Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1981-11-19 Minutesr � � - I 4 * INCONP wtATEji '* 1! 96 Q 7p�,COyFLO�` MINUTE S OF -PM-- INS I-M NOVEMBER 19, 1981 01 P 6 Z P1tzpARn sY ut OFFICE OF THE . CM CLERK ttrr Kuj., RALPH G. ONGIE CITY CLERK URI ND# ' 1 2.A 2.B 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 INE7f CI4t00M1ISSI9OF MIAh11, FLDRIDA (P & Z) SLUCT NOVEMBER 19, 1981 DISCUSSION ITEM: CHANLLENGE TO ELECTION RESULTS__ TESTIMONY GIVEN BY DAVID LEAHY, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, DADE CO. AND RALPH G. ONGIE, CITY CLERK DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL OF REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION TO BUILD A 553 ROOM HOTEL/PARKING STRUCTURE AT 1744- 56 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE. RESCHEDULING DEFERRED ITEM TO DECEMBER 17, 1981 BRIEF DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL OF AGENDA ITEMS 2A, 2B, 9A, 9B, 9C, 9D, & 9E; 10, 11, 12A, 12B, 12C & 16. I L1O'0 0, rSOUTCXV PAGE NO, DISCUSSION 1-5 DISCUSSION 5-11 R-81-993 M-81-994 DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL: REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING CLASSIFICATION 2661-2665 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE. I DISCUSSION SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 154-200 S.W. 17 AVENUE FROM C-4 TO R-4. ORD. 9350 LONG DISCUSSION PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUANCE: AMMEND ARTICLE XXi-3 SPD-I-CENTRAL ISLAND DISTRICTS. M-81-995 DISCUSSION OF 2% BED TAX AND URGE SPORTS AUTHORITY TO SELECT BUENA VISTA SITE FOR NEW STADIUM. R-81-996 SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATIO 271 N.W. 29TH STREET FROM C-5 TO R-4 ORD.9351 SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION-3575 SOUTH LE JEUNE ROAD FROM R-1 TO GU. ORD. 9352 FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REVISE ARTICLE XIV-I-C2A DISTRICT SPECIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FIRST READING FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ARTICLE XXIV-SIGNS PERTAINING TO THE C2-A DISTRICT. FIRST READING GRANT APPLICATION FOR MICROWAVE TOWER AT 2010 S.W. 17TH AVENUE -SOUTHERN BELL. R-81-997 DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL: APPLICATION FOR LIQUOR LICENSE AT 1947 WEST FLAGLER STREET DISCUSSION DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL: APPEAL BY APPLICANT OF ZONING BOARD DENIAL OF VARIANCE AT 551 S.W. 8TH CT. DISCUSSION UPHOLD ZONING BOARD AND DENY REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR LOT COVERAGE AND YARDS AT 20-22 S.W. 9TH STREET. M-81-998 UPHOLD PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DENY REQUEST FOR VARIANCE AT 264-66 S.W. 19TH ROAD. M-81-999 GRANT ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE FOR P.U.N. 3046 INDIANA STREET. R-81-1000 FIRST READING ORDINANCE:CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FROM R-4 AND C-1 TO GU. FIRST READING GRANT APPLICATION BY JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE HOSPITAL RELATED FACILITIES PER ART. X:XI-2, ORDINANCE 6871. R-81-1001 13-14 15-16 16-41 41-43 44 45 45-49 49 50-51 51-53 1 54-55 55-56 56-59 59-61 62-69 69 INOX = CI4VISSI0511AMI, &IDA ITEM NO, ( P & Z) RUCT NOVEMBER 19, 1981 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 DEFERRAL OF CONSIDERATION OF CLOSURE OF N.W. 10 AVE. BETWEEN N.W. 17 STREET ETC. HIGHLAND PARK DRIVE, SECTION ONE (JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL) ACCEPT BIDS: FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSIONS AT MISC. CITY PARKS APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRA*I 1981-1987 TO PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR CITY AGENCIES, BOARDS AND DEPARTMENTS. ADOPT LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT SUBMITTED BY RICK SISSER SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL INPUT BY CO%,DtISSION- APPROVE CONTRACT WITH R. SISSER AND DISCUSSION OF CONTINUED RETENTION OF CRAMER FIRM AS MAN IN WASHINGTON ESTABLISH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS-FY 1981-82 APPOINTMn :NTS TO ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE CLOSE CO;•LNIODORE PLAZA FROM GRAND AVENUE TO MAIN HIGH11AY NOVEMBER 22,d 1981 BETUIEEN 2 AND 4 P.M. FOR FIRST A.'INUAL COCONUT GROVE TURKEY RACE. FORAALIZING RESOLUTION: EXTEND LIQUOR HOURS FOR DECEMBER FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: CLOSE CERTAIN DOWNTOWN STREETS FOR DOWNTOWN ART WAVE 81 AND DOMINO TUMBLE ARTS FESTIVAL. FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: HOT MEALS PROGRAM IN ALLAPATTAH COMMUNITY. CLAIM SETTLEMENT-ARTHUR MC DUFFLE. APPROVE REQUEST OF JOSE MENDEZ IN REGARD TO BASEBALL EVENT HELD IN THE MIAMI STADIUM. DISCUSSION ITEM: 1% ADDITIONAL STATE SALES TAX - STATE WIDE. DISCUSSION ITEMS: CLEANLINESS OF CITY -GARBAGE, LITTER AND TRASH,, EDUCATION OF NEW REFUGEE ARRIVAL ON SANITARION, CLEAN UP DAY TO BE HELD IN JANUARY 1982. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: RECEIPT OF LETTER FROM PEAT, MARWICK AND MITCHELL REGARDING FINANCIAL CONDITION OF CITY. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO MARGARET PACE PARK. I PAGE 0 2 I NMCEoR sounlay No, PAGE N0, M-81-1002 R-81-1003 R-81-1004 M-81-1005 R-81-1006 FIRST READING R-81-1007 R-81-1008 R-81-1009 R-81-1010 R-81-1011 R-81-1012 M-81-1013 DISCUSSION M-81-1014 DISCUSSION M-81-1015 70-71 72-78 79-86 87-90 93-94 94 94-95 95 95-96 96 97-98 98-99 100-101 103 103-1C U MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSIGN OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 19th day of November, 1981, 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 9:10 A.M., by Mayor ?taurice A. ferre with the following members of the Commission found to be present: - Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ALSO PRESENT WERE: George F. Knox, Esq., City Attorney Howard V. Gary, City ;tanager Ralph G. Ongie, City Clerk Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk An invocation was delivered by Mayor Maurice A. Ferre, who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Mayor Ferre: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, this is a formal City of Miami Commission session, we are on the 9:00 o'clock Planning and Zoning agenda. There are however some announcements, there are people who must catch airplanes and others who are going to ask for delays and still others who would like to postpone some of the things that are to be discussed here today. 1. DISCUSSION ITEM: CHALLENGE TO ELECTION RESULTS - TESTI?i01''.T GIVEN BY DAVID LEAKY, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, DADE CO. A!TD RALPH G. ONGIE, CITY CLERK. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, if I can, I asked the City Clerk yesterday while you were out of town if we could take care of a matter first this morning, maybe he will explain it to you, we could go right to that and get it out of the way. Mayor Ferre: All right, sir, Mr. Clerk? Mr. Ongie: Yes, sir. I sent the City Commission on November 13th a -formal protest filed by one of the candidates in Group IV along with copies of the aoulicablc- State statutes and a memorandum briefly explaining. We are speaking about Mr. Suarez. He is asking for a recount. Under the law, if it is .5% of 1% or less it is mandatory, however, the vote was .6% and translated into votes it is a difference of 291 votes. I simply forwarded this protest to the City Commission but it was. after we canvassed and certified. Mr. Leahy, the Supervisor of Elections for Dade County is here. Mayor Ferre: Well, I have a very simple question, once a Commission canvasses and certifies it is not impossible but improbable for that vote to be overturned. Now, as long as we did it in a proficient, orderly and legal fashion, and I think that that was all accomplished. I might point out to the members of the Commission 01 NOV 19 1981 and to the public that the first time that I was elected as Mayor of the City of Miami, the difference between my opponent and I, as I recall, was about 160 votes and there was some thought of a recount. I think a recount —the opponent of Mr. Perez should have thought of that earlier, should have been here in person to protest on the canvass, and should have had definitive and hard proof of his pro- test. I personally do not see that anything is achieved other than just more agony and more and more name calling and all that kind of stuff. That's just my personal opinion. Mr. Plummer: .Well, Mr. Clerk, let me ask this question, as I recall reading the memo there were more than one and single issue involved, as I recall there were four, four particular issues. Now, as far as the recount is concerned, I think his contention there was that the computer was jammed and I would assume that the individual from the Elections Division is here to speak to that issue. I merely then ask the question, is it within the purview of this Commission to address the other three items which were listed in the complaint, and if so, I guess we would have to ask the Assistant Attorney how those matters would be pursued. I think it indicated that one person voted twice, and another issue was that one person was denied the right to vote. Is that within our purview?, and if so, I would assume those things would have to be answered, if you don't resolve them it is going to leave for the future, forever in the future doubt, at least in Mr. Suarez's mind, but maybe that kind of doubt could be cast over into other areas. So I would as- sume we will first hear from the Elections Division about the jam-up which was admitted, and then whether or not it is within our purview to address the other three issues. Mayor Ferre: I have no objections to following that procedure, Mr. Plummer, but I think that there is a matter, I think, of procedure, and we are thank God a country of laws and that means we are also a country of procedures. The procedure here is for a protestor to protests within the law. The law very specifically says that individuals have that right before we canvass and before we certify, but the law is very clear that once the canvassing procedure....that is why we canvass, precisely, to permit an individual to protest. Now, we canvassed as the law re- quires, on the following day, it was a public hearing, the press was here, and it was following a pattern of due process. Now, for us to tamper with that, in my opinion.... now, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't listen to complaints and to questions and if there is some hard proof that perhaps we would want to re- consider, but there is a process and a procedure that we followed in the past and I think we should continue to follow it. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, I think what you stated is really the bottom line, that is that we have a procedure that has to be followed and secondly, the question of whether there is hard proof. So far, I haven't seen an ounce the hard Droof, and the reason, Mr. Mayor, that I requested the Clerk to place this item on the agenda this morning is that I don't want any one accusing this Commission of ducking something such as this; and I don't want other people with negative ideas to go out and falsely lead people in this community as to what kind of process we are following in our elections. Even thought I do not think that is Mr. Suarez's in- tention, I do think that there are other people behind that that are very much trying to cause that seed of doubt in our citizens' minds; so, if it would be proper, Mr. Mayor, I would like to hear from the individual from the Elections Department at this point to address those issues that are concerned with the Elections Department. Mayor Ferre: Is there somebody here from the Elections Department?* Mr. Ongie: Mr. David Leahy is here. - Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Leahy. Mr. David Leahy: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, I'm Dave Leahy, Supervisor of Elec- tions for Dade County, 1444 Biscayne Boulevard. On the first allegation - "jam- ming of the computer equipment during counting", the computer equipment did not jam on elections night. I was there during the whole time of tabulation, so was Mr. Ongie. There is a monitor tape which describes everything that the computer did during the tabulation, which is sealed with the ballots, which is our proof that the computer did not jam on election night. Mayor Ferre: All right, sir, any further questions of Mr. Leahy? Now, to the �}2 NOV 19 1981 second part of your question, Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would hope, Mr. Leahy, that you would be willing, sir, to surrender what you just have said in writing, so that Mr. Ongie in the final text can answer the complaint and attach your letter to that answer of complaint to indicate that the people in charge have said there was -and have proof- that there was no jamming; so I would hope that you can reduce to writing what you just have said.. Mr. Leahy: I'll be glad to, Commissioner. _ Mayor Ferre: 'All right, the second portion was the three specific charges: one, that a person who was not allowed to vote; one who voted twice...and"what was the third? Mr. Plummer: Something about irregularities in certain precincts. Mr. Ongie: Improper invalidation of ballots and apparently, he was referring to the procedure that we go through to invalidate absentee ballots that are incorrectly submitted. That procedure was done by myself and Mr. David Leahy. ?tayor Ferre: All right, do you have anything to add to that specific charge? fir. Leahy: There was 48 ballots which were invalidated. Three ballots were in- validated because the signatures of the voter on the Certificate envelope did not match the sinatures on our files. The three signatures -we had two "x's" and one printed signature, and we had three full signatures on their registration records,, so we could not compare and prove that the voter actually voted that ballot, so those were invalidated for that reason. We had five ballots which were invalidated because the voter did not sign the Certificate, which is required by State law. We had twenty ballots which were invalidated because there was only one witness on the Certificate, and State law requires that either the Supervisor or Deputy Supervisor as a sole witness, or two persons 18 years of age or older witness a ballot. In this case we only had one witness, which was not a Supervisor or a Deputy Supervisor. The remaining twenty had no witnesses which again auto- matically invalidated those ballots. So that accounts for the 48 ballots which were invalidated. Mayor Ferre: But the point is that even if you had been wrong, 48 would not make the difference in the total amount. Mr. Leahy: No, that's correct. Mayor Ferre: Any other comments that you want to add, Mr. Leahy? Mr. Plummer: Just for my edification, Mr. Leahy, what would be your estimate for the cost of a recount? Mr. Leahy: If it were done on regular working hours, it could be done with my administrative staff, two or three people working, we would not charge the City. Mr. Plummer: No, no, no. What would you determine the cost to be if a recount was done? Two to three people?, two days?..hours involved? Mr. Leahy: No, no. We could recount in two to three hours. Mr. Plummer: So your talking about, then, a couple of hundred dollars. Mr. Leahy: At the most. Mr. Plummer: Okay, I just wanted to know, thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, any other questions from members of the Commission?, and then I will open it up since this is such an important issue and...Janet, if you want to say something I'll be happy to listen to you. Mr. Plwnmer: Mr. Ongie, the other two counts, how do we resolve those? I think the first two have been resolved. How do we resolve and put this matter to rest for the future? .A IN Mr. Ongie: Well, Commissioner, the thing was presented to me as I submitted it to you, without any further affidavits, names, dates, times, places, anything. Mr. Plummer: Then it would be in the proper perspective that you ask for that definite information? Mr. Ongie: Yes. Mr. Plummer: All right, fine. Then the matter is resolved. Mayor Ferre: Well, in other words, I think there has to be proof of something _ - like that. - Mr. Plummer: That's what I'm saying, if he doesn't furnish it then it is dead. Mayor Ferre: I mean, you know, I can give you plenty of rumors of what happened during the election but that doesn't mean unless there is definitive proof. Mr. Carollo: And that's precisely the point, Mr. Mayor, I think it's about time that we stop listening to rumor, after rumor, after rumor in this community. I think that what we have to deal in is fact and proof, not only in an issue like this but in any other issue. And so far there hasn't been a bit of proof presented to us, just a lot of rumors and a lot of allegations but no proof behind it. Now, I think the bottom line is, Mr. Mayor, that this Commission has taken a position in the past already, we canvassed this according to the law, according to our charter, and if Mr. Suarez -or anyone else, for that matter- feels otherwise, I think that they know the appropriate ways they can follow under the law, and that is to go to a court of law, not this Commission. Mr. Plummer: No, ah... Mr. Carollo: Plummer, I thought you were an undertaker, not an attorney, but... Mr. Plummer: No, I think, Mr, Carollo, what you would find is that the court would say that they have to exhaust their administrative procedures first, which is here, and then if they don't have relief here and if they are not satisfied then they can go to court; that's their procedure. Mr. Carollo: Lacasa taught you that, right? — Mr. Plummer: No, sir, I take it from a higher authority. Mayor Ferre: Are there any other questions or comments from members of the Commission regarding this important matter? Mr. Plummer: So then, what I understand, Mr. Mayor, is that the first two issues have been resolved and that if there is to be any further pursuing then facts of dates and times would have to be furnished, if not the matter is resolved, is that correct? Mayor Ferre: As I understood what Mr. Leahy said, he said that the computer did not jam. Mr. Plummer: I agree with that, I'm just asking the status of this.,. Mayor Ferre: What I understand is that this matter is that this matter is now officially dead unless somebody revives it with specific proof. In other words, there are two issues which, as you pointed out, remain as allegations which have not been substantiated and if somebody has substantial proof that individuals were allowed to vote twice or individuals were denied their right to vote that's something that we will have to consider. Now, I might point out that the dif- ference between one and the other, in my opinion, would not make up that much of a difference, it would not change the total tally. Now, is there anything else to be discussed in this issue? Janet, do you want to say something? Ms. Janet Cooper: Janet Cooper, 1901 Brickell Avenue. I have a question, per- haps Mr. Leahy is the proper one to answer it. I had to vote by absentee ballot in the primary, in the first election, and the instructions that I received from the Elections Department said that it could be witnessed by either two witnesses or notary or the Supervisor ,of Elections. I had a notary witness it. Now, if the Notary is not adequate Mr. Leahy did not say that a notary was permissible then it would appear that I only had one witness and that my vote was invalidated 04 NOV 19 1981 and I caution the Commission to understand, this was in the Primary and wouldn't affect the issues specifically before you but my question is.... Mayor Ferre: Well, then, Janet, rather than take up the Commission's time and the public's time why don't you discuss it with Mr. Leahy because we don't have an answer to your question, he does. Ms. Cooper: Okay, but if the instructions that the Elections Department is sending out with the absentee ballots are incorrect and results in invalidation it is some- thing that I think should be brought up. Mayor Ferre: Well, there is the man you should talk to. Ms. Cooper: Thank you. - Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I have to announce that I have to be out of the build- ing between'1:00 P.M. and 3:00 P.M., so I just wanted to let you know. 2.A DISCUSSION ATID DEFERRAL OF RFnUEST FOR CONSIDEI.ATION TO BUILD A 553 ROOM I°OTEL/PAR'_'IVG STRUCTURE AT 1744-56 NO-T:- BAYS1107--1 DIRIVE. 2.P RESCREDULING DEFE'oRSD ITF►' TO DECE:tBFR 17, 1981 Mayor Ferre: All right, there are also some requests for either withdrawls or postponements,..yes, Ma'am. Florence Robins, Esq.: Florence Robins, 1401 Brickell Avenue, I am here on behalf of Robert Traurig this morning. He is going to be delayed... Mayor Ferre: On what item? Ms. Robins: Item No. 1, the SPD Ordinance. He requests that you delay that item for about one half hour. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there any objection to that? There was also a request...there are some people that have to catch airplanes. Mr. Dawkins: Pardon me, Mr. Mayor, question please. Now, I don't know the procedure but if Mr. Traurig comes in I do not think, in my opinion, that he should be put before anybody who is here. He should have to wait his turn and come up wherever he can come up behind the people that are here. Now, if he is delayed and people are here on time, I don't.....now, maybe I'm just one person?... Mayor Ferre: You may be right, we've never done it that way but that's really the fair way to do it Mr. Dawkins: That's the only way to do it. Mr. Carollo: You are absolutely right, Miller, eat him up, you are.right. Ms. Robins: You know, now that your meetings are in the day time, on Thursdays, and they are at the same time as the County Commission meetings, we are going to have some problems like this come up regularly and if we could work out a sys- tem whereby there is not too much prejudice, it would be helpful. Mayor Ferre: See, I think what she is saying is that Mr. Traurig's absence today is really no fault in the sense that the County Commission also has proceed- ings at the very same time on the very same subjects, and therefore, since he is an attorney who specializes in zoning matters, he is going to be there and here and the problem is... Mr. Carollo: He certainly does... Mayer Ferre: ...problem is that he has to balance both...now, this is a new 05 ti 1 procedure, we've never had these meetings this way before, so I think it's. understandable that perhaps until we settle down.,. Ms. Robbins: What we are going to try and do as attorneys is balance between where we think that objectors might be and try and take their accommodation into account. Mayor Perre: We might be able to accommodate you. Mr. Dawkins The only concern I have is that individuals are here. Nlright, Mr. Traurig was scheduled No. 1. The person that is scheduled No. 2, No. 3 and No. 4. When Mr. Traurig walks in, the gentlemen who is No. 4 immediately becomes No. 5. I have a problem with that. - Mayor Ferre: What we will have to do during this transition period. Howard, I think one of the things that we ought to maybe consider if we are going to have day time zoning hearings like we are doing now. The County has Thurs- days. We are the ones that came after the County, so to speak, and so we are the new kid on the block as far as the time is concerned. Perhaps to accomodate the County and the people that are involved and have this conflict going, maybe the Commission should consider meeting either on a Wednesday or a Friday on zoning matters. Mr, Plummer: Make it Wednesday. Mr. Gary: Would it have been a problem here if we had not had the need to reschedule a meeting from the 26th to the 19th because of the holiday? Mayor Ferre: Well I think the point is that we have to avoid having con- flicts with the County because a lot of these people that are here on City Business also have County business. Mr, Plummer: Well let me ask this question. Does the County have more than one day a month of zoning? Ms. Robbins: They have two, Mr. Plummer: The 2nd and 4th? Ms. Robbins: I believe so. Mayor Ferre: 3rd and 4th? Mr. Plummer: 2nd and 4th. Mayor Ferre: It wouldn't have been a conflict if... Mr. Gary: It wouldn't have been a conflict if we had had our normally scheduled meeting on the 26th instead of the 19th. The 26th was a holiday, Thanksgiving, that is why we rescheduled. So if we follow our normal proce- dures there would not be a conflict. Mayor Ferre: Well this is an abnormal thing. Okay. Can we then proceed? Is there anybody else who needs to tell us that they have to catch an air- plane, or an emergency of some sort? Mr. 1@ d Hollo: Yes, we would ask your indulgence, Mr. :Mayor. If _ Honorable Commission if you would take Item 16 a bit further up. We have some consultants who came down and flew to the City and I understand from them that they also have a meeting in council in Cincinnati and they would have to go back sometime today yet. Mayor Ferre: 16, which is the appeal by Trinity Episcopal Church of the Zoning Board granting a variance of a 553 room...who is going to ask for a deferral? Mr. Ted Hollo: The objector is trying to get a deferral. He only added it for one year already. Mayor Ferre: The question before us is this,..whether or not we should, toaccommodate out of town experts that you have here, accomodate Item 16. 06 NOV 19 '1401 Now the question, of course is that the church is asking for a deferral. Now, so before I rule on that, let me find out from the church representative what the reason is for the deferral, Mrg.Massey: Emmenet Massey, 540 Reinante Avenue, Coral Gables, Florida, re- presenting Trinity Episcopal Cathedral. The church respectfully requests a deferral, as a courtesy to our new members, so they will have adequate time to study this proposal and likewise review the matter because last evening, at a rather long agenda with the Planning Advisory Board, we raised questions with regard to possible conflict with the Florida statute. In addition there- to, as you will soon find out, the Planning Advisory Board returned to staff - for re-evaluation to CB2.There have been no geographic boundaries set there. The Item 16 is across the street in an area that has not been rezoned and this is a request for a variance. With changing facts, with one City with interrelated circumstances, we respectfully request that the matter be de- ferred at this time. Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Massey, let me tell you that I think that this is an item that we have been talking about now for several months. However, we do have two new members of this Commission and this is a complicated issued. Now, it has been the position of this Chair for the past 8 years, and I am not going to change that unless I am overruled by 3 members of this Commission, that any member who has doubts because he has not seen the site, or has not sufficiently studied the issue can defer an item, certainly for one meeting. Beyond that, in the past, I might remind you that on several occasions, Rose Gordon, for example, used the tactic of continually deferring items and sometimes she would get up, I would let her have one and then she would get two and when she got the three, that was it. We couldn't defer anymore. Now, within reason I think it is apprropriate for a member, especially a new member of this Commission if they so wish, or the old memberq to defe w Uhin certain reasonableness, so I will now ask whether the new meru ers of the omruis- sion, and then to the older members of the Commission if they wish to have this item deferred for whatever reasons they may have. Item 16. Do you have any problems. Mr. Perez: I think it is very important, Mayor to have the opportunity to study more the picture. Mayor Ferre; You want to defer? Mr, Perez: Yes, I want to defer. Mayor Ferre: You would like to have item 16 deferred? Alright. Is there any objections to that? Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, I have no objections to that of course. I respect the request of my colleague. I do question, Mr. Mayor, and I think it is going to be brought out by the administration that the entire district, which is the Omni district, or the Trinity district, the administration is going to ask that to be deferred also and since they do go hand in hand or or somewhat related, I think that that has to be Given consideration. Mavor Ferre: Would you Put that into the record. Howard. What item is that? Mr, Gary: Mr. Mayor. we would like to have Items 2, 9, 10, 11 &.12. Mayor Ferre: We are going to have a short meeting. Mr. Plummer: 2, 9, 10, ll,. Mr.. Gary: and 12. Mr. Plummer; I won't have to worry about leaving at 1 o'clock. Mayor Ferre: For what reason are you asking then for these delays? Mr, Gary; The main reason is because we have two new City Commissioners, and we didn't have the opportunity of going over what is being proposed at this tirge and we would like to have that opportunity because of the nature of the decision to be made. ld Mr, Gary: (con't) and this is without predjudice, Mayor Ferre: The alternative to that Howard is to hear all the testimony and then put off the vote or since it is ordinances, we could have, with the exception of Item 2, which is the second reading... on items 9, 10, 11 _ & 12 we could just have first reading, The department would rather have the delay? Mr. Gary: We would rather have the delay. I would like to have the staff up to give us the opportunity to... Mr. Reid:. Each of them is a little different circumstance, Mr. Mayor. On Item No. 2, which is the second reading of the rezoning of the Omni area, at the last Commission meeting you took two actions. No. 1, you voted to bring this item back in 30 days and that's why it is on the agenda. Mayor Ferre: Well the reason we did that is, because you were supposed to have a report. Mr. Reid: And we do have a report, Mr. Mayor. The second reason it was deferred, or rather the second action was taken was a moratorium on building permits in this zone for 90 days and the purpose of that moratorium was to enable the administration, based on the recommendation of the City Commis- sion to draw up a new ordinance that in this particular zone mandated the amenities that we formally had agreed to provide bonuses for. Mayor Ferre: That issue was not decided. As you recall, that is where the breaking point was, whether they would be mandated or whether or not they would be bonuses on a based amount, and then from there we would climb on a bonus basis. Now as you recall, there were some rather heated words. Marty Fine will forgive me, because I know he doesn't like to get excited, but he was excited that day, and there were some heated words between he and Dan Paul as to whether or not these things should be mandated, or whether they should be bonuses. Now that is where we left it, and as you will recall, we said we will let the next Commission make that decision. Now, furthermore, that was the basic key issue. Furthermore, there was a study that was to be made and you were to come back within 30 days. Have you completed the study? Where is it? Mr. Reid: We ... no..Mr. Mayor, what we said we would do and it is what we have done is prepare changes in the text of that zoning ordinance and take them to the Planning Advisory Board so that you could hear them at City Commission meeting in December. Mayor Ferre: I see. So in other words you have not gone through the PAB. Mr. Reid: We last night proposed a set of changes to this section to the Planning Advisory Board; They deferred action on them until December 2nd. It was a very lengthy meeting, and we expect to be able to come to this Commission on December loth with a recommendation from the Planning Advisory Board on the text of this ordinance. We feel it is more orderly to make the changes in the text and then do the mapping. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr. Fine, you wish to be heard? And Mr. Watson. Mr. Plummer; Mr, Mayor, may I interject? Mr. Reid, I would like to remind you and the administration that I think that you are playing with fire, scheduling this for the December meeting. I will recall to your memory that we are having two meetings on that day. Under the new rules proposed, I assume going to adopted by the Mayor that all meetings conclude at 9 P.M., which I hope is adopted. I don't think sir, that you are going to be able to accomplish that and I think you would be much better to consider the zoning meeting of January, then'you would try to force this issue, which is complex and especially if you put this other one on here about the metro - rail in December. So I am just giving you that as a word of caution, be- cause I hope that the Mayor's guidelines are adopted. I will vote for them, and if such, that means at 9 o'clock at night we are quitting, which is only fair, that is 12 hours a day, and I am just cautioning you to try to sche- dule those over to December, I think you are making a mistake. �V NOV 19 IZS31 Mr. Fine: Mr. Mayor, for the record my name is Martin Fine, 2401 Douglas Road. We have no objection to postponing No. 2, but I would like to take a moment and just tell you that (a) we would like to have it come back in December. We were here last night until 1 o'clock in the morning and I just want to share with you that it is my personal opinion that what Plan- ning staff did is not listen to what the Commission said last time, but re- visited the entire ordinance. And it is my opinion that if the ordinance as they propose it is enacted, you won't have any development problems in that area, because you won't have any development. So I see it as a very, very, very serious problem. For example, that mandating a certain amount of retail. on Biscayne Blvd. as if that department was the market force, and — I am merelv saving that we have no objection to postponing it today, and we are going to try to work with the Planning Department and the neighbors to work it out, but we are going to need a good bit of time for that and I _ don't know when in December or ,January. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Jack do you want to say something, and then I am going to say something. Mr. Watson: Mr. Mayor, my name is Jack Watson, my address is 12600 Old Cut- ler Road, Miami, Florida. As to Item No. 16, I understand that the City Commission is, at the request of Commissioner Perez is entertaining post- poning this item until a further date. I just want to say this. As far as that particular item is concerned, that item is outside of the area that is currently being studied. It is next door, but it is outside. Secondly, is that we have been almost a year to try to get to this Commission. We went to the Planning Board on two separate, I mean the Zoning Board on two separate occasions. We have changed our plan, we have done everything possible that we could do and I want you to know that this matter is before you today on unanimous vote of approval from your Zoning Board, so the only thing that I am asking for is could you give us some kind of a date certain as soon as possible? Mavor Ferre: Okay, look. I am ready to vote on this. Miller Dawkins said he was ready to vote on it, and I didn't hear from Joe Carollo or J. L. Plummer, but I assume they are ready to vote on it. One member of this Commission, Demetrio Perez said he needed more time to study this issue. Now, he is entitled to that. If he wants more time, that is right and I am not going to deny him that, Now, what you are asking for is a specific date because you have a very important project to the City, and we certainly don't want to do undue harm to delay it, and you have to know what the outcome is, because the majority of this Commission may have a different opinion, I don't know. Now, I would like to ask this of the members of the Commission. I think we have some very, very important issues before us, and I think Plum- - mer is right. I don't see how in the world we can do it on a half a day on the loth. Put it off until January, To put it off until January, I think we would create an undue hardship for some of these people. They need an answer one way or the other. There are just too many important things that are riding on this. Now,. a lot of the people that advised me during my campaign said "don't talk about downtown and the importance of it, it is too complicated, people don't understand". That's not true. People do under- stand. People did understand the importance of downtown and the redevelop- ment of that whole area is the motor that is going to drive this City for- ward and so I reject this thing that people don't understand complicated issues like this. The fact is that I found the majority of the people that I talked to and surveyed in this town all are for a building boom in the downtown area. They are for it. They are not against it. And I think that it is time for us to define the issues and the majority of this Commission is going to decide how far, how high, how big, what see throughs', what walk throughs, what public amenities these properties will have. I don't think we should be putting this off much longer. The question is this. I don't think we can do it all on the loth, as Plummer pointed out. I think we should go back to having two meetings in December, and I ask therefore, if it would be a hardship if we had meetings side by side, one on the 9th and one on the loth, and that way we would not have to cram it all into one day which we know. as Plummer said that we are not going to be able to do. That will Rive Perez time to study the issue and then we can have the Zoning hearing on one day and the,,,no, can't do it on the 9th. Mr, Plummeri No, I can-t do back to back, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Okay. How about the 8th? The problem with the week of the 14th throbgh the 18th, one of you is going to be out of town, I forget who it was. Mr. Carollo: Not in December. Mavor Ferre; Is there any problem with having a second meeting? I would prefer either the 16th or the 17th is alright with me. The 17th, is that a problem, J. L.? Joe, 17th alright? Alright, then we will do this -way. We will then have the second meeting of December on the 17th. Mr. Plummert You were the one out of town on the 17th. Mayor Ferret Yes, well, I will make myself available, because I -think this is too important an issue to be putting off. Does anybody have any objection to the Zoning hearing being on the 17th? Mr, Dawkins; Mr, Mayor, will that put any undue problems on the City Manager and his staff in getting to Mr. Perez and I to explain these complex issues as he has already said? Mr, Gary: No sir. Mrs. Massey: Mr. Mayor, as the applicant, we graciously accept the 17th. Mayor Ferre: Thank you Mrs, Massey. Will somebody make the motion, then? Mr. Plummer: So moved, Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr, Hollo. Mr. Hollo: Mr Mayor and members of the Commission. For your indulgence, I would like to make a statement that the issue on Item 16 has nothing to do with the other items. It is purely a project expanding a specific project, not a zoning change of the City, not a complicated issue. A variance item that was pending for a year, given back and forth to the Zoning Board and the Planning Advisory Board, it got the unanimous approval without any ob- jectors on this issue, just a completely uncomplicated small issue. I would like you to be aware of it. It is not the total zoning issue. Mr. Dawkins; I beg to differ with you sir. Here it says 13 proponents. Mr. Hollo: No, all of them proponents, not opponents. Proponents. They are all in favor of this. Mr. Dawkins: And no.., Mr. Hollo: No objectors, Mr. Carollo: How about the Planning Board? Are they in favor of it? Mr. Hollo: The Planning Advisory Board gave unanimous approval,. Mr. Carollo: No, no, I am talking about the City of Miami Planning Board. Mr, Hollo; The Planning Department, we worked with them. Mr. Carollo: I know you worked with them, but are they in favor of it? Mr. Hollo: Some items they favor, some they didn't favor. The Planning Board approved.... Mr. Carollo: I am sorry, but what I am seeing here is a big "no" from the Planning.,. Mrs. Massey: The Planning Department recommends denial. Mr. Hollo: The Planning Board that you ask unanimously approved it, • Mayor Ferre: Okay, Again, four of us are ready to vote today. One of the members of this Commission has asked for a delay so he could study this issue. So. out of courtesy to him, unless there is some overriding emergency that this cannot possibly wait, then I think what we are doing is that we will.be hearing this on the 17th day of December. NOV 19 1�31 10 Mr. Plummer: I move Item 2 be deferred until December 17th. Mayor Ferre: Alright. would you first of all set the date of December 17th as the meeting date. Mr. Plummer: I make a motion at this time that the second day be created to hear zoning matters only on December 17, 1981, at 9 A.M. Oh wait a minute, do we need a full day, do you think? Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Plummer: We do? Alright, 9 A.M, - Mr. Dawkins.: I second. Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion? Call the roll on the 17th. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-993 A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 81-953, ADOPTED NOVDIBER 12, 19810 AND RESCHEDULING THE REGULAR CITY CO;L*iISSION MEETING OF DECL24BER 24, 1981 TO TAKE PLACE ONN DECEMBER 17, 1981, AT 9:00 A.M, (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 J, L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None 3. BRIEF DICCUSSION AID DEFERRAL OF AGENDA 1=1'C 2A, 2P; ^A, 9B, 9C, 9D & Sr; 10; 11: 12A, 12B & 12C; AND 16. Mayor Ferre: Now would you make the motion that Items 2...... Mr. Clerk, to save time can we do it all at one time? Mr. Ongie: Yes sir. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I have to ask a question, either that, or my agenda is wrong. I show here Item 2"B", and I am having problems equating that with 2"A" Mayor Ferre: Remember there was a special little pocket up on Flagler Street that was similar to.. Mr. Plummer: But 2"A" is a separate appeal application at Trinity Church.. Mr. Carollo: That is 16, Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry. I move for deferral of 2"A" and "B". Mayor Ferre: And would you also defer 9 Mr. Plummer: and Items 9"A", "B", "C", "D", "E", Item 10, Item 11, Item 12, "A", "B", "C". and Item 16. I move. 11 NOV 4 � ;YUj Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Alright, Under discussion. Mr. Gary: I think it would be appropriate, Mr. Mayor, if the motion said "to continue for further discussion". Mr. Plummer: I move to continue for further study, research and informa- tion. Does that catch it all? Mayor Ferre: Alright, so the motion is for continuance of Items as read out. Are there any objectors to this? Any problems with anybody on the Commission or members of the public. If not, call the roll on the continu- ance of these items read out. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 81-994 A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION STIPULATING THAT IN CONNECTION WITH THE PLANNING & ZONING AGENDA OF THIS SAME DATE ITEMS: 2(a), 2(b), 9(a), 9(b), 9(c), 9(d), 9(e), 10, 11, 12(a), 12(b), 12(c) and ITEM 16 ARE TO BE CONTINUED TO A FUTURE MEETING FOR FURTHER STUDY, RESEARCH AND INFORMATION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES:Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES:None AFTER ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would like at this time, that matter is now resolved. I would like to have the City Manager at least give some con- sideration. This has been done early in the day.... that a notice be pub- lished somewhere, whether it be behind us, or outside, that these matters have been deferred, so that people walking in today will not be subjected to possibly sitting here all day long to find out that these items were deferred early in the morning. I don't know how you can accomplish that Mr. Manager, instead of the Mayor on an hourly basis having to announce it, I think if we could put something somewhere, and I will go a step further, Mr. Gary. If you can devise some method, I think it would be good of a board that would say that these matters have already been discussed by the Commission, these items have been deferred, and as these items are ticked off, the board could reveal such a thing. Mayor Ferre: I think that is a very good suggestion and I think right over here so that the Clerk can, as these items are discussed, put them up on the board. Mr. Plummer: I -think it might save some people a lot of inconvenience. I know there is a number of times at 1 o'clock in the morning when the Mayor sees someone sitting there saying "well, why are you here, what are you here for" and he was on an item that was deferred at 9 A.M. and he has been sitting here for 15 hours not knowing that this item was deferred. 