structure. I think this could actually become a true eye sore, as you can see here. The billboard spacing would not necessarily limit the number of new signs and definitely would impact in the land use pattern and the changing of the angle, when view in contact with the other elements of this proposed amendment. Mayor Ferre: David, excuse me, I don't see any of the cameras rolling now. Could we turn off these li.ghts? You;' have no idea how hot it gets under these lights after a three or four hours. Thank you. Whenever you want them, we'll put them back on. Mr. Perez; The changing of the angle, when viewing contacts with the other parts of the amendment and adding the element of speed of the highway, it has no merit. Consequently, our chapter strongly urges this Commission to turn down the Proposed amendment that will weaken the existing ordinance' and could lead to the elimination of existing controls, Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre; The next speaker. Mr, Freeman;- Mr. Joseph Abrell, attorney. Mr. Joseph Abrell For the record, Joseph P. Abrell, my business address is 25 W. Flagler Street, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, when I arrived this morning, it had not been Ity intention nor had it been my inteh`:iOM td not speak, 8U4 there is a point I think heeds to be Lade twat is not being 1hade► Sighs like this be perMitted in at6-as abutting the airport t)tpressway, the 36th Street expressway, And 1-95, while We talk about the aesthetics, the View frota the exptea sway , the safety Ott the expreasWay, but gentlemen, there are people who live in the neighborhoods Who art renters abutting Property 6WnerS up and down those three thoroughfare and they've going to have to live with that. I suggest to you that this Commission ought hot require that 'those people live with this. It's ugh• APPLAUSE. Mr. Dawkins: May I ask you a question, sir? Hold that up again, sir. Is that on private or, public property? i Mr. Abrell: From what 'I cah see, sir, this is on private property. Mr. Dawkins: So therefore, that sign could not go there if the individual did not permit it on his private property. Am I right? APPLAUSE Mr. hbrcll: Yes, sir, but the point I would make to you, Commissioner Dawkins, is that the people who rent in this building and the people who Live in abutting properties don't get economic benefit, but they have to live with it. Mr. Dawkins: But this is America, and you have the right to do with your land what you want, if you own it. Mr. Abrell: No, sir. Mr. Dawkins: If the owner of that property "gives a right for that sign to go there, I don't think me, you or anybody in here should deny that individual that right. APPLAUSE. Mr. Abrell: Commissioner, you do that every time you enforce your zoning ordinance and every time you vote against the zoning variance request, and the Commission lawfully did it in 1964, when they adopted the present ordinance, which is a lawful regulation. APPLAUSE. Mr. Freeman: Our last speaker is Mr. Douglas Halls. Mr. Douglas Halls: My name is Douglas Halls. My office address is 100 S. Biscayne Boulevard, City of Miami, with the law firm of Thompson, Zeder, Bohrer, Werth, Adorno, & Razook. I believe Parker Thompson has written a letter; it's on your file.' Mayor Ferre: Yes, it will be placed on the record. Mr. Halls; Thank you. Our firm for years has been involved in civic activities relating to the Miami community and Dade County generally, particularly with respects to Biscayne Bay. We've made great strides in recent years to overcome image problems in the City of Miami. Recently we've had image problems created by civil disturbances, drug traffic, crime. The Miami image is also reflected in the visual Image which it portrays. We believe that the ordinance passed some twenty years ago is an excelient ordinance. It's worked; it should be kept on the books, There is no reason; for this Commission now to take a set back. Thank, you. Mr. Freeman; Mayor, this coalition was put 'together haatity, but it does represent, a good cress section of the economic and the neighborhood and the enviaren--intal interort AAL Of Miami, We all do agree that our vistas in this community need prctedti6M for ed6HOMid as well As envir6hmeMtal and aesthetic rweAsons. The key to edom6mid vitality is we have ad sadly demonstrated t0 the world is the perceived life style that we have. We have an envirohtbehtAl and an economic personality. We've made lots of alterations in that personality, partidularly in the last five or six Years. We are coming back. We are beginning to put our personality before the world back in shape, but it can't stand a lot of alterations. The high quality that's .demanded by citizens and visitors cannot be maintained, much less avoid degradation with backward steps sudh as this proposal. Let's out all this civic energy to work and improve in our great city not beating it down. Thank you. APPLAUSE. Mayor Ferre: Are there any more proponent speakers? I'm sorry, opponent speakers. These are people that are opposed to the sign ordinance. Any other speakers? All right, we'll hear from you first-, air, and then from you. Mr. Frank Martinez: Mr.,Major, Commission, my name is Frank Martinez, business manager of local union 1175 sign painters. I've lived in this area since 1930. I think we have a beautiful city and by putting more billboards in I- 950 I still state that it is a dangerous thing. People looking at the signs and take their eyes away from the road, put more signs on the roads and you will have more accidents. Again, I believe in this City. I've lived here practically all my life. I want to see a beautiful City. I cannot see an ordinance passed putting bulletin boards on I- 950 it was left to my people, we would get rid of all bulletin boards in the City of Miami and Dade County. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Is your union a member of the AFL-CIO? Mr. Martinez: Yes, sir, it!is. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you this. Are you here expressing your opinion or are your expressing the union's opinion? Mr. Martinez: I spoke to my board and my board is totally in favorof my coming here and speaking against this ordinance. Mayor Ferre: I see Dan Horton is sitting next to you. Did this go up to the executive board of the local AFL-CIO? Mr. Martinez: Ask Da, Horton on that when he comes up here. I do not know that, but I have spoken to Ed Stevenson, head of the South Florida AFL-CIO. Mayor Ferre: My question is are you speaking individually, for your union,_or for the AFL-CIO? Mr, Martinez: I'm speaking individually and for my union. Mayor Ferre: I see, thank you. Mr. Horton. Mr. Dan Horton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, Dan Horton, political director for the South Florida AFL"CZC, office at 2409 N.W. 17th Avenue. I've appeared in front of this Commission numerous times in the last few year's, Most often with our billing trade unions, 1 will tell you first, Mr. Mayor, that the South Florida AFL-CIO is on record as, supporting the current law and Opposing any change to it, I'd like to tale a moment to explain that. We've come before this Commission numerous times on many project 3 in this City with many of our -people here on occasion from these different unions, many of which you all know and many of which keep their headquarters within the City of Mia. W and have tetGbers Within the City, We're pretty proud of the fact that we've helped build major new city in the South; that's soitething to be proud of. Almost every building in that skyline has been built with our people providing the labor to do it, frahkly, it is an aesthetic argument to us, it truly is • It's a beautiful. skyline and there's no need to mar it. We've not talking about outlawing an industry. Your own department tells you there's almost 600 locations Within the City where these' people can do business, That's vat Zoning is designed to do. In that somebody had to be here on toning matters, I submit to you that What an individual does with their private properties is indeed their right within Zoning guidelines. Just because I have a piece of property in the City, that doesn't mean I can build a 30 story building on it -either, unless T come here and it's deemed in the public interest and everything is there to support that facility. The fact is this industry exists in Miami; it seems to be very profitable. It obviously can have a lot of people here. The do a good business. There's nothing wrong with that'. -,But we submit, that after all the work this Commission and •our people together jointly have continued to put into ,,this City, that image is more important to tourism and/our development than anything else we can do. To mar that'area to obstruct that view from one .of the few arterial roads where you can still get a clear view of the City doesn't serve our best interest. The only other thing I could point out, and I won't use the entire three minutes, if I did use the entire three minutes, on 1500 foot spacing, I would passed nine of those signs in three minutes at 55 miles an hour on I-95, assuming they - were minimally spaced. If I went 11 seconds over, that would be the tenth sign. That's the kind of image we don't need to send to people that come down to see this beautiful City. Thank you. APPLAUSE. Mayor Ferre: Are there any other speakers that are opponents? Yes, sir. Opponent to the sign, those who want to change the existing law and pass this law on second reading. Mr. Richard Rose: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners of the City of Miami, my name is Richard Rose; I'm an architect developer. I was born in the City of Miami. If I may, I also am a property owner at 45 N.W. 46 Street. I would like to read to you four short lines from a great Chilean poet. I would like to do so in Spanish and in English. "Toda la vida es roja y blanca. Toda la claridad is oscura; y no todo es tierra y adobe. Hay en mi herencia sombra y suenos." That translates into four beautiful sentences that I think have great meaning for us today. The whole of life is red and white. The clear is also the obscure. Not everything,-:' is earth and mud. Shadows and dreams are my inheritance. I think it is incumbent upon us to protect the beauty of this City nor only :for us who live here today, but for the children who come tomorrow. Signs are an obliteration upon the sky, upon the stars, upon the evening, upon the clouds that this City, has. I would beg you to replace this amendment with an amendment to plant 10,000 trees in the City of Miami. Thank you. APPLAUSE. Mayor Ferre; Are there any other speakers in opposition? Now we will hear the proponents. I think there were some people here that wanted to be speakers for the proponents. Mr. Plummer; Mr. Mayor, let me only ask you.... Mayor Ferre; Hold pn, J.L. , , are there any people here not - part of the official group that are official group that are citizens that Wish to speaks for the ordinance" Please step 'apV ma'am. i Mr. Plumlht r Mr. Mayor, for a matter of clarification, our, policy is that the last speaker at noon is the last speaker. it is your intent to conclude this matter or is it a matter that we will break as the policy of this Commission's Mayor Ferre: I think we're very elose, hoWU' ly, Of Winding this thing up ands voting for it one way car the other. I think it serves' little purpose to come back at 2t00 o'clock. I would hope that we Gould wind it up now, I think we're almost there. I think she's the last speaker. Ms. Rusty Dergean: I'm for passing this billboard ordinance. I read in the paper yesterday ... my name is Putty Bergran; I live at 700 Diltmore Way. I do.. live in the City, of Coral Gables, but I do drive on 1.95. Mayor Ferre: That's all right. We'll let you speak. Ms. Bergran: I believe in -free enterprise. I've lived in Dade County for 16 years.,' I've seen a lot of things change, the skyline change. From what I've read in the paper, from where they're going tot put the billboards, they're not really going in residential areas. I've also seen people like the Miami Herald and also various chambers of commerce use these billboards. We've also used them to fight in community causes, such as drunk driving, which I think is very important to advertise these needs. We've also used them for policemen appreciation and tourism benefits. I don't think they're a blight on our City. I think they help our City economically quite a lot. Accidents that people are saying that are going to happen, they've only been by a guess by the Planning Board. I haven't seen any statistics by them except by the people that own the billboards. They've shown statistics that they haven't been proved to happen. That's all really I have to say. APPLAUSE. Mayor Ferre: Are there any other speakers that are proponents. Please step up; don't be bashful. We're nct going to —we're trying to save a little time, so move right along. Mr. John Dawson: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is John Dawson. I live in Miramar Isles. I'm here as a guest of a Miami busine_-:sman. I've been in Florida now 29 years. I drive over 55,000 miles a year. I've never had a chargeable accident in this state and I don't see all this hubbub abcut the billboards causing accidents. I think my record speaks for itself. It may or may not mean anything. Thank you. APPLAUSE. Mayor Ferre: Anybody else, any other public speakers?--''' Please step up. After this I'm going to ask for a motion to close off the public portion of this and then when we get to the final arguments and to the Commission questions. Mr. Susacasa: I own property in the City of Miami. I really think the signs are O.K.; I like those next to the b 95 because I see other cities and they have then and it really looks good. That's all I can say. Susacasa is MY name, Mayor Ferre; Is there anything else you want to say? Than;4 you. Are there any more public speakers at this time? If there are not, is these a motion to close the public hearing? Mr. P31immer; Are you going to give him a rebuttal? M:aVQr Ferre; Xeg, but those are representatives �►s s s�'� 0 11 mr. Plummer: So move. Mayor Forre., I will reCiSgni2e at the invitation Of the Chair or members of the CbMMi68i6h We'll give eadh of these two sides, and Mr. Freeman, you'll have to choose who your spokesman is, yourself or whomever you wish, to fiM&li2&_ this debate before we get to questions from the Comm saiom, gut what f'm trying to do is try to avoid further discussion from members of the public.: Is there a second? ,Mr. Carollo: 86cond. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. THEREUPON MOTION DULY MADE AND SECOMMO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE P�8 LIC HEARING WAS CLOSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:/ AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissionew J.,'L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A/. Ferre -NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Knox, for your closing statement. Mr. Knox: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, and again, I will be brief. There is a great value in formulating and endeavoring to persuade public opinion through use of special interest groups, which is laudable and a part of the American way. But there is a question we would have this Commission consider, of context in the sense that what may be aesthetically pleasing to one may not be aesthetically pleasing to another. There are those, for example, who at one point in the City's history, enjoyed driving along I-95 to receive what has been called today a high level view' of the City of Miami and found some source of strength or encouragement from observing travertine marble buildings arising along Biscayne Boulevard. Today, those persons cannot see those travertine buildings because they are obscured by what those persons would call visual pollution. There are those who have traveled 150 miles southward,on the Turnpike who intermittently have been advised that there is rest and respite at the 79th Street Holiday Inn and by the time they arrive at the exit, they don't know that they have arrived.Those persons who are seeking information about lodging are those persons who are lost in endeavoring to find a place to rest, would not find information signs to be. -.-- visual pollution. The question is whether or not the touring public and even our citizens may have benefit of information about attractions and perhaps life-saving ,information that is provided by outdoor advertising. The last question represents a burden on this government as with any government. That burden is to show our. most overwhelming Justification for supporting a system of regulation that denies one classification of persons, equal protection of the laws, by providing opportunities and privileges to others who occupy that same classification, We ask thi3 Commis ion what is reasonable, correct, and right, Thank you. APPLAI;5E, Mr. Freeman. We're not really here arguing about whether or not we're going to have billboards. We're simply talXi g about the degree to which in, the test interest of all the citizens of this area billboards Should be replat:ed. Since 1964 we have used the present system, There is no mandate Wd of the cititehry nor ho value in change and there are rgany detrimthtt, We urge you clot to chahge it. Mayor perre! All right, we're at the level of the Commission questions, and 1 would like to ask that you limit this strictly to questions rather than comments until we get the question portion through, and then I'll reoognize you for Comments, ouestions. , Mr. Plummer. Mr. Mayor, mine are mostly comments. Mayor Ferre! Any questions at this time? Mr. Dawkins! I have some, but I don't know who to ask them, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Plummer. Let me ask a question. I don't know whether I want to ask it of the Aepartment or of the City Attorney. I had never seen that one billboard that was shown there, the True. That, to me, I ,want to tell you, is just completely out of question. Madam City Attorney, is there a way that if I vote for this, that we can, in fact, not permit this kind of a sign, but that as we know of normal outdoor advertising? Can we so write that into the ordinance? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir, I'm not sure that it isn't already. Is it already? Mr. Plummer: The only other question I have, Mr. Mayor... Mayor Ferre: By normal you mean just that they would have two sides rather than three sides? Mr. Plummer: Well, show the other one what I consider to be the norm, those that normally exist, I've never seen anything like that before. Mayor Ferre: Maybe that's..,. -is that normal? Mr. Plummer: I assume that would be called a tio- sided...no, not the Kent, the Kent is the same as the True, the daikin as shown by Mr.. Paneoast. Mrs. Dougherty: Can you have more than one place? Mr. Carollo: In other words, you're saying like this one here the Miami Herald paid for, right Commissioner? Mr. Plummer: No, sir that's not what I said. In other words, Madam City Attorney, we can then in fact prohibit that kind of a situation. Is that true? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: My other question is to the industry and not to any other, _because it is my understanding there are probably four or five or six different companies involved and I don't know if any one can speak for those. One of the things that I'm very much interested in is we did with the bus bench advertising, I think it was very good for this City. That is that we demanded and received a certain allotment of bus benches for public service announcements or public service good. Madam City Attorney, how would 1, if this were to be approved, extract that on behalf of this community or this City requiring that they must provide public service announcements. The ordinance that was passed by the state, I have no problem with as far a.$ tourist relation and things of that nature. Is it permissible that we can write that into the ordinance? If that's what YOU want or a sign that says, "It's lunch time, Let's go to lunch, 11 I remember the industry before volunteered it. 13 that what I'm lcQking for here that they would volunteer, its 998� r] How would you, when there is a Number of tbMpahi3s, Mow Would you get the sane ektradtions from &11, if that's �5ossble'? . Mrs. Dougherty; Mr. Commissioner, the other industry volunteered it. The reason they volunteered it, is because that was a contract toning. I don't know of any way you ` could impose it on all of the industry. Mr. Dawkins: Madam City Attorney, along the same lines, .l've looked at five different configurations of Sig-s along the same lines of what J.L. said. How do we, if this passes, regulate the signal That is have one uniform sign, one uniform size and that's it. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr, C,ommi'ssioner, like all regulations, when you snake distinctions 'between one kind of sign and another one when you are passing these kinds of regulations, it has to be on a rational basis. This record is going to have to reflect the rea'so'ns why you want a particular Size, sign, or a particular sided sign as opposed to a three -sided sign. So in order for your regulations to be reasonable, you are going to reflec6.' in the record the basis for those regulations, Mr. Dawkins: Let me put on the record now that the three sided monster is unsightly, unwanted, and unneeded. Mayor Ferre: That's objective. You got to make it more.... Mr. Dawkins: Well, she says state my ... go ahead, Maurice. Maurice is going to tell us how we can do it. Go ahead. Mayor Ferre: No, I don't know how to do it. Mr. Dawkins: I mean how we should do it. Mayor Ferre: I think the point is that what you're saying is that it's ugly and unsightly and all that is a very, subjective opinion, because the opponents can say we feel the same way about the two-sided one as the three -sided one. I think you have to put some specific language, and I think it has to do with bulk. Lucia, help me on this. I think, is there a cogent, legal argument that could be made on bulk. In other words, the magnitude of the size. I think we have a right to regulate. Don't we? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, you can regulate the size, ncL the content, but the size, yes. Mr. Dawkins: So if I said we don't want anything larger than nine by ten on one side. Is that legal? Mrs. Dougherty: If there is a reason for it, if you have a rational basis for that, and that should be a plane ng or safety.... Mr. Dawkins; If I say I wanted a nine by ten and rcthing more and I think it's rational, you show me where it's irrational. Mrs. Dougherty: I can't show you where it's irrationa:. Mr. Plummer: I think what he's saying is sh,ow me wha. s • a R . ' Mr. Knox: I think I can help a little bit, if YO'I so desire, Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. Mr, Dawki.nz: Not I don't need anything from ; you, You better keep quiet while you're'winning, Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, l think that the thing that is trying to be said is, what is the rational used today for the existing billboards to be in existing size. Is it that they shall not exceed a certaih width and lengthl It it they shall not be more than two -faded Or 6me-faced? Is that a rational? is that a justification? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, the; ordinances are presumed valid. You're the legislative body, You're the one that have the responsibility for passing reasonable ordinances. When you .do pass such an ordinance, they're presumed valid, and the other side has the burden of proving the unreasonableness of it. Obviously, some size signs are going to be too large. There's going to have to be a paint in which you all have to decide what is the right' dine sign given the context of where it`s going to be. 1 _ Mr. Dawkins: One more. question: Mrs: Dougherty: Of course, Aesthetics is always a basis for that. ' r Mr: Dawkins: One more ,question to the Manager or anybody you can designate to answer. How does the City of Miami .advertise? Mr. Rosencrantz: Mr. Commissioner, it depends upon the particular subject that we're talking about. If you're talking about advertising for tourism, for promotion.... Mr. Dawkins: Billboards, does the City of Miami use billboards outside of Miami to advertise to draw tourists? Mr. Plummer: Outside? Mr. Dawkins: Outside of the City of Miami. Mr. Rosencrantz: I don't 'believe that we do, but I don't know for sure whether we do or not. But it's never come to my attention that we've used billboards as a place to advertise, but it would be possible that we could. Mr. Plummer: But I think the point he's trying to make is all of us have traveled the turnpike and I-95 and from about the Georgia line down, private industry is doing one hell of a job to get people to come beyond Orlando. As you know and I know, 369000,000 people in 1982 came into the State of Florida. Only 12,000,000 or one third of them came further south than Orlando. The idea that this community sells sand and surf, they can go one hour trip over to Daytona and go back home where if they go to Disney World and then come here, it's an additional four hours down and an additional four hours back. I want to tell you that the hotel.:.. industry, the restaurant industry have done one hell of a job from the Georgia line to Orlando, everything humanly possible to get -people to go beyond Orlando further south. I think that's the point whether we, the City, are doing it if we had the money. Private industry along the turnpike and I-95 is doing one hell of a job to do it. Mayor Ferre; What's your question? Mr. Plummer; No, I'm just trying to say that I feel that is existing today. Mayor Perre; We're not in comments yet, We'll Have plenty of time for that, Any further questions? Hearing none, now we're into comments, Plummer, continue to comment, Mr, Plummer; Mr, Mayor, let We say there's three areas that I really want to speak to in' this particular case. The first is well known and long thpwght, coy defense of private enterprise. We're not here today to argue the point of are we going to or not going to, the point is are we going to possibly expand or trot expand? That comes to my sedond point. My second point is the gentleman spoke, Jot I think it was, of the concern of residents and their concerns. It is my understanding, as proposed before us today that these sigms would only be allowed in a commercial district, not in a residential district. The next area that I speak to is that of safety. I don't' have statistics. I've heard statistics given, whether or not they are correct, I'm not ,in a position to argue for or against. What I will argue for is that these, if allowed, would not be allowed to be of a distracting nature and let pie clarify for the record, there are billboards that have flashing lights, there are billboards that have moving. parts, like hands waiving, and to me that would be distracting: It would be a' safety factor. Mr: Mayor, the final comment that I want to make or the comparison that 1: want to draw is a convention center that we are presently having a $6.2 million subsidy to every year. How many times,h�ve you and 1 gone to that convention center to see some very ;fantastic events and the place is half full. You speak: to people later and they were not aware that event, whatever it was even took place. 'INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me? Well, that's their problem. Mr. Mayor, in Houston, Texas where I went and studied the Astrodome, and they do make money on the Astrodome. They have public service billboards throughout that community that show a 30 day event calendar. The people of Houston have the opportunity at all times to know what is going on in the Houston Astrodome if they wish to attend. In the final analysis what I'm saying is I think there can be a beneficial point to the outdoor advertising. Like anything, it must be done in moderation and it must be done in good taste. I think that is what we must be addressing ourselves to. Thank you. APPLAUSE. Mayor Ferre: Other comments? Are we ready for a motion', then? Is there a motion? Mrs. Dougherty: Do you want your amendments? Mr. Plummer: I would like to clarify these points, Mr. Mayor, that I brought up. Mayor Ferre: Sir, I'm following the same process I always follow. I ask for questions, I ask for comments. After everybody has made their comments? I ask for questions and then we vote. You made a comment. I asked further- comments. Nobody spoke up, so I'm ready for motions now. If you want to put motions to amend it to two sides, that there be no flashing or distracting elements, that the sizes be limited, and that it be public service billboards, I recognize you for that purpose, Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, assist me of suoh a motion, Mrs, Dougherty: Mr, Commissioner, if you look at page 2, section 202615•1, it ,can be amended to state the area of the outdoor advertising sign shall not exceed 750 square feet for each surface. Then additional language, such surfaces shall be limited to two, including embellishments, If an-y such sign and embeli3hment are measured as provided in section 203,Such signs shall not contain f lashin& ligt is or any mQving parts, With respect to the public' service messages, Mr. Commissioner, that would be.., Mayor Ferret. Lucia, this is Dawkina' statement, so he -tan get into it, but you're goifig a 1111e fast now, He said nine by teh; that's ninety square feet. You're to ping about 75©. Mrs. Dougherty,. That's the exiating ordinance, 750, It you want to reduce it, that's fine, i Mr. Plummer: Excuse me Mr. Mayor, how do you amen: a motion that hasn't passed? tsn't it proper that a motion.... Mayor Ferret. No, legislatively what you do is there is proposed document before you on second reading; thereforto for you to change that, you must make, this is a sec --Ad reading. There is a proper document before you. You must now make motions to amend the document. I recognize you f'or that purpose, Mr. Plummer: I stand cbrrec,ted. Mayor Ferret The language I have ,just read has three amendments limited to t«+o surfaces, no flashing lights, and no moving parts. The' public service messages is not a .permissible regulation. Mr. Knox: May I address that please? Mr. Carollo: Can we include, sorry, George, something to the effect that as far as the structure is built for the billboard, there would not be a structures allowed to be built with the wooden poles like this Herald billboard is in? You have several kinds that are built. You have sc=e that have the steel structure, which are the safest ty;e. They are also much more expensive than this type, but they're the safest type. Mayor Ferre: Wait, Joe, that now is a fifth amendment you want to make to it. In other words, what you're saying is you want to add into this that these structures be steel or concrete and that no wooden posts be a'Llowed. Is that it? Mr. Carollo: I don't believe, at least I don't know of a::; that are made out of concrete. I think.... Mayor Ferre: Steel structures. Mr. Carollo: ....the structures, the modern type that s the safest. ' Mayor Ferrer No wood structures. Mr. Carollo: No wood structures. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, is it proper that I offer my three amendments and ask for a vote and then we go to the other individual amend -cents that are proffered by Commissioners? Mayor Ferre: Sure, yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: I proffer those three and then I wou-.= understand from you, Madam City Attorney, if there is to tp any proffering from the industry, it must be on a voluntary basis. Mrs. Aouaherty By each company. Mayor Ferre; See, if you have five companies, One compar.,, may want to do it and the other company won't have any interest in doing it, sp you can't ;force them to do it, is what she's saying. In the case of the bw5 benches*,*,' M Mrs. Dougherty. That wag on the public right of way, Mayor Ferret *.,.we had an EFp it wag Public Propettyl th4a is private~ and there was an RFP out and we said all right, we'll give you a license for a right to put up these bus benches and here's what we Want. But this is difrerant. Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, tell me how to accomplish thaI i Mrs- Dougherty: Mr. Commissioner, you Gant accom0:115h that. Mr. Knox! May I address that's Mayor Ferret All right., Mr. Knox! On behalf oi' E.A.-Hancock Advertising, I've been authorized to advise the Commission that E.A. Hancock wail certainly adhere to any; policy of the Commission that whatever privileges ' it is granted by virtue of your legislative discretion,,: it recognizes a cor.currer,t obligation to provide benefits to the public. Because of their expertise, that benefit would of course be in working with the City and its staff to insure that public ser•�_ce announcements or other kinds of advertisement for the City of Miami would be provided. Mayor Ferret George, let's define that, because that's, and I commend you and your client for your generosity, but I think we need to get specific. How many signs, if this thing passes, how many signs will be allowed to be built on the highway? Mr. Knox: As I understand it, we're talking about approximately six 'miles of roadway where our signs will be permitted. Mayor Ferret So at the maximum, they went and got every sign they could get on every legal location, how many signs would we have? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The most you could put up, Mr. Mayor, would be about seventeen signs, if you got every location. Mayor Ferre: Seventeen, so the question is following what, is it your amendment of public service? Mr. Plummer: I'd like to, but.... Mr. Plummer: To what Plummer is saying of the seventeen signs, what proportion of those would have public advertisement, public service ads at one time? Mr. Knox: That is a detail that can be worked out. I think a kind of a numerical or even a monetary basis could be worked out in order to accomplish that. Mayor Ferret George, we're on second reading. So, once we pass'this, you have vested rights. We need to get that kind of pinned down and defined. Mr, Carollo: I have to ask a question. Did I understand. correctly that in the whole area of this being brought up for a change, that the most signs that you can place is approximately 17 signs? Mr. Knox; Yea, sir. Mr. Carollo; I don't understand the,....seventeen signs is nothing, We have hundreds of signs all .over this City. Mr. Whipple. We would suggest that is hot an acdurate Assessment of what could be placed along the expressway, The map in front of you in the red dolor showa the areas that will be available for billbdaed:8. Mayor Ferre: What is your opinion? Mr. Whipple! It would allow at least fifty billboards in our opinion. ' Mayor Ferre: Fifty billboards. Mr. Whipplet Fifty sites for billboards. Mr. Knox. There is a difference of opinion about that, but to answer the original question, Mr. Mayor," if we talk about that and if we talk 'about the rent structure usually associated with that, then- we're talking about probably $50,000 worth of advertising that would benefit the City of Miami. f Mayor Ferre: Mr. Knox,' C6 mmissioner Plummer has bought up a cogent point and that is/ deals with public messages on these 50 or. 17 billboards. So, he has turned to the City Attorney and said, please give me a way to accomplish legislatively what I want to do legally. That's the question that I want you to address yourself to. You can speak for the Hancock Company; but can you speak for Ackerly and can you speak for any of the other advertising companies? Mr. Knox: No, sir, but I do suggest that if you have an announced legislative policy of expecting a benefit to accrue to the City, if the City confers the benefit, then everybody would have to live with that policy. Mayor Ferre: Unless they take us to court and in the court of course, we couldn't enforce it. Mr. Plummer: Repeat that, Mr. Knox. Mrs. Dougherty: I heard .it. I heard it. You dor't have to... What you are suggesting is to pass a resolution and say that this is what we'd like from the industry. Mr. Knox: No, I'm suggesting that you make a policy statement that when people receive benefits from the City of Miami, they have a corporate duty or a civic duty to provide some reciprocal benefit to the City of Miami. • Mayor Ferre: That's like saying, all right, Barnett Bank, - since you have banking offices in Miami and you do well, you ought to help the United Way. Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, let me try this one on. For every billboard erected that every permit granted that they have to give us X number of months per year for public service announcements. Is that within the realm allowed? Mrs, Dougherty; No. Mr. Knox: They don't have to, but they volunteer to. Mrs. Dougherty; There is no way to enforce it, If the;,, voluntarily do it, that's to the City's benefit, but there. .s no way to enforce that kind of regulation, Mr. Plummer; There is no way that I can accept.... Mayor Ferre: Mr. H ancocks do you want to talk to the i3sue? Mr. Plummer.. I can't accept their volunteer and have all the rest of them get gdbt free and not do anything. That's not fair, absolutely not fair. Mayon Ferret Mr. Hancock, senior or juniors Mr. Charlie HA neock! It's hard for me to stand here and say what the other peoplee in the industry would do. Mr. Plummer: You can't. Mr. Hancock: I can't, but we have permits in here for six locations, all we Would get out of this because of the spacing. I have told George that we would give $50,000 a ` year in advertising to the City. i / r Mr. Plummer: But do yoo understand our dilemma? Mr. Hancock: I understand what you are trying to do. Mr. Plummer: No, blit do you understand our dilemma? Our dilemma is that's fine with you, and it's generous on your part, but what about `the other four, or five or six companies, how do we say to them, O.K., you want to be fair with us, we want to be fair with you. How do I get over that? That's my problem. Mr. Hancock: I can't answer for them. Mr. Knox: You have been quite successful over the past eight years that I've observed you in.... Mr. Plummer: Yes, but that was for black olive trees. Mayor Ferre: The problem, see, that's very nice, George, but every time Plummer extracts black olive trees from people, they're getting something at that point. They're coming in here saying we want this alley, closed. Then, we end up with 500 more black olive trees. That's fine, but the point is that once this thing is passed on second ordinance and you have a veQted right, Gene may be talking about six sites that he has in mind. There are eleven othersaccording to. his count, according to the City's count, there were a total of 50. If he has six, there are 44 others and the question, I think, is that they don't have to come and ask for anything. All they need to do is get the locations and put up the signs. They could say, "We didn't know about the legislative intent. We weren't at the meeting. We didn't read the newspaper story." Five years from now, six years from now, nobody is going to remember any of this. Mr. Carollo: I think we should send them a notice and. — advertise their notice. Mayor Ferre: -Whatever it is, let's get on with this, because we need to get down. Plummer, how do you want to word this? Mr. Carollo: Madam Attorney, will it be legal for us to' place a notice as to what the intent would be, to place a notice in the appropriate publications that we advertise in then, all the known billboard companies in South Florida send theca a written notice also. Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre; It would have to be when they pu=i a permit You know, fifteen years from now, they're not going to rememer tQo much of what happened here today. Mrs. Dougherty) Mr, Vice MaYOr, I meahi Mr. Vice Mayor, YOU can put a Notice iho but the problem is again ehforddability of it. Mayor repre. Make your Motion* Plummer► on this issue, whatever it is• Mr. Plummer, Mr. Mayor, on the three amendments that I would want, I spoke to what was the d.evices.... Mayor Ferret Whatl Mrs. Doughertyt No flashing lights or moving parts and the surfaces would be limited to two. Mr. Plummer: All right. i offer those two amendments, if that is in order. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion on the two amendments as proffered? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 85-181 1 A MOTION AMENDING PROPOSED SECOND READING ORDINANCE, SEC. 20269 ART. 20 �( (OR. 9500) "SIGNS - GENERAL & SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS" REGARDING BILLBOARDS, ETC., BY INSTRUCTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO AMEND SAID ORDINANCE TO STATE THAT THERE SHALL BE E NO FLASHING LIGHTS OR MOVING PARTS ON THE FACE OF BILLBOARDS AND THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF BILLBOARDS SHALL CONTAIN NO MORE THAN TWO FACES. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, 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. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, my other one I don't know how to overcome. Mayor Ferre; Well, I think you have to put it on a best try effort. I don't see that you can do it any pater way. Mr. Dawkins; Let me ask a question of Mr. Knox, Mr. Knox, how many miles of I-95 are we discussing? Mr. Knox: Let me have Charlie Hancock to explain that. Mr. Charlie Hancock: My name is Charlie Hancock, Hancock Advertising. I've made 'a map here to indicate and show to you exactly where billboards can be built and cannot. if you will notice, everything that is done in red is where you are not allowed to peat a billboard. If you will notice, it is moat of the area in all this City, As a matter of fact, you can see it is severely limited as to where you tan put billboards and they're only in industrials do=dreial, and waterf rorit industrial, 'those are the only areas that a6uid be built. Red is when you Cannot build, yellbw is where You can build. Mr. baw trot: How many riles is it that you can build' t Mr. Hantotk: I haven't Figured out the miles, Commissioner. It' a Approximately... . Mr. Dawkins: What limits you to six boards, revery boards! Mr. Hancock: It's just a. matter of spacing and leasing is probably all we would come out with when .we get down with the permit process were lot of other companies are involved. Mr. Dawkins: So the other companies, what it is is a bidding process. r 'j Mr. Hancock: Well, they; ve already done their leasing and they'll be in there to';' get permits and that process has already taken peace. Mr. Dawkins: So in other words, you are in here fighting a battle for some guys who have already some permits and they're sitting back and are going to get rich while you guys are setting billboards. Mr. Walter Pierce: No, that's not true. That's a ball face lie. No one has gotten permits on any of these signs. Mayor Ferre: Plummer, do you want to establish your motion? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I don't know whether I'm really accomplishing anything or not, but in talking with the City Attorney, there is only one way that I know of that we can accomplish what we're trying to do, and that is that each permit would have to go through the procedure of coming before this Commission. Mayor Ferre: Plummer moves that each permit be individually reviewed by this Commission and that the legislative intent be clarified so that it is .legislatively the intent of th_s Commission that on a voluntary basis those who pull these permits will realize that they have a civ-c responsibility.... Mr. Plummer: It's more than that, for the record. Mayor Ferre: Make your motion so we can move. Mr. Plummer: What do you call it? We used to call it a" . conditional use. Mrs. Dougherty:- It's a special exception, you can go to the Zoning Board for a recommendation.... Mr. Plummer: A special that all permits would require a special exception use, which would prompt a hearing before the.... Mrs. Dougherty: Zoning Board and the City Commission. Mr, Plummer: Correct. Mrs, Dougherty: I'm just advising their right, That's the only way to do it, but it has to go knack to the Planning Board, because this is a land.use right, v AL Mayor rerr d! 18 there a sedond to that m6ti6h ? Is there a sedond to Plulmer's Motion'? Dawkins aeoonda. Fur t►)er diacusaion on the motion? Call the roil; The following motion; was introduced by Cbmmiagiomer Plutrimer t who moved its adoption! MOTION! NO. 85- 1 82 A MOTION AMENDING PROPOSED SECOND READING ORDINANCE, SEC, 20260 APT. 20 (OPD. 9500) "SIGNS i. GENERAL & SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS" REGARDING BILLBOARDS, ETC., BY INSTRUCTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO AMENrt SAID ORDINANCE TO STATE THAT THERE SHALL BE NO FLASHING NIGHTS OR MOVING PARTS ON THE FACE OF 8ILL80ARDS AND THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF BILLBOARDS SHALL CONTAIN NO MORE THAN NO PkCES. r Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Mice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. 1 ABSENT: None. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, this would require the entire ordinance to go back to the Planning Board now. Mayor Ferre: So, in other words, we're back to first reading. Mrs. Dougherty: You are going to have to refer it to -the Planning Board for consideration as a zoning ordinance. Mayor Ferre: I understand. What other amendments do you have, Plummer? Mr. Plummer: No, sir. Mayor Ferre: Other amendments, Miller? What happened do the size issue? Do you want to leave that alone? Mr. Carollo: I have an amendment. The amendment is that there be no wooden structures and that each billboard that would be built would be limited to only one steel pole to hold the structure. In other words, you don't want six or five poles holding it up, just one structure. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second to that? Mr. Carollo: What is that called? Mr. Knox; It's called a unipole} Mr. Carollo; A one unipoie. Mr. Knox: Uni.pole construction. Mayor Ferree; A unipQle, O.K. Is there further discussion on. the unipole amendment? Gall the roll, The following motion; w4s. introduced by Commla;loner Carollo, who moved its adoption, MOTION No. 85-183 A MOTION AMENDING PROP08tb 88Cd';D REAbING ORDINANCE, SEC. 2026, AR',. 20 (ORD. 9500) "SIGNS GENERAL & SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS" REGARDINO EILLBOARDS` ETC.; SY INSTRUCTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO AMEND SAID ORDINANCE SY INCORPORATING REGULATI01;5 REOUIRINt THAT ALL FUTURE CONSTRUCT'Ititi OF BILLBOARDS WHICH ARE LOCATED WITH N CITY LIMIT'S SHALL BE OF A UNIPOLE-TYPE CONSTRUCTION ( ONE POLE TO HOLD THE BILLBOARD STPUCTOPE) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, was passed and adopted' by the following vote - AYES., Commissioner beirietrio Perez, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe �Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: None. the motion Mayor Ferre: Are there any further amendments to this? Mr. Knox: Can we please understand the Plummer acendment? Mr. Plummer: The Plummer amendment is simple. You're getting something. This community wants something back. The only way we will require that this Commission on an individual basis will require certain types of landscaping, certain types of other amenities, like black olive trees, that's the only way that we can do it and be in the interest of fair to uniformly apply the code to all people that are interested in pulling permits. Mr. Knox: Has the City Attorney, therefore, opined that in order to make these cosmetic changes to the ordinance, it must go back to the Planning Advisory Board? Mr. Plummer: Unfortunately, yes. Mayor Ferre: What in effect happens, then, is like we did Park West/Overtown, this then becomes first reading, which means we have to come back with a second reading, after these substantial changes have been put in the legal language, ' Mr. Knox: Then that raises the problem that the Hancocks have suffered for the last approximately eighteen months. That is that the time requirement, the ninety day rule, will now operate against them, as I understand it. Mr. Plummer: No, you speak to that. Mrs. Dougherty: This will be a new ordinance aga n. This will be a brand new ordinance. It will go back, to first reading again, so you are not going to be any.,.. Mayor Ferre: The answer is there is no damage on the 90 day rule, as I understand the City Attorney's interpretation? Mr. Dawkins: Can it come up as an emergency and have first and second reading at the oame' time? Mayor Ferre: Mrs. b6ughertyt This will be no emetgenoy; it will be fiwat and second reading. This is a brand new Ordinance initiated by the City dommiasion to the Plahhing Rbard, Mr. Plummer: Let me ask this question, Sergio or Whipple or whomever in the department, would this be back before us in the March meeting? l Mv. Sergio Rodriguez: No. Mayor Ferre: that do you mean"? Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: Because we have to go PAR, and we have to advertise properly. and procedures. , Mayor Ferre: When would it be back? Mr. Rodriguez: April. t ' back to the follow the Mr. Knox: That would represent the second anniversary of this matter before the Commission. Mr, Plummer! George, do you have an idea? Anybody has an idea? You know what I'm trying to accomplish. Y think it is fair. I think it is just and due and owed to this City. I don't know how to overcome it otherwise. Mr. Knox: Well, the problem, Commissioner, as I see it, is that in any event, there would still be some voluntary undertaking on the part of the individual involved. Mr. Plummer: That volunteer action then would be decided by this Commission. Mr. Knox: But what you've.,done is you haven't accomplished the need or desire to make that voluntary presentation. Mr. Plummer: No, sir, we don't have to do that. To do that would be an illegal entry,into the ordnance. That would be discrimination. Mr. Knox: So what, in effect, then is that it appears that the Plummer motion accomplishes is that it compares applicants for permits to come before the City Commission in order to voluntarily provide some service. Mr. Plummer: No, sir, that's not. George, quit putting words in my mouth. It .would require that each permit drawn would stand on.its own as an individual permit. It would be reviewed by this Commission. This Commission would then make the decision as to yes or no on an individual site, period. George, you read into that; I know what you're doing. You can't do that. Mayor Ferre: Are we ready on the main ordinance on first reading? Mrs. Dougherty: No, sir, Mr. Mayor, we're referring the entire thing back to the Planning Board. What we're doing is initiating a new ordinance before the PAS, Mayor Ferre: So we need a motion to that effect. Mrs. Dougherty: Correct. Mayor Ferre. Who moves it? Mr. Plummer: I have no oboice but to Offer. I don't want �, to offer it, but I have no choice. r Mayor Peree: Is there a seconds Mrs. Dawkins: I second. Mayor Ferre., Further discussion`? Before we vote, any comments before vt5ting? Go ahead. Mr. Knox% Juat one, is therl*e a tolling or a status quo with respedt to applications currently on file? Mayor Ferre: What does that mean? Mrs. Dougherty! Mr. Mayor, the Hancock, I believe, has many applications on file and they're going to be treated just like they would be before. ', You can keep them there.-- That doesn't mean, that they are going to be taken in that order, but they can still remain in the building permit department, just like they have been. Mayor Ferre: Are we ready to vote now? All right, call the roll. i The. following motit`on was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 85y-184 ' A MOTION REFERRING A PROPOSED SECOND READING ORDINANCE AMENDING SEC. 2026, ART 20, . (ORD. 9500) "SIGNS", "BILLBOARDS", ETC. BACK TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN AMENDMENTS MADE ON THIS DATE; FURTHER REQUESTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE A NEW VERSION OF THIS ORDINANCE TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION •IN APRIL, FOR THEIR FINAL CONSIDERATION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was pa3sed and adopted by,the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo NOES: Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ABSENT: None. ON ROLL CALL: 0 Mayor Ferre: Before voting, and I am voting on the-* ='- negative, I just want to say that I'm voting on the negative, as I did last time, because I just simply do not believe this is -'the right thing for the City of Miami. It has nothing to do with anything other than just my personal feelings on this, Gene Hancock and Peggy are good personal friends of mine and have been for 30 years." I'm terribly sorry to have to vote against something that they are interested in, but my opinion is known. I've expressed it in the past. I need to explain that it's based on that and the arguments that have been presented here and I vote no. Mr. Plummer: Mr.. Mayor, for a matter of clarification, pa. I ask the staff, you said that it would go before the PA". - when and be back here when? Mayor Ferre He said they would be back here April,. is what he said, Mr. Plummer. l aM going to ask them on the record for a definite date. Mr. Podriguat: I think we can meet the PAS meeting of April 3rd, which is the first meeting of the pA9 in April and it will be before you on April 25th. Mr. baWkins: This open confession is good for the soul, let me confess mine, i too feel that the people against the billboards made a good showing,, 1 also feel that those in favor Dade a good showing. But you elected me up here to vote my convictions. Some of them you are going to agree with. Some of them you are going to disagree with. Therefore, I'll also be running again in November. In November I will know whether you disagreed with me at 9110 whether you disagreed with me with none; and at that time, it you re-eleot me, you' will. re-eleot me knowing that as I sit up here, I will vote my convictions. Mayor Fer.re: That sounds like my statement to T. Millard Fair! r Mr. Dawkins: That's whyiyou got the recall. .Mr. Plummer: You might have a problem, Miller, if these people out here take out billboards to defeat you. Mayor Ferre: Be careful! I tell you, I wouldn't touch that one with Alice Wainwright and Rose Gordon if I were you. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, I think what we've seen here today is that we have a lot of well-intentioned people, some for and some against, but I think that even though sometimes you might agree, sometimes you might not, you can still go about this in a dignified manner and disagree publicly and still respect each other. What I can't understand is the hypocrisy that I see time and time again from that wonderful palace of malice by the bayside the morning and afternoon Miami Herald that here they have all kinds of paid advertisement by their firm advertising in billboards their newspaper and then they have the gull -'to come out with editorials --it's fine expressing their -point of view, which we should respect that- but editorials which agree going to the range of being insulting, personally insulting to members of this Commission, talking about stomachs or lacks of stomachs. I think that while the vase majority if not all the people that are here today have honorable intentions, they either feel very much for something or very much against something, I think that what we have to look at are the facts why these so called pillars of the community at the palace of malice, what their intentions are behind this. Of course, I don't really think some of those people there care either way whether you have the billboards or not. Their contention is that their pocketbooks are going to hurt, because the people that spent the thousands and thousands, of dollars in advertising in billboards are people that usually would place .ponies in newspapers that they did not have billboards to advertise in. In other words, it would affect the Miami Herald's pocket. If they were so much against billboards acid particularly billboards in those areas, I don't think they would be advertising like this. I don't think this is something that anybody made up. All of you have seen the Miami Herald advertising in billboards many times over and over Again, A couple of areas that you do have some major difference are the following, billboards, bus 4enches, they all pay the City a fee, In fact, if I can get Mr, Whipple up here to do..•do you have any recollection now up the top of your head how much bus benches pay the City in a monthly or a yearly fee, how much pillboards pay the City? Mr. Pierdes. Billboards, Vice Mayor Oar tlloo do not pay tr16 A, 4 City a rde. They take but Wffiit-S t��t' COMStruttiOh and dredtibh& It is not a revenue soutde. Mr. Carollol. But they are still paying the City a fee when they take out a per ' Mit, They have to pay something in order to construct that billbbardo I Mr. Pierce: yett air, Mr. Carollo! Therefore) the City has revenues. The question is you look at the City and you see newspaper ads. I mean) it we are going to talk about beautifying the City) it we've going to talk about protecting the public's right. bf-way and we're going to talk about public welfare, you have scores of newspaper racks that sometimes we have so many in places that you can't even cross an intersection without bumping into one of them. Then they have the gall without asking anyone's .permission, in public property to drill huge screws into the City's concrete and those that aren't screwed down into, the concrete where big poles are made and damaging City property, they get these chains and the tie them up around -Utility poles, City signs, anywhere they please. Maybe I'm missing the point somewheret but it seems to me like there's a major double standard here somewhere. I don't see how anyone can defend this by freedom of the press. Freedom of the press is when you interfere in trying to force a newspaper to publish something or other, like is done in other countries; like it's done in Nicaragua; like it's done in Cuba and the Soviet Union. But what I'm talking about here is freedom of the citizens, freedom of the City. What these newspapers have done is they've taken those freedoms, those rights that we have and they are telling us that we have no right in protecting the welfare of this community that they can place those newspaper racks anywhere they want to anyway they want to. I want to ask the City' Attorney to sit with me and any member of this Commission that would like to individually, to come up with an ordinance, in ordinance that's going to be for the public welfare of this community where, we Are going to limit the locations and the a=ount of newspaper racks that we can have in any given place. APPLAUSE. Mr. Carollo: How many feet away they are going to have to be from intersections, an ordinance that would not allow them, and if they do, they're going to have to pay the City for damages, to screw on screws to the sidewalk, to tie up chains around City of public property and that they would have to pay a yearly fee for each newspa-er rack that's out there to pay for City employees that are going to have to be assigned to inspect these newspaper racks to make sure they are in conformance with the laws that we will implement. C (Signs) The to of Ordiflatice Nog' 0500" 1 the 20mimg Of'diMaMde Of the City of Miatfti# Florida, is hereby amended as followat ttAMCLE 20. GENERAL AND 8UMEMENTARY REGULATIONS # SECTION 2026. '310146o SPSCtFIC LIMITATIONS AND REOUIREMENTS # 2026.15. Outdoor Advertising'signs. Signs used in the conduct of the Outdoor advertising 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 Projections of Embellishments. Tobal nn-face The area of an outdoor advertising sign shall not exceed seven hundred fifty (750) square feet for each surface, including embellishments, if any (with si— and embellishment area measured as provided at Section 2025.1-3, Area of Signs). Total area or embellishments, including portions falling within or superimposed on the general display• surface area, shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet. No, embellishment shall extend more than five (5) feet above the top of the sign structure, or two (2) feet beyond the sides or below the bottom of the sign structure. Embellishments shall be included in any limitations affecting minimum clearance or maximum height Of signs, permitted projections, or distance from any structure or lot or street line. 2026.15.2. himi t a b i 0M.3 011 1:0 cm t i 0'. rz .- i e M t3ti W & A eat'dool- *dvei tizins sie.6- i66 Retation to bimi'ved Access Hightle.1- -14� NO 0 a t do o' -, tiz-*.Arm �.&6il Q'A 3 r ib e eree-ted cvr,-Tb, ache'd' 3ite'-rdf Waitit'aiiied hundr 06 1 ci-azzted 'githi44 ed E68e) Feeb of: Hm 'ri-ahb-of %lay linen' cf- &A'17 -iahwa�' im'! dinti Ma eztnbii�hed by W!F it= ljoiiti=31 subdi,isizMa, ani:e--n :=Ch zigi& i.'J gjuraiiei 'HOH64 tal oi- 342 GAZI61e Of 410'. are -Abe. bi'an tf- (50) deg. eez With the cemte!-Iine-01'1�- Such 1i ... i t , d C. -3 hishway hi6hwa7. 3nd faced avlay F1 wit, �64616-j 'Ale. Wibilin zix Feet of th"44 Vne 1-6mited accezz Forth zabove Miai�! avipty vviHt ieQpect hi"h"07' to thm ml� such high-137:3. Words and/or figures atricken. 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. Sheet 5 of said Sciiedule of District Regulations is amended as follows: . "LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS" CGe GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GENERALLY) 5. Ground or -freestanding signs, onsite* shall be, limited to one (1) sign and forty (40) square feet of sign area F (for each face) for each business, or for each fifty N (50) feet of street frontage, whichever shall: yield 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 height limitation shall ' be twenty (20) feet incfuding embellishments, measurec from the crown of the nearest adjacent local or a-F-t-e-F-1aT_ street, r o t including limited access highways or 'ixpressways provided however --T-H—at the Zoninz Mministra..or at his discretion may increase the measuremen*.; of the crown by up to five (5) feet to accommodate unusual or -`undulating site conditions. 