HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Outlook Media Lourdes Slazyk Cross-Examinations QuestionsOUTLOOK MEDIA
LOURDES SLAZYK
CROSS-EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
I. DUTIES AS ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
a. What is your title with the City?
b. How long have you been the Zoning Administrator?
c. As Zoning Administrator, are you familiar with the Zoning Code
provisions regarding your duties?
i. As Zoning Administrator, in general, you are the person that is
responsible for the administration and enforcement of the
Zoning Ordinance (2101.1) Tab A (small packet)?
ii. This duty includes interpreting provisions of the Zoning Code,
doesn't it?
iii. Is it fair to say that where the Code is silent, you are
occasionally called upon to make an interpretation of the Code's
provisions regarding specific situations?
iv. Sometimes in those situations, your interpretation needs to
make sense in light of other provisions of the Code, right?
v. As Zoning Administrator, do your duties include reviewing
permit applications, including outdoor advertising sign
applications?
vi. When making decisions regarding permits, is it fair to say that
you are the responsible party for reviewing applicable
regulations, whether they are in the Code or elsewhere?
II. STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
a. Are you familiar with Section 1803 of the Zoning Code? Tab B (small
packet) - - - - - - — —
submitted into the public
record in connection with
item PZ.6 on 04-08-10
O, 00&/(off_ Sobv�1 1Qr— �V�% O p'j �iC�► Priscilla A. Thompson
LOUT es � ��a City Clerk
Cross- xc�►��naTre�v� QvestorL5'
b. "An appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed
from, unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the
zoning board, after the officer has received the notice of the appeal,
that, by reasons of facts stated by such officer, a stay would, in the
officer's opinion, cause imminent peril to life and property."
c. So — when your decision is appealed, the proceedings in furtherance
of what was appealed are all stayed — correct?
III. SPECIFIC ROLE REGARDING OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS
a. As Zoning Administrator, is one of your duties to review the
permitting for outdoor advertising signs?
i. What is your specific role?
b. What is the approval process in the City of Miami for approval of
outdoor advertising signs?
i. Do you review FDOT Form 575-070-04 as part of this process?
ii. Does that form ask for your confirmation that the proposed
outdoor advertising sign is in compliance with all duly adopted
local ordinances?
iii. Is there a prohibition in the City of Miami from allowing
outdoor advertising signs within 1500 feet of one another? Tab
D (small packet)
IV. FEBRUARY 2009 CAN PARTNERS REQUEST
a. Are you familiar with what's referred to as the Can Partners site?
b. Do you recall that in February, 2009, Outlook Media, on behalf of
Can Partners, submitted a request to you for approval of FDOT Form
575-070-04?
c. You denied that request on February 19, 2009, didn't you?
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item PZ.6 on 04-08-10
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
d. After you denied that request, Outlook filed an appeal of your denial?
e. Would you agree that pending the appeal of that decision, everything
was stayed regarding billboard permitting related to that site?
V. SECTION 926.15.2.1(a): 1500 FOOT SPACING REQUIREMENT
a. Are you familiar with Section 926.15.2.1(a)? Tab D (small packet)
b. Doesn't this provision of the City Code require 1500 feet of spacing
between outdoor advertising signs on the same side of a limited access
highway, including expressways?
c. If you have an application for an outdoor advertising sign pending,
and a second application arrives for a sign within 1500 feet of the first
application, what is the City's procedure?
i. Isn't it true that you give priority to the first application — and
that you wouldn't approve the 2nd application unless the I`
application failed to meet applicable requirements? "First in,
first out?"
ii. In short — doesn't a decision on the 2nd application depend on a
final decision on the I" application?
VI. APPROVAL OF THE LUMMUS SITE APPLICATION
a. In May, 2009, Outlook Media's appeal of your denial of their
application for the Can Partners site was still pending, correct?
b. On May 20, 2009, you approved FDOT Form 575-070-04 for CBS
Outdoor, Inc. for a site known as Lummus, located at approximately
the west side of I-95, 210 feet south of NW 2nd Street, didn't you?
c. Isn't it true that the Lummus site is within 1500 feet of the Can
Partners site?
d. Isn't it true that on the date that you approved the Lummus site, the
Can Partners appeal was still pending?
Submitted into the public
3 record in connection with
item PZ.6 on 04-08-10
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
e. Fair to say that if any party came in today with an outdoor advertising
sign application for a site within 1500 feet of the Lummus site, you
would deny that application?
VII. DECISION REGARDING APPROVAL OF LUMMUS SIGN
a. Prior to approving the Lummus sign, did you ever speak with any
other party regarding that application and the decision you needed to
make on that application?
1. Did you ever discuss the effect of the Can Partners
appeal on the Lummus application with anyone?
a. City Attorney's office?
b. City Manager's office?
2. Were you ever given any specific instructions to approve
the Lummus application?
a. Who, if anyone, gave you those instructions?
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
4 item PZ.6 on 04-08-10
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk