Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1984-11-15 MinutesCOMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON . November 15, 1984 (PLANNING & ZONING) PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL RALPH G.. ONGIE CITY CLERK !1e i INDEX MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA ITEM SUBJECT NOVEMBER 15, 1984 LEGISLATION PAGE NO. NO. 1. RECOGNITION OF OWNERS OF LES VIOLINS. DISCUSSION 1 2. PERSONAL APPEARANCE: ROSE GORDON RE: PURCHASE OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO ORANGE BOWL STADIUM. REAFFIRM INTENTION TO BUY. M-84-1295 1-2 3 DISCUSSION ITEM: INTERNAATIONAL TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. DISCUSSION 2-10 4 ESTABLISH DATE OF DECEMBER 20 AS DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING DISPUTE REGARDING "CHARLIE'S PLACE" (BAR - IN COCONUT GROVE) M-84-1296 10-14 5 BRIEF DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER DAWKINS STATEMENT ABOUT CRIME IN COCONUT GROVE AREA AND POLICE RESPONSE. DISCUSSION 14-15 6 ALLOCATE ONE MONTH FUNDING "MIAMI DADE TRADE AND TOURISM COMMISSION" -REFER REQUEST FOR $150,000 TO CITY MANAGER. COMMEND MR. H.T. SMITH FOUNDING CHAIRPERSON FOR HIS EFFORTS M-84-1297 15-17 M-84-1298 7 RATIFY ACTION IN ALLOCATION OF $35,000 ALLAPATTAH MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION. ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICAL SOUPPORT TO LDC. ALLAPATTAH SHOPPING CENTER ETC. R-84-1299 17-19 8 RESOLUTION PROVIDING IN -KIND SERVICES AND FEE WAIVERS: MAGIC ILE CULTURAL INDUSTRIAL FAIR ETC. WITH CONDITIONS; TWO DAY PERMIT TO SELL BEER AND t WINE, ETC. R-84-1300 19-20 l 9 CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY OF DONAL STEWART ON THE SAD OCASION OF HIS DEATH. R-84-1301 20-22 10 AUTHORIZE AMOUNT -ONE DAY RENTAL FEE LITTLE HAVANA COMMUNITY CENTER: READINGS BY CUBAN POET DANIEL ROMAN M-84-1302 22-23 11 DISCUSSION ITEM: SPECIAL MEETING ON BAYSIDE. DISCUSSION 23-24 12 FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: METRO TO STOP USING I.D.B.S. FOR RELOCATION OF BUSINESS FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI R-84-1303 24-25 13 DISCUSSION: PROPOSED PROCEDURES TO BE USED CONCERNING THE REMOVAL OF CITY MANAGER, HOWARD V. GARY. DISCUSSION 25-27 14 A MOTION OFFICIALLY CONTINUING SEVERAL AGENDA ITEMS BACK TO PERTINENT BOARDS FOR STUDY, MAKING PROVISIONS FOR A REVIEW COMMITTEE ON THIS LEGISLATION, ETC. M-84-1304 27-35 15 SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 3400-3490 S. DIXIE HIGHWAY AND 3640 BIRD AVENUE FROM RO-2.1/5 AND RG-2.1/3.3 TO `- CR-2/5. ORD.9933 35-36 L i 16 SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 2531 S.W. 37 AVENUE FROM CR-2/7 TO CR-2/8. 17 DISCUSSION AND TEMPORARY DEFERRAL: PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING AREA S.W. 32 AVENUE, OAK AVENUE, W. BOUNDARY KIRK MONROE PARK. ETC. 18 EXTEND LIQUOR HOURS N.C.O.P. ON SUNDAYS DURING DECEMBER. 19 MOTION DENYING APPLICATION FOR CHANGER OF ZONING AREA S.W. 32 ASVENUE OAK AVENUE, W. BOUNDARY OF KIRK MONROE PARK 20 AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ALLOCATE $200,000 PURCHASE ON LEASE OF LIGHTING EQUIPMENT FOR CONVENTION CENTER IN CONNECTION WITH FORTHCOMING BEAUTY PAGEANTS. 21 AUTHORIZE 2-DAY PERMIT FOR SALE OF BEER: CERAMIC LEAGUE OF MIAMI-KENNETH MYERS PARK DECEMBER 1 & 2. 22 BRIEF DISCUSSION AND TEMPORARY DEFERRAL: REQ. FOR CHANGE OF ZONING 2210 S.W. 16 ST. & 1600-02 S.W. 22 AVENUE. 23 FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: ALLOCATE $50,000 PARTLY UNDERWRITE 15TH ANNUAL BUDWEISER UNLIMITED HYDROPLANE REGATTA. ETC. 24 REQUEST METRO ON NEXT DREDGING REQUEST TO CORPS OF ENGINEERES, DREDGING PERMIT 32' PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BICENTENNIAL PARK FOR VISITING U.S. NAVAL SHIPS AND OTHER TOURIST ORIENTED SHIPS. ' 25 PUBLIC HEARING AND TEMPORARY DEFERRAL: REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING 2210 S.W. 16 ST. AND 1600- 022 S.W. 22 AVENUE. 26 INSTRUCT PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE ZI-84-14 "CHANGE OF USE IN CONVENIENCE ESTABLISHMENTS" TO INCLUDE TRAVEL AGENCIES. 27 FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION" 2210 S.W. 16 ST. AND 1600-02 S.W. 22 AVENUE FROM RS-2/2 TO CR-1/7 28 APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE APPLICATION OF NEW CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL INC. GRANT FOR 150 BEDS HOSPITAL; STATE INTENT OF CITY COMMISSION IF CITY IS SUCCESSFUL IN GRANT, CITY WILL ALLOCATE $300,000 FROM NEXT YEAR'S C.D. FUNDS ETC. 29 ALLOCATE $10,000 TO PRICE WATERHOUSE, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RE: FUNDING FOR PROPOSED CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL. 30 AUTHORIZE FINAL APPLICATION FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT. GROVE BAY PLAZA, LTD. TERREMARK AT BAYSHORE, INC. A.T.H. CURACAO, NV. 31 AUTHORIZE FINAL APPLICATION FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, BRICKELL STATION TOWERS, INC. 32 SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF COMMODORE BAY PROJECT IN COCONUT GROVE. CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 12, 6:00 P.M. 33 APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE: APPLICATION OF CONGRESS BUILDING PARTNERS FOR UDAG GRANT. ORD. 9934 36-37 DISCUSSION 37-52 R-84-1305 52-53 M-84-1306 M-84-1307 R-84-1308 DISCUSSION R-84-1309 M-84-1310 DISCUSSION M-84-1311 1ST READING R-84-1312 M-84-1313 R-84-1314 R-84-1315 R-84-1316 M-84-1317 R-84-1318 53-54 54-55 56 56-58 58-59 59-61 m-ulms 91-95 95-99 99-100 100-101 101-103 104-143 144 I - 34 APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE: APPLICATION OF LITTLE _ HAVANA PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP FOR UDAG GRANT. R-84-1319 144-147 35 EXPRESS CONCERN TO STATE DEPARTMENT NATURAL RESOURCES CONCERNING POSSIBLE STATE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BARNACLE, 3471 MAIN HIGHWAY. M-84-1320 146-151 36 FIRST READING ORDINANCE: TEXT AMENDMENT SIGNS, LIMITATIONS ETC. ARTICLE 20. 1ST READING 152-157 37 SECOND READING ORDINANCE: ARTICLE 35 AMENDMENTS, FAILURE OF CITY COMMISSION TO ACT, PROVISION COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE TO DATE CERTAIN, ETC. ORD.9935 157-158 38 APPOINTMENT OF PERSONS TO BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE TO STUDY VARIOUS PLANNING AND ZONING PROPOSED PIECES OF LEGISLATION. M-84-1321 159 39 ALLOCATE $88,537 FY 84-85 F.R.S.F. FOR PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES 19 1984 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1985.(ONE-TWELFTH). R-84-1322 159-161 3 40. RATIFY ACTION ON CITY MANAGER IN EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF R.F.P.S. FOR SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN PARK/WEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. R-84-1323 162 } 41 FIRST READING ORDINANCE: APPLY HERITAGE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICRT HC-1 TO MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT. 1ST READING 163-165 42 ESTABLISH DATE OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 AS DAY OF SPECIAL MEETING TO CONSIDER ON -GOING MATTERS CONCERNED WITH THE BAYSIDE DEVELOPMENT. M-84-1324 165-166 43 AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT: MIAMI DADE COMMUNITY COLLEGE ESTABLISH POLICE LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL PROCEDURES. R-84-1325 167 3 44 AUTHORIZE COMPETITIVE QUOTES: BORROW 12.4 MILLION TO INITIATE STORM DRAIN PROJECTS & POLICE FACILITIES R-84-1326 168 45 CONTINUE ALL OTHER ITEMS NOT TAKEN UP TO 1 DECEMBER 20, 1984. M-84-1327 168 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 15th day of November, 1984, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 9:13 A.M. O'Clock A.M. by Mayor Maurice A. Ferre with the following members of the Commission found to be present: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ALSO PRESENT: Howard V. Gary, City Manager Lucia Allen Dougherty, City Attorney Ralph G. Ongie, City Clerk Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk An invocation was delivered by Mayor Ferre who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. 1. RECOGNITION OF OWNERS OF LES VIOLINS. Proclamation: Declaring November 15th as Les Violins Day. Presented to Jose Albino Currais, President, and Alex Cachaldora, Vice -President. 2. PERSONAL APPEARANCE: ROSE GORDON RE: PURCHASE OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO ORANGE BOWL STADIUM -REAFFIRM INTENTION TO BUY. Mayor Ferre: We have two distinguished public servants and we always go out, of our way to accommodate out of turn people who have given or are giving of their time to welfare of the community. One is the former Mayor of Opa Locka, Helen Miller; we are honored to have you here - and a former distinguished member of this Commission, Rose Gordon. Rose, can we be of help to you today? Mrs. Rose Gordon: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, for clarification on the action that was taken last week regarding the purchase of the building adjacent to the Orange Bowl, the stipulation and the resolution contained a clause that funding to be from the Tourist, Development Council. My point for clarification is whether the Commission intends to purchase the property regardless of that, decision and if so, I'd like to know because as I have mentioned previously, there is a backup contract waiting for ld 1 November 15, 1984 0 0 the Realty Board and it would be a disservice if they were to lose that and that this ... Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon, the City of Miami would not be an embarrassment to itself, to the Commission - the Manager, I am sure would not, nor would we embarrass you or your distinguished group. The intention of the City of Miami is to buy your property. Mrs. Gordon: All right. Mayor Ferre: And if it is not, and I sure just to make you feel a little bit better, so we will memorialize it into a motion that it is the intention to purchase the property. This is just a means of doing it. If this means does not work, we will ask for another way of doing it, all right? So would somebody so move that, it is the intention of the City of Miami Commission to buy the property in front of the Orange Bowl and the recommended form of financing is "A" method. If that does not work, we will seek other methods of financing. i Mr. Plummer: I so move, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Mr. Plummer: For the record, Mr. Mayor, I received a call. f We have a meeting of the T.D.C. on Monday coming. I was informed by the Director that there were no funds left, in this year's funding, but possibly we could predicate on the two coming years half of our amount, towards that purchase if that is what the City wanted. As you know, that 20% of that money is used for the Orange Bowl and this is for the Orange Bowl, not maybe immediately, but for the Orange Bowl, so it easily can be diverted for this purpose. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1295 A MOTION TO REAFFIRM THE CITY'S INTENTION TO PURCHASE PROPERTY FROM THE MIAMI BOARD OF REALTORS ADJACENT TO THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM AND STIPULATING THAT IF T.D.C. DOES NOT PROVIDE THE NECESSARY FUNDING, THE CITY WOULD SEEK OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING TO ACCOMPLISH THIS TRANSACTION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo n ld 2 November 15, 1964 - -----P-- ITEM------------------W-------------------- DISCU INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Burton Landy of the City of Miami International Trade and Development Committee said that we have a major crisis because of the freeze. I said there is nothing I could do about it. You come down and explain your situation so at this time, Mr. Trablstad, the Executive Director of the International Center, on behalf of the City of Miami's committee and on behalf of the International Center would like to make a statement. Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission - Mayor, you recall, you and I had a couple of meetings privately and we also met, with Mr. Birger from the Herald. Mayor Ferre: Oh yes, Larry Birger, right. Mr. Gary: Right, and we agreed to establish a procedure to get us back into the thick of international trade and one of the things we agreed to was to set up a committee of people who were involved in international trade who were known to be involved and had expertise in international trade to set up a master plan for the City of Miami, and they have been working to do that as headed by Burton Landy and Mr. Trablstad is there. We have Latin, Blacks and bankers who 2 are involved in international trade on this committee. One of the assignments also was to go nationwide to find qualified persons to head up international trade and they proceeded to do that. We have got 100 or 200 some resumes. They have gone through it. They have narrowed it down to three and they prioritized those three and what they are here to tell you now is the process they went through and to request that the person which they have selected to be allowed to be employed by the City of Miami by lifting the freeze. ° Mr. Coleman Trablstad: Thank you, Mr. Manager. Gentlemen, thank you. I am Colman Trablstad with the International Center of Florida. I am also on the executive committee of the City of Miami International Trade and Development, Committee. Also I chaired the search committee, as the Manager mentioned for the Assistant, Director of Economic Development for International Trade. The other members of that, committee, I think it is important that we recognize - Burton Landy was on it; Ambler Moss, former Ambassador to Panama and presently dean at the University of Miami; Satraneno Lucio, local attorney; and Gladstone Cooper, a local exporter. We believe that, international trade is vital to this City of Miami. As this turnaround comes, we are starting to see some turn around with the Latin trade. We must, be prepared to take advantage of it. We must be in the forefront in this movement. When we asked to help the City determine who the new Assistant Director for Economic Development for trade promotions should be, we went through a process. We advertised in the all of the local papers - the Herald, the News, several of the legal papers. We advertised in the New York Times, the Wall Street, Journal, in the Washington Post, as well as the Economist, which is a magazine out of London. We received over 200 applications. It is amazing, the qualifications of these people. We narrowed that relatively quickly to 60 that did meet the qualifications - the specfic relatively high level qualifications that, we had set. We then cut that to an additional 15 and circulated that to the full committee. It was amazing. Of the five members of the full committee - out of those 15, call five of us selected the same individuals, so .... Mayor Ferre: 15 finalists? ld 3 November 15, 1984 a Mr. Trablstad: 15 finalists on paper. We circulated that and put it on a point system, but, it was very interesting that all five of us selected the same individuals as our number one choice. It went down from there with ... Mayor Ferre: Who were the five people who did this? Mr. Trablstad: This was Burton Landy, Ambler Moss, myself, Satraneno Lucio and Gladstone Cooper. We then invited the top three candidates to visit Miami and to meet individually with the members of the committee. This was a process that we went through over a period of about two weeks. We met with these three candidates, they came from New York, from Connecticut and from Washington, and once again, we had a unanimous choice of an individual who believe was highly qualified to fill this position. Mayor Ferre: Is that name public yet? Do we know, or is that ... Mr. Trablstad: It has not been made public at this point. Do you want ... Mayor Ferre: I think this Commission might, - even though we have no direct authority ... 7 Mr. Trablstad: His name is George Grafeld, he is presently with the United Stated Department, of Commerce. z Mayor Ferre: How long has he been with the Department of i Commerce? Mr. Trablstad: He has been with the Department of Commerce five years. He has ten years of international trade experience. He is a graduate of the Thunderbird Institute in Arizona for international trade. He has overseas experience with the U. S. Department of Commerce in Germany and he spent his first, fifteen years in Argentina, whereby he speaks fluent Spanish, which is one of our criteria. The three basic criteria that we were looking for, was a college degree, preferably in business and international business, at least five years experience in international trade and fluent Spanish. He is has easily met all of t.nese, as did a number of others. It was very interesting that, even though we ended up selecting this one unanimously, there were an amazing number of highly qualified individuals that applied for this position. My urge is not necessarily to speak on behalf of George Grafeld, but, what I am most interested in f is that this Commission remove the freeze on that one position. It is vital to our city that we move forward in the area of international business and trade and we can only 1 do this if we have someone who is in charge of it and can work with the City and with Charlotte as the head of the economic development area, which we have seen some real turn arounds in that area and we would like to continue that. Thank you very much. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Perez: Mr. Mayor, could I clarify something for the record? I received a letter about two - three weeks ago, Mr. Manuel Arques. He said that, he sent all the information, the resume and everything, and he never received an opportunity to have an interview with the board. Would you clarify that, one for the record? Mr. Trablstad: I have just been informed that he did apply. He was one of the over 200 applications that we received through our widespread applications. He made the first, cut that was done by the staff of this City. We had determine three specific areas that we wanted to make sure that all the candidates had credibility and experience in. That was s- ld 4 November 15, 1984 _ . �t x:. 0 0 the Spanish, the experience and the education. He did not however, make from that sixty, down to the last fifteen. There were other candidates as determined by the committee that, were more highly qualified. Mr. Perez: Okay, could you send him a letter explaining that, situation? ... and I would like to have a copy of that one because he called in public, he called the attention about, this issue he sent me a letter and also sent, some friends trying to call the attention and I would like to clarify. Mr. Trablstad: Let me ... there is another interesting sideline to this whole thing. When we cut, the first 140, we sent letters immediately to them, thanking them. We also said -"You know there are a lot of other positions down here, if you would like your resume on file down here, and interested in working in Miami", and many of them were not in Miami at the time, we would be available to set up a file for you at, the International Center and in the City and 30 of them had said - yes, they wanted that on file. We then when through this process a little bit later and have sent letters to the 45 that did not make that cut, and I believe that. that letter has been sent to that gentlemen, and he should have already received it by now. i Mr. Perez: I don"" have any complaints, but I want is to preserve the credibility of the proceedings, that is all, but I don't have any complaints. i Mr. Trablstad: Okay, we will make sure you get, a copy of j' it. We will write a specific letter. I have not seen those 9 letters. If it did not include the process, we will be happy to send him a letter explaining the process. Mayor Ferre: Well, I think, Mr. Manager, for the credibility of the process, I think that it is important that all of these applicants, especially the local applicants should be getting personalized letters from the Charlotte, or whoever the appropriate person is in the the Administration, explaining how the process went - there were 140 applicants, there was a short, list of 15 and 15 were then brought to 3 and out of the 3, you selected, or recommended Mr. George H. Grafeld. All right, are there any other questions or statements at this time? Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, my only statement is going to l be not directly to this, but to the statement of the freeze in itself. I believe that every one of the 181 positions, I think is what, they are, are likewise, and I believe justification could be given for all ... Mayor Ferre: And I think they should be on an individual basis ... { Mr. Plummer: ..# on an individual basis. Mayor Ferre: ... and I am, for one, willing to consider them that way and vote on them that way. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, at this particular time, I would be reluctant to vote on this, because of some of the other jobs that are frozen that. I think are much, much more important to this city, and unless we are going to establish a policy where we can hear these on an individual basis, that is where I have the problem. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, that, policy is already in existence, as you might recall during the budget, process when we made that motion, and we voted for it unanimously, ld 5 November 15, 1984 0 we specifically stated that we would see them one by one and would consider them as they were presented. Now, is this is the first one, or the second time it is presented. I will tell you, my position is this - I don't know Mr. George Grafeld. I never heard of the name before five minutes ago when it was proffered. Looking at his background, the fact that he is a graduate of both Notre Dame and the Thunderbird School - the Thunderbird happens to be one of the best schools in the country, if not the best for international management. I think that the fact that he was a super salesman at Xerox and was three times the sales representative of the month, that he went to the Department of Commerce in 1978, which was during the Carter Administration, and that he lasted through the Reagan Administration means that the man must have something going for him. The fact that he has moved up in the Department of Commerce, I think speaks well for him and if he has been selected out of 150 and this is the recommendation, I assume this has the recommendation of the Administration - I think the selection process was adequate. Now to the issue of importance. I differ with my colleague here, J. L. Plummer, to the relative importance of this job. I cannot think of a more important task ahead of us than to get on with the Trade Fair of the Americas, the African Trade Fair, which is now been dormant for years, and which we have been struggling with for five years. I cannot, think of something that needs more and quicker attention than this. We do have a committee. It is a distinguished committee. It is composed of representation of all of the community, and I am ready to vote for this, though I may be the only one that will vote for it, but it has got my vote. I realize that there are political connotations, but we really must, do this strictly on the premise of merit, and I think this gentlemen is eminently qualified, but it will require three votes. Mr. Plummer: What is proposed to pay this individual? Mr. Gary: It has to be negotiated. Mr. Plummer: What are their perimeters? Mr. Gary: The salary range is ... Mr. Trablstad: I believe it is $37,000 to $54,000 as an Assistant Director. Mayor Ferre: How much? This is the job that, Frank Diaz-Pou had before. Is it an expanded job, Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, it is not, expanded. It is basically the same job focusing on international trade. Mayor Ferre: How much did the job pay before when Julio Cost.ano and Frank Diaz-Pou were there? Mr. Gary: The range was $44,000 to about $64,000 - in the same range. Mr. Perez: What is the budget of the Department, at this time? Mr. Gary: International Trade Division is ... I don't, have those figures right off hand. Mr. Perez: No more than $300,000 or $400,000? Mr. Gary: Approximately $280,000. Mr. Perez: $280,000? Personally I think International Trade is one of the most important departments of this city rk a=: ld 6 November 15, 1984 at this time. They are suppose to request. State and Federal funds. Personally, I think this department is supposed to be an independent department. I don't find any reason to be a part, of Community Development. In my own position, as one vote, I think that this department has to have its own direction as an independent department, and not as a part, of Community Development, and that, is my position and if we have any time and any opportunity to discuss this issue, I would like to preserve the integrity of this International Development Department and I don't think they have any reason to relate this one with Community Development. I would like to recognize the efforts of this committee and the recommendation I made with Burton Landy two times before and I recognize also their efforts and in principle I support whatever you recommend using those qualifications, but, as a City matter, I would like to have this department independent of Community Development. I think that is supposed have its own budget, not, an Assistant Director - I think it is supposed to have a Director as was in the past with Julio Castano, with Diaz-Pou, but I am talking about personal. I am talking about the structure and the purpose of this department. Mayor Ferre: I personally support Commissioner Perez' statement and I go along with that, but I think what, we have before us is a question of hiring individuals and I think that it is a related matter and I accept that, but I think we should not lose the opportunity of getting this individual if we can. Then I think we can deal with the issue. I think that is fair, and if you wish to make a motion subsequent, to that, about, how the Department is run, I will have no problems in seconding that motion if that is necessary. Mr. Perez: When do we have to vote for the appointment? Mayor Ferre: Well, I think we have to unfreeze the position or we are going to lose that man. Mr. Trablstad: Mr. Mayor, one thing that, I think all of us were aware of the possible feelings of the Commission on this, since it was a department, in the past, and has been on the recommendation of the City audit people to hold it, in at this time in the Department, of Economic Development, but I think that we were aware that this would possibly come up and we looked at this position as either an Assistant Director, or a Director, and this gentlemen, is a very strong position and I would suggest that even though yes, they are related, that, this gentlemen would be able to fill this position as either a director of an independent department, or as an assistant director within the Department, of Economic Development, and I am not sure that they need to be separated completely. Mr. Perez: Mayor, I would like to accept in principle the recommendation, but to include this issue in the next aregular Commission meeting. Mayor Ferre: I think you have to separate them. Mr. Perez: Okay, first, to accept in principle this recommendation and to recognize the effort of this committee pending for final decision in the next, regular Commission meeting. Mayor Ferre: Well, I think you either have to accept the unfreezing of this position or not, accept it, and then I think ... if you want to make the other motion first, I have no objections to you doing that, as your position, but that, requires - I think you have to get, a legal opinion on that. ld 7 November 15, 1984 0 f Mr. Perez: Before deciding any*.hing, we have to discuss the freezing of the position also and I think that is for the next regular Commission meeting. Mayor Ferre: We have two issues here, Commissioner Perez. One is, George Grafeld and the position. The other issue is the issue of whether it, should be a department (T A P E 2) and whether it should be part of Community Development. We have to get the legal aspects of that. Mr. Plummer: I would have to break the one into two. One, to unfreeze the position, that is first. Second is whether or not this individual is to fill the unfrozen position. Mayor Ferre: That is not our choice, J. L. We have nothing to do with that. Once you unfreeze the position, it is the Manager's prerogative to appoint whoever the Administration wants. We have no right to select the individual ... Mr. Plummer: That is right, I agree. Mayor Ferre: ... legally, and I frankly would want to be very careful in not violating the Charter in that sense. Now, in regards to whether it is a department or not, we have been through this before. I can remember one time when I was on the Commission before I was Mayor and we went through this with the Fire and the Police Department and whether or not we were going to have a Department of Public Safety and the Commission dealt with that. We have also dealt with the issue when the Fire Department absorbed the Building and Zoning and we had several public hearings as you remember. Members of the construction industry came here and protested. We did it anyway. Now, in that particular case, it was the recommendation of the Administration that, it be done, and the Commission took a position. Now, I think since Commissioner Perez has a valid concern, that we need from the Manager and from the City Attorney a legal position as to whether or not this Commission has the authority to establish a Department, or to separate it, and I think in the past there have been legal opinions that I would recommend that you look at before you give this a ... Mrs. Dougherty: I will be glad to, but I can tell you that the Charter does permit the City Commission to establish departments, however, the City Manager has the authority to make one Department Director a head of two departments. Mr. Plummer: I think "he key, if in fact that is to be pursued, the key is budget. Mayor Ferre: What? Mr. Plummer: Budget. This Commission at all times retains control over anyone's budget on a day to day basis, so that is the key. Mayor Ferre: Is is a more complex issue than just the unfreezing of one position, as you can see. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, right now in terms of the ordinance, International Trade is still a department. Mayor Ferre: It is still a department? Mr. Gary: Exactly. Mayor Ferre: Well, Mr. Manager, there are four of us here. I have expressed my position of support to the committee, to a:r,J „,-_:r ld 8 November 15, 1984 0 f, the Administration on the unfreezing of this particular job. I have also expressed my position in backing Commissioner Perez in his position that it should report directly to the Manager and he wants to do it in that sequence, I would be happy to vote with him as a matter of policy of this Commission, but you know, that is all this Commission could do at this time. Commissioner Perez, I think if you wait, you are going to lose this man. Mr. Perez: Well, I would like to postpone for the next Commission meeting, Mr. Mayor, because I think it would be great if each member of the Commission has the opportunity to meet with the Executive Director and possibly to have a report, about persons in the county that have applied for this position and about, what, are the purposes and the new policy of this department and to discuss more with the Administration also about the future of this department. I think if we have waited two or three months or six months for this position, I think that we can wait one month more, and I would like to postpone for the next regular meeting. Mayor Ferre: All right. Mr. Perez: Looking at the agenda the future of this department would be independent department or nave to report, to the Manager direct, or would be a part of Community Development,. Mayor Ferre: The next. Commission meeting is December 12. Mr. Trablstad, do you feel that ... Mr. Plummer: That is the Special meeting, Maurice. Mayor Ferre: The 13th would be the next meeting. Could Mr. Grafeld wait - could this decision wait, that long? Mr. Trablstad: I cannot speak for him. I don't, know what his other options are, or what ... Mayor Ferre: Has anybody talked to him about this? Mr. Trablstad: The Manager, I believe was the last one to speak to him. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, after the five other individuals interviewed him, I interviewed him, based on their selection and he was under the impression that within three weeks we would get back to him, or let, me put, it, this way - he could make a decision. We were supposed to get back to him last week, but, because of the freeze, we basically wanted to wait, until we got the approval of the Commission on the freeze. Mayor Ferre: We have a request, from a member of the Commission that this whole matter be scheduled on the 13th of December for discussion. 4 Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, I will call him and tell him that we are still interested in him coming into Miami, but, the City Commission wants further information and we will have to wait, until that, time. Mayor Ferre: Any other ... Mr. Perez: Would it be possible to have that Commission meeting, before, the background and information on the last. 20 finalists for this position? Mayor Ferre: I think there were 15 that were finalists. Mr. Perez: Oh, 15. ld 9 November 15, 1984 II I Mayor Ferre: All right. Mr. Dawkins: Who was second behind this gentlemen? Mr. Trablstad: The gentlemen that was second, I cannot remember his name right now, but he was a distant second. Mr. Dawkins: Very distant? Okay, thank you. Mr. Trabls*,ad: Very distant. This gentlemen, Mr. Grafeld was selected unanimously off paper, and unanimously after the interviews, so he ... Mayor Ferre: But, there should have been a second in case he dropped dead. Mr. Trablstad: There is a second, although I think that there was a lot of discussion on it, and I would suggest, that if we did not select Mr. Grafeld, we reopen the position. Mr. Dawkins: Thank you, sir. Mayor Ferre: All right, any further discussion on the issue? All right, thank you sir. ------------------------------- -- - — ------------------ 4. ESTABLISH DATE OF DECEMBER 20 AS DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING DISPUTE REGARDING "CHARLIE'S PLACE" (BAR IN COCONUT GROVE) ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor I have a pocket item. Mrs. Bentley. Mrs. Helen Bentley: Good Morning, my name is Helen Bentley. = I reside at 3621 Franklin Avenue in Coconut Grove. It has come to our attention that Mr. Charlie C. Jordan and E. C. Pierce, who co-own Charlie's Place located at 215 Oak Avenue, and that is in Coral Cables, are initiating plans to transfer a beer and wine license to the former Jack's bar, located at, 3368 Douglas Road. We are in opposition to this. Coconut Grove Homeowner's and Tenant's Association and other well meaning residents of Coconut Grove feel that, we do not need, nor do we want another liquor place on that, corner. You understand also that a Mr. Claude Anderson owns the former Jack's Bar and I understand that Mr. Jordan and Mr. Pierce claim that, they have bought a liquor license from Mr. Mr. Claude Anderson. For too long that corner has been congested with undesirables that we have had to live with it. We are determined to be captains of our own ship now. We are appealing to the Commission to join us and help to make Coconut Grove the kind of community that they would want to live in. They have young children crossing that — intersection going to and fro from school. We have church folks; we have other decent folk and we have had to wade through undesirables for about 10 or 15 years. We no longer intend to do that. We are appealing to you that, should that, matter come up, to deny it. If you don't deny us, you are going to see us down here every time it, appears on your agenda. That, is not, a promise, that is a threat! Thank you. �r Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Anderson, would you come down, sir? Are you the owner of the subject property, sir? Mr. Claude Anderson: Yes, sir, I am. �: x 1d 10 November 15, 1984 Mr. Dawkins: Is there a liquor license intended to be moved to that spot? Mr. Claude Anderson: No, sir, I am not sure where that, information was fabricated up from. Let me go back and make a couple of points very clear here. I think this entire issue, Commissioner Dawkins, pretty much symbolizes the major problems we have in the Black community in several respects. First of all, you have a program in the City - an office of Economic Development that presently is not providing any kind services that that community needs desperately. You don't have a program for renovation. At the County level they have one, but the City doesn't qualify for it, so constantly, you have to look at this entire problem, the economic backdrop of Coconut Grove. You have got Black business people there that own about 55% of the property, the commercial property, and about 50% of that is vacant property, which means those Black people are holding onto property and trying to service debts and taxes without, any income springing from it. In addition to that, you have individuals now that are coming down before you that do not reflect the will and interests of that entire community. They are being prompted by a group called G.U.T.S. that only represents a small faction of the business people in that community. Mr. Dawkins: I will tell you what I will do. Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion that, we put this on as a public hearing and that Mr. Anderson be allowed to bring his people whom he said is not in accord and that Mrs. Bentley and Mrs. Alexander bring their group and we can actualiy see who is what. { Mr. Anderson: Okay, Mr. Dawkins, let me make one other 9 point, while I have the podium. Mayor Ferre: All right, I recognize that as a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Plummer: Second the motion. Mayor Ferre: All right, under discussion, go ahead. Mr. Anderson: Okay, I have no interest other than the fact that I am the Lessor of the building. What this individual has done has committed a lease with me. He has a beer and wine license that, he wants to transfer over. He has had j that beer and wine license for several years. I have absolutely no interest, above and beyond that, but I think that you have other rights that must, not be abridged here. You have rights for tenants, you have rights for businesses, and the problem is that if you ... I would ideally like to put. Mayfair and Burdines in the Grove, but if Black folk and Black citizens cannot have steak I am totally, adamantly opposed to anybody coming in here and have beans! What needs to happen, if these individuals are as concerned as they pretend to be, they should have gone and met, with that tenant, and got, some policies established with that tenant and said to that tenant "We will permit you to move in there if in fact, you will guarantee us several things - that you will take extra prophylactic measures or precautions to make sure that no one loiters outside that building, that the building is kept, in decent and respectable condition" and that there is no indecent exposing to any other violation of the City code". Now, that, has not, happened. And further more, what G.T.U.S. is saying to the people in the community is that if there is going to be any beer and wine licenses in that, neighborhood in the Black community, it can only be in the "Guts" building. I find that grossly insulting and very partisan and biased. I am not a G.T.U.S. member, ld 11 November 15, 1984 ku777777 :- neither are a lot of other property owners in that community. Mr. Dawkins: Let me ask you a question. Why is it, that you want, G.U.T.S. to go to this individual and seek concessions from him when every.time we have this sort, of developer or builder confrontation, this Commission usually sends the developer to the residents. Now, what makes this so unusual that these residents should go to the investor? Mr. Anderson: Several reasons, Commissioner Dawkins - first of all, there is no development in this particular instance. Mr. Dawkins: Yes, well, investor. Mr. Anderson: Okay, there is no investor. What, you have now is a ... Mr. Dawkins: Well, a businessman. Mr. Anderson: Okay, what, you have there is a piece of property that has been rented or leased to an individual, with the understanding that the individual will meet, the monthly overhead and he will not do anything illegal on that premise. My concern is that you have one group that represents a small contingency of businessmen, Black property owners in that, neighborhood. There are other people that I represent also from Black business property owners in that neighborhood. Mr. Dawkins: Property owners that you represent have invested how much? Mr. Anderson: I don't know, that is the personal business and I don't have the time to indulge in that. Mr. Dawkins: Okay, all right. Anybody back there - the "Guts" organization have invested how much of your own money? $133,000? All right, so now here you have a group, sir, that has invested $133,000 of their own money, and now you are telling me ... but, what we got we have got, here is a problem that only those ... Mr. Anderson: A problem situation, right. Mr. Dawkins: ... in the community can solve, okay? And, as they said now .. no, I'd better leave that alone - but, I think it is time for a public hearing. If the Mayor and the Commission feels that way, then everybody concerned should come down and voice their opinion and then we will listen and then we can make a decision. Mr. Anderson: I am in total agreement with you, Commissioner. I think in the bottom line if anybody - if one person cannot put or sell wine and the Black community, nobody should be able to sell it. Mr. Dawkins: Hold it! How many beer and wine shops do you know from where you are talking about, two blocks east - count them! Mr. Anderson: I don't know how many are there, Commissioner. Mr. Dawkins: Don't say that you know - that we are trying to keep one out. We keep adding one more! Mr. Anderson: No, no, what I am saying, Commissioner, is that it, has been pretty well publicized in the community that if one goes in, it must go into that property that is owned by G.T.U.S. ld 12 November 15, 1984 0 0 Mr. Dawkins: Well, that, won't happen either. Go ahead, Mr. Rolle. Mr. Billy Rolle: Billy Rolle, I reside at 3430 Williams Avenue. I think the question was between the Jack's Bar opening that Mrs. Bentley had and maybe the Lessor, I don't remember G.T.U.S. being in, but, as a property owner and a businessman, I would like to say that everybody needs to be considered in that area, because I have applied for some Rehab, and I haven't gotten any consideration yet from the Community Development department and I hope everybody gets what they are supposed to get, but I would like to have everybody considered in that same small block. This is what I am saying now. I came down here because I heard them announce it, in church about, the Jack's Bar and about the beer and wine license. This is my prime reason for being here. I heard the announcement read in church Sunday morning and I came down and I know that if you are to pull a C. 0. for that particular area, you must, abide by whatever ordinances you have there - footage and other liquor stores and the whole thing, but this is my primary reason, but being a businessman there, like you mentioned, I would like to have it considered and have everybody come in who is concerned to a public hearing and just have their day in court, that is all. Mrs. Esther Mae Armbruster: Good Morning, my name is Esther Mae Armbruster, and I live at, 3350 Charles Avenue. I don't know where Mr. Anderson is getting his information, but I resent anybody who comes down here and says that we don't have a program going on for the betterment of people in Coconut Grove. I don't even know where you live - it doesn't matter. t Mr. Anderson: Coconut Grove. Y Mrs. Armbruster: It really doesn't, matter. Yes, but anyway, we do not ... Mr. Anderson: First of all ... may I make - okay. Mrs. Armbruster: We really don't, need any more bars in Coconut Grove. As it is now, the Police Department is not doing its work, because they pass by men and woman sitting on the corners drinking beer and wine and they do not even stop them and on plaza and Grand Avenue beer is being sold. Children have to pass by there going to Tucker School. We don't need it! We really don't need it and I pray to God that you will listen to us and do not allow another bar to be established in Coconut Grove. Thank you. Mr. Anderson: Let me respond to that and answer two of your questions. First of all, I reside in Coconut Grove. Secondly, I did not imply there was no one in the community that is actively involved in trying to improve the community. What I indicated to you was the same thing that. Mr. Rolle indicated, that we have a City agency that has been defunct and negligent in its ability to provide those kinds of necessary public services, and thirdly, I totally supportive of any effort to appreciate and approve the properties in Coconut, Grove, so I am not pushing to put this specific individual into the Grove, or put another license. What I am saying is a broad right. There are other rights in Coconut Grove that are not being served by G.U.T.S. or by the special interest group that, is here this morning. What I am calling for is that you need to have a broad comprehensive meeting where all the rights of all the individuals that reside, work, or own property in Coconut Grove is there to represent their own interest. That, is hot, Kt�:r cyY`k' ld 13 November 15, 1984 I i happening today, and before you have a rush to judgment, I am going to support, the motion in my own mind that you must call all those individuals and nobody should have a right to dictate who should go into what business unless you can also accept the responsibility of going and finding other alternative businesses coming into Coconut Grove. Mrs. Armbruster: Well, I'd just like to mention that we have a meeting on the first day Monday night. There is a meeting held at Human Resources Building, Homeowners and Tenant's Association. On the third Wednesday night, we have C.A.C.D. meeting and everybody is invited to attend the meeting and express themselves. Thank you. Mr. Dawkins: I call the question. Mayor Ferre: All right., and then the hearing will be on what day now? Did we establish a day certain? Mr. Dawkins: No. Should we say the 10th of January? Mayor Ferre: 10th of January? Will it take you that long? All right, the 10th of January, then. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: 1 can't hear you. Is the 10th of January acceptable or not? (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mr. Dawkins: December? Okay, they want December. Mr. Plummer: December 20th, that, is the zoning. 5 Mayor Ferre: December 20th, all right. Any problems with that? Mr. Dawkins: No, sir. Mr. Plummer: I think to be fair we should hold the hearing on Saturday night, about, 8:00 o'clock in Gills Spot and then it will be fully understood and realized what needs are existing. Mayor Ferre: All right, then let the record reflect it will be on 20th of December. Do we need to vote on this? What was the motion? Mr. Plummer: That we have to hold a hearing. Mayor Ferre: Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1296 ld A MOTION ESTABLISHING THE DATE OF DECEMBER 20, 1984 AS THE DATE OF A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING A DISPUTE ARISING AMONG VARIOUS GROUPS IN THE BLACK AREA OF COCONUT GROVE CONCERNING THE TRANSFER OF A BEER AND WINE LICENSE TO "CHARLIE'S PLACE" AND INVITING ALL PROPONENTS AND OBJECTORS TO BE PRESENT AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS. 14 November 15, 1984 1 I i Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo ON ROLL CALL: (SEE COMMISSIONER DAWKINS' STATEMENT - NEXT ITEM) 5. BRIEF DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER DAWKINS STATEMENT ABOUT CRIME IN COCONUT GROVE AREA AND POLICE RESPONSE. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Dawkins: I would like to make one statement before I vote "yes". For those who don'.t know, at 10:00 o'clock Sunday morning, I was at Douglas and Grand and I called and j don't say our police are not doing anything. I went to my car and called and in five minutes I had six police cars that, stopped the hoods from selling drugs and snatching people's watches off their bodies and in six minutes they responded and after I went in the church and came out, they were still patroling and doing the best that they can. It is just that, we do not have enough policemen to put one visibly in that spot, but when I called, they did respond, and they cleaned it up - I don't know how long it, stayed clean, but, we do know that we did get some results. 6. ALLOCATE ONE MONTH FUNDING "MIAMI DADE TRADE & TOURISM COMMISSION" - REFER REQUEST FOR $1509000 TO CITY MANAGER; COMMEND Mr. H.T. SMITH FOUNDING CHAIRPERSON FOR HIS EFFORTS. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. H. T. Smith, sir. Mr. H. T. Smith: Good Morning, Mr. Commissioner, Commissioner Perez, Commissioner Carollo, Mayor Ferre. The Miami Dade Trade and Tourism Commission has passed out its funding proposal. We hope all of you have had an opportunity to review it. I am sure that you are aware of the many activities and the many functions that this fine organization has been involved in. I am sure you know that we have Thelma Gibson and Commissioner Helen Miller, Otis Pitts, George Knox and Newell Daughtry Al Dodson, Charles White of Eastern Airlines and several other very, very fine people in this community who have dedicated themselves to getting full participation in tourism. The main point that I want, to make today is that all through the years organizations come to the City Commission asking for funding and so many times we know for a fact that, there is going to be no return on the dollars, but that because of moral commitment or political commitments, or other type reasons funding is required. We are proud to say that we are probably the most, cost effective organization that you have funded. For the last year you have funded us at the rate of $75,000 and in our package you will see several organizations that have committed future conventions to Miami (I am not talking about Dade County now) to the City ld 15 November 15, 1984 I of Miami solely because of the efforts of the Miami Dade Trade and Tourism Commission and that will bring millions of dollars to the City of Miami. It will increase job opportunities and will increase the number one industries in the community. Just on Page 9, in particular, we have _ outlined the conventions that we have been in instrumental in bring to this community, so we have put together a funding package for this fiscal year, which we hope that, you will approve. Tomorrow hopefully will be my last day. I sat around and saw that there was nobody I felt that, was getting the community involved in tourism from our perspective and I did that and now what we are trying to do is to bring in people who really know about tourism, who really can begin to get into the nuts and bolts of things and I urge you to support this worthwhile project and to vote to support the funding of the Miami Dade Trade and Tourism Commission. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Gary ... Mr. Smith: Mr. Mayor, do you have a question? Mayor Ferre: Yes, I just need to know what the funding request is. i Mr. Smith: $15,000. Mayor Ferre: How much did we fund this last year? Mr. Smith: $75,000, on an emergency basis. Mr. Plummer: I don't think $75,000 was a full year, was it? Mr. Smith: It wound up not being a full year — nine months, something like that. Yes, Mr. Commissioner. Mayor Ferre: What is the Administration's position on this? Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, we support, this, but we have not had an opportunity to review the document, and come back with our evaluation in terms of the adequacy of that check. Mayor Ferre: When would you be ready to do that, Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: Next Commission meeting. Mayor Ferre: Well, let the record reflect then, Mr. Smith, that I am in support of this request. I do think it is important however, that we have the Administration's input, into the record. Mr. Smith: We ask that in the meantime, because of our funding year is over for the City that we be funded at, the same level ... Mayor Ferre: As last year. Mr. Smith: ... until the determination is made. Yes, the same funding as last year until the matter is brought back. Mayor Ferre: I have no problem with that, if that meets with the approval of the Administration. Mr. Gary: I think we can do them for a month at the same rate until we come back. Mayor Ferre: Okay, is there a motion to that effect? Mr. Plummer: So moved. ld 16 November 15, 1984 1 i Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mayor Ferre: It has been seconded. Further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1297 j A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ALLOCATE AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT FOR ONE MONTH OF ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE "MIAMI DADE TRADE AND TOURISM COMMISSION" AT THE SAME LEVEL OF FUNDING AS FY - 183-84; AND REFERRING THEIR REQUEST FOR FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000, AS STATED ON THE PUBLIC RECORD ON THIS DATE, BACK TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR HIS REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Mayor Ferre: Mr. Smith, I think in view of the fact, as you say, tomorrow is your last day, I think this Commission, and I am sure I speak for all of us, are very happy that you took time from your busy life, dedicated to this important cause. You have been one of the guiding lights, and I think you certainly deserve the thanks and the recognition of the City of Miami for having put, this together, and I am sure somebody here would like to make a motion to that effect. Mr.. Dawkins: J. L. Plummer moves and I second. Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion and a second - commendation and recognition of the efforts of the first chairperson - you were the founding chairperson. Call the roll on that. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1298 A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OFFICIALLY COMMENDING AND THA14KING Mr. H. T. SMITH, THE FOUNDING CHAIRPERSON OF THE MIAMI DADE TRADE AND TOURISM COMMISSION FOR HIS EFFORTS AS CHAIRPERSON OF THIS SUCCESSFUL ORGANIZATION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ld 17 November 15, 1984 i 3 i i Aft i NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Mayor Ferre: Now, who is the incoming chairman? Mr. Smith: We will make that decision tomorrow. It hasn't been decided yet. Mr. Plummer: There was no decision to be made without funding! Mr. Smith: That is correct,! 7. RATIFY ACTION IN ALLOCATION OF $35,000 ALLAPATTAH MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION - ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO LDC, ALLAPATTAH SHOPPING CENTER, ETC. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, as you know, at, our last meeting, we affirmed desires to have them establish a shopping center in Allapattah, so I would like to pass a resolution (COMMISSIONER DAWKINS READS HEREINBELOW RESOLUTION INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD) This was drawn up by Ms. Gallogly and the Allapattah Merchants. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a second to this motion? i Mr. Perez: Second. 3 Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Mr. Plummer: Under discussion, I think it is only fair ' after the discussion that took place before that I think we should especially note that, what, we are doing is paying for the study, but as clearly stated, the crux is the County's ;< ability to acquire 1.2 million dollar grant, from the Department, of Transportation and Urban Mass Transit Administration, that if for some reason they are unable to get that grant., at least. the City went the full nine yards to try to help and to accommodate and that it is not the City, nor can it be the City's responsibility for the 1.2. -X Mr. Dawkins: I also think, Mr. Mayor, that ill, should be noted that the Administration through this Commission has made available $300,000 to acquire that, land, but no one can come up with it. Would you like to speak to that, Mr. Gary? Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: Yes, Mr. Mayor, you supported this project up to now. We have done everything they have asked us to. Now - you have gone over the call of duty. You allocated $300,000 as our match to UMTA and UDAG and that $300,000 was in place when you passed the C.D. budget and this right, here will assist in the study, but, efforts need to be made to get. UMTA _ problems straight and Al Cardenas said that, he is going to continue to help in that regard. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, does this have the Administration's approval and recommendation? Mr. Gary: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there further discussion on the motion? Call the roll. s ld 18 November 15, 1984 l bk The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1299 A RESOLUTION RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING THE MOTION ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION AT ITS NOVEMBER 8, 1984 MEETING ALLOCATING $35,000 TO THE ALLAPATTAH MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION, FOR THE PERIOD FROM, DECEMBER 1, 1984 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1985 TO PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO THE ALLAPATTAH SHOPPING CENTER; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED AGENCY, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote- 3 AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre s NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo - ------------------------------------------------------------ I 8. RESOLUTION PROVIDING IN -KIND SERVICES & FEE WAIVERS: MAGIC ILE CULTURAL INDUSTRIAL FAIR ETC. WITH CONDITIONS; TWO DAY PERMIT TO SELL BEER AND WINE, ETC. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, as you know, at the other meeting # we had some Haitian businessmen who are desirous of trying to tie in with the CBI in an effort to develop some business ties. Now, out of all of the CBI money that has come through here, I personally do not know of any that the Haitians have been able to get out of it, or either Blacks, or Puerto Ricans or Wynwood area, or anybody, so we are hoping that through this trade conference, some sort, of would be established that would allow this, so all they are asking is that we waive the police, sanitation and what other fee did you want, Mr. Ringo? Mr. Ringo Cayard: My name is Ringo Cayard, 700 N. W. 2nd Avenue. The Fire Department also, and we need some lighting - the snowmobile. ': Mr. Dawkins: The snowmobile. Mayor Ferre: The showmobile is part of the $50. Mr. Cayard: Yes. Mayor Ferre: City staff, $1400. Mr. Cayard: This is a budget that we have put together, however, it might be less. Mr. Gary: If I might ... i 1 i Mayor Ferre: Let's put, it into the record. He asked for Police Department, $14,000; Fire Department, $560; Sanitation, $1200; insurance, $600. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, if I might update those figures. The total is $25,100 of City services. Police is $14,000, Fire is $5,600, Solid Waste is $3,000, Building and Vehicle Maintenance, $1,400, Parks and Recreation for showmobile is $700, so the total is $25,100 and it would be appropriate if you consider to vote to make a grant to this agency which obviously would not go to the agency, but a grant to the agency as opposed to a waiver. Mayor Ferre: Does this have the Administration's recommendation? Mr. Gary: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a motion? Mr. Dawkins: I move it. Mr. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. Mr. Cayard: Due to the delay, I was wondering if it is possible to have a letter from some offices in order to send a telex to Haiti saying that, it is possible because the people over in Hai'.1 at _ .:ui*.inL7. Mr. Dawkins: I would strongly advise against it, because 1 think one of our Commissioners has a problem anyway, so I mean I think ... my advice to you would be just to forget that. 1 Mr. Cayard: Thank you. ii Mayor Ferre: I think we need to vote now. l i The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: l s RESOLUTION NO. 84-1300 i A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE NECESSARY IN - KIND SERVICES AND FEE WAIVERS IN CONVECTION WITH THE MAGIC ILE CULTURAL INDUSTRIAL FAIR SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 8-9, 1984, AT PEACOCK PARK, TO BE PROVIDED FROM THE OPERATING BUDGETS OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF POLICE, FIRE, SOLID WASTE, BUILDING AND VEHICLE MAINTENANCE, AND PARKS AND RECREATION, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE CONTINGENCY FUND; SAID t ALLOCATION BEING CONDITIONED UPON SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 140. APM-1- 84, DATED JANUARY 24, 1984, AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING TWO (2) DAYS NON-EXCLUSIVE CONCESSION PRIVILEGES, INCLUDING A TWO (2) DAY PERMIT TO SELL BEER AND WINE IN CONNECTION WITH SAID EVENT. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here r` 1d 20 November 15, 1984 N and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, so there won't, be any problem later, it is a resolution - we would like for you to read and vote on the resolution. Mayor Ferre: "A resolution providing the necessary in -kind services and fee waivers in conjunction with the Magic Ile Cultural Fair scheduled for December 8 & 9 at Peacock Park." Let the record reflect that that has been voted on and Bob, would you give it to the Clerk. It also has a two day permit at the very end that says ... Mr. Gary: Beer and wine. Mayor Ferre: "Dated January 24th and further authorizing two days non-exclusive concession privileges, including a two- day permit to sell beer and wine in connection with said event." Let the record reflect that, that, is the resolution we voted on. Mr. Plummer: Let the record also reflect that is not is an approval, but that is our waiver to allow it. They still must get from the State the regular permit. 9. CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY OF DONAL STEWART ON THE SAD OCCASION OF HIS DEATH. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Plummer: I think it would be appropriate that this Commission go on record with the appropriate resolution to the family of Mr. Donal Stewart. Mayor Ferre: I have it. Mr. Plummer: Oh, I am sorry. Mayor Ferre: That is all right, go ahead. Mr. Plummer: (COMMISSIONER PLUMMER READS INTO RECORD HEREINBELOW RESOLUTION) Donal Stewart had served this City for as many years as I can remember, had always been a gentlemen, and always one who was willing to help and I think it, is only appropriate that on the passing of his untimely death that we do express our condolences to the family and I so move. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: ld 21 November 15, 1984 ., i RESOLUTION NO. 84-1301 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST CONDOLENCES OF THE CITY COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MIAMI AND ITS CITIZENS TO THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF DONAL STEWART, UPON HIS DEATH. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins 10. AUTHORIZE AMOUNT - ONE DAY RENTAL FEE LITTLE HAVANA COMMUNITY CENTER: READINGS BY CUBAN POET DANIEL ROMAN. Mr. Perez: I have a request, from Mr. Daniel Roman in order to celebrate a book presentation on December 16t.h at, the Little Havana Community Center - to reimburse the expense of that. Mayor Ferre: How much is the amount? Mr. Perez: How much is the rent of the Little Havana Community Center? $150 for one night. Mayor Ferre: Commissioner Perez moves, is there a second? Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced Commissioner Perez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1302 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ALLOCATE AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO WAIVE RENTAL FEE FOR ONE DAY'S USE OF THE LITTLE HAVANA COMMUNITY CENTER (150.00) PURSUANT TO REQUEST MADE BY DANIEL ROMAN, A CUBAN POET, IN CONNECTION WITH SELECTED READINGS FROM HIS BOOK OF POEMS. by Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - 22 November 15, 1984 Id i j i I i AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre y �Y NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 11. DISCUSSION ITEM: SPECIAL MEETING ON BAYSIDE. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: We need to have a meeting of November 29th for the final vote on Bayside and I don't think we have set the date or the time. There is a memorandum that you have all received from the Manager. I think there is a mistake on the date, Mr. Manager. No, I guess that is the correct date, okay. We have an absent Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir, I will be as you asked, attending the National League of Cities. Mayor Ferre: Anybody else going to be absent? That, is November 29th. - Thursday, November 29th, two weeks from today. Mr. Perez: I will not (INAUDIBLE) Mayor Ferre: You will not be here 29th of November? Mr. Manager is requesting a meeting on Bayside on the 29th. Mr. Plummer: Can I ask what the urgency is? Mayor Ferre: I think we need to finalize the Bayside contract and sign it, I guess. Mr. Plummer: But, is there a reason why it can't hold over until the 13th? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: They have to have the agreement to finalize all the financing so they can take possession December 1st and remain on schedule. Mayor Ferre: It has to be finalized that day, you say? Mr. Gary: Yes, sir, December 1st, is the deadline from them to remain on schedule. Mayor Ferre: I don't think it will be a controversial item and I would imagine, that it is a question of three of us gathering and passing a motion, but on the other hand, Mr. Manager out of courtesy to both Commissioner Perez and Commissioner Plummer, when will the document be available? Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, they are working on it right, now in Maryland. The complication was because of the parking garage and the UDAG and that is what caused a lot of delays in it. Mayor Ferre: When will it be available. Plummer, when are you leaving town? Mr. Plummer: I will be leaving town on the 23rd, the day after Thanksgiving. ld �3 November 15, 1984 1 7 i I i Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, can this thing be ready by then? Mr. Gary: I am checking right now. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Manager, while you are checking, you tell them that if I do not have the Affirmative Action package, I am not voting on it, I am delaying it, because I keep saying it over and over and I don't get it. Mayor Ferre: We will take this matter up this afternoon sometime. ---------------------------------------------- ------------- 12. FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: METRO TO STOP USING I.D.B.'S FOR RELOCATION OF BUSINESS FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: We now have the question of I.D.B. resolutions. Lucia, would you explain that? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor. This is consistent with your former resolution that was passed some time back. Yesterday the City Attorney and the representatives from the City Manager's office, with your letter, went to the Dade County Industrial Development Authority and asked them to do several things. One is the to stop soliciting businesses out of the City of Miami and into unincorporated Dade County. Mayor Ferre: You mean in the City of Miami, not, out of. In the City of Miami - soliciting businesses from the City. Mrs. Dougherty: Soliciting from the City, existing businesses - to the Director of Staff not to encourage that in the future and to make a policy from the County Commission not to do that, in the future. They passed the A. J. Kislak resolution yesterday. This is again confirming your resolve in this matter, directing the City Attorney and the City Manager to appear at any County Commission meetings and also Industrial Development meetings and also appearing in any court cases other than the Kislak and the ones that had preceded that time. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a motion to this effect? Plummer moves, Dawkins seconds. Further discussion? Call the roll. a t i The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1303 A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS BY METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY TO RELOCATE ANY ESTABLISHED MIAMI BUSINESS FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI TO UNINCORPORATED DADE COUNTY, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO INITIATE LEGAL ACTION IN AN APPROPRIATE COURT CHALLENGING THE USE OF THESE BONDS BY BUSINESSES SEEKING TO RELOCATE TO AREAS IN UNINCORPORATED DADE COUNTY; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER TO OPPOSE THE ISSUANCE OF THESE AND OTHER LIKE BONDS BEFORE THE DADE COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER TO SEEK ENACTMENT OF STATE LEGISLATION PROHIBITING DADE COUNTY OR ANY OTHER FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY FROM ISSUING INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS WHICH WILL RELOCATE ESTABLISHED MIAMI BUSINESSES TO UNINCORPORATED DADE COUNTY. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 13. DISCUSSION: PROPOSED PROCEDURES TO BE USED CONCERNING THE REMOVAL OF CITY MANAGER, HOWARD V. GARY. Mayor Ferre: We have a memorandum here dated November 14th from the City Attorney regarding the procedures of the public hearing on the City Manager. This was at, the request of Jesse McCrary and Mrs. Dougherty has recommended a procedure. I think it is an important document and I will call a special Commission meeting this afternoon for the purposes of voting on it. I would appreciate if you would have the opportunity to look at it and review it. Commissioner Carollo said he will be here this afternoon to vote on this matter. He is sick, but he said he will try to be here this afternoon. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I would like to inform you now that this is a very important document. I have not, seen it. I do not, intend to attempt, to digest it by this afternoon. I don't even know if Mr. Gary's counsel has seen fit to present it, and I will be invoking the rule. Mayor Ferre: I will inform you that I will be calling a special Commission meeting, in which time the five day rule ld 25 November 15, 1984 5e.4µ 1 s;. j cannot, be invoked and we will be bringing it up for a vote this afternoon. l Mr. Dawkins: I would like to go on record now by saying that, as important an issue as this, wherein a Charter has been in existence ... how long has the Charter been in existence, Madam City Attorney? Mrs. Dougherty: I believe since 1962 or 1963. Mr. Dawkins: 62 and 82 is 20 years, and in 20 years we did not write a set of rules governing the dismissal of a City Attorney. I doubt seriously in my mind if we can be fair to the City of Miami. I doubt, if we can be fair to the City Manager. I doubt if we can be fair to ourselves if we were to just take this and say "You have already been fired because we don't, like the way you part your hair, therefore, these..." Mayor Ferre: No, no. Mr. Dawkins: I can do my thing! I asked for this privilege, okay. Mayor Ferre: You have it. Mr. Dawkins: So now, we will not, under any circumstances, allow any Commissioner to have any input into the rules by which that Commissioner will sit, in judgment as to whether it is correct in form, in substance, or what.. Now, I go on record as saying the Charter specifically states that, the only thing required is three affirmative votes to dismiss the Manager. I am not arguing with that, and don't ever intend to, but I do have a problem with the way these rules that were drummed up last night, and are handed to me and I am told that because you are the Mayor, and you have three votes, and you are going to take these rules and shove them down my throat, and don't give me the privilege of having five days to look at, them knowing*.hat under no circumstances can I change them, under no circumstances can I alter them because you have the rules and I think it is very unfair, and I have to go on record as saying that. Mayor Ferre: All right, Commissioner, let, me answer that. First of all, explain that this is not a question of passing judgment. That judgment has already been rendered. It, was rendered by three members of this Commission and the vote was three to two, so it is not a question of judgment. It. is a question of the provisions of the Charter. The Charter says that the Manager will have 30 days in which he can petition for public hearing - not, an appeal, there is no appeal - not, a jury trial, not a trial, but rather a public hearing. Now, properly so, the attorney for Mr. Gary has requested the City Commission to establish rules. Now, this document - the City Attorney has been working on it. She concluded it yesterday. She sent it, to Mr. McCrary and we will be not be meeting again until December and I think it. is important that we - that at least the majority of this Commission adopt a proper rule of procedure. This document has been drafted by the City Attorney. We will have today to read it and look at it and then this Commission will have the opportunity to accept, it, reject it, or modify it by the end of the day and there will be a special Commission meeting that will be called for that purpose later on in the day before we adjourn. I will offer a time certain on it. and I will say that, we will do it sometime between 5:00 and 7:00 o'clock. Mr. Dawkins: I will read from the Charter: "Removal of City Manager. The Commission shall appoint by a majority ld 26 November 15, 1984 7 vote of its members a City Manager for an indefinite term and may remove him by a majority vote of its members. At least 30 days before such removal shall become effective, the Commission shall, by a majority vote of its members, adopt a preliminary resolution stating the reasons for his removal. The City Manager may reply in writing and may request a public hearing, which shall be held not, earlier than 20 days, nor later than 30 days after the filing of such request. After such public hearing, if one be requested, and after full consideration, the Commission, by a majority vote of its members may adopt a final resolution." ... My argument there is, this is not full consideration when you hand me something and tell me that I must accept, it. Secondly, you have orders of business, and rules of procedure from the Charter and like you say, it, goes on, and rules says, Rule 4, under Orders, Business and Rules of Procedure: "A copy of each resolution, ordinance, shall be furnished the members of the City Commission five days before meeting to enable the heads of the departments affected to prepare necessary and intelligent memoranda, data or report" ... but then it does go on to say - 9, under the same section - "Nothing in this section shall prohibit the Mayor from calling Special Meeting that any time he may deem proper for the consideration of any business of public import, and without complying with the provision of this section" ... so you are completely within your right as Mayor, but I think you disrespect, me as a Commissioner when you don't grant me that right. 14. A MOTION OFFICIALLY CONTINUING SEVERAL AGENDA ITEMS BACK TO PERTINENT BOARDS FOR STUDY, MAKING PROVISIONS FOR A REVIEW COMMITTEE ON THIS LEGISLATION, ETC. Mr. Dan Paul: Mr. Mayor, my name is Dan Paul, 100 Biscayne Boulevard South. At the time of the October 25t.h meeting, at, which you cancelled the remaining agenda, you stated in reference to this item that it would be heard after notice had been given to the property owners involved, and I point out to you that no notice has been sent, on Item 23 through 28, and it is an extremely important matter and I strongly urge you to defer that, matter until the property owners within the area have been notified and know that you are going to hear it and have an opportunity to be here. That will also give the opportunity to re-examine that proposal, because Item 28, which is the design criteria was crafted at a time when the City was expecting to buy all that property. There is no money to buy that property now, and that item needs to be looked at so that. you come up with a feasible proposal before it comes before the Commission, but I think it, is only fair when your Honor stated that this agenda was canceled and that they would receive notice when the Commission would hear it, again. I am not claiming you had to legally give them notice, but I think a commitment was made at that time to the property owners that they would at least have an opportunity to be here, and I strongly urge you to defer that until that, notice is given. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Toledo, I asked you and I asked my office to go to the Clerk's office yesterday to find out what the record reflected. I do not remember what was said and what, was not said on the record at, the time. Legally, I think the statement was made that these items would be continued to a date certain, and the date certain was today, so what is the basis then, for us to defer? ld 27 November 15, 1984 i i i Mr. Paul: Your statement, Mr. Mayor, that the property owners would be notified and they haven't been notified. I am not claiming it is a legal requirement, but it seems to me in view of the confusion at that meeting and the statement that was made that the property owners had the right to rely on the fact that they would receive a notice of this continued meeting. Mayor Ferre: Right, was this on the record? Mr. Ralph Ongie: The statement, on the record simply was that all matters that were not taken up on that, agenda were continued to November 15, period, and nothing else was said. Mayor Ferre: Well then, Mr. Paul ... Mr. Paul: It may not be on the record, Mr. Mayor, but. I think everybody who was present, at the meeting ... Mayor Ferre: Well, I have got to be guided by what is on the record, Dan and if the record doesn't, say it, then there is no way that we can deal with it. If the record stated that, then I think that is a proper ... Mr. Paul: I think it is very unfair to hear a matter of this importance without, the property owners having any notice. Mayor Ferre: Let, me say to you that first, of all, they had notice, and the notice was at the hearing when it, was continued to the 23rd. Secondly, I would point out to you since you know you go up before the Metro Commission as well as the City Commission that. this is a first reading and there will be a second hearing. Mr. Paul: It, is not a first reading on Item 28, Mr. Mayor, which is the critical document, which is the design guidelines governing the entire project. It is the final action you are planning to take on that matter. Mayor Ferre: If the record does not reflect the statement, and I do not frankly remember having made that statement, I don't see how legally we can defer this. Lucia? Mrs. Dougherty: There is no requirement that property owners are given notice at all with these resolutions. I am sure they were not notified specifically when they came up the first time. Mayor Ferre: This item is Item 23 to 28 which will be coming up in the afternoon. Mrs. Dougherty: On the other hand, I just heard Walter Pierce say that, there is really no problem continuing that i one until the other items are read on second reading, just that one item. Mayor Ferre: In other words, we would take 28 and continue a 28 until the second hearing. Mrs. Dougherty: But there would be no notification at any rate. Mayor Ferre: In other words, we would pass Item 23 through 27 on first reading today, if there is a majority of the Commission willing to do that. Mr. Perez: Mr. Mayor, I would like to ask something in reference to this item. I think we have nine items in this agenda that will affect the future of this community. ld 28 November 15, 1984 �'� � o- f Personally, I don't think that I have had enough time to study or to review what is the future of this ordinance. Personally, I would like ... Mayor Ferre: Are you talking about Item 23? Mr. Perez: No, I am talking about 17, 19, 21, 23, 24 through 27 and 28. I think that all of these ordinances will affect the future of this City and I am receiving sometimes a lot of calls from people of the City of Miami that are very surprised about some changes that the Administration has proposed and we have approved here. They are not familiar with the issue. Mayor Ferre: Would you tell me the numbers again? Mr. Perez: Yes, but. I would like to make a suggestion. I would like to propose here today to appoint a committee, a blue ribbon committee, of whatever, of five members in order that each member of this Commission has the opportunity to select one member to act in an advisory capacity in order to give us better advice, to spend enough time and to be familiar with each one of these ordinances and in order that at, the time that, we discuss this issue we have the proper advice and we have the opportunity to have the citizen's feelings on this matter, because I think it, will affect the future of this community. Mayor Ferre: All right, I think you have a valid point. We do have such a blue ribbon committee. It is not a five member committee, it. is a nine member committee and it, is called the Zoning Board and the Planning Board and you have two appointments. Mr. Perez: Yes, but that is special for this issue that I am talking about. I know that,, but I am talking especially for this item. I think this item deserves special consideration and I receiving every week different complaints of citizens - I know that they sent a notice, but, they don't have the proper information. I don't think that we have the ... Mayor Ferre: What items are you talking about now? Would you repeat, the numbers? I was unable to get the ... Mr. Perez: 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28. I think that Item 12 is a petition. Mayor Ferre: Item 12 is added to that, list? Mr. Perez: I don't have any inconvenience to vote on that one, but I think in that case we have to include for a future study, because this decision will affect all the property. I think it is a Grove Isle Club, a travel agency that they are requesting there, but, they have a similar request in other parts of the City and I would like that we have the proper recommendation for the future. We are only taking the part of the Administration. We don't have any strong feelings from the citizens. I know what you are going to mention about, the Zoning Board, but I think that, we need close information on this issue, and I would like to propose that, committee in order to have the proper advice before the next, regular Zoning meeting when we are going to discuss this issue. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Perez. Mr. Perez-Lugones: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, the items that, Commissioner Perez mentioned date back, most, of them, to September of this year. Some of them go back even ld 29 November 15, 1984 i longer, because they have been back to Planning Advisory Board, referred by this Commission and again been brought back. At least, one of these amendments, which includes a series of them is the result, of that. Blue Ribbon Committee discussions over a period months Mr. Aurelio Perez-Lugones(Con't): by this Commission and again, being brought, back. At least one of these amendments which includes a series of them is the result of that Blue Ribbon Committee discussions over a period of months. Mayor Ferre: What Blue Ribbon Committee? Mr. Perez-Lugones: The one that we had at one point studying 9500 and some of the amendments that resulted. Mayor Ferre: We had a Blue Ribbon Committee that held public hearings and came up with these recommendations. Mr. Gary: Correct. Mr. Perez-Lugones: That is correct. I was member of that committee. Mayor Ferre: Would you send to Commissioner Perez the list of the members of that, committee? Were there minutes kept of the meeting? Mr. Gary: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Would you send Commissioner Perez a full review of those copies of those minutes, and how many times they met, publicly to discuss this item? I think I am a believer in advisory committees, but, I think we have been through that process before and I think a member of this Commission has a right to request, a continuance. Is there any legal violence done to continuance on this? Mr. Gary: I can't speak to the legal aspects, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Well, let's get, a legal opinion because we want to make sure we are not violating any laws here and because it may be a moot point. Go ahead. Mrs. Dougherty: You are not violating any laws. You may run into that, ... Mayor Ferre: Are we jeopardizing anything by continuing? Mrs. Dougherty: You might be. I haven't, looked at each one of these applications. You might be jeopardizing that 90 day rule. Mr. Plummer: I thought we were removing the 90 day rule. Mr. Perez-Lugones: It is in here. It, hasn't been acted upon. Not, only that, there are a number of amendments which are the ones that, are causing problems with some property owners included in here, which has been deferred and continued several times throughout the months. This is one of the issues that have people complaining about, delays and matters that, are.... Mr. Perez: Yes, but Mr. Perez, I don't think you are familiar with what I said the people complained, because at ld 30 November 15, 1984 I i i several times I have sent to your office people complaining and you don't, have enough time to pay attention to that one. We have to pay attention to the people that complain. We have to pay attention to the property owners' complaints. Your office I don't think has enough time and I don't think that it, is proper, for example, yesterday night I was here about 8:00 o'clock or 7:00 o'clock at night. They had a Planning meeting for an hour and a half or two hours. I don't think in two hours they can discuss an agenda of this dimension and when they are discussing the future of this community. After, we receive the complaints, and you don't, have that kind of complaint and you don't have to give them the answer. Mr. Perez-Lugones: Let me say this. My office has all the time in the world to take care of people. What we cannot, take care is of problems that cannot be solved because legally they cannot be solved. There is a difference there. Mr. Perez: But that's the difference, but we are the people who are supposed to give the explanation to the people of Miami. If we are not completely familiar with what we are discussing, I don't think that itts not responsible to both, in my personal case, to both in an issue that I'm not completely familiar. I don't think that. I cannot, take the proper recommendation from the planning board or from the zoning board. I don't think that this is an issue that, can be discussed in one hour. Anyhow, that's the motion, Mr. Mayor, that I want to make to appoint a five members committee to have the proper advice before the next regular Commission meeting. Mayor Ferre: On these items alone or on every item? Mr. Perez: In this case, on this item and that, committee on all the items that any member of this Commission in the future have any doubt. Mayor Ferre: This is in addition to the planning board and the zoning board. Mr. Perez: Yes, that's only a special advisory committee. Mayor Ferre: For these items, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28. Mr. Perez: I don't think it is a permanent board. If we want, to use again for other items, we can use it, but I don't think that it is a permanent board. Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: Commissioner Perez, if I may, in relation to item 17, item 17 is the result, of that, committee that you created about one year and a half ago, the zoning ordinance review committee, made up of property owners and developers and lawyers, people from the community and they spent, several months reviewing the zoning ordinance to try to make sure that, we can make the corrections necessary. In reality, we have been inundated with complaints, because this hasn't, been passed for one year and a half. There are many people that cannot, go ahead with the construction of their properties because this item hasn't been passed. I am talking about item 17 specifically. Mr. Perez: Mr. Rodriguez, this item 17 will change the FAR and I think that it's very important, I don't, think it would make too much difference that if we wait one more month, but I think item 17 is very important, because it has a strong relation with the FAR and I think it, deserves more time. ld 31 November 15, 1984 `' i Mayor Ferre: Who are the members of the committee that we appointed a year and a half ago? Do you have that list? Mr. Rodriguez: I don't have it here with me, but I can tell you.... Mayor Ferre: Will you bring it this afternoon? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, I will. Mayor Ferre: So that, I for one, will go along with Commissioner Perez's request, but, I would be appointing the same person that I appointed a year a half ago. 1 don't, think that we need to appoint, any new people. Mr. Perez: I already make the motion. Mayor Ferre: The motion is that item 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 be continued until the December 20th meeting and that, this afternoon we will appoint a five -member panel that will review these items before that time and recommend specific positions to the Commission. Mr. Perez: And that item 12 will be included. I don't want to continue item 12, but what I want is that item be studied and this committee maxe a recommendation on this issue. Mayor Ferre: Include item 12. Mr. Perez: But item 12 I don't have any inconvenience to vote today, but what are the consequences of this item? I would like to have a recommendation also. Mayor Ferre: I think we have to be careful not to legally impair the charter of the City of Miami by in any way interfering with due process with the zoning board. The zoning board has a legal right to recommend to the i Commission and I think we must be careful and I would want some legal advice from the City Attorney to make sure that what we're doing here in no way impairs the due process of the rights of citizens that own property and due process. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, the citizens or the applicants have the right to apply and have it reviewed by the zoning board and then to the City Commission. You have now added another layer or potential other layer that is not a recognized, legally authoritative.... Mayor Ferre: But, it doesn't do any harm? 5 Mrs. Dougherty: It doesn't do any harm, but we all need to recognize that it is the recommendation of the zoning board that counts legally. Mayor Ferre: We understand that, I just want to make sure that what we're doing is not creating a serious legal impediment, that later on would be attacked by a dissident, zj- and would carry the day in court. I don't think there is anything wrong with a member of this Commission or a majority of this Commission continuing a specific item for more information, which is I think, what Commissioner Perez is requesting; that is his right. But I want, to put on the record if it is so. And if it's not so, I want to put on the record that, there is no legal impediment, that we're not creating a legal barrier that later on somebody could challenge in court, and demolish what we've done here. Mrs. Dougherty: I don't know of any legal impediment. The only thing I must, warn you about is that 90-day rule to get legislatively decided. j r'- �. ,, ......., ld 32 November 15, 1984 0 U, Mayor Ferre: Are we affected by the 90-day rule now? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, you are. Mrs. Dougherty: Yes. Mr. Plummer: We're removing it this afternoon. Mayor Ferre: Is that an ordinance? Mrs. Dougherty: Is that one of the ones that he's asked for a continuance? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, but, this afternoon the 90-day rule is second reading. So, if you approve it this afternoon, it will be in effect 30 days from now. Mr. Plummer: No, we can do it on an emergency basis. Mrs. Dougherty: No. Mr. Rodriguez: No, because it's zoning. Mayor Ferre: Not, zoning, so the question is, if we vote on this matter removing the 90-day rule this afternoon, the law goes into effect 30 days from today. By continuing this to December 20th, have we in effect, jeopardized the legal standing of all these ordinances? Mrs. Dougherty: I don't know how many days they've.... Mayor Ferre: Well, it won't be 30 days. Mr. Rodriguez: I think we have 35 days on item 17 and 18. Mayor Ferre: I'm sorry, it, will be because today is the 15th and we're talking about December 20th. Mrs. Dougherty: So we should be O.K. Mayor Ferre: So we should be legally O.K. If we pass the ordinance this afternoon the law is in effect in 30 days; the 20th is beyond that, so there should be no legal impairment as I understood the City Attorney. So what Commissioner Perez is recommending is both within his rights and does not in any way do any legal damage to anything we're trying to do here. Is that correct.? Mrs. Dougherty: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: Commissioner Perez has made a motion, which I've recognized that item 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28 be continued to the December 20th zoning meeting and that in the meantime this afternoon, we will appoint, he wants, a five -member committee to review all of these things and advise him, in particular and the Commission on these matters. We did have a committee, which we appointed a year and a half ago, the administration is going to give us the list of who is in that committee. I know that, Bob Traurig, and I saw Mr. Traurig. I remember Alberto Cardenas was on that committee. You were on that committee. Dan, I think you were on that committee, weren't you? Mr. Rodriguez: There were about 40 members. Janet Cooper.... Mayor Ferre: Janet Cooper was on that, committee. Mr. Rodriguez: Dan Paul. sl 33 November 15, 1984 0 Ok INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Rodriguez: I was referring to item number 18 only, 17 only. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, I just read the ordinance that we're considering this afternoon on second reading that, would repeal that 90 days and it doesn't do that. What it does is it tolls the time if you sent it back to the planning board or the zoning board. So, you might be running out these applications and they would have to go back to the planning board or the zoning board for consideration again. They'd have to start the whole process again, unless you refer it also to the planning or the zoning board. Mayor Ferre: So, in other words, Commissioner, what I think the City Attorney is telling you, telling us, is that you have to defer it, back to the planning.... Mrs. Dougherty: Whichever board it came from, the zoning board or the planning board. Mayor Ferre: ....for further review and then.... Mrs. Dougherty: As well as your committee. Mayor Ferre: ....so that, it. can be brought back to the commission on December 20th. Is that correct? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Would you amend your motion to include that so we can be within the law? Mr. Perez: Yes, but it's not, possible that we appoint...? Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Perez: Anyhow, it would have to ... O.K. Mayor Ferre: So, in other words, you are amending your motion. Let, me understand your motion. Your motion is that the numbers that, I've read be deferred to the December 20th zoning meeting; that in the interim that these matters be referred back to the respective zoning and planning board, depending on the item for further review, and that this afternoon we will appoint a five -member committee that will advise the Commission on these items before we vote on them on the 20th of December. Is that correct? Is there a second? Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. sl 34 November 15, 1984 0 The following motion was introduced Commissioner Perez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1304 A MOTION TO OFFICIALLY CONTINUE AGENDA ITEMS NOS. 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, AND 28 TO THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING PRESENTLY SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 20, 1984; AND MAKING PROVISIONS FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A FIVE -MEMBER PANEL TO SPECIFICALLY REVIEW THESE PROPOSED ORDINANCES FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION BEFORE THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 20, 1984; FURTHER REFERRING THESE ITEMS BACK TO THEIR PERTINENT BOARDS FOR FURTHER STUDY. by Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo ------------------------------------------------------------ NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Agenda items 31, and 34 were continued. ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ 15. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 3400-3490 S. DIXIE HIGHWAY & 3640 BIRD AVENUE FROM RO- 2.1/5 A RG-2.1/3.3 TO CH-2/5. i ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: We're now on item number 1. Mr. Whipple: This is the second reading, Mr. Mayor. You passed it on first reading at the last meeting. You may remember we concurred with the suggestions of the applicant and the restrictions that, they are voluntarily placing themselves into and therefore went along and recommended the change as modified. Mayor Ferre: Are there any objectors to item number 1 here or any other speakers? Is there a motion? Moved by Dawkins. Is there a second? Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Second by Perez. Further discussion? Read the ordinance. Is there further discussion? s Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, it is a public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to speak? Mayor Ferre: I've already asked that. Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry. Seeing no one coming forward, I'll move it. 2 s sl 35 November 15, 1984 a _- i Mayor Ferre: It's been moved and seconded. There is no need to move it. I've already asked if there were any objectors or people who wished to speak on this item. The record reflects that there are none. We are now ready to vote. It's been read, moved, seconded. We're on item number 1. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3400-3490 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM RO-2.1/5 RESIDENTIAL -OFFICE AND RG-2.1/3.3 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL TO CR-2/5 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 42 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 25, 1984, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Dawkins, seconded by Commissioner Perez, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO, 9933 The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. ------------------------------------------------------------- 16. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 2531 S.W. 37 AVENUE FROM CR-2/7 TO CR-2/8 Mayor Ferre: We're now on item number 2. ' Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, this also is second reading. You might remember from the last meeting, the Planning Department, strenuously objected to this change. We'd still a like that objection noted. We feel that, it's improper change of zoning. It's improper intensity and coupled with the variances that they were previously granted, this is.... Mayor Ferre: Do you want to put that up on the map, please? Mr. Whipple: We believe it was no hardship for the variances, but all you are considering here today is increase in intensity and as you see, all the surrounding sl 36 November 15, 1984 br . 3 � � I i area is of an intensity seven. We recommend denial of the CR-2/8. Mayor Ferre: Does anybody here wish to speak to this issue? Mr. Robert H. Traurig: Yes, sir, my name is Robert H. Traurig. I'm an attorney with offices at 1401 Brickell Avenue. I'm here representing Mr. Manuel D. Medina and I.R.E. Real Estate Fund. This matter was fully presented, if you will recall, at Robert E. Lee Junior High School. I think all of the issues are understood by this Commission. To revisit all of those issues, I don't think would have any special significance to this Commission. Unless the Commission has some questions of us, we rest on the testimony that, was previously proffered. Mayor Ferre: Is there anybody else who wishes to speak at this public hearing on item number 2? Let the record reflect that nobody else came forward. Is there a motion on item number 2? Mr. Plummer: Move it. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Moved by Plummer; seconded by Perez. Further discussion? Read the ordinance. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 955, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2351 SOUTHWEST 37TH AVENUE, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) FROM CR-2/7 COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL TO CR-2/8 COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 42 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINI14G A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. passed on its first, reading by title at the meeting of October 25, 11984, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Perez, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE N0, 9934 The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. sl 37 November 15, 1984 i 1 ------------------------------------------------------------ 17. DISCUSSION AND TEMPORARY DEFERRAL: PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING AREA S.M. 32 AVE., OAK AVE., W. BOUNDARY KIRK MONROE PARK ETC. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: We're now on item number 3 on second hearing. Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, this is a change of zoning initiated by the Planning Department including several properties. Request, for a change of zoning from its present RS-2/2 to RG-1/3. To our knowledge, we have the concurrence of the property owners. I believe Mr. Antoniadis is here to verify that information and he will be able to answer other questions. We believe this change of zoning is appropriate in light of the development that exists in the area and its location in relationship to other properties in the central Grove. Mayor Ferre: Are there any opponents to this present... We'll hear first from the... Let's see, this comes to us... This is second reading. Is that, correct? Ms. Holzhauser: It escaped us in the heat of the moment that it was read that time, sir, or we would have been objecting then. Mayor Ferre: This is on second reading. Ms. Holtzhauser: Yes, it is, but that's why we didn't. speak. Mayor Ferre: It, came from the zoning board. Is that, right? What was the vote on the zoning board on item 3? I'm asking for the legislative history. Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: Yes, sir, I have to review the file, because we don't carry this into second readings. Mayor Ferre: The Planning Department recommended approval. Is that correct? Mr. Perez-Lugones: They recommended approval. That is correct. Mayor Ferre: Let, me, for instance, so you'll know, it's in your file. I just, wanted you to read it into the file. Would you like my copy of it? The Planning Advisory Board on September 5th this year made a motion, which failed on a 4 to 2 vote; therefore constituting a recommendation of denial. Mr. Perez-Lugones: That is correct, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: I just wanted to put that, into the record. It was then voted on by this Commission favorably on a 4 to 0 vote on October 25th. This is the second hearing. So we will now hear from the applicant. Mr. Perez-Lugones: The applicant, is the Planning Department.. Mayor Ferre: Since we have the neighbors that are opposed, I think you need to explain it a little bit, more detailed, before we vote on it. Ms. Holtzhauser: That's not, what applicant.. The applicant, lists Mr. four other people as the applicant. sl In the agenda lists as the Yiannis Antoniadis and November 15, 1984 ! 0 0 Mayor Ferre: That's what I read too. It, says Derek Povey, Robert Malinski, Yiannis Antoniadis. Mr. Plummer: They are the owners, Maurice. The applicant is the Planning Department. Mayor Ferre: The Planning Department, I'm sorry. Ms. Holtzhauser: It, was instigated by the Planning Department, but the applicants are listed as those individuals. Mayor Ferre: The applicant, is listed as the Planning Department, so let the Planning Department speak to the issue. Mr. Rodriguez: Mr. Antoniadis came to our office saying that, he would like to change the zoning in that area. We felt, that the recommendation for a zoning change was justified. He came also and told us that there was full support by the members of...by the people affected by the _ zoning and that the application or the request for zoning was supported by all affected by it. At the first hearing, if you remember, when we talked about this at the first hearing, I mentioned to you that we hadn't received the letters from the people in the area supporting the application. Mr. Antoniadis told me that he was going to get those letters in support, of the application today. I believe he has some letters in support of the application. Mayor Ferre: Anything else that the department wants to = say? Mr. Plummer: No, I want, to see the letters. ;- Mayor Ferre: We're going to get the letters, all right. Mr. Yiannis Antoniadis: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Commissioners, my name is Yiannis Antoniadis. I reside at 3326 Mary Street in Coconut Grove and I'm one of the parties affected by this change in zoning. I have a letter here by Mr. Purifoy who reads: "Area bounded by approximately S.W. 32 Avenue and the west boundary of Kirk Munroe Park, and the rear lot line of properties fronting on the south side of Oak Avenue. We the undersigned hereby withdraw our objection to the zoning change of the above property and we would like too lend our support, in favor of the re -zoning. Yours truly, John Purifoy and Dianne Purifoy." As well as we have on file a lengthy petition signed by I would guess 20 or 30 people of the immediate surrounding area, people who are affected by this. Mr. Plummer: The letter you just read, which property does he own? Mr. Antoniadis: The immediate behind the red or the lower part. The red above it is represented by two gentlemen that own those rental properties; they own all of those properties. They have not been to any of these meetings to represent themselves on their objection. I have spoken to them and their objection has been that there is not adequate off-street, parking. That is their only objection. They don't object to the change in the zoning, but they object to the parking and there is evidence of that in the file or their card; they do specify their specific item. Mayor Ferre: Yes, I would like to see it. r �4{�f sl 39 November 15 1984 014 Oh Mr. Plummer: Let me ask the Planning Department, why you didn't, go back two additional lots in your recommendation to go right, to the park. It, would seem like to me the park would be a natural barrier. Mr. Rodriguez: That, property is now in use by the park, those two tots over there. Mr. Plummer: Are now park property? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes. Mr. Plummer: Oh, O.K. Mr. Rodriguez: You understand that the issue is that the property owner didn't have enough land to make an application. On the northern side of Oak is the same zoning that we're recommending for this area. We were led to believe that there was full support for this application. It was a good thing to do because it would conform with the rest of the area, with the northern part of the street. There will be two sides of the street, having the same type of zoning. Based on all those factors, we decided to initiate the application ourselves. The only change that has been since we started the application is that what we felt, was full support by all the people affected by it is not, there. Mr. Plummer: Are you withdrawing your recommendation? Mr. Rodriguez: I think on the Planning basis, the recommendation was correct. I wish we had all the support by all the people affected by it. But, from a planning point of view having the same zoning affecting both sides of the z. street makes sense. Mr. Plummer: Are you prepared to go additionally in the RS- 212 to the higher zoning? _ y Mr. Rodriguez: No. Mr. Plummer: How would you justify not doing it? Mr. Rodriguez: Because we believe in this area, in the area that we're marking the subject area, there have been already some changes in the structures that have been , besides the street is much smaller. We're dealing, if we were to make a change in McDonald, that might have an effect, all the way through affecting many other properties. Mayor Ferre: Sure, that's the point; how about lots 13, 14, and 15? Mr. Rodriguez: When we initially started the application, we included those lots and there was a tremendous amount of objections from those properties. They felt that they wanted to remain single-family and then they were afraid �~ also of the implications on the other side of the street, in Florida that, also didn't, want to change to anything other than single family. Mayor Ferre: What, is RG-1/3? Mr. Rodriguez: It's single-family and duplex. The issue here is duplex. Mayor Ferre. So, in other words, it would go from single- family to duplex. All right. sl 40 November 15, 1984 1 Mr. Antoniadis: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to point out that what is happening here is in fact the places are duplexes already. Out of the three properties that I personally own, two of them are duplexes I had built back in the 30's or whatever it, is and in fact we are maintaining the status quo in essence by making this into an R-2. The neighbors behind me who are actually abutting to the properties to the rear of Grand Avenue are going to try to re -zone this particular area because they are going to be faced with a high intensity development that's going to occur on Grand Avenue and is in planning at present. They would like to get a higher density, which makes it natural for them to request such a change in zoning. It would create additional living space who do not own a car, who are in such close proximity to the center of the town and everything is within a walking distance. The area has become depressed for some time now, particularly on Oak Avenue and would have a high traffic flow of over 500 cars per day and no longer lends itself to a single-family residences, such as west of McDonald where the entire area is a residential one. McDonald Street is the dividing line regarding character, regarding density, regarding many factors. I do have the support, and it, is in file, of a lengthy petition of neighbors affected in the immediate area that the circle describes. Perhaps there will be some people who object., but none of them who live in this particular area. Mayor Ferre: We will listen now to the neighbors who wish to speak on the issue. Mrs. Joanne Holzhouser: I'm Joanne Holzhouser, 4230 Ingraham Highway, and I'm president of the Coconut. Grove Civic Club. I'd like to be sworn. Is that possible? Mayor Ferre: If you unless somebody else have an objection? insist, I have no problems with that, has an objection to it. Does anybody Mr. Plummer: Do we get to swear at her? Mayor Ferre: Have her sworn in. Mr. Ralph Ongie: Do you swear that the evidence you are about to give is the truth, so help you God? Mrs. Holzhouser: I do. First I'd like to read a letter, which I was asked to read today, Janis E. Pepino, 3285 McDonald Street, and her mother has written a paragraph at the end, Roberta Pepino, same address: "Dear Sirs, I'm a 16 year old resident, of Coconut Grove, truly my home town, since I have lived here from the day I was brought home from the hospital. Even in my young years, I have seen a drastic change in the Coconut Grove community. This once quiet residential area has turned into a busy, over -crowded thoroughfare for much of the traffic avoiding the rush hour jam on US-1. I once enjoyed the solitude of my surroundings, the basic spaciousness of the community, and the freedom it allowed. Now when I go to take a ride in my j bicycle on these beautiful fall afternoons, my l mother cautions me with good reason to be careful of the speeding cars and the congested ' construction sites where mammoth concrete sardines are being squeezed into the last, possible inch of { space. The once peaceful, easy-going atmosphere that, symbolized the village life of the Grove is being destroyed by the influx of apartment sl 41 November 15, 1984 0 P dwellers and fancy shops that, cater to a non -Grove clientele; not to mention what a law that allows multiple -family dwellings in what was once a single-family dwelling space will do to increase the already troublesome crime problem. There does seem to be a correlation between crime and density of population. Though I feel that, growth of the right kind and in the right place in our fair City is important, I do not want it to jeopardize the Coconut Grove community as a whole. We, the residents, of a good, somewhat safe, basically single-family area urge you to consider our point of view. Keep our community safe and less crowded and even more beautiful for the future of Miami as a whole." The mother adds: "I would only add to what my daughter has so emphatically expressed by saying I concur with her sentiments wholeheartedly. I presented my view to one of the principals who was attempting to get the zoning change, when he came to my door a few months ago seeking my signature on the petition to get the issue before you. I absolutely abhor the idea of creating more congestion, business and concrete monsters that hide behind sleek facades of superficial growth and plastic beauty, the ugly decline of a quality of life in the Grove. I implore you, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, look beyond the surface of this upbeat Grove and see who the true benefactors of it are, certainly not the family residents, but the investors whose main interest is seeing a return on their investments." That, puts it so beautifully. I think it puts a point. there Mr. Antoniadis talks about some deterioration of the neighborhood. The people who live in that neighborhood are living in one of the most, successfully integrated in every way, neighborhoods in Dade County, Florida. It's a neighborhood that, all of us should be proud of, that all of us should be helping. Coconut Grove Elementary School voluntarily integrated before any integration artist came down. I believe it was the first in Dade County to do so. The people who live from Grand Avenue to South Dixie and from Douglas Road to Mary Street ought to be commended because they've found out how to live together peacefully and quietly and nicely. I think this is a frontal attack on the dignity of this neighborhood. We all know what Mr. Antoniadis just said for us. Yes, we know the crush is there, the push is on for the developers to move in to every residential area in Coconut Grove, and it's quite true, I do not, live in that neighborhood. I live in South Coconut. Grove, which will eventually be attacked. But I do care about what happens in the other neighborhoods and I will fight as long as people in any neighborhood in the Grove as me personally and/or the Coconut Grove Civic Club to stand with them, as they have, on this issue. I would like to bring one thing up, and this is why I asked to be sworn. I was told by Mr. Antoniadis, at the time of the...I believe September 5th meeting, that this request, did not come from him, that, Mr. Luft had suggested it, to him that he needed this change in order to regularize or some such word, the zoning atlas or the patterns, or something. This was explained at length. I don't see this appearing on the press, the packet. I didn't hear this. It, did not, originate, I was told from the developer, it originated from the department. I wish the department would spend more time planning with us and less time with this paternalistic authoritarian, we -know-it-all idea that they have to plan for all the people of Coconut Grove. Most, of us can do our own planning and if we didn't have to fight, all the time, we could do more things. But I think that it's outrageous that sl 42 November 15, 1984 ._ t 0 has not, been mentioned today. I was told that, by Mr. Antoniadis in a conversation. I'm not sure that it's a part of the public record from September 5th, but, if that is true, then I think it should come out, today. If it's not true, then either I misunderstood Mr. Antoniadis or something. But, that was my information; it is coming from Mr. Luft. I don't believe those properties have gone down in value. There are plenty of people who live along there who are very happy, but I think that changing this is going to put Florida Avenue in a squeeze, so that, whomever owns that property on Grand Avenue, the Grand Avenue property will then come to you and say, "Gee, we have the back tots there, so we have to go there." Then we have to come down from Oak and the ones that, face on Oak... It's what I call the doubling of the Grove, only it's not doubling anymore. You are eating us alive and we really want to keep Coconut, Grove. Again, I've heard the Mayor say this before, when we've argued things. We're not always on the same side, but, I've heard him say it about other things, "You are going to kill the goose that lays the golden egg." If you make Coconut Grove into another plastic community, nobody is going to want to be here. But, we're going to fight it every step of the way. Yes, if it takes coming out of our neighborhoods, we'll be there. We don't. have to be so parochial that we say, unless it's happening next door to me, I don't care. I do care about what happens in all of Coconut. Grove. Mayor Ferre: All right, yes, ma'am. Mrs. Marilyn Reed: My name is Marilyn Reed. I'm co- chairman of the Central Grove Home Owners Group. We are objecting to this at this time. I want to explain why. To us this is spot zoning at this time. To us, and I brought this up to the zoning board and I think this had a lot to do with their decision. I want you to ... I'm going to repeat to you what I told them. We have a major problem over there in that area. My property is at the corner at Day and McDonald. Since 1977, through your Public Work's Department, I have been requesting signs and they couldn't do anything about signs because Metro wouldn't, do anything about it. What we need in there is to stop this horrendous traffic that, goes day and night. I am talking about purveyor trucks; I am talking about, construction trucks. This is a residential area. At my corner, and I checked it through the computer, I have had five vehicular homicides. I average 67 wrecks a year. Our property damage is phenomenal. On Oak, it's the same thing. I have been run off Oak by purveyor's trucks on to the grassy strip. People have been hit over there; I don't have the figures there. Since the Public Works Department couldn't get Metro to do anything last, year, I went to J.L. Plummer's office and in sheer desperation asked him to help me. He did write a letter to Metro; he did request the signage we needed. We can't get police enforcement to stop this horrendous problem, unless we have the signage. He got a letter back from Charlie Baldwin refusing. This is the service we get. from Metro. I don't want any more people killed over there. I want a traffic program set up. I want some help on this and at that time, then Mr. Antoniadis can come back for his zoning, and at that time, I may support it. Right now I think it, is premature and it's jumping ahead of the priority issue we have in this neighborhood. I want you to know our property is being ruined from this traffic. I've talked to all my neighbors. The black filth that comes from this traffic is accumulating inside of our houses; it's affecting our health. It, just goes on and on, it's accumulative effect. matter. But I am talking about people's lives and nothing has been done. I thank J.L. for trying to help us, but you can't do anything with Metro when they refuse. I sl 43 November 15, 1984 i + can't get police over there to stop the speeders 90 miles an hour day and night, wrecks all the time. I can't get, the police to do anything when we don't have the signs for them to enforce it. What I would ask you to do is not allow this zoning today and Mr. Antoniadis can come back at a later date after the traffic is settled. I would ask you please to do that. Mayor Ferre: Next. Mrs. Esther May Armbruster: My name is Esther May Armbruster. I live at 3350 Charles Avenue. I was down here on the night of the zoning board when this first came up. _ At that particular time, the members of the zoning board rejected the idea of your changing it. Now suddenly, here it, is again. I think this is about the third time that this same item has come up on the agenda. In the meantime, I also had a list of petitioners and those people who sign it don't, even live in that particular area. I don't know whether you checked it or not, but if you would look on that list that you were given, the signatures of the petitioners, they do not live in that particular area. As far as we are concerned here in Coconut, Grove, once you begin to change on Oak Avenue, you are going to come on down and do a wipe out. That's what you are planning to do. Any technicality you can use, this is what you are allowing people to do. Somewhere along the line, you need to stop it. Somebody needs to stop these developers coming in here and getting richer and making more of a slum area and more people are jammed in. This is what you're doing. You are allowing this to happen to Coconut, Grove. I imagine the same thing you also intend to do to Charles Avenue, the same thing; you are buying up, buying up, buying up. Eventually, nobody will be here except those people who can afford the high rent. We don't intend to be moved out. I think we've been quiet, and nice in Coconut Grove. We haven't had any trouble yet, but you know, you can push a person so far and then you have to stop, they refuse to be pushed any further. So for you two to change this zoning for somebody else's benefit; I -° really don't, get it,, because if he wants a change, he does not like the idea of one side being one thing and one i another, then he is to change to the existing side of the residents. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Yes, ma'am. �:. Ms. Monty Steele: My name is Monty Steele. I've been asked to read a letter. I live at 3227 Virginia. I've been asked to read a letter from Miss Daphne Roberts, 3509 Marloe Avenue. "Dear Mayor and City Commissioners, I have a very valuable property on Oak Avenue and I'm deeply �- concerned about changing the zoning from RS-2/2.1 family to RG-1/3 general residential, one and two family. There is a very beautiful condominium town -house on Oak Avenue, seemingly unoccupied. It also seems that Coconut Grove is going to be over -populated with condominium town -houses and office buildings. Lastly, we do not have a market for these buildings. I would appreciate your sincere considerations in these matters before you make a final decision." Mr. Jim McMaster: My name is Jim McMaster. I live at 2940 a S.W. 30th Court., in a neighborhood very similar to this. I got involved in this largely because the Planning Department ' has come into our neighborhood and suggested that we might, need a higher density because our neighborhood has l deteriorated and is being run down. Before the PAB meeting, Mr. Luft went, to a long explanation, was very adamant that 3 ts ��3 sl 44 November 15, 1984 , there were two sides to McDonald Street that., if I can use the term, predominantly Black side, all those houses face the side streets, that none of them face McDonald. To tell you the truth, I didn't have a map in front of me, but I thought, from memory that, if you go down Oak or Florida, you would see houses facing you from the other side of the street. At that meeting, I don't know if you've seen this, but, they provided us with a little aerial map and some analysis and things. If you look on their aerial, he insisted -I'll say again- none of these houses face McDonald Street. That was why we could re -zone on this side and it would not affect the other side. They were two different neighborhoods. Well, on the aerial map he gave me there is a house that, faces Florida, it's right there; and there is a house that faces Frow Avenue. Starting up by Lamb Court, where the single-family zoning starts, you have 3308 McDonald, 3318 McDonald, 3320 McDonald, 3340 McDonald, and 3346 McDonald, all homes on the other side of the street facing what he now wants to re -zone. As a matter of fact, 3342 McDonald is an old duplex. A lady has bought it and if anyone drives over there right now, she is gutting the place and turning it into a single-family residence. She is converting an existing grandfather duplex into a single- family residence. I've heard rumors about, the post office property. I have a friend who knows two gentlemen who live on Florida. They have sold -I don't, know which lots they are- they are the third and fourth houses backing onto the post office property. From what I understand, they were sold quite a while ago, the two houses for $375,000. Obviously, there is a lot of movement in this area and re- zoning these nine lots accomplishes nothing. It's putting pressure on Florida now to re -zone. Do we also want Florida to be commercial? Mr. Antoniadis, in front of the PAB stated that the people in Florida did not want R-2, that, they wanted commercial. Do we want commercial? These nine lots, it makes no sense. It does not change anything, except for extending the R-2 down on to the single-family across the street. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Antoniadis. Mr. Antoniadis: Mr. Mayor, we have heard some of the opposition members speak out about the problems that this area is facing. None of these people live in this particular area. I would like to invite any of them to come in this particular area. Furthermore, I'd like to point, out that the people who game me support and the petition would reflect that there are people abutting Florida Avenue, as well as the opposite side of McDonald Street, all within the prescribed area that we are seeking the change in zoning. Furthermore I would like to go into the record and state that, whatever Ms. Joanne Holzhouser stated about our conversation is completely misunderstood. I am the one who went, to the Planning Department, and I am the one who presented the case, and the Planning Department concurred with me. The area behind me is a transitional area. Nothing has been done as far as seeking a change, although the change is imminent. Furthermore, I am not asking anything more than what is presently there and what is presently surrounding my area and abutting my area. For this, I seek your support. Thank you. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, somebody from the administration, presently we have duplex and single-family homes. That is correct or not? Mr. Rodriguez: Right, yes. Mr. Dawkins: Presently, we have documentary stamp money. Is that right or wrong? sl 45 November 15, 1984 9 1 Mr. Rodriguez: We do. Mr. Dawkins: Thirdly, we in Miami, are supposed to be attempting to build affordable housing. Is that right or wrong? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, sir. Mr. Dawkins: Why isn't it, that the administration is working with the citizens and the developer to try to show him, this gentleman, the advantages that he might pick up - because all of us, I think, ought, to realize the bottom line is profit.. We can sit here all we want. The bottom line is profit. Since we need affordable housing in the City of Miami and Coconut Grove is in the City of Miami, did anyone ever sit, down to try to see if this gentleman would be interested in taking his property and whatever the profit margin is for the duplex, show him how he might arrive at that with the single, affordable housing. Mr. Rodriguez: We can refer it to the proper department for that, sir. Mr. Dawkins: Did anybody ever do that? Mr. Rodriguez: That was not the question that came before us, so we didn't do it, no. The question, again to try to summarize the position that, we had on this, this property owner came to us saying that he and other people in the area wanted to have a zoning change, but they didn't, have enough land to apply. In the first, recommendation that we had that withdrew, we included the property of the whole block. After we realized that there was no support and that we didn't have the complete information from the property owners in the area, we had a meeting with the people from the area and we explained what we had in mind originally. We got very clear that the people facing Florida Avenue as part of the block, were not, in accordance with the recommendation that, we had. We limit our recommendation to half of the block because it makes sense always to have that, portion of the block recommended for duplex. Mayor Ferre: Why? Mr. Rodriguez: If you look at Florida.... Mayor Ferre: Look, let me tell you what my problem is and my confusion. Let me tell you where my confusion and where... This is not, spot, zoning, because it's RG-1/3 across the street, so it's not spot zoning, Joanne, I disagree with that statement. Mrs. Holzhouser: I didn't say spot zoning. Mayor Ferre: Somebody said spot, zoning. Mr. Plummer: Marilyn. Mayor Ferre: I disagree, this is not spot, zoning. On the other hand, here you have a property owner who owns six lots, comes to you and says they don't have enough land, they have convinced the department to do it for the whole block, -I understand that. We're just moving the duplex line from Oak to Florida and making it like the rest of McDonald and that whole area which is for duplexes. But then the neighborhood comes around and the neighbors say they don't want that. They want that whole area there wants to be kept, as a single-family area. This theory that on the one side you got Blacks, see on this side of McDonald, you sl 46 November 15, 1984 0 LAM 2 M got, S-2/2, because that's where Black people live; and on this side you got White people and therefore, we can go to RG-1/3, I don't see the logic of that. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's ridiculous. Mr. Rodriguez: I didn't say that either. Mayor Ferre: I mean somebody said that there was some kind of logic to...this young man said that one side was White, one side was Black. That, may or may not be, but I don't think that has anything to do with the zoning. Mr. McMaster: Excuse me, no, Jack Luft said that they were two different neighborhoods because the land on the west side, all those houses face the side streets, and as I indicated, that's not true. Mayor Ferre: What the color of the residences has nothing to do, I think, with the zoning of it. Are we doing zoning because on the one side it's White and therefore, we can go to RG-1/3 and on the other side we don't, want to go to RG- 1/3 because it's Black? I mean, I don't understand the logic of that. I need, I'm wrestling trying to understand why you want to do this. Mr. Rodriguez: If I may summarize it again. Mayor Ferre: No, I heard you twice, You summarized it twice, unless you have something new, I heard what you said before. Mr. Rodriguez: I was trying to finish last time. Mayor Ferre: Are you going to repeat what you said before or are you going to say something different. Mr. Rodriguez: Let me try to say something different. Also Oak connects 27th Avenue to 32nd, and people have been taking that road to go from one place to another. It makes more sense to have a higher intensity in that portion, and I think everything else that I mentioned about density across the street is there, so I don't want to repeat it. Mayor Ferre: I hope you don't apply that logic to my neighborhood, because there's an awful lot of people who cut from 17th, they get on Tigertail and they go through Espanola and they come out right in front of Jack Luft's property. Under that logic, then, you would increase the density of my neighborhood because it's used as a traveling street between one area and another. Mr. Holzhouser: Excuse me, but can you tell me what he's going to do with Ingraham Highway where I live, if he's go on the amount of...I've got 20,000 some commuters, does that mean we're going to have a high rise on my property now? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Luft, do you want to say something? Mr. Jack Luft: The question was posed to us by Mr. Antoniadis, if Oak is a busy street, and it is, and if one side has the right to build duplexes, why, if I share that same street, should I be limited to single-family, if have to have the same conditions as they do. Espanola, both sides are, of course, single-family, so is Tigertail, so is Ingraham Highway. We could not give him a good reason why he should be limited to single-family on the south side, if everyone else was duplex on the north side. sl 47 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you this, even though I'm sure the color of people has nothing to do with it. If the people on the other side of McDonald, right across the street, in section 11, lots 12, 13, and 14 and 3, and 4, and 5 and then on the other side on lots 13, 14, section 10 from Percival south, were to say, "Under your logic, it fits us, we want RG-1/3 also." Mr. Luft: If they could demonstrate through the platting of those properties, if there was a defensible line, a way to draw a line logically that would not creep, would not, move, then we would have to listen to them. But where this line is drawn and where we're drawing it down the middle of the block, that's clearly a separation. Mr. Plummer: How do you tell the people on Florida Avenue side that, it, won't creep there. Mr. Luft: Florida is a very different street than Oak Avenue, obviously. Mr. Plummer: What I'm saying is as far as the creeping. Mr. Luft: It's a one block street; it goes from no place to no where. Mrs. Holzhouser: I'm sorry, it, does go on over to Douglas Road, Jack. Mr. Luft: Well, it's not, a through street, Joanne, you know that. It's a very quiet block and we agreed that Florida Avenue is very different than Oak. Oak is where the whole thing. It all boils down to simply if the question was posed to us, "Why should I be restricted to single family when the people across the street on the same street, have duplex?" I really could not give them a good reason why not, and we would accept, a proposition. I'm not saying we're fighting for duplex on Oak Avenue; we're not. Mayor Ferre: But you do recommend this, Mr. Luft? Mr. Luft: We see there is a logic to it. We cannot, say that he should be denied it when the person across the street on that same street has it. Mayor Ferre: Thank you. Mr. Antoniadis, let me ask you a question. Do you own all six of these lots, or do you have an option to buy them, or what? Mr. Antoniadis: I do not. I own, in fact, I would like to answer your question.... Mayor Ferre: Why don't you answer this question, first. Mr. Antoniadis: Yes, I own the three lots in green. Mayor Ferre: Three lots in green, all right, the other lots which are lots 12, b and 7. Mr. Antoniadis: They are owned by two gentlemen, whose name escapes me. Mayor Ferre: Do you have an option to buy those? Mr. Antoniadis: No, I do not. They own all of the red area as rental units. Adjacent, to me is a Black family, Mr. Fudge, who is going to be there beyond his death through his children. My support came in mostly from Florida Avenue and from the Black community from block 11 and block 20, I believe. If you see the petition, you'll see that all the support has come from these two areas. sl 48 November 15, 1984 0 Mayor Ferre: Yiannis, let, me ask you this question. How long have you owned tots 9, 10, and 11. Mr. Antoniadis: I have owned them since 1969. I have built my own house, in which I lived for ten years and I still own it over there. In fact, instead of all these concrete abominations that, were mentioned here were going to be created there, I have lived a house that I live in it for better than ten years which should be published throughout the world and which has received recognition by this Commission several times. Mayor Ferre: So, in other words, this is something you owned for a long time. Mr. Antoniadis: I owned for a long time. Mayor Ferre: You lived there and this is not something that you just bought six months ago or a year ago to speculate on. Mr. Antoniadis: No, sir. Mayor Ferre: Is it your intention to knock down that house? Mr. Antoniadis: No, it is not my intention to knock down that house. I have, in fact, some of these properties have duplexes now. These duplexes exist since the 301s. They're grandfathered in. But in essence, they are still R-1. If a fire caught, on this place, if some catastrophe happens, I cannot replace what, I have there. Mayor Ferre: So why is it, since you are not going to replace what's there, why do you want to do this? I don't understand the logic to that. Mr. Antoniadis: In the future, I hope and I pray to develop to reconstruct, this area and to revitalize it because it is decaying and it's not, ... and I intend to do exactly what Mr. Dawkins says, to provide more housing for responsible people to be there, to revitalize the area. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask, then I'm finished and then somebody else can ask questions. Let me ask the department, if I may, through the Manager, whomever is going to answer. If Mr. Antoniadis does what he says and is successful, and if he should then desire an Mayor Ferre: come to an agreement with the property owners south, which are block 13, 14, 15, and 16 and then he would request that RG-1/3 were to be extended there, let's say in two or three years from now; then what would be the position of the department? What, are you saying, Jack? I can't hear you. Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: I would have to look at. what is the situation there. Mayor Ferre: But you just recommended that the whole block be.... Mr. Rodriguez: But, you are talking about a portion of the block only now. sl 49 November 15, 1984 t 7YN'i' .i iI t Mayor Ferre: Yes, I know, but the point is what was the logic that, impulsed the department to recommend the full block be rezoned to RG-1/3? Now you are telling me that you would have to look at it, again, but when you looked at, it, last, time, you said, O.K. Now you are telling me that you're not too sure. That's not consistent. Mr. Rodriguez: You are right. Mayor Ferre: In other words, if Mr. Antoniadis, or somebody else buys those lots and they come here and they say they want, the same treatment as their next, door neighbor, it's not spot, zoning, it's not, creeping because in effect what they really want is just a continuation of RG-1/3- Under what, logic would you deny them a request for RG-1/3? Mr. Rodriguez: What I'm saying by ... we'll look at that time at the situation is because if we were to get a project that, will be unified, that will provide some improvement to the area and that will take care of some of the dilapidated units that may be there, we will be agreeable to it, because I think that would be an improvement the the site. Mayor Ferre: Isn't it reasonable to assume that if you already approved it once, that if.... Mr. Rodriguez: It is possible. Mayor Ferre: ....Mr. Luft and you and the others and still there, that you would probably approve it the second time? Mr. Rodriguez: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Now let me ask you the next question. Then they buy lots 10, 12, 11, and 10 across the street, and they would say, "Well, you know you gave it, to us up in Oak, and you gave it us in Florida; what, logic would you have to deny it, in the last little strip between Florida and Grand Avenue? i Mr. Rodriguez: But isn't that the way zoning is done in the City? I mean, slowly we change as we see the needs for the different areas. Mayor Ferre: So, in other words, you recognize the fact that on the Wnite side of McDonald Street, from RG-13 it eventually will go right down to Grand Avenue, but we're not sure about, the Black side because that might be creeping since there is no pattern of that being established. Do you want, to tackle that one, Jack? Mr. Jack Luft: I think Florida has to be treated altogether from McDonald to the school. Mayor Ferre: You seem to be the author according to what, somebody said, according to this young man over here, Mr. McMasters, Jim McMasters said that there were two kinds of McDonalds. I don't mean the hamburger either. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, let's correct, the record. I think he has stated that there was a difference, but, he denied that he said because of Black and White. I think that needs to be corrected immediately. Mr. Dawkins: It's been corrected, Mr. Gary. That s no problem. The problem with me is who owns 12 now? Is 12 vacant, or built, on now? Mr. Antoniadis: Twelve is owned by Mr. Fudge. sl 50 November 15, 1984 7 Mr. Dawkins: I don't worry about whether he's chocolate or 3 vanilla fudge because we're on the wrong side of McDonald. No problem, who owns 13, 14, and 15 now? Are they vacant or do they have homes on them? Mr. Plummer: They have houses on them. Mr. Dawkins: Are they substantial housing, or is it inferior housing that, could be torn down? Mr. Jack Luft: Those are all decent homes. There is nothing inherently wrong with them. They are old. Mr. Dawkins: In section 11, who owns 3 and 14 and is it a home or is dilapidated and could be torn down? Mr. Luft: I don't know who owns 3 and 14. Those are likewise small, single family homes. I believe those are wooden homes. Are they not? Mr. Jim McMaster: Jim McMaster, 2940 S.W. 30th Court, if you go up to Lamb Court, where the line is between what used - to be R-1 and R-2, if you start at lot number 14... if you want to go down south directly where Florida comes out, if you follow Florida Avenue out to McDonald, directly across the street there, apparently it doesn't follow the original _ plat though the property is divided differently. There was an old duplex there, two old, flat, duplexes; the lady has gutted them and is in the process right, now of reverting a grandfather duplex back into a single family home. Obviously this neighborhood is being revitalized under the single family zoning on the other side of the street. What are we going to tell her if this zoning slips down. She's put, her faith in the City of Miami zoning and wants to live { in this neighborhood. What are we going to tell her? Then also, as I've mentioned before, the third and fourth house in on Florida, backing into the post, office, I don't know exactly who bought it. I assume the same gentleman who owns the post office, but he paid $375,000 for two houses on Florida backing into the post office. Apparently the two gentlemen who bought, these two houses two years ago were able to buy them from the landlord because one of them was in such bad shape that the landlord did not want, to bother fixing it, up, so obviously the gentleman who bought these two properties didn't buy them for $375,000 for the existing buildings on them. He's buying them because there is pressure from the post, office on back. Mr. Dawkins: O.K., now my question back to Mr. Luft. Mr. Luft, you said that, because of the duplexes on one side of s the street, we could not, deny this gentleman the right to put duplexes on the other side. Is that correct? Mr. Luft: You could deny him, sure you could. i Mr. Dawkins: But you said you saw no legitimate reason. Mr. Luft: I found it hard to explain why on Oak Avenue one side would have to be kept, single family and the other side is already duplex. .. Mr. Dawkins: So when we come down to McDonald, on that side _ = of McDonald and Oak, all the way to McDonald, that's going to be zoned duplex? How are you going to explain to me across in 3 and 14, if I come to you for duplex, how are you going to explain to me that I can't, get duplex? Mr. Luft: If we wanted to address an application on the west side of McDonald anywhere on any of those blocks, we r ,�- sl 51 November 15, 1984 -77 would be forced into the position of drawing a line not. a little jog around those lots, but drawing it all the way up from where that number ten is, finding an appropriate set, back, maybe two lots, maybe one lot, off McDonald and drawing it all the way down to Grand Avenue. We would have to take all of those lots. We would not be jogging in. It's a question of pattern. It could be argued, you're quite right., that people on McDonald...there's only what., five lots, six lots left on McDonald all the way to Bird that are single family. Marilyn Reed has a lot zoned duplex just, up the street. I'm sure somebody may say, why if I'm on McDonald, which is a busy road, if we're only five lots, there are 25 other lots on McDonald, they're all duplexes, why can't, we have it? It would have to be a uniform line down there. There would be a case for that. Mr. Dawkins: Why can't, we uniformly draw that line, uniformly now, and exclude what we want for duplex now, since you say all we have to do is uniformly draw a line and decide what we're going to zone it. Why is it that. we cannot, uniformly draw the line to exclude his lots and make them single family. Mr. Luft: We can, I think the pressure on McDonald, sir, the pressure on McDonald for rezoning to duplex.... Mr. Dawkins: Let's not make it worse; we have enough problems. Mr. Luft: O.K., fine. Mayor Ferre: We need to bring this to a decision now. Mr. Antoniadis: May I say something in answer to Commissioner Dawkins, please? The lots behind these have already supported me and there is, they have signed the petition in support. Mr. Dawkins: And if you can't buy them to make duplexes, I'll see if I can make a loan so I can make them duplex; there's no problem,. Mayor Ferre: As soon as we get Commissioner Plummer back, we'll take up...hopefully we'll bring this to a head. In the meantime.... Ms. Marilyn Reed: Mayor, please, I want to put something to rest. I have heard this line.... Mayor Ferre: Is this new testimony? Ms. Reed: No, no, sir, I have heard this for years and we j fought it in my area for years. This line always being drawn, this fictitious line about integration. I want you to know that, our whole area has been integrated since the founding of the Grove, since we're the oldest section. We like our Black neighbors and we want to keep them. I want, that to stop. I'm tired of hearing it. a ----------------------------------------- ---------------- 18. EXTEND LIQUOR HOURS N.C.O.P. ON SUNDAYS DURING DECEMBER ----------------------------------- -------------------- Mayor Ferre: O.K., while we get Commissioner Plummer back here, we have the people from CAMACOL who have requested Commissioner Perez a grant permit, to liquor stores in the Y, Y sl 52 November 15, 1984 .t . N City of Miami to remain open for the following Sundays of the month in December 2nd, 9th, 16th, 23rd, and 30th. Is there a motion? Mr. Dawkins: Move it. Mr. Perez: Move. Mayor Ferre: It's been moved and seconded. Further discussion? Call the roll. We do this every year. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1305 A RESOLUTION PERMITTING THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY LIQUOR PACKAGE STORES, NOT FOR CONSUMPTION ON THE PREMISES (N.C.O.P.) ON ALL SUNDAYS DURING THE E MONTH OF DECEMBER 1984, DURING THE HOURS OF 10:00 A.M. THROUGH 10:00 P.M. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 19. MOTION DENYING APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONING AREA S.Y. 32 AVE., OAK AYE., W. BOUNDARY OF KIRK MONROE PARK, ETC. Mayor Ferre: We now have, I think, to come to a decision on item number 3. I assume all the questions have been asked. Are there any other questions? What's the will of this Commission? What's the will of this Commission? What's the will of this Commission? Is there a motion, then to continue? Is there a motion for approval? Is there a motion for denial? Say something! Mr. Plummer: We are looking to the wisdom of the center chair. Mayor Ferre: I've already expressed my opinion. Mr. Plummer: I second your motion. Mayor Ferre: Make a motion, J.L. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, personally, I don't see how we can even consider this application on its face. Lots 7 and 8, which are a part, of this application are opposed, according to what we .5ee here to try to accumulate property to put it together, obviously the Planning Department, acted in good ..'," faith when they went forth to do and make their s _ �:•r._ _ sl 53 November 15, 1984 recommendation as they did. I don't see how in any way you could justify turning the other people down if they were to come in to it. If it's going to be done to me, it's going to be done as a study for the entire area, but this application as a single application, I would have to move for denial. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Seconded, is there further discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1306 A MOTION DENYING AN APPLICATION BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR ORDINANCE 9500 ATLAS CHANGE FROM RS-2/2 TO RG-1/3 AT APPROXIMATELY AREA BOUNDED BY S.W. 32ND AVE., OAK AVE., THE WEST BOUNDARY OF KURK MONROE PARK AND THE REAR LOT LINE OF PROPERTIES FRONTING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OAK AVENUE. (Here follows body of motion, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 20. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ALLOCATE $200,000 PURCHASE OR LEASE OF LIGHTING EQUIPMENT FOR CONVENTION CENTER IN CONNECTION WITH FORTHCOMING BEAUTY PAGEANTS. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, could I ask because Mr. Monty Trainer is here as head of the Host Committee, -what, item is it in reference to the lights? They would like to get..... Mayor Ferre: Items 30 and 38. Mr. Plummer: I'm assuming that comes with a recommendation of the Manager. What, is the cost factor involved? We have already tentatively approved it. Mr. Dean Hofineister: Yes, this was discussed at the special meeting on August the 16th. At that time, the basic lighting package was estimated to cost around $150,000. We have in the meantime been able to ascertain more accurately the cost, needed for the pageants. Mr. Plummer: How much? Mr. Hofineister: The total cost, would be $200,000 for a purchase of a basic lighting package for the center. sl 54 November 15, 1984 Mr. Plummer: Mr. Manager, do you recommend? You don't recommend? Mr. Mayor, I move item 30. Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mayor Ferre: That, means we're going to buy for $300,000? Mr. Plummer: Two. Mayor Ferre: It, says $320,000. Mr. Gary: We only buy the lighting, Mr. Mayor, that, we're going to need on a continuous basis. The other lighting, we will lease. Mr. Plummer: Maurice, this is all agreed upon. Mayor Ferre: It's been moved and seconded. Is there further discussion? Mr. Plummer: The only discussion that I would ask is that going to be in place for the Miss Teen-age? Mr. Hofineister: For the first pageant it will be necessary to rent the equipment. Mr. Dawkins: Will the rent be applied towards the purchase? Mr. Gary: We can try. Mr. Hofineister: We can explore that, yes. Mr. Plummer: I think it will be well worth while. Mayor Ferre: Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1307 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ALLOCATE AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $200,000 TO PURCHASE ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS OR LEASE LIGHTING EQUIPMENT FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI CONVENTION CENTER TO BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH THE 1985-1986 BEAUTY PAGEANT PROGRAM. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre Commissioner Joe Carollo November 15, 1984 21. AUTHORIZE 2-DAY PERMIT FOR SALE OF BEER: CERAMIC LEAGUE OF MIAMI-KENNETH MYERS PARK DECEMBER 1 & 2. Mayor Ferre: Item 38 is a two day permit to sell beer for the Ceramic League of Miami on their 35th anniversary to be held at, Ken Myers Park. Mr. Dawkins: Move it. Mayor Ferre: It's been moved by Dawkins. Is there a second? Mr. Perez: Second it. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion on 38? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: i RESOLUTION NO. 84-1308 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TWO-DAY PER14IT TO SELL BEER FOR THE CERAMIC LEAGUE OF MIAMI IN CONNECTION WITH THE "35TH ANNIVERSARY FAIR" TO BE HELD AT KENNETH MYERS PARK ON DECEMBER 1 AND 2, 1984. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 22. BRIEF DISCUSSION & TEMP. DEF: REQ. FOR CHANGE OF ZONING 2210 S.W. 16 ST. & 1600-02 S.W. 22 AVE. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: The next item is item 4. Take up item 4. We're on item 4. Mr. Plummer: Let me ask just one other question, because as I recall this matter was deferred at the request, of Commissioner Carollo, who asked that he have the opportunity to go see it and he is not here. The second portion of it is that they're not with counsel. Their counsel can't be here until this afternoon. Mayor Ferre: Then we should have said that to these people early this morning so they could have gone. i Mr. Plummer: I'm just, putting it on the record, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: I've got no problems breaking and then coming back in an hour and a half or two hours or breaking for an hour so we can get something to eat, and then coming back. I think this is going to be a long item. I don't, think this is going to be done in two minutes. Mr. Perez (Applicant): Yes, if I may, Mayor, I'd like to re-emphasize what Commissioner Plummer said. Several sl 56 November 15, 1984 AW things, first of all, our attorney isn't, here. I'm willing to represent myself. i Mayor Ferre: You see, that's not our fault; and that's not the neighborhood's fault. If your attorney isn't here, that's your problem; that's not, our problem. That's not a + valid reason. Go on. Mr. Perez (Applicant): We're willing to represent ourselves, so that's not a valid reason. Second of all, Commissioner Carollo said he wanted the opportunity to.... Mayor Ferre: Commissioner Carollo is not here because he's sick today. That's a valid point, and that's a courtesy that we always extend to a member of the Commission; but, you see, that, should have been said early on so these people could have gone home at 10:00 o'clock when they got, here. Mr. Perez (Applicant): I will abide with whatever the Mayor and the Commissioners want, to do. Mayor Ferre: What's the will of this Commission? Mr. Plummer: Let me ask of the neighbors, would you all want to consider a deferment, until the next meeting? INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Plummer: No, I'm just trying to ask. Mr. Perez: Do you want to have fifteen minutes for making statements and we continue the case at, 2:00 o'clock? I think that the Mayor was clear, we are supposed to finish at 12:00 o'clock. Mayor Ferre: Yes, ma'am, please come up and make your statement. See, the problem is that, this wonderful job that we have doesn't require us not to go without lunch. That's the problem. Ms. Gertrude Marks: Mr. Mayor, we have been here since 10:00 o'clock. What you may wish to do is to take a vote of the people who are here and who are opposed; and then ask those who have statements if they would be willing to come back. I am willing to come back. Mayor Ferre: I am willing to stay and let them, if they want to make them now. Ms. Marks: No, I don't think we should divide the meeting. I don't think it is fair to either side. Mayor Ferre: I think you are right. Ms. Marks: So what would you like to do, sir? Those who are willing to make statements, who wish to make statements, would be willing to come back. The others might not. Mayor Ferre: We need your name and address for the record. Ms. Marks: My name is Gertrude Marks, 2207 S.W. 16th Terrace. I am prepared to make a statement. Mayor Ferre: Ms. Marks, I think what, the Commission is trying to do is trying to accommodate the neighbors as best, we can. On the other hand, we do have a 2:00 o'clock session. We do want, to eat something. So the question is if we can get you to make a statement now, we'll stay over for a little bit and then we'll come back after lunch. sl 57 November 15, 1984 f,' Ms. Marks: Mr. Chairman, I believe it would be fairer to all concerned if those who are going to make statements make it after lunch, but, could you take a vote of those who are opposed here now and will not, be coming back? Mayor Ferre: All right, that's fine. Those of you who are opposed, that will not be coming back, would you raise your hand? Ms. Marks: Excuse me, sir, would you take a vote of all who are opposed? Mayor Ferre: All of those who are opposed, please raise your hand. Let the record reflect that 15 people raised their hands in opposition. Are there some of you that. cannot remain until after lunch and who wish to make a statement at this time? Anybody who wishes to make a statement, we will stay over to hear that statement. Those of you who wish to speak at this time, I will recognize. Ms. Marks: Mr. Chairman, may we begin at 2:00 o'clock with item 4? Mayor Ferre: Yes, ma'am, we shall begin at 2:00 o'clock with item number 4. WHEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO A RECESS AT 12:05 P.M., RECONVENING AT 2:01 P.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT EXCEPT COMMISSIONERS CAROLLO AND DAWKINS. 23 FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: ALLOCATE $50,000 PARTLY UNDERWRITE 15TH ANNUAL BUDWEISER UNLIMITED HYDROPLANE REGATTA ETC. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, may I bring up this item here on the Unlimited. We furnished what Commissioner Carollo has asked for. Mayor Ferre: Go ahead. Mr. Plummer: A resolution allocating from Special Programs and Accounts, contingent fund, an amount not to exceed $50,000 to partly underwrite the 15th Annual Budweiser Unlimited Hydroplane Regatta, and an additional amount of $15,000 as a grant in support of the said regatta, said additional amount being allocated in consideration of entertainment sports programming network (ESPN) television coverage of the event which will enable the regatta to be seen on closed circuit television; further conditioning said allocation upon substantial compliance with City of Miami Administrative Policy No. APM-1-84, dated, January 24, 1984. Mr. Mayor, I move. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, for your information, as requested, there is a second sheet giving all the particulars of the past, as requested. sl 58 November 15, 1984 3 1 Mayor Ferre: Further discussion of this item? Call the roll, please. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1309 A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS, CONTINGENT FUND, AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50t000 TO PARTLY UNDERWRITE "THE 15TH ANNUAL BUDWEISER UNLIMITED HYDROPLANE REGATTA "AND AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $15,000 AS A GRANT IN SUPPORT OF THE SAID REGATTA, SAID ADDITIONAL AMOUNT BEING ALLOCATED IN CONSIDERATION OF ENTERTAINMENT SPORTS PROGRAMMING NETWORK (ESPN) TELEVISION COVERAGE OF THE EVENT WHICH WILL ENABLE THE REGATTA TO BE SEEN ON CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION; FURTHER CONDITIONING SAID ALLOCATION UPON SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF MIAMI ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. APM- 1-84, DATED, JANUARY 24, 1984. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: NOES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins ------------------------------------------------------------ 24. REQUEST METRO ON NEXT DREDGING REQUEST TO CORPS OF ENGINEERS, DREDGING PERMIT 32' PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BICENTENNIAL PARK FOR VISITING U.S. NAVAL SHIPS & OTHER TOURIST ORIENTED SHIPS. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Item 32, go ahead, Mr. Sorg. Mr. Stuart Sorg: Stuart Sorg, Coconut Grove resident, this is following a meeting with the County regarding the maintenance dredging. I'm seeking direction from the City Commission. The County has determined that to maintenance dredge the FEC slip to a depth of 25 feet.... Mayor Ferre: Ladies and gentlemen, this is a sixty second item. We're going to take as soon as Dawkins walks in, ;f we'll take up item 4, so hurry up, Mr. Sorg. Mr. Sorg: The County has determined that to dredge 25 feet, it will be $150,000 and to dredge 32 feet, it's $500,000. This is the maintenance dredging of the FEC slip to bring naval vessels in. I want some direction from the City Commission as to.... Mayor Ferre: sl Would you repeat, those figures again? 59 November 15, 1984 ;i Mr. Sorg: Yes, sir, 25 feet maintenance dredge depth $150,000; 32 foot maintenance dredge depth, $500,000. It, has to be done.... Mayor Ferre: You're talking about the slip? Mr. Sorg: Yes, sir, to bring the vessels in that we've been trying to bring. Mayor Ferre: The only way that we can ever get vessels in is that, thing is... Right now, as I recall, there are portions of it that are, it's basically 28 feet, back toward.... Mr. Sorg: See, it drops down to 13 and 17 and 14. We need to dredge it up. Mayor Ferre: Where? Mr. Sorg: Look at the top just as you enter this. Mayor Ferre: That's because it would be next to the bulkhead there is only 13 feet. Mr. Sorg: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: But in the middle, of course, it's 30 feet. What you're saying is to make the whole thing 32 feet.. Mr. Sorg: Right, so we can bring the vessels in we want. Mayor Ferre: Who's going to pay for it? Mr. Sorg: That's what, we need to find out. What's the next direction? Mayor Ferre: The next direction is that, this Commission would pass a motion to the Metropolitan Dade County and the Port in specific that they ought to put, this into their port. + schedule and try to get money from Congress on ports, so as to dredge that slip to 32 feet,. I think that's something that we've already gone on record on, but if you want to do again, would somebody move that? Mr. Sorg: What would you like me to do to get the funding to proceed? Mayor Ferre: Why don't, you write out a check? Mr. Sorg: That's a good idea. Mayor Ferre: Other than that, my advice to you, Mr. Sorg, is that once you get this document, that you go to Carmen Lunetta and get after him to make an offer to the City of Miami, which he's been talking about for a year and hasn't done yet.. Mr. Sorg: All right, sir. aMayor Ferre: There is a motion now and it, has been duly seconded that the City of Miami goes on record as wanting Metropolitan Dade County in its next request, for funding for dredging money out of the Port's funds that, are allocated by Congress to include $500,000 so as to dredge the slip between Bicentennial Park and the FEC property to 32 feet and further requesting that Metro through its Seaport and r; the Director, Carmen Lunetta make an offer to the City of Miami for the usage of that slip for the purposes of having military vessels, U.S. Navy, and other governmental vessels perhaps, like NOAA and other such things and guest, sailing boats -what, are they called?- tall masts? yaky �r [IJ J sl 60 November 15, 1984 � t c Al i Mr. Sorg: Yes, sir, tall ships. Mayor Ferre: Tall ships and other tourist -oriented vessels that would bring tourists to the City of Miami. Mr. Sorg: I would like to also say that the City of Ft. Lauderdale derived $25,000,000 last year from naval vessels from people going ashore spending monies. Mr. Dawkins: That's fine, you tell us that every time. But we keep telling you over and over to go get the things dredged out so we can get the boats in and also tell them that we have to have money to maintain so that the before it comes back in, we can still maintain the depth. Mayor Ferre: Are we ready to vote now? Mr. Dawkins: Yes. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1310 A MOTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION GOING ON RECORD AND REQUESTING OF METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY THAT, ON THEIR NEXT DREDGING REQUEST BEFORE THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THEY REQUEST A 32' DREDGING PERMIT ON THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BICENTENNIAL PARK/F.E.C. PROPERTY; FURTHER REQUESTING THAT CARMEN LUNETTA, SEAPORT DIRECTOR, MAKE AN OFFER FOR THE USE OF THE SLIP BY VESSELS OF THE U.S. NAVY, NOAA AND TALL SHIPS AND OTHER TOURIST -ORIENTED VESSELS COMING TO THE CITY OF MIAMI. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 25. PUBLIC HEARING & TEMP. DEF.: REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING 2210 S.M. 16 ST. & 1600-02 S.W. 22 AVE. Mayor Ferre: Item 4, at, last. Counselor, you almost, didn't make it. Mr. Jose Villalobos: Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, I do apologize. It, was an oversight, but not only that, I also make a mistake and I thought it, was a different time. Mr. Mayor, we were here last time and I believe that this item - I can bore you with statistics and the same arguments, but I think the merits of the item have been heard by the sl 61 November 15, 1984 Commission. If I remember correctly, after hearing from both sides, Mr. Carollo requested a continuance until today, so that he could have another opportunity to take a look at the site. Mr. Plummer seconded by motion, on that, same premise. In other words, we have heard arguments on both sides. I have had the opportunity of my presentation. My people were here. I believe that, at this point, your Honor, it would be only proper for the Commission to go ahead and make their own determination. We have requested rezonification of lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. There was by the Mayor, perhaps, a suggestion that. items 1 and 2 could be changed leaving the 3, 4, and 5 as they are. I would be amiable to split the difference and instead of five, go for three. In other words, go 1, 2, and 3; leaving the rest as it, is now. I believe that again I stress the fact that the presentation was made and it would be only duplication of what. I have already stated, duplication of what, my people have stated, duplication of what, the department, has stated. I move, then, that this item would be discussed as it was for last. time. Mayor Ferre: Counselor, Mr. Villalobos, I just want to make sure that my position was not misunderstood; I just, want to make sure. I didn't, say that I was for this. I just said that one of the things that we should consider would be the rezoning of 1 and 2 under the logic that if you look at 16th Street and you see what happens both at 17th Avenue, as I remember and 27th Avenue at that level, there are commercial properties on both sides. Mr. Villalobos: I do stand corrected, yes, sir, that's what I meant. Mayor Ferre: That was the only logic that, I was trying to pursue on that. We will hear from the neighbors again. They have been here before. I want to on the record -I don't, know whether I did this last time. Mr. Villalobos: Then I would like to review. I'm going to pass at this point at the interest of time. I would like to request some time.... Mayor Ferre: Of course, you have that, right. I would like to, on the record, because I don't, know whether I made reference to Mrs. Marks' letter previously? _ Mr. Richard Whipple: At the ; pp previous hearing you did, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Did I? Mr. Whipple: Mrs. Marks is here today. Mayor Ferre: I saw Mrs. Marks this morning. I just want to reiterate that in my almost four years as a Commissioner and eleven years as Mayor, I've never seen a citizens' letter better written than this letter that Mrs. Marks wrote on this property. I just want, to commend you on it for the thoroughness and the simplicity of it. We'll hear from the neighbors. Mr. Whipple: Can the staff make some brief comments? We likewise, don't want, to reiterate what we went, through the _ last time when Commissioner Carollo requested the continuance for a view of the property. Just, as a statement with respect, to viewing the property, I want to call your attention to the existence and land use of 22nd Avenue and 16th Street without belaboring the point. On 22nd Avenue between S.W. 8th Street southward to Coral Way, S.W. 22nd j 'i Street, we have 57 single family homes, we have 40 duplexes, 3, 4 a+$ sl 62 November 15, 1984 t we have 6 apartment buildings, for a total of 187 dwelling units and 103 structures and three legal, non -conforming commercial uses, two within proximity of the subject area, one further south across from the school. On 16th Street, we have 117.... Mayor Ferre: Excuse the interruption, but we always, as you know, as a courtesy, whenever there is an elected official present, we always recognize him. We have a newly elected, 25-year-old representative that was just, elected to the State House, Alberto Goodman, who just walked in. Congratulations for your victory, Mr. Goodman. Mr. Whipple: I just wanted to allude to the land use of these two streets, which everybody is suggesting is commercialized because of traffic. When you are talking about 187 units and 103 structures in a one -mile stretch. In other words, what is shown on the map, 187 units, 103 structures, on 16th Street we have 117 single family, 26 duplexes, 3 apartment structures for 195 units and 146 structures. I suggest to you, as we suggested before, this is spot zoning in its most, violent, sense. With the eradication or suggested elimination of two of the lots, the spot zoning even becomes a smaller spot and even more objectionable. It, is outright spot zoning. That is our basis for recommending denial. Mr. Villalobos: Without belaboring the point, may I? I thought the department, stated that they did not, want to reopen this thing again, but anyway. We do have 340 signatures. I was not, going to mention that, because the department, stated that they did not, want, to belabor the point. However, we're not disputing the facts as they are, we're simply stating that our case was heard, that, the evidence is in, that I believe that perhaps recognition and standing of who's for and who's against would perhaps be proper, and in the interest, of time, we can go ahead with deliberations. Mayor Ferre: We now turn to the neighbors. Mrs. Marks, if you or anybody else wishes to address the Commission, you of course, have that, right.. We have debated the issues. We've heard both sides. You are entitled to whatever time you need to make your case. I would hopefully request that you not repeat.. Thank you. Mrs. Gertrude Marks: My name is Gertrude• Marks, 2207 S.W. 16th Terrace. Gentlemen, although I was out of the country during the first Commission review of this proposal, I obtained the tapes of the discussions and would like to comment on some of the points raised. In the statement which I had read on my behalf by Mr. Fernandez on October 25, I spoke of the erection of an eight foot wall around the boundaries not opening on either 16th Street, or 22nd Avenue. I reconfirmed that this information with Mrs. Brindley, who had been visited on Sunday, August 19th of this year by Mr. Perez, Sr. with an interpreter. At, that time representations were made that the wall would be erected. A representative of Mr. Perez' visited Mrs. Bookburger about two weeks after the first zoning board meeting on July 17th. Again, the same representation was made. Contacting the zoning board, I asked the breakdown of card responses by the homeowners within the 375 foot notification area for the proposed shopping center. Mrs. Betty Maud told me 65 cards had been received with 25 of the homeowners for and forty against. This means that 62% of the immediate impact zone are against, the proposal. It, should be noted that the list of residents provided by the sponsors of this spot, zoning change reside predominantly outside the zone of notification. I have personally visited 17th, 22nd, and sl 63 November 15, 1984 27t.h Avenues, 8th Street and Coral Way and found that, the residents outside the notification zone have more than ample facilities available to them with boutiques, bakeries and pharmacies on 8th Street, Coral Way, and the avenues; two markets on 17th Avenue, three on 22nd Avenue, and the Winn Dixie at 16th Avenue and Coral Way. All said facilities are within easy walking, cycling, or driving distance, even within the designated impact area. Thus, there is no obvious need to have additional shopping facilities at, the corner of 16th Street and 22nd Avenue. Driving north on 27th Avenue from the Main Highway to the N.W. 14th Street, particularly above S.W. 8th Street, one appears to be entering a cement jungle. The residents of the impact area do not want a cement, jungle. Crossing to 22nd Avenue from slightly north of Flagler Street down to S.W. 9th Street, there are many small businesses, particularly auto parts, auto repair and paint shops, as well as used auto sales lots. On S.W. 22nd Avenue between 2nd Terrace and 3rd Street, both the sidewalk and part of the outer lane were blocked with cars in front of an auto paint shop, so the motorists had to go from two lanes to one lane traffic and the pedestrian into the street. From experience, this is a regular occurrence and the residents of the impact area do not want this phenomenon on 16th Street. and 22nd Avenue. From S.W. 9th Street south to Coral Way there are residences with the E1 Osito market and laundromat between 14th and 15th Streets, the Solis market, at 16th Street and the Rimar market, laundromat, video arcade between 17th Terrace and 18th Street. All of these small businesses are grandfathered and have served the community for many years. At Coral Way, two service stations, one restaurant., and the bank are at the intersection. Small shops are along Coral Way for meeting every conceivable domestic need and in fact, are anxious for additional business, as demonstrated by pictures to be submitted to the Commission. The tape records Mr. Villalobos' last, comment at the October 25th meeting that "no commerce could exist within the notification area," and I agree with him. It, would appear that, the shopping center as being proposed more for the residents outside the notification area. Those residents would not be subjected to any of the problems associated with such a center, such as the commercial intrusion into a residential area, increased parking and traffic outside the shopping center on adjacent, streets, delivery, garbage, and miscellaneous service trucks, insufficient water pressure, noise, the increased traffic hazards to the residents, depreciated property, and in general, the luring of the overall quality of life now in the neighborhood. We appreciate the purpose of the zoning board and the Commission hearings is to permit the proposals and concerns of all sides to be fully known so that a consensus and fairness can emerge. It is apparent to me as well as to all of those with whom I have talked concerning this proposal and its on -going process of consideration by the Commissioners that the more we have heard as this review process evolves, the more we have grown increasingly opposed to the change in zoning. We, the 62% who live in the immediate area that would be affected, agree with the zoning board's overwhelming recommendation of denial and we look to the Commissioners for relief in this matter now pending. We have no objection to the construction of single family residences on these lots for which they are zoned, but, we continue to be opposed to this attempt at spot zoning. These additional pictures are submitted to demonstrate some of the existing problems as well as to show some of the facilities available to residents both within and outside the zone of notification. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mayor Ferre: at, them and sl Yes, ma'am, you give them to me, I will look pass them on to the Commission and put them on 64 November 15, 1984 the record. I think you Commission. This is a copy of the statement you just read. have enough copies for all members of the Mr. Villalobos: Mr. Mayor, just for the record, I don't. think I identified myself for the record. Jose Villalobos, 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, Florida on behalf of Jemajo Corporation. If I may respond to.... Mayor Ferre: You may, but what I'd like to do is if you would just hold back for a second, let's see if there are any other neighbors who wish to speak at this time and then you can respond to all of them at the same time. Yes, sir. Mr. Max Freedman: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, the name is Max Freedman. The facts in this matter have been fully discussed previously. Mr. Whipple has very ably presented the standing of the City and Mrs. Marks has more than demonstrated the reasons why the neighbors do not want this intrusion, as she calls it, into the neighborhood. Gentlemen, as feeling, reasonable people, I ask you to deny this request for rezoning. We are against, it, and if this is not, rezoned, we will have full faith in our elected officials. Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: Any other speakers? Mr. Denis Nunez: My name is Denis Nunez. I live at 2233 S.W. 16th Street, right, in front, of the building site or where they plan to build. When I wake up in the morning, the traffic is bad enough how it is at. 16th Street, right now. When I get ready to go to school, it's real hard for me to get out of there. Sometimes I arrive late at school or when I'm going to go to work. If you go with this building, I will get late for school and it, will create }- problems for everybody. As far as that is concerned, at night we have a market., and that parking space gets full of people that drink at night, heavy drinkers and all that. It will cause the same problem if you build another shopping center there with parking lots and all that. I'm afraid that our properties will depreciate in value. That's about, Mayor Ferre: Counselor, it's your turn now. Mr. Plummer: You have another lady there. Mayor Ferre: Sorry, I didn't see you. Yes, ma'am. Mrs. Gudrun Brindley: I'm Gudrun Brindley; I live at, 2245 S.W. 16 Terrace. Mr. Mayor and City Commissioners of the City of Miami, gentlemen, I appear before you again to express my continued opposition to rezoning of the five lots at the S.W. corner of 22nd Avenue and 16th Street,. I have already pointed out the unfavorable aspects of a change in zoning such as increase traffic, parking problems, crime, litter, noise, smelly garbage bins, commercial garbage collection between 2:00 to 4:00 A.M., delivery trucks, noisy air conditioners and air pollution, all combining to make adjoining properties less desirable and depreciate in value. If Mr. Perez, as he claims, and you, Mr. Mayor and City Commissioners, really want to something to benefit the neighborhood, you would leave it zoned as it, is and persuade Mr. Perez to build homes instead of a shopping center, which is not, needed and not, wanted.* What is wrong with one family homes? One -family homes are presently located on the two corners of the opposite side on 22nd Avenue and 16th Street. Now, I want, to call to your attention the relationship between the list, of names submitted by Mr. Perez consisting of more than 300 names and my list of sl 65 November 15, 1984 S signatures representing 55 property owners, all within the circle. It, is possible that, his list includes tenants, different members of one family and many people located outside of the circle. Those outside of the circle would not, suffer annoyances and tenants do not concern themselves with property devaluation. If a shopping center would be in their back yard, I think they would have an entirely different attitude. Furthermore, only property owners within the zone of notification were invited by the zoning board to express their views on this matter. My list consists of property owners only, living within the circle of the 375 foot radius. The properties adjoining the proposed shopping center and others directly involved would suffer the most annoyance and greatest loss. In conclusion we appeal to you to protect our interest and again I ask that you be guided by the unanimous decision of the zoning board members, 8 to 0 for denial. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Are there any other public speakers at this time? Counselor. Mr. Villalobos: I think my client wants to address the Commission and then I'll conclude. Mr. Perez (Applicant): Mayor, Commissioners, as you know the last, time the public hearing was held in our request to change the zoning for the lots of S.W. 16th and 22nd Avenue. Some of the Commissioners requested time to study the area in order to aid them in making the right decision. I hope you have all had the opportunity to do so. The continued growth of the City of Miami has changed the nature of this thoroughfare. S.W. 16th Street has become a major artery connecting Miami to Coral Gables. It's my belief that. the issue here is not whether a change will occur, because it already has happened. One simply has to stand in the corner of S.W. 16th Street, and 22nd Avenue at rush hour and it is evident.. Efficient use of the City's resources is necessary to maintain growth in urban survival. These lots have been vacant since the early 70's. I do not, feel it is realistic to retain the residential identity of the lots in question. I ask the Commissioners and the Mayor to ask themselves the following question. Would I live there? I submit to you there is a need for a zoning change. This need has been present, for quite some time and will continue to exist regardless of what we, the people, decide today. The City of Miami, being a progressive City, is presently expanding S.W. 16th Street in recognition of a community need. In closing, I'd like to say that we live in a democracy. We have all the right, to voice our opinions and concerns. I respect the opposition, who are also my neighbors. I ask them to keep an open mind in their eyes on progress. In the eventuality that, this change be approved now or ten years from now, I wish to make it, clear that we will not lease any of the stores for the operation of any objectionable establishment. It is our intention to run covenants with the property, making this clear and binding. Like them, I have lived in Miami all my life and I would never do anything to hurt this community or City or anything. I've lived here all my life. Thank you. Mr. Villalobos: Mr. Mayor, I am not going to say or ask the questions are you better off now than four years ago. Mayor Ferre: I hope you don't. Mr. Villalobos: No, I won't. But I'm going to say this, several years ago, I used to sit in the zoning board and I remember that, may good, willing people like we have here today came out before the zoning board. We have the 1 Planning and Zoning Department, we have the Commission, we sl 66 November 15, 1984 have the numerous things, people were saying that property was less desirable, that, depreciating value and so on and so forth and I'm sure that, they were stating their legitimate concerns. They were saying that traffic would be bad and that there would be garbage and so on and so forth. Although we do not. propose to build an OMNI for Little Havana or a Brickell Avenue on S.W. 8th Street, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Commissioners, those concerns were also expressed when I was sitting in the zoning board and people were talking about the depreciation in value of Brickell Avenue. We know on the last beauty pageant that we had the honor to have in Dade County, that those were the streets that flourished throughout the world. My clients are spending the money and have lived here. I am not proposing to the Commission saws or drinking or bars or air compressors or massage parlors. I am not, proposing an eight foot wall. I would convey to the Commission at this point that we would write a covenant running with the land that, there would be no eight, foot wall, like many people are afraid of. What we are proposing is merely just, going with the times. Time just some years back, we used to have a peaceful society in Miami. We had perhaps 120,000 people in the entire Dade County area. Times have changed and with that, have people. We have had numerous changes, among which there have been high rises and many businesses. We have to comply with the will of the people. Certainly, there is one block 375 foot area out there. What we're saying, Mr. Commissioners and Mr. Mayor, is that we have changed our mind and we have conceded that perhaps five would be too much, and at this point, we are asking for the one, two and three. I think this has been heard, has been studied, and at, the request of Commissioner Carollo and second before the study have been made and I'm sure that you will make the right, decision. Thank you very much, sir. Mayor Ferre: Further comments? At this time, are there questions from members of the Commission? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Villalobos, how long has your client owned the property? Mr. Villalobos: About, two years, sir. Mayor Ferre: Any other questions? I'll tell you, Mrs. Marks' letter, as I said before, was in my opinion, extremely well thought out, carefully drafted letter. I'd like to use that, as the basis for the questions that I have to make sure I understand the issues. The first point that, she made -you all have a copy of the letter- it is the second portion of the document that she passed out.. It says, one, makes commercial intrusion into the residential nature of a long established and well maintained neighborhood. Well, I don't think there is any question about that; can't, argue that, one. Second point that she makes, would severely impact and disturb adjacent property values. Well, that's conjecture and I disagree with that. I don't think it would disturb adjacent property values. If anything, it, would probably increase them. Three, increase the density of an already overcrowded and over -parked area, since 16th Street is not wide enough to support additional traffic and street, parking. Parking is prohibited on 22nd Avenue. Patrons of Solis Market on the north corner of 16th Street, and 22nd Avenue regularly park on 16th Terrace when the market's lot is crowded. There is no denying that one. I think there is no question that would happen. I think that's for real. Four, lot, depth of 100 feet is not, sufficient, intended, or planned for commercial use. Well, I don't think it was intended or planned for commercial use, but I think the 100 feet, is the width, isn't it? It's not, the depth. How deep is the property? r Mr. Whipple: The property is approximately 300 feet, from east to west, and 100 feet, north to south. Mayor Ferre: Three hundred feet? I'm talking about lots one and two, sir. { Mr. Whipple: Oh, one and two? They're 50 by 150 foot, lots, generally, roughly. Mayor Ferre: See, so it's 150 feet in depth. Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir, those two lots. i Mayor Ferre: It would be 100 by 150 and that's why they want that, extra 50 feet., so in effect what they are asking for would be 200 by 100. Mr. Villalobos: That, is correct, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: There I disagree with Mrs. Marks. On the fifth point, water pressure is insufficient for homes now and it would become increasingly worse if any of the above proposed businesses, a laundromat, for example, were constructed. I don't think that's much of a point. Six, what are the open air ordinances for Miami in the residential areas? There are two garage apartments facing on the area which would be affected by the erection of an eight, foot, wall. If there is an eight, foot, wall, I agree with point number six. One belongs to me, if such a wall would rise to within two inches of the top of the windows of the north side of my apartment; now Counselor, as I understand it, you stipulated that if this thing passes, you G. voluntarily have proffered a covenant. Is that correct? Mr. Villalobos: Already, sir. .x Mayor Ferre: That's in hand? Mr. Villalobos: No, it, isn't in hand, sir. I just say that ( I'm proffering to you that, this is what, we're doing. Mayor Ferre: I see, O.K. Is this in first reading? Mr. Plummer: Yes. t Mayor Ferre: So that, would have to be proffered by second reading, O.K. Seven, what are the noise control ordinances, since air conditioners and other ventilating mechanisms would be blowing on residences located behind the building? That's a problem generally in Miami. Obviously, it would add that problem to the residential community, but I think that would also be covered in your covenant. Mr. Villalobos: Mr. Mayor, we could put, the air conditioner x right, on top of the roof, so the air conditioner would be blowing skywards. Mayor Ferre: Is that, something that, you are voluntarily proffering in your covenant? Mr. Villalobos: Yes, sir, that, is correct. 7 Mayor Ferre: Eight, garbage disposals stored in metal ' containers, where would containers be located? I think that is a valid question. 4.- ¢t Est u sl 68 November 15, 1984 Mr. Villalobos: Your Honor, again, I can answer that. ! Three lots, which we are asking is 21,400 square feet. That would be 35% of the building at, the bottom level and 16% on -1 the top, utilizing only 25% of the area. In other words, 61 this would be a two -level structure. A total of 51% of the 21,400 square feet, but again, only 25% of the building of that particular lot. So, if granted lot 1, 2, and 3, then I would have 100 by 150. There will be a set back in the front, so we could have parking. Mayor Ferre: No, it would be 100 by 200. Mr. Villalobos: By 200, that is correct, sir. So, if we set the building back, we have the air-conditioning blowing skywards. We have the parking in the front. There will be no problem as to, and of course, a covenant.... Mayor Ferre: I think the question that she is asking is where would the garbage disposal and metal containers be stored? Mr. Villalobos: We can accommodate this particular point. _ Mayor Ferre: She is asking a question and it's a fair question. Where will it, be? Are you telling me that it will be in the front, part of the building? Mr. Villalobos: No, of course not., it would have to be in the part portion, but we still would be buffered by lots four and five, which will remain at the property of my clients. Mayor Ferre: What will you do with lots four and five? j' Mr. Villalobos: That will be up to them in the future. I don't, know what they plan to do. Perhaps they might want to live there. S Mayor Ferre: Are there houses there now? i Mr. Perez (Applicant.): There are two homes there right now which we own, two single family homes. i Mayor Ferre: So what, you're saying is that. the garbage Ai containers would be next to four and five? Mr. Villalobos: Right next to our property, sir. Mr. Perez (Applicant): Right, next, to our property. It would be a buffer between the rest of the neighborhood. Mayor Ferre: At, what, time would garbage collections be made and where would the trucks enter? Another valid question. Mr. Villalobos: Sir, I assure you that, this property is being built with money. In the United States, we want to profit, with money. We just, don't want to aggravate people so they don't come to our property. We would make it into — ' such a business that first, of all, what we're complying is light industries. Mayor Ferre: That's not the question, counselor. The question is what time would garbage collections be made and where would trucks enter. It's a very specific question. Would it be made at 3:00 o'clock in the morning? Mr. Villalobos: I don't know, usually into this type of .;. y business, garbage collection would be at 3:00 o'clock in the r morning. It, usually is in the late hours of the day, but not at 3:00 o'clock in the morning, certainly. 5 x sl 69 November 15, 1984 t fir f: 1 f 5 j Mayor Ferre: See, I think they have a valid question. At, what. time would garbage be collected and where would the trucks enter. I think you have to explain to us what it is. Mr. Perez (Applicant): If I may speak, Mr. Mayor, we presently own a shopping center in S.W. 17th Avenue. We are familiar with the way we have our garbage picked up, etc. There are various options on that. We'd be willing to even consider putting that, into -I'm not, aware that can be done - putting that into the covenant, whatever time you would like that to be done. There's very flexible schedule as far as that. So, you know, we can accommodate that to.... i Mayor Ferre: Are you proffering something voluntarily something? I can't., you know. What, is it that you are saying? There is a legal question. You know that the Commission can't force anything; it has to be voluntarily proffered. Mr. Villalobos: We are not asking the Commission to force upon us anything. We are voluntarily stating.... Mayor Ferre: What is it that you're volunteering? See, I don't understand what you are volunteering. Mr. Villalobos: We are stating that garbage collection would be at such time as is normally picked up during the day hours. That, this would not be something that, is in the evenings. We can, if required, put this in a covenant, running with the land. Mayor Ferre: Nobody is requiring anything. Mr. Villalobos: I am offering this. Mayor Ferre: O.K. Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, if I may interrupt, it's as if we are trying to build a building of which we have no plans, no ideas. We are talking about, a change of zoning. These are =' the neighbors concerns. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Whipple, since Carollo is not, here, I would like to... I know how strongly you feel and how emotional these things are and I understand. Mrs. Marks has written what I think is a well drafted letter. I'm using �- her letter to ask these questions so we can understand clearly on the record what it is that they are proffering. I'm not, saying that, I'm voting for it. I don't think you should assume anything, which you sometimes do a little bit too quick. Mr. Whipple: No, except, that we were getting into specifics of an individual and not, what could happen to a piece of property that, would be generally zoned commercial. Mayor Ferre: Fine, I understand your position. You don't, sit, up here. You don't, vote. We're going through this j process. I need to understand what, the answers to Mrs. Marks' valid point,, should this Commission pass it. I want, for this to be on the record. Do you understand? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Thank you, sir. Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor. f sl 70 November 15, 1984 W] Mayor Ferre: something? Mr. Whipple. Now, you were going to proffer Mr. Villalobos: I already did, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Terre: No, you addressed half of it. You didn't, address where the trucks enter. Mr. Villalobos: Well, we'll have it in the back, of course, we're not going to have it in the front. Mayor Ferre: By the back you mean along 16th? Mr. Villalobos: About 16th, that is correct. Mayor Ferre: There is no entrance on 16th. The entrance would be on 22nd. So, how could they enter 16th? Mr. Villalobos: Excuse me, I beg your pardon, you are totally correct. We would have to put, it either at one of the sides of the entrances of S.W. 22nd Avenue. Mayor Ferre: So, what you're saying is you are proffering this, as I understand it. Mr. Villalobos: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: In your words, so I don't want to.... Mr. Villalobos: You have my word, sir. Mayor Ferre: No, not your word, it, has to be in your words. Mr. Villalobos: In my words and in addition to that you have my word that, it would be in writing. Mayor Ferre: Thank you, but what, is it that you are proffering so that I can understand it. Mr. Villalobos: I am proffering, pursuant to my client's instructions, that the garbage is going to be picked up in the late hours of the day and it would be somewhat between the front, facing 22nd Avenue or the side of the building, which would be 16th Street. Mayor Ferre: But you see, there is no entrance to the property on 16th Street, so that is a problem. Mr. Villalobos: Lot number one is facing 16th Street, so there would be at least an entrance to 16th Street. Mayor Ferre: So what you are saying is that the trucks would have to enter through lot number one. Is that what you are saying? Mr. Villalobos: See, this would be one, two, and three, which we are asking now. Mayor Ferre: Where would the trucks enter? Mrs. Marks is asking a simple question. Mr. Villalobos: It, would be from 22nd Avenue and if granted, which would be lot 3 does have access to the street. Mayor Ferre: It would come in on 16th on lot, 3. Mr. Villalobos: That is correct, sir. sl 71 November 15, 1984 t, 1; e . Mayor Ferre: Again, the question is, as I understand, when you get, into 16th Street, there is no entrance to this through 16th Street, the way you've been requesting it. Mr. Villalobos: I don't believe that would be the case, sir, because if we do have a building covering lots 1, 2, and 3, that would be one unit. It, would not be three separate buildings, therefore, there is or there would be an entrance through 22nd Avenue and an entrance through the lot number 3 through S.W. 16th Street, which is ours. Mayor Ferre: But you see, I think the problem that is that..... U en, you're really getting into the residential community. See, your argument, up until now has been that, 22nd is a vehicular, heavily trafficked avenue. Therefore, it, is in effect, already non residential in nature. But you can't say that about, 16th Street. You are going against your own argument. Mr. Villalobos: No, sir, I think I have presented myself wrongly. I beg your pardon. If we're saying that, we are requesting for lots 1, 2, and 3. In that lots 1, 2, and 3, we would build one building. Certainly, we must accommodate garbage pick-up somewhere. To us, it, would be best to have it, in the front, like many other businesses have it, along S.W. 8th Street, entrance through the front into lots either 1 or lot, 2. Mayor Ferre: Now I understand. In other words, what you are saying is that you would enter from 22nd Avenue into lots 1 and 2. Mr. Villalobos: That is correct, sir. Mayor Ferre: O.K., I misunderstood, then. Now I understand. Thank you. The next, one is nine, which is rodent control for supermarket and bakery premises. I think that is another valid concern. Obviously, if you have food in the supermarket, that brings rats in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Villalobos: Mr. Mayor, I think we already covered that. We're talking about light commerces. We're talking about, boutiques and things; we're not talking about commerces that would bring out rats and so on and so forth. Mayor Ferre: You are saying that there won't be any supermakets and bakeries on the premises. Mr. Villalobos: That is correct, sir. Mayor Ferre: You are proffering that, also. Mr. Villalobos: Yes, sir. I stated before that there would be small convenience stores, clothing stores, and boutiques. Mayor Ferre: Item ten, -I'm just, going down the list here. Item ten is all night security lights would shine into the yards of homes on both 16th Street, and 16th Terrace. Mr. Villalobos: I believe, sir that is covered by the statutes and local ordinances. I don't know there is any commerce or small business in Dade County that allow lights without covers that would shine into bedroom windows and other type of windows. This is already covered by an ordinance. We would place our security lights in such a manner that they would be directed to -and now a days we do have such facilities- towards specific areas, without, shining to windows and so forth. sl 72 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: That's going to be part, of the covenant? Mr. Villalobos: Of course, sir. Mayor Ferre: Then next is item 11, a two story structure would be an eyesore and invade the privacy of the surrounding homes. Tell me what happens up on the second floor of the structure. Are those shops too? Mr. Villalobos: Yes, sir, that is our proposal. Of course, I would entirely disagree with that.. We don't, want to be looking into anybody's privacy and certainly I don't think that a two-story building is an eyesore anywhere, because in Dade County we do have plenty of buildings that are way above two stories and are not eyesores. Mayor Ferre: Item 12 is environmental changes would occur with the removal of the fruit and other trees now on lots 4 and 5, since these trees and houses would be removed and replaced by parking lots. Mr. Villalobos: Sir, there are no trees there. Mayor Ferre: In lots 4 and 5. Mr. Villalobos: We don't, have anything in 1, 2, and 3 that we're talking about. There's no trees there. Mayor Ferre: There are no trees in 1, 2, and 3. The trees are in 4 and 5. Mr. Villalobos: No, sir. Mayor Ferre: They are not the subject of this.... Mr. Villalobos: Of course, we would put sufficient amenities there as greenery that would do with what we have there, which is.... Mayor Ferre: That, is something that you have to also delineate that in your covenant. Mr. Villalobos: Certainly, and not, only that, but we would submit, to the Planning Department the appropriate plans and so forth for what, we have there. Mayor Ferre: Item 13 is boutique and professional offices report absolutely no guarantee of the types of use, for example, 24 hour convenience stores could be put there, noisy equipment,, shops, air compressors, electric saws, obnoxious odors, bars, loud music into the early hours of the night. Mr. Villalobos: We have no intent to do that, and I'm repeating myself. Mayor Ferre: You have no intent of putting.... Mr. Villalobos: Electric saws or air compressors.... Mayor Ferre: ....electric saws, obnoxious odors, air compressors, repair shops, bars, or loud music into the early morning. Mr. Villalobos: ....bars, drunks, or anything like that. Mayor Ferre: You would, of course, cover that in your covenant; is that correct? Mr. Villalobos: That is correct. sl 73 November 15, 1984 0 0 Mayor Ferre: Fourteen, granting this variance would be precedent setting for all those on 16th Street and so on. I don't think you can argue much with that one. Mr. Villalobos: So has S.W. 8th Street and Brickell Avenue. Mayor Ferre: I'm not saying that it, hasn't. I'm just saying that Mrs. Marks says that, this would set, a precedent, and there is no question that it would set precedent,. Mr. Villalobos: That might, be so. Mayor Ferre: This is spot zoning, right smack in the middle of a residential community and it would set precedent. Mr. Villalobos: Progress has made precedents in the history... Yes, sir, that might, be so, and I fully agree to that. Progress has always made precedents in the history throughout the world, especially in Miami. Mayor Ferre: Fifteen, this application is a repeating of previous years for the same property for increase use, which would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Others have been denied this use before by the planning board. There is no question that, is true. In other words, there has been previous attempts to rezone along 22nd Avenue that have been turned down. There is no question that this would be.... Mr. Villalobos: Again, I can answer that, sir. There is a project, now existing in N.W. South River Drive that. I believe was before the Commission and the board six separate occasions, turned it down, and I came in here and prevailed, because I think that, today, even the neighbors that, first said that those were detrimental.... a� Mayor Ferre: You were the attorney on that. si y� Mr. Villalobos: I was the attorney of record. At, one point in time, I believe that it, was Mr. Traurig that, had x attempted and failed. We do good projects there. P g P j Mayor Ferre: The next one is 16, designating this area as commercial would be the breakdown of the traditional, long- standing character of the neighborhood. That goes with that discussion too. Seventeen, when a purchaser buys a Koine in ``. this particular neighborhood, he or she should be able to rely in good faith on the master plan and set forth by the �.' City of Miami pertaining the zoning and use of properties. This proposed spot, zoning is a variance with the master plan of the City of Miami. That's true, as stated by Mr. Whipple, at which time he recommended this variance not be approved and I agree. It would be a variance with the w: master plan, that's why we have zoning laws and we have hearings is because master plans are not chiseled in stone, and they can be changed . So that one I disagree with Mrs. �. Marks. Eighteen, we are looking at the zoning board support our neighborhood to protect us from the intrusion of a shopping center. That's true. The zoning board and the �,.. Commission have the final say on these things and we are the ones that would make that decision. Lastly, Mrs. Marks says 1; she has no objection to the construction of single family, kP but, would be unalterably opposed to the flagrant attempt at Y PA g P spot, zoning. Spot zoning, it is, Mrs. Marks. You are right, about that. I'm satisfied that these questions that Mrs. p a . Marks posed have been answered. What is the will of this � °�,� Commission? Or are there further questions? INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC r. >3 RECORD. sl 74 November 15, 1984 Jf + 3 Mayor Ferre: Come to the record. The reason why these questions must be put on the record is that it leaves the legislative intent. Mrs. Butburger: I am Mrs. Butburger; I live at 2250 S.W. 16th Street. I would like to know what he means by a convenience store. Convenience store is a grocery store, milk, other things like that, that is a convenience store, but that, is like having a market.. Mr. Villalobos: No, sir, it isn't a market. I believe that, a convenience store is something that, will be convenient, to the lady, that would be convenient to the people that are here. Mayor Ferre: Does it, sell food? Mr. Villalobos: If I perhaps used the word convenience is because I was instructed by my client to use the convenience store. No, I already stated that we would not sell food. What we are talking is light, stores. We talked about clothing and we talked about, a boutique, so on and so forth. I already said that, sir. Mayor Ferre: You are talking about non-food quick shops. _ Mr. Villalobos: That is correct, sir. Perhaps not as good as Coconut, Grove, but something to that, effect. Mayor Ferre: I understand; are there further questions? j' What is the will of this board? "! Mr. Perez: How many persons, Mr. Mayor, do we have here in !� favor and how many against? Mayor Ferre: This morning I think we counted fifteen. I have a feeling these are steadfast, neighbors and they are all here. Raise your hands again, those that, are opposed, :. the same fifteen. Who are for? Mr. Villalobos: I'm going to be talking, t g g g, asking .he people, 3( excuse me a minute.... 3., a' INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. i A Mayor Ferre: We have the right to ask a question and you can't, deny us that, right. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Villalobos: If the lady allows me, I listened to them. t: .r Mayor Ferre: Let, me run the meeting. I'd like to have a show of hands of those people that, are for this project, and a then I will ask where they live. Show of hands of who is ?> for the project. Counselor, don't confuse the issue, ` please. Let me run the meeting. I want to know who is here in favor of what is being proposed. Raise your hands so I h can see who is for. You confused the issue, counselor. Who is for? Twenty, of the twenty that, raised your hands, how many you of live in the neighborhood? COMMENTS IN SPANISH. 8 How many of you live in that, area? COMMENTS IN SPANISH. f, There is the answer. There are 22 for, of which 11 or 12 t.i live in the area. How many of you live within the circle? Three. COMMENTS IN SPANISH. Seven. It doesn't matter, you '3 know, it, doesn't, matter one way or the other. We don't vote �¢ that, way around here. Let, the record reflect, that there • r rA^ �Pr.• rZ sl 75 November 15, 1984 0 were 15 opposed who live in for, of which 12 live in the within the circle marked. microphone is available for COMMENTS IN SPANISH. 0 the neighborhood; 22 that, are neighborhood, of which 6 live If you want to speak, the you to make a statement, Mrs. Brindley: All the people who oppose this project are living in the circle. Mayor Ferre: I understand that. The record so states. Furthermore, if you would look up at the map, all the people that, are in red, 28 lots are in red. I understand that. Mrs. Brinkley: I'd like to say this morning, when the meeting was supposed to me, Mr. Perez didn't have anybody here. Now suddenly he has 12 or 15 people. I do not, know why is this. Mayor Ferre: Because he went, out and got them. But, that's fair; there's nothing wrong with that. Mrs. Brinkley: That's what I wanted to point out. Mayor Ferre: That's not against the law. He has the right, to do that. Mr. Perez (Applicant): If I may, I'd like to make a point. Mayor Ferre: We need to come to a conclusion on this. Mr. Perez (Applicant.): I'd like to make a point that, no shopping center, no area of business makes a living from the people that are directly adjacent to that, place. There is a circle in that area, but I think that is perhaps a limitation, because you'll find that, a lot, of people travel more. Mayor Ferre: No, it's not a limitation. It's the law. Mr.Perez (Applicant): It's the law. I'm not going against the law, but my point is a valid one. That, people within, from outside that particular area also benefit, and also do their shopping in the area and that, is something to be considered also. Mr. Humberto Gonzalez: COMMENTS I14 SPANISH. Mr. Aurelio Perez-Lugones (TRANSLATING FOR MR. GONZALEZ): My name is Humberto Gonzalez. I live in 2225 S.W. 16th Street, just across from this parcel. I have been 20 years in this country where they know me, where many of those who are sitting here know me, where I know that many of them don't live in the area, and they have come over here just, to make a group to raise their hands. I have committed the mistake of building a house with my sweat next, to a convenient, store, a small grocery, where every day, where I am suffering every day because that is more than a convenience store, it's like a bar, where people drink every day. I get tired from calling the police many times. Sometimes they come; sometimes they don't. Some people drink in the parking area because the owner of the store also likes to drink, and as he likes to drink there is always a group over there that likes to drink. Because of that reason, I don't, want to make a second mistake again of having a shopping center across from where my house is, where I want, to live in peace. I built my house with my own effort and I want to live in peace. Sometimes we say shopping, we don't, say a grocery, we talk about other type of stores. You know that, once it is built, it is either a grocery or shopping or whatever. It, doesn't matter. When sl 76 November 15, 1984 it becomes commercial, if my next, door neighbor wants to put a convenience store or a fruit stand, he can do it. Therefore, my recommendation is no shopping. j Mr. Villalobos: May I move that the question be called, sir, because we are going to call the cops on those people too. We don't want any drunks in that area. We are going to invest money there. We don't want, any people that drink and make noise and so on and so forth. Make the question be called. Mayor Ferre: Counselor, you can't call the question because you don't serve on this body, and secondly, there is no motion. Mr. Villalobos: I move, I just moved. Mayor Ferre: You can't move it. It, has to be moved by somebody in this Commission. That's what I'm trying to get, one way or the other, is an action by this body. Mr. Perez: Mr. Manager, could we take an action about the complaint, of Mr. Humberto Gonzalez? He has a complaint of some people drinking beer in the neighborhood. He said that he had called the Police Department several times and he had not received any action. Could we take a strong action on that complaint? Mr. Gary: Yes, we can, but what he said was that he calls the police and sometimes they come and sometimes they don't. But we will address that problem. Mr. Perez: I would like to have a personal report. Who'll be your assistant, in charge of this issue, Mr. Eads? ' Mr. Gary: Yes. f' Mr. Perez: COMMENTS IN SPANISH. Mayor Ferre: Again, we've heard testimony. We've asked questions. We now need to act either in agreement with the board or opposed to it. What is the will of this Commission? Mr. Perez: Mr. Mayor, I was in this neighborhood yesterday. They are constructing that, tract. At, this time, I was asking also about what they have right on the corner, where they have all the equipment and storage there. I think that for example, property 2230 and 2240 that I think represents lots 4 and 5, I never support anything in that location at, this time. I think it is residential. It is occupied this time. But we have a first reading today. We are pending for a second reading, would be the final decision. Anyhow, I would like to move to approve lots 1, 2, and 3 just pending for a second reading to honor the petition in that way. a Mayor Ferre: We have a motion on the floor, I assume with 41 all the stipulations. Commissioner Perez, with all the stipulations? Mr. Perez: Yes. Mayor Ferre: We have a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second with all the stipulations that, are proffered? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, with the right to vote against the motion, I will second it for the purposes of discussion. sl 77 November 15, 1984 0 9 t� Mayor Ferre: All right, under discussion, the Chair recognizes Commissioner Plummer. Mr. Plummer: I would have discussed it, before, except that. I didn't know that was going to be the motion. I want, to tell you exactly where I am. I pretty much am where you were before on lots 1 and 2. Lots 1 and 2 were previously commercial. They existing there, conforming or non- conforming, there was a filling station there. My only concern, even for voting for lots 1 and 2 is to the south side of 2, my concern would be for that neighbor and I can't see the lot, number. Mr. Whipple: 21. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Whipple, what: would be the set back from that property? Is it at least ten feet? Mr. Whipple: It would be five feet for the first, twelve feet of building height, and then a set back of I believe 63 degrees from that point. Mr. Plummer: Would that equate to about ten feet? Mr. Whipple: For the first story it's only about five feet. You might get somewhere between five and ten.... Mr. Plummer: They've indicated a second floor. Mr. Whipple: Probably a little bit less than ten on the second floor. Mr. Plummer: Where I'm at, just so everybody would know where I'm coming from. I too, feel as I said at the last hearing, that, this not, immediately, but there is change and change is going to come. It is no longer a quiet, little residential street that it was prior. There is no parking on that street. It, is 40 miles an hour and people are whizzing up and down that street; there. are no ifs, ands, and buts about it. I would look favorably with the restrictions placed on lots 1 and 2, but I cannot vote for 3, 4, or 5. Mr. Villalobos: I withdraw 3, sir. I'll take 1 and 2. Mr. Whipple: We might have a problem with that, depending upon the Law Department, a minimum petition to be filed of this file is 200 feet, frontage or 40,000 square feet. The removal of 3 drops the 200 feet of frontage, does not have 40,000 and I would have to leave it to the Law Department as to what, it is would be within the purview to grant, less than those minimums established by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Plummer: The Law Department says they need about a five to ten minute break to get the answer of Mr. Whipple. Mr. Dawkins: Before we move on, Mr. Whipple, individuals in the group have said this is spot zoning. I mean that is the accusation that they made. Mr. Whipple: Including the Planning Department. Mr. Dawkins: In the event that, we vote in the positive, can they go to court, and withhold everything? Mr. Whipple: Even though they call me the Dinner Key lawyer, I don't, believe I can respond to that. That's strictly conjecture and opinion, personally. sl 78 November 15, 1984 Mr. Dawkins: All right, I'll go back and try to break it down where it will not be conjecture and it, will not be a hell of a problem for you to answer. Will you ask the City Attorney, sir, if you answer that for me and then whatever he tells you, I'll take from you. Mr. Whipple: Department. Mr. Dawkins: you, sir. I'll be glad to refer it to the Law No, no, you ask him. I'd like to know from Mr. Bob Clark: We have no problem with any administrator in the City of Miami making any administrative decision, if that administrator feels qualified to do so. Mr. Plummer: Boy, oh boy! That means all the legal opinions we've had for the last ten years are now null and void. Mr. Whipple: I believe that, of course I believe Mr. Clark would agree that, anybody can file a suit. The perimeters of which they'd file a suit, whether the court the decide this to be spot zoning, as we suggest or not, is of course the court's decision, but. I'm sure that could be an avenue of pursuit of litigation against, the Commission's actions. Mr. Clark: The Law Department, concurs in that, decision. Mr. Plummer: Anybody with $27 can file a law suit.. You don't have to have a basis, just, have $27. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I'll abide by the rule and wait until they are finished. Mr. Plummer: Don't confuse it with the facts. Mr. Clark: Let, me get it clear that right now, you are only asking for lots 1 and 2. Is that correct, Mr. Villalobos? You withdrew 3, but the motion was only 1 through 4, that Mr. Perez made. a Mr. Villalobos: I have been so instructed by my clients, sir. Mr. Clark: No, he said 1 through 4. Am I correct, Mr. Perez? Mr. Perez: 1 through 3. Mr. Clark: 1, 2, and 3. Mr. Perez: Yes, but I think Commissioner Plummer made an amendment. Mr. Clark: And right now it's only 1 and 2. Mr. Plummer: No, sir, I did not make an amendment. I told you exactly where I was coming from. z Mr. Clark: That's what I want to get clear, as to whether ;$ or not Commission.... a Mr. Plummer: My understanding is that based on the comments I made, Mr. Villalobos immediately jumped to his seat and withdrew 3, 4, and 5. That, under consideration presently, r and Mr. Whipple's concern is lots 1 and 2 sufficient square footage to make the application valid. We would like from the Dinner Key Bar Association a legal opinion. f x ,.. sl 79 November 15, 1984 Mr. Clark: No, the City Attorney will give you that in about five or ten minutes. 1 Mr. Plummer: So then we will hold everything in abeyance until you are ready to answer. j AT THIS POINT THIS ITEM WAS MOMENTARILY DEFERRED $ WHILE THE CITY ATTORNEY DELIBERATED. ------------------------------------------------------ 26. INSTRUCT PLANNING DEPT. TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORD. ZI-84-14 "CHANGE OF USE IN CONVENIENCE ESTABLISHMENTS" TO INCLUDE TRAVEL AGENCIES. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Mr. Whipple, can we take up item 12? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir, representing the building department, we have Joseph Genuardi, regarding this appeal of the Acting Zoning Administrator, Mr. Genuardi. Then, I will follow him. Mayor Ferre: We can't take up item 12? Mr. Whipple: No, he's right, here, Mr. Mayor. I'm sorry; I just, wanted to introduce him. Mayor Ferre: Wait, a minute, but, the question, I guess, is to the Clerk or no, who sets the agenda around here anyway? Mr. Alvarez, the question is is this on the 3: 30 agenda or could we take it up at this time? Mr. Gary: You can take it, up. Mayor Ferre: We can take it up. It's not a public hearing. Go ahead, Mr. Genuardi. i Mr. Joseph Genuardi: Good afternoon, I'm Joseph Genuardi, - ? Acting Zoning Administrator with the Fire Rescue and Inspection Services Department.. I'm appealing the decision of the zoning board, which approved an appeal of my _ interpretation of the zoning ordinance. I feel that the members of the board have voted in favor of the appellants, did so without addressing the real issue of my interpretation. The issue whether a travel agency, which is not permitted or permissible in the Grove Isle area, which is zoned RG-3, general residential, could replace an existing tennis shop. The reasoning of the appellant was that the tennis shop was a non -conforming use and as such, under subsection 2104.5v of the zoning ordinance tax may be replaced with another nonconforming use. The tennis shop was allowed in 1981, as a convenience establishment for the residents of Grove Isle in conjunction with a permitted tennis facility. The tennis shop was not, a permitted use under the R-5 zoning designation of the old ordinance, but was allowed as an accessory use. If you read the minutes of fi the zoning board meeting, you'll see that they did not jl follow the counsel of the assistant city attorney. That, the issue was whether the use was allowed under the zoning ordinance and not, whether they felt, it was not an objectionable use and therefore could be allowed. The zoning ordinance in specific under article 20, section 2003, on what, uses are permitted or permissible by special permit as an accessory use. If we were to agree with the appellants that, the tennis shop is a non conforming use, then this would defeat the purpose of allowing only convenience establishments as accessory uses to residential sl 80 November 15, 1984 w a ' 'd i 0 0 or office use structures. Allowing a travel agency to replace the tennis shop would set a precedent detrimental to the residential areas. It could lead in the future to someone using the same reasoning to another existing convenience establishment, which may be first allowed in a commercial zone and request that it be replaced by another more objectionable operation. This could be a repair shop, automobile shop, or whatever is allowed in that commercial district. This is not the intent of the ordinance. A travel agency is not permitted in an RG-3 zone. It is first, permitted in the RO-3 zone. It is not the type of business that can operate mainly with the business generated by department or hotel residents. Under the present, zoning ordinance, certain accessory uses specifically listed are allowed in this area, which is zoned RG-3. A travel agency is not one of them and was not under the previous zoning ordinance. A travel agency is first, permitted, as I said, in the RO-3 district, which is a more liberal district, therefore, cannot be allowed in the more restrictive district. If the feeling is that, this type of use should be allowed as an accessory use, then the proper procedure would be to amend the zoning ordinance to include it in the article 20 section 2003 of the text,. To summarize the issue, is a travel agency allowed as a permitted or accessory use in an RG-3 zone; and the answer has to be no. I therefore urge you to overturn the decision of the zoning board and uphold my interpretation. Thank you. Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, the Planning Department, concurs with the interpretation given by the Acting Zoning Administrator on this item. As was indicated by him, we feel this is a precedent, of opening the door to allow any use, which may be said to relate to occupants of an apartment structure or an apartment, zoning to have any type of commercial activity. The zoning ordinance is very specific in 2020, establishing specifically what convenience establishments are permitted. A travel agency is not one of them. Offices are not allowed, except in specified districts and that's delineated in the schedule of district regulations. So, on that, basis, we're supporting the Zoning Administrator and would request that, you likewise overrule the decision of the zoning board. Mayor Ferre: I'm a little puzzled as to why this is before US* If it's not an allowed use and it's against the law, then why are you here? Mr. Whipple: The ordinance allows an appeal process. Mayor Ferre: Appeal what? Mr. Whipple: The applicants.. whichever have requested the permission of a travel agency feel that because there was a tennis shop there, that a travel agency should be allowed. They went, to the Zoning Administrator and he said no, that is not a convenience establishment allowed under the zoning ordinance. They are appealing his decision. Mayor Ferre: But. doesn't it need to go to a court of law rather? I mean, this is not a court of law. Mr. Plummer: No, this is the appeal procedure. Mr. Whipple: This is the appeal procedures set forth by the zoning ordinance as to a decision by the Zoning Administrator. Mayor Ferre: Does the zoning code say that they can have a travel agency, yes or no? sl 81 November 15, 1984 Mr. Whipple: No, sir. Mayor Ferre: Mr. City Attorney? a, Mr. Bob Clark: It does not. ! Mayor Ferre: Can they have a travel, under that zoning, can they have a travel agency? Mr. Clark: No. Mayor Ferre: Then what are we talking about? Mr. Clark: This is part of the process, which is necessary for them to go to the circuit court. Mayor Ferre: I see, so then you can go to court,. Is that it? O.K., I got you. Mr. Robert Freeman: Mr. Mayor, if I may, my name is Robert Freeman. I represent the occupant of the space, who is seeking to open up a travel agency within the retail shops over at Grove Isle. I totally disagree and the zoning appeal board disagreed with what staff is telling you now. The issue before the zoning appeal board was whether or not, within the definitions of accessory, convenience uses, a travel agency, which occupies 300 square feet of space, out of a total project, of a million square feet., is an allowable use. It's clearly incidental. It's a very small part of the project, out there. It has nothing to do with physical structures. It's a question of use. The definitional aspects of accessory use within the code have leeway for those uses that are clearly accessory and convenient and incidental to major uses. The staff takes the position that you can only have as an accessory use those very few items x'. that. are listed specifically in section 2.003.7.3 of the code. But, that's a false interpretation. There are many references in the zoning code which talk about, the fact, that ±; there can be other accessory uses, other than those specific a; uses enumerated. In that, regard, we have first, of all, under section 3602 of the code a general definition of an accessory use. It says an accessory use or structure is a use or structure customarily incidental and subordinate to a principal use. In this particular case, we are seeking to have a travel agency open up next, door to the hotel, which is the Grove Isle Hotel. Clearly, incidental to the uses out there and clearly accessory to uses of hotel and 500 and some odd apartments in Grove Isle. It's not a principle use for Grove Isle. It's an accessory use. You've also got a grocery store out there, a barber shop, a ladies' wear shop and a few other accessory and convenience and locations there. So, firstly, if the staff's interpretation were correct, there would be no need whatsoever in the code for section 3602, which gives a general definition of an accessory use. It, just simply would be those uses that, are ,r enumerated in the section the staff refers to, which is 2003. In addition, under the schedule of district, regulations, Grove Isle is in an RG-3 area. Under RG-3 area, you are also permitted as accessory uses, those uses defined in RG-2. RG-2 use, under accessory use, says that, accessory uses which are customarily accessory and clearly incidental to permitted uses, is an allowable accessory use. } In addition, in RG-3 you are allowed some office space. Furthermore in section 2001 of the code, it specifically : makes reference that where their use is not specifically identified in the zoning ordinance, that the general character of those listed should be referred to in making a determination as to whether or not, the y are permitted *` - accessory uses. This is exactly what the zoning Y Y B appeal board did, they looked at the situation, they determined sl 82 November 15, 1984 that a travel agency occupying 300 square feet, of space in the Grove Isle complex is an incidental and accessory use to the hotel operation out there and for the convenience of the 500 and some odd apartments out there and determine that it's an acceptable use within the general definitions of accessory and convenience use. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Manager, under section 3001, status of administrative decisions, time limits on appeal, number one, I'd like to know why did they become necessary to have a zoning administrator and then I want to read to you from section 3001. It, says: "Decisions of the Zoning Administrator or the Director of Planning shall be deemed final, unless within no more of 15 days of the date such decision was rendered, a notice of appeal is filed." My concern with that is what, about, the private citizen who does not know the procedure, cannot, hire a lawyer, and does not, know that, if he does not appeal within 15 days these Zoning Administrators' decision is final? Mr. Gary: First of all, I think, every American citizen is in a position of having to be familiar with the law when it, affects them. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. However, when the Zoning Administrator makes a decision, Commissioner Dawkins, he is informed a* that time, that he has the right to appeal. Mr. Dawkins: O.K., I'm going to read to you something else here that, says: "As you are aware, Commissioner Dawkins, City Ordinance 8500 provides that appeals from administrative decisions shall be filed within 15 days of the date such decision was rendered. Failure of an aggrieved property owner to appeal an administrative decision within the 15 day period, effectively wipes out any rights an aggrieved party might have in regards to that particular matter." What is of specific importance is the fact that the administrators of the zoning code of the City of Miami have taken this principle one step further to the effect that if j; any matter affecting any district in the City of Miami is ti not appealed, that is any decision by the zoning administrator, is not appealed or that a negative decision is reached by either the zoning board or City Commission, then that issue is forever foreclosed from being appealed, according to what we've got here. For example, a hotel wishes to place an accessory use to the hotel, a travel agency. A travel agency is not permitted accessory use, even though it, is customarily found in most hotels around the City of Miami. If a hotel in Brickell Avenue desired to seek a permit for a travel agency and denied by the Zoning Administrator and no appeal is taken from that, decision, then all hotels within the City of Miami are permanently foreclosed from seeking release. Is that, correct? Y Mr. Gary: No. Mr. Whipple: That, is not correct,, Commissioner Dawkins, and let me start from the end and work backwards. The presumption is, the assumption, I think, from the statement you read is that the only hotels that we have in the City of Miami are in the RG-3 districts. That, is not the case. The majority, in fact, I would say 95% of our hotels in the City of Miami are in commercially zoned areas, in commercially zoned areas including RO districts. Residential office districts do permit travel agencies as a permitted use, not just, accessory to a hotel. So, the difference is in our sl 83 November 15, 1984 more restrictive residential areas, which in this instance do permit the hotel units, the convenience establishments that, are permitted in these restricted residential districts f are specifically set forth in the zoning ordinance and travel agency is not one of them. Mr. Dawkins: What is one of them. How many are there? Mr. Whipple: Referring to 2003.7.3, the listing is, apothecary bar, barber shop, beauty shop, laundry and dry cleaning agency, news-stand, physician or dentist office, restaurant and sundry shop. Mr. Dawkins: That's nine. Mr. Whipple: Did I say it was eight? Mr. Dawkins: I'm asking you. Mr. Whipple: I didn't count them as I was reading, there's nine. Mr. Dawkins: Because we didn't write the tenth, travel agency, then it's illegal. Mr. Whipple: It is not, permitted. Mr. Dawkins: If you are going to play semantics, the same thing. Mr. Perez: What is the zoning board's recommendation? Mr. Whipple: They reversed the decision of the zoning administrator. Mr. Genuardi: The zoning board voted in favor of the land z use as a travel agency. Mr. Plummer: Let, me ask a question, is there anyone here or anyone on record that, is opposed to this? Were notices sent out? Ai Mr. Whipple: They were for the appeal, yes. Al 541 Mr. Plummer: Were there any objectors? Mr. Perez-Lugones: This type of appeal, which is something completely different; this is the first time ever that you see this kind of appeal. There were no notices sent, to property owners other than those involved in the appeal. Mr. Plummer: My question is still the same. r Mr. Perez-Lugones: No notices were sent. Mr. Plummer: Were there any people objecting at the lower level, the upper level, the middle level. Mr. Perez-Lugones: There are only two parties involved in zt' this, Commissioner. 