HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-09429ORDINANCE NO. 9429
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO, 6871, AS
AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
FOR THE CITY OF MI.AAiI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE XXXIT,
SECTION 4(2), APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF 'ZONING
BOARD, BY PROVIDING THAT PERSONS AGGRIEVED BY
ANY ACTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION MAY SEEK RECOURSE
TO THE COURTS BY FILING A P17TITION FOR ISSUANCE OF
A WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN THE MANNER AND WITHIN THE
TIME PROVIDED BY FLORIDA APPELLATE RULES; AND BY
REPEALING ALI., ORDINANCES, CODE. SECTIONS OR PARTS
THEREOF IN CONFLICT AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting
of March 17, 1982, Item No. 3, following an advertised hearing,
adopted Resolution No. PAB 20-82, by a 4 to 3 vote RECOrJ�JENDING
DENIAL of amending Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 6871, as
hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the Citv Commission, after careful consideration of
this matter, deems it advisable and in tlae best interest of the
general welfare of the City of Miami and its inhabitants to grant
this amendment, as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMT, FLORTDA:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 6871, as amended, the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance for the City of Miami, Article XXXII, Section 4(2),
Appeals from Decisions of Zoning Board, is hereby amended to read as
1/
follows:
"Article XXXT I, Section 4(2)
Appeals from Decisions of Zoning Board
(2) Any person, or persons, jointly or severally,
aggrieved by any action of the Citv Commission
affirming, modifying, or reversing a decision
of the Zoning Board, or any officer, department,
board, commission, or bureau of the City may
seek recourse to the courts as-p�-etri�ed-b�-l3e
by filing a petition for issuance
of a Writ of Certiorari, in the manner and within
the time provided by Florida Appellate Rules."
Section 2. That all Ordinances, Code Sections or parts thereof
in conflict herew!tla he and the same are hereby repealed insofar as
they arr in conflict.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1/ Words stricken through shall be deleted. Underscored words
constitute the amendment proposed. Remaining provisions are
now in effect and remain unchanged. Asterisks indicate omitted
and unchanged material.
a
Section 3, Should any part or provision of this Ordinance be
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid the
same shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole.
PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 22nd day of -
April 1982.
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING 13Y TITLE ONLY
this 27th day of May 1982.
_ Maurice A. Ferre
MAURICE A. FERRE, MAYOR
Al
RALPH G. ONGIE, CITY CLERK T
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
JOEL E. MAXWELL
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
-GuoRq F. KNOX, JR. -- -
CITY1 TTORNEY
-2-
9429
F]
MIAMI REVIEW
AND DAILY RECORD
Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and
Legal Holidays
Miami, Dade County. Florida
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
Dannae Is the
tthie Publisherrof the oMiami Review andil oath sas that Daily Assistant
Record, adaily
(except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) newspaper,
published al Miami in Dade County, Florida; that the attached
copy of advertisement, heing a Legal Advertisement of Notice
in the matter of
City of Miami
Re: ORDINANCE NO. 9429
X X X Court,
In the .............. .I ......
....,........ .
was published In said newspaper In the issues of
June 9, 1982
Afftant further says published att the aid Miami nr said
Florida,d Daily that pe p
.
Record Is a
Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been
continuously published In said Dade County, Florida, each day
(except
assecondSunday
mail and Lmatteral f at the) and has post office eBin
Miami In said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year
next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
neitheadvertisement: and aflia ftt further oays that
sheporatnahas discount(
paid not promised any pe
rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publi�celion+i� (theTsefd newspaper.
�bom totanp subsclib;id More me this
�1Ii4� ... A.D. 19 82
9t11 d� o� -
i1
Tpphie:Franco
Notpry pubiic,y5t�te' 01 Florida st large
<tU�' v:•
(SEAL) r,L
My Commission expleLN-OM'21, 1985.
N. , r. t:' HE15EBY GIVE ur-
suant ,n ar, Order or Fina g•
merit dated MAY 14, 19 d'
entered in Civil Action Case No.