12 Nov 9 ���� 4. DISCUSSIO11 AND DEFERRAL: RF.'UCST FO:i CiWTSE 0" ZOTTIi13 CLASSIFICATION 2661-2665 S. BAYSHORE DRIVE. Mr. Nodell: Mr. Mayor, excuse me but there is another request for a post- ponement. It is for Item No. 6. My name is Martin Nodell, 444 Brickell Avenue. Mayor Ferre: Alright, now Mr. Nodell, what is the basis for your... this has already been deferred once. Mr. Nodell: Yes your Honor, but that deferral was at the behest of the Commission because there were not enough Commissioners present sitting to... Mayor Ferre: No, that was your request. Mr, Nodell: Yes, but that was because the panel was diminished, therefore I suggest, your Honor, that it was not a matter of deferment because of our request so much as the fact that the Commission was not fully present. Mayor Ferre: What is the basis for the request for deferral on this occas- ion? Mr. Nodell: The original purpose of the development of this property was for sale by the owner. The owners have now reconsidered and decided to develop the property themselves. They intend to prepare and are preparing architectural drawings rendering site plans and models. We would like to have some additional time to complete that preparation. The decision to develop themselves was made after the last meeting on October 24th. We have not yet had an opportunity to prepare all of the information with re- gard to the development of the property, We would like a chance to pre- sent this information. Mayor Ferre: Alright. I'll recognize you in a second, but lets find out from the department. Does the department have any objections to this? Mr. Gary: No it doesn't. Mayor Ferre: Okay, there is a motion... Mr. Carollo: What is your problem, Mr. Perez? Mr. Perez-Lugones: I don't have a problem. I just want to make the applicant aware that we are charing a fee for this kind of deferral, as instructed by the Commission some time ago. Mayor Ferre: We are charging a fee. Mr, Nodell: We have no problem with the fee, Mayor Ferre: Is there a motion now for a deferral? Is there a second? Mr. Plummer: I'll second it for purposes of discussion. Mr. Mayor, I think the most important thing we need to ask - is there any objectors.bere who this would cause an undue burden or hardship on? Mayor Ferre: Well, there were 4 objections by mail, but are there 4 objec- tors present? Are there any objectors present? Are you an objector? Mr. Rosen: Michael Rosen, 1401 Brickell Avenue on behalf of the Tigertail Condominium Association. Our opposition to this proposed zoning change has been based on our feelings with regard to changing the zoning on Tigertail Avenue. Mr, Plummer: You can only speak to the issue. The issue is to defer. Mr. Rosen3 I see. Deferral, the reason why we have no objection to the deferral was in the discussion with the proponents this morning, they indi- cated that by developing the site plans, they may be able to accomplish their objective; without changing the zoning by asking for certain variances from 13 _, zoning board and they would work with us, consult with us and get our views on the matter regarding variances to existing zoning rather than changing the zoning. It is for that reason that we have no objection to deferring it, if that is indeed the purpose of the deferral. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, speaking to the deferral, I asked if there were any objectors. Obviously this is not an objector. Mayor Ferre: Yes, okay. Well, I think he wanted it on the record to ex- plain his position in representing the Tigertail Association. I would like to tell the attorney for the property owner that one of the things that I feel very.strongly on, this is one out of five votes, so you can be guided. _ I think Coconut Grove wants to retain a certain character and I think we must at all costs, and you may call me now a believer, or whatever you want to call me, but I am for the development of the downtown area, but I cer- tainly am for trying to retain as much of the traditional Coconut Grove character as possible. Mr. Nodell: We agree with that, your Honor. Mr. Plummer: Just for the record Mr. Mayor.., Mayor Ferre: This isn't going to be called the Impact Building, is it? Mr. Plummer: Just for the record, to the applicant, sir, your letter which I received a copy of is considerably different in its request than that which you made here this morning. Your letter indicates, I don't have it with me, that the reason for your deferral is for the purposes of the owners being, or the principals being out of the country. Now, you say noth- ing in your letter about redoing your plans. Mr. Nodell: That is not an inconsistancy. The letter was couched in those terms because indeed the owners are out of the country, but the point of asking for the deferment today is to permit us an opportunity to gather our plans together. Mr. Plummer: Alright. I just want it on the record. Mr. Nodell: Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Is there further discussion on this deferral? OF. Now it is being deferred at your expense and you are going to bring it back when? Mr. Plummer: On the 17th. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Call the roll. Mr. Nodell: Your Honor, on that, could we have a later deferment, that is Mr. Perez: He is going to pay the fee, it is up to him. Mr. Gary: If he is going to pay the fee, it is up to him to bring it back whenever... Mr. Nodell: We are going to need more time. Mayor Ferre: That is fine with me. Mr. Nodell: Thank you. THEREUPON, the City Commission on motion duly made by Commissioner Carollo and seconded by Commissioner Plummer, UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE MATTER. 14 Nov 1 0 1981 5. SECOiTD READI11G ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZO:TI,TG CLASSIFICATION 154-200 S.W. 17 AVENUZ YRON -4 to R-4. Mayor Ferret We are now on Item 3. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor this item was deferred at my request and the reason - for my request, let me reiterate for the new members present. Would you Put it up on the wall please? Mr. Whipple: Mr. Plummer, while he is doing that ... at the last meeting, the applicant did indicate that he had complied with the Commission's wishes with respect to limiting access on 17th Avenue. However, it was the request of Father Gibson to get something in writing from the applicant to assure that it would be done. The applicant has proferred a covenant. The covenant was reviewed by the Law Department. A signed copy and the filing fee is in the hands of the City Attorney, pending your decision today on the item. Mr. Plummer: When you say limited access, what is limited? We do not have a copy of the covenant. Mr. Whipple: It was in your supplemental - it is no access on 17th Avenue. Mr. Plummer: Alright. That, Mr. Mayor, definitely removes my objections of the concern that I have to drive that street twice a day and if there are no objectors, I will be happy to move it. Mayor Ferret That is fine with me, if the new members don't have any pro - blew with that. This is on second reading. Is there further discussion? First of all, there is a motion by Plummer. Is there a second? Gibson made the motion last time and Lacasa seconded it, so we don't have any of the.. Mr. Plummer: I move it, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferret I recognize your motion. I am asking for a second. Mr. Dawkins: I second. Mayor Ferret Alright, is there further discussion on Item 3 on second reading? Alright, read the ordinance. i AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COM- PREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE E1/2 OF TRACT "B", TENTATIVE PLAT NO. 1051-A - "LITTLE HAVANA FIRST ADDITION", BEING APPROXIMATELY 154-200 SOUTHWEST 17TH AVENUE, FROM C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE), AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2, THEREOF, BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 22, 1981, it was taken up for its second and fival reading by title and adopt- ion. On motion of Commissioner Plummer, secondeu by Commissioner Dawkins, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: 15 Nov 10 1JI1 AYES: Commissioner J. L, Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9350. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and an- nounced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. ANNOUNCEMENT: Mr. Gary: I would like to announce the appointment of Jim Reid as Assistant City Manager for Planning. I think that he has demonstrated that he is capa- ble of handling the job and he will be a great asset not only to the adminis- tration, but to the citizens of Miami, Mayor Ferre: We expect you to work twice as hard, 6. LONG DISCUSSIO11, PUBLIC IIEARIIIG AND CONTIIVJAIdCE: AMEND ARTICLE ,Xi-3 SPD-1 CENTRAL ISLAND DISTRICTS. Mayor Ferre: We are now on Item No. 1. I notice that the attorney for the item delayed at the County Commission just walked in. Are you ready to take that item now? Alright, we are on Item No. 1. This is an ordinance on second reading and it pertains to ground level pedestrian open space and i required off-street parking for residential development. Now, I might point out to the members of the Commission, especially to the new members, that because of the serious implications of this ordinance, we asked for a work session to be held. The work session was held, what, about a month ago? Maybe 3 weeks or a month ago, I was the only member of the Commission that was present. It lasted for what, an hour? The two issues that were before us was the question of ground level pedestrian open space, and the off-street parking for residential development, the requirements. I might say that I think on Item No. 1, I didn't have a serious problem, Where the serious question came up is in the number of parking spaces that would be available to the residents and visitors of Phases 3 and 4, is that correct? Mr. Mc- Mannus, is somebody following me? Since Phase 1 and 2 would not be affected. The question of the averages, there would be an effect on the averages, but at that time it was my opinion that we would have to reconsider this whole thing, which is where we are at now. I just wanted to bring the members of the Commission up on that particular issue, You know, you can get a copy of the proceedings. Can't somebody come in and buy or get a copy of all the proceedings? How much does it cost? Mr. Ongie: To a member of the public, 25C per page. Mayor Ferre: I am talking about tapes. Mr. Ongie: Oh a tape,..a couple of dollars. It is not very much. Mayor Ferre: A couple dollars? I don't know whether your time is worth a couple dollars an hour or not, but for a couple of dollars you can get a tape: of everything that goes on and that way you don't have to go through s all that problem. It is probably cheaper. Saves you a little time, unless you figure it is worth staying here. You are welcome to do it, but you can buy it for a couple of dollars and you can have an exact certified copy. Okay. Let's proceed. What are you waiting for Joe? Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, may I just correct a statement that you mad,_ earlier, because it has been a bone of contention all the way through this process, Mr. Traurig is not the applicant. The Planning Department is the 16 NOV 19 198, F or Mayor Ferre: That's what I am saying to Joe...what are you waiting for? You have a problem now? Mr. Joe Mc Manus: This ordinance is basically divided in two parts, as you knos. One part deals with open space and dimensions and requirements the other part with parking requirements. There is no controversy over the open space part of it. The continuing controversy is over the parking require- ments. The initial proposal before you from the Planning Department was to reduce the parking requirement to an average of 1.25 spaces per dwell- ing unit. That represented decrease in the City's requirements under the ordinance from an average of approximately 1.5. Now, since then, there has been proffered by the developers of Brickell Key and Claughton Island in which there would be spaces set aside for the individual residents of the island and there would be pooled spaces. And I think the latest offer or suggestion from the developer was there would be one space per dwelling unit and there would be one pooled space for eachfour dwelling units. Mr. Traurig: I would like to update that if I may. Mayor Ferre: Bob, let me make sure I get the procedure right. Plummer pointed out something very important. The applicant on this second read- ing is the department itself. Okay? Now, you have something new that you want to add, then I will recognize Janet Cooper. Mr. Traurig: Just for the benefit of the Commission, the only issue that really has been extant is the question of how many unreserved parking spaces there would be. And in the meeting in the conference room behind these chambers, we did agree to have unreserved parking spaces and that would be at the rate as Mr. McMannus indicated, one parking space for every four apartments to be unencumbered, unreserved. We recently changed that at the request of Ms. Cooper to one parking space for every two apartments to be unencumbered. The net effect of that is that if we have one and one-half parking spaces per apartment and one is assigned to the apartment, the other half a space will be available to anybody and it won't be reserved to the occupants of that apartment, We communicated that to members of Your staff, and also to Ms. Cooper who has now reiected even that. Now that took us from zero to one in two, to one in four and then into one in two, and yes- terday she indicated to me that she wanted 1.65 parking spaces per apart- ment with the .65 to be unreserved. So we have again reached an impasse because of that escalation. Mayor Ferre: She started at two, and you want...... Mr. Traurig: She wanted initially, she wanted one for every two and we have now agreed to that and she says prior to your agreement I withdraw my offer to settle on that basis. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor and Mr. Traurig, I most strenuously object to this line of evidence being presented before you, since at the request of Mr. Traurig, any and all conversations regarding possible settlement were con- fidential and not to be raised before this Commission. This is a serious breach of our discussions. Mayor Ferre: Ms. Cooper: No, Mr. Mayor it is not because it is a question 6f whether this is to be considered by this Commission. I don't believe any settle- ment negotiations ought to be considered, especially since it was at Mr. Traurig's specific rf,quest to me that it be off the record and not admitted into evidence. mayor Ferre: That's between you. Zi NOV 19 1981 Mayor Ferre: Janet, this is not a court of law, this is a City Commission. Now, what you and Bob come to an agreement on is your business, not ours. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor, you remember that at the workshop I started to say - off the record what negotiations had been and I was stopped and I was told that it would be on the record as a courtesy and in accordance with the agree- ment that he -and I had I did not disclose that information and I feel it is a real problem and absolutely wrong on his part to do this. Mayor Ferre: Look, that's fine and you can have that difference with him but we have to make a decision here. Now, you tell us why we should make the decision or why we shouldn't make the decision. Ms. Cooper: I'm happy to deal with the issue on the merits. However, if I am going to be asked as the objector to go first I'm going to request rebuttal time. Mayor Ferre: Fine, I've never denied you the right -to rebuttal. No, I never have that I can remember within reason. Now, do you want to go first? Ms. Cooper: I don't care either way. Mayor Ferre: Well, he has already made his statement as to what his client is willing to do. Mr. Traurig: I would merely ask Commissioners Dawkins and Perez whether or not because they may not have heard the prior presentations to this Commis- sion if they want some additional information because if you lack information that is important to you and you want a more complete explanation on our part we would be happy to give it to you. We understand that you are less familiar with the subject matter than the others who sit on the Commission and we don't want you to vote with a lack of information if you feel that that is going to be important in your deliberations. Mr. Dawkins: I appreciate your concern and I do share that concern about parking, I'm not familiar with it, I do know that in that area parking is a premium but I am at this time prepared to listen and vote accordingly but I would, if it was possible I would like more time to study it but we have so many things on the agenda that need attention that I could very easily go either way. Mr. Plummer: Move to defer. Mr. Carollo: In other words, Bob, if they're going to vote for you go now and if not defer it. Right? 0 Mr. Traurig: No, I think that the Commissioner is saying he would like more time to study it, I was really saying if you want a more con-plct_• explanation we have the traffic people from Wilbur Smith here, the staff can explain their rationale and we can explain our's. Mayor Ferre: If it is all right with the rest of the Commission, what I'd like to do is for you to go ahead and explain what the issue is and then let the members of the Commission feel their way through it. If they, after you have explained the whole thing still feel that they don't quite understand what the issues are or they would like more time to study it or to go to the site or look at the drawings and all of that then we will defer it at that point. Go ahead and make your presentation. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor, if that side is going to make their presentation I would request the opportunity to make a presentation so that not one side is heard only before a deferral. Mayer Ferre: Of course. is NOV 19 1981 Ms. Cooper: Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Go ahead, Bob. Mr. Traurig: As you can see from the photograph that is displayed on your screen. SPD-I is the soning district that is applicable to what we generally call Claughton Island or what we call Brickell Key. It is the only zoning district in the entire City of Miami that has the designation SPD-I. That island was zoned as part of an overall administrative proceeding which in- cluded a review of the Development of Regional Impact and the review of all of the development plans, etc. And it was recognized when the island was initially zoned that it is unique. It doesn't impact directly the main land although obviously there is a relationship between them and the bridge that _ crosses from the Four Ambassadors to the Island is a bridge that has been built by the owners of the island but has now been given to the public. It is recognized that some of the development criteria in the ordinance govern- ing only this island may not really be in the best interest of the island or the general public. For example, in this request for an ordinance change we are requesting two things: (1) a change in what they call the ground level open space and (2) the change in the parking. Now, it is obvious that we can create parking on the island by having large parking structures and we can do a lot of other things to provide for the parking. what we want to do is to have the provision of the ground level open space changed so that if we build a parking structure which has landscaping on its roof and is, therefore, an undulation because the parking structure is one or two stories but it blends in with the general landscape then that would be Okay. Now, that was recommended by your Planning Department, it has been recommended by everybody concerned and I think that Ms. Cooper has already indicated.... Cooper, am I misquoting you? Ms. Cooper: No, I would just ask that you not speak for me since you are prone to say things you shouldn't. :fr. Traurig: I'm not going to speak for you, but my recollection is that she said that she has no objection to the ground level open space and that is really in the best interest of the City. The other issue was the issue of parking. The testimoney that has been given, and I'm really paraphrasing and I'm really summarizing the testimoney that you could get in much greater detail from the experts who are here, these are the experts from Wilbur Smith and Associates and the developer and they have worked on this with your City staff over a period of a year or a year and a half. The testimony has been that because of the special nature of the island, because of the developer's commitment to provide a tram service between the island and downtown and the employment centers and the commercial centers. Because of the relative proximity to mass transit and the downtown component of Metrorail that it really isn't necessary to have many vehicles on the island as you might other- wise require for a major housing project. Furthermore, the basic development plan of the island has been changed so that it is primarily at this time a residential island and the experience has hewn, Mr. Cheezam's experience especially becuase he has had a great experience in the Brickell Avenue area, that a great percentage of parking spaces are controlled, and apartments, are controlled by people who don't live here on a full time basis and that, therefore, we don't really need as many parking spaces for this kind of a project as would normally be required and that in the event we were wrong only we would suffer because that's an island and people wouldn't be parking _ on the mainland and impose upon other properties on the mainland and this isn't a residential neighborhood on the other side of the bridge anyway, it is basically a commercial neighborhood with supplemental parking. Further- more, we have recognized that there was merit to the position which Ms. Cooper originally advocated before this Commission and that is that if we tie up all of the parking spaces by selling those to condominium owners then there may not be enough parking spaces for the service people and for the guests and others who come to the island and that, therefore, it is necessary to have unreserved a large number of parking spaces so that those people can be sL,rved. we have now recognized it and in my discussion with the mayor before I made this presentation I have indicated that we're willing out of every 1� parking spaces to take � of that parking space and have it unassigned so that they general public could use it. Now, I want you to know that we have built the first phase, we have drawn a permit for the second building in phase, we have completed the planning for the third phase. We're not even talking about buildings I or II or III, we are satisfied that the parking requirements ror those buildings have to be the old parking requirements and we're not asking for any modifications. So whatever this Commission does is applicable only to the residential units in Phases later than Phase III. Now, we're asking 19 NOV 191 -0 4 at the present time for a very slight relaxation of the parking requirements so that we provide 1� parking spaces for every dwelling unit and we would have � of that, therefore, 1 out of every 2 unreserved. I think in summary that's our position, we do have the technical people here to answer questions. Mayor Ferre: Yes, would you answer specifically how many parking spaces are you talking about? Because I get mixed up on this � of � of �, so just tell me in numbers what are you talking about? Mr. Traurig: We have 1,336 dwelling units scheduled for Phases IV, V and VI. Mayor. Ferre: IV, V and VI, 13 what? Mr. Traurig: 1,336. Mayor Ferre: All right, and how many will be sold to those 1,336, 1�? Mr. Traurig: No, only 1 parking space per apartment will be sold, so only 1,336 will be sold and 668 will be available for the general public. Mayor Ferre: I see, Okay. Now I understand. In other words the proportion of two to one is based on the sale of only one parking unit per apartment. Mr. Traurig: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: Okay, now I understand. Does that conclude your statement? Mr. Traurig: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Do you want to bring up anybody? Mr. Traurig: Well, I think we want to bring up as many people as the Commis- sion would like to hear from to supplement the information I gave you. If you need more information we'll bring them back. This -is an ordinance change, it is not a zoning hearing so consequently I think you can devote as much time as is necessary with as many separate trips to the mike as you need. Mayor Ferre: We may have to bring you back then after. Ms. Cooper, the Chair recognizes you. Ms. Cooper: Thank you, Janet Cooper, 1901 Brickell Avenue. First of all, let me congratulate our three recently elected Commissioners and welcome our two new Commissioners to the Commission. For the record, I must reiterate and re -incorporate all technical and legal objections that I previously made in- cluding lack of notice which there was failure to post notice again today, failure to have the study in the file - and I checked the file just a few moments ago and the study still is not in the file, it was supposed to be there at the time that the application was presented - failure to decide the issue within the time limits as required by the ordinance, failure of the true applicant to apply, pay the zoning fees, to go to the Zoning Board and failure to interested persons to recuse themselves. I also object to not being informed in advance of the fact that there was an amendment to the ap- plication and I would point out that this amendment to an application by the Planning Department has been offered and initiated by the true applicant, in this case the developer who hasn't paid his fees or filed the procedure required when a developer makes an application of this nature. And -I would point out that that is a problem because what we really have here is not a usual application for a change of an ordinance but really a special interest or a request for a variance and at this time I will pause and wait for Com- missioner Dawkins to return because I would like him to have the information. In the meantime I have requested that five copies of the study be available and I would like to have them di6tributed to the Commission at this time if I may. While we're waiting for that to be passed out, in regards to settle- ment negotiations that were evidence that was improperly presented to you, I would inform you that I have obtained new information at the workshop and since and my change in position was due to new information which I received and was not due to a waivering or any kind of calculation on my part but merely due to new information that had not been available to me prior. Now, the alleged justification for this change in the ordinance has been supplied by this study that has just been passed to you by Wilbur -Smith. This study was initiated and paid for by one of the developers on Claughton Island who was only one of what would seem to be at least two but maybe more. In deal- ing with the study itself which I finally got a copy of after the first read- inq, and that was the first time I had an opportunity to review it or evaluate 20 NOV 19 1981 it and thus to challenge it and this is the first time I have presented this information to this Commission. I would like to point out the falac- ies in this study. First, page one deals with the development order. It tells you that there is going to be or that there would be permitted to be 1,200,000 square feet of non-residential space, 3,075 dwelling units and 1,200 hotel rooms. Now, you'll notice if you look on page one the next to the last paragraph says very clearly, "It was stipulated that the develop- ment would adhere to the zoning provisions of SPD-1". Those zoning provi- sions were in effect at the time they made that promise, they agreed not to come in and ask for variances, they're using at this time a manipulative technique of trying to get the Zoning Ordinance changed to get out of that commitment which they made to adhere to the Zoning Ordinance as it was at the that theymade that commitment and received their development order. This is essentially a breach of promise on the part of the developer and it does not show good faith at all. Turning to page two of this study, we see that one of the main justifications for this request was an alleged study that was made at Brickell Place which happens to be where I live. What they claim to have done was to come in and count the number of cars that were occupying the parking spaces and that is relatively easy to do but they claim to have done it on a wide range of days covering the entire year, they really only counted it on a maximum of 6 days, they present the basic information on page 3 for only 4 days. They counted in June and July which are some of the slcwest months that we have at Brickell Place due to the absentee ownership. The busy times of the year are Easter which was April 15th, 1979, December, Christmas time and August, sometimes it goes into the end of July. But they didn't come to count the spaces at the busy times to see what the peak demand on parking spaces is. They only counted the total number of cars, they didn't count the number of spaces that are available in visitor parking but I did. I did my own little study and I would like to pass a copy of that out to you at this time. In my study I found that when there were a similar number of cars as Wilbur Smith found for 552 residential apartments plus assorted accessory commercial uses on one day there were only 17 spaces available and on other day only 13 spaces available. Then in August at our busy time on one day there were no guest spaces available and on another day t:iere were 3 available, again for over 552. UMGM; Mayor Ferre: okay, Janet, let me make sure that I understand what we're talking about because we're not comparing apples to apples here. What page — 2 study says is that they found 458, 481, 459, 502, 491 and that, therefore, parking vehicles per dwelling units were .83 and so on. Now what you're saying is is that that may be but that means that there were only 17 avail- able spaces in the areas that are available to visitor parking. Ms. Cooper: For visitors, second car, employee parking and so forth. Mayor Ferre: Okay, and then the next one is 13 and then o, o and then 3. Ms. Cooper: Right. Mayor Ferre: Okay, but that's not apples to apples, it's apples to oranges. Ms. Cooper: Well, it compares in a way because I did on two days count the total number of cars so I showed you that we were in the same range, I'm not suggesting that they falsified figures. But I am suggesting that there is another figure that is more important than the total number of cars that were parked there and I present that information in addition and I present it as a contrast on the first two days to the total number of cars so that I show what the impact of their findings are. Mayor Ferre: Okay, I think the question is, assuming there are - how many parking spaces are there in that place? Ms. Cooper: I don't know the total number but they comply with the current code. Mayor Ferre: There are 550 units in two buildings. Ms. Cooper: 552 units plus some accessory commercial units which required additional parking. Mayor Ferre: Now, the question is if the new formula that Traurig is talking about were applied on a two to one basis that means that of those 550, two- thirds would he. I guess, used for permanent parking and a third would be used for visitor parking. NOV � •ti%V Ms. Cooper: I didn't follow you, 550 we're talking about. Mayor Ferre: Well, as I understand it there are 550 parking spaces? Ms. Cooper: No, 552 residential dwelling units. Mayor Ferre: And how many parking spaces are there at Brickell Place? That's the question. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I would guess there are approximately 800. Mayor Ferre: 800, Okay. Now, Janet says here that there were 17, 13, 3 and 0 spaces available. Now, that's because the available spaces for visitors is only how much -out of the 800? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I don't have that figure available, it is approximately, I would say in the neighborhood of about 180, something like that. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor, you don't let me make their presentation, I would re- quest to make my presentation alone. Mayor Ferre: I was just trying to get something so that I would understand you better. Ms. Cooper: Well, I am prepared to answer your questions as well as Mr. Cheezham is. Mayor Ferre: Well, my question, therefore, to you is that if you apply this two to one formula here would this problem have arisen? That's my question to you. Ms. Cooper: Yes, the problem would have arisen because as Brickell Place, there was one parking space assigned to each dwelling unit, there were a few extra sold but not many, not a significant number and especially when you're talking about a situation where 1.75 parking spaces were provided per dwelling unit at Brickell Place and they are now asking 1.50 parking spaces. That would certainly account for any difference, in other words the extra one space for every four apartments would more than make up for the number that was sold above the one. The problem would still exist. And we suffer from this on a routine basis, it isn't just a once in a lifetime occurence. To further con- firm my position that we have a parking problem at Brickell Place regardless of what the Wilbut Smith people found when they went around and counted, there is a letter that was posted at Brickell Place regarding parking to em- ployees saying, "... We're experiencing a shortage of guest parking spaces..", this letter has been made a part of the record, signed by Albert Cohen who was at the time the Security Supervisor. On page 4 of the study they talk about other sources, other communities that have an effect on parking or that com- ment on parking. These comments are very general, they don't refer to speci- fic studies by date or names so it is impossible to obtain them as far as I - would know, they deal not with parking in some instances but in trip genera- tion which is not an issue before you today because the issue of parking and trip generation may, in fact, be inversely related. When you have fewer trips generated you have the cars remaining parked at their homes more so that when they talk about low trip generation that may, in fact, indicate high parking rates not low parking rates. The only comment in that section which is in any way meaningful or interesting is (4) that says that what in- vestment houses require of developments that they will fund is to meet the local code requirements or a minimum of 1� spaces per dwelling unit. But generally investment houses depend upon the nature of the Zoning Code to pro- tect the interests and they do not delve very seriously into that question. So the argument that the project could not be funded because the investment houses would not grant the funding is a fallacious argument. In regards to the next section, parking requirements for other cities, they would like you to believe that parking required in Boston, Washington, Tampa and New Orleans make a difference on what should be required here in Miami. I see no relation whatsoever. Miami has its own problems, it's own nature of residential develop- ment, it's own people who use vehicles more than even the people in Los Angeles so comparing Miami parking requirements to those of areas that have effective rapid transit and other public transportation does not seem to be effective. What might be effective would be to compare th parking requirements of other communities in Dade County, and I have some of that information for you here. Without going into it in great detail, you can see that in no instance is there a requirement of less than 1� spaces for the smallest unit. Our Code, as it exists now, requires parking spaces to increase depending on the increased size of the unit and that is the way it is in most communities. Hialeah, -2 N0Vi0!2 W W their minimum is 1�, it goes up to 2�, and incidentally, they don't allow any compact spaces. South Miami also has 1� for a one bedroom unit, 2 spaces for each two bedroom unit plus they require additional spaces for guest parking over and above that requirement. Miami Beach has two dis- tricts where they require more parking than what is currently the Code let alone what is being requested here and Coral Gables has the same thing. Interestingly enough, they also require additional parking for guests over and above the 2 spaces for an efficiency, 1, 2 or 3 bedroom unit and 3 spaces for a four bedroom unit. I should point out at this time that the planned development at Brickell Key on Claughton Island does have 1 four bedroom apartment on each floor and 3 three bedroom apartments on each floor and a significant number of two bedroom apartments, we're not talking about the small dwelling units so the decrease would be more significant _ to those larger apartments. Turning again to page 5, there section called "In Retrospect", they deal - I would like to know if Commissioner Perez can hear me? You can? Okay, I don't mind you standing there as long as you can hear me. Page 5 "In Retrospect", they deal with what had been presented as basically the justifications for this ordinance. The first, they say that absent ownership justifies reducing the parking requirements. At the workshop the Mayor expressed it better than I could, that who knows whether we're going to have absentee ownership for very long. These buildings are going to be here for a long long time and if you don't provide the parking for it now it isn't going to be added later, a change in the demographic ownership of condominiums has already started to occur partly as a result of changes in tax laws which no longer permit capital gains avoidance for people who do not live here in this country. And as a result the sales have gone down and they have gone down significantly in the foreign owner- ship market and when we see that trend occurring now I think it is absolutely wrong to rely on a statement,"we're going to have a lot of absentee owners" to justify such a significant change that will affect over 3,000 residential units and so many people on that island. Also, you should understand that not all absent owners take their cars with them when they go back home wherever they live and I don't have the original pictures because I submitted them at a previous meeting but here are copies of photographs of cars that hve been wrapped up in tarps and canvas and tied with rope to protect them while the people are gone, I'll pass that among you. The next point that they cover is that Brickell Key is close to the central business district. Besides the fact that being close to the central business district doesn't preclude the need for a car to go to Dadeland or visit your aunts up in North Miami or any place else you might want to go in the City it's really not all that close to downtown. To walk from the island to downtown would be a significant walk especially in the heat that Miami suffers during the summer. Mayor Ferre: Janet, I have a particular problem with a statement in here, it says that it is 1.5 blocks from the people mover, do you understand that? I'm talking about.... paragraph 4. Ms. Cooper: Yes, you're dealing with number 4, right. Mayor Ferre: I'm talking about page 5, paragraph 4, it says, "... a key station on the People Mover System would be approximately 1.5 blocks away." Now, how could that be? Ms. Cooper: I believe what they're trying to say, is that from the foot of the bridge it would be 1.5 blocks away. I don't know that that is quite true, because as I understand it the People Mover Station would be on S.E. First Avenue and 8th Street and those are very long blocks any way even if it would be 1.5 blocks and we've got a very long bridge, I think the bridge there is over 800 feet long and the peor?a would have to walk the length of the island, say the people who lived in one of the far buildings, I have a little diagram here I can show you. Mayor Ferre: Can we set a time limit of say ... 20 minutes till 11 O'Clock? Ms. Cooper: I'm hoping I'll be done by that time. People who live in Build- ing III, for example, would have to walk to the foot of the bridge. Building III is at the equivalent of 4th Street or maybe it is even 3rd Street, it is right at the line of the river and they'd have to walk all the way down to 8th Street plus over to get the bridge then over the 800 foot bridge and then a very long block and a half at the best to get to the People Mover Station so that argument is also fallacious. And the same thing applies to 1tapid Transit. That is going to be on loth Street and west First Avenue which is just much farther. And when we're talking about proximity to the 0 4 People Mover or Rapid Transit, People Mover proximity according to the Planning Department has been considered 600 feet and Rapid Transit 1200 feet and they are way outside of those distances so that you can't really consider that Rapid Transit has an effect on this island. In point (5), they say that the energy crisis is discouraging cars but we haven't seen that and when I get to the Dade County study you'll see that that has not been borne out especially here in Dade County. As far as their point (6), that there is going to be fewer cars on the island because there are so many services that are going to be on the island, it's a self-contained island, first of all that's just baloney, people are going to leave the island all the time, they're not going to necessarily patronize the doctor who has his office on the island and so forth, plus the fact that we have heard today from Mr. Traurig for the first time that I heard that they're going to cut -down considerably on those kinds of development so that wipes out that argument. That's the end of their study, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, I don't see any justification that is reasonable, that is valid, that stands up to support this kind of request for a change. So why are they asking for it? Well, I didn't know they were going to come in and modify the request of the Planning Department, but if they reduce the parking as they are now asking by 769 parking spaces at a cost of $6,000 per parking space which is the cost that I believe Mr. Reid indicated would be, that would be, well, for double that it was $9,222,000 so it is close to $5,000,000 that would be saved and yet the presentation has been made that what this will do is it will expand the open space, it will make it nicer for the people who live there. We're not talking about providing more open space because there is no surface parking permitted on this island. What we're talking about is as Mr. Braman, an officer or employee, authorized representative of Brickell Key said at the Planning Advisory Board Meeting on September 17th, it is just less materials and labor and cost and that's why this is before you today, irrespective of what effect it will have on the over 3,000 dwelling units, maybe 7,000 people who will live on that island. Now, Mr. Traurig suggested to you, and he has been suggesting all along that this will not affect the entire island, that Phases I, II and III are going to be built in accordance with the current zoning and that only phases IV, V and VI I believe he said, would be affected by the new zoning. Well, besides the fact that that's not true, he failed to consider the development on the other portion of the island by another developer, he may have only been talking about the particular developer that he recognizes. Mayor Ferro: Well, you know you just made a statement that's not true, what do you mean it's not true? Ms. Cooper: Well, I'm going to get to that right now. There is no legal requirement that they comply with the current zoning. If you pass this ordinance today, in 30 days any building permit, any CU's or CO's that are granted could be granted legally in compliance with the ordinance as effective 30 days from today. He can stand here and promise it to you all you want but it is not legally binding. The Building Department may not even know about his promise, I'm certainly not going to stand out there and count the parking spaces and file a lawsuit about that, and there is just no reason that it is binding, that's (1). (2)They are deal- ing with a common garage for all the phases so that even if they build, if they do build I, II and III or any part of them in accordance with the zoning as it is now, when they come up to IV, V and VI, it isn't something that is merely added onto the existing building, but the garage would be considered as a whole, as a totality and at the time that they build buildings IV, V and VI it would be possible for them not to build 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit but to build one for the new ones but to count it for the entire project so that even if they do comply now it is poss- ible later on that that advantage would be lost and there would be nothing that we could do about it legally because contracts and.condi- tional zoning is not permissible. Now, it has never been denied, and as a matter of fact, it has been openly admitted that the nature of the use of the parking spaces is going to be to assign one space per apartment and to sell additional spaces. And we have to think about all the people who need the second and third spaces that would be available over and above that one. .rust briefly, besides the owners' additional cars over one, employees of the owner, visitors and guests, employees of the condo. Now Brickell Place has found that it requires one employee for every eight apartments in order to function and that is a significant number of parking spaces that are occupied by employees of the condominium association. Now, the really interesting part of my presentation deals with a study that was done not by a hired gun, not for the purpose of supporting a particular proposal that would save anyone millions and millions of dollars, but a study that wad done by Dade County when they study traffic and transportation on a routine basis. I went and I picked up their recent studies, I hav wo ye rs 1 i � i981 24 W It here and I'm going to go over them with you, I'm going to pass out copies of the key points. The 1978 study which you have various pages from talks about on page 32 that the number of automobiles available per household or per capita continues to increase. This is a trend. On page 36 it deals with specific figures. In households where the head of the household is under 63 years of age the average vehicles per household are 1� but if you look below that, to the last statement before Table 33, see that those households earning $15,000 or more usually own at least one car and this income Brackett represents the majority of households with two cars. We see in the bottom graph on page 36 that where there is an income level of $15,000 or above, and I think it would be conceded by everyone here that in order to live on this island with this development you're going to have to have that .level of income or significantly greater, that the average vehicles per household is 1.9. Now the current code requires 1.75 which is represented by the black graph, the black bar on my homemade graph for you here today. The request that was made as of the time that I drew this graph when I was sitting here when the item was deferred was 1.25, it has now been raised to 1.5. But you see what the average is for households in the bracket of people who are going to live here and it is 1.90. It seems to me that any reduction from the 1.75 would be going in absolutely the wrong direction. We're not dealing with a question of whether it is suit- able to reduce it a little or a lot, it is a question of whether it is suitable to reduce it at all. Experience in Dade County and in Miami has been that in condominiums everybody knows there is a shortage of parking spaces with the code as it is today and this perhaps explains why and why it will be such a factor on this island. Mayor Ferre: You've got 7 minutes left, Janet. Ms. Cooper: Combining the figures in graphs, Tables 30 and 31 I found that 71% of all households with incomes of $15,000 or more have 2 or more vehicles and if a portion, as indicated on page 64, of households with 3 or more cars is expected to increase from 2.4% to 10% in the year 2,000. In the 1979 study which was the same date as the study done by Wilbur Smith, we find that Dade's passenger car registrations are once again increasing at a brisk pace after a period of stability. There was a brief hiatus in 75 and 76 but the present data fails to show any indication of a long term deviation from the previous trends and by 1978 registrations had increased by more than 40% over the 1970 figure while the population growth was only half as great as the increase in registrations. So we have a tremendous trend of increase in vehicle and especially in the high income bracket which will be inhabiting the development on Clauahton Island. And now, as if that is not bad enough, we come to the proverbial straw to break the camel's back and that is that under the ordinance as proposed there could be 307,600 square feet of office space without a requirement of one addi- tional parking space. In an article in the Miami Herald which I'm going to pass around, maybe I'll just pass some this way and you can pass them down, they were promoting this development and they said that 200,000 square feet of office space would be provided attached to the condominiums and that that total office space of approximately one third of One Biscayne Tower - not one additional parking space. You're talking about 300,000 square feet, you're talking about half the size of One Biscayne Tower with not one addi- tional parking space. We know what parking problems we're having down- town. There is not going to be any on -street parking in this island to absorb any overflow that may exist. If you pass this ordinance and there is a shortage later on there is nothing you can do about it. Mr. Traurig said, "If we're wrong, only we would suffer". Who is we? Mr. Traurig's we is a developer who wants to save almost $5,000,000. Mr. Traurig's we does not include the thousands and thousands of people who are going to live on this island. I don't see any of those people up here asking you to reduce the parking that would be available to them. In fact, if they knew about it I believe that they would be up here arguing against it. I have received calls from people who have bought, had heard about it and were very upset about it but because of repercussions that may come u� they were afraid to speak up. But the "we" who will suffer on that island if this goes through, there will be people who will suffer, it's not the "we" who is asking to reduce it. The reason for the Zoning Code is to protect the people who will ultimately live somewhere from developers who would rather save money than provide the amenities that are necessary in order to have a good quality of life. That's the basic purpose of the Zoning Code and I think that you would be going against the intent of the Zoning Ordinance if you were to grant this. And I'll point in closing specific comments in the "Intent", Article I of the Zoning Ordinance, "To stabilize and enhance property and civic values, to facilitate adequate provisions for vehicular parking, to lessen congestion, disorder and danger and to protect the common Ti NOV 9 1981 rights and interests within each district. That means within the island, not only to protect the rest of the City of Miami from Claughton Island. And in order to meet these objectives and intents and to provide an ade- quate parking situation for the people on Claughton you must reject this ordinance. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, Counselor. Mr. Traurig: Mr. Mayor, I've just sat here and listened to a diatribe and an attack on the integrity of a lot of people and I'm not going to get into a spitting contest in connection with this, I think that as long as the issue becomes one of integrity we've got to call on experts and people who really understand what happened so that they can explain to you the facts on which you're going to make your decision. I don't think that it would be in the best interest of this commission or community for Ms. Cooper or me to start arguing with each other about who did what. So I'd like first to call on Mr. Ken Cheezam who can talk on behalf of the developer, he is one of the developers, and can talk about the specifics of the project and then I'd like to call Mr. Clyde Tolland of Wilbur Smith and Associates and for those new Commissioners who are not familiar with Wilbur Smith and Associates, that's one of the world's most outstanding traffic engineering firms and employed by this City on many occasions to do its studies so that they can tell you what they know about this island, about Brickell Avenue, about trends, and they're not going to compare apples with oranges, they're going to compare apples with apples. I think that they can do a far better job than I and I call on them collectively to respond. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Cheezam. Your name and address for the record, Ken. Mr. Ken Cheezem: Ken Cheezem, 3166 Mary Street, Coconut Grove. There have been numerous criticisms voiced and there have been several misstatements of fact that are really very important and if there are any in particular that you would you like to question, we really don't intend to address every- one of them. Mayor Ferre: Well, we don't know what they are so how can we question them? Go ahead and make your statement. Mr. Cheezem: Okay. Like for example, like we have always provided for or intend to provide for separate parking spaces for our office and commercial facilities that are going to be on the island. Going back to her Brickell Place comments, June and July is a very busy time for Brickell Place, espec- ially back in 79 and 80.... Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute, Ken, you went awfully quick over a very import- ant issue. Are you saying that you're going to provide parking for the office space? Mr. Cheezem: Yes, we will meet parking for the office space, it will be, you know, as per the Code and it will be separate parking in just about all in- stances. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Reid, you need to clarify that when your turn comes up. Mr. Cheezem: In Brickell Place, talking about the guest parking, for instance, Brickell Place did convert approximately I think it is 60 or 80 parking spaces that were, you know, dedicated for guests to a playground area. So 'they pur- posely did this. This is in a prime location of guest parking. There is, I don't know if Ms. Cooper when she did her investigation looked in the far side of the project, there is one area for guest parking that is farther away, but I would like to point out that when we did our study we did a complete survey by one of the largest and most respected traffic engineers. I would like to just give a quick overview, if I could, of where we are in the presentation because we have to weigh the benefits here to the community and we are vitally interested in making this project the greatest asset to the community we can and it just really hurts us to hear otherwise. We have spent in the neighbor- hood of three years designing the first phase which is going to be complete ill two months. We have literally just gone over and over our design decisions to make sure they're right and we invite you all to see our project in a couple of months, it is really going to be outstanding. And, of course, Ms. Cooper also who has bought an apartment in the Second Phase I'm sure will want to see it. The existing ordinance right now will call for about 1.75, you know it v.iries because of the formula based on the number of bedrooms, we will provide approximately 1.75 parking spaces per dwelling unit. We have proven, 26 NOV 19 198 it is a fact that at Brickell Place, that less than cne space per dwelling unit was actually occupied. There is approximately, you know, 40 or 50% there of unutilized parking spaces. And our project, of our magnitude at Brickell Key, this means a lot of devastating things to us, well, it is harmful things, that to our project and to the community. We're going to have a lot larger parking structures and it is going to be unused, it is really useless. You're talking about in the neighborhood of 20-40% extra parking spaces than we actually need. There is room there for substantial reduction in heights of our buildings and condensing our parking structures. This is what will be of great benefit to the community and to our island. The current proposal which is as represented in the ordinance was 1.25 spaces per parking space and after criticism by ths. Cooper and discussion with the Planning Department and other people, we agree that 1.5 would be a reasonable middle ground because, in fact, there are guest spaces and other things that _ we would have provided anyway, even if the ordinance was passed at 1.25, we would have provided probably more spaces because of the need for them for guests and this kind of thing. I would like to mention also that we do intend to have some kind of a tram service which will be available for local residents' use. As far as this ordinance not binding on the developer as far as our promises on earlier phases, I would like to point out that Phase I has been built, Phase II, the pilings are in the ground, our structure is fixed so the number of parking spaces is fixed and Phase III, the spaces we're confined in and our number of parking spaces that we can fit in in that area is also fixed and we do plan to meet the present ordinance as currently on the books. That's all the comments that I have. Ms. Cooper: Sho!ild I rebutt now or wait till the end if their rebuttal? Mayor Ferre: Let them finish and then we'll take it from there." Mr. Traurig. Dr. Theede, we're in the middle of a discussion between the people that are representing the island and Ms. Cooper. I will recognize members of the pub- lic subsequently so you write down your questions. Will the next speaker come forward, please? Mr. Cheezem: Clyde Tolland of Wilbur Smith and Associates is here to talk. Air. Clyde Tolland: My name is Clyde Tolland, 413 Vizcaya Avenue, Coral Gables, Florida. Your honor, I am a principal associate, architect with Wilbut Smith and ASsociates out of Colombia, South Carolina. And I praise Ms. Cooper's presentation but as has been stated, a shadow has been cast on my particular firm's technical capacities and expertise. First of all, the issue is not at Brickell Place, we used that as a basis but it is on Brickell Key. I would like to state that Wilbur Smith and Associates not only has performed trans- portation engineering studies and services for this community but also through- out the United States of America and throughout the world where we have done these similar services for the government agencies and have had no retributions from it. I don't wish to go on a point by point defense of our report, but there are a couple of instances there that need to be clarified. The study report which was July 18, 1980, preceding that we had only July and June and a portion of April to work in for the report. On page 1, we did stipulate that the development would adhere to the zoning provisions of the Special Planned Development-1 Central Island District. That was not a promise, but a statement of a basis. On the second page there are approximately 550 units in two buildings at the time at Brickell Place. That generated .83, .91 vehicles per dwelling unit at the time. One page 4, we stipulated that at recent trends, anticipated development at Brickell Key, an average of 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit is recommended. We also modified that by saying that it is likely that some changes will be made due to shift in travel patterns and vehicle owner- ship. On page 5 we again stipulated that our recommendation as transportation engineers and our expertise showed that a parking ratio of 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit would be generally consistent with other cities where we have made similar studies for those municipalities. The portion of people getting to and from the Key to within 1.5 blocks from a planned transportation station for the rapid transit system was based upon an island network of tram service for the Key residents to the base of the bridge, approximately at Flagship. That is all I would like to say, your honor, in defense of that particular report that we submitted to the owner. We have also done our calculations based upon current coding and you all have on file the recommendations for Phases I, II, III and also IV and V. Thank you very much, your honor. Mayor Ferre: All right, any other statements by you, Mr. Traurig? Mr. Traurig: ... then I hope Mr. Reid would be called on to respond for the City. 27 NOV 19 1o81 4 4- Mayor Ferre: I will call upon Mr. Reid next. Mr. Cheezem. Mr. Cheezem: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. I want to make one thing clear, that we are in support of the Planning Department's recommendation and we did ask for a variance that Ms. Cooper referred to but it was only in an effort to compromise between what the Planning Depart- ment was recommending and what she wanted and a concession on our part in the fact that we did hire the best professionals to make these studies and comparisons because it is our interest to have the best community there not only for ourselves but for the community and this inference of the monetary, she mentioned $5,000,000 or some ridiculous thing, I can assure you we're not making $5,000,000 on the first building and we wouldn't make that much on it under any variance changes we or anyone else could want here. We made these changes only in an effort to compromise with her position and to try to meet a situation that would be acceptable to everyone. We do not want any changes as recommended by the Planning Department, we feel it would be good for the community, it would be good for the City. She indicated that our people were coming basically from typical American settings, this is not the case, they are by far and large European and South American, predominantly South Amer- icans and we are spending $750,000,000 in advertising outside the country to bring people and money to Miami and we would like to have, that's for next year only, and that's to bring the class of people that would make a real ser- ious contribution to our City. They're not people who bring three or four cars with them typically even though they are very very affluent, wealthy, nice people to do business with. They don't bring a half a dozen cars here and they do not put a burden on the City as some people would like to have us believe. This business of having 1 to 8 ratio of employees per apartment to maintain a condominium, she neglected to reflect one very important point which is this covers four shifts and you certainly don't have to have that many people there. Again, I did not come prepared, we have made all of our studies and things public, we've had people here from last summer, early on in June and July to meet with everybody that was interested in this question and I had no idea that she was going to bring up all of these points here today, it would be nice if we had a little advance of what she is complaining about now. She did, I would like to point out that maybe there was some feduciary relationship between her conversations with Mr. Traurig, that was not the case in mine and she made the same proposition to us as far as a compromise on the ratio. As far as the parking is concerned, we believe that the proposal that the Planning Department has made is a good one, it is just good urban planning. People all over the country are moving back to downtown U.S.A. and we want to design projects and communities that will ac- comodate them in the best way possible. If you don't want our help, as I understood you did, and concurrence, we're perfectly happy with that ratio whatever you come up with. Mayor Ferre: All right, sir,'Mr. Reid. Mr. Reid: I'd like to make two kinds of comments, one is a short restate- ment of why we supported this in the first place and the second is a direct response to the points raised by Ms. Cooper. This was a recommendation initiated by the Planning Department and it involves a single island in the City of Miami in which there are two developers, not just one. So the recom- mendation affects more than the party that has been testifying this morning. It was recommended by us for two principle reasons. (1)We think in the long term, and we're not talking about today or a 1978 study, we're talking about the future of the City of Miami when we mandate requirements like this, that it is in the interest of the City to reduce dependence upon the auto. This relates to traffic congestion, it relates to energy savings, it relates to noise and pollution so to the extent that the developers through parking requirements are ready to reduce that dependence it coincides with that ob- jective (1). (2) We have an objective that we do not want to mandate to any developer unnecessary costs through City regulation because those costs may end up in the profit line, 10 or 15% of them but they also may end up coming out of the pocket of the consumer and so that unnecessary costs mandated by regulation do come out of the pocket of the consumer and you should recog- nize that. The parking reduction that we're talking about is meant to apply only to the residential development and I thank Janet Cooper for pointing out, I think, some unclear language in the ordinance, and as I go on to her testi- mony I'm prepared to recommend a change in that language. The developers are encouraging pedestrianization on the island, walking to local doctors and shops and so forth. Of course, not everybody's doctor is going to be on the island but some of them will and because it is a mixed use island they will be able to walk and get those convenient services. There will be in their representations tram systems to connect the development to the People Mover, assuming it is built, and the rapid transit and to downtown Miami where we 28 Nov 19 i9o1 0 0 have initiated major retail activities that could relate to support this development. So basically we're talking about something that we feel is in line with the objective of reducing dependence on the auto, reducing unnecessary regulation and that applies to a very specific point. Now I would like to respond to the major points that Ms. Cooper has raised. (1) I want to do this by saying that I commend her for what she has done because in retrospect there are two flaws in the ordinance that have come out of this hearing process from my perspective. (1) We did not take into s account the need for unassigned spaces and to answer your question, Mr. Mayor, if the unassigned ratio was applied to Brickell Place today that we're ap- plying here now there would be 275 spaces set aside instead of 180. Mayor Ferre: I got 267, that's close enough. Mr. Reid: 550 and .5 is 275. Anyway, I'm not going to argue with that. So I thank her on the record for that and that's the reason we have these hearings, we're not perfect, we learn from these processes too. The second thing is that the language in the ordinance is vague on page 2, Section 1 where it says Off -Street Parking and it talks about off-street parking re- quirements shall be the same as set forth in other districts, meaning it was not our intention to modify the commercial requirements as they apply to Claughton Island, the retail and so forth, only applying to residential. And it goes on to say A spaces per dwelling unit and the applicants have proferred an amendment, a suggested amendment that raises the 1.5, we have no objection to such an amendment, we think it has come out of this process, it makes sense, including that only one of these spaces per unit could be assigned. We think the following, the remainder of that paragraph really is confusing. It was our intent that it would apply to mixed use buildings, buildings that are both office and residential in character. It could be interpreted by this developer or any other that the parking that they are building for the residential will suffice for the office development. That is not our intention and I recommend that this be stricken to make our in- tention clear. Okay? So in this process we are embracing some of Ms. Cooper's recommendations two suggestions. We are the true applicants, in any process like this where we mandate zoning in a development order in 1974 we might change the zoning for a good sensible reason to us in 1981. That doesn't mean these things are set in concrete. We don't think that this can be compared to Dade County as a whole. We're talking about the center of downtown Miami and a center that is becoming an urban centergistic area in its own right and one which can't be compared to some development being built out in the boondocks of Dade County. The opportunities for pedestrian movement and so forth are important here. As I said, I mentioned the point in terms of the consumer paying some of these costs and so forth. The point is that we think that the recommendation made sense in the first place, it has been further improved by the public review process and we would recom- mend that the Commission enact the ordinance embracing the 1.5 spaces per residential unit and embracing a requirement that at least one-third of these spaces be unassigned and striking the remainder of that paragraph that I think causes confusion. Mayor Ferre: All right, are you finished? Excuse me, you did finish and we went to Jim Reid and then we're going to let Janet and then you can have one more second and then Dr. Theede and I hope that will finish it. But before we get to the second round which I hope will go quicker than the first I'm going to open it up fnr questions from members of the Commission. Any questions at this point? Mr. Reid, I do have three questions or points that I wrote down as I went through this. In the first place, I agree with the intent, Mr. Reid, of what you're trying to do, what the Department is trying to do. I think that Janet Cooper has come up with some very very im- portant points and it is obvious to me that the developer or one of the devel- opers has recognized that and I congratulate both Janet Cooper and Messrs. Cheezem and their partners for having modified positions so I think that we're getting to a middle ground. Let me say that I reject the premise that Hialeah and other communities in Dade County are significant in any way to what we do in downtown Miami because it is a totally different ball park. Now the ques- tions that I have are as follows: I think in the study that was made in page 5, Item 3 and 4 about Rapid Transit and the People Mover, I think that if we're going to be reducing parking somewhat even though I see that it has been modified, the availability of a tram is absolutely essential because without that you're talking about a�block and a half, I totally reject that. If you look at those pictures that Janet passed out, for example, from 4 which is the hotel or from Phase III the walk is a substantial walk. Now, since I think that's not going to really require much of a burden because the developer has that in mind anyway, I think that has got to be chiseled into stone a little hit better in this ordinance. And by that I say that at the point where you 29 NOV 19 1981 pass the thousand mark or the two thousand, you're going to have to define what marks, you're going to have to have transportation available at a reasonable cost and I don't know how you're going to define that, so that the people will be able to go from the island to both the people mover and the Rapid Transit Station on a reasonable basis. Now how you're going to define reasonable is something that I think you're going to have to deal with. So that was point (1) that I had. Point (2) is I want to make sure that we can also chisel into stone, that we're not talking about varying Phases II and III, I is already done, but this question as to whether or not a permit could be revised for Phase III in particular because II is under construction, since it's not the intent of the developer to alter Phase III I think that needs to be chiseled in stone a little bit stronger so that when we're talking about 1.5 you're talking about 1.5 for IV, V and VI, is that correct? Mr. Reid: 'That's the representations they made on the record and.... Ms. Cooper: And the other development on the island. Mayor Ferre: Yes, that needs to be specifically spelled out and it also has to be spelled out for the Claughton portion of the development so that there is no hesitation or question on that. Now, the third point that I had here was the question of business and commercial parking and I want to make sure that by striking that section that you're talking about that it is abundantly clear that there is going to be some parking that has to be built for the commercial or business sector. In other words that it is not going to be drawing on the residential. I'm sure the developer would not put up a 200,000 square foot office space or commercial space without taking into account the parking requirements of that area. Mr. Reid: Mr. Reid, I think the striking of the remainder of that paragraph I've talked about makes that clear because it says off-street parking re- quirements for this district shall be as set forth in the general parking articles for the City as a whole which means that they have to meet for units other than residential units the parking requirements of the City as a whole. Mayor Ferre: The fourth question that I had was of the developer, Mr. Traurig, and that is, you're saying that you're going to set aside one parking space per dwelling unit not withstanding how many rooms it has. Mr. Traurig: We're going to have one parking space out of every two units unreserved. Mayor Ferre: That's not my question. My question is the one parking space that will be sold to the dwelling unit owner, will it be one per apartment no matter whether it has one bedroom, two bedroom or three bedroom? Mr. Traurig: No, becuase we have the discretion to increase the parking and if we find that there are people with three bedroom apartments who absolutely have to have two reserved parking spaces we may just have to increase the parking to provide it for them. Mayor Ferre: But that's a discretionary thing on your part. Mr. Traurig: Yes. Mayor Ferre: What this ordinance does is it earmarks one per dwelling unit, not withstanding how many rooms it has. Mr. Traurig: Well, we did it negatively, what we're saying is we have to pro- vide 1.5 parking spaces per unit and we have to provide at least one parking space for every two units as an unreserved parking space and the rest of it is a matter of implementation. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but the point is if you build a thousand units, just to simplify the numbers, you have to provide 1,500 parking spaces. Mr. Traurig: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Of which 1,000 units are for the 1,000 dwelling units, one per unit. Mr. Traurig: Correct. 3J .s_'.I �j Mayor Ferre: The 500 would be made available to those who are visitors, etc. etc. or joint parking for the project. Mr. Traurig: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Now, if I own a three bedroom apartment and I want two parking spaces you're not going to take it from the 500 because you would be pre- cluded from that. Mr. Traurig: Correct. Mayor Ferre: So, if you have, just for argument's sake, 100 two or three bedroom apartments who all want two then your 1,000 would have to be 1,200. Mr. Traurig: Correct. Mayor Ferre; Now, at that point your 500 also increases according to this ordinance, you realize that. Mr. Traurig: No. Mayor Ferre: Sure it does. Mr. Traurig: No, because according to the ordinance we only have to allocate 1 unreserved parking space for every two units and it has nothing to do with bedroom count. Mayor Ferre: All right, I stand corrected. So in other words the 500 would remain constant. Mr. Traurig: Yes. Mayor Ferre: But you would have to increase and you could not dip into that 500 so to speak. Mr. Traurig: That's correct. Mayor Ferre: Then let me turn to Janet and say Janet, I think not from your viewpoint but from my viewpoint I think what you started out to do, I am satis- fied that we have accomplished it by creating 500 parking spaces in a pool. Now, whether or not we should have 700 parking spaces which is what you're talk- ing about is something that is really one that we're all going to have to deal with. From my vantage point I think some very important concessions have been made and I think we have accomplished a great deal. I know that doesn't satis- fy you but I just want to tell you that.... Ms. Cooper: Don't put words in my mouth. Mayor Ferre: Okay, well those are the questions that I had and the statements that I had. Any other questions or statements from members of the Commission? Now we're going to get to this next phase. Janet, do you want to start? Ms. Cooper: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Okay, we've got to keep this very short now. Ms. Cooper: I'm really trying. First of all, I think that I can say that we are headed in the right direction. I am very encouraged by the direction this is taking and some of the concessions that have been made since this hearing - started but I would like to point out a couple of things. First of all, in regards to the tram, it is true that that would be absolutely necessary in order to discourage ownership, you see, we're not dealing with the question of traffic as I think I explained. We're dealing with a question of people and their human nature and their wanting to retain their own car for their own independence. We can try to encourage it by legislation, we're going to have some problems doing that but we're headed in the right direction. I would need to see the language that would assure that a tram would be operating continuously through the existence of the structures on Claughton Island. I was going to suggest that some of the money that the developer is going to save, and I wasn't suggesting that the developer would make an extra $5,000,000 profit but merely that he would be saving that in costs and that was one statement that was made by one of his own people, Mr. Braman. But the sum of that money might be placed in an irrevocable trust for the purpose of funding the tram into the future. I would suggest that I have nothing on paper in front of me that deals with the problem of parking for offices. Ken Cheezem said that 31 NOV 19 1981 they intend to provide separate parking for the offices for most situations and they intend to comply with the Code and my point was, and it has been somewhat addressed by Mr. Reid, my point was that the Code allows them to not have any extra parking. So we would need to change the Code. Mayor Ferre: Let me just make that statement into the record. We had prev- iously announced here at the last meeting that we're going to change our way of working around here. We're going to break up at 12 and come back at 2 at every meeting. So the last item that is on the agenda at 12 O'Clock is the item that we will hear and that will be the end of it and we will come back at 2:00. So those of you that are here on other items be advised. Go ahead. Ms. Cooper: Now, as to changing the Code in regards to the office parking, and I would ask the opinion of the attorney for the City, I believe that that would be a substantial departure from what was advertised here and that you couldn't actually do that today. You could not strike the portion of the Code that deals with no additional parking required for the office space without advertisement, bringing it up. That's (1) and (2) I'm certainly not prepared to agree to it until I have seen it in writing and verified that it accomplishes, for my own mind, that it accomplishes what it sets out to ac- complish. I think that is critical. Mayor Ferre: Okay, anything else? Ms. Cooper: Yes, I have some other things. I'm not going to get into the picky stuff about who the applicant is and misstatements made by various people. Reducing parking doesn't reduce noise, it doesn't reduce pollution, it merely provides parking spaces for people who have cars and need a place to put them. We don't have four shifts of employees at Brickell Place, we have three shifts and the only people who are not on the day shift are three security guards per shift, insignificant when we're talking about the number of spaces occupied by employees. In regards to Mr. Charlie Cheezem's state- ment that he has a lot of foreigners, again, Mr. Mayor, you said it best, we can't depend on that, we can't depend on their lifestyle. The reason that Americans in Miami have developed and non -Americans in Miami have develop- ed a dependence on automobiles is the situation that exists here in Miami not because they're foreigners or Americans. Mr. Tolland from Wilbur Smith did exactly what I had hoped, not hoped, well, first of all I wasn't attacking the integrity of Wilbur Smith organization and I hope he understands that. This study was a biased study in that it was commissioned for a particular purpose and it was their own statement and evidently a part of the develop- ment study..... Mayor Ferre: Janet, let's not get into the definitions, you know, let's get to the nitty gritty and let's get on with this. Ms. Cooper: I'm not, this is it. Anyway, it was stipulated that they would adhere to the zoning and Mr. Tolland said it wasn't stipulated, it is in writing in his own study. As to enforcement of the assigned and unassigned spaces, I think we need some input from the Zoning Department as to whether that is truly enforceable because that is a key, an absolute key point to what is being proposed as a compromise here and I do believe that if you did hear from the Zoning Department they would say that it is unenforceable. The developer can give deeds to one space per dwelling unit and he can build _ a few extra and sell those few extra but there is really no way that anybody could enforce the actual assignment but not conveyance of additional spaces. So to incorporate that into an ordinance would be incorporating a totally unenforceable provision that would invite violations. Ken Cheezem said that it was proven that less than one space was occupied at Brickell Place. It wasn't proven, it wasn't even significant evidence presented. I won't get into the rest of it on Brickell Place. Basically I think we're heading in the right direction but I would request that before anything becomes final I see in writing what is going to be proposed and that the public has ad- vance notice. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Traurig. Let's see if we can wind this up. Mr. Traurig: Very quickly, Mr. Mayor, the proposal consists of two parts. Part one is to permit an innovation in topography by encouraging the ele- vated landscaped areas up to a height of 32 feet on 20% of the lot to cover the garages and make it a much nicer area and I think everybody concurs that that is good. (2)Mr. Reid's response to Ms. Cooper was far more eloquent than I could make a response to you, I'm not going to make a re- sponse, I'm going to urge that you follow the recommendations of your staff a,id particularly Mr. Reid's colloquy and that you approve this as staff has recommended, 32 Nov 1 9 1981 t 2 Mr. Carollo: Bob, excuse me. Can I have your word that you're always going to ask us to follow the recommendation of our staff? Mr. Traurig: I would say you have my word that every time this ordinance comes up we're going to do that. Mr. Carollo: This ordinance, not all if you give me your word I would vote ingly with all the other ones. the others you come for? Because for this one today and vote accord - Mr. Traurig: I would say to you, Mr. Carollo, that you have a great staff and that when your staff says something to me I accept that as the decision of wise people and I really sincerely mean. that. Mayor Ferre: Dr. Theede, you wanted to speak. Are there other members of the public that wish to be heard on this issue? Dr. Jane Theede: Yes, I have a place of business not too far away. Dr. Jane Theede, President of All Night Animal Clinic, 150 S. W. 7th Street. Since my business will be located on the passageway of all the traffic I will be somewhat affected. There is so much said it is sort of hard to start. First of all, talk is free and Miami has too many experiences with free talkers and these people haven't yet once offered their promises in writing so that they will be binding and I think the time will have to come that this Commission will have to ignore talk and look at what is in writing. Secondly, these apartments on Brickell Avenue and on Biscayne Island where there is an 82 apartment building and 12 occupants are bought by South Americans for speculation purposes or a place to retreat in case of political problems. Therefore, yes, presently these spaces are not occupied but sooner or later these will be sold to people who will be resi- dents, therefore, there will be a shortage of parking places throughout Brickell Avenue and any of these great great expensive condominiums simply because when they are occupied it will be a one car per person and my own family where there are three members or more there are four to five cars because if a car breaks down they don't want to be bothered with having to wait for another car to be fixed so that if you've got three or four occu- pants you're going to have four or five automobiles. I'm facing reality, not right now but ten years from now and ten years from now these builders are not going to come in and change what they have built. Now, Mr. Reid, I appreciate you attempting to change my mode of life, but unfortunately the people in the City of Miami are totally dependent on Dade County for their transportation, therefore, as a Miami resident I do not have adequate bus transportation. I would dearly love to get on a bus and be able to read my journals and leave the driving to the bus driver but this is not the case and I don't think we will ever see it in Miami like we see it in New York or Zurich or wherever it may be. Therefore, I think Ms. Cooper is correct in asking for more parking places on this island and I think the Commission should realize that wherever we build in downtown Miami we should increase the parking places even above what the City Planning Board recom- mends. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Thank you. Any other statements by members of the public at this time? If not, the Commission, what is the.... Mr. Carclic: Mr. Msy,:)r, I'll try not to offend anyone on our staff or anyone present hare. I'm only going to speak for myself, each member of this Commission could speak for themselves. I understand that therq has been a lot of time and effort put into this both by our department and other people involved but I just find it so unrealistic to believe that one parking space per apartment is going to be sufficient. You know, your- self, Mr. Mayor, you know you have, you have more of an average family, you have several children, but you have you know, quite a few cars that you use. An average family today is almost bound to use two vehicles. Granted, for the present time there is being a lot of speculation being made with these condominiums but we don't know what the very near future let alone the far future is going to bring and I'm just concerned as to what might happen then we will have a whole new situation, because we already gave the green light for developers there to build designing one space, we won't be able to force them to build additional parking spaces there so that's my concern, it's not going to be a vote against our Planning Department or Mr. Traurig or any other individuals involved here, I just don't feel that it is realistic at all especially in the very near future. Mr. Traurig: Mr. Carollo, may I just correct something? 33 NOV 19 1981 Mr. Carollo: Sure, Bob. Mr. Traurig: I guess we did a bad job of explaining. We're not talking about building one parking space per unit, it's lit parking spaces. Mr. Carollo: Well 1�, but you're going to assign one per unit..... Mr. Traurig: But only on Phases IV, V and VI, not on the existing phases. Mr. Carollo: I realize what you're saying, Bob, but a lot of those other half spaces are going to be used by employees, they're going to be used by visitors.... Mr. Traurig: I just wanted to correct a fact and obviously you understood it so I apologize for interrupting you. Mr. Carollo: So this is going to be my reason why I am going to vote neg- atively on this issue and again it is not a vote that's going to be against anyone, it's just my personal feeling of what I think is logical in this situation. Mayor Ferre: Any other statements or questions? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I was looking here, is Mr. Cheezem still here? Mr. Cheezem, this does not directly, but I think I'm at liberty to ask this question. Quoting from an article in the paper, sir, I am very much disturbed, and let me read this to you, and it is a statement by you. Mayor Ferre: What is the date of that? Mr. Plummer: August 3, 1979. It says, "Brickell Key will be even fancier than Brickell Place Cheezem said. And to make sure it stays that way, the general public will be barred from most of the island." Now, are you speak- ing, when you made that statement, to just the condominium? Let me tell you my concern. This Commission went to great extremes and even through a public referendum of public right-of-way and especially access to waterfront access around that island as well as to other places. I'm concerned that I feel that this statement in the paper quoted to you is in direct defiance of that statement. Mayor Ferre: Didn't we go over that? As I recall, J. L., that was in 79 before we finalized, the previous Commission finalized this SPD Zoning and as I recall the 50 foot setback issue came subsequent to that.... Mr. Plummer: That's correct, sir. Mayor Ferre: And then there was some discussion on the bridge and whether or not that was a public bridge, and it is a public bridge. Didn't we go through that before? Mr. Plummer: I don't think, Mr. Mayor, there's any question in your mind or in my mind as to what we think and what is our intent but I am concerned when I read an article even though it is in 79, I want it clarified for the record of today. Mr. Charles Cheezem: I would be delighted to respond to that. Of course, generally speaking when you step off the bridge you're on private property. Mr. Plummer: Correct, sir. Mr. Cheezem: 75% of this property is being developed for residential purposes and that is what I was trying to say and sometimes what you say doesn't always come out in the press exactly like you say it. Mr. Pluii r: All of us here are very much aware of that, sir. So in other words what you're saying is that the public will have access to the island but not to the private residential development. Mr. Cheezem: I believe we were trying to say most of it will be treated as a condominium and the ingress, egress, security, all of these things eventually by the wisdom of the State of Florida are really turned over to the condominium owners and the developers and very few others have a lot to say about how that will be maintained on that part of it. That was the thing I was trying to get across. 34 NOV 19 1981 t 0 Mr. Plummer: My second area of concern is either Mr. Cheezem or Mr Traurig, either one can answer. In these units, sir, is it mandatory, excuse me. Are the units being sold, a unit, with a parking space? Mr. Cheezem: With a covered parking space. Mr. Plummer: Not necessarily covered, but a parking space. Mr. Cheezem: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: In other words someone cannot buy a unit without buying a park- ing space. Mr. Cheezem: That's correct, sir. Mr. Plummer: It's included in the price. Mr. Cheezem: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: All right, question (b). Mr. Cheezem: They're priced, if you get a garage, and underneath we have covered spaces with garages and you can lock them and secure them and so forth, there is a little difference there.... Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask a question in the negative, sir. Can some- one buy a unit without having a parking space? Mr. Cheezem: No, sir. Mr. Plummer: All right. Then I am to assume to the contrary... Mr. Cheezem: If you bought a unit and you didn't have a car and you wanted to assign it or let someone else use it you could do that, to that extent you could have one but there is a space provided for that apartment. Mr. Plummer: Well, sir, you will find that there are some condominiums in this community in which it is possible to buy a condominium without buying a parking space and I think the end of 25th Road is a prime example where that is allowed to happen that everybody didn't buy parking spaces and the congestion on that street is unreal. I then would assume if available, second parking spaces would be at an additional cost. Mr. Cheezem: That is correct. Mr. Plummer: All right, the third and final item that was brought up by Ms. Cooper, Mrs. Cooper, whatever. Ms. Cooper: A little of each. Mr. Plummer: I'm not about to touch that line. Ms. Cooper: I'm divorced, I'm currently a Miss but a previous Mrs. Mr. Plummer: Twixt and between. I have not heard a lot, and I think it is going to be a real problem especially on your island, is the concern that I have about the amount of employee parking. And I don't think it is unreal- istic that you are going to require in an overall picture one employee per eight units, whatever that equivalent is and what is being.... Okay, 150 parking spaces, is that problem being addressed..... Mayor Ferre: I'm sorry, J. L., I gave you wrong information. 