HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2004-06-24 MinutesCity of Miami
City Hall
3500 Pan American Drive
Miami, FL 33133
www.ci. miami. fl. us
° , e
0 ' .L.::- '49;1-, °I:It-
it
11C0flFE1]H„T[G
. *
`4, � �
z ,
Verbatim Minutes
Thursday, June 24, 2004
9:00 AM
PLANNING AND ZONING
(Verbatim Minutes)
City Hall Commission Chambers
City Commission
Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor
Arthur E. Teele, Jr., Chairman
Joe Sanchez, Vice Chairman
Angel Gonzalez, Commissioner District One
Johnny L. Winton, Commissioner District Two
Tomas Regalado, Commissioner District Four
Joe Arriola, City Manager
Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney
Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CONTENTS
PR - PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS PAGES 3 - 4
MV - MAYORAL VETOES PAGE 4
AM - APPROVING MINUTES PAGES 4 - 5
CA - CONSENT AGENDA PAGES 4 - 23
PA - PERSONAL APPEARANCES PAGE 24
M - MAYOR'S ITEMS PAGE 25
D1 - DISTRICT 1 ITEMS PAGE 25
D2 - DISTRICT 2 ITEMS PAGE 25
D3 - DISTRICT 3 ITEMS PAGE 25
D4 - DISTRICT 4 ITEMS PAGES 25 - 31
D5 - DISTRICT 5 ITEMS PAGES 31 - 37
PH - PUBLIC HEARINGS PAGES 38 - 42
EM - EMERGENCY ORDINANCES PAGES 43 - 45
SR - SECOND READING ORDINANCES PAGE 45
FR - FIRST READING ORDINANCES PAGES 45 - 49
RE - RESOLUTIONS PAGES 50 - 62
BC - BOARDS AND COMMITTEES PAGES 63 - 68
DI - DISCUSSION ITEMS PAGES 69 - 101
ES- EXECUTIVE SESSION PAGES 102 - 104
PART B
PZ - PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS PAGES 105 - 339
SI - SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA PAGES 339 - 343
City of Miami Page 2 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Present: Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Regalado and Chairman Teele
Absent: Commissioner Winton and Vice Chairman Sanchez
On the 24th day of June, 2004, the City Commission of the City of Miami, Florida, met at its
regular meeting place in City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in regular
session. The meeting was called to order at 9: 23 a.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele Jr., with
Vice Chairman Sanchez and Commissioner Winton absent, recessed at 12:17 p.m., reconvened
at 2: 36 p.m., and adjourned at 3:18 a.m. on June 25, 2004.
Note for the Record: Vice Chairman Sanchez entered the meeting at 9: 24 a.m.; and
Commissioner Winton entered the meeting at 9:46 a.m.
ALSO PRESENT.•
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney
Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk
Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk
ABSENT.•
Joe Arriola, City Manager
Note for the Record: Larry Spring, Chief of Office of Strategic Planning, Management and
Budgeting, and Alicia Cuervo Shreiber, Chief of Operation substituted for the City Manager,
who arrived after 5 p.m.
PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
DELIVERED
PR.1 04-00684 CEREMONIAL ITEM
Name of Honoree Presenter Protocol Item
Goodwill Ambassadors Commissioner Regalado Certificates
Karen Coplin Cooper Commissioner Regalado Salute
Homer Whittaker Commissioner Regalado Salute
1. Commissioner Regalado presented a proclamation to the familily of prominent businessman
Dr. Manuel Rico -Perez (in absentia), a famous medical doctor who has tremendous visibility
throughout the United States with radio programs in Miami, New York, Los Angeles and a
national busines headquaters in Miami.
2. Commissioner Regalado salutes the Community Relations Board for their hard work in
several community events. Chairman Teele presented a proclamation to Ms. Karen Coplin
Cooper, Sr. Assistant to the City Manager, for her participation and leadership in the Goodwill
Ambassadors Program and working with the Community Relations Board. Certificates of
Appreciation were presented to the following members of the Community Relations Board and
the Goodwill Ambassadors: Brenda Shapiro, Jack Blumenfeld (in absentia), Teresa Zorilla
Clark, Jennifer Gerz-Escandon, Chantal Meo, Reverend Richard Bennett, Barbara Bisno and
Willy Calvino (in absentia), Julie Mansfield, Alicia Squitin, Mariaelena Alpsagir , Grecia
Ameneiro, Teresa Austin, Dawn Budham, Yolanda Camacho, Kin Sun Chu, Liliam Daniel,
Daniel Davila, Berta Davis, Orlando del Valle, Dirk Duval, Debrah Ennevor, Natalie French,
Mayling Ganuza, Jennifer Goodman, Patrice Humbert, Susel Izaguirre, Zulema Leon, Ruby
Lockett, Adrienne Lynch, Maria Martorell, Tracy Osley, Dorcas Perez, Hilton Pierce, Gigi Rolle,
City of Miami Page 3 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
MAYORAL VETOES
Zelideth Sanchez, Joy Saunlett, Theresa Shelton, Michelle Sims, Charmane Standifer-Tate, and
Avery Washington. A certificate was also presented to Homer Whitatker, Coconut Grove Net
Administrator (in absentia) for his extraordinary work during the Goombay Festival.
Chairman Teele: Good morning. Welcome to the City Hall of the City of Miami government.
This City Commission meeting is for June 24, 2004. The time is approximately 9: 25. This
morning we'd like to begin by thanking all of you that have come to see government in action,
and particularly, we note the presence of the Brigade 250 -- is it 2506? -- 2506, and Mr.
Rodriguez, it's always a pleasure to have you in our Commission chambers. We also have with
us today the Civilian Independent Panel, and other distinguished citizens who are giving up so
much of their time. We thank all of you. This morning, in that spirit, we'd like to yield to
Commissioner Regalado, and ask that the persons that are going to be presented to start making
your way to the dais, but this is a very special moment in which we honor some of our community
Ambassadors.
NO MAYORAL VETOES
Chairman Teele: This concludes the informal portion of our meeting. We normally start our
meeting with a prayer. Reverend Bennett, why don't you stay and offer a prayer for the City, and
following the prayer, we will have the pledge of allegiance to the flag. All right. There are -- as
of this date, the City Clerk has not received any mayoral vetoes, legislative items acted upon by
previous Commission meetings.
APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETING:
Planning and Zoning Meeting of May 27, 2004
DEFERRED
CONSENT AGENDA
CA.1 04-00600 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SUBMERGED LAND
LEASE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM,
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND,
FOR A TERM OF TEN (10) YEARS, FOR THE CITY'S USE OF SUBMERGED
LANDS OWNED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA ADJACENT TO CITY UPLAND
PROPERTY, LOCATED AT 601 NORTHWEST 7TH STREET, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, A/K/A SPRING GARDEN POINT PARK ("PARK"), WITH
SAID LEASE TO REFLECT NO RENT AS LONG AS THE DOCK SLIPS ARE
USED FOR TEMPORARY DOCKAGE PURPOSES.
04-00600-cover memo.pdf
04-00600-pre Iegislation.pdf
04-00600-pre agreement.pdf
04-00600-exhibit-submerged lands Iease.pdf
04-00600 - submittal.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
City of Miami Page 4 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
R-04-0389
CA.2 04-00602 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER'S ENGAGEMENT OF PBS & J,
SELECTED FROM THE LIST OF PRE -APPROVED SURVEYING AND
MAPPING FIRMS, APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 02-144, ADOPTED
FEBRUARY 14, 2002, FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO THE
REPLAT OF LANDS AT GIBSON PARK FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "
GIBSON PARK REPLAT," IN DISTRICT 5, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$57,500, BASED ON: (1) THE SCOPE OF SERVICES AND SCHEDULES
REQUIRED FOR SAID PROJECT AND (2) THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
SET FORTH IN THE WORK ORDER AUTHORIZATION; AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE WORK ORDER AUTHORIZATION, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSES;
ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $57,500, FOR
SAID SERVICES AND EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI
FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 331419.
04-00602-cover memo.pdf
04-00602-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00602-revenue and exp. report.pdf
04-00602-pre psa.pdf
04-00602-pre legislation.pdf
04-00602-exhibit 1- work order auth.pdf
04-00602-exhibit 2- proposed replat.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0390
CA.3 04-00603 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID
OF ROBBIE'S FEED & SUPPLY, FOR THE PROVISION OF DOG FOOD FOR
THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE CANINE, FOR A TWO-YEAR PERIOD,
WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR
PERIODS, AT AN ANNUAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $14,940,
FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $59,760;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE GENERAL
OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.710.
04-00603-cover memo.pdf
04-00603-award recommendation.pdf
04-00603-tabulation of bids.pdf
04-00603 - submittal.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0391
City of Miami Page 5 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CA.4 04-00606 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID
OF NES TRAFFIC SAFETY, FOR THE PROVISION OF BARRICADE RENTAL
SERVICES, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, ON AN AS -NEEDED
CONTRACT BASIS, FOR AN INITIAL TWO-YEAR PERIOD WITH THE
OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, AT
ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT
CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.610.
04-00606-cover memo.pdf
04-00606-award recommendation. pdf
04-00606-tabulation. pdf
04-00606-bid security list.pdf
04-00606 - submittal.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0392
CA.5 04-00607 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, ACCEPTING BIDS
FROM GLEN'S TENT AND TABLE RENTAL SERVICE
(PRIMARY VENDOR) AND NAVAS PARTY PRODUCTIONS
(SECONDARY VENDOR), FOR THE PROVISION OF TENTS, TABLES,
LINENS AND CHAIR RENTALS, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING,
TO BE UTILIZED CITYWIDE, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, FOR
A TWO-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN THE PROPOSED AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $65,000, FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR (
2003-2004); ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $65,
000, FROM THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT ACCOUNTS, SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, AND/OR OPERATING
BUDGETS OF THE VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, AS
MAY BE ADJUSTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY THE CITY COMMISSION IN
THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
ORDINANCES, OR AS OTHERWISE ADJUSTED AS PERMITTED BY LAW.
04-00607-cover memo.pdf
04-00607-award recommendation.pdf
04-00607-award sheet.pdf
04-00607-tabulation sheet.pdf
04-00607-bid security list.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0393
City of Miami Page 6 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Direction to the City Manager by Chairman Teele to alert the administrative staff, who gather in
the staff room in City Hall during Commission Meetings, that when the Commission takes up an
item, the appropriate, relevant staff person(s) report to the Chambers immediately.
Direction to the City Manager by Chairman Teele to provide a report listing all expenditures
made by each of the City departments during the last year.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed unanimously, directing the City Manager to provide a semiannual status report of efforts
made by the Purchasing Department in reaching out to local vendors to aggressively encourage
their participation in City bids, listing the number of vendors solicited, their names, product, and
tally of success.
CA.6 04-00608 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, ACCEPTING THE BID
OF PALM PETERBILT-GMC TRUCKS, INC., FOR THE ACQUISITION OF
TWO (2) ROAD TRACTORS, EACH WITH A FIVE-YEAR BUMPER -TO -
BUMPER PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE SERVICES, FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF FIRE- RESCUE, AT A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$206,396; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE "FEMA/USAR GRANT AWARD
PROJECT NO. 110120," ACCOUNT CODE NO. 280104.6.840.
04-00608-cover memo.pdf
04-00608-award recommendation.pdf
04-00608-tabulation. pdf
04-00608-bid security list.pdf
04-00608-FEMA memo.pdf
04-00608-FEMA program position paper. pdf
04-00608-pre legislation.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0394
CA.7 04-00609 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF CISCO LAN MANAGEMENT
SOLUTION ("LMS") SOFTWARE, AS LISTED ON THE ATTACHMENTS,
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, FROM COLEMAN TECHNOLOGY,
AWARDED UNDER EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 250-
000-03-1, EFFECTIVE UNTIL JULY 31, 2005, SUBJECT TO FURTHER
EXTENSIONS OR REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, AT AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $21,965; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE
INSTALLATION, CONFIGURATION AND INTEGRATION OF THE CISCO LMS
SOFTWARE, AS LISTED ON THE ATTACHMENTS, FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF POLICE, FROM UNISYS CORPORATION, AWARDED UNDER EXISTING
STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 973-561-04-2, EFFECTIVE UNTIL
MARCH 31,2006, SUBJECT TO FURTHER EXTENSIONS OR
REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AT AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $34,878, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO
City of Miami Page 7 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
EXCEED $56,843; ALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$56,843, FOR SAID PURCHASES, FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST
FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 690003.291278.6.840, IN THE AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $21, 965 AND 690003.291278.6. 340, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $34,878, WITH SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN APPROVED
BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S, "GUIDE TO EQUITABLE SHARING."
04-00609-cover memo.pdf
04-00609-affidavits. pdf
04-00609-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00609-fax. pdf
04-00609-contract. pdf
04-00609-cert. of contract.pdf
04-00609-exhibit 1- inv. for quotation 1.pdf
04-00609-exhibit 2- inv. for quotation 2.pdf
04-00609-exhibit 3- inv. for quotation 3.pdf
04-00609 - submittal.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0395
CA.8 04-00610 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY CLIFFORD ELAM, WITHOUT ADMISSION
OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $31,000 IN FULL AND COMPLETE
SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE
CITY OF MIAMI, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS AND SERVANTS, IN THE CASE
OF CLIFFORD ELAM V. CITY OF MIAMI AND STEVEN WATHAN, IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CASE NO. 03-20223-CIV-UNGARO-
BENAGES, UPON EXECUTING A GENERAL RELEASE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER OFFICERS, AGENTS AND
EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM THE SELF INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND,
INDEX CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.652.
04-00610-cover memo.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0396
CA.9 04-00611 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "SCHOOL
BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY 2004 SUMMER READING PROGRAM"
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $301,875, PROVIDED
TO THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE
City of Miami Page 8 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
COUNTY, TO FUND A SPECIAL SUMMER ENHANCEMENT READING
ACTIVITIES PROGRAM DESIGNED TO AUGMENT THE READING SKILLS
OF SCHOOL STUDENTS ATTENDING SUMMER CAMP IN CITY PARKS;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID FUNDS AND TO
EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT FORM FOR CONTRACTED SERVICES, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
04-00611-cover memo.pdf
04-00611-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00611-exhibit 1- agreement.pdf
04-00611-exhibit 2- addendum to agree.pdf
04-00611-exhibit 3- payment request.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0397
CA.10 04-00612 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A NEW
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "MIAMI FIRE EXPLORERS JUVENILE
FIRE SETTER PROGRAM," AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $1,000, PROVIDED BY A DONATION FROM
FIREFIGHTERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ("FCF"), A NOT -FOR -PROFIT
ORGANIZATION, TO BE USED EXCLUSIVELY TO COVER COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") FIRE EXPLORERS
JUVENILE FIRE SETTER PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION PROGRAM
TOWARDS SUPPLIES, VISUAL AIDS AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID DONATION AND
EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
04-00612-cover memo.pdf
04-00612-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00612-letter. pdf
04-00612-copy of check.pdf
04-00612-charitable foundation.pdf
04-00612-program description. pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0398
CA.11 04-00613 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), DECLARING THAT THE ACQUISITION OF THE FEE -SIMPLE INTEREST IN
PARCELS 67, 75, 76, 77 AND 92 THROUGH NEGOTIATED CONVEYANCE
OR CONDEMNATION SERVES A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND IS NECESSARY
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CULTURAL AND RECREATIONAL
COMPONENT OF THE LITTLE HAITI PARK PROJECT; DIRECTING THE
City of Miami Page 9 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CITY ATTORNEY TO USE ALL RESOURCES AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CITY ATTORNEY INCLUDING THE RETENTION OF SPECIAL
COUNSEL, EXPERT WITNESSES AND CONSULTANTS; AND TO TAKE
FURTHER ACTIONS THAT ARE REASONABLY NECESSARY TO ACQUIRE
SAID PARCELS THROUGH CONDEMNATION; AUTHORIZING THE
RETENTION OF SPECIAL COUNSEL, TO RENDER LEGAL SERVICES
RELATED TO SAID PROPERTY ACQUISITION IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($200,000.00) PLUS
COSTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY; ALLOCATING FUNDS
FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ACCOUNT CODE NO. 331412.
819307.6.270.
04-00613-cover memo. pdf
04-00613-exhibit .pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0399
CA.12 04-00614 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION FOR THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OF METRIC ENGINEERING, INC.,
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 03-1192, ADOPTED
NOVEMBER 25, 2003, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "N.E. 71 STREET
STORM SEWERS PROJECT, B-50690," FOR PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING FEES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,250,
INCREASING COMPENSATION FROM $75,000 TO $95,250, BASED ON THE
MODIFIED SCOPE OF SERVICES REQUIRED FOR SAID PROJECT;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR SAID INCREASE, IN A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $20,250, FOR SERVICES AND EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM PROJECT
NO. 352216 ENTITLED "CITYWIDE LOCAL DRAINAGE PROJECTS FISCAL
YEAR 2002-2006;" AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
SUPPLEMENTAL WORK ORDER, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED
FORM; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-1192 TO REFLECT SAID
INCREASE.
04-00614-cover memo. pdf
04-00614-budgetary impact .pdf
04-00614-pre Iegislation.pdf
04-00614-pre psa.pdf
04-00614-pre corporate reso.pdf
04-00614-pre agenda pg.pdf
04-00614-exhibit- work order auth.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0400
City of Miami Page 10 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CA.13 04-00616 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
FUNDING OF THE POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE ("PAL") PROGRAM, TO
ASSIST WITH EXPENSES RELATED TO THE OPERATION OF THE
PROGRAM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $559,495.84; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO.
690001, WITH SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE
CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH FLORIDA STATE STATUTES,
CHAPTER 932.7055, AS AMENDED.
04-00616-cover memo.pdf
04-00616-affidavit. pdf
04-00616-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00616 - submittal.pdf
04-00616 - police summary.pdf
DEFERRED
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed unanimously, to DEFER item CA.13 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for
July 22, 2004; further requesting the Chief of Police to explain this item to Commissioner Gonza
lez.
CA.14 04-00622 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL ("CIP") APPROVING THE
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, PURSUANT TO REQUEST
FOR LETTERS OF INTEREST NO. 03-04-097, THAT THE MOST QUALIFIED
FIRMS TO PROVIDE PRIVATE INVESTIGATION SERVICES FOR THE CIP,
ON AN AS -NEEDED BASIS ARE: (1) GELLER INVESTIGATIONS, INC., (2)
UPTOWN INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY, INC., (3) HORIZON INVESTIGATIONS,
INC., AND (4) PEDRO FERNANDEZ-RUIZ C/O A INVESTIGATION AGENCY,
INC.; AUTHORIZING THE CIP'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH EACH TOP -RANKED FIRM,
FOR AN INITIAL TWO-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR
THREE ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS; ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN AN
AGGREGATE ANNUAL AMOUNT FOR ALL CONTRACTS NOT TO EXCEED
$142,000, FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.830201.6.340.
04-00622-cover memo.pdf
04-00622-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00622-email.pdf
04-00622-evaluation of RFLI.pdf
04-00622-exhibit 1-psa.pdf
04-00622-exhibit 2-scope of services. pdf
04-00622-exhibit 3- compensation.pdf
04-00622 - revision.pdf
04-00622 - revised attachment.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS on the Consent Agenda.
City of Miami Page 11 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0401
CA.15 04-00628 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A NEW
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "PROGRAMS FOR THE
DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED, 2004 -2005" AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS FOR ITS OPERATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $243,744, CONSISTING
OF A GRANT IN AN AMOUNT OF $9,720, FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES AND A SECOND GRANT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $234,024, FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA AGENCY FOR
HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, MEDICAID PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
TO FUND PROGRAMS FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED, WHICH
ARE ADMINISTERED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI'S DEPARTMENT OF PARKS
AND RECREATION THROUGH ITS PROGRAMS FOR PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES DURING THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2004 THROUGH JUNE 30,
2005; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE
GRANTS AND TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO IMPLEMENT ACCEPTANCE
OF SAID GRANTS.
04-00628-cover memo.pdf
04-00628-budgetary impact.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0402
CA.16 04-00629 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING BIDS OF
HPI INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR GROUP 1 AND DIXIE SALES COMPANY
USA, INC., FOR GROUP 2, FOR THE PURCHASE OF PHOTOGRAPHIC
SUPPLIES, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING, TO BE USED
CITYWIDE, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, PURSUANT TO
SOUTHEAST FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL PURCHASING COOPERATIVE
BID NO. H-45-04, EFFECTIVE THROUGH MAY 28, 2005, SUBJECT TO ANY
FURTHER EXTENSION OR REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS, WITH THE
OPTION TO EXTEND FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR, FOR AN ANNUAL
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $90,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $90,000, FROM THE GENERAL OPERATING
BUDGETS OF THE VARIOUS OPERATING DEPARTMENTS AND
AGENCIES; AUTHORIZING SAID PURCHASES, AS NEEDED, SUBJECT TO
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS, AS MAY BE ADJUSTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY
THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS/CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCES, OR AS OTHERWISE ADJUSTED AS
PERMITTED BY LAW.
City of Miami Page 12 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00629-cover memo.pdf
04-00629-pompano beach purchasing memo.pdf
04-00629-pompano beach tabulations.pdf
04-00629-advertizement. pdf
04-00629-pompano beach proposal. pdf
04-00629-pompano beach letters. pdf
04-00629-award under southeast FL. gov.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0403
CA.17 04-00631 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY THE SUM OF $60,000 TO PLAINTIFFS'
ATTORNEY, RONALD COHEN, ESQUIRE, FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND
COSTS IN SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE
CITY OF MIAMI FOR THE CASE OF AFSCME, LOCAL 1907, CHARLES COX
V. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE
NO. 99-00620 CA (30); ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE
AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND, INDEX CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.661.
04-00631-cover memo. pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0404
CA.18 04-00633 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION FOR THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OF PROFESSIONAL GENERAL
CONTRACTORS, INC., PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 03-
552, ADOPTED MAY 22, 2003, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "LEMON
CITY DAYCARE CENTER PROJECT (FOURTH BIDDING), B-6272A," FOR
ADDITIONAL WORK REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000, INCREASING COMPENSATION FROM
$542,000 TO $567,000, BASED ON THE MODIFIED SCOPE OF SERVICES
REQUIRED FOR SAID PROJECT; ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR SAID
INCREASE, IN A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000, FOR
SERVICES AND EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI, FROM
PARKS FACILITIES GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS ACCOUNT PROJECT
NO. 331369; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED
FORM FOR SAID PURPOSE; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-552 TO
REFLECT SAID INCREASE.
City of Miami Page 13 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00633-cover memo.pdf
04-00633-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00633-pre contract.pdf
04-00633-back up.pdf
04-00633-exhibit- 1st amend. to contract.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0405
CA.19 04-00601 DISCUSSION ITEM
ACCEPTING A REPORT FROM THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD.
04-00601-report. pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
CA.20 04-00642 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), ACCEPTING THE BID OF HORIZON CONTRACTORS, INC., FOR THE
PROJECT ENTITLED "GRAND AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS B-40680 (
FORMERLY B-4668), 2ND BIDDING, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PROJECT #
651022" IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,952,531; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 341208, IN THE
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,952,531, FOR CONTRACT COSTS,
PLUS $615,989, FOR ESTIMATED EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FOR TOTAL PROJECT COSTS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $
4,568,520, AS SET FORTH IN THE TABULATION OF BIDS DOCUMENT AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FACT SHEET,
ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM,
FOR SAID PROJECT.
04-00642-cover memo.pdf
04-00642-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00642-exhibit 1-tabulation.pdf
04-00642-exhibit 2-project fact sheet.pdf
04-00642-exhibit 3-contract. pdf
04-00642 - revised fact sheet.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0406
CA.21 04-00652 RESOLUTION
City of Miami Page 14 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
ACQUISITION OF KRONOS WORKFORCE CENTRAL LICENSES,
HARDWARE, TRAINING, SUPPORT SERVICES AND IMPLEMENTATION
SERVICES FROM KRONOS, INC, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS,
UNDER EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 252-023-00-01,
EFFECTIVE THROUGH APRIL 30, 2005, SUBJECT TO FURTHER
EXTENSIONS OR REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, AT A FIRST YEAR AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $378,000,
INCLUDING SOFTWARE UPGRADE AND ONE (1) YEAR MAINTENANCE AT
AN ANNUAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $70,000; AUTHORIZING THE OPTION
TO EXTEND YEARLY MAINTENANCE FOR FOUR ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR
PERIODS AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED 3% OF THE COST FOR
MAINTENANCE PER YEAR; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT VIII, ACCOUNT CODE 142023, IN THE
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $378,000, FOR THE INITIAL PURCHASE;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR OTHER PURCHASES FROM FUTURE FUNDS
FROM VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ACCOUNTS, THE
OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT'S OPERATING BUDGET, AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC FUNDING, AS MAY BE
ADJUSTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE
ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCES OR
AS OTHERWISE ADJUSTED AS PERMITTED BY LAW.
04-00652-cover memo.pdf
04-00652-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00652-order form.pdf
04-00652-cert. of insurance.pdf
04-00652-certification. pdf
04-00652-award under state of FL.pdf
04-00652 - submittal.pdf
04-00652 - police summary.pdf
DEFERRED
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed unanimously, to DEFER item CA.21 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for
July 22, 2004; further requesting the Chief of Police to explain this item to Commissioner Gonza
lez.
CA.22 04-00661 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW FIRM OF HOGAN &
HARTSON, L.L.P. FOR LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE CITY OF
MIAMI IN CONNECTION WITH ILLEGALLY PLACED BILLBOARDS AND
THE CASE OF NATIONAL ADVERTISING CO. VS. CITY OF MIAMI, IN
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CASE NO. 01-3039 CIV-KING,
AND ALL RELATED BILLBOARD CASES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $140,000, PLUS COSTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE AND
INSURANCE TRUST FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.661,
FOR SAID SERVICES.
04-00661-cover memo. pdf
City of Miami Page 15 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0407
CA.23 04-00669 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW OFFICES OF RONALD J. COHEN, P.A., ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR REPRESENTATION OF OFFICER
ACQUILES CARMONA IN CONNECTION WITH THE CASE OF RUBEN
ORTIZ VS. CITY OF MIAMI, ET AL., IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT, CASE NO. 00-3533 CIV-GOLD, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $
40,000, PLUS COSTS, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE
TRUST FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.661, FOR SAID
SERVICES.
04-00669-cover memo.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0408
CA.24 04-00676 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A USE AGREEMENT,
IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH SOCCER MARKETING
AND PROMOTIONS, INC., RELATING TO A SOCCER MATCH BETWEEN
THE NATIONAL TEAMS OF COLOMBIA AND ARGENTINA AT THE ORANGE
BOWL STADIUM ON JUNE 27, 2004; AUTHORIZING A CAP ON THE USER
FEE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,000, FOR THE EVENT;
CONDITIONING SAID AUTHORIZATION UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1)
PAYING FOR ALL NECESSARY COSTS OF CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY")
SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT, (2)
OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE, (3)
COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE AND (4) OBTAINING
ALL PERMITS REQUIRED BY LAW.
04-00676-cover memo.pdf
04-00676-exhibit- use agreement.pdf
This Matter was ADOPTED on the Consent Agenda.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0409
City of Miami Page 16 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Adopted the Consent Agenda
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, including all the
preceding items marked as having been adopted on the Consent Agenda. The motion
carried by the following vote:
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I've got some deferrals.
Chairman Teele: All right. Are there any other deferrals?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir, I have three.
Chairman Teele: On the regular agenda?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I would like to defer CA.13.
Chairman Teele: OK. Hold on one minute. Are there any other deferrals on the regular
agenda? All right. On the consent agenda, deferrals.
Commissioner Gonzalez: CA.13, CA.31, and SI.4. I would like to defer these items until the
Chief of Police --
Chairman Teele: On SI.4 --
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We did that.
Chairman Teele: -- deferred that to the next meeting.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We did?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Chairman Teele: Yes. You second it, Sanchez --
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right, so that's deferred.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So CA.13 and CA.21, until the Chief comes back to the City, and he
can explain himself to me what are these items all about.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, that would be a deferral to what particular
meeting? You should identify a meeting date.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second meeting in July.
City of Miami Page 17 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Vilarello: July 22nd.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Or until the Chief comes back. Maybe he's --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 22nd.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second meeting in July.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 22nd.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, if you allow me, while we are in the Police items --
Chairman Teele: Before you do, let's take -- let's -- we said CA -- what are the two, CA.13 and
what?
Mr. Vilarello: 13 and 21.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And 21.
Commissioner Gonzalez: 21, sir.
Chairman Teele: Is 21 related to the Police?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: At least, it is in the Police handbook that they give you when they try
to --
Chairman Teele: Well, mine says Capital Improvements, various departments. Information
Technology Department's operating budget.
Commissioner Gonzalez: CA.21?
Chairman Teele: CA.21. Where is the technology czar?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because the Department of Technology --
Chairman Teele: CA.21, you or the Police?
Peter Korinis (Chief Information Officer): Mr. Chairman, it's (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Chairman Teele: Your name for the record.
Mr. Korinis: Peter Korinis, Chief Information Officer. It's a technology project for the Police
Department.
Chairman Teele: Is that your intent? Motion, as moved and second by Commissioner Winton.
Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
City of Miami Page 18 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All opposed? All right.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Can we get a motion on CA -- on the consent agenda item, and then discuss it?
Commissioner Winton: I have -- yes, OK
Chairman Teele: Do you have withdrawals?
Commissioner Winton: No. I just have discussion, so I'll move --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move the remaining consent agenda.
Chairman Teele: Move for discussion the consent agenda. Second. On discussion.
Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: CA.5.
Chairman Teele: CA.5.
Commissioner Winton: CA.5 is about -- and I don't have a problem with the item itself, but it
says allocating -- it's for provision of tents, and tables, and linens and, you know, for events.
Chairman Teele: Is this GSA (General Services Administration)?
Commissioner Winton: I guess it's GSA.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, you know, you're going to have to help us today. Now, we bring
all this staff down here, and if you've got an item on the CA (consent agenda) agenda, the staff
needs to come out. We need to adopt a policy: All staff that has an item on the consent agenda,
when we bring it up, they need to come out. Glennn, we appreciate the long walk, but answer
the Commissioner's concerns.
Commissioner Winton: The -- it says funds will be allocated from current -- let's see -- from
current year capital improvement project account, special revenue funds operating budgets of
various user departments and agencies. I'm --
Commissioner Regalado: That means, whatever they can get their hands on.
Commissioner Winton: Well, it -- there's the point. I said, the capital improvement project
account. I'm not sure that I understand why would we be using our CIP (Capital Improvement
Project) monies for this kind of an -- I can't understand how it would come out of all these other
sources, but I don't get the CIP part.
Glenn Marcos: Commissioner, Glenn Marcos, Purchasing Director. Basically, what you have
in front of you is a standard language, and we use the actual language on all of our procurement
items, and basically, it's not going to apply to this particular procurement item, but it will for
others. It's just a clause which will allow us to grab the money, as Commissioner Regalado
indicated, at the time of need.
Commissioner Winton: Well -- and I would like to modem this. I don't care if it is standard I
City of Miami Page 19 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
want to take out the capital improvement project account. I don't think it's appropriate.
Chairman Teele: Without objection, the capital -- references -- it's amended to withdraw the
references to capital improvement account.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Is this for parties?
Chairman Teele: Without objection.
Commissioner Regalado: Where are these parties going to be held?
Commissioner Winton: Who knows? They're all over the City.
Mr. Marcos: It's all over the City. Let me continue to clarify the matter.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. OK. All over the City. What's the purpose of
the parties? What are we celebrating here with these tables --
Chairman Teele: It could be a road opening. It could be --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- a park opening.
Commissioner Winton: Park opening.
Chairman Teele: It could be an event in the park.
Commissioner Regalado: This is not for the Summer Park Programs?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It could be used for that.
Mr. Marcos: Commissioner, it's a citywide contract, and what we're doing here is, is that at the
time that the actual department has a need for tents and events, OK, we're going to end up
hitting those specific accounts for that particular department, so therefore, what you have in
front of you is generic language, which will allow those departments to utilize the contract at the
time of need.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, you have the floor on the item.
Commissioner Winton: Well, he makes an -- you made the interesting point. You said it could
be for a road opening, and I guess it could be for a road opening, so I'm going to withdraw my
objection. Because if it is for a road opening, it makes sense to utilize those funds, so I'm going
to just suggest that y'all be very diligent in terms of how you use CIP money for this, and I will
trust that you all will do that.
Mr. Marcos: Can I continue also to make clarification that you're going to end up seeing this
language mostly for citywide contracts, because of the fact --
Chairman Teele: But, Glennn, that's a very uninformed statement to make, in light of
Commissioner Winton's point. We have template language, we can respect that, but we hire
professionals to adjust template language to ensure that it applies to what it is we're saying, and
I don't think -- I'm like Commissioner Winton. I mean, I appreciate his eagle eye on the issue. I
City of Miami Page 20 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
happen to think it's appropriate here, and that's why I said, if you were to do, for example, a
ground breaking on Little Haiti Park, which we've been waiting for for five years now, I would
assume that that would come not from the Parks' budget, but from the --
Commissioner Winton: From CIP.
Chairman Teele: -- CIP, Little Haiti Parks' budget, as an example, or roadways, or any of those
kind of things, but I do think that Commissioner Winton is one hundred percent right, and that is,
we should not use template language so that somebody could create a window to use something
that we don't intend. I think it would be very helpful if we had a list of all of the departments and
expenditures on this account for one year, sent out to all the Commissioners, and I think that
would answer a lot of the questions.
Mr. Marcos: Commissioner, I understand the actual message and direction that you're
providing clearly. All I wanted to continue to clam the matter is, is that from time to time, you
will find us spending a lot of time coming back to the City Commission to amend a resolution to
reflect another account that was not mentioned specifically in the actual resolution, and what
we're trying to do here is create efficiencies within the actual organization that will allow us to
basically get those accounts for those particular departments, and allow them to make the
purchase without coming back to the City Commission and having that amendment to the actual
resolution.
Commissioner Winton: Like I said, I withdraw my objection.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado for discussion on the item.
Commissioner Regalado: No discussion. I just hope that we get a list, as parties or activities
being held to understand where are we using this funds. That's all.
Chairman Teele: How long will it take you to get us that list, Glenn? Will you be able to get it
to us today, before the meeting's over?
Mr. Marcos: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: All right. Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Gonzalez on this item.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I also have a concern on this item. My concern is that neither one of
the two vendors that were chosen are within the City of Miami limits, and you cannot tell me that
we don't have enough businesses in the City of Miami that provide this type of services, rental,
share rentals, and table rentals, and linen and -- I mean, you know, I don't know what the
problem is, that we keep insisting on giving the business -- the City business to enterprises and
businesses outside the City limits, you know, and I keep insisting and insisting in the fact that the
businesses that are located in the City of Miami are the ones that pay taxes to the City of Miami,
the ones that pay fees to the City of Miami, occupational licenses, certificate of Use. You know,
we put all of these burdens on these businesses and then, whenever there is a chance to give
them an opportunity to make a buck, then we give it to somebody else. I don't know what the
problem is, and when -- you know, when you people are going to start understanding that your
salaries, your salaries come from these people that pay taxes in the City of Miami. Homeowners
and business established in the City of Miami are the ones that pay salaries, OK, and the
expenses of the government, and every time I look at one of these items, it's the same thing, the
same thing. I can't understand what the problem is.
Mr. Marcos: Commissioner -- I'm sorry. Commissioner, on this particular CA.5 item, local
preference didn't apply because of the fact that we didn't have a bid that will allow us to apply
local preference, but if you look at CA.4, CA.4 is for barricade rental, and if you look at it, you
City of Miami Page 21 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
have local preference being applied there, in which the actual lower bidder was not a local
bidder, but the local bidder was within 10 percent of the actual low bid, and we're giving the
actual opportunity to match the low bid and now you have approved that particular award for
barricade rental, so just want to make it clear, for the record, that I would, too, want to see local
preference to be applied in every case, but in order for that to happen, we must have the
participation of local vendors.
Chairman Teele: All right. You know, Glenn, let me just say this to you. Two things. First of
all, on the item you used, why isn't the Public Works the main user of barricades? That's a
question. Maybe you ought to ask the Public Works Director, but number two, between Glenn
and Mr. Attorney, if there were a local vendor that were qualified -- first of all, the answer is,
you've got to bid and win to be on the list, but could this Commission, consistent with the
Mayor's State of the City Address, in which he went on for five minutes about using local vendors
-- and we need to get that part of the message. Would one of the Mayor's aides please get us a
copy of the State of the City speech? I'm sure they have plenty around. We need to take that to
heart -- could a local vendor be added by a four -fifths vote of this Commission?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Could they be added?
Chairman Teele: Added to this list by a four -fifths vote.
Mr. Vilarello: Who had not otherwise bid?
Chairman Teele: Who did not bid.
Mr. Vilarello: No. The only way you could do that, Mr. Chairman, is if you would waive
competitive bids and award to a particular vendor because it's in the best interest of the City.
Chairman Teele: But isn't that the same question I just asked?
Mr. Vilarello: While --
Chairman Teele: Can't --
Mr. Vilarello: You can't add it to the list, no, sir, but you can --
Chairman Teele: It cannot be added to the list.
Mr. Vilarello: You can reject these bids, waive competitive -- the competitive bidding process.
You have the authority to do that, and in the best interest of the City, award to a particular
vendor.
Mr. Marcos: Commissioner, also, for the record, I want to stipulate that when we do issue these
bids, we do advertise in the newspaper, and we also advertise in our own web page, so the
opportunity to provide public notice does exist in various media.
Chairman Teele: Public notice is not an issue, as far as I'm concerned. I'm just trying to see if
there's any creative legal ways that we can do what the Mayor says we're going to do and what
Commissioner Gonzalez is raising a legitimate point about. There's got to be some local vendors
that can provide tents. There was an article in the Miami Herald, Letter to the Editor, raising
questions about some action the County took very recently, and saying, I know certainly that
some local vendors can do it. I mean, this is something people are concerned about, but we need
to listen to the people.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman, I think there is a way for us to get at it without creating
City of Miami Page 22 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
the kind of mess that they have with the County related to procurement, which is where we don't
want to go, but I think that one of the things we might do is direct the Manager to set up a task
force of City staff and direct the Manager to do a much more -- we've done this before, but a true
aggressive -- that they have to report back to us on -- an aggressive outreach program to
vendors in the City of Miami, and aggressively pursue them. Teach them how to get in the
system; teach them how to be competitive, and it -- but it has to be a commitment, and if we
require that there be a reporting mechanism that comes back to us once a month -- and I would
require it to be once a month -- you know, how many vendors -- -- who are the vendor and how
many vendors, who are the vendors, and what's the success rate at getting those vendors in the
system? I think, over the course of a year or 18 months, we can have some real success. We
won't have success overnight, but if we're disciplined in the approach, I think, over an 18 -- a 12
to 24-month period, we could have some real successes, so I think, if we direct the Manager to
do something like that, we could hit the objective that I think all of us here want.
Mr. Marcos: Commissioner, we do have two individuals within my staff that's part of a Local
Vendor Outreach Program, and at the time that we issue these bids, they're out there trying to
outreach to the local vendors.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Let's get a report then.
Chairman Teele: First, could we get a report?
Mr. Marcos: We can include the actual information in our bid packet, when it's being presented
Commissioner Winton: No, I --
Mr. Marcos: -- or you want a report?
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. The Commissioner asked for a report. Can we get a report?
Mr. Marcos: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Once a month?
Mr. Marcos: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: The vendors that you reached out to, obviously that will include a
number, so the name of the the vendor, what their product is, and let's start keeping a tally of
success; how many of those reach -out efforts -- and I don't care, Glenn, if you go back six
months, or nine months, or 12 months and give us a historical report to show what's been
happening. I think that would be very valuable, both to you and to us, because I think it's going
to show results, and if you go back and look historically, and you have real proven results, that's
going to make us feel better, too, so --
Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez directing the staff to provide monthly
reports, and a semi-annual report to the Commission in the manner outlined by Commissioner
Winton. Is that a fair --
Commissioner Gonzalez: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Chairman Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Winton, you --
City of Miami Page 23 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- made it, so -- is there objection? We're all clear on what we're asking for?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton, you withdrew your --
Commissioner Winton: I withdrew my objection to CA.5.
Chairman Teele: He withdrew his -- on the motion, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed. We're still on the consent agenda. Are there any further
discussion items or deferrals?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes, Mr. Chairman. There's substitute items that I want to
make for the record.
Chairman Teele: You want to read them into the record? Item --
Mr. Vilarello: Consent agenda item number 11 has been substituted from the agenda package.
It includes an additional parcel, as well as a general reference to the retention of special counsel
. CA.14 is a substitute for the Civilian Investigative Panel. It substitutes a contract, which will
now have a term of two years, with three optional one-year -- three options to extend the
contract for an additional one-year period, and the third change is the Investigative Panel can
use these firms on an as -needed basis, and finally, that the annual amount shall not exceed $142,
000 for these services, and finally, consent agenda item CA.20, which is accepting the bid of
Horizon Contractors. The substantive change of that -- I don't know -- Mr. Marcos -- Javier,
could you describe what that is?
Javier Fernandez: Again, Javier Fernandez, Assistant to Chief of Operations. The substance of
the change, that it increases the amount to be awarded by approximately $68, 500, as a -- both
vendors failed to include pricing for one of the line items included in an addendum for that
invitation for bid.
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Mr. Fernandez: Sorry, sir?
Commissioner Winton: That's it.
Mr. Fernandez: Would you like me to repeat what I said, Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Winton: No. I understood.
Mr. Fernandez: Shall I repeat myself or -- I'm sorry.
Mr. Vilarello: That's all. All three of those items had been distributed on the dais.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection to the technical amendments, the substitutes?
Commissioner Winton: Move CA agenda.
Chairman Teele: Move the CA agenda, as amended --
City of Miami Page 24 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: As amended.
Chairman Teele: -- with the substitutes, by Commissioner Winton. Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: One "no."
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: One "no."
Vice Chairman Sanchez: One "no."
END OF CONSENT AGENDA
City of Miami Page 25 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
4:00 P.M.
PA.1 04-00658 DISCUSSION ITEM
MR. JUMEL CALIXTE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION CONCERNING
PLACE KAMOKEN "LITTLE HAITI FREEDOM GARDEN", CARIBBEAN
MARKET AND INFRASTRUCTURE IN LITTLE HAITI.
04-00658-letter. pdf
04-00658-recommendation memo. pdf
04-00658-master schedule of work. pdf
WITH DRAWN
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was
passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to WITHDRAW item PA.1.
Chairman Teele: Any other deferrals -- and it is a voluminous agenda. Commissioner
Regalado, you want to defer all of your discussion items?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Chairman Teele: Just thought I'd ask. Commissioner Gonzalez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I just want everybody to do their part here today, you know. I was
hoping he would.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
Chairman Teele: You set the right tone. I understand PA.4 -- I'm sorry, PA.1. Is that official?
Would somebody from the staff come to the mike and state your name and withdraw PA.1?
Commissioner Regalado: PH?
Chairman Teele: Public Appearance Item Number 1.
Javier Fernandez: Mr. Chairman, Javier Fernandez, Assistant Chief of Operations, requesting
the withdrawal of PA.1.
Chairman Teele: And that's with the consent of the person who's offering it, right?
Mr. Fernandez: That is correct, sir.
Chairman Teele: Is there a motion and a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right. The item is withdrawn.
City of Miami Page 26 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Fernandez: Thank you.
City of Miami Page 27 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
MAYOR AND COMMISSIONER'S ITEMS
CITYWIDE
HONORABLE MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ
DISTRICT 1
COMMISSIONER ANGEL GONZALEZ
DISTRICT 2
COMMISSIONER JOHNNY L. WINTON
DISTRICT 3
VICE CHAIRMAN JOE SANCHEZ
DISTRICT 4
COMMISSIONER TOMAS REGALADO
D4.1 04-00555 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING AN UPDATE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION
REGARDING THE QUALITY OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
AND THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ADMINISTRATIVE ERRORS.
04-00555-cover memo.pdf
DEFERRED
D4.2 04-00688 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING ALLOCATING DISTRICT 4 ROLLOVER
FUNDS FOR THE 2506 BRIGADE MUSEUM & LIBRARY LOCATED AT
SW 19TH AVENUE.
04-00688-cover memo.pdf
DISCUSSED
Discussion of Item D4.2 resulted in the resolution below.
(D4.2) 04-00688a RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DONATING FUNDS TO
THE BRIGADE 2506 BAY OF PIGS MUSEUM AND LIBRARY LOCATED AT
1821 SOUTHWEST 9 STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $10,000; ALLOCATING SAID FUNDS IN AN AMOUNTS NOT
TO EXCEED $1,000, FROM THE DISTRICT 4 ROLLOVER ACCOUNT NO.
001000.920.919.6.930, $1,000, FROM THE DISTRICT 3 ROLLOVER
ACCOUNT NO. 001000.920.918.6.930, $2,000, FROM THE DISTRICT 1
ROLLOVER ACCOUNT NO. 001000.920.921.6.930, $3,000, FROM THE
City of Miami Page 28 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
DISTRICT 5 ROLLOVER ACCOUNT NO. 001000.920.922.6.930 AND $3,000,
FROM THE DISTRICT 2 ROLLOVER ACCOUNT NO. 001000.920.920.6.930;
FURTHER CREATING A TWELVE (12) MEMBER COMMITTEE ENTITLED "
BRIGADE 2506 BAY OF PIGS MUSEUM AND LIBRARY FUNDRAISING
COMMITTEE" COMPOSED OF EACH MEMBER OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION APPOINTING TWO MEMBERS, ONE OF WHOM MAY BE A
COMMISSIONER AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE(S), AND THE MAYOR
APPOINTING TWO MEMBERS; FURTHER DIRECTING SAID COMMITTEE
TO PREPARE A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE BRIGADE 2506 BAY OF PIGS
MUSEUM AND LIBRARY AND PRESENT SAID PLAN TO THE CITY
COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE END OF THE YEAR.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0471
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele stated "a Committe of 11 people, with each Commissioner
serving or designating a person to serve, and 1 other person, as well as the Mayor the same right
"; therefore, the Committee would total 12 members.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for one minute for one item.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I was going to say that I do have an important item, but we also
have --
Chairman Teele: No. Let's --
Commissioner Regalado: Our Supervisor of Elections here.
Chairman Teele: You're recognized for the item.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Thank you very much, and this is an item that is important for
large sector of our community. It's -- recently, the Governor of the State of Florida veto some
package, and by doing that, he veto money awarded by the state legislature to the Museum of the
-- 2506 Brigade Museum, that museum which is in District 4, also abutting District 3,
Commissioner Joe Sanchez. It's been visited by thousands, and it's used as a meeting point for
many, many civic and groups -- civic groups in the City. We have here the president of the
association, a former Bay of Pigs Barons Group, a Mr. Felix Rodriguez, and my motion is to
allocate from the District 4 rollover funds $1, 000 for the emergency needs of the 2506 Brigade
Museum and Library, located at Southwest 19th Avenue. That's my motion, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second for the purpose of discussion.
Chairman Teele: Purpose of discussion. Commissioner Sanchez, you're recognized.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: First action, I'm going to request the City administration to provide
Commissioner Regalado with a district map because the Brigade's in my district; across the
street from your district.
City of Miami Page 29 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Well --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So --
Chairman Teele: Make sure you give a map to Angel, too.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But it's all right. Your heart's in the right place.
Commissioner Regalado: But you know what, Joe? He parks in my district.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Since when? But your heart's in the right place, and as a second
maker of the motion, I would also like to donate out of my office account and match your $1, 000
donation to assist them, and also to open up my office to assist them in any way they can to raise
funds, because it's my understanding that Tallahassee had allocated some funds to them, but
apparently, the funds were cut through the budgetary impact through -- from the state, and
they're in a tough situation, and you know, it's a shame, Johnny, because you made a statement
the last time that we talked about it, and I want to put this out because it came from you, being
an Anglo, and it really meant a lot, and that we have so many Cuban Americans that are here,
and especially Brigade members that are millionaires, and still with a lot of donations that are
being made to a lot of worthy organizations in our community, still some of that money's not put
into something that the real close to the Cuban community and to the entire community, because
really, it's history, and you know, we need to work together and they need to work with the
private sector to go out and get donations brought to them, so I want to open up my assistance
and, you know, the entire community to help you, whether it be through a TV (television)
marathon or whether it be a radio fundraiser, any way that you could -- assist you in raising the
money so you could keep that museum open, because it's significant, and we invite everyone to
come and visit that museum and see what's there, because really, it's a part of our history.
It's a part of our great diversity community that's one out of many pieces that truly make Miami a
magical historic community, so --
Chairman Teele: Further discussion?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, Mr. Chairman. I would also like to join my colleagues,
Commissioner Regalado and Vice Chairman Sanchez, and also requesting from the
administration to allocate a $1, 000 to match their contribution to the Brigade 2506. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you. Further discussion? All right. On the motion, we have a motion
that's been amended for a total of $3, 000, and Mr. Director, I'm going to move $3, 000 -- I'll
match these non -soldiers $3, 000 out of my respect for the Brigade, and those persons who have
fought for freedom. $3, 000 from the rollover account of my district.
Commissioner Winton: Three?
Chairman Teele: 3,000.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Come on, Johnny, you could match it, man. Come on. You can do it.
Commissioner Winton: So, do I --
Commissioner Regalado: He's a soldier, man.
Commissioner Winton: So, I need to match Arthur?
City of Miami Page 30 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Commissioner Regalado: You need $6, 000 now.
Commissioner Winton: I'll match Arthur.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So you've got 9,000. That's good.
Commissioner Regalado: $9, 000, but also, Joe is right. I mean, we need to do something more
than this. I mean, $9, 000, which, by the way, Mr. Manager, they need the check because, if not,
they have to pay the bills because they got cut off from the state, you know. Let's understand that
he cannot pick up the check today, but not in one or two months, you know.
Commissioner Winton: And I might add, you know, we're -- we've talked a lot about creating
real culture in the City of Miami, and making the City of Miami, as far as I'm concerned, the
epicenter for arts, entertainment and culture Countywide, and this is a museum. We've talked a
lot about museums, and I do think we do need to figure out a way to help, not only sustain the
museum, but build it up, and create -- help them create a museum that has greater recognition,
more tourists, more people coming to visit, that will be an economic engine, another piece of the
bigger puzzle in the City of Miami, so I'm open to future thought about that, and maybe one day,
in the fall or something, we might want to make this a discussion item, but if you all have ideas,
I'm, you know -- I think we ought to focus on it.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, what I was going to do -- and I think you've hit the nail on the
head. I really do think that, when we finish this item, we should appoint a committee. I was
going to recommend a committee of 11 people, with each Commissioner serving or designating a
person to serve, and one other person, as well as the Mayor, the same right to really sit down
over the next 180 days and to come back within 180 days -- before the end of the year, on a plan
for this museum, in terms of fundraising, as well as the strategic plan that you've talked about.
In my opinion, anything that this County and City does for the culture community, the downtown
culture community is going to have mixed receptiveness, citywide, Countywide, until we can
embrace all aspects of the community.
