HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1980-03-18 MinutesCITE OF MIP Ml
it IQCOW� �IIi4[� Yi
0• �0
COMMISSION
Cj;'RST105*lAFM,o FLORIDA
QRDINANCE OR
ITEM NO,
(PLANNING .6, ZONING) SRECT MARCH 18, 1980: i
KBOLUTION NO. PAGE NO.
UPHOLDPLANNINGDEPARTMENT'AND ZONING:.BOARD'-S;-DENIAL
M-80-182 1 17
OF REQUEST.BY EMERSONCONGER .FORI�LIQ'UPR,LICENSE-
2
SECOND READING ORDINANCE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
,
ORD. 907318
APPLICATION CHANGE"ZONING"CLASSIFICATION 20.1158
N.E. 41 STREET" FR0M:,R-3,T0 R-.0 i
3
APPLICATION: BY: SEAROCK,_.lNC..�-, FqR, THE:OFFICTAL VACATI
R40-481 18-20
AND CLOSURE OF N.W.,20TH:AVENUEq.-ETC.: -
4
REQUEST BY RADIO.'STATION�WTMI FORiEXTENSION'OF
-R--80-18420-21
�,.,-
VARIANCE TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF: A,, RADIO
-TRANSMITTING TOWER-100 BISCAYN&,BOULEVARD,;:
5
APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD.. S DEN IAL,: FOR: COND TIONAL�,.USE;
M-40- 185"'. 21-49
90: SLIP MARINA.ON GROVE'.ISLE
6
DENIAL OF APPEAL BY JAFCO PROPERTIM:OF VARIANCE FOR
�-
M-80-186 49-56
SIDE YARDS-1852.'N..BAYSHORE DRIVE -INSTRUCT -PLANNING,
DEPARTMENT TO,CONDUCT-STUDY AND COME BACK TO CITY,.,
COMMISSION WITH RECOMKENDATIONS,
7
THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BE:INSTRUCTED,.TO:HAVE�,A..B i6p
iM- -18T
80
56
OVERALL GENERAL REVIEW OF CITY` ORDINANCES APPLICABLE"`
TO MARINAS.
8
SECOND READ ING:,ORD INANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE!",6871, BY.
ORD., 99741", 1
57
ADDING A, NEW ARTICLE VII-2-LOW:DENSITY TOWNHOUSE R= 3B,:
DISTRICT.,,
9
SECOND READING, ORDINANCE:; AMEND ORDINANCE 6871,1BY
58-60
_APPLYING,ARTICLE._VII.2,.lOW DENSITY TOWNHOUSE R-3B
DISTRICT.TO.:.PROPERTIES-ABUTTING AND ON THE NORTHWEST
SIDEOFBRICKELL-,1AVENUE 10 A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF
APPROXIMATELY,.180,.BETWEEN S.E. 15TH ROAD AND S.E.
24TH ROAD': (ZONEDR43A AMD R-1)
10
ISECOND,I,READING,ORD,INANCE:.AMEND ORDINANCE 6871,
ORD. 9076
60
ARTICLE I XI V SECTION . ,2( 6-B) TO PROVIDE FOR INTERIM
.,PARKINGiLOTSJN'THE C-3 DISTRICT
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
F
CITY COMMI5SIONOF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the,.18th.day of March, 1980, the City Commission of"Miami r
Flo rida►;met`
at -its regular"meeting .placein ;the' City Hall► 3500 Pan .
American
Drive, Miami, Florida, in regular session`.,
The
meeting was called to order at 8.10'P M., by Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
with the
following members found to be present:
Commissioner J. L. Plummer,' Jr.
Commissioner- Joe''Carolb
Commissioner (Rev )`Theodore R.'Gibson
Vice -Mayor Armando Lacasa
Mayor: Maurice A. Ferre'
ALSO PRESENT `WERE.
Joseph R.,Grassie,;City;Manager:
R. L..,`Fosmoen, Assistant Cty�Manager
George F. Knox, City,Attorney
Matty Hirai, Assistant City "Clerk
An
invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson who then led those
present
in a pledge of allegience to the flag.
UPHOLD PLAN14ING DEPARTMENT AND ZONIaG BOARD'S DENIAL OF RE�'UEST
1. BY EMERSON CONGER FOR LIQUOR LICENSE
Mayor Ferre: Jack, 'is the Dr.. Conger? His family or what?
1 P►i 18 1980
MIAR 18 1980
P 0
ist
B:
fl
q
TI
,ween 58 and, .�1962 I..diiected: the then proressiona
'
?nsive -Land Use'and'Zoning.Study .and.other reports.
-lieadopt ion,':.4n F June,�,1961 of the now Zoning Ordinance,
- ice687l,,'.an_d_t.he maps as - amended.. Also during that:
,idl since ..I� I 1ave- ef*,the'City four years ago, I have.
Courts:::to , telstify,in zoning land use and condemnation.
tI. ook at,:in conjunction with this public hearing
is particular map generally bounded by N.W. 36th
o I n the.East, I stopped at Biscayne Boulevard, but this
to�'Miami Avenue. Within this complete area from
0- 1 ki ami:.Avenue, the zoning in that area is composed of
i fications. Along Biscayne Boulevard, both sides,
j the property is zoned C-1 and is developed with—, J-1
buildings, banks, motels, and some very nice apartments,;
iartment buildings along Biscayne Boulevard. Then we,
,age along N.E. 2nd Avenue which is C-4 continuously
is I a very liberal general commercial district..
�4n,question tonight sits right here by the two yellow
strict. :,Other representative uses along this particular
2 ire quite I mixed in the permitted uses for the C-4 district.
There, . �is _office ,u'sage,,re I tail, gas stations, plumbing and electrical
supplie'.sf. warehouses.
, � 'auto repairs. There is a transmission repair station
right :at.the ,,`intersection of 36th Street. So generally, it is zoned and
fully 11 developed'a s�av I ery general commercial area. On the West.side of
N. E. 1 2 1 iia Ave , nue w e - have a combination of zoning, C-4 and then a triangular
portio , n I.* i n� :tii isare I a I that -is -zoned I-1. Again, C-4 General Commercial, I-1
is light .,industrial.1I.The uses along there are compatible with the zoning.
There air'e-reipiir:�stations, there is outdoor advertising all through this
area. "At�lthis particular large tract, is a banana supply warehouse, there
is a 1. very large wholesale furniture development here, and interspersed
'with a few professional usage in smaller structures. But generally, the
area is I fully developed in the.commercial nature. There is no residential
along I E..2nd:'Avenu e:for this,entire strip that,I was able to find. 11
Moving to the :W6st y I cu.':ll all recognize this,as,the FEC property which
runs from.,the :railroad.tracks.at.this.poi,nt, over to Miami Avenue. This
entire ,tr'ac't'f right in 'the, middle. of. our -,City of Miami is zoned 1-2 which
is the .most ;liberal zoningin, the. Citty, f o Miami. We are faced,directly
across from theproperty, by,a,, I lar,ge".1storage area of railroad cargo, piggyback
containers. . Also i I n this area ,there zis a lumber yard, warehouses, but�
npnprally the property is:vacant.,iyinature. .And by way of location, before
I get tothe,specifics of this property here, the variance that is
being requested tonight is from .this location down here. The original
03
.1 18
de o
ctea,- or
gist
i
1 St
'�'" 18 1980
e.-
Amok.
ell', P,
18 1980
SECOND F.EADING ORDINANCE: PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION
2. CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 20-156 N.F. 41 STREET FROM R-3 TO
R-C
�t
APPLICATION BY SEAROCK, INC., FOR THE OFFICIAL VACATION AND
`y
3. CLOSURE OF N.W. 20TH AVENUE, ETC.
Mr. Plummer: What's., going to happen,' with 'the property?.
Mr. Perez:` Let's let the 'applicant answer that.
Mr. Plummer: For the record, sir, your name and mailing address.
ist
�VIVIi % 18 1980 .
Mr . John Immer : My name i. s .7o1In !,=,er f rom the Law f irm of , Smather s
and Thompson, 1301 Alfred I. Dupong Building, Miami, Florida. I'm
representing Searock.
Mr. Plummer: t9hat': gairi_Y to har,pcn to that property?
Mr. Trnner: All t4c:''e cc.ny is c,+pandinc; into the thirty-five feet. We'll
probably use it foi c} lr} i-=]c, As, vot' know, t:he' Planning Department has
required us to kf L� r.h�, : oI' ;: for tt:�' i ire Department and also to round
st
out the str.ect that' i.,7 front c>,T 'the o ?erty. So we're going 7
it,
ba ,i -�i.1.1'�, sae rca tc purchase the pro
keep perty right
next dour„ The people. next aoow ,avt:: not o,�z>osed the aprlic:ation and we're
just goirl to uL;0 it to <:c:;,tLri:rE' he p v, ert:y out. Nobody's using it
right now. ':�ilt:IC aree..* t :f.'YL , or sewage which We
are going to maintain.
Mr. Perez: Basically, they are expanding their boat yard operation
there.
Mr. "Piiurmer: Into ghat area?
Mr. Perez: t9e1.1, by provi:d ir,g the parking , etc.
Mr. `P,lurumer: Are they�saintj --o nc.t the deed to this, property?
Mr. 'Perez: Its beer, closed by p:l.att.
Mr. Immer
we own the �_>roperty, subject to your easement, already.