6. '3round or free standing signs, offsite, shall be limited to 2 for any lot, whether or not occupied by 3 building. Totmi: aU,face The area shall not exceed 750 -sq.ft. emmulatil-i) T—or V-I+ each surface-i including embellishments. The total height will not exceed thirty (30) feet, except as set forth in Section 2026715.2. including emoellishments, measured from the crown of the nearest adjacent local or arterial street, not including limited access 'Rignways or expressways, provided However T75-E, Ene Zoning Administrator- —at his discretion may increase th;a-- measurement BF the crown by up to five - (5 7 feet to accommodate unusual or undulating Site conditions. W'W - . W *' - W `y+>Y 1�,.TL.y} �t��Y�_��i.i`�t:�. 6�P.ri�.`!^'+�r•3�•�..Vii�r' .. r • . .. . .a . .. .. � . •.+4'. ►%•yii . .. .. .......:lit �.-. :...a.• :. ar: a. :;Sw': r.:{.a'.':.aai.:. .1•'.: ,'. .. .. rW',�t•:•.,'� : 000.04*A­04 WOW r oV V rh •... July 5, 1984 plus firlor)CIoil *UNOINB MILLIONS TO FLOg101AWr f j 1 Mayor Maurice Ferre Vice -Mayor, Dimitri Perez Commissioner Joe Carollo Commissioner Miller Dawkins Commissioner J.L. Plummer Richard Whipple, Planning Dept. P.O. Box 330708 Miami, FL 33133 ►i 1 1i.. ��` �9 JUL3�trrn11.1t Oct,pet�tive Date: Re: Billboards Along Public Roads and Highways Dear Sirs: As manager of GROWTH PLUS FINANCIAL, INC. and as a resident of Dade County, I would like to register my strongest objection to the proposed possibility that licenses may be granted to various advertising agencies and billboard operators to erect billboards along public roads and highways in our home, Dade County and Miami. The reason why I feel so strongly is because I love .Miami and I don't want to see her beauty marred by these unsightly monstrosit- ies. They are truly unattractive and distracting and, if per- mitted, will be an eyesore that we will come to regret. Let's not "sell out" for a modest sum in licensing fees to be collected and slight land valuation increases. Please protect my interests and other Dade residents' interests. Keep our city beautiful. Sincerely, Ted Qmholt, Manager TQ/cf . Y •��.r Y :.i:; X. a �••1 .•.Y .... 1Y���li•�i:11Y �•.SY � .. f..• . .. ....•. ..,.y..r.r • M.ralrr .......-. ... , . . ♦ .• ••r. • : i ii11.w YL y ... - .. ...Y.aritii:C•:d:Jt11.O+�•r..iiai�a• n.%4:a►i�: a. aY • . .. iY:•..b� ... . .a .a: !�ri i. +r:: .c a: Flonida South Chapter American Institute' of Armtects 1150,5. W. 22nd street . suite 1`8 i Warni, Florida 00129 June 27, 1984 Mavor Maurice Ferre City Hall 3500 pan American Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Dear Mayor Ferre and Honorable Members of the City Commission, a The Florida South Chapter of the American Institute of Architects would like to take this opportunity to voice our concern regarding amendments to the sign regulations of the zoning ordinance (Agenda Item #24, June-28, - • 1984) as they pertain to Billboards and/or general advertising structures. As you may be aware, the chapter has consistently over a number of years been involved with sign and billboard* legislation. in the City. The regulations established under Ordinance #6871 and subsequently incorporated into Ordinance`. #9500 were endorsed by the chapter as reasonable and proper_sitn legislation. We are very disappointed and disturbed. to learn, however, that billboard removal which has been in litigation for fourteen years has not been eifectuated and is not at this point of prime concern to the City of Miami. The amendments presently before the Commission are deemed to be a further .relaxation of the Billboard regulation of which the: chapter is opposed. The proposed sign height of 50' is excessive and is not in scale with our urban structure; the billboard spacing, although a control, is not one that would necessarily lesson the number of new sign locatirns in our set land use pattern; and, the changing of the angle when viewed in thc: context of the section being amended, has no merit. It is obvious that the proposed changes are directed toward changing the prohibition of billboards along expressways and the chapter would strongly urge the Commission to turn down any proposed amendment that would lead to elimination of this prohibition. S erelyF, _ r J�- Ume Filar, Pres{denc .. South Chapter._ erin,.Ingtitute of Architects J? *' :red cc; C41 � �I,i�:e t onar ���114r Dawkins "M" ..' #�k:slTl�`' .�s+r13111A:1�'T CQr=i.*$tQMcs Joe Carolle COM- ssiotlo r OQmearic Perez flaw -n G4ry4 Clty Vanuor Mr. Gr3tc RQ�ii<iSt� t, t�ite�:cQp, Planr tn4 3�ePa5cm4c1E T DT '; P,ANSCA t P 1 _ July 184 198,1, Ito a5 Planning Aavitery Boded der re=,,eral cf uhe City uoilCflis, 9ion by Lotion 34-72 7, .tune 28, 1084 , Eor the Purpose o.0 considering additional factbr, rlteonsidaration Of teat AMehdMeftt8 to Lonih9 Ordinance 9SOO as amended by afftending Section 2025 Signs, Specific Limitations and requirements of Articie 20 Certeral and SuPplementary Ikegulations to clarify billboard height, I introduce a billboard spacing formula, and i change current limitations on the angle of billboards from limited access highways# including expressways, allowing billboards to be -viewed from and allowed within 600' along ' limited access highways., including expressways, clarify applicable surface area —j of outdoor advertising signs (billboards): further amending sheet 5 of the gfficial - Schedule of District Regulations made a part of said Ordinance 9500 by reference and description in Section 320 thereof, pertaining to CG General Commercial Zoning district, Limitations on Signs' by providing for height limitations and a spacing formula for ground or free standing signs; onsite and offsite, clarify applicable 'surface area of outdoor advertising signs (billboards), and containing a repealer provision and a severability clause. Secretary filed proof of Legal Notice of Public Hearing. ' Mr. Rodriguez: Presentation of this item will be made by Mr. Whipple. Mr. Manes: We'll give you a moment to set up there, Mr. Whipple. Mr. Whipple: Thank you. I'm sorry, I didn't. realize number 4 was put off. Mr. Chairman, members of the 1A/ Board, just recapping for a moment, you might "remember the last time this item in a similar form or almost identical form was ( before this Board requesting certain considerations with respect to height of signs, angle of signs and we had quite a serious discussion about those two items. At the end of that meeting, this Board had made recommendations recommending 50 ft. height limitation. I'm not sure of the angle recommendation but the final recommendation. —resolution of this Board, was to inquire, of the City Commission as to whether this Board was to consider the facing, angle, etc. in relation to expressways. It did go on to the City Commission and before the item got started, it was suggested by the Commission that we had not included all the _f suggestions that the industry had proposed to the Commission at a previous meeting and_they very specifically informed the Department and a reflection to the Advisory Board as to what they should or shouldn't consider. The bottom line of this is something similar to what I had indicated to you at'the previous' meetings. The angle has no significance unless you want to allow billboards along the expressway. The height has no significance unless you want to allow billboards along the expressway. We have a couple other items involved that being the sign area which was included last time which you have not heard before but it's in the item tonight, and. the other item was spacing of billboards and we truly don't believe spacing is necessary unless, agaiAt you want to include billboards along expressways. So that brings us to where we are tonight. in that, number one, the City Commission asked the Department and the Planning Advisory Board. to consider whether or not they want to allow billboards along tkpragmwayt and the Caity Cammi!Igiom also got the imdUtta-7 to finally ad" it that through all thi.' dett7tand4ri*,19 of hdight And Andleg and What have '15u, what they're really looki,.i(l !or Is to put 6111boarda along the LAXpreAsWAyd and that 'l part of the record and that's dur basic d0M§id4tdti6n herd this evening and t'll integrate the other qleMdMta as we go along, in the City of Aiafflij - therelt been a Prohlbitidm against billboards along expressways within 600 It,, with some exceptions and I'll explain those 49deptionA in a Mffidn'to Since 1063. That law was questioned. bade County law Came into ha*, aril our new law in 65 took over Where the bade County law left off. It prohibited billboards within 600 It. except where billboards that do not face the expressway but face other streets will be permitted within 600 ft. because they do not face the expressway and they face, let's say, A crossing street, we attached an angle to that because the angle might be of consideration with regard to expressways and we said it shall be parallel to the expressway or not exceeding an angle Of 10 degrees to the expressway and therefore, following through with .the intent of the provision of.1prohibition except that where signs are facing in other areas, fine, we have no problem and we had an allowance, re: the angle, parallel, 10 degrees from and what have you. All we were . doing With the other part of that section was to allow billboard that weren't facing the expressway to exist to other surface streets, on the most part, or to other streets that did not face 'the expressway. So again, we're to the bottom line, forgetting the angle for a minute and forgetting the height for a minute, you don't need a 50 ft. billboard in the City. Thirty feet as we had under the old ordinance is more than enough. The only reason you'd want 50 or 60 ft. is if you were facing the expressway, so again we're back to the issue, are we facing the expressway or aren't we? Botto.n line or start with the bottom line as far as that is concerned, the Planning Department recommends lbsolutely'no. Billboards should not face the expressway. We have many, many reasons why they shbuld not and I'd like to give you a few and then I'd like you to show... like to show you some examples of what billboards along the expressway look like through a few brief slides. Number one, when it comes to expressways the objective of a billboard or sign even, any sign, is to attract one's attention to that sign and I would suggest to you when we're traveling expressways and going 50-55, or to be realistic, on 1-95, except in peak hours, we're going 60 or 65 and you have heavy traffic and you take your eyes off to see a billboard, that in my opinion and the Department's opinion and' many others' opinion, constitutes a potential hazard and I'm sure we're goin-1 to hear it tonight, do I have the statistics to say that that's a hazard and you'll notice my words, potential hazard, and leading into that is that the objective of the billboard is to take your attention and if you take your attention off of the road, that is a potential hazard. I don't think there's to much question on that. I'd like to show you the physical characteristics that if you approve billboards along the expressway, what you're likely to see. (Mr. Whipple started to show the slides.) Perhaps we could have a couple more lights off. If you give me a moment, just let me pull this back a little bit further. The first couple or three slides, I just wanted to show you what a 50 or 60 ft. billboard in height looks like. it's a little bit dark but you can see the cars below. This is from Palmetto Expressway which is probably elevated to a height of at least 25 ft. at this point and you can see that this sign is approximately 50 or 60 ft. in height. It's an existing board on the Palmetto Expressway. This is another one and again bythe scale of the building in the parking lot, you can have an ices of what the impact of the additional height that's being requested, of which we're recommending against, does. Again, we're tal.1jing about a 50 or 60 ft, high billboard, (Pause) And this is a third, this Particular sign is a Marlboro and we'll get back to it later On but again it is in the 50 to 60 ft. height range, I would imagine that base is close to 5 ft. around at the bottom and July 18f 1984,, TtOM 5 Planning Advisory 5037d 41 these are the b6ttnvial - to allowing blllbc5arldla along the 4A-ert�glawayi i NIS lftwos t1h4le he iq h t and wahe ,1,Aqft4A.tUde thAt %-.aft bddUr. very 4uid"."ly vt just 'Alotnd to tame I tr"'O dd,.Vh aLmetto with you And let ta pteEaCd t 1111 0" , this it nog all the Palitettd, Dade C4ounty has A regulation that I -a the game as the City of 14iamis They do tAdt allow billboards within 660 I them I J, S W _:tL -it7 of Riami d6e.91 hdw4vL ft, They ps"'ohib.ithe C 5 r o through... excuse td* through dome unknown reason Or What have you, the County COMMi8giOn d4dided to eliminate their control over thundipAlItiag Whidh they've had 81ndd 1063 and tay# "Okayt I ML-,lidipalitidap do your own thing... We're just gohna worry about ,our part,* which is fine. We have Our Part in gear. However# Madleyt. Hialeah, Hialeah (3ardent and other municipalities of where these signa are taken have decided they would like billboards; evidently, they don't have the respect for the rest of the region that the City of Miami has, So as we go down Palmetto Expregswayt we see these signs of the height and magnitude. if YOU remember this was one that Showed you the height of before and these are a little poor in graphics but you can as you go on down there's five billboards in that viewo' there's six in this view, you.can see the configurations that they take. You can see how they vie for the intentiont.4your attention. You can see the height. We're coming up to that interesting one that I indicated to you and that's a triangle. That's a three -faced sign. Two faces, one for the northbound, one for the southbound and o,ie for the eastbound which is quite a structure as you can see. Thi.2i is as you're looking back. Let me go back to that just for a minute. it's just not a matter of allowing a sign as you're going in a direction. You saw this sign earlier heading in a north direction. This is the same sign heading in a southerly direction. It's what they call a crossover as far as viewing goes and you'll see in a minute another couple more examples of that. Again, this is a southbound view when the traffic's heading north or a crossover view. Here's a crossover looking at the signs that are on the southbound side but are available for northbound viewing. I think you get...have an idea as to what lack of aesthetic consideration there is, lack of potential hazards, lack of awareness as to the opportunities that exist in this community particularly more so than in other communities with our climate, with our trees, with our low profile, how this intrudes, is unsightly and really not necessary. The next two slides, just wanted to indicate to you what was meant by a sign that would be permitted within 600 ft. of an expressway but did not face the expressway, how it's allowed. This happens to be a-,. NW Sth .Street. As.you see it is facing the eastbound Sth Street traffic. It is faced at an angle with 1-95 which is behind it and that is the intent of the angle and the exception to the 600 ft. prohibition next to expressway. It does not discriminate; therefore, for those signs that are not there for the expressway it allows them. It was intended to allow them with those , conditions but again I'm reminding you that the request was to change the angle within this prohibition area. Fire, I told you last time you could change it to 100 degrees as long as it , doesn't face the expressway. Fifty foot height, you basically don't need 50 ft. height particularly adjacent to an expressway when it can't be viewed by the expressway. So finally we get back to what's really wanted and really is a concern that they want billboards along the expressway such as I've showed ex*ist in a fortunately small segment of Palmetto Expressway, only those three municipalities; Dade County doesn't do it. Gables doesn't do it. South Miami doesn't do it. None of the other municipali- ties do it except Medley, Hialeah Gardens and Hialeah. This is that same sign faced away from the expressway and please , understand this picture is taken from pulling oft the driving lane and there's no way that somebody traveling southbound on 1-95 could see this sign but the present provision and previous provisions allow that sign to occur within the 600 ft. 31 July IS, 1984# Item 5 Planning Advisory 5oard t have- two snore items one being spacing , i',1 yo LAd to .+ax_, a I: e##t briee(:dt tints as} ��,O pacgsnq and,.ineyrha{p1s{it backup q�yy oo �;d ckup vetj uidl.t t' .by but, •js �'1 �s�.S.cing, spat l.iig is a mII �Ii u+4. it's a darrot because our lobbyists in Tallahassee and our lawyets Have convinced the state that billboards are all right as long at they're spaced. Well i can't argue with that, it's a degree with sparing and we suggest to you when you're going 55, 50, 55 tiles an hour on an expressway, the viewing power of a billboard, they have to be at least spaced 1,500 ft to have that, viewing power. That's roughly four billboards within a mile and th.+ only reason they want the epacing is because they know they won't want the competitor to dome 'in and block their view. With the *spacing requirement, they can put their sign in at there first and therefore Nobody else can come in because if a competitor come in, they'd be able to block their view and that would be the first one within the, whatever, distance for viewing. Bottom line on that issue is that we do not feel spacing is an important element. We do not feel it's applicable although we said it was at our previous meeting, `In the local streets we don't feel that it'i applicable there and we don't think it's necessary on expressways -if you were to allow signs on expressways. If you want a recommended distance requirement or separation, if you see fit to,allow billboards on expressways, we'd be glad to give you a dumber of at least 2,500, 3,00O, 4,000 ft. by which to not perpetuate this unaesthetic problem that is being fisted upon you as chatiga► in regulation this evening. Give you an idea of distance...(pause while Mr. Whipple was looking for the appropriate slide) I'm sorry, went the wrong way. There is 550 ft. between that sign on the left and the one in the background. That's 550 ft. Now you understand I don't have a top notch camera, nor does the Department at this point, the distance between this sign is roughly 550 ft. between. that and the next one on'the left. You have approximately 1,000 ft. between this sign and not the far one but the next one, in the middle where it has something sticking on top, just trying to give you an -idea of depth with respect to the spacing formula. Lastly, at the last Commission meeting when they directed this Board and this Department to consider billboards along expressways, there was another item thrown in and that's a clarification item regarding what they called sign area at that time. It's an item that came before this Board in Excess of a year ago in relation to Ackerly Advertising's request of which we concurred with. The way that the 9500 sets forth the sign area suggests you can have two signs limited to 750-sq. ft. It was not the intent of 9500 to say you could have one at 750 or two at 325. So we have clarified that wording and made sure that they can have two double-faced ... they can have two faces on a structure each of which could total 750 sq. ft. as long as they're not within 600 ft. of the expressway and do not face the expressway. So we have included that clarifying wording. If the Board has any questions as to our proposals we'd be...I'd be glad to answer. , Mr. Manes: Are there any questions from the Board members at this time? Mr. Benjamin: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: - Mr. Benjamin. Mr. Benjamin: I would like to know why is it that after this Board spent a considerable amount of time at a previous meeting discussing this item and deciding that we should have 50 ft. signs and 1,500 spaces that Mr. Whipple should come back before us discussing these matters? The only thing that's before us, the facing, the angle and the distance from expressway and I think that some steps should be taken to let the City officials know that they must not waste our time in this fashion. I strongly object to this sort of behavior. 4 July 1$, 19840 Item 5 Fldnning Advisory Board • �p�II ,p7 �,t, a ;�tr� :•ta�-ie±s: '•tr. �ocri•j�3e, Kr. Aodriguet! t think that maybe you oan ask the Mayor and the City cdmrftssion not to instruct the staff to done baek before you On this item because they $pecifidally asked us to come on these three spec i f id i tettis that 'ale have 16V4red and I believe the presecitation by Mt-- Whipple had spedifitally oovered the distance between signs, the angle towards the expressway, the height of the billboards and trying, to clarify for your..;i be:i.ieve so you will knew exactly what they asked us to do, all the issues that were involved in that decision because we believe it is a very important decision that you all are going to make today in recomending Eor or against this recommendation and I would like to add something else. Mr. Whipple has been emphasizing the importance of this item as it relates to a hazard situation and so on, I would like you to imagine -95 as you are driving towards downtown looking into the bay, into one, what I believe is a beautiful skyline., and how that would be blocked or interfered by billboards in the future even if they are 1,000 or 1,500 from now on. I think that the recommendation that you are making today will set precedence for future generations and I think the responsibility that you have today in many cases it may be more important than some of the decisions that have come to you in the past. That is why the Department has taken such a strong position on this issue because once you put a billboard over there► it can not be removed. Mr. Benjamin: Mr. Chairman, I would 'hate that I'm taking my responsibilities seriously and the information I have before me says that this matter is referred to the Planning Advisory Board for further consideration to include facing, angle and distance of billboards from expressways. I don't see any place in this agenda where we are being asked -to reconsider the 50 height limitation or the 1,500 space between the billboards and that's the only comment I'm making, you know, I'm not in a disagreement with the comment Mr. Rodriguez is making, I'm just considering with how these matters are presented to us and I would hope that they'll present it in a much more useful and beneficial manner. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcia. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, I have a comment to make regarding what Mr. Rodriguez said. Sergio Rodriguez just said that he's very worried about looking east and seeing Biscayne Bay full of billboards but he never is worried about looking and seeing the monster of the rapid transit which is blocking my way of the view of the sea and he never protests against that monster that we, a taxpayer, have to pay for that (word inaudible) and also to Mr. Whipple, he says that at the peak hours, at the peak hours in the expressway my friend, Mr. Whipple, you can not go more than 30 miles per hour, your bumper to bumper, bumper to bumper and you won't have any accidents more than you have today because of a billboard. If you go 35, 25 miles an :our you can not go faster. _ Mr. Manes: Any other comments from the Board? Mr. Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes; Mr. Rodriguez. Mr. Rodriguez; If I can respond to 'fir. Armesto- Garcia. 1 don't believe we're discussing today the rapid transit. If and when we discuss that item, I will address anything that you might want t o address on that and you may get more from me than you might want to and in relation to the other July 18, 1984, Item a Planning Advisory board L stj , ¢ ,+'1 i v ,► ch�k, tc ;4,,d he a kdyfiisgp 1+h `•tr t�'h♦ppie J �a 4 i L r�1 . Ui i, J J t1 ; :: � , +3 v h .Y C J• c _ r . i i' 1 W ei a _ 1.1 - i 1 1�c m l l :a . 1 i. . I t�. te,ltai,oned was tt;at when ,you 1mc not going -it Peak �,,Ouct A. -Id lou will be gbir1l It VO-rl1 ucaa-t Sb_ eed-a And 3— that *e=i lt► it will be dangeero�l5. I think 4 in a way the example he's showing on the palmetto might not be the best possible in the sense..*well this is the only e;taffiple that we dah. show but in the City of Miami when you go through the expressways, you have exits and entrandes veey close to each other with a list of traffic going through all the time making the situation more ha2ardous than in ether places 6L : the County and of the State of .PldridA. 1 r �# Mr. Luaces: Mr. Cha irnnan? Mr.' Whipple: Mr. Chairman, if... Mr. Manes: Just...I think you had your hated ` up before Mr. Luaces. I'll recognize you next, Mr. Luaces. w Mr. Whipple: ,' I just wanted to add one more piece to my presentation not in what have you...but at the City commission meeting- Rathy, if you would --at the City Commission meeting regarding this item before they referred it back to the Board, there was a letter frcm the American Institute of Architects regarding this item. It's being passed out to you. I don't see any need to read it but in essence they have two problems. One-they're...have a problem and recommend against the proposed amendment to allow billboards along the expressway and they also in a very slight way criticize the City as to their handling of the elimination of billboards under previous legislation saying or indicating that they haven't seen much accomplishment and they're asking the question "why?". The second letter handed out to you was just one that came in the mail. Growth Plus Financial, Inc by Mr. Ted Omholt, again objecting to billboards along the expressway and I think they ought to be included as part of the record this evening. Mr. Manes: Mr. Luaces. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman, Sergio... Mr. Manes: Into the microphone, please. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman, Sergio, I requested in a previous meeting to know and now you mention that there would be too many signs on I-95 that would block our skyway facing the bay. It's pretty hard to see the bay from I-95 but I requested previously to know how many billboards are we talking about with a 1,500 ft. spacing. Nobody was able to answer that question to me at the previous meeting, about two meetings before this one, when the request from the industry was not as extensive and then we were arguing only about was it grade or not grade, now we,'re involved with something more deep and I requeste9 that and nobody answered and now I'm listening to... Mr. Rodriguez: Well part of the problem is that you can not establish exactly where would they buy and in what = s== areas you have the zoning. The zoning is in different places throughout I-95, okay, it's there but we don't know what control they have at this point of those properties. We don't know what zoning change might come in the future. Mr. Luaces: But we're basing our study, the Department's basing out study also in something that is out of thin air. There may be 1,000, and there may be only 4 or 14,,. Mr. Armesto-Carcia; Or six. Mr. Luaces: ...or 6. Mr. Whipple; Not Sir. 0 6 July 18, 1904, ItCm 5 Planning Adlrisory 504rd Mr. Aodriauea: 4411, t tnink one is 6A! yo %Amvp In sp=" iGri bU t t Can' t ?i ICU Hr. %,uaces: Well, in my opiflit5tli it's not because when 1 go to Orltlhdd, for instance, t travel Over there and t see ' signs that will tell tftq what Holiday tmm t dould drive to and things like that, they advertise the city and the things that are oEtered by the city and t look forward to looking at those billboard.$ to be honest with your Even Walt did. t Mr. Arrnesto-Garcia: Mr. !Ghairman, one ;tinute to Finish my interrogation. t also would like to point out that Mr. Whipple tentibned tunicipalities... of course, Coral Cables can not object or approve because Coral Gables has no expressways. I mean, you can not give me the example of Coral Gables or West Miami, West Miami has no expressway at all. Coral .-Cabl.es... but Medley, Medley has an expressway and they want it and they have it. Hialeah has an expressway, they -have it. Hialeah Gardens has expressway,/they have it but they are municipalities who can have or can not have and they Chose to have it but don't give me the example of Coral Gables because Coral Gables is a locked in municipality and they have no expressway even they don't have a� rapid transit either. I mean, Coral Gables is not a good example of that as well as 'hest Miami. It's like Miami Beach. Miami Beach don't have expressway. I mean, they don't have a cemetery either. Mr. Whipple: They don't have billboards et;:e:, neither does Coral Gables period. Mr. :lanes: Okay. Mr. Benjamin, in response to your initial comment there, my understanding, I'm not the Law Department maybe Mr. -Maxwell will correct me if I'm wrong; our recommendation at the last meeting did include•a height limitation and a spacing recommendation to the City Commission. They did not take any action on that recommendation and in their request for consideration by this Board concerning angle, facing and distance from the expressway, it's conceivable that new information could be made available and it would induce the Board to change their recommendation from the previous meeting. Mr. Maxwell: That's correct, Mr. Chairman. When the City Commission sent the item back down to this Board, it was again properly noticed and I believe Mr. Rodriguez gave certification and notice, it was properly noticed, therefore this Board has jurisdiction of the whole ordinance, the whole proposed ordinance at this time so it can consider everything that was in a previous one as well. Mr. Benjamin: Mr. Chairman, all I'm saying is i that the information that's given to me does not refer to a reconsideration of the 50 ft. height limit or the 1,500 ft. spacing but rather a consideration of the facing, the angle and distance of billboards from the expressway, that's all I'm saying. Mr. Manes: Okay, well, it's, you know, that's the wording that we have here, The wording could just easily have been, you know, "Consideration including but not limited to." It was not, you know, solely restricted to those three items, Those were three items that they wanted to address. I feel it's within the purview of the Board to readdress the previous issues if that's the Board's desire. Do we have any more discussion on this item? A Ms. Kolski: Yes, I... Mr. Benjamin: Finally# Mr. Chairman, I don' want to 'give the impression that I'm pic} iaq on Mr. Whipple".. Kr. Whipple; yes you are. 7 July 1.3, 1993,. Item 5 Planning A4visovrly Zoav r Ott. aenjafftiftll Not t deal with languages j,4ry care; oily and that' l all f' ;t sari ing . Mr. ;Manes: Thank you. Mr. Whipple! Thank you. Mr. Manes: Is there any other Comments at th1t tithe? ` " Ms. Kolski! ohd question, I warted to ask if whether you had the specific wording of the City COMMiss iOn # t request handy to that Mr. aenjamin could hear what their actual request was. Obviously, they want as to fight it out and send theta a definite decision one way or the other and that's probably what they'll go with. Mr, aenjamin: Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to accept what you have said. 11m sorry. Mr. Manes: okay, I think we've settled that. Just before we open the publ.c hearing, I would like to say to all of you that are here on Sinner Key, it is scheduled for eight o'clock, at the conclusion of this item we will go into the special public hearing on the Dinner Key Master Plan project and we're now ready to open the public input section of the public hearing concerning agenda item number S which is proposed amendments to Section•2026. Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: Mr. Maxwell. Mr. Maxwell: For the record, I would like the record to reflect that the letter that Mr. Whipple passed'out was a.letter from Florida...it was from Jerome Filer, President of the Florida South Chapter of the American Institute of Architects and it's to Mayor Maurice Ferre dated June 27, 84' and it will be introduced into the record as an exhibit for this item. Mr. Manes: Okay, does the second letter...do —� you wish to do that to the second letter, also? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, we will include also the letter from Ted Omholt, Manager of Growth Plus Financial, Incorporated. E Mr. Manes: And that's also addressed to the Mayor. Mr. Rodriguez: Also addressing the billboards and addressing the Mayor and ... the Mayor and the Commission and it was raising. the objection to the proposed possibility for advertising agencies and billboard operators to erect billboards along public roads and highways. Mr. Manes:- Thank you. This is a public hearing item, those of you in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this item, we're gonna ask you to stand and be sworn in and then we always have the proponents for the item here, petition number 5, speak first and then the opponents will speak second there. (Man in the audience started to speak out. Mr, Manes: Okay, any.,.any comments or questions that you have will need to be on the public record and we're gonna:, you know, as we get everybody sworn in. -,are you addressing the agenda item number 5 the signs' a July 19, 1984, item 5 Flann ng Advisory Board 3. from in t.t,.d audience. Mrs Rands! Okay, sorry you can't 8aV anything from ytjur seat. if you want to address the goard.,,Oefttlontan *walkdd to the rftidrOPhone) We'll need your name and address for the record. Mr. Aasalonet lift Pat Aagalone# 1600 SW 2 Avenue al-d it's five minutest that's allt, ye're all here and t promise you 'kA-hert Won't be no discussion on it. t just want to tell You what we want and We'll get out of here. Mr: Manes! Okay, are you talking about agenda item number, I believe, it's ll� Mr. Atsalonet We re actually 11t. yes. Mr. Manes: Okay] well You're not going -to be able to do anything on 11 until we conclude number S. At that time we'll address whether or not we can allow you live minutes prior to the scheduled hearing.-, Mr. Assalonet Thank you. (Another gentleman speaking out from the audience) Mr. Manes: CAddressing a gentleman (Mr. Halt) in the audience] Okay. Okay, are you talking about agenda item' number 5, this public hearing on signs? (Mr. Malt answered from the audience. Inaudible.) Mr. Manes: Okay. Is there anybody else wishing to speak on agenda item number 5? (Addressing Mr. Knox) You're an attorney. (Addressing the other gentleman) Are you an attorney? Mr. Malt: No, sir. Mr. Manes: Okay, we'll need to have you sworn in and... (Mr. Perez-Lugones swore in the gentleman) Mr. Manes: Okay, are you a proponent of this item? Mr. Malt: I have a little different position, sir, in that I'm not a proponent on the ordinance nor an opponent but if I may be permitted to say my position. Mr. Manes: Okay, well, Mr. Knox is up here first. Mr. Knox, do you mind yielding the floor? Mr. Knox- Not at all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Manes:- Okay, your name and address please. Mr. Malt; Harold Lewis Malt, 3695 St. Gaudens Road, Coconut Grove. I'm a professor of architecture and planning at the University of Miami and if you'll permit me a modest little degr s e sion here, I'll say that every semester in my course on Urban Planning Process I send my stu -dents down here to observe proceedings. I have to confess it's the first time I've been here before you but I'm very, Very impressed with the conduct of the meeting and the subjects that you deal with and I'm glad that I'm here. Any rate,toget to the point, I'd like to make some comments which I think are important in the total context, not specifically dealing with, which is why I hesitated on the matter of the ordinance or not the ordinance, not July l3f 1984, Item 5 Planning Advisory Boo itYt`:h as .situ, SC:ae ar?af i Yi - 1 J anCna and so . to th, k thiftk ltl a LMPOttarlt 1-0 r4MLI "b_+r 'ditoJ controls were hadted ri the tiirst place back in ahe 6o I --and b thinly that ,'ty Ortnefltt and sty intttesto det`lle frbtn the Ida adt so, t;at In 196'S t t.41as 1ftvited by the 30hntOft Admi;lystratiom to be a participant iCt the White House conference on natural beaut attended those Aeetings and those committee Meetings and f ;tusW tell you that just refreshed my mamory a little bit by readi:rtg the prbceedings just a few hours ago. Now, the Main thing was tt,are was a concern about billboards along highways and the coiiaensua of those that attended those proceedings in the 6011, middle 601 s, 'wAa that... Mr.' Manes: excuse le j excuse me one moment. Could you have somebody quiet them down in the lobby please. Okay, you can proceed. Mr. Malt: ,...that spacing whether it was 1, 000 ft. or some such number 'was not adequate. The real important issue was one of visibility. Visibility as you're proceeding along the highway to that any sign which is visible is presumptively a trespass on the -public richt-of-way. It was continually stated and confirmed in the proceedings that it should be deal with as that kind of a visibilityj as a trespass. It's an unlawful device and it"s appropriate to not permit those devices which destroy community values created by public investment. Nov of course traffic safety as well as aesthetics was also recocnized and I'm not going to belabor this point but those proceedings and other documents quote a number of legal citations such as Pollis vs. Smith, Illinois Appelate Court 1966. Based on many of those decisions at that time, the Dade regulations and of course, the City of siami regulations,, which actually was a very early model, a marvelous model nationally to the rest of the nation, some of those were challenged so that in 1970 the Fifth Circuit Court found that, and I quote exactly, "Ordinance 63-26," this is a Dade Ordinance, "63-26 is desired to accommodate two ends, to promote highway safety and to improve the beauty of the land and thus to increase the attraction of the area to tourists and residents alike." Well, I submit that there's some, therefore, some larger issues here than those dealing with statistics of size, height and so forth. We're dealing with some larger issues: traffic safety, aesthetics and something that I haven't heard here yet tonight, the question of. the total environment of this area with respect to its impact on tourism with its respect to Miami as a place that people want to come to have surcease from the commercialism that they see perhaps along some other highways or interstates in other parts of the nation and they want to see sky; they want to see skyline; they want to see palm trees; they do not want to see advertise- ments for, you know, we can name whatever we want that they're likely to see elsewhere in the nation. Well, I said I'd be brief and I'm brief and I thank you and I appreciate the opportunity to be here. (Applause from the audience.) a s— AN, Mr. Manes: We thank you for your comments. Mr. Knox. Mr. Knox; Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, so that there...mv name is George F. Knox for the record. I am an attorney and I represent E. A. Hancock: Advertising, Mr, Manes: We'll need your address please, Mr. Knox: My present business address is 200 SE 1 Street, Miami., Florida. There is no doubt that the essence Of these deliberations has to do with whether or not the City Commission has adapted or wishes to consider the adoption of the 10 July 16, 1934, Item 5 Planning 4dyizory 504rd v poi .C'1 Whilth wi;:l stti utddcr adiJer.isi:tg Aig;is Along I� „� 4 • w .. eY, y) bj o , N Yi ♦ iY �1 i� Pw' Y1 3'1 .r 'I. 1 y 11 •. iiii %1 % Yi 1.� X ♦a IYt .yG • \ •\yi/ \i .. 5 � I. a i `7 . t W ii i • • :1 � \.yl to lw .yJ . \ 1cJii.7 � W L o Ci 4 l f• �i 111 .YY I I G 311y�� 3 `wY p�{ .y�\ g � .i/ f j (1 C1 . i l A. f 1 �:� t C s n �.i i 11 •+ S i ci \: r1 t is') l 1 .'� lJ 1u to t 1 �Jl L •� :w �I 1 i i� 11 Yt tii •7 ii viY l 1 4;1 l lJ i. t'4i lG s clear, cl'_'ai.l¢ esvidiftded by Erie charge �,ha= the clt'l Cotl`mi:sgidh trantmitted back to this Board. In 1165 she Congress of the Oftited States passed and adopted the Highway Aeautification Act. This act represented 'Jfiited States gover1ft,-Aef1t policy of pettItting outdoor advertising signs aloft- federal high+gays and interstate highwa*ys And I quote, "To peor56te the reaeonabl.e, orderly and effecti•�e display of outdoor advertising." The Le0alature of the State Of Ploridar as recently Al its m6st recent session revisited the State Statute regarding outdoor advertisement and also stated its legislative intent and if I may quote in part, ".. , to enhance the economic well bei ng of the state by promoting tourist oriented businesses such as public accomodations, vehi la services# attractions, cam!pgroundS, parks and recreational areas and to promote points of Scanic, historic, p cultural and educational interestsi" which is reoisel the kind of advertisement that Mr. Luaces referred to earlier. The State of Florida in its wisdom as it revisited its statute regulating outdoor advertising Also set forth certain guidelines, certain restrictions and re \slations and I can state on behalf of E. A. Hancock that those regulations are reasonable and that the request that they hake pertaining to the amendment of Ordinance 9500 is consistent with the regulations and limitations imposed by the State Legislature at itz last session and simply stated, it is a respectful request of E. A. Hancock that a recommendation go forward to the City Commission which unequivocally pernits outdoor advertising signs along federally...federal-aid highways . and expressways su::-_ct to certain limitations. Number one that those signs be placed 1,500 ft. apart from any other per -milted sign on the same side of an interstate highway and that signs be permitted to be placed 1,000 ft.. apart on any federal -aid primary highway such as State Road 836 and 112 and that the sign s:.all be no more than 50 ft. in height above the crown of the main -traveled way recognizing that the State Legislature has provided a maximum height of 65 ft. and finally that no sign shall exceed 750 sq. ft. of facing per sign facing in recognition of t:.e fact that the State of Florida Legislature has permitted 950 sc. ft. It is the opinion of E. A. Hancock that the regulations that are proposed in addition to the regulations that have been imposed by the State of Florida are reasonable, rational, in the public interest and on behalf of E. A. Hancock, I respectfully request that you adopt these recommendations and forward them to the City Commission for its deliberation and I could be pleased to answer any questions that any member of the Board may have. Mr. Manes: Are there any questions fr--m the Board? (Pause) I have one, Mr. Knox. Just so I understand exactly what you just read which I believe was from the legislature, the crown of thi-i main -traveled way, I'm not saying what the Board is doing or going to do but, if the main -traveled way happens to be an expressway are you looking 50 ft. higher than the crown of ".e expressway? Mr. Knox: Yes, sir, and this is the definition that the legislature has given to the phrase crown of the main -traveled way.. Main -traveled way is defined as the roadway to which the sign is being addressed. Mr. Manes: Okay, thank you, Mr. Knox, Yes, sir. Mr. Benjamin: Mr. Chairman? Mr, ;banes: Mr. Benjamin. ll Ju1'y 18, 1984, Item 5 P14nning Adviss :: Body:M 00 'Ar, t144ow tuci iif4drqntisthat frcm the adtloh W LA 0 o A -Ijs a height I i, ft i 't W i '1-6h 6 0 t spec izyinn ahytlA ilIg ? Mr, Knox! To my knowledge, Mr. aemjaMim, the only diStiftdtitft is that the basis upon which the 50 ft. height was tfteAtured may not have been cleat`,tothe City Corftmisgi6n, Mr. Madesi Mr.. Rodrique2j just in case you cal look that up from our last meetiftqt t doft1h recall the exact wording. but I don't know if we could find that somewhere to find out if we were looking at SO height from the mains -traveled way or 50 height from the ground level. Mr. Rodriguez! Maybe, Mr. Whipple can do this better than I do As a refreshing your memory, but if I remember the evolution of this, the discussion at the beginning was 30 It. from grade and then from the crest. At some point, I think you made a recommendation to go 31 ft. from the crest or from the highest grade. Then because of the interest of the billboard industry, in order to make gome.allowances for the difference in height between the grade of the roads under and the expressway you allowed to SO. By going to 50 over the expressway in some cases you might have 80, 90 f1t., that's why you... Mr. Manes: Well, Mr. Knox is stating that the legislators put a cap of 65 ft. on that but I'm just wondering what the intent of the Board exactly was last time? Mr. Benjamin: Mr... Mr. Rodriguez: I understand last time you said 50, ft. period. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I understand we said 50 ft. period but that is irrelevant because we are going to have a new motion and everything new tonight. It's irrelevant what we did before because the City Commission sent it back to US. Mr. Manes: Okay, we're just trying to clarify things. We're not really in discussion yet. Mr. Benjamin: Well, Mr. Chairman, a copy of the ordinance I have here, it says 30 ft. from the crown of the nearest adjacent local arterial street, whatever that means, I don't know what it means and then in another section it says, "30 ft."--where is it, I missed it already --anyway that's what it says. Mr. Rodriguez: The way you have there is recommendation from the Planning Department... Mr. Benjamin; (Mumbled. Inaudible.) Mr. Manes: Any further questions for Mr. Knox'.. at this time? Okay, we may want to check with you again, Mr. Knoxf thank you.' Mr. Knox: Yes, sir, thank you. Mr. Manes; Is there anybody else wishing to speak either for or against agenda item number 5? (Pause) Mr. 14hipple. Mr. Whipple; yes, sir, if I may address the last 00int, If you may remember this all started out • initially.,. Mr. Zenjamin; That was the last point? 12 July 18, 1964, Item 5 Planning Advisory Board 2 ?ardolt to ;chat was _ne Last print? Mr. ��ttlipp e ., . the last toint had to do with the height with respect to the questions oL the Board. Tha ,�nb1e item initially started out with height only and as you ta7 remember, increased to potential spacing, to angles and to the consideration as to where the height was teaturea f om. 1.4e had siMply stated grade which is a tent that is comtonly used in the City of Matti in its Zoning regulations and we had 30 ft. above grade. We got into a debate as to grade because at that tote the Hancocc Co. suggested well; what happens if you have an elevated expressway, what is grade? As far as we're can see...we're concerned, grade is grade and as long as that was a question then we have specifically clarified in the provisions in front of you where the grade is and we put it in relation to the crown of the adjacent rights -of -way and we allow a 5 ft. variation if there's some probLem with the undulation of the grade in that particular" area at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator. Again, the whole point is that we feel a 30 ft. height limit on billboards overall in the City of Miami on arterial streets, streets where they are permitted by certain zoning districts and what hay. you, 30 ft, is a proper height. Now then, if you want 50 height....50 ft. height, then you obviously must be talking about expressways and that's what I said at the beginning of our comments with regard to the height of 50 ft. iq tied to the allowance of billboards along expressways. If you don't allow billboards along expressways, then I would suggest you accept our reco.:,.nendations and definitions of grade and set the height at 30 ft. .Secondly, Mr. Knox as Mr. Price did at the last time this item was before you, cited one or two sections out of a thirty-six page state law which I'd be glad to read all but to you, but one item that Mr. Knox did not mention contained 'in this bill this year, well, one of the prime items, was a clarification as to the standing of municipalities with respect to state law as the law applies along expressways or in municipalities and it very specifically, along with Dade County's law incidently, states that the municipality may enforce anything more restrictive or stringent than the state law provides. In other words, they're not telling the City of Miami that we must allow billboards along expressways and we will allow them with 1,500 ft. spacing; they're not telling 'us to do that.. They do tell us very specifically in that legislation, it's up to this jurisdiction or other municipalities or counties to enact the regulations they deem appropriate for their municipality or jurisdiction. Mr. Manes: I think that was ;Wade pretty clear to the Board but we thank you for your clarification. Is t.".ere anybody else wishing to speak on this item? Any closing comments, Mr. Knox? Mr. Knox: I'd just like to make one final comment, if you please, Mr. Chairman, and that is that assuming that this Board desires to implement the policy as it appears_to have been articulated by the City Commission, then it is necessary therefore to be consistent in the application of that policy and I refer specifically to the question of height. If indeed signs are to be constructed in such a manner that they may be seen from the expressways or federal --aid 'highways then it is incumbent upon the Department to recommend a height where they would not create a safety hazard by having signs that individuals on the expressway would have to strain to seQ and I woul,41 have no further comment beyond that unless there's some additiona'_. Question from the Board. Mr. Manes: Thank you, Mr, Knox. y: s 13 Ju :y lot 195,41, Ite^t 5 FlAnning Advil-r}• ao,3�d Mt, �11 .ji i Leian.< 'lou 50 .' It udh 4�or jea it at -aft tli�n. Mr, i�aflly5: Thank YOU Very much. ti theCa'g no one else wishing to spear do this item we're going to close the public inert of the hearing, go into discussion ar►onq the Board ti e►nbers. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Chairman? a Mr. Manes: Mrs Arttesto-Garca. Mr. Arttesto-yGarcia: Yes, I will stove for a motion. Mr. ,Manes! Okay, t realize you're well pretared for the meeting. t think just a suggestion I may havito I don't know what your motion is, but I think the first item that we need to address is whether Or not the Board wihhes to have 0E billboards facing the exprestt. ay. I think a notion first - answering that question will be required so that we Can deal with all the other items. I wouldn't want to have one motion addressing six different thin,�s: Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Okay, then I will move for the motion facing ... that the Board -allows the billboard facing the expressway. Mr. Diego: And I second the motion. Mr. Manes: Okay, is there any discussion an the motion? (Pause) Okay, the motion made by Mr. Armesto- Garcia, seconded by. Mr. Diego... Ms. Kolski: Yes, Mr. Chairman, are we still open to discussion? Mr. Manes: Yes, we are. Ms. Kolski: I think I established quite well at the last meeting wherein we discussed this item that I am not in favor of billboards facing the expressway and I ask my fellow board members to please consider what Professor Malt had to say. Blocking our visibility is a trespass upon our rights. It destroys community values. It presents a traffic safety problem i.� in an area where traffic is going at higher rates of speed and bumper to bumper and it also is an aesthetic intrusion and ruins the view from the expressway of the City. I do not feel that the angle should be facing the expressway. I think it's a severe - distraction and if we are going to vote in favor of this, that means we're voting against all of those things that he mentioned. Thank you. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Chairman... ' _j Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcia. ' Mr. Armesto-Garcia: ...I would like to respond for a minute. Number one, the Professor Malt says, he stated that he has been here for quite a number of years as follows, in 1965 he was invited to the White House but this is the first time I see Professor here in the City chambers in this meeting of us. He , never took the time to come here before... Mr. Manes; Is that... Mr. Armesto-Garcia; ...I have the floor --took here before. He has,,,must have some kind of personal interest against the billboard in When he comes here tonight. That's number one. Number two, I agree with fellow WrenZO Luaoes when he states that those signs are helpful for the 14 July 18, 1984, Item 5 Planning A&isory Board turaIg1-1e, t haV4 Ce4M 'Ie'L +eta 611 those 6L1lhoarls in Z=1l5 teat otlattno r ft_;,Ar Ta toa at s i,t o ` d!,O�r, four e),'Aloc?t in tnq of tLrnco;t, f 3ti drili:lg, to Ocala; de sv►ne place, doCi' t know where to stay and i see a aigm there, "Nett exit a Holiday Inflo" and ne ext xit it will nave a Shall gas station, whatever it is and those sighs help the tourist indu8tt7 and We need the tourist industry here in ,Miami and we, need the billboard facing the % highways. Ks. Kolski: Mr.; .Chairman? Mr. Manes: Ms. Kolski, Ms.'Kolski: Professor Malt may have not shown his face at City Hall very much, however, obviously he cares a great deal about the item or he wouldn't have taken his time to come here tonight and t1m sure a lot of people care about the item but they're not here tonight., If we are to disregard all of the things like safety and aesthetics and things like that, then one wonders why are we disrerlarding it. Do we have an interest in the billboards? (A few laughs fro,a the audience) Mr. Manes: Does that conclude your... Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: Mr. Luaces. Mr. Luaces: I believe that all of us here have an interest in the City of Miami and I feel strongly that they do - serve the community and the signs are all over the City of Miami and nobody protested when those signs were erected in other parts of the City and nobody live near the expressways. Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman, people do live near the expressway and people probably protested those signs. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Chairman, I will call the question, please. Mr. Manes: You'll need a second on that. Is there a second on calling the question? Mr. Luaces: Second. I second the... Mr. Manes: Okay, Mr. Rodriguez, please call the roll on calling the question. This is a motion to end debate and will require a two-thirds vote. (Secretary called the roll on calling the question) AYES: Messrs. Manes, Correa, Luaces, Diego, Benjamin and Armesto-Garcia NAYES: Ms. Kolski ABSENT: None. Mr. Rodriguez: The motion carries 6 to 1. Mr. Manes: Okay. The question has been called, the vote has passed bly a twQ-th rda vote. We're now ready to take a vote on the motion that's on the floor. I'll repeat it for the record. Made by Mr. Armesto-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Diego to change the current... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: ordinance. Mr. Manes; .:.ordinance, whatever. ek July l8, 1904( Item 5 planning x4viap"W7 Board .`',r ?,cid 'stij` t9,. ;'I6110 two 3Ct3CtVq 61s.lbd..�rA. the t rYeSs:va'}e . Me, Manes. Right. So that billboar6a can Ease the eXbressway. Please call the roll. ( Secre taty Called the toll) AYES. Messrs, Manes, Senjamin, Diego, Luaces, Correa and AM- dato-Garcia NAYE,S: Ms. Xolski ABStNT! None, Mr. Rodriguez: The notion carries 6 to 1. RESOLUTION PAS 75-84 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 20 GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, SECTION 2026 SIGNS, SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS BY ALLOWING SIGNS TO FACE EXPRESSWAYS. Mr. Manes: Thank you. Mr. Armesto-Garcia. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Now, Mr. Chairman, the next part of my motion is that I move that 9500 be amended to permit outdoor advertising signs within. 600 ft. of limited access highways and expressways. That is the other motion. That's the way you want it, no? . Mr. Manes: Yes, I think that's the appropriate way to do that. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Okay, that's good. Mr. Manes: When you say to allow them within, do you wish to include any limits or recommendations as to how close they may be or just... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: The signs may face the roadway up to 90 degrees. Mr. Manes: Okay, but we're talking about distance from the expressway. Do you wish to substitute any new distance? Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Six hundred feet of limited access, s sz as Mr. Manes; No, you're saying within 600 ft. Do you just wish to say that they may be placed anywhere? Mr. Armesto-Garcia; Anywhere. Anywhere. Ms. Kolski; How about the median strip. Mr. Armesto-Garcia; The median strip's part of the expressway. Please don't insult my...our fellows' intelligence. Mr. Manes: Okay, okay. Mr. Armesto-Garcia; We're talking about signs facing the expressway, not inside the expressway. to uIon ?•tr. '-tan«,s: I r�kay. :� there a �ectnd to that I IIW Mr. Diego! YeS, l second that totif�n. Mr. Manes: Okays we have 3 Motion made by Mr. Artesto-darcia, seconded by Rr. Diego to allow outdoor billboard advertisement, outdoor advertising signs also known as bi`Abdardn, within 600 ft. of exptessways. Mr. Armesto-garcia: And if we can appraise a friendly amendment from Ms. Kolski, not in the median. I want she to be happy. ' Mr. Manes: I don't think... Ms. Kolski: .Sir, I don't feel the compulsion to be particularly friendly. t don't think we've been friendly to the citizens of this City in this action. Mr. Manes: Okay. Mr. Maxwell: .fir. Chairman? (Applause from the audience.) Mr. Manes: Mr. Maxwell. Mr. Maxwells Maybe the maker of the motion would clarify, (cleared throat) excuse me, to exclude billboards within the public right-of-way, at least making that some. line of demarcation. - Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Okay, to exclude the billboards on the...that's of course, on the right-of-way, whatever you say, Mr... Mr. Maxwell: They are excluded by statute but maybe you'd like to make it part of your motion. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: We make sure we don't violate the statute. Mr. Manes: Did you have a comment, Mr. Rodriguez? Mr. Rodriguez: I felt that was not necessary because they are not allowed within the right-of-way anyhow. Mr. Manes: They're not allowed. Mr. Rodriguez: At this point, they're not allowed. Mr. Manes: Okay. Do you wish to make that part of your motion? Mr. Armesto=Garcia: Yes, I do. Mr. Manes; Mr. Diego, do you wish to second? Mr. Diego: Yes. Mr. Manes: • Okay, motionasmade by Mr. Armesto- Garcia is to allow billboards within 600 ft. from the expressway but not on public right-of-way and made by Mr. Armesto-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Diego. Is there any discussion, further di,scussion? (pause) Being none, please call the roll. 17 July lo,, 1904, item 5 Manning .Mv '50r'y Boars �2 ,teta't tV19 if 011 AYE 8.- Messts. '•lanes, C-40er!ia, Luades, Diego, aenjamin and Ar;tcSto-Garcia NAYES: Ms. Kd1ski ABSENT: Norte. Mr, Mdrlguet: The motiom carries 6 to 1. RESOUI ttON PAB 76-54 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OP Ari AME►iOMCNT TO T#E TENT OF ZONING ORDWANCE 5500, AS AMENDED, BY 1,,48NDING ARTICLE 20 GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, SECTION 2026 SIGNS, .SPECI?tC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS BY PEPHITTING THE ERECTION or SIGNS WITHIN 600 FT. Off` ANY LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAY, INCLUDING 8XPRESSWAYS, BUT EXCLUDING THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OV--WAY.' Mr. Manes: ,Mr. Armesto-Garcia. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Now, the other part of the motion would be to incorporate 1,500 ft. from any other permitted sign on the same side of the highway, if on interstate highway and 1,000 ft. from any other permitted sign on the same side of the highway if on a federal -aid primary highway. Mr. Manes: is there a second to that? Mr. Diego: Yes, I second the motion. Mr. Manes: Okay. Motion made by Mr. Ar3esto- Garcia is to have a spacing formula between signs of 1,500 ft. minimum on interstate highways and 1,000 ft. on federal -aid highways. Is that correct, Mr. Armesto-Garcia? Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Manes: Motion made by Mr. Armesto-Garcia, seconded by Mr. Diego. Is there discussion on -this? Ms. Rolski; Yes. Mr. Chairman, I truly believe that if you're going to move them closer, you're gonna allow them at all, that you should have the spacing be ... you should have them a lot'farther apart. Mr. Manes: Well, we're going to discuss this, I think, for a moment or two here. I have some discussion on this. Does anybody else in the Board? (Pause) Okay, under` discussion, I think there's a few things we need to take into consideration here, one is that the wording as it's proposed by Mr. Armesto-Garcia which was taken from the state wording is clearly on this, you know, it clearly says on the same side of the highway. I think that this Board ought to take into consideration that with the spacing formula we're looking at here and considering we've already seen pictures of signs on both sides of the road that are crossing over so that you conceivably could be going, let's say, northbound or southbound and see as many as ten signs per mile on a federal. -aid highway and eight s ns, roughly, , g g ! per mile on an interstate. I think that the :Board ought to consider the amount of signs that you're actually permitting with the wording that "fir, Armesto-Garcia has suggested and that the state has built into their legislature. Does the Board f0l1Qw my reasoning or my theory on that? Mr. Armesto-Garcia; yes. .itlilLJi tJ theta illy 1W4�111iM4,Mk-4 ; q�i'�j�e i�a�� bn nis? Ns. Kolski: Yeah, ghat dues the state recommend aain Mr. Mates: the state is eecoffimend iftg a minimum of 10500 it. on interstate highways which IS t-96 aAd ij000 it. on federal -aid highways which t guess would be like $3.fr 82...916, 826, 112,.. , 3 At, Armesto-Garciat 'that's right. Mr. Hanes! ..