Commissioner Winton: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: The Brigade 2506, the Black Archives, Folk Life Village, Lyric Theater are the
kinds of thing we've got to put into the mix in this, and I think it's a great start to start here with
this great museum. I mean, we ought to really look at this very, very closely. Joe, I know it's in
your district, and what I would like to do is impanel all of us, sort of as a committee at large, and
appoint one other business person to see how we can start with this Brigade Museum, and really
make it a first-class museum. Let's take the Governor's veto, which I singularly accept from as a
challenge to make it better for all of us, so in that regard, Commissioner Sanchez, did you want
to add something? If I were a Baptist preacher, though, I would say $9, 000 just doesn't sound
right.
Commissioner Regalado: You need 10,000.
Chairman Teele: You've got to have 10,000 to make it come out an even number, and since you
started this, Commissioner --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll contribute the extra $1, 000.
Commissioner Regalado: It's just that I'm giving the --
City of Miami Page 31 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Make it a round figure.
Commissioner Regalado: -- end of my rollover.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Mr. Chairman, we have a 1,000 more dollars, so that
rounds it off to 10,000.
Chairman Teele: That rounds it off --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Rounds it off to --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But let me just add --
Chairman Teele: But a Baptist preacher says, but 12 would be so much better.
Commissioner Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And then, of course, 14 would be much better. Mr. Chairman,
another problem that they're faced is that, you know, with time, a lot of the members are just --
you know, they're going to go to heaven, and they're looking for young blood, and we've had this
discussion before, because it's going to get to a point where they're really also focusing on
bringing in youth to participate and also family members that -- of relatives that participate in
the Brigade 2506 to be involved in the process, so you know, it would be an honor if the
Commission would appoint me to work with them to try to help them, because my office is
already assisting them as much as we can with some funds to help the facility. I also welcome
each and every one of you, when you do have time, to go see their museum, because you know,
we spend money, we support museum, we support the Performing Arts Center, which is fine, and
we support other major museums in our community, but their museum, even though it's small and
it's in the back streets in Little Havana, really do have something to show and educate our
community, so I just wanted to put that on the record. That's another problem that they're
having.
Chairman Teele: On the motion, as amended to $10, 000, is there objection? All in favor, say
aye.
If
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? Felix, did you want to say anything?
Felix Rodriguez: I want to thank the Commission very much on behalf of the Brigade 2506, and
it is a real pleasure to be here today and really need this help continue the work of the museum.
We're getting old. I am one of the youngest of the Brigade. I am 63 years old already, and we'd
like this to continue; for future generations to know what it was, what the Bay of Pigs represent
in the country. As a matter of fact, this Sunday, there will be a presentation on FOX News on
Oliver North War Stories that represent -- it's with the Brigade. It was confrontation with Cuba.
He filmed at the Brigade Museum recently, so you can watch it. I really appreciate it. I thank
you again, and you are all invited (UNINTELLIGIBLE) coordinate with Commissioner Sanchez
for you to visit the museum as a whole, as a group, and we would be a pleasure for us to host
you there so you know what we are doing and what our plans are for the future. Thank you very
much, Commissioners.
Chairman Teele: All right. We have indicated -- is the Chairman of the CI -- is the Chairman of
the Independent Panel -- hold on just one minute.
D4.3 04-00689 DISCUSSION ITEM
City of Miami Page 32 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
DISCUSSION CONCERNING CONFLICTING OPINIONS REGARDING
ZONING MATTERS RELATED TO BUILDINGS ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL
AREAS.
04-00689-cover memo.pdf
04-00689-planning memo.pdf
DEFERRED
D4.4 04-00690 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING WAIVING PARK RENTAL FEES FOR THE
ANNUAL CELEBRATION OF SANTA ISABEL DE LAS LOJAS
MUNICIPALITY.
04-00690-cover memo.pdf
04-00690-permit to use park.pdf
MOTION
A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, to waive the park rental fees for the annual celebration of Santa Isabel De
Las Lojas Municipality.
Chairman Teele: The Chair notes the presence -- I mean, the time of 11: 30. Commissioner
Sanchez, as Chairman of the Bayfront Trust has preserved time. Would you yield just for a
moment and allow Commissioner Regalado to deal with any issue he wants to before he leaves
this morning?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Did you have some items there -- I saw some people in the room a minute ago
that -- I thought it was that Watson Island guy.
Commissioner Regalado: No. It's -- Mr. Chairman, it has to do -- everything that it is in the
blue page, it has to do with the moratorium and permits and buildings that we will deal that in
the afternoon.
Chairman Teele: No. I was talking about your discussion items , but in any event, if not,
Commissioner --
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I do have one that is very brief, if you allow me. It's to waive
the park rental fees for the annual celebration of of Santa Isabel de las Lajas Municipality in
Robert King High Park in District 4.
Chairman Teele: What's the item number, please?
Commissioner Regalado: D4.4.
Chairman Teele: Is there a motion? Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
City of Miami Page 33 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: Item is unanimously adopted.
6:31 P.M.
D4.5 04-00640 DISCUSSION ITEM
AN UPDATE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING PERMITS
BEING APPROVED FOR BUILDINGS LOCATED ON THE S.W. 27TH
AVENUE CORRIDOR.
04-00640-cover memo.pdf
DEFERRED
DISTRICT 5
CHAIRMAN ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR.
D5.1 04-00547 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE STATUTES OF THE LAW INTO
2 C.O.P. (CONSUMPTION ON PREMISES)
04-00547- email.pdf
WITH DRAWN
A motion was made by Chairman Teele, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was passed
unanimously, with Commissioners Regalado and Winton absent, to WITHDRAW item D5.1.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Vice Chairman, could I -- would you -- may I yield to you --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: -- and ask to take up D5.3 and D5.4, and to withdraw D5.1?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: D5 --
Commissioner Winton: Where are you?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Wait a minute.
Chairman Teele: D5.3, D5.4 and D5.1. I want to have five Commissioners when we take up D5.
2. All right. Mr. Vice Chairman, may I be recognized?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir, you're recognized.
Chairman Teele: I would like to move to withdraw item D5.1, and the reason for this is, I think,
Mr. Attorney, there needs to be a very clear legal opinion with the alcohol tobacco, and the
concern that I had was to express my concern to the Chairman of the Quality of Life committee,
which is Angel Gonzalez, and the sunshine law doesn't allow us to discuss it, but apparently,
Commissioner Gonzalez, the -- there was some application of the law that was different from
what the state alcohol bureau was enforcing. This relates to CO -- to 2COP, where we had
people being charged with violating 2COP during the day, because they didn't have a balanced
meal on their plate, and they had a beer. In other words, there was somebody saying, you had to
City of Miami Page 34 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
have a bread and a potato, and a vegetable, and you couldn't just eat a steak if you're going to
have a beer, and we -- I think it's very important that we get with the City Attorney and have the
City Attorney opine on this, because it was my understanding that the 2COP related to the
annual sales of a business and not the daily sales per se, and it didn't apply really to the person
eating, as much as it applies to the operator or the license holder, so I really was hoping the City
Attorney would clam because apparently, we've given people Code violations that are eating
because they don't eat a balanced meal. In other words, they say well, you don't have -- you're
just eating a piece of steak and drinking a beer and you can't do that.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, if we had particular instances, I would like
to address and review those particular instances. The law provides that for 2COP, you have to
have a full course meal. The definition of full course meal is what you're expressing some
concern about. My understanding of enforcement is not that it was a debate whether it was a
sandwich and French fries, but that there was no food at all --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No food at all.
Mr. Vilarello: -- at the time that the beer was being consumed. That, together with what we
passed last summer, which was an ordinance that directed at sandwich shops and cafeterias,
which are not in proper zonings for the full sell or bar of beer and wine, where we limited the
hours of operations, as is our right, to 10 o'clock.
Chairman Teele: Right.
Mr. Vilarello: So, at that point --
Chairman Teele: I'm talking about in the day. I'm only talking about in the daytime, and I'm
trying to understand, does the 2COP relate to the business owner or does it relate to the patron?
Commissioner Gonzalez: To the business owner.
Mr. Vilarello: Business owner.
Chairman Teele: So a patron, somebody sitting there having a beer with a steak or without a
steak, forget the potatoes and lettuce, and salads, and all of that, they wouldn't be subject to
arrest or to --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, sir, they're not, and that I know, and that I know, as far as, you
know, as I know, there hasn't been anybody arrested for consuming alcohol in any of these
places without consuming food. They -- once the Quality of Life Task Force goes into these
businesses, they interview the clients and then they are asked to leave the place, and the reason
that the clients are being interviewed is that some of these operators, what they're doing is, you
know, is they have -- they cook some food and you walk into this place and say, "Let me have a
beer, " and they shove a plate of food in front of you and say, in case the police comes in, this is
your food. You don't have to pay for it. You just, you know --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Just eat.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You don't have to pay for it. This is your food.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's a free buffet.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, if they come in, you say that you were eating and you're
paying for it, and you know, all of that, so when -- once they go into those places, they start
talking to the clients, and the client says, "Well, you know, when I asked for a beer, they gave me
City of Miami Page 35 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
the beer, but they put this plate in front of me. I didn't ask for it. I don't want to eat. I just want
to have a beer. OK. Thank you very much. You can leave and that's it, but nobody has been --
none of the clients has been arrested. The owners -- some of the owners have been arrested for
selling alcohol without food, because that's a City ordinance that we passed some seven months
ago.
Mr. Vilarello: And, Mr. Chairman, that particular instance, that testimony of what the owner of
the establishment did was information provided to us by the patron, whose name is listed --
name, address, and contact numbers are listed on the A -forms.
Chairman Teele: The 2COP, though, relates to daily sales.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's consumption on premises.
Chairman Teele: I mean, individuals sales during the course of the day, and it does not relate to
consumption on a daily or annual basis.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No. It allows your establishment to have -- to sell beer and wine, and
the 4COP is for hard liquor, and also you have the package license.
Chairman Teele: I'm talking about 2COP. Is the 2COP related to individual sells by a business
or does it relate to annual sells of a business?
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, in order to conform with our ordinance, we have a provision that
provides for an accounting that, at the end of each year, we can account as to whether they've
met those thresholds.
Chairman Teele: But is it -- that's what I'm asking. Is it --
Mr. Vilarello: That's one component of it. Another component of it is, while the beer and wine
or alcoholic beverages are being consumed on the premises, it has to be served together with a
full course meal. We've tried to avoid the debate over what is and what is not a full course meal,
because people do have a disagreement on what is or isn't. That's --
Chairman Teele: So the language itself is ambiguous. I mean, all these diets -- I saw Clinton
the other day saying he lost weight because he was on the South Beach Diet, whatever that is. I
mean, all these diets are saying, don't eat this, don't eat that. The potatoes are out. The
spaghetti is out. The pasta's out. I mean --
Mr. Vilarello: For many of those reasons, they --
Chairman Teele: So, if I go in and order --
Mr. Vilarello: -- the arrests are made essentially with no food being consumed.
Chairman Teele: If I go in and order a steak, is that a full course meal, yes or no, Mr.
Chairman?
Commissioner Gonzalez: It is.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't know. I haven't seen a steak in quite some time.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You have a steak, it is a meal.
Mr. Vilarello: You having a salad?
City of Miami Page 36 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: If you have some rice and black beans, it's a meal.
Chairman Teele: If I just go ahead and have a salad, is that a full course meal?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I, myself, would consider that a meal.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It is not clearly defined, what a full course meal is.
Commissioner Gonzalez: But it's not clearly --
Chairman Teele: Especially today's diet --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: A Twinkie and a Hot Pocket could be a full course meal.
Chairman Teele: Well, I just think we need to discuss it so that the public is aware and
particularly, the police and the Code Enforcement people are aware that this is a very
ambiguous area, and we need to err on the side of good judgment and caution as opposed to
something different. I would move, Mr. Vice Chairman --
Commissioner Gonzalez: But let me clam --
Chairman Teele: -- to withdraw the item from the agenda because we're not going to resolve it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me clam something to you before you withdraw that. You know,
the mess out there is so extensive that, for example, we went into a place one night -- well, one or
two, three or four different places that have a restaurant license, restaurant license. When we
walked into the place, we asked where is the kitchen? No, there's no kitchen here.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No kitchen.
Commissioner Gonzalez: What do you mean, there is no kitchen here and this is a restaurant?
And you know what they were doing?
Chairman Teele: Catering?
Commissioner Gonzalez: They were buying the food somewhere else, and they were dispensing
the food on those -- and they had a restaurant license. Some of these places are selling alcohol
and they don't even have --
Chairman Teele: But were they -- but if they were selling food --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Huh?
Chairman Teele: If they were really selling food, what's the problem with that?
Commissioner Gonzalez: In order to have --
Chairman Teele: If they were really selling food, what's the problem with that?
Commissioner Gonzalez: In order to have a restaurant license, you have to have a full kitchen;
you have to have a grease trap; you have to have -- because I used to own restaurants --
Chairman Teele: I see.
City of Miami Page 37 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: You have to have two bathrooms; you have to have -- you know, you
have to comply with so many things in order to be able to open a restaurant.
Chairman Teele: Then how did they get this -- who gave them the permit?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't know. I don't know. That's the -- those are the problems that
we have. We have people that have occupational licenses, and they don't have Certificate of
Use, and we have people that have Certificate of Use and they don't have occupational license,
and we have -- I don't know tenth of businesses that don't even have Certificate of Use or
occupational licenses, and they are operating businesses in the City of Miami. You know, it's
totally out of control.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion to withdraw. Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All in favor?
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, say "nay." Motion carries unanimously, 3/0.
D5.2 04-00582 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AUTHORIZING A
COVENANT TO BUDGET AND APPROPRIATE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $7,500,000, AS A GUARANTEE FOR THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA
"); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE COVENANT AND ANY
OTHER NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF A LOAN FROM THE
FLORIDA MUNICIPAL LOAN COUNCIL'S POOLED FINANCING PROGRAM
TO THE CRA FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CAPITAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE
SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AREA, CONTINGENT UPON THE CRA AGREEING THAT THE LOAN
PROCEEDS MAY NOT BE USED OR APPROPRIATED WITHOUT FURTHER
APPROVAL OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION.
04-00582-Ieg islation . pdf
DEFERRED
D5.3 04-00657 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO INSTRUCT STAFF IN THE FOLLOWING DEPARTMENTS:
DEPARTMENT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, CODE ENFORCEMENT,
NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT TEAM, PLANNING AND ZONING,
PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION, TO COORDINATE AND
CONDUCT A COMMUNITY WORKSHOP WITH THE OAKLAND GROVE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND CITIZENS TO HEAR AND DISCUSS
CONCERNS REGARDING MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, PARKING, STREET
INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITIONS, CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC, STREET
CLOSURES, AND OTHER CONCERNS EXPRESSED TO THE OFFICE OF
COMMISSIONER ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR.
City of Miami Page 38 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Motion by Chairman Teele, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 2 - Commissioner Winton and Regalado
R-04-0415
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move D5.3. This is -- is the Planning Director here?
Mr. Chairman, this is -- Mr. Vice Chairman --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: This is simply instructing the management to hold -- we don't wand to use the
word charrette, but we do want to hear all of the concerns as we plan that neighborhood, and
they are extremely frustrated because we've sort of eliminated the formal charrette process to
move forward, and this is instructing a workshop to be held there, and I think the staff is in
support of this. I would move item D5.3.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There is a motion and a second on D5.3. Open for discussion.
Hearing none, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Hearing
none, motion passes unanimously.
D5.4 04-00683 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO IMMEDIATELY INITIATE ALL ACTIONS AND
PROCEDURES NECESSARY TO REZONE, FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL, TO R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ALL R-2 ZONED
LOTS LOCATED WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY NORTHWEST 19TH
AVENUE ON THE WEST, NORTHWEST 56TH STREET ON THE NORTH,
NORTHWEST 17TH AVENUE ON THE EAST, AND NORTHWEST 39TH
STREET ON THE SOUTH.
Motion by Chairman Teele, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 2 - Commissioner Winton and Regalado
R-04-0416
Direction to the City Manager to strategically study the City's boundaries with a view toward
possible annexation of unincorporated areas.
Chairman Teele: And the final item this morning, Mr. Chairman, is Item D5.4, which is to
initiate -- to direct the Manager to begin to initiate the rezoning of an area, which is two blocks
deep and about 14 blocks long. This is in the Model Cities area, but it's the forgotten part of the
City of Miami Page 39 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
City of Miami. In fact, it's in the County census data, when you do the census data, this is also
the boundary of the City limits, and I think one of the things that we've been hearing from
everybody in that area is, as much as we're doing in the Model City area, why aren't you doing
more in our area? We heard from a lady on 21 st Street the other -- on 21 st Avenue, et cetera. I
believe, as a strategy, Mr. -- Commissioner Gonzalez -- and I know you're looking at our
boundaries. We need --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no, no, no. I'm looking -- the reason I'm looking is because before
I left Allapattah Business Development and becoming a City Commissioner, I left a project,
which is now in your district, which is going to consist of 30 new town houses, and it's funded
and it's right on 39th Street and 17th Avenue.
Chairman Teele: 39th Street and 17th --
Commissioner Gonzalez: A corner lot.
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's being funded by County, but we have the bank, the private bank,
finance in place, everything is in place. The project should begin by -- probably by the middle of
July or the end of July. It's going to be a 30-unit home ownership --
Chairman Teele: Home ownership --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- town house project. Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Well, I think that's one of the things that the Planning Department's going to
look at. What's beginning to happen is, because this is right on 17th Avenue, we need the lots
behind that really to be, what do you call them, SD-10s or 17s, the parking --
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): SD-12.
Chairman Teele: SD-12, so much of this is going to still be commercial, and the other thing that
is happening is people are taking duplexes now and turning them into quadplexes and all sorts of
things are going on. We would like to get a handle, but the important thing that I was about to
say, Commissioner Gonzalez, is I believe the City should take a strategy of looking at all of our
boundaries and again to, on a priority basis, enhance the areas that abut with Unincorporated
Dade County, because as those hearings get held, it's going to create more desire and more
momentum for people like we're hearing now in the Brownsville area, who are saying, "well, why
can't you all plan better in our neighborhood?" and I think this is going to have a very positive
effect. I don't know how this is going to come out, but we're just going to begin the process. A
part of it is already R-1 and a part of it is R-2 --
Ms. Gelabert: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: -- so I would move this item for the Planning Department to begin.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There is a motion and a second on D5.4. It is open for discussion.
Hearing none, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Hearing
none, motion passes unanimously, Madam Clerk.
City of Miami Page 40 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PUBLIC HEARING
PH.1 04-00615 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), BY A FOUR -FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE
AFTER AN ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND
CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE SOURCE;
WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING
PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE USE OF THE SCAVENGER 2000
DEPOLLUTION BOAT, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, FOR
SURFACE CLEANING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S ("CITY") WATERFRONT
UTILIZING A UNIQUE PROPRIETARY PROCESS, FROM WATER
MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES, THE SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, FOR A
ONE-YEAR PERIOD WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, FOR AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $200,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS
OPERATING BUDGET ACCOUNT NO. 001000.311003.6.270; AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY
THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PROJECT.
04-00615-cover memo.pdf
04-00615-budgetary impact. pdf
04-00615-purchasing memo 1.pdf
04-00615-purchasing memo 2.pdf
04-0061 5-letter. pdf
04-00615-pre memos. pdf
04-00615-pre legislation.pdf
04-00615- finance corp. letter.pdf
04-00615-district of columbia letter.pdf
04-00615-daily work schedule.pdf
04-00615-location map. pdf
04-00615-public notice memo.pdf
04-00615-public notice .pdf
04-0061 5-award. pdf
04-00615-exhibit- psa.pdf
04-00615 - submittal.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0411
Chairman Teele: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioners, we have an executive session
today at 2:15 and we have a very long agenda. I would like to try to go through as many of the
items, starting with the public hearing items, PH.1 and the resolutions, as we can before noon. If
we have an item, let's don't debate it. Let's just pull it out and not discuss it, and not act on it.
PH.1 is a public hearing; a resolution requiring a four -fifths vote. Is there -- this is a public
hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come forward.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move PH.1.
Chairman Teele: Public hearing's closed. There's a motion.
City of Miami Page 41 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed say, too.
Commissioner Winton: All right.
PH.2 04-00620 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED "TOWER TWENTY-SEVEN," A
SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") OF THE PROPERTY
DESCRIBED IN "ATTACHMENT 1," SUBJECT TO SATISFACTION OF ALL
CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THE PLAT AND STREET COMMITTEE AS SET
FORTH IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, AND THE
PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 55-8 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS
SHOWN ON THE PLAT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND PROVIDING
FOR THE RECORDATION OF THE PLAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
04-00620-cover memo.pdf
04-00620-budgetary impact. pdf
04-00620-public notice memo.pdf
04-00620-public notice .pdf
04-00620-public works notice memo pdf
04-00620-public works notice .pdf
04-00620-tentative plat. pdf
04-00620-exhibit 1-legal description.pdf
04-00620-exhibit 2- report of record plat.pdf
04-00620-exhibit 3-legal description. pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
R-04-0414
Chairman Teele: PH.2 is a public hearing.
Commissioner Winton: I have discussions on it, so --
Chairman Teele: We'll temporarily pass it.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, you had an item we temporarily passed. Did you want
to go back and discuss that item?
Commissioner Winton: Oh, you mean the one that we went by?
Chairman Teele: We skipped over.
City of Miami Page 42 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Chairman Teele: I think it was PH.2.
Commissioner Winton: PH.2.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing on Public Hearing Item Number 2.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, yes.
Chairman Teele: Any person desiring to be heard should come forward. There are no persons
coming forward. Mr. Attorney, would you read the item into the record for discussion?
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. This is a public hearing. We've had that. For discussion,
Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I've got to get my map out and make sure I'm -- refresh my memory in
terms of where this is.
Chairman Teele: Is there anybody here on an item that was supposed to been taken up this
morning? Ms. Wilcox, I know you're here. Are you here on an item that was on the agenda this
morning? No, no. You have to come to the mike. Is there anybody here on an item that was
suppose to have been taken up this morning, because this evening's going to get very long.
Commissioner Winton: My questions were -- I was trying to understand exactly where this is. Is
this adjacent to -- there were three questions. I was trying to figure out exactly where this site is,
and I can figure that out. I wanted to know if it's adjacent to Metrorail, and I wanted to
understand what the zoning and land use is on this adjacent parcels, and Mr. City Attorney, I'm
probably going to have a question for you, as well, relative to the legislative process here, and I
guess maybe before I ask these three questions, which, Ben, I'm sure you can answer, when we're
approving these plats, is that -- do we have any reason to never approve a plat? Do we have any
authority not to approve a plat?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: So we cannot approve a plat?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir, if you find it's in the public interest.
Commissioner Winton: OK Then what exactly -- with this plat, what does this accomplish?
Ben Fernandez: Commissioner, for the record, my name is Ben Fernandez. I'm with law offices
of Bercow and Radell, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of the property owner. This plat
accomplishes the vacation of a public right-of-way that is not -- is no longer in use. The
Commission determined, through the Major Use Special Permit process and the associated alley
closure application --
Commissioner Winton: That we've already approved?
Mr. Fernandez: That you've already approved that this alley is now vacated. The plot is the
formality that accomplishes the vacation.
City of Miami Page 43 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Where is this?
Mr. Fernandez: This is right off of -- across from the Shell Lumber. It's one block from the
Metrorail Station. It's the entire block --
Commissioner Winton: That's fine. That's what I wanted to understand. I wanted to make sure
that it was -- that it was very close to Metrorail, so I'm clear.
Mr. Fernandez: Directly across the street.
Commissioner Winton: I have no objections. In fact, I'll move PH.2.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Motion and a second. Are you here on PH.2, sir?
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: He just answered my question, so --
Chairman Teele: Are you --
Commissioner Winton: I'm satisfied.
Chairman Teele: You're satisfied, Commissioner?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Public hearing.
Chairman Teele: All right. The public hearing was closed. Did you want to be recognized?
Commissioner Winton: No. He answered my question.
Mr. Fernandez: I just answered --
Chairman Teele: I know that, but --
Commissioner Winton: Oh, I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: Are you satisfied?
Mr. Fernandez: I'm satisfied. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. All those -- I'm sorry. We've had the attorney. Madam Clerk.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): It's a resolution.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right. All right.
City of Miami Page 44 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
PH.3 04-00621 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED "COCO BREEZE," A SUBDIVISION IN
THE CITY OF MIAMI OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN "ATTACHMENT 1,
" SUBJECT TO SATISFACTION OF ALL CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THE
PLAT AND STREET COMMITTEE AS SET FORTH IN "EXHIBIT A,"
ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, AND THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN
SECTION 55-8 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS
AMENDED, AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLAT;
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY CLERK
TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF
THE PLAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
04-00621-cover memo. pdf
04-00621-budgetary impact. pdf
04-00621-public notice memo. pdf
04-00621-public notice. pdf
04-00621-public works notice memo. pdf
04-00621-public works notice .pdf
04-00621-exhibit 1-legal description. pdf
04-00621-exhibit 2- new tentative plat.pdf
04-00621-exhibit 3- record plat.pdf
04-00621-exhibit 4- legal description. pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0412
Chairman Teele: PH.3 is a public hearing, entitled "Coco Breeze." A plat.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: PH.2 is temporarily passed. There's going to be discussion. Moved by -- this
is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come forward. There are no
persons coming forward. Public hearing's closed. PH.3, moved Commissioner Winton. Is there
a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those if favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
PH.4 04-00635 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF MIAMI'S BROWNFIELD
AREAS TO INCLUDE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1960 - 1970
City of Miami Page 45 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA ("PROPERTY"), AS
ILLUSTRATED AND DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND
INCORPORATED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUEST OF
AGUACLARA, LTD. ("AGUACLARA"), THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OF
THE PROPERTY, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATUTORY
REQUIREMENTS; RESERVING TO THE CITY COMMISSION THE RIGHT TO
WITHDRAW SAID PROPERTY'S DESIGNATION AS A BROWNFIELD AREA
IN THE EVENT THAT AGUACLARA DOES NOT PURCHASE SAID
PROPERTY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE ALL
REQUIRED NOTICES IN CONNECTION WITH SAID DESIGNATION;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIRST
SOURCE HIRING AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED
FORM AS "EXHIBIT B," WITH AGUACLARA, LTD.
04-00635-cover memo.pdf
04-00635-public notice memo.pdf
04-00635-public notice .pdf
04-00635-request letter.pdf
04-00635-exhibit 1. pdf
04-00635-exhibit 2- location maps.pdf
04-00635-exhibit 3- agreement.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-041 3
Chairman Teele: PH.4.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move PH.4.
Chairman Teele: Well, is that a part of -- OK, PH.4 is being moved. This is a public hearing on
PH.4. Any person desiring to be heard should come forward. There are no persons coming
forward. There's a motion. There's a second by Commissioner Regalado. Is there objection?
All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? The vote is 5/0.
City of Miami Page 46 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
ORDINANCES - EMERGENCY
EM.1 04-00434 ORDINANCE Emergency Ordinance
(4/5THS VOTE) AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 2/ARTICLE X OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "CODE
ENFORCEMENT;" MORE PARTICULARLY, BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2-811
, 2-812, 2-814 THROUGH 2-819, 2-821, 2-823 THROUGH 2-826, 2-828
THROUGH 2-829; REPEALING SECTION 2-822; ADOPTING, RATIFYING,
AND REAFFIRMING THE CITY COMMISSION'S AUTHORIZATION OF THE
USE OF SPECIAL MASTERS IN LIEU OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
BOARD; ADDING NEW SECTION 2-830; PROVIDING FOR THE
AFFIRMANCE AND ADOPTION OF AN ALTERNATE CODE ENFORCEMENT
SYSTEM THAT GIVES SPECIAL MASTERS THE SAME AUTHORITY AS THE
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD TO HOLD HEARINGS AND IMPOSE FINES,
COSTS, LIENS, AND OTHER NON -CRIMINAL PENALTIES AGAINST
VIOLATORS OF THE CITY CODES AND ORDINANCES OF SAID CODE;
PROVIDING FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS, APPOINTMENT, POWERS,
COMPENSATION, AND RETENTION OF SPECIAL MASTERS; CLARIFYING
THE ROLE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH RESPECT TO SPECIAL
MASTERS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A RETROACTIVE EFFECTIVE DATE OF APRIL
11, 2002; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY CODE.
04-00434-cover memo.pdf
04-00434-legislation. pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
12547
Chairman Teele: Emergency Ordinance Number 1.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): First roll call. Second roll call.
Roll calls were taken, the results of which are stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted as an emergency measure, 4/0.
City of Miami Page 47 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right.
EM.2 04-00632 ORDINANCE Emergency Ordinance
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ("FDOT"), IN THE AMOUNT OF$85,
000, FOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG SOUTHWEST 64th COURT,
FROM SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET TO SOUTHWEST 6TH STREET, IN THE
FLAGAMI AREA, MIAMI, FLORIDA; AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 12451,
ADOPTED NOVEMBER 25, 2003, AS AMENDED, THE CAPITAL PROJECTS
APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE, TO APPROPRIATE SAID GRANT FUNDS
TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ("CIP") NO. 341330, ENTITLED "
CITYWIDE TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT;" AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE; APPROPRIATING
UNALLOCATED HOMELAND DEFENSE/NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT
BOND FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $202,000, TO CIP NO.
331416, ENTITLED "VIRGINIA KEY PARK IMPROVEMENTS" AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $1,335,500, ALLOCATED FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PURSUANT TO RESOLUTIONS NO. 03-711, ADOPTED JUNE 24, 2003, NO.
03-991, ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 11, 2003, NO. 04-0275, ADOPTED APRIL 22
, 2004, AND A MOTION RESULTING FROM DISCUSSION ITEM NO. 03-0371
ON JANUARY 8, 2004; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
..Body
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation ("FDOT") has
approved the obligation of funds in the amount of $85,000, to partially fund the
project located along Southwest 64th Court in the Flagami area, Miami, Florida,
to provide drainage improvements and alleviate a major flooding problem in the
Flagami and West End areas of the City of Miami ("City"); and
WHEREAS, said funds, in the amount of $85,000, are to be
appropriated into Capital Improvements Project ("CIP") No. 341330, entitled: "
Citywide Transportation & Transit:" and
WHEREAS, it will be necessary for the City Manager to execute an
agreement on behalf of the City for this purpose; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to appropriate unallocated Homeland
Defense/Neighborhood Improvement Bond funds in the amount of $202,000,
into CIP No. 331416 entitled "Virginia Key Park Improvements;" and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to appropriate Community Development
Block Grant Program funds, in the amount of $1,335,500, allocated for capital
improvements pursuant to Resolutions No. 03-711, 03-991 and 04-0275, and a
motion resulting from Discussion Item, File No. 03-0371 on January 8, 2004,
into the respective capital projects;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI FLORIDA:
City of Miami Page 48 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this
Ordinance are adopted by reference and incorporated as if set forth in this
Section.
Section 2. FDOT grant funds, in the amount of $85,000, for the
drainage improvements along Southwest 64th Court from Southwest 8th Street
to Southwest 6th Street, in the Flagami area, Miami, Florida, are accepted.
Section 3. Ordinance No. 12451, adopted November 25, 2003, the
Capital Projects Appropriations Ordinance, is amended in the following
particulars:{2}
"Ordinance No. 12451
Section 1. The herein appropriations are made for implementation of all
municipal capital improvements of the City of Miami, including new capital
improvement projects scheduled to begin during Fiscal Year 2004. The herein
appropriations which are designated by reference to descriptive project title and
number also include appropriations for previously approved scheduled projects
as well as reappropriations of prior funds. The sources of revenues to support
the herein appropriations are identified by fund and project in ten Capital Funds,
as follows:
Appropriations
V. Fund 325 Public Facilities
* * * * * *
Sub -fund Auditoriums
3 322062 Manuel Artime Center Interior Improvements
Funding Sources
a. Contribution from Fiscal Year 2001 General Fund
(Strategic Investments)
b. Contribution from Special Revenue Fund
(Public Facilities Fund 119003)
c. Community Development Block Grant
Total
* * * * * *
VI. Fund 331 Parks & Recreation
36 331416 Virginia Key Park Improvements
Funding Sources
$324,795
a. Homeland Defense/Neighborhood Improvement
$206,600
118,195
131,000
$455, 795
City of Miami Page 49 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Bonds
$1,202,000
b. Assessment Lien Revenue
111,000
Total
$1,313,000
1,000,000
$1,111,000
VII. Fund 341 Streets & Sidewalks
10.341183 Citywide Street Improvements Fiscal Year 2001-2005
Funding Sources
a. Contribution from Special Revenue Fund
(Municipal Fuel Tax Project 693001) $
303,600
b. Local Option Gas Tax
5,002,900
c. Community Development Block Grant 2,299,345 _
3, 503, 845
d. Assessment Lien Revenue
475,800
Total $ 8,081,645 $
9,286,145
* * * * * *
33. 341330 Citywide Transportation & Transit
Funding Sources
a. Local Option Gas Tax
7,700,000
b. Impact Fee
1,818,946
c. Transit Half Cent Surtax
(Cont. from Special Revenue Fund Proj 122001)
11, 215, 093
d. Florida Department of Transportation Grant
85.000
Total
20, 819, 039
* * * * * *II
$
$ 20, 734, 039 $
Section 4. The City Manager is authorized{1} to execute an Agreement, in
substantially the attached form, for said purpose
Section 5. All ordinances or parts of ordinances, insofar as they are
inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, are repealed.
Section 6. If any section, part of section, paragraph, clause, phrase or word
of this Ordinance is declared invalid, the remaining provisions of this Ordinance
City of Miami Page 50 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
shall not be affected.
Section 7. This Ordinance is declared to be an emergency measure on the
grounds of urgent public need for the preservation of peace, health, safety, and
property of the City of Miami, and upon further grounds of the necessity to
make the required and necessary payments to its employees and officers,
payment of its debts, necessary and required purchases of goods and supplies
and to generally carry on the functions and duties of municipal affairs.
Section 8. The requirements of reading this ordinance on two separate
days is dispensed with by an affirmative vote of not less than four-fifths(4/5ths)
of the members of the Commission.
Section 9. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its
adoption and signature of the Mayor.{3}
04-00632-cover memo.pdf
04-00632-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00632-pre memo.pdf
04-00632-pre legislation.pdf
04-00632-pre memo 2.pdf
04-00632-pre legislation 2.pdf
04-00632-pre memo 3.pdf
04-00632-pre notice.pdf
04-00632-pre legislation 3.pdf
04-00632-pre legislation 4.pdf
04-00632-pre agenda pg.. pdf
04-00632-exhibit- agreement.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
12548
Chairman Teele: Emergency Ordinance Number 2 --
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: -- is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come forward.
There are no persons coming forward.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: There's a motion by Commissioner Winton; second by Commissioner Gonzalez
. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Commissioner Winton: To accept how much money?
City of Miami Page 51 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry. Did you have a question?
Commissioner Winton: No. Go ahead.
Ms. Thompson: OK. First roll call. Second roll call.
Roll calls were taken, the results of which are stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted as an emergency measure, 4/0.
Chairman Teele: Did you want to say, Johnny, on that?
Commissioner Winton: No. I was just being a smart aleck.
ORDINANCE - SECOND READING
SR.1 04-00497 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER
54/ARTICLE V/SECTION 54-190 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS/BASE
BUILDING LINES/NONSTANDARD STREET WIDTHS," TO MODIFY THE
WIDTH OF NORTHEAST 9TH STREET BETWEEN NORTHEAST 2ND
AVENUE AND BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00497-cover memo.pdf
04-00497-public notice memo.pdf
04-00497-public notice .pdf
04-00497-location sketch.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
12549
Chairman Teele: All right. The next item is Second Reading 1, SR.1.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: It's a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come forward.
There are no persons coming forward. The public hearing is closed. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Madam Attorney -- Madam Clerk.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
City of Miami Page 52 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 4/0.
ORDINANCES - FIRST READING
FR.1 04-00466 ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION REPEALING
SECTIONS 35-341 TO 35-347, IN ITS ENTIRETY OF ARTICLE IX OF THE
CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ("CODE")
ENTITLED: PARKING FACILITIES SURCHARGE, AND REPLACING IT WITH
NEW SECTIONS 35-341 TO 35-347, AMENDING THE CODE PROVIDING
FOR THE IMPOSITION AND COLLECTION OF A PARKING FACILITIES
SURCHARGE AT THE RATE OF FIFTEEN PERCENT (15%) OF THE
AMOUNT CHARGED FOR THE SALE, LEASE, OR RENTAL OF SPACE AT
PARKING FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI; PROVIDING
DEFINITIONS; SETTING FORTH PROCEDURES FOR COLLECTION AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY CODE.
04-00466-cover memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
Chairman Teele: FR.1.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard on FR.1, First Reading Item
Number 1, should come forward. There are no persons coming forward. The public hearing is
closed. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/0.
FR.2 04-00468 ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER
2/ARTICLE XI, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS
AMENDED, ("CITY CODE") ENTITLED: "ADMINISTRATION//BOARDS,
COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS," CHAPTER 35/ARTICLE V, ENTITLED: "
MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC/COCONUT GROVE PARKING
IMPROVEMENTS TRUST FUND" AND CHAPTER 54/ARTICLE IX, ENTITLED
"STREETS AND SIDEWALKS/COCONUT GROVE SPECIAL EVENTS
DISTRICT" TO ABOLISH THE EXISTING COCONUT GROVE PARKING
City of Miami Page 53 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE COCONUT GROVE SPECIAL EVENTS
AND MARKETING COMMITTEE, AND SUBSTITUTE IN LIEU THEREOF, A
NEW DIVISION 17 TO ARTICLE XI OF CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED "COCONUT
GROVE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE" ("BIC"), TO SET FORTH
THE PURPOSE, POWERS, APPOINTMENTS, QUALIFICATIONS,
APPROVAL OF BUDGET, AND ANNUALLY PROVIDING FOR SUNSET
REVIEW, MORE PARTICULARLY BY DELETING SECTIONS 35-223 AND
SECTION 54-342, AND SUBSTITUTING IN LIEU THEREOF, A NEW
DIVISION 17, NEW SECTIONS 2-1250 THROUGH 2-1255 TO SAID CODE;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00468-cover memo.pdf
04-00468-legislation. pdf
04-00468 - Memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
Direction to the City Manager and City Clerk to schedule an item for discussion to try to
consolidate some City boards and eliminate boards which are not active and productive.
[Note: The Clerk prepared a report and scheduled a discussion item on September 9, 2004
Commission agenda. ]
Chairman Teele: All right. The next item is First Reading Number 2. This is a public hearing.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Any person desiring to be heard should come forward. There are no persons
coming forward.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: It's moved and seconded.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Discussion. Just brief. If you look at the appointments of all the
boards that we have, I would like to put on a discussion for future discussions this Commission,
to try to merge an consolidate some of these boards and maybe do away with the ones that are
not being productive, because it's taking a lot of my time from my staff and resources to find
people that are willing to serve and people that are committed to serve.
Chairman Teele: Here here.
Commissioner Winton: And that's what -- this is combining two different groups finally, and
then it's actually going to be three.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Exactly, so maybe this is a step in the right direction.
Chairman Teele: It really is, but here here.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Attorney -- Madam Attorney.
City of Miami Page 54 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, there are just two things that I would
like to add. I would like to specifically add to this ordinance qualifications for the members,
which is not set forth in the body of it, and I would, after some discussions, we noticed that we
didn't have the qualifications set out, and I would like to clam the City Manager as the director
of this committee so that a liaison from the City Manager's office is participant at the committee,
so I'd like to make those two amendments to the title.
Commissioner Winton: Sounds great.
Chairman Teele: It's acceptable to the maker and seconder of the motion?
Commissioner Winton: Sure.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Then read the ordinance.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/0.
FR.3 04-00648 ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER
40/ ARTICLE IV/DIVISION 3 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEL/ PENSION AND
RETIREMENT PLANS/ CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES' AND
SANITATION EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT TRUST TO PROVIDE
PROCEDURES FOR THE EQUITABLE TRANSFER OF RETIREMENT PLAN
MEMBERSHIPS BY ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES; MORE PARTICULARLY BY
AMENDING SECTION 40-250 OF THE CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION, AND PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00648-cover memo.pdf
WITH DRAWN
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to WITHDRAW item FR.3.
Chairman Teele: Further deferrals.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, with regard to FR.3--
Chairman Teele: FR (First Reading) what?
Mr. Vilarello: FR.3. I'd request that that item be withdrawn from the agenda.
Chairman Teele: Withdrawn.
City of Miami Page 55 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hold on, hold on.
Mr. Vilarello: That's the opportunity for unclassifieds to opt into the plan after 10 years. I've
requested that to be withdrawn. I sent out the memorandum last week.
Chairman Teele: FR.3.
Mr. Vilarello: Yes.
Chairman Teele: Is there a motion to withdraw FR.3?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move to defer.
Chairman Teele: Is it a withdrawal?
Mr. Vilarello: Withdrawn.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, withdraw.
Chairman Teele: This was placed on the agenda at the request of the City Attorney; is that
right?
Mr. Vilarello: Correct.
Chairman Teele: And you're requesting that it be withdrawn?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So moved.
Chairman Teele: Moved and second. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed. Commissioner Winton, thank you very much for being here.
We're in the withdrawals from the agenda -- deferrals, withdrawals, and we're encouraging that,
given the voluminous --
City of Miami Page 56 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
RESOLUTIONS
RE.1 04-00482 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, WITH SARMIENTO ADVERTISING GROUP, L.L.C. ("
SARMIENTO") FOR EMERGENCY MAINTENANCE, ON A MONTH -TO -
MONTH BASIS, OF BUS SHELTERS IN CITY RIGHTS -OF -WAY AS PER THE
ATTACHED PROPOSAL, AND PROVIDING THAT IF ANY SHELTER IS USED
FOR ADVERTISING, THE CITY SHALL NOT PAY TO MAINTAIN THE
SHELTER AND SARMIENTO SHALL PAY THE CITY AT THE RATE LAST
PAID BY THE PREVIOUS BUS SHELTER CONTRACTOR; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A BILL OF SALE FOR
BUS SHELTERS AND MUTUAL RELEASES, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
ATTACHED FORMS, WITH CLEAR CHANNEL OUTDOOR, INC.
04-00482-cover memo.pdf
04-00482-exhibit-letter.pdf
04-00482 - revised attachment.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0427
Direction to the Administration by Chairman Teele to take pictures of bus stops all over City;
further directing the City Clerk to provide a copy of the record when the previous assistant
manager assured the Commission that a study would be done related to the provision of bus
benches. [Note: Clerk provided copy of transcript on 6-24-04.]
Direction to the Administration by Chairman Teele to review the record on the bus bench issue
and come back with at comprehensive plan; further directing the Administration to thoroughly
review the contract with Sarmiento Advertising Group.
Chairman Teele: All right. Next item.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): FR.3 has been withdrawn.
Chairman Teele: FR.3 is withdrawn.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Yes.
Chairman Teele: RE.1. Resolution number 1.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved.
Commissioner Winton: I don't get it.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, we have a substitute to that resolution that clarifies that the
maintenance of the bus shelters, which are being taken over from Clear Channel, would be
pursuant to a professional services agreement, that's approved on a month to month basis, until
you can conclude a competitive process with regard to the bus shelters.
City of Miami Page 57 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: I'm going to ask this item to come up right after lunch, because he had notes, I
saw, right here on his desk. I don't know what they're saying.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. I -- there's going to be discussion on
this item.
Chairman Teele: But is the Public Works Director here? I want to make sure we bring this item
up right after lunch as the first item, but this is where I am. This City is going 180 miles an hour
in the wrong direction. I'm going to ask cooperation with the Manager's office, to take pictures
of the bus stops all over the City. What is happening, I don't know if it's because school is out.
This morning, Johnny, down there, apparently because of the construction around the
Performing Arts Center, they've rerouted some of the buses. There were 40 people standing out
all along 7th Avenue. I brought this up for six months. You know, if we would order the City
staff not to bring cars but to ride public transportation, I think we would begin to see some
changes in the way we deal with the public, the transit dependent. I have never seen it so bad in
any City I've ever been in as to the callous way we're treating the transit dependent. The people
along 7th Avenue there at 20th Street, where the people go to Miami -Dade Community College
or it's the Miami Tech. You know, there's just -- there are no seats, not even for old people.
You've got old people sitting on the ground. Somebody's mother, somebody's sister. We're
dealing with this thing all wrong. I don't know where we're going. We've asked repeatedly from
the previous director, who came -- the previous assistant manager, came up and gave us an
assurance that they were going to do a citywide inventory -- Madam Clerk, go back and get the
record when the previous director -- assistant manager came up and gave us his assurance, they
were going to do a study.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: We were going to, in fact, appropriate land with Economic Development. We
were going to buy space. Most of the problem is the City refusing to treat transit dependent
responsively. Most of the land is owned by the government whether it be the State of Florida or
Miami -Dade County, or Miami -Dade Community College, particularly around the schools for
the poor people, and yet, we have nothing. We have no plans, and I want to see it after lunch,
the plan that we're working on, the citywide plan to deal with bus shelters, and bus benches,
because we said we need to harmonize between those two things, but right now, nobody's
providing the service. We had Sarmiento to promise us directly that they would get bus benches
out. They've not done it, and I'm not inclined to do any of this stuff until we can see some direct
progress in their getting the bus benches and bus shelters issues resolved. Madam Director, very
good answer. Thank you. Stephanie, you need to put your name, address on the record. I mean,
your name and title on the record.
Stephanie Grindell: Stephanie Grindell, Public Works.
Chairman Teele: And you're the --
Ms. Grindell: Director of Public Works.
Chairman Teele: All right. Can we have the discussion on this after lunch?
Ms. Grindell: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: And can we get some specifics on what you all have done, and have you all
reviewed the record? Madam Manager, have you reviewed the record in what was promised by
your predecessor, and what you all have promised to do? Your name and address for the record
or your name and title.
City of Miami Page 58 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Alicia Cuervo Schreiber: Alicia Cuervo Schrieber, Chief of Operations. Commissioner, what we
have done is we've reviewed all the contracts.
Chairman Teele: Have you all reviewed the record as to what the management has promised
this Commission you all are going to do on bus benches and bus shelters?
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: I have not. I have received, though, clear direction to do an analysis,
which we have done on all the contracts and all the spacing requirements, and we are creating a
plan and we have met with the attorneys to create a plan for right-of-way.
Chairman Teele: Madam Director, that's the very point that has been -- that is wrong. The
problem is not the contract. The problem is the management has not directed the contract. In
other words, what we need the not a review of the contract. We need a review of the bus stops
and the demand for bus shelters and bus benches in this City. We don't need to let the vendors --
you know what the venders are going to do? This is the way this City -- God bless this City, the
way it was run, but do you know what the vendors are going to do? They're going to go worry
about one thing: Bus shelters and bus stops where their advertising gets up. That's all they're
going to be worried about, with all due respect. They are not going to be worried about bus
shelters and bus stops in some of these very poor areas, where the buses run that may not be as
visible and that's where the bus shelters and bus -- we're letting the tail wag the dog right now,
and candidly, I think the problem is us.
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: Commissioner, if I could clam. As it relates to contractors, what we
have analyzed is technical elements that we can put into the contract that requires right-of-way,
specifically for shelters and stops, and it requires actual bus stops to be at locations where the
County is providing transit pick ups and stuff. Those are the type of analyses we've done.
Chairman Teele: Wait, wait, wait. Say what you just said again, because you misspoke.
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: You're requiring what, bus stops?
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: We are requiring in our upcoming either RFP (Request for Proposal) or
with the current contract, we are requiring -- we have done an analysis on technical elements, as
it relates to County bus stops, as they provide at their locations where they would pick up transit
constituents trying to ride the transit facility. We have looked at right-of-way components as it
deals with going on private right-of-way, and if there was advertisement, what impacts that
would be, both in acquiring right-of-way or doing a permanent easement as it relates to right-of-
way, so we've had those discussions. We're trying to develop a plan so that we can implement
that plan.
Chairman Teele: Has there been any analysis done right now, today, of the bus -- the transit
dependent usage and the unavailability of any type of shelters or bus benches for -- especially
for the elderly and people who may be affirmed?
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: No, but it was our goal to provide a bus shelter at every stop that any
constituent would stand at to give them shelter from the sun. Our goal was to provide that at
every location.
Chairman Teele: Well --
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: But, no, a study has not been done, Commissioner.
City of Miami Page 59 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Again, the only thing that I'm saying, Alicia -- I wish you would listen to me --
shade from the sun is important, and I'm not disputing that. There are elderly and handicap
people who use transit as the only way to get around. We need to look at those people,
especially in those corridors where we know it's used, and we need to prioritize the placing of
bus benches, and this has what the discussion has been for nine months now, and we still can't
get it. Every time I drive by a bus shelter, a bus stop, and I see older people standing there,
sitting on the ground, I think about my mother or my grandmother, and that's not the way life
should be in this City, so if we could at least get what has been agreed to by you all to be
brought forth, and how you all are going to be respond to it, I'd be grateful.
Ms. Cuervo Schreiber: We will, Commissioner.
Chairman Teele: I would like to do this: Mr. Manager, your staff -- where is the Public Works
Director? Your staff has indicated that they had not reviewed the record. I talked to them
directly. This is on RE.1. I think it's really important. There's some very important language in
here that goes back to 2002. Commissioner Sanchez made certain directions, Commissioner
Gonzalez and, apparently, in the transition between one Assistant Manager and the next, none of
this has been reviewed. They both said, for the record, that they've not even seen the record.
I've asked the Attorney -- the Clerk to pull it, and here's the record. This goes back to 2 -- you
just have one; this is the full record now, so I'm going to ask, respectfully, that RE.1 be deferred
to the next meeting, and what I need to see is a comprehensive plan consistent with what we have
all been talking about on how we're going to approach this whole issue of the transit dependent,
and I think we need to deal with this aggressively but, right now, Mr. Manager, all we are doing
is managing a contract. We are not dealing with the needs of the transit dependent public, at all.
All we're doing is going from contract to contract. This contract's gone through three revisions
right now, but we still don't have a comprehensive plan, as Commissioner Gonzalez requested,
Commissioner Sanchez and myself so, again, I think, you know -- Commissioner, if you would
move -- let's try to resolve the RE.1, at least to bring it back on --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, I agree.
Chairman Teele: -- July 8th, as the first item. Would you move to defer it to July 8th to --
Commissioner Winton: Move to defer to July 8th.
Chairman Teele: -- time certain of 10 a.m.
Commissioner Winton: Because what I'm going to agree with you on 100 percent is we don't
want another damned contract. We want a system that we understand, then we go to contract
renewal. We don't want to renew any contract right now until we understand what the system is
that we're recommending to make these bus shelter things work and a transit dependent system
work. That's what we want; is that not right?
Chairman Teele: That's correct.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Yeah. You know --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Go ahead.
Mr. Arriola: Commissioner --
Commissioner Winton: So move to defer to --
Mr. Arriola: All we're asking in the RE.1 is for a month -to -month contract for maintenance.
City of Miami Page 60 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Oh, month-to-month's OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's a month -to -month contract.
Mr. Arriola: And on the bus shelters, so I mean --
Commissioner Winton: And it's maintenance?
Chairman Teele: But see, this is my concern. They need to sit down and look at the --
Commissioner Winton: So let's give them --
Mr. Arriola: This is emergency maintenance on month -to -month basis, that's all.