Mr. Plumuner: tgi.t}: our eas m'. r,t file f'-. This Commission adopted a
policy about two mead s M.go. You']'e going to benefit greatly y
'`c. going y�o get to utilize property
that
this closure. D}�a.y? You'
you can't utilize prior to this hearing.
Mr. Immer: That's correct.
Mr. P1Lunmcr: All night, �i.r�' Now, the policy adopted by this
Commission, You're qc,in.. g o benefit. What's going to benefit this
Commission?
Mayor Terre: Y,'ou mean the City of Miami.
Mr pll_L ner : City of ::i.a*r,i • I' m sorry.
Mr, Immer: The City of D°ia�Y,i is going to have the same position they
an easement through this for
had before. They are going to have the
they are going to have roundoff for the
disposing of s.,�erae water and
street.
Mr. Plummer: I see a man here I don't think really agrees.
Mr.Immer: Mr. Campbc.il... we've already told Mr. Campbell..
Mayor Fcrre: I hate to c`10 this to you. But I said I was going to
discussion
take up non -controversial things. We're getting into a
so I hate to make you wait, but you're going to have to wait.
Mr. George Campbell: Mr. Mayor...
Mayor Forr•e: yes, sir, Mr. Campbell.
Mr. Campbell: Just for clar.ificatior,, if I may. We have reivewed this,
and as far as the benefits to the City, there will be some dedication
of right of way by the platt on filth Street, and there will be
improvements to N.W. lith Street which will be paid for by the goperty
owner.
Mr. Plummer: he's going to enhance the City then?
ist
1 aY tlr cn 8 19
REQUEST BY RADIO STATION WTMI , FOR MX'.^.ENSION OF VARIMICE TO
4 . PErU-,IT CONSTRUCTION OF A RADIO TRA 4SMITTING TOWE72-100
BISCAYNE DOULEVARD
"DITIONAL USE 90 SLIP
5. APPEAL. OF Y."I'�T-IG BOAP-D'S DENTAL FOR CON
1S ILARINA C)"", G:'.0VE !"7
Mayor Ferre: All right. Take up item number two,
Mr. Lacasa. Mr. Mayor, I'm excusing myself on item number two. The
Planning Department recommtended approval. And according with plans
on file. The Zoning Board denied five to ond, Does the administration
wish to say anything into the record at this time? I think, we all
know what the issue is and we've gone through it.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I think it maybe would be good, it's brief,
that he expands on his recommendation.
Mayor Ferre: Fine.
Mr. Richard Whipple: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, Richard Whipple with the
Planning Department. The Planning Department recommends. approval
of the proposal in accord with the plans on file. We do not feel that:�,,
the marina facilit-.*'i:ss be4.T,,Cr provided would have an adverse impact, up
on'.'
the surrounding communit-y-. They do not interfer with any fairways
waterways, tc, other.froyc!rties. It is within the purview of the zoning
ordinance that this Commission decide whether... and the Zoning Board
recommend, whether clocks can oxt.end beyond twenty-five feet. We find',L,
no objections to dicks extending beyond twenty-five feet in this farea
::
to provide t11!_S ninety Slip Marina.
Mr. Larry Stewart: For the record, Mr. mayor, my name is Larry Ste -t
war
My address is 25 ... 25th floor, one Biscayne Tower, I am,lthe attorney
for the applicant, Martin Mlargulies, and we are seeking, a_condit'ional.
use permit which will allow us to extend the dock off -shore one hundred,
igAn
%"o
LSt
22 1 r �� 'j Q Q
��� � ii \ V 19
iSt
3 M'' 181980
01
Mayor Ferre: An you counsellor?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I would say,.Mr. Mayor,+perhaps ten to fifteen .
minutes for possible time for.`..
Mayor Ferre: I would be very grateful if you could make it ten minutes,
and six minutes to you and the rest of you three minutes. Okay?
Mr. Stewart: Before Mr. Doheny tees off, there is a representative,
two representatives of Marine Council here who have a resolution that
they would like to present in support of that, and I also neglected,
I have a petition here from a number of residents in support of this
which I would also like to offer in the record.
Mayor Ferre: Okay. Mr. Doheny, why don't you sit down for a moment
while he finishes then his presentation, and I'll recognize ,you as'soon
as that happens.
Mr. Robert. Carter:" Mr. Mayor, may 'I speak .for the 'Marine Council?
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir:
Mr. Carter: My name is Robert Carter. My address is 2660 N.W. 21st Street,'
Miami. Honorable Mayor, and Commissioners, I'm here to represent the
Marine Council. Many times we've been asked by the Commission to study, and,
comment on important marine matters. And we're privileged to do so
tonight. We have a special interest, and -I think this is also been
commented on before in our direction to help encourage projects that are
on private property, to be paid for entirely with private capital which
do not involve the City Commission, or the City of Miami, or Dinner Key
and some of these other problems. We have addressed ourselves to. this.
We have reviewed the study, the Grove Key Project, and I'm happy to
present here, and I will turn a copy into the City Clerk here, a resolution
to this effect from the Marine Council which states in effect, that
we would like to recommend its adoption. I'd like to say further, about
five years ago I was asked to serve on a panel with the City of Miami
Planning Department. And we worked for several weeks in drafting
revisions to water front zoning. Particularly as it impacted the
Miami River and the canals along Biscayne Bay. We met with some
residents of this ... the Pelican Canal area. And as a result of their
imput, I believe we came up with some even more strict and stringent
requirements in this particular area. I believe that we have found that
the Grove Isle project certainly meets with both the letter and the
spirit of the zoning regulations that developed with our work, unless
something has been changed in the meantime, that I'm not aware of. I,,
feel that this would leave almost no alternative but to accept this
recommendation as being in the interest of the public and not in `any
way detrimental to the enviornment. So Mr.;Mayor, I"would like to
submit this resolution for the Marine Countil.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you, sir. Anybody else, Mr. Stewart?
Mr. Spencer Meredith: Mr. Mayor, members of the .commission, my name is
Spencer Meredith, Suite 607, 100 Biscayne Boulevard, speaking also for
the Marine Council and for myself. I've been in the marine business
for the last twenty years, much of that here in the Grove area and
I'm familiar with this Grove Isle project. Mr. Stewart presented a
long list of the permits that has gone.through to get this project done,
I think it gives you all some idea of how difficult it is to construct
any new marina facilities in this area. I've been in that particular
bay in a boat, and it is an ideal site for a marina as proposed by
Grove Isle. I have been involved in a number of enviornmental groups,
I belong to most of them, I sat on the Advisory Committee for the
Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act rules. I am aware of what's involved
in it and as a professional in this business, I can see no objection
from an eriviornmental point of view why anyone would oppose this marina.
ItIKIl 80
24 1819
ist
Mr. Spencer Meredity (continued): It's an excellent marina and I_strongly`
urge you all to support it and give it all the help you can. We need the
slips desperately. The people who live in that area have a right to own
boats and they need a place to keep them. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Any other proponents that wish to make a statement at
this time? You'll have the right to rebut later on. Okay.
Mr. David Doheny: Mr. Mayor, gentlemen of the Commission, my name is
David Doheny. My address is 1778 South Bayshore Lane, Coconut Grove.
I am here this evening representing myself and my wife and family, as
well as four community organizations who are here tonight to oppose and
to urge you to deny the conditional use permit before you this evening.
Those organizations are, Tropical Audubon Society, Tigertail Association,
Incorporated, Coconut Grove Civic Club, and the Bayshore Homeowners
Association. Now, there are representatives from each of those
organizations here this evening who may wish, or may not wish to add a
few comments to what I have to say. There are a number of people here
tonight, and I should make this clear, who are also in opposition to
the proposal before you whom I do not represent, whom I do not proport
to speak for. i make that comment because I think it's important in
terms of the history of the overall Grove Isle project which I'm sure
most of you are familiar, certainly Mayor Ferre, and Commissioner
Plummer and Father Gibson, from the occasions this has been before you
in the past. I mare that comment because I think it's important to have
a little bit of the background before us as we consider what's before
us, and that is that the proposal, the development of Grove Isle was
a controversial issue for many, many years in this community. It 'came
before this Commission on many occasions, it came before the Planning
Advisory Board on several occasions, a great deal of emotion, a great
deal of controversey was invovled with that project. The last time it
came before this Commission was April the 22nd of 1976, in recommendation
of by your Planning Department to down zone Grove Isle from R-5, which
it has been for many years, to R-3. That was denied by this Commission.
Subsequent to that, the organizations that I represent this evening
settled their differences with the developer. Certain litigation;,
that had been mending at that time was resolved by virtue of a -settlement
agreement entered into between all of the organizations that I represent -
and the then owner of the property, as well as the current owner of
the property who intervened in that proceeding and became a plaintiff
for the purpose o:' settling and resolving that law suit. So all of the
issues, all of the basic issues as to the zoning use of the island
itself, of the upland island, and what go on on that island were resolved,
and were agreed upon and were contained in the settlement agreement which. '
was incorporated in a final consent order filed with the ... approved.by:,.`
the Circuit Court of. Dade County, which the City by the way,:is also'a
party to because the City was a rdefendant in that propr litigation':
We settled all of the issues as to density, height, floor ... area ratio
and you remember the other issues that were involved at.that`time. The
one issue which was not settled and was not resolved by that settlement,
agreement was the issue before us this evening, of a marina. The
agreement provides, and I'll give a copy of it to you, it's in your,
records I'm sure, but just so that you are aware of it, the agreement
provides that if a marina is to be developed on or adjacent to Grove
Isle, that it must comply in all respects with all applicable State,
Federal and local law and regulations, including the Biscayne Bay
Aquatic Preserve Act. It is our position of the groups that I
represent, that that has not been done, that the applicant has not
demonstrated compliance with any of the applicable rules. Despite
what Mr. Stewart indicated to you earlier, or the impression that
could have been received by you from his comments, there have been no
Federal permits issued for this project, the Corp of Engineers has not
approved the project, the Corp of Engineers must approve the project
before it can be built. The Department of Enviornmental Regulation
of the State of Florida has not approved the project. We argued an
appeal before the Secretary of the Department of Enviornmental Regulation
last Friday, he has until April the 8th to enter his final orderas to
whether or not to grant a water quality certificate under State law or.not.
5 18 1980
ist 92s
�.':'� 18 1980
Mr. .Doheny`(continued): of private marinas occurrs, this would
undoubtedly. reduce the urgency with which local government will undertake
public marina expansion. it may appear that this makes no difference
as long as berths are built and occupied. However, I believe that it
makes a very big difference because these private marinas are built
on public bay bottom and everyone does not have an equal opportunity
to obtain a slip. If private marinas, meaning private financing, is
necessary, then they should be operated as commercial enterprises
serving the entire community. The equity issue is only heightened >
by the existing shortage of facilities and the fact that because
of the high cost of building marinas every slip that is added, private
or public will undoubtedly influence future public policy towards the
orderly expansion of facilities open to everyone. Respectfully yours,
C. Bruce Austin, P.H.D. Associate Professor, Division of Biology.
and Living Resources". if I may enter that for the record. It's
important to bear in mind the scope of the project involved. .'We're
talking about ... and let me make our position clear. We are note
objecting to any marina being built in that area. The applicant
certainly has a right under this City's zoning ordinance to build a
marina or to build docks coming out twenty-five feet from the'.,seawall.
There are docks coming out twenty-five feet from the seawa11 on the`
opposite side of the bay which, you can see on the illustration behind
US. I would call to your attention to the fact,. Mr'. Mayor,. -that, and .:.`
I think you can see if from the illustration, the area immediately,
across from Fair Isle between the bridge and the Pelican Canal. is all
R-1 and most of the area there is R-1. These; are single family
homes. Many of them do have small docks and small 'boats but they are
all within the twenty-five foot existing limitation. And we have.no
objection to anybody else building within that limitation. But we
do object to the dock coming out one hundred and sixty-five feet,.over,
six times the allowed limitation for everybody else. Coming=out from
the 'island towards or property, towards the property of those who live
on the mainland, and intruding directly into our enjoyment,.quiet
enjoyment and use of our single family properties. :'.This marina, by .
the way, would occupy approximately three point four acres"of'submerged.
lands and waters of the State. I shall also mention one.`final''point
and then I will rest for the moment. As Mr. Stewart mentioned, the
issue before the DNR and the trustee's, is whether''or not the!use of
this property involves a lease. The applicant takes the position that
he does not require a lease. He is not offering to pay anything for the
use of this land. He is proposing to take for the ;private,use.of.ninety'.
boat owners, who happen to be fortunate enough to live on that island,
for their private use to the exclusion of the general public,.'three.
point four acres of the State and the City's, and the public's lands
and waterways without any compensation whatsoever.. I'd'ask.you to;':
bear that in mind as we go through this discussion this 'evening. We
would raise a few legal issues. We feel that the application -before you
is legally deficient in that this applicant does notown.the.property
for which he is requesting the conditional use. We would submit to
you that it is fundamental to zoning law that an applicant for a
conditional use has got to own the property upon which the conditional
use is to take place. Or at least have an ownership interest of some
kind. I can't come and ask to zone your property without your consent.
and you can't come and ask to zone my property without. my"consent. And
it is argued that we cannot...that they cannot askayou.to,grant a `
- conditional use for the State's property. We would further submit'
that the application before you does not comply in any. respect with the,':',
specific conditional use requirements contained in`'the`Code of the
City of Miami. Now those specifically require that the.applicant address
traffic flow and control, access in case of.fire or catastrophy, the
noise effect of the conditional use on adjoining property,'screening
and buffering with reference to the type of dimensions,: the character
of the property, proposed exterior lighting, 'and the general compatiability
and aesthetic compatibility with the adjacent properties and other
property in the district. Furthermore, the applicant I,has .got the 'burden
- of showing that the proposed conditional use will promote the.public
health, safety, welfare, morals, order, comfort, convenience,' appearance,
or the general welfare. And we would submit to you that'he has proved
none of those things and the Zoning Board, by; its vote on December 17,.1979;
by a five to one vote so found, as the minutes before you will indicate`.
2
�w;r6 18 19on
C
Z'
Mayor Ferre: All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Doheny. How much
time was that, please?'
Mrs. Hirai: Twenty minutes, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferrel Twenty minutes', I see. You're next. As 2 remember, you
requested six minutes'.
Mr. Harvey Abrams: Yes, Mayor Ferre, and I hope that I keep to it.
I'll abbreviate my remarks as much as I can. I'm Harvey Abrams:: I'm
the President of Tropical Audobon Society and I live at 166 N.W. 100th
Street. Mayor Ferre and honorable members of the Commission, Mr. Carollo,
Mr. Gibson, Plummer, Tropical Audobon Society is the oldest conservation
organization in the community and we represent three thousand two hundred
families. We come before you tonight on the Grove Isle Marina matter;
with two positive messages. Two yeses. The first yes is we'd like you
to join with us, with the State of Florida Legislature, with the
Dade County Commission in 1980, inaugrating,the`decade of bay
restoration. We'd like you to join in`with.;the-efforts of the
Legislature which has provided legal cover for the enhancement of the
great economic and natural resource that.the bay is through its
Biscayne Bay Acquatic Preserve Act. Joing with the Legislature which
has contributed already one million dollars in funds for the
improvement of this great body of water which is such an attraction
for all us that we either want to come and sit on or near it, or live'
on it, and the Dade County Commission which has comitted over two
million dollars over the next six years to further fuel the process.
We'd like you to join tonight. We think the way that you can join
the decade of bay restoration is by doing another yes. And that
yes is supporting the judgment of the'vast-majority of your Zoning
Board when it voted five to one against the approval of the conditional.
use in this matter. So my message to you is a,positive one for
the bay that we all share. The bay, as you know, has a long history
of regulation. For many, many years it had. hardly any regulation and
gentlemen, during those. years its water quality, it deteriorated' to the
point where fish were unsafe to be taken. In vast areas of the bay
it was unsafe to touch the water, and in which the area deteriorated
so much that the commercial and economic interests that live off,the:
bay were themselves suffering. That began to change one decade ago
exactly. This is actually the second decade of saving our bay-1 en
the Biscayne National Monument was declared by Congress after the
assiguous work of Congressman Dante Facell'.and"local officials as well,
to protect the Southern half of the bay from further' deterioration
and to keep it a resource that all of.us, residents, tourists, businessman',
pleasure boater all could use. That was followed a few years later by
the State passing the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act, and declaring
these waters waters of the bay, shall not be degraded or deteriorated
any further. A sense of that law, that- spirit, the clear intention
in paragraph one is, "the bay shall be enhanced and restored and no
other activities that don't contribute; to it should be allowed, because
we all one heck of a big economic, social and health interest in that
bay. Dade County added its might to the Legislature's interest when
it committed, just one week ago, two million dollars of bond revenues
to the Legislatures million dollars. So that the comprehensive plan
for improving the bay that is now underway, which involves planting
of seagrass instead of tearing it up, replacing broken seawall with riprapping
planting of trees on islands that are now barren, filling of deep
dredge holes, doing a variety of things that will make that bay
more beautiful, more valuable, and more alive for generations to come.
There are important legal enviornmental issues affecting this case.
Mr. Doheny I think has very eloquently described the fact that we're
facing a most unusual case. A non -owner, who owns not one acre, not.'
square foot of the bay bottom. You and I and all of us in the audience
own it, comes before you to ask you to change the zoning so that he could
proceed with further applications processes to seize that land for
private use. It is clearly outside of the normal zoning practice, and
so far from being legally possible that we're confident that various
regulatory bodies will act accordingly. And of course we'll pursue
28 "' . % 18 1980
Mr. Abrams (continued): the matter as we need. What are the enviornmental
issues ? After all, we're an enviornmental organization, not a tax payer
organization. There are three big ones. Competent scientific evidence
independent of enviornmental groups, independent of the developer,,
independent of regulatory bodies, leading experts on Biscayne Bay's
ecology independent persons have judged that the seagrass community
surrounding the island between the island and deep water will be
irretrievably harmed by sixty foot boats and fifty foot boats. There
are no such boats of that draft and size using the area today. ,That
in of itself is grounds for denial. Second point is that competent
scientific evidence is to the fact that water quality that sustains the
fish, that is safe for us to touch will be degraded significantly
by the poor flushing of this area, that is proposed. The materials
hat come off the boats whether it's bilge water, whether 'it's `paint.
off the hull, whether it's insecticide flushed from killing roaches,`
whether it is simply someone who breaks the law and pumps out his tanks,
will not flush for significant Humber of months, very, very well given
the hydrology of that particular location. The <last 'point, and think
it's an important one, is noise. I think that the public facing there,
T. think they have a reasonable right to not have
twin engines, sixty foot moats chugging in their front lawns. And I
believe that's wi-iy you wisely established the zoning ;code in this
particular case. Well, the last point I'd like to make is;a broader
one than the narrow enviornmental issues which I believe this project
will impact most adversely and the zoning issues which I think are
fundamental to the decision making power of this body. And that -Is'.
gentlemen, a question of public interest. The Biscayne Bay Aquatic
Preserve act which by legally binding agreement filed in the circuit
court, this developer agrees to abide by defines public interest. And
it certainly does not include in its definition public interest of a
solely private dock, solely for the purpose of the residents of, Fair.