3 Mr. Plummer: Wasn't there a hearing in front, of the zoning board? Mr. Perez-Lugones: There was a hearing in front, of the zoning board.... Mr. Plummer: Did you sent out letters on that? Mr. Perez-Lugones: No. sl 84 November 15, 1984 E Mr. Plummer: You did not. Mr. Perez-Lugones: Yes. Mr. Plummer: Objections? I Did anybody appear? Mr. Perez-Lugones: The department. Mr. Plummer: Besides the department. Mr. Perez-Lugones: No, nobody. Mr. Plummer: They get, paid to be there. Mr. Perez-Lugones: No, nobody. Mr. Plummer: O.K., did I not hear that there was a petition signed by some 50 people or residents of the Grove Isle. Mr. Freeman: Yes, that's correct., in favor of the travel agency. We could have gotten more but we thought, that would be a good representation. Mr. Plummer: I'm going to tell you how I feel about, the matter. Maybe I'm out of bounds as far as the law is concerned, Grove Isle is unique in the fact. -and I realize when you speak to zoning, you have to speak City wide, and that, is your fear and I understand that. The fear is that if you give it to Grove Isle, then everyone else is entitled to it. That's not quite right. It's right to the fact, that Grove Isle went through a procedure to bring it to this level, and if anybody else wants to do it, they are going to go through that procedure and bring it to this level. Mrs. Dougherty: No. Mr. Plummer: What do you mean no? Mrs. Dougherty: What you are doing is interpreting the law to include travel agencies as an accessory use in that zoning district and never again is it going to have to come back. Mr. Plummer: Why can't we make it then a conditional use? Mrs. Dougherty: It's not a conditional use. The application is an interpretation of what, the law is. Mr. Whipple: That is correct, in carrying it, a step further, if that's a desire of the Commission to allow travel agencies, what, have you, then fine, the proper procedure would be to amend the ordinance. That's what, we have said all along. Mr. Plummer: I want, to do both. Mr. Freeman: Mr. Commissioner, may I add? Mr. Plummer: No, you've had your bit. You get paid; I got, elected. That's what, I want to do. I want to do both. I want to allow it in the Grove Isle. The people that are going to be affected, obviously are in favor of it. They want it there. I have no qualms about allowing them to have it, because it doesn't affect anyone off the island. Now, changing the ordinance, I think there should be a change in the ordinance to allow it on an individual basis. Do we still have conditional uses? sl 85 November 15, 1984 Mr. Whipple: They are now called special exceptions. Mr. Plummer: Special exceptions, we could then change the ordinance to make a travel agency as a special exception to the ordinance where each individual case has to come before the Commission. That's where I am. Whatever motion, if a motion is in order, I'd be happy to make such. Madam City Attorney, is a motion in order? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir. x Mr. Plummer: If I make a motion to allow... What is my motion? Mrs. Dougherty: Your motion would be to affirm.... Mr. Plummer: The action of the zoning board? Mrs. Dougherty: Correct. Mr. Plummer: In relation to item 12. i Mrs. Dougherty: Right. Mr. Plummer: Then I follow it, up immediately with another motion. Mrs. Dougherty: Yes. a Mr. Plummer: All right,. i Mayor Ferre: Well, Miss Cooper. w.. Miss Janet, Cooper: Mr. Mayor, how nice to be here this afternoon. ..J Mayor Ferre: Are you speaking on this one too? Miss Cooper: I would like to briefly give you a moment of ,' ?! my thoughts on it. The accessory uses.... aj Mr. Plummer: Wait, a minute, now that you're a lawyer, are you doing that free? You are giving us your opinion free? A! Miss Cooper: Yes. Mr. Plummer: O.K. .j: Mayor Ferre: This is not, per se, Brickell Avenue or for one of your clients. Miss Cooper: This is affected by my experience with say, Brickell Avenue. High rise residential districts have had a tremendous problem with accessory uses in the building, what, to allow, what, not to allow, what, is disruptive, what is not, disruptive, what, brings in traffic, what doesn't. I think .` before you start making an individual exception here and an ;p individual exception there to start adding to the code, 'r maybe we need to address the entire thing. Because if it's a travel agency, why isn't it something else, and why isn't it something else? So I would just ask, let's look at, the E- = whole thin and I would be more than hap py, ppy, I'd like to work =` `' on that, with you. s Mr. Plummer: So what you are saying is, I move item 12 as it stands and then that I ask the department to look into „= changing the ordinance with your cooperation. sl 86 November 15, 1984 I it Miss Cooper: Well, I don't know if you should go so far as to say changing the ordinance. I don't, know.... Mr. Plummer: Amending the ordinance. Miss Cooper: I don't know that, an amendment is necessary, but review the entire procedure on accessory uses in those a districts. .' Mr. Plummer: My first, motion on item 12 is to move for approval in upholding the zoning board. Miss Cooper: No. Mr. Plummer: What do you mean no? Miss Cooper: The zoning board wanted to allow this special exception that was not permitted in the code. Mr. Plummer: Oh, I see. Mr. Gary: No, you can't do that. Miss Cooper: I think you have a real problem with that, because then you are asking them to do what is not in accordance with the code. Mayor Ferre: I don't, want anybody to get, the wrong idea, but. I'm with Janet. Miss Cooper: Thank you. f Mayor Ferre: I think Janet has a valid point. In other words, my personal position in this is I don't object to what is being questioned here, but it, has to be done in an j' orderly way. I don't think we can just pick one out of the ,.° hat like this. I think it's a valid request that in certain ' residential communities that they have certain rights that jperhaps we have not, addressed. I think the way to do it is ?; the way that Miss Cooper is recommending. In other words, I am for what you are trying to do here, for the people who own the shop, I'm for what you are trying to do, counselor, but. I think it's got to be done properly. You can't shot- gun it this way. {, Mr. Freeman: May I address that point, Mr. Mayor? What I am contending is that the code already allows the procedure that Commissioner Plummer has already talked about. That is when you talk about, an accessory use that is incidental to a principle use, then you are taking it, on a case by case basis. Mayor Ferre: How can you say that a travel agency in Grove Isle is an incidental use to a sports shop? Mr. Freeman: I'm saying it's incidental to the hotel and to the project. You have 300 square feet located within a �,. retail area that's already designated. t Mr. Plummer: Let me tell you another thing. If the zoning r administrator had absolutely refused to hear the issue saying he couldn't hear it, that's one thing. But he r>>' didn't. Obviously, there was something within his purview to consider. He did consider and did deny it. If he has the reason to deny it, he could have thesame reasons to approve. Had he said no, I can't, even consider this issue, that's a different ball game. But, he did consider it and after consideration, denied it. So obviously, there was 0i` _ some avenue there that he could have had for approval as well as denial. That's all I'm.... rt sl 87 November 15, 1984 Mr. Gary: Yes, but J.L..... Mr. Plummer: If he had said, "Hey, I can't touch it." Mr. Gary: He cannot say that, because he has to review those things that are changes and not conforming uses. Mr. Genuardi: Mayor, I did deny it to start with, but then the attorney brought up a section of the code which, if we considered it, a non -conforming use, it could allow another non -conforming use. He didn't ask me for an interpretation whether he could apply for this condition, and I gave him my interpretation and I said no. Mayor Ferre: Plummer made a motion that never got a second. Mr. Perez: I second. Mayor Ferre: Moved and seconded. Mr. Ralph Ongie: Would you restate the motion, please? Mayor Ferre: Plummer, repeat, your motion. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, I understand that, I can make a motion that, says that, this particular item be from one non -conforming use to another non -conforming use. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mr. Genuardi: We do not consider it, a non -conforming use because if it is allowed, it, is an accessory use to the tennis club. Mayor Ferre: Plummer, you're getting stuck. Mr. Plummer: No, I'm taking one step forward and three back. Mayor Ferre: That's right, that's called getting stuck. Mr. Plummer: My motion, according to the City Attorney, is now to read no, forget it. Mayor Ferre: No, I think Janet Cooper gave you good advice. I don't know where she went. I think the advice is that, this has to be done in a procedural proper way and it has to be done generically rather than a shot -gun basis. In other words, don't shot -gun it. Mr. Plummer: Fine, then what, I understand, the only motion that is in order in spite of what. I want to do, the motion is that, the Planning Department be instructed to amend the ordinance to include travel agencies as a special permitted use. Mayor Ferre: Now you got, it. Now that has to go through a procedure. You have to hold public hearings, and I'm going to appoint Janet to be a.... Mr. Plummer: With the association of Janet Cooper running the department.. Miss Cooper: I thought we were going to study it and not, make a determination on the spot that this should be allowed. sl 88 November 15, 1984 Mr. Plummer: consider it, 12 They are going to study it before they Miss Cooper: No, the motion is to allow it. I'm requesting a motion to study whether we should allow it. Mayor Ferre: I don't think that this Commission can just unilaterally and arbitrarily say allow it. All we're doing.... Miss Cooper: That's what the motion read. Mayor Ferre: Plummer, is that your intention? Mr. Plummer: No, sir. Mayor Ferre: Tell us what your intention is, so we.... Mr. Plummer: My motion's intent, is to send it, back to study it, to bring it back to this Commission as an item for consideration. Mayor Ferre: That's what I understood. See, you weren't listening, Miss Cooper. Miss Cooper: I apologize. Mayor Ferre: Now it's clear where we are. Is there a second to that motion? Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Now that, is the proper way of doing it and I think it doesn't open up pandora's box; it, upholds Mr. Genuardi and the administration's integrity in the process; and it also allowed an orderly procedure. Is that, correct? Mr. Plummer: Question, Mr. Whipple, isn't a lounge and a restaurant an accessory use to a hotel? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir, I folded the book up. I believe a lounge is a special exception in addition to being an accessory convenience establishment. Mr. Plummer: I just, wanted it to get in the record, that's all. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-131 1 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE, SPECIFICALLY, ZI-84-14 "CHANGE OF USE IN CONVENIENCE ESTABLISHMENTS" TO INCLUDE TRAVEL AGENCIES AS A SPECIAL PERMITTED USE; REQUESTING THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT STUDY THIS MATTER AND REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION AS QUICKLY AND EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE. by Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote- sl 89 November 15, 1984 AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. k" Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo �I Mayor Ferre: Mr. Freeman, don't, look so discouraged. You, in effect, will get your way. It's just, giving you an opportunity to earn your fee. I apologize to the people who want the travel agency, but we have to follow the law and j' there is an orderly procedure that we must follow. We can't shot -gun things because somebody wants to do it that way and they happen to be at the Grove Isle Club. The Grove Isle Club is very nice, but that's not the way we operate. Mr. Freeman: I only hope that, they can somehow expedite it so it doesn't drag until the patient dies. Mayor Ferre: Let, the record reflect that it is the intention of this Commission to do and orders the Planning Department to do this as quickly and expeditiously as possible. Mr. Whipple: We understand, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Plummer: Does that mean January? Mayor Ferre: We're not, trying to deprive anybody. I think Commissioner Dawkins brought out a very germane, pertinent. point. I would support, him, if he wants to make a motion. I think that, the letter he wrote from attorney Price is very, very... Is attorney Price here? I think that letter is very germane. Basically what it says that in effect the procedure that, we have here is that, once the zoning director _;.. makes a decision, unless it is appealed, it is final, but, it # is not only final for the individual that makes the appeal, it is final for everybody. That is patently unfair for the ! project next door, who has not had the opportunity to ask A. for the 15 day appeal, since he is not affected and doesn't care. What Mr. Price is saying... You weren't listening r! and neither was I; that's why I read it. What he says is shocking. Janet,, I want you to listen to this. This is one of your colleagues, Stanley Price, and here's what he says: "What is of specific importance is the fact, that the administrators of the zoning code of the City of Miami have taken this principle one step further to the effect that if any matter affecting any district in this City is not appealed, or that a negative decision is reached by either the zoning board or the City Commission, then that issue is forever foreclosed from being appealed. 5 For example, a hotel wishes to place as an accessory use to the hotel a travel agency. A Y travel agency is not, a permitted accessory use, even thought, it, is customarily found in most. hotels. If a hotel in Brickell Avenue desires to seek a permit for a travel agency and is denied by L 4" the City zoning administrator and no appeal is taken from that decision, all other hotels within the City of Miami are permanently foreclosed from seeking similar relief." N; I can't believe that's true. If it is true, I think it, is very wrong. "This position is in total contravention of all that, is well established zoning laws that each 4' case must be determined on its own individual ;n• �w4 merits. The Supreme Court, of Florida...." .1. sl 90 November 15, 1984 And then he goes on to cite law on it, says that you can't do that. "I respectfully submit, to you that, it is ill advised policy to foreclose in the example above any subsequent, hotel from coming in and making a viable argument against, the City zoning administrator's position, the travel agencies must, not be permitted in hotels." I don't, know that this is or it not true. I am not, a lawyer. I'm not saying that Mr. Price is correct.. I am saying that, if there is any truth to this, I think it is wrong. I'm totally opposed. I'm very surprised that we're following that procedure. I think it must be addressed. Miss Cooper: I didn't, know the premise of the letter or the beginning of it, and I don't really understand what he is saying there, but I think that it is something that should be addressed, and I could have a copy of the letter, I'll be glad to give you my opinion. Mayor Ferre: I'll by happy. This is Commissioner Dawkins' letter. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion that I turn this over to the legal department and let the legal department respond by all means and give us a legal opinion. I'll ask for a legal opinion on both of these. Mayor Ferre: And you will submit that letter at the proper time.... Mr. Dawkins: Janet, I'm going to have them give you a copy now. 27. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION: 2210 S.N. 16 ST. & 1600-02 S.Y. 22 AVE. FROM: RS-2/2 TO CR-1 /7 . Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, item 4 is ready for an opinion. Mayor Ferre: We are now on item 4. This has been an all day affair on item 4. Are we now, what is the legal opinion. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, the issue was whether or not you could delete the third parcel from the application. The answer is no. The zoning ordinance requires at least, 40,000 square feet or 200 feet of frontage on a major street. This parcel does not, contain either unless you include lot 3. The zoning ordinance specifically says you shall not even consider.... Mayor Ferre: Plummer, it must with lot, 3. 1r. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Perez made a motion. lis motion is still the prevailing motion. When I seconded .t, I did it for purposes of discussion, reserving the right, .o vote against, it. I still reserve that, right. But the lotion is still on the floor and it's ready for a vote. layor Ferre: O.K., let's get. Dawkins back here and we will ,ote. Ir. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I wish to announce to you it, loesn't, affect any of the people here, but as I told you 11 91 November 15, 1984 1P last, night and again this morning, I do have to leave this evening at 7:00 o'clock. I am going to a City function and I just, want to put, that on the record once again. Mayor Ferre: Would somebody advise Commissioner Dawkins that we're ready for a vote on item 4? Mr. Villalobos: Mr. Mayor, can I be heard? I was a little bit premature, since Commissioner Plummer had not said anything, I did jump the gun, so there was a motion that, I'd like to be heard on. Mayor Ferre: The motion was for lots 1, 2, and 3. Perez made the motion. Plummer seconded the motion for discussion, reserving his right to vote against, it. Then he said, "I want to amend it to just 1 and 2." Mr. Plummer: No, sir, I said the only thing acceptable to me was 1 and 2. Mayor Ferre: He said the only thing acceptable to him, Plummer, was 1 and 2. Mr. Plummer: So the motion addresses 1, 2, and 3. Mayor Ferre: Then he said, "Would you give me a legal opinion?" The City Attorney has ruled that it, cannot, be done with 3 absent. Mr. Villalobos: Then I'll stand with 1, 2, and 3. Mayor Ferre: Are we ready to vote? Mrs. Dougherty: I'll read the ordinance, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute, counselor, do you have anything else? Did you reserve the right to say something? Mr. Villalobos: No, that's it, sir, 1, 2, and 3. Mayor Ferre: Got you, a first reading with stipulations as made, I'm sorry, with volunteer covenants that must be submitted by the second reading. Is that correct? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Read the ordinance. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2210-30-40 SOUTHWEST 16TH STREET AND APPROXIMATELY 1600-02 SOUTHWEST 22ND AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) EXCEPTING FROM LOTS 4 AND 5, FROM RS-2/2 ONE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL TO CR- 1/7 COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL (NEIGHBORHOOD) BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 39 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREEOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. sl 92 November 15, 1984 I Was introduced by Commissioner Perez and seconded by Commissioner Plummer and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and stated that copies had been furnished to the City Commission and that copies were available to the public. DURING ROLL CALL: Mayor Ferre: I have the deciding vote on this, ladies and gentlemen of the neighborhood. Let me explain to you what, my position is. My position is in concurrence with Commissioner Plummer. I agree with the fact that, 1 and 2, 3 I cannot, accept. Out of courtesy to the applicant, on this, since we are missing a Commissioner, this is a first vote on it, I'm going to be voting so that it, comes back on second reading. At that time, it is my intention to vote no against this. I just want it. :clearly understood that I'm doing this out of courtesy to Commissioner Carollo, who is sick today and is absent, therefore, this gives him the opportunity to vote on this matter on second hearing. I will vote with the majority at this time, fully stating that on second reading, it is my intention to vote against this. Mr. Dawkins: Since everyone has declared himself, hold it, sir, Mr. Villalobos, you yourself volunteered to drop 3. Mr. Villalobos: That, is correct, sir. Mr. Dawkins: The City Attorney says you can't drop 3. Mr. Villalobos: That I cannot? Mr. Dawkins: Yes, that's what she said. You have a vote for this in your favor, but you also have people who are against 3. So this may come up and if you have not made some arrangements or adjustments to 3, we don't know what the vote will be. Mr. Villalobos: That is correct.. Mayor Ferre: In other words, let me concur with my colleague has said. In my opinion, you are going to lose this. That's my personal opinion, because I think of this lot 3 question. I think you have a lot, of work to do with these neighbors to convince them that you're not the ogre that, they think you are. Not, you, counselor, your clients or the project. I think I have already gone on record and I'm just doing this to keep this project alive until Commissioner Carollo has the opportunity to vote, but you already have, I think two negative votes and I don't know what the third vote is going to be. But you heard what Dawkins said he just did. That, kind of tells you.... Mr. Villalobos: I want to thank the Commission for the time I have taken, but I assure the Mayor that we have worked and will continue to work for the community, like they have said. Of course, this is not, the first, time that things have looked gloomy and didn't have bright, because we have the best of the community at heart. Thank you. sl 93 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: To Mrs. Marks and to the community, may I give you some unsolicited advice? Mrs. Marks: Be my guest, please. Mayor Ferre: You noticed that I went through your letter and I tried to extract from these people as much as I could, not because I'm for the project, but, in case it passes, that I think you get, as much protection as possible. My advice to is that you always have a fall back position. I think you ought, to, those of you like yourself and others in the neighborhood ought, to sit down with these people and try to get whatever it is you can best, get, just, in case it passes. I think you can still get a lot from them. Mrs. Marks: Mr. Mayor, thank you, I have never met, the Perez family; I have never heard anything except through the notes on the tape. But what I did not understand was what was the vote decision. Mayor Ferre: The vote was three to one. I voted with the maker of the motion.... Mrs. Marks: Who was against? Mayor Ferre: Plummer was against. Mrs. Marks: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, when will the next, meeting be held and will the....? Mr. Plummer: The 20th of December. Mayor Ferre: The 20th of December, and Mrs. Marks, so you understand again, I have stated that it, is my intention to vote against this project at that time. I voted in the affirmative because my vote, the third vote, was the decisive vote in keeping this alive for one more meeting, while these people have the opportunity to talk to the neighborhood, number one, and number two to give the opportunity to Commissioner Carollo to vote on the issue. f Mrs. Marks: Will the neighbors be notified when the meeting 41 will be held, or do we just, take it....? Mayor Ferre: No, ma'am, you are notified right, now. Mrs. Marks: What, time do we anticipate...? Mr. Plummer: Sometime after 9:00 A.M. Mayor Ferre: No, let's be fair to these people. Mrs. Marks: We've been here since 9:45, remember that. Mr. Plummer: I've been here since 8:30. Mrs. Marks: You are paid; we're not. Mayor Ferre: But you got elected to do that and they didn't, so out of fairness to them.... Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to move that we set a time certain and let this be the first item on the agenda. Mayor Ferre: This will be the first item on the agenda, which makes it, at. 10:00 o'clock in the morning. Mrs. Marks: The first item on December 20th at, 10:00 A.M. Mayor Ferre: Yes, ma'am. sl 94 November 15, 1984 10 Mrs. Marks: Thank you very much. Thank you, gentlemen. Mayor Ferre: To you, Mr. Perez, I would strongly advice that you meet, with the neighbors and I would recommend that, you coordinate it through Mrs. Marks. Mr. Villalobos: I certainly hope, Mayor, if we bring out something that might change his mind, would not, be strong - headed. Mayor Ferre: I said it is my intention. Mr. Dawkins: You still may get the Mayor and lose two more. Mayor Ferre: That's right.. Mr. Villalobos: We had it no in the future, of course. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'd like to thank the Mayor and the Commissioners. Tape 10st ------------------------------------------------------------ 28. APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE APPLICATION OF NEW CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL INC. GRANT FOR 150 BED HOSPITAL; STATE INTENT OF CITY COMMISSION IF CITY IS SUCCESSFUL IN GRANT, CITY WILL ALLOCATE $3009000 FROM NEXT YEAR'S C.D. FUNDS, ETC. Mayor Ferre: Before I take up the 3:30 P.M. agenda, I have the obligation to take up a matter that Senator Pepper calls me up on just about every day and has driven me up a wall on it - rightfully so - he is right and it is a major issue that needs to be addressed, and that, is the new Christian Hospital. I saw Dr. Simpson walking around some place. Mr. Plummer: He was out back when I saw him. Mayor Ferre: There he is, right back here. Mr. Manager, can we take care of S-I on the 3:30 Supplemental Agenda? Mr. Gary: Yes, Mr. Mayor, we recommend this so we can proceed forward with the Christian Hospital. Mr. Plummer: Let me make a point., Mr. Mayor. I definitely intend to vote for Christian Hospital. Mr. Mayor, there is an item - there are three of these applications before us, and the one that is concerning me is the one in Little Havana on S. W. 1st Street. Mayor Ferre: What, does that have to do with Christian Hospital? Mr. Plummer: It has nothing to do. What I am saying is, that, I don't, want, these rubber stamped, because I as a neighbor, have no information. The neighborhood has not been notified. We have nothing to go on. Mayor Ferre: J. L., I accept that. I am just trying to get, with all due respects, Jim Brennan ... Mr. Plummer: And Claude Pepper off your back. sl 95 November 15, 1984 y Y 2 Mayor Ferre: George Clark and Nicholas ... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I will move S-I if that will ... Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Dawkins: No, I would like to hold it up. I've got some stuff coming out of my office. Will you bring the material out of my office on the Christian Hospital now, please? Yes, sir, I definitely oppose this. I keep telling Mr. Simpson - I will tell George Simpson now in front of everybody until he shows me where he owns, or Black people, on part of this hospital, I am against, it,. Let me start, Mr. Mayor, here where on the 13th of October, 1983 I wrote Mr. Gary and I said "The Christian Hospital Grant, in my opinion, leaves much to be desired. I would like to have the following information before we move forward on this matter: Who is the owner, owners, and what percentage is owned by them? Where are the matching funds coming from, since the City of Miami is giving this land. What written guarantees are there that the poor and indigent will be provided with health care. If one has no hospital insurance, he/she cannot often obtain health care service. Will this be true of this hospital? Are the doctors on staff going to put their patients in this hospital, and how are these doctors going to contribute to the maintenance and upkeep of this hospital? Dr. Simpson called this morning and requested that, action be taken." On, and on, and the last thing I received, sir, was September 25, 1984 and I will read it. It, says: "From Howard Gary to the Mayor and Members of the Commission. During the discussion I had last, week with the U. S. Under -Secretary in charge of this UDAG program, he stated that one of the main reasons the UDAG amendment, for Christian Hospital was not, approved, was the failure on the part of the City and the Applicant to sign the approved UDAG grant submitted to the City on September 220 1983." As a followup to this comment, I asked Dena Spillman,. Director of Community Development, to explain why the UDAG was not, signed. Attached is her response. She says: "In mid October she met, with Dr. Simpson and Anthony Estevez to discuss the changes proposed, which were non- profit group to profit, group, allows syndication. Contract does not allow for syndication ; request for non-reclause loan, a decrease in project cost from $22,000,000 to $17,000,000, with UDAG amount, remaining stable at $3,000,000, allowing for divestitude of up to 48% of Estevez's interests ..." and I have gone on and on and on I too, am like you, Mr. Mayor, I am really and truly honored by the calls from Senator Pepper every other day, but I have told him, and I will tell him again, until they show me that this hospital, Mr. Mayor, is going to be self supporting, I cannot support, it. If they are going to put, a teaching hospital there, or some hospital that will support itself, then I am for it, but to put another hospital where we are going to have another 60 or 80 empty beds, I am just not for it. Mayor Ferre: On the record, let, me ... Mr. Manager and Mr. Castaneda, I want you to listen to this. We are not into the issue now as to why we missed that UDAG. We know it is pertinent. Whatever happened, and whoever is at fault, or whatever was at fault, the issue is that, we now have an opportunity to once again apply for a UDAG. What is before us - and the reason, to Mrs. Marjory Stoneman Douglas and to the others that are patiently waiting on another matter, this is a very important hospital of the Black 'community, 150 beds right smack in the middle of Liberty City, --which is much needed and which we, I think, can get the Federal government because of Claude Pepper's tremendous interest in this, and his persistence, to get some funding from an sl 96 November 15, 1984 io agency called UDAG, and all we are doing here today in effect, is allowing the Administration to properly petition the Federal government for a UDAG grant. We are now in the month of November. There is a cut, off date, which is around the corner, I imagine in December. Mr. Casteneda: November 30th. Mayor Ferre: November 30th. If we don't vote on it today, we will miss the November 30th cut off, which means that, we miss ... the decision is made by March, is that right? Mr. Casteneda: January 30th. Mayor Ferre: This is the first cut off, but the final decision is made in March. Mr. Casteneda: Right. Mayor Ferre: So, if we don't do it now, the next go around is in March, right? Mr. Casteneda: March 30th. Mayor Ferre: March 30th, and by that time, the competition is very, very severe, and it, is of major importance. Now, let, me say to my colleague, Commissioner Miller Dawkins. I subscribe to his theory that the majority ownership of this hospital must, be Black, and I have always subscribed to that. I do today. Secondly, let me say, in addition to which, I think the question of it being economically viable, is important. That is something that, the Federal government must, also deal with. I think we should preclude the Federal government and the the applicants from coming up with solutions that will satisfy the Federal government and it is my intention, if there are three votes on this Commission to pursue this matter, and not lose this very important, opportunity. It is further my intention, Mr. Manager, to make a motion to specifically apply $300,000 of the C.D. funds for next year's go around to be committed to this project, provided we get, a UDAG application. I would expect, Metropolitan Dade County to do the same and I have Senator Pepper's assurance that he has that kind of a commitment, from Merrett Stierheim and Steve Clark and that that will help in moving forward on this project.. Mr. Dawkins: I think Mr. Castaneda will tell you that. I too have been moving forward on the Christian Hospital. I too, have agreed with him that we must get an application in for the UDAG grant, in November. I also have received a commitment from a private investor that in the event we get the UDAG grant, this investor will put $26,000,000 into this hospital. He will tell you this, so this Commission ... people don't know, we look like we are divided, but are all working for the same thing. It is just that the Sunshine Law prevents us from ... I could not, tell J. L. Plummer that I have a developer who is going to put in $26,000,000. I couldn't tell the Mayor until now, but we have a private developer who said if we get the UDAG grant, he will put $26,000,000 ... Mayor Ferre: Miller, let's just, apply for the UDAG grant. We will argue about rules. Mr. Dawkins: If we get, the UDAG grant, we are home free. Mayor Ferre: That is right, but, let's apply for it! Are you going to second Plummer's motion? Mr. Dawkins: Sure. sl 97 November 15, 1984 q Mayor Ferre: All right. 1 Mr. Dawkins: There is no way in the world Mr. Reagan is going to give us a hospital and with Claude Pepper running around talking bad about the Republicans! i Mayor Ferre: All right, we have a motion and a second on Item S-I. Is there further discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1312 is � t? i ii �i �1 M1: A RESOLUTION APPROVING IN PRINCIPLE THE APPLICATION OF NEW CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL INC. FOR SUBMISSION BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING 7 URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANT, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A 150-BED ACUTE -CARE GENERAL HOSPITAL. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Mayor Ferre: Would somebody move, if not, I will be happy too ... I will tell you what, so Pepper will leave me alone, I pass the Chair to the Vice -Mayor and I move that the City of Miami go on record stating that if we should be the successful recipient of a UDAG grant for the new Christian Hospital in Miami, that the City of Miami would go on record as saying that in next year's C. D. funds, $300,000 of it would be specifically earmarked for this important community development in Liberty City, should we be successful in getting the grant - if lightning strikes and we get it. I so move. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Perez: Motion understood. We have a second. comments? If not, call the roll. Any other The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1313 A MOTION STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY COMISSION THAT IF THE CITY OF MIAMI IS THE SUCCESSFUL RECIPIENT OF A U.D.A.G. GRANT IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED "CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL" IN LIBERTY CITY, THAT WE WILL ALLOCATE FROM NEXT YEAR'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS AN AMOUNT OF $300,000 WHICH SHALL BE EARMARKED FOR THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN LIBERTY CITY. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo Mr. Casteneda: Mr. Mayor, we can do that, by resolution so we could also attach that? Mayor There was a motion that was passed. You have got, to get after Bob Clark, over there and Lucia to get this put, in resolution form and we will vote on it hopefully before Plummer leaves at 7:00 P.M. (MAYOR FERRE READS RESOLUTION INTO THE RECORD) Now, where did this come from? Mr. Gary: Go ahead, vote on it again. That is okay, vote on it again. 29. ALLOCATE $10,000 TO PRICE-WATERHOUSE, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RE: FUNDING FOR PROPOSED CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL. Mayor Ferre: Who gave you this? Did Walter Pierce give you this? Mr. Gary: That is fine. What that does, it accomplishes the $10,000 that, was received for the UDAG to pay Price Waterhouse. I think you should vote and specific on that resolution. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a motion? Mr. Dawkins: Move it. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Ferre: Plummer seconds. Call the roll. sl November 15, 1984 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1314 A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING AN AMOUNT UP TO $10,000 FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS, CONTINGENT FUND, TO BE PAID TO PRICE WATERHOUSE AS PAYMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED IN CONNECTION WITH THE FUNDING OF THE PROPOSED CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL AND PROVIDING FOR REPAYMENT OF SAID FUNDS TO THE CITY BY NEW CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL, INC. WHEN SUCH FUNDS BECOME AVAILABLE FROM THE PROCEEDS OF A PROPOSED REVENUE BOND ISSUE. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 30. AUTHORIZE FINAL APPLICATION FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT - GROVE BAY PLAZA, LTD. TERREMARK AT BAYSHORE, INC. A.T.H. CURACAO, NV. Mr. Robert. Traurig: Item Number 9, which is a resolution just to set the hearing on the D.R.I. on the Terremark Application on Bayshore. Mayor Ferre: What day would the hearing be on? Mr. Plummer: January 24th. Mayor Ferre: Is there a motion? Mr. Plummer: Move it. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: There is a second, further discussion on Item 9? Is there anybody here who wishes to speak to Item 9? Let the record reflect, that nobody stood up on this. We voting to set the public hearing date on January 24t,h. Listen now, we are on Item 9. All that, does is sets a date for a public hearing on Item 9 which is Grove Bay Plaza on Bayshore Drive. It sets a hearing date? Does anybody wish to speak on this item? Let, the record reflect that, nobody stood on that. Call the roll on Item 9. sl 100 November 15, 1984 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1315 A RESOLUTION CONTINUING THE PUBLIC HEARING PERTAINING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, A DEVELOPMENT ORDER, AND ZONING RECLASSIFICATION FOR THE TERREMARK CENTRE PROJECT, A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY AVIATION AVENUE, TIGERTAIL AVENUE AND SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN); FROM 3:30 P.M., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1984, TO 3:30 P.M., THURSDAY JANUARY 24, 1985, OR A RESCHEDULED OR RECONVENED MEETING, AS THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF SAID FINAL APPLICATION FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT; FURTHER, DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO SEND COPIES OF THIS RESOLUTION TO AFFECTED AGENCIES AND THE APPLICANT. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 31. AUTHORIZE FINAL APPLICATION FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, BRICKELL STATION TOWERS, INC. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Now we are on Agenda Item 10, is that it? Mr. Robert Traurig: Item 10 is merely a major special use permit, which has been recommended for approval by Staff and the Planning Advisory Board. Mayor Ferre: The Planning Department recommended approval. The Planning Advisory Board - did they vote on this? Mr. Joe McManus: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Unanimously? Mr. McManus: 5 - 0. Mayor Ferre: 5 to 0, all right,. Mr. Plummer: What is it you are trying to accomplish, very quickly. Mayor Ferre: Authorizes the final application of a major use special permit for Brickell Station Towers. sl 101 November 15, 1984 Mr. Traurig: To build a high rise tower across the street, from the Brickell Station where the Western Union Building is now at the corner of the Trail and 1st Avenue. Mayor Ferre: I've seen it 100 times. Mr. McManus: Mr. Mayor ... Mayor Ferre: This is the one that Peter Wenzel was involved in? Mr. Traurig: Yes, Peter Wenzel. Mayor Ferre: The Japanese man, because he is here to finance and the architect was Raul Aubrey. Mr. Traurig: Absolutely. Mayor Ferre: And has been before us a whole bunch of times. Now, what, is the problem? Mr. McManus: Mr. Mayor, for the record, the Planning Advisory Board acted on this approximately a week ago. They made minor changes in the recommendations. Mayor Ferre: Those minor changes are a part of what we are doing here, is that correct? Mr. Traurig: We have accepted all the changes. Mayor Ferre: For the record, is there anybody here who is opposed to Item 10, which is the Brickell Station Towers, Inc., application. Does anybody wish to speak as an opponent? You are an opponent,? Mr. Traurig: He is a proponent. Mayor Ferre: No, I am not, asking for proponents. Is there anybody here who is an opponent? Does anybody wish to speak on Item 10 who is opposed to it? ... who has reservations to it, who is against, this project,? Let the record reflect, that nobody stood up. Go ahead. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I don't think it, is proper for this Commission to vote without either a written document or there putting on the record what, those minor changes are. I have seen in the past, where the Department had what they called minor changes that were wiped away from Ojus South. Mayor Ferre: All right, you have a about a minute and one- half left, of your three minutes. Mr. McManus: Mr. Commission, if I could indicate to you the minor changes referred to in Exhibit "A" in the development order. You have Exhibit "A" I would be happy to pass out green copies, however ... Mayor Ferre: Can you for the record satisfy Commissioner Plummer request.? It, is a valid request, to specify what Appendix "A" means. Mr. McManus: Exhibit, "A" is an attachment to the major use special permit and the changes are Condition one, the numbers are changed slightly, but they are still within the overall numbers of the development, that is the total of 284,110 square feet of development.. Mr. Plummer: Is the new number? Mr. McManus: Yes. sl 102 November 15, 1984 0 Mr. Plummer: All right. Mr. McManus: Throughout the language on the conditions there was mention made of a development order. Two words have been stricken and replaced by major use special permit. Mr. Plummer: All right. Mr. McManus: There was a requirement, that the Applicant install an air monitoring station to test the air in the Brickell area. We think this is redundant, because two other developers are going to be doing the same thing. Why should this developer follow on and come up with the same numbers. We recommended to the Planning Advisory Board and they agreed to delete that requirement. The last, change was a requirement, that the Applicant, file the permit with the Clerk of the Circuit. Court and we agreed that that, was going beyond what we reasonably could require the applicant, and we agreed to delete that and the Planning Advisory Board did also. That, was the sum and substance of the changes. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Traurig, you have heard the changes as detailed in amending the motion. Is that agreeable with you? Mr. Traurig: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Call the roll, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Ongie: You need a motion. Mayor Ferre: All right, we have a motion - Mr. Plummer. Is there a second to the motion? Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: On Item 10 as amended, with the amendments as been specified. It, has been seconded by Commissioner Perez. Further discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1316 A RESOLUTION ISSUING A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT 'A' AND INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE, APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, THE BRICKELL STATION TOWERS PROJECT PROPOSED BY BRICKELL STATION TOWERS, INC. FOR APPROXIMATELY 32-90 SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET, 801-899 SOUTHWEST 1ST AVENUE, AND 61-89 SOUTHWEST 9TH STREET (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN), PROVIDING FOR ISSUANCE OF A CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT, AND PROVIDING THAT THE PERMIT SHALL BE BINDING ON THE APPLICANT AND SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) ld 103 November 15, 1984 1 L Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the , . resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre J NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 1 ----------------- -- - -- - ------------------------------------- 32. SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF COMMODORE BAY PROJECT IN COCONUT GROVE - CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 12, 6:00 P.M. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Mr. Luft, we are now on Item 6. All right., Mr. Luft, were you the band leader here? i Mr. Jack Luft: That, is one word for it, I guess. I would like to take this opportunity to enter into the record the correspondence that, has occurred since First Reading to this date between various civic individuals, the Applicant, the Department, and other agencies within the City of Miami and Dade County. The first, item that I want to enter into the record is a memorandum from Lt. Riggs concerning the fire flow questions. It is dated October 12th and it is concerning water pressures. Following that is a letter from -ki Kenneth Treister. �i Mr. Plummer: What, does the memorandum say? Mayor Ferre: What are you saying? !, Mr. Plummer: He is reading from the letter of the questions raised by the Commission. The first one was in reference to water pressure. He said he had such a letter, and all I am asking is, what did the letter say? Then he went on to the v� second one. Mayor Ferre: While he is looking for the letter, let me read into the record telegrams and letters so that the i record will reflect, these letters: "To The Mayor and Commissioners: Please oppose Commodore Bay Project and truly represent the public interest." Mr. & Mrs. Wallace Cole. Well, I thought, we were doing that. "Please vote no today on the Commodore Bay Project to give State of Florida a chance to buy and preserve for the public this key property in the heart, of the Grove." Louis & Nancy Hector, Precinct, 841. From Elton Gissendanner - u`, "The Department of Natural Resources stands ready >. 't to cooperate with the City of Miami and other local interests and any effort to acquire the Commodore Bay property in Coconut Grove for public 4w, purposes. Please feel free to call on us at the appropriate time." Elton J. Gissendanner. ld 104 November 15, 1984 + I understand that he has spoken to the Governor and that this also has the Governor's support, even though it hasn't gone on the record. We have a letter from Mr. Eugene Massen. It reads: "I am writing to you at this time to convey my feelings for the proposed Commodore Bay Project, put, forth by Ken Treister. I feel that this i project will develop and enhance and prove to be one of the most eagerly sought, after areas to visit, not only by we the Floridians, but also by visitors who will hear this project from all forms of media. Kenneth Treister, who we know due to his involvement with and development of office buildings in the beautifully detailed Mayfair in the Grove has proven in the past and continues to prove in the present that forward looking advances are a necessity for the coming times. The proposed Commodore Bay Project envisioned by Mr. Treister will consolidate these very important facts detailed further on in the letter and which whereupon careful consideration, prove to be a decided asset to continuance of the strength of Coconut. Grove and Commodore Plaza have had and will continue to have upon the City of Miami, mainly one, Commodore Bay Project will create badly needed public access to the waterfront area that, surrounds this section. It, will be available to all. Two, Commodore Bay Project will strengthen the Village Center by bringing shops and cafes. Parking will be across Commodore Plaza. Three, Commodore Bay Project will create moderate income apartments, a total of 197 apartments for Village Center. Four, Commodore Bay Project will create artist center - the Grove House reactivated and will open pavilions for sl different, art disciplines. Five, Commodore Bay Project, will provide pavilions accompanying paintings, ceramics and photography. Six, ?' Commodore Bay Project, will open an art school run by Juanita May as part of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Seven, Commodore Bay Project will open outreach art center, part of the which will be in the Black neighborhoods. I highly endorse this proposed project we feel that the time has come g for Coconut Grove to stretch itself and become the focal point of a very unusual and beautiful area. Commodore Bay Project, is well conceived and covers the needs of the community. I feel that. this project will prove to be an asset and prevent the eventual takeover by the possibility of a high rise in our midst." Your truly, Eugene Massen, Professor of Fine Arts, University of Miami. "I am writing this letter and I am requesting that you read it into the record and make it a part of the official hearing with regard to Commodore Bay Project. I am a native Miamian and have been a frequent visitor to Coconut Grove for many, many years. Coconut. Grove is in fact, my favorite part of Miami and I have placed a contract for the purchase of a home near Main Highway. I am familiar with the plans for Commodore Bay, and have had an opportunity to briefly review them. I wish to speak out wholeheartedly in favor of this project. I believe it is consistent for the City r of Miami's plan to develop an urban business section where people live, work, and spend their leisure time. I have had the pleasure of visiting t Port Banus in Costa del Sol, Spain, and believe ld 105 November 15, 1984 that. this project, will be very close to the port project of Port Banus. That project brings many people to the area who live on port who share the life of community. I believe Commodore Bay Project will have the same positive result for Coconut Grove and for the City of Miami. My wife joins me in this wholehearted endorsement, of the project. Thank you for your attention and interest in the future of the City." Donald I. Bierman. There is a letter from Mr. Howard Scharlin, which I will not, read but put into the record, since I saw Mr. Scharlin around here and if he wishes to speak further on it, he can, and there is a letter lastly, by Marshall Harris, former distinguished legislator from Dade County that he wants read into the record, and it reads: "Recently I had the privilege of listening to some very interesting cocktail conversation concerning the zoning application pending before the city. As you probably well know, Howard Scharlin and Ken Treister are close personal friends of mine. Kenny and I served in the Miami Beach High School debating team in 1947 and 1948. I have had the opportunity by virtue of my being up in Howard Scharlin's office t,o see the plan that, Kenny has developed for Commodore Bay. I personally cannot imagine a nicer development for that property. Property is abutted on both sides by parks, and this development would give everyone the chance to utilize the shoreline of Biscayne Bay. I find the walk way proposals very intriguing. A walkway along the shore in this area is even more appropriate than in the downtown area. I know that there are many objectors and that, a major focus of their objection is traffic and congestion. Coconut Grove is congested, but this project is not going to add materially to that, and the beauty of the project offsets what little congestion is added. I recommend your wholehearted support of the project and hope that, the City Commission endorses it unanimously. By the way, I am enjoying my service both as your arbitrator in cable television and chairperson of the Miami Audit Advisory Committee. In both cases I have been very impressed with the caliber of the City's professional staff and I thank you for doing me the honor of appointing me to both of these positions." Very cordially, Marshall S. Harris. Now, does anybody else have telegrams or memorandums or things that need to be read into the record? Mr. Dawkins: I have all of those you read. I think I need clarification on just one, Mr. Mayor, please. Is there anyone here from Bishop Schofield's office? Mayor Ferre: The Bishop is here himself. I saw him standing in the back of the room a little while ago. Mr. Dawkins: Bishop Schofield? Mayor Ferre: Is the Bishop still here? The Bishop of the Episcopal Church? I saw him at, the back of the room about, 15, 20 minutes ago. Is there anyone here from his office? Okay, Father, you want to stick your neck out on this one? ld 106 November 15, 1984 9 0 k Mr. Dawkins: Okay, well anyway, Mr. Treister, I have a letter here saying that ... and I will read the letter. It. says: "I send this letter to you and the Commission to let, you know that St. Stephens Church opposes the wall and has not in any way, shape or form requested it. Through the Vestry of the Congregation the school is part of the Church and anything requested should go through the Vestry and not, through the people outside of the parish. Thank you for your attention." All I need to know from somebody or anybody what, is the status of the wall? Mayor Ferre: Okay, we are going to get, into all these subjects in a little while. All I am asking for now while he searches for a letter that, Plummer asks him to find, and I assume that, you have found it now, is to put things into the record that people have requested be read into the record since they cannot be here. I have one from Alfred Browning Parker. Do you have more for me to read? All right, that is fair. Everybody is entitled. I won't read it all. I will just put it into the record and I will read the highlights of it, or would you want to do it? All right, this is from Alfred Browning Parker. "The Commodore Bay mixed used development of the site for which it is intended are both well known to me. This project has my wholehearted approval with no reservations. We must, encourage as many citizens as possible who live in our satellite urbans areas. Over a dozen years ago I presented to the Chamber of Commerce a plan to revitalize downtown Miami. Housing for thousands were proposed in megastructures to the north at the City's dock property and to the south with similar housing structures over the I-95 interchange and the land along Miami River - Ball Point, recommended for purchase by the City would have been left, open, and the City docks with the deep water fingers would have remained under the megastructure instead of being filled in for the ill-fated Bicentennial Park. This plan was well documented in the Miami Herald's Tropic Magazine of January 2, 1972. Even early than this, a planning suggestion was advanced for developing the Grove area along the Bay from St. Stephen's Church to Ransom Everglades Day School. This was intended to bring people into the immediate area with all of the urban amenities within walking distance. It could have been done and can be done in a manner that, would not only preserve the bayfront and the natural charm of the hammock grove, but, also introduce our community to that waterfront which they have never enjoyed and at, the same time offer housing to those of moderate income. The Commodore Bay Development is an opportunity to move confidently into a future where careful planning and durable construction will not destroy our Coconut Grove Heritage, but rather fulfill its promise. There is no justification in criticizing the project on the basis of density. A high density within the immediate confines of our Coconut Grove Community would be a blessing. A very modest proposal of under 200 residential units in Commodore Bay is a creative step into the future which I hope you will support." Sincerely, Alfred Browning Parker. ld 107 November 15, 1984 You don't, want me to read all of it, do you? Okay, this is David C. Neil. "Dear Maurice: As a personal friend, but more particularly as a citizen of Miami, I implore you i to take a close look at, the Commodore Bay Project. 1 Living within 375 feet of the proposed multi- functional development., the residents of Abitare have sustained the rigors of 10, 20 special events per year in the Grove which block our driveways, preventing egress and ingress to our very homes. The trash and the garbage thrown each week throughout our hammock and weekly the noise and wreckless cruising of teenagers through our village - don't, allow Coconut Grove to become more attractive to such nuisance. It is inexplicable to be nearby residents. How the Miami Commissioners can ride roughshod over the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Board and play so little heed to those of us who will be directly affected. The noise level already peaks in our living rooms on weekends from Peacock Park. Now they want to bring it closer to us as a daily sufferance, which in the proposed lounge and restaurant facility, will be allowable until 3:00 A.M. each morning with no other access road but the driveway on Main Highway already constricted by historically preserved hammocks. I cannot foresee anything but, increased traffic stress to the point of disaster if an emergency vehicle needs to enter or exit the project. Furthermore, who is going to protect, the Barnacle from vandals if the access becomes so easy from the Bayside. An often mentioned selling point, of the developer -! has been the great numbers of apartments and condos which will be available to "moderate income folk". They passed around the lovely photographs ?! of Port Banus and Marbella. Maurice you have been to both places and you know that, the only moderate income people there are those of tour _jl buses from X for the cruise on the million dollar yacht for those providing services needed t! by the nearby jet, set condos. I am afraid the arrogance and the deception of the developers is only equaled by the insensitivity of the Miami Commission. Please, (please underlined) ask Mr. Treister to nullify the high density residential units and parking facilities when you vote no again on October 25th. Thank you for your time." Sincerely, Peggy F. Neal. I hope that concludes all of the letters that are being asked to be read into the record and the rest, will be people speaking for themselves. All right, are you now ready to answer the question that Commissioner Plummer asked? Mr. Luft: Commissioner Dawkins, I was approached after the First, Reading by Mr. Hugo Parsons and Mr. David McCrea representing the parents of the children in the church school - not the church, but the parents of the school children. They requested of the Planning Department that we put in as a requirement in the Development Order that an 8 foot wall be built, along the church property line. I agreed to put language to that effect before the Commission today for your consideration. Whether you want to require an 8 foot wall or not, will be up to your assessment of the various requests here. The point however, is that the church and the Bishop speaking for the church was apparently not consulted by Mr. Parsons and Mr. McCrea and the church, ld 108 November 15, 1984 i .