Commissioner Winton: So let's give them another --
Mr. Arriola: For the Clear Channel ones that we took over.
Commissioner Winton: So let's -- we'll approve that and give them a direction to come back to
us in a time certain, Commissioner Teele, with a definitive plan to deal with this whole bus
benches --
Chairman Teele: Would you move to approve the month -to -month contract for --
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): There's a resolution that we're distributing.
Commissioner Regalado: How about --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: How about the reduction of the bond?
Mr. Vilarello: That's included in the resolution that --
Commissioner Regalado: That's included in --
Mr. Vilarello: -- Mr. Villacorta is passing out.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but, see, I'm going to tell you something. I think once you reduce the
bond, you know, you really opened the door now to what is the real issue here, and the real
issue, as far as I'm concerned is, is Sarmiento and the City going to come together with a
comprehensive program to address this?
Commissioner Winton: And if they don't, they go away.
Chairman Teele: And if they don't, they go away.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
City of Miami Page 61 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: And that's the real issue, as far as I'm concerned.
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Chairman Teele: When you start approving the bond, all you're doing now is letting this whole
thing go.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: I think we need Sarmiento, the Public Works Department, the Manager and all
the other parties at the table to try to come to something that makes sense --
Commissioner Winton: And we --
Chairman Teele: -- because right now we've changed the panel size twice, we've reduced the
number -- I've looked through the record. We've reduced the number of panels. We've increased
this, but we still haven't deal with a comprehensive plan on how we're going to address --
Mr. Arriola: Yeah, you're right.
Chairman Teele: -- the transit dependent, and we're being driven by the contractor, just like we
were 20 years ago, so I would respectfully ask that you all defer this until July 8th, and let's get
everybody to the table and do it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hey, and we've seen --
Commissioner Winton: OK
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- the good, the bad and the ugly on this issue.
Commissioner Winton: I'll withdraw my motion and we'll defer it to July 8th.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. -- can I --
Commissioner Winton: How's that?
Mr. Vilarello: -- try to bring a compromise out of this, Mr. Chairman? Your objection is to the
change in the existing contract with Sarmiento. If we can pull that out of there and just go ahead
and authorize this on a separate agreement for the maintenance of the bus shelters --
Chairman Teele: That's what he had moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: On a month -to -month.
Mr. Vilarello: It also included --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but I was going to --
Chairman Teele: On a month -to -month basis.
Mr. Vilarello: -- the reduction in the bond issue.
Commissioner Winton: I was going to withdraw that.
Mr. Vilarello: And we'll take out that piece that changes the contract, and only authorizes to
City of Miami Page 62 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
have some maintenance to the bus shelters, which --
Chairman Teele: Look, we can do this in two weeks.
Commissioner Gonzalez: What piece --
Chairman Teele: I mean, what's -- but what we --
Mr. Vilarello: We've taken control --
Chairman Teele: -- need to do is we need to get Sarmiento, we need to get the Manager -- they
need to at least review the record. The record hasn't even been reviewed.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, the only issue is we've taken control over some of these bus
shelters. We've cut off the power --
Chairman Teele: And I have no objection to that.
Mr. Vilarello: -- on some of them, and we'd like to maintain them until that -- it's on a month -to -
month basis.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't have a problem.
Chairman Teele: I have no problem with that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe that I was the one that brought the issue of the bus shelters --
Mr. Arriola: Yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- up for discussion, if I remember correctly.
Commissioner Winton: Hopefully, we don't stay on this subject very long.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And my issue was a issue of safety.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Going back to --
Mr. Arriola: Yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- what happened in the County with the 7-year-old --
Commissioner Winton: Oh, yeah, right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- that got electrocuted because the County didn't took care of
business.
Commissioner Winton: So we need to move this.
Mr. Arriola: And that's my concern.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And I brought it up, and we've been playing around with it. If you
want to defer it, it's fine with me.
City of Miami Page 63 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: No, no, no.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm putting on the record that I'm concerned with it. If we have a
fatality, then my conscious is clean and clear.
Commissioner Winton: No, no, we're not deferring it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I brought it up.
Commissioner Winton: We're not deferring it.
Chairman Teele: That's not what we're doing, at all.
Commissioner Winton: We're moving the motion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because, you know, in all fairness, we have been playing games with
Sarmiento for three years, you know --
Commissioner Winton: We moved the --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- giving them contracts, and I remember. I'm going to go back. Since
we're going to discuss it, let's discuss it. Put this type of bench. No, we don't want these these
benches after they ordered I don't know how many hundreds of benches. We don't want it
because it's too hot. Now we want this other bench. Remove it. Bring the other one. Put the
other one back.
Commissioner Winton: That's all --
Chairman Teele: Designing a bench.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, that is not a serious business.
Commissioner Winton: That's all true.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's not a way that a city should conduct business because it reflects
Commissioner Winton: That's all true.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- petty bad on the image --
Commissioner Winton: It's all true.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- of the people that are sitting up here and the administration, and I'm
not talking -- it was the city -- it was not the present administrator. It was a prior
administration, and it took about a year for these people to finally, finally be able to start
installing bus benches, and we keep playing around. We keep playing games with the contract
and the bus benches and --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm prepared to support this resolution.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- as far as I'm concerned, I'm fine with it. You want to defer it for
another six months, fine with me.
Chairman Teele: The motion is --
City of Miami Page 64 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: If we have a fatality, it'll be someone else's responsibility.
Chairman Teele: The motion is to grant them the month -to -month, as you have suggested.
Would you move that, Commissioner Winton?
Commissioner Winton: I did.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: To grant Sarmiento the month -to -month. Is there objection? All in favor, say
aye.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Mr. Vilarello: It also authorizes to take possession of the bus shelters from Clear Channel and
resolve that agreement, as well.
Chairman Teele: That's --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But later on --
Chairman Teele: On a month -to -month basis.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- later on --
Mr. Vilarello: On a month -to -month basis.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- we will bid it out.
Chairman Teele: Well, we're not --
Mr. Vilarello: Later on you all decide what to do.
Commissioner Winton: We (UNINTELLIGIBLE) talking about that.
Chairman Teele: We'll decide that later on. We'll --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, later on.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We'll decide that later.
Chairman Teele: -- decide that on the 8th.
Commissioner Regalado: OK, but --
Chairman Teele: I think we need to have a full discussion of where we're going.
Mr. Arriola: Absolutely.
City of Miami Page 65 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: But I think the staff ought to at least review the comments that Commissioner
Gonzalez --
Mr. Arriola: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- made, which he just made again. I just gave them to you, the comments of
Commissioner Sanchez.
Mr. Arriola: Yep.
Chairman Teele: And I want to say this: I think Sarmiento got a bad deal. I want to say on the
record --
Commissioner Winton: Amen.
Chairman Teele: -- I think that we ought to look at the Sarmiento contract cold and fresh. They
need some adjustments on the size of the panels, of the bus benches. We ought to go ahead and
do this in a comprehensive basis; deal with the bond issue and the whole thing, but right now
we're being Chinese water treatment. Every -- it looks like we've had four amendments to a
contract already.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly.
Chairman Teele: Already --
Commissioner Winton: But unfortunately --
Chairman Teele: -- and we need a comprehensive approach.
Commissioner Regalado: So what's --
Commissioner Winton: And -- but guess what?
Chairman Teele: What?
Commissioner Winton: That said, that sounds simple, but this is Miami where nothing's simple.
Chairman Teele: Where nothing's simple.
Commissioner Winton: So -- and I can tell you because I remember all these discussions. The
Grovevites are going to stand up and say I don't want any advertising. The ones at Brickell, I
don't want any advertising, and then I don't -- I want this, and then I want that, and so the real
issue -- I don't -- I almost don't blame the administration because you can't get a damn decision.
I mean, it's impossible and -- so I almost don't blame them for not wanting to go there because it
doesn't matter what they recommend. There's a group of people totally opposed to it. In the
meantime, the transit dependent get totally screwed, and I'm ticked about it, and so I guess, that
said, most of the people that are opposed to this stuff are in my district. I'll deal with them.
Bring a damn plan back here. I'll deal with the people in my district because the transit
dependent deserve something good on their streets, and maybe if there's some advertising,
there's got to be some advertising, so --
Chairman Teele: And the real issue is none of the above. The real issue is what your Manager
committed to, and that is that Economic Development and Public Works were going to work
together; they were going to ident space. The problem that the contractor's got is that they're
all in the right-of-way, and whether -- you have the most congestion, you have the least space,
City of Miami Page 66 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
and we need --
Commissioner Winton: OK, let's -- we've got to get going.
Chairman Teele: All right. On the motion, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? Mr. Hollo, we apologize to all of the people here on the Magna -
- what is it?
Unidentified Speaker: Villa Magna.
Chairman Teele: What's the item, Madam Director?
Commissioner Winton: But in 10 minutes, we can get through 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, that are
second readings --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, let's --
Commissioner Winton: -- and there's people here waiting for that also.
RE.2 04-00643 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A QUIT CLAIM DEED
FROM SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN PARK WEST COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA"), FOR CONVEYANCE TO THE CITY OF
MIAMI OF THE CRA'S INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 104
NORTHWEST 1ST AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN
"EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; FURTHER AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A QUIT CLAIM DEED, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR THOSE PORTIONS OF
LAND THAT WERE ORIGINALLY DEDICATED TO THE GRAN CENTRAL
CORPORATION PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 88-471, ADOPTED MAY
19, 1988, AND OTHER ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
04-00643-cover memo.pdf
04-00643.exhibit-Quit Claim.pdf
04-00643 - revised attachment.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 2 - Commissioner Winton and Regalado
R-04-0417
Chairman Teele: If I could regain --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Are there any other items that anybody would like to take up this morning.
Ma'am, did you want to be heard on something?
City of Miami Page 67 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes. RE.2 and 3.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: RE --
Chairman Teele: We didn't do them?
Mr. Vilarello: No.
Chairman Teele: I thought we did.
Commissioner Regalado: RE2.
Chairman Teele: Oh, RE.2 and RE.3. Is this the grand thing?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes. It's authorizing the City Manager to accept the Quick Claim Deed from the
CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency).
Vice Chairman Sanchez: RE --
Mr. Vilarello: 2.
Chairman Teele: RE.2 and RE.3. These are both authorizing the Manager to accept Quick
Claim Deeds.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.2.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: What does this basically do? (UNINTELLIGIBLE) clear any defect in
the title that wasn't recorded after the Commission; is that what it does?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes. We -- this gives -- the CRA gives a portion of property back to the City so we
can correct the Grand Central plat that we discussed several meetings ago at the CRA, as well as
the City.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there a discussion on RE.2? If not, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
RE.3 04-00645 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A QUIT CLAIM DEED,
AS DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT B," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, FROM
THE MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY ("MSEA"), FOR THE
CONVEYANCE TO THE CITY OF MIAMI OF THE FIRST AVENUE RIGHT-OF-
WAY LOCATED WITHIN TRACT "C" OF THE MIAMI ARENA SUBDIVISION,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED
AND INCORPORATED; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO JOIN WITH
MSEA IN THE EXECUTION OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED, AS DESCRIBED IN "
EXHIBIT C," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, FOR THOSE PORTIONS
OF LAND THAT WERE ORIGINALLY DEDICATED TO THE GRAN CENTRAL
CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 88-471, ADOPTED MAY
City of Miami Page 68 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
19, 1988, AND ANY OTHER NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
04-00645-cover memo.pdf
04-00645-exhibit 1-quick claim deed.pdf
04-00645-exhibit 2- legal description.pdf
04-00645-exhibit 3- map.pdf
04-00645-exhibit 4-quick claim deed 2.pdf
04-00645-exhibit 5- legal description 2.pdf
04-00645 - revised attachments.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 2 - Commissioner Winton and Regalado
R-04-041 8
Chairman Teele: RE.3.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.3.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Along the same line, this is a -- authorizing the City
Manager to accept a Quick Claim Deed from MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority) for
the same purposes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? OK.
City of Miami Page 69 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
Note for the Record: Commissioner Gonzalez deferred all of his appointments.
Chairman Teele: Did we want to go through and get any anything else? We've pretty much
done -- anybody got any sole appointments that are not group appointments that they wanted to
handle? Any sole appointments of boards?
Commissioner Winton: I have one, if you would like me to --
Chairman Teele: Let's see. Joe, you've got the street codesignation. You want to do that now or
later? Angel, you've got technology.
Commissioner Gonzalez: In lieu of the big agenda that we have for today, I would like to defer
all my appointments until --
Chairman Teele: All right, without objection.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- the next meeting.
Chairman Teele: Without objection.
BC.1 03-0233 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN
INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY:
Chairman Arthur Teele
03-0233-memo-1.doc
03-0233 applications-3.pdf
DEFERRED
BC.2 03-0234 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN
INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE MIAMI STREET CODESIGNATION
REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY:
Chairman Joe Sanchez
03-0234-memo-1.doc
03-0234-members-2. pdf
City of Miami Page 70 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
DEFERRED
BC.3 04-00086 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN
INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY
ADVISORY BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY:
04-00086-memo-1.doc
04-00086-members-2 . d oc
DEFERRED
BC.4 04-00446 RESOLUTION
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE PARKS ADVISORY
BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEES: NOMINATED BY:
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Joe Sanchez
Mayor Manuel Diaz
04-00446-memo-1.doc
04-00446-members-2 . d oc
04-00446-resignation-3. pdf
DEFERRED
BC.5 04-00539 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE LITTLE HAVANA
FESTIVAL COMMITTEE FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEES:
NOMINATED BY:
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Johnny Winton
City of Miami Page 71 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Joe Sanchez
Chairman Arthur Teele
04-00539-memo-1.doc
04-00539-members-2 . d oc
DEFERRED
Chairman Teele: Vice Chairman, did you have anything?
Commissioner Winton: I have three I could make, if you want to get them out of the way.
Chairman Teele: Johnny, yeah, go right ahead, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Little Havana Festivities Committee.
Chairman Teele: BC. 5.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's one that we -- they don't meet. I mean, it's not active.
Commissioner Winton: OK, fine. Forget that one.
Chairman Teele: Is that being consolidated?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We need to consider consolidating some of these boards or getting rid
of them because, you know, they don't have a quorum in many cases. You know --
Commissioner Winton: I'm happy not to make the appointment.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- some of these boards are hurting us because --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- they can't get a quorum. You know, people volunteer and then they
don't show up.
BC.6 04-00540 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE ORANGE BOWL
ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEES: NOMINATED BY:
Theodora Hayes Long Vice Chairman Joe Sanchez
Sam Burstyn Chairman Arthur Teele
City of Miami Page 72 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00540-memo-1.doc
04-00540- MEMBERS-2.doc
DEFERRED
BC.7 04-00541 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE NUISANCE
ABATEMENT BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEE:
Robert Valledor
Anthony Cantey
04-00541-memo-1.doc
04-00541-MEMBERS-2.doc
DEFERRED
BC.8 04-00542 RESOLUTION
NOMINATED BY:
Vice Chairman Joe Sanchez
Chairman Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE HISTORIC AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD FOR TERMS AS
DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEES: NOMINATED BY:
Anthony Parrish, Jr. Commissioner Johnny Winton
(Business/Finance or Law Category)
Gloria Loyola -Black Commissioner Johnny Winton
(Citizen Category)
04-00542-memo-1 .doc
04-00542-members-2 . d oc
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
R-04-0430
A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, with Commissioner Regalado absent, to appoint Andy Parrish and Gloria
Loyola Black as members of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board.
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele, Vice Chairman Sanchez, and Commissioners Gonzalez
City of Miami Page 73 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
and Regalado deferred their appointments.
Commissioner Winton: On the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They do a disservice when they want to do a service.
Commissioner Winton: -- Historic Environmental and Preservation Board, Andy Parish and
Gloria Viola Black.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Moved and second. Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Winton: I'm done.
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
Commissioner Winton: That's all I've got.
Chairman Teele: All right. Now, apparently --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm going to defer all of mine.
Chairman Teele: OK. And now we've got this entire Historic and Environmental Board. Could
we get the Planning Director after lunch to come in and tell us what are we doing on that, and
why all of those appointments are up now at one time? It ought to be a little bit of overlap on
BC.8. Mr. Manager, and where is the City Manager today?
Larry Spring (Chief of Strategic Planning Budgeting & Performance): Actually, he's in
Tallahassee meeting with the Governor and the Cabinet.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Commissioner Winton: He has an excused absence.
Chairman Teele: Is the Planning Director here?
Mr. Spring: She'll be out in one second, sir.
BC.9 04-00543 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE BAYFRONT PARK
MANAGEMENT TRUST FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEES: NOMINATED BY:
Michael G. Barket Vice Chairman Joe Sanchez
Rodney Noel Chairman Arthur Teele
City of Miami Page 74 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00543-memo-1.doc
04-00543-members-2 . d oc
DEFERRED
BC.10 04-00548 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN
INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE FIRE FIGHTERS' AND POLICE
OFFICERS' RETIREMENT TRUST FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED
HEREIN.
APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY:
Joseph Kaplan, Esq. Miami Association of Fire Fighters
04-00548-memo-1.doc
04-00548-members-2 . d oc
04-00548 - nominations - 3.pdf
DEFERRED
Chairman Teele: Apparently, we've got the firefighters for the Officers' Retirement Trust.
Madam Clerk, who's their representative? We ought to at least confirm that. That's BC.10.
Commissioner Winton: What is it, number?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): BC.10 --
Chairman Teele: A member of the Firefighters and Police Retirement Trust.
Ms. Thompson: Yes. They turned in a list of names for you to select from, one person.
Chairman Teele: All right. Would you give us -- publish that list and let's take that up at 2: 30,
when we've got five people. We can do that with four.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. I don't even know where it is.
Chairman Teele: We shouldn't.
Commissioner Winton: No, but where's the list?
Chairman Teele: Nuisance Abatement.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
BC.11 04-00617 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN
INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE AUDIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
APPOINTEE: NOMINATED BY:
Chairman Arthur Teele
04-00617-memo-1.doc
04-00617- MEMBERS-2.doc
City of Miami Page 75 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
DEFERRED
City of Miami Page 76 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
DISCUSSION ITEMS
DI.1 04-00594 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING A STATUS REPORT OF BUS BENCHES,
BUS SHELTERS AND ALL RELATED MATTERS.
04-00594-cover memo.pdf
DEFERRED
DI.2 04-00651 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE EARLY VOTING SITES FOR THE
AUGUST 31, 2004 PRIMARY AND NOVEMBER 2, 2004 GENERAL
ELECTIONS.
04-00651 - Early Voting Sites.pdf
This matter was DISCUSSED. PASSED.
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele suggested to post on the City's website, Senate Bill 2346,
with an explanation accompanying same, regarding the new regulations for Early Voting;
further to work with the Communications Office to inform City residents of the new requirements
of the Bill, and showing the delegation vote and who sponsored the Bill.
Direction to the City Clerk by Chairman Teele to contact the Mayor's Office, Supervisor of
Elections Constance Kaplan and the Agenda Coordinator Elvi Alonso in order to agree on a
time certain to schedule on the July 8th Commission agenda a discussion item related to the
2005 City of Miami Runoff Election.
Note for the Record: The Agenda Office, the Mayor's Office and the Miami -Dade County
Supervisor of Elections, Constance Kaplan, agreed to schedule the aforementioned item for 10:
00 a.m. on July 8, 2004.
A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and
passed unanimously, to direct the City Attorney to research and report back as soon as possible
on the possibility of a class-action suit of voters against the Supervisor of Elections, the Miami -
Dade County Elections Department and the State of Florida Elections Department for the
disenfranchisement of City of Miami Hispanic voters because none of the early voting sites
identified for the First Primary Election on August 31, 2004 and the General Election of
November 2, 2004 are located in predominantly Hispanic areas.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, what we'd like to do is, we'd like to take up item D1.2, which
should be very brief, Ms. Kaplan, and then we're going to take up D1.4, if that's all right with
you? We've got a request to get you back to your office, Ms. Kaplan. I don't know if your office
has done this trick before, but it worked.
Constance Kaplan: They're always afraid I'm getting lost.
Commissioner Regalado: And she's been very busy. She's been very busy these days.
Ms. Kaplan: Been a little busy. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Just so that the public is aware, Ms. Kaplan, would you ident yourself as the
super -- as the Constitutional Officer of the State of Florida, Supervisor of Elections?
City of Miami Page 77 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Kaplan: Constance Kaplan, Constitutional Officer, Supervisor of Elections for Miami -Dade
County. Thank you for letting me appear here this morning. Do you want me to just go --
Chairman Teele: Leap right into it, Ms. Kaplan.
Ms. Kaplan: -- leap right into your concerns.
Commissioner Winton: What item is this? What item?
Chairman Teele: D1-- D1.2.
Ms. Kaplan: Right.
Chairman Teele: Or DI.2.
Ms. Kaplan: DI.2 is the early voting issue. In discussions with your municipal clerk, and I know
your concerns having been here previously, are about expanding the locations for early voting in
the City of Miami. I know you are aware that recent legislation has been passed and signed by
the Governor, which really restricts what we can and cannot use as early voting locations. The
legislation requires us to have early voting, 15 days prior to an election; we must have the early
voting site open eight hours -- a minimum of eight hours each day, and it must have an
aggregate of eight hours on the weekend days. Also, the legislation requires us to set up early
voting in our office, as well as any branch office in existence a year or more, and it give us the
option of two additional types of sites: City Halls and libraries. We have been told by the State
Division of Election, there is no latitude there to add schools or centers; that those are the only
other options to us. In discussion of the locations that you had asked us to check into, we
reviewed the libraries that were provided to us that are in the City of Miami. Out of those
locations, let me mention the requirements for early voting are a secure room that is secured for
our purposes for the entire time of early voting; ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act)
accessibility, as well as telephone lines or the permission for us to install the telephone lines. In
addition, the facility must be able to accommodate 15 to 20 of our iVomatics -- iVos -- in each
room, and that is because this facility must be open to the entire County. It is not specific for any
one in any area, so all early voting locations will have -- any person from the County can go in
and vote there. If I may very briefly, the locations in District 1, the Allapattah branch library
and the Grapeland Heights branch library are both too small. In Allapattah, we could only fit
four iVos in that room, and Grapeland does not have any closed room for our use. The main
library, we are already having an early voting --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Excuse me, excuse me.
Ms. Kaplan: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Gonzalez: In Grapeland, you have the Steven P. Clark building.
Ms. Kaplan: In Grapeland, I'm sorry.
Commissioner Gonzalez: In Grapeland Park, you have the Steven P. Clark building, which is an
enclosed structure. It's being used as a community center for the park, for Grapeland Park.
Ms. Kaplan: OK. As I said, we cannot use a community center. We can only use a library or a
City Hall. We don't have the latitude to go to another building that's a community center, or to
go to a park. It can only be a library or a City Hall.
Chairman Teele: Ms. Kaplan --
City of Miami Page 78 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: And you said that's --
Chairman Teele: -- my reading of the law is a little bit different. I also understood that you
have the authority to designate an office -- of your office --
Ms. Kaplan: A branch office --
Chairman Teele: A branch office.
Ms. Kaplan: -- has been in existence for a year or longer, and that is the Clark Center, our
branch office.
Chairman Teele: But you do have that authority, as well, right?
Ms. Kaplan: Yes, yes.
Chairman Teele: OK. All right. You listed two and I was saying there's three, as I recall.
Ms. Kaplan: No.
Chairman Teele: In other words, you said, it must be a library or a --
Ms. Kaplan: City Hall.
Chairman Teele: -- City Hall --
Ms. Kaplan: Our office --
Chairman Teele: -- or our branch office.
Ms. Kaplan: -- and our branch office are mandatory to have it in. We must have it in our office,
and in any branch office, we have that has been in existence a year or more.
Chairman Teele: And --
Ms. Kaplan: The optional --
Chairman Teele: -- and to the Commission, if I may, this is the importance of the County
neighborhood centers. The County neighborhood centers, which provide for office space for all
of the County governmental instrumentality that request it, and Ms. Kaplan, by virtue of the fact
that she's a County official, as well, could have a branch office, for example, of the Clerk's
Office, a regular office, in neighborhood centers, as well, and that's the way a lot of cities --
governments are -- for example, the Caleb Center is a government center owned by the County,
and virtually everybody has got an office there. I mean, all these County departments;
department of family services, department of juvenile, department of this, department of that.
The Clerk's Office could also have an office there, as well, if they would work that through this
budget process to do it; is that a fair statement?
Ms. Kaplan: I believe so. That is an option for us to attempt in the next year, to establish many
more branch offices in the County, and that would be the way to allow for early voting in many
other locations, but again, even at that, the state said it had to be in existence for a year or more,
so we couldn't do anything for these upcoming elections.
Commissioner Winton: Is this relative -- the rules on where, is it relative only to early voting?
City of Miami Page 79 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Kaplan: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Kaplan: These are specific rules for early voting that were --
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Ms. Kaplan: -- recently passed. Excuse me. District 2, it's been suggested the main library. We
do have the early voting site right across the street at the Clark Center, and so we do have that
general area covered. We have a possible site at the Coconut Grove branch location, but at this
time, we haven't been able to confirm whether we could go in there or not. That is one that
physically meets the criteria. District 3, the Hispanic library is not ADA accessible. District 4,
Shenandoah branch is also too small. It has no auditorium. We could only fit two to four iVos
in it. The West Flagler branch is under -- or will be under construction. District 5, Little River
branch is, again, too small. It has no enclosed room; only open floor space. Dixie Park branch
or Culmer library is too small, and the Edison Center branch is going to be under renovations;
is not available to us.
Commissioner Regalado: Ms. Kaplan.
Ms. Kaplan: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: So the whole thing means that we cannot have early voting in the City
of Miami? That's the bottom line.
Ms. Kaplan: No. We do have a site at Lemon City library.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Ms. Kaplan: Which is in Miami, and then, of course, the Clark Center will also be open.
Commissioner Regalado: OK, so that means that we have to --
Ms. Kaplan: Well, again, anyone can go to any of these branches, and we do have 14 locations,
and I don't know -- Priscilla, had we given you the proposed list?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): No. I'm sorry, I have not gotten the proposed list yet.
Ms. Kaplan: OK
Commissioner Regalado: Let me just say one thing -- and we thank you for the new numbers
that you provide us, and I'm referring to District 4. District 4 has the largest number of voters in
the City of Miami, in any districts in the City of Miami, and I've noticed that 65 years and up, we
have 13,027 voters; that is, 42 percent in District 4 are elderly residents, many have disabilities.
I guess that they will have to go to Lemon City or downtown Miami and, you know, pay large
amount for parking and -- or just wait until election day and try to make their vote count,
providing that your machines work, because as of now, we don't know because of the mistakes of
your department and the Department of Elections in the State of Florida, if our vote is going to
count.
Ms. Kaplan: I might add that there is voting by mail, absentee voting, which we find many of the
elderly and disabled do do, and all they have to do is request and we do send a ballot out. In
fact, there are many that do get a ballot by mail because they don't want to leave the house at
City of Miami Page 80 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
any point, and so that also is an option for them.
Commissioner Regalado: I -- you know, I feel that what this regulation, if that is the case, is
doing is that is disenfranchising 65 percent of the voters in the City of Miami, which are
Hispanics. What you're saying is that you will only be providing one or two in areas that are
non- Hispanics, and I -- I would tell you, I -- hopefully, it will go smooth and, hopefully, you
know, we trust you and we hope that all these 7,000 laptops that you're going to buy will make
those machines work, but I will tell you that if voters in my district feel disenfranchised, I will
personally lead a group to sue your department and go to the federal government to demand that
this segment of the population, which is elderly and sick, will have to right to vote and their vote
being counted, because you know, I'm a journalist and up to now, we have not received any
assurances that those computers or electric -- electronic machines are being certified by the
state, the whole components, and that they're votes of the people will be registered and
recounted in case of a run-off or a recount of votes, so, you know, I understand your problems,
but you have to understand ours, and I --
Ms. Kaplan: Absolutely.
Commissioner Regalado: You know, I promise you, I will personally start a campaign to sue
your department for disenfranchising Hispanics elderly voters in the City of Miami.
Ms. Kaplan: OK. I appreciate very much what you're saying, and we are very concerned. My
goal is to expand early voting throughout the County, not in one demographic group or another.
However, I don't have that latitude. The suggestion of expanding our branch offices is one that
we have already thought about, but again, that is something we would have to start right now so
that it can be in place a year, and that, too, is restricted on the state level for us, so I appreciate
exactly what you're saying. There still will be polling places open on election day, and the early
voting issue is nothing that we in the County have any control over, because it has been
legislated by the state to make it uniform throughout the state.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. Ms. Kaplan, are there any other matters regarding -- are there any
other matters on this? Ms. Kaplan, I've asked repeatedly, would you look at the precinct that
I've --
Ms. Kaplan: Yes, I know the precinct where the polling place is. The one that we had discussed
the last time.
Chairman Teele: And there was no relief?
Ms. Kaplan: Is that -- could you just -- I have my polling place deputy supervisor here.
Chairman Teele: Well, I don't want to take up the Commission time.
Ms. Kaplan: OK
Chairman Teele: If they could meet with Brenda Lee in my office after this --
Ms. Kaplan: OK
Chairman Teele: -- so we could get this resolved.
Ms. Kaplan: Yeah.
City of Miami Page 81 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Madam -- Ms. Kaplan, let me just say this. I respect the fact that you're new to
town. We want to give you every opportunity to succeed, but I will tell you this: Given the
history that this state has had, I -- and given the fact that if you watch the Jay Leno Show or any
of the other shows, we're the brunt of all the jokes. Every elected official in the nation says they
don't want to be like Florida, especially Miami -Dade County and South Florida, the bug-eyed
guy who's made himself famous with the microscope -- I mean, the magning glass, looking -- I
mean, these are the caricatures, the scenes that all over -- it seems to me that we'd be a lot
further ahead in dealing with this issue, particularly as it relates to the disenfranchise --
particularly, as it relates to voter accessibility for poor people, African Americans, as well as
Hispanics. I know that my colleague talked about Hispanics and elderly, and it would just seem
to me that, as a matter of policy -- and I'm going to ask this Commission to at least make a -- to
approve a resolution to the County Commission, asking that in every neighborhood center, that
the Clerk's Office have a regular office for the purpose of qual wing, under state law, to reach
out into neighborhoods and communities. That is no more than the Manager, and the County
Manager, and you, and the GSA (General Services Administration) Director, and you and the
Manager agreeing to make space available to you. We've done that in the Caleb Center, for
example, in the past. The Caleb Center, by the way, is not in the City of Miami. Is that one of
your offices now?
Ms. Kaplan: No, it is not one of our offices.
Chairman Teele: But that has always been an early voting place, and it has all been manned on
election day, or for the two weeks before by the Supervisor of Elections, as an election place, and
whether it's the Caleb Center -- there's a library in the Caleb Center which would qual as
well, but it just seems to me that we're going backwards. Everything that I'm hearing now is
moving in the wrong direction. I know you've not raised the issue because the Mayor wants to
be here, but I want to alert my colleagues, the Clerk's Office, the Supervisor of Elections Office
has determined that our Charter provision, which requires run-offs in 7 days, is an impossibility
for the Supervisor of Elections Office; is that a fair statement?
You all --
Ms. Kaplan: In 7 days?
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Ms. Kaplan: With this equipment, yes.
Chairman Teele: And so what we're doing now, we're going backwards in time on everything, in
my opinion, and I think there's got to be some median ground here. They're going to be calling
for a Charter change this year for the City to meet -- and I want to support something that goes
in the direction that Ms. Kaplan is saying she's got to go from a technology point of view, but it
seems to me, technology's taking us backwards rather than forwards --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- and there are reasons for it, and we'll get into that, but I do think, as it
relates to the issue that Commissioner Regalado, Commissioner Gonzalez have raised as relates
to the Hispanic community, this is a Countywide issue, and whether it's Perrine, or Goulds, or
Allapattah, forget the cities for a minute. There are 30 cities. Countywide, the neighborhood
centers -- what seems to be those neighborhood resource centers that are, I think, run by your
Department Director, Dean Taylor, I believe, who's a Department Director there, he's got
centers to address just these issue, and there's one in every major neighborhood, and those are
all County facilities, with County staff, and it would just seem to me that your office would
interface with Mr. Taylor's office, and with the Manager and figure out a way to address this
thing, because you're going to have lawsuits from all over the place about this, and I don't think
City of Miami Page 82 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
it's going to make us look good, at all, but I think --
Ms. Kaplan: Your absolutely --
Chairman Teele: -- I'd rather look bad and fight for the voters and the public's right to vote than
to protect the system, so with that, I can only tell you that we're all frustrated over here.
Ms. Kaplan: Absolutely, and again, I am, too -- it was my goal to expand early voting in this
reduction of it. It does make a problem for us. We will look into providing our branches
wherever we can, but again, it's got to be full service and it's got to be for a year or more,
according to law.
Chairman Teele: Respond to that legislation. Who was the author of that legislation?
Ms. Kaplan: Oh, that, I don't know. I can give you the bill number.
Maria Chiaro (Acting City Attorney): It was Senator Lee.
Ms. Kaplan: Who was it?
Ms. Chiaro: Senator Lee.
Ms. Kaplan: Senator Lee.
Ms. Chiaro: I don't know where he was from.
Chairman Teele: Well, I think we ought to get and put on the website or where the vote -- this
bill and why -- and do an explanation, and I think we ought to move in the direction that
Commissioner Regalado is saying. We need to think through how we're going to represent our
citizens, and I think we ought to work with the press office, communications office, to say we
apologize that you're not going to be able to vote, but there was a bill passed, and here's how the
delegation voted, and here who sponsored it, and put up there on -- from the delegation vote in
Dade County how it is. I mean, that's the only way people -- people -- that's all people worry
about, is there record and their reputation, and we're going in the wrong direction. The bill
right now reduces the accessibility of early voting. Now just think about this: I have always
been opposed to absentee balloting, for one reason, because of the administrative mischief, the
problems; honest people can get caught up in something that a dishonest person would do.
There's a hundred things that can go wrong. The easiest way to get -- deal with early voting or
absentee ballot is to take the person to vote, but that's got to be assessable. Everybody can't
come down to government headquarters, and what we're doing now is, we're forcing people back
into the absentee balloting business.
Commissioner Winton: But the legislature made absentee balloting even easier because they
removed the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The signatures. The witness signature.
Commissioner Winton: -- yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I was going to --
Commissioner Winton: I mean, what -- I mean, two opposite extremes here that they're running.
Ms. Kaplan: You are absolutely right.
City of Miami Page 83 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Johnny, you hit the nail right on the head. I was going to talk about
that. In 1997, there was a big issue about witnessing absentee ballots.
Chairman Teele: Right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Now -- I don't know why. Maybe because we have a presidential
election in November -- the law has been changed.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Now, you're no longer required to have a witness to, you know,
witness the absentee ballot, so, you know, all the issues that they created back in 1997 now has
been erased --
Chairman Teele: It's erased.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- by just, you know --
Commissioner Winton: A mystery to me.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I mean, it's -- you know, and last night I was watching the news and
the Election Department is going to be taken to court because now they're trying to eliminate
numbers on the candidates.
Ms. Kaplan: No. That is with the state, not our department.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, with the state.
Ms. Kaplan: The state has also passed a rule or is in the process of passing one that would not
allow us to use position numbers for candidates.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Which is, you know, also ridiculous because there's a lot of people --
so, you know, senior citizens, for example, it's very hard for them to remember names, especially
when you go in a ballot where you have 10 different candidates for 10 different positions, you
know, and you have 20 candidates running for the position, so they have been accustomed to use
the number for the candidates. Now, they want to erase the numbers, so instead of making it
easier for people to vote, they're making it more difficult, you know.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's true.
Commissioner Winton: But making it easier for corruption --
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: -- on absentee ballots.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion? If not, Ms. Kaplan, thank you so much --
Ms. Kaplan: Thank you, and I'll see you again.
Chairman Teele: -- and we look forward to -- now, you're going to be coming back at the
Mayor's -- when the Mayor's available? Because the Mayor, I think, wants to discuss --
Ms. Kaplan: Is that July 8th, possibly?
City of Miami Page 84 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: I assume it will be July 8th.
Ms. Thompson: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk --
Ms. Kaplan: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- would you get with Ms. Kaplan and the Mayor's office, or the Agenda
Coordinator? Where's the Agenda Coordinator? And you all need to stop putting on these time
certains, Agenda Coordinators, unless we approve them, but let's get with the Mayor's office and
Ms. Kaplan and agree on a time certain so that we can focus this discussion. Thank you, Ms.
Kaplan.
Ms. Kaplan: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. We do have a time certain item of 10 o'clock --
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: -- for the Civilian Independent Panel. Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Brief comment or request. I would ask the City Attorney to research
the law, which regulates the early voting sites, and to report as soon as possible to us if there is
some discretion allowed to the different Supervisors of Elections, and also to start researching
the possibility of a class action suit of voters against the Supervisor of Elections and the
Elections Department of Miami -Dade County, and the Election Department of the State of
Florida for disenfranchising Hispanic voters in the City of Miami.
Commissioner Winton: Hispanic? How do you figure it's just Hispanic?
Commissioner Regalado: Because none of the early voting sites are located in the heavily
populated Hispanic areas.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, so you got a better (INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Regalado: 62 percent of the vote is Hispanic and only there is one center in
Lemon City and downtown Miami, and none of the Hispanic areas are allowed to have early
voting, so that would be any direction, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion, and your motion was to --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second the motion.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. There's a motion and a second, and it's open for discussion.
Basically, directs the City Attorney to come back with a format and process to start a class
action lawsuit against the Election Department -- Dade County Elections Department --
Commissioner Winton: And the state.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and the state.
Commissioner Regalado: And the State of Florida.
City of Miami Page 85 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Further discussion on the matter? Mr. Chair.
Chairman Teele: All in favor --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, say nay. Motion carries unanimously.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And I'm not only seconding the motion, but, Commissioner Regalado, I
want you to count on my full support and I will join you in this effort. Whatever it takes to, you
know, get mobilize people or whatever it needs to be done, I want you to count on me, because I
think it's only fair.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
DI.3 04-00686 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE RESOLUTION REGARDING A POSSIBLE
SETTLEMENT IN THE MATTER OF MARK'S CLASSIC CORPORATION,
RICHARD AND SUNNY MANAGAN, ET AL. VS. CITY OF MIAMI [CLEAR
CHANNEL]
04-00686-cover memo.pdf
MOTION
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed unanimously, to approve the settlement, in principle, in the case of Mark's Classic Corp.,
Richard and Sunny Managan, Et. Al. vs. City of Miami (Clear Channel), and further requesting
that the other parties bring back an executed agreement , along with a settlement check, at the
Commission Meeting currently scheduled for July 8, 2004.
Direction to the City Manager by Chairman Teele to meet with each Commissioner concerning
the proposed uses of the settlement funds.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, regarding the matter that we've had a lawyer sitting here for --
did she leave?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): No. She's (INAUDIBLE) We're ready to go.
Chairman Teele: Where is she? We have special counsel that has been here, I apologize, for
over 10 hours. We are paying them by the hour, and I hate to think about how much money, so
Madam Attorney, you're recognized on a matter --
Mr. Vilarello: This is --
Chairman Teele: -- that is before us for a settlement, as I understand.
Mr. Vilarello: -- Item DL 3.
City of Miami Page 86 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: What is it?
Mr. Vilarello: DI, Discussion Item Number 3, discussion with regard to a possible resolution of
a lawsuit involving the billboard litigation. This matter is Marks Classic Corporation. It's
otherwise known as Clear Channel.
Chairman Teele: She's been here since 3 o'clock, at $200 an hour.
Mr. Vilarello: This is Ms. Carol Licko --
Commissioner Winton: So have they.
Mr. Vilarello: -- special counsel for the City.
Chairman Teele: They're paying theirs. At $200 an hour -- can we get for the record that you're
not going to bill us for all the time you've been here today?
Carol Licko: Yes, you absolutely can, sir.
Chairman Teele: All right. I just want to -- please state your name and address.
Commissioner Winton: She'll take an hour off.
Ms. Licko: Yes, thank you.
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead, counsel.
Ms. Licko: Carol Licko, Hogan & Hartson, here on behalf of the City of Miami, and Mr.
Chairman and members of the Commission, you are correct. I'm here today, after meeting with
Doug Halsey from Clear Channel. We believe we have an agreement in principle, and we would
request that you give us a few days to get the terms of this down into a settlement agreement that
we would propose to bring back to you on July the 8th. You directed us that we go back with
several principles in mind --
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead.
Ms. Licko: -- and the settlement that we had reached in principle, I think, achieves those
principles. First of all, they have 452 signs, 92 of them were subject to removal. Those 92 signs
are on appeal. We've achieved removal. Clear Channel has agreed that they will take down all
of their eight sheets in C-1 and C-2; that's a total of 202 structures. They will remove the
rooftop signs; 25 percent of them will come down quickly, another 25 percent will come down in
the next five years and, within 20 years, the remaining 50 percent will come down. At the end of
the 25 year settlement agreement, 25 percent of whatever they have left in C-1 would also be
removed. You directed that we give them relocation credits for additional billboards that they
remove above and beyond the 202. We've achieved that. For the next five years, for every two
signs they remove, they can relocate one. We've also instituted fees for that; 50, 000 for those in
C-1, 20, 000 for those in C-2. You asked that the City be reimbursed for its costs and the
expenses incurred, and they've agreed to do that. Upon signing the agreement, they will pay fees
totaling $152,000 to the City. Those are the fees that they've paid for the renewals to date. They
will also pay all fees and expenses of the City incurred in its enforcement proceedings, which is a
total of $800, 000, and they will also pay $300, 000 for the six relocation permits that will be
issued. Upon issuance of the permits for the six relocated billboards, there will be an annual
settlement paid of $250, 000 per year for the next 25 years.
Commissioner Regalado: Wow.
City of Miami Page 87 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Licko: You asked that all the signs be modernized and retrofitted. Beginning July of 2005,
they will begin one per month of actually modernizing and retrofitting those billboards. You
asked to have control over the billboards that remain in the City. They will have replacement
permits issued for any billboard that does not have a permit, so from here on out, if -- you will
know that every billboard has a permit, has a control, has a location. You asked for public
service. They have agreed that they will do public service messages, at the request of the City, at
a retail value of $50, 000 per year for the term of the agreement and, finally, you asked for some
mitigation for the six relocated billboards that will go up, and they have agreed to pay $50, 000
per year, as a neighborhood enhancement account, and that money will be given to 501(c) not -
for -profits within the district where these billboards are being located and, finally, as
Commissioners, I know you have asked for peace. This is a 25 year agreement. We -- it will end
the litigation with Clear Channel. It will end the enforcement proceedings, and it will bring you
peace for 25 years. We would ask that you give us a couple of days to try to get this all wrapped
up on a piece of paper and submit it to you. What we've told Clear Channel is that they need to
bring back an agreement consistent with these principles, signed by them, that we would submit
to them in time to review on July the 8th.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I move --
Chairman Teele: Let me just make sure I understand one thing. Did I hear about a million two,
a million three?
Ms. Licko: Yes. Annual settlements, yes.
Commissioner Regalado: And that is a separate issue from the $250, 000 --
Chairman Teele: Per year.
Commissioner Regalado: -- per year?
Ms. Licko: Yes, that's separate. The -- once they have the relocated permits, that will start the
annual payments of $150, 000 per year.
Commissioner Regalado: But the attorneys' fees will not come from that --
Ms. Licko: No, it does not. Attorney fees are being paid separately.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Ms. Licko: The other thing I know the Commissioners were insistent upon and Clear Channel
has agreed to this, is that there are no conditions on those initial payments. Originally, they had
talked about an escrow. That's all gone, so that money comes to the City for doing what is
within the City's control.
Commissioner Regalado: Talking about control, I think that the Commission should direct the
Manager to create a special account for that $1, 200, 000 for the special events but, especially,
the City services that we all have so much trouble helping different community groups whenever
they have activities in -- throughout the City so, hopefully, when it comes back -- you come back
with a check on the -- on July the 7th?
Chairman Teele: 8th.
Commissioner Regalado: 8th, I'm sorry.
City of Miami Page 88 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Licko: It's following the effective date of the agreement, which is upon approval and
signature by the Commission.
Chairman Teele: Well, why don't we do this. First, I think on the expenditure of the funds, we
should instruct the Manager and the Budget Director to meet with each of the Commissioners. I
have no problem having a fund, as long as it's paying for City services. In other words, right
now we're spending so much money for City services that --
Commissioner Regalado: That we cannot help the people.
Commissioner Winton: Say what?
Chairman Teele: But I would hate to see money being spent outside of the City, is what I'm
saying. If we're reimbursing for City services, police services, fire services, something like that, I
don't have a problem with it, but I don't want to just create something where the money is going
to leave the City, if you understand what I'm saying.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I said, City services.
Chairman Teele: But why don't we --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Teele: -- why don't we ask the Manager to meet with each of the Commissioners and
everybody will have an opportunity to come in. We don't have any money right now, do we?
Ms. Licko: No.
Commissioner Winton: Why don't we bring this back at the next Commission meeting when we
can think about it?
Chairman Teele: Well, I think it's a good idea, but I think this is the point. It's got to come back.
We need to give her a clear signal as to whether or not we can accept this in principle so that she
can bring it back --
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- to the next meeting and, hopefully --
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- she'll bring it back with a check.
Commissioner Winton: In --
Mr. Vilarello: In principle.
Commissioner Winton: In principle sounds great.
Chairman Teele: In principle.
Mr. Vilarello: The request was not to approve the settlement itself, but to approve it in principle,
and we'll bring it back --
Commissioner Winton: The term sheet.
City of Miami Page 89 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Vilarello: -- with the documents --
Commissioner Winton: You'll bring a real written term sheet.
Mr. Vilarello: -- a real settlement agreement --
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK.
Mr. Vilarello: -- back to your next meeting.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) approve in principle.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: Moved to approved in principle with a second, with a further proviso that the
other party should bring us an executed agreement. In other words, let the lawyers work it out,
but let the other side sign off and, preferably, have a check. You follow what I'm saying? And if
it's in principle, then that should authorize the City staff to begin to operate and to function with
them under the terms of the agreement in principle.
Commissioner Winton: Is that the check for us?
Chairman Teele: Yeah, the check for us, the $1, 200, 000.
Commissioner Winton: For parks.
Chairman Teele: I don't want to start to hold that off, so --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, good.
Chairman Teele: -- as long as we all agree that we're talking about in principle, they can go
final on the document, let the other side sign, and then we'll look at it and see if we're ready to
sign. You follow what I'm saying? Is that fair, Mr. Attorney? You understand what I'm saying?
Mr. Vilarello: Although we won't -- no parties will be able to act until you approve the
agreement.
Chairman Teele: No party will be --
Commissioner Winton: We got it.
Chairman Teele: -- able to act on it until we approve it, but they should act accordingly and
bring the check on July 8th. That's what I'm trying to get to, the check.
Commissioner Winton: Good faith.
Chairman Teele: Good faith. All right. In principle -- we have a motion in principle
authorizing the Manager and the Attorney to work through all of this, and further requesting that
the company execute the agreement and bring it to us for -- determine whether or not -- and we
have confidence in you and the Manager to work through the details of this. Is there objection?
All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
City of Miami Page 90 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right. Mr. Hollo, I really apologize to you all. You
all were advertised for after 6: 30, and it is going to be after 6: 30.
Commissioner Winton: Yes. Mr. Chairman, no --
Chairman Teele: It's now 12: 30.
Commissioner Winton: However, there are some other people here on -- I think we've got four
or five second reading, non -controversial items. I think we ought to hit them so those people can
go away, and this next one's going to take some time.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman -- Mr. --
Commissioner Regalado: Or the school, the school.
Commissioner Winton: And the school. You've got Ransom Everglades that we've got to do.
Also -- then we bifurcated that process this morning.
Chairman Teele: We're not going to get out --
Commissioner Winton: So, they could bring that back, so --
Ms. Slazyk: So what do you want to do next?
DI.4 04-00687 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE
GOVERNING BODY OF THE SEOPW/CRA ORDINANCE.
04-00687-cover memo.pdf
DEFERRED
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton absent, to DEFER item DI.4 to the meeting
currently scheduled for July 8, 2004.
Direction to the City Attorney by Chairman Teele to schedule an ordinance on the next agenda
regarding staffing of the Community Redevelopment Agency.
Chairman Teele: Requests for deferrals, withdrawals.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, due to the voluminous agenda that we have today, for
the sake of time, I'd like to defer DI.4, which is a discussion and a consideration of an
amendment to the governing body of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) ordinance. I
would like to defer it to next month's meeting.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Is that July 8th?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: July 8th.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I would like to --
Chairman Teele: One moment.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's DI.4.
City of Miami Page 91 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed. Now, Alex, let me ask you this. I asked that you staff a change to
the CRA that I had proposed some time. Is that on the agenda?
Mr. Vilarello: It's the discussion item that Commissioner Sanchez just mentioned. Was that
item. At the last City Commission --
Chairman Teele: That's under his --
Mr. Vilarello: No, Commissioner. At the last City Commission, you directed me to, in fact, meet
with Commissioner Sanchez to discuss changes to the CRA ordinance, and to come back for the
Commission to have a debate on those issues at this meeting.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but I've never been in a position, to my knowledge, where an item that
I'm asking to be discussed is being withdrawn, and that's because you didn't put it on the agenda
the appropriate way. I'm all in favor of not having the discussion, but I do think to -- before you
leave, I think it's very important, under a City Attorney's item, that you place the item on the
agenda that I asked to be put on the agenda three weeks ago, because it's beginning to look like,
you know, we're deferring an item that I want to at least put out there. I know that there are
going to be some other variations, which, I think, is helpful, but at least I'd like to have it public
so that we're not doing everything out of the sunshine.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, what would you like me to do with regard to your item?
Chairman Teele: All right. And I would encourage other Commissioners to consider other
alternatives, as well.
10:00 A.M.
DI.5 04-00636 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING A STATUS REPORT ON CIVILIAN
INVESTIGATIVE PANEL ISSUES.
04-00636-cover memo.pdf
04-00636 - submittal.pdf
DISCUSSED
Discussion of Item DI.5 resulted in Resolution listed below:
(DI.5) 04-00715 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL TO DETERMINE, IN ITS SOLE
DISCRETION, THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR
ITS INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, SUBJECT ONLY TO PROVISIONS SET
FORTH IN CHAPTER 11.5/ARTICLE II/SECTION 11.5-34 OF THE CODE
AND CHARTER OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED,
ENTITLED: "CIVILIAN COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION AND REVIEW/THE
CITY OF MIAMI CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL/ADMINISTRATIVE
ASSISTANCE; INDEPENDENT COUNSEL;" FURTHER DIRECTING THE
City of Miami Page 92 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE BUDGETARY SUPPORT
FOR SUCH DETERMINATION.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-041 0
Direction to the City Manager by Commissioner Winton to schedule a discussion on the Budget
Workshop related to the policy of the City requiring one million dollars insurance coverage from
all vendors and the possibility of lowering that amount for at least some types of vendors.
Direction to the City Attorney and the City Manager by Chairman Teele to draft an ordinance
that stipulates that the City Commission has ultimate power to decide who uses City Hall
Chambers; further directing the City Manager to arrange for the Civilian Investigative Panel
meetings to take place in City Hall Chambers and that such meetings be televised on "Miami
Television" cable channel 9.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, would you mind introducing the other members of the board
that are here for the record in your opening statement, and let them all come up and at least give
their name and address for the title?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: What item is this?