82.7621 of the Circuit Court of the
Eleventh Judicial Circuit In and
for Dade County, Florida, wherein
CARNEGIE CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, a Florida corporation,
Plaintiff, and FRANK PETTY,
Defendant, I will sell to the highest
and best bidder for cash in the
lobby at the South front door of
the Dade County Courthouse In
Miami, Dade County, Florida at
11:00 o'clock A.M., on the 16 day
of JUNE, 1982, the following
described property as set forth in
said Order or Final Judgment, to
wit:
Lot 20, Block 2 of HIGHRIDGE
PARK, per Plat thereof,
recorded In Plat Book 17 at
Page 5 of the Public Records
of Dade County, Florida;
together with the Improve-
ments thereon. Also known
as 2351 N.E. 56th Street,
Miami, Florida.
Dated this 1 day of JUNE, 1982.
RICHARD P. BRINKER
Clerk of said Circuit Court
'Circuit Court Seal)
by C. STAFFORD
Deputy Clerk
4ltorney for Plaintiff
Burton Engels
M W. Flagier St.
Miami, Fla. 33130
173.4713
First publication of this notice
m the 2 day of June, 1982.
112-9 M82-060288
fNWh(alf= 6F SALE
01UNWANt tO t HAOtEp 46
IN THE CiRCUIT COURT OF THE
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF FLORIDA iN AND FOR
DADE COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 81.186
section 10
OASIS, A CONDOMINIUM ASSO-
CIATION, INC.
Plaintiff
vs
URIEL OOUENDO alkla URIEL
OUENDO, a single man
Defendant
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pur-
suant to an Order or Final Judg-
ment dated MAY 13, 1982, and
entered in Civil Action Case No.
81-1ee of the Circuit Court of the
Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and
for Dade County, Florida, wherein
OASIS, A CONDOMINIUM ASSO•
CIATION, INC. Plaintiff and URIEL
OOUENDO aWe URIEL OUENDO,
a single man Defendant, I will sell
to the highest and best bidder for
cash in the lobby at the South
front door of the Dade County
Courthouse in Miami, Dade Coun.
ty, Florida at 11:00 o'clock A.M.
on the 16 day of JUNE, 1982, the
following described property as
set forth in said Order or Final
Judgment, to wit:
NOTICE OF SALE
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 45
N THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF FLORIDA IN AND FOR DADE
COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 82.1740
Section 30
'LAGLER FEDERAL SAVINGS
AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF
MIAMI
Plaintiff
vs
CRAIG A. CARAGLIOR, at al.
Defendants
AM FRANK
Crossplaintiff
vs
CRAIG A. CARAGLIOR and
BERNADETTE J. CARAGLIOR,
his wife
Crossdefendants
NOTICE IS HEREBY GiVEN pur-
uant to an Order or Final Judg-
ient dated MAY 13, 1982, and
ntered in Civil Action Case No.
2.1740 of the Circuit Court of the
ieventh Judicial Circuit in and
)r Dade County, Florida, wherein
LAGLER FEDERAL SAVINGS
NO LOAN ASSOCIATION OF
IIAMi, Plaintiff, and CRAIG A.
ARAGLIOR, at al., Defendants,
id SAM FRANK, Crossplaintitt,
-td CRAIG A. CARAGLIOR and
£RNADETTE J. CARAGLIOR, his
ife, Crossdefendants, I will sell
r the highest and best bidder for
ish in the lobby at the South
ant door of the Dade County
ourthouse in Miami, Dade Coun-
, Florida at 11:00 o'clock A.M.,
i the i6 day of JUNE, 1982, the
,flowing described property as
>,t forth in said Order or Final
idgment, to wit:
Condominium Parcel des,
ignated 9712 NW 51h Lane,
Miami, Florida, located in
Building No. 54, of EAST WIND
LAKE VILLAGE CONDOMIN.
IUM together with an
undivided interest as Tenant
in Common in the Common
Elements and the Limited
Common Elements appur-
tenant thereto according to
the Declaration of Condomin.
ium thereof as recorded in O.R.
Book 9546, at Page 500, and
Condominium Plan Book 55,
at Page 1, and amended by
Amendment No. 1 as recorded
under Clerk's File No.
77R3775, Amendment No. 2
as recorded under Clerk's; File
N,, 77R,jnRR9 AmanAmont
Unit No. G•7 of OASIS NUM-
BER TWO, A CONDOMINIUM,
according to the Declaration
of Condominium thereof,
recorded in Official Records
Book 9236 at Page 292 of the
Public Records of Dade Coun-
ty, Florida.
DATED this 1 day of JUNE, 1982.
RICHARD P. BRINKER
Clerk of said Circuit Court
(Circuit Court Seal)
by C. Stafford
Deputy Clerk
Attorney for Plaintiff
Edward S. Polk
6520 N. Andrews Ave.
Fort Lauderdale, Fla. 33134
944.2926
First publication of this notice
on the 2 day of June, 1982.
612.9 M82-0602 7 c
NOTICE OF SALE
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 45
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF FLORIDA IN AND FOR DADE
COUNTY
CIViL ACTION NO. 81.16874
SECTION 26
LANDMARK CONCRETE, INC., i
Florida corporation,
Plaintiff
.vs-
ALFREDO MUJICA and BERTA
MUJICA, his wife, et al.,
Defendants
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pur
suant to an Order or Final Judg
ment dated MAY 10, 1982, an(
entered in Civil Action Case No
81.16874 of the Circuit Court o
the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in anc
for Dade County, Florida, whereir
LANDMARK CONCRETE, INC., t
Florida corporation, Plaintiff, an(
ALFREDO MUJICA and BERT/
MUJICA, his wife, et al., Defend
ants, i will sell to the highest an(
best bidder for cash in the lobb,
at the South front door of the Dadi
County Courthouse in Miami, Dads
County, Florida at 11:00 o'clocl
A.M., on the 16th day of JUNE
1982, the following described prof
arty as set forth in said Order c
Final Judgment, to wit:
Lot 7, Block 5, MAYSLANI
SUBDIVISION, according t
the Plat thereof as recorde
in Plat Book 10 at Page 1 c
the Public Records of Dad
County, Florida, alkla 280
Northwest 15th Street, Miam
Florida,
Dated this 1st day of June, 198;
RICHARD P. BRINKER
Clerk of said Circuit Court
(Circuit Court Seal)
by Suzanne Rupena
Deputy Clerk
Attorney for Plaintiff
CHAD P. PUGATCH, ES( .
s
n
e
8
E
f�
E
r.
J
C
a
h
r
MR 131
'41Ah11. F'_ORIDA
O(A
i�l'�5'R•OT'r�iC= 'r�1Ei�10RAhlDUM
-�. Howard V. Gary 0ArE.
C-t -Manager
t'nJPCT
r ZOM: Al Z-Lugon 'q�F.❑CNCF:3
Director
Planning and Zoning Boards LNCLS5URES.
Administration
April 14, 1982 FILE:
ORDIANCE AMENDMENT -RECOMMENDED
DENIAL ARTICLE XXXII, CONDITIONAL
USE
COMMISSION AGENDA - April 22,1982
PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS
The Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of March 17, 1982, Item #3,
following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution No. PAB 20-82 by a 4 to 3
vote, RECOMMENDING DENIAL of amending Ordinance 6871, ARTICLE XXXII, CONDITIONAL
USE, Section 4 appeals from Decisions of Zoning Board, Paragraph (2) by pro-
viding that persons aggrieved by City Commission action may seek recourse to
the courts by filing for a Writ of Certiorari;- as per the attached.
An ORDINANCE to provide for this has been prepared by the City Attorney's
office an submitted for consideration by the City Commission.
AEPL:mmc
cc: Law Department
NOTE: Planning Department recommendation: APPROVAL
9429
9
Howard V. Gary
City 11anager
' V. McManus
Acting D01
irector
Planning Department
Background
January 6, 1982
. Agenda Item 8
City Commission Meeting on
Planning and Zoning: February 25,1982
Discussion Item: Appeal Fees
Discussion during the City Commission
meeting on Planning and Zoning: December
15, 1981 centered on fees being charged
for appeals. This memorandum discusses
the current procedures and recommends
continuation of existing procedures.
During the City Commission meeting on Planning and Zoning:
December 15, 1981 the Commission discussed fees being charged
for appeals and requested further information on the subject.
Existing Procedure
For appeals for both variances and conditional uses the existing
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 6871 language states (in part):
ARTICLE XXXI VARIANCES; Section 6
ARTICLE XXXII CONDITIONAL USE; Section 4
Appeals From Decisions of Zoning Board
"(1) Decisions of the Zoning Board shall be deemed
final unless a request is filed together with the
payment of any required fee with the Department
of Administration for Planning and Zoning Boards
y the petitioner or by anyperson or persons,
jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision
of the Zoning Board, or by any officer, depart-
ment, board, commission, or bureau of the City
within fifteen (15) days from the date of such
Board decision requesting the City Commission
to review such decision..."(following language
omitted)
(underlining added)
10Q 29
Howard V. Gary
City Manager
Page 2
January 6, 1982
The City Code sets forth the fees or alternative procedures,
as follows:
Section 62-62 Request for Review
"All requests for review of decisions of the zoning
board under ARTICLE XXXI, Section 6 and ARTICLE XXXII
Section a of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Ordi-
nance No. 6871 of the city, except those requests for
review initiated by an agency of the city shall be
accompanied by a fee which shall be the equivalent
of the fee originally charged the applicant as set
out in Section 62-61, with a maximum fee per review
request of five hundred dollars ($500.000); provided,
if ten (10) percent of the owners in fact of property
within three hundred seventy-five (375) feet of a prop-
erty involved in a decision of the zoning board shall
in writing request review within the time limits set
out, then no fee shall be charged as a prerequisite to
consideration by the city commission of the request
for review." (underlining added)
(additional language omitted)
Analysis
For appeals from Zoning Board decisions:
1. A fee of up to $500 is charged to a single petitioner.
This fee deters frivolous appeals designed to delay a
project.
2. No fee is charged where aggrieved neighbors can collect
the signatures of 100 of property owners within 375 feet
of the subject property. This fee waiver allows con-
cerned neighbors to carry an appeal without a finan-
cial burden.
Howard V. Gary
City Manager
Page 3
January 6, 1982
3. No fee is charged city agencies. This allows
the Commission to hear staff objections with-
out penalizing the concerned department.
Recommendation
The Planning Department recommends continuation of the existing
appeal fee procedures as being fair and equitable, without pen-
alizing neighborhood groups, while detering frivolous appeals.
PLANNING FACT SHEET
APPLICANT City of Miami Law Department: February 9, 1962
PETITION 3) Consideration of an Ordinance amending Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance 6871 as amended, by amending Or-
dinance 8199, ARTICLE XXXII CONDITIONAL USE, Sec- f
tion 4 Appeals from Decisions of Zoning Board, para-
graph (2) by providing that persons aggrieved by
any action of the City Commission may seek recourse
to the courts by filing a petition for issuance of a j
Writ of Certiorari in the manner and within the j
time provided by Florida appellate rules, deleting
the phrase "may seek recourse to the courts as pro-
vided by the laws of Florida"; repealing all ordi-
nances, codes, sections and parts thereof in con-
flict; and containing a severability provision.
REQUEST To specify the legal recourse for persons aggrieved
by an action of the City Commission concerning con-
ditional uses.
ANALYSIS Persons aggrieved by an action of the City Commission
concerning conditional uses now "may seek recourse
to the courts as provided by the laws of Florida".
A recent court decision has held this phrase to be
ambiguous and allowed an aggrieved party to choose
the.recourse. This proposed amendment specifies
the recourse i.e., petition for issuance of a Writ
of Certiorari.
RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: RECOMMENDED DENIAL AT THEIR
3/17/82 MEETING BY A VOTE
OF 4-3.
Q1-
'41Ah11. F'_ORIDA
O(A
i�l'�5'R•OT'r�iC= 'r�1Ei�10RAhlDUM
-�. Howard V. Gary 0ArE.
C-t -Manager
t'nJPCT
r ZOM: Al Z-Lugon 'q�F.❑CNCF:3
Director
Planning and Zoning Boards LNCLS5URES.
Administration
April 14, 1982 FILE:
ORDIANCE AMENDMENT -RECOMMENDED
DENIAL ARTICLE XXXII, CONDITIONAL
USE
COMMISSION AGENDA - April 22,1982
PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS
The Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of March 17, 1982, Item #3,
following an advertised Hearing, adopted Resolution No. PAB 20-82 by a 4 to 3
vote, RECOMMENDING DENIAL of amending Ordinance 6871, ARTICLE XXXII, CONDITIONAL
USE, Section 4 appeals from Decisions of Zoning Board, Paragraph (2) by pro-
viding that persons aggrieved by City Commission action may seek recourse to
the courts by filing for a Writ of Certiorari;- as per the attached.
An ORDINANCE to provide for this has been prepared by the City Attorney's
office an submitted for consideration by the City Commission.
AEPL:mmc
cc: Law Department
NOTE: Planning Department recommendation: APPROVAL
9429