Isle. 'That's by no stretch of the imagination public. The last
point I'd like to make is that numerous efforts to compromise this
project, to work with the developer to find another way for him to.
11
provide marinas in an ecologically better place, in a place better
that won't harm zoning, won't stick docks into people's front yards`
has not been successful. The project only exists because negotiation
was successful. It was tied up in legal, regulatory, and; judicial
matters for years and years. And we are signatory's to an agreement
that made it possible for development to take place on that island.'
We do not oppose wise development, we do not oppose economically sound...
development. We don't oppose a development that -won't ruin a natural.
resource owned by you and owned by me and owned by all of -these people:
But we do vigorously oppose, and we rarely give up on a project that
shows clear and present danger of ruining a bay that we have all worked
so hard to protect. So I'd like to ask you, if you will, in;consi,e`ring
the ,applicant, considering the arguments of the opponents; to`join
with all of us in this State and the community in saying :yes, we do
want to protect and enhance Biscayne Bay in the 80's,.and yes, we
will support the recommendation of our own Zoning Board which was five
to one. Mr. Mayor, thank you very much.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you. Next speaker. Next opponent..>
Mr. Greg Marburgh: My name is Greg Marburgh and I live at 1600 South
Bayshore',Lane. And I was here three or 'four years ago before the
first building was built, when there was all the discussion about even
building on Fair Isle and this Commission refused to let them build.
The marina came up for an issue at that time, it was turned down, so
nobody who bought on Fair Isle could possibly have bought under the
impression that there was going to be a marina because there was none
permitted. when you talk about this little diagram, that doesn't
paint the picture quite as well. Just look at the picture here, that's
a lot better picture. Count out the number of boats and see how
far out the dock comes from right.here and Dinner Key and that will
give you a lot better picture. Here you see, one, two, three, four...
and that's what they are trying to do in this little tiny bay. -I,,own
a little sail boat at 1600. To get out of here, that water is shallow,'
�bi ;i l 1 8 1900
OF
T
30
MIAR 18 1980
C
Ms. Doherty (continued): have enjoyed leisure boating, fishing, viewing
of the wildlife, which is now in a very precarious state; such as
manatees, seagulls. This variance will bring about changes unfair to
the tax paying public. The noise alone caused by ninety engines coming
and going will cause a very real disturbance to the peace of the area.
Water pollution is another concern. This variance would take public
land away from citizens who have every right to use it and enjoy it
as they always have in the past. I urge you not to grant this
variance to benefit a few but to doa disservice to the general public.
Mayor Ferre: Next opponent.
Mr. E. F. Swann: My name is E.F. Swann at 3585 West Glencoe.
(MR. SWANN SPOKE AWAY FROM THE MICROPHONE -STATEMENT NOT PLACED IN
THE PUBLIC RECORD).
Dr. Waldo Ellison: I'm Dr. Waldo Ellison. I live at 1623 Miaonopy. '.
Avenue in Coconut Grove. I want to discuss a few issues here.- First
of all, we're dealing ... we want to discuss the merits of this project.
Now I'm not here to completely deny that this project has some merits,
even though I'm opposed to it. The only merit that it does have is that
it will provide so:;e marina space. That's valid. But there's a difference
between a need for marina space and a want for marina space. We want
marina space but we cannot afford to place the marina space here. It is
not a need. It is not imperative. We need to breath, we need to eat;
we need to have a heart, but we don't need a marina over there. We want'
one. As we get over to the issues, with regard to the opposition here.
We're dealing with a special interest group. A special interest group
that wants to take public land and use it for public use. What.is the
message? What is the hardship? The only hardship involved is that::;
the people of Grove Isle would have to go and place their names on a°
waiting list. That's the only hardship. What else is there? So
I think that the Commission has to take a look of the issue of `needs'
versus wants. And I was waiting for the Commission meeting to.begin
tonight, I was looking through this magazine called "Where". I looked
at Coconut Grove. it says here, just South of Miami on scenic Biscayne
Bay is the quaint retreat of. Coconut Grove. If anyone drives down
South Bayshore Drive and looks at the Grove Isle, I think the magazine
is quite appropo. Where is the quaint village of Coconut Grove?
now the concrete village of Coconut Grove. So I charge the City
Commissioners with the following. The responsibility is greater than
the desire not the need for a marina. The people of Miami have to be
served. It isn't just the issue of a desire or the want of a marina.
If we take a look at what's going on with the Federal government,,at
the present time, they are saying it is time to bite the bullet. And as
a result of biting the bullet, I think Dade County is going to suffer
with Rapid Transit, and we're not going to get the money to build'
our Rapid Transit System, at least to complete it. And that we're
going to have more traffic on South Bayshore and we're going to have
more traffic Downtown. And I think anything possible to limit the:
traffic through Coconut Grove would be very helpful as an additional
issue here. The one other thing...the reason why I brought this.up;.
I live on Micanopy Avenue. It's a somewhat quiet street<'between Tigertail
and South Bayshore. In my home, I planted about ten mature trees.,,They
were trucked in. I planted them there to reduce the impact of sound,.the
noise. But when Grove Isle throws a party, what happens is the noise
from Grove Isle bounces off the water and comes right up, to Miconopy and:
I can hear everything that's going on over there.. And that's an issue
that I presented to the Corp of Engineers, that did not appear in
their brochure that was sent to me and to the others. And I wish
that the City Commission give heed to what I said tonight. Thank you
so much.
Mayor Ferre: Next speaker.
Ms. Marilyn Reed: For the record, my name is Marilyn Reed and I'm_
a resident and tax payer in Coconut Grove. I'm going to be speaking -
in -opposition to this application for the following groups as well as
myself individually. The Friends of the Everglades with twenty-one hundred
ist
31 ""; i 8 1980
s
, s
y'.
Mrs. Reed (continued): families for membership, Save Biscayne, Inc.,
"
a coalition of organized groups, and Key Biscayne Property Owners and
Tax Payers Association, Incorporated, whose concern is for the
preservation and restoration°of'the by and the public interest in
the soveirgn submerged lands held 'by the State in trust for all the
people. I've only three points,to make so this won't be too long. One,
.',.
we.fre all aware that the City of Miami 'Code has for some time been
outdated and out of synchronization with new State and Federal laws
passed in the last several years. We hope to get those brought up to
".-
date soon, however. The City is a creation of State government. It should'
not place itself in a -position to its out of date`: code`at,this time,
of being in conflict with the new State -Federal laws. Article II; Section
7, of the Florida Constitution made it State policy to protect our
natural resources, of which the bay is our.largest natural and economic
resource for the entire region. Further, this section.in the Constitution
provides for abatement of air and water,,'pollution and of excessive and
unnecessary noise. I submit to you, that a vote.to allow the requested
zoning in this case will be in conflict with not only State
Constitutional policy but with several State. statutes and Federal
laws.' As you are -aware, I can quote -these laws chapter and verse. I
would like to make one comment here before L;get, to the next point.
All the material that the opponent has`given;.you with.all the agencies'
commenting, let me make you aware 'of .this. When an,age'ncy cannot get
on site for an inspection, they neither, approve or oppose. They..,simply
send out a letter saying, we'rdo not,have�"any;: opposition: This does...".
not constitute approval, so`don'.t let,them fool,you,with that." It -means
that they're understaffed and they couldn't `come down.and do an on -site
review. Point number two, when the'State of'F1' ida joined"'the.Union<
in 1845, and the Federal .'goconveyed to Florida all rights
title and interest in lands under'`the navigable waters', it stipulated
that these lands were to'be,held in. trust for the''benefit of all`'people
of Florida. This did not mean that,a single product developer was
to be construed as all the peopleof, Florida. The proposed ,marina'
will be.under tight security;ind.will deprive ,the_peoplej`that`is;the
general public, of their right to'use the water column`, the submerged
lands,.; and the navigable waters over which this mar ina`is proposed to
be built. This water and ,submerged land is:;held'for'the public
trust, therefore, -it is not-in.the public interest to allow`'a marina,
through the zoning process, which`,will- deprive the. public .their public
land and water. I therefore,'submit to,you'that.to,vote for, this
marina'is.inconflict"with the.public interest and clearly will deprive
the public of their rights to, their; water and land. Point ;number:
three, and my final point, applicant .has what. is generally, known`
in real, estate terms as the highest and best use of this land at ,
Grove Isle. ,Unit sales in" the highly speculative market are ranging.`"
from two hundred thousand to three hundred thousand plus.bracket'.. These.
unit sales carry no guarantee of a marina,which is`nothing more than
an amenity -,indeed, 'it is'not even a'necessity, for the real estate '
news is.replete,with reports,of`the so called hot sales'market at '
Grove Isle.; There is no hardship here since the,highest,.and best use
has already been given the applicant'.' Indeed,`Ihave seen no proof
on the dpplicants;partf 'o;hardship wh chis a requirement of our zoning
in the City of Miami. In truth,;the only real hardship is 'on the
adjoining property owners whose x :s taassesments will soon reflect the
highly speculative market sales at, Grove.Isle. This will certainly
be an undue burden and extreme hardship on the adjoining property owners.