Chairman Teele: This is DI.5, I believe, under the Order of the Day. It was set for 10 a.m. It's
now 10: 45. Is it DI -- it says 4 here, but I think it's DI.5.
Larry Handfield: Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the City Commission, City Attorney
and Madam Clerk. I bring you greetings from the -- your Civilian Investigatory Panel. My
name is Larry R. Handfield. I would like to first recognize a group of dedicated public servants,
who have accepted the challenge and the mandate by the citizens of Miami. They are -- they
consist of a diverse, well qualified, dedicated group of individuals who have put in timeless
hours in training, in learning the process, and on some occasions, but very frustrated with the
process. Present with me, we have, first of all, our vice chair, be introduced and come forth;
Janet McAliley, dedicated member of this community, former school board member of Miami -
Dade County School Board.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, let me (UNINTELLIGIBLE) let them --
Janet McAliley: Janet McAliley.
Chairman Teele: -- introduce themselves.
Ms. McAliley: All right.
Mr. Handfield: If you could just come forth and introduce yourself.
Ms. McAliley: Janet McAliley, proud member of the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel).
Fred St. Amand: Fred St. Amand, member of the CIP.
Chairman Teele: What are they calling it?
Unidentified Speaker: The CIP.
City of Miami Page 93 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Jaime Perez: Jaime Perez.
Commissioner Regalado: CIP. CIP.
Otis Davis: Otis Davis.
Tangier Scott: Tangier Scott.
John H. Ruiz: Good morning, Commissioners. John H. Ruiz.
Rudy de la Guardia: Good morning, Commissioners. Rudy de la Guardia. I'm also the
Treasurer for the CIP.
Tom Rebull: Good morning. Tom Rebull.
Brenda Shapiro: Once again, good morning. Brenda Shapiro.
Danny Couch: Good morning, Commissioners. Danny Couch.
David finger: Good morning. My name is David Finger, independent counsel to the panel.
Mr. Handfield: Present, could not be here, we have Donald -- Don Bareman and Reverend
Richard Dunn are the only two panel members that could not make it. It is my pleasure to bring
you greetings, and give you pretty much an overview and a status report of the Civilian
Investigatory Panel. As I indicated, we have accepted the challenge, but discharging our duties
have not occurred without its pitfalls, or I can describe as some frustrations. It has been not an
easy task, due to bureaucracy, due to a lack of resources have created what we believe
obstructions that have made it difficult for us to be where we want to be and where we ought to
be. It took a calendar year, from February 2002 through February 2003 to create the selection
process and criterias for the selections panel members to be selected; just giving you a brief
history of it. The panel members afterwards, after they were selected and approved by the Board
of City Commissioners, received a mandate of orientation, training, with the City of Miami
Police Department; extensive training on operation, what would be expected as relates to police
oversight, Internal Affairs. After the training session, then we started April of 2003 with our first
discussions as it relates to the budget. The budget discussions consisted of input from and
directives in consultation from the City Attorney's office; our Executive Director, who relied on
information that was provided by City personnel, the City Attorney's office, as well as the
Manager's office. We first submitted a proposed budget of about $1, 000, 000. The budget that
was eventually submitted for -- before the City Commissioner and approved was 39 percent less
than what we felt should be the appropriate budget. The budget that was approved was 674, 000.
The results of that budget was based upon discussions being had that one, that we could -- would
be advised to save money and trim costs, instead of hiring a full-time legal counsel --
Chairman Teele: Who told you that?
Mr. Handfield: -- to hire -- that was the advice of the City Attorney's office, as well as with the
Budget Office and the City Manager's office. We then --
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chair.
Mr. Handfield: Yes.
Chairman Teele: You all have been here a long time this morning, and I want to apologize for
the delay. We took up matters related to the Supervisor of Elections. I think everyone here can
understand the importance of that. I don't need to have the dirty linen of the City exposed like
City of Miami Page 94 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
this. It is a horrible, horrible story that you're preparing to un-- to make public.
Commissioner Regalado: Why not?
Chairman Teele: Because --
Commissioner Regalado: You know, the public -- Art, the people watching voted for that panel.
We spent hours, days trying to make the panel what it is today, and then we are getting the blame
and they're getting blamed because the perception is that the panel is not working. It's not our
fault. It's not his fault. It's not their fault. Somebody has to be accountable, and the only way to
do it is to watch the dirty linen.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman -- I mean, Commissioner, with all due respect, the problem, if
there is a problem rest, first and foremost with this Commission in not resolving the problem.
Now, let me say this. I have avoided going to any meetings of the CIP because I felt it was
important that the CIP have not only independence, but the appearance of independence, and
even though I received invitations, had I known of the problems that they were having, which, in
my judgment, are almost counter -manning the decisions of this Commission and the voters, by
budgetary and administrative decisions, I would have acted immediately -- and I think you would
have, but I think we have to acknowledge some of the responsibility in correcting it. It gets down
-- essentially, down to two issues: Number one -- and I hold Alex Vilarello, the City Attorney,
personally responsible for this, not his subordinates. There was a long discussion and debate in
this Charter language in trying to ensure that the Civilian Independent Panel is totally
independent, independent of the Commission, independent of the Manager, and independent of
the City Attorney. That was a very painful debate, which Alex personally engaged in this
Commissioner in and we worked out what I thought was a reasonable compromise, and that is,
the City Charter specifically says that the City Attorney is the sole legal authority for the City,
including the Mayor -- and you'll recall, we had a debate with Mayor Suarez about who was --
you know, whether he could have his own lawyer. It is the City authority for the independent
boards; the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), the DDA (Downtown Development
Authority), Off -Street Parking. That's embedded in the Charter, but we, in fashioning this
Charter provision that created this entity, recognized that you need to have your own lawyer,
and the dialogue went back and forth between myself and Alex for the better part of two hours.
The compromise that we fashioned was that you have your own lawyer, but the City Attorney
must cent or approve that the attorney meets the requirements that we set forth, so in effect, the
City Attorney has a veto over it, but he doesn't have control over the City -- the counsel, once he
has been selected or she has been selected.
Mr. Handfield: It also indicates that the City Attorney has the sole responsibility of firing the
independent counsel that works for the CIP.
Chairman Teele: Yes, and that is a compromise that I made with Alex, and this Commission
supported. It is highly unusual that someone could be fired by an entity that they don't work for
or supervise. I recognize that, and of course, the thing that comes to mind was the firing during
the Water Gate hearings of Archie --
Mr. Handfield: Archibald Cox.
Chairman Teele: Archibald Cox in the middle of the night, and that underscores the flaw of the
Nixon Administration, and the Attorney General's Office forever, and we would hope that the
Archibald Cox precedent on whoever's sitting in that seat would ensure that that person does not
do an Archibald Cox kind of situation, but it's there, but what has happened, Commissioners, is
that through this process, the City Attorney's office, and the Budget office have basically
determined that the counsel should be part-time, which, in effect, means that the agency, in my
opinion -- it's not the intent that I had when I authored this provision, and it certainly, I think,
City of Miami Page 95 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
has the effect of reducing the agency from being not only proactive and independent, but really
making it sort of a part-time kind of thing. The biggest mistake I think we made was that in
keeping the Executive Director's title and not making that title an administrator -- because what
has happened is, is that the agency now -- investigative agency now is almost set up to be
managed by and run by a person who doesn't have the investigative experience, which we spend
all of our time working on, so I would like to propose, as a compromise, as opposed to everybody
saying all the things that have gone wrong, that we reaffirm -- and would you read the language,
Mr.
Attorney or Madam Attorney, that I think we all agreed on? Your counsel --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): With regard your resolution?
Chairman Teele: Yes.
The Resolution was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We need a motion and a second.
Commissioner Winton: OK, I'll move it --
Chairman Teele: For discussion.
Commissioner Winton: -- for discussion.
Chairman Teele: Moved --
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- and second for discussion.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Discussion.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Winton: I think, there's -- in my mind, there's a number of parts that I would like
to focus on. First of all, in the last sentence, 'further direct the City Manager to write
appropriate budgetary support, " isn't going to do anything.
Chairman Teele: Isn't what?
Commissioner Winton: Isn't going to do anything, because they've determined, I think in their
own mind, that they're providing appropriate support; for they've given the money they need, so I
think we need to put a dollar amount in here.
Chairman Teele: But, Commissioner, the reason I didn't is -- and I agree with what you're
saying. The reason I didn't this: Based upon how this is drug out for the last six months, seven
months, there's sufficient budget authority in the agency for them to do anything they need to do
through the end of this year.
Commissioner Winton: OK All right.
Chairman Teele: Then it comes back to us in September --
Commissioner Winton: All right.
City of Miami Page 96 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- for us to make sure that they get the budget that they need to function. The
department wants to shift this back and forth and have the --
Commissioner Winton: I'm fine with that.
Chairman Teele: You're fine --
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Chairman Teele: You follow what I'm saying? They're only 30 percent expended of their
budget, of the budget that's been given to them, because this has just been going back and forth.
We just approved this morning the investigators.
Commissioner Winton: Got it. OK. One more point. When I met with the Chairman, he
describes to me a situation whereby I think somewhere City staff is encouraging them to make
their staff City employees. I think that's a big mistake. I think they need to be independent. They
need to have their own staff that's independent of this City, and much DDA staff does not work --
they're not City employees; they're independent, and I think -- if this isn't independent authority,
you can't have the City bureaucracy dictating how they do their hiring and f ring, and who's
going to get the job and how many --
Chairman Teele: Would you yield on that one point?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: It goes even further -- it's worst than what you've said, and I underscore and
support one hundred percent what you're saying. By City Charter, all employees work for the
City Manager, OK? So how can you have an independent panel if the employees --
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Chairman Teele: -- are working for our staffs, Johnny.
Commissioner Winton: I agree.
Chairman Teele: Just so you know --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- our staff don't work for us, by Charter. They work for the City Manager, so
Commissioner Winton: OK
Chairman Teele: -- there are some things that are wrong in the Charter per se.
Commissioner Winton: You've accented the point?
Chairman Teele: I've accented the point.
Commissioner Winton: Beautifully, absolutely.
Chairman Teele: It absolutely should be independent.
Commissioner Winton: And I think we ought to put that provision in this resolution.
City of Miami Page 97 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: I will accept that as a -- I mean, absolutely, as a strong recommendation, that
all of the staff be independent of the City.
Mr. Handfield: And just to give you an example just to echo that point: We were struggling
trying to hire an investigator, so you know as an investigative panel, you cannot conduct your
business properly without investigators. For months, we were struggling with just fighting with
administration on the requirement that this administration was having for the investigators that
they wanted us to have as independent, but placing hurdles as relates to the insurance
requirement, which was counter to what the state required, and as a result, finally, I gave
approval, not without reaching an agreement with the administration so that the process would
not continue to be held up to send out the RFPs (Request for Proposals) that thankfully you all
approved this morning.
Commissioner Winton: And trust me, as you go forward over the years, there will be a thousand
new examples how you can be thwarted in terms of what you're trying to get done over
bureaucratic rules and I'm not -- you know, those are our rules, and they're appropriate rules, I
guess. I mean, sometimes I struggle with them, but I'm going to accept that they're appropriate
rules for governing the City of Miami. They're inappropriate rules for governing your entity,
which is the reason we're going to make this motion to make all employees of the CIP employees
of that entity, not employees of the City of Miami.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are three matters that we discussed
in our office that I just want to make sure that they have been taken care. If not, I think we need
to take care of them here today, because we are the policy makers in this City. First, one of the
concerns was the legal counsel. That was one of the concerns. The other one was the
investigators that I believe there was two or four investigators.
Mr. Handfield: There are four that you approved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That we approved, and of course, they're independent. They won't be
City employees.
Mr. Handfield: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And you've agreed on that, right?
Mr. Handfield: We agreed on that based upon a compromise because the Manager's office did
not want to take on anymore City personnel; Risk Management office did not want to deal with
the potential liability issue. However, we accepted as being independent and consultant, but we
disagreed by the City -- the Risk Management Office (UNINTELLIGIBLE) dictating what type of
insurance that we will require.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That was the third issue, on the insurance. Have we taken care of that
issue?
Mr. Handfield: No, we have not. I received a call yesterday, through my Executive Director.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Handfield: That they would compromise for 500 -- requiring 500,000 instead of a million.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's clear that issue. That issue has not been discussed.
City of Miami Page 98 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: But can we get the Risk Manager -- can we get the person responsible --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Exactly.
Chairman Teele: -- for Risk Management out here, please, so we can clear the issue up?
Commissioner Winton: If we pass this resolution, as amended, all these questions go away.
Chairman Teele: Not that one.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, not that way.
Commissioner Regalado: No, not that one.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And let me tell you -- hold on. And my understanding is, if the state
requires you to have --
Mr. Handfield: Three hundred thousand.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- an insurance, OK, now Risk Management is saying to CIP that
they're required to have "X" insurance, which I believe is more. It's like $1, 000, 000.
Mr. Handfield: $1, 000, 000. The state requires 300, 000.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That is a problem, and I think what we need to clarify is -- a decision
is being made by Risk Management is -- they need to state it on the record why, as to why is it
that you're required to have $1, 000, 000, because car insurance, you could have -- you know, you
could have 100, 000, 300,000 coverage and you could have -- I mean, you don't want PIP (
Personal Injury Protection), but I mean, you want good insurance, but why have the burden of
having more insurance that you truly need, and I just want to have a justification as to why
you're being required to have $1, 000, 000 insurance?
Chairman Teele: Madam Risk Management Director.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, could I frame that question before she gives you a response? I
want for the Commission to understand that this entity is not otherwise sui juris; that is, any
negligence on their part flows back to the City.
Commissioner Winton: OK, got it. That's what I thought.
Mr. Vilarello: So when you ask the question to the Risk Management, the Risk Manager is
ultimately looking back through the CIP and to the City.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ramona Fiumara: Ramona Fiumara, Assistant Director of Risk Management.
Chairman Teele: Where is the Director?
Ms. Fiumara: She is not here this morning.
Chairman Teele: Where is the Director?
Ms. Fiumara: She actually had a medical appointment that she had to take care of.
City of Miami Page 99 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, you know, listen, we can't have this. We can't have meetings like
this, when -- we have to have our questions answered by City --
Ms. Fiumara: Well, I'd like to try to --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Could you handle that?
Ms. Fiumara: -- answer that for you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well --
Ms. Fiumara: Originally --
Chairman Teele: I just want to say for the record --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't -- I certainly don't have a problem.
Chairman Teele: I want to say to the record -- to the Manager, everybody up here on this dais
cancels appointments, makes medical appointments, and emergencies are emergencies, and
nobody's upset about that, but it just seems to me, you know, that we need to have a lot more
discipline about having accountability, because we only meet once every two weeks. If we met
everyday, it would be different, and maybe we need to meet more, but the fact of the matter is,
these are heavy decisions that are being made, and the whole issue is bureaucracy, can't get
straight answers. You talk to one person, you get one answer. You talk to somebody else you get
a different answer. Are you prepared to answer the question?
Ms. Fiumara: Yes, I am.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Ms. Fiumara: Originally, we were treating them like an outside entity, which we require $1, 000,
000 of coverage to protect the City.
Chairman Teele: Who's the lawyer for your department?
Ms. Fiumara: Who's the lawyer we work with? Alex.
Chairman Teele: What lawyer is assigned to your department?
Mr. Vilarello: There's assignment on a case -by -case basis on issues.
Mr. Handfield: The only issue I have is that absence a playing field --
Commissioner Regalado: No. She hasn't finished her --
Chairman Teele: Hold it. Let her answer the question.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, I want to hear this answer before we -- because I --
Ms. Fiumara: That initially, Risk Management was treating them like an outside entity requiring
the $1, 000, 000 of coverage. Now, it's my understanding that yesterday they reached an
agreement to lower that to $500, 000.
City of Miami Page 100 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: No. That's not what he said. He said you all sent him an e-mail saying you all
lowered it.
Ms. Fiumara: It was an agreement. There were many discussions that took place to reach that
agreement, to reducing it to the 500, 000.
Commissioner Regalado: But can you tell us how long this --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I'm not done.
Commissioner Regalado: -- conversation --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No -- whenever.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez has the floor.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Just a --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would yield to Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: One second, Joe. How long this conversations, negotiations took?
Ms. Fiumara: I cannot answer that question.
Mr. Handfield: I can answer. Months. Finally, I gave the approval --
Chairman Teele: Well, you said months --
Mr. Handfield: -- it's not the hold up -- months. I'm talking about at least -- about what, three
months? About almost two months, and the only reason why we finally got -- received the
agenda item is that I gave the approval to send it out without having any requirement on the
RFPs. Otherwise, we were being held hostage, based upon what was being required by Risk
Management.
Chairman Teele: But what I'm trying to understand is, if the attorney is the attorney for Risk
Management -- Mr. Attorney, what is the appropriate level of insurance for a municipal body in
how much insurance do we have for every police officer that's got a gun running around here?
Mr. Vilarello: The Risk Management Department --
Chairman Teele: How much insurance do we have for every police officer --
Mr. Vilarello: There is -- Mr. Chairman, there is -- the City is self -insured. It acquires
insurance based on case -by -case analysis, made by the Risk Manager analyzing the risk
associated with the action.
Chairman Teele: What makes them any different from any other instrumentality of the City?
They're under the same City Charter. Why do they have to have any insurance is the first
question? Why aren't they self -insured like every police officer that's got a gun running around
here?
Mr. Vilarello: You can ask that question to the Risk Management.
City of Miami Page 101 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: No. I'm asking that question to you.
Ms. Fiumara: Well, they're not a City employee.
Chairman Teele: You're the City attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: Well, to determine -- your -- well, but the City Attorney doesn't determine the risk
associated with the exposure to the City. That's the Risk Management --
Chairman Teele: What other departments of the City have other insurance? What other
departments of the City have --
Mr. Vilarello: We have --
Ms. Fiumara: Only outside entities. If they're being treated as a completely independent entity,
that's why the insurance requirement --
Mr. Vilarello: We have also access (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Ms. Fiumara: If they're City employees, then they don't have an insurance requirement.
Chairman Teele: But outside -- they are not outside of the Charter of the City of Miami.
Mr. Vilarello: The DDA has insurance, the Bayfront Park Trust has insurance --
Chairman Teele: How much does Bayfront Park have?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Tim, what's your insurance?
Unidentified Speaker: I don't know.
Chairman Teele: Madam Director, ma'am, are you sitting here? How much insurance does bay
park --
Unidentified Speaker: I do not know the answer off the top of my head.
Chairman Teele: Director.
Tim Schmand: Tim Schmand, Bayfront Park Management Trust. A million dollar liability policy
for both Bayfront and Bicentennial Park.
Chairman Teele: How much does the CRA have?
Ms. Fiumara: I have to say -- I'm assuming that it's $1, 000, 000 because, like I said, we treat
everybody -- those entities as outside entities, and we make that requirement consistently. We try
to apply that consistently.
Chairman Teele: My question --
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, could I -- Department of Off-street Parking also has insurance,
but this is not insurance for the CIP. This is insurance for the vendors that are going to be
providing a service to the CIP, if that draws any distinction from --
Chairman Teele: That draws a big distinction.
City of Miami Page 102 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Handfield: Right. You're talking about individual insurance, and the problem --
Chairman Teele: We're talking about your vendors.
Mr. Handfield: Yes, the investigators, and therefore -- that's why the State of Florida has a
requirement to be licensed, you must maintain 300,000 worth of insurance, so therefore, for Risk
Management to put another additional burden, other than what's required by state, doesn't make
any sense.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Gonzalez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and that's the problem. I mean, they're
required by the state to have $300, 000. Now we went down to 500, 000. If I'm a private
investigator, I'm working, you know, and I've entered an agreement with you on what you're
paying me, I'm going to back away from the deal because you're requiring me to pay additional
insurance. I mean, that's the bottom part. I mean, the bottom line here is that you're going to
have investigators that aren't going to be willing to enter into an agreement with CIP because it
doesn't make financial sense to them.
Mr. Handfield: And that's been the problem, and that's why, even with the independent counsel,
we had to keep extending the deadline because of the lack of interest, because the purse strings
control everything.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Look, on the bottom line. We worked on the creation -- took us a long
time to create it. There was debate back and forth, healthy debate, to get it right. We focused on
the selection. I think we have outstanding representation in the CIP. We worked on the roles
that it requires; that set forth on what they're doing. Now, they came on line and with the FTAA
(Free Trade Area of the Americas), they were baptized by water. I mean, they're -- there's
investigations that's going on; they're required to start the process, and then, you know, you
can't send soldiers to go to war without bullets, and that's the concern that I have. I mean, I'm
concerned about the budget, but I want to make sure that they have to resources to be able to
provide the service that -- not the Commission, but the voters established and created them to do,
and that's the biggest concern here, and if we could just get over these hurdles, I think that we
could catch up, and I know it's frustrating.
Mr. Handfield: Absolutely.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's frustrating when you have to come see me and the other
Commissioners as to, whether there's a difference of $200, 000. It's not a difference to you, but
it's a difference to the investigators who are going to say, I'm not interested because, you know
what? It doesn't make any sense for me.
Ms. Fiumara: If I can just expand upon that a little bit.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Please do.
Ms. Fiumara: There's a very -- I know there was some research done to determine the dollar
amount impact; if they had to go from $300, 000 to $500, 000 of coverage, and it's a minimal
dollar impact. Now, our goal, obviously, is to protect the City, so our minimum deductible --
we're self -insured -- is $500, 000, and that's why we're pushing for the $500, 000 to ultimately
protect the City. We're self -funded, so we have $200,000 of additional liability with this entity if
we don't get at least the minimum of $500, 000. I understand the point of if recruitment side of it,
but it's a minimum dollar impact to them to get that additional coverage.
City of Miami Page 103 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman -- thank you for the response. It clears it up. Mr.
Chairman, is there any way that we could come -- you know, take the last missing piece of the
puzzle here -- was the insurance -- and come to a compromise? And maybe if you have to pay --
you know, you might have to pay the investigators a little bit more to track them to come and
provide the service. I mean, can we compromise on that, where we protect the City's -- the City
and then we're also able to leap this frustrated pitfall that you consider to be a pitfall and move
forth so we can get to what they're role is, to invest investigate, you know, wrongdoings in the
Police Department?
Mr. Handfield: Commissioner, if I can speak to that, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Sanchez
. We will -- for purposes of moving forward, we will agree, as far as the panel, with the 500, 000,
and we will just, as you indicated, make the difference in trying to at least make this a little bit
more attractive, because our obligation and our mandate is to discharge what is expected by the
citizens of Miami, and that's all that should matter. We should not be tied down in bureaucratic
matters that thwart the process, so based upon your request, we will agree to the 500, 000, and
we will reflect it to at least make sure that we have individuals who are going to be capable of
discharging the task.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, I'm prepared to support the legislation that's being presented by
the Chairman, as long as I know that it's going to resolve these issues, so you could move
forward.
Mr. Handfield: Thank you so much.
Chairman Teele: Hold on one minute. Commissioner Gonzalez, and the City Attorney, and
Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Gonzalez: My question is, what we're trying to do here, we're just trying to do
here is to hire your own investigators or you're hiring outside investigative agency to do your
work?
Mr. Handfield: These are four investigator's firms, a diverse represent cross section of the
community
Commissioner Gonzalez: Independent firms.
Mr. Handfield: -- but they -- yes, independent firms that will be --
Commissioner Gonzalez: As a private investigator? As a past owner of investigative agency, the
Florida Statute, the Department of Professional Regulations requires you to have $300, 000
liability insurance in order to issue a license, so, you know, if that's what the state requires from
you to have your investigative agency, I don't see why -- you know, and we're going to be
soliciting services from outside agencies, I don't see what the controversy.
Mr. Handfield: And, Commissioner Gonzalez, I agree with you. The panel members agree with
you. That's been our frustrations and that's being a tug of war for the last two months based
upon that same theory.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I mean, that's -- DPR (Department of Professional Regulations) and
Florida Statute, $300, 000.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I'm kind of torn because Ramona made one good point, and that is, our
deductible is $500, 000, so it -- there's some policy logic to making it 500, 000. I don't get the
City of Miami Page 104 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
million at all, but there's some policy in physical impact rational for that $500,000 level, so I
don't know which is right. I'm tilting more toward the 500,000 because it seems -- it isn't
irrational. The million, I don't get. Here's the other question I have, and this -- it relates to a
question you asked this morning on vendors. Do we require all -- we passed CA (Consent
Agenda) item that -- where we're going to hire a vendor that's going to provide tables and
chairs, and linens, and all kinds of jazz to City of Miami for events. Do we require all vendors to
have $1, 000, 000 liability coverage?
Ms. Fiumara: Yes, we do.
Commissioner Winton: That's the reason we can't get local companies. That's the reason we
can't get local companies to bid, so --
Commissioner Gonzalez: We have a case, only six months ago, a guy that was -- what he used to
do was repair radiators for City vehicles, and we requested $1, 000, 000 insurance. You know
what the guy did? Says, "I don't want the business because, you know, whatever I'm going to
make on the radiators is going to go on insurance, so, you know, I don't want your business.
Thank you."
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Acting Manager, I would like to request that we put -- because I
don't want to make more time on this -- but I want -- either on one of the July agenda items or
the first meeting in September -- I don't care which -- but I want an agenda item where we're
going to discuss the policy relative to -- and Risk Management needs to be ready to talk to us
about the rationale -- but I want to discuss, from a policy standpoint, the rational for us
requiring from all vendors $1, 000, 000 coverage, and I'm thinking that -- and from my viewpoint,
where I'm going to come from, is I'm going to want to know why we don't lower that, and maybe
you will have some good reasons why we create different levels for different services, but I'm
going to want to know why we can't go to a $500, 000 threshold for many local vendors or
regular kind of vendors, and then y'all figure out why we have to have 1,000,000 for certain
kinds, and I could support both, but that's what I would like to discuss.
Larry Spring (Chief, Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance): Commissioner, would you
be open to allowing that discussion to occur during the budget workshop? I think it's a policy
discussion we need to have prior to going into the budget.
Commissioner Winton: OK, fine with me. That works.
Mr. Spring: And I'd like to have that time -- sometime during this months.
Commissioner Winton: Works.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: OK I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, did you want to say anything else? I think
everybody's pretty much in agreement now.
Commissioner Regalado: No, Mr. Chairman, because what I thought I should say, I shouldn't
say it, but I'll tell you something. I think that the people -- and I told the Chairman this --
expected a lot from this panel, and you're right. I personally have to take responsibility because
I didn't ask how the panel was going? I didn't publicly, as -- for us to get a report. It is my fault
as a City Commissioner, but as a resident, I am very disappointed that this committee -- board
City of Miami Page 105 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
that I voted for was railroaded by the administration and/or the Police Department, because I
cannot believe that many mistakes could be made. I think there was a deliberate attempt, either
by the administration or the police, and the administration and the police to stall what you
needed to do, and you know, I hope that everything goes to the way that this Commission wanted
and you wanted and your board wanted, but I've got to tell you, you know, you must continue
fighting because those hurdles are going to keep coming, and if it's not Risk Management, it
would be some other department that would tell you that probably you cannot meet in this hall
because they're cleaning the hall, and this is why the people won't be able to see you on TV (
television), and that's a shame, because this is not a board appointed by us, you know, our
district.
This is a people's board, and, you know, I am --
Chairman Teele: Would you yield on that point? Are you using that as a hypothetical or are
you --
Commissioner Regalado: No, I am using that as a fact. This board has asked for this room,
and they were told that they cannot use it; that they can --
Chairman Teele: By whom?
Commissioner Regalado: By the administration. I don't know.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, who has jurisdictions over this City Hall?
Commissioner Regalado: I don't know who has it.
Chairman Teele: Does a City corporation --
Mr. Vilarello: The City Manager does manage the buildings and the facilities of the City, under
the Charter.
Chairman Teele: All right. Then I want an ordinance prepared that gives this Commission the
ultimate authority in deciding the use of this City Hall, OK? I mean, that's -- there was a movie
once, when I was much older, called Walking Tall --
Mr. Vilarello: Walking Tall.
Chairman Teele: -- wasn't it? We need --
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, it's coming back now, the new version (UNINTELLIGIBLE), the
Sheriff.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, and that was --
Commissioner Regalado: He had a stick like this big.
Chairman Teele: -- and that was a big fight, and the finally, he read the Charter of the County
and figured out that the sheriff had the authority to assign everybody, and so he assigned the
Mayor of somebody into the urinal, to the bathroom. He made that his office in that movie, but I
mean, I do think that it's really important that the public know that what they directed us to do,
we're doing. This is all about confidence and trust in government, and as far as I'm concerned
you all should have priority over everything, other than a City Commission meeting, for the use
of this building, at least for the foreseeable future, and for the access on Channel 9.
Mr. Handfield: Yes, and we have --
City of Miami Page 106 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Mr. Handfield: And we have agreed --
Chairman Teele: I mean, Channel 9 is really -- I mean, you know, that's a subject for a whole
another matter, because everybody's getting the comments about Channel 9, but Putin doesn't
use Channel 9 the way we do. I mean, really.
Mr. Handfield: And we have -- as a panel, have accepted and agreed to have our meetings
televised live at the Commission chambers to -- because we believe that is appropriate so that
the community and the public knows what's going on.
Chairman Teele: Did we approve the resolution, yet?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Ms. Thompson: You have a mover and a second, but no vote.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman --
Commissioner Winton: As amended.
Chairman Teele: -- let me just say this, on behalf of the Commission. I think you've heard from
all five of us. I don't think there's any question that this Commission --
Commissioner Regalado: Another member.
Chairman Teele: I note the presence of member Dunn, who is coming in 2 hours and 25 minutes
late, but he's here, nevertheless.
Mr. Handfield: But he's here.
Chairman Teele: But this Commission takes very seriously what the voters approved. This
resolution or this ordinance was approved by approximately 70 percent?
Commissioner Regalado: 76.
Mr. Vilarello: Better than 70.
Chairman Teele: 76 percent of the vote. That's an overwhelming mandate.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I said.
Chairman Teele: And the voters want to have this panel functioning. I hope that the board will
not take what has happened as a reflection of the board of the City Commission, and we are
pledged now to follow this more closely. We need to hear directly from you all, through the
budget office, but independently, as well, regarding your budget for next year in two months.
We're going to all be sitting here, and I think one of the things we should do, Commissioners, is
we should almost adopt a resolution to take up the Civilian Independent Board budget ahead of
all other budgets, so we can at least clear that out of the way and not get caught up in the last
minute in that. I'm just saying that for discussion at this point. The other two points that I would
ask you to consider are these. Number one, even though we recognize that the staff -- and
City of Miami Page 107 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
especially the principal staff should be independent -- I do think that the discussion by the
director of --
Commissioner Winton: Risk Management.
Chairman Teele: -- Risk Management has been very helpful, and thank you very much for your
testimony today, and I want to modem my comments. I think you should have a Chief
investigator, who probably is a City employee. You've got to manage these contracts, and you
should not manage these contracts with a contract. You need somebody there to manage these
contracts. We approved four contracts. Candidly, I don't -- I think that has a lot of potential for
conflicts.
Mr. Handfield: OK
Chairman Teele: -- and for misuse of authority.
Mr. Handfield: OK
Chairman Teele: I really do, and I don't want to get into that, but I do think that has some real
potential for misuse of authority by the individual companies down the road as they -- are they
investigating on behalf of, you know, John Doe? Are they investigating on behalf of the City of
Miami? They have a client John Doe and they have a client now City of Miami, and I think
there's a built-in potential for some misuse of authority --
Mr. Handfield: OK
Chairman Teele: -- in that, and that makes me a little bit nervous.
Mr. Handfield: And that will so be reflected when we review it.
Chairman Teele: And I would hope that the contract language would clearly indicate that they
may not use their authority in this board in anyway, other than dah, dah, dah, as specified, but I
would also ask you to meet with the City Attorney and understand the role of expert consultants,
because it would seem to me that the general counsel or the independent counsel is ideal for
what is regularly used as the expert consultant which this Commission authorized and now it's
out of control in the City, as well, but I do think that the general counsel or independent counsel
lends itself to an expert consultant role, as well, which is something less than contracted person
but more than an employee or vice versa, so with that, I would ask you just to consider those
things, and we have a clear understanding of the challenge and the problem before us, and we're
grateful that the board members took the time to come out and to inform us.
Mr. Handfield: On behalf of the panel members, it is my sincere appreciation that you all have
given us the gasoline, the fuel to continue our mandate, and we appreciate the support, the
public support that you have given us this morning and with that, I thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Teele: On the question. Madam Clerk.
Commissioner Regalado: We're giving you the fuel; watch it if somebody else throws a match.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, call the roll.
Commissioner Winton: As amended, right?
City of Miami Page 108 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: As amended.
Ms. Thompson: That's correct. Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
City of Miami Page 109 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
EXECUTIVE SESSION
2:15 P.M.
ES.1 04-00668 EXECUTIVE SESSION
UNDER F. S. 286.011(8) [2003], THE PERSON CHAIRING THIS MEETING
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION WILL ANNOUNCE IMMEDIATELY
AFTER THE CITY COMMISSION CONVENES, THE COMMENCEMENT OF
AN ATTORNEY -CLIENT SESSION, CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC, FOR
PURPOSES OF DISCUSSING PENDING LITIGATION: AFSCME LOCAL
1907/COX VS. CITY OF MIAMI, CASE NO.: 99-00620 (CA 30). THE SESSION
WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 2:15 P.M., OR AS SOON THEREAFTER,
AT CITY HALL, IN COMMISSIONER ANGEL GONZALEZ'S CONFERENCE
ROOM, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AND CONCLUDE
AT APPROXIMATELY 3:00 P.M. THE SESSION WILL BE ATTENDED BY
THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, ANGEL GONZALEZ, JOE
SANCHEZ, TOMAS REGALADO, JOHNNY L. WINTON, AND ARTHUR E.
TEELE, JR.; THE CITY MANAGER, JOE ARRIOLA; THE CITY ATTORNEY,
ALEJANDRO VILARELLO, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, JOEL E. MAXWELL,
AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS MARIA J. CHIARO AND MIMI V. TURIN.
A CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER WILL BE PRESENT TO ENSURE THAT
THE SESSION IS FULLY TRANSCRIBED AND THE TRANSCRIPT WILL BE
MADE PUBLIC UPON THE CONCLUSION OF THE LITIGATION. AT THE
CONCLUSION OF THE SESSION, THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING WILL
BE REOPENED AND THE PERSON CHAIRING THE COMMISSION
MEETING WILL ANNOUNCE THE TERMINATION OF THE SESSION. SAID
COMMISSION MEETING WILL CONVENE AT CITY HALL, CITY
COMMISSION CHAMBERS, 3500 PAN AMERICAN DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA.
04-00668-executive session. pdf
DISCUSSED
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was
passed unanimously, with Vice Chairman Sanchez absent, to TABLE item ES.1 to 5: 30 p.m.
today.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney stated that there was no longer a need to hold the
Executive Session because the settlement was approved on the Consent Agenda (Item CA.17).
The Exective Session was only to further explain the judge's order and judgment. The City
Attorney further stated that their office would issue a memo stating the particulars of said order
and judgment.
Chairman Teele: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to need a little cooperation.
First, Mr. Attorney, we would like to defer the scheduled 2:15 meeting for the executive session
to a time, let's say, of --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Five?
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Mr. Vilarello: 5 o'clock or --
City of Miami Page 110 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: What about 6 o'clock.
Commissioner Regalado: 6 o'clock, we have the moratorium. We have the moratorium.
Chairman Teele: What about 5: 30?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir, at the convenience of the Commission.
Chairman Teele: All right. Could we get a motion to defer the executive session to 5: 30 p.m.?
This will allow for some of the personnel that are not in place to be in place.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move to defer the executive session to 5: 30 --
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- time certain.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed? What we've done is, we deferred the executive session from 5:
30 -- from 2:15 to 5: 30.
Commissioner Gonzalez: This is not a pocket item. This is been --
Chairman Teele: Well --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's a pocket item.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- been holding this since early this morning.
Chairman Teele: Well, hold on a minute. The executive session? Do we need to do the
executive session? Why did we pass the thing on consent agenda if we were -- didn't we pass the
executive session item on the consent agenda?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It might have been inadvertent.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, I don't think so.
Chairman Teele: Inadvertent?
Maria J. Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Passed it on the consent. You didn't -- did we pull it
off?
Commissioner Winton: Well, inadvertent passed is passed.
Chairman Teele: I thought we passed it on the consent agenda.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't think so. We did?
Ms. Chiaro: The executive session was to explain the terms of that which was on the consent
agenda.
City of Miami Page 111 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: But we've already passed it.
Ms. Chiaro: Yes, sir. Most of the Commissioners are aware of the terms of that which you
passed on the consent agenda. It was just to further explain the order and the judgment, so we'll
issue a memo and give you --
Chairman Teele: All right.
Ms. Chiaro: -- the particulars.
Chairman Teele: All right. Let's issue a memo and give us the particulars at 2: 39. All right.
City of Miami Page 112 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PART B
PZ.1 04-00558 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN MIAMI DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL
IMPACT ("DDRI") MASTER AND INCREMENT II DEVELOPMENT ORDERS
RESOLUTIONS 87-1148 AND 02-1307, ADOPTED DECEMBER 12, 2002, AS
AMENDED) TO EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DDRI TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA OF THE CITY OF MIAMI UNDER THE
JURISDICTION OF THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND
TO ADD EIGHT (8) WET -SLIPS TO THE MARINA LAND USE CATEGORY OF
THE DDRI, AND FINDING THAT THESE CHANGES DO NOT CONSTITUTE A
SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA
STATUTES, AND ALSO FINDING THAT THESE CHANGES ARE IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN, PURSUANT TO A NOTIFICATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE ("NOPC")
TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DRI PROPOSED BY THE DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, APPROVING SAID NOPC AFTER
CONSIDERING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SOUTH
FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AND CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING
ADVISORY BOARD, BOTH INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE,
SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE INCREMENT II DEVELOPMENT
ORDER, MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW;
PROVIDING THAT THE DDRI BOUNDARIES BE EXPANDED AND THE LAND
USES PROVIDED FOR BY THE DDRI DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BE
REDISTRIBUTED TO ALLOW FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT;
WHICH ORDER SHALL BE BINDING ON THE APPLICANT AND
SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS; AND
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO
FULFILL THE CITY'S OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE MODIFIED INCREMENT II
DEVELOPMENT ORDER.
04-00558 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00558 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00558 Applicant Ltr & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00558 Legislation.PDF
04-00558 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00558 Exhibit B.PDF
04-00558 - exhibit C.pdf
04-00558 - submittal.pdf
04-00558 - correspondence.pdf
04-00558 - ballot question.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend the Master and Increment II of the Downtown
Development of Regional Impact (DDRI)
LOCATION: Downtown Development Authority Boundaries
APPLICANT(S): Downtown Development Authority
City of Miami Page 113 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Dana Nottingham, Executive Director
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission
on May 5, 2004 by a vote of 6-0.
PURPOSE: This will allow the expansion of the Downtown DRI boundaries.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Regalado
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Teele
R-04-0425
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was
passed unanimously, with Commissioner Winton and Vice Chairman Sanchez absent, to TABLE
item PZ.1 to 3: 30 p.m. today. (Item PZ.1 was tabled at 2: 39 p.m. and passed at 5:11 p.m.)
(Minutes for PZ.1 and PZ.2 are below.)
Chairman Teele: If you're here on a PZ (Planning & Zoning) item, would you please stand,
raise your right hand, and let the Clerk swear you in as a witness, if you expect to speak or
test. Any person who plans to speak or test, should please stand, raise your right hand and
be sworn.
The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving
testimony on Zoning issues (said oath was translated into Spanish).
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. We're going to have deferrals, withdrawals; anyone seeking to
withdraw an item or defer an item. Is there a motion to defer items 1-- what is that, Mr.
Attorney? 1--
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.1 and 2, we would like to table for
a little later on the agenda.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a motion to defer PZ.1 and 2 until 3: 30?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move to table PZ.1 and 2 to 3: 30.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those opposed have the same right.
Chairman Teele: All right. Let's re-- let's take up the matter of Ransom Everglades. Counsel,
you were about to say you're going to take as long as you need. Go right ahead. Does anyone
have an estimated time of arrival for the Manager, yet? Just so that the public is aware, the
items 1 and 2 have been deferred at -- temporarily deferred at the request of the Manager, who
City of Miami Page 114 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
is in route.
Commissioner Winton: I heard he's landed.
Alicia Cuervo Schreiber (Chief of Operations): Commissioner, they have landed and they are in
route over here.
Commissioner Winton: The Eagle has landed.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, we deferred the Items 1 and 2 for your arrival. We are pleased
that you got back safely, and we'd like for your staff -- for you to give an instructions to your
staff on this very important matter. I'm going to yield to the Vice Chairman on Items 1 and 2.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. PZ.1.
Ms. Slazyk: PZ.1 is a consideration of amending the Downtown Miami Development of Regional
Impact in order to modem the Master and Increment I Development Orders. What this item does
is, it expands the boundaries of the Downtown DRI (Development of Regional Impact) in order
to be consistent with the jurisdictions of the Downtown Development Authority, which includes a
portion of Watson Island. The amendment also specifically allows -- adds wet slips to the
marina land use category of the DRI in order to allow such a use in the new area located on
Watson Island. The proposal has been sent to DCA (Department of Community Affairs), and as
a result of comments from DCA, we're proposing to add conditions on the record. They're being
handed out to you now. The amended conditions are labeled Exhibit C and we are
recommending approval. There's also recommendation from the Planning Advisory Board for
approval, attaching Exhibit C to the development order, with the addendum to the conditions
and modifications.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. All right. Applicant, you've got -- you're recognized.
You're going to have -- how much time are you going to need?
Ms. Burke: Eight and a half minutes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Eight and a half minutes. That means that the opposition will also
have eight and a half minutes. Would you like to reserve any time for rebuttal?
Commissioner Winton: Is there any opposition to this item?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there any opposition to this item? There is opposition?
Commissioner Winton: No, no. They need to be clear on what the issue is, so could you explain
what agenda item this is? This is not -- this is not about Island Gardens, the development. This
is about the Downtown Development Authority boundaries. That's what this item is all about.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, let's not get them confused. I mean, I think your opposition
comes in PZ.2 --
Commissioner Winton: So --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- if I'm not mistaken, so let's -- is there any opposition to PZ.1?
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but Mr. Chairman --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hearing none --
City of Miami Page 115 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, they should understand that although this is not about
the development, it has conditions on the development, and they should know, whoever --
Commissioner Winton: But they're here -- the opposition is about the development, and the
boundaries can go forward regardless.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Listen, all the arguments could be made on two. They're completely
different. One is based on the boundary and the other one is related to the development, so let's
just go ahead and go with PZ.1, hearing that there's no opposition -- Art.
Christina Cuervo: Hi, Mr. Chair and Commissioners. Just for the record, I think that the City of
Miami Beach just wants to comment on both PZ.1 and PZ.2.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We need your name for the record.
Ms. Cuervo: I'm sorry. Christina Cuervo, the City of Miami Beach.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Christina, you should know that.
Ms. Cuervo: I'm sorry. I think that I'm talking in front of my Commission, so --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's go ahead and just put it on the record. OK. The
applicant, go ahead.
Judy Burke: Good evening. For the record, my name is Judy Burke, practicing law with Schutz
and Bowen, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, in Miami. I'm representing Flagstone Island
Gardens LLC, the contract lessee of the property that's is subject of this notice of proposed
change.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Just for the record, you are proponent, not the actual
applicant. You're the proponent.
Ms. Burke: I am representing both the contract lessee and the DDA (Downtown Development
Authority) in this presentation. The DDA is the applicant.
Mr. Maxwell: You didn't mention the DDA.
Ms. Burke: Thank you. We are very pleased to finally be here this evening requesting your
approval of this NOPC (Notification of Proposed Change), and in the next item --
Commissioner Winton: Well, don't confuse the two.
Ms. Burke: -- presenting the Island Gardens project to you for a Major Use Special Permit.
Commissioner Winton: Excuse me. Judy, would you please not tie these two issues together?
We're on PZ.1. We're not on PZ.2.
Ms. Burke: Right. I just wanted everybody to know that we're not going to be presenting the
project in this application. That's going to be coming next, so --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: In PZ.2.
Ms. Burke: In PZ.2, so I'm not going to be introducing our development team at this time, but I
would like to take this opportunity to express the sincere gratitude of all of the members of the
development team for the incredible support that we have received from the City's administrative
City of Miami Page 116 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
staff. First, I would like to thank Laura Billberry for her tireless efforts on behalf of the project;
also Alicia Cuervo Schrieber, Lourdes Slazyk, Mary Conway, Aldo Bustamante and Lillian
Medina. We would also like to thank the Mayor's office and the City Manager's office for their
support, and all of you for giving us this incredible opportunity. I would like to introduce the
members of the Downtown Development Authority that are here tonight. Dana Nottingham is
the executive director of the DDA; Rob Curtis is the DDA's consultant, and they're available to
answer any questions you might have. The notice of proposed change was filed on behalf of the
DDA and it seeks a change in the boundary of the downtown DRI (Development of Regional
Impact) to make it consistent with the boundaries of the Downtown Development Authority,
which currently includes this portion of Watson Island. By way of background, the expansion of
the Downtown DRI to include this portion of Watson Island has been under discussion for almost
a decade. The idea was first mentioned in a letter in 1995 from the DCA (Department of
Community Affairs) to Jack Luft, and you'll find that letter in tab number 1 of the small blue
binder that we've handed out to you, and I did that in order to be able to move this hearing along
a little faster. I'd like to incorporate all of the documents contained in that binder into the
record this evening, and I've passed out copies of the binders to various representatives of the
groups that might be speaking, and my colleague, Maria Gralya (phonetic) has extra copies if
anyone would like to read one. The idea of the expanded DRI advanced its way into reality when
the Downtown Development Authority issued Resolution 3102 on April 19, 2002, recommending
to this Commission that the DDA district boundaries be expanded. Thereafter, on November 19,
2002 and December 12th, this Commission adopted ordinance 12307 officially expanding the
boundaries. The purpose of expanding the boundaries was to permit the filing of this notice of
proposed change, and what it does also is besides expanding the boundaries, it adds 8 marina
slips to increment 2 of the Downtown DRI. As you may know, there were no marina slips
originally under that DRI, and although the marina for Watson Island has 42 slips -- has 50
slips; 42 of those slips were vested pursuant to November 15, 2002 binding letter of vested
rights, which was issued by DCA. That letter can be found under tab number 3 in your binder,
as well as the June 22, 2004 clearance letter that was just issued by DCA, which extends vesting
for the proposed marina that goes with the Island Gardens project. As I'm sure you're aware,
there has been a good deal of controversy about this application. In particular, on May 13,
2004, the City of Miami Beach sent letter to the South Florida Regional Planning Council
seeking to convince them that the notice of proposed change constitutes a substantial deviation.
That letter was issued as the result of a lengthy hearing that the Island Gardens project, which
was held by the City of Miami Beach Commission on May 5th. For the record, Flagstone was
neither informed of, nor invited to attend that meeting. That letter is in your binder, along with
responses refuting that letter that were filed both by representatives of Flagstone and the DDA.
On May 28, the South Florida Regional Council sent a letter to the Department of Community
Affairs addressing the concerns of Miami Beach and the concerns raised by the Urban
Environment League. Later that same day, the DCA issued their letter to the City, and you can
find those letters in tabs 9 and 10. Basically, the letter from the DCA advise the City that certain
conditions should be included in this development order in order for the NOPC not to be
considered a substantial deviation. Following the receipt of that letter, Flagstone, DDA, with
represent -- met with representatives of the Regional Planning Council, numerous conversations
with the Department of Community Affairs, and together with the City of Miami Planning staff,
we developed a list of conditions that satisfied the concerns of both agencies. Those conditions
are included in the letter from Lourdes Slazyk to DCA, dated June 21 st, which is number 13 in
your binder, and as Lourdes noted in her remarks, those conditions have been included in the
development order that is before you this evening, and last, I am very pleased to be able to
report that on June 22, 2004, the Department of Community Affairs issued a letter, which is
under tab number 15 in your binder. In that letter, the DCA makes the finding that the NOPC
does not constitute a substantial deviation. In addition, the letter states that based upon their
review of the proposed development order, as amended by the additional conditions, the DCA
has no objection to the adoption of the development order by the City Commission this evening.
As many of you know, that letter is extremely important. If this Commission approves the NOPC
and adopts the development order before you this evening, that decision cannot be appealed.
City of Miami Page 117 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
This is most exciting and significant development I have ever worked on. When you develop a
project of this magnitude on one of the most incredible pieces of real estate in the country, it's
bound to create controversy. Therefore, I'd like to just wrap up our presentation and allow
anyone who wishes to speak to come forward.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Madam counsel, do you reserve some time for rebuttal?
Ms. Burke: Yes, I would. Thank you so much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Before we go to the proponents and have them test, two things
I want to put on the record. One is, everyone who will be testifying on this matter needs to be
sworn in, so please stand up and Madam Clerk, could you swear everyone in who's going to
testes on these matters.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Anyone who is going to be testing on any items on the PZ
(Planning & Zoning) agenda, I need you to all please stand up, raise your right hand and be
sworn in.
At this point, the City Clerk administered oath, required under City Code Section 62-1 to those
persons giving testimony on zoning issues.
Ms. Thompson: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Another matter is that, under City ordinance, anyone testing
or representing someone here as a lobbyist, must be registered, and in you're not, then you need
to take the appropriate action to register as a lobbyist over at the City Clerk's office. So point
stated, the opponents that are willing to testes on this item, relevant to PZ.1, please stand up to
the mike. Is anyone going to be testing on PZ.1?
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, before we go on, I would like -- sorry -- I would like
to
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, before we do that --
Commissioner Regalado: -- request --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- so there's no opposition on PZ.1?
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I asked to be --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized.
Commissioner Regalado: I think it's important that the City Attorney will get the wording of the
ballot, but when on the ballot for the projects in the general election, if we can get a copy of that,
I would really appreciate it, because I think it's pertinent to the debate. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Well, it's -- if the opposition would like to make a statement -- I
don't want to deny anyone the public forum to state -- so state whatever you have to state for PZ.
1.
Ms. Cuervo: I believe our testimony is really -- the City of Miami Beach's testimony is really
relevant to both PZ.1 and PZ.2, so if you and -- obviously, the DCA has already granted its
approval. This is not an appealable process, if you all approve this today. We really -- we just
would like to put our comments on the record, and so I think they're probably going to be more
relevant after the second item, and -- but we'd like to submit them as comments for both PZ.1 and
City of Miami Page 118 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PZ.2.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. So the public hearing is opened. Anyone willing to testes on PZ.
1 in opposition or in support? Hearing none, the public hearing is closed. It's open for
Commission. PZ.1. Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Winton: Sorry. What did you say?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The public hearing is closed. PZ.1. Commissioner --
Commissioner Winton: Then I move staff recommendation -- I'm sorry -- move staff
recommendation on PZ.1.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There is a motion --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and there is a second. It's open for discussion. It is a resolution.
Hearing no discussion, there's a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Resolution
passes unanimously.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ.2.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.2 is the Major Use Special Permit
for the Island Gardens at Watson Island project, located at 950 and 1050 McArthur Causeway.
This is a Major Use Special Permit in order to construct two hotel buildings, housing 500 rooms
and 105 fractional ownership units, with accessory uses; approximately 221,000 square feet of
retail space; 1, 610 parking spaces, and a 50 mega yacht slip marina. The project also includes
a maritime gallery and approximately 6.5 acres of public gardens and open space. The project
has been recommended approval unanimously by the Planning Advisory Board, voted 9/0; also
approval with conditions by the Planning and Zoning Department. The only condition I would
like to modem on the record is condition number 10. At the time that the project went to the
Planning Advisory Board, there was still some -- there was some review going on by URS, the
City's traffic consultant. The review has been concluded and I would like to replace condition 10
to say that the applicant will modem the garage to relocate the gates pursuant to the comments
by URS, to ensure appropriate stacking be met in conjunction with the garage. That was the
only comment. Therefore, we recommend approval. The rest of the conditions are in your
package.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. The applicants are getting ready. Did you bring lunch or
dinner? See all those boxes.
Ms. Burke: Midnight snack.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, midnight snacks. All right, ma'am, you're recognized. You'll
have -- how much time are you going to need?
Ms. Burke: I'll wait until they get everything handed out.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk, let's time the applicants' time so we can give ample and
equal time to the opponents. OK. Also, all -- everyone speaking in favor or against this item will
City of Miami Page 119 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
have two minutes each, and we will time them or else we'll never get out of here. We have a
voluminous agenda today, and we're going to try to get it -- that does not -- that excludes both
the applicant and the opponents testing. All right. Joel, is that it?
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. What you want to do is give them equal time.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Madam Clerk, are you passing a list around to get everybody's
name who will be testing? Just out of -- while we get prepared, how many will be testing
for or against, just a show of hands? OK. All right.
Commissioner Winton: Not that bad.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk, let's see if we can establish some order as to getting
their names, so both sides, when -- OK. Two minutes when they speak. Not you. Of course,
you're limited and so is the opponent in stating your case and putting it on the record.
Commissioner Winton: Are we going to get started? Judy, are you going to get started or what
-- what are we waiting on?
Ms. Burke: I'm waiting for them to pass out -- to finish passing out -- I'm sorry.
Commissioner Winton: We don't need to wait for them to --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a lot of -- fewer trees.
Commissioner Winton: Like I'm going to read all that.
Mr. Maxwell: Is there counsel for the opposition present?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Let's go ahead and start.
Ms. Burke: For the record, my name is Judy Burke, with law offices at 201 South Biscayne
Boulevard, in Miami. I'm here on behalf of Flagstone Island Gardens, LLC, the developer of the
Island Gardens project on Watson Island. I would like to introduce the members of our
development team that are here this evening to present the project. First, our leader, Mehmet
Bayraktar, the head of Flagstone Properties; Joseph Herndon, the Project Manager for Island
Gardens; the project's architectural team, headed by Julio Grabiel: Michael Kerwin and Steven
Laruso of Spillis Candela; Ramon Alvarez of David Plummer and Associates, who will address
the transportation assessment; Larry Dugan of EDSA, who will detail the landscaping plans;
Andrew Dolkart of Miami Economic Associates, who will outline the beneficial economic
impacts of the project, and Christy Brush of Coastal Systems, who will address the
environmental issues related to the mega yacht marina. We are requesting your approval of a
Major Use Special Permit to develop this mixed use project containing two hotels, retail shops,
restaurants, a 50 mega yacht marina, a fish market, a chandlery and a maritime gallery. I'm not
going to bore you with a really long history of this approval process, but as you know, the RFP (
Request for Proposal) for Watson Island was issued in February of 2001, Flagstone development
team won the unanimous approval of the selections committee in July of 2001. This Commission
approved the Flagstone proposal in September of 2001, and in November of that year, the voters
of the City of Miami, by a substantial majority, approved the lease in a public referendum. The
project has been approved by the Internal Design Review Committee, the Large Scale
Development Review Committee, the Urban Design Review Board, and twice by the Waterfront
Advisory Board. The only variance requested for the project was approved by the Zoning Board
on May 10, 2004. The Miami -Dade County Shoreline Development Review Committee approved
the project on April 1, 2004 by unanimous vote, and even more incredible, on June 2, 2004, in a
meeting of the Planning Advisory Board, the project was recommended for approval with an
City of Miami Page 120 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
unprecedented unanimous vote. Because there was -- has been considerable controversy over
the project, and because of the importance of the project both to Flagstone and the City of
Miami, I'm sure you understand how essential it is that we make the appropriate record this
evening. I promise to do my best to relay all the essential information to you as quickly as
possible, and for that reason, I've delivered to each of you four binders --
Commissioner Winton: Judy, hold on one second, would you? Whoever's in the back back
there, you're leaning against the light thing, so you just turned the lights off, so --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Behind you -- the gentleman behind the camera -- no, the one -
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Another -- that was leaning against the wall. Yeah, right there. There
you go.
Commissioner Winton: Go ahead, Judy.
Mr. Maxwell: Just for the record, too, Mr. Chairman, during this slight break, I'd like the record
to reflection that the proponents and applicant has made a set of the binders available for the
opposition, as well. If you'd like, you could pick that up right -- they have it available for you
now.
Commissioner Winton: And while we're interrupting, could we get the Sergeant -at -arms to kind
of hang around here and kind of patrol the doors so that people don't hold the doors open while
all the noise is going on?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, counsel, you may proceed.
Ms. Burke: Again, in order to make that record, we have before you four binders and I'd like to
incorporate that material into the record this evening, and I'd like to also incorporate into the
record everything submitted, the June PAB (Planning Advisory Board) hearing, as well as the
materials I submitted earlier for the NOPC application. Anybody, as they said, that wants
binders, I think I've passed it out to everyone that I thought had an interest. The binders are
separated into four volumes. Volume number 1 contains various documents, which demonstrate
how the project satisfies the requirements of the Major Use Special Permit specifically, under
tabs 1 and 2, you'll find our analysis of how the project satisfies the requirements outlined in
articles 13 and 17 of the City Code. To summarize, first, the project is in conformity with the
Miami Comprehensive Plan. The MUSP does not require any Comprehensive Plan changes, nor
does it require any zone changes. As to the financial impact, in addition to the significant
guaranteed lease payments Flagstone will pay to the City and to the lease agreement, the City
will receive approximately $3, 500, 000 in impact fees. In addition, Island Gardens will generate
over $11, 000, 000 in annual tax revenue shared by both the City and County. The project makes
efficient use of public transportation facilities. Island Gardens is served by four separate bus
routes, which are operated by Miami -Dade Transit, and it's also located adjacent to Watson
Island station of the proposed Baylink segment of the Metrorail. The development will make
efficient use of the existing public facilities, as well as the enhancement of those facilities by
expanding the electric, water, and sewer service and reconstructing roadways to increase the
efficiency of traffic flows. The development of Island Gardens will not have an adverse effect on
living conditions in the neighborhood in which the development is situated, because as you
know, there is no residential development on that island and none is included in this project. All
of the necessary design reviews have been conducted and the project satisfies the criteria of
Article 13, specifically Section 1305 of the Code. No potential adverse effects have been ident
by the City staff, nor by any of the numerous special boards which have reviewed the project.
City of Miami Page 121 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Accordingly, and pursuant to staff recommendations, Island Gardens meets all applicable MUSP
criteria set forth in Articles 13 and 17 of the City of Miami Code. As I mentioned to you earlier,
as part of the development proposal, we requested a variance to the building setback. Pursuant
to Section 401 of the Code, buildings exceeding certain heights must be setback an additional
one foot for each foot over that height. That variance was approved by the Zoning Board on
May 10, 2004. Pursuant to section 1902 of the Code, variance authority is vested in the Zoning
Board. The Code provide that the Zoning Board's decision is final, unless appealed to the City
Commission within 15 days of the board's decision. Since no appeal was filed, we believe that
that variance is now final. Of course, if the MUSP is not approved by the City Commission, the
variance becomes null and void. Although we believe that the Zoning Code clearly provides that
the variance is final, there is some language in the intent section of article 17, which could be
used to support a contrary position. Therefore, in the event the MUSP is appealed and our
position is not the prevailing interpretation, I would like to emphasize how we have met the
standard for the guaranteeing of that variance. A complete analysis of our compliance with the
six criteria outlined in Article 19 of the Code is provided under tab 3 in the binder, and was also
submitted with and in support of our variance application. Therefore, it is part of tonight's
record. However, to give you just an example of our justification, because of the configuration
of the property, absent this variance, a portion of the project would be required to be setback
into the middle of Biscayne Bay. Our architects will demonstrate that fact in their presentation.
Volume one also contains, under tabs 14 through 20 the curriculum vitae of those experts who
may give testimony this evening. In addition, if, for any reason, they're unable to make their full
presentation tonight, a summary of that remarks are also contained under tabs 14 through 20.
As you may be aware, at prior zoning hearings on the projects, representatives of Misters
Dearmus and Sanchez, the operators of this existing fish markets on Watson Island spoke in
opposition to the project. Therefore, to provide you with an accurate picture of events, I have
included under tab 7 through 9 pertinent documents related to Flagstone's relationship with
these individuals, which was placed of record at the PAB hearing. This section also includes a
summary of the current litigation, including recent correspondence between the party's counsel.
Other than providing this documentation, Flagstone is not in a position to comment on issues
related to the current operators of the fish market. As you know, those parties have sued
Flagstone for damages for allegedly interfering with their advantageous relationship with the
City, and because that litigation is still pending, it's inappropriate for us to have further
comment. As I'm sure you're aware from letters that you have received and various newspaper
articles, certain parties have expressed their concerns with the development of Watson Island.
The binder includes, under tab 6, a history of the numerous meetings that City staff and
Flagstone have conducted with many of those parties. The material was submitted to the PAB
after the application was initially deferred in order to provide the parties an opportunity to
continue their dialogue. Parrot Jungle, the Miami Children's Museum, 1000 Venetian Way, the
Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Association, the Watson Island fish markets, the Miami Yacht
Club, and the Miami Outboard Club attended those meetings. The materials included an outline
of the issues discussed and the concessions agreed to by Flagstone. A schedule of the meetings
and the attendance sheets are included to give you a complete picture of the efforts Flagstone
has made to incorporate those various community groups into the development process. You
will also find in the binder remarks submitted by Steve Herbits on behalf of Venetian Causeway
Neighborhood Association to the PAB as well as our response to the issues he raised. I do
understand that Mr. Herbits and his neighbors on Venetian Island are very concerned that the
project will block their views of the City, but our architects will show you, during their
presentation, that the majority of their visual corridor remains intact. In addition, Flagstone met
on separate occasion with Nancy Liebman and other representatives of the Urban Environment
League. The interested -- the interest of all these parties is very diverse, and it's impossible to
fully satisfy everyone. However, I believe we were able to alleviate many of the concerns,
particularly those concerns that were voiced by our neighbors on the island. As to the other
binders, volume 2 contains the request for proposal, issued by the City in 2001; volume 3
contains Flagstone's response to the request for proposal, and volume 4 contains the agreement
to enter into the ground lease between the City and Flagstone, as well as the ground lease
City of Miami Page 122 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
between the City and Flagstone. My portion of the presentation is finally complete, and I would
like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to outline these issues for the record. I would
now like to introduce Joseph Herndon, the project Manager to present Island Gardens.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Attorney, how many witnesses will be testing on your
behalf, experts?
Ms. Burke: Yes, the members -- the development team that I introduced earlier will be testifying.
Joe will begin the presentation and call them forward on specific points.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Sir, you're recognized. Could you please state your name for the
record?
Joseph Herndon: My name is Joseph Herndon. I'm Project Director for Flagstone Island
Gardens.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You may proceed.
Mr. Herndon: One second, if you don't mind. If I may, while the technology's catching up with
us, I'd like to just to go over some broad project highlights, some of which Ms. Burke highlighted
a few moments ago. First of all, I think it's very important for you to know, this is the only
possible location that a mega yacht marina and facility can be developed and built, not only in
Miami, but in all of South Florida. That is an issue that goes back to a number of historical
records that is based upon the original channel cuts and having direct access to deep water.
We'll go into more detail with that, if you'd like specific questions, but that what's been the case
since even -- since master plans were done for the island in 1913, 1926, 1952, 1980, again in
1996, and the last time in 2001. The project is also consistent with a master plan for the area.
It's consistent with the RFP. When it went to the voters, it received 68 percent of the votes
throughout the entire City, and in the immediate precincts of the neighborhood around it,
including Venetian Islands, it received 74 percent of the vote. No additional zoning changes are
required. It has no impact to DRI on traffic, although I know that is an issue we will discuss in
more detail. It has been approved by the South Florida Regional Planning Commission, as --
Council, as well as the Department of Community Affairs. It has substantial public benefits,
which we'll go into some detail over. It is received unanimous approval from UDRB, Shoreline,
Waterfront, and PAB boards. We've complied with most reasonable requests and, of course, we
have a very tight time schedule. The voters voted on this more than two and a half years ago. I
think the voters are waiting and we want to get on with the project. On the issue of the only
viable site, very quickly, that is primarily because it's the only area in the entire South Florida
region that has access to a deep water channel, adjacent to a commercial marine basin with a
land side transportation connectors, with port and cruise facilities in the near area, including
repair and service facilities, as well as the combined services and a regulations necessary from
the Department of Homeland Security, the coast guard, the Pilots Association, as well as the
tourism facilities that exist on the island or planned for the island and the parking garages both
current and proposed. As you know, the City of Miami went through an RFP and selected
Flagstone to be the developer of this project. I know some question was asked about the ballot --
what the ballot question was. You see that in front of you on the screen. Basically, I think
there's copies of that being circulated referring specifically to mega yacht marina, fish market,
hotels with time share unit, a marina museum, public garden, cultural facilities, restaurants,
retail and support facilities. I think probably going to the next step of what the project objectives
are very critical to the City, as well as to ourselves and all of South Florida. It is important that
this project become the leading mega yacht facility on this planet, for the next 30 years, that it
also becomes a landmark gateway icon as a part of a downtown orientation to which it faces and
which is it oriented to, and also probably as much as anything is a very significant public benefit
is to create for Miami, take Miami's magic and create a more global face for it, and a global
recognition for it, much like the Mediterranean and other areas currently may have. It's also a
City of Miami Page 123 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
very critical component of the project is to create publicly accessible garden environments, not
only throughout the ground areas, but also on the landscape roofs because all of our roofs on
the lower floors are landscaped and terraced -- and terrace themselves down to the waterfront.
We also -- a very critical important aspect that we separate service and security activities from
public areas in order to be able to maintain public access for security purposes, as well as to
minimize liability and, of course, the project is compatible with future plans for all of FDOT (
Florida Department of Transportation) projects, including the tunnel project. As we said, this is
to become the leading mega yacht facility for the next 30 years. There is not a mega yacht afloat
that we would not be able to handle in this marina. It's very critical that it become a gathering
point for these types of boats and these type of groups which will then create a very strong nexus
into Miami and enhance the sense of that magic. Not only are these motorized yacht, but also
most tall ships will be able to dock at the marina. The orientation, as you'll see from these
strange diagrams, is primarily facing the water for pedestrians, leaving the views of -- directly to
the downtown, and through the marina to the downtown quite open for people to review, and
again, these are some of the terraces, landscapes of the roofs that you see on the various
different levels of the project. We're also security compliant. We spent great deal of time, and it
has had an effect upon the project in terms of being able to provide the necessary security to the
project, and incorporate that architecturally in ways that it doesn't appear and it is not apparent.
Also, we've been very compliant with FDOT projects. This project has a great number of public
benefits, some of which has been mentioned and I'll go through just briefly. Obviously, the idea
of creating and the opportunity to create a global project for the City, and a global image
garden access to the public. We have -- we anticipate almost 1,000 full-time -- 1,000 full-time
jobs and over 3,000 construction related jobs; a maritime museum, a fish market, a fishing pier,
as well as a number of other financial components to the City that I won't go into detail over at
this moment over, with participation of Fairchild Tropical Gardens, and the Historical Museum
of South Florida and many of these assets, including the maritime museum and the gardens.
Numerous fountains, as well as a variety of price points throughout the facility, including
restaurants available to all groups, and a Civic Arts Trust that maintains and pays for the
various fountains, landscapes and other public areas, and maintains them well, in addition to
those we have provided over $1, 000, 000 in the cost of master planning an additional
improvements to the South Park, which is not on our property at all, but City owned park land
immediately to the south facing the cruise port. With that, I would like to introduce the
representative from Spillis Candela, who will give you a virtual tour of the project. I assume you
haven't seen it. I think it would be very important for you to see it, unless you choose otherwise.
Julio Grabiel: Thank you, Joe. My name is Julio Grabiel. I'm a partner with Spillis Candela
and Partners. We have a very quick tour of the project. This project has every potential of
becoming an icon for Miami. One of the greatest icons that you can find in the southeast coast
of the United States, if not the whole coast of the United States. It's -- we have created --
attempted to create a spectacular project that lives with spectacular setting. It's a setting that's
both natural and urban. Truly, a 360 degree project that can be seen from everywhere in the
City. Its key elements are the marina, that opens. It's open to the City; two slender towers that
occupy the two sides of the open space, and the marina opening to the west, and to the views of
the City, and to the setting sun over the bay; 43 slips of mega yacht marina. The tower is
designed to be slender so they will minimize the view, but to be visible from all over and really
making a composition as you move around the site and you move around the City. The towers
are designed to be seen best from every advantage. Everything is linked together. The land, the
buildings, and the water, and the key element of it is a gardens that will be surrounded --
surrounding the site. Not only do we have the garden at street level, but we have gardens
throughout all of the roof levels, so you don't see any roofs. Everything is green. Everything is
water. Everything is opening to the water with maximum visibility and maximum views, and the
key element to it is one of the greatest open spaces that any City will ever have, which is a 1,000
feet long open space, overlooking at the City a "Malecon" that will be wonderful. The imagery
that we selected is one that goes wonderfully well with its setting, which is the water views, which
are the ships, which are the boats are going back and forth in the marina. It's going to be
City of Miami Page 124 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
spectacular setting, spectacular side for a spectacular City. Thank you. Joe.
Mr. Herndon: OK. Thank you very much, Julio. In the process of this, we had a numerous set
of public hearings we've gone through, as well as workshops with the neighbors and the tenants
of the area. What you see before you is basically a list of discussions and points brought up by
various meetings in the workshops. We handed out to you in the beginning of the meeting this
exact document that you see on the screen before you, as well as follow up behind it with specific
responses that we have had, which I'm sure would be a subject to a number of discussions we'll
have here with the opponents shortly. Among those community concerns, very briefly, was that
we were not providing enough public amenity and access -- public access amenities; our
amenities guarantees, fish market access being restricted, inappropriate use of lands, time
shares being prohibited, hotel use, more than 20 acres, and private clubs not permitted, and
basically, we've gone through these, as well as a number of issues in giving you very clear
positions. The specific concessions that we currently have made to date relative to the entry
boulevard between ourselves and the Children's Museum, the drop-off for the Children's
Museum, minimize the elevation of the differences between ourselves and the museum, and the
road -- exterior roadways, mitigating the drainage from those roadways, providing construction
staging operations plan through the City's process, and our construction staff to provide (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) credential and also provide pedestrian access from the project to the
museums, specifically for children and the disabled; provide sufficient parking for facility and
staff. avoid encroachment on museum parking spaces; provide landscape and screening to the
garage; building lighting should not be offensive, and -- in minimizing noise processes, and
evaluating events both onsite and on weekends throughout the projects in its projections.
There's a variety of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) we can concur with these issues. There's a number of
details that we've worked out. We've been in discussions with the City and the City, as landlord,
will be very involved in working out solutions for these solutions, which we indeed participate in.
Specifically, on traffic, I'll go through very quickly, is -- as you may know, our traffic
methodology has been through two -- has been reviewed by two state agencies, one regional
agency, two public authorities, two City agencies, five different traffic consultants, but -- and
probably the most importantly is the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and the DCA has
approved. I think with -- there are a number of other issues relative to traffic that will probably
be brought up that we were prepared to discuss subsequently, but at this point, we will defer, if
we may, to the opposition, and let them have an opportunity to speak, and then we will come
back with a rebuttal. However, before I do so, if I may, I would like to take one minute and
introduce our Chairman, Mr. Mehmet Bayraktar.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Absolutely.
Mehmet Bayraktar: Dear Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, Mehmet Bayraktar, my name,
1000 South Point Drive, Miami Beach. I'm a resident here.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Miami Beach?
Mr. Bayraktar: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: And where's all the opposition coming from? Miami Beach. And he
lives on Miami Beach. There ought to be some lessons learned in that. Sorry, Commissioner
Bower.
Mr. Bayraktar: It was back in September 17, 2001 that I was here before the Commissioners
presenting the results of RFP for the approvals, and since then, it was a long journey, but it was
very pleasant journey preparing for the walk that we are about to start with your approvals. We
have a lot of support from the Commissioners, Mayor, City Manager's office. City staff has been
very essential on helping us, informing us and directing us the things that we have to watch, and
like Joe mentioned, we have been trying to be as informative to our neighbors, to the officials, to
City of Miami Page 125 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
the agencies, to Miami residents, everybody who have come up and knock our doors and phoned
us or one day somehow, sometimes we have heard of news articles coming opposing for the
development. We have talked to everybody; try to understand their concerns. This project is for
Miami, and it's for Miami Beach, and for Miami -Dade County and for Florida, and it's for the
public, and we will be fooling ourselves thinking that we are doing this project for ourselves, and
it's for the City of Miami, and we are ready to work with the rest of the people who have some
concerns, which has been the case for last two years that we have been working, and it will
always be the case, and they can have my word, our team, our consultants that -- as long as we
are here, which is next 75 years, we are going to be listening, understanding the issues that they
may have, because those issues, if there is any problems, it would be also our issues in future, so
we will be fooling not to address them and look closer and pay attention, and I'd like to thank
you, again, for everybody who have been supporting Flagstone proposal from the very first day,
and we are so eager to get started and build a landmark facility which everybody in the world
will be talking about. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Counsel, you're going to set aside some time for rebuttal?
Mr. Herndon: Yes, well set aside time.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You have anyone else you wish to testes on your behalf?
Mr. Herndon: Not at this time. We'll --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Not at this time, so the opponents. How much time, Madam Clerk?
Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. I just want to make sure. It was about 45 minutes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 45 minutes. We want to make sure that on the record, the opponent
has equal amount of time to -- welcome to City Hall. Please state your name for the record.
Helen Marie Gordich: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. My name is Helen
Marie Gordich, and I live at 1000 Venetian Way in Miami. I'm here today to represent the views
of two separate organizations, the 1000 Venetian Way Condominium Association, and its 123
residences, and the Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance and its 1500 residences. The
boards of both these organizations have approved the contents of my comments. Mr. Chairman,
we request that the Commission postpone consideration of the Island Gardens project. It has
become clear to us that materials that the FlagstoneGroup have provided the City contain
serious flaws, and are therefore materially inadequate as a basis for the Commission to make a
fair judgment of the project at this time. We believe that with additional time, and well
intentioned discussions with the interested parties, it may be possible to improve the quality of
the information that should be required by the Commission. There are several areas of concern,
all representing opportunities for the Commission to insist on improvements in the plan before
agreeing to it. The Commission needs to be permitted to carry out its democratic function, which
is to mediate a balance between the various interests of a public and this City and the
importance of development. It cannot do so today based on the inadequacy of a one-sided
presentation you have before you. Here are some of our concerns. The traffic studies upon
which this Commission is relying are so flawed as to potentially invalidate its own decision.
This, as in other areas, can be remedied through new and broadened inquiries. We need studies
and hurricane evacuation. Do you know that no hurricane evacuation study was undertaken for
Watson Island itself; neither does the traffic study consider high use spillover traffic onto the
Venetian causeway. The absence of sidewalks along significant portions of the Causeway makes
the issue of spillover traffic not just one of inconvenience, but also one of pedestrian and cyclist
safety. We also believe that this has implications for the state, because residents of Miami
Beach, especially off McArthur Causeway, are affected, so we desperately need more accurate
and up-to-date data on the impact on the major arteries of beach traffic, especially when
City of Miami Page 126 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
multiple events take place simultaneously, like the use of the American Airlines Arena,
Bicentennial Park, Performing Arts Center; events at Fisher Island, the Annual Boat Show, July
4th fireworks, and multiple new Chemed weekend events at the beach; hotel ballrooms for some
900 patrons, as well as the implications of the proposed tunnel, Baylink, FTAA (Free Trade Area
of the Americas), the growth of attendance at the Parrot Jungle, and the Children's Museum, and
the possible presence of up to 20, 000 people at Island Gardens as suggested in the
development's MUSP. These factors, especially if several occur simultaneously could result in
congestion that would disrupt traffic on northbound and southbound Biscayne Boulevard, as
well as on 1-95 and I-395. Much more work needs to be done identing real traffic issues and
planning accordingly. After the fact will be too late, too costly, and contributes only to the
profits of the developer who should have to contribute to mitigation. Further, the current
absence of specifics for funding levels, guarantees, enforcement provisions, and penalties makes
the current pleasant intentions of the developers to meet the requirement of public use under the
deed, no more than a sham. We are also concerned that there is inadequate planning for
parking for this facility. We cannot use former standards. We need to assess the need of this
particular location and plan accordingly. This has not yet been done. With the absence of
sufficient parking, would you expect the public to park on the mainland and walk the half -mile or
so over the McArthur bridge? I would hate to try doing that in heels. As to streams, buffers,
lighting, noise, the size and scope of this project is materially different from the proposal
submitted to the Commission for initial approval in 2001. The MUSP presented this April does
not include a sufficient description of the 107 foot pedestal on which this project is built, in
which will house garages and other utilitarian facilities. Venetian Causeway residents are
directly affected by the details of this aspect of the building in particular, and request that the
City defer afnal vote on the project until such time as details of this great wall are further
explained to the neighbors. There are certain other aspects of the building impacted on our
residents that concern us as well. These all need to be discussed in detail. Consider the many
promising assurances we are given regarding the economic impact data this development will
bring us. We need a delay to prevent the public to examine these assurances and perhaps
provide you with other viewpoints. Let us not forget, the City belongs to the people, not to the
developers. I thank you for --
(APPLAUSE)
Ms. Gordich: The Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance and the 1000 Venetian Way
Condominium Association both thank the Commission for giving us the opportunity to present
our views. Thank you all very much.
Chairman Teele: All right. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, let's try to gain what the ground
rules are at this City Hall, first and foremost. We appreciate very much your being here, and we
welcome the opportunity for you to express yourselves. The Clerk has a little beeper that beeps.
It beeped about four minutes ago. The speaker spoke for about 5 and a half minutes.
Everybody's entitled to 2 minutes. I thought we always let the first speaker have a little bit more
leeway, and I felt that that might be appropriate. Secondly and very importantly, this is City
Hall of the City of Miami. We welcome you here and we encourage you to go to the Miami Heat
games so that you can applaud and jeer, and participate, but in this Commission chambers, we
ask for you -- that you refrain from applauding, booing, jeering, or in any way expressing your
views. We're sitting here in a quasi judicial capacity normally as judges under the court ruling,
and our decisions are to be quasi judicial in nature, generally, so we would ask that you conduct
yourself in that manner of comportment. Mr. -- Madam -- Mr. Manager, welcome back. We're
delighted to have the representative of the City of Miami Beach here, the Commissioner, Matti
Bower, and Matti is certainly no stranger. Feel right at home, so to speak, and we're just
delighted that the City of Miami Beach is taking time to come over and visit with us. I note that
my favorite City administrator is --
Commissioner Matti Bower: And the prettiest one.
City of Miami Page 127 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Well --
Commissioner Bower: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- the smartest one. Let's just --
Commissioner Bower: That also. That also.
Chairman Teele: Let's just say the smartest one in Miami Beach. The smartest one in Miami
Beach.
Commissioner Bower: OK, but the prettiest one also.
Chairman Teele: And so, we're delighted to have you all here to be here. I would just note that
Commissioner Winton has worked extremely close with Miami Beach as the Commissioner
candidly that has the entire waterfront of the whole City of Miami. He figured it out some years
ago, and we're delighted that you're working so closely with the City in any number of projects,
Baylink, among others, and so we just want you to feel at home and take as long as you need to
express your views.
Commissioner Bower: I was going to concede my two minutes to Christina because she has
something that she would like to put on the record.
Chairman Teele: Well, you're not limited --
Commissioner Bower: But let me tell you one thing.
Chairman Teele: You're not limited to two minutes.
Commissioner Bower: Thank you. I appreciate that, but first of all, I want to congratulate you
on the most beautiful City Hall I have ever seen. I think that the job that you have done restoring
this is just lovely, and when you look at the pictures in TV, it's just beautiful, so as a
preservationist at heart, which is my first love, I want to thank you for putting this building back
into the original state, which is beautiful. I will concede to Christina. I know that you have a
long meeting, and we all love when somebody speaks short and to the point. I will ask you to
listen to her carefully. I think that what we're asking is for you and us to work together on
another traffic study; to make sure that this project is as magnificent as it looks when I was
watching the pictures on the presentation. I think that when you have people that work together,
as I learned when I was an activist and preservationist, the projects always turn out much better
when you have input after input, so I hope that you're open to that one request that I bring, and
that is to work together in the traffic so that we can both work and come and visit every place in
Miami. Thank you, and I'll turn my time --
Chairman Teele: Madam Commissioner, now, I may have missed a portion of this, but you are
aware that we have a letter dated June 22 from the district Secretary of Transportation, and that
letter by Mr. Martinez states that we reiterate our position, the Florida Department of
Transportation finds a traffic methodology acceptable and consistent with previously submitted
DRI and has no objections to the proposed development going forward. The Department
concurs that the McArthur Causeway segment between Bayshore Drive and Watson Island does
not function as an arterial street, and more realistically functions in a range between an arterial
street and a freeway. The Department continues to support the Miami Dade MPO (Metropolitan
Planning Organization) and the municipalities in their efforts to meet the challenges, et cetera,
dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, and they make reference to their partnership with the City of Miami
Beach.
City of Miami Page 128 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Bower: So, I think that's what we're asking, the partnership at the end to work
together again to make sure that we have a very compatible entrance to your project and our
Miami Beach, and that I think that working together, it would be much better. You know, we
have the issue of the flyover in Miami -- in Miami Beach on the 63rd Street flyover. We had over
four or five traffic studies, paid by different people because the issue here, as you all -- if there's
some lawyers here. I mean, I'm full of lawyers. I'm not a lawyer, but in my Commission, there's
many lawyers. You know that we all pay our own expert, and all I'm saying is, let's do one
together to make sure that everybody addresses the issues that everybody's concerned. I think
the residents will be happy and all of us will be -- and it will be -- turn out to be a better project.
Chairman Teele: Are you proposing that the City of Miami and Miami Beach do a joint study; is
that what you're --
Commissioner Bower: Yes, that's fine.
Chairman Teele: Is that what your signature --
Commissioner Bower: Yes, yes, this is what we want. This is what we want. That's all that I am
here to ask. I think that you all want -- the project looks lovely. I think that we all will enjoy the
project. I just want to make sure that we work together to make the traffic issue a very palatable
one, one that is resolved in the early stages and not after the project is done.
Chairman Teele: Thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Bower: Thank you for having me here, and again, this is beautiful.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much, Commissioner. Please feel free to come back.
Gentlemen, those of you that are standing, about half of y'all to just take your seat and --
because we're not -- this is an important project, like you all recognize. We're not going to rush
through this, so you can just -- Madam Manager, it's a pleasure to have you back here in City
Hall.
Christina Cuervo: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It's very -- I'm very happy to be here
as well, and I think Commissioner Bower stole a lot of my thunder, but I think it's important, the
comments that the City of Miami Beach has gathered and putting those in the record. First of
all, thank you for allowing us to address you both on the Major Use Special Permit, as well as
the amendment to the downtown DRI that you have just approved. Again, I'm Christina Cuervo,
Assistant Manager with the City of Miami Beach, and I'd like to begin by stating on the record,
as Commissioner Bower has, that the City of Miami Beach is not here appearing to -- before you
today to oppose a project. I know that that's been widely disseminated and that's not what we're
here for. In fact, from a purely economic development standpoint, this project has over 600
hotel rooms, and it means that there's going to be more tourists in our region and more tourists
visiting Miami Beach. You also have over 221, 000 feet of retail that is going to be included in
the project, but those 605 hotel rooms and those 221,000 square feet of retail also mean that
there's going to be additional traffic on McArthur Causeway. That's our primary concern.
Normally, a project of this size would have triggered a DRI review and certain mitigation
requirements, as did the four towers that were constructed at the south point of Miami Beach.
All of those went through a DRI process. Your process, in essence, has stated that this DRI
amendment is non -substantive. It's a non -substantive deviation, and therefore, that more
extensive review for this project was not triggered. The City of Miami Beach's only interest at
this time is to ensure that all the negative impacts are addressed and that the appropriate
mitigation strategies are identified and implemented as part of the project. As you know, traffic
congestion is the single greatest threat to our region's economy, and the City has identified
several areas and points of concern, but our main issue is transportation, and the adverse affect
it has on the quality of life of the area's residents, and the businesses, and this includes the
City of Miami Page 129 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
businesses that are located on Watson Island today, including the Children's Museum, the Parrot
Jungle, and eventually this project. To put it in some perspective, a 600 hotel room (sic) is going
to be the 6th largest hotel in our County. Moreover, the 221,000 square feet of retail is equal to
the amount of retail that was built in Bayside. That's not to mention the other components of the
projects that are very attractive. Again, let me state that we're not here to oppose it, but we're
here to tell you that you've held a number of public meetings regarding the development on
Watson Island, and many of those occurred while you were developing your RFP, while you
formed your evaluation committee, and you did your selection process, and then for the
subsequent referendum. The most recent public hearings were conducted when you filed the
notice of proposed change and you went in front of the County's Shoreline Review Committee.
Therefore, between November of 2001 and April 2004, the City of Miami Beach was unaware of
any opportunity for public in-- for its public input, other than the pre -application meeting that
was hosted by the South Florida Regional Planning Council in September 2002, which we did
attend and we did have input in. I know our Mayor and our City Manager met with your Mayor
and City Manager in August of 2002 and expressed their interest in participating in these
discussions. The next and only opportunity we've had to comment is here today, as part of this
notice of proposed change, and the hearings leading up to this notice of proposed change. Your
Transportation Assessment Study took -- didn't take -- it was expected to take 12 months. It took
over 17 months, but we had 30 days to review it, and we did submit -- as Ms. Burke mentioned,
we did submit our comments. They were not -- we did not ask for substantial deviation review to
be triggered. We asked the question, is this a substantial deviation review? Your public -- we
also held a public hearing in our City, and Island Gardens attorneys were present at that
meeting and we solicited comments from our public, and our comments were submitted. Just for
the record, South Florida Regional Planning Council did forward to DCA, as part of that DRI
review, that portions of the traffic analysis don't clearly and convincingly rebut the presumption
that no roadways will be significantly impacted. For that reason, we're asking today that "A,"
an additional new traffic study be conducted together in cooperation and partnership between
the City of Miami, the City of Miami Beach and the developer of the Island Gardens project. We
understand that FDOT does not see a fatal flaw in the traffic impact methodology. However,
they do acknowledge that McArthur Causeway should not be classified as a freeway, as was
done in the transportation assessment that was submitted for this project. In fact, FDOT states
that McArthur Causeway lies somewhere between an arterial and a freeway, but it was studied
as a freeway. It's the City of Miami Beach's position and the causeway today, it is classified as
an arterial. It should be studied as such. However, again, if it could be studied somewhere
between the arterial and the freeway, we're open to that.
Chairman Teele: Are you speaking -- excuse me. You stated the City of Miami Beach. Has
there been a -- have you all taken a formal vote on this? Is there a vote by the City of --
Ms. Cuervo: Yes.
Chairman Teele: Are you going to introduce that in the record?
Ms. Cuervo: Yes, yes. I will tell you now, our City Commission met on --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is it in resolution form?
Ms. Cuervo: In a resolution form. It was a motion --
Chairman Teele: A motion.
Ms. Cuervo: Yeah, it was a motion, and I'm sure that will be asked in shortly to draft a
resolution, but just for the record -- and I was going to state that at the end -- our City
Commission met on June 9th and asked that this item be deferred, and also asked in a letter to
the City Manager, as well as a letter to Ms. Burke, representing Island Gardens, that the item be
City of Miami Page 130 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
deferred and that you come and make a presentation -- or the developer, together with the City --
come and make a presentation to our City Commission at their next City Commission meeting,
which is July 7, 2004. That was the request of our City Commission. Shall I continue?
Chairman Teele: Please continue.
Ms. Cuervo: Therefore, as I've just articulated about the methodology, we still feel that there's
outstanding traffic issues that have been identified by FDOT's consultants, although they
recognize that there's no fatal flaw in the traffic impact methodology, and we feel that it
necessitates further study. We're here to support FDOT's recommendation, as you just read,
Chairman Teele, that the City of Miami and the City of Miami Beach partner with the MPO to
address the regional transportation issues, and we seek your support to address these challenges
. They behoove us both to address them correctly and to address them ahead of time. Yes,
there's been significant development in Miami Beach, and yes, there is traffic congestion in
Miami Beach that -- but that traffic congestion extends beyond our boundaries. All those
projects that have been referenced in Miami Beach have gone through a DRI review, and they
have been subjected to mitigation as part of the City's concurrency system. Much of our traffic is
not necessarily related to these developments, but it's related to unprecedented growth and level
of popularity that our whole region has received. There's not just traffic in Miami Beach. There
is traffic everywhere. We all know that. The reality is that the transportation assessment for this
project, because of the methodology that was used, underestimates the true impact that will
occur on the causeway. It will not only have a negative impact on Miami Beach. It's going to
have a negative impact on this project, and therefore, it would behoove us again for it to be
addressed ahead of time. Once -- specific item of significance that the City of Miami Beach is
unaware of is exactly what mitigation FDOT will require of the project when the project does
proceed, and FDOT, after submittal of that letter, has spoken with our Public Works Director,
who's here today, and has stated that there will be -- they will be closely working in the design of
the project, and we ask to be included in that. The City understands, as well -- and I'm getting
close to the end -- the City of Miami Beach understands, as well, that the Miami Children's
Museum, and the Parrot Jungle and other organizations have serious concerns, and their
concerns center around traffic, parking, access and drainage. I'd also like to clam for the
record -- and I think it's important that the voters of Venetian Causeway precinct voted in favor
of this project in the City of Miami's referendum. Only two of the Causeway's six residential
islands are located in the City of Miami and were afforded the opportunity to cast a ballot. The
other four Venetian islands -- Bell Isle, San Marino, Rivo Alto and Di Lido -- are in the City of
Miami Beach. Additionally, they're residents of our islands on the McArthur Causeway. The
Palm Island, Hibiscus, Star and Fisher Island that were either -- are going to be even more
directly impacted by the proposed development and they've had no opportunity to vote on this
issue. We had an opportunity to meet with the City Manager and his staff last Friday to discuss
the issues. At that time, we again expressed our request for the deferral, but we understand that
you're here today to move forward, so for that reason, what we really are asking you today is
that you jointly work with us to conduct a new traffic impact analysis that we -- the developer
seemed amenable when we met last Friday to participate in that process. I really think it's up to
you to add that as a condition of your approval today, and we've also -- I understand that today
prohibitions were placed at the state level with the deed waiver that was granted. I think that
those meet our concurrence, and they were things that we were looking at as it related to
residential use that was shown in the project, but had not been reviewed as part of the DRI
project, so again, I want to conclude by thanking you for giving us the time. We ask that you
support a new traffic study, and it's -- the implementation of that traffic study and its
recommendation, and we invite the participation by FDOT and a joint participation with both of
our cities. I have some technical comments I'm going to -- I can add and leave. I've written
them in documentation form that we can submit to you. If you'd like to hear those technical
comments, we can add them for the record, but I think that you've seen them already. They've
been in all of our previous correspondence.
City of Miami Page 131 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Cuervo: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: One question.
Chairman Teele: Before anybody, can we get a copy -- can I get a copy of the letter that you all
transmitted to the City, please?
Ms. Cuervo: Yes.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, can I put two words in to clam things? In the
year 2002, Mayor Dermer came to visit Mayor Diaz. At which time, the project was shown as
much information as we had. At that time, Mayor Dermer was told that if he had any questions,
had any problems with the project, that he -- his staff and our staff will get together and show the
whole project. First notice of this was approximately about three weeks ago, and the letter that
Christina's talking about, I received yesterday. The -- what she's talking, what happened, as
stated today, Mayor Dermer, for an unknown reason to me, mentioned that -- the possibility of
building a casino in this property, which was outrageous -- and that's kind of the restriction that
was put in -- that if we go forward with this project, there will never be a casino there, so let's
don't confused this thing. This has been studied, restudied, and you know, the last minute, they
want to walk in here and tell us to stop a project, you know, when we have all kinds of causeway
problems, and when they're building all kinds of units not very far from here. I don't recall that
they ever came to us for our opinion, and I think that that's one of the things that really upsets
me the most, that now that we're one of the poorest city is going to build one of the largest and
best hotels in the area, and we're going to have one of the best retails in the area, Miami Beach
is not very happy with the competition.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Chairman Teele: Well --
Commissioner Bower: I -- you know, I really feel very bad about those statements. I had to get
up and come and say, you know, I think there's money in this world; greed in this world, enough
to go around to every space of land that is available. As long as somebody knows that they're
going to make money, they're going to build, and God bless that you all get it.
Chairman Teele: Madam.
Commissioner Bower: I mean, I really don't mind it. I hope that we -- you know, I commend you
on your preservation, because that's where I'm from. I don't like the buildings in Miami Beach,
many of them, and I was the lone vote many times, but please do not say that, because we wish
you -- and I, as a Commissioner, wish you to be as great, and I think you're coming along fine.
You're going to be as great because what makes us good, makes you good, and I think that we all
Chairman Teele: I thought you were saying as great as New York --
Commissioner Bower: -- want to live in a place that everybody loves, so please, do not put those
thoughts in anybody's mind.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Commissioner, please, and to the public, let's make our
comments to the Chair and let's don't get into a debate. The comments were unfortunate, but
your comments also, I thought, were a little bit unfortunate, because I thought you were saying
as great as New York. I didn't know you were saying that we can be as great as Miami Beach.
City of Miami Page 132 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Bower: Well, no. I mean -- you know, I was there when Miami Beach was worse
than any part of Miami, and I worked very hard -- through the Chair, I worked very hard and I'm
very happy and unhappy because I didn't want to see the development that we have.
Chairman Teele: Your work speaks for itself, and there's no question Miami Beach would not be
what it is today had you not been in the vineyard for so long by yourself a long time. If you
would just allow us for a few moments.
Commissioner Bower: Yes.
Chairman Teele: Before -- I'm going to ask -- before anybody does anything, let's close the
public hearing right here for a minute, and let's deal with the public issue in a way that we need
to deal with it, before we get this thing all confused. Commissioner Winton, you've heard from
the City of Miami Beach. I still need to see the letter, but I think we need to figure out where
we're going before we start hearing a hundred different issues, because it's rare that we hear
from a governmental body to come before us and -- what was the vote, by the way, at the City of
Miami Beach?
Commissioner Bower: You know, I never remember anything after it happened. Was it
unanimous?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It was unanimous.
Commissioner Bower: It was unanimous.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, you know --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may. Can we just -- I think we need to get over this
. Let's allow the public to say what they have to say, and then we're the ones that are going to
make the decision --
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but the public is the public.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: But government is the government, and the one thing that we all have a strong
feeling about is how Miami -Dade County deals with us.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Right.
Chairman Teele: I don't want to now substitute us for being the arrogant Miami -Dade County.
I've been before the Commission and told you've got two minutes to say whatever you want to
say; just make your comments and that's it, and that's not the way government should deal with
government, and I don't think government should be reduced to being a mere public speaker on
the record. As long as I've been in government in the County or here, I have never dealt that
way, and I think we need -- we owe it to City of Miami Beach, that's going to be our neighbor --
that is our neighbor, to figure out exactly how we're going to dispose of this issue before we hear
from all the other issues, and that's not to put the public down, but that is to give the dignity to
the elected representatives of the City of Miami Beach, and whatever it is, it is.
Commissioner Bower: Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that very much.
Chairman Teele: Whatever it is, it is.
City of Miami Page 133 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And with all due respect, I think governments protect their interests.
That's just -- you know, she's a Commissioner representing Miami Beach and we're
Commissioners representing the City, and I do agree with you, that we need to be good
neighbors, but I think there has to be healthy debate, and if you want to separate apples and
oranges, and not to have some of the public to speak on some of the other issues not pertaining
to government, that's perfectly fine, but I think that this issue today needs to be resolved through
a vote by this Commission. They voted on their --
Chairman Teele: Mr. Vice Chairman --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They -- yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Vice Chairman, with all due respect, under every rule of order, a motion
or a discussion to defer takes precedence over everything else.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm not disputing that.
Chairman Teele: And I'm not proposing that we defer it, but I do think we need -- before we
start hearing from everybody's different angles, we ought to deal with the government of the City
of Miami Beach, and we ought to give them the courtesy of a debate and a discussion, and I
really want to hear from Commissioner Winton, who is the district Commissioner closest to them.
Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Regalado, Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Sanchez.
Commissioner Winton: Well, I guess I'm a bit troubled by -- and don't understand some of the
comments made by Ms. Cuervo, particularly related to the Florida Department of
Transportation, where she said that they still have some concerns. I'm sitting here reading the
letter and the letter says, "To reiterate our position, the Florida Department of Transportation
finds the traffic methodology acceptable and consistent with the previously submitted
development regional impact and has no objections with this proposed development going
forward" It doesn't say we are concerned about this, or concerned about that, or that we have a
quasi (UNINTELLIGIBLE). It says we're OK; go forward, so that's point one. The second point
-- and it's about traffic, and Madam Commissioner, and Christina, Igo to Miami Beach all the
time. I take lots of clients to Miami Beach. I spend a lot of time on your island, and I will tell
you, whether it's daytime, nighttime, weekends, the causeway is jammed up almost to the top of
the bridge, not people trying to get to Watson Island; not people trying to get into downtown
Miami, but people trying to get on Miami Beach.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Nightclubs.
Commissioner Winton: Every single weekend, and when there's events. That's where the traffic
is, and so I'm troubled by this concept that this development is going to create some new event
about traffic when the real event about traffic is all to people trying to get on Miami Beach to go
to events, and it's huge, and I go there all the time. I've sat in that traffic, so you know, I'm
sympathetic to and think it's important for these two cities to work together, but I don't get this
whole -- I'm not buying into this concept that we need to do another traffic study. I haven't seen
any evidence that suggests that from Florida Department of Transportation or anyone else that
there is flawed methodology going on here that should require another traffic study.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: So I'm troubled -- I'm not -- you know, as much as I would love to say
yes -- because I think Commissioner Bower's great and I would love to be saying yes. I'm not --
you know, unless I heard something else that was really compelling, I can't get on board this
train yet, and I'm not opposed to hearing something else, so let them speak (INAUDIBLE).
City of Miami Page 134 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, what is the will --
Ms. Cuervo: Let us respond. Let us --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: What is the will of the Commission? Do we allow this to proceed?
Commissioner Winton: I'm sorry?
Ms. Cuervo: And I don't think -- I'll let Commissioner Bower speak --
Commissioner Bower: No, go ahead.
Ms. Cuervo: But, I mean -- again --
Commissioner Regalado: Can I say something? I asked to be recognized.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioners always have preference. Commissioner Regalado,
you're recognized.
Commissioner Bower: Can I say something? May I say something?
Commissioner Regalado: Sure.
Commissioner Bower: I don't think that -- you have moved on, since we voted on the deferral.
The project has continued to move, and maybe the deferral at this moment is not what -- you
know, even though we voted unanimously on it, maybe that's not the -- but to work together on
the traffic study, you are correct, a lot -- and that is the concern. A lot of people go to Miami
Beach already. You are bring -- you are building a hotel that will hold 500 and so or more
rooms that will bring many more. Our concern is that everything works well together, not that
we're against the project. As it is with the Parrot Jungle and the museum, what has happened is
the entrance is not well -- apparently, the people coming through do not understand that it's on
the right hand side, and they continue and they pass the entrance, and what has happened is, we
have had -- and I've been called -- on accidents because they're making a U-turn now to come
back when they realize they pass the entrance, so what we're saying to you is, it has grown. It
has overgrown maybe. We want it to continue to flourish and be good, but let's do it and let's do
it in conjunction and with more of a study.
Commissioner Winton: OK Let me see if I can figure something out here because, Matti, I
think -- you were absolutely right, and I've passed -- the first time I tried to go to Parrot Jungle, I
drove right past the entryway. Right past it. I had to go figure out where I could go make a U-
turn, so I think there are -- I think that's a very, very clear issue. Here's -- and maybe you can
help me do this. I'm not necessarily opposed to us working together to figure out if there are
better ways to deal with traffic. Here's what I'm opposed to. I'm opposed to putting this project
on hold while we spend another 15 months or something developing a plan.
Commissioner Bower: I don't think that's what I'm saying --
Commissioner Winton: OK Help me here.
Commissioner Bower: -- right now, OK I -- what I think I'm saying is that -- and I'm speaking
on myself, because the Commission took an action, but I think we've move on from that action.
What I am asking you now is to look at the traffic again, do the mitigations that we need to do to
make this project work for all of us, not for anybody in particular, but for both -- all of us, and
that's what I keep asking you. I want to work together on the traffic issue.
City of Miami Page 135 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: I think one of the things that we can do -- this is -- is this first reading?
Ms. Burke: Only one reading.
Mr. Maxwell: This is a resolution. This is approval.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK, so it doesn't come before us again.
Commissioner Regalado: Johnny, can you yield?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, sir, because -- yeah, I'll yield because I want to think about
something.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: What we need to ask is what are the mitigations? Put them on the
record, but go ahead, Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Let me just -- I was remembering the PZ.1 I think it was, downtown
development boundaries, and it says, no more than 1, 700 parking spaces. That's what it said.
I'm sure that that's a concern to you, but to Christina, who I know she's always on top, when is
the Miami Beach boat show? Is it --
Ms. Cuervo: President's Day weekend, every year, in February.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm sorry?
Ms. Cuervo: President's Day weekend, every year, in February.
Commissioner Regalado: Right, and you are aware -- is that -- is the City or the promoters, the
entity that rents Watson Island to park there?
Ms. Cuervo: It's the promoters.
Commissioner Regalado: The promoters. You know how many cars people park in Watson
Island during the boat show?
Ms. Cuervo: We only know how many cars are parked in Miami Beach, unfortunately.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I will tell you because I tried once to go to the fish market and I
couldn't get through. There were about 2,000 cars for more than a week in Watson Island Park,
and I think those are cars that didn't went (sic) through the Causeway to Miami Beach, but the
Causeway was clear. It didn't affect, you know, people got in and out; came in those little
trolleys and buses, and I'm just telling you that the fact that for more than a week, you had --
actually, Watson Island was almost paralyzed with thousands of cars parked there for the Miami
Beach boat show.
Ms. Cuervo: The boat show also takes place in -- at the Biscayne Bay Marriott.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, yeah. I know that (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Cuervo: In places in the City of Miami, but --
Commissioner Regalado: But the shuttle takes the people to Miami Beach, not to the Marriott.
I was there, and the City -- I mentioned that because the causeway wasn't like packed. It was
opened during those days of so many cars park there.
City of Miami Page 136 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Cuervo: And I don't think that we're here saying the causeway's going to be packed because
of this project. What we're saying is, let's not make this project pack the causeway by assuring
that the entrance into Watson Island -- Right now, the proposed project is using the exact same
ingress and egress that exist on that island. There's no additional deceleration lane that's being
added to accommodate the project. Those are the types of things we're talking about. Again,
we're not here blaming this project for our traffic problems. That's -- we've brought that on
ourselves by everyone, everyone, all the development, both in Miami and Miami Beach. This is
not -- this is again, we're not here attacking that project. We're here saying, let's work together.
Make it a subject to condition, as your approval today as part of this Major Use Special Permit
that you ask that mitigation strategies be identified and implemented and that a traffic analysis
be conducted and an impact analysis be conducted that can address these issues to ameliorate a
vote for you and for us. That's all.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, the only signs that I've I see always in the Causeway -- and I
think that's -- it's not your fault. It's the City of Miami -- is those electronic billboards that says -
Ms. Cuervo: The ones I've --
Commissioner Regalado: -- Club South Beach Space, you know, band tonight, Saturday. The
City of Miami is at fault. The City of Miami has been negligent for not having signage in that
area, telling the people you go Children's Museum, you go fish market, you go Parrot Jungle.
There's no signage there, and I think it's important that we do the signage. I think it's important
that -- if you get -- when you get off 1-95 and you go 1-395, you see the signs saying, you know,
Watson Island next right. It's a logical thing, so I don't understand the crisis on this.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner --
Ms. Cuervo: It's not a crisis, but this is -- this is our only opportunity to add that condition.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You will have -- Ms. Cuervo, you will have ample opportunity to put
anything you want on the record and state your -- and make your case. Commissioner Teele.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Look, this has got to be brought to some logical
point, and --
Commissioner Winton: I have (INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Teele: -- I would like the permission of the Chair and the district Commissioner to
move what I think is a compromise, and that is that I would move that the City of Miami and the
City of Miami Beach enter into a formal agreement to do a new comprehensive traffic study,
provided -- further requesting that the MPO and the Florida DOT fund the study, all right?
Ms. Cuervo: OK.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. Hold --
Commissioner Winton: We like that.
Chairman Teele: That the MPO and the DOT participate and fund the study, and further
provide that the project will continue to move forward. However, any study -- any results of that
study shall be clearly available to this Commission to impose, as any further condition, should
this project come back before this Commission for any reason at all. I would so move, and ask
for the second for discussion.
City of Miami Page 137 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Second for discussion.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, can you live with that?
Mr. Arriola: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Madam Commissioner, is that a fair compromise for you all?
Commissioner Bower: He's whispering something that I don't understand. He's a lawyer.
Chairman Teele: Well, let the --
Commissioner Bower: I think it sounds good.
Chairman Teele: Well, why don't you tell it to your assistant --
Commissioner Bower: I think that it means that you're --
Chairman Teele: -- Assistant Manager. Let the Assistant Manager. She's the one that's been --
Unidentified Speaker: That's our City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Oh, I'm sorry.
Gary Held: Hi. Gary Held, I'm an Assistant --
Chairman Teele: Are you a lawyer?
Mr. Held: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Bower: He's a lawyer.
Mr. Held: I'm an Assistant City Attorney with the City of Miami Beach. My one concern with
your motion, Mr. Chairman, is that the ability to return to this Commission to take further action
is totally within the discretion of the developer, unless the City, as joint applicant, is retaining
discretion to do that.
Chairman Teele: Well, we're not -- look, this project is going to be back before us five times in
the next five years, and I think what we really need to do is the City of Miami/Miami Beach need
to stop talking at each other --
Commissioner Bower: Right --
Chairman Teele: -- and start working together.
Commissioner Bower: I agree with you.
Chairman Teele: -- so that your concerns will become filtered and become a part of our
concerns.
Commissioner Bower: I think it's --
Chairman Teele: And a lot of it can be resolved probably through informal working with --
through our City Manager and our City staff with the developer, but I think right now we're just
acting like amateurs talking at each other, and we all are on the same side. I think the
City of Miami Page 138 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
developer, the City of Miami Beach and the City of Miami are all on the same side.
Commissioner Bower: I think so. I think your think you're doing a yeoman's job trying to get
this through, and I think that I will agree with you, that that is a fair -- I trust him, so I think --
his son lives in Miami Beach and I see him all the time, so I think that I would be happy with
something like that.
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chair.
Ms. Cuervo: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: The Chair has been -- is over with the Vice Chair.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would yield to the counsel, and then I'll --
Ms. Burke: I'd like a clarification of what you're suggesting. This -- what you're suggesting is in
no way a condition to our --
Chairman Teele: It is not a condition at this time --
Ms. Cuervo: -- to our proposal.
Chairman Teele: -- on this --
Ms. Burke: Because you know that there's no way we're going to be able to get financing --
Chairman Teele: I answered the question, counsel. This is not -- I am not -- my motion does not
make it a condition at this time.
Ms. Burke: What type of -- when you say come back to this Commission, obviously, since we're
working with the City on so many things, we will have visits back here. Are you just saying, if we
come back to change or increase the project?
Chairman Teele: No, what I'm saying --
Ms. Burke: Not for a minor change in the lease agreement or something like that.
Chairman Teele: What I'm saying is, we need to go ahead and study what Miami Beach wants,
and if they want and we want at the same time, we're in agreement with, we're going to work
with you on it, but I think right now, we're dealing with hypotheticals, and candidly, I don't think
there's going to be a whole lot there, but I think we owe it to the public to at least explore this
with them.
Ms. Burke: I understand. I just wanted to understand what would trigger when you said come
back before the Commission, if you meant --
Commissioner Winton: Anything.
Ms. Burke: -- specifically as to the site plan, but not some minor --
Commissioner Winton: Anything.
Ms. Burke: Let's say we came back with a first source --
City of Miami Page 139 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Why not (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Burke: -- hiring agreement (UNINTELLIGIBLE) ?
Commissioner Winton: We don't -- why would we want to restrict -- if we need it to come back,
we're going to use any trigger we need to get it back.
Ms. Burke: OK. I'm just -- I need to clam --
Commissioner Winton: Well, it can be anything: It could be a little minor thing.
Ms. Burke: -- what he said.
Commissioner Winton: You scratched your nail and you need our approval.
Ms. Burke: Anything, but the approval tonight is not subject to this?
Commissioner Winton: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: My motion -- I don't know how the majority of the Commission is going to vote
. My motion does not make it subject to that tonight.
Ms. Burke: OK. Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: But I think we need to show good faith with not only Miami Beach, but with the
public. There are a lot of people who live on those islands who are going to want to say that we
at least agree to study something and know what the devil we're dealing with down the road.
Ms. Burke: We agree with that, and we concur.
Commissioner Winton: So we have a motion and a second, and I have no problem with that, so
call the question.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Still under discussion.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I realize that all of us impact one another. Miami Beach impacts us
and we impact the beach. I mean, I also want to be in the spirit of being a good neighbor and
work on this issue, but I just want to state that I'm glad that it was put on the record that they're
not against this development. They're for it. I think it's one of the best projects that this City has
moving forward. It's a signature event that I think will turn City of Miami to an icon. Let me just
state that it does not stop the project from moving forward. The project continues. We're just
going to enter into an agreement and do a traffic study-- interlocal agreement to do a traffic
study and then, of course -- now, here's the question that I have, the concerns were mitigation,
no one has put on the record what those mitigations are.
Chairman Teele: That's what the study will do.
Ms. Burke: That's what the study --
Chairman Teele: That's what the study will do.
Commissioner Bower: That's what the study --
City of Miami Page 140 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The study's going to come back with mitigation --
Commissioner Bower: Yeah. That's the issue. That's the issue, that we don't know exactly what
could come, for not --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Bower: That's the point.
Commissioner Winton: And --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No further questions.
Commissioner Winton: Well, let me say one more thing, and I think I have a -- Madam
Commissioner, I think I have a reputation, at least in this City, that somebody's pretty
straightforward and everybody knows what I'm thinking. It don't hide anything. I will tell you:
You know the battle that you all had principally lead by your Mayor in opposition to Baylink.
Now, your Commission has voted in favor of Baylink, and it's now moving forward, and you and
I are serving on a committee together, but I can tell you unequivocally, I wouldn't have voted to
support anything you're suggesting had y'all continued to follow the Mayor's lead in opposition
to Baylink because Baylink, as far as I'm concerned, that -- mass transit is the answer to this
transportation crisis we have, and so -- so I'm trusting you to help us carry this forward in a
fashion where we do have a true real partnership and thinking about this, and I do trust you, but
I'm putting it on the record that I'm trusting you to make sure that you are our partner, and I
don't want some new battle ground created --
Commissioner Bower: On this issue, you can trust me. I will ask them to make me the liaison, if
that is your pleasure.
Commissioner Winton: Wonderful.
Commissioner Bower: I am also known for being very straightforward and saying what I think
when I think about it, so --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And a person of your word.
Commissioner Bower: I am a person of my word, and I hope that I can -- you know, I appreciate
that you're taking the time to do this. I think that we will come out with a much better project. I
think everybody in the end will be happy, and I hope you invite me, even though I might not be in
office any longer at your ribbon cutting, so that I can be with you enjoying the project. Thank
you. I hope you vote on that motion.
Commissioner Winton: And what's the study area by the way? Is it the whole causeway we're
really looking at here? I mean, it seems to me that if y'all are concerned, we need to be looking -
- this needs to look at the whole causeway, not just that little piece of it.
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Ms. Burke: But not just the impacts --
Commissioner Winton: Is that correct?
Ms. Burke: -- -- of our project, but all the impacts, correct?
City of Miami Page 141 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Oh, no, the whole cause --
Commissioner Bower: Oh, yes, yes, yes.
Commissioner Winton: Because if you're going to solve the real problem, you've got to look at
the whole impact of everything.
Commissioner Bower: Yes, yes.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Chairman Teele: And the beauty, Johnny, of all of this is this: This is a federal roadway. All
we've got to do is agree on something. 95 percent of it is going to be federally funded. I mean,
we're not even talking about the developer. The developer should really want to be on board on
this --
Commissioner Winton: I think they are.
Chairman Teele: -- if --
Ms. Burke: We definitely are. A comprehensive study would be wonderful.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Bower: Thank you, Chairman.
Commissioner Winton: You're welcome.
Commissioner Bower: Now, you have to vote. Vote.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Winton: All in favor --
Commissioner Bower: So I can go to my party. I had a party to go.
Commissioner Winton: Call the question.
Chairman Teele: Call the question, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay". Hearing
none, motion carries unanimously.
Commissioner Bower: Thank you so much. You were wonderful to be with.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
City of Miami Page 142 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Moving right along. What other item do we have? All right
. Public.
Mr. Maxwell: Wait a minute. Didn't we just vote on that?
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We voted on it.
Commissioner Winton: No, no, we only voted on the traffic study.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: On the traffic study. OK
Commissioner Winton: (INAUDIBLE) still? The middle of this thing.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. You all have been sworn in?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Listen --
Commissioner Winton: Two minutes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I'm going to -- for the sake of time -- and we have a voluminous
agenda --
George Basto: cIt's very short. I promise you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- please keep it at two minutes. And you know, if you become
repetitively -- all right, so Madam Clerk, could you time him two minutes, please. Sir, please
state your name for the record.
Commissioner Winton: Y'all close the door back there, please.
George Basto: My name is George Basto.
Commissioner Winton: We can't hear because the door's open. OK.
Mr. Basto: Ready.
Commissioner Winton: Speak -- pull the microphone up and get close to it, please. Thank you.
Mr. Basto: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, my name is George Basto and I live at 1000
Venetian Way. I'm here today to ask you to postpone consideration of the Island Gardens
project of Watson Island, with a reasonable amount of time, we can fairly address issues that
must be of serious concern to this Commission. I was invited to attend a meeting on May 26th
this year, where the Flagstone group presented its plans for the Watson Island. I live in the
affected community, and it was the first time that anyone had provided an opportunity for me to
learn about the details of this development. I am appalled and concerned that things are going
much too fast. My principal, personal concern has to do with traffic. It may turn out that there
is not a problem, but I certainly think that it is the duty of this City to inquire whether there may
be a problem and to relay the results of the inquiry to those who might be affected.
Commissioner Winton: Excuse me. Did you miss the whole last half hour?
City of Miami Page 143 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Basto: No, I heard the whole thing. I -- you know what, Commissioner, I'll be more than
happy to stop. I'm glad that you all decided to do this, you know, and I think it's important to
hear the people that live on this causeway, myself being one of the residents, and I think it's --
this study will -- you know, obviously, it's not necessary for me to do this, because it has already
been stated.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, don't read the wrote. I mean, deal with the real issues here.
Mr. Basto: So, I will defer to the next person.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, the study is advantageous to your cause. OK All right. Thank
you so much, sir. OK. Sir, please state your name for the record.
Michael Bryan: Hi. I'm Michael Bryan and I live on the Sandpiper Villas in Miami. I'm here,
Mr. Commissioner, to express my concern about the lack of guarantees for public access and
amenities for the current plans for Island Gardens on Watson Island. As you know, the 1949
deed for Watson Island makes it very clear that this Island is meant for the sole use of the public.
I'm hear to request of the Commission defer a final decision on this project until it asks the
developers to meet with representatives of the public and City officials in an attempt to assure
that the public access and amenities provision that Flagstone has proposed really would satisfy
the reasonable needs of the public. For instance, at a community meeting on May 26, attended
by some 50 people, when Flagstone presented the project to the affected neighborhood for the
first time, residents voiced concerns about restaurant prices, which would be out of range for the
average Miamian or tourist. In response, Joe Herndon, Project Manager, stated that, "Well,
they'll be some place for the cruise of the mega yachts to have a hotdog." Unfortunately, these
plans -- as we can see these plans in this project are for the wealthy developers to make profits
from wealthy people and apparently, only wealthy people. Available parking becomes a
deterrent for non -wealthy visitors. There's serious questions as to whether the adequacy of
parking and the fees charged are in line with what the average Miami citizen could pay. The
issue here is whether the City understood took to obtain a broad enough set of views from
interested parties to assure that giving up of public land, deeded for public use only, is really
going for the public, and that the public will have access that it can afford. We need to
remember the public is who is giving this land up, and to this private venture in exchange only
for access and in the event that they say they're going to have. I hope that a more open,
deliberative process in this matter can be undertaken before this City makes its final decision
and then one aside. It was stated that -- the Chairman stated that he hoped Miami was being
compared to New York. I grew up in Miami, went to a university here, moved to New York eight
years ago, and just moved back last month.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right, sir.
Mr. Bryan: New York is a wonderful City because of the fact that the five boroughs, which are
five cities, have combined together to protect the green land and the green spaces that make New
York a wonderful great City. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Sir, welcome to City Hall.
Eugene McManus: Hello. My name is Eugene McManus, and I live on Biscayne Island in Miami
. I am 83 years old, and every morning I walk one mile on Venetian Causeway because I want to
live to be 103 years old, and I am very concerned about making it because with the added traffic
and the construction going on right now. If this Watson Island Project goes through, without
further traffic study, God only knows if I can run fast enough to get out of the way of those fast
extra cars, and with no curbs on Venetian Island to jump up on. Mr. Commissioners, please
don't let them pull the wool over your eyes. Think about all of the old fogies who don't even have
a curb to our name on Venetian Causeway. Thank you for listening, and may God bless you.
City of Miami Page 144 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Victor Rones: Good evening. Victor Rones. I am the attorney for John Waterman, Nelda
DeArmus, and Lazaro Sanchez, the fishermen at Watson Island. I was fascinated to get the
document here that said, "We provided a lease with very favorable terms. " That was their
position. What they testified to at the last hearing before the Planning and Zoning Board. That's
what they keep saying. Yet, if you will look in the attachment number 9 of the document they
gave you, their attorney specifically say, "A binding sublease agreement with your clients is not
feasible. " They cannot do a sublease. They've never presented a sublease. We're trying to get
one. We've been trying to get one all this time. Indeed, we were the ones who moved to have
them come to mediation. What did they say? "We can't come to mediation. We're not a part of
the suit. We won't voluntarily show up until we're a party." Great, so we shoot him. Now, guess
what? We can't go to mediation. You want to know why? You'll shoot us. You asked us to.
Strange. We have very great problems. The original resolution and matters passed (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) allow us proceed would soon include a fish market. Not just afsh market.
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) the fish market. Casablanca and Dearmus.
Commissioner Winton: Who need -- when is that (INAUDIBLE).
Mr. Rones: We have here the last document. Rather than read the whole thing, I'm just going to
put it in the record. All it says is, "Come." The City's trying to get you to come to mediation to
resolve this. Come. And at least when you test, be correct. Where can I submit this? And I
am done.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: To the City Clerk.
Mr. Rones: City Clerk. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Next.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Steve Hagen: Steve Hagen, 725 Northeast 73rd Street, Miami. I had a prepared statement
before I came today, and I stopped off at Watson Island. Circling my mind are a couple of things
. Here we're developing Watson Island. If you draw a line over to the Performing Arts Center,
then go onto, let's say, the Lyric Theater in Overtown, then go over to Miami Arena, then go to
the American Airlines Arena, and go to Bicentennial Park, we're doing all these projects and
there's no master plan, so I don't know whether this is a good project or not. I don't know where
it fits into what this urban core of Miami is supposed to look like five or 10 years down the road.
I know one thing for sure, that Watson Island is basically ruined, in terms of any pedestrian
traffic. I was over there today. The only place that's really quiet on that island is on the north
side of Parrot Jungle because the building shields you from the six lanes of traffic delays. I'm
listening to the developer and they're talking about access and -- another gentleman is
concerned about the access to the building. Frankly, I don't care to go and have 200,000 square
feet of retail experienced on Watson Island, but I would like to go there and enjoy a bit of
walking around, and I don't know if the developer has been over there lately. Underneath the
expressway is a parking lot for school buses on unapproved coral rock with oil and so forth
running into the bay. If you go a just a little bit further, you get the beginning of the sidewalk
that goes to Parrot Jungle and knee high trash in the corner, on the sidewalk, you look over the
sea wall, trash is piling up on the shorefront. There's no access to the shorefront of Parrot
Jungle. I don't know why that wasn't in their lease. Is the developer proposing to build a
walkway around? I'm thinking that if people are coming with mega yachts from all over the
world and they park these yachts in fabulous cities like Sidney or Akland or some other cities --
City of Miami Page 145 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hagen: -- that they may want to have some place to walk --
Commissioner Winton: His two minutes are up.
Mr. Hagen: -- some place to walk besides the 200 foot of promenade.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, thank you so much.
Mr. Hagen: I want you to consider these things about access.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much. Point well made.
Commissioner Winton: Great.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Two minutes are up.
Ed Pascoe: My name is Ed Pascoe. I live at 185 South Hibiscus Drive on Hibiscus Island. I
have two concerns. One is the traffic that we've already discussed and I am really concerned
because the people on Palm and Hibiscus Island basically are prisoners to this traffic on the
causeway. I understand you're going to do this study, but I really would request that you defer
the project until the study's complete, rather than to continue. It's -- you know what the turn is
like at that -- I'm in that traffic everyday, twice a day, and my car sticks out into the traffic, and
cars are whizzing by at 60 miles an hour. It's very dangerous.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Pascoe: Thank you.
Jerry Chasen: Good evening. My name is Jerry Chasen and I live at 1000 Venetian Way. Thank
you for allowing members of the public to share their views with you, because Watson Island
project, as any Watson Island project would, involves more than a typical development decision,
and that's because Watson Island project involves space that was deeded for public use. Your
responsibility therefore is to make sure that the public's interest in access and amenities are
protected and enforceable. As currently written, the MUSP and the lease agreement, which it
sub -assumes, do not seriously again to meet that requirement. These problems may be
correctable but not under current timetable. I, therefore, ask the City to defer final judgment on
the project until it has met with the developers and outside interests to craft language that
assures and protects what has to be part of this decision, and that's public use. The issue is one
of intention and enforceability. As written, we have no standard for the public access or the
amenities. For example, how is the developer to be judged as to whether they're meeting their
commitment? And what consequences ensue if they don't meet their commitment? The only
remedy is the lost of their lease. A comparable highway example would be to -- we would be to
charge them with speeding when there's no posted speed limit and then say, because they were
speeding, they go to jail for life. This kind of scenario is unenforceable and probably wouldn't
hold up in court. To meet the public access and amenities requirement to lease this precious
public space, the Flagstone group has grandly proposed a Civic Arts Endowment Trust, but if, as
the saying goes, "The devil's in the details, " the details, unlike the devil, are nowhere to be found
in this proposal. I could go on, but the reality is, there's nothing in here that says specifically
what they're going to do, why they're going to do it, how they're going to do it, and how it gets
enforced by members of the public when they don't. Thanks for your consideration. I urge you
to defer making this decision today because there's way too much at stake for the public.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Sir, before you go, can we get the Sergeant -at -arms
City of Miami Page 146 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
to, you know, try to quiet the noise. I think it's very disrespectful when people are trying to make
their point. There's noise in the background. Sir, you're recognized. Please state your name for
the record.
Robert Zimmerman: Yeah. It's Robert Zimmerman. I live at 1000 Venetian Way, and yes, I am
concerned about my view, and I'm concerned specifically because this project's being granted
side setback variances for the tower and for the pedestal, and there's no hardship justification
for that, so -- but that being said, my issues with the project are far beyond the view. One of my
big issues is parking, in which -- in a way relates to traffic, but I don't possibly see how 1600
parking spaces for a residential and retail space that's almost the size of two Wal-Marts is even
possibly acceptable, but I said that to the Planning Board and they didn't say much, so I guess
you already know the numbers. I did want to say that, you know, when the public voted in 2001,
one of the things -- I guess I'm always tired of hearing for this project the public voted for this.
We have to do it because the public voted. Well, the public voted for a Maritime Museum, and
the Maritime Museum they're getting is -- I believe it's 4500 square feet of interior air-
conditioned space, and that's kind of like promising someone for Christmas, you're going to
bring them a luxury car and showing up with like a leather interior Hyundai. I mean, the whole
project to me is filled with issues like that, and I think, if nothing else, if you're going to build a
Maritime Museum -- and I voted to approve this. I feel stupid saying I did, but I did -- and I
think it should be able to look at cruise ships and but more than that, the parking and traffic has
to be addressed and the setback issues must be addressed. The project has all kinds of variances
that have no basis other than the developer just wants them. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Zimmerman: Appreciate your time.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Francine Liebman: Any name is Francine Liebman. I'm a resident of 1000 Venetian Way.
Thank you for the chance to share some thoughts with you today on the Watson Island/Island
Gardens Project. My purpose today is to ask you to defer decisions on this project until such
time as the public has had a proper chance to ask questions and obtain answers. It might just be
possible that the input you get from the public could be helpful in your decisions. Given the one-
sided nature of the presentation to have proceeded from the developer and the one-sided nature -
- thank you -- of the one-sided nature of the land lease agreement, you might well understand
why some of us are skeptical about the other features of this project. Since the release of the
MUSP and traffic studies in April, many of us have been busy educating ourselves on this
enormous project. It is new to us. 40 percent larger than the proposal put before the public in
2001. To me, one area of particular concern is the elevation of the project some 15 feet above
the bay. Initially, one could assume that the flood protection was the purpose. However, a quick
look around the Biscayne Bay basin at other buildings, including two projects that the
Commission recently approved -- the Children's Museum and Parrot Jungle-- suggest that the
elevation decision was not based on flood protection, so the reason must go to the return on
investment to the developer. Cementing over 10 acres and beginning at a height of 15 feet
requires explanation. Had the Flagstone group initiated contact with the community, especially
with the neighborhoods who are most affected, a fair and open discussion might have occurred.
Perhaps, you can arrange for that to be done now. Thank you very much.
Eleanor Kluger: My name is Eleanor Kluger, and I live at 1000 Venetian Way. Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners, staff, ladies and gentlemen. In 2001, I was part of the 65 percent majority that
voted for the Flagstone project. Certainly, Watson Island's valuable prime land should not
remain vacant, and no longer after all the City was poor and needed the income. The
neighborhood met before the vote and got a glimpse of what the proposed project was to look
like. The photo pictured two slim buildings, approximately 16 stories, and the other about 25
City of Miami Page 147 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
stories high, with a large open space between the two. A marina was also to be included. Even
though it would block some of the City's view, the majority of the residents favored what we
perceived to be somewhat like the Plaza Venetia and the Marriott marina complex, so this is
what we voted for, but the period between 2001 and 2004, about two and a half years, we heard
little or nothing about this project, until it emerged in front of the Planning Advisory Board to
acquire a major use permit, a MUSP. My, how it had grown. Mega size, mega yachts, and
mega bucks. The 2001 proposal called for 525 rooms; the new project increased that by 15
percent. The 2001 proposal called for an investment of about $281, 000, 000. The new project is
estimated to be $395, 000, 000, a 40 percent increase. The 2001 proposal called for 2,000
parking spaces, and if you'll see that on page 4, line 17. The new project contains 1,610 spaces,
a decrease of 20 percent in a project that is now much, much larger. On the face of it, the
project has changed dramatically.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Ms. Kluger, you're going to have to wrap it up. I'm sorry. Please.
Ms. Kluger: OK I'll finish this in a minute. -- and the City -- yet, the City -- neither the City's
Neighborhood Enhancement Team nor the developers ever reached out to the affected
communities, and I'll go to the last paragraph.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Please.
Ms. Kluger: In all fairness, I am sure the City followed every technical requirement it had to,
and that the amenities have been put in place as required, but there is more to it than that.
There is the traffic concerns, and of course the access to the wonderful amenities the developers
has shown us. Please give the process more time to see if we can overcome our differences.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much.
Ms. Kluger: You're welcome.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mariano, two minutes. You know the rules more than anybody here.
Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. I tell you, it's becoming harder and
harder to participate and come here. When I come -- at the 5 p.m. time certain, and it's already
7 o'clock and nothing, it cost an hour and a half overtime to leave my job at 4 p.m. to be here.
Although, you know, because you don't get paid, beaurocrats, you know, they get paid whatever,
regardless, you know, but going to Watson Island, I remember that Watson Island, the theme
park from Ferre, the whole thing, Jim Kilpatrick Zamora, Suarez and the whole thing, and the
referendum to -- before it was the Carollo amendment, and now with that (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
two, three years back, there was an election, a referendum (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that, in the
wording of that referendum was included a fish market. It's in the wording. Check the ballot of
those -- of that referendum, and I've been here with so many meetings and now Miami Beach
come here and get so much time -- Miami Beach, that they send homeless across the causeway to
Miami. You know, all that. They do all those kind of things. They want to still remember the
convention visitor's building for them, too? Oh, all kind of thing, and now we defer to them?
When you get to defer to the taxpayers here, that's been here since 4: 30, 4 p.m.? No, no, no, no.
I believe (UNINTELLIGIBLE) only thing, I believe in my Commission. I vote for you. I believe -
- I vote (UNINTELLIGIBLE) whatever --
Commissioner Winton: You voted for both of them?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Winton: How did you do that?
Commissioner Regalado: He moved. He moved.
City of Miami Page 148 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Cruz: In the Republican party, Commissioner, whatever it was there.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Cruz: Remember, Commission --
Commissioner Regalado: Remember what Constance Kaplan said, "vote absentee. Don't worry
about it."
Mr. Cruz: I was at the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) with the (UNINTELLIGIBLE), too (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) cemetery.
Commissioner Winton: His two minutes up.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much, Mariano.
Mr. Cruz: Thank you.
Colgate Darden: I promise, I'll make this quick.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You've got two minutes.
Mr. Darden: I'll make it quicker. My name is Colgate Darden. I live on 510 West Di Lito. I
come before the Commission with two hats. One as a board member of the Venetian
Homeowners Association, and basically, our main concern is that the traffic issues are
addressed. I mean, it's very simple. It's a big project. Our causeway is obviously going to be
affected (UNINTELLIGIBLE) backed up. My other hat is one as just an area citizen, and while I
feel that this project is unquestionably a very glamorous project that the area could use very
much, it is a curious choice for public property, and therefore, if you are going to make this
choice, you need to make extra sure that you're going to take a count for the public access and
the other issue that's people are bringing forward. I think that's your only duty, and if it means
deferring the project for a little bit longer, it's a small price. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Sir, did you wish to state -- OK Two minutes.
John Ballou: I'll take less time than that.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Mr. Ballou: My name is John Ballou. I live at 801 --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: John what?
Mr. Ballou: Ballou.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Ballou.
Mr. Ballou: -- at 801 North Venetian Drive, in the City of Miami. My concern and the concern
of a number of folks that I've spoken with has to do with the setback waiver provision. The City
Charter requires a 50-foot setback for any construction along waterside. This is being moved up
to zero basically. There is no evidence that we've seen -- and we've done some research on this -
- that there's any requirement on the part of Homeland Security to do this in this manner that
would require a waiver of that setback, so we're asking to see if we can get the Commission to
have the developer submit something to us to document the fact that this is a requirement by
City of Miami Page 149 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
home land security, this in fact waiver requirement, because at this juncture, rather than having
any setback at all, there's zero setback. In addition to that, they're looking for and expect to get
a waiver on having water level walkway, which is another part of the City Charter.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Ballou: Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much. Counsel, you reserve some time for rebuttal.
Maybe you want to answer some of the questions. Want to take some time to rebuttal on any of
the statements being made by --
Ms. Burke: Well, in order to save some time, perhaps the Commission --
Commissioner Winton: There are a bunch of people here also who want to testes on behalf of
the project, as well, so we haven't even heard that group.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, we haven't?
Commissioner Winton: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. All those in favor, that are going to be testing, have you
been sworn in? Raise your hand all those that are going to be speaking in favor of the project.
There's only two.
Commissioner Winton: OK, good.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. You have been sworn in? OK Sir, you're recognized. Two
minutes. Tucker Gibbs is in favor of something. Tucker Gibbs in favor of something. Oh, God,
I've seen it all. I've seen it all.
Richard Lampen: Commissioners, I'm Richard Lampen. The address is 100 Southeast 2nd
Street, Miami. I'm the volunteer Chairman of the board of trustees of Miami Children's Museum,
and I'm here in support of the Flagstone proposal because a successful hotel, retail and
restaurant complex next to the museum would be a real benefit to us. Miami Children's is the
closest, most affected neighbor by virtue of our location, immediately next to the project. We
have some special issues that need to be addressed. I hope you wouldn't have to trouble the
Commission and take any of their time but we've been unable to reach agreement with
Flagstone, but we appreciate Mr. Herndon's statements of the issues that they have considered.
We merely ask that these commitments concerning the Children's Museum be made in writing or
made part of your approval or at least put on the record. Our issues, which are unique to us by
virtue of our relationship is -- and I'll hit these very quickly -- one, Island Gardens wants to build
a road between the Children's Museum and their project. We need to reach an understanding
with them on the cost of this project, the landscaping, and various issues, such as drop off and
pick up locations and access to the Children's Museum. Secondly, they plan to build an elevated
roadway in front of the Children's Museum between the museum and the McArthur Causeway.
Again, we understand that there are issues involved in this related to the Florida Department of
Transportation. All we have asked is that we be part -- that we have a seat at the table in order
to try to work with the developer and the City to minimize the height of this roadway in front of
us. Third, we've asked that they establish a process to deal with parking insufficiency on Watson
Island. Fourth, they were going to be building a very large parking lot immediately adjacent to
the museum at a minimum, we have asked them to provide for the same landscaping on the side
facing the museum that they have provided on the side fronting on McArthur Causeway. Fourth,
we've asked them to work with us and the other residents of Watson Island on developing special
events, parking plan. Five, we've asked them to work with us on installing signages at
City of Miami Page 150 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
designated locations in their project to show handicap accessible routes from their project to the
Children's Museum. Six, we've asked them to assure us that the drainage from their project will
be retained within the Island Gardens property and not spillover into the Children's Museum.
Seven and last, we've asked them to work with us on providing us with a construction staging
plan, as well as security plans to the extent they can share those with us, because I understand
that they have homeland security issues, and that they would work with us in cooperate with us
in developing a mechanism by which construction vehicles, equipment and workers will be able
to function and do their job without disrupting the normal operations of the museum.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Dick. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. All right. Come
on, Tucker. You're not going to sit -- OK, counsel.
Ms. Burke: In terms of rebuttal, I think it would be helpful, since there were a lot of different
issues raised, if this Commission could give us some direction as to which, if any, of those issues
you would like us to address and we would be happy to do so.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. We don't want to leave anybody out from the public, so
we're going to close the public hearing. Commissioners. Commissioner Winton, you're
recognized.
Commissioner Winton: I have a series of issues that I think do need to be addressed, and
frankly, I don't know that we can. I'm just going to -- I'll put the issues on the table. I think the
issue relative to what's going on with Children's Museum are very important issues and we have
to figure out a way to get those resolved, and I don't know what that process is going to be, but it
needs to happen. Number two, issues related to Maritime Museum, which is now called the
Maritime gallery. Well, the ballot language calls it a Maritime Museum. I've never heard of a
Maritime gallery until recently, so that makes me -- I don't know what a means, so that makes me
nervous; never mind what the public's going through, so that's an issue that we have to deal
with, so we have to understand where the museum's going to be because positioning of that
museum is important. You know, it can't be in the basement as an example because that won't
work, so where the museum is going to be, how we're going to work that museum is a question.
This whole issue on water setback requirements tied to Homeland Security -- it's a first I've
heard -- I don't know what that is, but I would like to hear what that issue is all about, because
we do have in our Charter the requirement that we have the 50-foot -- and I know y'all have
much wider than 50 feet in a big part of it, but we need the right answers on the record so the
public understands. The -- I think we need a clearer definition -- I think it exists by the way, but
a clearer definition of this -- I forget what it's called. The civic arts trust or whatever that thing
is called, but that needs to be better delineated and then with staff, you know, this whole issue
over 1600 parking spaces for this project, I have a question about that and I want to hear more
about why we think that 1600 spaces really works for this project when you combine the visitor --
the retail, the hotel component and all the employees. I mean, I don't get that yet, so I --
somebody needs to help me with that math, and finally, and this is to all you guys on this side. I
know a lot of people on Venetian Island and that is not an island of irrational people. That's an
island of really -- and I've been over there many time, and I'm talked to the people over on that
island many times, and they're not irrational people, but, Joe, I've got to report back from two
people that I know well, that I trust, and I trust them implicitly, I trust their tone, I trust their
approach, and I will tell you guys, you guys screwed up big time, because there was a tone issue
related to that meeting, and how we answered their questions, and I don't think owe all did a
good job at all of dealing with the people's questions and issues on that island, and I will
guarantee you, if we would have done -- if you all would have done a better job upfront in that
meeting with those people, they wouldn't be here. Maybe a couple of people, because there's
always -- in City of Miami, we don't get a hundred percent of everybody in favor of anything. I
understand that. I'm prepared to deal with that, but I'm not prepared to deal with an issue where
we had a real opportunity and we blew it, and so I'm going to have some directive here, and I'll
give you guys a classic example. I'm sitting here because I asked Otto Boudet to put together --
City of Miami Page 151 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
he brought the original books out on the original Island Gardens proposal that won the RFP.
That document has what was in the RFP. I measured -- matched up RFP current lease. It
matches on four pages worth of issues, almost across the board with one significant exception.
One of the towers now has instead of 28 floor, has 38 floors, but I think that the footprint is
narrower, but except for that -- and I have them all here, and I went through the original book --
they don't understand that. They're not irrational people, but they don't understand it. They
think that it's something radically different, and I'll guarantee you that 90 percent of people
sitting here today wouldn't be here today if we would have given them good information, and
they deserve it, so one of the directives to you all is going to be -- and Joe, don't go to the
meetings, please. Y'all find somebody else that represents Island Gardens and go meet with the
folks at Venetian Island and you all from Venetian Island, I don't want to hear that you didn't
want to hear what's being presented. I don't want to hear that the irrational part took over the
meeting. I'm going to direct them to go visit with you all and I want them to provide you with
real documentation. This didn't come from them. This came from our staff, and I double
checked much of it, not every single piece, but pulled the original book out, which is this -- and
there's four volumes of this -- checking details, and it matches, so they need to hear that. The
issues related to Children's Museum, Maritime Museum setback, guarantees related to public
access and the Civic Arts Trust or whatever it's called. I think I'm calling it the wrong thing --
those are issues that I want to hear about.
Ms. Burke: First, as to the Children's Museum, Tucker Gibbs and I got together on Monday. We
had a wonderful meeting and we talked about a lot of issues. He put it together in a letter that
was sent to us late on Tuesday, but as you know, Wednesday getting ready to go off to
Tallahassee, getting ready for the hearing today, it was very hard to focus on being able to put
anything in writing, and making sure it wasn't something that wasn't going to come back and get
our lenders crazy, so we promised to work with them. We want to work with them. We
understand what their concerns are. Some of them, as it relates to the elevation of the road is an
issue that DOT is more or less taken out of our hands, because, you know, it's their roads, but
other than that, I think that we can resolve almost everything -- particularly now, Tucker and I
have a groove going, now that he's not in opposition --
Commissioner Winton: Counselor, you can resolve all these issues by when?
Ms. Burke: I think that we can certainly get things resolved within the next couple of weeks
without having to resort to any written declarations. Tucker's already agreed that that would be
a problem for the project.
Commissioner Winton: OK So you're saying two weeks. OK Next item.
Ms. Burke: OK. Maritime Museum -- I think perhaps what happened is the word galleries
sounded better, but it's still going to be with the South Florida Historic Museum who's going to
be putting together the exhibits that they want there, the museum is --
Commissioner Winton: Can we resolve the issues and --
Ms. Burke: -- clearly shown --
Commissioner Winton: -- and how the Historical Museum -- I would like to resolve those issues
and have the Historical Museum that's going to manage this space on board and we ought to be
able to get all those details worked out within two weeks, three weeks?
Ms. Burke: So, you want to see a copy of our signed agreement within two weeks?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, so that it's -- so that we know that it worked. The details are
worked out.
City of Miami Page 152 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Burke: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Burke: We will do that.
Commissioner Winton: In what time frame?
Ms. Burke: I would -- could we have three weeks on that?
Commissioner Winton: Three weeks.
Ms. Burke: You know, summertime people go away.
Commissioner Winton: Three weeks. Water setbacks.
Ms. Burke: Water setbacks. OK. As you know, the -- we have to put all of the INS and
immigration and all the facilities because we're having ships come in from foreign ports, and this
is just like a port, so all the security has to be there and it has to be in a secured area, so that all
has to go down on the water level, and so we're building the promenade above it, and so all
those underground things are actually within the setback. The second thing that's in the setback
-- and by the way, we did apply for a waiver of the Charter amendment. It's in the package. It's
one of the approvals under the MUSP, but the other things that are in it is a fish market because
it has to be right by the water for them to bring the fish up. The other thing that's in it is because
the security that's required for the port is underneath, they have to have this big tall tower to
look for the boats so that tower, the security tower and the chandlery for the boat, and we put --
since we had the empty space, we put the museum there.
Commissioner Winton: Do y'all have all this stuff on a rendering?
Ms. Burke: It's all in a rendering, and it was all detailed and outlined in our site plan submittal,
where everything's within --
Commissioner Winton: Where is it right now?
Ms. Burke: Would you like our architects to come and show it?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, why don't you find them and see if we can --
Ms. Burke: OK
Commissioner Winton: In the meantime, you can go to the next issue.
Ms. Burke: OK. So that, as I said, those are the only little things in this whole 100 foot setback.
There's no other encroachments.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Burke: OK. As to the civic arts trust. What this was, it was set up a lot of projects put in all
this beautiful art and 20 years down the road, it's deteriorated; they don't add anything new to it,
and what we -- we wanted to make sure that never happened to Island Gardens, so there's a
certain percentage of the profits from the project that go into this trust. Of course, we have to be
in operation, and that money is used to maintain all of the civic art, to add to it, and to make
sure that the island is always beautiful.
City of Miami Page 153 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Is this provision in the lease?
Ms. Burke: This -- I know it's in the RFP. I think it's in the lease, but I -- you know, it's --
Commissioner Winton: Is Otto here?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It is in the lease?
Ms. Burke: The answer is yes, Mehmet says absolutely.
Commissioner Winton: So -- but how did we end up letting them get away with making the
contribution be tied to profits, as opposed to gross revenue? Who the hell's ever going to prove
the profits?
Ms. Burke: Well, that was -- what was in the proposal and so it was determined that we would
go with what the proposal was. Alex -- I remember having discussions about it, now that you
bring it up.
Commissioner Winton: I don't remember, because I was involved and just so the public -- I
don't know if the public knows, but I've been -- the Mayor and I were involve intimately in a lot
of the detail negotiations relative to the lease and they were very intense. We spent a lot of time
at it. I suppose we've put in, the Mayor and I alone probably spent 20 hours on it, at different
times, so -- and I don't recall us discussing that particular piece about the formula for what goes
in, and maybe I've just forgot.
Ms. Burke: I know there was a discussion. It might have been with other staff members, but it is
in the lease and I believe it says profits. And this will be an ongoing thing. We'll fund the civic -
- the maintenance of the civic art in perpetuity.
Commissioner Winton: And how is that art fund going to be managed? Did we put that -- is
that determined?
Ms. Burke: It is -- there's a trust that's set up, that's made up of representatives, Flagstone and
other people. I think someone from the City. Other people appointed to it to oversee it, and let
me say it's a little loosy goosy because we haven't yet had the formation documents because we
haven't gotten going yet, but they will be documents that the City will see when we have it put
together.
Commissioner Winton: Are we going to get to approve -- is the City going to get to approve the
structure of this oversight committee, board?
Ms. Burke: If you would like to.
Commissioner Winton: I think we would, because I think we'd like to make sure that there's
some public people involved that probably would like to participate and could offer something
very valuable to the process.
Ms. Burke: I think you could.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Burke: And I think that we can state that that will be -- you will have the approval right to
join in with us.
City of Miami Page 154 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Lack of guarantees relative to public access. Now, here's the issue --
and I think -- we've talked about this kind of thing before, because we're not going to suggest for
a minute that Mehmet's going to close off the joint and disallow public access, but the point that
-- and I'm still struggling with this. I can't decide if I'm in favor or not in favor. The ultimate
penalty is, we can -- that you're in default of your lease -- you know, I heard somebody say it's
capital punishment. I'm in the management business. I'm in the real estate business. We have
lots of leases and leases have provisions in them, and those leases are enforceable and you, in
fact, can default somebody on a lease and you throw them out. Well, the developer has a huge
investment here. They don't want to be in default of their lease. If they go in default of their
lease, they go in default of their loan, and so there's lots of repercussions associated with going
into default, so I guess I've talked myself through this issue. I don't think that we have to have --
I think the default provision in the lease is fabulous. It is the best protection we can get, and I
don't think we'll be -- and trust me, as the public, when you trigger the default, they're not going
to stay in default, because it defaults their loan, it puts $400, 000, 000 in jeopardy and they're not
going to do this. I'm not -- I'm OK with that part of it. The parking and these other three issues,
and then I'm going to make a decision here, at least a recommendation. Parking.
Ms. Burke: OK. Can I just say one thing that we have stated on the record. If we ever have a
parking problem, we will park our employees on the main land --
Commissioner Winton: Where?
Ms. Burke: Bus them in.
Commissioner Winton: Where?
Ms. Burke: We will get a parking --
Commissioner Winton: That isn't so easy.
Ms. Burke: It might not be so close, but we have already stated on the record that we will do it.
We need to make the project work. We don't want an employee parking there if we're going to
have a shopper who's going to come -- just like when -- we don't want the public not to come.
We want them to come.
Commissioner Winton: OK I heard you, but explain this to me.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Just for the record, the requirements are 1553. That's all that's required by
Code, because, remember, hotels have a much smaller parking requirement than residential, and
they exceed by going to 1610, so they meet the Code. If they want to do other provisions or do
something else for employee parking, they can do that, but they do meet the requirements of the
Code.
Ms. Burke: Also, Julio just mentioned, that doesn't include valet parking, which, of course, is in
addition to that.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Ms. Slazyk: Valet spaces can't be counted in the required spaces. They could have another
couple 100 in valet.
Ms. Burke: We have the renderings available now on the setback issue.
Commissioner Winton: By the way, Judy, I saw in some print something from one of the
neighbors somewhere that -- or maybe this should be directed to staff. I saw in here, there was
City of Miami Page 155 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
something about we're going to allow them to develop this complex in some fashion that will
accommodate or build something in the complex that will accommodate 20, 000 people. Is there
anything about that in this proposal anywhere? I mean, ballroom space or something. I mean,
is there -- have you -- Don't frown, you know.
Ms. Slazyk: I haven't heard that number, and I don't know if there's -- if you were to open up the
garden areas with, you know, the public spaces, it could probably accommodate that many
people, but I don't think there's a single space that.
Commissioner Winton: Standing on each other --
Ms. Slazyk: No.
Mr. Herndon: No.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Slazyk: There's not -- I haven't heard that.
Commissioner Winton: So, there's no big ballroom. There's no like --
Mr. Herndon: There's no way to get 20, 000 people on this property.
Commissioner Winton: How big's the ballroom? Is there a ballroom?
Mr. Herndon: Yes, of course, but there's no way to get that kind of --
Commissioner Winton: How big is the ballroom?
Mr. Herndon: The total square footage of all meetings spaces 25,000 square feet.
Commissioner Winton: Of all meeting spaces.
Mr. Herndon: All meeting spaces.
Commissioner Winton: And those are disconnected or they're all --
Mr. Herndon: Some are together, but you'll never get that number of bodies (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Slazyk: No, I don't --
Commissioner Winton: That's what I'm thinking. OK The -- and there's a gentleman here
that's really interested in the rendering part. If you -- is this it?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: OK Show us.
Mr. Herndon: You remember, Commissioner, you may remember that these original proposals
that when Flagstone submitted the original response, their RFP was on September 12, 2001, one
day after the fatal events of September 11 th. That created a whole new series of events. When
we met with Homeland Security in the early part of this project, they told us that if we
maintained our access to the docks, at elevation 9, then they would declare that a secure area,
and they would not permit public access, so the rational for moving this up the additional 15 feet
is not only for the necessary service that goes to these boats -- because they'll be a lot of forklifts
City of Miami Page 156 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
and they'll be a lot of fueling and a lot of activities that create a liability and conflict with
pedestrian traffic, but it also is because Homeland Security would otherwise require a restricted
area with no public access, and this is one of the ways we go about providing the access. What
you're looking at in the drawing in the dark black on the left side of the drawing is the ground
level, where all the secure area is. We've also gone to the point of providing a 1, 000 foot
cascade fountain, the entire length of the property for the purpose of concealing what otherwise
would be an open lower level. This is what's presented to shoreline committee, as well as all the
other groups and was made clearly apparent to them and they have -- all the boards have
approved it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton, has your concerns been answered and
addressed?
Commissioner Winton: Well, here's what I want to do. Children's Museum, Maritime Museum,
and meeting with the residents, I just asked the Planning Director when the next logical point
would be that y'all would be back here, and there isn't a defined time, so therefore, I am going to
make a motion -- when's the next Commission meeting?
Ms. Sl azyk: July 8th.
Commissioner Winton: I'm going to make a motion to defer the decision on this to July 8th.
That's going to be two weeks, so Judy you've got two weeks, and you asked for three on Maritime
. I want these issues resolved.
Chairman Teele: I second the motion.
Commissioner Winton: So, I want these issues resolved. And I want the three things. Hold on.
I want the meeting with the residents. I want the issues with Children's Museum worked out, and
the Maritime gallery worked out, and at the next meeting, Mr. Chairman, I'm -- I don't want any
public testimony. There's going to be no public hearing. We've had all the formal testimony.
I'm going to assume that -- and I will talk to some of the residents that I know, and find out how
the meeting went, and I'm going to ask them and I'm going to ask you all, and I'm going to count
on them providing you all information and I'm going to count on you all having an open mind
and listening, and I've watch some of the faces out there out there's some, you know, I don't know
that I'm going to believe anything you say, and trust me, I ain't going to hear your voice, for
those people who have chosen not to listen and walk in with an open mind, so I'm giving you all
an opportunity -- and there's a lot of good people on that island. Get them to the meeting. Let
these folks -- Joe Herndon isn't invited, so you are not going to have to hear from Joe. You're
going to hear from somebody who's going to answer your questions politely, every single
question, and I'm going to expect you all to be polite to the representatives and ask the questions
and get answers, and then with the Children's Museum and the Maritime Museum, thing, you're
going to bring that back and we will vote. This whole process should take not more than ten
minutes at the next Commission meeting.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion with condition, and a second, and it's open
for discussion. Commissioner Regalado, you are recognized.
Commissioner Regalado: About two weeks ago, USA Today, which is the largest circulation
newspaper in the United States, had a front page article on the travel section regarding South,
and on the corner of the front page, there was Miami Children's Museum, and the article said
that Miami has become one of the major destinations because of amenities like the Children's
Museum. That is why I think that the gentleman that just spoke on behalf of the board of the
museum was half right and half Wong, because he said that your project will help the Children's
Museum. I say the Children's Museum's will help your project because it's on the map right now
throughout the United States. My concern with the Children's Museum is not that technical,
City of Miami Page 157 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
what Commissioner Winton ask in terms of, you know, meeting with Tucker and Tucker is very
technical, very meticulous, so it's not about height and size and color. My concern is that during
the construction period, which is going to be, I guess, long, somehow it would be difficult for the
people to reach the Children's Museum, to park on -- in and around the Children's Museum. To
me, the Children's Museum is one of the best deals the City ever made because we had the vacant
land. We didn't put any money, and now the majority of the visitors are City of Miami residents,
and the -- if you go to the museum and like I have, you see a lot of inner City kids, a lot of people
from the City of Miami visiting the museum, so I ask you to watch the way that, you know, the
construction and all that, because the museum must function, and then I will ask you something
else, which is nothing for you; will not add any burden to your accounts or -- every time that you
will publish some advertisement, which I'm sure you will, you just need to include next to the
Children's Museum in Watson Island, because I think, you know, for you, it's a signature project
of the City, and hopefully, this will continue to put the museum in the map.
The other question is, on the retail, we still have the plans for the fish market. We do?
Commissioner Winton: (INAUDIBLE) question.
Ms. Burke: Yes. It's not within the retail area. It's a separate fish market along the wharf.
Commissioner Regalado: Both the component of the fish market is still there?
Ms. Burke: Yes, it is still there.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Burke: I just wanted to say, as to the construction issues, those are issues that Tucker and I
have already discussed and so it will definitely be part of whatever agreement we reach. As to
the publication, we're going to try to include it. It might not be appropriate in all the things that
-- you know, things that we might advertise differently that reference to a Children's Museum
might not be appropriate, but we will look to insert it whenever we can.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but I'm talking about your brochures. I'm not talking about
you, you know, publishing some RFP for construction or something like that. I'm just talking --
Commissioner Winton: We've got to go to the next deal. We've got two more major ones.
Ms. Burke: Commissioner Winton, you said that there was an issue about when we'd be coming
back. We're on the agenda. We're coming back July 8th for an amendment to our lease.
Commissioner Winton: Well, you're coming back July 8th for two things now.
Ms. Burke: Right, so I thought maybe --
Commissioner Winton: Well, perfect. That works --
Ms. Burke: -- if you might want to approve it tonight, and then we come back July 8th and
resolve these other issues?
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no. You -- I -- I'll approve it on July 8th.
Ms. Burke: Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
City of Miami Page 158 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a motion. The motion further states
that there will be no further public hearing, and I want the record to be very clear to all parties:
There will be no further public hearing on the matter on July 8th. Would you like to ident a
time that it will not come up before? Let's agree now that it will not come up before 5 p.m, if
that's acceptable to everyone?
Commissioner Winton: Fine with me. I don't care.
Chairman Teele: Huh? It will not come up -- we're not giving -- you know, because we've given
people a time certain for 5 p.m., and those folks have been out there for 2 hours and 30 minutes.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: So, this item will not come up before 5 p.m., and this item will not have
additional public hearing.
Commissioner Winton: Correct.
Chairman Teele: On the motion, I've not said anything on this. I would like to say to
Commissioner Winton and my colleagues, I've listened very carefully to the people who would
like to defer the item, and I think they're some very good points, and I think there are some
points, candidly, as you've said, that ought to be disregarded. However, I think it's really
incumbent upon the developer and the development team to really take to heart the fact that we
have two entities on the island, specifically Parrot Jungle and the Children's Museum. I am
extremely concerned about having good agreements and good memorandums of understanding
between those two parties, particularly during the construction phase. I'm very concerned about
parking, particularly during the construction period, and I'm going to be asking in the next -- in
the final action for the staff to have certain conditions regarding and preserving and protecting
those two entities while we go forward, particularly during the construction phase, which could
be very prolonged, and I think we need to be very careful about this as we move forward, so I
would ask, respectfully, as a Commissioner, not as part of the motion, that you all meet
separately with Parrot Jungle and separately with the Children's Museum and see if you all can
get at least a memorandum of understanding on how the parking is going to work through the
construction period, and in the end. Is there further discussion on the motion --
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman --
Commissioner Winton: -- as made by Commissioner Winton?
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner --
Commissioner Regalado: On July the 8th -- this is a question for the City Attorney. On July the
8th, when we have an amendment to the lease, we could discuss issues like first source hiring,
organized labor, those issues can and shall be discussed, or they shall be discussed within the
framework of other permitting process?
Mr. Maxwell: No. That would be -- I think that would be something you'd have in the lease
agreement. A first source hiring is something that goes along with Major Use Special Permit as
well. The labor stuff you may want to put in the lease. I mean, discuss, discuss during the terms
of the lease.
Commissioner Regalado: So, that's what I'm asking. Within the framework of the lease or in
City of Miami Page 159 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
the permitting process?
Commissioner Winton: In the MUSP or the lease?
Ms. Burke: I just want to say, Commissioner Regalado, that has already been before this
Commission and it was approved and it's been executed. That came --
Chairman Teele: Excuse me.
Ms. Burke: -- two months ago.
Chairman Teele: Excuse me. I heard part of the testimony to go beyond the first source hiring
which was the issue relating to the labor piece agreement, and that would be a part of a MUSP.
Commissioner Winton: The who, the what -- the what agreement?
Commissioner Regalado: The labor piece agreement. The possibility for the workers to decide
whether they want to be part of a union in the future. It's a normal agreement whenever major
things happen, and I'm asking -- and this is why I'm asking. Does it come --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, he wants to know when you discuss that piece -- that issue.
Commissioner Regalado: When can I discuss that?
Chairman Teele: That has to -- I'm going to tell you. That has to be a part of a special use
permit. That does not flow with the lease.
Commissioner Winton: So, that would be --
Chairman Teele: If it's going to happen.
Commissioner Winton: So that -- Commissioner Regalado --
Mr. Maxwell: If it's going to happen.
Commissioner Winton: -- that would be on the MUSP deal that's deferred until next week.
Chairman Teele: That's what I said. What do you mean by repeating? What does that mean?
Mr. Maxwell: The language -- well, wait until it comes up.
Chairman Teele: It's a term of art language. It's not generic language. Those words are a term
of art. Mr. Ballou, did you -- I didn't hear all of your testimony. I saw you -- did you make that
very clear? All right. All right. All right. Well --
Commissioner Regalado: So, we'll discuss this on July the 7th?
Commissioner Winton: The 8th.
Chairman Teele: But -- well, let me tell you this, there will be no further public hearing.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: There will be no further public hearing, so whatever is on the record, is on the
record. What is not on the record is not on the record. All right.
City of Miami Page 160 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Call the question.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, are you satisfied?
Commissioner Winton: I'm perfectly satisfied.
Chairman Teele: Madam Attorney, do you understand what is being expected?
Ms. Burke: Yes, I do. At -- just the last thing that you mentioned, that is going to be discussion
when we talk about the lease next time, that we're going to discuss this labor agreement with the
Commission and staff ahead of time.
Chairman Teele: If one of the Commissioners brings it up, yes.
Ms. Burke: OK
Chairman Teele: Apparently, one of the Commissioners brought it up and I would recommend --
Commissioner Winton: Just be ready.
Ms. Burke: We will be ready.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Teele: On the question, all those in favor of the motion, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
Ms. Burke: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: The matter is deferred until not later -- not sooner than 5 p.m. on Thursday,
July 8th. Ladies and gentlemen, those of you leaving, please leave quietly. We're going to take
up the item that's were scheduled for 5 p.m. relating to --
Commissioner Winton: 26, 27, 28.
Chairman Teele: -- 26, 27 --
Commissioner Gonzalez: 27 and 28.
Chairman Teele: -- and 28, and let's --
Commissioner Regalado: About the moratorium on --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Which one is yours?
Commissioner Regalado: 26 is Angel, right?
City of Miami Page 161 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: 26, 27 and 28.
Commissioner Regalado: And --
Chairman Teele: Well, who has the 5 o'clock? Which one was 5?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have 5 o'clock.
Chairman Teele: See, we're dealing now with the 5 o'clock time certain.
Commissioner Regalado: Well --
Commissioner Gonzalez: And the moratorium was 6. We're an hour behind it.
Chairman Teele: The moratorium --
Commissioner Regalado: 6 Cuban time.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Huh?
Commissioner Regalado: Cuban time.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Cuban time. Mr. Chairman --
Chairman Teele: Lucia --
PZ.2 04-00644 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS,
APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT
PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 13 AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000,
FOR THE ISLAND GARDENS AT WATSON ISLAND PROJECT LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 950 AND 1050 MACARTH U R CAUSEWAY, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, TO BE COMPRISED OF TWO HOTEL BUILDINGS HOUSING 500
ROOMS AND 105 FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP UNITS WITH ACCESSORY
USES, 221,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE, 1,610 TOTAL PARKING
SPACES, 50 MEGA -YACHT SLIP MARINA AND ANCILLARY USES,
MARITIME GALLERY, AND APPROXIMATELY 6.5± ACRES OF PUBLIC
GARDENS AND OPEN SPACE; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL; MAKING
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING
FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 162 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00644 MUSP Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00644 MUSP Analysis.PDF
04-00644 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00644 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00644 School Brd Recomm.PDF
04-00644 Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF
04-00644 PAB Resos. P D F
04-00644 MUSP Application.PDF
04-00644 Variance Fact Sheet.PDF
04-00644 Variance Analysis.PDF
04-00644 Variance ZB Reso.PDF
04-00644 Variance Appl & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00644 Sp Ex Fact Sheet.PDF
04-00644 Sp Ex Analysis.PDF
04-00644 Sp Ex ZB Reso.PDF
04-00644 Sp Ex Appl & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00644 Plans.PDF
04-00644 Legislation.PDF
04-00644 Exhbit A.PDF
04-00644 Exhibit B.PDF
04-00644 Exhibit C.PDF
04-00644 - submittal.pdf
04-00644 - submittal a.pdf
04-00644 - submittal b.pdf
06-24-04 FIG City Commission MUSP Hearing -.ppt
04-00644 - submittal -2.pdf
04-00644 - submittal 1. pdf
04-00644 - letter of intent Museum.pdf
REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Island Gardens at Watson Island
Project
LOCATION: Approximately 950 and 1050 MacArthur Caseway
APPLICANT(S): City of Miami, Owner and Flagstone Island Gardens, LLC,
Contract Lessee
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Judith A. Burke, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with
conditions*.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to
City Commission on June 2, 2004 by a vote of 9-0.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval of the variance to City Commission
on May 10, 2004 by a vote of 6-3. Also recommended approval of special
exceptions to City Commission on May 10, 2004 by a vote of 5-4.
*See supporting documentation.
PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Island Gardens at Watson
Island Project.
City of Miami Page 163 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CONTINUED
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was
passed unanimously, with Vice Chairman Sanchez absent, to TABLE item PZ.2 to 3: 30 p.m.
today.
A motion was made by Chairman Teele, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, and was passed
unanimously, to instruct the City Manager to enter into a formal agreement with the City of
Miami Beach to do a new comprehensive traffic study of the area around the Island Gardens at
Watson Island Project, located at approximately 950 and 1050 Mc Arthur Causeway; further
requesting that the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) participate and fund said study; and further providing that the Island
Gardens at Watson Island Project will continue to move forward, and that any results of said
study shall be available to the Commission to impose as further conditions should this project
come back before the Commission.
A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Chairman Teele, and was passed
unanimously, to CONTINUE item PZ.2 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for July
8, 2004 at 5 p.m.; further requesting the developer to meet with the residents of the area and to
try to resolve issues concerning the Children's Museum and the Maritime Gallery site; and
further stating that there will be no additional public hearing at the July 8, 2004 Commission
Meeting concerning this matter.
(Minutes for PZ.2 are located under PZ.1.)
PZ.3 04-00576 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS,
APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION TO A
MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT, RESOLUTION NO. 98-1151, PURSUANT TO
ARTICLES 17 AND 22 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED,
FOR METROPOLITAN MIAMI PROJECT LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY
300 AND 200 SOUTHEAST 3RD STREET AND 200 SOUTHEAST 2 N D
STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO ALLOW A CHANGE IN THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION FROM 227,625 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL
FLOOR AREA AND 4,284 PARKING SPACES (AS MODIFIED BY
RESOLUTION NO. 02-1249) TO APPROXIMATELY 736,700 SQUARE FEET
AND 3,716 PARKING SPACES; AND TO PRESERVE THE 1,500 DWELLING
UNITS APPROVED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 02-1249; DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT;
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 164 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00576 MUSP Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00576 MUSP Analysis.PDF
04-00576 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00576 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00576 School Brd Recomm.PDF
04-00576 Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF
04-00576 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00576 MUSP Appl & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00576 Sp Ex Fact S heet. P D F
04-00576 Sp Ex Analysis.PDF
04-00576 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00576 Sp Ex Appl & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00576 Plans.PDF
04-00576 Legislation.PDF
04-00576 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00576 Exhibit B.PDF
04-00576 Exhibit C.PDF
REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Metropolitan Miami Project
LOCATION: Approximately 300 and 200 SE 3rd Street and 200 SE 2nd
Street
APPLICANT(S): MDM Residence, LTD; MDM Retail, LTD; and P&G,
Development LTD, Owners
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Gilberto Pastoriza, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with
conditions*.
HISTORIC & ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD: Pending
recommendation on June 15, 2004.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with
conditions* to City Commission on May 19, 2004 by a vote of 7-0.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* of special
exceptions on May 10, 2004 by a vote of 7-1.
*See supporting documentation.
PURPOSE: This will allow the modification of the previously approved One
Miami Project, also known as Metropolitan Miami Project.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0419
Direction by Commissioner Winton to finalize the parking and transportation plan and to
distribute same to the downtown merchants and residents.
City of Miami Page 165 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: One other housekeeping matter -- do we have all five Commissioners here?
When we get the fifth Commissioner, we would like to deal with the City Attorney, all right.
Madam Director, you're recognized.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): We're ready for PZ.3? PZ.3 is a
consideration of a Major Use Special Permit. Actually, it's a substantial modification to the
original One Miami Major Use Special Permit. This is for the Metropolitan project, located at
approximately 300 and 200 Southeast 3rd Street and 200 Southeast 2nd Street. The modification
is in order to replace the approved development program, with a new program that consists of
736,700 square feet, and 3, 716 parking spaces, and to preserve the 1500 dwelling units
approved pursuant to Resolution 02-1249. The Planning and Zoning Department is
recommending approval with conditions, and just as a couple quick housekeeping items for the
conditions. Condition 13 of the development order had required that the applicant appear
before the HEP (Historic and Environmental Preservation) Board before coming to the City
Commission. They have done that, so I would like to replace condition 13 with the requirement
that the applicant adhere to the Archeological Management Plan as approved by the HEP Board
in 2004. Also, condition number 16 required some additional traffic analysis, prior to City
Commission approval. They have also complied with that, and I would request that condition 16
be replaced with a condition 16A, that per comments by the City's traffic consultant, URS, that
the applicant shall limit truck deliveries to the hours between 7 to 10 a.m., and 3 to 6 p.m., and
condition 16B would be that the applicant is strongly encouraged to commit to a TCM,
Transportation Control Measures Plan, subject to review and approval by the Planning and
Zoning Director, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and that that plan comply with
Section 14-182 of the City Code, again subject to review and approval. Other than that, the
project was recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board; recommended for
approval by the Urban Development Review Board. It is a well -designed mixed use project,
right in the heart of downtown, in the Dupont Plaza area, and we would recommend approval.
Gillberto Pastoriza: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is
Gillberto Pastoriza, 2665 South Bayshore Drive, 4th Floor. I fully support your staffs
recommendations. We are ready to give you a long presentation with this project. I think you're
very familiar with the project. I would like to read a statement into the record that I agree with
one of our neighbors, the Crescent property, a Mr. Jeff Bass, that I would read into the record,
and the statement is as follows: "The applicant agrees to work together with our neighbors,
Crescent, the City, and DOT (Department of Transportation) on issues dealing with parking,
staging of construction, and traffic circulation, which will protect access and traffic circulation
in our neighbors facility." I am -- I can go forward with a presentation, if you think that it's in
order. If not, I would urge you that to follow your recommendation from your staffing, your
boards and approve this application. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: We have any opposition? Do we have any opposition?
Chairman Teele: Are there any persons here in opposition to this item, PZ.3? Are there any
persons here in opposition? If not -- Go to the microphone, please, if you're here in opposition
to PZ.3. Give us your name and address for the record, please.
Mary de Gunzburg: My name is Mary de Gunzburg, and I live at 45 East Delito Drive, Miami
Beach. I'm just going to state the obvious. I don't really see how the greatest geniuses could
figure out a way, but not to be stopped dead traffic in the area, if you go ahead with this plan.
What do people in the Venetian Islands do if they have to have an ambulance --
Commissioner Winton: Excuse me. I think you're talking about the wrong project, ma'am. PZ.
3, it's a project in the heart of downtown Miami.
City of Miami Page 166 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. de Gunzburg: Sorry.
Commissioner Winton: Not that we're going to agree with you on your point about the other
one either, but --
Chairman Teele: Are there any other persons here in opposition? If not, the public hearing is
closed. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Lourdes, this is kind of an aside, but -- since we have Gill here also.
Have we done anything to pull the three major developers, which is George and -- you know, the
three major developers of those three projects together, including some of the other property
owners to develop a Comprehensive Plan for parking and transportation?
Ms. Slazyk: I think Gilll could probably answer that better, but our office of transportation has
been doing that, and Gilll could probably answer.
Mr. Pastoriza: Yes. We're all working with your City, Mary Conway, your consultant, Mr.
Plummer, and not only us, the three big developers, Wachovia, Crescent, but also Dupont, the
Hyatt. Everybody's working --
Commissioner Winton: Because what you get -- what y'all need to do -- and you've read it, I've
read it, I've heard it -- but there are certain real estate brokers who make their money by moving
tenants around. That's how they get paid. You know, they don't get paid if the tenant stay in the
same buildings. They get paid if they can move them around, and some of the brokers from some
of the bigger firms, in particular, have been making these giant pronouncements that when
construction starts on all three of these projects, that there will be absolute 100 percent gridlock
downtown, so therefore, nobody's going to be able to get to their existing office, and blah, blah,
blah, blah. What we need to do is get that plan finalized as fast as we can, and we need that plan
announced.
Mr. Pastoriza: OK
Commissioner Winton: So that the tenants, who are in existing buildings, don't have to hear the
propaganda coming from the brokers, who are going to make a buck by moving the tenant to a
new building.
Mr. Pastoriza: If I could, Commissioner Winton. As you know, we're phasing this project out,
and one of the tracts is going -- we're going to have a bid -- Tract B first, Tract D--
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Mr. Pastoriza: -- and then Tract C. All of the construction staging for our project is going to be
done internally, within one of the parking lots for the two first parcels.
Commissioner Winton: But you still are -- but the three of you do need to be very coordinated,
and we need a -- it isn't just about -- it's about Georges, it's about Hugo, it's about yours, and
that message needs to be delivered to all of the building owners downtown and the tenants
downtown so that they're crystal clear that this is going to turn out real well.
Mr. Pastoriza: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: I would.
Commissioner Winton: OK I would move PZ.3, with staff recommendations.
City of Miami Page 167 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: We have a motion and a second. Further comments? Did you have any
comments? Mr. Attorney. All in favor, say --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): It's a resolution.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's a resolution.
Chairman Teele: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you.
PZ.4 04-00650 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS,
APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT
PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5, 13 AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO.
11000, FOR THE 500 BRICKELL PROJECT LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY
550 BRICKELL AVENUE AND 41, 47, 51, 57, 59 AND 65 SOUTHEAST 6TH
STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE COMPRISED OF TWO 42-STORY
TOWERS HOUSING 633 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH
RECREATIONAL AMENITIES, 20,497 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL, AND 857
TOTAL PARKING SPACES WITH THE TWO TOWERS BEING CONNECTED
AT ROOF LEVEL; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT
AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING
EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00650 MUSP Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00650 MUSP Analysis.PDF
04-00650 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00650 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00650 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00650 MUSP Application.PDF
04-00650 Sp Ex Fact Sheet.PDF
04-00650 Sp Ex Analysis.PDF
04-00650 Sp Ex ZB Reso.PDF
04-00650 Sp Ex Application.PDF
04-00650 Variance Fact Sheet.PDF
04-00650 Variance Analysis.PDF
04-00650 Variance ZB Reso.PDF
04-00650 Variance Appl & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00650 Plans.PDF
04-00650 Legislation.PDF
04-00650 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00650 Exhibit B.PDF
04-00650 Exhibit C.PDF
City of Miami Page 168 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the 500 Brickell Project
LOCATION: Approximately 550 Brickell Avenue and 41, 47, 51, 57, 59 and
65 SE 6th Street
APPLICANT(S): The Related Group of Florida, Beneficiary and City
National Bank of Florida, Owner as Trustee
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Adrienne F. Pardo, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with
conditions*.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with
conditions* to City Commission on June 2, 2004 by a vote of 7-0.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* of the special
exception to City Commission on May 10, 2004 by a vote of 8-0. Also
recommended approval with conditions* of variances to City Commission on
May 10, 2004 by a vote of 8-0.
*See supporting documentation.
PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the 500 Brickell Project.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
R-04-0420
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.4 is a Major Use Special Permit
for the 500 Brickell Project. This is at 550 Brickell Avenue, and 4147, 5157, 59 and 65
Southeast 6th Street. This project is a -- comprised of two -- 42-story towers, with 633
multifamily residential unit; it has recreational amenities, 20,497 square feet of retail and 857
parking spaces. This was recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board. It was a
unanimous recommendation. It was also recommended for approval by Planning and Zoning,
with the conditions in your package. The conditions include, their Archeological Monitoring
Plan, and a transportation control measures plan to be approved by the Planning and Zoning
Director. Other than that, it was recommended for approval. It's a very well designed project.
The buildings connect at an upper level, and it's going to be a very unique looking building for
Brickell Avenue. We recommend approval. We recommend approval with conditions in the
package.
Commissioner Winton: Any opposition?
Lucia Dougherty: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221
Brickell Avenue. Here today --
Chairman Teele: Who's the architect on the project?
City of Miami Page 169 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Dougherty: Architectonica, Bernardo Fort -Brescia. He's the architect. It's a very beautiful,
exciting project.
Chairman Teele: We heard that from the staff. Staff rarely says it, this is a beautiful project,
and so subjective.
Ms. Dougherty: And we agree with all the conditions.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there anyone here in opposition? Is there anyone here in
opposition? If not, the public hearing's closed. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Lucia, could I ask you one question and staff, too, I guess? You know,
when I looked at the picture, this particular wall on -- what is that, 7th or 5th or whatever?
Ms. Dougherty: That's 5th and 6th. It's in between 5th and 6th.
Commissioner Winton: 5th and 6th -- that hides the parking structure that hides the parking
structure, and you're -- that wall seemed to bother me. I mean, it seemed like a big wall that was
out of character with what we've been doing along Brickell, and -- but this is only the picture, so
I can't -- maybe there's something that I'm missing here, but it just didn't -- it didn't seem like it
had the right feel to me, so can y'all --
Ms. Dougherty: Well, it's a very urban area. We do have arcades and retail on the ground floor
. That particular wall is actually -- if you didn't have that wall -- in other words, unless you -- if
you put program behind it, the parking garage would be 15 stories tall, so that's -- we thought
that bringing the parking garage down and actually making it a very beautiful sculptural wall
and having arcades and things on the street level would actually --
Commissioner Winton: And see, that's what you can't see from any of these pictures. You can't
see the street level, at all.
Ms. Dougherty: Correct.
Commissioner Winton: And that's what I was trying to -- I was trying to get a sense of what that
street level would feel like, but the pictures don't reflect it.
Ms. Slazyk: The big deal with us was the Brickell Avenue frontage. There, there is no parking.
We made them bring liner all the way down, so from Brickell Avenue frontage, you won't see any
of it, but the rest of it, it's a very -- it's an artistic articulation over the parking garage, but we
really wanted lines all the way around like we insist with the larger sites, but there was no way to
make this work without going to, you know, full elevator parking.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, and this is a --
Ms. Slazyk: It just wouldn't have worked.
Commissioner Winton: -- very narrow site.
Ms. Slazyk: Very narrow.
Commissioner Winton: But you're comfortable with the -- the street treatment to me is very
important because the whole Brickell Village concept is to get people out of their cars, and
walking to the restaurant, walking to dry cleaners, walking to wherever they have to walk to, and
so this is a long narrow site, so that frontage on 5th is going to be crucial, and how that's treated
is going to be crucial, and I can't see what's there --
City of Miami Page 170 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Commissioner Winton: -- which is the only reason I'm questioning this.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. If you look at the ground level floor plan, you'll see that they've got program
on the ground level, and they've got this big area in between the two buildings, where you've got
like pass -through loading, so there's no loading exposed to the street. With this narrow site, is
they had -- I think they did a very good job of articulating what they had. The other reason why
that was not objectionable to us is that 5th and 6th are both very narrow streets.
Commissioner Winton: Very.
Ms. Slazyk: A pedestrian only perceives up to a certain height. You can't get far enough away
on these streets to see all of that. It's -- from a distance, where it will be seen, but then it will
look more like an artistic wall because of how they articulated it.
Commissioner Winton: OK, so I'll move with staff recommendations.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
PZ.5 04-00388a RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), DENYING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING
BOARD, THEREBY GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000
, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, ARTICLE 9, SECTION 908.9, TO ALLOW A WATERFRONT
YARD SETBACK OF 10'0" AVERAGE WHERE 20'0" AVERAGE IS
REQUIRED, AND WITH A 10'0" MINIMUM WHERE 15'0" MINIMUM IS
REQUIRED, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY
500, 510 AND 520 NORTHEAST 29TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A."
04-00388a Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00388a Appeal Letter.PDF
04-00388a Analysis.PDF
04-00388a Zoning Map.pdf
04-00388a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00388a ZB Reso.PDF
04-00388a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00388a Plans.PDF
04-00388a Legislation A.PDF
04-00388a Exhibit A.PDF
04-00388a Legislation B.PDF
04-00388a Exhibit A.PDF
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
City of Miami Page 171 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
R-04-0421
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ. 5 is an appeal of a variance. This
is for the property at 500, 510 and 520 Northeast 29th Street. This is for the Moon Bay Project.
You've actually already heard an appeal on this property, and you had recommended to uphold
the Zoning Board and grant the variance. This is a very narrow piece of property. The
applicant had two variances, and they had been bifurcated through the zoning approval process.
The first one had been approved by Zoning Board, appealed to the City Commission, and the
City Commission upheld the Zoning Board and granted the variance. This is the other side of
the project. It's exactly the same project you already saw. At the time, this came to you before, I
told you that you would be -- that there was a variance coming forth for the other side, which is
the waterfront side. We recommended approval of the variance, finding that there is hardship.
This is one of those cases where we want the liner; the property's very narrow; the requirements
here are very difficult to accommodate parking and liner without this variance. It's also along
the water, which we would like the liner -- oh, they're not here. The appellant's not here? Well,
anyway, we recommend upholding the Zoning Board and granting the variance.
Commissioner Winton: And granting the variance, you said?
Ms. Slazyk: Granting the variance, yes. It's a much better project, urbanistically with the
variances.
Chairman Teele: All right. Where are the two parties?
Lucia Dougherty: I don't believe they're here. Gloria Velazquez, of my office, is on her way,
and I don't see the appellant here at this time.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is the appellant here? Whose district is this in?
Commissioner Winton: Mine.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton.
Chairman Teele: It's a public hearing. Is anyone here that would like to be heard on this item?
If not, the public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Winton: Can we act without them here?
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It was properly advertised.
Commissioner Winton: Move PZ. 5, with staff recommendation.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Motion to approve staff recommendation. Is there objection?
Ms. Dougherty: And that's a denial of the --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): This is an appeal, so it would be --
Ms. Dougherty: -- denial of the appeal.
City of Miami Page 172 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: Denial of the appeal and uphold the variance.
Mr. Maxwell: -- a denial of the appeal.
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Commissioner Winton: OK That's what I move.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, state the motion.
Mr. Maxwell: This would be a motion denying the appeal and upholding the decision of the
Zoning Board, granting the variance.
Chairman Teele: Acceptable to the maker of the motion and the seconder. If not --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Accepted.
Chairman Teele: -- all those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: All right. Now, hold on. I've got everybody telling me what to do. Who is
Attorney Dickman? You need to be out here. Mr. Attorney, we have Attorney Dickman, who is
here, who arrived late for PZ (Planning & Zoning) Number 5, and the Chair is going to
recognize you, Mr. Dickman, to put any comment on the record that you would like to regarding
PZ. 5.
Andrew Dickman: I appreciate that, Mr. Chair. Again, for the record, Andrew Dickman, law
offices at 9111 Park Drive, Miami Shores, Florida. This was placed in my calendar at 3 o'clock,
and I apologize. It was difficult getting here. I represent Mr. Redondo, the adjacent property
owner. This is on the Moon Bay LLC item, and our position is that the variance is not warranted
. It does not constitute a hardship that the bay walk provisions that are found in the coastal
element of the Comprehensive Plan, and other areas dictate that shrinking the area between the
waterfront on Biscayne Bay and the property is not warranted in this case. I do have some
goals, objectives and policies that I will put into the record, to the Clerk, and if I can, I would
just like to site those goals, objectives and policies real quickly.
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Yes. No, no. Hold on one minute. Counsel, we're not going to take any
documents from you, at this point.
Mr. Dickman: OK
Chairman Teele: We allow -- we recognize you for the sole purpose of making any statement
that you wanted to make --
Mr. Dickman: OK
Chairman Teele: -- to explain your absence or tardiness or whatever. I was only trying to
City of Miami Page 173 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
protect the record. Counsel -- Madam Clerk, you're directed to return those items back to
counsel. Now, don't get -- don't --
Mr. Dickman: No, no. I -- so you just want to hear why I was not here?
Chairman Teele: No. I just wanted to allow you to make a very brief statement that you might
want to make regarding your tardiness, and just something very brief for the record, but I'm not
going to let you put on a case now.
Mr. Dickman: I need two minutes. That's all I need, real quickly.
Chairman Teele: That's about all you're going to have, sir.
Mr. Dickman: That's all I need.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah, but -- Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Dickman asking that these items be included in
the record for that item?
Chairman Teele: I told -- I have ruled that we are not going to take any documents from him.
Mr. Maxwell: All right. As long as he understands that.
Chairman Teele: And that case is closed. I'm recognizing him for a personal appearance, at
this point.
Mr. Maxwell: I understand that. I wanted -- I was going to make sure Mr. Dickman
understands that clearly, what happened -- what your rights are.
Chairman Teele: The case is gone, locked. The only way we can even afford you any
opportunity -- counsel, you know the rules. The other counsel's not here. This is an ex parte
discussion --
Mr. Dickman: I understand.
Chairman Teele: -- that you're being afforded as a courtesy to you, based upon your tremendous
service to this community.
Mr. Dickman: OK
Chairman Teele: But don't get me in trouble by putting a whole lot of stuff on the record.
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Chair, I would not ask to do that. In fact, if -- and I think counsel, I did see
her here a few minutes ago. If the opportunity would be available to reconsider this item, I
would be happy -- I would very much appreciate that. Otherwise, I would just state that we
object; that we -- that the variance granted did not constitute a hardship because it is on the bay
side. It's on Biscayne Bay and we believe that it violates the Comprehensive Plan, as well as
certain aspects of the Zoning Ordinance.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, you would have to make that request to us, if you wanted to
do that.
Mr. Dickman: I am making that request.
City of Miami Page 174 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Are you making that as an official request to this legislative body?
Mr. Dickman: I would very respectfully ask that you reconsider that item, if other counsel is
here.
Chairman Teele: The only thing that could happen today, the most that you could hope for --
and I doubt you'll get it -- would be a motion to reconsider, and then it would have to be set for a
hearing at a later date. Couldn't be reconsidered today. We've already acted on that.
Mr. Dickman: Once again, my --
Chairman Teele: I mean, we don't know who from the public was here or not here, that would
have spoken if you had come up to speak. I mean, that's what the whole purpose of notice is.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't believe there was anybody in the public opposing it.
Chairman Teele: But we don't know that, and notice requires that you not assume that, I mean,
with all due respect. In other words, notice is opportunity to be heard, and once the case is
finished, it's finished, but then it has to be renoticed.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But in all cases -- in all cases -- not to argue your point, but in all
cases, you -- the Chair, in this case, asked whether there's any opposition to that -- and there
wasn't any opposition on the record.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but see, he's in opposition.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, but he got here late.
Mr. Dickman: We're the appellant. We're the appellant here.
Commissioner Winton: I think we need -- we've got a very big agenda.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: Very big. We're going to be here until 3 o'clock in the morning and --
Chairman Teele: You're correct. You're correct.
Commissioner Winton: -- I don't know understand why we're debating.
Mr. Dickman: But I asked for --
Chairman Teele: You've got two minutes to just make any statement you'd like --
Commissioner Winton: I thought he made it.
Chairman Teele: -- but not as it relates to this case. Not to put on your case, in chief, but to
preserve the record that you weren't here; why you weren't here, and the fact that you would be
asking that the case be reopened.
Mr. Dickman: Again, for the record, Andrew Dickman, representing Alex Redondo. The reason
I am not here, because it was put in my calendar at 3 o'clock; all subsequent hearings before this
have always started at 3 o'clock. For some reason, the calendar changed to 2: 30; was not
registered in my calendar, and that is the reason I wasn't here. I was here a few minutes before
3 o'clock. The crowds outside here -- you could see the building is very crowded. Took me a
City of Miami Page 175 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
while to get in. I didn't hear that it had actually been heard, until the Hearing Boards notified
me that it had actually been heard, so I would again respectfully -- I see counsel is here from the
applicant -- if this could be reconsidered and rescheduled, I would very much appreciate it.
Chairman Teele: Counsel, do you object to it being reconsidered and renoticed?
Gloria Velazquez: I just want to clam whom he represents. He stated on the record Alex
Redondo?
Mr. Dickman: That's what it -- Aurora Brito Redondo.
Ms. Velazquez: So you represent Aurora and not Alex?
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Redondo.
Ms. Velazquez: You stated just a few seconds ago --
Chairman Teele: Hold it.
Commissioner Winton: Wait, wait, wait.
Ms. Velazquez: -- a few seconds ago that he represented Alex.
Chairman Teele: You all go out of this room and have this discussion, lawyer to lawyer, as
members of the Bar --
Mr. Dickman: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: -- in an appropriate way, OK, and I'm going to tell you this: If I were in your
shoes -- no, I won't say that. I won't say that.
Unidentified Speaker: It's a small shoe.
Chairman Teele: That's a small shoe for me.
Chairman Teele: Now, where's the matter of Mr. Dickman, and counsel, did you all reach an
agreement on anything? Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Velazquez: Gloria Velazquez, with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. Although we would
love to agree, but I cannot agree to a reconsideration at this point. I'd be harming my client,
especially in court.
Chairman Teele: All right. If there's no -- if you all don't have an agreement to reconsider, then
that's the end of that. Counsel, you know what to do from here, right?
Mr. Dickman: Yep.
Chairman Teele: OK. Thank you very much.
PZ.6 04-00450 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND
DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF AN ALLEY
LOCATED BETWEEN NORTHWEST 20TH STREET AND THE MIAMI
CANAL, WESTERLY OF NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, MORE
City of Miami Page 176 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A."
04-00450 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00450 Plat & Street Cmte Recomm.PDF
04-00450 Public Works Recomm.PDF
04-00450 P&Z Dept Analysis.PDF
04-00450 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00450 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00450 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00450 Applciation & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00450 Legislation.PDF
04-00450 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00450 - submittal - 10.pdf
04-00450 - submittal.pdf
REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of an Alley
LOCATION: An Alley Located Between NW 20th Street and the Miami
Canal, Westerly of NW 27th Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Rollins, Inc., Owner and Aguaclara, Ltd., Contract Purchaser
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Anthony L. Recio, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval on February 5,
2003 by a vote of 5-1.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on April 12,
2004 by a vote of 8-0.
PURPOSE: This will allow a unified commercial development site.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0422
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ. 6 is an official vacation and
closure of an alley located between Northwest 20th Street and the Miami Canal west of 27th
Avenue. It was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Department; approval
by Public Works, approval by Plat and Street, and a unanimous approval of the Zoning Board to
grant it. This is a case in which we believe that the dedication of the public easement from
Northwest 20th Street to and along the entire length of the Miami River on the property is a
public benefit, and it complies with the criteria, and we recommend approval.
Commissioner Winton: Whose district is this? Is this Angel's? OK.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is the applicant here? Are there persons in opposition? Let's hear
from the Public Works Director. You want to put your recommendation on the record?
Stephanie Grindell: Stephanie Grindell, Director of Public Works. Public Works recommends
City of Miami Page 177 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
approval.
Chairman Teele: Have you talked to the Planning -- where's the Planning Director? Madam
Planning Director, you know, I am sick and tired of the street closures -- alleyway closures in
which the City seems to get no real benefit, other than perhaps a development, and I'm going to
formalize a request to you to see if there's some greater benefits that we can get from the City
with these alleyway closures in the future. Probably two or three years from now, may be a part
of the master plan review, maybe, but we really do need -- this doesn't affect you, Gil. I know
you're --
Gilberto Pastoriza: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: And we've been saying it all along.
Chairman Teele: We've been saying it all along, and it's just -- you guys all come and smile
politely, and get your street closure and move on, but we really do need to look at some other
incentives or perhaps benefits that the City can achieve. We're giving -- in some cases, we're
giving away huge tracts of land and very valuable land for no benefit from the public, and this
has no relationship on this application and this outstanding lawyer.
Commissioner Winton: And it creates --
Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: It creates huge additional value for the developer.
Chairman Teele: For the developer.
Commissioner Winton: Because they can build a much bigger, much different project than they
can build if the streets are in the way, and so I, too -- you know, we've closed a lot of streets, and
we've done it on purpose; we've done it by design, but we've also tried every single time to make
sure we get something back from the public benefit standpoint. I mean, it's a -- I agree a
hundred percent.
Chairman Teele: And I had one discussion with the Planning Director and her staff, and one of
the issues came back with maybe some creative ideas on historic preservation, so let's begin to
look aggressively at that and see if we can move something down the road, but again, this does
not reflect on your client or you --
Mr. Pastoriza: I understand.
Chairman Teele: -- in any way.
Commissioner Winton: But maybe there's an adoption of a park or something, and this is
Angel's district, and he might want to think about some new conditions on this street closure.
Chairman Teele: And it needs to be a part of a rational scheme, though. It just can't be --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- just because you're before us, we're going to do it, but we're using you as an
opportunity to discuss this among ourselves. Gil.
Mr. Pastoriza: I think -- Mr. Chairman, if I could, Commissioner Winton, I think that you would
see that this application is a little bit unique, in the sense that the developer on this application is
City of Miami Page 178 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
giving away more than what he's seeking. I've --
Chairman Teele: We're not talking about the application, Gil.
Mr. Pastoriza: Oh, OK.
Chairman Teele: We're talking about the broad principle --
Mr. Pastoriza: OK
Chairman Teele: -- that, in the future, maybe a year from now or two years from now, we're not
just going to be closing streets like this. We're trying to lock the door and, in the future, when we
begin to close streets and alleyways, we're going to be looking for some clear public benefit over
and beyond the street closure, and as Commissioner Winton just said, maybe it could be some
improvements to a park, or adoption of a park, or it could be maybe some historic preservation
kinds of -- but it would have to be a part of a broad regulatory scheme, and we recognize that.
Mr. Pastoriza: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: On the motion -- on the item, is there a motion to --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. I'm going to move to approve the street closure, and the way I
look at it is that there's going to be a City benefit --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second for the purpose of discussion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- and a public benefit, both, and the reason is that you're not familiar
with this piece of property; I am. It's in my district. It's right at the corner of Northwest 27th
Avenue and 20th Street. It's a lot that has been abandoned for the last 12 years, probably. It's
contaminated. That's where there used to be Orkin Exterminating Company. As a president of
the Chamber of Commerce, I spent, I don't know how many years trying to find someone to invest
in this property and to do something productive of the lot. Well, now we have a company that is
-- when I say is going to be benefit to the City and benefit to the public, they're talking about
building a project, which is going to consist of affordable housing, and that is going to be a way
to serve the public, and at the same time, they're going to be paying taxes to the City of Miami.
Right now, we're probably collecting almost zero to the City coffers, so based on that fact -- and
another reason is that this is a road that goes to -- I call it a road to nowhere, so based on all
that, I move to approve the street closure.
Chairman Teele: We have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? Are you on this item?
Tucker Gibbs: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I was out at the Clerk's Office signing up. Could I just
place my client's objection into the record, for the record?
Chairman Teele: On the street closure.
Mr. Gibbs: On the street closure, yes. It's very brief.
Chairman Teele: Of course.
Mr. Gibbs: My name is Tucker Gibbs. I represent the Miami River Marine Group, Beau Payne
and others. We object to the alleyway abandonment, because it would allow the construction of
a building that's out of character with the neighborhood. Alleyways have an important purpose
in planning. They limit the size of buildings. This is the reason why we're opposed to it. We
think it's out of character with the neighborhood, and with that, I thank you.
City of Miami Page 179 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Point well made for the record, counsel.
Mr. Gibbs: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me add to that, that I don't know what neighborhood the counsel is
referring to, because there is -- at this time, there is no neighborhood over there. What you have
is a marina; supply business on one corner, a furniture store on the other corner, a junkyard on
the other corner, and this empty lot, so you know, the nearest house to this property is about 3,
000 feet, probably 5, 000 feet; five blocks or six blocks away.
Chairman Teele: On the motion --
Commissioner Gonzalez: But the counsel is not familiar with the area, so I -- you know, I can't
accept his statement.
Mr. Gibbs: I grew up here in Miami. I'm very familiar with it.
Chairman Teele: Counsel, do not get into an argument. You wouldn't argue back and forthwith
a judge, would you? No.
Mr. Gibbs: If someone made a comment about my lack of knowledge of the area, I might, at
least to make the record straight.
Chairman Teele: He said the counsel. Are you the counsel?
Mr. Gibbs: Yes, I'm the counsel. They said the -- I mean, he meant the attorney, did he not?
Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those oppose have the same right.
Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
PZ.7 04-00567 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT,
CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC
USE THAT PORTION OF EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE EAST END OF
BATTERSEA ROAD AT BISCAYNE BAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A."
City of Miami Page 180 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00567 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00567 Plat & Street Recomm.PDF
04-00567 Public Works Letter.PDF
04-00567 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00567 Aerial Map.PDF
04-00567 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00567 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00567 Legislation.PDF
04-00567 Exhibit A.PDF
REQUEST: Official Vacation and Closure of Easements
LOCATION: East End of Battersea Road at Biscayne Bay
APPLICANT(S): Linda Murphy, Owner
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLAT & STREET COMMITTEE: Recommended approval on July 3, 2003
by a vote of 5-0.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on May 10,
2004 by a vote of 6-2.
PURPOSE: This will allow a unified residential development site.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0423
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.8 is a request for a modification of
a covenant for 2947-49 Southwest 22nd Terrace.
Commissioner Winton: PZ (Planning & Zoning) what?
Chairman Teele: 8.
Ms. Slazyk: This is the Latin American Cafeteria.
Commissioner Winton: Where's 7?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): PZ --
Commissioner Regalado: Why is 7 -- 7. What happened to 7?
Commissioner Winton: What happened to 7?
Ms. Slazyk: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I jumped.
City of Miami Page 181 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ. 7.
Ms. Slazyk: PZ. 7 is an official vacation and closure of an easement located at the east end of
Battersea Road of Biscayne Bay. It's been recommended for approval by Planning and Zoning,
Public Works, Plat and Street Committee, and by the Zoning Board. Like I said, this is not an
alley or a street closure. It's an easement. It's a 12-foot wide easement between two properties.
Jan A. Yelen: Jan A. Yelen, 1104 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, representing the
property owner, Linda Murphy.
Commissioner Winton: Any opposition?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there any opposition on this?
Chairman Teele: Is there anyone here in opposition? Is there anyone here in opposition? If
not, the public hearing's closed.
Commissioner Winton: Move PZ. 7.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right. The item is unanimously adopted.
Ms. Yelen: Thank you.
PZ.8 04-00522 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO A DECLARATION OF
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ("ZONING COVENANT") DATED SEPTEMBER 28
, 1992 AND RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 15663, PAGE 0716-
0720, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2947-2949
SOUTHWEST 22ND TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN
ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A", IN ORDER TO AMEND CERTAIN SECTIONS OF
THE COVENANT IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED THEREIN.
04-00522 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00522 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00522 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00522 Applicant Letter & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00522 Legislation.PDF
04-00522 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00522 - submittal.pdf
REQUEST: Modification to a Covenant
LOCATION: Approximately 2947-2949 SW 22nd Terrace
City of Miami Page 182 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
APPLICANT(S): Judy Galindo, Owner
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Ben Fernandez, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial.
PURPOSE: This will allow a modification to an existing covenant.
CONTINUED
A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was
passed unanimously, to CONTINUE item PZ.8 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled
for July 22, 2004.
Direction to the City Manager by Commissioner Regalado to provide the attorneys on both sides
of PZ.8 a copy of the plans that Public Works and CIP have for 22nd Terrace near the Aston
Project; further requesting the attorneys to meet with City staff to be briefed.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Now PZ.8. I'm sorry. Modification
for the covenant at 2947-49 Southwest 22nd Terrace. This is the Latin American Cafeteria
property. The current covenant requires that the -- there be a wall placed 20 feet back from the
setback line up to Southwest 22nd Terrace. The properties located across the street are zoned R-
2. The requested modification is in order to move the wall all the way to the property line, and
the second request is that the current covenant allows no vehicular ingress or egress onto 22nd
Terrace, because it is a residential area, and the request is to allow an egress only on the 22nd
Terrace site. We are recommending denial based on findings that those conditions were put
there in order to protect the residential area from the effects of commercial intrusion and
commercial traffic, and that the proposed modifications could result in adverse impacts on the
neighborhood.
Chairman Teele: Are there persons here in opposition?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes, your Honor.
Chairman Teele: All right. Counsel.
Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Good afternoon, Vicky Garcia -Toledo, with offices at the Wachovia
Center. I'm appearing here today on behalf of Mr. Raul Galindo, property owner of the subject
property, and this is a vacant lot at this point in time directly behind the Latin American
Cafeteria. To give the Commissioners a bit of history, in 1992, the property was owned by Luis
and Raul Galindo brothers. However, Mr. Luis Galindo was in possession of the property and of
the business. The two brothers were at the time litigating over business rights. Mr. Luis Galindo
brought the application forward and proffered a covenant with certain requirements. The
execution of that document was handled by the litigation attorneys on both sides. In the last 12
years, very significant changes have occurred. For one, Mr. Luis Galindo has passed away and
his brother, Raul, is in possession of the property. Further, there has been a series of changes in
the neighborhood, which have occurred with the development of a high-rise building directly
next to his property. Several houses around 22nd Terrace have been -- are being used for
commercial ventures. During my client's walk of the area, she found that there is one house that
has been converted into a recording studio; another one into some type of sewing school, et
cetera, and their front yards have been turned into paved parking areas, and so, when Mr.
Galindo -- Raul Galindo took over the property, his wife, Judith started to operate the business,
and unknown to her -- and she apologizes for that, having no knowledge of the previous
covenant -- she took down the wall on the property. That resulted in a Code Enforcement case,
City of Miami Page 183 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
and she attended the Code Enforcement Board and asked for time to come before you to amend
the covenant, consistent with the circumstances and the characteristics of changes that have
occurred. At this time, we would agree to put the wall back up, but instead of putting the wall 20
feet into their property line, to put the wall at the front boundary of her property, next to the
sidewalk, and to allow an opening that would permit only exit -- as an ancillary point of exit
from the Latin American Cafeteria. As you all know and probably have experienced, Latin
American Cafeteria fronts on Coral Way. It's the access point, as well as the exit point is all
from Coral Way. Once in a while, as cars are trying to maneuver inside the parking lot to exit,
there is back up into Coral Way, and it is in moments like this where we need to have a
secondary scape to facilitate the movements of vehicles. We are therefore requesting that you
allow us to move the wall 20 feet forward to their property line, which would allow them to have
additional parking, and to have an opening on that wall that would only be a secondary
ancillary exit on the site. That is basically our proposal. We have submitted a covenant into the
public record. We have sent that covenant to the Law Department for approval, as to form and
correctness, and that covenant would be an amendment to the original covenant, and it would be
recorded in the public record and binding on the property.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there anyone else that would like -- on support of the application?
If not, can we hear from those persons that are opposed?
Sky Smith: Yes, sir. My name is Sky Smith. I'm here on behalf of the neighbors on 22nd Terrace
that live there. It's specifically Omar and Omilia Fernandez and some other people that are
present here, whose names I'm not familiar with. They've asked me just to state to the
Commission that they are opposed to any further adjustments to this covenant. This covenant.
This covenant was originally instituted to change a residential to a commercial use, and it was
done specifically to give the residents there some protection and some buffer from the
commercial operations that would eventually, over the course of time, take place, and such has
taken place. We've already heard that the wall was torn down, and that the landscape area has
been eliminated and it's been paved over, so what the residents of -- along 27th Terrace now are
dealing with is that they're right in the heart of a commercial operation, not only are cars going
in and out in front of their homes, but now, as I have been advised, the personnel that work at the
Latin American Cafeteria are parking along 22nd Terrace in the swales and in front of their
properties, so the situation has gotten exacerbated rather than maintains itself. The neighbors
are asking that this Commission not that -- this Commission not to grant any sort of modification
. Covenants are done for specific reasons, and those reasons haven't changed. I would suggest
that they are unilaterally changing the character of this property over the course of time is
somewhat an offense to the neighbors, and I contend with this Commission's understanding of
restricted covenants. The neighbors have asked me to express their opposition to this.
Chairman Teele: Are there any other persons in opposition? If not, counsel, you'll be afforded a
reasonable amount of time to rebut.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you, chairperson. Basically, I would like to show you some pictures
of how this residential area has changed. This is the actual development that is next door to the
Latin American Cafeteria and fronting on 22nd Terrace. We also have submitted into the record
a signed petition by 21 residents of the area who are in support of this change that we are
bringing before you. He is correct, that the wall was taken down and the landscaping was taken
out. I have apologized for that on behalf of my client. She was unaware of the existence of the
covenant. In fact, she was -- not the only person who was not aware of the covenant, since once
she started to take down the wall and demolish the property, a NET (Neighborhood
Enhancement Team) inspector came by and said, this is fine. You do need the parking. All you
need to do is go to the City and pull a permit, and it was in her efforts to pull that permit that she
found out about the covenant. Further, I can also say that the reason why it has stayed the way
it is
City of Miami Page 184 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me, excuse me. Did you say a NET inspector? NET doesn't
have inspectors.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: This was a few months ago, and when --
Commissioner Regalado: A few months ago, NET didn't have inspectors.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: When the Code Enforcement team was still part of NET, so that's what I'm
referring to, but an inspector came back. They didn't know. I mean, these covenants are done.
They're put in the public record, but normally rank and file individuals don't have access to that
kind of information. We certainly are not questioning the existence of the covenant and the fact
that my client, without knowledge, did violate it. All I'm saying is that when she tried to put the
wall back up, she couldn't do it because when there is a pending Code Enforcement violation on
a property, the property owner is not allowed to pull permits, and in order to move the wall
forward, then we needed to come -- and -- before you to change the covenant so that that wall
could be moved forward 20 feet. Now, let me explain. The wall, in the previous covenant, was
required to be put not on the client's property line, but 20 feet back on their front yard. That's
what the covenant called for. What we're asking now is to be able to move that wall, when we
rebuild it on the property line, so that whatever space is there, can be on the inside of the wall
and serve for additional parking for this business. Let me also say that this business, at this site,
employs 25 neighborhood residents -- excuse me, 65 neighborhood residents, who are current
employees of Latin American. This business has been on this site. They will be celebrating their
30th anniversary at that location, come October of this year. Most of the people, if not all of the
people who live there, purchased there after this use was in place. The other Latin American
Cafeteria that is on 27th Avenue and which employs approximately 95 City of Miami residents
will be closing its door in about 9 to 10 months, as a result of a new development project that
was approved -- actually, a Major Use Special Permit that was approved for that site by this
Commission about six months ago, so we already have 95 people losing their jobs. We have 65
other residents who work at this site, who need to maintain their jobs, and I would respectfully
request that you would approve just a -- the wall moving to the property line, and just an
opening for ancillary, secondary exits from the site.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Mr. Smith: I 'm sorry, Commissioner. If I might, this might assist the Commission in some way.
I've just been advised that the neighbors don't fully oppose the wall being moved, if it allows for
a compromise and some indication of their business. What they object to is the ingress and the
out -- and the -- of the cars on to that street, and have asked me also to state that this 22-story
building that they referred to, as some sort of a precedent, also came before this Commission
asking for access to 22nd Terrace and was turned down. I'm just repeating what's been told to
me, so perhaps there is a compromise.
Chairman Teele: Do you understand what he's saying?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: No, sir.
Chairman Teele: Why don't we recess this item; give you all 15 minutes. We won't take up any
big item, and why don't you all use the Commissioner -- if Commissioner Regalado would let you
use his office --
Mr. Smith: That's fine, your Honor. That's fine, Commissioner.
Chairman Teele: -- to meet. Why don't you all meet and see if we can come to a closer --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Absolutely.
City of Miami Page 185 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- decision on this, OK?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Teele: All right. We're going to recess this item.