►and you know, and they're stating that on the same side of the highway. As we've seen in the pictures that Mr. Whipple presented, there can be signs, yc-s know, directly opposite each other' facing this wary and they could be spaced every, you know, 11000 it. or 1#500 ft. as the case --ay be. Ms, Kolski: Okay, well, how many feet away from the expressway do they have to be? Mr. Manes: ,There's no...we've just removed the restriction on it. MS. Kolski: No, I mean in the state pro-1 sic t. Mr. Manes: The wording that Mr. Arnmestc- Garcia has recommended is the state provision. Ms. Kolski: Yeah, but how many... + Mr. Whipple: But that's not the stag recommendation. It is what the state law indicates. it is not their recommendation to this body or to the City of Miami. Mr. Manes: But it's a provision in their.. Mr. Whipple: Yeah, but everybody was saying recommended by the state and that's not the case. It's not recommended by the state. Ms. Kolski: Okay, okay, in the state provisions, the state law, they're saying 1,500 ft. but how many feet from the expressway do they have the billboard? —i Mr. Manes: I believe the ordinance is ;mute en that. Mr. Whipple: I'm sure Mr. Garcia has that information. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: That is according to the special zoning of the place where the sign is going to be. If it's :�..._ commercial, it is cultural, it is residential, whatever it is, it has different formulas of different feet. If you want to co into this and do that as a practice•for...filibustering to have this until, 12 o'clock tonight and these people from Coconut Grove waiting for this thing to be resolved, we can have those questions and thee: we can call Tallahassee but I'm telling you that each case is treated different according to the zoning of _ the proper place where they are applying for the permit. When the sign outdoor company applies for the permit, he has to specify where it's going to be located and then the local rules and apply to that permit. I don' t know, you give me an example -- yay;pianes! y '•15, 01i k,i's yud�tioM ',dons p oc�iaty. t behave �4r. ♦•+ 1 t.piq{,. byr�q ,tit i quaiiritii-d av� �. 11 Cr .t 111 ilt W •9 4�.. answer thatt Mt. Knox: 'Thank you, if I !nay. the State Statutes provide two measures. One is simply outside of the right -of -Way of the roadway and the Second alternative under certa.ih oircuftstances is 15 ft. from the outside or the inside edge of the roadway. to other words, you measure 15 ft. from the edge of the roadway out and sighs,can not be within one or twor one of those two distances. Hr. an ea Is that if there's no City ordinance or municipal ordinance that otherwise would restrict i t? Mr. Knox: !tight. The municipal ordinances, of course, or the municipalities do have the power to impose reasonable restrictions consi.,tent with the carrying out of the policy. Mr. Manes: mr.`Maxwell? Are you in agreement basically? Mr. Maxwell: 'Yes, I am,.. Mr. Armesto-Garcia:_ That will be case of Miami. Mr. Maxwell: ...the State Statute sets minimum standards. Mr. Manes: Okay, thank you. Well, I'don't think that, you know, basically, I, in my opinion, I don't think that the distance from the expressway is at issue, you know, on this. We're looking at the spacing of signs and how close they may be to each other and the question I raised is that when you have signs this close to each other and then you can allow them on both sides of the street that close to each other, you have literally, a never-ending progression of signs, you know, given all the other circumstances. Ms. Kolski: Well, that's... that's what I don't want either and what I'm thinking about is they're saying 11500 ft. counting on the fact in most areas you have, you have . restrictions on how close you can get to the roadway and since we're gonna allow it right up to it, then I think the separation should be a lot greater. Mr. Manes: Well, I, you know, I'm basically in agreement... Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: Mr. Luaces. Mr. Luaces: Yes, Mr. Garcia, I do believe that'" the 1,500 ft. would be a little bit close. Don't you think,we should allow it a little bit even though I agree that they should be on expressways? I feel that the 1,500 ft., if they're going to be...it's going to be reduced to 725 whatever... Ms. Kolski; Seven hundred and fifty. Mr. Luaces: 1 1 ...750 because they're going to be facing both sides. The same sign is going to have two faces. One sign with two faces. so actually they're going to be a lot closer, Ali`. Ar�►es�,o�daroia: i,►C��.`=�1`1��r � �tSti' � �i1�1i� sf.� b��,.'�u� r1 a 4t. 1� '�rtat u`.:iGs 3CicxG >t l Cyt a adopia rJ, not reco; r�tended, 3c�bbt4d 18 a law. tt' a 4 law of the state oe i for lda that the tax innum is i, 500 ft. we can Ieg is la te.. ,mr. Manes: The miftimum. MLA. ArMeeto-Garcia: t rtlean the rttinimum-r=we can legislate to have another. tyde of :tliiliMUtft f...Y think it's not proper and they legislate and they pass the law and the governor signed the law 1r500 ft. from eaoh .sign# from one to the next one. He showed us on the screen how big is the distance of 1#500 ft., 1#000 ft. and 500 ft. and I think it's reasonable, 1#500 ft. Mr.' Luaces: Let me ask you a question because I'rt a little bit confused. The signs that you showed us were 1r000...10500 ft, away or you mentioned 500 ft. away? Mr. Whipple: I Mentioned two dimensions, one 550 and one 1#000 on the examples that I showed you. .Mr. Armesto-Garcia: He nester mentioned the 1,500. Fifteen hundred's greater than that. It's greater than that. Mr. Luaces: Yes. Right# then you're right. Right. So it's going to be about that distance awayr pat. _E Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Twice that. z Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Luaces: It's going to go out 750 from what he showed you... Mr. Manes: Well, Mr. Luaces, just so you understand. The distance between the signs will still be 1,500 ft. on each side of the road whether it's facing one way or facing the other way... f Mr. Luaces: No, I under... Mr. Manes: There'll still be 1,500 ft. between the two... Mr. Luaces: So actually there's going to be 750 ft. from one side of the road and the other side of the road. They could be... Mr. Manes: No, not necessarily. The two sides of the road have nothing to do with each other. Mr. Luaces: Oh, yes. You're not going to have — a sign that may be exactly in the middle because you're going to be allowed the... Mr. Manes: Oh, no, you see, on different �. sides of the road, you can have the signs parallel to each other. Mr. Luaces: Fifteen hundred feet. —; Mr. Manes; Well you can have them 1,500 ft., you can have them staggered but you know, let's just take one side of the road at any one time. _ Mr. Luaces; t You may have two, I know, you may have two that are going to be 400 ft. away but then the next one is going to be 900 ft. away. 21 J41y 18, 1984, Item 5 Planning Advisory Board �tr r�te� t ®�sa rd is : e i 4 * &en huftd k ad r r i*hu . Always its . c� s1 At. duestidit please for xr, Whipple, A Wtiipple► these slides that you showed us with the bill'b6aeds along the palmetto, how oar frort the expressway t the roadway, were thay2 Mr. Whipple: In the majority... Mr. Manes! adEore you answer that...Ms. Kolski, that's not an issue here. ' Ms. Kol.aki! lt's an issue with rye. Mr. Manes: Well it may be an issue but it has nothing to do with the spacing on the sighs. you know, we can,,. legislate the distance from:.. Ms. Kolski: 'I think it does. t think it does. We either have them,..we either have them bang, bang, bang right after each other or we have them spread out a little bit. Mr. Manes: Well, you see, the distance from the expressway to the sign will.not influence the spacing between signs... Kr. Diego: Mr. Chairman you want me to call g � the question? - Mr. Manes: I don't want you to do anything... q Ms. Kolski: I asked a question. I have a #t right to get it answered. - Mr. Manes: Okay. Mr. Whipple, can you answer that? i. Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. In the majority of...well, not the majority, half the instances along Palmetto, ie signs are immediately adjacent. to the right-of-way line. In t„e other half, there might have been an intervening street or an intervening exit ramp off of which they had to follow the right- of-way line which would remove them slightly. If there was a parallel street, it would remove them back the distance of that' street. Ms. Kolski: Okay, but just tell me in feet. Hcw many ... how far away are they from the road where people are driving? Mr. Whipple: I would say in half the instances. they were immediately adjacent to the right-of-way line and the other they were approximately 75 ft. off of the right-of-way line. Ms. Kolski: All right, thank you. --:r Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcia, do you understand the question that I raised where, you know, if we allow the spacing formula that you're working with now, that this would allow, you know, signs on both sides of the street, facing both directions at all times, do you understand.,, do you follow me? Mr, Armesto-Garcia: Yes, sir. Yes, but also.,,also.,. how many instances can this happen within the limits of the City Of 3iami? We are here trying to legislate about: the whole Palmetto and the palmetto doesn't belong to the City of Hiami, i `•1r, "'lanes: . 'No, no, WeII you 04ea, , r Re, Artesto-Garcia: I Lean, let's be r'ealittid, how many Miles of the Pal;rtetto ctoss the City of Miami and front that..,that amount of .;tiles of the Pal�itetto that crosses the City of Ai,amii of that artdunt, how Many Mil?s are usable in both sides? Ninety -Mine percent is using only One side because the ether Aside is used by buildings. It's improper to use, They can ntt use it. Mr. Manes: We.11 # we have, .. t dory t know if the planning Department has a number of idles of expressway but between 1120 826f 836, 1-95 and I don't know if there's any other federal highways but we have riles and miles and idles and we're looking at, you know, between 8 and 10 signs per ;Wile, conceivably. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Chairman, this is the reason I want this motion presented for me and let0s get it to vote and don't delay anymore because there are people here... Mr. Manes: 'We're under discussion. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: '...hoping...hoping---it's almost 9 o'clock --hoping that we have the Coconut Grove affair tonight here and the way it is going I don't see a way for the Coconut Grove tonight. Mr. Manes: Well, we're addressing the sign issue right now and the Coconut Grove people are being very patient, we appreciate that. They're very concerned I think also on the signs and they wouldn't want us to make a hasty decision, you know, using their behalf, their well-being, as an excuse there but I'm just trying to, you know, find out here...at our last meeting we, you know, we had reduced it on federal -aid highways from 1,000 to 1,500 ft. so there would be that 1,500 ft. spacing on both types of highways and now I'm, you know, as Mr. Knox has read the state wording there, you know, it's clearly that they say both sides of the road so I want to bring to the attention of the board... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, I know it's both sides of the road... Mr. Manes: Okay. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: ...and probably next generation that visit in here will decide what they do with the outer space but now we got the two sides of the roads. Mr. Manes: Okay. Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman, if we need to know what's -happening in outer space, we'll know who to send. - r Mr. Manes: Okay, well we don't want to get...we don't want to get too far away from the subject. Mr. Whipple; Mr. Manes, I'll be glad to answer the question if you want the question answered. I'll be glad to answer it if you want the question answered. Mr. Manes; • No, I think we're okay, Is there any other comments or questions? If not, we're ready to call the roll. Juiy 18, 1904, Item 5 VIAM-1ing Advisor. -I 30ard (bed ttaty dalied the toll) AYES: Me88rt, Ar testo-Garcia, genjamift, Diego, Correa and Luades NAYESt Ms. Kolzki Messr, Mates S AgS= t None. Mr. Rodtiguet! The motion carries 5 to 2. 'RESOLUTION PAS 77-84 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF -ZONING ORDINANCE. 9500, AS AMENDED, BY' AMENDING ARTICLE 20 GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, SECTION 2026 SIGNZS, SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS BY ALLOWING A MINIMUM 1,500 FT. SPACING BETWEEN SIGNS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY ON AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, AND 1,000 FT. BETWEEN SIGNS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY ON A FEDERAL -;-AID PRIMARY HIGHWAY. Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcia. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Now, the last ;notion on th; s matter is that no sign...no sign shall exceed 50 ft. in sign structure height above the crown of the main -traveled way and no sign shall exceed 750 sq. ft. of sign facing per sign face. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: Mr. Luaces. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Garcia, I would like to second your motion but I would like to keep it within the recomc--enda- tions of the State of Florida and have a cap of 65 ft. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: I will do that, too. I incorporate that. We will ... okay, you want to... Mr. Luaces: Yes, I would like to second the motion... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Luaces: of 65 ft. as, more or less... I accept the amendment. ...and you amended to have a cap . Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Instead of 50 ft., 65 ft. you want? Mr. Luaces: With a cap. Mr. Armesto=Garcia: With a...and no sign shalt. exceed 50 ft, with a cap of 65 ft. in sign structure height above the crown of the main traveled way and no sign shall exceed 750 sq. ft, of sign facing per sign face. That's the motion. Mr. Manes; Mr. Luaces? Mr. Luaces; Mr, Manes: that, ..►ft, Maxwell? Mr, na weli; Is that what you're seconding, Yes. okay. Before we, . ,we repeat 14 r 'tames: Mr. maxwells .-Luadest is that the maker of the ffiotioh? Mr. mand!.g! Not Mr, Artnesto-Garcia is the maker of the fflotiOn, 91 am the maker. Mr. Maxwell: Right, 8ecauge of the conversation that transpired during that notion, I think you should restate specifically what your motion is. Mr. Arme:sho-Carclat The motion is no Sign shall exceed so ft. in sign structure height above the crown with a cap of 6S ft. maximum of the main -traveled highway and no,,,,. Mr. Rodriguez: t don't understand. Mr, Manest You don't understand that? Mr. Rodriguez: I'm sorry, but I don't understand your motion. Mr. Manes: Okay. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Okay, I do it. No sign shall exceed 65 ft6 in sign structure height above the crown of the main -traveled way i * f inside an incorporated area and no sign shall exceed 750 sq.-ft. of sign facing per sign face. Mr. Manes: Mr. Maxwell. Mr. Maxwell: The motion included the phrase inside an incorporated area. We're talking... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Which is the City of Miami. The City of Miami is an incorporated area. Mr. Maxwell: Right, but you. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: We are not legislating about unincorporated area because unincorporated area is Dade County. Mr. Manes: Okay, but we... Mr. Maxwell: I understand that but I think your motion...you know, leave that out. i Mr .. Benjamin: Leave it out. You can leave it out. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Okay, I take it out. (&veryone in audience laughed) Mr. Manes; Okay, and I think Mr. Luaces wanted you to put in there that, you know...did you say there were,,, Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Sixty-five feet. Mr. Manes; Sixty-five feet cap, Mr. Daces; That would be the maximum height. Mr. Armesto-Garcia; The maximum height. Sixty-five, lat 1934, item 5 Planntng Advisory 0,04rd 1-1r, Aodotquit, To be tddlut4d fftM, 'mh4rLO Mr. Manes., He mentioned 2.0.10M the drown... Mr. Arme9to-Garcia: from the crown... Mr, Manes-. ... of the Main-ttaveled way. Mr. Armetto-Garcia; ... 6,f the main -traveled way. Mr. Maxwell! Again Mr. Chairman, I'm, sorry. Until that Motion is dlear# it will not be pro per4ba Mr. Rodriguet! Because t understand that the motion before was 50 et. height from the crests how could you have a cap of 65 from the crest? Mr. Armesto-Garcia: We never mentioned the crest, Mr. Rodriguez. We mentioned the crown of the main"traveled way. Mr. Luaces: Not the motion that he proposed first was 50 ft. above the crown... Mr. Rodriguez: Right. Mr. Luaces: ,,and I suggested to him that it will not exceed 65 ft. Mr. Whipple: Well in what conditions would it exceed 50 ft. if you say 50 ft.? Mr. Luaces: Above the crown. Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcials motion was... Mr. Whipple: In what conditions would it go to 65? Mr. Manes: ..;from the crown of the main - traveled way. It was on an elevated... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Right. Mr. Luaces: Sixty-five from grade. Mr. Rodriguez: Okay. Mr. Luaces: it will not exceed, and I get it now, it will not exceed 65 ft. from grade, I stand corrected, from ground level. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Mr. Luaces: Mr. Whipple: 9t. comment? Mr. Manes: Mr. Whipple: grade? Okay. From grade. Are you eliminating then the ..50 No, the 50 ft. applies... You're just saying 65 ft. above Mr. Manes; No, the 50 ft. applies from the crown of the main -traveled way, my understanding of the...you know, if the expressway goes up on a ramp then the crown of the expressway would be changing. Mr. Armesto-Garcia; Right, . .1. , xr-. - a. �}y1{ yhy tj'IYr .y r'hi�p_ ,tyi.e t �y y And the �iqh can q6 '0 �t a higher than t'A (iG ele�yated �xpresa�iayi elevation,Mr. Manes! 1kight. Up to IS ft. of expressway Mr. Whipple: Plifty feet above the expressway? Mr. Luacea! No, hot rto, no, no. No, that's not it. 1 i Mr. Armeato-Garciat Not sir. Mr..Luaces., Let ire repeat it. Mr. Manes: Well up to the first 15 ft, with a cap of 65 ft. Mr. Luaces: "NO. Mr. Manes! I understand it perfectly. Mr. Armesto-Garcia't Yes.' Mr. Luaces: No, no. Let me repeat it. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: The maximum will be 55 ft. Mr. Luaces: The maximum height that a sign may have will be 65 ft. from grade. Mr. Rodriguez: Right. Mr. Luaces: So this elevated expressway like in downtown Miami, there's no use in having a sign there because you will not be able to see it from the expressway. Mr. Rodriguez: Right. Mr. Whipple: It's not true incidently. Mr. Luaces: Not clear yet. Mr. Rodriguez: No, if I... Mr. Whipple: No, it's just not true. But what's the second part? Mr. Benjamin: It's clear to us. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: The second part is that the no sign shall exceed,750 sq. ft. of sign facing per sign face. Mr. Whipple: What happened to the 50 ft. that's what I'm trying to... Mr. Rodriguez: If I... if I may to see if I understood your motion. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes. Mr. Rodriguez: No sign shall exceed 50 ft. in height from the crown of the main -traveled expressway... .Mr. Manes; Well, way, Mr..Armesto-Garcia; Way. Mac. Rodriguez; ...with a cap of 65 above grade from adjacent route. t a At, Manes: Pight. Mr, 90drigueta That's what i thought out it wasnit ;nentibned like that before. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Exactly, Exactly. Mr. Manes: Okay; yelp and then there's also included in that that no sign shall exceed 7S0 sq. ft. of total surf.acF area& is that correct, on one face? Mr. aen j amin : 'yeah. Mr. Rodriguez! Yea, sir. Ms. Kolskit 'Mr. Chairman, does that mean from the ground? Does all that boil down to where it -goes into the ground, 65 ft.? Mr. Manes: Well that's the maximum. Mr. Rodriguez: Right, max. Mr. Manes: Okay, and that's the motion that you're making, Mr. Armesto-Garcia? Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes. Mr. Manes: And that's what you're seconding, N Mr. Lorenzo Luaces?' Mr. Luaces: Yes. Mr. Manes: Okay, the motion on...well the motion made by Mr. Armesto-Garcia is to allow billboards up to 50 ft. above the crown of the main -traveled way with a maximum of 65 ft. above the grade of --what is itt called exactly, the grade of the road? Mr. Rodriguez: Grade of the adjacent... adjacent. grade. Mr. Manes: The adjacent grade of the city, let's say, and also that no sign shall exceed 750 sq. ft. of surface area on any exposure. Is that... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Right. Mr. Rodriguez: Per sign face. ` Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Per sign face. "Right. Mr. Manes: It was made by Mr. Armesto-Garcia., seconded by Mr. Luaces. Is there any discussion on that motion? Mr. Benjamin: Call the question. Mr. Manes: Mr. Maxwell. Mr. Maxwell.: I think the Board should be clear on the definition of main -traveled way. Mr. Manes: Okay. In the Previous motion we approved billboards facing expressways and if the billboard is facing the expressway, we're working under the assumption that that's the main -traveled way. 28 July 18f 1944, Item 5 Pl4nninq Advisory Board 1 At, 8o you are 9ajidg 70u Will alldw then 6 Et, above the expres8wa7? ML i Hands! Mr. A►rttesto-(3ardia: Right. r - Mr. Manes: Up to a maximum of 65 It. above grt)ut:d, grade, crest, call it what- yOu will. Mr. Luaces: No, there's a difference 'between ground and grade. Mr. Manes: Ground and grade. Well you're the construction expert there. Mr. Luaces: 'Specifically there's a difference. The difference may be about 7 ft. because grade is grade and the crown of the road is something else. Mr. Manes: Ckay, 65 ft. maximum commencing at the crown of the adjacent local,or arterial street. Mr. Benjamin: 'That's it. Mr. Am.esto-Garcia: Well, that's it. Mr. Manes: How's that? Mr. Rodriguez: If that's what he wants. t Mr. Manes: This is wording coming out of our fact sheet here. Let's see, establish the height of signs commencing at the crown of the adjacent local or arterial street. So that's where the 65 ft. cap would start. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Okay. 1 Mr. Manes: But it would go up to 50 ft. higher than the crown of the main -traveled way... Mr. Benjamin: Right. .be Mr. Manes: ...which would interpreted as - the road, the main street, that the sign is facing. Mr. Benjamin: Don't interpret it, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, that's it. Mr. Manes: Any further discussion? Are we clear on the motion, Mr. Rodriguez? Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes. Mr. Rodriguez: Fifty feet from the crown ... •I have it somewhere. (Everybody laughed) Mr.Man It's all being recorded. We've got it, Please the roll. 0 r �r. ( Seere tatp called the t611 ) AYES: Messtt, Manes, Di4(10t ArMdAtO-G'atvia) COttea, 8dM jamin and Luedes NAYESt Ms. Kdleki ASSENT: None. Mr. Aodtigue2: The Motion carries 6 to 1 RESOLUTION PAS 78-84 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 20 GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, SECTION 2026 SIGNS,,SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS BY PROJIDING FOR BILLBOARD HEIGHT TO SE 50 FT. FROM THE CROWN OF THE MAIN -TRAVELED ROAD,!IN RELATION TO EXPRESSWAYS, 'WITH A MAXIMUM OF 65 FT, FROM THE CROWN OF THE NEAREST ADJACENT LOCAL OR ARTERIAL STREET ANJ CLARIFYING THAT EACH SIGN SURFACE SHALL NOT EXCEED 750 SQ. FT. AND PAGE S OF THE OFFICIAL SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN SECTION 320 PERTAINING TO CG GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS, Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcia? Does that conclude your motions, Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, sir. Mr. Manes: Does that answer all the questions that the City Commission has asked this Board to review, the viewing, the surface, the billboard height, billboard spacing formula, angle of billboards? I believe we've covered all the items. Mr. Whipple: You have some more, Mr. Knox? Mr. Knox: Oh no, sir, no. Mr. Manes: No. Okay, I believe we've finished it. Closing comment, Mr. Knox? Mr. Knox: I'd just like to thank the Board again and there is an understanding, I think, that the matter has already been placed on the agenda for the City Commission's next meeting. That is my information. Mr. Maxwell: That is correct. That's correct. Mr. Knox: Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. Mr. Manes: Thank you, Mr. Knox. i t ! t f• TRANSCRIPT CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 26, 1984 PAGES 155-158 ' t 61 Mayor Ptr"is Any *bjeotjana td that, Provided Mat it dries not dxdeed three days donsedutivd? Mr. Plummer: That's in the ftrAt, 2003.0.1 r Wait a minute, With this tither Wording .. their problem, Mrs. Mayor, is three days. Okay? I said to them under a normal aircumstances of three days or as approved by the Com2ission, leaving the latitude of this Commission to Make a decision. Mr. Carollo. Mr. Mayor, what I'm more donderned with is not the private darnivai operators that are going to be batinb the profits, I'm dOnderned with the churches, Synagogues i. t the City that are the ones that in my opinion really have some legitimate doftcerns. And What I would like to do is to have the opportunity to meet with some of the representa- tines from some of the churches, synagogues, get their opinions and come back with something Concrete. Mayor Ferre: There is a motion by Commissioner Carollo that this item be deferred to the next Zoning Meeting - contin- ued, so that he will have the Opportunity to meet with some of the affected parties. Is there a second? Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Is there further discussion? All right, call the roll on the continuance. The preceding motion to continue was introduced by Commissioner •Carollo, seconded by Commissioner Perez and _r passed and adopted unanimously. 67. BRIEF DISCUSSION AND RETURN TO PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FOR REVIEW A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TEXT CRANGE TO 9500 ENTITLED: SEC. 2026 ENTITLED: SIGNS, SPECIFIC LIMITA- TIONS AND REQUIREMENTS. —' Mayor Ferre: Take up 30. This is on First Reading. All right, sir. i rir. Stuart Sisson: I'm not going to talk more than a minute and I think I can make a suggestion that will be very appealing to you and the Commissioners. I'm going to recom- mend that you send this back to the Planning Advisory Board for further consideration. Mayor Ferre: Based on what, Mr. Simon? Mr. Simon: There was a 3 - 3 vote, and I think we should.: - get a recommendation if we possibly can frcm the Planning Advisory Board. The issue before you is a very simple one. We had recommended that there be a height limitation on signs of 30 feet above the grade of the road. The Planning De artment s recommendation was that it be �0 feet above the p ' ground, -There is very little difference between these too proposals, Mayor Ferre: Wait a =inute, I don't understand this, One is 30 feet above ground, the other one is 30 feet from the crown of the road? , Mr. Simon: Yes, no, above the grade of the road. One id 30 reet above the grade of the road and the other R,s.... Mayor Ferre: Does that. include expressways when expresswayp are 40 reef up in the ai:^'; okay, now I age :abet Once is , Did you say there wan eery little s�if :stenos' AFR Z6 le 00% Mr, zigaon., WL6114 let Me 9AY this, in 2031t cases ",here are very little dittairlftd4s Of dduraeo - there are some aaaas Where there iA a Very eXtdnaiVe ditfirtnad-, Mayor Ferre: I'll tall you what I'd be willing 1100 Iota on, Itd be Willing to vote On it from the *rOwft Of tha road for all ground level roads and all those teat are elevated roads Would go back to the Planning Board. Hr, Simon: Well, we think one of the thwib,193 that you should consider is this., The old ordinance that you had had the aritkoarioft that we favor, 30 feet above the grade of the road and that was the rule in the City 04*4 Miami for many years, You are suddenly going to make.... & Mayor Ferre You're recommending t1&-14at we send it back to the Planning... Mr. Simon4. Tea. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, what he is asking is reasonable. Mayor Ferre: I agree. There is a motion by Co=issioner Carollo that this item be referred to the ?fanning ... Yes, staff will have an opportunity. Do you want to have the opportunity now or before the Planning Co=is-s-4on? INAUDIBLE RES?ONSE Mayor Ferre: Go right ahead, air. Mr. Richard Whipple: 'Mr. Mayor, the reason for bringing this to the Commission and pursuing it is that the new Zoning Ordinance is silent or very unclear as to the height limit of signs. We believe it is important that a limit be established as there is no clear one established in the ordinance today. We, in fact, are utilizing a recommended height that was,reco=end!3d to this Cc=Jssion approximately a year ago in conjunction with some litigation and thisis the same height, as Mr. S .1mon has p04 ",ad out, as was in 'the old Zoning Ordinance as to 30 feet.. Specifically, the wording of the old Zoning Ordinance which we've never had any problem with for 19 years, and Mr. Simon point out, simply reads: in commercial and industrial districts StriotS the shall not exceed a height of 30 feet above the grade of the street at which the sign is oriented. This grade refers to ground level or surface grade. This has never been questioned before and we don't see any problem with it today. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Al'_ right, thank you, air. Call the roll. The preceding motion to contiau4 was intr-oduced by Commissioner Dawkins and Carollo, seconded by Cc=issioner passed and adopted unanimously. Mayor Ferre: Did you want to say something? Mr. Simon; Yes, I U% ; 3 : wanted to say t60_ When you Bond it, back, we have made W -on3 two- other sung_esW in the letter that -- I sent to you that the PlanningAdvisor Board =ake recOm- mendati=3 on. One is the ridiculous requirement that 3i$" face away from the road., Mayor Ferro; Well, what 13 a sign for if it is 50"'Wag to be facing away from the road? APR 2 6484, Mr, Simon: I *an't imagine what vaj. lue the Sign would hate, it is a requirttant. Mayor Ferre: Does the maker 614 the Motion have any ob ;?►r= r tiona to indorpdrate that? Alm. right, what is your sedond thing? Mr. Simon: And the second thing that we _ would like is that we would like to recommend to the City Comrtigsiorl 1000 Net spacing requirement between ai,gns. Otherwise you're goi;:g to get a tremendous proliferation of Signs in the City of Miami and it is going to affect the aesthetics of the City. Mayor Fevre: Do you have any objections to that, Mr. �thipp�.e -` Mr. Carollo: Do you think 1000 is enough Whipple, or do i you think we should have snore? Mr. Whipple: I'm not prepared to comment as to the reason- ableness of the proposed regulation, my concern is that there is some direction with respect to legislation before - the Planning Advisory Board of which (1) we're not familiar with or haven't proposed or have any legislation being expounded nor does the Planning advisory Board so I'm not s too sure what the Commission's direction is on this. Mayor Fevre: Let me tell you what the Comais-sion's direc- tion is. It was a 3 - 3 vote and the Commission is, there- fore, sending it back so that they further deliberate on the issue, (1 ) of height, (2) of the directions of signs and (3) the spacing of signs. And we're not sending it back, Mr. Simon, with all due respects to you, with any recommenda- tions because then why are we sending it to them? We are - sending it to for them to deliberate on those issues before it comes to us. —' Mr. Whipple: yes, but there is only one issue before this Commission, that is the height of signs and the new issues Would have to go through a new process. a Mayor Ferre: Well, then that is something that we'll have to deal with but I think the instructions from this Commis- sion is that if possible - and that means if it is legal - that you also consider the direction of the signs and the spacing of the signs. Mr. Dawkins: Is it a fact that we do have some law or ordinance that says the sign has to be 90, 60 or 30 degrees turned from the road? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. Z. Mr. Dawkins: Wall, if, I am putting up a sign and it is at an angle, I'm Zoing to run off the road trying to see it. Mr. Whipple: No, sir, you would have to have a full. expla- nation as to the reason for that angular relationship. It specifically has to do with billboards along expressways, so you end up with a basic decision (1) do you want to have billboards along the expressways or not. If you do not, you still need to allow billboards that might be adJapent to expressways on adjacent streets but that are not oriented or cannot be viewed «roar the expressway and that is one of the reasons for the angles involved and *.he way thO ordi name has been written which, has been its eff40t likew43e for 19 Years Without any diffioulty Mr. Dawkins: But Mr. Whipple, Why 'd01414 I, a sign person, rent Spa;e to put a sign hear a highway if people. from the highway can't sce it. *APIR 2 6 1084 A Mr, Wh'&pple: Not air, you'rd misu:tderstanding the quastibri. T:1ey don' t rent Anna that oantlot be 14 ,11ded by the passing motori.aWn 90 Whey don't build When that way, Mayer Farm: CO=isaionee Dawkins, thane is a ifotion, hdrt is a' second, it is clear, we've voted on it Haven't we? } Mr. Ongie: yes, sir. y Mayor Ftrre: And it has been amended to include whose thred items and Wet re not voting on it today and I wan,: to tell you I'm not saying how I'm going to vote, I resertte that for when it comes back. Mr. Simon: And we will not present something cold to the Planning Advisory Board. Mayor Ferre: Thank you, sir. ROTE FOR THE RECORD: AGENDA ITEM 31 WAS CONTI2`UFD TO T28 MAY 10, 1984 HEET=G. 68. FORHALIZ12G RESOLUTION: A=ZQRIZE CITY MANAGE! TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH ATHALIE RANGE FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANT SERVICES CONCERNING LEGISLATION WHICH IMPACTS ON THE CITY OF MIAMI. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-493 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAG- ER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTAN- TIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH ATHALTEE M. RANGE FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANT SERVICES CONCERNING LEGISL:.- TION WHICH IMPACTS ON THE CITY OF MIAM I AND ITS CITIZENS; ALLOCATING THEREFOR xN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $159000 FOR SUCH SERVICES AND AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $6,000 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS CONTINGENT FUND. (Here follows body of resolution, omit- ted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resalu- tion Was passed and adopted by the following vota- AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo Commi,43,oner Miller J. Dawk:.ns - Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. V.+4ce-Mayor Demetr _o Pere:, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES; None. ABSENT: None. TRANSCRIPT PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 4, 1984 ITEM 1,3 Planning r,, vi;Cty Sdard s have a 8"eOd .al request this 4V4hiny, There's a geht: 4,tan 1,01 the audiendn at thil' tiitle, gentleman or lady its the Audience that has a plane to date i do item 413, Gould that person pleasa raise their hand? tt that you, sir? Okay, if thert l t no ob"pction frbM either the ad at:d or the public, we're gbhna take item 13 out a of order and then return to our original agenda, (Pause) There being mo discussion we'll now go into agenda 13. i4e' ire gonna need to read this into the record, we'll be read7 for you` in dust a moment, sirs sir, Rodriguez. Consideration of amending the text of Ordinance 9SOb, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, by amending S'eotion 2026 entitled "Signs, Specific Limitations and Requirements", article 20 entitled "General and Supplementary Regulations" clarifying billboard height; further, amending sheet 5 of the Official Schedule of District Regulations made a part of said Ordinance 5500 by reference and description in Section 320 thereof, by providing for height limitations on ground or free standing signs, onsite and offsite, and incorporating the above textural changes; and containing a repealer provision and a severability clause. Secretary filed proof of publication of Legal Notice of Hearing. Mr. Manes: will be presenting this? Mr. Rodriguez: Mr. Manes: Mr. Whipple. Welcome! 'Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez. Who Mr. Whipple. Whenever you're ready, Mr. Whipple: Good evening. For the record, Richard Whipple, Chief of Land Development Division in the City of Miami Planning Department. This is an amendment that is a, in part a result of an oversight with the transition of Ordinance 6871 into Ordinance 9500. Ordinance 9500, pretty thorough in its sign controls, did have specific regulation as to sign heights. In the translation to 9500, we have found out that there are no specific height limits included in the new Zoning Ordinance. Now as the Board may be aware, there were certain amendments that were up for consideration before the ... this Board and the City Commission, particularly in relation to Ackerly Outdoor Advertising problems and at that time, we had put in a provision along with their concerns to limit the sign heights as they were under Ordinance 6871 to 30 ft. However, that... although that has passed First Reading, it has been sitting dormant for quite some time and pursuant to recent activity with respect to outdoor advertising, we feel it is necessary that the ordinance be clarified as to what are the permitted sign heights and that the remainder of the sign activity that was previously addressed will come along in the future so we are very specifically and straight forwardly saying that there are height limitations needed for offsite signs and that is the proposal before you this evening and we would lake to recommend your...that you recommend this amendment to the City Commission. Mr, Manes: Thank you, Mr. Whipple, Are there any questions for Mr. Whipple at this time? if there are no questions at this time we'll open the public hearing. This is a public hearing item, ,s there anybody in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this item? You wish to speak, sir? Okay, we'll get to you in just one second. We're gonna need first to have you sworn in, anybody wishing to speak that is not an attorney be sworn in. Sir, are you an attorney? You're not On attorney, Qkayf if you wish to speak, you'll need to stand and be sworn in.. You too, sir. 1 April 4# 1934, Item 13 414nning Advisor;/ Soo d r • e' ;M i !I®IA®i i01.!l lR.1 1. ;-.:�:x'G'n'.nsJ3Yi9G.•.'. _••.•,-•."'.••- 4 K tPett4-"-.raut;thes1 ad.t1i.1ittited oath to all Persons w i Sh jn j to speak On this Mr. Manes: Okay, just One second. Are you in favor of thisr sir, 6r do you just have a question? Man in audience: No, I would like to just to introduce tyself. (Pause while somebody off the record told him th'�s was not item j as he thought but Instead 13). I will ... t wIII.. • \ Mr. Manes! Man in audience Addreea`2 ...introduce later. Mr. Manes: Okay, thank you very much. Okay, we always have the proponents speak first there. 'Mr. Hancocko did you wish to speak on this? Mr. Hancock: Yes. My name is Andy Hancock with E. A. Hancock Advertising. I live at 3856'Douglas toad. The reason I brought this up tonight and unfortunately I didn't hear about it soon enough or I would have made sure you got some further information on this item. I represent the outdoor advertising business for myself but not all the other companies because I don't believe they knew this was coming up tonight. I think what you should consider is the 30 ft. height limitation which is standard in the industry is all right but what you should look at further and the only little addition that needs to be made because probably of...somebody just didn't think about it at the time, was that it should be 30 ft. above the grade of the road which the sign is showing and the reason for that is a lot of times the grade of the road is a lot higher than actually where the sign is built and it reaches a point where you can't even see it or it might be to the point where it's half what you see. Aesthetically, anyway if that's the major argument that it would be obviously much better for them to be a level height and not scattered different heights all along. That's basically the. only change I would like to make than what I think the staff has presented. Mr. Manes: .Okay, thank you. We may have some questions for you, Mr. Hancock? Are there any questions at this time for Mr. Hancock? Okay, is there anybody else wishing to speak on this item? There being none, we'll close the public hearing and go into discussion among the Board members. Mr. Whipple, would you address...did you get a copy of Mr. Hancock's memo? Mr. Whipple: Yes, I did. Mr. Manes: And has one copy been entered into evidence on this? Thank you. Mr. Whipple: I believe we understand Mr. Hancock's request but we have two problems with that consideration. We have no problem making sure that we're talking about 30 ft. above grade of the land but in essence, the suggestion is that it be above, let's say the grade of an expressway, an elevated expressway. The problem with that is number one, we have a regulation that does not allow billboards to face the expressway within a certain distance 600 or 660 ft.. so there would really be no need in the -City of Miami by which to use the expressway grade plus an additional 30 ft because the signs are not allowed to begin with. Notwithstanding that, it's been the policy of the City and what have you, in, the past, as Mr. Hancock, Jr. and Sr. and I have discussed that we have not allowed and do not allow signs to be laced toward the expressway, Sty, therefore, the :wording would not be acceptable to us because it infers that we're going to allow expressway signs and they should k Q viewed and allowed to go to a height of 30 ft, above an expressway by this change in warding. r . ~ 2 April 4, 1964s Item 13 planning Advisory Beard , .. i I I �, `iaies. okay, iL i �i5d� is W ; 5 cottacrly, any sign that Ne see as we go through the "ity of Miami► if there's billboar6 that's closer than 660 o, or 60 ft., that's been grandfathered in since:? ,Mr, Whipple: Yes, sit. At the present tite, notwithatanding the litigation, they are monconEorting ar,d they are subject to the finali2atiOM of that litigation and yes, legal no:toontoY:ning is the proper term. Mr. Hancock! Mr. Chairmant if i night „take a suggestion that... Mr. Manes: Okay, let me just...is there no ' abjection from the Board, we have closed the public hear;-g; ` Mr. Armesto-Garcia: I have no objections, let's hear it. F Mr, Manes: Okay, proceed. Mr. Hancock: If Mr. Whipple's only concern is the expressway and signs are effectively banned from the expressway then he should have no objection to making it a f uniform height above the grade of road. Mr. Manes: Any comment, Mr. Whipple, there? Mr. Whipple: ,Wrong. We do have an objection. The standard, notwithstanding Mr. Hancock's comment, 30 has been quite acceptable for...since 1965 when the`City of Miami and as we do keep pretty well up-to-date, this standard is still acceptable as far as we know` and we believe ... and we believe that a 30 ft. height on a billboard is more than enough height for proper viewing unless you really want to do something extraordinary and we don't believe that Miami, Florida and South Florida is the place to do something like that. Mr. Manes: Mr... Mr. Luaces: I have a question for Mr. Whipple. Mr. Manes: Okay, Mr. Luaces. Mr. Luaces: What is the ... what is the Dade county height limitation on billboards? Mr. Whipple: Mr. Hancock may have to correct me on this but I believe it's either 30 or 35 ft. There are other municipalities that have allowed higher signs pursuant to a change in Dade Counts legislation. The Dade County legislation is basically the same as ours, they do not allow signs within 600 ft. or odd feet of the expressway and to the best of my know- ledge, all ground signs are limited to either 30 or 35 (ft.) and I'm not sure as to the exact number. -; „„- know... Mr. Luacesa Mr. Whipple: Mr. Luaces: Mr. Whipple; Mr. Hancock: Mr. Manes; 3 Thirty above grade or thirty... Thirty above ground, sir. Above ground not grade. That's -right. If I might add a little, you Okay, APril $r 1964, Item 13 Pl.zi mOg Adyis My B a A .. ,Ar, L't bt -4tty aat4.. isaia o f the si�4n Ord i.naMce i n the 20 rtutt icipal i t ies i;; Oada Counvy plus bade Count7f 'there are quite a few ;tun id ipal itied that ,agrnd that the hdight is subposed to be aboVe gra�-ie and reallY the ptbi tt is not whether it should or shouldit' = to but what lco s the best and ;ty point is to YOU that if 70u have a tOdd that 4 or 3 ft. high above the Irade of the sign where you build the sign down lower and then on down the road about another half a mi. a or another 500 ft., the road cones up like this and you knave an effect that it not, aesthetic,if what you're 100king for is to strive for aesthetics, that certainly isn't the way to achieve it. Mr. Manes: I'm curious, where do you see the roads going up and down? Mr. Hancock: In a lot of cases 7ou have....e�'en on South Dixie Highway, it will be 4 ft. higher than the ground right next to it and what Mr. Whipple is referring to is where you actually build the sign whichwill be ground level, might be a different level from where the road is that the signs is going to show to. Lt's just a logical solution to a problem that hasn't really been dealt with and I think should �:e. Mr. Manes: stating your views here? Mr. Whipple: Mr. Manes: Mr. Whipple, is he accurately Not our views, no, sir. Okay. Mr. Whipple: We understand the difference of grade, if there's a question on grade and if it is not an approved site which might be subject to flood criteria filling then they would use the crown of the road at grade, they would not use the expressway grade naturally, but the term -grade at ground level, you know, that's variable and let's, you know, if we want to talk aesthetics for minute, the viewirc of a sign at a 30 ft. height and if you can imagine doubling that height to 60 ft. on South Dixie Highway, the 3 or 4 ft. grade is immaterial with the 30 ft. and the 60 ft. is immaterial as to viewing because signs on South Dixie Highway at a 60 ft. height are just completely out of place because of the angle and the height. There is just no real value to putting a sign"at a... in a norr..al situation to that height. Mr. Manes: Mr. Luaces? Did you have a cc.:..ment, Mr. Luaces: Yes, it is to no value of the 2, 3 ft. difference. I don't see why we shouldn't then do as he recommends to be above grade. Mr. Whipple: But the wording as proposed would-= : allow that consideration in relation to elevated expressways... Mr. Luaces: No, I... Mr. Whipple: ...the way it's worded now. If,.. } Mr. Luaces; Legally he can not put a sign and use the grade of the expressway because'it's not ailo�red in the City of Miami right now so this will not effect the expressways at all. Mr, Whipple; Well, I would like to suggest that... that is perhaps a good thought but with respect to what i� trying to be gone in the City of Miami and elsewhere in made County, that tz in fact not the case. Ij the 3 and 4 ft. would be a problem which I don't consider it a problem whatsoever and 4 April 4, 1934, Ito, 13 PlAnni;,1g M is or! 30art O ri 3C b I '1 1 i f Y —a -4 ► 1\ e a .� �% ti Yi . � � ./ � i i Y� y �',• .G �Y � a� Y Vi 1 l Y'v31 itdst a'3. �,,. L7ti �n a sJ ru ji v y -7 r4i t,a ry l 1 µµ ri + r c+ i .5. y {.. �y r t y p .� y +� K p 1ft I �Iydc Liar Lr nd � r teid -A by u- t-hat �VId � wdrr!jirlg about the viewing path. They havo- to haoa ar clear Path that it can be reviewed and the EaCt that it nay diffd►rentiate bet•deen the actual road on grade, 3 or 4 Et. doesn't make that muoh 6f a difLarence. The basic response is that that's needed Ede an approach and DttbP_r viewing. ,Manes : Mr. Arfne s to -Ca rc i a . Mr. Armesto-darcia! Yes, what I don't...t don't set any conflict here in what Mt. Rancock's saying.. if he has no right to taut a sign facing the expressway new and this is what he wants, "the maxi3tum height above the ground for a co;--terc al advertising sign shall riot exceed 30 ft. £rom the grade of the road to which the sign faces." I don't see anything wrong why the Department can not get along with this. I mean this is the most common sense and common language instead of going through to many languages and since this is clear... Mr. Manest Well, not speaking for the Department, I... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: This is clear to me that...in Dade County the maximum height is 35 *ft. in Dade County, in Dade County's unincorporated, 35 ft. Here we are not exceeding 30 ft. is okay from the grade of the road. I will move for that. Mr. Manes: Okay, well, we're not quite in a motion stage yet, but... Mr. Luaces: We're not ready for that but that's... I'll second. Mr. Manes: What I wanted to say was, not speaking for the Department, I think that there's other things to be taken into consideration besides expressways, there's ramps and overpasses and things like that that is what the Department's concern...Mr. Rodriguez, did you have a comment? Mr. Rodriguez: The only comment I would like to add is that is conceivable that you could be beyond the distance from the expressway, you know, more than the 600 and not facing. the expressway but taking advantage of the height differential of the road of the expressway. I guess you might be able to rase the billboard much more than the 5 ft. What I think we're doing is by doing what they're proposing, we're really opening it up and we don't know exactly the implications of what they are saying. Ours is a very clear standard, you apply, if it is only 4 or 5 ft., well if it's not a big deal in one area, it's not a big deal the other side, you know. Four or five feet won't kill them, right? if it doesn't... Mr. Manes: Is there or do either you or Mr. Whipple see any compromised language that would allow for, _ �- you know, something where the road is possibly built up for, you - know, 5 ft. or so? I remember that it was just last fall that we increased the sign height limit from 20 ft. to 30 ft. and that was after...isn't that correct, Mr. Whipple, there? Mr. Whipple: Well, that had to do with the residential districts and the ground signs with respect to the residential district. We had proposed, yes, many months ago that the maximum height be 30 ft. which was the same as it was under 6871 which has been no problem since 1965. Mr. Manes; But, you know, do you see that there is enough of an instance or enough instances where the road varies from the, you know, from the grade where it,$ not an expressway situation to change the language? a April 4, 1934, Item 13 Planning Advisor; loa d Yf i't kc 1 i� h L N aJ Y 'j a Y V L L j L G �i� d L? 4look at t eta4ota at aerials in the wit j` C9 .�la: l could S'e� th o happen dowft in 5"outh bade, Hot'testead t our Oft Tamiami Trail, ou iti the County areas there might bei a 3 or 4 ft. difmatehtial buy I dot` t see 3M7 problem in the City of Matio whatsoever. I do see a problo-M though with the language as proposed or as being proposed by Mr. Hancock. i Mr. Manes! Thank you, Mr. Whipple. Any more cottttents or questions from the Hoard? Mr. Luaces: Yes, I have a question. If we increase the height limitation to 35 ft. and Leave it as it is from the ground level, will that be. ..will that give you erioug;; leverace to work it out? Mr. Hancock: I don't think...I`think there's a lot of cases in Miami evert though we're pretty level around here that the idea would be not to say it's 1 ft. or 2 ft, or 5 ft. or whatever, it's to say that it's uniform and if you want to get something that's uniform that's simple, this is' -the way to go atd you Might run into a case where it might be 6 ft, or 7 ft. or it might be 3 ft. but that's really not the point. What the point is you're making it a uniform ordinance that you all know it's going to be 30 ft. above the grade and so there's no misunder- standing, there's no question, that it's better for my business because you can see the sign better if it's visible from a car driving along the road. If you can't see it, it has absolutely no value for me and you cut out a lot of property owners that might derive income from leases,that we would pay because we can't show the sign from the road and it's just something that would be uniform. I'm not saying that... I'm not an angel. I'm sitting up here telling you I would make more money, I would be able to sell more signs if ybu could see "them from the road, in a lot of cases you can't and this would solve that problem. Mr. Manes: Ms. Kolski. Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Whipple, when did you first get knowledge of Mr. Hancock's proposed wording? Mr. Whipple: A few moments ago. Ms. Kolski: Okay, I understand what you're saying, Mr. Hancock, but I'm afraid to adopt this wording without a study of the impact of this wording. I would mike to know some of the implications that would be involved. Mr. Hancock: I want you to know I agree totally. I think we. should study it and I think there's a lot of other areas that should be studied but this just came to my attention recently. Ms. Kolski: What I'm saying...What I'm saying is if the Department takes your wording and somehow tries to wo-.4 with it so that we can achieve some of what you want and yet protect the things that we are trying to protect... Mr. Hancock; Certainly. Ms. Kolski: ...then maybe we can come up wit:: a compromised wording. I don't know how anybody else feels abot;. it but I'd be for deferring this is or continuing or whatever yQu have to do. Mr. Luaces; we should do that. I agree with you, Pat. I believe Mr. Manes; Okay, well we are in discussion. Mr. Whipple, you have a comment there; Mr. Whipple; Ms. Koi.sk? Dial' you want a response, 4 April* 4, 19044 Itim, l3 9 M. rc la;�i: Sure, 10 ahead tiilict5le, Mr, think Mr. Randock'; rttpo`1se tb the last question regatding It Et, really quite clear Iy spells out their de5ie4, Their desire is now to Have to do w W ! a variation in graded their Jesite is to have a sign 60 £t. in height, t think this is really just a subterfuge. If you want to deter, fine, but our analysis isn't going to be any different th,ln what I put before you this evening and that we feel it's a put'e attempt by which to relate advertising signs to expressways. We believe this is wrong. The law does not permit it now. We would not teCOMMend permitting it in the future to we see no deed to really give them the leverage by which to say, OWell, hey, you know, we changed this wording and now we : re talking above.. , 3n ft. above the expressway." Mr. Manes: Mr...I have something I just thought of, sitting here smiling. If we were to, you know, put some sort of limitation on the distance from the road which the sign face would be applicable... let's say that if you, you know, from the grade of the road to which the sign faces, it appears that the Department's apprehension is that they're going to face it towards the expressway at 661 ft. and put it at any height but if the sign and the road facing each other must be, let's say within 650 ft. or something. Mr. Whipple: You're dealing in areas which we believe are, may come up and be addressed in the future either pursuant to the City Commission's first reading offering that really shouldn't completely enter in and govern this control tonight. The control tonight is a very basic control one only of height. This height has been in effect since 1965 until 9500 was adopted. We would see no problem other than ... in fact, one of the problems we have is that: there is a question right now as to what height the signs are permitted and we feel it's necessary that the legislation continue on and that these other problems be addressed in the proper form and through the proper studies. We just have a serious problem with the delay and we see a real need due to that lack of 9500 to get legislation moving. Mr. Manes: Mr. Mackey. Mr. Mackey: Bill Mackey, Public Works Department. I'm the highway Engineer for the City of Miami and I was just trying to go through in my mind what streets may be higher, say 5 ft. higher than the abutting property. I can't think of any but I'm sure that there may be a few isolated incidences but I don't think that that's a major problem. Mr. Manes: Thank you, Mr. Mackey., I couldn't visualize any more than one corner that that was much higher, myself, there. Board members, what.is your pleasure there? Mr. Luaces: I feel that... Mr. Manes:: You can sit down, Mr. Hancock, Mr. Luaces; ...I go along with Pat and with both in mind, I'm not thinking that the private sector or the businessman is using subterfuge. He's trying to make a living :• and I feel that we should go and try to find out the solution for it, He's open to do it and he's not saying that we're out to Kill him. He's saying let's find a solution and a compromise and I think we could work that out or we should continue the item, Mr. Manes; to say also.., mr. Mr. Manus: Any other; comments? I would li%e MRfR ...Did you want to speak? 7 Apr*1, 199 ►.I item 13 • l'lanninC �d'�i�ary ��at<d .- . god r . w Yeah, 1 i it a 1 i t. t l e t i s ,•tr . � I .,, i5 that, you :now, here �e' ra tr7Lng tee "t; redr a mis toke OE softAtthing that was. , .that' � hot clear its the drdinande and delaving it there- may be some apPlidants tf7i.ng to get some permits at this point that the puepose of the language' at this point: �_ tent df the ordinance et;om the beg inn ing and the iw&i. a itcwas originally drafted. By delaying .. . • i not approving the proposal as we are proposing, we are leaviwg a si. ;uation that should be cleared up iMmediately, unclear. ai re all f or clat: frying the future. I. -think we dan do that between the time we do now dnd we go to the Commission for first reading if you give us sotte instructions in Looking to different possibilities but 1...if you make a dea:�4i.on tonight of tfying to approve this limitation, I think it's important that we get it through. Mr. Manes: 'Thank you. Mr. Maxwell. Mr, Maxwell: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, it's not normally the Law Department's position to, or place to inform you of what ramifications of your actions might be. I have in this particular situation, I must inform you that there exists a serious loophole in 9500.to which this particular amendment is addressed and to delay it any further subjects the City to...well, because there is litigation, I will say it could work to the City's detriment to defer this item for any prolonged period of time, even to maybe next month because of the applications that come in on a continuous basis. Therefore, I would recommend that this Board take some action one way or the other at: this particular point because we're only talking about, the Hancock amendment that is, could be addressed at the City Commission level and does not amount to what could be considered a substantial deviation froT what this Board is considering at this point. There rights would not be substantially harped by your acting at this particular time. They would have an opportunity at the City Commission to propose the same language and the City Commission if they desire to, could accept it at that particular time but there is...I think time is of the essence on this particular amendment before you. Mr. Manes: We thank you very much, Mr. Maxwell. Does everybody understand what the situation is here? Ms. Kolski: Yeah, yeah. Mr. Hancock: I might... Mr. Manes: I'm sorry, the public hearing is closed there ... there will be no more comments from the public. You know, the Board is not traditionally in the policy of going against the recommendations of Planning Department. It's seldom that the Law Department makes a recommendation of this type here. Mr. Maxwell is -accurate, whatever action we take tonight...still _..,,,._.- this matter would be coming up to the City Commission probably what? before the end of this month, Mr. Maxwell? Mr. Maxwell: That would depend on the Planning Department but I would assume they're moving it quickly. Mr. Manes; Probably by the end of this , month, Mr. Maxwell: What I would aisor for the record, like to also say so Mr. Kancock could understand it-, I'.m not proposing that you vote one way or the other, Mr. Manes; Fight, you just... Mr. MaNW411; I'm just saying that you should. :say that you should vote. I'm not saying how you should vote... a April4r 1964, Item 13 Planning AdviSO-V ` DezaTd tecdIttend t1t ► : Mr, Maxwell t .. , you tiqh t -,rote for Mr. Hancockp Abu might -rate for tite Planhina laparttent, 'that's tyot oUr eer trtfet5datiotl. I'm s ,tpil saying we Would pr _0_2 that,.,we would suggest that you do lottothi;;t at this ti ;e, Mr. Manes: Can we...can •fie get ...Ms. Spohn, Mg. Spohn! 'Yeah, t' d like to know when we' oe voting on this, the wording on here says, " ` A tt�aximum he Clt above the ground for cothmercial at 30 ft.0 what is the pj ar�nittc �oat:d's redtSriSttendati.oti? Mr. Manes: recommendation. Ms. Spohn: Mr. Manes: Ms. Spohn: Mr. Maness following page there under #5. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Manes:' Mr. Luaces. Mr. Mackey. Mr. Manes: That is the ?fanning De'part:`lent's Oh, that is. That is. Oh, okay. That's the underlined text on the Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Luaces. I would like to ask a question of Mr. Mackey. Mr. Luaces:' You referred that in the City of Miami you can not find several places that are above ground more ' than 4 or 5 ft. Do you find in your- mind a lot of places in which the sign company could place a billboard and face expressway and be farther away than 600 ft.? Mr. Mackey: I'm not sure that I can answer that question. Mr. Luaces: Well, then the other question I can ask either because it's...that's the pro''_em, we're thinking, we're opposing this idea that he has to equal the height limitation to ground level because we are afraid that something may develop from it but then again nobody knc+s what could happen. Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Am, esto-Garcia: Let's handle what he develops. Ms. Kolski:` Mr. Chairman? Mr. Manes: Ms. Kolski. Ms. Kolski: I can understand what you said but by the same token, number one, we have a Iiery serious loophole, and dumber two, we can't approve it Intil it's been studied so what I think is what we ought to do is fill the lega, loophole that we currently have and then perhaps study it. Mr. Manes: Yes, the, you ;.row, the Hancock amendment, as we'll call it here, is subject :o further...futur.. review, is it not? .You know, even after the ",cmmi�sion level action, whatever action they may take without teing...because this particular item haon t been presented before us by the eoart: en , is that correct? 9 0 �N 4 v.J4 z ULLi ktl qa Inc,s� ... .., �.��i•�.ii 11 "��ll�. 4E..i yu. �. the C�At-;ttission for first teadiitg. Me,Manes! ad to the CV�tission but ladp let's Say the Co;futissidn decided no to AVI to it, it cbuld cond,ailibl`r` dome back to us at a l,ate2r ti 1e tt be addrts.sed, -io%; j khow, for what it is. Is that accurate? „r Mir, Rodriguett No, ftot... Mr. Manes! No... Mr. Etodrigue z ...unless the ommission re!ers back to the Planning Advisory Board, this will be part of th,a record and the Hancock Company can go before the Commission to present their case and it will be, as in tha case, they will be notified as we have been notifying through t:.e news ;media, you know, that the item is on the agenda and they will be able to present their case before the Commission. Mt. Manes: Okay. Mr. Imaxwell. Mr. Maxwell: It would on-',., come back to this Board if the Commission made so many changes in it that it Would be considered a whole new ordinance. In that case, it :ai_ht co:;e back to you but just the Hancock amendment, if you will, it Would not be necessary for it to come back to this Board. You would not see it again unless the Commission... Mr. Manes: 'Directed it. SKr. Maxwell: ...directed it back because of the 90 day rule or something like that. Mr. Manes: Thank you. Mr. Armesto-Garda. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: Yes, I see that this is a stor:a in a glass of water because the only difference I see here is the Hancock amendment said, "The maximum height above the ground for the commercial advertising sign shall not exceed 30 ft. from the grace of the road to which the sign faces." What the Department is the same thing, they say, "Thirty feet," but they don't say fron. the grade, they say, "above grade". It's only one word different. - Mr. Manes: Well, no, that's not the zone of contention that is that which way the sign =aces. If tha s'_:n is facing the expressway then a different grade would apply. The f grade is not the problem it's which grade are you using to way the... Mr. Armesto-Garcia: We are pulling the horses before the cart. That is something to be developed in the future and we can. handle that or other people will handle that in the future with what develops. We have not here a crys:al ball to see what is going to happen tomorrow or two years fr--:1 now. We are :ere tonight on April the 4th with a problem and :he problem is only one word "grade" or 'from". That is the way I see it and I thin:c that Mr. Hancock, also, can go to the Supre, Court but we don't have to penalize a taxpayer with those expenses. I think that here tonight we have the opportunity to fill the loophole an correct the mistake that has been done with adopting this or including this in the proposal of the Department. I don't see... is nothing wrong why the Department can not accept a friendly amendment from the taxpayer, something that they ;ma e a mistake and let's recognize it. Not everybc, y because wo-"As =or the City has, has the wisdom of deciding wh : i5 right and what is wrong, In the same way, here, we are faced with a prpo"Icm- let's solve the problem and take the bull by the horns not defrR it to any future meeting. Let's do it toni-3t. The only 41 1Q April 4, 1a�954, Item. n . . :. y �i .; 1r :- u- .0 ,'1n, uPl l'r Ji'e .tea wan-i t? wotd ";�V• a' -I) a"d i``^te 1 L . � r c+u� v1 ..t � j ff t� t: gr ude" ►T,onI 3 i : 6nde aftyt ;it 4 61se sty in u to rfty intell icjened, t+l . ,`banes: No, that, .okay► �s� �tl18k1. Ms. Kolski: Yes, Ott, Chairman, mft is this. We have an otdinanoe, We used to have 6871 that cofitai-aa these provisions and it's worked for us since 1065, We knad now it works and we know all of the implications involved, We ha'je bra rAd new wording that Mr, Rancodk handed us tonight and Wta_>be there's merit in it but I don't know enough about it. f want to know a lot more but by the same torten, I still want to go ahead and at least put our old provisions in in order. to get the protection that we need right now and then perhaps study t.s matter and dome up with something else to change it a little bit and still protect the expressway deal. Mr, Manes: Ms. Spohn, did you want to comment? Okay:. I have one more comment and then I think I'm going to ask for a_motion. My feelings are this. As the Law benartment's advised us, we have a serious loophole that needs to be filled. The Planning Department and Mr. Whipple in particular as this is his department in the Planning Department, feels vertj strongly about the wording of the proposed ordinance and the wording that the Planning Department has proposed by... the Planning Department's proposal and the Hancock, as we're ca_lin= it, the Hancock amendment. I feel that...and, you know, the potential loopholes that we're opening up here with adopti.n , you know, without further study the Hancock amendment is opening up possibly a very large door. This item is going to be before the City Commission in the very near future and if the City Commission feels that this amendment merits to be the further consideration or action they.will either.take it or send it back to us and I think that's a Commission level decision. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman, I feel .the Commission level decision... they appoint us because we have a say. I...my feeling is that I will recommend what I feel is good for business, which is above grade. I will recommend it and if they feel and they find the loopholes, let them find the loopholes and send it back to us then. Mr. Manes: Okay, fine. Mr. Luaces: It works both wav_ s so at this point I would recommend to pass this... Mr. Manes: You're making a motion to... Mr. Luaces: Yes. Mr. Manes: ...adopt amendment number or item 13... Mr. Luaces: Number 13. Mr. Manes: ...and incorporate... Mr. Luaces: Incorporating from the grade off the read to which the sign faces, Mr. Manes; Okay, the wording from the Hancock. amendment there. Mr. Correa: I'll second it. Mr. Manes: Seconded, Is there any fum e: discussion on the amendment? Ms. Ko15)�i; Yes, Mr. bhAirman. Mr. Manes; Me. Kolski* 1l April 4# 1934, Item, 1*3 Planaincj Advigovi 0*7&`rd i- MA - Kd 1- in 1 . I wduld )Ml y ask ,1y Jallo+,j 26a4A putting so�nut�tinz� i to tet. to release oonsidee that we may be n here And 96teone .may be able to dote along and put in 56f1e rat-:e'r Uhtict,tll things. We don't know all the implicatiohs, lt's rathgt 3angerous to vote on an amendment unless it't been full; s tud %ed . Mr. Manes: Okay, is there any further d i.�cuss c�fi? Mr. Ameeto-0arcia! to the same way, I would like to reco,tr=end to vote for Mr. Luaces and second by Mr. Correa, I will vote for that because if something happens tomorrow, let's worry about that tomorrow. The people who will handle that in the next meeting, they will worry about that. Why we have to go back again to pull the horses before the cart. Mr. Manes: Okay. Ms. Kolskit Mr. Chairman, probably a lot of things that we're unhappy with in the City .today is because somebody said let them worry about it tomorrow. I think we're here today to make the plans so,that tomorrow is more enjoyable in this City. Mr. Luaces: Mr. Chairman. What I'm referring to, Pat, is that if the City Commission knows the Planning Hoard knows and will find those loopholes or those errors, they have time to present it to the City Commission before they approve or act on it. Ms. Kolski: Well, I understand that but the City Commission can recommen$ a study and` they probably would recommend+a study after seeing Mr.•Hancock's amendment. I'm not saying that I'm totally opposed to that. I'm saying let's not take a chance and do it tonight. Let's wait until a'study has been completed. Let's fill the loophole tonight. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: We are filling the loophole in this way with their part and his part. We're putting both parts together and filling the loophole then the City Commission will tare the whole thing as a whole or divideit. That's their problem but we are filling the loophole. We have...I will sleep' very well tonight with my conscience because I am pulling together two people and sending the two thinking together to the next meeting, to the above us hierarchy, and they will decide if we were wrong or we were right.. We can not decide if we are right or we are wrong. They will do it. Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman. We're filling the, loophole by putting them both together. What I am suggesting is that we fill the loophole with the old wording. The City Commission is going to have in all of it's information, Mr. Hancock's suggested wording. I'm saying it's potentially harmful to combine the wording if Mr. Mackey couldn't even tell us what places in the City a sign could be put up. This thing needs to be studied. _You just...you just don't combine wording like that. You study it. Mr. Armesto-Garcia; That is the problem, Mr. Chairman, that after so many years..,after so many years with the City they can not tell us what even Ms. Kolski wants to know. Now, if in so many years they can not, how do you think, Ms. Kolski, they're going to know in two or three days? Ms. Kolski; Did you honestly expect a man to stand there and tell you where all these signs could be putt just like that at the drop of a hat' Mr. Manes; Mr. Luaces, l� April 9, 1984 r ltsq l3 i�i:r+nlrt l�d'�iss"*o rd a 1 •lt'. Uao s: ` ha` i i '! ` rb. l att R4 .4a0A a xe wd '``gat doluld not e4mdrf,ber a glade in Aiami •Oqt . ��. doe i% couid be aide over grade and if he can do that, he (taft femetber the 3.t t8tway bedauae if' t thin)*. a little bit, nayb4 t will be Able td kMOW which eXb_ td9sways are in MiaMi. Ms. iulski! Sir... Mr. Luacet! Ms. Kolski! Mr. Armesto-dare a! I think he was... ;i . ...he works with roads. Call the question. Mr. Manes! We have a motion to call the question by Mr. Armesto-Garcia. Is there a second? Mr. Correa: No, no... Mr. Luaces: Call the question. Mr. Manes: bkay, we have a second. There's no discussion? please call the, roll on calling the question. Mr. Rodriguez: The motion is for approval of item 13 as... Mr. Manes: Mr. Armesto-Garcia: -No, call the question. Mr. Manes: Just to call the question. Yes or no, do we end debate. Mr. Rodriguez: that I have the right motion. Ms. Spohn: Mr. Manes: ending debate first. Mr. Rodriguez: Oh! No, I wanted to make sure Yeah. Okay, but we're just...we're Okay, I'm sorry. (Secretary called roll on calling the question.) AYES: Messrs. Man -as, Luaces, Correa and Armesto-Garcia NAYES: Ms. Kolski and Spohn ABSENT: Messrs. Benjamin and Diego Mr. Manes: We have 5, 7. We need two- thirds. Mr. Rodriguez: No, we have 4 to 2. Mr. Manes: Four to two? Mr. Rodriguez: MmHm. Mr. Manes: 'then we -have two-thirds. Okay, debate is over, please...okay, I'll state ,the motion and the second and then we'll call the roll. The motion is for approvi^g item 413 as presented and incorporating the, more or less, the last line of the Hancock amendment here, as we're callin5 it,, incorporating the wordage "grade of the road to whi:.h the sign faces" and the motion was made by Mr. Luaces, seconded by Mr. Correa and please call the roll, M r �d tt y �a q �'Jcl n twalia 4ue5ti.�n. �iesar : La cc so +rtesto-3atdia any; (104 rea NA` 88 Ms. Kolski and Spohn M b s s r. M a n e s A88c, : Messrs. Senjai in and bego . Mr. Mdrigue2: The Motion fails 3 to 3. Mr. Manes! NOW, Ms. Kolakl, what's In order here is, since you are the proponent on the other end, an alternative amendment or an alternative ,%otion.. Mr. Armesto-Garcia: I will propose one if she has,.. W Mr. Manes: No, Ms...okay, Ms. Kolski: Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman... Mr. Manes: -Item 13. Ms. Kolski: Mr. Chairman, I moue approval of item 13 as presented by the planning Department. Mr. Manes: Is there a second? Ms. Spohn: I'll second it. Mr. Manes: Thank you. Is there any discussion on the motion? Motion is to approve item 13 as -*� presented. There being no discussion, please call the roll. (Secretary called roll on the motion.) AYES: Ms. Kolski and Spohn Messrs. Manes NAYES: Messrs. Luaces, Correa and Armesto-Garcia ABSENT: Messrs. Benjamin and Diego Mr. Rodriguez: The motion fails 3 to 3. Mr. Manes: Thank you. This item will now go on to the City Commission deemed as being denied in its orginal fora and we wish you a lot of luck there, Mr. Hancock. Thank you for coming. Okay, we're back to our initial or our original agenda and we're up to agenda item number 3, I believe. 14 April 4, 1484, Item 13 0 MIAMI REVIEW AND DAILY RECORD Published Daily except Saturday. Sunday and Legal Holidays Miami, Dade County, Florida. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF DADE: Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Sookle Nfilliams, who on oath says that she is the Vice President of Legal Advertising of the Miami Review and Daily Record, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) published at Miami en Dade County, Florida: that the newspaper, ached copy of advertisement, being a Legal Advertisement of Notice In the matter of CITY OF MIAMI Re: ORDINANCE N0.9993 In the .........X..X..X.......................... Court, was published in said newspaper In the issues of May 31, 1985 Alliant further says that the said Miami Review and Daily Record Is a newspaper published at Miami in said Dade County. Florida, and that in said Dade County Florida. each day (excer has heretofore been contipt Saty, p (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Miami in said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertis nt: and affiant further says that she has neither paid n p mised any person, firm or corporation of secany uring discount , rebate c mission or refund for the purpose adve s ant for p blication In the aid no $►Lom to rid subsari ad ti•,piore me this 31st of, 14 a85 Yr S- AM.1e....... —'w ' .. X elty .� roti s No Public, glary @ Ronda at Large 9 Q` MyCommission exp`&e WITH CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL, F.OR dMAIN.OUT bOOR AbVERt0HG'SIGNS; CONTAINING A ht0tALER PROVISIbN ANb A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE,, ; - ORDINANCE NO.999a AN EMERGENCY ORDINAN CE AMENDING SECTION,53.161(3);; � • OF THE CODE OF 'THE CITY'OF MIAMI; FLOR1bA, AS .OF ` AMENDED, WHICH CREATED A SCHEbULEFEES,FOR THE USE OF THE CONVENTION CENTER PARKING GARAGE (MUNICIPAL GARAGE NO, d)_ BY CHANGING :THI: ,RATE SCHEDULE FOR THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF. AND THE, , SERVICES FURNISHED OR TO BE FURNISHED IN CONNEC TION WITH THE CONTAINING A RMIAMI ENTER AND PARKING GARAGE,, R PROVISION ANb A SEVERABIL• ITY CLAUSE. ORDINANCE NO.9995 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ORDINANCE NO.9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 2031.2 OF SECTION 2031 ENTITLED "DRIVE-IN'ESTABLISHMENTS; CAR WASHES," . TO FtFni 111:71: e'%SDGCIAI 9:V1`.rVTInKl WITu. ADDQnW: 7kiV.', THE OF C IN T1 ING AND DO P E•IN BANKS, TICKET SELLING TERS.OR:OTHER DRIVE-IN-F • NOT.LIMITED'TO FOOD AND ONDRY ,AND` DRY CLEANING PROVIDE THE MINIMUM NUMI DISTRICTS 04 AND ( WITH APPROVAL BY IN FACIUTIES'THAT BER OF'RESERVOII PROVISION AND Al O AN ORDINANCE AM NANCENO.9500 'TI 14TO'REQUIRE E HE CITY COMMIS i0 NOT PROVIDE SPACES; CONTA :VERABILITY CIJ DINANCE NO 99 NDING'THE ZON' ElONING ORDIt BY CHANGING T .1-95 EXPRESSWAY, METRORAIL 17TH ROAD; SOUTHWEST 2Nt TO.AND'APPROXIMATELY 2101 WEST 17TH ROAD AND SOU' PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENT `OFFICE;'. MAKING' FINDINGS; =1 NEGESSARY CHANGES,ON..R ATLAS MADE A, PART OF OR ERENCE,AND _DESCRIPTION; THEREOF; CONTAINING A RI SEVERABILITY �IAUSE ,.' ? OFIDINANG AN ORDINAN�E AMENDING F .N H T, .A N N A u"Wh NCLUD-; SALES, ►TIONS)_: ERVOIR ,• ttEDULE,_,.-,.• . !ONING;: M NUM•, '° ,EALER:' JG }JryC ENTIAL ' �ONINGM� BX REF ON AND >A f ; i'F Qlii,?1t.= NQ AVER . GRIBEp, (I�INQSt !tI P>A-GE; T,j0 1N` MR 110 Altlnni runner says that !ne sera '*'ro..;, mho.. .. ,..., npcord is a newsoalinr ;n-blr5hi'd at Miami in said OAde County, Florida, ands +hat the �,iid newspaper has hbtttl6latb beeh continuously published in said Dade County, Klbridb. ea6h day (except Saturday, Sunday and Leqal Hblideyfl and hA§ been entered as second class mail ri'lattbt At the post affide In Miami in said bade County. Florida. for A p6riod of one yak nexi oreCAdihq the lir§l publl6Atl6n of thil aHadhNtl 600v of advetii§ nt; end attiant fuHhet Say! that shb has neither paid h p thised any petson. lift of cofpdmilon any dik6unt. tebAlb c this§tan or ralurid tot the purpose of secutim§ this AdOtl § ent tot p blibation in the Aid tietNspapet. `,```rttlti lit tt(// i �146tn to and sublidr&d Iiefote me this 31st dlvot_ .C�f�S9 AD.ig:......85 of , toti s -Ub publ)c, StajN 1' Florida at Latga (SEAL) 'y�'`FO�� ... • `r�` \ ' My Commission exp((4, MR i10 n PA ATLAS MADE A PART OF 6RbINAN66136A_M* b ERENCE AND bESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 31 Std+ION 3 THEREOF; CONTAINING A `REPEALER PROV MON AND.A SEVERASILITY CLAUSE. ORDINANCE NO.00, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF Ohm, NANCE NO.'9500, THE ZONING ORbINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSit,, FICATION OF APPROXIMATELY `IW0 9OU1'HWt8t.2Nb AVE- NUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM RS,2/2 ONE -FAMILY. DETACHED RESIbEN- TIAL.TO,R0.3/S RESIDENTIAL -OFFICE, MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALLTHE NEOESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE . . NO. 37 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDi- NANCE N0. 0600, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE' 3; SECTION 306, THEREOF; CONTAININGA REPEALER: PROVISION AND A SEVERASILITY CLAUSE. ORDINANCE NO.991313 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORbI• NANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLAM. FICATION FOR THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED 13Y SOUTHWEST 2ND COURT, SOUTHWEST 15TH ROAD, SOUTH- WEST 1ST_AVENUE AND A LINE PARALLEL TO AND APPROX IMATELY 115.150 FEETSoUTHWESTOF. SOUTHWEST ISTH ROAD (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN); FROM FIG 2/5 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL TO RO-3/5 RESIDENTIAL OFFICE; MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING 'ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO.37 OF SAID'ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO 9500, BY;REF- ERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3; SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. ORDINANCE NO.9999 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDI- NANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSI- FICATION FOR THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY SOUTHWEST 2ND AVENUE, SOUTHWEST. 17TH ROAD, SOUTHWEST 1ST AVENUE AND A LINE PARALLEL TO AND APPROXIMATELY 390 FEET NORTHEAST OF SOUTHWEST' 17TH_ ROAD, MIAMI,- FLORIDA I(MORE .PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM RG-2/5 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL TO RO-1/5 RESIDENTIAL` OFFICE MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY: MAKING'ALL THE;:NECESSARY,_CHANGES: ONPAGE'' NO.:37 OF SAID.ZONING',ATLAS MADE A`,PART,OF:ORDI NANCE NO.` 9500; BY: REFERENCE,AND :DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE';% SECTION 300,� THEREOF; ICONTAIN [NO A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE a9 r R ORDINANCE NO: 10000 le AN"ORDINANCE AMENDING JHE=TEXTOF.ORDINANCE N0. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF -THE CITY OF,, MIAMI; FLORIDA `BY`AMENDING;"SUBSECTIONS 2102.2A.1,0AND 2102.2.1.2.OFSECTION 2102 ENTITLED "NONCONFORMING LOTS," ,TO PROVIDE THAT. NONCONFORMING LOTS UTI- LIZING'THE`"EIGHTY PERCENT";,EXCEPTION AND'RULE' FOR LOT DIVISION MUST'MAINTAIN''THE'SAME COMMON FRONTAGE AND ORIENTATION AS THE, PREVIOUS'LOTS' CONTAINING'A`REPEALER PROVISION AND':A SEVERABIL- ITY CLAUSEo ORDINANCE NO.10001 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING. TWO -,NEW; SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS ENTITLED, "RENTAL-REHABIL ITATION PROGRAM'— 1984" AND,;"RENTAL REHABILITA=' TION PROGRAM 1985'', APPROPRIATING':FUNDWFOR THE OPERATION OF SAME;IN THE AMOUNTS OF 096,800 " AND $690,000 RESPECTIVELY, CONSISTING'OF;FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS FROMTHE _UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT, OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT-ANP AIIT,HOR• (ZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE GRANT-AWI RD FROM THE UNITED STATES P€PARTMENT`OF• HOUSING AND UR13AN DEVELOPMENT, AND 10 ENT€R .INTO "TH€ NECESSARY CONTRACTS) AND/OR, AGRE€M€N.T(S)'.FOR ' THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANTS;,'CO.MTAININi3 A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERA0ILITY Q AUSE. RALPH G ONGIE CITY CLERK CITY OF MIAMI, FWRI 0,4114 5/31 m PROPOSAL E. A. Hancocki 3856 bOUoLAS 4OAC r COCONUT G IM. FLONI[M 33133 • tFLtPHONL9 (305)Ad5•22Og130-0565 TABU OF CONIVrS a L 1) Letter from Metro P.B.A. 2) Article on State Signage. 3) Map Of Interstate 195. 4) Private Enterprise Using Billboards: a) Nobody Covers South Florida Better - Channel 7 b) WSVN - Channel 7 on I - 95 now c) Neighbors - Miami Herald d) only 25 Cents - Miami Herald e) Athletic Club - Southeast Bank Blvd Sign I Nelson'Perry. ketfdoht 12oo N00hWOM 78 Ave. Sulte 217 1V la tti, K10Hda 33128 305/593-0044 To WHOM IT MAY CONCM We support the use of billboard advertising; to promote increased awareness, particularly of the law enforcement community. We support the Metro -Dade Police Department and the "Wear the Silver Badge" Campaign, and we supported the Florida Highway Patrol campaign on highway safety. The Dade County PBA spent some $18,000 for billboards (copies attached). We felt that billboard advertising reached the most number of people, and by the calls we have received, feel our campaigns were a great success. Very truly yours, Nelson Perry President NP:1dw Enclosures Florida News Driver prays for, victim, himself CIE WAER �(oAP) — Jo" w►lkd thseph Linke grave of the I1•year•old boy and began his court -ordered Paster evening visit With a silent prayer. He said the prayer Was partly for the boy, victim of a hit=and�ritn driver, and partly for' himself, He was the driver. ,Tm sorry it ever _happened. I think of It every day — the Idea that I took a boy 'a life," said Link, 32, Who Went to the cemetery from a gall cell, where Is serving, 90 days on weekends, from 8 a.m. Saturday to 6 p.m. Sunday. April I was the first anniversary of the death of Edward "Tony" 5ylantrki, Link was ordered by a judge last month to visit the child's grave for atx anniversaries as part , of his sentence for vehicular homicide andleaving the scene of in accident. He also was sentenced to one year house arrest, followed by five years probation. He lost his times, but In a year will be able to get a permit to drive to work. On his way to a party last year, Link struck and killed the young= ster, who was pushing his bicycle up a bill. Link said he thought he AROUND THE STATE Greetings to get more colorful From Herald Wire Services TALLAHASSEE — A new "Welcome to Florida" sign — featuring blue skies, sunshine and palm trees — is replacing the staid green and white state line markers, the Commerce Department announced Monday. The first sign — 13 by 8 !I feet — was put up near the state welcome center on In- terstate 75. At least 17 more are planned on interstate highways and other major roads leading into the state, but it will take several months since each sign, has to, be Individually made. The next signs will go up at welcome centers on I.95 near Jacksonville and I-10 near Pensacola. Instead of the white block letters on a standard -issue green Interstate highway sign saying "Florida State Line" or "Now Entering Florida," the new signs have a blue background and the message "Welcome to Florida" above three green palm trees and the slogan, "The Sunshine State." The Ietter,O-in "Florida" Is,a yellow sun, with the states silhouette imposed across it. 3rd collegian killed in fall DAYTONA BEACH April Trumble of Joliet, Ill.; became the third collegian to die' in a fall from a hotel balcony during spring break, according to police. Trumble, 20, fell 10 floors early Sunday as she tried to climb between balconies at the Plaza Hotel, police Sgt. Walter Carr said Monday. "Her friends Indicated she had been partying E that night," Comatose mother, 17, dies AUBURNDALE — Taml Dawn Hicks, 17, who gave birth to a healthy daughter last summer while comatose, died Sunday at her parents home without regaining consciousness. hit it road sign and continued to the party, lie turned himself in three days later after learning he wag being sought. Speaking haltingly, Link said; "I'1 probably come out here ISylvan Abbey Memorial Parkll even after it's all over With ... t think it's an obligation , , , it's been building up, the anxiety, pressure. This is sort of a release. He stood for a few silent mothents before a marker that read: "Edward A. 'Tony' Sylanski. Nov. 13, 1972 --- Apr. 7, 1984. So Dearly Loved." Cruise ship Key 'West stop runs overtime By CHRIS VAUGHAN, Herald Staff Writer KEY WEST — The Mallory Square sunset celebration took place in the shadows Monday when the Bermuda Star, a cruise ship on its last stop of the season In Key West, ran aground due to an unusually low tide. "All I can say is, she's on the bottom," said Richard Steadman, Key West agent for the Bahama Cruise Line. "When nature says stop, you stop." The wait began for high tide early today — and for nature to undo what she had done. 'The ship's 261A-foot draft ordi- narily clears the bottom by three or four feet, Steadman said. Not that Steadman didn't try to get the black -hulled behemoth out of the way. A pair of tug boats .tried to free the ship late Monday, but it remained stuck In the muck off the famous pier where jugglers flip flaming torches and refugees peddle handmade merchandise ev- ery evening at dusk, "Actually, It's kept people here longer," said Mira Negron, who sells Austrian cinnamon twists. "They don't know the sun has already set." Indeed, the Cancun -bound ship blotted out the view that for decades has attracted visitors from around the' world — just as the Mallory Square sunset celebrants had feared It would do on a Or V11 sob, Tlri - ro� Bermuda. Faris ....- For full} call Delta in N 448-1433), in Dream Vacati fares and Dre out notice. Dream Vacation rate reservations are regt can vary and maybe takes, rental deposit All air fares shown ar Wed.; other days slip least 30 days ahead your reservations-v holiday periods. A ,9993.. ,. V ALL OF INTERSTATE 95 IN THE CITY OF MIAINII What the ordinance would do Ganges to Miami's sign ordinance would keep signs confined to ;heavily induStrial and commercial areas, and. 1) Allow them to face expressways with 600 feet of the right-of-way; 2) Increase their maximum height f rum 30 to 50 f eet as measured from the crown of the expressway, or 65 feet as measured from the nearest adjacent local road; 3) Require 1.500 fact of space between expressway sign and 1,000 feet N-_tween those on federal -aid primary highwa,, . succh as South Dixie Highway and Tamiami Trail; j) maintain tilt -i�)u-square-foot size ii-At on all signs. Red indic4_ _ where signs are not Fellow w IE signs are allowed. Spacing, Zoning, i _..ng Signs, Severely Limited Buildable Sights. Signs will be allowEz n only 3.1 miles ­f 1-95, Scale Ij_" = ?" Ft.. La M- A � I � �� i �"� � mAk'GRAM SERVICE Cil"to 4603611038139 oVillis Its Ipmmill CIP 'OlAs 2029720611 MGMI ?bMT WASHINCTON 1C J09 o'sall .04310 181 SANDY YbUKILIS# AICP# VIC9-:CHAIRMAN- FLOAIDA COLD COAST ittTIONs"APA`CORAL ' CORAL CABLES 1LANNIN'd btpl 4bl''ll-OKORE '.WAY' CORAL CABLES 'FL .33114 THE AMERICAN PLANNING -ASSOCIATION# THE NATiONAL 1ORGANIIATI-ON Olt 21#000 CITYP -COUNTY# METROPOLITAN# !REGIONAL -AND 47AMPLANWSP INCLUDING ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS MAl 't-ONSISMILY 'OPPOSED, ATTEMPTS BEING MACE At ALL •LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT I'TO 'FACILITATE 11HE" PROLIFERATION' OF :BILL BOARDS .IN 1OUR iURSAN AND 'AURAL AREAls 'Wg� . THEREFORE SUPPORT 0FORTS BY -OUR :CHAPTtRl AND VCTIONO lt 40CIPT -00 MAINTAIN LOCAL ORDINANCES 'THAT WILL -PROTECT ,OUR iNATIONI IVIIUALt ENVIRONMENT, GEORGE I MARCOUt AICP# ;DEPUTY 'EXECUTOR DIRECT -OR 4 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1776 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW -$It 704 WASHINGTON DC 20036 UNSIGNED 16t4O EST MGMCOMP 9993 TO REPLY BY MAILGRAM MESSAGE, SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR WESTERN UNION'S TOLL - FREE PHONE NUMBERS m gtDICATED TO PROTEtTINR AND PRRSERVINR THE UNIQUE LAND AND LIFESTYLE OF �DDONtIT aROVE,�'� THE ASSOCIATION NO 3100 JEFFRRSON STREET, COCONUT GROVE, FLORIDA 23133 306 858 4600 — w s 4 am s 17 Ari1 10g5,�'' to 4 y �Q t •1�: �' �'l.�C.r::i Ui�V t.Ct1: :.iiS1 JJ'l At a repalar mie ibcrship tae,7Ainfr on ::e yj ji ssociation vo te(l to exprcs t0 tilE' i:iai-,,i City ""C-r icstor t:nanimo t: n--T'osi" u tion to arj chance in the pose," =ctYiCtion o;i th.? si � and j lacrm.-z nt of - bislboar �c Sri-, Yin the boundaries of thr= city. i!;is Y.as voted; ir, t �� ir.t.�r� eCt Oi ii()4r- tr.� �?Ecl::t,. G:� ..� S"( jt. ST'`.'�i'^E 8n-I In -I';-1.ii+crD'.1of" 'cafety on thc; si " TYNG AND 'PAWAViNA THE UNIQUE LAND AND 'C PESTYLE OF COCONUT GI�OM" DSD2CAfi�D fi� �ROT�C i s THE ASSOCIATION INC 5100 JEFFERSON STREET, COCONUT GROVE, FLORIDA 33133 305 853 4600 C CA m � -4 f �i r tb � ^_o s ' -!s Il: arli city vorn. ssion Ett ci regular iaer;br;rsrip noeti nts 011 ii.c crr� 19P' 5 t}ic! y`:-(.rik-.: I 1: ssol:latior, vc "Io. ` to E:. P ',''C' c s to t I i i a, ma Ci Ly ',c-r tcz ioI, u nazIii ,o-.us r,ppos tion to any chanE;c i.l tLe prese.it r'eGt. ict=ion on the size and blllbonr,:F -,;!'Yin the boundaries of thr- cit;;. T! is vas voter', ir. t w i.