The approval of this, marina' -would only add to th'e neighborhood's burden.
I would caution the Commission,'that."there is one and: probably a
second marina planned within this small cove, on; the western shore line „
by two different developers'. This.brings up the question of carrying'
capacity of this cove', and.the ability of the neighborhood, to withstand
the impact of overdoing. ,This,cove'simply,does not have the capacity:
to carry such a Toad. `I am not,going: `,to. `addres.s the damage done by
such projects to, -the, base,enviornment and vent'the communities
in this area at a' zoning hearing ;",since it is not appropriate.• This
matter..is being litigated through'Florida Statute, Chapter 120,'Administrative
Procedures.` I can tell you, the',impact will be `adverse and severe. I .
submit`. to you'. that s}iould you approve this marina,you will be behooved'
Mrs. Reed (continued): to approve the other two when they come before
you. Should you approve Grove Isle and deny the other tow, you ,risk
`prolonged and expensive litigation. And I don't believe the tax
payers in this day and time can really afford that. The most prudent
course to take then is to adhere to the Zoning Board's decision of
denial and to uphold their denial. I urge that you consider all these
points and the ramifications and that you vote to deny. Thank you.
Mr. Jim Apthorp: Mayor and members of the Commission, my name is a
Jim Apthorp. I live at 1680 Micanopy Avenue. I want to talk to you
for a moment tonight about property rights and the property rights
of the citizens of the State of Florida. I had the opportunity a few
years ago, of the agency that's been referred to here, the Trustee's
of the Internal Improvement Fund, and I do have some familiarity with
the basic principles about which the agency operates and should
operate. Its duty is to protect the interest of the public as owners
of the land. So what I want to do for us just a minute is talk
to you as the owner of the land in yellow. The developer owns
the land within the blue circle, and the people in Florida own the
land in yellow, and I want to talk to you for a second as the owner...
as one of the nine million owners of the land in yellow. First of all,
no one has asked me, as one of those nine million people, or my
representatives, the Trustee's in the Internal Improvement Fund, for
the permission to build the docks. There has been a determination that
the docks are private docks and not commercial docks but there is no
f
dock permit. It's a very discretionary permit and I don't believe
that the owner has produced that permission of the State of Florida
`
to build these docks. Now, if I were your neighbor, and I need to..
#
build a tool shed and I want to build it on your land and I need a
`
variance from the zoning to be able to do that, and I came into; your
Zoning Department and asked for that variance, they would say, well
do you own the lands No Do ou hay t' ? d '
y e an op ioN n o, I on L...have
an option? No, I don't have an option. Do you have some agreement
with it? No, I don't have anything. I just want to build my tool
shed on his property and I'm asking you to vary your code to allow me
to do that. It's very analygous to the situation your faced with
tonight. I think you're being put in a very difficult posture by
this application at this time because the basic property right.question
of who owns the land and whether the applicant has the permission or
the agreement of that owner to place these facilities on that land
has not been resolved with the State of Florida. So I think ,
procedurely we're operating a little bit backwards here. And there
is no difference. It is the principle that I've tried for three or
four years to talk about and get people to accept. There is no
difference between this land because it is publicly owned and the
privately owned land in terms of the rights of the owners. So my
purpose is to try to persuade you to view this ... these as two
adjoining pieces of land and that boundary is no different than the
lot line between you and your neighbor. And the applicant does no
have permission of the Omer to build the facilities that are in
question in this hearing. Thank you very much.
Mayor Ferre: All right. Next opponent?
Mr. Carl McDermott: My name is Carl R. MCDermott. I reside at
3531 Crystal Court. I'm speaking for myself and for the Key Biscayne
Civic Association. Everything I was going to say has been said so
much better than I can say it, that I can only echo our objection to
this marina and hope that you will vote against it. Just one point
that I've heard the attorney Steward use in the past, is that what
the people of Grove Isle are asking for is the same thing that
everybody else has that lives in the neighborhood. They want to have
access to the water. And my question is, with just ninety slips,
and there is going to be almost five hundred units, I believe, on
that island when it's fully operational, plus the hotel, plus the club
and plus visitors, I mean, what good is the ninety slips going to be
for that large number of people? I also would like to know, is this."'
just the first phase of a marina? I mean, are we going to be. -asked`
later on when the thing gets the three units fully going, will there
be more marinas built out there? Thank you.
33 MAR 18 )980
ist
ist
Mayor Ferre: All right. Any other opponents thatwishto be heard?
34 MAR 18 1980
Mr. Reed (continued): to you, this development and the developer,
has not gotten together with the community to try to ir1.on out our
differences and you're, probably going I' have thousand more petitions
who are you tax payers and voters who are going to say,", ."you're going
to give our property away?"I'm real tired of coming down here.,.I'.ve
got other things to do with my time and I think a lot of these people'
do. This is not the first night. You know 'how many years we',ve been
looking at each other. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre:, All right. Thank you".very much.. Are there any other
statements by the opponents? All right. Counsellor, rebuttal.
Mr. Stewart: Mr. Mayor, and members of the Commission.. It seefis
like there is several common threads that run through ,:'what has been
said here: tonight. Unlike you, I've heard this so many, times I.'..
because we've heard the same thing in every single agency that we've:
been in front of. But let me start with the accusation'that'.s been
made out right, that we're some how tryingto;steal the States'
property and get away without paying any money or anything else. 0-
March 27th of 1979, we made application to the State,of Florida, and
we said we wanted the lease for the use of this facility and we paid;
the one hundred and fifty dollar fee. On April`4, several weeks
later, we _received back from the State their determination that a lease
was not required. Now several of the speakers said this really„is, an
'
issue that is not in front of you because that is within the province,
and the jurisdiction of the State DNR, but I feel, I, must"answer -some.
of these things because of the accusations that ''have been made.: We,
have turned that letter over to staff. They have a copy, of it.,.
April 4th was the first time the State said you"do.not need a, lease.
file State.
our -worthy opponents started rasing a lot of cane with
they asked us a few more questions, and on" June; they `came back.- And'.
"
again, we've given a`letter to your staff, and ,they said,"you do not=
i"
need a lease. We've heard the accusation'here "tonight that we".have "
not complied with the State laws: Do you now what:, -they -said to the
State agencies? Don't give them anything on the State leveluntil"`
they first go to the City and get the City approvals., And "now.
�tiiey -are :coming here and saying, don't give them-anything"until` they,,
get the State approvals. Well we've been through it with>the State,,
we've been through every agency with;the..State." It's not :just our,
biological, scientific studies that have shown there, 'wilhibe,.no ,.
enviornmental damage, but'every;single.State agency''"has conducted .
their own studies. You know what this all boils down to?. It's.
real` interesting. Somebody stood up here and said,, well go ahead
and put out twenty -.five foot docks. You can do that,%6rever you
want to. They're not really concerned about the enviornment They
don't mind if we tear up all this seagrass and destroy.the bottom,"just.
as long as we only put out twenty-five foot piers., .'Well there is
six hundred and fifty to"seven hundred feet across there. When we
originally came in with this proposal, we had proposed two"hundred
foot piers. We met with a lot of different agencies,"including your
own staff people and they said cut it back. So we cut it=back to '
one hundred and sixty-five feet of which only one, hundred and twenty-five
feet is useable. And I think we have gone''more than a little bit
in an effort to try ,to make this as aesthetically,pieasing,,as,
enviornmentally unobjectionable and that'swhat the State agencies
have said. It does 'not ... we"are in ?compliance.with every single
State and Federal law. And you know good and well, thatif Iwe
weren't they would have us down in;the courthouse. And everytime
they've tried to take us to the.courthouse, we've won. Every ;single
law suit. We've won every sin gle.heaiing. W61iave'been:through this.
This is like the fifth...fourth or fifth public hearing we've -been
through. Every single report that has been issued by any State
agency has been favorable. So we say that we°have.done everything
that we are required to do, and .we request that you;. grant us the
permission to have the conditional use of extending these piers out.
Mayor Ferre: Harvey, would -you. whosegoing'to do? Dave, go ahead.
But not twenty minutes, please'.
ist 35 N!AR 181980
� r
ist 38 AR 18 1980
ist 39 MAR 181980
ist .10 W,,AR 18 1980
Father Gibson (continued): City of Miami, may then proceed. You
an attorney?
mr1% D6heny-, Xes,_sir-
ay hi went to: law, school,
Father,Gibson: All right. tet me say t s-
r::: one day and�thatls�the.wa hey.,, aught.
often,; for y Y
I tell this, every so�, o
me how to'.., reason'.
yor,Ferre: .All right. Further questions io s from of the
Commissio'n?
Mr. Plummer I:b n.a,'good boy, walted.:'an"h'our and -a,half..I guess
..'ve, ee
it's my turn.
:Mayor Ferre- All: right" good boy it's yoururn.
'
Mr. Mr. Stewart, let me preface my - remarks -'to the gentleman
.
—Plummer:
I ---d w en is'�this-thing going,',to'
who I've vd know for a long time,, who sai
n e 6t tc'� e -you,, regard ess,.OL
c o,an�end ? The one thing g
ome,
::
'whlichway-thit mm coission votes>thisevening,,don t'p anon too, -many
You're.going to b back not necessarlly'herei but
t,.v..,p;qgrams. e-
somewhere else, regardless of whatEiversway .t,his ,goes'.Mr: -Stei.4ar t"L
.,
Ad of a very illustrious group,.of..people who have..surrendereo
-
you re "
you, in I writing, approval or norobjection,Y ich is tantamount. to
approval. Then on the record, 1. must ask, I YOU . the ,question, , is::thore
any ,where :in any ofall of the mass of agencies that,youhave appearedV
a negative?