150, eight for one is 1.50 but as he said it is on a shift basis so, you know, it might be 60 or 70.... Mr. Plummer: Well, I'm concerned about the thing that says how many parking spaces are dedicated for employees. Mr. Cheezem: They, of course, would come out of the.... Out of 1,000 apart- ments we were proposing 250 of these to be unassigned and, of course, that is where the employees would park. Mr. Plummer: But Mr. Cheezem, you cannot use unassigned spaces on three or four different avenues. You can't use them in my estimation for visitor parking when it is convenient and employee parking when it is convenient and 35 NOV 19 1981 ... Well, Maurice, I want to tell you I'm not a cave dweller and that doesn't appeal to my style even though I know a lot of people do. But I know when I have gone to visit with people if you try to find a parking space at some of these condominiums it is almost impossible sometimes to find visitor parking even to the extent in some areas where they demand and require valet parking. Mr. Carollo: Oh come on, J. L., Armando has got you a parking space on Grove Isle. Mr. Plummer: Well yes, but I don't have a unit that you have over there. I'm just concerned in that area. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Plummer, may I answer two of those questions? Mr. Plummer: No, I was talking to Mr. Cheezem. Mr. Cheezem: The valet parking will take care of most of that stuff but to answer your question, I'm not prepared to tell you exactly how many employees we'll have. I do know from the experience at Brickell Place the total is a little over 1,000 units in Phase I and Phase II and I do know that a number of these spaces by the election of the condominium owners themselves have converted these to playgrounds which would indicate to me pretty strong proof that the amount of spaces unassigned, that the spaces were in excess of what was needed and we want to keep it in that posture. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I have problems with the parking. I feel that they are providing too little spaces for future expected growth and not enough parking now. I also have problems with the fact that it is a blow to my intelligence I think to have me sit here and think that an individual with a three bedroom apartment will only have one vehicle and that through some magical turn of force they will be able to split their car in half and share it in a half space. So I would hope that the Planning Department in the future would take into considerations that Commissioner Dawkins is concerned with future requests coming before this board and that when there are more than 2 or 3 bedrooms that it be considered that there may be 2 or more vehicles and that space be provided for this. I am at the present, like I said disturbed but this has been going on before I got here, but please in the future I would like for the staff to take that under consider- ation. Mayor Ferre: other questions or statements? All right, let me make my position clear. What we have here is a request for 1,336 apartment dwell- ings who presently have to build 1.75. Would you tell me how many parking units that is? Will you multiply 1,336 by 1.75? Mr. Mc Manus: 2,338. Mayor Ferre: 2,338. Now, these people, what they're saying is that they are going to build 2,004, is that correct? So what you're talking about is the reduction of 334 parking units. That is specifically what we are dis- cussing here, whether or not the 1,336 living units to be built will have 2,338 parking spaces or 2,004 parking spaces. What I think we have achieved here is much more important than the reduction of the 334 parking spaces. What it is, and this is something that came out at that work session here. Now what we have achieved here is the ability to build into these future IV, V and VI phases a pool of 668 parking spaces which are available on a first come first served basis to visitors, to employees, to people who are in the building. This is the first time we've ever done that. In the past what we do is we have more parking but I assure you that when you go into any of these apartment houses on Brickell Avenue you will see that there are always a tremendous amount of empty spaces because that shows that there is a tremendous waste because we have too many that are earmarked for a speci- fic apartment that just is not used. I much prefer to approach this on a pool basis. Now, I don't have any problems frankly with having a three bed- room apartment and having one place assigned to me because I'm going to buy the additional one and believe me the developer is going to make sure that I have one available because otherwise I'm not going to buy the apartment and the problem that I have in apartment dwellings is that there are never any spaces available as Janet has pointed out so well, for visitors and employees because they take all the spaces and what in effect, this is a major step forward in my opinion, and I think the department is to be commended for what they have done. I think Janet has greatly improved, I do think that 1.25 would have been too small and I think by going to 1.5 and making 668 available in a pool is a major step forward, I wish we had done this with 36 NOV ;gat t other apartments that we have approved. I think the tram service in such a large project is absolutely essential. I think the enforceability issue is also essential, Janet, I think that is a very good point that you made. And the question of business and commercial parking has to be clarified. Other than that, I'm ready to vote for this because I think this is a big step forward in the right direction and I commend you for your initiative. Ms. Cooper: Thank you. May I address the issues that are raised so that I don't forget them, please? _ Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, we've got just about 3 minutes. Mayor Ferre: Let me clarify what I have said in the past. Whatever issue we are on at.12 O'Clock we will see to its completion and that doesn't mean that we're cutting at 12. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, what I would like to do at this time is make a ( motion and then we could open it up for discussion again if there is a second or vote, whatever. My motion, Mr. Mayor, is a motion for denial as it is presented to this Commission now. Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion, let's get the wording of this properly, that SPD-1, Central Island District on Second Reading be denied. Is that the legal way of doing it, Terry? Mr. Percy: Correct. Mr. Traurig: Could we break this into two parts, the ground level open space which is really not controversial as part I and then parking as part II? Mayor Ferre: Yes, Joe, I think.... ground level open space is not an issue, j you're talking about parking. Mr. Carollo: That's what we're talking about, parking. Mayor Ferre: In other words let's make it into two motions then. Is that all right with you? Because they are separate issues altogether. Mr. Carollo: That would be all right with me if it would be all right with the Planning Department and the City Attorney says it's all right. Mr. Percy: Well, we would prefer that the Second Reading be proposed as is with deletions as have been discussed and we would require just one motion. Mayor Ferre: Well, what he is specifically saying, Terry, is that he is making a motion to deny the parking portion, he says he has no objections to the open. Mr. Percy: That means that he's for the other portion. Correct. Mayor Ferre: So I guess the way to do it is you..... Mr. Percy: Would be to make a motion approving that acceptable portion, delet- ing the unacceptable with one motion. Mr. Carollo: All right, I will make a motion accepting Item I and deleting the area as far as to the parking spaces they're requiring, that is not acceptable. Mayor Ferre: All right, you have heard the motion, is there a second? Mr. Dawkins: I'm confused. State your motion again, please? Mr. Carollo: My motion, Commissioner Dawkins, is accepting Item I, there are two Darts to it, the ground level pedestrian open space, we're accepting that, I don't think there were any problems with that. However, we're deleting, in other words voting against the parking space cut that they are requiring. Mr. Dawkins: I second it. Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a second now on the motion. To the motion specifically, any comments? Well, I just on the record want to say that I respect my colleagues to the right in their opinions and I understand their position but I respectfully disagree with it, I think this is a major step forward in the right direction. We've spent an awfully lot of time and effort bringing this to this point and I would hate to - that's my personal opinion, I think that this is a big step forward and I would hate to let all of that go down the drain but if that is the will of the majority then that is the 37 NOV 19 1981 will of the majority. Mr. Dawkins: I'll have to borrow a phrase frm Ms. Cooper, I would hope the Mayor would not put words in my mouth, because I seconded it I didn't say I was for or against it, I merely seconded the motion. Mayor Ferret Miller, I was just basing myself on the statement that you prev- iously made but you're entitled to your opinion and that's fine, that's the way this Commission functions. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, let me say this for the record, that I certainly respect your opinion in that it's just a difference of opinion that we're going to have from time to time like it is normal in any form of government. Mayor Ferrer I've got no problem with that. Mr. Carollo: This is nothing personal against anyone here, least of all your- self. Mayor Ferret No problem. All right, any further discussion on the motion as made? All right, call the roll. Mr. Ongie: Mr. Carollo? Mr. Carollo: Yes on the motion. Mr. Ongie: Mr. Plummer? Mr. Plummer: Yes. Mr. Ongie: Mr. Perez? Mr. Perez: Yes. Mr. Ongie: Mr. Dawkins? Mr. Dawkins: Yes. Mr. Ongie: Mayor Ferre? Mayor Ferret I vote no. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, you're voting no on the motion to approve the ground level space? Mayor Ferret Yes, because it doesn't include the parking portion and I think what we're ending up is a lot worse than what the Department recommended. I think the Department has spent a year in coming up with a very important step forward and we are, in effect, killing it. Mr. Plummer: Well, now, we have a second portion to the motion. Mayor Ferret No, sir. Mr. Plummer: Oh yes, sir. Excuse me, reread the motion. The first motion was split into, the motion he made was split into two parts. Mr. Carollo: No, J. L. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, it is not? Mayor Ferret No, sir. Mr. Carollo: No, we approved the ground level pedestrian but deleted the parking. Mr. Plummer: Fine, but that's not a second motion? Mr. Carollo: No, that was only one. Mr. Plummer: I reverse my vote. It was my understanding that you asked Mr. Carollo to split. Mayor Ferret He did, J. L., and the way he split it was, because Terry, if you listened to him when the City Attorney said to do it properly what you do is you approve the ordinance and delete that portion that you object to. 3� Nov 1 9 ;98t So Carollo conforming to the City Attorney's request made the motion delet- ing the parking. So in effect, when you vote with the motion you're kill- ing the proposed parking solution to Phases IV, V and VI and I really think, and I hope, you know, that all of us that are here that this is a big step backwards. Mr. Plummer: May I clarify something, please? Mr. Clerk, my understanding was different, it was my understanding that the motion was split into an A and a B portion and as such, sir, since I was incorrectly in my own mind, I would reverse my vote, sir, I vote no. I'm sorry. Mr. Carollo: what we're doing here, for the benefit of all the Commissioners, we're voting for the ordinance that was presented before us with the except- ion that we're not voting in favor of the cutback in the parking requirements. What I would hope that would be done is that our Planning Department could possibly meet with the individual Commissioners and maybe we could come to a reasonable compromise that would be fair for what we had before us here. Mayor Ferre; Okay, what we have now is a vote and the vote, as I understand it since Plummer has now reversed his vote is 3 to 2. Is that correct? Mr. Ongie: Yes. Mr. Perez: That's what I want to clarify, I had the same understanding that had Commissioner Plummer and that's what I want to clarify. Mayor Ferre: Are you voting yes or no? See, the motion that was made is a motion that in effect turns down the parking solution that the Department is recommending. If you want to turn it down then you vote with the Commission. If you don't want to turn it down then you vote no like Plummer. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me only go on the record and I'm going to do this, excuse my history. The tradition of this Commission has been to split the motion or the ordinance into portions A and B and I'm sorry that this new, and I have no problem with it as long as I understand it. Mayor Ferre: Well I didn't do it, it was Terry who said, and I frankly think he did it....... With all due respects I don't think Terry realized Terry realized what he was doing. Mr. Percy: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make my position clear. The ordinance before this Commission on Second Reading contains two features, ground open space and parking. As I understand Mr. Carollo's motion is he doesn't have a problem with the ground open space but he wants to delete the parking provis- ions. So the motion to approve the item before you less the unacceptable portion is what I suggested that this Commission do and that is correct pro- cedure. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but the Mayor has ruled that if you do that it is a defeat of both. Mayor Ferre: No, sir, it is a defeat of the parking portion of it. Mr. Plummer: No, the ground level. He said he was in favor of the ground level and that was a non -controversial, and that's why I voted with this motion. Mayor Ferre: Well, I just think that we should really, well, you vote any way you want, I'm voting no. Mr. Perez: Mr. Mayor, could I make an explanation? ...was a misunderstand- ing at the beginning and after you explained the position, Commissioner, I vote no and I rectify my vote. Mayor Ferre: Well now then the motion as proposed fails on a 3 to 2 basis, is that right? Mr. Ongie: Yes, sir. Ms. Cooper: Mr. Mayor, may I answer some of the comments, please? I'll be very brief. I wanted to point out, Mr. Mayor, that we're not dealing only with phases Iv, V and VI, we're dealing with the Claughton portion and I have inquired of the Assistant City Attorney, Deputy Assistant City Attorney and he has indicated to me that at the time the building permit is pulled is when it must apply so Phase III would not be required legally to comply. 39 NOV 19 1981 J 0 Mayor Ferre: All right, Plummer, are you in the building? Ms. Cooper: That's (1). (2)To answer everyone's question regarding the number of employee spaces, the number of employees, if you figure one employee for every eight apartments with the 3,075 apartments that are permitted on the island you have 384 employees, 384 parking spaces. Some would be the evening and night shift security but the bulk of the employees are all in the day shift and as to enforceability, I think that is a serious problem and the Zoning Department would object and the last point and this is perhaps the most im- portant point, I would request that whatever action the City takes if it is with any type of amendment whatsoever to what was advertised that it be on the condition that it be presented in writing for objections before it becomes enforceable or effective and that the motion if it is made should clearly add all the conditions that were talked about including adding parking for the of- fice spaces, unassignability and so forth but I would still urge the Commis- sion to reject any change in the parking. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I think you covered that when you said that this ordin- ance be for the lack of a better term, "etched in stone" and I took that to mean that when Phases IV, V and VI come before us they would still have to ad- here to the parking agreement reached today, is that right? Mayor Ferre: Here's the way I would like to do it. I'd like to pass the gavel over and I'd like to just for the purposes of seeing if we can get some direction on this do the following: I would like to move that this item be continued to the next zoning hearing on the following basis, if you would, please: That it is the intent of this Commission to accept this ordinance but since this is second reading and since we have some major issues that have to be spelled out, that those issues be (1) tram service, (2) the enforceabil- ity issue, (3) the clarification that the 1.5 is only beyond Phases I, II and III and that includes the Claughton portion along with Phases IV, V and VI of the project in front of us and that lastly the question of business and com- mercial parking be cleaned up and clarified. Mr. Dawkins: Second. Vice -Mayor Carollo: Okay, is there any discussion? Mayor Ferre: Now Janet, does that cover all the basic issues? Ms. Cooper: I think so, I think it does. Oh, the assignability of the spaces, that was not originally before you, that one for every two apartments could not be assigned either by deed or other assignment. Mayor Ferre: I have no problems with that. Counselor, is that acceptable to you? Mr. Traurig: Sure. Mayor Ferre: Okay, so that would be point (5) and that is the question that the pooled area at no time ever be assigned. Vice -Mayor Carollo: Okay, hearing no additional questions or remarks from the Commission members, Mr. City Clerk, take the vote. The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 81-995 A MOTION TO CONTINUE PROPOSED SECOND READING ORDINANCE AMEND- ING ORDINANCE 6871, ART XXI-3, SPD-1 CENTRAL ISLAND DISTRICT TO THE NEXT PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING TO SPECIFICALLY EXAMINE THE AREAS OF: 1) TRAM SERVICE; 2) ENFORCEABILITY; 3) CLARIFI- CATION OF THE: 1.5 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED PER UNIT BEYOND PHASES 1, 2 AND 3, INCLUDING CLARIFICATION OF PHASES 4, 5 AND 6; 4) CLARIFICATION AS TO WHETHER THE SPACES PROVIDED FOR VISITORS WILL BE SHARED IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER WITH ANYBODY ELSE (e.g., commercial parking, employee parking, etc.). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion %+a:: lacsed and opted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo t► Mayor Maurice Ferre v r t ON ROLL CALL: Mr. Plummer: Let me clarify my vote. I'm going to vote with the motion. All right? But only because the Mayor has asked for further consideration. I'm ready to vote now on the issue. The Mayor has asked for that and I'm going to honor it and I will vote with the motion. Yes. Mr. Carollo: I vote with the motion, however, I reserve the right to change my vote depending on what is presented before this Commission at the next meeting. Ms. Cooper: Thank you. Mr. Traurig: This comes back on December loth? Mayor Ferre No, sir, it will be December the 17th, we set the next date as December 17th. And that gives the administration plenty of time to hammer out, I would request that you extend to Janet Cooper the courtesies of giving her all the information of the new language well before, that you follow the law and post it and do all these things that we're supposed to be doing so that we don't have any legal entanglements beyond the 17th. Ms. Cooper: Thank you all. Mayor Ferre: All right, this Commission will now recess until 2 O'Clock. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, just for the record, I want to remind you, sir, that I will not be able to be back until 3:00. 7. DISCUSSION OF 2% BED TAX AND URGE SPORTS AUTHORITY TO SELECT BUEtIA VISTA SITE FOR VEW STADIUM. It.. . Mayor Ferre: Joe and Miller, before you break, since J. L. will not be here and I want to bring this resolution up for a vote this afternoon because the County Commission will be making a decision on the sports complex before we meet again which is on December loth. I will have it sent to your offices, it is a resolution strongly urging the selection of the Buena Vista Freight Yard site as the location of the new multiple sports public stadium proposed for construction in Dade County using tourist supported tax revenues, directing the City Clerk to forward a copy of this resolution to the Dade County officials. Now, the reason why I think we have to take that position before the loth is that this matter is coming up for their - as you know, you sit on it - and I think it is good for you to have that in hand as you go into the negotiating phase. They're going to need some help and they're obviously going to come to us for the Orange Bowl property and in my position, and I'm just talking about one voice on this Commission, my position has always been (1) that new stadium be within the City boundaries of the City of Miami and (2) that the name Miami be kept into the stadium. I think it is frankly ridiculous to get into the Dade County Super Bowl or whatever because nobody knows where Dade County is and I don't care if they call it the Miami -Dade of the Miami Metro as long as Miami is kept into the name. And (3) that the City of Miami have some say, chiseled in stone on how that stadium is operated and the govern- ing board of that stadium. Now those have always been my conditions. Now, what is going to happen is this: Their position, the County's position is, the advisory board now is down to two selections. One is Opa Lock$ and one is the Buena Vista site. Now, I think that their position is if you don't give us the Orange Bowl and the Orange Bowl property we're going to go to Opa Locka. Our position I think is also the reverse and that is, if you go to Opa Locka then not only will we not talk any further about the Orange Bowl site but, furthermore, and this is my position, we are going to then pursue vigorously the construction of a colliseum within the City of Miami boundaries because that I think we can finance and we can do and that is going to create a serious problem for them in their so-called Opa-Locka Stadium so there are two sides to this coin. Mr. Dawkins: I have one thing I would like to add, I need information. Is it a fact that the majority of the bed tax comes from City of Miami hotels? Mayor Ferre: It is a fact. 41 NOV 1 9 m°81 Mr. Dawkins: All right, then what we're saying then is that we are providing the money for the County to dictate to us what to do. Am I right? Mayor Ferre: No. The hotels that are located in the boundaries of the City but also within the boundaries of Dade County are being taxed.... Mr. Plummer: No, there are exclusions to that, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Well, the exclusion of Miami Beach. Mr. Plummer: And Surfside. Mr. Dawkins: So if Miami Beach and Surfside can be excluded why can't the City of Miami be excluded? Mayor Ferre: We have to go to the Legislature to do that. Mr. Plummer:- Let me answer his question, if I may, Mr. Mayor. The reason both of these were in prior to this legislative State mandate of 2% resort tax, so they were grandfathered in effect. Mayor Ferre: I was there when it happened in 1967. It was Louis Wolfson who made the motion in the Legislature and I was one of the people who voted for it. Mr. Plummer: The recent is only a year and a half or two years old, that is the one that is presently existing today. Mr. Mayor, let me only comment further, if I may, since this issue is three -fold, it is not just the Metro- lolitan Dade County Commission, but it is also the Tourist Development Com- mission and the Sports Authority. Mr. Ongie, you should be aware that the TDC is meeting on Monday, that the Sports Authority is meeting on Pearl Harbor, maybe it is significant, and that, in fact, the Metro Commission I understand is going to handle this on the loth. So you had better get copies, if this passes which I feel that it will, you'd better get copies on Monday to the TDC and then appropriately to the others. Mayor Ferre: Let me do it this way, let me pass the gavel and say I would like to move a resolution be sent to Metropolitan Dade County strongly urging the selection of the Buena Vista Frieght Yard site as the location for the new multi -sport public stadium proposed for construction in Dade County using the tourist supported tax revenues and directing the Clerk to forward the copy to the appropriate designated officials. I'd like to so move. Mr. Carollo: Second. The following resolution was introduced by Mayor Ferre, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-996 A RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING THE SELECTION OF THE BUENA VISTA FREIGHT YARD SITE AS THE LOCATION OF THE NEW MULTI -SPORT PUBLIC STADIUM PROPOSED FOR CONSTRUCTION IN DADE COUNTY USING TOURIST - SUPPORTED TAX REVENUES; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICIALS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file . in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo the resolution was _ passed and adopted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, before I leave I'm going to distribute to each one of you, I have been appointed by the Florida League of Cities as a member of the Task Force on the 1%, 1C increase on sales tax. I would hope before the afternoon is concluded that you all would have the time to review this 42 +, r 41 and take a position on this issue. Mayor Ferre: On the sales tax, is this a local option sales tax? Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir. It is more than just the local option, it is the full gamut of this thing so I'm going to distribute these to you. Mayor Ferre: Well let me ask you a question. What portion of that is dedicated to crime fighting? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, that has not been determined at this point, that is what is being worked out with the Legislature, for example, let's remember that 1C increase in sales tax equates to $800,000,000. There is some thinking that says that 50% of that must go for the reduction of ad valorem property tax. There is some thinking that says that a portion of that 25%, one has said must go for education and whatever is left over will be divided among the cities and the counties. That is going to be another problem, how that distri- bution comes -about. I merely am asking that this is the latest information, I went to Tallahassee on Monday, got all of this information, I have brought it back and if this Commission wishes to take a stand they may do so and give me instructions on this 15 member tax force headed up by Mayor Martinez of Tampa and I would hope that you would want to address it before the day is concluded. Mayor Ferre: Well, I don't know how Mr. Dawkins, Carollo and Perez feel, J. L., but I'll tell you for my vote I think that we are in desperate need of funds to fight crime, that is the number one issue, it cuts through every thing else, it affects education, it affects tourism, it affects our tax base, it affects the development of this community and I think that I certainly would not vote for any local sales option unless a minimum of 50% of those funds are used for fighting crime and I wouldn't mind voting for 100% of that with the will of this Commission. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I'm not going to go into, and I'm not trying to hold you up but some of the areas that are going to be of great concern, and that is Metropolitan Dade County is hoping to address a lot of those dollars towards rapid transit so those are some of the areas. I think the first thing that - they have to do is to get together and to say yes, we're for it and then if we're for it why and what stipulations and what the individuals have to do. As you know, I, like yourself have no problem with 100% going to crime but yet when we look at this thing realistically we have to look at it state wide and how would it fly statewide. There is no question that statewide that the burning issue is ad valorem property tax and it is felt by a number, a lot of people on this task force that if you don't address the reduction of property _ tax it's not going to fly. So these are the areas that I want you to consider and I will be asking you, if you wish, that sometime before this afternoon is concluded that you give me a sense of direction of which way this Commission, because I serve at your pleasure. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion riow? THE CITY COMMISSION RECESSED FOR LUNCH AT 12:20 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 2:05 P.M. WITH COMMISSIONERS CAROLLO AND PLUKMER ABSENT. 13 Nov 19 1581 3. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CE'.ANGL ZONING CLASSIFICATION-271 N.W. 29TH STREET FROM C-5 TO R-4 Mayor Ferre asked if there were any objectors present who wished to be heard on this item. NO OBJECTORS APPEARED AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 8 9. 10, 16 AND 17, BLOCK 11, NORTHERN BOULEVARD TRACT (2-29), BEING APPROXIMATELY 271 NORTHWEST 29TH STREET, FROM C-5 (LIBERAL CO?L`tERCLAL) TO R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE) , AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DIS- TRICT MAP MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871, BY REFER- ENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2, THEREOF, BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 22, 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 Demetrio Perez, Jr. Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Joe Carollo and J. L. Plummer. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9351. 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. 9. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 3575 SOUTH LE JEUNE ROAD FROM R-1 TO GU. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS ATTENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 3575 SOUTH LE JEUNE ROAD, BEING TENTATIVE PLAT #937 - "MIAMI DADE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY SUB", FROM R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) TO GU (GOVERNMENTAL USE), AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2, THEREOF, BY REPEALING ALL ORDIN- ANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of October 22, 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 Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9352. 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. 10. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REVISE ARTICLE XIV-1-C2A DISTRICT SPECIAL COMMUPIITY COMMERCIAL. Mayor Ferre: Take up Item 8, an ordinance on First Reading, a Planning Depart- ment application. Is there anybody here that wishes to speak in opposition to Item 8? The Planning Department recommended approval, the Planning Advisory Board recommended approval on a 5 - 0, there were 27 objectors by mail. Are there any objectors here? Now, this is an ordinance on First Reading, it is a Planning Department application which revises Article XIV-1 of the t-2A Dis- trict, Special Community Commercial. Do you want to explain that, sir? Mr. Joe McManus: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, Joe McManus, Acting Director of the Planning Department. Might I comment on the number of objectors for the information of the Commission. Because of the interest in this topic in Coconut Grove we noticed by mail property owners within the C-2A District which includes the Central Coconut Grove area in black Grove and Grand Avenue, out on Grand Avenue and an area on the intersection of 27th Avenue and Bird Road. Members of the Commission, this C-2A District was tailored specifically for the Coconut Grove Village Center. It has been in existence for approximately five years. During the course of that time, we have found that there were cer- tain revisions that we wanted to make to improve the ordinance. And what you have here before you are a series of minor amendments based on the Planning Department's experience with 5 years of working with the ordinance and the ob- jective here is to improve the environment in the Grove. Now, very quickly going through the proposed amendments, the first amendment would amend the use .15 NOV 19 1981 regulations to provide for conditional office use on 100% of the local j street frontage. Currently, there is a limitation of approximately 65%. j The second amendment would address the problem of the Farmer's Market up 1 on Grand Avenue and allow that within the ordinance and it would also give permission for food vendors to sell food on public streets within that zon- ing district and it would allow permission for certain - and I stress the fact "certain second-hand merchandise" to be sold incidental to merchandise sales. Now, for example, what this would do, there is a currently an estab- lishment in the Mayfair where part of their business is selling 1890 formal j evening gowns and dresses. Now strictly speaking, that is second hand and this would allow that as a part of their main operation. The next amendment, and again this speaks to pedestrian streets where certain streets are identi- fied in the village center as pedestrian streets, and we're requiring that retail uses occupy 65% of the ground floor building frontage and including -_ both sides of corner lots rather than just the front so we're turning the _ corner on that. And amending the paragraph to change ground level open space for residential from 80% to 20% of the total required. We're amending the area requirements to permit residential developments on lots of 5,000 square — feet and 50 foot frontage, that merely recognizes that most of the lots in the village center are that size. We're amending floor area premiums, that is the bonuses that we're giving, removing the limit of 1.75, the accumulated bonuses and eliminating the bonuses for hotel and residential use to avoid a _ double bonus. We're allowing a Floor Area Ratio credit to change the bonus for community theatres from a formula based on seating capacity to one based on gross square feet of theatre space then we don't have the problem of count- ing the seats. We're adding a paragraph providing for a .25 FAR bonus for the preservation of a designated historic structure, and I stress the term there "designated" it just can't be just any historic structure, it has to be desig- nated by this Commission. We're amending certain of the parking requirements to require one parking space per residential unit and amending a paragraph to remove the parking requirements for outdoor cafes and outdoor art sales. We're amending the articles on signs to permit detached signs for existing buildings further than 20 feet from the street right-of-way. What that does is where we have a commercial structure or series of shops and they are some 40 or 60 feet back from the street because there is a double row of parking in front of them, we are allowing that business greater latitude in locating their detached sign. And, Mr. Mayor, we have met with community groups, Mr. Luft, as you know, is in general charge of planning in Coconut Grove and has met with community groups in the Grove and we believe that we have a uniform agreement that these are all, they are small improvements but as I say, we have identified these _ over the course of five years and we think they are necessary improvements to improve the environment of the Grove. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Is Jack Luft here? Is there anybody here who wishes to speak on this item from the general public? Any objectors? Well, I want to just say on the record that I am absolutely flabberghasted and amazed. This is the first time ever, and I have worked 12 years with this City on the City of Miami Commission, 8 as Mayor, I have never seen an item of this magnitude where no- body in the Grove objects, that is just unbelievable. Mr. Dawkins: I disagree, it says here 27 objectors, and maybe I'm in error, Mr. Mayor, but it appears to me that notices were sent out by mail and evi- dently, and I'm just assuming that individuals received these letters and they felt that if they protested by mail their presence was not necessary here and I for one will vote no in that you have 27 objections by mail, 12 replies in mail which is two thirds against and one third for it. Mayor Ferre: Okay, do you want to explain? Mr. McManus: Mr. Mayor, usually the Commission is faced with a question of a single parcel under a single ownership where a property owner is coming before you. We are obligated to notify all property owners within 365 feet of that site. Up until fairly recently, we did not, as a matter of course, notify all property owners in a zoning district where we were changing the text of the zoning district and I would site for you the example of if we were to change one line in the R-1 zoning district text that would affect 40% of the property owners of the City of Miami and up until recently we have not followed the course of notifying all property owners in a zoning district where the text was being changed. In this instance, that was done, approximately 500 letter: were sent out to all property owners of properties zoned C-2A. Mr. Commis- sioner, I would submit to you that given the magnitude of the mailing, to only have 27 objectors really is a sign of.... Mr. Dawkins: And I submit to you that that's not what you told me. You said you sent out 5 and according to your report here you only got 37 responses. 46 NOV 19 1981 Now this what your report is saying, your report does not say of. the 500 that 400 and x-number approved of it and that from that we got 27 objectors and 12 replies saying no. Mr. McManus: Mr. Commissioner, we had 12 replies in favor and 27 objectors out of a total mailing of approximately..... Mr. Dawkins: That's impossible, you've either got to have, if you sent out 500 and you got 500 replies you've got to have x-number that's for it and x- number that's against it that will equal 500. Mr. McManus: No, people often, you know they get something like this.... Mr. Dawkins: Well, then you see, you're assuming that the people who did not respond is voting, or you're speaking what they want to say and you can't assume that. Mr. McManus:- What I'm saying, Commissioner, is that they didn't feel strongly enough to respond. Mr. Dawkins: You don't know what they felt, they didn't respond. They did not respond and you cannot assume what they felt. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, in response to Commissioner Dawkins, first of all, his- torically any time we're going to make changes in the Grove, Commissioner, if it was that severe this room would be crowded. I'm under the impression that we went through a process where we met with all of the community people and at those meetings we had overwhelming support of these amendments particularly in view of the fact that a lot of the amendments really is an attempt to legal- ize what exists already. Secondly I'd like to say that the, and I agree with you, you can't assume that they people who didn't respond were in favor but I think it is a pretty reasonable assumption that one could make that if they were that concerned about it that they would be in opposition and would have complained. I think the bottom line to this, Commissioner, is that the majority of the people at those public meetings which we had extensive meetings through- out the neighborhood not just in the white Grove but in the black Grove were in overshelming support of these modifications. As a matter of fact, a lot of them were suggested by them. Mayor Ferre: Jack, since you're the one who guided this whole thing, how long has the department been working on this issue? Mr. Jack Luft: These are an accumulation of amendments that we have been com- piling in the last five years. These are problems that have been brought to our attention by merchants, some of them are related to signs that blew down in Hurricane David. You know, it is very difficult to come through here every - time a little problem comes up but it finally got to the point where these accumulated things that had been brought to our attention by merchants and property owners got to the point where we had to come all together with them. Mayor Ferre: How many public hearings have you had on this all totaled? Mr. Luft: I've had three meetings with the merchants, with the residents, I've had two Community Development Meetings in black Grove and I have personally passed out 50 of these to property owners and civic associations, presidents, officials of civic associations throughout Coconut Grove. Mayor Ferre: Specifically, have you been before the Coconut Grove Civic Club, the Coconut Grove Chamber of Commerce, the Tigertail Association? - Mr. Luft: Yes, I have. Mayor Ferre: Black Grove C.D.? Mr. Luft: Yes, I have presented to the officials of those groups, I just got out of a Chamber of Commerce meeting now, I apologize for being late. Yes, all of those groups have been contacted, they have discussed this, they have called me on the phone, they have come to my office, we've talked these things out and that is why there is no one here objecting, that's why they're not here. Mayor Ferre: At the Planning Advisory Board the approval of 5 to 0, were there any members of the public that were present at that hearing? Mr. Luft: There were no objectors at that hearing. Yes, there were supporters at that hearing, 47 NOV l� Mayor Ferre: Who wtl the 27 people that wrote letters in objection? Did you analyze who they are? Mr. Luft: Many of them were residents in residential areas abutting this who were afraid that they were getting zoned commercial, it was a misunder- wtanding. Mayor Ferre: How many of those, and this is an assumption on your part, how many of those 27 do you feel were under the mistaken assumption that they were getting rezoned to commercial? Mr. Luft: I would say half of them were, there was just a lady here this morning who had come in with the same impression. As a courtesy notice we mailed notices of these zoning changes to everyone within 375 feet of the commercial area which means that a lot of residential properties get the notice and they see that it says a change to the commercial zoning and they assume that they're getting zoned commercial and then they send in the letter saying no, I don't want to be commercial. But we have received the endorse- ment of the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Joe Avalos: My name is Joe Avalos and I'm on the Board of Directors of the Coconut Grove Chamber of Commerce and I'm not here on this issue but I will emphasize that the Chamber is aware and is fully in favor of the changes that are listed there, it has been thoroughly gone over by the Chamber of Commerce. Mayor Ferre: All right, what is the will of this Commission? Unless there are no futher questions, further statements? All right, what is the will of this Commission? Mr. Carollo: Mr. .Mayor, I make a motion for approval. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINN4CE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE 'ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, ART- ICLE XIV-1 SPECIAL COMMUNITY COPLMERCIAL - C-2A DISTRICT BY: A. DELETING PARAGRAPH (j), SUB -SECTION (57) SECTION 1 USE REGULATIONS AND RE -NUMBERING SUBSEQUENT PARAGRAPHS (k) AND (1) TO (j) AND (k) RESPECTIVELY; B. ADDING NEW PARAGRAPHS (f) AND (g) TO SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 3, CONCERNING LIMITA- TIONS ON USES; C. BY AMENDING SUB -SECTION (3) SECTION 3 CONCERNING LIMITATIONS ON USES; D. BY DELETING PARAGRAPH (a) SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 4 CONCERNING FRONTAGE ON PEDES- TRIAN STREETS AND SUBSTITUTING IN LIEU THEREOF A NEW PARA- GRAPH (a); E. BY AMENDING PARAGRAPH (c) SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 4 CONCERNING OPEN SPACE ON PEDESTRIAN STREET; F. BY AMENDING PARAGRAPH (a) SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 5 CONCERN- ING LOT AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL USES; G. BY AMENDING THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 9 CONCERNING FLOOR AREA PREMIUMS; H. BY DELETING SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 9 CONCERNING FLOOR AREA PREMIUMS AND RE -NUMBERING SUBSEQUENT SUB -SECTIONS (2) (3) (4) AND (5) TO (1) (2) (3) AND (4) RESPECTIVELY; I. BY AMENDING SUB -SECTION (3) FORMERLY SUB -SECTION (4), SECTION 9 CONCERN- ING FLOOR AREA PREMIUMS; J. BY DELETING THE RE -NUMBERED SUB -SECTION (4) SECTION 9 CONCERNING FLOOR AREA PREMIUMS AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF A NEW SUB -SECTION (4); K. BY ADDING A NEW SUB -SECTION (5), SECTION 9 CONCERNING FLOOR AREA PREMIUMS; L. BY DELETING PARAGRAPH (b) SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 10 CONCERNING ON SITE PARKING AND INSERTING A NEW PARAGRAPH (b); M. BY AMENDING PARAGRAPH (d) SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 10; WITH RESPECT TO REFERENCE NUMBER THEREIN;, N. BY AMENDING PARAGRAPH (e) SUB -SECTION (1) SECTION 10 CONCERNING PARKING; AND BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Carollo and seconded by Commissioner Perez and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner Dawkins NOV 19 I981 ABSENT: Commissioner J.L. Plummer 4 r ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the city commission and to the public. ON ROLL CALL Mayor Ferre: In voting yes with the motion, I would like to, I think Commis- sioner Dawkins has a valid and serious concern and I would like to ask the administration that before the Second Reading is taken that you canvass the 27 individuals that reported in objection and see if you can get that on the record as to where they stand. I don't think we can do a mailing again of another 500 but I would like for you to specifically put an ad in Neighbors which I think is the section of the Miami Herald which is read the most by people of Coconut Grove, explaining what it is that we're doing before it _ comes up on second hearing. Is that something that you need a motion on? Mr. Gary: No, sir. Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, I would like to also instruct the administration that before this gets put on the agenda for the Second Reading, we will have an answer to the questions that the Mayor had asked and in turn that _ we would all like especially in as far as those 27 people go. 11. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: A14END ARTICLE XXIV - SIGNS PERTAINING TO THE C2-A DISTRICT. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI BY AMENDING ARTICLE XXIV SIGNS, PARAGRAPH (a) SUB -SECTION (2) SECTIO14 6 CONCERNING SIGNS IN THE C-2A DISTRICT; BY REPEAL- ING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CON- FLICT AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Carollo and seconded by Commissioner Perez and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the city commission and to the public. 49 10 ,1 12. GRANT APPLICATION FOR MICROWAVE TOWER AT 2010 S.W. 17TH AVENUE - SOUTHERN BELL. Mayor Ferre: The next item before us is 13. This is an application by Southern Bell to construct and operate a microwave tower, addition to their facility at approximately 2010 S. W. 17th Avenue. Is the representative of Southern bbll here? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAPER: Yes. Mayor Ferre: All right. As I understand it this meets with the Planning Depart- ment's recommendation, the Planning Advisory Board recommended approval 6-0 contingent upon receipt of a letter from Dade County regarding a microwave tower on Key Biscayne. What is that all about? Mr. Richard Whipple: There was a question regarding the need, I believe, that the representatives of the company have indicated that need on the record, and the board was asking for additional written need. There is a problem with respect to beaming to serve not only Miami but to serve Key Biscayne and this would be a key location by which to beam signals over to Key Biscayne to im- prove the communications. Mayor Ferre: You know, I don't mean to be one of these science fiction buffs but I keep hearing that all of this microwave stuff makes men impotent and has all kinds of effects....... Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, at your age, I wouldn't worry about it. Mayor Ferre: That's a low blow, I'll tell you. And Ricki Thomas, I wouldn't laugh too much I were you. Seriously though, has anybody ever looked into the safety hazards of microwaves? I keep hearing that these things are terrible. Do you want to tell us all about it? Ms. Vil Mastergil: (sp?) My name is Vil Mastergil, Associate Manager with Southern Bell with offices located at 666 N. W. 79th Avenue. I am not an expert on microwave towers, but at the last meeting we did have an expert and he said that's all falacies. Mayor Ferre: Just because you look so convincing, I will accept that as being i scientific proof. Mr. Carollo: Maybe you're not that old after all, Mr. Mayor. I move. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-997 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PERMISSION, AS PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE IV, SECTION 32, TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A MICRO- WAVE TOWER ADDITION TO THE EXISTING SOUTHERN BELL FACILITY ON TRACT "A"; TELCO SUB (87-21), BEING APPROXIMATELY 2010 S. W. 17TH AVENUE, AS PER SITE PLAN ON FILE, SAID TOWER TO BE 97.6' IN HEIGHT (25' PERMITTED), CONTINGENT ON RECEIPT BY THE PLAN- NING DEPARTMENT OF A LETTER FROM DADE COUNTY INDICATING THEIR APPROVAL OF A SOUTHERN BELL MICROWAVE TOWER ON KEY BISCAYNE WITHIN 60 DAYS; ZONED R-2 (TWO FAMILY DWELLING). (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 Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOV 19 1981 NOES: None. 50 t 4 ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. ON ROLL CALL: Mr. Perez: I want to explain something. I vote yes on this issue but I think that we have to try in the future a place out of the heart of Little Havana instead of in a residential area like this one because it doesn't benefit the City of Miami, that is for the people of Key Biscayne only and I think that in the future it would be very important to have better locations for these sites. Anyhow, I vote yes but I think it is important to take notice of that. Mayor Ferre: Are we getting any benefit out of this financially, Mr. McManus or whoever? Mr. McManus: Not to our knowledge, Mayor. Mr. Whipple: I would just suggest with my very limited knowledge that I'm sure that there are other areas, perhaps in other municipalities or in un- incorporated areas that are being used in a similar manner by which to im- prove the communications in the City of Miami. I'm just suggesting that, I don't know that for a fact, but understanding the necessity to relocate towers and beaming by which to by-pass areas which are under development perhaps with higher structures and things of that nature, I think we have to look at the system as a whole and understand that we're all part of that system and that it's not a matter necessarily of we're benefitting somebody because I think somebody is also benefitting us and the whole system. Mr. Perez: I believe it is very important because this location is in the heart of a residential area. These people are very interested in trying to keep a beautiful area, not that kind of commercial..... Mr. Whipple: For the information of the Commission, you do understand there is an existing building structure and facility that has operated there for approximately, in my estimation, 12 years. Mr. Carollo: Yes, a very large structure they have there. Mr. Whipple: A very large structure on a very large site, and this is a tower on top of the existing facility. It's not like it is going in and all of a sudden changing the character of the area because the Southern Bell facility does exist in that area right now. Mr. Carollo: All right, congratulations. Ms. Mastergil: Thank you. 13. DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL: APPLICATION FOR LIQUOR LICENSE AT 1947 WEST FLAGLER STREET Mayor Ferre: Item 17, does he want a full Commission here? Mr. Aurelio Perez-Lugones: The problem is, Mr. Mayor, that the owner of the property, Mr. Elias has had an accident or something and he is not present. He is leasing from Elias and he doesn't have the power of attorney to represent the case in front of you. Mayor Ferre: 'Do you want to continue it? Mr. Perez-Lugones: It should be continued. Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a motion to continue Item 17? The gentleman who is the owner has had an accident and, therefore, he is not present today. This gentleman leases the property but does not have a legal document to represent the owner so, therefore, it should be continued. Mr. Rene Valdez: Mayor, may I have a word, please? Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir. Mr. Valdez: I saw the applicant here this morning. We are about 15 people who are opposed to this application and, therefore, it happened that the first _ time that we had this case come up quite a few months ago the man disappeared before it came for a hearing the first time.... Mayor Ferre: Is he using it presently as a liquor.... Mr. Valdez: I haven't seen him around here right now, but he was here this morning but we are 15 people who have been here all morning..... Mayor Ferre: We need your name address for the record. Mr. Valdez: My name is Rene Valdez. I am the delegate of the Independent Beverage Dealer of Florida and we are located in Tallahassee and Miami, 1710 N.W. 7th Street. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Valdez, the question to you is does Mr. Elias G. Elias of 1947 West Flagler Street have at the present time a liquor license? Mr. Valdez: No, sir, he does not. Mayor Ferre: So the fact that we are continuing this in no way does any harm to you because he is the one that is being denied the liquor license. Mr. Valdez: But the question here that he was here this morning, sir, and this is the third or the fourth time that we have come to this hearing. Mayor Ferre: That I didn't know. Mr. Valdez: we are 18 people here, we have been here since 8 or 9 O'Clock this morning. Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, is this the fourth time we've delayed this, or the third time? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER MADE STATEMENT IN SPANISH Mayor Ferre: Translate that for the.... Mr. Perez-Lugones: Mr. Elias is sick and I saw him last night, I have been here since d O'Clock this morning.... Mayor Ferre: tie said that Mr. Elias was here and he got sick. Mr. Perez-Lugones: No. t� r� 1 - NOV 1 ii -' Mayor Ferre: That's what I heard him say in Spanish. Oh, I'm sorry, he was not here. Mr. Perez-Lugones: He was not here, he has been here since 8 O'Clock in the morning waiting for this but Elias who is the owner, because of the accident he had is not. Mayor Ferre: The question is how many times has this been put off now? Mr. Valdez: No, sir, this is an appeal. This one was denied for the second time on the Zoning Appeals Board and now it is coming in front of you people. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but my question again, you said that this has been up _ before this Commission three times. Mr. Valdez: 'Not the Commission, I mean for a hearing. Mayor Ferre: Well, I cannot, we are not responsible for anybody else but the Commission. Has this been before the Commission before ever? Mr. Whipple: No, sir, this is the first time. Mayor Ferre: So this is the first time it has been before the Commission. The man is asking for a delay because of the illness, I think that is a reason- able request once. Now, if he keeps on doing this obviously the second time I don't think we can do it. Does anybody else want to say anything? Yes, sir. Mr. Jorge Valleriesca: Good afternoon, my name is Jorge Valleriesca. What I want to say is that in the previous meetings or hearings that we had with this problem the same gentleman has appeared as to be the person representing and acting directly for all these hearings and problems so I don't think why we shouldn't let him now represent the owner or do what he did in the previous meetings. Thank you very much. Mr. Perez-Lugones: I just conversed with the representative of the applicant and he is stating that both Mr. Elias and himself were present at the time of the Zoning Board hearings. Mayor Ferre: The question is really very simple. This man leases the prop- erty from Elias. Elias evidently is sick. He is asking, therefore, for a deferral until the man can be available. That is on the 17th of December. Now, if he is not here on the 17th of December, and I'll tell him in Spanish too. If he is not here on the 17th of December and if he doesn't come with a legal document we're going to hear the case one way or the other. (Thereupon, the Mayor translated the statement into Spanish). Okay? Further discussion? Call the roll on the deferral of Item 17. The preceding item was deferred by the following vote - AYES: Mr. Carollo, Mr. Perez, Mr. Dawkins and Mayor Ferre. NOES: Mr. Plummer. _0_ W. 14. DISCUSSION & DEFERRAL: APPEAL BY APPLICANT OF ZONING BOARD DENIAL OF VARIANCE AT 551 S.W. 8TH CT. Mayor Ferre: Item 18 is appeal by the applicant, Armando Gonzalez, of the Zoning Board's denial of a variance for side and rear yards at 551 S. W. 8th Court. The Planning Department recommended a denial, the Zoning Board recom- mended a denial according to... Is the applicant here on Item 18? Would you step forward, sir, your name and address for the record. Mr. Armando Gonzalez: My name is Armando Gonzalez, 551 S. W. 8th Court. Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. I was explaining to the other Commission about a month ago -that I bought this house in the photograph and a small house, one bath, one bedroom. I bought this house about three years ago because I was living just with my son. He is now 16 years old. At this time my mother is very very sick, very upset and almost senile and she cannot live alone so I am applying for this addition in order to close this section to take care of her. I don't need any plumbing, any bathroom because she is living in the same premises, you know. The only thing is the house is too small for three persons so I need your help and I can't buy another house. Mayor Ferre: The problem, Mr. Gonzalez, as Father Gibson would always say when these matters came up before, when you bought the property you knew, or the law requires you to know what the regulations were. Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, I knew. Mayor Ferre: And the fact is that you now want a variance so that you can construct an additional bedroom and family room to your existing single fam- ily dwelling on the above site. Mr. Gonzalez: Right, it is like a family room. Mayor Ferre: And it has a nine inch side yard proposed, nine inches is that much. Mr. Gonzalez: That's the problem. Mayor Ferre: when nine feet is required and a 5.1 foot rear yard where 20 feet is required and we have these laws to protect the neighborhoods and neighbors. Mr. Gonzalez: Well, you know, Mr. Mayor, this is a private road and it has just two blocks and everybody is in favor of the construction, we don't have any.... Mayor Ferre: But the problem is that you cannot do something, see, you're living there now but in 20 or 30 years somebody else may be living there and.... Mr. Gonzalez: I know what you mean, but you can be sure that I am going to stay over there for a long time because.... Mayor Ferrer Well, I realize that but the problem is that this Commission has been very strict in not permitting, and I'm very sorry because I know it creates a personal problem for you and your family, but we in the past have had to be, that is not under the law a reason for a variance because no hardship exists other than, there is a personal hardship but under the law that is not admissible for this kind of a variance. I always feel very bad about these things because my heart tells me to vote with the poor people who need to build these extra rooms but Father Gibson always put it very well, he says the law that works for you will work against you and so we've got to be consistent. I'm awfully sorry, my heart votes with you but my mind doesn't let me do it. Mr. Gonzalez: I would like to ask you something. Could I be permitted to close an existing carport and forget the other section because the carport is existing? I have floor and roof. NOV 1sIJ8.1 Mayor Ferre: Mr. Whipple, you'll have to answer that question. The man wants to know if he can enclose the carport. Mr. Whipple: Not without the requested variances..... That's what he is requesting here, that's part of his request. Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I move that we uphold the recommendation of the Planning Department. Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion to uphold, is there a second to the motion? Mr. Perez: What is the motion? Mayor Ferre: Upholding the department and the Zoning Board, in other words it is a denial. Is there a second on the motion to uphold? Mr. Carollo:' Mr. Mayor, I'll tell you what I'd like to do. I didn't get the opportunity myself to go by that property. Let me tell you what is bothering me. Any other time I would, you know, agree with the Planning Department's recommendation but what bothers me is that, you know, we have a tremendous influx of people in the City of Miami and a very limited amount of land. What I would like to do as one member of this Commission, so that my conscience could be at rest, is go by there and have a look for myself just to see how close it is going to be to additional property that is there. Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion by Commissioner Carollo, therefore, to defer Item 18. Is there a second? Mr. Perez: I second the motion. Mayor Ferre: All right, further discussion? Call the roll. The preceding motion to defer was passed and adopted by the following vote -AYES: Mr. Carollo, Mr. Perez, Mr. Dawkins and Mayor Ferre. NOES: None. ABSENT: Mr. Plummer. Mr. Carollo: Were there any objectors present here? Mayor Ferre: No, I don't think .there are any objectors of record. Mr. Carollo: Yes, there were. Mr. Gonzalez: I had three people in favor of the plan but they left. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: ITEM 17 WAS DEFERRED TO THE JANUARY MEETING. 15. UPHOLD ZONING BOARD AND DENY REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR L0T COVERAGE AND YARDS AT 20-22 S. W. 9th STREET. Mayor Ferre: Is Mr. Eakle here? All right, usually on these things if the applicant is not here what we do is, if it has a recommended denial by the Zoning Board and the Planning Department, we go along with their recommenda- tion. Is the applicant on #19 here? All right, is there a motion on 19? - Mr. Dawkins: Yes, I recommend that we follow the recommendation. Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion that the department and the Zoning Board be upheld. Is there a second? Further discussion on 19? Call the roll, please. .5 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 81-998 A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION UPHOLDING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE ZONING BOARD TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE ON YARDS, LOT COVERAGE AND PARKING AT 20/22 S. W. 7TH STREET. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion was passed and opted by the following vote - AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 16. UPHOLD PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DENY REQUEST FOR VARIANCE AT 264-66 S. W. 19th ROAD. Mayor Ferre: Take up Item 20 which is an appeal by Dr. Forrest H. Foreman of the Zoning Board's denial of a variance for a lot width and area for prop- erty located at 264-66 S. W. 19th Road. The Planning Department recommended a denial and the Zoning Department by motion to grant 2 - 4 failed to pass, constituting a denial. In other words, Terry, that means that 2 people of the Board voted for it and 4 against it? Mr. Terry Percy: Correct, and it need 4 affirmative votes to approve it and they would not accept it the other way. Mayor Ferre: I would like, just for the record, let me go into it and see who are the two people that voted for it, just out of curiosity. I find that curious. Do you remember? Does anybody remember? Mr. Carollo: We used to get that for the record, it seems we're not gettinrl it anymore. Is there a reason for it? Mr. John Kehoe: Mr. Mayor, my name is John Kehoe, I might be able to answer that question. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Kehoe, do you remember who the two people that voted for it were? Mr. Kehoe: The two people who voted for it were Mr. Gort and the woman sit- ting to his left, I don't remember her name but.... Mr. Percy: Gloria Basila. Mr. Kehoe: 'I believe that was the name, yes. Mayor Ferre: Okay, go ahead and present your case, Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Kehoe: Excuse me, it wasn't the woman to his left, it was the woman to his left if you were facing me, right over here. What happened, if I could just go into that for a moment, there was a vote to deny and there was a 3 to 3 vote on that and then when they voted to approve it was 4 to 2 because Mr. Garner changed his vote, he originally voted against denial. I represent the owner of the property, Dr. Forrest Foreman and the prospective purchaser who is Cambridge Equities doing business as Publitech U.S.A. This is an applica- tion for a variance on three different points. (1) This property is zoned R-C and if the 3 problems that we have did not exist we would be able to use this property as a business. We intend to, if we are able to get an approval of our application, use it as an advertising agency with two people present at the office at the most, an account executive and a secretary. The problems J NOV f 9 1981 1 J that we have are that you need 6,000 square feet and we've got 3,942, we need.an average lot width of 60 feet and we have presently 54 and you need :! a rear yard setback of 20 feet, we presently have 3 feet. The property J faces north and if you use the actual rear of the house based on the way it faces, there would be 15 feet in the back instead of the three that is presently the rear setback according to the way that Building and Zoning views the property. We submitted with our earlier application a petition signed by 36 of the 51 property owners within 375 square feet of this area, that is over 75% of the people in this area that voted in favor of this ap- plication. At the meeting there were 4 objectors, two of the objectors were met with last night and shown the proposed plans indicating what we intend to do in the way of improving this property and they indicated after reviewing the plans that they do not intend to be here today to object. The reason why we have a problem with this property is because of the size of it and you might wonder, well how did we end up with a piece of property of this size; and the way this developed is that there was a divorce back in 3938 when the husband pursuant to a property settlement agreement gave to the wife this particular parcel and that is how it ended up being such a strange size. It is a sub -standard lot remnant. In the way of hardship, if you will, the property was previously assessed by the Dade County Prop- erty Appraiser at $79,882. 57 NOV 19 1981 .I Mr. Kehoe: ..... (Cont'd)... they are at seventy-nine thousand eight hundred eighty-two dollars. This assessment was appealed on the grounds that the present owner is unable to use the property as -a business unless a variance is granted and that's what we are seeking right now. On the basis of that argument on appeal, the assessment was lowered to sixty-six thousand five hundred thirty-six dollars and then the assessment that came out this year was fifty-four thousand dollars. So, in effect, in the last year we have gone down twenty-five thousand dollars and the property appraisal assessment of this parcel. rPresently the parcel is the subject of a contract for purchase and sale which is contingent upon the approval of this variance. If the variance is approved it will be used as an advertising agency with one account executive and a secretary., Presently it's a duplex which would entail it's being used by at least two, possibly four people. We intend to make improvements on the property in the way of, you know,_ providing three additional parking spaces. At present people park in the median out in front of the property. We are going to improve the actual structure by changing the location of the windows, changing the location of the doors. We are going to move the door from the present location over to Coral Way side of the building, because this is on Coral Way. It's on 3rd Avenue which at this particular location 19th Road is Coral Way. Across the street from it presently there is a business, the League Contra Cancer and if you look out the front door as it presently stands you are looking right into the side of this office building. Well, I shouldn't say office building, but it's used as a business. There are no windows on it or anything. It's a sign of what is _ taking place in this particular area of town. If the present owner, Dr. Foreman, were to continue renting this property as a duplex it's next to impossible for him to make a profitable venture of it just because of the dilapidated condition of the building and because of its location. If the variance is granted as I have indicated before now the building will be improved. I think it will be an asset and a sign of progress in this particular neighborhood, because if it's left at its present situation it's going to do nothing but go down hill. And that basically concludes what I have to present. Mayor Ferre: Alright, are there any objectors present? If not, will the department give us their recommendation? Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, the department feels that there is no hardship to justify the request. I call attention to the sketch attached to our fact sheets and our problem is that it's a exceptionally exceedingly small site in our opinion by which to accommodate commercial development. It is only thirty-nine hundred square feet in size. The minimum required by ordinance is six thousand, but even so you can see that this is a portion of a lot that was probably sold off a number of years ago legally. However, we don't feel it's of sufficient size to accommodate a commercial activity or an office use. Mayor Ferre: Alright, what's the will of this Commission? Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I move that we uphold the department's recommendation. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion to uphold the Board and the department, is there a second? Mayor Ferre: Hearing no second... Mr. Carollo: Second. Mayor Ferre: There is a second, further discussion? Alright, call -the roll on Item 20. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 81-999 A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION UPHOLDING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE ZONING BOARD TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE FOR LOT WIDTH AND AREA FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 264-266 S.S. 19th RD. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: ,Z3 NOV 81 AYES-. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 17. GRAIIT 1-YEAR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE FOR P.U.N. 304f3 INDIANA STREET Mayor Ferre: We are now on Item 21, this is a application by Luis Santerio, TR, for a one year extension for a conditional use of a plan of a PUN at 3046 Indiana Street. This Item was deferred on September 24th. The Planning Department recommended approval. Is the applicant here? Is the applicant here? Well., usually Plummer is the one that ask the question, why didn't you do what you were supposed to do? Mr. Whipple: He was here earlier, Mr. Mayor and this... Mayor Ferre: You got an answer for that, Mr. Whipple, since the man was here before? Mr. Whipple: Let me back track a minute. I missed your question first point. Mayor Ferre: Well, you know, Plummer alway asked the question of PUN's that are... that go beyond... they got a one year variance and then they come back with your recommendation and he asked them usually, why haven't you done what you were supposed to do? Mr. Whipple: The applicant didn't get his package together and get his financing together on time and pursuant to that comment, if you might remember, the Commission asked specifically that he come in with his plans because he didn't have them the first time and explain the project to the Commission. Mayor Ferre: Ok. Did he come in with the plans? Mr. Whipple: He did the last time, but there was not a full Commission and he wasn't heard. Mayor Ferre: Ok, have you seen the plans? Mr. Whipple: Yes, I have seen the plans and we... Mayor Ferre: Are you satisfied? Mr. Whipple: ... recommended the project. Mayor Ferre: Do you recommend it? Mr. Whipple: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Ok, is there a motion? Anybody want to do anything on this? Well, we have got to do something. Either you deny it or you... Mr. Dawkins: Well, I recommend denial since nobody seems to want it approved. Mr. Carollo: We are talking Item 21, correct, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: Yes, this is an individual who has a one year extension for a conditional use. e;9 r . Mr. Carollo: Did he come before the... Mayor Ferre: He came and he was here all day and evidentally the man left. Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, I wonder if I might just take a minute to explain to the benefit of the Commissioners in case they do not understand the process. A development of a planned unit nature is handled under a condition use. The Zoning Board hears conditional uses and they approve or deny that request. In this case they approved the request. They have a six month period by which to pull the building permit. The law requires that if they have not pulled the building permit they may ask for an extension of that Zoning Board approval before the City Commission, which the applicant did in proper time and that's what's before you, is actually the extension with respect to... you have not even seen the plans for instance, by which to judge the development in my opinion for approval or denial, so that's why I'm trying to explain it. The Zoning Board pursuant to their authority did approve it and if you would like to review the plan... May I suggest that if you would like to review the plans and then decide whether the extension should be granted or approved. I think that is appropriate. I'm suggesting may be you might want to wait a little longer today to see if the architect does arrive or... He is here, ok. Mayor Ferre: Alright, are you the applicant for Item 21? Mr. Luis Santerio: I am Luis Santerio. I would like to apply for the extension of the PUD. Since Mr. Plummer wanted to see the plans here... you know it was postponed evidently because of Mr. Pljmmer not being here the last meeting. And he said he was... Mayor Ferre: Ok, you want to wait for Plummer? Mr. Santerio: No, I don't want to wait, but I thought he said he was going to be here at three. Mayor Ferre: Yes, Plummer is the one who showed an interest in seeing these plans. So, may be you want to wait for him. Mr. Carollo: Well, Plummer is the one who said that we got to start all meetings punctually. He said he would be here by three, it's after three. Mayor Ferre: What's the will of this Commission? If there is a second on the motion we will vote on it. That's alright with me. Mr. Santerio: All I want is to get an extension on the PUD zoning and I can't... Mayor Ferre: I understand, but there was a motion... Mr. Santerio: I have my plans ready and I have the... Mr. Dawkins: Ok, I will withdraw my motion and let me hear why you need it and then I can go along. Why you have to have your... well, let me hear it from you. I heard it from the Planning Department. Mayor Ferre: Why don't you explain your case now. Why do you need an extension and why didn't you start on time. Here is Plummer now. So, what's your plans? Plummer, as you remember you had deferred this item because you want to see the plans and the man didn't have the drawings the last time he came here. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, there was two reasons... (BACKGROUND COMMENTS OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mr. Plummer: What item is it? al. Mayor Ferre: Say it on the record. Alright, Plummer, go ahead. Mr. Santerio: I would like to apply for an extension in order to be able to get a decent financing for it. If I go through a... Mayor Ferre: As I understand the rpan said that he was unable to get his financing or something or other... 00 Nov 1 9 1J$1 t f Mr. Plummer: Sir, how much, if any, has these plans changed from the original that you submitted. Mr. Santerio: Those were approved by the City. Mr. Plummer: These are the ones that we approved at the previous hearing? Mr. Santerio: Yes. Mr. Plummer: There has been no change in the plans whatsoever and the only reason you are asking for the extension is because of... Mr. Santerio: Financing and Building. If I would get a commercial bank they want a permit take out from a federal and I'm not able to get it right now. Mr. Plummer: Alright, sir. I have no further questions, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Carollo: I make a motion to move... Mayor Ferre: You want to move the item? This is a motion that there be a one year extension for the conditional use as recommended by the depeirtment and by the Zoning Board. Is there a second? o . Mr. Perez: I second. Mayor Ferre: Perez seconds, further discussion, call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1000 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 1(4-A) (a) TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL DE- VELOPMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT NATURE (P.U.N.) ON LOT 47 AND N25' OF LOT 52; PALMHURST (7-22) BEING 3046 INDIANA STREET CONSISTING OF 3 _ DWELLING UNITS IN 2 STRUCTURES AS PER DETAILED PLANS AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF - METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION; - ZONED R-2 (TWO-FAMILY DWELLING) . 1 (Here followsbody.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 Demetrio Perez Jr. Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. r 91. 0 NOV 191981 It 3 18. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FROM R-4 And C-1 TO GU Mayor Ferre: We are now on Item 7 and so therefore, why don't you proceed with your statement. Mr, Plummer: May I ask a question, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: In reference to Item 7. Sir, the last time you were here you did not own all of the parcels. Are you coming here before us today, sir, stating that you own all of the parcel? Mr. Fred Flamm: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Fred Flamm. I am Administrator of Maintenance to construct the Jackson Memorial Hospital. Commissioner Plummer, yes, I can state categorically, we have turned over to the City Attorney documentation to show that a new order of taking for the property in question has been completed and that a sum of forty-one thousand five hundred dollars has also been filed with the court by the County. So that the impediments or cloud previously existent have been taken care of. Mr. Plummer: Alright, to the City Attorney, sir, are you satisfied that then the County is before us legally as an owner of the property. Mr. Percy: Yes, sir. Mr. Flamm: I have my associate pointing to where that house would be for the benefit of the other Commissioners. Right over here on 17th... Mr. Percy: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: So, you are satisfied that the County is the legal owner and as such is before us properly? Mr. Percy: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Alright, let me... for the purposes of enlightening the two new Commissioners as to where we stood and I will let, of course, Senator Weisenborn represent his client. Mr. Flamm: Excuse me, Commissioner Carollo was also not at the time that we appeared. Mayor Ferre: At that Commission meeting the discussion came up as to who owned the property. Senator Weisenborn... there was a parcel. There was a parcel. Senator Weisenborn as I remember it said that his client--- this was -up before a court and why should we precipitate an action until the court has -ruled. So as I recall; Plummer, requested that this matter be deferred until the court ruled and then at that point we were ready to move on this thing, because as I understand this is going to be a major improvement to the medical center master plan at Jackson Memorial Hospital and I think we were all in concurrence with it, but out of deference to Senator Weisenborn and his client we want to let the court rule. Mr. Flamm: Mr. Mayor, would you have me represent for the benefit of the new Commissioners our intention here? Mayor Ferre: Yes, I think so. I think you ought to do that. Mr. Flamm: Alright, thank you. I am here today, gentlemen, on behalf of the Public Health Trust of Dade County which is a creature of the Dade County Commission which operates the medical center. For some years we have been 62 NOV 19 1981 rebuilding the medical center as you know and finally in its time we are ready to proceed with the major development. Wherein on this future master plan you see a project that we are proposing called "Garage #2". Let me say that this is more than just a fifteen hundred car parking garage that we are planning but also, of course, on it's first floor a commercial activities such as the University Book Store, restaurant and so forth that will be consistent with the ' needs of the medical center and Miami Dade Community College Allied Health Scientist Center, the University of Miami Medical School, the John Elliott Blook Bank, the Parkenson Institute, the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, all are with this project and I'm speaking for and on their behalf. We proposed to build this garage in the... in stage one and two. This would be stage one. The picture of the building is before you and will be discussed later by our _ architectual consultant. We had built garage #1 within the medical center --- John, point to that--- and we are now ready to proceed because of pressures and growth within the center on this next major building. The planning for this project has been actually on record since 1968 and finally when the good people of Dade County approved the Decade of Progress Bond Program in 1973 where we are able to move to this stage over a period of years. Mayor Ferre: Alright, I will tell you in the interest of time why don't you cut your... make it in the next two minutes and just wind it up and then we will hear from the Senator. Mr. Flamm: well, we are here to proceed. We have been in the planning. We plan to close some streets to change the movement of traffic and there is a companion project to it which is the rebuilding of the 9th Avenue bypass as we call it, in order to close loth Avenue and move the medical center over a block. We own all the properties where this building is planned. We are ready to go. It's been approved by the Planning Advisory Board, by the Zoning Board and we need your approval here on this first reading. Mayor Ferre: Ok, Senator Weisenborn? Mr. Lee Weisenborn: Mayor Ferre, members of the Miami City Commission, my name is Lee Weisenborn and I'm an attorney at law and I practice law at 235 Northeast 26th Street, Miami. I represent the objectors to this application, Mrs. Hilda F. Coppolo who is too old and too sick to be here is the owner of M the property. And I represent her son and her daughter, Mr. Roger Coppolo and Mrs. Margaret Rivera who is sitting right out here. The County does not own this property, not yet. Mr. Flamm, when he appeared here the last time was asked the same question and he gave the same answer and at that time you all didn't agree with him. As a matter of fact, I remember Father Gibson sitting up in his chair and saying there is not a title company in the world that would pass title on that property under these circumstances. Now, the difference _ between then and now... let me tell you the difference. There is an eminent domain proceeding that was filed by the County against my client's property. She is eighty-seven years old and I don't want to belabor the point either. She has lived there since 1923 and she doesn't want to move until she dies and she is very sick and we think that, that parking garage just isn't as important as that long time resident of the City of Miami and that there is other property they can put that parking garage on. So we are opposing this lawsuit. We had a hearing on what was known as a quick taking proceeding by the County before Judge John Gordon several months ago. Judge Gordon, after hearing the testimony of several witnesses brought in by both sides, entered an order of taking and I appealed in behalf of my client to the District County of Appeals. Thereafter the County Attorney's office filed a motion in the District County of Appeal and in essence said the order of taking is not in proper order. We need to come back to the Circuit Court. An answer hasn't been filed. The motion to dismiss has not really been ruled upon in writing and it was at that posture that we had a hearing. The morning the prior Commission met, that morning Judge Gordon at the request of the County Attorney vacated the order of taking. We appeared here that afternoon, Mr. Flamm was asked the same question. He is not a lawyer. He is not a property lawyer. He is not a lawyer. I'm sure he is very good at what he does, but he is not trained, I don't believe and skilled in the law and he told this Commission the same thing, "Yes, we have good title". It was the unanimous opinion at that time of the Commission that the County did not have good title. Now, since that time there has been... Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, Senator, have you seen this order dated November the loth? Mr. Weisenborn: Yes, sir. 63 Nov 1 9 1981 Mr. Plummer: And you are contesting this? Mr. Weisenborn: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Alright, sir. Mr. Weisenborn: Now, what's happened now Commissioner Plummer, is that the matter has now gone back to the District Court of Appeal and we are back in handling this appeal again now from that order of taking. We are challenging that in the District Court of Appeal. Mr. Framm, has handed me today, which I already knew about, at the last order of taking the County graciously uped _ the offer five hundred dollars and they have now deposited the additional five hundred dollars in the registry of the court, but the money has to be deposited _ in the registry of the court under a quick taking proceeding before they can take your property. We have not taken the money out of the registry of the court. This tax bill just came out to my client two or three weeks ago from Dade County. They say she still owns the property. Now, I think we have got a good chance to win this appeal. If we win this appeal, you all have rezoned my client's land against her wishes and I think she is entitled to come back into court and say "Now, knock the parking garage down, you had no right to do that. And I think that you ought to wait... at least wait until this appeal is resolved. Let me also tell you something else that was mentioned before for the new members of the Commission. When the County... I opposed this at the County Commission which had to approved the resolution of eminent domain. We were back before them three times and they finally said when they passed the authorizing resolution, we are going to authorize it, but we are going to... with the proviso that Mrs. Coppolo is not to be disturbed in her residence there until March 3, 1982, for one year. So no matter what you do today they still should not be... she still has a right to live there until March 3, 1982. Now, on the agenda for today they want to close streets. Her family needs to get in there everyday and if she gets ill an ambulance will need to get in there and if they close the streets off what protection... what ingress and egress rights does she have left. I'm also advised they are going to start some demolition of the surrounding buildings at the end of December. How is that going to affect the right that the County Commission told the Public Health Trust that they want her left alone for a year. So I think because of these reasons and because ... I may not win the appeal and I may win the appeal. I want to tell you what I'm concerned about and I'm going to argue on the appeal. They want to build a parking garage, that's a valid public purpose. But they want to put in restaurants and they want to may be put a bank in and they are going to put in two hundred fifty apartments and I'm going to raise the issue, hey, this is the highest, the exercise of the power of eminent domain, is the exercise of the harshest remedy known on the civil side of the law. It's the only area on the civil side of the law where you have a twelve person jury, as under criminal law you only have a twelve person jury and a capital case and the reason why is the founding fathers feel that when the government takes your property that is one of the harshest things that can be done. It can be done, but it should only be done for a valid public purpose. I'm arguing just a little bit now and I want to tell you what I raise there. I don't think putting restaurants in and banks in and privately owned pharmacies in and a convenience store in and apartments that might be rented to non -medical personnel is a valid exercise of the power of immanent domain. If I'm successful in convincing the District Court of that, they are going to reverse this order of taking and that is the end of the eminent domain lawsuit and then my clients, she owns that property. So I think from a title point of view, Commissioner Plummer, what you are interested in. This... I mean, they may have. _.. they may own the bare, naked, legal title at this point, but it's got a great, big cloud on it'and the cloud needs to be removed before you... I would think, before you iezoned this property. Mayor Ferre: I have got a very simple question, Lee, and that is from our City Attorney. Do they have an insurance or do they have something that will protect the City or aren't they able to insure the title of that property until appeal is finished? Mr. Percy: The City has no exposure in this case, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: No, I'm not asking you whether it has exposure or not. I'm asking whether they have an insurable title. Mr. Percy: They have a Circuit Count Order which is tantemount to insurable title, that indicate the County has title and can take possession in 1982. a4 NOV 9 1J�1 Mr. Plummer: But what about the appeal process? Does that stay the action of the lower court? Mr. Percy: No, it doesn't. That's the County's problem. If they should lose, they may have to give the property back if the court find that the County... Mayor Ferre: Well, what's your legal position on this on the legal issue? Mr. Percy: This applicant today owns the property that they are asking you to move on. Mr. Plummer: And let me ask you, Mr. Attorney, under normal procedures how long before the appeal would be heard? Mr. Percy: It's hard to say. Mr. Plummer: Normal. Mr. Percy: I guess thirty to ninety days. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, what I might suggest to you and I'm sure will be of no detriment to the County, this is an ordinance and it will take a second reading, that whatever we do here today excluding denying, that we read on first ordinance and that the second ordinance not be read until the appeal process has been completed. That way they can still proceed. They know that our intent is there. Everything is in order and it's just a matter of reading the second... the final reading after the appeal process which would probably be in January. Mayor Ferre: I might remind you that if you had the second reading in January it doesn't become law until thirty days after. So you are really into... until the end of February and she has got a March 3rd... the lady has a March 3rd... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, that, of course, was imposed by the County, not by US. _ Mr. Framm: And agreed to by the Public Health Trust, gentlemen, because we knew that we would be going through these legal procedures before this Commission, that there had to be months of planning with our architects and engineers and other efforts. So, we have all these planning tracks going concurrently. And we have agreed to allow Mrs. Coppolo to stay in her home until March of 1982. We even agreed that we would go forward with sixty day notices. If we didn't need it in March we would allow it until May and so forth until we actually have to begin construction. Our intent is serious here. While it is true that we have heard the appeal from Mrs. Coppolo who is an incompetent lady under the care of her two children. The benefits to the City and of course, to the County and the people receiving medical care at Jackson Memorial Hospital also have to be considered in this instance. This project will add approximately two to three million dollars worth of improved values around the institution as well that the City will benefit from. Now, my good friend, Lee Weisenborn has confused a number of issues here today and I don't intend to dig into everyone of.them. We also do plan in January to proceed with the demolition of the houses other than Mrs. Coppolo's and the other one owned by the County permitting us to do underground studies in borings and so forth to permit us to get our designs going. You have heard many projects here and their construction cost, which are going up for us on a project like this almost eighteen to twenty million dollars which are going to escalate at the rate of a hundred thousand dollars a month. Speaking to the commercial and other things that my friends speaks against. The only uses of this building will be for- the medical center. With nine hundred nurses, six hundred fifty interns and residents, five hundred fifty medical students, six hundred technical personnel, we have no problem feeling and saying it before you, that the occupants of this building will be medical center people and the uses of the commercial activities off of their benefit. This is not a commercial venture for anything else other than the medical center. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Senator, I need response or anything else you want to add. Mr. Weisenborn: Well, the alleged monthly increase has now gone down a hundred thousand a month. The last representation was that it was two hundred thousand dollars a month. I am concerned, very concerned about this closure of the streets business and I don't think... I would ask that if you do approve this .905 NOV 19 1981 It 4 on first reading you put some sort of an amendment to it that they can't close the streets off as long as she is living there or at least not until March 3, 1982. , Mr. Flamm: Mr. Mayor, can I speak to that point? Or ask your attorney to define in your own legal language when you speak of vacating closure. No streets are to be closed. As a matter of fact we are improving the streets, widening them, repaving them. The language of closure is for public purposes only. It's not that the streets are being closed or Mrs. Coppolo won't... will have access to her home. Mayor Ferre: Alright, look... Mr. Weisenborn: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir? Mr. Weisenborn: Excuse me, you asked me if I had anything to say and I didn't interrupt Mr. Flamm. There is no reason to get all excited, alright? Mr. Flamm: You know the legal language, you don't have to throw a red flag in here. Mayor Ferre: Ok, alright, let Senator Weisenborn finish his statement. I think I sense a consensus here and we can move along. So let's go. Mr. Weisenborn: I have nothing further to say. Mayor Ferre: Senator, I'm glad to see that you haven't lost that wonderful touch and that's fine. Mr. Flamm: He is a tough opponent. Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, what's the will of this Commission? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, two things. In relation to Item C, which is the closure of the streets. Mr. Mayor, I will want a stipulation in the ordinance, a full understanding that the street of loth Avenue is not to be closed until 9th Avenue is completed. Mr. Flamm: That is the intention. It can't be any how. Mr. Plummer: Well, ok, I'm telling you that I want it in here, because the County has a strange way of... Mayor Ferre: In other words, that in the resolution in Item 7C that must be stipulated. Mr. Flamm: It's impossible to operate the medical center without that stipulation. Mayor Ferre: Ok. Alright, let's start it up with 7A. Now, this is an ordinance on first reading. • Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute. I have one other point, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Go ahead. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Whipple, have you got an approximate calculation for me? Mr. Whipple: No, sir, I don't have... Mr. Plummer: Alright, Mr. Mayor, let me tell you what I have of concern and of course, I realize that I'm dealing with another governmental agency. Mr. Mayor, they are acquiring City owned streets and I have asked the department to come up with a calculation of the approximate square footage of what they are going to be bestowed upon with a gift. And I don't think that they are entitled to a gift. Mr. Mayor, when we buy and pull the teeth out of the lions of the County they demand of us dollars and that's cold dollars. Now, sir, I am not asking you for dollars, but I am going to ask you that Mr. Gary is in negotiation with the County for some fifty, sixty parcels at the present time and I think it is only right that the people of the City of Miami are entitled Alb to the value of the square footage of those streets which we would be vacating, jnamely. 9th Avenue and in return the City receive a piece of property of like value. I'm not asking you for money. Mayor Ferre: Well, that's the way we traditionally do it. Mr. Plummer: Well, that's the way we traditionally and I want to make sure that it's a part of this ordinance. (BACKGROUND COMMENT INAUDIBLE) Mr. Plummer: That's fine, sir and that's for your benefit. You will be getting — that is an already... that is already a dedicated street. Alright, sir. 9th Avenue is not? Mr. Flamm: 9th Avenue is... I wish... 9th Avenue operates between... Mayor Ferre: Yes, what he is saying is that 9th Avenue is there, but... Mr. Plummer: Yes, I understand. Hey, all I'm saying is that we are going to be giving quick claim title to the vacating of that street. Now, I'm not asking the County for money and I'm not holding them up for money, but I think the taxpayers of the City of Miami are entitled to like amount of square footage in value as to what we are giving up. Mayor Ferre: Ok, that's a reasonable request which we have always done in the past. Mr. Flamm: 9th Avenue is not shown. We are taking a piece of our own property to make the 9th Avenue bypass... Mr. Plummer: And sir, I commend you for that, but I also commend to you that you are going to give us property for that which we are giving up. Mr. Flamm: And may I also say there is ample precedent for this. There are major areas within the medical center now where this has taken place in the past as well. Mayor Ferre: Hey, what he is asking for I don't think amounts to a hill of beans when you calculate it out, you know. What he is asking for really it's a net. He is asking for a net. If you are replacing a street with a street. Mr. Dawkins: Well, that's not what we are asking for. I think I hear... Mr. Framm: Yes, and the improvements that will occur on loth Avenue after it's closed making a major pedestrian mall out of it. Mayor Ferre: You are not following this. Mr. Flamm: I heard. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer is saying that as in the past whatever it is that you are asking us to give up that you give us a like amount in return. Now, that's the way we have always done it. And what I am saying to you, sir is that when you balance what you are... the land that you are giving with the land that we are giving, I don't think the difference is going to amount to a.hell of a lot and therefore, I don't think that what he is asking for is an unreasonable _ thing at all. I don't think it will be an awful lot of land. Mr. Flamm: Is Commissioner Plummer, making this an condition preceeding to the approval then? Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir, sure. Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Dawkins: Yes. Mayor Ferre: And what I'm saying... Mr. Plummer: You know, Maurice, I'm sorry, but I remember when we tried to 67 y t acquire the piece of property of the auto inspection station, you remember the hell they put us through? You remember the piece we tried to get on the South side of the Baseball Stadium, the hell they put us through and we paid cold hard dollars. Mr. Framm: May I respectfully remind you, Commissioner Plummer, that while the County... it is the County who will be the final owner. It's the Public Health Trust, a quasi public body acting on behalf of the Commission which is operating the medical center for the public interest under an enabling legislation of the State... Mr. Plummer: Sir, and may I remind you that, that 10th Avenue is owned by the _ taxpayers of the City of Miami. Mr. Framm: Right. I understand that. Mayor Ferre: I would like to know what you are arguing about. It doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Mr. Dawkins: May I cut this short and say that if they do not want to accept the conditions laid down by Commissioner Plummer, that we just, you know, forget about it, because just like you said, obviously, there is a hidden agenda, because it's cut and dried, that is value for value. Mayor Ferre: Make that a condition. Mr. Plummer: Well, I will attach that to C. I move 7A. Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion and a second on 7A which is the application by the Jackson Memorial Hospital to change zoning, now, from R-4 to C, and C-1 to GU. Mr. Plummer: You are talking about forty-two thousand five hundred square feet. Mayor Ferre: Ok? And this is on first reading only and the second reading will be coming up--- when, Plummer? March? Mr. Plummer: The day after the appeal. Mayor Ferre: Or March 3rd, whichever comes first, ok. Mr. Plummer: Fine, I have no problem with that. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Dawkins seconds, further discussion, read the ordinance. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY _ OF MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY APPROXIMATELY N. W. LOTH AVENUE, N.W. 17TH STREET, N. W. 9TH AVENUE, N. W. 18TH STREET, N. W. 8TH AVENUE AND THE WEST DUNBAR SCHOOL SITE (75-87), BEING TENTATIVE PLAT #1103 - "HIGHLAND PARK DRIVE SECTION ONE", FROM R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE) AND C-1 (LOCAL COMMERCIAL) TO GU (GOVERNMENTAL USE), AS PER ATTACHED MAP, AND BY MAKING ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871, BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 2, THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote: S$NOV i AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. 19. GRANT APPLICATION BY JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE HOSPITAL RELATED FACILITIES PER ART XXI-2, ORD 6871 Mayor Ferre: Item B. Mr. Plummer: Move 7B. Mayor Ferre: Plummer moves 7B, is there a second? Mr. Dawkins: Second. Mayor Ferre: Seconded by Dawkins, further discussion, call the roll on the resolution. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1001 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL RELATED FACILITIES, PER ORDINANCE 6871, ARTICLE XXI-2, SECTION 3(1,2,), AS PER PLANS PREPARED BY FERGUSON, GLASGOW AND SCHUSTER, REVISED AUGUST 5, 1981, ON PROPERTY GENERALLY BOUNDED BY APPROXIMATELY N. W. LOTH AVENUE, N. W. 17TH STREET, N. W. 9TH AVENUE, N. W. 18TH STREET, N. W. 8TH AVENUE AND THE WEST DUNBAR SCHOOL SITE (75-87), BEING TENTATIVE PLAT #1103 - "HIGHLAND PARK DRIVE SECTION ONE", ZONED R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE) AND C-1 (LOCAL COMMERCIAL), PROPOSED TO BE RE- ZONED TO GU (GOVERNMENTAL USE). FINDING THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS USE IS: (a) COM- PATIBLE WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT: (b) IN CONFORMITY WITH PLANS FOR THE AREA; (c) READILY ACCESIBLE; (d) OF LITTLE ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA; (e) IN SCALE WITH SURROUNDING INSTITUTIONS; (f) ESSENTIAL FOR THE EMPLOYEES AND PATRONS OF THE HOSPITAL COMPLEX; AND (g) OF COMPLEMENTARY DESIGN, SUBJECT TO FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. (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 J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. 69 It 20. DEFERRAL OF CONSIDERATION OF CLOSURE OF N.W. 10 AVE, BETWEEN N.W. 17 STREET ETC -HIGHLAND PARK DRIVE, SECTIO14 ONE (JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL) Mayor Ferre: Now, on 7C, Plummer. Mr. Plummer: Alright, sir, on 7C you stipulate the two items? Mayor Ferre: In other words, that you will not construct 9th until you... you will not close 9th until loth is finished. Mr. Plummer: No, the opposite, Mr. Mayor. You will not close loth until 9th is finished. And the other one is that you will give us a difference in a value of like for like as far as property is concerned. Mr. Flamm: If you make that a condition... Mr. Plummer: No, you are stipulating it, sir. Mr. Flamm: I'm a minor functionary. I cannot make that kind of stipulation. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Mayor, I move 7C for deferment until they get an answer back to this Commission that they are willing to stipulate. Mr. Flamm: But it sounds like a reasonable thing that the County can negotiate with the... Mr. Plummer: I agree. I understand your position also, sir. So, when you get an answer from the County you come back. Mayor Ferre: In the interest... I know that you have a boss and he has a boss and all that. I'm trying to be helpful. Mr. Framm: Can you approve it subject to that? Mayor Ferre: That's right. I think the way to do it is approve it subject to that... Mr. Plummer: (INAUDIBLE)... second reading. Mayor Ferre: No, there is no second reading, these are resolutions. He would have to proferred, no, legally. Mr. Plummer: Well, look, a resolution is only one reading, right? Mr. Percy: Correct. Mr. Plummer: Ok, so, why can't we take 7C up in the March meeting when we take the others? And in that time sir, you will voluntarily come back with a stipulation to those two points. The monkey is on your back. Mayor Ferre: You see, the only other alternative to that is for you... you have to on the record profer it now. But it has to be you. Now, if you don't feel that you have got the authority to do that... Mr. Framm: I don't feel I have the authority to do that. Mr. Plummer: I understand that, sir. Mayor Ferre: Then we will just have to wait. The motion now is that 7C be deferred until the second reading of the ordinance 7A. Mr. Plummer: And a stipulation from... a voluntarily stipulation from them as received. Mayor Ferre; Further discussion? do Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, for the record let me indicate to you that they are asking us to give to them seventy-one thousand three hundred seventy square feet. ' Mayor Ferre: Well, I think that's probably not a net figure, J. L. Mr. Plummer: No, it's not, but that's what they are totally asking of us. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but they are also giving back that strip of land which is the curbed portion on both sides, which I assume would somewhat off -set that. Mr. Plummer: And do we know yet who is going to maintain that street? Mayor Ferre': They have to. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, you don't do the work. Mr. Framm: The County is going to pay for the construction of the 9th Avenue bypass. Mr. Plummer: And who is going to maintain it, sir? Mayor Ferre: Is that an arterial? Mr. Plummer: No, it's not a main arterial, that's why I'm asking. Mr. Framm: I can't answer that question techically... Mr. Plummer: Well, why don't you come back with that answer to us. Who is going to maintain it and who is going to keep up the landscaping and who is going to do the lighting. I would like to know that answer. Mayor Ferre: Do we have an answer now? Can you clarify it? Mr. George Campbell: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, for the record I'm George Campbell representing the Department of Public Works. It is our position of the Department of Public Works that if the County builds it, the County maintains it. Mayor Ferre: Sure. Mr. Plummer: That's your position. Has that been the clear understanding of the County all the time they have done these things, Mr. Campbell? Mr. Campbell: To the best of my knowledge, yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Does that become arterial? Mr. Campbell: Yes, sir it would because of the fact that loth Avenue to the best of my knowledge is an arterial street in nature at the present time. Mayor Ferre: So that therefore, it would remain as the County responsibility? Mr. Campbell: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: And they will pay for the relocation of any and all utilities? - Mr. Campbell: We will see to it that they do. Mr. Plummer: Ok. Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion, call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption. MOTION NO. 81-1002 A MOTION TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF REQUESTED VACATION AND CLOSURE OF N.W. LOTH AVENUE BETWEEN N.W. 17TH STREET AND APPROXIMATELY N. W. 20TH STREET, AND N. W. 17TH AND �� NOV 1 9 1981 1Jl 18TH STREETS BETWEEN N.W. 9TH AND N.W. LOTH AVENUES (AS PER JACKSON MEMORIAL APPLICATION) UNTIL THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE READ FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS SAME DATE IN CONNECTION WITH AGENDA ITEM 7(a); AND PENDING A DETERMINATION FROM DADE COUNTY AS TO WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY SHALL IT BE TO MAINTAIN THE STREETS PROPOSED TO BE CLOSED. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. GPA1T VADT_ASICE TO PERVIT t.DDITI_Or? C�ITTIECT?I1 D•,.?^TING 21. 3UTLDINGG O" I11- 9' CF LOT 5. 7LCC„ 6 - :'.IR::LP_I1B (3-214) Mayor Ferre: I think we can do 15 and get these people out of here quickly. This is an appeal--- 15 --- by applicant Manuel Rivero and Rene Perez on a variance for parking required. We are on fifteen, is that right. Is the applicant here? Mr. Mike Anderson: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Ok. Mr. Anderson had requested that we have a full Commission before his item be heard. Mr. Micheal Anderson: My name is Micheal Anderson. I'm an attorney with offices at 4350 Southwest 75th Avenue and I represent the applicants Rene Perez and Manuel Rivero. My clients are in the field of computerized accounting and they own the property at 115 Southwest 36th Court. You can see that property up there and it's one of the few properties where two streets are directly adjacent to one another without any private property in between 36 Court and Ponce de Leon Boulevard. What they are asking to do... First of all, I wanted to say that there was a three -three decision of the Zoning Board. It was very close and unfortunately there were some comments made in voting that I - felt that I could have responded to, but because the public hearing was closed I was unable to do that. So, I hoped that if those same thoughts... I'm going to respond to what happened at that time. First of all, my clients... What my clients have presently are the two buildings that you see in purple. Those are the existing buildings. When these buildings were built this was a duplex zone and this was many, many years ago. The one building is all the way to the front property line. It was built as a residence. The one building was on the rear... almost to the rear property line, five feet from the rear and that was - built as a residence. The zoning presently is C-4 which is sort of a heavy commercial usage. My clients are using the property as an office and one of the problems that they have here is a weather problem when they go back and forth from these two buildings. They also have a security problem and that this building contains... houses the computer area that they have and it requires the door to be open in this building and this building and in the front building. In addition there are some cramp conditions in the buildings. What they are. proposing is a new addition that would run between the buildings. It's fifty-five feet in there. If they wanted to simply put a hall way in there, a fifty-five foot hall way, they could do that and we wouldn't be here asking for these variances. The four... there would be a hall way through and then there would be some offices in that addition. They are not trying to expand their operation. The operation itself will be the same number of employees, but what they want to do is expand the area that they have to work in. What we are asking for is seven compact parking spaces where we would normally be required to have seven regular parking spaces and in conjunction with that we have to ask for certain `2 NOV 1 9 1 981 AOL other variances. For example, the drive -way should... on today's standard would have to be moved from the South side of the property line up five feet, but because of the existing building there we are asking for that variance. And we are also asking for the variance which would require the two foot grass strip here because this asphalt pavement goes completely on across the property line to the neighbors building. And now if I can just show you. This is the computer center in the back building and it is extremely crammed. Mayor Ferre: Well, what's the name of the company? Mr. Anderson: It's call Perez and Rivero. They are accountants and they do a lot of the computerized accounting for airlines industries. Small airlines. one of their clients is, for example, Air Florida. And this is what we are trying to do. We are trying to spread some of this out so that we have a little room in the building. Now, I want to show you how the parking lot is presently. It has five cars. What we would be doing is having seven. if you notice the way the spacing is we could easily, if these cars were a little closer together put in one on this side and one on the other and all this would be moved back toward the other side of the property. So, there is plenty of space. They do actually have seven cars and they are all mid size to compact. The other important factor is that Ponce de Leon Boulevard has... and 36th Court has tremendous amount of public parking. It's one of the most under utilized commercial parking areas on the street and the ordinances are designed so that you don't burden the street parking and... although we are going to provide the proper number of spaces, someone might say "Well, what happens if you drive up in a full size car and there is no parking spaces?" This is the existing building and all along this street which is 36th Court and this was taken at 1:15 on a Thursday afternoon, you can see that there is no cars. There is one here. Taken across the street show Ponce de Leon Boulevard. There is a church right here, it has eleven metered parking spaces in front of it. This is directly... this is taking from the opposite angle where you can see my client's building and it has the parking spaces. You can see there is eleven meters in here that are rarely, if ever, used. This is the building here. Across Ponce de Leon Boulevard you can see that there are some spaces that are also not used. What we are proposing would look something like this when completed. This would be the front of the building and in the back where the cars are parked you would see this building. We think it's a substantial improvement. It's a problem.because of the fact there is so much public property there. If 36th Court were closed and we had the property out in front... I mean, property is either public or private. If we had the 36th Court closed and we owned that property we would have no problem with parking. As I said it's one of the most under utilized areas in the City and there is one thing I think that you have to understand and that is it's a small building and small buildings have their own special types of uses. It's kind of like when I drive home at night and I pull up in the drive way behind my wife's car she doesn't say "My God how am I going to get out of the drive way?" She knows whose car is in back of her. And I think that's the way small buildings work. Small buildings no matter how... even if they have access parking. The boss comes in, he is the one that goes out, gets the business and he is in and out and he pulls up behind somebody's car sometimes and so there is a question that came up, well, my God, what if one full size car pulls in? The place where I'm located now we do that all the time. And it's going to happen... it's not only this building. It happens in this building presently the way it is it would happen in the future and it's something that I don't think that you can stop. But we feel that we are providing the maximum parking spaces that we can provide doing what we want to do. There was another question that came up. Well, can you build two stories in the C-4 Zone? Well, yes, you can build two stories in the C-4 Zone. However, this particular property was designed as two single family residences and the fact is that, you know, we don't want the funniest looking building in the world with part of one second story on one building and a fifty-five foot hall way in between. So, what we are asking for is what we think are very minor variance in an area where there is certainly an over abundance of street parking. There neighbors or anything that came to the meetings. There were a couple of objections which were really on the street in back of us. There is actually a residential street in back which it wouldn't affect in any form or fashion and those... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Anderson, is that a residential street behind you or an alley? Mr. Anderson: It's a street behind us. and there is an R-2 District behind us. 73 In other words, we are on 36th Court NOV 19 1981 A Mr. Plummer: No, no, no. immediately to the East of your property line. Isn't there an alley in there? Mr. Anderson: No, there is no alley there. My clients... actually their building is five feet away from that property line and the people would not be affected in the residential neighborhood in any way. As a matter of fact, the people next to us... if these people were concerned... the business people were concerned about parking they would have objected, but you can see we have a couple of people. Even the next door neighbor has no objection to this variance. As I said there is more than twenty parking spaces right on the street in front of us that are not utilized. Mr. Plummer: Alright, let me ask a question of the department. This is C-4 and C-4-will allow parking? Why is this up before us for a variance? What is the variance that's being requested? Mr. Anderson: We are asking for a variance... We are required to have seven regular spaces. We are asking for seven compacts because of the location of this property. In other words,... Mr. Plummer: Aren't you already there? Aren't you doing business? Mr. Anderson: Yes, we are here. We don't have that existing addition in there. Mayor Ferre: He wants a permit to add that addition, you see and... Mr. Plummer: But the question I'm asking Maurice, if that's in a C-4 District now? Mr. Whipple: They are adding on to the building which increases their parking requirements which they cannot meet, but they are asking therefore, a variance. Mr. Plummer: So in effect, what they are asking for is a waiver of parking? Mayor Ferre: Now, Plummer, if you will look at the map there the purple area on both sides is existing buildings, they want to build the orange. Mr. Plummer: Correct. Mayor Ferre: Now, for them to do that they have got to ask for some variances. One of them that they are asking for is to be able to put in seven compact spaces rather than seven regular. Now, the other thing that they are asking for is, is some setbacks. Is that right? Mr. Anderson: No, there is no setback. Mr. Plummer: No, it's just a variance for parking. Mr. Anderson: It's smaller parking spaces and actually a smaller back out aisle because of the compacts. Mr. Plummer: How small? Mr. Dawkins: Ok, may I ask a question too along those lines? If you are in a C-4 area and you have space for parking and your requesting compact parjcing what is the need to save whatever footage you will save on each side of the parking area? What are you going to do with it? Or why do you need it? Mr. Anderson: .What we have here is this addition which we are... Mr. Dawkins: No, no, come down the sides where the parking is. I understand what you want to do across the top. What I don't understand is and for the lack of better figures, if it takes five feet per square... I mean, per parking space and you want to put eight, that's forty feet. Now, if it requires 4 feet per compact, then that means you need thirty-two instead of forty. What do you plan to do with the extra eight feet on each side? Mr. Anderson: We only have a certain amount of area in there. We have enough area to put in seven feet of our addition. All the way down to... we have enough square footage to put in the addition if it were only seven feet wide and we could still put in the regular size parking spaces which are additional nine by nineteen and we would have a proper amount of back out which is 74 W twenty-three feet. However, because we want to put an addition in there which is simply not a hall way, so that it alleviates our over crowding and helps us out there. We have to ask for compact spaces. The square footage would be roughly seven by fifty-five is the difference. In other words, that the difference of the addition that we proposed to put in . Mr. Plummer: I'm lose here somewhere. Is this... you are saying this is an existing building on the yellow parcel? Mr. Anderson: Yes. It's existing two buildings. The purple are the two buildings. You see, if we were to come in here with a vacant lot and build the square footage that we want to build today we would have not problem, because we could... well, because these were... this was a duplex zone at one time and you had two single family residences. Subsequently it was changed to C-4 which is commercial and in effect, does not allow single family residences today. Although you could keep them... you could continue them if you wanted, but you couldn't build them today in a C-4 zone, but normally in the course of things the City would normally want because of that regulation to change the property to commercial. So it was changed to commercial, but it creates this problem of back and forth because it's the same business occupying two separated buildings. Mr. Dawkins: May I ask another question then? Mr. Anderson: Yes. Mr. Dawkins: Ok. Then are you saying that you could put an alley way and _ have no problems, but because you want to put space with extra offices, then for the lack of a better word you need a setback that would push you in the middle of the streets with your back out in parking unless we give you variance. Is that what you are saying? Mr. Anderson: Yes, it would push us on to the next person's property. The street is actually out here and what we are —what you are saying is we... Mr. Dawkins: Yes, bring me that, let me show you what I'm trying ... Ok, now you have this, right? Mr. Anderson: That's the new addition that we are proposing. That's what we want to build. Mr. Dawkins: But if you were just to put a walk way across here, then you would have all of this for spaces? Mr. Anderson: That's correct. Mr. Dawkins: But because you want to come this far down, then you want a variance that would permit you to do that. Mr. Anderson: That's what we are asking for. Mr. Dawkins: (COMMENT INAUDIBLE). Mr. Anderson: Yes. It's part of the problem that we have with the over crowding in the building and the only thing I want to point out is that the regulations themselves are designed so that you don't create problems, so that nobody builds parking and has all there parking on the street: And what I was trying to point out to you was that the over abundance of parking on the street that is not utilized. In other words, we are not going to create a parking problem in this area. we are going to have seven spaces which is what we are required to have. They are just not regular spaces, they would be compact. But when you look at, for example, there is a church right here and these photographs taken at 1:15 on a Thursday afternoon, there is eleven parking spaces right out there and there is spaces along 36th Court that nobody uses because it's just not a... I think it's the most under utilized parking area in the Southwest section really. Mr. Plummer: Mike, if we grant you seven compact spaces how are you going to guarantee us it's going to be seven compact cars? Mr. Anderson: Well, I can't guarantee that. But I can tell you this, that if you go to the Administration Building any day of the week you will find vans and wagons and trucks and all size cars parked in those compact spaces, because '75 NOV 19 1,981 b I'm down there a couple of time a week. And I want to tell you out in front here you will always find and this is one of the things that the staff once said that... when they first came out there. We only have five spaces so somebody pulled in back of the other spaces and in every building you will find people back parking back, including the City Hall. Mayor Ferre: Well, you see, what Father Gibson always used to say Mike, you were sitting here and you would hear him say, he says the law that works for you will work against you and vice versa. So, I think the thing that you are going to have to do... I mean, that this is what we want to do, then we have got to do this city wide. I don't know whether we can just go around... and I just..: you know, I understand what your problem is. Mr. Anderson: Can I read the definition of a variance? Ok. It says "A variance is a meanings of relief which is available only when some peculiar circumstance as to size, -shape or nature features of the parcel of land and sometimes it's location". Now, this location as I tried to explain to you has an over abundance of public property in front it. If you will look at it... you just don't find that kind... property is either public or private. If it were private we wouldn't have this problem if you would close off that street. We have an... the location of this property is such that it's in an area where there just is an over abundance of street parking. Now, I could see where if you were to go in almost any other area of Southwest there would be a problem, but I can't see the problem here. Mayor Ferre: Alright, what's the will of this Commission? I think we have talked about this and everybody has seen both sides of this issue and I think, you know, you got valid points on the one side and on the other hand the Administraticn has got a valid point. So, what's the will of this Commission? Time to vote. Mr. Carollo: Well, Mr. Mayor, this is one of these tough ones, but one of the points that I see is that here we have a business that is producing for the City. I think we have to be helpful at the same time considerate to botn the people in the area and to that business helping it expand. If I would have seen a strong objection from the people in the area I would have gone along with them, but failing to see that I think what they are asking for is minimal and we have to be considerate and won't take an action such as this. So, I vote to approve it. Mayor Ferre: So there is a motion for reversal of the Zoning Board. Is that the technical way, Terry? Mr. Percy: Correct. Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there a second? Mr. Perez: I second. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a second, further discussion, call the roll. ON ROLL CALL: Mayor Ferre: Now,... Alright, I guess... I really have got to, since the decision now becomes mine. Is there a way that we can... if we were to grant this on a one year basis to see how it functions as a conditional use? Mr. Perez: You could have a condition established even if it is not a conditional use. It is subject to review after a year of... Mr. Plummer: Yes, but your problem... excuse me. Are you finished? Mr. Perez: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I think that the problem that you are faced with that what is your alternative. At the end of the year if you say no, it doesn't work, you are going to make them tear down the building? That's the only alternative you have, because if you make them go back to five spaces which are regular size, then it doesn't fit into the picture. So I don't see that as an alternative. I looked into that possibility. Mayor Ferre: Is the space in between going to be... is the connector going to be full of machines or what? What is that connector going to be? Mr. Anderson: It would be about three offices in there with the hall way. Mr. Plummer: You see, one of the things, Mr. Mayor, that's brought out in the staff recommendation is the strenuous objection of Metro Traffic and Transportation and that is the turning around radius of nineteen feet and that's going to be — a... It's going to be a serious problem even if they do hold seven compact cars to seven spaces, which I... Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, I think we are all out of order. We are in the middle of voting. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but I'm trying to make up my mind on which way to vote on this thing and it's based.. I'm trying to figure out how unreasonable this is. Mr. Plummer: He was asking questions. Mayor Ferre': Whipple, how strongly do you feel on this? I mean, they are making an improvement and the question is... Mr. Whipple: Mr. Mayor, I think there is a, may I add, another consideration perhaps for your thought. Our concern... I say our, the Planning Department and Public Works for some time has been one of the practical utilization of parking areas. And I think if you will look at the plan just for a minute you have the potential of having the two end spaces extremely difficult to get in an out because of the turning movements required, having to bring the car around to the proper driving lane to get in and out. Now, they meet the technical--- well, almost, except for the variances they are seeking--- responses to the ordinance. But from a practical matter it's quite often plans are approved with the numbers which actually and practically function less than the numbers that are actually shown. Mayor Ferre: In other words, what you are saying is what's going to happen is we are going to have six cars parked in there rather than seven? Mr. Whipple: Or even four. You know... It will be a lesser number is what I'm suggesting and that's the point I wanted to bring to your attention. Mr. Plummer: Let me give you an alternative. Let me ask you this, Whipple. I probably wouldn't have any problem to vote in favor of the waiver of two parking spaces, but the approach they are taking of four foot wide spaces I would be opposed to and I am opposed to and did vote like wise. Mr. Whipple: You understand we are going to catch twenty-two there. If you go to full size spaces that makes your aisle problem more severe. Mr. Plummer: But they have five spaces if you go the normal parking space. They have five. Mr. Whipple: but their aisle space goes from nineteen down to sixteen where twenty-three feet is required. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but let's be realistic, you know. It is in fact to catch twenty-two and what I'm trying to say and said before was, there is no guarantee anyway that they could stand out there and say there is only going to be seven compact cars. Mayor Ferre: Ok, look, I would like to figure out a better way of accommodating this thing, but the way to do it... Terry? Mr. Perez, let me talk to the City Attorney so I can find a legal way of doing this. If I vote "no" on this can then we offer a motion waiving the two or maybe we can get away with doing it with one of the parking spaces and therefore approve this on that basis? Mr. Percy: A "no" vote would uphold the Zoning Board's denial and kill the... Mayor Ferre: What? Mr. Percy: A "no" vote would uphold the Zoning Board's denial and effectively defeat the application. Mayor Ferre: Well, then, if I... Alright, but if the motion is withdrawn before the final vote and then restructured, is there a legal way of doing that? Mr. Percy: You would have to consider essentially, what was before the lower NOV 19 i9 1 i Board and that is as it's before you. You would have to start anew. Mayor Ferre: We have to start a new one. Well, I hate to, Mike, to make you go through that, but I would vote... I think Plummer is right and I would vote with that, but we can't do it legally today. Mr. Anderson: We would have to have a year. It would be a year to come back to you. Mayor Ferre: Would there have to be a year lose on that? Mr. Percy: If it's denied. Mayor Ferre: Well, suppose we don't deny it and have them go back to the Planning Board with that alternate proposal. You follow me? Mr. Percy: What this is, is an appeal to the Commission. The Zoning Board has denied it. Unless that appeal is overturned the matter is deem denied and they have to start all over again within one year. Mayor Ferre: No, you don't understand what I'm trying to say. Is there anyway that legally we can send this back to the Zoning Board for them to consider an alternative that has not been considered here, which is the changing of the requirements of a waiver for the parking. Mr. Percy: No, sir, not if this application is configured. Mr. Plummer: Hey, we want to help the people, tell us how. Mr. Percy: That this Commission took no action on the application, you could... the Zoning Board's denial is effectively there wiped out. The application was defeated. Mayor Ferre: So, in other words, it's that simple. I have to vote "yes" or "no" and there is no other way of doing it other than to vote "yes"? Mr. Plummer: What about if we do it without prejudice. Can they file tomorrow for a new application? Mr. Percy: You would be in effect, making an exception to the rule in the Code that requires... Mr. Plummer: That we can't do it. Mayor Ferre: I vote "yes". And that's... I tried to find a better way of doing it. I'm sorry that... in the future I think we have got to find alternatives, because I think what they had was a reasonable problem, I didn't like voting with it. I frankly, didn't like that vote, but on the other hand, you know, you left me no alternative. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1003 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE XXIII, SECTION 2(2), TO PERMIT AN ADDITION CONNECTING THE EXISTING BUILDINGS ON N49' OF LOT 5, BLOCK 6; KIRKLAND HEIGHTS AMD (3-214), BEING 115 S. W. 36TH COURT, AS PER PLANS ON FILE, PROVIDING THE FOLLOWING: 1) 7 COMPACT SPACES (7 REGULAR SPACES REQUIRED) 2) A 19' ACCESS AISLE FOR 90 ANGLE PARKING (23' REQUIRED) 3) NO LANDSCAPED SEPARATION BETWEEN DRIVEWAY AND THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE (2' REQUIRED) 4) NO SEPARATION BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY AND THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AT THE POINT WHERE THE DRIVEWAY CROSSES THE BASE BUILDING LINE (5' REQUIRED) THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED C-4 (GENERAL COMMERICAL). ` NOV -1 9 1981 (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 J. L. Plummer, Jr. Vice -Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. 22. APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1981-1987 TO PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR CITY AGENCIES, BOARDS AND DEPARTMENTS Mayor Ferre: We are on Item 14. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me preface my remarks before Mr.'Ac Manus starts his very long speil. I want to tell you from word go and I hope the rest of the Commission. I have gone over this capital improvement program and I commend the City Administration for proposing to us a program which in effect, if money were not tight is a great program. Mr. Mayor, you are the very one and others of this Commission that have been screaming loud and long that every dollar that we can muster must go for police protection of this community. If we in fact, take and look... I don't know if it's page 213 or... in this book. Mr. Mayor, we are talking about nine million six thousand dollars. We hear the Administration discuss the fact that they are going to have a real problem with putting the hundred eighty-six policemen on. We don't have the money to buy things for the Department. We had to cut back on the P.S.A. program, eliminate the C.S.A. program. Mr. Mayor, I wonder very loudly if in fact the Bay Front Park land fill of the people were asked, do they want more policemen on the street or a walkway in a park that at the present time is not being used. Are the people going to want to worry about the Coconut Grove Exhibition Center which I am all in favor of. As you know, Mr. Mayor, from day one on this Commission I have dearly and want to see the development of Virginia Key for a recreational area, but I think we have to look at Virginia Key as projected somewhere in excess of a quarter of a million dollars. Mr. Mayor, I want to tell you they can proffer here today all they want,but I'm saying to this Commission and in my vote will reflect that I don't think that anyway, shape or form, my priorities are being expressed in this presentation here this morning. Here we find, Mr. Mayor, for example, fifty thousand dollars for trees. Here we find swimming pool renovation's, Virginia Key recreation, two hundred fifty thousand dollars, Miami Springs Golf Course a perimeter fence which doesn't even exist in the City of Miami, fifty thousand dollars. I have gone over this Mr. Mayor, very closely and I want to tell you that I find very simply near a million dollars that I feel that can be cut from this budget and diverted to the use of the very much important thing that you spoke to and I want to speak to and that is the fighting of crime. Now, I realize the danger that you can get over heavy in a Police Department if the•monies aren't allocated properly, but Mr. Mayor, I don't think for one minute that the people of this community are as concerned about, yes, my pet project of Virginia Key as they are about crime for two hundred fifty thousand dollars. 