-ter- o.i rotr.c 4 .. of i 6-I,.:: si,`.11re a na in tJ.e of zan-�ty on the orpr-zs.4a-s. 5ccre ; J 9993 mestern union Telegram MAA015(.1047)(1-,0071W107)PD 04/17/85 1046 10.9 IPMPTUL PTL 1985 APR 17 All to: SS 01951 04-17 0735A PST PTUI % ICS IPMMAOS 4-008708S107 04/17/C5 04 ICS IPMMTZZ CSP 3055730446 TDMT MIAMI FL 7 04-17 1033A EST PMS MAYOR MAURICE FERRE AND COMMISSIONERS, DLR CITY OF MIAMI 3500 PAN AMERICAN DR MIAMI FL 33133 M f 14 MAYOR AND C9MMISS1ONERSq PLEASE VOTE AGAINST BILLBOARDS. Ali PAMELA BAKER JOHNSON 1035 EST NNNN W.U. 1201-SF (R5-69) 99913 r� 1 _ western union leg r� MA5015 C 1044> (1i008620A107) PD 04/ 17/85 1044 ICS I PM PT US PT L 01511 04=17 0734 A PST PT UA ICS I PMM AO 9 4-006626S107 04/17/C5 ICS IPMMTZZ CSP 3055730446 TDMT M IAM I FL 14 04- 17 1032A EST FMS MAYOR MAURICE FERRE AND COMMISSIONERS, DLR CITY OF M IAM I 3500 PAN LAMER ICAN DR M I AM I FL 33133 M 41,90 5- / 0'" I WISH TO EXPRESS STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN THE BILLBOARD ORD INANCE. M IT CHELL WOLFSON JR 1034 EST NNNN • 5. f f v* L A CAMAc()t, w CAMARA DE COMERCIO LATINA DY, LOS ESTAI)OS VNID 8 I.dthl Chamber of Ct�l�tl'�1'l�l'���it�`V A rr� MAILING ADDRESS } y'_, ';(� 17 P:Wl'V C� FIOE, P,O BOX 350824 PHONE 0 ST. _ W -"JNCA DI (;t)RIERNO MIAMI, FLA 33135 (3051 642.3870 135 t. , A !. n Ek� I9R3 — 19Hii �'.r. 1� c t _ . �1 A O PRESti)ENTES DE IIONC)R Ihn'avio Agwrre Mailltiel Fialado 11I1ES IDENTE Eloy Ii Gorilez VICE-PRESIDI;NTE S Elltitho Nurie,z Willimn Alex.urder \)rgilhe I't,rez Anihtrim C Rivas Adalcr•rto Ruiz Mann 1'e-stomt Alberto 1puirantes SECRETARIO Fcrna nh, t arr.uidi VICE-SECRETARIOS Malmel Vega Ilunmberlo.l i'rllim TESORF:RO (Irlamlo N;iranjo VICE -TF.SOREROS Angel Fandirio ('edro Alhuernt, DIRECTOR DE REI.AC'IONES EXTERIORF,S .lay Rodriguez VICE -1)IRFCTORES OF REI.ACIONF:S F,XTFRIORES Jose Ehats Bello Atmado .L Acosta DIRFCTORES Armando Gutierrez A. Armwido Alejamire Fermtndo Rodriguez F'raincisvo F'igneredo F:Inter I.evva Alotlesto 6oniez Horacio S. Garrta Elio A. GonzMez Mauuel Itodriguez Mario t 1. Gumerrez Ricardo V.tidrs Plorvs Teresa 'Lubiz.rreut VICE -PRESIDE NTF EJECUTIVO Luis sabim s PAST PRESIDF.NTES Eliseo Itiera t;tinuz Gilbeno Aitneida Mwitiel liailadb Rogeho Nurius Imis Sabines ASESORES LEGALES Pedro Ramon I.6pez Luciano Isla ASESOR MPOTECARIO Abel Holtz April 16, 1985 Mr. Maurice A. Perre Mayor City of Miami 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Dear Mr, Ferre: The Board of Directors of the Latin Chamber of Commerce of the United States (CAMACOL) agree to support the Committee Against Expressway Billboards (CAEB) and commend their efforts in their fight against these signs. Miami is a growing metropolis both nationally_ and internationally recognized for its natural beauty. Despite our phenomenal growth, we have managed to maintain, through hard work, a lovely city full of trees and with a impacting view of the beautiful ocean which surrounds us. We hope that by supporting CAEB, keep all the positive things about Miami alive as well as contribute to stop those things which are negative. We urge you to consider not changing the 1962 Law and continue to work togelt making Miami the wonderful and pleasant place it i� o live. Sincerely 4.-'uy,eGonz�ale4//Fernando Carrandi President Secretary EBG:pa CENTEO DE INFORMACION *INFORMATION CENTER Todas las donaciones son deducibles de impuestos • All donations are fully tax deductible ;Y M UNIVI.RsITY o1z SCI10 11. OF ANC111 EC"11'IZ1f (3u5) 8r•308 POM 0111ce llox Coral (A)Ie%. FL 33 12 i To the Honorable Mayor and Commissioners, City of Miami: Resolved that the quality of the urban environment would be greatly diminished by the presence of billboards visible from expressways within the City of Miami, and that the faculty of the School of Architecture, University of Miami, respectfully urge the City Commission to reject the proposed changes to the sign ordinance. Unanimously approved April 16, 1985 t Moll at rIkk5►bN8 BILL tyUNtOk iecretury of 3rarr State qf F16ridd hmsrtW JINI 5U►7N .' bovi.l: t:6NI.4tR .�nomei' Goneml 110h, OkAHA ; ; cahtihttslahrr of AgHealtu)t Cdhipiraltrr T.. tolhiit(.siofrrl of Vardlla" 0 6 les Highway Safety andMot'or Yehle D We Pn a rt.1 ratent Of OF Nell kirkhidh liullding LI )NAND N. M1 LLON ratldhastrd, 321A1 Etectltive ►i4'eclar _ DIVISIONS +� E'LORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL 6 DRIVtR LICENSES i MOTOR V041CLES ADMINISTRATIVt: SERVICtg Colonel ►iobhy h. lluActt, birertor C. W. Keith, bitertne Charles J. Brantley, birertar W. B. Kaufman. bfrertar April 11t 1985 Mr. Eugene A. Hancock President E. A. Hancock Advertising C/o Rick Sisser 3510 Biscayne Blvd. Suite 312 Miami, t_-I 33137 Dear Mr. Hancock: The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles was recently involved in a statewide billboard campaign directed at drunk driving. This campaign was made possible through the cooperation of the Florida Outdoor Advertising Association whose members donated billboard space through- out the State. The outdoor advertising media is frequently called on by this agency to support various highway safety programs. We feel this method of conveying a message to the motoring public has been very successful. LRM/jog cc: Eck Sisser Sincerely, d - *YM) Leonard R. Mellon Executive Director :., . a IY n- li- in 6r is e- )0, ht 4- ce le, rt- ed nd he ,a- #G nt iff as 1Y jIe Reagah'A ,roirtugal .,fid] [� UL01 IN M LISBON, Portugal President Reagan is return- ing home today from a symbol laden, fotir•nation trek through Europe that renewed painful memories of World War 11. saluted democracy and set a stern tone for talks with the Soviet Union. Reagan said yesterday it had been a long journey, "but one fruitful in results and rich in memory." Aides, acknowledging there were problems on the trip, busily accentuated the positive and declared the 10-day trip to Germany, Spain, Prance and Portugal a success. "There have been a few glitches here and there," chief of staff Donald T. Regan said. "But overall, this has been an excellent trip." Secretary of State George P. Shultz, who flew from Lisbon to Tel Aviv last night, called it "a very hard working trip ... But, f think it's all been really worthwhile..,." Reagan ended the trip on an upbeat note with a state visit to Portugal, a founding member of the NATO alliance and a staunch U.S. ally. It was a welcome rest from a string of difficult sit- uations: a seven -nation summit that failed to agree an a U.S. proposal for setting a date on starting interiftA6 tional trade talks; a state visit to Nest Germany that included a controversial wreath -laying ceremony at a cemetery containing Nazi SS graves; a state visit to Spain, whose leaders expressed opposition to U.S: economic sanctions against Nicaragua, and a major speech in Strasbourg, France, marred by hecklers. Yesterday, Reagan hit at Soviet and Nicaraguan leaders and expressed hope for a time when totalitari, an rule "is only a sad and distant memory." Reagan said he was not surprised that Nicaraguan President ,Daniel Ortega %•isited Moscow last week. "That's his patron saint," Reagan declared. In the last speech of the tour before the Portuguese National Assembly. yesterday , Reagan declared that the free West learned after World War 11 it Is not - enough "only to wish for peace." "Instead, we accepted reality. We took seriously those who threatened to end the independence of our nations and our peoples, and we did what peoples who value their freedom must do -- we joined to- gether in a great alliance," Reagan said. NOTICE OF AMENDMENT TO THE.CIT,Y OF MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE ZONING 0 .01h ANCE AND THE MIAMI CITY 'C ZE AT THE SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI FLORIDA TO BE HELLI;0N THU.RSDAY- Mi Y 23' 1995 WILL CONSIDER AT 9:00 FOEIN UING ITEMS RELLA,AT TEDCTO THE PLANNING AAMERICAN D ZON NNGDPORTION OF' THERAGENOA FOR FINAL R� NG AND ADOPTION THEREOF; AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 9500,THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE _CITY OF MIAMI_FLORIDA, BY I.. THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROPOSES TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY MAY 23 1985 COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM AT CITY HALL, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE MIAMI FLOR• IDA; TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS RELATEd TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION OF THE AGENDA FOR FIRST RWING ONLY; AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO 9500 THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY APPLYING THE HC4: COMMERCIAL AREA HERITAGE CONSERVATION MALAY DISTRICT TO THE "DU PUIS MEDICAL OFFICE AND DRUG- STORE " LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 6D4145 N.E. 2ND AVENUE (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN)- MAKING FINDINGS ADOPTING AND INCORPORATING BY REFERENCE THE "DESIGNAY& REPORT'; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES 64 PAGE 14 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROPOSES TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500 AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE: A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 23,1985, COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM IN 6ITY HALL, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION OF THE AGENDA; A RESOLUTION CLOSING VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING THE PUBLIC USE OF A PORTION OF NORTHWET STH AND 6TH AVENUES NORTHWEST 5'TH COURT, NORTHWEST I I TERRACE AND NORTHWEST 12TH AND 13TH STREETS; ALL AS A CONDITION OF AP- PROVAL bFTENTATIVE PLAT #1240-A"BOOKER T, WASHINGTON JR. HIGH". A RESOLUTION CLOSING VACATING ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING THE PUBLIC USE OF THAT PORTION OF MIAMARINA PARKWAY DRIVE AT BAYFRONT,PAI'IK LOCATEb SOUTH OF PORT BOULEVARD AND EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD ALL AS A CONDITION OF AP- PROVAL OF TENTATIVE PLAT # 1167.8 "BAYFRONT PARK". _ `A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI; AND ACCEPTING THE rHE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK TO 04CUTE THE RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY. FLORIDA. OF A DEVELOPMENT ITED AT APPRQXIMA- A f TEMPORARY C VIC ANDIN EIPOLIYICAL TIVELY, IN CR AND CG DISTRICTS:1 THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PRO HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THUR; LOWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE P THE AN ESI IE A AND 3, 1 FOR A PUBLIC H�pRING:CONSOER THE ISSUANCE OF A DEVEL0 REGIONAL IMPACt TO BE LOCATED AT 1111 BRICKELL AVENUE, AN DI WtNtNd A11:00 AM; IN CITY HALL, 3506 PAN AMERICAN OWE. TO Is= Ili ORDINANCE 9500 AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CItY CODE. A rUI3LIe 3-30 PM iNN CITY HALL, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, TO CANSID R THE lAtON OF ?HE AGENDA if RiAAA At. AAA! fLu ,rwr ,.... --'. +'— A. Ain kk+06A M 14"hiftoft 3500 PAN AMt AND THE DRIVE MO CONS DER THE FOL ' E M N 300, THEREOF: CONTAINING A REPEA �E OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY kSHES." TO REQUIRE A SPECIAL EXCEI -1N BANKS, TICKET SELLING SPACE C AND BEVERAGE SALES. AND LAUNDR OF ORDINANCE N0.9500 THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA, BY AMENDING 1.2 OF SECTION 2102 ENTITLED "NONCONFORMING LOTS." TO PROVIDE THAT NONCONFORMING IT" EXCEPTION AND RULE FOR LOT DIVISION MUST MAINTAIN THE SAME COMMON FRONTAGE AND CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE SES TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE. A PUBLIC Y MAY 23, 1985 AFTER 5:00 PM IN CITY HALL, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, TO CONSIDER THE FOL- IWING AND ZONING PORTION OF THE AGENDA; OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500. AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI FLORIDA anti Ira;o TO At I OW TEMPORARY CIVIC AND POLITICAL CAMPAIGN SIGNS: SUBSECTIONSt 2025.1.19 ,TEMPORARY POLITICAL CAMPAIGR SIGNS, SUBJECT R BY {TO THEIPROVISIONS OLE FF DIS-- SUBSEC- I, RG-2; RG-2.1, RG-2.2, AG-2.3 AND RG-3 DISTRICTS; AND PAGES 4 AND 5, TO ALLOW REPEALER PRS ON AND ATO THE ISEV NS ERABILITY CLAUSEOF S 2025.3.11 AND 2025.3.12 RESPEC- ND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE. A PUBLIC 1985 AFTER 6:30 PM IN CITY HALL, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, TO CONSIDER THE FOL- IONING PORTION OF THE AGENDA FOR FINAL READING AND ADOPTION THEREOF; OF ORDIANANCE 9500. THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA BY IE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY SOUTHWEST 2ND AVENUE, SOUTHWEST 17TH RdAD, IN 300, THEREOF: CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY 'E NO. 9500. THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY IERALLY BOUNDED BY THE 1-95 EXPRESSWAY, METRORAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY rARALLEL TO AND APPROXIMATELY 210 FEET NORTHEAST OF SOUTHWEST ILY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM RS-2/2 ONE -FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO.37 OF SAID ZONING ;E AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF: CONTAINING A ;E NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. BY IALOR5DESIEAAIZ(MORE NGSAY ESIDENTTO-3/RDNTIL-OFFICE,,MIFINDNDBl 'AID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO, 9500, BY REFERENCE TAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. 'F NO. 9..W- THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA. BY MAINV u�+n�.. ............... MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHA GES ON PAGE N0.37 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE PARTORDINANCE BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Copies of this proposed Ordinances and Resolutions are available for review at the Planning and Zoning Boards Administration Department, 275 N.W.- 2 Street, Room 230, Miami, Florida. The Miemi City Commission request that all interested parties be present or represented at this meeting and are invited to express their views. Should any person desire to appeal any decision of the City Commission with respect to any matter to be considered at this meeting, that peraat shall insure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made including all testimony and evidence upon which any appeal may be based (F/S 2fI8.0105). i° Aurelio E Perez•Lugones Deputy City Clerk Director, Piann" and Zoning BoardsAdminiiiration Department 1,:/Y (A Rio �::�4iu P �/ w .. d No. 2786) MW t Ah b� it mi to TNIE MIAMI NEWS A KNIGHT-RIDDER NEWSPAPER A COX NPWSPAPER Two editorially independent newspapers, prihted, 'bii and distributed by „ ..._.......�..�..�.......� `THE"`MIAMI "HLRALM"'i LI''HING-COMPANY-'-°- 1 HERALD PLAZA, MIAMI, R"kA`'3 bi (11 2EIA CODE 305) 3SO-2111 Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Bill Jesson who on oath says that he is the Retail Advertising Office Manager of The Miami Herald and The Miami News, daily newspaper (s) published at Miami in Dade County, Florida. He further says that the advertisement for CITY OF MIAMI #2786 was published in the issue or issues of THE MIAMI NEWS on MAY loth, 1985 for the above publication (s) as'per the attached invoice. Affiant further states that the said THE MIAMI HERALD/NEWS are newspapers published at Miami, in said Dade County, Florida, and that the said newspapers have here -to -fore been continuously published in said Dade County, Florida, each day, and have been entered as second class mail matter at the Post Office in Miami, in said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year nest preceding the first publication of the advertisement. IJ �liv� Bit sson Sworn to and Subscribed to 'b Nx'e me this ',cyC!,'da of Notary Public 0041) I9TARx PUBIC STATE OF.FLORIPA NY GONM19s1OM EXP, AUs. 111900 9QRPEO TORII.GEMERA4 144, 040# x- At►ocialed P*' Reagan toasts Portuguese President Antonio Ramalho Eanes in Lisbon Analysis 'resident's trip to Europe mars U.S. image, erodes his standing ROBERT TIMBERG TM bsitfmor• Sun LISBON For President Reagan - after Bonn, Bitburg, Bergen -Bel - sell, Strasbourg and Madrid - Lis- ton was to be refuge, solace, a place where the issues were small and manageable and the worst that could happen was that some communists, might stage a polite walkout. It was. Lisbon thus occupies a unique place in the ragged annals of Reagan's seemingly jinxed trip- -it was the only place where hopes, however limited, were real- ized. The president, after etching his breath here during a 4I-hour state visit, limps home today secure in the knowledge that, whatever the post-Bitburg fall -out, this trip is in the can. "I think in the most profound sense it has been a successful trip,' Secretary of State George P. Shultz told reporters late yester- day. On Reagan's performance, the secretary said, "1 think he has done an absolutely (pause, search- ing for just the right word) great job.' About three months ago, a se- nior White House aide said, "It's a lovely little cemetery.' as he ran down the itinerary for Reagan's trip for a handful of reporters. The stop at the military ceme- tery in the obscure town of Bit. burg was to be a short one, maybe 20 minutes, a photo opportunity. But. in the past month, Bitburg had achieved world class standing as a word that seerns to say it all. Last Monday, for no easily dis- then he arrived here ten days ago. BI l'BtIR(;: Thf, president has enraged Jews throughout the world by visiting the cemetery. Because of Bitburg, the U.S.-- scen by many as the liberator of European Jews during the war - suddenly became the target of pro- tests by many concentration camp survivors, their families. friends and many others. Reconciliation with West Ger- many was accomplished, but was it necessary or merely a solution in search of a problem? I3ONN ECONOMIC SUMMIT: The U.S. went into the summit having publicly stated on a num- ber of occasions that its major goal was to win the endorsement of its six summit partners for a new round of trade talks in early 1986. The president could not bring it off as French President Francois Mitterrand, like a resurrected Charles de Gaulle, stopped him cold. Asked yesterday what would constitute success in his talks next week with Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei A. Gromyko, Schultz re- plied, "Oh, you know. I ant secre- tary of state. My trips aren't suc- cessful. I just talk to people.' FRANCO-AMERICAN RELA- TIONS: Not good, though Speakes said Reagan never grew so frustrated with President Mitterrand that he worked a name change into his fa- mous "Dammit, Pierre' comment directed at then Canadian Prime Minister Pierre C. Trudeau at last vear's summit in London. support early trade talks. SPAIN: The president arrived the 4y after 300,000 Spaniards demon- strated against him and his poli- cies, especially the Nicaraguan trade embargo. Perhaps his major goal during two days of meetings with Spanish leaders was to fore- stall any a reduction in the 12,000 U.S. navy and air force contingent based in Spain. He left with a low- ering of the American presence seemingly a foregone conclusion, NICARAGUA: U.S. policy toward Nicaragua al• ways has been an issue in Europe. but Reagan made it unavoidable, imposing his trade embargo short- ly after Air Force One touched down in Bonn May 1, By the end of the trip, nearly every leader he met with expressed deep reserva. tions about it. NEGATIVE BAGGAGE GOING HOME: Quite a bit, including a comment from White House chief of staff Donald T. Regan on the CBS Morning News yesterday that, if it gets wide circulation, is not likely to endear him to Hispanics in the U.S, and elsewhere. Speaking about Nicaragua, he said that the president will be ,si. lently applauded' by Latin Ameri= can nations for the embargo even if they don't actually "come out and say so.' Then he added, "That's only natural. That's actu- ally "come out and say so.' Then he added, "That's oaly natuttl. That's been the way. And we, in the U.S. understand the Latin mind.' Secretary Shultz ..yp,51erdax _wa.s: Reap ends I,tia�1Y1M/ Pti1i LISF30N,µ'or t gat ing home today fro trek through Europe: of World War M sal tone for talks with th Reagan said veste "but one fruitful in r= Aides, acknowied_ trip, busily accentua; 10-day trip to Germa success. "There have been chief of staff Donald has been an excellent Secretary of Stas from Lisbon to Tel hard working trip , worthwhile...." Meagan ended thr state visit to Portu- NATO alliance and a' It was a welcome'' NOTICE C. AT THE SCHEDULED REt_ COMMENCING AT 9:00 !— WILL CONSIDER THE FC ADOPTION THEREOF: AN ORDINANCE AMENC FOR PRUVAL OF t ENTATIVE A RESOLUTION CLOS►W DRIVE AT BAYFRONT.P! DRAVAI rid; TPUTATIC- i 1y n- 1i- itn pr p +e- )0 nt' p- ce ie, le, ,rt- ed ad he a• 1. (G pt if 3S ,it !y be se ti- In A�7 Y1 a• ►m Ip� a #1 Reagan'#s, 'Ploowtugal visitl nd-s is trip Al"dood piisi LiSMN, Portugal -- President Meagan is return- ing home today from a symbol laden, foot-h9t1on trek through turope that renewed painful memories of World War 11. saluted democracy and set n stern tone for talks with the Soviet Union. Reagan said yesterday it had been a long journey, "but one fruitful in results and rich in memory:'` Aides, acknowledging there were problems on the trip, busily accentuated the positive and declared the 10•day trip to Germany; Spain, France and Portugal a success. "There have been a few glitches here and there," chief of staff Donald T. Megan said. "gut overall, this has been an excellent trip." Secretary of State George P. Shultz, who flew from Lisbon to Tel Aviv last night, called it "a very hard working trip , :. But, I think it's all been really worthwhile...." Reagan ended the trip on an upbeat note with a state visit to Portugal, a founding member of the NATO alliance and a staunch U.S. ally, It was a welcome rest from a string of difficult sit - A A =#.# il*; T10 uations: a sevownation summit that tailed to agree tm a U.S. proposal for setting a date on starting iHtefita. tional trade talks; a state visit to West Germany that Included a controversial wreath laying ceremony at a cemetery containing Nazi SS graves,, a state visit to Spain. whose leaders expressed opposition to U.S. economic sanctions against Nicaragua, and a major speech in Strasbourg, France, marred by hecklers: Yesterday, Reagan hit at Soviet and Nicaraguan leaders and expressed hope for a time when totalitati, an rule "is only a sad and distant memory," Meagan said he was not surprised that Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega visited Moscow last week. "That's his patron saint," Reagan declared. in the"last speech of the tour before the Portuguese National Assembly .yesterday , Reagan declared that the free West learned after World War 11 it is not` enough "only to wish for peace." "Instead, we accepted reality. We took seriously those who threatened to end the independence of out nations and our peoples. and we did what peoples who value their freedom must do — we joined to- gether In a great alliance," Reagan said. NOTICE OF AMENDMENT TO THE ..CITY,. QF MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDNANCE AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE y T THE SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO 4 HEM,01NI THUR$DAY, MAY 23 =1995 OMMENCING AT 9.00 A.M. IN ITS CHAMBERS, AT CITY HALL 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE MIAMI FLORIDA;,TT}H}E MIAMI CITYOM CMlb§i6R TILL CONSIDER THE FOLLbWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION Or THE AGENDKFOR FINAL READING AND DOPTION THEREOF; N ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO.95G0_ THE 20NING nAnINANrF OF THE r1TV nF weu, c1 MiMA ov AMEND ELATEd BY ROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE ONCE 9600, AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE, A PUBLIC SAM AT AND ZONING PORT(6N OF THE AGENDA FOR FIRSMIAMI RIEWNNGG THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. BY RLAY DISTRICT TO THE "DU PUTS MEDICAL OFFICE AND DRUG- DRE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN)- MAKING FINDINGS' :PA r,; AND Y AAKIIUGALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES OFI CLA ,NCE 96M AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE. A PUBLIC 00 AM IN 61TY HALL, 35M PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, TO CONSIDER I OF THE AGENDA: THE PUBLIC USE OF A PORTION OF NORTHWET 5TH AND 6TH HWEST 12TH AND 13TH STREETS; ALL AS A CONDITION OF AP, THE PUBLIC USE OF THAT PORTION OF MIAMARINA PARKWAY EAST OF BISCAYNE BOULEVARD ALL AS A CONDITION OF AP- 4CE 9500 SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, PAGE 4 CIF 6, 1 RUCTURES,TO PERMIT A DRIVE-IN FACILITY FOR THE FLORIDA NANCE95W AS 'ILITY jCBRF� AT PLANS ON FILE. 10 FAMILY►.. EXCEPTION AS AMUNITY BASE�)-p T SH NANDOAH VERAF RESIDEN- ACCEPTING THE D EXECUTE THE 19, MMIIAMI, FLW. DEVELOPMENT AT APPRQXtMA• N'l - ven 14tit ed, tu- is n +gl. in flit 41.1 it lit w he Ind LISTED IN ORDINANCE 9,", AS AMENDED, ARTICLE 20, SECTION 2034 2 2 PrRMITT]Nr� THE T Tn T i ; n +MAItINITV BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITY CBRF) AT 1351 SOUTHWEI 2.3RD STREET, ALSO OtSt.1318E F A`� ( v, t HFNANDOAH ++t4 55 AS PER PLANS GN FILE, FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE (5) RESIDENTS AND ONF I j I Ai f na, kj + ; NERAL RESIDEW t'IAL (DNEAND TWO FAMILY). A AESOLLITIION ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED "PAPANICOLAOU TRACT", A 5UBDIVI ..!0N IN NIF ( IT+' Or MIAMI, AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON SAID PUT' AND r_ AI VORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANA6FP ANT) T�I.r: ' • CLERK irk EXECUTE THE PLAT AND PROVIDI40 FOR THE RECOADATION OF SAID PLAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF DADS GOUNt r r [ORIDA THE MIAMI CITY. COMMISSION PROPOSES TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500. AS AMENDE41 ANT THE +MIAMI CITY COOS A PUBLIC MEETING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY MAY 23, 1985, COMMENCING At 9:00 AM IN CITY HALL IF ­CT PAN AME RICAN DRIVE. MIAMI, FLOR. IDA, TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION & FIIE AGENDA. A RESOLUTION ESTABLfSHING JULY 25 1985, AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING CONSIOERIN+, 1HF I:,Sllnrlt'.E Ot A nEvFLOpMENt ORDER FOR THE BRICKELL SQUARE PROJECT PHASES 11 AND fit A DEVELOPMENT OF REGiONAL IMPdr T 10 Sr.. t OCA TEDAI APPROXIMA- TELY 845-0" 8RICKELL AVENUE AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO NO FY THE AARf RQPR14A . A vlf� Aht OA Oii i` 11 i 8PON01 L4M E LOOA q 11111 BgICK LL A NU�, A ECTING THE OLEA11+��1 A 019 LL"IbTHE I.NA N70N 8ElfJ Nb ON EL PM fit bI OEI T$g5; ,tl�iMOCAff f :011 AM, IN CITY HAIL, 3600 PAN Ai�E�ICAN bA11iEX, to I�& HEAR HEARING MIAMI AtOHI D ON lRW PROPOSES, MAY 23 N19B6 A : PMAP arty R�4 a6� o�PA ' MEAICANMDRIVE TOtCOONS�Ib AU E PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ORDER; AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO SEND TH15 HESOLUIIUN IU AhhtU1tU A1Jt14Wtb ANU IHt DEVELOPER. THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROPOSES TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY MAY 23, 1985 AFTER 6:00 PM IN CITY. HALL, 3500 PAN AMSRICAN DRIVE, TO CONSIDER THE FOL- LOWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION OF THE AGENDA; A RESOLUTION FOR FORMALIZING MOTION 86-460• APRIL 19, 1985 WAIVING THE TIME LIMITATIONS BETWEEN REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3161.3199 S.W. 27 AVENUE, 2660 LINCOLN AVENUE AND 2699 TIGERTAIL AVENUE, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 INCLUSIVE BLOCK F AMENDED PLAT OF NEW BISCAYNE ttB-161 PER SECTION 3514.5 OF ZONING OR• DINANCE 9500 IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE D6`VELOPME'NT OF THE CITY IN CONTEXT OF THE ADOljtED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROPOSES TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDEDN AM AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE. A PUBLIC FOL- LOWING RELATEDOTO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION OFTHETHE AGENDA F3500 OR FINAL READING AAN ND DRIVE, TO THEREOF; HE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3151.3199 SOUTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, 2660 LINCOLN (AVENUE AND 1699 R. LAY 7O RGA-2l6NGENERALIRESIDENTIAL I[WETHOUT�SP 3 OVERLAY)IMEAKING FINDINGS AND 9GENERAL MAKING RESIDENTIAL NECESSARY CHANGES ON RAGE NO. 45 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SEC- TION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO.9500, THE ZONING ATLAS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHAN- ING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3151.3199 SOUTHWEST 27 AVENUE. 2660 LINCOLN AVENUE AND 2699 TIGERTAIL AVENUE MIAMI, FLORIDA (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM G-2/6 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL PD-MU PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT MIXED USE MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 45 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO.9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVI- SION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF SUBSECTIONS 2102.2.1.1 AND 2102.2.1.2 LOTS UTILIZING THE "EIGHTY PERCENT" ORIENTATION AS THE PREVIOUS LOTS; C THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROPOSE: HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY, I LOWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE PLANNII AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1520, 15% and TIONS 2025.3.12, IN THE RS-1 RS-1.1, RS-2 RG-1. FIG-2RG-2.1, P TEMPORARY CIVIC AND POLITICAL CAMPAIbN SIGNS SOBJECT TO TIVELY, IN CR AND CIS DISTRICTS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVI THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROPOSES TO AMEND THE ZONING HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 23; 1985 AFTER 6:30 LOWING ITEMS RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION 3 DISTRICTS 0-1 AND CR-1 TO REQUIRE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WITH AP - HAT DO NOT PROVIDE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF RESERVOIR SPACES; ED "NONCOOD ORMING LOTS,CITO PROV EI THAT NONCONFORMING M LOT DIVISION MUST MAINTAIN THE SAME COMMON FRONTAGE AND +ROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, AND THE MIAMI CITY CODE. A PUBLIC PM IN CITY HALL, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, TO CONSIDER THE FOL- OF THE AGENDA; AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA. kt:f 4GES 4 AND 5, T 1 t AND 2025.3.12 AND ADOPTION THEREOF; FINDINGS' AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 37 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 95130, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CI OI LCF Copies of the proposed Ordinances and Resolutions are ayailabie for review at the Planning and Zoning Boards Administration Department, 275 N.W. 2 Street, Room 230, Miami, Florida The Miami City Commission request that all interested parties be present or represented at this meeting and are invited to express their view& Should any person desire to appeal any decision of Pia City Commission with respect to any matter to be considered at this meeting, that parson Mail insure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made including all testimony and evidence upon which any appeal may be based (F/S 288,0105). Aurelio E. Perez-Lugones Deputy City Cleric Director, Planning and Zoning BoardsAdministration Department in (Ad No. 2786)