Mr. Stewart: I There is no, agqpcv,that has said this project,.should not
go forward. The only comments ,Whatsoever that .could,in',.t he" wildest
'
imagination be termed a -zie4ative:� ,things as, it,.
ma comment, is. .such t
goes:1orward, these c onditions.'should be-met,,like ,turbidity .in the
An we
el0 1 ibf that- nature`_:'d
water, certain, levels f 'tu i�ity.,, - things o
complied,; i-, and
have ,agreed.to,e , ver I yo I ne of'those.:cond,itions., o�we:have '_-
it �i jt�L f , the �r6cess.. At every�-s ;step where as
s pa '0 e,whole'j t h h
ing' that, 1 this,
made a request of it I in say* t� should �be conditione&:-"on is r
Suct�
assv
e I
that,; we ni
Ta - 4-hni- nrvri
is to st
tion. Ill
di f
se..�
MAR 18 1980
OV� . .....
Mr rosmoen':..That's ,correct.
'�
42 18 1980
Mr. Plummer (continued): Whether it's one -that cranks up,or ninety.
The second point that etas made here this evening, and I have no truck
with it, I'll tell you truthfully', the issue is being raised and being'
said that we're deg the public the right of that water.'.. But
each and everyone.that ;live on that waterfront are exercising;that
right. They're exercising that right now. have has a.boat in front
of his house. I can't get to the water in front of his }louse, I can't
,..
get to he water in front of your house because I would be trespassing
r:
on your property and I cannot do that.; So in effect, ;you have taken
over., you that have built docks, you have taken over land that is
owned by the people by the State of Florida for your personal use
and I don't 'think anybody can deny that. I don't...(APPLAUSE)... please
please. Okay, you own,the land to the water. Okay? All water
Internal Improvement Association. Look, -here s
property is owned<by the
I think the only thing before this Commission
where I'm-comingto.
this evening is whether or not this Commission feels that a
conditional use of dock`s extending one hundred and ,six -five feet
'determine
into`Biscayne Bay is yes or no. ..werenot here this evening to
or the channel;is deep.`
whether ornot the grass can grow, whether -not
to be determined by the
enough: Those are things that are going
due time.I'll =Now, if you have objections to hat,
proper authorities in
"Dave is no 'stranger to Tallahassee when he's been up there `to object,_
and I'm sure he's not 'going to be .in the future; When he feels very
very strongly about an issue, he's going to pursue it'. I just, really .
is'
feel that as far as this Commission here this evening; is concerned,
whether or not we feel that it is reasonable-6 have.,a marina of
comment and then
one hundred and sixty-five feet.`, I wll.make one other
it to him and
I will quit. You say to this Commisson,if you allow
somebody, comes across the other, side and they want one hundred and
sixty-five feet, my kids are not going to be able to get out of. the,
canal. That time is when this.Commission,..in my estimation,,will have
to make a determination as to what is.enough. Okay?: I don't think.,!
that 'inany way, shape or form,�because if;. I don't know the way.;
it to
the rest of these people,areigoing to vote, if we were to ;grant:
this applicant,` that = it is° automatic 'thatsomeone else would get it.
I don't think that. I've seen too many cases with .this Commission,in
which that:was used in an agrument and _did not'hold water. These are
my feelings, I'm expressing them with you.
__.: __ . A, 1 eiM- _ mh;% s the will of this
had the
The M
i.I do.
P has to
opportunity for
recommendation'with'the-stipulation, Ihow do I.wan ;,,to�wor i as o
the starting of.boats after 7:01 A.M.
Father Gibson.' wait, a minute he isn't through.,
4
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT FROM THE AUDIENCE)
Mr. Plummer.- our department,' : sir would enforce it.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
nave, ar n(
on how commissioner Plunvner-can...,:
think it's Just: going to create' ' i:i nighfAa're down there.'
to.have ii'dockmaster, :and.we,willbe':responsible under
ordinances as I f'a I I r a �l s , noise i , s I cor I I ice rne . d.
ist 18 1980
Your w
point.'
applic
of not
We're
in the
that cc
towers
dispers
The'set
would b
light a
was to,:
very sF
anund 8
he will but has ni
before this marin
-the issue at ali'
about a marina th
tang ► ne was-; Lo cw, -- Laiaa •��,... �....i �..� . - -
to do 'sound and light studies. He did the
s,';he hasn't completed the landscaping. He says
t.' But the sound L and light studies were done
posal was -ever announced, they don't address
e,:sound an& light of this marina. Now we're talking
.45
`' '18 1980
Father Gibson:From North, South.
-Commissioner
m going; to
-unaersuanaing
I had
I'11�make
st 46
qp 10
+6. DENIAL OF APPEAL BY JAFCO PROPERTIES OF VARIANCE FOR SIDE YARDS-
1852 N. BAYSHORE DRIVE -INSTRUCT PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO CONDUCT
STUDY AND C014E BACK TO CITY CONL4ISSION WITH TLCOt iENDATIO*IS
0
Mayor Ferre: . Planning Board recommendeddenial six 'to zero. And is the
applicant here?. Go right ahead, sir.
Mr. Rick-Zelman: Mr. Mayor and members of the City. Commission,.my_ name "is
Rick Zelman'and I'm an attorney in'Miami; Florida wi.thoffices on 444 Brickell
Avenue. I represent Jafco Properties which is the,applicant,before this ;
evening. The purpose of us being here specifically is to request 'aside
building line setback variance. And I think in order to understand what we
are talking about specifically and there was a specific reason that this
application should in fact be granted by you this evening, is -.for you to make
reference to the model which is situated'.right over here',and have `a pretty good
look at it, because that is quite to a scale and it defines the property to
your left as you face it as an already existing property and the property model
on the right is the one which the applicant proposes to construct. What I think
the issue which is critical is in view of the fact that this is a unique parcel.
You should be.aware of the physical distance and it is again is,the scale between
the two existing models which are situated before and you will have an opportunity
to ask questions this evening.of me or of the architects, the`desgners,and so
forth as we get into our presentation. I will try and.keep this relatively
brief because I know the hour is very late and you 'have 'a lot of other,things
that you would like to do. My concern however, is this is a relatively critical
issue for the City of Miami and for this area of the City in particular and
that's why we would like to make a'fairly extensive pres'entation,.but.we.will
try and do it as quickly as we possibly can.' We have had 11 negative feedback
obviously, from the Planning Department and from the Zoning'Board"on this.
The particular problems however, are the fact that`this.is,a very.rregular shaped
lot which is why a variance is really appropriate here.,;` It's about two hundred
eighty feet deep and it 'runs from 'about sixty; feet 'in,width on the front_to about
ninety feet in width on the back. 'This'lot'was platted -about forty, years ago
when the area was entirely an_R-1 zoned 'area and it wasplattedas.a single
family lot back then. Of course, now the situation11
has -;drastically changed.;
We are now in an R-5 zoning for the area. It's a.high;density use:.= The existing`
square footage of the lot would be reasonable'to handle.fifty:units on.the,'`
subject property and what the applicant._ would like°to.do'is:to.build thirty_four,.
The density issue is a crucial factor in`your-.decision,-because the nature of
our argument is that we need a variance because ttie lot :was ,platted forty' or some
years ago and the existing platting doesn't.make:any sense`and is :incompatible
with use of this lot into an R-5 capacity. The neighborhood has changed greatly
since the land was platted We have,in'the immediate ,area Omni, Plaza.VenetYa
and the adjacent hundred and plus unit Carlye'Apartments'which are'.shown.on
there to the North. I have a small handout whichI think might_be Helpful and
if you care to take,a look at it, and .this shows a drawing of ;the. site, highlights
some of the issues and contains some recommendation letters which we have gotten
from some of the property owners in the area. Agan,;what'�'have got :here is a
very special,=unique situation. It's. an odd "shaped.lotc" There has been a
change in the zoning since it'was.platted. The residential area has been changed
to a high density urban area which -are all reasons that would logically support
a variance. So what I did upon... you know, when -I saw"all this information
is I took a look at the `City of Miami,Zoning.Code and I read `what ;it said about
variances and I thought I, would read it into the record;this,_evening because I 11
think it really suits this particular lot and; this: particular application right
on point. [,That it says is and I want e to quo it. This,is-Article 4., Section
7 of the -City -Code. "Where such conditions exist in present,.platted and recorded
areas that conformance with lot width, depth,`area',or yard requirement causes
unnecessary difficulty in the <;practical 'utilization of a lot, the Board may
recommend such alterations of deviations.in the application 'of these requirements,
as will in its judgements, permit the reasonable development and use of this
specific lot in such a manner as to carry out the `spirit,,purposes of this ordinance".
And our essential argument before is specifically that this 'is R-5 zoned property.