}r yr i through the letter to you expressed its opposition to the 2.. wall being built along its property line, separating a potential project on the Commodore Bay site from the church. Mr. Dawkins: So .... f Mr. Luft: So there is not a wall there today. There may be a wall if this Commission decides to accept this proposal and require that a wall be built. There may be, if you want, Mr. Dawkins: And the walls that will be built, will be built. on .. . Mr. Luft: On the Commodore Bay property. Mr. Dawkins: On the Commodore Bay property, but it would shield out light from the church's property. Mr. Luft: That is right. It will separate the two properties and it was the desire of the parents of the school children that, a wall be built, but it is apparently +; the desire of the church that there not be a wall built without conferring with the church first. Mr. Dawkins: How do we justify listening to the parents whose children are in school instead of listening to the property owner? Mr. Luft: Well, I think we will listen to everyone. It, is up to you to decide who should properly speak, or where the y needs lie here. Mr. Dawkins: Okay, thank you. Mr. Luft: Okay, the first memorandum I have is from David 4� Teems, Deputy Chief of Fire Inspection Services Department 'I and the memorandum was to me dated October 12th and it expressed some concern about fire flow. Mayor Ferre: Jack, are these part, of the record? Mr. Luft: No, they are not. These came after the first Al reading. a: Mayor Ferre: Are they available? Mr. Luft: They are available. Mayor Ferre: Janet, just, mentioned to me that she has no .ti access to these. Ms. Janet Cooper: I went, to the office yesterday and looked at the file and these were not in there. If this A letter was October 12th, today is November 15th. I think there was adequate time for it to have gotten to the file. Mr. Luft: They were on my desk and I was organizing this - for the presentation today. rr' Ms. Cooper: We have great photocopying machines in the City. Mr. Plummer: Can we get copies of those now? Mr. Luft: Yes, these are all copies to be presented to the Clerk. v Mr. Plummer: No, I mean to the Commission! The Clerk is not, voting. 1d 109 November 15, 1984 W Mr. Luft: Well, I have one complete let of copies of all the memos. Yes, we can get copies to you, and I will send .� it back now, if you wish. Ms. Cooper: We haven't had the privilege of seeing them or reviewing them or having the opportunity to evaluate them, ?. come up with contrary evidence if we find it is so { t necessary, so technically I need to object. Mayor Ferre: Janet, I understand, and I let, your objection _- be recorded and noted, but on the other hand, there are a ;> lot, of people that, are waiting patiently here and I am not, going to deny them the right to have their say for or against this project. Ms. Cooper: I am not, asking that. Mayor Ferre: Okay. Ms. Cooper: I've sent, all the letters and memos back to be copied. Mayor Ferre: Would then make them available to members of the Commission and put, them into the record so that the public will also have availability to these letters. Now, is there anything else you want to add to that? Mr. Luft: There were several requirements or conditions that we have written into the major use special permit, since the first reading, as the result of the discussions and conversations and letters and as a result, of certain conditions that, this Commission imposed on its motion on September 20th on First, reading. The first condition was that the restaurant, space be reduced by 5,000 square feet, with an equivalent square footage transferred into general retail use. This was due to a request of Public Works to reduce the impact of sewers. A second provision was that artists pavilions along the northeast property lines be set back an additional five feet in the event that an access road is needed along that, property in the future. Requirement that internal drives be used before exiting the property through St. Stephen's Church has been deleted since St. Stephen's is no longer participating with an access drive. Number four, access requirements for three entrance drives have been changed to require only one entrance drive intersecting Main as to the Department's proposal on September 20th. Requirements to preserve the coral rock wall along the Peacock boundary has been added at the request of local residents. Requirements to submit all final plans to environmental preservation review board have been restated in the major use permit to reinforce current requirements of the preservation district ordinance. The statement providing that no height, variances shall be granted has been added as per citizen request at, the meeting. Requirements for a two lane road intersecting Main Highway at Kennedy Plaza has been added as to the revised access plan. A new requirement that all construction and service vehicle access to the site be limited to the two lane road, and not along any property line or fire lane adjacent, to the Church has been added, or the third lane that, the primary two lane entrance road at Commodore Plaza would be single access for construction vehicles during the building of the project. A provision that, the Public Works Director may request a second access drive be constructed along the property lines should this Commission so desire or request, and ... Mr. Plummer: requested by That is the third lane? And that is if it . . . Id 110 November 15, 1984 Mr. Luft: There is two possibilities. One, the Commission may decide to request a third lane as a condition of its a approval, should it approve this at second reading, or it may approve at Second Reading and put a condition that, should traffic conditions warrant at a later date, the Director of Public Works could require it to be built by the project, at any time if the Commission chooses to make it a condition at, a later date, as opposed to right now. A ' developer proffered amenities at the last reading of 250 palm trees and picnic shelters and bay walks with Peacock Park have been added to the major use permit. An 8 foot coral rock wall, requested by the parents along the property line has been added as a requirement, should the Commission accept that, request. Use of Peacock Park for construction vehicle access is prohibited completely. A remote site artists pavilion to be built by the developer, or with the cash contribution within a mile of the project, and to be approved by this Commission, has been added. All project construction vehicles shall be prohibited from using 32nd Avenue or McDonald Street to access the site and should be confined to major arterial roadways. That, the coral rock wall, which encroaches from the park side onto the property, that the developer agree, after a building permit, is issued, to dedicate that, wall and any land under it, back to the City to protect that wall and that the Dade County Archeologist, Historic Preservation Division be granted prior notice to any earth moving, clearing, tree removal, ditch digging, or filling of solution holes so that he may test the site and monitor all of those activities. Those are additional requirements to the major use permit. Mayor Ferre: Anything else you want to add on the record? Does the Administration have any other statements to make? Mr. Luft: On the Historic Preservation Board, there was a hearing in June, advertised public hearing, wherein this project presented to the Board the concept, plan for the development. At that hearing the Board chose to endorse the a' project and voted so. Subsequent to that, hearing, there was representations made at the Planning Advisory Board and again before this Commission at first reading as to that i Board's endorsement. It was pointed out, after First Reading that there had been changes in the first, plan that was reviewed by that, environmental board - those changes consisting of the two lane road through the hammock. It was requested by the various individuals that we reschedule another hearing before the Environmental Preservation Review Board. The Administration declined to do that, inasmuch as the road is a requirement. It is not an option and the only point of the hearing would be to consider how the road goes through, and that will be taken up at the required Environmental Preservation Board hearing subsequent to a Second Reading if this project is approved. We would however, point out that, any approval by the board prior to this would best be discounted by the Commission due to the fact, that they had not seen the two lane road prior to this time. Mayor Ferre: All right, are we ready to start, on the other side? Mr. Treister, do you want to say something before we get, started, or do you want, to reserve it all for later, or what? You want to say one thing on the record? Mr. Ken Treister: Since we are handing out letter, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, we also sent, a letter to the Planning Advisory Board describing the reinforcement, of the hammock that we propose to do after hopefully, we get approval, and I would like to just submit, those letters to the Commission, copies of which were in the files. cy k% t _., ... Y ld 11 1 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: Thank you. Now, on the Commodore Bay order of speakers proposed, I have been given a suggested list of speakers who are in opposition and I will read it into the k, record and then we will see how many other speakers wish to be heard that are not part of this speaker's bureau, and then we will take it from there. Speakers are Huber Parsons, who will introduce miscellaneous legal procedural - Kark Muench, Citizens's traffic; Ken Bynem, Traffic Expert; j David McCrea, environmental and other issues; Linda Dan, Citizens Parks; Monk Terry park and other items; Mike Simonoff, Grove and architectural items; Joanne Holshouser, — Grove items; Carol Kniseley, Grove items; Thelma Altshuler, - Grove items; Jim McMasters, Grove items; David Doheny, miscellaneous Grove items; and Janet Cooper, legal items. Then to close up and sum up, Marjory Stoneman Douglas. Mr. Jack Rice: Mr. Mayor, they have agreed ... Mayor Ferre: You don't look like Marjory Stoneman Douglas to me! . Mr. Rice: No, I must, say I am not! I wish I was, I would probably have a lot, more influence! I understand that they are going to let me and my experts speak second after the introductory speaker. Mayor Ferre: Okay, in other words Parsons, you speak, is that, it? So in other words, we have Rice as the second speaker. All right. Mr. Rice: And my zoning expert is Acton Mayor Ferre: And your zoning expert, Acton. Okay. a Mr. Rice: Action with Acton. Mayor Ferre: Okay, Mr. Treister. •: (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO PUBLIC z; RECORD) Mayor Ferre: I think that the fairness of this whole thing is that it be balanced. You will have an equal opportunity and whether you divide it amongst, the same number of people or get twice as many or half is your problem. You organize and I will be happy to do the same thing for you. All right, now, I will add Grady Simkins - is that right? Where, after you, Joanne? All right, are we ready to start? Mr. Huber Parsons: No, Mr. Mayor, I would like to raise a procedural point with you. a Mayor Ferre: All right sir, go ahead. X Mr. Parsons: I am Huber Parsons. I believe that the Applicant has the obligation and burden of going first. Mayor Ferre: He wants a procedural question - go ahead. Mr. Parsons: I believe the Applicant has the responsibility of going forward on the matter. After all, it is the Applicant seeking major changes. I think the Applicant, should go forward and I think the opponent should reserve the right, to rebut. That was the thing applied for. ^ f Mayor Ferre: Mr. Parsons, that is correct. Let me tell you �r, that historically I try to run a loose operation here and }, let, everybody have a say so that nobody feels cheated, and I want to tell you that I don't, go on this thing about _Y,, ld 112 November 15, 1984 t 0 rebuttal and then the other party doesn't have a chance. We have speaker rebuttals, counter -rebuttals and counter - counter rebuttals and believe me, in an important, issue like this, I will not deny somebody the opportunity to have their say, so everybody will have an opportunity to speak. I think procedurally that you are right and I think that the proponents should present, their case and you have the opportunity to answer and then we will get, into the rebuttals and Ken, to you and to your associates, we will keep careful time and everyone will have equal opportunity to say what they have to, okay? Mr. Rice: Could I just add the name Norma Post onto the list, of opponents in case she gets here in time? Mayor Ferre: I will not, deny anybody the right to speak. Mr. Post, Mrs. Post, Ms. Post, or anybody else. Mayor Ferre: Yes, Ma'am? You want to postpone? Well, I am afraid probably the Applicant, probably wouldn't want that. Now, do you want to postpone, Mr. Treister? Mr. Treister: No, sir. Mayor Ferre: Well, I am sorry. Proceed. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS. Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Douglas votes twice. Mr. Treister only votes once. Mr. Treister: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission and Ladies and Gentlemen: I will try to make our presentation very short and is it procedurally proper, Mr. Mayor, to limit, our remarks more or less to new items and then have a chance, if items come up on opponents that we would have a chance to answer on that. Mayor Ferre: Absolutely. You will have that opportunity and I would so advise the speakers that please do not go through this thing in a repetitious kind of a way. If somebody else has already said it, don't repeat the same thing fifteen times. Mr. Treister: Well, I am going to ask my friends here who are proponents to keep their remarks short and to new issues to expedite the hearing. Just, to summarize our position, we are proposing to build a mixed use center in the village center of Coconut, Grove. We do that with great concern with the importance of this property to the village. We want to do the following four things. We want to preserve the hammock and reinforce it. Number two, we want to create a subsidized artist center that, would bring arts back to the village center. Three, we want to have a continuation of Commodore Plaza from the roads to the waterfront, bringing shops and restaurants to that public street.. That street would be open to the public and would be the first commercial street in the County to allow people to shop, walk and eat along a public street, to the water's edge. Fourth, we want to bring apartments, 197 apartments above these restaurants and shops in a low rise, or three story fashion above the shops, which bring needed people back to the City of Miami. The City of Miami wants people downtown. It, wants people in Brickell Avenue. It needs people in Coconut, Grove. There is a great fear we have of the de- population of Coconut Grove as apartments are torn down, as people are forced to leave by office buildings and other construction. I think it is very important, as a Planner that we have people living in the village center. And last, we want to link the village center, the Playhouse and ld 113 November 15, 1984 Commodore Plaza with the park system. All of these are very, very positive things that are going to enhance the City and the Village of Coconut Grove. We have worked now for almost a year on this project, with the Planning Department. We are very proud of their endorsement. We have agreed to almost every condition that is asked of us. Now, on new issues. First, I would like to report. that. traffic is very impor+.ant t.o us. It is important to the success of our project.. It is important. to the future of Coconut Grove. In addition to David Plummer, we have added t.wo other traffic consultants - not. only to help us decide whether it is a viable project., but. help the City. We have added Miles Moss as a traffic consultant, who is here. We have asked Joe Rice to join our team, who is the traffic consultant that already did studies for the City of Miami and Coconut. Grove. We have three traffic consultants who all have concurred that our project, will not deter or add to considerably the traffic in the village center, but in some ways will actually benefit, us by the inclusion of a traffic light on Main Highway, which we will build, by the inclusion of parking which we will, provide, eliminating the need for searching for parking and bringing people living in the village center - -.hose people who live in our project can walk to the Commodore Plaza, can walk the Playhouse, can walk to their boats in Bayfront Park. In addition to that, we are very-oncerned with the hammock, and we had a very fine hammock consultant, Mr. George Allen, who is a very famous consultant and the head of the Association for ` Preservation of Hammocks in Florida this coming year. We have added a Dr. Manly Boss, who is a professor of botany at Florida Atlantic University, 30 years a botanist, a professor, doctor, and a famous botanist who has studied this project and concurs with George Allen's assessment of l the hammock. In summary, George Allen told the Tree Preservation Board that in eight years, if this property is left fallow and it stays without reinforcement, this hammock will die. There are so many foreign plants and what is called exotics coming in that this hammock will die. Dr. Boss agrees. We are going to, and we have put it as part. of }' our condition of acceptance, a major replanting of the hammock. We are going to plant I forget how many major trees, many minor trees, fern, all types of native plants, eliminating the poison wood and some of the exotics. We are �.` going to give back to the community a hammock which is having problems now and these same exotics would spread to the Barnacle and other hammock areas, so we are going to help preserve that. So, I just wanted for the record to say we have three traffic consultants that concur that: traffic is not, going to be seriously affected by us. Number two, we have added to our development, plan a third access along the eastern property line, which would give us three lanes of traffic. Third, we have gotten another consultant, as I said, to reinforce our belief that the hammock is a good and worthwhile area t.o preserve. Now, there are a couple of little points that I would like to put on the record that. are, I think, typographical errors in the major use permit, - which we agreed to, by the way. Everything Jack Luft said that we promised, we promise again. We will do whatever we can and we will do whatever isn't. even there if it is right. " We live here. We have major property values here. We love the Grove, we want. to do what, is right, and without exception, we have agreed to anything the City has asked us to do. There is 197 units in our proposal, not. 195. The required parking, because of the reduction of restaurants, is 351, not. 396. In addition, I would like to answer Mr. Dawkins' request. about the wall. We do not, want a wall. The church, I think, according to the Bishop's letter, and I 1984 ld 114 November 15, 0 think there are representatives of the church here, do not want a wall. We were told by the Planning Department that. some of the parents of the (T A P E 13) church school wanted a twelve foot high solid wall between our property and the church. The reason I asked, and it was given that, they though*. that the artist pavilions, or the people *.hat would go to the ar*ist's pavilions would somehow jeopardize the comfort and safety, well being of the children. The City said "Would you, if the City requested, put an eight foot. wall there?" Our answer is yes. If you demand that we put an eight. foot wall there, we want, to get. your blessings. We will do whatever that takes. I think the mentality of putting a wall - a twelve, or eight. or ten foot. wall between our project and the adjoining church is sad. We have a beautiful hammock. We are going to have beautiful artist. pavilions. We are going to have beautiful artists working there. It is going to be a beautiful thing for the children and for the community, and I think if I had a child there, I would really want the resource of an Anita May lead artist school land pavilion there, so Commissioner Dawkins, we will build it if you insist, but, we would rather not, and I think the church would rather not, also. I think the Commission asked us for three things at the last meeting when we were fortunate enough to get your preliminary blessing. One was a third access, a third lane. We have submitted to the Planning Department, and they have approved this, an alternate road that would be parallel to the artist pavilion. It would be entirely on our property. It would be one lane. It. would parallel the property line and it would join either into the circle, and into the parking, or it would go though the brick covered area that we had under the canopy of trees here to go into the property, so we now i have three lanes. Two is our main lane, and the third lane is the auxiliary lane. We are prepared to do that, and that is part of our development master use permit requirement. We are going to do it, along with all of the other things that we promised. In addition to that there was concern about fire and police access. We checked with the Fire Department, they gave us a letter saying that this access through the main road, which is the existing road, only +' It widened, is adequate. We would have the police and fire use this lane. They could also use the second lane. And in addition to that, they would welcome and we would of course, encourage them to use, in emergency time only, the boardwalk that we will build through Peacock Park and have access - through the waterfront. That would only be used by emergency vehicles and, obviously they would have the right to do that. The third item was, what about someone in our two lane road if they got a flat tire or some way and wanted to pull off to the side. We met with the Planning Department and this sidewalk that parallels our road would have a convenient place for cars to pull off. There isn't. any concern that the village has that we don't have. We want the traffic to flow right. We want our people to get. ` in and our of the property. We want the police and fire to do it. This, if we get your blessing today, we are promising you not only what we promised in the past, but will continue to make those promises because the value of this property for the community is our value. We promised, - as you know, to build this art center and we are excited about. it. Just let me go over that. because we have met many times now with the groups. The Coconut, Grove Association that puts on the art festival is part, of our team. Juanita May, who heads the Metropolitan Museum is part of our team. Jean Masson, and many, many of the artists - they are here today if you want to hear some of them. What, we want to do is bring artists back in a subsidized fashion to Coconut. Grove. This won't. happen if this project doesn't happen. Rates on Commodore Plaza to Mayfair up to $40 a foot. plus maintenance. We are going to have subsidized rent that will ld 115 November 15, 1984 be very, very low and at cost. and therefore will allow artist's galleries and public service, non-profit. artists groups to participate. We want to reconst.it•ut.e the Grove House, one of the great assets to Coconut Grove that we lost . We are going to do that. We are going to have a series of artist's pavilions, sculpture, pottery, painting, ceramics, glass blowing, open to the public - real artists working. They will be able to sell their work. You will be able to see it.. It. will be a tremendous asse4. and when our Publicity Department in the City of Miami and the Miss Universe contest and everything else which we are so proud of, telling the world about Miami - one of the things that we are going to tell them is that we have one of the unique artists communities in Coconut. Grove, and we have a home here. We are going to give it a subsidized basis, a home for Pace, so we can have street, musicians and street people working out, of Coconut Grove for the whole community. The next item that I would like to just touch on, which is new is this idea of selling this as a park. Forgetting my developer's hat for a minute, my citizen's hat.. I think that this is a good project for the community. I think that it would be a sad day if we took this project which is open to the public - it says public access, and take badly needed public funds and make it into what, would probably be a passive park. We need the funds from the State to help buy the Deering Estate. If there are funds, I would suggest that. the Naval Reserve Training Center, which is a potential problem, be used for the acquisition of that. The purpose of State funds to buy a park, in my opinion, should be where we want to gain public access, where we want to preserve a site that would be used not for the public use and convert it to public use. Here we have myself and Howard Scharlin, Jerry Ketcher, developers who say "We are going to make this a public activity center at, our expense. We are going to preserve the Hammock and have a tram go through it. We are going to create an art center, which I don't think the State realizes that they will be robbing, or taking away from the City. I don't think really that the State, and I know they haven't called us, realizes that this would be taking away public access, would be taking away an art center, would be j, adding to the tax burden, obligations which we said we would do. We would reinstate the hammock. We would maintain the roads. We would put in the tram. We would do the improvements to Peacock Park. We will install the light at Main Highway. Now, we are not; doing this only for ourselves, we are doing it to get your blessing, but one hand washes the other. Private industry, civic people, people that live here, hopefully people with sensitivity that we try to be, should work together and not burden the taxpayer with type of expense, but wouldn't it be sad if this becomes a passive park, and we don't have a village that now opens to the bay, that you can't walk on a shopping street. to the waterfront., that visitors may not be able to go in here because the State Park isn't open all the time - in fact, it is walled in and open only certain days, and whatever else, and the bottom line is, we don't want to sell it, to them. We think as civic citizens and as developers we want to develop this as a public amenity. We think putting people in the village center is important, and I don't think the State wants to rob the City of Miami of giving these people the opportunity. You can",, believe how many people in the village have called me and said they would like an y apartment here. I think the convenience of living on the water, having a boat, walking to the Playhouse, having breakfast. in the Village Center with certain people is very, '1 very, important and I think this Commission, this City, and the citizens here should say "We don't., want to 'be the last. R' person in Coconut Grove, we want to bring other people". Everybody wants to be the last person and draw up the brid e. I think it. is health to have g y people walking the ld 116 November 15, 1984 t 0 st.ree*.s in the Village Center. We have a very healthy village. We have got to reinforce it by these, hopefully type of projects. Basically, t.ha', is the ... Mr. Parsons: I would like to request that that drawing be made a part of the record. Mayor Ferre: Tha+. is fine. There is no objection to that. Mr. Treister: All our drawings are part of the record. All of drawings have been submitted to the City. Everything we have is public and everything from here on out is public. One las* general comment and then I would rather just. listen. We are not, coming for a building permit today. We are here a'. a preliminary hearing on the general concept that, we are offering. We will have to go to the Tree, Preservation and Historic Board, which we welcome, and we will do it right. We will welcome anybody to come and see the *sees being relocated, or new *sees planted. We will have to get sewer, water, police, fire, Building Department approval. All the things that we are going to do we are going to do for ourselves and for the City because it is a team effort. We welcome the work with the Church that we have worked with in the past.. We worked with the City. We worked with the Parks Department.. Miami is a great. Ci*.y. Coconut. Grove is the most fabulous place probable on the eastern seaboard. It, is either going to grow positively or negatively, but it is not going to stand still. I will pledge and we have tried in the past and we certainly will do in the future, to do everything possible for the residents, for the people that live in homes. We want to keep the South Grove residential. We want to keep the North Grove residential. We want to build developments that are sympathetic in concert with the village. We are partners with the City. At Peacock Park we are going to provide parking for that. We are going to provide access to the public. We are going to work with the church. We are going to create an art community that is going to be an asset, and I think it is just one of the best things that I have ever been associated with and I pledge today that if we can get your blessing, we will make outstanding. We will make it some thing that everyone will be proud of, including all of the citizens of Coconut. Grove. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, we will now begin, I assume, with the opponents and then Mr. Treister, I will give you more time later on, if you want to, as the opposition makes points, you may want to have some of your experts testify. I think one of your senior advisors is whispering something into your ear. Ready? All right, the first spokesperson is Mr. Parsons. Mr. Parsons, let us find out - how much time has elapsed now? Ms. Hirai: 17 minutes. Mayor Ferre: 17 minutes, all right. Now, I am pretty sure that the 15 or 20 speakers will take more than 17 minutes. I would like to keep all of you together, if possible, within an hour, and then you will have more time later on, I am sure, to rebut, but. I would hope that you could all make your statements within an hour. Do you think that might be possible? You seen to be the introducer here. Mr. Parsons: I am sure we can try, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: I would be grateful and I am sure everybody else would and I think Marjory Stoneman Douglas will be grateful too, as she is your anchor person here. Mr. Parsons: We will try and do our best., Mr. Mayor. ld 117 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: Sir. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS. Mayor Ferre: All right, do you want to get. Dr. Ryan up now to speak? Yes, sir. Are you a proponent? INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS. Mayor Ferre: See, the problem that we are going to have is that there are an awful lot of people that have dinner appointments and all of that, and if you have an emergency like you have to catch an airplane or you have to go to a hospital, or you have a trial to at.tend or something, or a funeral or something, then I would accept that, but I really don'*, think that it is valid because somebody has a dinner appointment, to make everybody kind of sit, still, so if you have an honest, to goodness emergency, I would accept it. Mr. Keith Swenson: Mr. Mayor, if I may - I am Keith Swenson. I am a member of the vestry of the church. I do have perhaps a part of ... Mayor Ferre: Is the vestry meeting tonight? Mr. Swenson: No, Monday night. Part of an answer to the question that was posed before about the Bishop's letter, and unfortunately, I do have to leave. Mayor Ferre: Go ahead. Mr. Swenson: For the record, I am Keith Swenson. My address is 1635 Nethia Drive, City of Miami. I stated I am a member of the vestry of St. Stephen's Church. I am the junior warden of the vestry, which means I am essentially responsible for property, or the real property owned by the church, that occupied by the church and of course, the �! church school. I also serve as a member of the Board of Trustees of St. Stephen's Day School. I am here basically to qualify and to perhaps to add some light to the statement or to the letter that was written by Bishop Schofield. I a believe that Jack Luft, stated the position clearly, but basically to reiterate that, the Bishop is stating that the responsibility for determining what happens on, or let's say to St. Stephen's property is properly with the vestry. The vestry has not met, or had the opportunity to consider the wall, per se. However, about a year ago the vestry adopted j a statement, and I would read just the two or three sentences that. I believe shed some light upon what the vestry's probably feeling about the wall would be. "We must, open our resources to the community. As we provide our educational resources in a spiritual context through St. 5 Stephen's Day School, we must make our pastoral resources more visible and available. We must share the physical beauty of our courtyards and spaces, a quite oasis in a developing cit.y." By no means did we envision that we would r want to see walls constructed around St. Stephen's A wall that was proposed originally to be as high as that clock up there, but then I understand has been lowered to something betwen the clock and the seal. I don't believe that it will be in our best interests to have that occur, but I would suggest to you and the Commission in considering this project, that. if that is a matter that. you are concerned about., it, is a matter that. you will want. to make conditioned upon, and hopefully your approval of Mr. Treister's and Mr. Scharlin's project., that you condition your approval upon letting the subject of the matter be more properly discussed between St. Stephen's Day School parents and St.. Stephen's vestry. Let that be discussed there. We will deal with ld 118 November 15, 1984 those matters and so that you will have to be concerned on that. subject. Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: Thank you, Mr. Swenson. All right, now, are we ready to start.? Mr. Parsons: Dr. Ryan is back. Mayor Ferre: Dr. Ryan. Dr. Una Ryan: I am Dr. Una Ryan. My address is 3420 Poinciana Avenue in Coconut Grove. I am a long standing resident of Coconut Grove. I am an elected member of the vestry of S* . Stephen's Church and I also serve on the Board of Trustees of St.. Stephen's School. My last child is still at, St. Stephen's School. I know it is unreasonable to expect you to remember, but I spoke to you at this previous hearing, and I am not, going to make the same points over again, but I and many members of the parish of St. Stephen's Church are strongly in favor of the Commodore Bay Project and I think that it: would be a mistake to feel that the issue is really between development and no development. I think the issue is between a selfish development, or one that really will enhance the beauty of Coconut Grove. When Mr. Treister bought, the property, as with any work of art or treasure, he could have had the option of knocking this out for a privileged few; in fact, he chose the option of opening it to the community, and thereby in my opinion, enhancing the safety and the beauty of Coconut Grove. Previously, without trespassing it seemed very difficult difficult to citizens or visitors to gain access either to the hammock or to the bay and it is for these reasons that. as a citizen of the Grove, I very much welcome this new opportunity, but now to speak as a member, a parishioner of St. Stephen's Church, I like many of the parishioners, support the Commodore Bay Project because it coincides with the long standing plan and goals of the church, and this was to open up the church to the community and to try thereby to attract new parishioners. Now, for this, we obviously welcome the advent of new residents as neighbors. The church already has a park on one of its sides, and the prospect of parishioners and visitors having access to the beautiful hammock and to the bay through a commercial development seems to me to complete the picture as far as the church is concerned. Now, Mr. Treister's plan is one of vistas and vision, and that immediately brings me to the question of the wall. Obviously during construction I am in favor of some sort of a fence to protect the children and I am not opposed to a friendly kind of four foot wall on which the children and other people could sit, but it, seems to me that an eight., ten or twelve foot wall is really just an invitation to ugly graffiti and is really a symbol of a much more unenlightened society. As the Bishop pointed out. in his let.fer to you, Mayor Ferre, and to the Commissioners, one sentence that Commissioner Dawkins didn't read is that the primary concern of the church is that Mr. Treister's development would enhance the hammock south of the church. The wall would be another barrier to the openness of the natural surroundings. Since neither neighbor, the church, nor Commodore Bay want the wall and I think it would be a mistake to listen to people who do not represent, either of those two neighbors, so I would like just to finish by saying urge you t.o support, the Commodore Bay Project, but. without. insisting upon a permanent or high wall. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Parsons. Mr. Huber Parsons: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Huber R. Parsons, Jr. My offices are located at. 799 Brickell Plaza in Miami. My wife and I previously lived in ld 119 November 15, 1984 t Coconut. Grove on Aviation Avenue. Currently we have two children enrolled in St.. Stephen's Episcopal Day School, which is, as previously noted, located north of and immediately adjacent and contiguous to the proposed Commodore Bay Project. I do want to speak in opposition to { this proposed Commodore Bay Project. It is truly regrettable that. this novel, architecturally striking and innovative development, is not proposed for a suitable site. The crux of this issue is not, per se, the scheme, the aesthetics, the plan or the uses of the proposed development, or for that, matter, the proven track record, and how regarding which the development group is held, but rather, the impact, on first., the site itself, and second, the surrounding area. Coconut, Grove and especially central Coconut. Grove is special and indeed, fragile area and all _ that truly remains of what continues to be referred to as the Village of Coconut. Grove with its at.tendent street lights is that which will be most, and most negatively impacted by this massive development, with in terms of sheer building size, is as I unders*.and it, in excess of 25% of the size of the new Southeast. Financial Center Tower. Consequently, you will be hearing a great deal this afternoon and in no particular order, concerning the impact of this proposed development on traffic movement., or stagnation thereof through central Coconut. Grove, and especially on Main Highway and Commodore Plaza. The impact. of this proposed development on sidewalk street lights on Main Highway and/or on Commodore Plaza, the impact of this proposed developed on the residential, scenic, and - historical corridor located along the bay to the southwest, the impact of this proposed development on real property taxes in the area, and especially on that economic and demographically fragile area to the west, of the development. across Main Highway. The impact of this proposed development on the the provision of city services, including police, fire rescue and sanitary sewer, finally, the interest of the State of Florida in acquiring this property for park land. For these sorts of reasons, it is apparent that a substantial majority of citizens, not directly or indirectly connected with the development, group or with real estate interests in the area, oppose the proposed development. I will very briefly address three principal points. First, the matter that the applications are fatally flawed. For legal reasons, the Applications for each of the zoning changes and the proposed major use special permit are defective. Among the reasons for the foregoing, and they will be addressed more specifically by a later speaker or speakers, are the following: one, the applications do not conform to the purposes and intents set forth in the ordinances which was enacted which resulted in Article 28 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami. Two, the applications which are before the City Commission today were not complete at the time that, they should have been final. Three, taken as a whole, that which is being sought constitutes spot zoning. Four, the application for major use special permit., do not contain a developmental impact study as specifically required by the provisions of Subsection 2802.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, reference is and this connection specifically made to the basic categories of public services and environment. Five, the application have been materially, substantive, and other ways been amended and supplemented - for example, this site plan that is here before you today with this third lane just y appeared in the last ten or fifteen minutes. Since they were originally filed, so as to make those defective and 'j both in violation of public notice requirement. Six, the mat.t.er is not, right. for Commission disposition on account of the fact that the City Commission has not yet received the final recommendations called for in Section 2803 and elsewhere, of the Zoning Ordinance. These and other ld 120 November 15, 1984 s - I defects, non-conformat.ies, and inconsist.eneies indicate and require that these agenda items, including both rezoning matters and the major use special permit, no*. proceed, and be denied today. Second, the matter of the Heritage Conservation Board referral and recommendation - since the proposed development as now materially constituted has not been approved or authorized by the Heritage Conservation Board, the application, including both rezoning matters and the matter of the major use special permit cannot proceed. Consequen+.ly as with respect to this item alone, the hearing today should be deferred until the Ci+.y Commission receives proper notification that, the Heritage Conservation Board has considered the proposed development and made a recommendation. In summary, the development site is an environmental preservation district, Number 46-5, and has, at its westerly extremity, all along its perimeter, abutting Main Highway, a magnificent, virgin hammock. Apparently the Commodore Bay Development. has was then proposed early last summer was taken before the Heritage Conservation Board; however, subsequent to that hearing and just on the very eve of this matter coming before the City Commission September 20th, a dramatic change occurred with respect to the proposed development. and then it was revealed that due to the non -availability of the proposed three or four traffic lanes going through St. Stephen's property to the north, accessing both McFarland and Main Highway, all ingress and egress to the project, would be to the westerly boundary of the property on Main Highway, consequently through the hammock and the environmental preservation district. Obviously, this considerable material change negates the effect of any prior consideration as to this matter given by the Heritage Conservation Board and specifically its resolution HC-8422 dated June 19, 1984. The Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of Chapter 17, entitled Environmental Preservation of the City Code, and other provisions of law require that there be a proper recommendation of the Heritage Conservation Board, to the City Commission, whether or not followed by the City Commission, prior to any final action being taken by the City Commission. Consequently, these matters, should for this reason alone, should be if nothing else, deferred until proper public notice and proper compliance with the law, the proposed development has been considered and acted upon by the Heritage Conservation Board. Third and final, Commissioners, is the matter of the request for analysis, investigation, and a report by the City Administration, as with respect with denial of public access to public decisional process, and to a lack of due process of law. the Commission may recall that, at the hearings held, in other words, the First Reading on September 20th, at least, two members of this City Commission inquired of the City Planning Department, whether due to ingress, egress changes and alterations, this matter would again be referred to the Heritage Conservation Board. That occurred toward the conclusion of the Commission meeting. The question that. I recall then, either stated or clearly assumed a hearing before the Heritage Conservation Board prior to this matter coming on for this hearing today before the City Commission. The response by the representative of the Planning Department to the inquiries made by the Commission member was in the affirmative. Subsequent, to the City Commission meeting of September 20, 1984, but prior to October 16, 1984, principle representatives of the Planning Department. specifically represented to several concerned citizens who are known to have an opponent's view of the proposed development, that the proposed development., as modified, would not - I repeat. not. - be taken to the Heritage Conservation Board prior to the next relevant, meeting of the City Commission. The stated reasons were that one, the sign was not lawfully required; two, no contrary indication or ld 121 November 15, 1984 response, had indeed been given to the inquiries made by the members of the City Commission; and three, there was inadequate time, due to public notice requirements, for the matter to be placed upon the agenda. Interested and S concerned citizens in independent, reliance upon these several segments made by the Ci+.y Planning Department represent. a*.ives, did not, attend the meeting of the Heritage Conservation Board held on Tuesday, October 16, 1984. Not withstanding the statements made to those citizens, three things have in fact occurred which are irrefutable. One, the agenda of the Heritage Conservation Board did not contain any reference to the proposed development, Two, and interoffice memorandum of the Planning Department, which I have, and will present for the record, dated October 16, 1984, was delivered to the Heritage Conservation Board, and presumably, al+.hough I do not. know this, to each of its members; and three, at. the meeting of the Heritage Conservation Board held on Tuesday, October 16, 1984, a principal representative of the Planning Department addressed the subject matter of the proposed development. In connection with this one, I have a tape with me today which I will introduce into the record of that meeting of the Heritage Conservation Board. The factual circumstances outlined above in relation to the denial of interested persons of access +.o the decision making process, *.he matter of consensus building were lacking thereof, and consequently the due process of law. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Parsons, excuse me for +.he interruption, but my colleague says that there are a lot of people here on the Overtown Parkwest. matter. We will not, be hearing any other issue, I don't think, but that, one in particular was deferred this morning, and I am sorry that we didn't repeat again this evening. We will not be discussing Park West Overtown. There was a request by Commissioner Perez that all of these items be deferred and that a special committee be appointed - a five member committee to study these things and recommend them before the December 20th hearing, so those of you that are here on other items, you of course may remain, but it is my opinion that we will not, conclude anything other than what, we are doing right. now. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, for the record, that is Items 23 through 28 were deferred. Mayor Ferre: Items 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28. Correct? Mr. Plummer: Correct.. Mayor Ferre: We are back to you, Mr. Parsons, and I apologize for the interruption. Mr. Parsons: No problem, Mr. Mayor and I will be concluded here in about a minute and one-half. These factual circumstances noted above are in terms of a government's relationship to its citizens - outrageous and require redress. It would appear a proper and useful function that the or a planning department recommend on a professional basis and approval, whether or not with conditions, or y denial of a particular proposed development. It is somewhat arguable whether the principal spokesperson for the Planning Department., in connection with the particular development should, as has obviously proved here in earlier public hearings to be the case, be a advocate of a proposed development.. In fact, no less of an advocate then the applicant. However, when a department and/or a public official commits acts and omissions which deny rightful access to the public decision making process, such acts and omissions should not be condoned, and should be addressed. ld 122 November 15, 1984 Consequently, this respectfully requested and petitioned j that the City Commission direct, and authorize the Administration through the office of the City Manager to review, investigate and report on these matters, or in the event that such a review and invest. igat ion is under way, conf.inue with the same and report, findings to the City j Commission. Please note in this connection that there is no statement or implica*ion here by me made, or which may be inferred that there has been any kind of wrongdoing by the City Commission or any member thereof, whereby the Office of the City Manager, or any member thereof, or by personally, the Director of the Planning Department.. it is desired by this request. that our public institutions by strengthened and utilized such as to allow confidence in our governmental processes. Surely non of us wants less. In conclusion, the proposed applications cannot go forward on account of legal defects. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Mayor Ferre: All right,, Mr. Parsons, I thank you. That took 13 minutes. Mr. Plummer: Are you going +.o ask for an opinion of the City Attorney? Mayor Ferre: Yes, I think that requires it. Mr. Plummer: Because he has raised some heavy questions. There had better be some heavy answers. INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS Mayor Ferre: You know, tha*. is very nice of you to sit out there and talk. I didn't hear a word you said. It is not on the record, which makes i*. illegal, and later on we get. into problems. Now, if you want to speak, come up and get. to that microphone. That puts it on the record. Your name and address for the record. Mr. David McCrea: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, you are quite right. Mr. Mayor, my name is David McCrea. My address is 6755 Royal Palm Drive. My office address is 777 Brickell Avenue. I am here as an attorney for my father, Sloan McCrea who lives at 1990 Tigertail Avenue. The point that I wanted to make to Commissioner Plummer was, we have a number of legal points that various of our speakers will be — addressing, and perhaps in the interests of efficiency in letting the City Attorney hear everything we have to say, we might defer it for a few minutes. Mayor Ferre: Do you want this item deferred until you have had an opportunity? Mr. McCrea: In terms of having the City Attorney address the specific legal questions that we have. Mayor Ferre: Okay, are you going t.o bring up further legal questions? Mr. McCrea: Yes, sir. 7 Mayor Ferre: Well, I think it is appropriate for you to be the next speaker, then, unless ... I think, since we have, obviously some pretty heavy legal things that have been brought up, that we get all of the legal stuff out and then the City Attorney will have to deal with the legal aspects. Mr. Jack R. Rice, Jr.: I am Jack R. Rice, Jr., attorney for Charles J. McCormick. My address is 2424 N. W. 1st Street, Miami, Florida. Mr. McCormick's address is 3370 Royal Road. r.: . He owns Lot14 Run Road plat, Book D, Page 253, lying n. is �i Jt_ ` A } ld 123 November 15, 1984 easterly of Main Highway and soul.herly of Royal Road, shown on the plat entitled the Royal Garden, plat book 20, page 3, i Dade County, Florida, and it• is approximately 10 acres. Mr. McCormick asks you to vote against this project. He has resided, or his family has owned property in the Grove since 1900. His family has owned the property where he resides, which is a short distance, approximately two blocks from the site that is under discussion today. I have listened to Mr. Treister, and he makes a great, argument, but the problem is, he has got, a great project in the wrong place, and he is taking advantage of Peacock Park, which is owned by the public and the Barnacle, which is next, door, southerly of him, for use of the people that. he is going to place in this location, and I think that is contrary to public policy! We can'*. be condemning property for public parks and public uses and then put right. immediately between them, within three and one-half feet. from the park on one side and three and one-half feet from the Barnacle on other sides. Mayor Ferre: Jack, I don't. mean to interrupt you, but you know Mr. Parsons brought some pretty heavy legal arguments. If you have got. ... Mr. Rice: I have some more. Mayor Ferre: Okay, but. you are talking about non -legal issues now, and I would respectfully request that we now get: to the legal aspects of it and then we can come back to the arguments such as what you are now making. Mr. Rice: Predicated upon the ordinance proposed by Mr. Treister or the City by Mr. Luft, the RS-1.1 to RS-4 takes a single family residential area and puts it in high apartment. intensity. It is contrary to the RS-1.1 uniformity that has been applied from Rickenbacker Causeway south to the south City limits. It creates an unrelated district. There is nothing in that area that supports Mr. Treister's application. It., is out, of scale with the area because it. increases and in institutes building bulk. There is no change in condition from the south city limits to e' Rickenbacker Causeway tha*. would authorize this project as contemplated under the ordinance. The building is 34 to 46 ' fee* above grade, and if you put this building in, I would like to show you what will occur. He says he is going to preserve the trees and he is going to put. more trees in Peacock Park. He missed, because he is going to remove practically every tree in the hammock. Why is he going to remove every tree from three and one-half foot on the southerly side to three and one-half foot, on the northerly side? ... all between that, area is going to be a building bulk. He is going to take everything out of there to build the building. Now are you going to preserve the hammock and the flora if he is going to remove all of that? I think some of it. goes down two stories under the ground. In addition, on the outer perimeter here, he has arts and crafts and other types of buildings. How are you going to preserve any trees there? The only trees that I know that he may be preserving is in this center area, right here towards the bay, there appears to be a circular set of trees, but everything else is going to have to be removed. r Now, Number two, why is Mr. Treister permitted to set, back less than 50 feet, from the water? What is there about this project, that. permits him to have a variance from the 50 feet. setback from the water? There is nothing that I could see in the record that. would justify this unless you just, want, to give it to him because he is a nice guy. There is nothing to support, that provision. Thirdly, I have not checked the F.A.R. of this site, but. I have been told that. j the F.A.R. includes bay bottom land, and you know under the 1968 constitution the State of Florida owns the bay bottom ld 124 November 15, 1984 land, unless somebody has given him title to it. by deed in the State of Florida, and there is nothing in this record where I see, or where I could find that he has a deed from the State of Florida for the bay bottom land which is included in the F.A.R.! Secondly, there is a coral rock fence running along there. There are two surveys, one of them, I understand was done in the 60's that shows that, this coral rock fence belongs to the City of Miami. He has included that in his F.A.R. It might not be much, but, it, is probably 500 square foot, or 1000 square foot that gives him more building bulk in this area that he is entitled t.o. I think the city has an obligation to determine what it owns and to provide t.ha* any plans that is submitted by an applicant., that they can't show on his plans an F.A.R. that includes City property. By the way, I want to tell St. Stephen's they need not, worry about, a wall, because they are going to have the apartment house sticking up 46 feet., starting from the bay all the way down for 350 feet distance and that doesn't include all of these little so-called shops where all the artists are going to be doing something and they had better be paying about $25 a square foot, or they won't., be in there and they had better be making a lot of money and on top of that, when they put this road in here, I understand in order to keep from tearing up the foliage, that they are going to to depress the road four foot. Well, what foliage are they protecting? They are digging everything out. there. There is no foliage left., unless what they are protecting is what they are taking out and going to be replacing it.. I am going to get to it! Hold it, hold it. Mayor Ferre: You are wandering and I asked you not to do that, and I asked you to stick to legal arguments and you are talking and foliage and cover and all of this kind of stuff and you are entitled to say that, but please, stick to the legal arguments now and I am going to ask Janet to do the same thing and Mr. McCrea, and let.'s get on with legal arguments now. Mr. Rice: This will have a profound effect on other properties, including my client's 10 acres. He doesn't want to change it to commercial. He wants to keep it. single family residential, and this application is going to grant to a special person a change in zoning that nobody along the bay front has ever enjoyed in the history of my life here, from the time the City was inaugurated in 1896. Mayor Ferre: You were here then? Mr. Rice: No, but, I have been here a long time! We did it differently then. We filled in the bay. Also under the ordinance is the intent of Article 5, Section 500, reference to neighborhood plans, commercial/residential P.D.'s violates the planned development mixed use, as it introduces intense commercial. In other words, it was intended that when you have these P.D.'s, that you utilize it for the existing zoning, which was residential. It creates a residential intense use that towers over surrounding areas and increases traffic. Article 1202, dealing with principal and accessory use, says that. the zoning for the P.D. M/U must be complimentary and compatible, zoning R-S.1 to commercial is not compatible. It provides for a residential use where there is no commercial or private property, and there are no commercial on the surrounding private property along the bay front. This is strictly spot, zoning. Under Section 503, Article 5, you cannot modify setback in height unless certain findings are set forth in the ordinance, and you can't alter ratios or the F.A.R., and certainly there is some playing around with the F.A.R.'s in this application. The information provided does not, properly meet the ld 125 November 15, 1984 w 4 ir requirements of the ordinance, nor does it include all information required under 510.2.3. The parking garage occupies approximately 70% of the total grant site underground parking and 28% of the site for building above the garage. As to the resolution, itviolates the intent, of the waterfront charter amendment. Two, the Commission cannot amend comprehensive plans by major use special permit.. You must follow Section 2804, amended by Ordinance 9649. I wan* go into the traffic study. We have somebody else to do 'hat. Under 2802.3, the final application is not sufficient. The general report impact study is sketchy and provides inadequate information. It allows buildings three and one-half feet. from the property line and there is no substantial question as to who owns the coral rock fence. One other thing, in looking at these plans and as set. forth in the resolution, it sets a thirty-six foot height limitation, but. I noticed penciled in on the plans, appears to be ... forty-six to thirty-six ... penciled in on the plan appears to be a penthouse, and I think we ought to get that, straightened out there ought to be no penthouses permitted under here. I ask the Commission to do the following: I ask that you deny the application and if you are going to let. him do anything with this project, that you send it back to the Planning Director where the intensity of the use is changed, that if you are going to have apartment houses, or residential, it, ought to be as on the Switman property to the south and that it not, be intense ... and by the way, I want to tell you something else you are doing here - you are allowing them 24,000 square feet of restaurant space, which permits them to have six liquor licenses. They are going to have more activity on this six acres than you have anywhere in the Grove, starting with McFarland Street over to Douglas Road. The intensity is just tremendous! I don't think you have given that adequate consideration. I don'*, think the Planning Department has even given it a thought! I now have with Mr. George Acton, who is the former Planning Director. He has a master's degree in Urban Planning. He is a member of the Institute of Certified Planners, a registered State of Florida architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He has 18 years experience as an urban planner and he has been director of the City of Miami Planning Department and consultant for preparation of the ordinance that we now have under review. Mr. Acton. Mayor Ferre: Jack, legal arguments ... I will recognize you for other than legal arguments later on. Mr. George Acton: I am going to address certain parts of the ordinance, but I am not a lawyer, but I can speak to certain parts that are ... Mayor Ferre: You can, and I accept that, and I just ask you not to tell us about, the foliage and the other things that. are non -legal arguments. Go ahead, Mr. Acton. Mr. Acton: Mr. Mayor, can I ask a question? You are going to determine whether it is a legal argument, in the decision to postpone this and if so, you will postpone it, otherwise . . . Mayor Ferre: I think you were listening very carefully. Go ahead, Mr. Acton. Mr. David McCrea: Mr. Acton has requested that. I precede him as he is still in the process of organizing his materials. Before I get. into the precise legal points that I want, to make, I ought to say that my name is David B. McCrea. My residence address is 6755 Royal Palm Drive. My office address is 777 Brickell Avenue. I am here as an Id 126 November 15, 1984 attorney for my father, Sloan McCrea who is a property owner at, 1990 Tigertail Avenue and I also appear as the father of two children who attend the St.. Stephen's School. Before I get into the precise legal points tha+. I would like to make... Mayor Ferre: No, no, no. Mr. McCrea: Wait., the over all concept of my presentation . . . Mayor Ferre: S+ick to the legal arguments and I will recognize you again to fell us about your over all concerns. Mr. McCrea: Okay, I understand, Mr. Mayor. Legally defining what the developer has proposed to do over the last several months has been like nailing jello to the wall. There is a scheme set forth in Article 28 of the handling of major use special permit applications, and frankly, in this instance, it has been thrown in the trash can. Under the major use special permit, Article 28, Section 2802.3.3, the developer is required to submit prior to the time that the application is deemed final for processing, a developmental impact study. The developer is required to prepare the developmental impact, study. It. says the "Applicant shall submit a development impact study except as herein set out". the only exception is for a development of regional impact, which maybe we have here and maybe we don't have, but that certainly hasn't, been the approach of the developer. "The development impact study shall demonstrate whether the impact of the proposed development: is favorable, adverse, or neutral on the economy, public services, environment and housing supply of the City and of the region." In this case, we have had numerous different proposals concerning the traffic with respect to this project. First., we were told there would be access through the St. Stephen's property. Then we were told there would be two lanes through the hammock at the last hearing. Now we are being told there is going there is going to be a third lane. How can you possibly analyze the impact of this project on public services in this City when you don't even know what the plan is. In addition, and also with respect to the traffic, under 2802.3.2, Subsection "A", the developer is required to submit a concept. plan. "The concept plan shall demonstrate not only functional internal relationships within the area to be encompassed, but shall demonstrate particularly the relationship of the concept plan to surrounding existing and proposed future uses, activities, systems and facilities." Further, the developmental impact. study is required to address the environmental impact of this project. There is an environmentally sensitive hammock in the front of this property. The only thing that is in the record concerning the hammock is the tree removal study a perhaps a list of some of the species that are on the property. How can you possibly analyze what should be done in the future to protect, this hammock? Mr. Treister submitted a letter earlier concerning the hammock. I object strenuously with proposed that that be stricken from the record. That is an attempt to amend the application in this case subsequent to the commencement of its processing. I object to this drawing which was presented by Mr. Treister and was labeled "Commodore Bay Site Plan". This thing has changed so many times, Lord knows what. it means now, and it. is another attempt to amend the application in this case, prior to its commencement of processing through the Planning Department. Further, upon receipt of the final application, the City Manager disburses various portions of the application amongst the City departments and agencies. The concept• plan, in this case, as I understand it, was taken up in June of 1984 by the Heritage Conservation Board. There ld 127 November 15, 1984 have been dramatic changes in the concept plan since that. time by virtue of the changes in the traffic flow and by virtue of the impact of the new traffic flow on the hammock. How can we possibly know whether the Heritage Conservation Board previously addressed this plan or some other plan or what they addressed. Further, subsequent to the First Reading before the City Commission, I was told by a member of the City Planning Department that this matter would not be on the agenda at the October 15, 1984 Heritage Conservation Board meeting. In fact, it was not on the agenda, but. yet, on October the 15th or 16th - I don't. remember the exact date, a memorandum was submitted by Mr. Rodriguez, prepared by Mr. Luft, to the Heritage Conserva*.ion Board for the purposes of determining whether or not there had been a change in +.he concept, which would require this project to go back before the Heritage Conservation Board, and that was presented by Mr. Luft - no public notice, no opportunity for all of these people to stand up and scream, or do whatever they want to do. Mayor Ferre: Mr. McCrea, again ... Mr. McCrea: Bear with me, I am making these points for the record. Mayor Ferre: Problem is, I have been bearing with you and with Mr. Rice. Both of you have been skirting on the issue between legal points and points that are non -legal. I would ask you again to ... I know it is difficult to do it, I know this means a great deal to you - I know you have your heart in it., but I would ask you to please speak only to legal arguments because it is my opinion, and I wanted Lucia put on the record what you just told me because I think we are not going to vote on this today. Go ahead. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, I received a letter from Janet. Cooper as well as listening to some of the other legal comments here tonight. I have never personally reviewed the file. I don't any of these, or some of these questions, and most of these questions can't be answered without looking at the file. I don't think they are going to be answered tonight. Mr. McCrea: Okay, let me summarize what I have just been saying. Two point that I wish to make for the record are, there is no ... this application began the processing through the City Planning Department, though the Planning Advisory Board, through the First Hearing of the City Commission without there being a complete and sufficient Developmental Impact Study. Further, the major use special permit concept plan has been changed so many times after the application was deemed to be final that it is impossible to tell what it is and we ought to force the developer to go back and start all over again and propose some thing that. can be considered in a logical, rational manner. Further, the major use, special permit resolution right here that you all are being asked to consider tonight contains certain findings of fact. which are without. support in the record. On Page 3, Section one, Subparagraph B, it says "The City Commission finds that the project would not create adverse impact on air quality, ground water, soil, animal life, vegetation, waste water management, or solid waste disposal". It further finds that it would have a number of positive impacts. Where is the support in the record? Section one, paragraph C, "The City Commission finds the adverse impacts related to water demands, energy demands, solid Waste generation, demands on public services and traffic generation will be mitigated by the conditions set forth in Exhibit A." Exhibit A is the major use special permit. The major use special permit refers to the ld 128 November 15, 1984 4-1 40P Commodore Bay Traffic Study dated August 16, 1984 and the marketability study of Commodore Bay, dated August 19, 1984. There have been so many changes in the traffic plan of this project, that this traffic report right here, which, by the way does not address, as I understand it, the third lane issue is totally out of order and does not demonstrate the findings in Paragraph 1-C. Fur+her, you are asked to find, in Paragraph D-5, "The project will have a favorable impact on the environment and the natural resources of this City." Where is it in the record? Further, on Page 4, Section 1-D, Subsection 6, "The project will not adversely affect living conditions in the neighborhood." Finally, and most importantly of all, the project would not., in Sub -paragraph 7 on Page 4 of Section 1-D, "The project would not adversely affect public safety. Finally, just to confirm the dramatic change in this project over the last several months - and on August 31, 1984, Mr. Rodriguez, in his capacity as the executive Secretary of the Planning Advisory Board wrote a memo to the Planning Advisory Board dated Augus+. 31, 1984. On Page 2 of 7, under the category "Traffic Impact.", Paragraph 2, it-, says the following: "The second proposed traffic scheme, forcing all exiting and entering traffic from the project to the Commodore Plaza Main Highway intersection is unacceptable as it results in diminished levels of service from Main Highway traffic and probable severe backup congestion for traffic exiting the Commodore Bay project." If there is any proof that there has been dramatic changes in the concept of this plan. If there is any proof that there has been dramatic changes in the concept of this plan, compare this remark by the Director of the Planning Department, to what the Planning Department. is saying now. Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you, sir. Mr. McCrea: Thank you, Mr. Commissioners. Mayor Ferre: All right., Janet, I guess you have some legal ... or George, do you have some? Mr. George Acton: Yes, I have a few points that I would like to bring to the Commission's attention. Mayor Ferre: Legal? Mr. Acton: Yes, I understand that.. Mayor Ferre: Legal points. All right, go ahead. Mr. Acton: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, I have brought down for your review a copy of the 1977 adopted City of Miami comprehensive plan and I want you to note that in Coconut Grove from the Rickenbacker Causeway to the City limits - the colors you see in that plan are virtually all shades of yellow, with the exception of the park that, exists adjacent to Rickenbacker Causeway around Dinner Key. There is no red on private property from Rickenbacker Causeway all the way down to City limits. If you adopt the ordinance that is in front of you, it would be a flagrant example of spot zoning. What you would be doing is taking a piece of property a 100 feet wide and conferring on that property special privilege that, is not conferred on any other property from the Rickenbacker Causeway all the way down to the City limits. Mayor Ferre: George, how is that a legal argument.? Mr. Acton: Spot zoning, Mr. Mayor, is a legal argument. Am I right, Mr. Rice? ld 129 November 15, 1984 a !� 4 Mr. Rice: You are correct.. t Mayor Ferre: Former City Attorney! (LAUGHTER) Mr. Acton: Okay, Mr. Mayor, that, is point. Number one. I will try to be very brief. The second point I want to make is that. State Law is very clear on what a community has to do prior to the time t ha*, they enact, any zoning that is not in compliance with their adopted comprehensive plan. The City of Miami has not changed the comprehensive plan to allow commercial, residential t:o be placed on specific property to this date. The State law is very clear that before you change the zoning, the plan must be changed. finally, Mr. Mayor, the application of the planned development mixed use in our true underlying zoning, which is supposedly RS-1, Sector 4 is not in accordance with the expressed intent of the planned development., either enabling legislation, or the planned development., mixed use. Those were the major legal points that. I wanted to make, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Right., Mr. Rice? Mr. Rice: I want to remind you that that, was George Acton speaking and two, that I would like to introduce at a later time both of these drawings that we alluded to, and I would like to mark them for identification. Mayor Ferre: Go right, ahead, Mr. Rice. Mr. Rice: The land use plan ... (INAUDIBLE). Mayor Ferre: Janet, it is your turn at bat. Mr. Michael Simonoff: Just before then finish up the legal thing, I want to do one thing for the legal record. I want incorporate all the comments made by the attorneys and the people speaking before me, as well as any comments being made by Janet Cooper into this record in case there may be a future look at. this. Mr. Rice: Exhibit two for identification, the so called planned development for the property - the reason is that no one has spoken so far may have legal standing within the 375 feet radius, and I do ... Mayor Ferre: Let the record reflect that the speaker in all of this is a Mr. Michael Simonoff. All right, Ms. Cooper. Ms. Janet Cooper: Janet Cooper with offices at 169 East. Flagler Street. I am very proud to be here today representing Friends of the Everglades. As you know, Marjory Stoneman Douglas is the Chairman, and the Sierra Club - two very fine organizations. I am going to stick to legal issues; however, I do need to say one thing. Mayor Ferre: Quickly! Ms. Cooper: This map is from the developer's application. Everything in red - well, let me start, with what is in Orange, is the subject. property. Everything in gray is identified as parks and marina. Now, the last time I looked, in the parks and marinas of the City of Miami, there was access to the bay. I have never seen a map that. went from one end practically down to the other with as much access to the bay, and all the arguments that we keep hearing that, we need this project in order to provide access to the bay in this location is a very small portion and this argument just doesn't. wash. I am going to pass this and ask it to be admitted into the record. ld 130 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: Now for the legal arguments. Ms. Cooper: First, as Mr. Acton so rightly pointed out, not only does State law require that there be an amendment to the comprehensive neighborhood plan - however, in specifics, ordinance 9500 Section 2802.7 requires "If the approval of the final application Will involve a change in the adopted Miami comprehensive neighborhood plan, notice shall also be given in accord with the applicable provisions of Chapter 163.381, and 163.387, Florida statute". I just reviewed the notices both City Commission meetings. Nothing was ever mentioned about, a change in the comprehensive plan. The State requirements for notice and hearing have not been met, to the best of my knowledge. In addition, I would like to point in the record to a memorandum dated September 13, 1984 to the City Manager from Aurelio Perez-Lugones, Director of the Administration Department, and in one portion of this memo, it says: "Amending the Miami comprehensive neighborhood plan". It is right here, but nobody has bo+.hered in the record to submit, a copy of the amendment. to the plan, to submit, any evidence to support an application. There is no application in the file for an amendment, to the comprehensive neighborhood plan. There is no notice for any hearing. There is nothing. How can be this accomplished? It can't. I would have been surprised today when I reviewed that. However, I looked at the file yesterday, and now nothing surprises me anymore, because I found that you have before you Item 6 and 7 on the agenda for changes of zoning. These changes of zoning were requested by the Applicant in application dated September 14, 1984. These applications have never been heard by the Zoning Board. The City Code requires that applications submitted by the property owner or his agent be heard by the Zoning Board. I find it very interesting. I find it equally interesting that there are no separate files for applications 6 and 7. All in the information is included in the files for 8. I saw no evidence of any fees being paid for the application for change of zoning. I see two very interesting requests for changes of zoning. I am befuddled by them, actually. One is for RS-1. Sector 1, to RS-1, Sector 4. What are you allowed to build in RS-1? Single family homes! You tell me how you are going to build a single family home with a sector number of 4? When he gets that change, if he gets it, and I don't. think he will, but if he gets it, all he will be able to build at that point is single family homes. Then we have a request for another change of zoning from RS-1, Sector 4 to P.D.M.U. Now, P.D.M.U. allows him to build most anything - attached dwellings high-rise dwellings, multiple dwellings, so on and so forth. This is a critical change. This is what it would permit this project. It is not the special use major permit that would permit this project. It is the change of zoning from RS-1, Sectior 4, which the property is not today to the P.D.M.U. Now, can he get, a change of zoning from RS-1, Sector 4 to P.D.M.U.? I say no. He tried to that originally in his application for major use without filing the application for that change, because of course it cannot be done. It, can't be done because of the specific provisions in Section 503, which states "It is specifically provided however, that where floor area and similar ratios, including land use intensity ratios have been generally established by these regulations for a particular type of district and any particular areas, the City Commission shall not, act in a particular case to alter said ratio". So, you couldn't take the property from RS-1, Sector 1 and transform it into P.D.M.U., giving him what he is requesting. That is why he has to come back and file an application for the sector change first and then the change to the P.D.M.U., so we see an attempt. to get around the specific provision of the code. ld 131 November 15, 1984 q However, there is another problem that, is created by that, and that is a prohibition in Article 35, specifically Section 3514.3, which prohibits the Commission from considering a successive change of zoning any sooner than 18 months after a first change of zoning has been granted. What, I '.ell you is this project cannot, be accomplished from the present. zoning, which allows 30 single family homes, to what is being requested, 197 dwelling units - 80,000 square feet of commercial and office space and a parking garage, allegedly public, for almost 700 cars. It is not permitted under the code This is the major thrust, of my argument. There are other more detailed ones, but they are included in the letter, and I would rest at this point unless you have any questions. Mayor Ferre: No, I would say that the letter would be then submitted into the record for the City Attorney to also answer when she answers generally all of the other legal arguments that have been made. Now, are there any other lawyers or people that: wish to present legal arguments at this time - legal arguments? Mr. Jim McMaster: I am not a lawyer, but: I have some legal arguments. If they are not, you correct me. My name is Jim McMaster. I live at 2940 S. W. 30th Court. in Coconut. Grove, and I am the gentlemen who brought up the question about the coral rock wall at the last. ... Mayor Ferre: How is that a legal argument? Mr. McMaster: Well, I have surveys here dating from 1967 from the City line and grade office down at the City building on 2nd Street, clearly showing the coral rock wall belongs to the City of Miami. There is a companion survey see Mayor Ferre: All right, then let the record submit that is something that needs to be legally determined. Mr. McMaster: I talked to Mr. George Campbell prior to the other City council meeting and he assured me there is no question the Cit.y's plat supersedes Mr. Treist.er's. Mayor Ferre: All right. Mr. McMaster: So I have these. As far as the May 31 from Mr. Campbell to everyone involved, clarification and encroachment, and clarification of ownership of submerged lands and/or submit revised tentative. That is May 31. We have a letter here from the Bureau of State Land Management. dated June 6th stating that the bay bottom is vested in the State of Florida. Mr. Treister has used 34,000 square feet of bay bottom for his F.A.R. Mayor Ferre: That has already been pointed out. Mr. McMaster: I am saying that I want to introduce this letter into the record. Mayor Ferre: Okay, will you give those to the Clerk and Janet, would you give a copy of your ... you already have, all right. Are there any other lawyers or people who wish to present, legal arguments at this time? Ms. Cooper: Two other brief things, if I may, that were not in my letter, but came up. First of all, we do need to file a technical objection to the submission of a new plan. I think that has been done. Second of all, I need to point out to you Mr. Treister represented to you that this is a preliminary hearing, that no building permit is going to be ld 132 November 15, 1984 pulled here tonight, but-. what you would be doing here tonight if you were to vote on this and approve it, would be authorizing him to pull a building permit-.. I+. is not, a preliminary hearing. It would be Second Reading on the changes of zoning and the final hearing on the major use. Mayor Ferre: All right - legal. Ms. Carol Kniseley: I was going to make some of the arguments *ha+ Ms. Cooper made. I am Carol Kniseley. I live a*. 3877 Li*+le Avenue. I am a resident, of Coconut Grove and a member of the Board of Directors of Coconut-. Grove Civic Club, and I am pleased tha+. Ms. Cooper brought. out some of the poin*.s that we brought. out at the last-• meeting, as members of its homeowner's association and I would like to incorpora*e the things she has mentioned. Many of these *.hings are not available, as you may find, if you look at the file. Anyone can go down there and look at it, and I want to really encourage the fact-, that these procedural guidelines for different projects and from the to be considered in the same light.. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: I assume that that concludes it and now, Mr. Treister, I don't know whether you want your attorney to make a statement of some sort. I think it is quite obvious from what Mrs. Dougherty has said that she is going to need to look at the record and study all of these legal arguments. Now, do you have any problems with that? The question is, do you have any problems with the procedure? Into the record. I will repeat it. Our Ci*.y Attorney, Lucia Dougherty has stated into the record that with all of the legal issues that have been brought forward and they wanted them all to go into the record so that we don't have a repetition of this again at the next meeting, okay? She is going to look, and I would recommend procedurally that after she has done it, that she invite your attorney, (whoever represents you legally in this) and all these attorneys, and I would limit. it, with all due respects to Mrs. Kniseley and Mr. McMasters and the others to the attorneys, namely Janet Cooper, Jack Rice - I don't know who the other attorneys were. I am sorry - Mr. McCrea, Mr. Doney. Mr. Simonhoff: What are you limiting to attorneys, the future hearings? Mayor Ferre: Legal discussions that Lucia Dougherty will have with all of the attorneys on the legal questions. You sir, are not an attorney, but. Mr. Parsons is, and he will be invited. Mr. Treister: Is it my understanding, Mr. Mayor, because of these legal questions, that we can proceed with this hearing and a vote of the Commission and if the Commission approves this, that we would then have a subsequent hearing with the City Attorney and attorneys on both sides to decide whether this has been legally done or not? Mayor Ferre: If the City Attorney tells me ... (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: Wait a moment! If the City Attorney tells me that she feels comfortable with that after all these complicated legal' issues that have been brought. up, then I would so rule, but. I think we need to be guided by her. Mr. Treister: If I can just say why I think that is proper. We did, at least our intent was to follow the laws of the City and we were advised by the ... ld 133 November 15, 1984 6 Mayor Ferre: But that is not what these people are saying. Mr. Treister: I understand that, but I just want you to know that the City Administration in all cases has told us that we were following the procedures. Mayor Ferre: City Administ•rat.ion? Mr. Treister: Administration, right. Mayor Ferre: The City Administration is not the City law officer. Mr. Treister: I understand that, and we obviously want, to do what is legally correct. We have been working for one year at these hearings and doing exactly what the Administration advised us was legally correct. We would like to have the permission of having this hearing heard tonight. We have people here that came to speak on the issue. We have been postponed now three times on this particular issue. We would be very happy if we were lucky enough to get the Commission's blessing on this, to submit the approval to the attorneys for the City. We would like to be represented, and if the City Attorney says that we erred or the City erred, we would then follow that mandate, or if we did not err, which we don't think we did, we obviously would not, you know, object: to that. So, we would like to go on that. procedure. Mayor Ferre: Lucia, there you have it. You have five attorneys bringing up legal considerations on one side. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, it is rather simple. Mayor Ferre: And you, at the request of the Applicant of this, that it be heard tonight and that we come to a conclusion and then let you deliberate on the legal questions after the vote. Now, you have got to give us legal guidance. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Treister, I think it is really in your best interests not, to close these hearings today with a formal vote, because what may be minor sorts of problems or deficits with your application could be cured by reason of doing something in between now and the final vote, so I would say even for your own best interests, if there are some defects, minor or otherwise, that you don't foreclose your ability to open these proceedings and supplement the record by not continuing the hearing, so ... Mr. Treister: With all due respects, we would prefer to hear it tonight. We do not. think we have any legal defects. We have studied this now very thoroughly and we would like to hear this on its merits and we are subject to any legal findings of the Commission afterwards, or the City Attorney. Mayor Ferre: All right., the City Commission doesn't have legal findings. This is not a court of law, nor are we lawyers up here. It is the City Attorney and the courts of this community that would have legal findings. Now, there have been legal questions posed. Commissioner Plummer, who will be back hopefully in a moment, said that he wanted some legal answers. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, I am not prepared to give those legal answers. Excuse me for interrupting you. Mayor Ferre: That is what I thought. you had said. ld 134 November 15, 1984 Mrs. Dougherty: But, at the same time, Mr. Mayor, some of these things are so profound that you would be foreclosed from doing anything further, so I cannot advise you to take a vote on it now. You might ... Mayor Ferre: Unless somebody gives me other reasons, I would be guided by the City V t.orney's recommendation on that. 1, of course, could be overridden by three votes. Mr. Treister: Mr. Mayor, we haven't had a chance, or Mr. Luft, hasn't, or the City Manager, to answer some of these legal ques+.ions which are completely - many, of which are erroneous, many of them are not, true, and if this is going to proceed with another mont.h's delay, or more months, I think Mr. Luft, or the City Manager should answer these questions, since we have been guided by their opinions as to the laws of the City of Miami for a year. Mayor Ferre: Ken, the point is that these are legal questions than, have been posed. I do not, think that. Mr. Luft or the City Manager can answer legal questions. They have got, to be answered by the Legal Department. That is why I have been trying to limit all this stuff about foliage and the wall land all this other you know, totally superflous - we spent and hour of which 20 minutes dealt with legal issues. The reason I am trying to do that. is I heard very clearly that Ms. Dougherty said that she did not think that she could give a legal opinion on serious legal questions now. Mr. Scharlin: Mr. Mayor, may I say something. Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir, Mr. Scharlin. Mr. Scharlin: Just a few comments. Mayor Ferre: Of course. Mr. Scharlin: My name is Howard Scharlin. I am one of the Applicants. I live at 3615 Battersea Road, Miami. My office is at 1399 S. W. 1st Avenue, Miami. I recognize that. the Commission has before it., based on the presentation of parties opposed to this application, a terrible question to face. They have - one of the major objections you have heard, as a matter of fact, is that reviewing the application has been a bowl of jello, and they couldn't pin down what we were doing. We, on the other hand, for the first time are hearing their legal objections. It is fair, they are entitled to do that, but take apart what has been said. Take apart a moment., because it is frightening for legal people to speak to non -legal people, and use a lot of section numbers and use a lot of rules and make all kinds of allegations and everyone says "My God, my God! The law must be broken with that many numbers, with that many months, with that many hearings, with that many notices that have been published, or have not been published, there must be something wrong. All that smoke - fire is there someplace". Well, what have they said? They said that the mixed use procedure upsets them because they are constant changes in it, but the whole concept of the hearing procedure, and if you take apart. - and I was making notes of each of the objections, and will come to Janet in a moment - you take apart what was said one thing at. a time. There was a serious concern that there wasn't proper no+.ice. First Mr. McCrea insisted that that ground plan or site plan be inserted in the record, and then he stood up and said "I want it. stricken from the record because it. was a change from what was originally done". But the purpose of hearings, the purpose of interplay between a developer and the City Planning Department, and ultimately the initial ld 135 November 15, 1984 Planning Advisory Board, which was inserted instead of the Zoning Board, in this situation for the consideration of zoning. I don't know why, but. that, was the requirement.. Our appearance before the Board and our dealings with the Planning Department is to enable this mixed use to evolve as the best. possible use, both for the developer and the public. Inherent, in i} - inherent, is constant change. If you had a procedure where everyt.ime at each step any change was made, you had to go back to ground zero, which is the implication from all of the objections to the jello that, they couldn't nail to the wall. If you had to do that, you would never have any forward motion. The purpose of your ordinance and it is very good one, although it, is not. located in any one place in the book - the purpose of your ordinance in substance, is to allow a developer to present an application, to deal with your professionals - (And by the way, as an aside, our law over the last two centuries has been evolving from one of procedure to one of substance.) Are we getting in substance what we as a community need? Is everyone getting an opportunity to understand? And maybe the opponents haven't had their chance to understand what was going on, but everyone as far as I know has made an effort, to be as open as we could, to deal with all of the bodies at each step of the way as we should. Now, so much for changes. Whether the application was complete, did we have a development impact.? Yes, there is development impact. It is difficult for the City Attorney to say here now, that we did or we didn't, but there is a very detailed study of the impact of this development on the community, and on the local residents and on the traffic. I think my partner is going to summarize. Mr. Treister: Mr. Mayor and the City Commission, I do not think it., is a legal question that is posed now. If I can, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Luft has been our planner in charge of our procedures. They said we haven't done things which we did. They said we didn't submit. applications which we did. I would appreciate it: if Mr. Luft , or I can ... Mayor Ferre: No, sir. Kenny, you have to understand this, and Howard, I want you to listen to this. I, personally resent any implication that has been made here about honorability on the part of the developers. I think there is no proof of that; on the contrary, I think both you and Mr. Scharlin and the other members of your group have in my opinion, been great citizens of this community. I think that you are honorable men and trying to do the right thing. There are people who have a different vision of what Coconut Grove and Miami should be. They are entitled also to their opinion. I don't think any of that is the question. We are not now dealing with the merits or the substance of the is- sue as such. When Mr. Parsons started to talk and subse- quent to that, ending with Janet Cooper, there were a whole series of accusations that deal with the law that are a lot more than just a lot of numbers. Now, Commissioner Plummer, at: the conclusion of Mr. Parson's remarks, said, "I need an answer before I can render a vote. Subsequent to that, af- ter several other speakers, our City Attorney said she can- not, in her opinion, give us a legal opinion on the ques- tions posed at this particular time, without spreading this further. I recommended to you, to the Applicant and to the the opponents, procedurally that. Janet Cooper have a meeting amongst lawyers so that you can, after she has had an oppor- tunity to study this, so that you can all come to a discus- sion - you can argue it back and forth among the lawyers, and then at the next meeting, she will be privy to your ar- guments and she will then render a legal opinion. Now, I want to tell you, and I want to tell all those opponents that, I will be guided as I have for 15 years, by the opinion of the City Attorney, and I will not accept personally, your ld 136 November 15, 1984 6 arguments, or Jack Rice's arguments, or Howard Scharlin's arguments, one way or the other, once she has rendered a le- gal opinion on legal matters and I will be guided by what you say. Beyond that, your place is to challenge her legal opinion in a court of law, not in this political body. Now, if we get past the legal stuff that is going on here, then we could proceed to the foilage and the vegetation and the traffic and what the school says and what Friends of the Ev- erglades say, and all these other things that. are important and should be brought to the record. We also have - Mrs. Dann has written me a letter which I made par*, of the re- cord. We have a telegram from Elton Geisendanner. It is an issue that we need to discuss. On the other hand, Mrs. Dann, I am not going to allow that subject to all of a sudden be a door, a massive door to stop this project without it being substan*ive in nature. In other words, Elton Geisendanner, and therefore the Governor, his boss, and the Cabinet, have got to put their money where their mouth is, because, if at the end of this rainbow, they say, well, you know, we are willing to chip in $200,000, well, that is very nice, but that won't do the trick, and we really need to have that. as a real issue. If they are really talking about buying this property to add to the Barnacle as a park, then they have got to act on it in a reasonable time. We can't stall this for six months or three months, while they are thinking whether they are going to give us $100,000 or $500,000, so I think we need to follow some due process there, and it needs to be timely so that these people will have a reasonable an- swer on a timely basis. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor ... Mayor Ferre: Janet, let the Applicants have their say, be- cause I have already ruled on this and ... Ms. Cooper: I just have a couple more points. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but you see, that is ... Ms. Cooper: When you are ready. Mayor Ferre: I will recognize you later on. She has made a statement and I have ruled on this. I can be overruled by three members of this Commission. Mr. Treister: Mr. Mayor, on the timeliness of this, if we agree to this, which we may have to, obviously, because you have the authority. We were supposed to be on the agenda in June, and it, was legal question, and they said the applica- tion was not. our fault., but was published wrong. We were then postponed through August and then into the fall and we would appreciate it if this could be done - the legal meet- ing in the next few days and we could be heard without a week because .. Mayor Ferre: That is reasonable. I don't know whether we can hear you in a week. Mr. Plummer: No, not. within a week. We don't meet again for a month. Mayor Ferre: I don't see how we can hear you in a week, but: I think that the meeting should be concluded and that hope- fully, the City Attorney would conclude her ... now, I want to tell you so that you don't get angry at me later on. Be- yond this, once we have a legal opinion, the rest of these legal arguments are before a court of law, because this is not a competent. jurisdiction to that, and only as to the procedure, do we get involved in this whole legal question. Beyond the ruling of the City Attorney, beyond that, you are ld 137 November 15, 1984 it i r into a court, of law, because I am not at the next meeting going to then have three more attorneys stand forward and say "Well, and this one, and that one, and we forgot to say that. Section such and such were not discussed". That is not fair. Okay? Mr. Treister: Could we have it. as soon as possible and all 3f.. that? i Mrs. Dougherty: I am available tomorrow. i Mr. Treis*er: No, I meant f.he ... Mayor Ferre: I don't see any reason why it can't. be brought. to the next meeting, and then we will hopefully conclude it. Mr. Treister: We will agree to that. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Treister. Yes, Ma'am. Ms. Cooper: First of all, I also have the utmost respect for the City Staff, for Mr. Treister, who has done a lot of fine things for the community and who is very well known, and for Mr. Scharlin. He doesn't know that I know of him, but through is very fine activities in another organization that he and I belong to (GASP), and I have always had tre- mendous respect for him, if for no other reason, for his work in that organization. However, I do need to point out that. I didn't overlook the fact that the Planning Advisory Board did meet on this issue. I didn't think that the Plan- ning Advisory Board made a recommendation on the application for change of zoning. The reason I thought that is the Planning Advisory Board met on September 12th and these ap- plications were not filed until two days later, September - 14th, so I really don't think that the Planning Advisory Board could have been substituted for the Zoning Board to F" have voted on the application for a change of zoning. See- and of all, in regard to jello and our complaint that we have been having difficulty knowing what is going on. We may have some difficulties working with a system that allows the developer to make changes at will and I am not sure that that is what the code provides, but even assuming that it does, we may have difficulty working with it, but if we did- n't object to it. What we object to is the failure to dis- seminate information - letters that were being written Octo- ber 12th that are not admitted into the public record, that are not. in the file until the hearing - no opportunity to review them. The developer not submitting the plans, not meeting with the people. Mayor Ferre: Janet., the City Attorney has decided, I have ruled ... Ms. Cooper: I understand. Mayor Ferre: You are not talking to any of this. Ms. Cooper: Let me say one other thing. If Mr. Treister is so anxious to have a final decision, I can provide an oppor- tunity for him to have that by Section 3508.1, which pro- vides that the Zoning Board must hear the application for change of zoning within 60 days of the application. That has not occurred, so I think we could, if he wants a final decision, we could make a ruling that the application be ad- ministratively denied for failure to comply with that. Mayor Ferre: I thought you were going to challenge him to a dual or something - something practical) [A ld 138 November 15, 1984 6 44 Mr. Cooper: No, no, I am just trying to be helpful and an- swer his question and solve his time problem! Lastly, I would like to ask that. the record, since the condition of the record, as it stands today, be maintained in the securi- ty of Mr. Ongie. Mayor Ferre: That is fine. All right., is '-.here anything else now? Legally, do we need to vote on this to continue for further information? Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir, to a time and place certain. Mayor Ferre: All right. Mr. McCrea: One more point., please, sir. I certainly hope that *.here has been no implication made by the people who are opponents who have been speaking to these legal issues that would impune the integrity of any individual. Mayor Ferre: I didn't think so. Mr. McCrea: Mr. Scharlin and Mr. Treister have a record of service in the community which speaks for itself, and I have in no way, shape or form impuned anyone's integrity. Mayor Ferre: I didn't say that you had. I just, wanted to clarify in case somebody might, misinterpret. Mr. Fraser Schuh: Mr. Mayor, may I say something briefly. My name is Fraser Schuh, and I live at 6953 S. W. 128th Place. My office address is 3000 Miami Center, 100 Chopin Plaza, Miami, and I represent David Swetland, who is the co- owner and co -developer of the Biscayne Camp Development with Mike Simonoff and I have several legal arguments to bring here today, all of which were more than adequately covered by the attorneys who spoke, however, if there is to be a hearing on these legal arguments in front of the City Attor- ney ... Mayor Ferre: Are you an attorney? Mr. Schuh: Yes, I am. Mayor Ferre: And your name again? Mr. Schuh: Fraser Schuh - S-c-h-u-h. I would like to be included in a legal argument made to the City Attorney. Mayor Ferre: I don't mean to exclude those who are not at- torneys, but since in effect the arguments are legal, I think and you have some pretty heavy weight - and I mean that figuratively (LAUGHTER) legal talent, I think you ought to kind of depend on them. You have enough certainly to protect your interests and I think it will go easier if we get, lawyers to deal with these issues that are legal in na- ture rather than otherwise, even though I do agree with Shakespeare in his opinion about. lawyers. Mr. Plummer: Yes, all to do about. nothing! (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: We may have to. All right, yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Mr. we would like to deadline be set surrendered to by 29th or some date. Mayor, I would suggest as you said, that get. the legalities behind us - t.hat a for any and all legal arguments to be the City At.t.orney by no later than the ld 139 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: Or before then. J. L., as a matter of fact, we are really kind of stretching it to do this today. I really don't think that we can take any more legal arguments beyond today. Mr. Plummer: 21st.? Fine. Mayor Ferre: Whatever other - all right., 21s*. is fine. Mr. Plummer: I am just, saying that everybody that wants to surrender legal argumen*s do it by the 21st ... Mayor Ferre: Which is Wednesday. Mr. Plummer: Which is nex*. Wednesday. Mayor Ferre: If you have any further arguments or any of your friends, clients or associates or otherwise, please submit them to Lucia Dougherty those things that, have not. been brought. up, and as of 5:00 P.M. on the 21st of November, which is the day before Thanksgiving, everything is cut off, and hopefully Mrs. Dougherty will have a meeting with the affected attorneys that are on the record in the following week - I would imagine towards the end of the week, so that she can be ready to give an opinion to this Commission in the first week of December, so that. this Commission can then - or certainly by the 10th of December so that we can then deal with it on the zoning meeting, which will be on the 20th. Mr. Treister: Mr. Mayor, I am not a lawyer - I would appreciate it if they could have less time to put the arguments forward so that we could have time to receive them and have our attorneys review them in proper time for the hearing. Mayor Ferre: Kenny, how could you have less time than the 21st, which is 6 days from now? Mr. Treister: No, no, we need time after they submitted all their arguments to have somebody before this hearing ... Mayor Ferre: The 21st is a Wednesday, and we are not going to hear it until the 20th of December. Mr. Treister: Oh, I am sorry. In other words, the Legal Department ruled to that. Mayor Ferre: You are going to have four weeks to think about it, argue it and look at it. Mr. Treister: There will be a hearing with the Legal Department right prior to the City Commission meeting, is that it? Mayor Ferre: No! I would imagine that. she would call together all these lawyers in the end of November, and hopefully, she would conclude a legal opinion a week later, sometime in the week of the 10th through the 14th so that you ... Mr. Treister: Mr Mayor, how much time after the deadline that the opponents can submit these arguments, will we have before the City Attorney rules to answer those objections? Mayor Ferre: Well, I think you should have as much time as they have. Mr. Treister: Yes, but. we have to get. them first. If you are giving them to the 21st ... ld 140 November 15, 1984 A C_ J i Mayor Ferre: Right,, and that, is six days, so we will give you a week to answer everything before she concludes. That means she is not conclude her position legally on this until a week after that. She is going to need at least a week to think about all the things you are going to talk about.. Mr. Treister: Fine, thank you. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor, I am leaving the country on December 11th, so I would very much appreciate ... (LAUGHTER) ... I know Mr. Treist.er and Mr. Scharlin and his friends are very unhappy about that and maybe they would like to finance my trip! Mayor Ferre: They would if you accept a one-way ticket! Ms. Cooper: What if I promise to come back after the hearing? But I would certainly appreciate it, and I don't. think Mr. Treister would object if we were hold the hearing no later than December 10th. Mayor Ferre: All right, they would like to have the hearing as quickly as possible! Problem is that there are five members of this Commission who ... this is a part time job, you know, and there are five members of this Commission who have got other things to do. They travel, they have families, they run businesses ... Ms. Cooper: Well, come with me on the 11th! Mayor Ferre: But not if you have a one-way ticket! (LAUGHTER) Ms. Cooper: So far it is round trip. Mayor Ferre: Sounds like an offer I can't refuse. Mr. Plummer: Mayor, I move these items 6, 7 and 8 be deferred until December 20t.h. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: There is a motion and a second. Continued, you mean. Mr. Plummer: Continued to 9:00 A.M. Mayor Ferre: Not 9:00 A.M., because you already gave those people on 22nd Avenue ... Mr. Plummer: 3:30 P.M. Ms. Cooper: Let, me ask you this. You have meetings scheduled for the 12th, the 13t.h and the 20th. Mayor Ferre: They are not zoning meetings. Ms. Cooper: I understand that, but we switch sometimes of necessity. If I can change my ticket to the 13th, can you do it. on the 12th on that, hearing at the least ... Mr. Plummer: No, the 12f.h is a police hearing only. Ms. Cooper: Can we please set it? I really - it is tied up with a number of other people and it is not something that I have a lot of flexibility. With one or two days I do, but. I too ld 141 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: It is a question of what the majority of this Commission has to do. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, the only problem, if it was just 6{ coming back here to answer the legal questions, that is one thing, but I see a hundred people out here biting the bit that wanted to speak tonight who are not going to speak and �w you are talking about another five hours!` Y 8 Ms. Cooper: Well, I don't think you are going to have that, because I think the ruling is going to be that this application cannot even properly be addressed by this Commission. Mr. Plummer: Don't worry about. it. Just go. Ms. Cooper: Well, I might! Mayor Ferre: Well, you are so confident. of your legal opinion, that my advice is take the trip on the 10t.h! Ms. Cooper: Okay, that is a deal. I am that confident. Mayor Ferre: All right, are we ready now to vote on the motion? Okay, call the roll. (NOTE: MOTION DULY MADE AND SECONDED WAS ADOPTED TO CONTINUE MEETING TO DECEMBER 20, 1984. Said motion was later rescinded and superseded by MOTION 84-1317 - see below.) Mayor Ferre: Now, I just don't see how we can do it on the 12th and the 13th is going to be a Regular City Commission meeting, which will be jam packed with things, and I think the 12th is just as important as these police things. I would hope that we would conclude this on the 12th and it is too important a hearing for us to confuse with other issues, and I know you are concerned with zoning and Coconut Grove, but you are also concerned with the Police Department and issues dealing with it. and we don't really want to any way tarnish that. But, the problem Janet, is that the rest of this Commission - you know, we struggled hard to come to an agreement on the 12th and 13th. As I remember, one or two of the members of the Commission are not going to be here the first week of December. Mr. Plummer: I won't. Mayor Ferre: All right, the police hearings, as I recall, was going to start, at 1:00 o'clock? Mr. Rice: Well, you know the rest of us make a living also, and we are required to sit here all day while you go through the police hearings, that is unfair. Mayor Ferre: That is unfair. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: What? That is between you and your fellow attorneys. Janet, there is nobody here the first, week in December, okay? (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: At 1:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.? I have no objections to that. I really don't think that our hearing would take more than one to 6:00 P.M. I am going to tell ld 142 November 15, 1984 A 0 you this, I am not going to stay here un+.il 2:00, 3:00 o'clock in the morning. Mr. Plummer: Neither am I. 9:00 o'clock I am walking out. Mayor Ferre: I would be willing to discuss this from 6:00 to 9:00 o'clock, or even 10 : 00 o'clock, but. I am not going to go much beyond that. Is that acceptable to you, Mr. Treist.er, Mr. Scharlin, Mr. Rice? Anybody have any objections to 6:00 P.M. on the 12th of December? Does anybody have any objec*•ions to that.? (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: I need to ... Mr. Rice It is going to be a long time before you get out of here on that day, I want to tell you. Mayor Ferre: I need to tell you tha*% if we do this as a special thing on the 6th, in my opinion, it is not going to be over by 9:00 o'clock and this Commission is going to be over by 9:00 o'clock, so what you have ... Mr. Rice: Well, let's get a date where we know we can finish it. Mayor Ferre: Therefore I think that we are really to the 20th. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: Let's leave it this way, Jack. Let's try to do it on the 12th. If we cannot, then we will have to roll whatever is left over until the 20th, all right? And we will stay as long as we can on that day to see if we can solve this. Is that acceptable to everyone? So it is the 12th at.. 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Dawkins? Commissioner Perez? Commissioner Plummer? All right, let the record reflect that it was unanimous and the date now is the 12th at 6:00 P.M. Make it a motion. Mr. Plummer: So moved. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Plummer moves, Perez seconds, call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1317 A MOTION TO CONTINUE AGENDA ITEMS 6, 7, AND 8 DEALING WITH THE COMMODORE BAY PROJECT TO THE MEETING PRESENTLY SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 12, 1984, AT CITY HALL, AT 6:00 O'CLOCK P.M. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ld 143 November 15, 1984 ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 33. APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE: APPLICATION OF CONGRESS BUILDING PARTNERS FOR UDAG GRANT. Mayor Ferre: I just got. a telephone call from Mr. Traurig's office - on UDAG which does not involve Little Havana. The Congress building partners ... Mr. Plummer: Move Agenda Item S-3. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call on Agenda Item S-3? Call the roll on S-3. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1318 A RESOLUTION APPROVING IN PRINCIPLE THE APPLICATION OF CONGRESS BUILDING PARTNERS FOR SUBMISSION BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANT, FOR THE ACQUISITION, SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION AND CONVERSION OF THE 21-STORY CONGRESS BUILDING INTO AN OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 34. APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE: APPLICATION OF LITTLE HAVANA PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP FOR UDAG GRANT. Mayor Ferre: Now, I assume, J. L., that the 14,000 square feet office space in the Latin Quarter is something that you have not had an opportunity to review. Mr. Plummer: Has anyone? Mayor Ferre: I know nothing about. it. This is the first. time I have ever heard of it. ld 144 November 15, 1984 z,. yr a x a Mr. Dawkins: Move that• it. be deferred. Mayor Ferre: No, you don't- have to do that., because if you � P don't take it up ... Mayor Ferre: All right., we also have the question that. Gene ` Hancock has been waiting on for six months, and I think out of eourf.esy to him ... Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: On the UDAG, the one tha*. you didn't vote, they i t. have to be in by the first, so if you don'do it. at. this meeting, you have got to wait for the next round. a Mr. Plummer: Until March. 1 Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, I am ready to vote on it excep*, t that there is a member of the Commission who ... Mr. Plummer: The Congress Building has been passed. Go home. i Mayor Ferre: The Congress Building has been passed. The one that is being held up is S-2, which is the one in Little Havana. Yes, sir? Mr. Gerardo Mendez: Mr. Mayor, my name is Gerardo P. _ Mendez. I live at 2530 S. W. 5th Avenue, and my office is at 1437 S. W. 1st Street. I am one of the owners of that building there and I am one of the interested parties with respect, to that UDAG for the Little Havana Office Building project. We would respectfully ask the Commission to approve the recommendation to allow us to petition the Federal government to obtain this UDAG. We have a matter that has to meet a certain deadline. I believe that is everything the Federal government requires prior to :..< submission of this application has been complied with and the only thing that the City Commission needs to do is vote on it and hopefully approve it. Mr. Mendez: As I was saying, Mr. Mayor and the rest of the Commissioners, it is not a very controversial project at j' all. It consists of a five story office building which is going to be located ... a Mr. Plummer: No, according to your application, it is a six story building. Mr. Mendez: Well, actually five, it has been amended. Mr. Plummer: You would be the first six story building on S. W. 1st Street, from my recollection. Unidentified Speaker: We are talking about a six story building on UDAG? ' Mr. Mendez: It has been amended. It does comply with all of the zoning requirements of the City, so there is no special variance or anything of that sort, that we are requesting. We are just requesting the City Commission ... Mayor Ferre: Let me say to Mr. Gus Casteneda UDAG process Y y � is a complex one and it is not an easy thing to do. The -' final say is the Commission's. This is the elected body. It is unreasonable for ... and I know that they have pressures to do other things, for this Department to bring " up something to this Commission that this Commission has not seen before. The Christian Hospital we have seen before, a . you know, for years. The other one, the Congress Building is a non -controversial issue. Yours is controversial. Now, it is, in the opinion of some members of this Commission. • + s" y r v ld 145 November 15, 1984 0 O Mr. Mendez: Well, perhaps I can clarify some of those issues because I don't believe that.. Mayor Ferre: The members of this Commission have a right to say that they don't want to deal with that, or they don't, want to vote, or make the application for that. UDAG grant at this time. Mr. Plummer: Let me make it, easy for you. Let me pass you a motion. Listen well to what I am saying. I offer a motion at this time to gran', the approval of S-2, that if no Commissioner - a single Commissioner does not voice an objection by next. Wednesday, it is approved. If a single Commissioner voices an objection, it is disapproved. I will offer that for you. Then that will give you the time to come see me, come see the members of this Commission. Mr. Mendez: We will accept that. Mayor Ferre: You had better see me and you had better see Perez and you had bet.t.er see Dawkins! Mr. Plummer: I am your neighbor, and I don't know a thing about it..! Mr. Dawkins: .. (inaudible). Mr. Plummer: Well, I am saying ... Mr. Mendez: I think that is fair. We will get ... Mayor Ferre: Yes, but it is fair, but you know, I don't want to mislead you. That, doesn't mean you have got it! Mr. Plummer: Any single Commissioner voices an objection before next Wednesday, the item is denied. You understand that? Mr. Mendez: I understand. Mr. Plummer: Okay, I will offer such a motion. Mayor Ferre: Is that an existing building? Mr. Mendez: No, it is going to be new construction. Mayor Ferre: You have a 14,000 square foot building with five floors? What., it is 2,000 per floor? What does it have, a bathroom in the corridor? Do you have a drawing of this? Can I see it? Where is this going to be? Mr. Plummer: 14th Avenue and S. W. 1st. Street.. It will be 14th and 15th. Mr. Perez: What is the exact address? (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: Does that meet the zoning? Mr. Mendez: Yes, it does. Mr. Plummer: It has five floors it. does. Mr. Casteneda: The amended amount. They have sat with Planning Department and they are decreasing the size of the building by 3,275 square feet and we would also have to lower the amount, of and so forth in relation to that. ld 146 November 15, 1984 ot Mayor Ferre: This doesn't mean that this is going to pass, and .. . Mr. Perez: I think Mr. Mayor, that, it is important that. these people try to reach each member of the Commission. I don't. understand how, Mr. Manager, we have all these important things the same as the last meeting and it is important, to disclose ... (inaudible)... Mayor Ferre: I would rather reverse that. I would say that you ought to make you motion that, by next. Wednesday they ought to have the signature of all five members of the Commission. Unless they get the signature of all five, then this matter ... Mr. Plummer: You have got, to get five to sign off. Mayor Ferre: Is that legal, Lucia? Mrs. Dougherty: This is very creative, but very legal. Mayor Ferre: All right, Plummer's motion then, has been amended as I understand, and that is by the 30th of November, which is the cut-off date ... Mr. Plummer: That. is fine with me. It. gives them more time. Mayor Ferre: That gives you more time, that a memorandum with five signatures - separate, so as not to violate the Sunshine Law, be obtained by the Administration, approving this project:. Mr. Mendez: Mr. Mayor, what if we cannot obtain Commissioner's signature because of absence or some kind of an emergency? Mr. Plummer: That is your problem. You are liable to have to go to Indianapolis to get mine. Mr. Perez: Do you have the opportunity of the December 12t.h? Mr. Plummer: No, no. Mayor Ferre: All, there is a second to that motion? Dawkins seconds. Further discussion, call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1319 A RESOLUTION APPROVING IN PRINCIPLE, THE APPLICATION OF LITTLE HAVANA PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP FOR SUBMISSION BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING 7 URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANT, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX - STORY OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING; FURTHER PROVIDING THAT THE RESOLUTION BECOME EFFECTIVE UPON ITS SIGNING BY ALL CITY COMMISSIONERS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) ld 147 November 15, 1984 0 P Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 35. EXPRESS CONCERN TO STATE DEPT. NATURAL RESOURCES CONCERNING POSSIBLE STATE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BARNACLE, 34TI MAIN HIGHWAY. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: This is Mr. Treister's Commodore Plaza - Agenda Items 6, 7, and 8. Mrs. Dann. Mrs. Linda Dann: Linda Dann, 803 Anastasia Avenue, Coral Gables, 33134. Elton Gissendanner, the head of the Department of Natural Resources is very interested in helping the City, as you read in your telegram, Maurice Ferre. What he said to me in a telephone conversation inserted in the telegram too - he said the Commission has to vote to ask the State to help them. Mayor Ferre: I think that is appropriate that you ask that, and I think we have to take a position, but I think we have to let the State know that it must be a fairly quick response. I think it is unfair to hold all these people up after all this work and all this ... I i Mrs. Dann: I certainly agree with that totally. I am not trying to delay it in any way. I just have heard what Mr. Gissendanner asked that the City Commission has to make a request and then I anyone else who can, like the Friends of z the Everglades and the Sierra Club who are more used to these things ... Marilyn, help me. i Ms. Marilyn Reed: Let me clear the air a little bit here. In order for them to move, we need a resolution to indicate your interests in this. Mayor Ferre: All right. Ms. Reed: The funds are probably ... I will call Elton and find out - I believe they will come from Land and Conservation funds, which is furnished from off shore oil leases and it is a very heavy fund, okay? It has nothing to do with the Deering Estate, which comes under the coral program - I want to clear that up. But, in order for us to move immediately and get this started, we need an ind8ieation of your support and interest. Mayor Ferre: All right, out of courtesy, I think we need to k° Mr. Treister speak to the issue. Mr. Treister: Yes, I think this is out of order. We have }._ for instance, Jim Apthorpe here to speak on this issue - the ex -Governor's aide. Mr. Gissendanner and the Governor we -` could not get by phone. We would like to speak to him. Everybody has left. f:C Gf Id 148 November 15, 1984 ow f Mayor Ferre: I would recommend you talk to the Governor, because that's where the issue ... Mr. Treister: We will, and we would like that opportunity and I just hope that the City wouldn't act on this so ` impetuously and we would like ... i Mayor Ferre: No, it, is not an impetuous thing, Ken. I think we really have an obligation if the State is willing to put up a major amount of money to purchase a major piece of waterfront. property. The least we can do is ... and I would recommend that we word it in the following way, which I think is only fair, that the City is about. to vote on Second Reading on December 20th for your application to develop it as you have proffered, that. we understand from Dr. Gissendanner's telegram that there might be State monies available for the purposes of purchasing the property for that of a State park, but that in fairness to the developer, that we need a very quick response and the Second Reading is on December 20th and if we don't hear otherwise from them, that we do ask them for the money if it is available, but we do need an answer by the 20t.h. Mr. Treister: But., Mr. Mayor, I think that the State has not. been properly informed about this project. I don't think they have been told that the Planning Department and the Administration has supported this proposition. I think they think an individual developer against the will of the people and the City Planning Department is trying to do something. I really don't think this has been presented... Mayor Ferre: Well, I would couch it that way, that the Planning Department and the Board has recommended this and it is about to be voted on and the Commission on First Reading voted favorably for it and it is about to concluded December 20th and they have until then and the City is anxious for an answer from and they are really serious in this. Now, I think it is ... I just do not see how in the world we can turn our back on Dr. Gissendanner's offer, if there is one. On the other hand, I think you are entitled to a speedy, expeditious answer. i Mr. Treister: Well, I just would like the opportunity of talking to him and telling him the facts because ... Mayor Ferre: I think you should immediately. I think you should fly to Tallahassee and talk to the Governor and do everything ... I expect for you to do that and I am sure Marilyn and others will do the same. Ms. Reed: Maybe I can calm you down, Ken. This is not taking issue. You will have to negotiate with them, should this occur. They are required by State law two A.I.A.'s, market values involved, so don't feel afraid of this, we just need to start the process. Mr. Treister: No, we ... Marilyn, I appreciate. Number one, we will not sell to the State. Number two, we want to do the project. We think it is the best for the community. Three, I don't think the State will take property that is going to be open to the community and I don't think, four, the State would want to frustrate the art center and I don't think that the Commission, in debating whether we should have our project or a State project, in my very ... Mayor Ferre: How can you say no, for goodness sake? Mr. Treister: Well, but it wouldn't ... ld 149 November 15, 1984 094 Mayor Ferre: If the State says that they are willing to make money available to purchase this land it is waterfront., how could the City of Miami, not at least pursue it to a reasonable extent so that, there is a reasonable answer? Mr. Treister: Well, as long as the City doesn't say there would like it to be park instead of an art center and a commercial development. If you are just saying to them ... Mayor Ferre: I cannot speak for anybody but one person on this Board, but. I am going to tell you that if the St•a*•e of Florida says that they have money available to purchase any piece of property, including Mr. Gould's project, okay ...? or especially Mr. Gould's property, or any other major proposed development., how in the world can this government body say that we don't' want to listen, we don't want your money? We don't. want any part, of your money - it is unreasonable! Mr. Treist.er: Mr. Mayor, it is a matter of priorities. We have a Naval Reserve Training Center. I think the City should say "Mr. State, give us all the money you can, let, us help you make a wise decision" and then the City of Miami... Mayor Ferre: I would want to put• that as a part of this, that they should also consider the U. S. Naval Reserve Center. I think that is appropriate. I think that is an appropriate resolution. Mr. Treister: I just feel bad that our people left - I am just staying by accident speaking to Jack, and I don't. really think if you ... Mayor Ferre: I mentioned this before we broke up and inadvertently everybody began to leave and we didn't deal with the issue. This is one voice on the Commission. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS) Mayor Ferre: All right, what is the will of this Commission, one way or the other? Ms. Reed: Nobody is committed, it is just to support. the idea. Mr. Dawkins: Well, I feel like the Mayor - if the Governor is going to give us the money, I make a motion that we ask the Governor for the money. If the Governor doesn't give us the money, we let, Mr. Treister build and even if we have the money and Mr. Treist,er shows us a better project, then we go with that. Ms. Reed: We have to start. the process with a resolution. It doesn't mean it is cut in concrete at all. Mayor Ferre: All right. Is there a second to that motion and I think that that mo+.ion should also cover the U. S. Coast. Guard building and we should ask monies for ... Mr. Dawkins: I move as amended by the Mayor. Mr. Plummer: Second. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: ld 150 November 15, 1984 MOTION NO. 84-1320 A MOTION EXPRESSING THE CONCERN OF THE q CITY COMMISSION TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, IN CONNECTION WITH A TELEGRAM RECEIVED FROM THE DIRECTOR, Mr. ELTON J. GISSENDANNER, i CONCERNING THE POSSIBILITY OF STATE FUNDS FOR POSSIBLE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3471 MAIN HIGHWAY, FOR USE AS A STATE PARK, AND RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THE APPROPRIATE STATE AGENCY TO ATTEMPT TO RENDER AN ANSWER TO THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION CONCERNING THIS PROPOSAL BEFORE DECEMBER 20TH, SINCE THIS MATTER IS SCHEDULED TO BE VOTED UPON ON SECOND READING FOR A ZONING CHANGE INVOLVING ITS DEVELOPMENT BY A PRIVATE DEVELOPER; AND ALSO REQUESTING THE APPROPRIATE STATE AGENCY TO INCLUDE IN THEIR CONSIDERATION FOR FUNDING AN ACQUISITION OF THE U.S. NAVAL RESERVE TRAINING CENTER, LOCATED ON SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE FOR A PUBLIC USE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo } Mr. Treister: What is the motion? i Mayor Ferre: The motion says - State of Florida, if you really want to buy this property and you are serious and you want to do it timely, we aroe going to be voting on this on December 20th, you bring your money in and ... Mr. Treister: Before that. Mayor Ferre: That is right. Mr. Treister: And also the Naval Reserve Training Center would be an alternate site. Mayor Ferre: That is right. . ------------------------------------------------------------- 36. FIRST READING ORDINANCE; TEXT AMENDMENT SIGNS, LIMITATIONS, ETC. ARTICLE 20. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Mr. Knox. ld 151 a, - November 15, 1984 Mr. George Knox: For the record, my name is George F. Knox. I am an attorney and a member of the law firm of Long, Knox and Mays with offices located at, 4770 Biscayne Boulevard and I represent a proponent of the measure that is before the Commission at this time, respecting item 16 and the proponent, J. Hancock, simply requests that the City Commission approve and adopt. the recommendation of the Planning Advisory Board, respecting an amendment to Section 9500 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance and further recommend that, in the public interest, that, having adopted the ordinance on First Reading, that. the Commission refer the matter back to the Planning Advisory Board in order that: a question of distance requirements from the Expressway may be clarified and the request for the clarification is again in the public interest. to prevent. a proliferation of outdoor advertising signs along arterials which are parallel to limi+.ed access highways. Mr. Richard Whipple: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, and you will note from the fact sheet., this item was initiated by the Planning Department March 15th of this year. We feel that the Department should have the opportunity to make a full presentation before any enactment on any reading of this ordinance. We initiated the item. There was certain locution and little games played for a number of months until final word was spoken on the record that yes, in fact, the request is to change the ordinance to allow billboards along the Expressway at heights 50, 60, whatever number of feet. We are prepared to make a full presentation of this item. The Administration believes we should have this opportunity before any action and that we should not be forced by virtue of time and what have you, to not have this opportunity. As you know, it has been deferred for various reasons over the past three or four Commission meetings. There are many people involved who want to speak on this item that have not had the opportunity and .. Mayor Ferre: How many people are here that wish to speak on this? i Mr. Whipple: Well, there is only about two or three right, now, but there is more, would be more, if the item was going to be heard. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Whipple, I do think that it is a very important issue, and I do think that it is matter that has to be properly presented, period. That is all I am going to say. Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor ... Mayor Ferre: I am prepared to make a presentation if the Commission desires. Mr. Plummer: You might, be prepared, but: you are going to be doing it to an empty table. Mr. Mayor, as I said before, the only way that we could do justice to this item before us is to hear the full presentation of Mr. Whipple, to hear the full presentation of the people who are vitally interested. We cannot do it tonight. There is just no way we can do it i tonight. It is not Mr. Hancock's fault, nor is it Mr. Knox's or your fault that on t.wo different meetings I everybody had to leave in a hurry. I will leave it at that. Okay, now I am saying the only way we can do justice to this according to what. I am told by the City Attorney because of the time frame is to pass it on First Reading tonight, which keeps back to the Planning Board, where then on the 20th you have the right to make your full presentation. They make their full presentation and the Commission will make a ld 152 November 15, 1984 A A decision. That is why I said tonight, no discussion, just merely do what is necessary. Stay within the framework of the time, and that is what I am suggesting. Mr. Whipple: Well, as this is the Department's petition, the City Commission could direct us to take this back to the Planning Advisory Board and bring it, on up in the proper manner, not withstanding the time limi+.s that are currently attached. Mayor Ferre: Provided +.ha+, we don't get into a legal problem on that, because if there is this 90 day stuff, I will tell you ... Mr. Whipple: Well, Number one, you are amending that section sometime or other, perhaps. Mayor Ferre: Now, you are not the lawyer. Mr. Whipple: All I am saying is the alternative is to just go ahead and send the whole thing back, start it over, do it in a process, and perhaps even with the suggestion that when it comes back to the City Commission, that we hold a Special Hearing so that everybody could make their presentations and... Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Dougherty, we need a legal opinion on this. Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, if you want to keep this particular application and this particular ordinance alive, you are going to have to pass it on First Reading and refer it to the Planning Advisory Board again. Mayor Ferre: Well, that is what Plummer is saying. Whipple is saying ... Mrs. Dougherty: If you want to keep this application alive - I think what the Administration is saying, start it all again, but if you want to keep this one alive, you are just going to have to ... Mayor Ferre: Is that, what you are saying - you start it all over again? Mr. Whipple: What I am saying ... Mayor Ferre: Just yes or no. Mr. Whipple: ... I do not: believe the City Commission should take an official action such as First Reading without having full presentation from both sides. Mr. Plummer: And Whipple, this Commission doesn't want to do that.! But, the only way that, we can be fair to you and to these people is to do it because of this 90 day time frame. Mayor Ferre: Lucia, see, in effect, I did that this morning, as you know, even though we did hear it on this issue on the 22nd with Carollo. Now, so you know, I can in effect rule that that is not proper, I don't think. I don't think I have the prerogative of ruling it out of order. In other words, I do think that it is proper for a member of this Commission. I guess I could get into the technicalities and rule that we can't vote on it if there is no presentation, but as you know, in the Metropolitan Dade County, they traditionally pass things on First Reading and the public hearing is the second hearing. ld 153 November 15, 1984 Mrs. Dougherty: This is a zoning ordinance and it takes two public hearings. Mayor Ferre: I see. Well, this is technically a public hearing, is that correct? I can't deny Rose Gordon, who is back there, and anybody else a right, +o speak. Now, I don't think my posi+.ion is any secret.. Oh, it is a secret? Everybody knows I am opposed to this, but that is just one person's opinion, but I don't want to get into a big hassle in discussing this, and I think Commissioner Plummer has a valid request, which is to pass it on First Reading so as to keep the thing alive, send it back to the Planning Board and then we will have a full fledged presentation and Public Hearing for the Second Reading. Mrs. Dougherty: The Administration has just made a second suggestion. That is, you send it back to the Planning Board, have them come back up for First and Second Reading. While you are there, you are towing your 15 day time. That may get you back where that 30 day ... if you pass the other ordinance, that would repeal that 90 day period, Item 15. That. doesn't come into effect for 30 days. Mr. Plummer: I will be happy to move Item 15. That has caused us more grief. Mayor Ferre: Okay, we will get to that in a moment, as soon as we finish with this. Now, what is the will of the Commission on this particular item? I will accept: a motion either way, but I do have to let Rose and others who want to speak speak. Mrs. Gordon? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I have made my point very well - pass it on First Reading, send it back to Planning Advisory Board, bring it back on the 20th for a full blown discussion. Mayor Ferre: I will accept that as a motion, but this is a public hearing and whoever wishes to speak on this has a right to speak. Mrs. Gordon, would you like to speak on this? Mrs. Rose Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I know a great number of people that would like to speak on this issue that are not: here right, now. Mr. Plummer: Aren't here? Mrs. Rose Gordon: Are not here, no, and if this is a public hearing, I feel like it is inadequate for me to be the only one to speak to the issue when the issue is so important to the City of Miami. I urge you to take whatever legal means there is to defer this, and not take any action, because taking an action would give an impression of acceptance, and I don'.*.believe that acceptance of this - these changes are best the best interests of the City. Mr. Knox: Mr. Mayor, if I may, please. It may be unfortunate that there are not persons here. It is a public hearing. I believe that, there has been no defect in the notice. The matter is properly agendaed. Notice is given to the public by advertisement in the newspaper and all of the procedural requirements for a public hearing have been met and there is no reason not to adopt the measure on First Reading, especially in light of the fact that as all of us know, an ordinance does not. become effective, particularly as relates to land use, unless there is a reading on two public days, record of public days and a thirty day period following the Second Reading. ld 154 November 15, 1984 r Mrs. Gordon: May I speak again, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: Go ahead. Mrs. Gordon: With respect to Mr. Knox, who is a proponent for the change representing a particular interest that would have an economic benefit, from the change, those people who would be here to speak against it have no economic benefit and would be strongly opposed to the change and to pass it even on First. Reading, in my opinion, is condoning the change and giving the wrong impression to people that you were favoring it. Therefore, I would suggest, that you either take no action, or vote negatively, if you must. Mr. Plummer: Rose, no action by the statute means it dies, all right., because of a 90 day time frame for us. No action at all, that is what that. means. Mrs. Gordon: I an not a legal counselor, so I don't, really don't know and I know you have a competent one this year. If there is any way that this could be kept: alive and not adopted tonight, I would strongly urge that. Thank you. Mrs. Dougherty: There is no way that this particular application can stay alive without passing it on First Reading and referring it back. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT) Mrs. Dougherty: You would have to do both. Mayor Ferre: Well now, which is this? Is that it? ... because you just said something differently five minutes ago that the Administration wanted for us to send it back and if this is what: the Administration wants legal, or not.? i 4 Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, certainly, it is legal. Mayor Ferre: Well then ... Mrs. Dougherty: They are just starting it all over with First and Second Reading. 3 Mayor Ferre: So in effect, we have three options. One, is denial, but I think out of fairness to the Petitioner, we have to have a full hearing on this. The second thing is to pass it: on First Reading and send it back to the Planning Board for further discussion to be brought back for Second Hearing eventually. The third way to do it is to send the whole matter back to the Planning Board for further deliberation, is that what: you are telling me? That legally keeps it alive too. Mr. Dawkins: That: doesn't legally keep it alive. That kills it. It starts it all over. Mr. No, it doesn't! Please stop the clock. Mayor Ferre: What is the will of this Commission? One way or the other, we need to get along, because we have got a 3 lot of people here from Morningside. We have people here on the revenue sharing, we have all kinds of things. Mr. Perez: I would like to approve Mayor, on First Reading, 6 if legal. I would like ... I think Commissioner Plummer has made the motion and I will second. Mayor Ferre: There is motion now by Plummer, seconded by Perez that this matter be passed on First Reading and sent back to the Planning Board, and then eventually to come up ld 155 November 15, 1984 % ON on Second Reading, at. which there will be a public hearing at which time ... Mrs. Dougherty: Another public hearing. Mayor Ferre: Another public hearing. Mr. Plummer: Continued public hearing. Mayor Ferre: Continued public hearing. Is }.here anybody here who wishes to speak at this time on this issue. Mrs. Dougherty: Second public hearing. Mayor Ferre: Yes sir, Mr. Whipple? Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, I believe the date certain needs to be attached to the motion and my only question was about. the 20th. Mayor Ferre: I will tell you one thing certain, it is not going to be December 20th! Mr. Whipple: That is what I was wondering, sir. Mayor Ferre: No way we can do it December 20th the way that agenda is piled up now - we have got 27 - on the committee and all this - there is no way it can! Mr. Perez: We have to appoint a committee. Mr. Whipple: That is why I brought it to the Commission's attention. Mayor Ferre: You are right. You are indeed right! Mr. Plummer: Give a date certain. Mayor Ferre: The January meeting is what, the 24th? January 24th. Okay, further discussion? Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 2026 ENTITLED "SIGNS, SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS, AND REQUIREMENTS," OF ARTICLE 20 ENTITLED "GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS" TO CLARIFY BILLBOARD HEIGHT AND CHANGE BILLBOARD HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, INTRODUCE A BILLBOARD SPACING FORMULA AND CHANGE CURRENT LIMITATIONS ON BILLBOARDS LOCATED WITHIN 600' OF LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS, INCLUDING EXPRESSWAYS; 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 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS, BY CLARIFYING APPLICABLE SURFACE AREA AND PROVIDING FOR HEIGHT LIMITATIONS ON GROUND OR FREE-STANDING SIGNS ONSITE AND OFFSITE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. ld 156 November 15, 1984 AN Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Perez and passed on its first reading by ti*,le by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. NOES: Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo ON ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: For the record, what we are voting on - that which was read is the recommendation of the P.A.B., okay? So that is for the record. I vote yes. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and stated that copies had been furnished to the City Commission and that copies were available to the public. 37. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: ARTICLE 35 AMENDMENTS, FAILURE OF CITY COMMISSION TO ACT, PROVISION COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE TO DATE CERTAIN, ETC. Mr. Plummer: Can I move Agenda Item 15? I don't think that will be controversial. I move Item 15. Mayor Ferre: All right, Plummer moves 15. Mr. Perez: Second. Mayor Ferre: There is a second. Is there anybody here who wishes to speak on Item 15 on Second Reading? If not,, read the ordinance. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 35-13 OF ARTICLE 35 BY ADDING A PROVISION THAT THE CITY COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD OR THE ZONING BOARD TO A DATE CERTAIN AND STAY THE TIME WITHIN WHICH THE ITEM IS TO BE LEGISLATIVELY DECIDED DURING SUCH CONTINUANCES; FURTHER, PROVIDING THAT IN THE INSTANCE OF A REFERRAL TO A BOARD OR A CONTINUANCE TO A DATE CERTAIN, THE INTERVENING TIME SHALL NOT BE COUNTED AND THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY CODE SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE ITEM UPON ITS SUBSEQUENT CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COMMISSION; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. passed on its first, reading by title at, the meeting of July 31, 1984, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Perez, the Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote- ld 157 November 15, 1984 As AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Joe Carollo THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE -NO, 9935 The City Attorney read *.he ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. 38. APPOINTMENT OF PERSONS TO BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE TO STUDY VARIOUS PLANNING AND ZONING PROPOSED PIECES OF LEGISLATION. Mayor Ferre: You have a list, of the people that were on the Advisory 9500 Review Committee, where Mr. Gary and Garcia - Pedrosa were co-chairmen and we have a list of the people who were represented, or who were for it. Mr. Plummer: I nominate Mr. Hank Greene. Mayor Ferre: All right, we have a nomination. Mr. Plummer: The Blue Ribbon Committee. Mayor Ferre: Okay, Mr. Perez? Mr. Perez: Guillermo Freixas. Mayor Ferre: He is on the Zoning Board. That is good - this makes this continuity. I appoint Mr. Walter Pierce. (T A P E 18) We need the other two appointments. All right, there is a motion by Commissioner Perez that the three mentioned members plus two others that Dawkins and Carollo will appoint be appointed to a Blue Ribbon Advisory Committee that will recommend to the Commission and to the individuals that were appointed there positions on the items that. were deferred today and will be heard on the 20th of December, as I remember - 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28. Perez moves, Plummer seconds. Further discussion? Call the roll. ld 158 November 15, 1984 The following motion was in+.roduced Commissioner Perez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1321 A MOTION APPOINTING THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS AS A BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE TO STUDY AND RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COMMISSION IN CONNECTION WITH AGENDA ITEMS NOS. 17, 19, 21, 12, 24, 25, 26, 27 AND 28 OF THE PLANNING 7 ZONING AGENDA OF NOVEMBER 15, 1984 IN CONNECTION WITH ITEMS WHICH WERE DEFERRED ON THIS DATE AND WHICH WILL BE HEARD AT THE MEETING PRESENTING SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 20, 1984: (1) Mayor Ferre appointed JANET COOPER (or Stan Price as an alternate if Ms. Cooper is unavailable); (2) Commissioner J. L. Plummer appointed HANK GREENE; (3) Vice Mayor Perez appointed GUILLERMO FREIXAS; and Commissioner Dawkins appointed RON FRAZIER. (NOTE: Pending is Commissioner Joe Carollo's appointment.). by Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Joe Carollo Mayor Ferre: Walter, maybe I should appoint Janet Cooper. You are going to be ex-officio anyway, right? Let the record reflect that I would Janet Cooper - is she around? She is going off to Europe next Wednesday. I would appoint Janet Cooper and if she is not available, in her place - Stan Price. All right, I will appoint Janet Cooper on this committee and if she cannot accept because she must go to Europe, or if she does go to Europe, and the meeting is subsequent to that, I would appoint Stan Price. And I would - I think that the Administration should appoint somebody ex-officio and the City Attorney's office should appoint somebody ex-officio - either the Manager, or the City Attorney, whoever they appoint, should be present, at. all meetings, okay? Let the motion so reflect. Is that all right. with the maker and seconder of the motion? Call the roll. Mr. Ongie: I will just change it.. 39. ALLOCATE $88,537 FY 84-85 F.R.S.F. FOR PREVIOUSLY APPnnVED SOCr'T• SERVICE AGRNCIES DE. 1, 1984 THRU DECEMBER 31, 1984 . t UHE-TWELFTH ) ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Plummer: Did we do Agenda Item 40? 40 is Federal Revenue Sharing. All we are going to do is one -twelfth, right? That is it? I move Item 40 for an additional one - twelfth. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? ld 159 November 15, 1984 MW Mr. Perez: Yes. I need a minute to clarify a resolution that we approved the other day. It, is a senior center of Dade County. You have to clarify something on the senior center of Dade County.4 Mr. Plummer: That has nothing to do with revenue sharing. r Mr. Perez: That is right, that has nothing to do with revenue sharing. The resolution that we approved - Mr. Plummer: Four of them. Mr. Perez: Yes, four. One, was senior seniors. Mr. Frank Castaneda: Yes, the senior centers the purpose was not clear. Last, time remember, I asked if it was for meals or if it is a new program or social service or of Mr. Plummer: Continuation - the four of them. Continuation until a further decision by this Board. Mr. Perez: That is right ... (INAUDIBLE) .... Mr. Plummer: Never been considered by this Commission. We haven't seen it. I have never seen a food bill program for senior citizens. Mr. Castaneda: We have just received one. We have available. Mr. Plummer: I have not, seen it. Mr. Castaneda: I know. Mr. Perez: They closed that project. How are you going to fund that project? Mr. Castaneda: Our intent tonight. was to deal with the revenue sharing issues, not just an additional one -twelfth. Mr. Perez: There is something here that we want to clarify that we approve. ...(INAUDIBLE)... Mr. Castandea: Right. They were in last: Friday. We have evaluations that are just being completed. They are available. Mr. Perez: Okay, but now do you think that they have the same program that they have last year? Mr. Castaneda: I know that they have been *here continuously. Mr. Perez: Okay, I want it clear. Mr. Jose Feito: My name is Jose Feito, 3663 S. W. 8t.h Street and I am coming here for representing Professio, Inc., which we filed the application late and we were considered last, year and we were granted $10,000. We are an organization that we help and bring medical services to the needy people of this community, and all free of charge and all the people working in this group are volunteers and we were presented to you last year and we received the support from this Commission. I am here for any questions you have on this matter. Mr. Plummer: Do you understand what we are doing tonight,? Id 160 November 15, 1984 Mr. Feito: I am not sure, but. I want to be here. Mayor Ferre: We are funding it. for one -twelfth so we can get one ... Mr. Plummer: This is a continuation of old fund's programs from last year. No new programs are being considered. Mr. Feito: So I cannot talk on this issue? Mr. Plummer: Not, tonight. Mr. Feito: Okay. Mr. Castaneda: Professio is a new program. It is not under the one -twelfth. Mayor Ferre: So he doesn't ... Mr. Feito: I was considered lasts year, but in another kind of program. Mr. Castaneda: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, I would like to be clear that if you continue this one -twelfth policy, there is only a balance of $273,000, so in three more months you would have expended all of your funds unless you increase the allocations. Mr. Plummer: Sir, 1 will remind you that this Commission pulls rabbits out. of the hat with an additional $250,000 without. even thinking about it, but: it is kind of hard to say no to hungry people. Mr. Castaneda: It sure is. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Plummer moves. Perez seconds, call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1322 A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING $88,537 OF FY184-85 FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 84-9901 TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES LISTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD FROM DECEMBER 1, 1984 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1984; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO AMEND AGREEMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH SAID AGENCIES FOR CONTINUED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESPECTIVE SOCIAL SERVICE PROGRAMS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Joe Carollo ld 161 November 15, 1984 40. RATIFY ACTION ON CITY MANAGER IN EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF R.F.P.'s FOR SOUTHHEAST OVERTOWN PARK/WEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. Mayor Ferre: Take up Agenda item 39. Mr. Perez: Moved. J Mayor Ferre: Perez moves 39. Plummer seconds 39. Further discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Perez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1323 A RESOLUTION RATIFYING AND APPROVING THE ACTIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER IN EXTENDING THE DEADLINE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PHASE I, FROM OCTOBER 31, 1984 TO DECEMBER 14, 1984; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INFORM ALL INTERESTED PARTIES OF SAID EXTENSION IN THE SAME MANNER AS WHICH THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WAS DISTRIBUTED. S (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here 1 and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) a Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Joe Carollo 41. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: APPLY HERITAGE CONSERVATON OVERLAY DISTRICT HC-1 TO MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: Morningside - Agenda Item 5. Go ahead. The Chair recognizes Item 5. Mr. Plummer: Are most of you people out there for Morningside opposed? (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF AUDIENCE) Mr. Plummer: I am sure glad it is a clear answer! Mayor Ferre: All right., go ahead, present Morningside. Ms. Sara Eaton: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, I am am Sarah Eaton, Historic Preservation consultant, to the ld 162 November 15, 1984 City. Morningside is the first historic district. t.ha*. we have proposed for the City, as opposed to the individual sites that, you have previously heard. Morningside is one of the very few neighborhoods that was developed during the 1920's and 30's that remains intact, and retains its character and its charm. The designation reports that you have in your packet explains in del -ail the historic and architectural significance of the district; and I would like to point out, for the record that Morningside meets at, least six of the criteria for designation where only one is required. Mayor Ferre: In the interest of time, and I don't want to deny the ... first of all, you are very pretty and you are nicely dressed and all that and speak well, and I hate to deny you the right to speak, but:, I think that everybody ... is anybody opposed to this? Ms. Eaton: Well, there has been opposition that we have ... I don't believe anyone is here, as there was opposition at the Planning Advisory Board. We have met ... Mayor Ferre: Is anybody opposed to it. here? All these people have been sitting patiently all day and I think - I have read about: it; there was a very nice article in the Miami Herald, wasn't. there? Ms. Eaton: I think the reason the opponents are not here is because we agreed to compromise with them, even though we still stand by our original recommendation, we do not oppose a change in boundaries. Mr. Plummer: May I make a suggestion? Can we pass this on First Reading. We have got to have a Second Reading anyhow and if these people want to come back and have a full blown hearing, let us do it then. Ms. Eaton: Could we pass the item with the amendment that you see? Mayor Ferre: It. is to exclude the properties on Biscayne Boulevard from the district. It follows the current zoning boundaries. Mayor Ferre: Does anybody disagree with that? You do? Tell us why. On the record, name and address. Mr. Neal Robertson: My name is Neal Robertson. I live at. 670 N. E. 56th Street. My feeling that the boulevard is the entryway to the entire neighborhood is very important to this neighborhood and what is going to happen in this area as a hist:,•ric district. People that are going to have businesses or residents or whatever along the boulevard are going to gain by the fact that we a historic district. As a consequence, they should also chip in and do their fair share to make sure that it is than historic nature of the neighborhood is preserved. Now, I understand the primary resistance to the property owners along the way who want to develop their land. You want to build something new out there. What, we are talking about here is not going to stand in your way. If you are going to alter something that is there, you simply have to come before this board who will approve your plans. Their are going to gain financial benefits to this. The primary objective I am certain that as soon as this goes into effect, they are going to advertise they overlooked historic Morningside. Well, I think they should contribute to the group if they are going to grab a benefit by being a part of that community. That is my reason for resisting. I don't want to exclude that area. ld 163 November 15, 1984 Mayor Ferre: I think it is a valid reason, but, there is also another side to if., and I think in the interests of at least moving this matter ahead with the least, amount of pain — I think if we don't do it as is recommended by Ms. Eaton in this compromise, then I think we would have, in fairness to the other people, have to put this whole matter off and let them have an opportunity to come back and speak, and I think we should move forward with the recommendation as amended and get, this matter under way, and if you wish to pursue it. further on the boulevard portion of it, then we would have to call these people back. Mr. Robertson: Mr. Mayor, I am not certain that I understand the Cit.y's procedures on this, but. I believe the Planning Board approved it. without the amendment.. I am don't know the procedures. Can you do that or not? Mr. Plummer: We have the right to amend. Mr. Robertson: Okay. Mr. Plummer: Well, let me move it ... Mayor Ferre: Well, let's hear from this lady, because she may have something to add to this. Ms. Schaeffer: I am Nora Schaeffer. I live at. 598 N. E. 56th Street. I am a member of the Heritage Conservation Board for the City of Miami. The boulevard frontage, which I am not sure that Neal is aware of, has very few historic buildings on it and the ones that are there have already been restored and are being taken care of. The ordinance would simply want to preserve things that were already historic, and it wouldn't really be putting any kind of, as I understand it ... they would have no power over a building like Mr. , so if we can make this compromise and get done with this, since we have all been here twice, we would really appreciate it very much. Mayor Ferre: So you think we should move on with this. Ms. Schaeffer: Yes, I do. Mr. One thing that I would like to add for the record is to protect those properties that the gentlemen was talking about, we are intending to come back to the Commission with a proposal for an S.P.I. district covering the properties strung in the of our area, that, we take into account guidelines and additional measurements to protect the quality that we would like to get in that area. Mayor Ferre: Is there now therefore an amended motion on Item 5? Plummer moves. Perez seconds. Is there further discu ld 164 November 15, 1984 #�• ssion? Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY APPLYING THE HC-1, GENERAL USE HERITAGE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT TO THE "MORNINGSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT," AN AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY NORTHEAST 60TH STREET ON THE NORTH, BISCAYNE BAY AND MORNINGSIDE PARK ON THE EAST, THE REAR LOT LINE BETWEEN NORTHEAST 55TH STREET AND NORTHEAST 53RD STREET ON THE SOUTH, AND BISCAYNE BOULEVARD ON THE WEST (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN); MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE 14 OF THE ZONING ATLAS MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 9500, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Perez and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and stated that copies had been furnished to the City Commission and that copies were available to the public. 42. ESTABLISH DATE OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 AS DAY OF SPECIAL MEETING TO CONSIDER ON -GOING MATTERS CONCERNED WITH THE BAYSIDE DEVELOPMENT. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mayor Ferre: J. L. before you move Item 33, I want to do this with you and Miller present. Commissioner Carollo - we 4 delivered a copy of the procedure that. Lucia Dougherty - he told me that he was willing to get out of sick bed and come here. Out, of consideration for my colleague Commissioner Dawkins' statement this morning and out of consideration for Commissioner Carollo who is willing to come and vote for these procedures, what I am going to do is this, which is a kind of compromise position. As Mayor, the Charter gives me the right to set rules, so I will announce that the # submission of Lucia Dougherty of rules and procedures for the public hearing for Mr. Gary - I am hereby on the record stating that. those are going to be the rules we will be guided by. However, I will accept amendments to them. We will discuss them on the 29th when we will be meeting next time, at which time, we will then hopefully come to a final conclusion on the rules ... Mr. Plummer: 29t.h of what? ld 165 November 15, 1984 0 Mayor Ferre: of November. We have a meeting ... Mr. Plummer: You do maybe, but we don't! Mayor Ferre: What day are we going to have a meeting? Mrs. Dougherty: On the 12th. Mayor Ferre: We said we had a meeting, as I remember ... Mr. Gary: This was regarding the Rouse project. Mayor Ferre: The Rouse project? Mr. Gary: But you did not decide on that. I had a talk with Gilchrist. Mayor Ferre: You were going to give us an answer whether or not ... Mr. Gary: Right,. I've talked to Mr. Gilchrist• and Mr. Weaver and they prefer to do it on the 3rd or the 4th. Mayor Ferre: 3rd or 4th of what? Mr. Gary: Of December. There is a ceremonial signing with the major - down at ... Ed Rouse ... Mayor Ferre: What date do you want, Mr. Manager, the 3rd or the 4th? I am talking about. Rouse now - Bayside. Mr. Gary: The 3rd. Mayor Ferre: All right, Plummer moves, Dawkins seconds that the Bayside meeting be held on the 3rd of December. Mr. Ongie: We need to call the roll on Bayside. Mayor Ferre: Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1324 A MOTION DECLARING THE DATE OF DECEMBER 3, 1984 AT 12:00 NOON AS THE DATE OF A SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING TO CONSIDER THE ON -GOING MATTERS CONCERNED WITH THE "BAYSIDE PROJECT" WHICH IS TO BE DEVELOPED BY THE ROUSE COMPANY. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo ON ROLL CALL: 12:00 noon, is that all right with you guys? 12:00 noon, all right I vote yes. ------------------------------------------- ld 166 November 15, 1984 eis 43. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT: MIAMI DADE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - ESTABLISH POLICE LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL PROCEDURES Mr. Plummer: I move Agenda Item 33• Mayor Ferre: There is a motion and second on Item 33. Okay. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1325 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH MIAMI-DADE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM ATTACHED, FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICE OF AN ASSESSMENT CENTER FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING POLICE LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL PROCEDURES AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED TWENTY-NINE THOUSAND AND FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS ($29,400.00) WITH FUNDS THEREFOR ALLOCATED FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 44. AUTHORIZE COMPETITIVE QUOTES: BORROW 12.4 MILLION TO INITIATE STORM DRAIN PROJECTS & POLICE FACILITIES. Mr. Dawkins: I move Agenda Item 35. Mayor Ferre: Hold on. Mr. Gary: 35 allows us to go our. and borrow money so that we can begin the storm drainage projects and police facilities. See police facilities underlined? Mr. Dawkins: I move it. Mayor Ferre: Dawkins moves. discussion? Call the roll. Id Plummer seconds. Further 167 November 15, 1984 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 84-1326 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SECURE COMPETITIVE QUOTES FROM INTERESTED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BORROWING $12.4 1 MILLION TO BE SECURED BY NOTES ISSUED BY l THE CITY, SAID FUNDS TO BE USED TO INITIATE CONSTRUCTION OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS AND POLICE FACILITIES; FURTHER PROVIDING THAT SAID NOTES WILL MATURE IN APPROXIMATELY EIGHT MONTHS AND WILL BE REPAID FROM THE PROCEEDS OF THE SALE OF AUTHORIZED GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS ANTICIPATED TO BE SOLD IN THE SPRING OF 1985. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo 45. CONTINUE ALL OTHER ITEMS NOT TAKEN UP TO DECEMBER 20, 1984. ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. Gary: You need a motion to continue all those items you did not take up today. Mayor Ferre: All right., there is a motion by Plummer, seconded by Dawkins that all items not voted on this agenda be continued to the next date certain Commission meeting which is December 20th. Further discussion, call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 84-1327 A MOTION TO CONTINUE ALL PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS ON THE NOVEMBER 15, 1984 AGENDA WHICH WERE NOT ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COMMISSION ON THIS DATE TO THE METING PRESENTLY SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 20, 1984. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins j Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Demetrio J. Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ld 168 November 15, 1984 e*1 eo*) NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Commission, on motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 8:03 P.M. ATTEST: RALPH G. ONGIE City Clerk MATTY HIRAI Assistant City Clerk 169 MAURICE A. FERRE Mayor November 15, 1984 • Clw"�V OF P411AMI ft nne-iiMENT MEETING DATE NOVEMBER 15, 198.4 INDEX EVAI DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION I COAET1eNON AND Co EI O. RATIFY/CONFIRM THE MOTION ADOPTED NOV. 8, 84-1299 1984 TO ALLOCATE $35,000 TO THE ALLAPTTAH MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION (DEC. 1, 1984 - JUNE 30, 1985). AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE AFORE- MENTIONED AGENCY. PROVIDE INKIND SERVICES/FEE WAIVERS IN CONNEC- 84-1300 TION WITH THE MAGIC ILE CULTURAL INDUSTRIAL FAIR (DEC. 8 - 9, 1984) AT PEACOCK PARK. EXPRESS DEEPEST SYMPATHY/SINCEREST CONDOLENCES 84-1301 OF CITY OF MIAMI/ITS CITIZENS TO THE FAMILY/ FRIENDS OF DONAL STEWART, UPON HIS DEATH. - OPPOSE ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEV. BONDS BY 84-1303 METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY TO RELOCATE ANY STABLI- SHED MIAMI BUSINESS FROM CITY OF MIAMI TO UNINCORPORATED DADE COUNTY, ETC. PERMIT SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY LIQUOR 84-1305 - _' PACKAGE STORE ON ALL SUNDAYS (DEC. 1984) DURING THE HOURS 10:00 A.M. THROUGH 10:00 P.M. AUTHORIZE PERMIT TO SELL BEER FOR THE CERAMIC 84-1308 LEAGUE OF MIAMI IN CONNECTION WITH THE "35TH ANNIVERSARY FAIR (KENNETH MYERS PARK. DEC. 1 AND 2, 1984.) ALLOCATE FROM S.P.A.C.F. AN AMOUNT NO TO EXCEED 84-1309 $50.000 PLUS $15,000 TO UNDERWRITE "THE 15TH ANNUAL BUDWEISER HYDROPLANE REGATTA, ETC. APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE APPLICATION OF NEW CHRIS- 84-1312 TIAN HOSPITAL INC. FOR SUBMISSION BY CITY - OF MIAMI TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT (150 - BED ACUTE -CARE GENERAL HOSPITAL). ALLOCATE AN AMOUNT UP -TO $10,000 FROM S.P.A.C.F. 84-1314 TO BE PAID TO WATERHOUSE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE FUNDING OF THE CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL, ETC. — CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING PERTAINING TO MAJOR 84-1315 USE SPECIAL PERMIT/ZONING RECLASSIFICATION FOR TERREMARK CENTRE PROJECT (AVIATION AVE./ TIGERTAIL AVE./SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE FROM 3:30 P.M. OCT. 25, 1984 TO 3:30 P.M. JAN. 24, 1985, ETC. a m ENTol N D E) CONTINUED DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION ISSUE MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT (EXHIBIT "A") 84-1316 AND APPROVE, WITH CONDITIONS, THE BRICKELL STATION TOWERS INC. (32-90 S.W. 8TH. ST./ 801-899 S.W. 1ST. AVE./61-89 S.W. 9TH ST.). APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE THE APPLICATION OF CON- 84-1318 GRESS BUILDING PARTNERS FOR SUBMISSION BY CITY OF MIAMI TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ETC. APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE THE APPLICATION OF LITTLE 84-1319 HAVANA PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP FOR SUBMISSION BY A CITY OF MIAMI TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX -STORY OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING, ETC. ALLOCATE $88,537 FY' 84 - 85 FEDERAL REVENUE 84-1322 SHARING FUNDS APPROPIATED BY ORD. NO. 9901 TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES (FROM DEC. 1, 1984 THROUGH DEC. 31, 1984) ETC. RATIFY/APPROVE ACTIONS OF CITY MANAGER TO 84-1323 EXTEND FOR THE SUBMISSION OF REQUEST OF THE PROPOSALS S.E. OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DEV. PROD. PHASE I (OCT. 31, 1984 - DEC. 14, 1984), ETC. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT 84-1325 WITH MIAMI ,DADE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, FOR PROFES- SIONAL SERVICE OF AN ASSESSMENT CENTER TO STABLISH POLICE LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL PROCE- DURES ($29,400.00), ETC. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER FOR THE PURPOSE OF 84-1326 BORROWING $12.4 MILLION TO BE SECURED BY NOTES ISSUED BY THE CITY (TO INITIATE CONS- TRUCTION OF STORM DRAIN PROJECTS AND POLICE FACILITIES, ETC. r E mm