1 just merely want to say that on the record, that as proposed Mr. Mayor, there is no way that I am rubber stamping this capital improvement program. I would hope that other members of the Commission would look very seriously and set what they feel as I will their priorities. Mayor Ferre: Plummer, just so I don't get out of training in arguing with you, let me just argue with you, ok? Mr. Plummer: Please do sir, it makes me feel better. 1 NOV 19 1981 Mayor Ferre: Just so I feel a little bit better about it. Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: And since you are not telling me what I said let me tell you, sir, that my opponent during the last three months has said nothing but that his priorities would be fighting crime and I wasn't fighting crime and the neighborhoods were abandoned and the kind of stuff that you are talking about right now. And let me remind you, sir, in case you have missed it. I got thirty-one thousand five hundred thirty-one votes which is more than any member of any Commission at any time in the history of the City of Miami and that is more than any Mayor, including Bob High and Steve Clark has every gotten and I want to tell you that I went all over this town saying that the Downtown area _ and Brickell Avenue was the motor that had to drive the future of this City because that's where we are going to get the money to pay... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I... Mayor Ferre: Let me finish, I didn't interrupt you. And just so I can stay in like your friend Irwin Christie and my former friend main Christie used to say. I like to stay in, you know, in punching, in shape. I like bouts. So let me bout you a little bit and tell you that I reject your statement, that, that's not what I ran on, that's not what the people voted for and I mean to tell you that I do not think that the Manager is any less committed and this Administration is any less committed to fighting crime than you are and that if he is recommending this he has got a good valid reason for it. I'm not saying that I agree with it a hundred percent, but I want to tell you that this money is coming from somewhere and I think we ought to give him the opportunity to explain where the money is coming from and why he is recommending these expenditures. And I would like to point out that one matter does not preclude the other. I do not think that because we are going to go out and spend some money improving Wainwright Park or West end lighting or the Douglas Park ball field lighting or the Fort Dallas Park improvement or the etc., etc., etc., that we are necessarily going to stop fighting crime. So, I think you ought to give him an opportunity to explain why he wants to spend these monies and then maybe we might agree with you or we might agree with the Manager. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I, obviously, as in the past you have misunderstood. I was not speaking to your election. Mayor Ferre: Absolutely, right. I have misunderstood a lot of things. You are right about that. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, what I was speaking to was your continents of this morning. Your comments this morning in relation to the sales tax increase of one cent. You said that you didn't think the voting one hundred percent of that eight hundred million addressing the propblem of crime would be out of line, nor sufficient. That was the comment that I was referring to, yours of this morning. Mayor Ferre: Good, I stand by that comment. Mr. Plummer: And I agree with that comment, sir. Mayor Ferre: Alright. Mr. Carollo: Well, if I may, Mr. Mayor, end the topic of your conversations with an old saying from the Chinese philosopher, Confucious. It sums like this Plummer, which I mentioned before. "No guts, no glory". - Mr. Plummer: I have heard that, but other suffer around here from not having either one. Mayor Ferre: Well, that's a matter of opinion. Mr. Plummer: Sure. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor,... Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir, Mr. Manager. Let's get back on the subject. Mr. Gary: ... and members of the City Commission, first of all I would like f to state that this is a capital budget that the... over ninety-five percent of the funds are from bond funds or C.D. funds dedicated to those purposes. Mayor Ferre: Would you repeat that again, Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: Over ninety-five percent of the money are... Mayor Ferre: Ninety-five percent. Mr. Manager, would you also tell us on the record for about the hundredth time that I can think of, of a Manager or a City Attorney on previous Commissions saying that we are precluded by law from using those funds directly or indirectly. And in other words, we cannot go into subterfuges of substituting one element for another so that we can circumvent the law. Mr. Gary: That's correct, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: So, what you are talking about is five percent of the--- how much?--- nine million dollars. Mr.. Gary: Fifty-seven million dollars. Fifty-eight million dollars. Mayor Ferre: No, I'm talking about this year's specific capital improvement budget. Mr. Gary: The capital improvement budget for this year is fifty-eight million, but of that you have FP&L funds which we have traditionally separated out which amounts to nine million dollars. Now,... Mayor Ferre: Out of the total? Mayor Ferre: Out of the total. Mr. Plummer: That's right. That's what I spoke to. Mayor Ferre: And the nine million dollars is for a five year period? Mr. Gary: No, the nine million dollars is our allocation for this year from FP&L funds. Now, of the nine million dollars, Mr. Mayor,... Mr. Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Gary, did I speak to anything else? That's what I was speaking. Mr. Gary: well, I misunderstood you. I thought you were talking to whole 1981-62 budget. Mr. Plummer: I'm glad when you are corrected, sir, and you do it yourself. Mr. Gary: If you are talking about the FP&L funds, I would like to just go down this list. Of the nine million approximately 3.9 million is for the general fund which is a normal process or a normal procedure we have been following where we have been using 3.9 million dollars per year to support the general operating budget. The hundred thirty-one thousand with regard to the acquisition of Miley property is a long-term contract to buy th- tbnty Trainor Property which we have no other recourse to do but to pay that bill. The three million dollars for the Downtown People Mover is a contribution to our commitment, this City Commission's commitment to put in approximately 9.9 million dollars to the Downtown People Mover and... Mayor Ferre: And if we didn't use these funds where would we get the money? Mr. Gary: We wouldn't be able to get it, Mayor, unless you went out for referendum and we decided the best... Mayor Ferre: And then we would have to go back on a specific commitment that we have already made to Metropolitan Dade for a People Mover which this Commission has been chasing after. Mr. Gary: Yes, sir. Now, with regard to Virginia Key recreation area development... Mr. Plummer: That's reserved funds, but it's not being spendable dollars at this time. Mayor Ferre: We are reserving it. Il Mr. Plummer: Well, your reserving it is true, you know, but that doesn't mean that those funds would be used this year. Mr. Gary: That's correct, Mr.... Mr. Plummer: And under most circumstances they are not going to be used this year and that's why I said a matter of priorities for this year. Mr. Gary: Well, two things that you would take into consideration when you make those statements. First of all, all the money may or may not be used this year because of the certainty with regard to the Downtown People Mover in terms of the complexities and the issues related to the Federal Government and the Downtown business people it's very difficult to determine whether we will need those funds. The second thing you need to understand is that the FP&L Franchise Revenue runs out in 1984. So, we would have to get nine million dollars between now and 1984 and we are talking about two years. So, we have got to begin to commit them now. With regard to the Virginia Key _ recreation area development, as you know as a part of the condition of us making the swap with Dade County we were required to come up with a plan for redeveloping that area that they would agree to and we had a certain period of time where we had to show some progress in redeveloping that area and you alluded to that earlier. With regard to the swimming pool renovations, as you know we have a lot of pools that are in bad shape and we are confronted with the problem every year of not being able to open the pools on time because we have plumbing problems, we have leakage problems and one of the issues that was raised during the campaign was the fact that we had water leaking out into the Bay. So, we would like to improve those pools so they would be ready for the Summer months and we need to begin now. And by the way we have... in the past the renovations of those pools were dependent upon the general operating budget and because we had a tight general operating budget we neglected certain maintenance to those pools. With regards to the Communication Maintenance Shop addition, this deals directly with law enforcement. We need more space, more facilities to provide the services to our mobile digital equipments in the police cars. Mr. Plummer: And you will note for the record that I did not address that as part of the reprioritized. Mr. Gary: 1 was just explaining what we have here. Renovation of general accounting. I understand the position of at least a couple of City Commissioners with regard to spending money for this purpose, but I think the deplorable condition that we have those employees working in is inhumane. I think it affects our productivity and it affects our ability to attract and maintain good people to wLrk for the City of Miami and I would... this appropriation does not solely de91 with furniture, but deals with renovating the space on a horizontal/vertical basis so that we can get more space out of the area we have back there. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Gary, I think if you will check the record, sir, you will find that this Commission set a policy taking that out of capital improvement, sir. Mr. Gary: I understand, but... Mr. Plummer: Well, it's out. That's it. Mr. Gary: Well, I think that three City Commissioners can bring it back in if they so choose. Mr. Plummer: Well, if it is, but at the present time it is out. If this thing is approved it is not in it. Mr. Gary: Ok, I'm just explaining what we have proposed. Mr. Plummer: Ok, alright, as long as we understand each other. Mr. Gary: The Miami River walkway, this is a project that's been approved t,y the City Commission in the past. The Virrick Gym boat ramp is something that the City Commission has passed in the past or approved in the past in terms of giving access to boater right next to Virrick Gym. The are for the Fire Department so that we7 determine through heat sensorship NOV 19 1981 whether human beings are in buildings that are presently under fire. Mr. Plummer: That could come out of the twenty-one million dollar bond issue that was just passed, right? Mr. Gary: It could, but let me tell you why I made the decision to recommend it here is because of the timing factor, that we could save some lives in the short period of time and if necessary we can have the fund reimburse us. Coconut Grove Exhibition Center, we have discussed about the need for that. The Bay Front... Mayor Ferre: And furthermore, Mrs... oh, no, that's the Coconut Grove Exhibition Center. But the problem is that, that's three hundred two and as I understood... Mr. Plummer: No, seven hundred and something. Mayor Ferre: It was seven hundred and some odd thousand. Mr. Plummer: No, it's seven hundred in here. Mr, Gary: Well, we had a previous appropriation of about three hundred forty-eight thousand Mr. Mayor, in prior years. Mayor Ferre: Well, you are talking about three hundred two this time? Mr. Gary: This time and we have already appropriation of three forty-eight and we only need just a small amount to do analysis first. Bay Front Park, Bay walk land fill and bulkhead replacement, this also has been approved by the City Commission with regard to the development of Bay Front Park and Noguchi. So that's in compliance with what the City Commission policy has been. The reserve for... the six hundred eighty-seven thousand reserve for acquisition of Bay Front F.E.C. Property also complies with the City Commission policy to obtain the F.E.C. Property. Right now we have monies in the bank and we have turned it over to the bank with regard to the cost of the land, but we have not gotten a judgement from the court as to what legal fees the City would be liable to for going through that process and this attempts to address that. So, it won't be a hang up for us in terms of taking over that property. Thus, a nut shell is what we have proposed for the nine million dollars and Mr. Mayor, if you would like further discussion on it I would like Mr. McManus of the Planning Department to give an overview. NOV 1 91981 Mr. McManus: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission: The item properly before you is the Capital Improvement Program Which is a six -year program. I think the discussion we just held pertains to the FP&L portion of the Capital budget which is Item 3 on your supplementary agenda. Now, if I can get back to the Capital Improvement Program, this is a six -year program. It takes all of the City's capital projects for the next six years from what- ever source, from the bond funds, grants, FP&L or whatever. Your considera- tion today.Vith regard to the Capital Improvement program is approval in concept. You are not appropriating one dime. You are approving in concept. Appropriations is properly part of your supplementary agenda 3. Let me hit the highlights of this document. During the past year, 35 projects repre- senting $15,800,000 were concluded and removed from the Capital Improvement Program. 69 projects totaling nearly $150,000,000 were under contract under construction with designer site acquisition during fiscal '80-'81 so 51% of all funded projects in the '80-'86 CIP are completed or are now in progress. The proposed six -year program includes 179 projects valued at $436,000,000, and again, that comes from a variety of sources: the various city's bond funds, revenue bonds and various other sources, including federal grants. It is estimated that the City Revenue and General Obligation bonds provided 71% of the total funding required for the Capital Program; federal grants will pay for 12% of the program. The remainders come from Capital Improve- ment funds, site dedications, private funds and state grants. Now, the '81-'82 Capital budget which has just been discussed includes 52 projects valued at $57,994,000, and again most of that has to do with the various bond funds, and federal grants and state grants. Again, a small portion of that, comparatively is the FP&L franchise fund. Again, we are dealing with your supplementary agenda item 3. Let me indicate also to you as a matter of form that if you were to approve this Capital Improvement Program, we would have the report printed in better format for distribution to various City departments and agencies, and that would indicate, given your approval, that you are generally giving your blessings to the program, subject of course, to your further review of specific appropriations. I would be happy to answer any further questions on that. Mayor Ferre: Alright. I think we have discussed this, we go through this all the time and in effect the Capital Improvement Fund is an approval of a capital budget for the year '81 through '87, for the program and the capital budget '81-'82 and it can be amended as we go along and when the appropriations come up, you can vote against it. Mr. Plummer: Let me inquire. Mr. McManus page 205 Sir. It is my un- derstanding that Dinner Key Marina expansion is to be from a bond, which has not been yet approved. Mayor Ferre: Dinner Key? Mr. Plummer: Yes sir, the second item. That shown in '81-'82 budget alone is $2,000,000. Where is that money coming from? Mr. McManus: I think there is further coding back in the program that indi- cates that that very likely comes from a prospective bond sale. Mr. Plummer: Which hasn't even been sold? Which hasn't even been to a refer- endum? .. Mr. McManus: No sir. Mr. Plummer: How can you do such things? Mr. McManus: Mr. Commissioner, what I am indicating to you is you are look- ing at this concept. Mr. Plummer: No sir, I am looking at what you have proffered to me which states this is the appropriation for '81-'82. Mr. McManus: Your appropriation for '81-'82 is your supplementary agenda item 3. ld g4 NOV 1 9'081 Mr. Plummer: I am looking at Page 205 sir, Do you have that in front of you? Alright. I am looking at the Dinner Key Marina expansion. "Previous alloca- tions or appropriations - none. FY 181-'82 appropriations, $2,000,000", sir. The bonds haven't even been put to a referendum. Now how can you put that in as you know if we were to approve it today to go to a referendum it would be longer than a year. Mr. Gary: May I respond to that? Mr. Plummer: Please, Mr. Gary: First of all, we do this, we go through this process historically, religiously, we even do it with an operating budget. Generally accepted accounting procedures allows you to appropriate before you receive the funds; however unlike the operating budget, we do not expend funds in a capital bud- get until we actually receive the dollars. The appropriation does not mean we will go out and expend. Even if you assume that we will do that, remem-. ber, before we spend one penny, we have to come back to the City Commission. Mr, Plummer: Mr. Gary, excuse me. I think what you are,.. no it is not necessarily a plan because you are limiting to '81-'82 appropriations. I think when you start talking about the Dinner Key Marina expansion for $2,000,000, you are painting a false picture. I think when you put Watson Island Marina at seven and one-half million for this year - those bonds haven't been sold, they haven't even been offered to the public. I think when you put down here "Watson Island at seven and one-half million dollars" I think you are painting just a totally, totally bad picture. Parking facil- ity at Omni. What is that sir, $10,000,000, What is that? I don't know. Watson Island development - $7,200,000, These are things that are yet to be even offered to the general public in the way of a referendum, and yet you have them listed in this book as an appropriation for '81-'82. Mr. Gary: Mr. Commissioner, first of all, they will be financed with revenue bonds so therefore we don't have to go through a referendum. Secondly, the City Commission has gone on record, even though it may not have been unanimous, that they support the Dinner Key Marina expansion. There is a resolution.... Mr. Plummer: And I was one who supported itl Mr. Gary: Okay, fine, so therefore, what do you expect us to do during the course of the year. We need to begin to implement that. This is a plan, a budgeted plan. Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion. Alright. What is the will of this Commission? Is there a motion? Mr. Plummer: I make a motion, Mr. Mayor that this Capital Improvement be sent back to the Manager for further review and reprioritization. Mayor Ferre: There is a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second? Is there a second? Alright. What is the will of this Commission on Item 14? Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, I will make a motion that will be to the contrary of what was presented here just now. Mayor Ferre: You have to be specific Joe, What exactly is the motion? Mr. Carollo: Well, I think that what you said previously Mr. Mayor has a lot of merit. Yes, I think that crime is a number one problem, We are all con- cerned about crime, but I think at the same time we keep flag time effective- ly and bring that crime rate down to where it should be, we could still do a lot of these same projects that we are talking about here. So I guess in essense what I am saying is what you talked about before. We can still do this. That is my motion. Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there a second to the motion, for resolution 14. Mr. Perez seconds the motion. Is there further discussion? Call the roll. S5 i The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1004 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MIAMI CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1981-1987 IN PRINCIPLE: TO PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR CITY AGENCIES, BOARDS AND DEPARTMENTS. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk), Upon being seconded by Commissioner Perez, and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. AFTER ROLL CALL: the resolution was passed Mayor Ferre: Alright now, Mr. Manager, just so that we all have a clear un- derstanding. The fact that this item has been voted 4 to 1 at this point does not not mean that the members of this Commission will not be voting against specific appropriation bills that you are bringing up on Capital Expenditures and I am sure that the vote might be a little. different, so you should not assume under any circumstances that necessarily guarantees the votes of anything, Mr. Plummer: 'What you are saying to him is, proceed with caution. Mayor Ferre: I am saying is, that for everything that he has gotten appro- val of, he needs to get specific approval from this Commission on an appro- priation basis and that he may not have three votes on a lot of the issues he is going to be bringing back. Mr. Carollo: With red lights flashing. Mayor Ferre: In other words, he is on first base, he is not at home plate. Mr. Gary: Mr. Mayor, I understand what you are saying and before we get money, particularly for contracts that come before you, with one exception, and that is for the acquisition of Miami property, you know we have to pay. Mayor Ferre: Anything else? Now we are on ordinance --I would assume that that concludes our Zoning Meeting, is that right? Mr. Gary: Exception of the 7 o'clock meeting. Mayor Ferre: Other than the item. We will now... this Commission is now on Zoning and Planning matters adjourned until 7 P.M. THEREUPON, the Chair TEMPORARILY ADJOURNED THE ZONING 6 PLANNING PORTION OF THE AGENDA AND PROCEED TO TAKE UP ITEMS BELONGING TO THE REGULAR PORTION OF THE AGENDA. a6 NOV 9 1981 k f 23. ADOPT LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT SUBMITTED BY RICK SISSER SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL INPUT BY CO2Q1ISSION - APPROVE CONTRACT WITH RICK SISSER AN1D DISCUSSION OF CONTINUED RETENTION OF CRAMER FIR11 AS MAN IN WASHINGTON. Mayor-Ferre: Item "A" before us is a contract with Rick Sisser. Mr. Sisser, are you still awake? Wake up. Mr. Sisser, you have a ongoing contract for the past two years, as I recall to represent the City of Miami at the Talla- hassee legislative session. Do you want to tell us all the wonderful things you are going to do for us? _ Mr. Sisser: Yes, Mayor. My name is Rick Sisser. I think I am still the lobbyist for the City of Miami. You have before you a proposed suggested issues that myself, the City Manager, Mr. Clark Merrill and Mr. Jim Reid have gone over as possible proposed items of priority for the City of Miami. The first issue is crime control, and we have 3 areas under that. Now this is basically a workshop type session where I think as the final priority list the City of Miami will be voted upon on December loth and any addition that the Commission would like to make to this list is very welcome. We are making shooting a police officer a minimum of a mandatory life sentence; requiring state a 72-hour waiting period when purchasing a handgun, so that if Dade County just adopts the issue, people can't go to Broward and buy a gun; and pro- viding Florida highway patrol officers to enforce traffic laws in city streets and highways which they do for Dade County and which they are not doing for the City of Miami. The second is requesting the state to appropriate 23.3 million dollars for the bifurcated road system for Dupont Plaza. No. 3, removing the pension from the 10 mill cap; No. 4 would be reimbursing the City from alllost, currently lost and future loss revenues through state mandate. There is a state law on the books for this, but the legisla- ture has never appropriated any money and we will probably file a claims bill before the 1982 legislative session for $600,000 for previously lost money due to state mandate. Create single member districts for state legis- lature, which is Commission Resolution 81-599; provide a surtax on documents to provide rental b housing assistance; to provide legislation that would allow municipal regulation.of taxicabs on a state wide basis; amend the laws to provide both licenses revenues to be ..... yes? Mayor Ferre: What is this about regulating taxicabs state wide? Mr. Sisser: I believe the manager here wants us, the current point in time here, the law is before the Third District Court of Appeals, and the Manager wanted us to put in a bill to have municipal regulations of taxicabs. Mayor Ferre: Oh this is a reversal of the County then? Mr. Sisser: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Okay. Mr, Sisser: Number 8 is Dade County has been collecting all the funds from boat licenses and not been distributing any monies to the City proportionate to those fees collected in the City. No. 9 would be removing of the 4 cent sales tax on City Public Work projects. No. 10 would be the sales tax, 1% sales tax distribution in the Cities and Counties, which the Dade Delegation has not yet decided whether they are going for a 1 cent local option, the Dade league and the State league have a 1 cent on revenue sharing and I think the Commission ought to leave it open until we decided which is the best way to get the 1 cent sales tax passed through the state legislature is how we are going to attack that issue. No. 11 would be to provide the City use of existing state secondary roads gas tax for City streets. The City is to be included in any distribution formulas for a proposed state sales tax on gasoline; provide revenue growth to the City from the state municipal revenue sharing fund; continued legislative support for the the City's self-insurance program. in the 1982 legislative session, the entire law regarding insurance will be under sunset and we want to keep the self- insurance program in there. How can we make the state's system available to Cities, increase the state's civil disturbance fund, making Miami capital eligible for loan funding. No. 17, state sharing of additional condemnation costs on the Blue Lagoon project and No. 18 would be to add a7 �J 0 consultant fees to the competitive consultant renegotiation act. Mayor Ferre: What does that mean? Mr. Gary: Well, presently there is a law that prohibts certain professional consultants from bidding, using a price only in terms of services and we get zinged award, select the firm. Mayor Ferre: Howard, is this your list? Mr. Gary: Yes, it is a joint list. Mayor Ferre: In other words, you approve it. Mr. Gary: Yes sir. Mayor Ferre: We have something called a Coordinating Committee which I will admit that I stopped going to those meetings two years ago, because I thought most of the time it was wasted time. Has the Coordinating Committee gone through this? Mr. Sisser: Are you talking about the Coordinating Council? Mayor Ferre: They have the City, the County, the School Board, the United Jewish Appeal, the United Fund, The City of Miami Beach is a member. Mr. Sisser: This has not been proposed to them directly. Some of these items they have already approved, some of them they have not. Mayor Ferre: Howard have you been to those meetings ? Mr. Gary: No sir. Mayor Ferre: Who represents the City these days at those meetings. Mr. Gary: To be honest with you Mayor, I am not familiar with that committee. Mayor Ferre: Alright, let me tell you how this came about. Umpteen years ago the Miami who was then headed by Don Shoemaker decided that there ought to be a committee in this community that made important decisions, or so he thought. And so, the County, the City, the School Board, and in each one of those cases was the mayor or the chairman of the board in the school board's case and the professional director or administrator were on a council. Now how Don Shoe- maker ended up being chairman of it it - I guess he was through the United Way was the vehicle. For about 3 or 4 years it really was a very important committee that met and made an awful lot of decisions. Then it started kind of wearing thin and what happened was, it went the way all things happen in this community. It ran into obliviance. I think it still meets. It has an important function, but I think the way they went about it kind of didn't _ have much impact. As I recall, isn't Bill ieuben the president of it this year? Alright, so my question is, who in the City is meeting with these people. This is for the County, the United Way, the United Jewsih Appeal, the School Board and so on. Mr. Odio: They met until about six months ago, and they made a trip to Wash- ington to get more funds for the recreation. Mayor Ferre: the next time they meet, I think you and I should go back again and see what is going on. They usually are the ones that come up with a legislative issue for the community, and then it comes back to the County and the City and that is why I am asking that question. Mr. Odio: I asked Mr. Fox Monday night what happened to the Coordinating Council and he said I am the only one here and we haven't had time because they have been in the drive for money. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Fox is with the., Mr. Odio: United Way. He is on the staff of United Way. Y$ NOV ; 91�:1 4 V Mayor Ferre: You ought to ask him to have a meeting again specifically for the purpose of having united legislative effort, because let me tell you what happens. What happens is,..who is your counterpart in the County? Mr. Sisser: Bill Hampton. Mayor Ferre: What happens is that we get torn in 3 different ways, because Hampton goes one way and Rick Sisser goes another and the School Board goes another way and they have a lobbyist and they send somebody up there to lobby for them and then Pat Tornillo does his own lobbying for the School Board and before you know it, you have 5 lobbyist lobbying in different directions, and I think that what we really need to do is to at least come to an agreement on 4 or 5 priority items that we can all agree on and then do, because otherwise we get torn apart. Mr. Sisser: Mr. Mayor, what is I think possibly become of the Coordinating Council in an indirect way, here again the four meetings that I have attended that have been chaired by Senator McKnight who is the chairman of the Dade Delegation this year that have included members of the School Board, Mr. Tornillo and their lobbyist, myself, lobbyist for Dade County, lobbyist for the Chamber, Lester Freeman of Southeast Bank and other business interests specifically on the one cent sales tax and how best to pass it through the legislative process.,.. Mayor Ferre: But you see Ricky, the problem is as Plummer pointed out this morning, this Commission has not taken a position on that item so how can you meet with Senator McKnight? Who are you representing? You represent the City, well what are you representing? You haven't been instructed as to ::hat our position is. It hasn't been discussed here. What is our position on the one cent sales tax? Do you know? Mr. Sisser: Outside of the fact that we are for it? Mayor Ferre: Outside of the fact that we are for it, yes. Mr. Sisser: Not the specific way that we are going about funding it. Mayor Ferre: Plummer brought that up this morning and with this, are you .acquainted with the Florida League of City Strike Force for Property Tax -relief, Bobby Martinez. Are we supporting that? Mr. Sisser: That is up to the Commission. Mayor Ferre: That's my point. Mr, Gary: Mr. Mayor I agree with your position. I think the reason we were bringing this before you today is because we were instructed at the last meet- ing to bring this before you to discuss what you want to be your priorities and this is merely a discussion and we would like to get some directions from the City Commission as to how we should proceed. Mayor Ferre: Well, let's hear from the Commission. Does anybody want to... you have before you a suggested 1982 legislative issue. There are 18 points, starting with crime and going down to consultant renegotiations. These are items that our lobbyist Rick Sisser with the Manager has gone over and put on for us to discuss. I have no problems with it, except that I think it falls a little bit short on the crime control, there is a lot more things we want to talk about than that, Mr. Gary: The reason we put the one we have on here, and that is the only thing is because at the last City Commission meeting, this City Commission said they wanted to establish a committee and we didn't want to second guess you as to what you wanted to do, so we thought that we would get, and Mr. Sisser and I have talked about it, that we would amend this list once you and the committee established what you want cpposition to be for the State. Mr. Plummer: Plus the fact that I talked to Mr. Sisser this week, and it, you know, it doesn't come up by coincidence, I am sure. I spoke to him about a 72-hour gun waiting period state wide so people can no longer go in 11.,de County and turn around and not wait the 72 hours and walk up to Broward County and get all the guns they want. I think it is a good thing, and it is one of the things that 1 proffered to him. What we have done in the past 171 RM no .0 NOV 191981 is Mr. Sisser has spoken to each one of us and drawn from our conversations his conclusions, and I am assuming he spoke with me and that is where a lot of this, I hope, came from, Mayor Ferre: Well for example, one of the things that Commissioner Carollo supported last year that I don't see on here, and we all concurred was, cer- tainty of punishment for someone commiting a crime with a gun. That's not on here. This is fine, it is a good beginning, but I would say that the way we do this Ricky, is I think we could tentatively approve it and then ask you to meet with each member of the Commission and then come back with a ... Mr. Plummer: Model form. Mayor Ferre: improved list and I think really we have to priorities. You and I both know that you are not going to get 18 things done. If you get 3 or 4 of these, you are going to be lucky. So I think we ought to really put a category "A" and a category "B" and I think category "A" should be limited to 5 items. I don't think you can do more than 5, Okay, any further statements? Mr, Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would hope that what we are going to do is each individual Commissioner will give input to Mr. Sisser and at our next meet- ing we will come back and determine what are those 5 important issues. Mayor Ferre: What I would like to do, Mr. Plummer, if it is alright with the members of the Commission is actually adopt this as a legislative issue work - sheet and then come back and amend it at the next meeting, and that way you have something to go on, Alright, is there a motion then? Moved by Carollo, second by Plummer. Further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 81-1005 A MOTION ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT ENCOMPASSING CITY OF MIAMI PRIORITIES WHICH ARE TO BE PURSUED BY LEGISLATIVE LIAISON RICK SISSER AND WHICH LIST WAS PUT TOGETHER BETWEEN RICK SISSER AND THE CITY MANAGER, SUB- JECT TO FURTHER INPUT FROM INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION WHO SHALL ATTEMPT TO PRIORITIZE SUCH GOALS BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR'S SESSION OF THE LEGISLATURE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None FOLLOWING ROLL CALL: Mayor Ferre: Now on your contract, Mr. Sisser, when does that come due? _. Mr. Sisser: As of December 31st. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, do you have a recommendation on that? Mr, Gary: Yes sir, Mr. Mayor, I sat down with Mr. Sisser and in view of our ambitious plan and in view of his performance in the past, we are recommending this agreement which provides a 2-year contract for $60,000 for two years, $2,500 on the first day of each month and an expense allowance of $12,000 for two years. Mayor Ferre: An expense of what? �0 NOV 191c9521 :7 A Mr. Gary: $12,000 each year to cover expenses. Mayor Ferre: Now, what was it last time, Mr. Manager? Mr. Gary: Exactly the same, with the exception that the salary was $48,000 for 2 years. Mr. Carollo: It will be now how much? Mr. Gary: $60,000 for 2 years, Mayor Ferre: That is an increase of $12,000. What you are recommending is an increase of $6,000 per year. Mr, Carollo: What percentage? Mr. Gary: About 25%. Mr. Carollo: A year, Mr. Gary: Yes sir, Mayor Ferre: Are you...is the $12,000 in effect now? Mr. Gary: Yes sir. Mayor Ferre: So you are not recommending an increase on the $12,000? Mr. Gary: No sir. Mayor Ferre: Is that an amount that is accounted for? It is not an automatic $12,000, is it? Mr. Gary: It is automatic I think. Yuv must take into consideration that Mr, Sisser does a lot of traveling back and forth as well as the fact that, the way the legislative process works, he has to spend a considerable amount of funds taking people out to dinner and lunch to try to persuade them toward the Citv's view. Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you this, as the County has a lobbying operation also. Do you know how much they spend? Mr. Plummer: That is in-house basically, isn't it? Mr. Sisser: They have approximately 4 staff members which are full time, plus all expenses are paid by the County. Mayor Ferre: For example, I know that they have Hampton who is in charge of it. Does he do it full time? Mr, Sisser: When the session is on, yes. He has been doing it full time, plus he has 3.. Mayor Ferre: He has Seth Gordon I know is one of the people. Mr. Sisser: No, Seth is now with the Chamber. They have somebody in Seth's. place now. Mayor Ferre: But Seth did nothing but lobbying, right? How much did Seth get, do you know? Clark, do you know? Mr. Sisser: He was on salary right? Mr. Gary: It is a salary. If I recall, it was in excess of $20,000. Mayor Ferre: Well, whether it is salary or whether it is a contractural ar- rangement, it is money out of the taxpaper's... Mr. Gary: Oh no, what I was trying to tell you was that it was in excess of $20,000 where we are paying something less than that. 01 Lj h1^11 . n An^A 0 a Mayor Ferre: I guess the point I am trying to make is that if we are spend- ing $42,000 a year, the County is spending 5 or 6 times that amount, Mr. Gary: Exactly. Mayor Ferre: And I guess that is what I am trying to document, and I would like for you to document it further. You know, I am ready to vote on this personally, but I think we need to document that in comparison to what the County is spending; that this is not an excessive amount. Mr. Sisser, I only have one other question for you on the record, and that is, how much of your time are we.going to get for this? Mr. Sisseri Well over the last 6 years I would say I spent over 50% of my time in Tallahassee for the City of Miami. Mayor Ferre: While the legislature is in session, you will be giving at least 50% of your time, is that what you are saying? Mr. Sisser: Yes sir. Mayor Ferre: Now, suppose there are extraordinary sessions, like a special session on crime, or tax. Mr. Sisser: I represent the City of Miami before all committee meetings, be- tween all regular and special sessions and before the cabinet. Mayor Ferre: During the full year? Mr. Sisser: During the full year. Mayor Ferre: So this will include representation before the cabinet and the legislature for the full twelve month period. Mr, Sisser: Yes sir. Mayor Ferre: Any other questions? Mr. Plummer: I move the contract. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Perez seconds. Further discussion? Alright, call the roll, The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1006 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM ATTACHED HERETO, WITH ERIC R. SISSER, INC, FOR THE SERVICES OF ERIC R. SISSER TO SERVE AS LEGISLATIVE LIAISON REPRESENTATIVE AND REPRESENT THE CITY BEFORE ALL FLORIDA STATE LEGIS- LATURE SESSIONS HELD DURING THE TERM OF SAID AGREEMENT; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF $30,000 AS A YEARLY FEE FOR SAID SERVICES AND AN ADDITIONAL SUM OF $12,000 YEARLY TO COVER EXPENSES INCURRED DURING THE TERM OF SAID AGREEMENT, WITH FUNDS ALLOCATED THEREFOR FROM -. SPECIAL. PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS. (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. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetr10 Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None Q� v NOV 91981 6 0 Mr. Plummer; I would like to ask a question at this time, Mr. Mayor. We al- located for a Man in Washington $2,000 a month for Mr. Cramer, I have not received anything that has crossed my desk; I don't know if others might have. Mayor Ferre: I have not, except that Vince Grimm told me that he and Jim Reid are going to Washington tomorrow to see some people at HUD and that we will see how ... if the man can get us off the hook on the problem, not at HUD, it is the Department of Commerce. Mr. Gary: It is HUD, It's HUD. Mayor Ferre: With EDA, then I think he is well worth it. I would like to - do this. I would like to appoint Mr. Joe Carollo as a committee of one of this Commission to discuss this ;natter with the administration, our administration and Mr. Cfamer and come back with a recommendation, Mr, Carollo: Alright Mrs Mayor. I accept that. Mayor Ferre: And recommend as to whether or not we should continue with Mr. Cramer or whether we should seek somebody else to represent us in Washington. Anything else? Mr. Gary: I understand, Mr. Mayor. 24. ESTABLISH CAPITAL IMPROVLMENT PROJECTS FY 1981-'82. Mr. Gary: This is now the annual budget. What you passed last time was the capital improvement program, a five-year program. Mayor Ferre: Now, does this require specific appropriations? Mr. Gary: Yes sir, but just as with the capital improvement program, before we expend any money, we still have to come back before the Commission. Mayor Ferre: Alright, what is the will of this Commission? Mr. Carollo: Well, if they have to come back to us before they spend any money, I will moved based on that. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Further discussion on second reading. Call the roll. AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED - AN ORDINANCE MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVE- MENTS, CONTINUING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CAPITAL IMPROVE- MENT PROJECTS AND ESTABLISHING NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO BEGIN DURING FISCAL YEAR 1981-82; CONTAIN- ING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of November 12, 1981, it was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Carollo, seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the ordi- nance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9353. GO NOV 191981 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. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: AGENDA ITEMS 4 & 5 WERE DEFERRED. 25. APPOINTMENTS TO ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE. Mayor Ferre: Now we have agenda Item 6. The Arts in Public Places Committee. Do you have any recommendations? Now there are 5 people that are recommended to us and I would like to proffer Margarita Cano. Now there is another open- ing. Does anybody have any? Mr. Plummer: This is only for one. Mayor Ferre: Two. "Pursuant to Ordinance.... appoint five persons to serve as members of the Arts-in-Public...two of whose terms expired" okay. Lester Pancoast is already there and I think we ought to have a Latin or a Black and I know that Margarita Cano is highly qualified and I would like to recommend her. Okay, it has been moved by Carollo, second by Plummer. Fur- ther discussion? Call the roll, The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1007 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ONE INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE ARTS -IN -PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE FOR A TERM - OF FIVE YEARS COPDIENCING NOVE!4BER 1, 1981. (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 J. L, Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None 26. CLOSE COMMODORE PLAZA FROM GRAND AVENUE TO MAIN HIGHWAY NOV. 22, 1981 BETWEEN 2 AND 4 P.M. FOR FIRST ANNUAL COCONUT GROVE TURKEY RACE. Mayor Ferre: Well, what is the request for the turkey race? Motion by Carollo, is there a second? Second by Dawkins that Commodore Plaza, so on be .... further discussion? Call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1008 A RESOLUTION CLOSING COMMODORE PLAZA FROM GRAND AVENUE TO MAIN HIGHWAY ON NOVEMBER 22, 1981 BETWEEN 2:00 P,M. AND 4:00 P.M. IN CONNECTION WITH THE FIRST ANNUAL COCO- NUT GROVE TURKEY RACE SPONSORED BY THE COCONUT GROVE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, SUBJECT TO ISSUANCE OF PERMITS BY THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMEI�LTS4 ��"ii NOV i 919 (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 voter AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr, Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None 27. FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: EXTEND LIQUOR HOURS FOR DECEMBER. Mayor Ferre: Plummer moves 8. Perez seconds. Further discussion? Call the roll on 8. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1009 A RESOLUTION GRANTING CERTAIN EXTENSIONS IN PERMITTED HOURS OF SALE FOR ESTABLISILMENTS DISPENSING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES DURING THE CHRISTMAS AND NEW YEAR HOLIDAYS. (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. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None 28. FORMALIZING RESOLUTIO14: CLOSE CERTAIN DOWNTOWN STREETS FOR DOWNTOWN ART WAVE 81 AND DOMINO TUMBLE ARTS FESTIVAL. Mayor Ferre: What is the will of this Commission on the Downtown Art Wave 81 and Domino Tumble Arts Festival, whatever the hell that is. Mr. Gary: It is the Downtown Businessmen's Association. Mayor Ferre: Is that costing us any money? Mr. Gary: No sir. Mr, Carollo: Can it cause any traffic problems? Mr. Gary: No sir. Mr. Carollo: Moved. Mr. Ferre: Alright, i,- nas been moved and seconded. Further discussion? Call the roll on 9. •�5 NOV 1 91981 6 0 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 81-•1010 A RESOLUTION CLOSING CERTAIN STREETS TO THROUGH TRAFFIC ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1981, BETWEEN 8:00 A.M. AND 6:00 P.M. IN CONNECTION WITH THE DOWNTOWN ART WAVE '81: DOMINO TUMBLE ART FESTIVAL SPONSORED BY THE DOWNTOWN MIAMI BUSINESS ASSOCIA- TION, SUBJECT TO INSURANCE OF PERIMITS BY THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT. {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. Commissioner Miller J, Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None 29. FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: HOT MEALS PROGRAM III ALLAPATTAH COMNUldITY . - The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1011 A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 81-852-1, ADOPTED OCTOBER 7, 1981, WHICH HAD AUTHORIZED FUNDING FOR THE ALLAPATTAH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INC., SAID RESCISSION BEING EFFECTICE NOVEMBER 19, 1981; FURTHER REALLOCATING UNENCUMBERED SEVENTH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS ORIGINALLY ALLOCATED FOR SAID AGENCY UNDER SAID RESOLUTION NO. 81-852.1 TO ALLAPATTAH COMMUNITY ACTION, INC., AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXE- CUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH ALLAPATTAH COMMUNITY ACTION, INC. FOR THE PERIOD COMMENCING NOVEMBER 20, 1981 TO JUNE 30, 1982 FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING ITS HOT MEALS PROGRAM. (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. Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None NOV 1 9 1931 30. CLAIM SETTLEMENT - ARTHIJR 11C DUFFIE. ■i Mayor Ferre: On 11 we have the Arthur McDuffie matter. Alright, this is what you have been waiting for all day. Put on your light. Are you ready now? Action! Mr. City Attorney, on the McDuffie case, please sir. Mr. Knox: As you may know, Metropolitan Dade County Commission authorized a settlement in the so-called McDuffie case in the so called Mc Duffie case and we placed in on the agenda for your consideration. Mayor Ferre: Does this meet with your approval and recommendation? Mr. Knox: Yes sir. Mayor Ferre: Do we have any choice? _ Mr. Knox: The choice would be to proceed to a trial and it is the considered judgement of the law department that the settlement proposed is a reasonable one. Mr. Carollo: George, if we go to trial, just in attorney's expense, how much would it cost us? Mr. Knox: You mean in actual cost of trying the case? Mr. Carollo: Exactly. That would be considerable in itself, wouldn't it? Mr. Knox: Yes sir. As a matter of fact, the person who was handling the case is no longer in our office and it would make sense to retain him and his rate is approximately $125 and hour and you could anticipate about a two week trial plus the appellate process would be considered into there. Mr. Carollo: So we are talking in probably an excess of $2s,000 alone. Mr. Knox: In attorney fees alone and then there is whatever the jury award if they would determine that the City had some liability. Mr. Carollo: I make a motion, Mr. Mayor that we approve the recommendation of our attorney. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Further discussion. Call the role. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81-1012 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO FREDERICA McDUFFIE, AS THE PERSONAL REPRESEN- TATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ARTHUR McDUFFIE, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $100,000 IN FULL _. AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY, PER- SONAL INJURY PROTECTION LIENS, WORKMENS COMPENSATION LIENS, ANT) ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, AND UPON EXECUTION OF A RELEASE, RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI AND ITS EMPLOYEES FROM ALL CLAIMS AND DDIANDS . (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: u7 NOV 1 91981 AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr, Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None 31. APPROVE REQUEST OF JOSE MENDEZ IN REGARD TO BASEBALL EVENT HELD IN THE MIAAMI STADIUM. Mayor Ferre: We have a request here from Mr. Jose Mendez which is a pocket item which he says is an emergency. "Dear Mr. Mayor: I am respectfully requesting from the City of Miami Commission the sum of $1,500 to fulfill the obligation undertaken by the Puertc Rican Youth Bost Committee in con- nection with expenses incurred by the committee for the Thanksgiving base- ball tournament to be held at the Miami stadium on November 26, 27 & 28. Already a delegation of 50 individuals is expected to arrive from Puerto Rico on November 25, and at the moment our budget has a $1,500 deficit. Due to a prior commitment, other members of the committee such as secretary Mrs. Alicia Baro and our treasurer tfr. Benny Moore"... Benny Moore. isn't he from the County?..."cound not be here to make this presentation and re- quested me. I thank you for your consideration." Now, didn't we discuss this before? Mr. Carollo: Yes we did. Didn't we issue some money for this? Mayor Ferre: I recall that we instructed you to go ahead and....there was something on this. I forget. _ Mr. Garv: No. what we instructed was that we would give him the facility and that the revenues that he was able to accrue for the event would be used to pay off the cost of the facility, such as lighting, the event personnel. What he is telling you now I think, is the fact that he is not going to get sufficient revenue, at least to the tune of $1,500 to accomplish what the City Commission had directed in the first place. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr. Mendez. You have to explain if you want three votes on this Commission, you have got to explain. Mr, Mendez: Yes, when we started this activity, we were not expecting as many people to come to the City of Miami on the 25th. All of a sudden we have obligation to the hotel. We got other expenses that we cannot actually, regardless of the amount of money that we will be throwing in from the sell- ing of the tickets. We cannot count with that money simply because it is the money that we have to advance, so the part of the tickets which is coming to the City of Miami, whatever the amount might be. Mayor Ferre: Okay, questions from members of the Commission regarding this? Mr. Mendez: Joe is looking at me, I know you want to say something. Mr. Carollo: There is an old Cuban saying, Mendez. (comment is in Spanish.) Mr. Mendez: What can I say? I am a hard working person. You know me. Mr. Carollo: You had better say that to Plummer and Dawkins and the rest of you here, he is like a drop of rain water. He keeps pouring and pouring and pouring, never stops. Mr. Mendez: I also want all of you to know that I think I have Passed a reso- lution that has been Passed by the School Board for the first time that they have ever extended this kind of proclamation to a delegation that is coming from the outside here. NOV 1 91981 Mr. Plummer: How much are we going to give Uncle Charlie for his turkey? Mayor Ferre: $1,500. Mr. Plummer: We are going to give Uncle Charlie $1,500 for turkey? Mayor Ferrer $1,500 for this turkey. Mr. Perez: Mayor, I move to approve this motion. I was connected with this activity for a long time and I think it is something good for this community to try to get out these children and thegP voun� fel1lows from the street. I recognize the efforts of Jose Mendez and I move to approve this request. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Mr. Carollo: I second the motion. Mr. Plummer: I'd like to ask a question. Has this been before the committee? (LAUGHTER) Mr. Plummer: Has it been before the committee? I heard Mr. Mendez stand up here and say "By God, take it before the committee". Mayor Ferre: What we are saying here is what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. _ Mr. Carollo: We are talking turkey here now. Mr. Plummer: Has it been before the committee? - Mayor Ferre: We are not talking about goose, we are talking about turkey. Now are you going to approve Mendez' turkey or aren't you? (LAUGHTER) Mr. Plummer: Now comes the truth. Mr. Mendez: I am not laughing, anymore. You know, honestly speaking I know that you are going to give me your blessing, but prior to your giving me your blessing, let me say to everyone of you that we keep thinking on preventing crime in the City of Miami and the streets of the City of Miami. This is a sure thing good way of preventing crime. Mr. Plummer: Would you, Mr. Clerk, put those words immortal up on the wall for Mk. Mendez' future. Mayor Ferre: Further discussion? Mr. Dawkins: I am going to vote for this, but I am attuned with Mr. Plummer. You were the one who adamently stood out there and said that it had to come to the committee and other gentlemen who sat there with you he was and said it. So now, the only thing I would ask is that you bring back a certified accounting of how the monies were disbursed, that is aii I would be interested in. Mr. Plummer: I am going to vote against the motion, even though I am in favor of it to defend the committee, seeing as how he has four votes. Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion on this world shattering revelation? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Perez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 81-1013 A MOTION GRANTING A REQUEST MADE BY JOSE MENDEZ AND ALLOCATING AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,500 IN ORDER TO CURE DEFICIT INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH THE UTLIZA- TION OF THE MIAMI BASEBALL STADIUM ON NOVEMBER 26, 27 AND 28 ON ACCOUNT OF BASEBALL TOURNAMENT WHICH BROUGHT DOWN TO MIAMI A DELEGATION OF 50 PERSONS FROM PUERTO RICO. 'a NOV O ! ��81 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perez, Jr, Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. 32. DISCUSSION ITEM: 11% ADDITIONAL STATE SALES TAX - STATEWIDE. Mayor Ferre: Go ahead Mr. Dawkins. Mr. Dawkins: On the one cent sales tax, I am in favor of it, but I would like for our representative to have everyone understand that I am favor of it statewide. If you give a local option, to me this means that if adopt it here in Dade County and Broward County does not adopt it and Monroe County does not adopt it, then our citizens may drive to Monroe County & Broward to shop and therefore, we are left holding the bag. So if it is not state- wide, I would be opposed to it. Mayor Ferre: Okay. I would concur with that thinking. I think the local option portion is the expenditure. In other words, I would agree to a local option expenditure - how we spend it. I think it ought to be raised state- wide as he said, but I think we should have a local option as to how we spend it. And all I was saying this morning is that I think that the No. 1 issue in this community is crime, and I think that effects tourism and commerce and hotels and jobs and everything else, and I think we need to spend at least half of that money, if we are able to get it in crime, if not all of it. I would go for 1.00%, but I would be willing to say that we could go down to 50% and that the other 50% would be optional item for tax relief, or for other things such as transportation, if the County may want to use it, however, question come down on the breakdown on the usage of that money, be- cause at the last session, I want to remind all of you that the way that thing was going, the City is going to get zipped. In other words, it would go all to the County, so it wouldn't make any difference, in other words it meant absolut ely nothing for the City. 1-think if we are going to go for crime fighting, and disagree with all due respects with my colleague Barry Barker, who came up with it all going to the County or was it Barry Schrieber? Mr. Dawkins: Wait a minute. I think somebody needs to clarify something, to clear something for me. This can only pass in the state legislature. Now, as much as we know that crime is our problem. Crime means nothing to the porkchoppers in the Panhandle, So we are talking about getting this passed, then we have to address the issues that are common to the Panhandle. Now like the Mayor says, once the funds come here to us, then I am in favor of our using a local option and priortizing the fund as we see fit. But I think if we are to get this thing through the legislature, we have to add- ress education, and say that these funds are for education and for little tax relief and the other things that will get it sent through. Now maybe I am in error, but that is how I feel. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me draw a consensus of feeling. We are in favor of the increase. We are in favor of no local option. It has to be passed statewide. Then, I am mixed in the feeling as to how. Let me tell you what I draw as a consensus from my meeting on Monday. That is, that you are going to be looking at least 50% of those funds, are in some way going to be reduc- ing ad valorem tax. The best thing that I heard, and this is just my opinion, was the remaining 50% would possibly be distributed on the same population ratio that is presently used for state revenue sharing. Now, the County doesn't like that in particular. Dade County doesn't like it, be- cause it is about 60-40 in favor of the City. Dade County is making a very strong pitch to say that they need it all, That the City of Miami doesn't 100 Nov 19t�,3�i need any yet, because they have the major problems, Now, what I think...let me ask this. Is there any objection of anyone on this Commission to that 50% going toward ad taloeem reduction? Mayor Ferre: Well, there is on my part, if the other 50% doesn't go to the reduction of crime, and that brings us to what Commissioner Dawkins was talking about, and how about education? In other words, I tell you, as big a problem as ad valorem tax tax reduction is as an issue, my sense of this community is that by far and away the number 1 condern of the people in this community is crime. Everybody is affected by it. White, Black, Latin and English speaking, everybody is affected by crime, the one common denomi- nator. Mr. Plummer: Where did I hear that the City of Miami can be to Dade County is a total of $1,000,000 or more? I will try to get that figure. Somewhere Mr. Mayor. I think I heard that in all of these discuss- ions that you are Possibly talking about to the City of Miami the Possibil- itv of $1.000.000, under the 60-40 ratio. Mayor Ferre: We are talking maximum and what I mean to tell you is, if we get $1,000,000, with all due respect, I don't mean to ... but you know I really went into these figures during this campaign, because I had to ex- plain it in simple terms to people. It is a complicated issue. We get 62,000,000 in ad valorem taxes. Okay. Now follow this, Plummer. Out of that, $24,000,000 is paid for by residential part of this town. That is unbelievable. I didn't know that. I must admit. I have been Mayor for 8 Years and I didn't know that it was that low - $24,000,000, out of the $62,000,000. Now I mean to tell you with all due respect to the commercial sector of this town, I don't think that their real estate taxes is a major issue to them. There are some that are, but most businesses past it on. First of all, it is deductable as a business expense, and secondly, they pass it on. So the people who are really affected by ad valorem taxes are the homeowners. What I mean to tell you is that 50% of the $1,000,000, or $500,000 and if 40% of it is paid for by the real estate owners ........ I am sorry...40% of $500,000 is $200,000, right? And what I am saying is that $200,000 tax relief for the homeowners of this community is a drop in the bucket. Whereas that $200,000 is an essential amount to fight crime, Mr. Plummer: I don't want to give you any misleading figures and tell you dollars, but there has been no discussion anywhere that to the contrary of what I have heard that says whatever dollars this City gets, that we don't have full control over. I think if we get 60% or 50%, whatever that alloca- tion is to the City of Miami, you can spend it how you want. If you want to dedicate it, as you said morning and I concur with 100% toward crime fight- ing, you can do that with what your portion is. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT NOT PLACED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Plummer: Well the old theory is, if you get a dollar, you are ahead a dollar. I just would like to know whatever strong feelings you all have, please let me know. Mayor Ferre: I think we have a consensus, somewhat. Do you want a formal one? 33. DISCUSSION ITEMS: CLEANLINESS OF CITY - GARBAGE, LITTER AND TRASH, EDUCATION OF NEW REFUGEE ARRIVAL ON SANITATION, CLEAN UP DAY TO BE IN JANUARY 1982. 101 NOV 1 9 1981 Mr. Perez: I would like to call to your attention about the cleaning of the streets, about a campaign that we want. During my campaign I was in contact with citizens that normally have very little feeling with the City Hall. Most of them share several -concerns that demand a quick response. Crime is our main worry.But in order to tackle that problem, we need a cumulative efforts of City, State and Federal agencies in the de- partment. One problem that the City can't handle and one that I promised from people to be of top priority is making the City as clean as possible. There are three areas I would like to look into. First, using fonds from the private sector. We would like to take first steps to start a pub- lic relations campaign for the purpose of educating the citizens, especially the new arrivals in the community, in the way, the proper way of garbage, litter, and trash control and •Drevention. The Inter -America Chamber of Commerce whose President is here.. Mr.Fernando Cruz and the Bilingual Private School Association has volunteered their service and resources to take the first step in this campaign. Second, due to the many complaints we have received, I would like the City Manager's office to contact the proper de- partment and find out why we have this problem and why and how we can correct this. This is mostly every day in the low income area and in the inner city. Third, in conjunction with the above items, I would like to set aside a day in January of next year for the thing of making a proclama- tion for a cleanup day. To be successful, it will be a public - private campaign and we will call 5,000 students to participate in distribution of literature in helping to carry the message that we want clean streets clear of garbage and trash in all the neighborhoods of Miami. That is all I wanted to say today. Mayor Ferret Do you want to make that in the form of a motion? Mr. Perez: Yes, I would like to. Mayor Ferre: Alright, it has been moved by Perez, seconded by Carollo. Fur- ther discussion? Mr. Plummer: I would like to suggest to Mr. Perez. There is presently with the City of Miami Beautification Committee a cleanup-fixup day set aside. I don't remember what day that is, and maybe you could have a joint effort, be- cause they always have a parade down Flagler Street and all of that, so I would urge that you.... Mayor Ferre: Would you make sure that the chairman who is Al Pallett is in- formed of Mr. Perez' inititive and perhaps a joint effort could be made be- tween the Commission and the Beautification Committee. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Is there further discussion? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Perez, who moved its adoption. MOTION NO, 81-1014 A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION SETTING ASIDE A DAY IN JANUARY OF NEXT YEAR WITH THE INTENT OF MAKING A PROCLA- MATION FOR A "CLEAN-UP DAY", SUCH EFFORT TO REPRESENT A PUBLIC SERVICE CAMPAIGN WITH THE INTENT OF CALLING ON THE PARTICIPATION OF THOUSANDS OF STUDENTS WHO WOULD DISTRIBUTE LITERATURE AND HELP TO CARRY THE MESSAGE THAT _ WE WANT CLEAN STREETS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L, Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miller J, Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Perei, Jr, Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A, Ferre NOES: None 102 NOV 191981 34. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: RECEIPT OF LETTER FROM PEAT, MARWICK AND MITCHELL REGARDING FINANCIAL CONDITION OF CITY. Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr, Manager, I would like for you to submit to the Com- mission once again, we have it, but I want you to make it a special item the July 28th letter of Peat, Marwick & Mitchell on the financial, I'm sorry, the accounting conditions, budgetary conditions of the City of Miami. It is addressed to the City of Miami Commission. Did you all receive that? It is addressed to the City of Miami Commission. How come the City of Miami Commission has not received copies? Mr. Gary:- I would like to talk to you privately about that. Mayor Ferre: Okay. Well, I would like to request that the members of the ity of Miami Commission get a copy of that and I think we will need to dis- cuss it. Mr, Gary: Sure. THEREUPON, THE CHAIR ADJOIIRTED THE REGULAR PORTION OF THE AGENDA AND -WENT INTO A RECESS AT 5:30 P.M., RECONVENING AT 7:05 P.M. TO TAKE UP AN ITEM OF THE PLANNING & ZONING PORTION OF THE AGENDA. ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WERE FOUND TO BE PRESENT. 35. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO MARGARET PACE PARK. Mr. Gary: This matter mainly affects the Parks Department, since you are talking about Margaret Pace Park and we would like at this time for the Parks Department to give you a presentation as to what we have planned. _ for the park and at that time I think it probably be appropriate to hear from the audience. Mr. Carollo: Very good. Will you proceed then? Mr. Gary: Yes sir. Mr. Gonzalez: Good evening members of the Commission, My name is Ralph Gonzalez. I am the Assistant Director of the Department of Parks. The Parks Department received late last year and the beginning of this year a donation from the a Wylder Foundation, a private, non profit foundation, a contribution of approximately $90,000 to enhance Pace Park. They had envisioned some picnic shelters and other amenities to make the park more accessible to the people and to orient itself to the bay. It was a specific donation to Pace Park. It wasn't an across the board donation to the Depart- ment of Parks to be used anywhere. It came through the efforts of Mrs. Margaret Pace Burton who is here tonight and a number of the other members of the City of Miami Beautification Committee. What we have for you tonight is a schematic of what'the park development would entail. It has been presented at two different meetings to neighbors of the surrounding area who have voiced some concerns on the project, and I am going to turn it over to Juanita Shearer, who is our chief of design to go over the actual plan. Ms. Shearer: My name is Juanita Shearer, I am with the City of Miami Parks Department. design division. The development plan that we have before us for Margaret Pace Park involves a very small picnic shelter. This is an overall development plan of Margaret Pace Park. North is over on this side; here is the little plaza that we are proposing. It is drawn to scale. 103 NOV 1 91981 Margaret Pace Park is approximately 1260 ,ft. north south, East west at its widest point 470 feet, an average width of 300 feet. The park is presently an open field with Palm trees and several small shade trees scattered along the coastal edge, along the property line that we share with the Miami Wo- men's Club and International Fine Arts College, and along N. Bayshore Drive. To the north of the park is an inlet thereon which is a condominium tower that also juts out into the water as the park side does. The development that we are suggesting consists of effectively of a shaded area to which park user could walk and sit down at the game table, which is effectively a table with 4 benches around it, rather than individual long benches which we have some problems with sometimes. And have their lunch, play checkers, talk to their friends, read a book and enjoy the absolutely beautiful view of Biscayne Bay, That is one of the primary reasons why we have located the plaza out•on the peninsula point, because the view is absolutely spectacular on this side and rather constricted to the rest of the area. The svelter, which would be a concrete roofed house shelter supported by 4 columns, concrete blocks wide and tow and one-half feet long, is approximately 25 by 25 ft. On the other side of the plaza area we have a trellis, or over- _ head lattice work which will provide a different type of seating area. Peo- ple using it will be able to enjoy, as the sun changes angle, a varied pat- tern on the ground. Under both of these forms of shelter we have, as I said before, tables, There is a drinking fountain, a couple of square benches, a small wood deck that juts toward the water to give a more tropical feeling and a stairway on both sides allowing you to go up the the 18 inches that this plaza is raised above the ground level of the park. On the north side we intend to incorporate the Mildred Pepper palm grove, by extending it by adding more palms to it, so that the pavilion will be enclosed here by the Palm trees that will eventually grow and add a more tropical feeling to the site. We also intend to place shade trees in the plaza itself. These very schematic sections through the plaza show you scale figures. You can see that there are no high barriers, no enclosed structures, nothing that will allow for visual... Mayor Ferre: Have the neighbors seen all of this? Ms. Shearer: Yes they have, Mr. Mayor. Vie presented the projecE rnree times to the community. Mayor Ferre: You will get your turn to talk next. Ms. Shearer: Essentially, it is an extremely simple plan with no walls, no barriers behind which people can hide. It also has a ramp access so that people who find it difficult to go up the stairs can use the facility as well. We feel it would be a great asset to the joggers, lunch time users, and late afternoon users of the park that form a viable part of our community. Any questions? Mayor Ferre: Not now, Mr. Plummer: How much? Mr. Gonzalez: Approximately $90,000 from a donation by the Wylder Foundation. One final note... Mavor Ferre: Does $90,000 cover the cost? Mr. Gonzalez: Yes sir. The plan has been changed. The plan was first pre- sented to this Commission back in February, and at your request, we went back to the citizens of the area to present the plan to them. At that time they voiced some objections as to the size of the project. We had three pic- nic shelters. We downgraded it to one picnic shelter in the trellis area and are going to use the balance of the money for additional landscaping, which they voiced an interest in. They had voiced some concern regarding the pos- sibility of the area becoming a hangout. We then modified the design, lower- ing the walls and making it a design that you can practically see right through. There are no large barriers that you can hide behind. Mavor Ferre: Alright, we will hear now from members of the public who wish to be heard. Does anyone want to be heard on this? This is your chance. 104 NOV 19 1981 Mr. Cassell: Mr. Mayor, I guess I will start it off. My name is Marvin Cassell, attorney. I represent Hornblower Trust Company,Sylvia Barbosa Trustee; Peter Collins, Trustee; myself as Trustee, owners of the two block area lying from Biscayne Blvd. to Biscayne Bay; from 19th Street to 20th Terrace, with the exception of two parcels. We directly abut the park on the park on the west, where you see the R-5, right into that area. The specific address is 1910 N. Bayshore Drive, so it is just beyond where the street turns. All of our clients in this matter object strenuously to any construction out in that area. They feel, that first of all, this is 300 feet or better from the street, therefore it is not visible to patrol cars that go by. It is an ideal place for undesirables to hide behind that wall at dusk. A runner comes by, perfect place to mug. No reason whatsoever to be out there. Ideal. to have trees out there, that is lovely. They want to have plants and bushes at certain intervals where people can't hide behind; the park. -is lovely there, we are very pleased to have it there. But there is no protection, if you put this building out there. There aren't enough people that use this park that warrant this at this particular use. It would just be a location where undesirables can sleep at nignt and be sheltered. We have a problem if one of our buildings empties out, that night we have a bunch of free tenants that have to be run. They go right out to the park. They disappear into the area, so we urge you not build anything in the area other than the running areas and a limited amount of trees, bushes and so forth. Mayor Ferre: Marvin, you know what? I have got to share this with you. I've got to tell you who you remind me of. You won't believe this. You remind me of Ed Ball. Mr. Cassell: I wish I had the money! Mayor Ferre: I tell you, Ed Ball gave me that same sneech. 11r. Ball was a very formal man, and he said "Mr. Ferre," He was 93 years old then. "I want you to step out here for a moment". I said yes, I didn't know what he wanted to show me. He said "Look out that window, what do you see?" I looked out there and there were two or three bums sleeping on benches and he says "That's what parks are for. That's what parks are for. Now you and all those dogooders down in Miami are always trying to build parks and all that. Is that what you want parks for? All that is good for is for rapes, and drugs and panhandlers and the best thing that -,you could do is let people like myself build along those parks and we would get more money into the coffers of the City and what have you". Mr. Carollo: He still didn't convince you did he? Mayor Ferre: I am telling you, he made me think twice. I will tell you, the truth of the matter is, we spent $5,000,000 on Bicentennial Park, and the truth of that matter is, that actually the $5,000,000 was money well spent, because without it we would never have gotten the property. The $5,000,000 was not in the design. It included everything, the filling and the whole thing. We wouldn't have had that tremendous piece of property and that is a cheap price to pay for that big acreage, but the fact is that the rest of it, all the berms and the beautification and the covered areas and trees and all that have really been a disaster because nobody ever wants to go into that park and with good reason. And I am afraid with the prob- lem, and I know poor Margaret Burton, and she has been coming back and back and back on this and I know that the park is named after her mother and it is a well -deserved honor and all of that. The problem is that the people of this community simply do not want parks that will attract people who end up getting mugged, raped or transacting drug transactions. And the problem is that it is one of these situations where you are dammed'ff you do and damned if you don't, you know? I frankly think that that piece of green expanse without a single tree on it is rather ugly. I would rather see it beautified a little bit, but the people in this community simply don't want to beautify it, They just want it open green space. They don't want any trees and they don't want buildings, because what happens when you put up buildings is that attracts evidently the wrong kind of individuals. Alright, it is one of these things where you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. 105 NOV 1 91981 r UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well Mr. Mayors you could always give consideration to certain types of practical sculpture. I remember as a youngster I used to play in Bayfront Park. Believe it or not, kids played there three or four years ago when I was a youngster and they had a camel there and the kids would climb on the camel and even when you go down to Dadeland, there is a big turtle. Kids can climb on the turtle. Something like that! It still beautifies. It breaks up and yet it doesn't afford the shelter that the people in the area are afraid of. Mr. Dawkins: Mr, Mayor, I have a problem in that this is another one of those you and us and they, Now here we have individuals saying they do not want undesirables in their neighborhood. I don't want them in mine - either. But, by the same token, we have to share them. Now, I am not going to sit up here and let people dictate to me that because undesirables are going to"come in my neighborhood, you keep them in yours. This is Miami. And all problems of Miami must be shared by the citizenry of Miami, and be- cause you do not want undesirables, I do not want them either. But we can- not keep undesirables out unless we go back to what Mr. Plummer has been saying all day and that is we come up with the type of police or law enforce- ment that will enforce the law, get undesirables irregardless of where they are off of the street so that you will not feel unsafe in'having such a situa- tion like this in your neighborhood. Now I sympathize with you and nobody in this room know more about what you talking about undesirables than I do. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Any other comments from members of the Commission? Mr. Carollo: Yes, one more comment, Mr. Mayor. The $90,000 that is being donated for this project as I understand it is being donated solely for the purpose of constructing the picnic buildings in this park. Am I correct? Mr. Gary: Yes sir. Mr. Carollo: I think it would be absurd on our part to throw some money away and not use it for something in the park. I just cannot invision (INAUDIBLE COMMENT) Mr. Carollo: You had better believe it, especially in today's times. Dr. Wolfe: My name is Dr. Grace Wolfe and I reside at 2121 N. Bayshore Drive. I have attended several of these meetings before. Mayor Ferre: Is that the highrise? Dr. Wolfe: I beg your pardon? Mayor Ferre: Is that where Congressman Claude Pepper lives? Dr. Wolfe: Yes, that is right. I run in this park and I run with many other people who enjoy the park. Mayor Ferre: Does Claude Pepper run in the park? Dr. Wolfe: No, he doesn't, but we run around the Mildred Pepper palm grove, which has helped beautify this park and I would like to say that it isn't only . because of the undesirables; in fact I have met some very high class undesira- bles in that park. There are some very friendly people there as well as some very friendly bums, if you would put that in quotation marks. An actually, I think it isn't only that we are concerned about undesirables. We are also concerned about retaining some of the beauty, the natural beauty and we in previous requests have asked for is that we have plants, we have foliage, we have something besides artificial structures, so that we are not at all op- posed to beautifying the Dark. but we would like to have natural structures. Mavor Ferre: Well let us ask that auestion aeain Dr, Wolfe, Mavbe we can cut throueh all of this. Could that S90.000 be used for sculDtures. beauti- fication other than a roof entitv? 106 NOV 1 9198, M_ Dr. Wolfe: Yes. I think most of us would agree with that, but..,oh, I am sorry. Mayor Ferre: No, I am not asking you, I am asking the department. Could the $90,000 be used for a sculpture garden and some nice trees, thin trees so that people can be seen in between, they can't be big trees. No bushes, that kind of stuff. Mr. Gonzalez: When we redid the plan to downkill the amount of shelters we allocated a substantial amount of money toward additional Mayor Ferre: So in other words, you don't have to lose the $90,000. If _ it is the decision of this Commission and let us see if we can have the wis- dom of Solomon around here, and say that the middle road is, we are going to spend the: $90,000 to improve and beautify, but we are not going to have any structures as such. Now, you can have a bench and you can have a sculpture and you can have a statue or something, and maybe a waterfall or whatever, but as long as it doesn't obstruct the view and it is within reason, I mean you can't have everything 3 inches wide, but I think that as long as it is a see through, so that people don't feel fear that somebody is hiding be- hind a bush and will jump out and grab somebody, Mr. Gonzalez: I see Mrs: Pace nodding over there and she was a prime mover in obtaining the donation and we have no objection to it, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Ferre: Would that be acceptable, Mrs. Pace, I mean Mrs. Burton? Dr. Wolfe: I would just like to make one more comment. We really oppose things like concrete. Our City is becoming concrete. We oppose these kinds of structures. We would like very much to see pleasant structures. None of us want to see a large fountain in the park, which would compromise much of the land, much of the space that we use in the park, but certainly we would all be very pleased to see it beautified, but not with artificial structures, Mayor Ferre: I think the sense that I really feel in the community is they don't want any concrete or obstructive things. They don't want roofs. They want beautification, and that means sculpturing and maybe, you know, plant- ings, and things like that, but nothing that is obstructive in nature. Mrs. Burton: I am Margaret Pace Burton, Mrs, Robert A. Burton, the daughter of Mrs. Johnson H. Pace (Margaret Pace) for whom Pace Park was named. I have worked with you gentlemen in the City of Miami and with your permission, Mayor, I am going to chastise Marvin. I knew you before you were born. Now I need you. I need you to help me. You know his family, and I knew him be- fore. We are very anxious to make Margaret Pace Park a beautiful park. It is to be a gassive park, but you did sneak in a mini -jogging area around there, which has been to the advantage of this park. I don't to see it go by the way. The monies was given for the park to enhance it. I will work with the community. The Miami Women's Club next door approves of whatever the -City or Commission thinks is best for the park and will work with you on it, and that you know. The unseemingly characters are everywhere, and Mr. Dawkins, thank you for what you said. You anticipated what I was think- ing and what I plan to say. There are some, may I call them unseemingly characters, and we can find them in a number of places, including the cathedral right next door, and all around this area. Are we going to live in Miami, (I have been here since 1917) and you all weren't even thought of either, are we going to live in Miami with the fear that we can't do anything that is right and good because of the unseemingly characters? Are we going to prepare the City for my grandchildren who are here now? I was here last night till 1 o'clock on another of the matters of the Planning 6 Zoning of that area. You are aware of the fact that many plans are in the hopper at this particular time to enhance the density of that area. Therefore, more than ever, this particular park is needed, and more than ever it was a great dream of the City of Miami to create this park because it was created from the bay, and before Marvin was born I played along that bay and know it well. So I beg of you, do what is best for Pace Park, but do not desert it. I know you have not the money to place the things that I would like there, but we do have this temendous offer. Let's not let it just go by the way, please. Now I have asked, Mayor for a fountain many, many years ago and if you will remember Mr. Stone told me when we get your park, that we kept the name; that this was not a good thing to put in the park, it was too close to the water. However, the thing is that everybody is worrying about the water is that these unseemingly characters come and take a bath. So, I'll forget 107 NOV 1 91981 my fountain, but will you please work with us and let us put something in that park, including the green, and you know the Miami Garden Club has been planting there and the other groups, so don't desert it. Mayor Ferre: Margaret, because everybody is tired, we have been here most of the day and I think... Mrs. Pace: But I beat you, I was here last night at 1 o'clock. Mayor Ferre: I sense a consensus forming here. Now see if we can cut through all of this and get to it. Now, I would like to say this. First of all, I want to commend you, because I can't think of too many people.. You are one of the grand dames of this community who spend their time and has for decades trvinR to help others and I think that is to be commended and we arq all very Around of You. I am glad to see you up here with us and that you have your walking machine there, so we are proud to see you up and about. Now, secondly, we don't want to lose the $90,000. I think we want to do something that is constructive and imaginative. On the other hand, I sense that we can perhaps spend that money in beautifying the park without having to put a structure. I don't think really a structure in that park really does anything other than create a lot of dissention, so per- haps the middle ground is, we go ahead and do the beautification without putting the structure in. Now, that I think is a happy middle...is that _ acceptable to you? Mr. Dawkins: Well, I am this way. The doctor said that she was in favor of anything as long as it was not a structure, but what about the rest of them? That is only one resident. We have other residents. Mayor Ferre: They have been here before. Mr. Dawkins: Yes, but I still would like to know if .... see it is no sense in me agreeing with the doctor if the rest of them are not in attune to what we are saying. Mayor Ferre: Everybody in agreement now? Everybody's happy in the neigh- borhood? Now we are going.to beautify, but not put anything.....now Harry, are you happy with that? You and Marvin and everybody else happy on this? Phyllis, are you happy? (INAUDIBLE COMMENT NOT PLACED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mayor Ferre: Well, don't give us a lecture now. just tell us, is that ac- ceptable to everybody? Alright then, I think the moti.nn is what? That the City of Miami Parks Department accept the $90,000 and... Mr. Carollo: spend it in Margaret Pace Park in a way appropriate for that neighborhood without putting structures. I so move. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Further discussion. Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who moved its adoption. MOTION NO. 81-1015 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A DONATION OF $90,000 TO BE USED BY THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS AT MARGARET PACE PARK WITH THE PROVISO THAT THESE FUNDS NOT BE USED FOR THE CON- STRUCTION OF ANY STRUCTURES BUT RATHER THAT THEY BE USED IN THE AREAS OF ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, SCULPTURES, SHRUBBERY, ETC. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: 108 Nov 1 9 1981 kq AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr, Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Commissioner Demetrio Petei, Jr. Vice Mayor Joe Carollo Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None ON ROLL CALL: Mr. Carollo: I would like to add to that motion if I may if we could at least put one live oak tree in there. If we don't have any here, I will bring one from Ocala. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Commission, on motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M. ATTEST: RALPH G. ONGIE City Clerk MATTY HIRAI Assistant City Clerk ld 109 MAURICE A. FERRE Mayor NOV 1 91981 'IVYof W�..i CI a DOCUMEUT IDENTIFICATION 1 2 =i 3 I 4 5 i 6 f 7 9 10 i 11 i 1 =i 12 i 13 14 I 15 VARIANCE FOR 553 ROOM HOTEL PARKING STRUCTURE AT 1744-56 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE. 2% BED TAX AND URGE SPORTS AUTHORITY TO SELECT BUENA VISTA SITE FOR NE14 STADIUM GRANT APPLICATION FOR MICROWAVE TOWER AT 2010 S.W. 17TH AVENUE -SOUTHERN BELL. GRANT ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE FOR P.U.N. 3046 INDIANA STREET. GRANT APPLICATION BY JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE HOSPITAL RELATED FACILITIES PER ART, XXI-2, ORDINANCE 6871. ACCEPT BIDS: FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSIONS AT MISC. CITY PARKS. APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1981-1987 TO PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR CITY AGENCIES, BOARDS AND DEPARTMENTS. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH R. SISSER / CONTINUED RETENTION OF CRAMER FIRM AS MAN IN WASHINGTON. APPOINTMENTS TO ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE CLOSE COMMODORE PLAZA FROM GRAND AVENUE TO MAIN. HIGHWAY NOVEMBER 22nd, 1981 BETWEEN 2 AND 4 P.M. FOR FIRST ANNUAL COCONUT GROVE TURKEY RACE. 4 FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: EXTEND LIQUOR HOURS FOR DECEMBER FORMALIZING RESOLUTION:CLOSE CERTAIN DOWNTOWN STREETS FOR DOWNTOWN ART WAVE 81 AND DOMINO TUMBLE ARTS FESTIVAL. FORMALIZING RESOLUTION: HOT MEALS PROGRAM IN ALLAPATTAH COMMUNITY. CLAIM SETTLEMENT-ARTHUR MC DUFFIE. MEETING DATE: November 19, 1981 COMMISSION ACTION R-81-993 R-81-996 R-81-997 R-81-1000 R-81-1001 R-81-1003 R-81-1004 R-81-1006 R-81-1007 R-81-1008 R-81-1009 R-81-1010 R-81-1011 R-81-1.012 tETRIEVAL ODD. E_ NO, 81-993 81-996 81-997 81-1000 81-1001 81-1003 81-1004 81-1006 81-1007 81-1008 81-1009 81-1010 81-1011• 81-1012