It' high density, multiple use property. We,'have 'discus"sed'this with the Planning
staff many, many times. `The bottom line is,>is the position:,that-they seem to
be taking is that this property will only support.,a thiee'storystructure. .That
..seems to me to be relatively `silly: It seems to be incompatible with good urban
planning for the 1980s and the 1990s and that's what we, 'are really talking about
here. There is no precedent which is.going to beset because it's an unusually
platted lot. The ph roperty to the North has been `developed and the property to
the South is a different circumstance and I will go into that later if you are
interested.. This is a unique lot in_a unique area. There is about sixty-five
some feet between the building to the North and the building that Jafco proposed
to build, shown here. The public views are not block because we are across from
Margret Pace Park and so there is no public blocking of views to the Bay. The
alternative recommended by Planning is a three story motel like building which
is frankly just simply very bad planning. Therefore, what I would like at as
gl 50 OU
f
the issue comes: down as something very critical for the City, which is why at
ten mnutes,past twelve I'm,standing here. The ,density in development of the
Omni,.Pla'za-Venetia area is really what is critical here. And as references
in some of"those.letters.and materials you have_.got.in front of you. What we
are looking for here is what I consider to,be a issue Iof good urban planning
and implications for land use, R-5 zoned land use in this area for the next
forty or so years which is the affect of life of anything .which is going to,
be built up there now. My concern was that this is an issue which is not only
legal and not only an issue which has to be decided by you, but ultimately it's
an issue which requires expertises beyond legal'.expertises'; It'requires.urban
planning expertises and land development expertise. .So what I did when h saw,
this problem and I analyzed it the way that I have. I felt that.'you folk. needed`
to have some input from some.nne beside me. I.called on�a fellow named Michael,'
Lambert who is a member ofthe American Institute of 'certified planners and the '
American Planning Association. Mike has a 1. .very interesting background. He has
got a' Bachelors in urban planning and a Mastersin community development,`but'
also_he,has got `ten years of;planning in both the`piivate and public,sectors and
specifically he, is the °_Director of Station` Area' -Design for Kaiser Transit'; Group.
-Now,she-is-not here representing Kaiser but you; understand what he is'doing,;is
he is` planning urban ;transit on behalf of Dade County which includes;. this area.
And the isski
uethat we really tall about here,is urtianizationand urban
planning for this area, which is why ;I would like to ask for your indulgence`
you lip
and. I: would like to have step to Mike for :a,couple`of,minutes describe -this
areaspec f ically and more particularly why this variance should in fact be granted
to permit thirty -£our units on this parcel. 'Mike?
Mr. Michael'Lambert: Rick, thank you,. When Rick asked me to take a look at this
obvious- iy,:my'first.stopp ng place was ,your own zoning ordinance to determine
whether or not the situation.was,one thatiin fact was unique to the parcel. My
name is Michael'T.,Lambert and my address'is,18310 Southwest 1I2 Court, Dade
County.. The circumstances that exist on this parcel or quite simply, specifically
as Rick hasalready. indicated. The parcel goes from approximately sixty-two
in width down to approximately ninety feet in width as it approaches the Bay. '
These lots were platted in about 1926 and'they are facing onto the Bay in a pie
shaped .pattern. ..This obviousiy,. was; intended` to provide as much visual access`
to the,bay;as.possib a for those located on the sites. Subsequent to the time
they ;were <originally platted and met all the requirements of the R-1 zone under
which they were',platted,.replatting or rezoning, excuse me, occurred as part of
the planning program: Now, the area we are talking about here is the Edge Water
area. It is indentified in Miami's Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan for 1975 to,
1980as an area that is intended for high density development. Now, the
experience frankly, that we had with the Planning Advisory Board is one that
frankly confused m& jor the following reasons; The basic... the variance which
is being requested.is a yard variance because of the nature of the controls in
the,City regarding yards and setbacks. However, when you are talking about a
lot that is sixty feet wide, to ask somebody to provide more than twenty foot
side yards on,either side`'is asking them to build a building that's narrower
than twenty to"thirty feet which is physccally unfeasible. So what is being
requested by the staff apparently is this, provide two side yards of about fifty
feet`'which will cross by a factor of about twenty feet and put your building in
the negative twenty 'foot area. 'In other words, it's physically impossible to
provide side. yards, of greater than the side yard depth proposed in this proposal.
Accepting that fact ;that the twenty foot side yards are the maximum side yards
physically. possible on`this thing. The only thing left then, is the issue of
density.,* How many. dwelling units should be provided on this lot? The next
stop in my'evaluation was` -a couple of other things I want to point out. First
of :all we are,.not talking:here 'about a minimum sized lot. This lot is more
than twice the minimum-siie required for an R-5 zoned lot. Minimum lot size
for`R-S is tenthousand square feet. This lot is over twenty thousand, ok. So
what. you have is a lot that is intended, it's been laid out, it's a large lot,
s it'',half an.acre.'. It's got a building width... a minimum building width provided
I ril,the proposal.. Jt1s got the maximum side yards physically possible and then
we get to.the issue of density. Given that lot area, the current R-5 zoning
would provide for as many as fifty dwelling units on this lot. If the variance
requested is not granted, fourteen dwelling units are possible. That is all
that is possible physically on this lot under the existing yard requirements.
What'is proposed is about amid point between the two. Fifty percent between
the fourteen and the fifty just about, thirty-four. That is not asking even
the maximum obviously, for the zoning in the area. In addition there was a
comment made in the previous session about the view of the Bay. The public
view of the Bay is provided quite adequately in the best manner that's possible,
by a public park, !Margaret Pace Park. The public has access to that park, of
51t,n� z 8 joAn
course, along,'Bayshore. The public has views from that park, of course, because
of the fact that the structure that is being discussed here is on a and fall
side, not the Bay; "side of Bayshore Drive. No public's view of the'Bay is
impeded. And in point of the fact, if a three story structure is, bu'ilt"with
twenty foot Side .yards, anybody standing back here will have his view obstructed
in exactly the same manner as with a ten story building, because;I don't know.,'.
anybody who.; can stand on the ground and look over a three story building. So "
quite frankly, the question of the public's view of the Bay comes down. to a.
question not of view of the Bay, but again, back to the same issue. Is the,.""
intent of the Miami's City Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan what"it says it,is.::'
Which is to provide for high density development in this area? Is the zoning
what it says it is to provide high density zoning in this area? 'Or."are the side
yard regulations really what determines the kind of development patte'rn'J or the,'
City, of Miami, because that I is the issue. Now, the proposed side yards are
greater than the building code minimum. Their are more than'-adequatefor"public
safety and for air circulation and for light. The variance..:'and another-pofnt:.
is that the variances hat have already been granted; n this area do 'have. .have
already set the.precedent of permitting high density~development.' Specif ically
Omni, Plaza Venetia and this building were 'all granted;.variances':for their
construction. And they were all appropriate obviously, because they,did provide .
for the potential to implement the intent of the'plan by allowing:high density "
development. So what is being requested is to maintain that":'consistency of
treatment to permit the high density development 'that is recommended and proposed
within the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. The issue of setting a precedent
further down the block is relevant obviously." In point'of 'the fact, the"th'tee
parcels to he Southarein a single ownership. 'Consequently,'they had:a lot of
at least a hundred fifty to two hundred seventy foot width: '11
As<it happens,, the
way the regulation is written any lot of'over'a Hundred fifty foot width will not
require a variance to have these kind -of.:. this kind of development.;"Jn'ternis`,
of the trust trust in the area and in terms of planning also, there is the issue of.
the transit and Downtown.development densities.'': A -_'three story structure with:
fourteen dwelling units on half :an acre is hardly high density,and it's hardly
the kind of density needed to support'transit.'It.is'low moderate density; level
inconsistent with the future development of the area, inconsistent with the planning,
inconsistent with the zoning of the area. The proposed development meets on
site all of'the open space.requirements'of the zoning regulation and'it meets
all of the required parking requirements which it's neighboring=party...,unit
does not and for which the zoning variance was granted. The proposed development
will be lower than the Omni, it will be lower than Plaza Venetia and as far, as
comparable, it's exactly the same height as the neighboring units: ' It's at a
lower density than the neighboring land use, but it's`at the same height. So
what's being discussed here is the following; Is a.s'id'e yard requirement for a`
greater width of side yard than is the total width of°the lot going to,be use
to prevent a reasonable use of this property tol meet 'the objectves;not only of`'
the zoning which is existing on the, lot, the R=5 zoning, but also -Miami's:own .
Comprehensive Neighborhood Master Plan? Rick?
Mr. Zelman:; Thank you, Mike.. By way -of summary I would".like to make a few
short comments. The City. has a current and an active: program of urban development
for Downtown and;for this district in,particular. That's why this area is now
zoned R-5. There is. many of the :re.ent structures which -
have been constructed
in this area have received variances suitable-to'iet:th6m be constructed 'in a
manner in which they were done, I'm speaking now about'Omni"and Plaza Venetia
among others. There is as you probably now"a proposed new municipal parking
garage at the Red Coach insite on Biscayne which is within,walking distance of
this site. The North leg 'of the Downtown'People Mover will"terminate very close
to this site with a major 'bus :distribution center., It's been'in the interest of
government of the City of Miami, Dade 'County, State of Florida and so forth to
encourage the development of the inner city area; of the Downtown area, of areas
which ;have already existing facilities and .plan'new facilities to move people
around conveniently without automobiles. Thai's'why.'the urbanization of this
area is so critical and that's why specifically the Planning Department is playing
off base when they talk about a three story building because their planning...
Biscayne Boulevard in 1952 when they talk about "a"three story building on this
site. It doesn't make planning sense,"it's foolish. There are good economic
reasons to grantthisvarianceforthe-City. They are good urban design reasons.
The view is`not blocked for the ,public. It is very; similar to the area around
Southeast 15th Street just,off of Brickell'where you`have got buildings like
Costa Bella and Brickell Shores. There is, no precedent,'set because it's a
unique location and a'unique lot' configuration. There are good legal reasons
to grant this variance. That's what the ordinance was made for to give you the
gl I1i�
sit
18 19M
Mayor Ferre:' On rebuttal short and quickly
And speaking.,of economics
March 20, 1978 when Mr. Fi.
need this variance to.make
number of units we think i
I agree with them and h,ag
to the, application of that
There is a hardship here.,
of the ,property. Thehard
done forty. some years,Iago.,
what we are attemptingto
to build that. :You have b
something which,is unreaso
application to .this partic
this evening to build that
Mayor Ferre Any': further
Mr. - - -
lot
lot
i
a.F, ..a.ov uvw�:.� ..) ��......... �..
uld.like to quote from a Zoning Board Meeting of
equesteId a variance for the Carlye when he said "we
s project economically feasible and to have the
uld take to operate efficiently and properly" and
with them then and I agree with them with regard
tement to this particular unique parcel as well.
hardship is not a`function of the present ownership
is particularly a -function of a platting which was
h developed a:lot which :is very, very peculiar and
.s,to build that. To .build nothing different than
,e you,what it 'looks like land that is certainly not
would,allow that type o£.building if it were'not because of -the fact that the
is a narrow lot which would,require the°setbacks variance in order to be built.
gl 53 % 1 a 1980
Mr. Lacasa:
Mayor Ferre:
s
Chat's right,;
that we hav
Br
Mr. Plummer: Call the roll.
g1 55 MAR 181980
_---- - -WIMP
Mr Fosmoen: The area that we propose to study is from Omni up to 36th Street.
Re%,. Gibson: From Omni to 36th Street.
Mayor Ferre: Ok, further discussion, call the roll.
ON ROLL CALL:
(COMMENT INAUDIBLE)
7. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BE INSTRUCTED TO HAVE A BROAD, OVERALL
GENERAL REVIEW OF CITY ORDINANCES APPLICABLE TO MARINAS.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would like to bring up something to everybody. It's
settled down nowandthere is... I have waited to bring this up. You know,
Marilyn Reed I have great respect for as I think all the members of this Commission
and after the thing on Fair Isle she made a comment to me and I think a very
fair...
Mayor.Ferre: is it quotable?
Mr. Plummer: It's uotabl S i '
q e. ure t s quotable. I won't refer to the remarks
Sl
56 A R 18 1980
� 1 �
6
0
8 • �
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 6871, BY ADDING A NEW
3B DISTRICT.
ARTICLE VII-2 - LOW DENSITY TOWNHOUSE R-
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED-.'
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871,
THE.COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI' BY ADDING ANEW ARTICLE
VII-2'- LOW DENSITY TOWNHOUSE R=3B DISTRICT;,
BY DELETING SUB -SECTION (91-a), SECTION 2
ARTICLE II IN ITS ENTIRETY.AND IN LIEU THERE.
OF ADDING A NEW SUB -SECTION (91a);
PEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS; OR
PARTS 'TH.EREOF IN CONFLICT, AND CONTAINING,A
SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
Passed,on,its`.first reading by title, at the meeting:of February
12, 1980,-
was taken up for its second and final reading by title.:and;adoption.
On motion of
Commissioner Lacasa, econded by Commissioner Carollo, the Ordinance
was thereupon
given its..second and final reading by title and passed and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Mr.'Carollo, Vice -Mayor ,Lacasa and `Mayor Ferre...
NOES: Mi.lplummer and Rev. Gibson.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 9074'
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: AMEND ORDINANCE 6871, BY APPLYING ARTICLE
VII-2 LOW DENSITY TOWNHOUSE R-3B DISTRICT TO PROPERTIES ABUTTING s
AND ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF BRICKELL AVENUE TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF
APPROXIMATELY 180' BETWEEN S.E. 15TH ROAD AND S.E. 25TH ROAD. (ZONED
R-3A AND R-1)
Mayor Ferre: Take up 4B. Lacasa, you still want to move it?
Mr. Lacasa: Move.
Mr. Carollo: Second.
Mayor Ferre: Carollo seconds, ;further discussion, read the ordinance.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: Oh, sure, all the time in. the world.
Ms. Selma Alexander:>.My,name is Selma Alexander and I live at 2323 South Miami
Avenue I and I have in, %front of me'a little memo at which time the City Commission.
directed the Planning Department meet with people in the neighborhood to see
about the application of R-3B or. the maintenance of R-3A in the neighborhood
and unfortunately I was unable ao be present, but you all have a copy of the
memo. And in applying this-6 t' the Northwest side of Brickell Avenue which
impacts upon South Miami.Avenue, it occurs to me that you are legitimizing something
that already has gone too far. ' I will leave Mr. Mayor and Mr. Lacasa. We can
just drop_ the whole subject. You know, I find this really rather interesting
and I know iE's late,and I stayed up late to be here and to be heard. And I
might add :that at the Planning Board when this thing was passed there were three
new member .,of the Planning Board and with all due respect they didn't have a
clue. So:anything that they may have voted on this really has no merit in their
recommendation.; I feel that the neighbors and people involved all felt that the
R-3A should remain as it is. I think that the R-3B is entirely too, dense and
will be,too dense for what's there. I'm -living with it and I don't think it
needs to go anyfurthe'r and I'm not going to go into the merits or demerit of
that, but I feel that there is not enough difference and too much margin for
looseness with just the... the,,, what is it? Not the Environmental Review Board,
gl 58
produce go11 od housing along itr=Keli Avenue..
Mayor Ferre: Further discussion.r.
Mr. Plummer: Do,you,own,property in the area, sir?.
gl 59 NEAR 18 1980
10 .
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 6871, ARTICLE XV, SECTION
2(6-B) TO PROVIDE FOR INTERIM PARKING LOTS IN THE C-3 DISTRICT.
gl 60 MAR 181980
•
•
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, AS
AMENDED,' THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI,,BY ADDING A NEW SUB-
SECTION (6-B) TO SECTION 2,, ARTICLE XV,
-3 DISTRICT, ASEREINAFTER
CENTRAL COMMERCIAL'C , H
SET BY REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE
.FORTH;
SECTIONS,; OR PARTS THEREOF IN .CONFLICT; AND
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION:.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting.of
February 28 .1980
On,mo'tion of
was taken up _'for its second and final reading by ,'title Viand
seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the
adoption". .11
Ordinance was:thereupo
Commissioner Lacasa,
given its second.and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by
the followingvote
AYES:: Mr. Carollo, Vice -Mayor Lacasa and,Mayor. Ferre.
�
NOES:" Mr. Plummer and Rev.'Gibson.
ABSENT:" None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO: 9076
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.
11FIRST AND SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND "SCRIVENER'S ERROR"
CONTAINED IN ORDINANCE 8939 ADOPTED MAY 24, 1979.
gl 63. MAN 18 1980
0
0 { -0, 1
12.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE OF ZONING - 296 N.W. 20TH STREET -
FROM C-4 TO R-4.
Mayor Ferre: Ordinance first reading, Planning Department, change of zoning
classidfication of approximately 296 Northwest•20th Street, from C-4 to R-4.
What's that all about?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Lacasa: Who requested this?
Mr. Reid This is a request from Dade County HUD really to conform to"the Opertown
redevelopment :plan and allow' hem to rehabilitate some housing units that are
a part of the housing program.:
Mayor Ferre: Ok. Mr. Carollo moves, Father Gibson.seconds,;further iscussio-n-11
on Item 8? Read the ordinance on;first`'reading. Call the roll.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
LOTS 1 AND 4; HOME SUB (B-124) BEING APPROXIMATELY
296 NORTHWEST 20TH STREET, FROM C-4 (GENERAL
COMMERCIAL) to R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE)
DISTRICT, AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN
gl
�2 MAR 18190V
, 6.0 0 •
•
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 ORDINANCEA D* OR PARTS
CONTAINING ASEVERABILITYECLAUSE.
IN CONFLICOF
,
Was introduced by Commissioner Carollo and seconded by Commissioner
Gibson and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
CITY OF r +rV.AMI
DOCUMENT
MEETING DATE:
March 18, 1980
INDEX
COMMISSION I RETRIEVAL
ITEM NOI DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION _ACTION CODE N0,
1
COMMISSION AGENDA AND CITY CLERK REPORT
0013
2
CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND'DISCONTINU-
ING THE .PUBLIC USE OF THE PORTION OF N.W. 20T
AVENUE FROM THE NORTH RIGHT"OF WAY LINE OF
N.W.�11TH STREET, ;NORTH +512.39' IN CONJUNC-
TION WITH TENTATIVE PLAT NO. 1061-A
R-80-183
80-183
3
GRANTING A ONE YEAR'EXTENSION OFA VARIANCE
AS"LISTED JNORDINANCE,NO.. 6871;`ARTLCLE IV,`.`
SECTION 21(1)"(b), TO PERMIT"ERECTION OF"A;'
RADIO TRANSMITTING TOWER;"FOUR"'HUNDRED"EIGHTY,
FEET ABOVE "GRADE "( 3 7 5 " FEET PERMITTED) ;.ON LOTS"`
R=80-184'
80-184
1.2,&3 SMITH SUBDIVISION`
4
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE AS LISTED IN
ORDINANCE N0. 6871,.'ARTICLE"IU, SECTION 23(2)
R=80=185
80-185
(b