Commissioner Winton: No ingress/egress.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, that's what it really gets down to.
Chairman Teele: All right. Now, we have PZ.1 and 2 that we'd like to be in a position to take up
next. PZ.1 and 2, but before we do, Commissioner Winton's off the dais right now. Before we
do, is there any other matters that any Commissioner would like to take up before we get into PZ.
1 and 2?
Commissioner Regalado: Let's -- I -- Mr. Chairman, you sent --
Chairman Teele: Yes, we did deal with this issue. Where is Mr. Dickman?
Commissioner Regalado: No. No, no, no.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
Commissioner Regalado: He's not -- no. He's the attorney for the -- I just want to understand
something here.
Chairman Teele: What item are we taking up now?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I believe it's number 8.
Mr. Maxwell: PZ.8.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: PZ.8.
Commissioner Regalado: PZ.8 is --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: You heard my presentation and the presentation from opposing counsel.
Commissioner Regalado: -- the modification of a covenant, and I just --
Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to need a little cooperation. We recessed
PZ.8, correct?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Correct.
Chairman Teele: So we're going to come back to PZ.8 at this time. Commissioner Regalado,
you're recognized.
Commissioner Regalado: I just wanted to understand what -- are you representing some
neighbors?
Mr. Smith: I represent neighbors, yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: And where do they live? Do we know --
City of Miami Page 186 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Smith: These are the neighbors directly behind the Latin American Cafeteria. They face the
parking lot.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Mr. Smith: You know, they're directly behind --
Commissioner Regalado: And you said you have some neighbors.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We have a petition that was signed by 21 neighbors, that is part of your
record, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: So, you all are aware that because of the Aston Construction, there
was an agreement made by the City to redo 22nd Terrace, and that the oversight bond had just, I
think, yesterday or the day before yesterday approved some of the quality of life funds of District
4 to fix 22nd Terrace. That -- according to what the residents wanted when we had the public
hearing at that time during the project, would eliminate parking, most of the parking in the swale
areas in 22nd Terrace. I just want to make sure that the residents -- because one of the
complaints that you said was that the employees were told to mark on 22nd Terrace and --
Mr. Smith: I'm advised that employees are parking there. Commissioner, I have no personal
knowledge; it's what I'm advised.
Commissioner Winton: Microphone.
Mr. Smith: I'm sorry. You're right.
Commissioner Regalado: So can I ask you what are you proposing, other than moving the
wall?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We Would like to have an opening in the wall. We would reconstruct the
wall, either at 6 or 8 feet of height; CBS block wall at the front of the property, facing 22nd. We
would put landscaping outside of that wall in whatever space is left between the sidewalk and the
wall, and we would ask for an opening for vehicular exit only, right turn only.
Commissioner Regalado: One of the things that I think is -- it doesn't have that great
importance, but about 9 months ago, there was -- almost a year, there was an opening in this
wall, and I called the attention of the Zoning Department and they told me that there was a
covenant because the neighbors came to my office with a copy of the covenant, so after long they
did find the covenant, and I told them that they -- that the residents were complaining about the
opening. Just because of that, somebody has told residents that we are against the Cafeteria,
which is a signature business in our area, and I think it's something wrong, and my problem, my
very big problem is, first of all, the covenant was never respected since the day that they were
told that they were in violation and they kept that open, and second, we keep having complaints
of cars coming in and out on 22nd Terrace, none of the projects that have been approved on 22
nd Terrace have an exit on 22nd Terrace. I can understand perfectly moving the wall because
you need parking spaces. That, I can understand, moving the wall. I could even understand
having an opening, but that opening cannot be used for entering and exiting the place. I
understand the problems that we face in Coral Way. There have been some accidents there
because of the narrow entrance and cars exiting, but I have a problem by using 22nd Terrace as
entering point, exiting point for the Latin American Cafeteria.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, my client totally agrees with you in terms of entrance. She
doesn't feel that that's an adequate site to have an entrance from 22nd.
City of Miami Page 187 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: It's being used now as entrance.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: The problem is that she -- you may not know, but when her husband took ill,
and she had to take over the business, she had no idea of the existence of this covenant. She
admits that she did not know of it and took down the fence. She got an demolition order and
took down the house and the fence. It was wrong for her to do it. She just did not know that it
was prohibited at the time that she did it. When -- then she found out about it and tried to fix it,
as long as there is a Code Enforcement violation hanging on the property, she cannot pull a
building permit to pull up part or all of the wall or anything, so that's why we're before you. We
need to change the covenant. We would like -- and we thank you for agreeing, and I think the
neighbors agree, they don't have a problem with it moving forward because it would allow us to
pick up parking. The only other thing we would request is a small opening so we can have exit
only, and by making -- opening a vehicular size opening that will prevent any vehicles or
anything from coming in. We did perhaps do something -- I mean, signage to say no entrance,
you know, whatever you think.
Mr. Smith: Commissioner, we've met with them; we've offered a compromise of extending the
wall. We even offered to allow them to come back to the Commission at another date after
speaking to the neighbors and saying, if they can convince them, apparently all of this is falling
on deaf ears. It's basically what Latin American Cafeteria wants or the highway, and they just
want this -- they want the wall moved and they want an egress from the business. The neighbors
that I've spoken with, that have asked me to be here are absolutely completely objecting to any
sort of entrance or egress from the wall; although they tried to -- they were agreeable to
extending the parking lot, if that would help the problem.
Chairman Teele: All right. Let me tell you what we're going to do.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Excuse me.
Mr. Smith: That's it.
Chairman Teele: Hold on. With all -- ma'am, are you a new player to this?
Commissioner Winton: She's the applicant, I think.
Judith Galindo: I would like to speak for a moment.
Chairman Teele: Are you the applicant? No, ma'am. The public hearing has closed, at this
point, with all due respect. You want to put your name on the record, just so that you're here.
Commissioner Winton: May I weigh in also?
Chairman Teele: Your name and address for the record.
Ms. Galindo: Yes. My name is Judith Galindo.
Chairman Teele: And your address?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I can see an agreement in the sunrise.
Chairman Teele: I think what we need to do is recess this item to the next regular Commission
meeting.
Ms. Galindo: If I may just --
City of Miami Page 188 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. Hold on. Just hold on. Just hold on. The public hearing process
has ended at this point. We will recess this item unless the Commissioner objects to July 8th.
We'll bring it back as a special item on July 8th. We will reopen the public hearing, if necessary,
and allow you the opportunity to speak at that time. Would that be fair?
Commissioner Winton: Well, I could -- I'm ready to do something right now.
Ms. Galindo: What I'm going to say --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Respectfully, Commissioner --
Commissioner Winton: This isn't that hard.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I am scheduled to be out of town on July 8th.
Ms. Galindo: What I'm going to say is so simple.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, yes, so am I.
Ms. Galindo: And we're here. With all due respect --
Chairman Teele: But we don't have a motion. See, the --
Commissioner Winton: May I weigh in for a second? Maybe -- and Commissioner Regalado,
tell me to --
Ms. Galindo: May I?
Commissioner Winton: You're free to tell me whatever you want, but this isn't very difficult for
me. I mean, this is pretty simple. The neighbors agreed to move the wall back, and if I were the
neighbors, I would demand -- I would be, in addition to allowing that wall to move back, I would
be demanding some standards relative to that wall, what it looks like, those kind of standards,
standards related to the landscaping, I would demand that, if you're going to agree to move the
wall back. The ingress and egress on to 22nd Avenue is a no-brainer. It ought to be no, zero, no
. There's no way to enforce whether the cars are coming in, going out, how many cars are going
to come out. It is -- and I will guarantee you, I don't care what's posted; I don't care what it
looks like; I don't care about any of that jazz, as soon as you put an opening on the wall, as
many cars as can are going to go out onto that residential street and that's bad public policy, so
in my mind, this one was -- is real easy. I would deny an opening in the wall, and I would put
some standards on what the wall looks like and allow them to move it back.
Chairman Teele: The problem with this is, this is in a different district and we've got to hear --
Commissioner Winton: I know, but I told -- that's why I told Commissioner Regalado he can tell
me to be quiet. I just wanted to put my opinion on the record.
Ms. Galindo: May I offer --
Commissioner Winton: On the record so that he understood it.
Chairman Teele: Look, we've given you all ample opportunity for you all to meet. We expected
you all to walk in here, both smiling and agreeing on something. If you can't agree on it, then
we're going to have to hear from Commissioner Regalado to see exactly how he's recommending
that we do it. Obviously, the five of us are free to vote our own conscience, but at least we defer
City of Miami Page 189 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
it to the district Commissioner, at least in framing the issue for us, but everybody's free to vote
their own conscience.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Do you have a property next to -- is that property next to Latin
American, owned by the restaurant?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Fronting Coral Way?
Commissioner Regalado: Huh?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Front -- you mean on the front -- on Coral Way?
Commissioner Regalado: Fronting Coral Way.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: It belongs to a different company, but the principals are the same, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I understood.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes, and there is a sign that says additional parking for Latin American
Cafeteria.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, I'm going to violate my own rules. The owner is so eager to
speak. If it's all right with you ma'am, would you like to just say whatever you want to say on the
record, please?
Ms. Galindo: I apologize, and I thank you. I understand that there was a problem, and I'm one
million percent guilty of it, without knowledge. I sincerely did not know there was a covenant.
As a matter of fact, I didn't even know what a covenant was until this arised -- arose. I have
tried to do good by it, and as she explained to you, I was blocked because of the legalities of it.
I'm not going to sit here and argue with you that I deserve anything. I am at your mercy. I am
begging you for our business. We need exit, at least. We don't want entrance and exit because
we understand that the neighbors have a concern, and we want to comply with their needs, as
well, because we are neighbors, but we're begging for an exit. We are willing to comply that no
trucks, no large delivery trucks are allowed there, by that making a shorter exit so that only
vehicles can go out through there. We're even more than willing to adopt it some way so that we
can regulate it so that only exit is permitted.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Defer.
Commissioner Regalado: Look --
Commissioner Winton: But that actually is part of the issue.
Chairman Teele: I think this ought to be deferred. I really --
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I think --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, Vice Chairman Sanchez.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I think that the two attorneys should take a look of the
plans that Public Works and CIP (Capital Improvement Project) have for 22nd Terrace, because
City of Miami Page 190 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
they do not know what those plans mean for the street. I would ask Alicia to provide information
to both attorneys about 22nd Terrace project near the Aston, which finally was approved by the
Oversight Board last Tuesday afternoon. After that, they meet -- they can meet with staff and,
like the Chairman said, we'll bring this back on the first Commission meeting. Like I said, I do
not have -- the second, you say, because you --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I'm scheduled to be out of town during the week of the 8th.
Mr. Smith: As I am.
Commissioner Regalado: No problem.
Chairman Teele: Vice Chairman Sanchez. He's --
Commissioner Regalado: And --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No comments. Just defer because I do see a compromise on the
horizon.
Commissioner Regalado: And --
Chairman Teele: Would you make a motion to defer it to the next regular zoning meeting, which
will be July the 20 --
Ms. Slazyk: The 22nd.
Chairman Teele: -- July 22nd?
Commissioner Regalado: But what we need to understand is what's going to happen on 22nd
Terrace, and we also --
Chairman Teele: I thought you instructed them to do that.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah.
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, there's a motion to defer to the next regular zoning meeting,
with instructions to the staff to meet with both parties and explain what's going to happen on 22
nd Terrace, as well as Commissioner Winton's concerns about 27th Avenue, and on and on, and
we would hope that you all will come in all smiling and in agreement, because it looks like
there's two reasonable parties here, and that's, I think, the point that the Vice Chairman was
going to make, is that there's the element of a compromise. Mr. Vice Chair, would you second
the motion, please?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: So it's moved and seconded. Please, meet and try to work this out, so that we
can all --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those opposed?
City of Miami Page 191 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PZ.9 04-00577 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT,
GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, REQUIRING CITY COMMISSION
APPROVAL, AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE
ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 9,
SECTION 934.1 THROUGH 934.3, TO ALLOW A COMMUNITY BASED
RESIDENTIAL FACILITY WITH A MAXIMUM OF FIFTY BEDS, WITH A TIME
LIMITATION OF TWELVE MONTHS IN WHICH A BUILDING PERMIT MUST
BE OBTAINED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 365 NORTHWEST 8TH STREET, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, ZONED R-3 MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A."
04-00577 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00577 Analysis.PDF
04-00577 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00577 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00577 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00577 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00577 Plans.PDF
04-00577 Legislation.PDF
04-00577 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00577 - submittal.pdf
REQUEST: Special Exception Requiring City Commission Approval
LOCATION: Approximately 365 NW 8th Street
APPLICANT(S): Jakobi Group, Inc.
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Jorge Orta, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval (not per
plans on file) with conditions*.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval of a special exception requiring
City Commission approval with conditions* to City Commission on May 10, 2004
by a vote of 7-0.
*See supporting documentation.
PURPOSE: This will allow a community -based residential facility with a
maximum of fifty beds.
Motion by Chairman Teele, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0424
Chairman Teele: OK. On item number 9, I'm going to yield to the Vice Chair.
City of Miami Page 192 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Item 9.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.9 is a special exception that
requires City Commission approval. It is for a community -based residential facility with a
maximum of 50 beds. It's been recommended for approval to the City Commission by the Zoning
Board. The Planning and Zoning Department also recommended approval with conditions. Our
conditions have to do with the fact that this project is not only a CBRF (community -based
residential facility), but they also have an adult day care center and a child day care center
component. The plans that were submitted for review and approval -- there was additional
information that we wanted from them as to how they were going to separate the uses. The
landscape plan also needed to be submitted for review and approval, so we're recommending
three conditions: One, that the landscape plan with the specifications be submitted for us for
review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit; two, that they give us a new set
of plans that depict the distribution of the proposed uses, the number of clients for each and a
narrative of the uses explaining the method of operation. These three uses, they had the day care
center, and then they had the CBRF and adult day care center look like it was on upper floors,
but how they're going to operate and how they're going to maintain separation was unclear; and
the third condition, we wanted a new site plan that depicted all of the required parking
provisions on and offsite for each of the proposed uses, and again, because they have such a mix
here, we wanted to make sure that everything was accounted for adequately, so basically, we
want to be able to keep working with them, but give them CBRF approval so that they can move
forward, and continue to work with the details out with us as they go through permitting and CU
(Certificate of Use).
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Applicant, are you ready? Is there any --
Jorge Orta: We are, your Honor.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there any opposition? Sir, you have just a brief -- you want to give
just a brief presentation?
Mr. Orta: Yes, Mr. Commissioner. Mr. Chairman, honorable Commissioners, Jorge Orta, on
behalf of the applicants. Basically, why we're here in front of you is for one reason and one
reason only. It's within your power to grant the special exception. We have been working with
the Planning and Zoning. We look forward to continue working. The three particular agendas
that they have just cited, we're working with and well have them all resolved and we're looking
forward to do that, so basically, what we do need right now is just the special exception for the
ALF (Adult Living Facility) so that we may continue. At this point in time, I would like to
introduce Mr. Ted Lyons. He's the president of the Mary Elizabeth Group for this ALF, which is
a very important project in the Overtown community, and he will make --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel.
Mr. Orta: -- the official presentation and then, if you care to listen to them, we have some very
valuable, relevant members of this community that wish to tell you how important this project
and service is in the Overtown community. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel --
Mr. Orta: Mr. Lyons.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- that's a great presentation you've given us. There's no opposition,
and I think this is going to move along District Commissioner.
Chairman Teele: All right.
City of Miami Page 193 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Orta: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, I move the approval of the Director -- the staff
recommendation.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and a second, accepting the granting special exception. It's a
resolution. All in favor, say "aye"
Chairman Teele: Discussion.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Discussion. Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Winton, this project
never should have happened. This is a very, very inappropriate project for the Overtown
community, in my opinion. This City has voted on three occasions to demolish this building.
This building, just so that you know where it is, as beautiful as it looks, looks nothing like that.
Commissioner Winton: Is this the green one?
Chairman Teele: It is the green building that is a disaster.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: And, obviously, this is going to be, if built, a tremendous improvement, but let
me just tell you why -- and I hold the Planning Director and the City Attorney directly
responsible for this. This site is a gateway, by any definition to the City of Miami --
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Chairman Teele: -- and it's a gateway to Overtown, but it's a gateway to the City. Anybody
coming off of 95 going downtown, going to the Miami Arena, going to Overtown, going to the
Miami River, this is where you get off. The City Commission directed the City Attorney, on three
separate occasions, and voted to use the powers of eminent domain, if necessary, to take this and
build it into a beautiful landscape gateway into the City. This should have fountains and
pictures of the founders of the City and all of that, and all of that, like Coral Gables has, like
we're doing in all of the other neighborhoods, but the City can't have it both ways. For five
years, this has gone on. The City cannot have it both ways. If the City doesn't act in a
responsible manner, you can't hold the public up and the developers up basically because we
can't get our act together. This, as great as this project looks -- by the way, it's named Mary
Elizabeth, which is probably the most important hotel in the South. This is a hotel -- the name is
the hotel -- of a hotel that A. Phillip Randolph stayed in; that Mary McCloud Bethune lived in --
Unidentified Speaker: Joe Lewis, Sammy Davis --
Chairman Teele: That Thurgood Marshal wrote his briefs in; a hotel that the President of the
United States' wife, Mrs. Roosevelt, would come and stay in because she didn't want to subject
blacks to having to go through the back door of other hotels when she came down here, so rather
than living on Miami Beach, the President's wife, President Roosevelt, would come to the Mary
Elizabeth Hotel, which literally was about three blocks away -- is that right, Irby? -- about three
blocks away and meet with these black dignitaries from all over the world, so that they could be
treated as an equal person; that they didn't have to subject themselves to the segregation era,
and it's a beautiful name, and I compliment the developer on this, but the simple fact of the
City of Miami Page 194 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
matter is, is that this City voted and instructed the Planning Department to designate this as a
gateway. We voted to, and approve money for the eminent domain. The building had not less
than three years of Code violations on it. It was a building that had City money in it, that they
never repaid. I mean, this goes on, and on, and on, and on, but I, for one, am not going to hold
a developer and a developer team hostage to the City's failure to do its job, and so I moved it in
support of it with this caveat: Please do not come to the City and ask for any City public money
for this project, as beautiful as it is, because this really, candidly, is an inappropriate use, given
the context that the City has instructed the Planning Department to be in, as it relates to
gateways in the City. There are very few locations in all of the City of Miami that will see the
amount of traffic and the amount of people coming in or leaving as this location does, and I can
only hope that as people drive by, they won't see what they've seen for the last 20 years, and
that's people hanging out the windows; people's laundry on the back porches; clothes being
hung out of the windows, and et cetera, and by the way, the building behind that has that right
now. If you drive by there right now, you'll find dirty clothes or clean clothes being aired out on
the 3rd and -- 2nd and 3rd floor. Now, Mr. McKnight, now you live in the area, and am I stating
this correctly? So I just want to put this in the context that this developer has every right to do
what he's doing, and it's unfortunate, I think, for the City that we didn't act in an appropriate
manner.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Any further discussion on the item? Hearing none on PZ.9, all in
favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion
carries unanimously.
Mr. Orta: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Orta: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Commissioners.
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
PZ.10 03-0295 ORDINANCE
Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3160, 3170, 3180 AND 3190 OAK
AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "
DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS, DIRECTING
TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 195 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
03-0295 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
03-0295 Analysis.PDF
03-0295 Land Use Map.PDF
03-0295 & 03-0295a Aerial Map.pdf
03-0295 School Brd Recomm.PDF
03-0295 PAB Reso.PDF
03-0295 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
03-0295 Legislation.PDF
03-0295 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Single Family
Residential" to "Duplex Residential" to Change the Future Land Use
Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 3160, 3170, 3180 and 3190 Oak Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Angel A. Gonzalez, Julian Guilarte, Augusto J. Gil, Robert
C. Brazofsky and M. Trading & Inestments, Inc, Owners
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Adrienne F. Pardo, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval on November 19
, 2003 by a vote of 5-4. See companion File ID 03-0295a.
PURPOSE: This will allow a duplex -residential development site.
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12553
Chairman Teele: OK. Commissioner Winton, what would you like to take up next?
Commissioner Winton: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, in that order.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yeah, 10 and 11 --
Commissioner Winton: They're second reading.
Ms. Slazyk: -- are second reading ordinances for 3160, 3170, 3180, 3190 Oak Avenue. It was
recommended approval -- Number 10 -- to the City Commission by PAB (Planning Advisory
Board) and Commission adopted on first reading, May 22nd.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, read the ordinance.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Which item?
Ms. Slazyk: 10.
City of Miami Page 196 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: We have a motion -- no, no, no.
Commissioner Winton: We have a motion.
Chairman Teele: We have a motion -- this is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard
on this, Item Number 10, should come forward. Are you here on Item Number 10? Yes, ma'am,
you're recognized.
Gloria Velasquez: Gloria Velasquez with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I urge your
approval on second reading.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Great presentation.
Chairman Teele: Great presentation. Public hearing is closed. Madam Clerk, call the roll.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.11 03-0295a ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 46 OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE
OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-2
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 3160, 3170, 3180 AND 3190 OAK AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED, IN ATTACHED
"EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
03-0295a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
03-0295a Analyis.PDF
03-0295a Zoning Map.PDF
03-0295 & 03-0295a Aerial Map.pdf
03-0295a ZB Reso.PDF
03-0295a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
03-0295a Legislation.PDF
03-0295a Exhibit A.PDF
03-0295a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
03-0295 - submittal - 9.pdf
City of Miami Page 197 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-1 Single -Family
Residential to R-2 Two -Family Residential to Change the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 3160, 3170, 3180 and 3190 Oak Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Angel A. Gonzalez, Julian Guilarte, Augusto J. Gil, Robert
C. Brazofsky and M. Trading & Investments, Inc, Owners
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Adrienne F. Pardo, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on
December 15, 2003 by a vote of 9-0. See companion File ID 03-0295.
PURPOSE: This will allow a two-family residential development site.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12554
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.11 is the companion zoning change
. Recommended approval by the Zoning Board, passed by the Commission --
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Ms. Slazyk: -- on first reading --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come forward. This
is PZ (Planning & Zoning) Number 11. Are you here on that item?
Gloria Velasquez: Yes. Gloria Velasquez with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue urging --
Chairman Teele: Public hearing is closed. Next --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Great presentation.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): It's an ordinance.
Ms. Slazyk: Read the --
Commissioner Winton: Read the ordinance.
Chairman Teele: I thought you read -- go ahead.
City of Miami Page 198 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Maxwell: No, read the first one. This is -- we're on 11 now, are we not?
Ms. Sl azyk: 12.
Commissioner Winton: 11. Well, hurry up and read it.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.12 04-00329 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2101 AND 2135 NORTHWEST MIAMI
COURT AND 2110, 2118 AND 2134 NORTH MIAMI AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM "INDUSTRIAL" TO "GENERAL COMMERCIAL"; MAKING
FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00329 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00329 Analysis.PDF
04-00329 Land Use Map.pdf
04-00329 & 04-00329a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00329 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00329 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00329 Legislation.PDF
04-00329 & 04-00329a Exhibit A.PDF
04-00329 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Industrial" to "General
Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami
Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 2101 and 2135 NW Miami Court and 2110,
2118 and 2134 N Miami Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Chrome Miami, LLC
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire
City of Miami Page 199 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City
Commission on March 17, 2004 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 04
-00329a.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to General Commercial.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12555
Commissioner Winton: 12.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.12 is a second reading ordinance
recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Board and by the Planning & Zoning
Department, and passed by the Commission, first reading, May 27th, North Miami Avenue from
industrial general commercial.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second? This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard -
- ma'am?
Commissioner Winton: No.
Chairman Teele: All right. The public hearing is closed. Madam --
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.13 04-00329a ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AMENDING PAGE NO. 21, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO.
11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM I
INDUSTRIAL TO C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2101 AND 2135 NORTHWEST MIAMI
COURT AND 2110, 2118 AND 2134 NORTH MIAMI AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 200 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00329a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00329a Analysis.PDF
04-00329a Zoning Map.PDF
04-00329 & 04-00329a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00329a ZB Reso.PDF
04-00329a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00329a Legislation.PDF
04-00329 & 04-00329a Exhibit A.PDF
04-00329a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from I Industrial to C-2 Liberal
Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 2101 and 2135 NW Miami Court and 2110,
2118 and 2134 N Miami Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Chrome Miami, LLC
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on April 12,
2004 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 03-0329.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to C-2 Liberal
Commercial.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12556
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.13 is companion zoning change.
Recommended for approval by Planning & Zoning, Zoning Board and passed by Commission,
first reading, May 27th.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: It's a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard? There are no persons
coming forward. The public hearing is closed. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
City of Miami Page 201 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.14 04-00330 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1760 SOUTHWEST 7TH STREET,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS;
DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00330 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00330 Analysis.PDF
04-00330 Land Use Map.pdf
04-00330 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00330 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00330 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00330 Legislation.PDF
04-00330 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00330 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Medium Density
Multifamily Residential" to "Restricted Commercial" to Change the Future
Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 1760 SW 7th Street
APPLICANT(S): John C. Harrison, Jr., Owner
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Gloria M. Velazquez, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City
Commission on March 17, 2004 by a vote of 6-2. See companion File ID 04
-00330a.
PURPOSE: This will change the above property to Restricted Commercial.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12557
City of Miami Page 202 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
zoning . 14 is 1760 Southwest 7th Street, recommended for approval; passed City Commission,
first reading, May 27th.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward. The public hearing is closed. Madam Clerk.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.15 04-00330a ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT,
AMENDING PAGE NOS. 35 AND 38 OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF
DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION
FROM R-3 MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND C-1
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL WITH AN SD-12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT
AND SD-25 SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT TO
SD-14 LATIN QUARTER COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL AND PEDESTRIAN
PATHWAY DESIGNATION ON SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET FOR THE
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1741 SOUTHWEST 8TH
STREET AND 1760 SOUTHWEST 7TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00330a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00330a Analysis.PDF
04-00330a Zoning Map.pdf
04-00330a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00330a ZB Reso.PDF
04-00330a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00330a Legislation.PDF
04-00330a Exhibit A.PDF
04-00330a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-3 Multifamily Medium -
Density Residential and C-1 Restricted Commercial with an SD-12 Buffer
City of Miami Page 203 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Overlay District and SD-25 Southwest 8th Street Special Overaly District to SD-
14 Latin Quarter Commercial -Residential Pedestrian Pathway Designation on
SW 8th Street to Change the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 1741 SW 8th Street and 1760 SW 7th Street
APPLICANT(S): John C. Harrison, Jr., Owner
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Gloria M. Velazquez, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on April 12,
2004 by a vote of 7-0. See companion File ID 03-0330.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to SD-14 Latin Quarter
Commercial -Residential and Pedestrian Pathway Designation on SW 8 Street.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
12558
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.15 is a companion zoning change
to SD-14 for this property, recommended for approval.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward. Mr. Attorney, read the ordinance.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance was adopted on second reading, 4/0.
PZ.16 04-00452 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT,
AMENDING PAGE NO. 16, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO.
11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, ARTICLE 6, SECTION 612, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN
SD-12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 5317 NORTHWEST 5TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
City of Miami Page 204 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00452 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00452 Analysis.PDF
04-00452 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00452 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00452 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00452 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00452 Legislation.PDF
04-00452 Exhibit A.pdf
04-00452 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-2 Two -Family Residential
to R-2 Two -Family Residential with an SD-12 Buffer Overlay District to Change
the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 5317 NW 5th Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Major & Betty Jo Threlkeld, Owners
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission
on April 12, 2004 by a vote of 7-0.
PURPOSE: This will add the SD-12 Buffer Overlay District to the above
property.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
12559
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): You want to --
Chairman Teele: Is there anybody here in opposition to PZ.16?
Commissioner Winton: What is that one?
Ms. Slazyk: PZ.16, second reading, SD-12 --
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Ms. Slazyk: -- buffer overlay district, recommended for approval. You passed it first reading on
May 27th.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: It's a public hearing. Any person here in opposition or support of PZ.16
City of Miami Page 205 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
should come forward. Yes, sir.
Major Threlkeld: I'm PZ.16.
Chairman Teele: Your name. PZ what?
Commissioner Winton: Oh, no. He was here. He's the applicant, so --
Ms. Slazyk: He's the applicant.
Major Threlkeld: I'm the applicant.
Commissioner Winton: Right, so --
Chairman Teele: Give us your name for the record.
Major Threlkeld: Major Threlkeld.
Chairman Teele: All right. Thank you. Good presentation. Public hearing is closed. Mr.
Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on -- I'm sorry -- adopted on second reading, 4/
0.
PZ.17 04-00390 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, ORDINANCE NO.
11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 6 SPECIAL DISTRICTS,
MORE SPECIFICALLY SECTIONS 614, 623 AND 625 IN ORDER TO
MODIFY LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN
ORDER TO ALLOW FOR CERTAIN CONDITIONAL REDUCTIONS;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00390 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00390 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00390 Legislation.PDF
04-00390 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text
APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, Chief Administrator
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
City of Miami Page 206 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City
Commission on March 31, 2004 by a vote of 8-0.
PURPOSE: This will allow certain conditional reductions in parking for the
SD-14, SD-23 and SD-25 Overlay Districts.
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12560
Chairman Teele: All right. What do we have open, Madam Director?
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.17 is a non -controversial second
reading text amendment --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hallelujah.
Ms. Slazyk: -- for the parking for the Coral Way, 8th Street in Little Havana. We recommend
approval. You approved it first reading --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Whoa, whoa, which item?
Chairman Teele: Is this a public hearing?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes, it's an ordinance.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Clerk. Do we have motion?
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
City of Miami Page 207 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance was adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.18 04-00462 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING ARTICLES 9 AND 25, MORE
SPECIFICALLY SECTION 915.2 AVIATION HAZARDS; AND SECTION 2502
SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS, IN ORDER TO MODIFY THE PROVISIONS FOR
SPECIAL PERMITS FOR AVIATION HAZARDS AND THE DEFINITION OF "
LODGING UNIT"; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00462 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00462 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00462 Legislation.PDF
04-00462 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text
APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, Chief Administrator
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission
on April 21, 2004 by a vote of 9-0.
PURPOSE: This will correct and clarify language in the Zoning Ordinance
related to aviation hazards and lodging units.
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12561
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): 18 is another non -controversial
cleanup second reading zoning ordinance amendment. You approved it first reading on May 27
th.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, read the ordinance.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should
come forward. There are no persons coming forward. Is there a motion?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
City of Miami Page 208 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.19 04-00191 ORDINANCE
First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3720 SOUTHWEST 27TH TERRACE,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED
COMMERCIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO
AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00191 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00191 Analysis. PDF
04-00191 Land Use Map.PDF
04-00191 & 04-00191a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00191 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00191 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00191 Legislation.PDF
04-00191 & 04-00191a Exhibit A. PDF
04-00191 - submittal.pdf
04-00191 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Duplex Residential" to "
Restricted Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the
Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 3720 SW 27th Terrace
APPLICANT(S): Fanio and Caliz Marrero, Owners
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval of a motion,
which failed (due to failure to obtain the requried five favorable votes),
constituting a denial to City Commission on February 18, 2004 by a vote of 4
-4. See companion File ID 04-00191a.
PURPOSE: This will change the above property to Restricted
Commercial.
City of Miami Page 209 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
REQUESTED TO BE CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 23, 2004.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.19 and 20 is a first reading zoning
and land use change. This has been continued from the meeting of May 27th. It -- the Planning
& Zoning Department is recommending denial. It was recommended for denial by the Planning
Advisory Board, and approval by the Zoning Board. This is in order to change property from R-
2 to C-1, restricted commercial for 3720 Southwest 27th Terrace. We believe that this is
commercial intrusion into a residential area and we would --
Chairman Teele: Who's district?
Ms. Slazyk: -- recommend denial.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's not my district.
Chairman Teele: Who?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Johnny's.
Chairman Teele: Yours?
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, it's Johnny's.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner -- now this is in Commissioner Winton's district?
Rosario Kennedy: Yes, Chairman Teele.
Commissioner Winton: I'm sorry?
Chairman Teele: Do we have your attention?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, I was trying to chase down my daughter.
Ms. Kennedy: Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. I'm Rosario Kennedy, with
offices at 26 --
Commissioner Winton: And it turns out that she was right here the whole time.
Ms. Kennedy: -- 2645 South Bayshore Drive, here in this very long night representing the
applicant, Mr. Julio Marrero.
Commissioner Winton: What is this issue? What item?
Ms. Kennedy: PZ.19.
Commissioner Regalado: 19 and 20.
Chairman Teele: Ms. Kennedy, given the lateness of the hour, would you --
Ms. Kennedy: My presentation is not long.
City of Miami Page 210 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: No, no. I'm not concerned about the time for us. Are you comfortable going
forward on behalf of your client?
Ms. Kennedy: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: OK, good.
Ms. Kennedy: Joining me are Mr. Marrero and his architect, Oscar Familia. The request before
you is a rezoning from an R-2, duplex residential, to a C-1, restricted commercial. The property
address is 20 -- 3720 Southwest 27th Terrace. For your convenience, I have an aerial
photograph that shows you the relationship of this property to the surrounding area. Thank you.
The blue and red areas designate the commercial properties in the area. Specifically, the red
designates the other commercial -- the other properties similar to ours that have been rezoned in
that area. The green shows you the neighbors who are in favor of this rezoning. Mr. Marrero is
a partial owner -- and this is our property -- is a partial owner of these two commercial
properties on 37th Avenue, immediately adjoining the subject property. One of them is a
convenience store, although detailed plans do not required at this stage, we have designed this
building to give you and the community a level of comfort. Our intent is to build an upscale,
completely self-contained mixed use project in an adequate sized parcel, with sufficient parking
and landscaping. In fact, the applicant's proposed project will enhance homeownership in an
area that is, according to the 2000 Census, between 60 and 70 percent investment property, thus,
rentals. We believe that our application is a logical extension of the limited commercial zoning
along Southwest 37th Avenue and, more specifically, that it is consistent with the character of 37
th Avenue, as a major artery of our City. Your NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office
polled the immediate neighborhood, and there was no opposition. In addition, I have personally
met with all the adjacent property owners, and they were all very happy to see this convenience
store turn into a beautiful project because, as we all know, convenience stores have activities not
conducive to safe neighborhoods, in addition to people who clearly degrade the properties.
Since January, there have been seven police reports of illegal activity -- and I have them right
here -- including three arrests -- oh, thank you -- three arrests on site and, Mr. Chairman, I'd
like to introduce that into the record. The proposed project will significantly enhance the area,
especially in light of the City park across the street. Mr. Marrero is prepared to proffer a
covenant to you today that this project will go forth only as a mixed use development, with self-
contained owner occupied units. Parking will be three stories; two underground and one at
ground level. As you can see, the westernmost part of the property will be heavily landscaped
along a wall to protect -- to cast a buffer between the residential area and the building. We will
agree to work closely with the Planning Department and subject ourselves to design review,
heights, buffers and everything else, and I'd like to introduce Oscar Familia, if you have any
questions for him.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I have a question? Is that next -- right to the park,
right?
Ms. Kennedy: It's across the street from the street. This is the park --
Commissioner Regalado: From the same sidewalk of the --
Ms. Kennedy: -- and this is the property.
Commissioner Regalado: On the same side of the park.
Commissioner Winton: No, it's across --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Across the street from the park.
City of Miami Page 211 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: -- it's the other side -- opposite --
Ms. Kennedy: NO. Across -- this is 37th Avenue.
Commissioner Winton: -- other side of Douglas Road.
Ms. Kennedy: This is the park and this is --
Commissioner Gonzalez: West of the park.
Commissioner Winton: That's west.
Ms. Kennedy: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. Oh, OK. It's right on the border of Coral Gables and the City.
Ms. Kennedy: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Coral Gables is like a drop away.
Ms. Kennedy: These are the buildings, also, in the area, and Mr. Julio Marrero, a co-owner of
the property, also -- perhaps, you'd like to show them.
Julio Marrero: I can approach? May I approach?
Ms. Kennedy: State your name and address.
Julio Marrero: Julio Marrero, 2903 Salvedo Street. I may approach?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You need the microphone if you're going to --
Mr. Marrero: These are buildings in the area. As you can see, I'm just going to run real quick
and show them to you as quickly as possible. I know the hour is -- very quickly. As you can see,
most of the buildings are quite tall. Our building is going to be five, six, seven stories, depending
on whatever regulations you have at the time that we start the buidings. This one is -- big yellow
one is pretty much right across from us.
Ms. Kennedy: We had many neighbors also here sine 2: 30, but because of the lateness of the
hour, they had to leave; the four that came back.
Chairman Teele: Who's presiding, you?
Oscar Familia: For the record, Oscar Familia. OK, 4444 Southwest 71st Ave. I'm the architect
for Mr. Marrero on this project, and let me present the project. As you see here, we presented a
building mixed use. On the first level, we have office space, then we have one -- six levels of
apartments, and we have underground parking. At the top of the building we're going to have
amenities, so we tried to bring some flavor for the neighborhood, which is Mediterranean style.
We just self -contain everything so we have parking enough for the building, and also for the
commercial on the bottom, so what we propose here is a building 20 feet separation between the
commercial parcel and the residential; that create a big buffer between the building and the
neighborhood, so we propose a green area between them, and also a nice landscape in the front
of the building. If you have any questions, I'm glad to answer.
City of Miami Page 212 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Marrero: I'd like to also point out to the Commission that this is a map of the area, and
everything in the blue is what's commercial zoning. What's red was formerly residential zoning.
As you can see, many of the residential lots have been zoned commercial, including this one, this
one, and this one, which is right on our block, and these over here across the street. The need
for the -- by giving us that residential lot and zoning it commercial allows us to build our
building where we can go ahead and do something nice in the area and, at the same time, be
able to stay away from our neighbors and get the required space so that we are not so close to
the neighbors behind us. In the last meetings that were here -- you obviously weren't present -- a
lot of the neighbors complained about the convenience store; the crime, people doing things that
are improper in the area, and I do want to show you that picture real quick, if you allow me to
go forward.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah.
Mr. Marrero: This picture here in the corner; it has the convenience store and, as you can see,
it's not very sightly, and a lot of the neighbors that came in here in support were very happy that
we were making these changes and getting rid of something that they hadn't liked for quite a
long time.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: All right. What can they do for the park across the street? They get a
park.
Ms. Kennedy: The park, I understand, has several needs, correct? Talking to some of the City
staff and, Mr. Marrero, would you like to --
Mr. Marrero: You can address the park, I mean, you were talking to the City staff more than I
do.
Ms. Kennedy: OK Well, we had --
Mr. Marrero: I know that we are willing to do whatever the park needs.
Ms. Kennedy: We had a discussion. Since it needs some lighting and some equipment, perhaps,
for the gym for babies and a park maintenance man on Sundays, we were talking. Mr. Marrero
has offered to give the City $10, 000, and you choose where --
Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me. This is a comp. plan change --
Ms. Kennedy: Zoning change. OK
Mr. Maxwell: -- that's before the Commission. It's not a special permit or anything like that.
This is a Comprehensive Plan change. If you're proffering something to the City, I would prefer
that you keep it separate --
Ms. Kennedy: All right.
Mr. Maxwell: -- from this discussion right here, and I -- and the decision of the City
Commission couldn't be based -- just for the record --
Ms. Kennedy: Absolutely.
Mr. Maxwell: -- is not based on that, nor the zoning change based on any proffer you may make.
City of Miami Page 213 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Kennedy: Yes, Mr. Maxwell.
Chairman Teele: All right. All right. Did you have any more that you'd like --
Ms. Kennedy: That's it, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Thank you so much --
Ms. Kennedy: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: -- Ms. Kennedy. Are there opponents? Are there persons here in opposition?
Are there any persons here in opposition? If not --
Commissioner Winton: Just me.
Chairman Teele: -- the public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Winton: This is -- Madam Planning Director, where is she? There she is. By
right, on the commercially zoned site -- forget about the R-1 that we're talking about now -- on
the commercially zoned site, by right --
Ms. Kennedy: R-2, R-2.
Commissioner Winton: Huh? What's R-2? OK.
Chairman Teele: Excuse me. Would the Planning Director, please --
Commissioner Winton: Well, no, no. Lourdes is fine. That's what I really want. I'm sorry.
Lourdes, by right, what height building could they build on -- is that C-1 along Douglas?
Ms. Slazyk: C-1, yes.
Commissioner Winton: What's the height they could build on Douglas?
Ms. Slazyk: They have a 120 foot height limitation in the front, and then it goes back on a 45-
degree angle, so the depth looks to be a little less than 100 feet, maybe around 100 feet.
Commissioner Winton: But the 45-degree --
Ms. Slazyk: 45-degree angle -- 120 with a 45-degree angle. I don't know. Maybe they can get
up to about 16 stories. I'm trying to --
Commissioner Winton: 16, OK, but somewhere in that --
Ms. Slazyk: -- do math in my head.
Commissioner Winton: That's the magnitude.
Ms. Slazyk: 18 -- yeah.
Commissioner Winton: OK, so here's the point -- this isn't -- an edition of one of these classic no
-wins, because my initial reaction was I don't -- I had no idea who the -- didn't recognize the
name, but it was no, hell no. That was my initial reaction when I read this. However, this is
another one of these deals where along these commercial corridors, we've got the same damn
City of Miami Page 214 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
issue. The -- you know, and there's no difference, in my mind, between the R-1 and R-2. It's still
-- you know, R-2 is duplex, so it's still same height, essentially, as a single-family home, so the
issue is exactly the same, and so we're intruding into the R-1, R-2, which I think is awful.
However, this building has one, two , three, four -- seven stories.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Or six.
Commissioner Winton: What's the height? What's the total height there?
Mr. Familia: Eight stories.
Commissioner Winton: Well, what's the height?
Mr. Familia: 86 feet.
Commissioner Winton: 86 feet, so it's substantially less height than he could build by right if we
don't allow the change, which all by itself helps create the buffer that we're trying to create in the
neighborhood so, Lourdes, come back here, please. You might -- I need some help. I don't want
to make a mistake here and I'm tired, but it seems to me that there's some real practical logic if
we're trying to save our one-story neighborhoods, R-1, R-2 neighborhoods. Is there not a
practical reason to accept this application, because this is going to be a lot better than the
alternative that could be built by right --
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: -- right up against -- except the house that's going to be taken away now
becomes the house that's right up against the 16-story building.
Ms. Slazyk: When we make our recommendation, our recommendation is based on the fact that
once you grant the land use and zoning, there is no controls and, technically, that whole height
could possibly move back. Now our objections are mitigated by a voluntarily proffered covenant
. If the City Commission were to accept the voluntarily proffered covenant where height and
setbacks, and buffers and all of those issues, including --
Commissioner Winton: Landscaping.
Ms. Slazyk: -- design review and landscaping are included, that could -- I'm not going to say --
we could say we have no further objections to it.
Commissioner Winton: OK, well --
Ms. Slazyk: But, on its face value, we have to say --
Commissioner Winton: Right. I got it.
Ms. Slazyk: -- that's intrusion.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, so --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And I would tend to have to -- I would agree with you on that.
Ms. Slazyk: Right. It's the safeguards that could come with the covenant.
Commissioner Winton: So I want to put a couple of things on the record. One -- the first thing I
want to put is that I think the Planning Department and the Planning Advisory Board made the
City of Miami Page 215 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
right decision on the surface, so I don't want to discourage them --
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Commissioner Winton: -- in the future from making the same exact decision over and over
again, so -- however, that said now, I think that I want to move to overturn the denial --
Ms. Slazyk: Right. Well, it's a recommendation, so you just wouldn't move for approval.
Commissioner Winton: OK With all of the covenants that you think we need to put in there for
the protection that we need that creates a better position, and I think they're going to proffer
something about doing something substantial -- a little more substantial than I heard -- in the
park across the street.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second, as amended.
Ms. Slazyk: Well, the --
Chairman Teele: All right. What we need to get on the record --
Ms. Slazyk: -- covenant --
Chairman Teele: -- we need to get on the record --
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- what are the proffers. Forget the park for just one minute. What are the --
Ms. Slazyk: Well, the covenant's in the next item really.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, they are?
Ms. Slazyk: The --
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Slazyk: This one is the land use change --
Commissioner Winton: All right. Fine.
Ms. Slazyk: -- and what you have to do here is find --
Commissioner Winton: But (UNINTELLIGIBLE) --
Ms. Slazyk: -- that it's a logical extension of the land use category.
Commissioner Winton: OK, fine.
Mr. Maxwell: And this is first reading.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Commissioner Winton: All right, good, so what am I doing?
City of Miami Page 216 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: We have a motion.
Commissioner Winton: I'm moving to what?
Ms. Slazyk: Approve the land use on first reading.
Commissioner Winton: OK, so moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 5/0.
PZ.20 04-00191a ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 42 OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE
OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-1
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 3720 SOUTHWEST 27TH TERRACE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A;"
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00191 a SR Fact Sheet. pdf
04-00191a Analysis.PDF
04-00191a Zoning Map.PDF
04-00191 & 04-00191a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00191a ZB Reso.PDF
04-00191a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00191 a Legislation.PDF
04-00191 & 04-00191a Exhibit A. PDF
04-00191a - submittal.pdf
04-00191a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-2 Two -Family
City of Miami Page 217 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Residential to C-1 Restricted Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 3720 SW 27th Terrace
APPLICANT(S): Fanio & Caliz Marrero, Owners
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended denial.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on March 8,
2004 by a vote of 5-4. See companion File ID 04-00191.
PURPOSE: This will change the above property to C-1 Restricted
Commercial.
REQUESTED TO BE CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 23, 2004.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Chairman Teele: Companion item.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.20 is the companion item. This is
the zoning change. This is where you would accept the voluntarily proffered covenant.
Commissioner Winton: Would you read them in the record again, please?
Ms. Slazyk: And if you want, we could meet with them and try to come up with some terms to
bring back for second reading.
Commissioner Winton: Perfect.
Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Attorney --
Rosario Kennedy: Absolutely.
Chairman Teele: -- read the item into the record.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. Commissioner, did you want to make a proffer on the record?
Ms. Kennedy: Absolutely. We would like to offer $10, 000 for park improve --
Chairman Teele: The proffer on the --
Ms. Kennedy: That we will subject ourselves to height limitations, buffers --
Ms. Slazyk: Design review.
Ms. Kennedy: -- design review, and we will work closely with the Planning Department.
City of Miami Page 218 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): What we will need --
Commissioner Winton: You guys are going to bring something back at second reading.
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. You have to -- we will need a formal covenant.
Ms. Slazyk: Before second reading.
Mr. Maxwell: You prepare it then --
Ms. Kennedy: Yes.
Mr. Maxwell: -- we have to review, and you need that at second reading.
Commissioner Winton: And they're going to evaluate their park --
Ms. Kennedy: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: -- proffer, too.
Ms. Kennedy: All in good time.
Chairman Teele: All right. So, Commissioner Winton, would you move it subject to the
covenant, as proffered?
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Clerk.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 5/0.
Ms. Kennedy: Thank you very much. I hope you can go home soon.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Clerk --
Julio Marrero: Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: -- the time is now 2: 30. What else do we have left, Madam Director?
PZ.21 04-00389 ORDINANCE
First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF
THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 3804-3820 NORTHWEST 12TH AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO
"GENERAL COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING
TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER
City of Miami Page 219 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00389 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00389 Analysis.PDF
04-00389 Land Use Map.pdf
04-00389 & 04-00389a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00389 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00389 Legislation.PDF
04-00389 & 04-00389a Exhibit A.PDF
04-00389 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Duplex Residential" to "
General Commercial" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the
Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 3804-3820 NW 12th Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Planning and Zoning Department
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City
Commission on March 31, 2004 by a vote of 8-0. See companion File ID 04
-00389a.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to General
Commercial.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): All right. There's PZ.21, 22 and 25.
These people have been waiting for 21 and 22 for a very long time. These are first reading
ordinances to amend the land use and zoning for 3804, 3820 Northwest 12th Avenue from duplex
residential to general commercial. If you look in your packages, you see this property is
bounded by State Road 112 on the north --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, it's a no-brainer.
Ms. Slazyk: -- the Metro guideway and a commercial zoned property across the street. That is
the reason that the Planning & Zoning Department, as a sort of cleanup item -- nonconformities
on the property. We are moving this item forward, so it was recommended for approval by the
Planning Advisory Board and approval by the Zoning Board, and this is first reading so --
Chairman Teele: All right. This is in the district that I represent. I understand that the people
that were objecting are not here, and I think what we should do is approve this for first reading
subject to a full hearing --
Ms. Slazyk: Second reading.
City of Miami Page 220 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- on second reading, if that's all right with everybody.
Commissioner Winton: 111 move it for you.
Chairman Teele: All right. This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should
come forward. There are no persons coming forward. The public hearing is closed. There's a
motion by Commissioner --
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- Winton. Seconded by Commissioner Regalado. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has passed on first reading, 5/0.
PZ.22 04-00389a ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AMENDING PAGE NO. 17, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO.
11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL FOR THE
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3804-3820 NORTHWEST 12
TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "
EXHIBIT A;" CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00389a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00389a Analysis.PDF
04-00389a Zoning Map.pdf
04-00389 & 04-00389a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00389a School Brd Recomm.pdf
04-00389a PAB Reso.PDF
04-00389a Legislation.PDF
04-00389 & 04-00389a Exhibit A.PDF
04-00389a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-2 Two -Family Residential
to C-2 Liberal Commercial to Change the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 3804-3820 NW 12th Avenue
APPLICANT(S): Planning and Zoning Department
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
City of Miami Page 221 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission
on April 21, 2004 by a vote of 9-0. See companion File ID 04-00389.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properites to C-2 Liberal
Commercial.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.22 is a companion zoning change.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward. Sir, before you leave -- sir, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir.
Chairman Teele: Before you leave now, we're about to vote on this but, on second reading,
we're going to have a full public hearing. We're just moving this as a courtesy to you but --
Ms. Slazyk: OK.
Chairman Teele: -- but this may or may not go forward again. All right. Public hearing's
closed. Madam Clerk.
Ms. Thompson: Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 5/0.
PZ.23 04-00559 ORDINANCE
First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF
THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 1990, 2000 AND 2020 TIGERTAIL AVENUE AND 2015
AND 2035 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES
TRANSPORTATION AND
UTILITIES"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO
AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 222 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00559 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00559 Analysis.PDF
04-00559 Land Use Map.pdf
04-00559 & 04-00559a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00559 School Brd Recomm.PDF
04-00559 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00559 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00559 Legislation.PDF
04-00559 & 04-005559a Exhibit A. P D F
04-00559 - submittal 1. pdf
04-00559 - submittal 2.pdf
04-00559 - submittal 3.pdf
04-00559 - submittal.pdf
04-00559 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00559 - submittal - 1pdf
04-00559 - submittal - 2.pdf
04-00559 corrected Exhibit A.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Single Family
Residential" to "Major Institutional, Public Facilities Transporation and
Utilities" to Change the Future Land Use Designation of the Miami
Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 1990, 2000 and 2020 Tigertail Avenue and 2015
and 2035 South Bayshore Drive
APPLICANT(S): Ransom Everglades School, Inc.
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Carter N. McDowell, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval of a motion,
which failed (due to failure to obtain the requried five favorable votes),
constituting a denial to City Commission on May 5, 2004 by a vote of 4-2.
See companion File ID 04-00559a.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to Major Institutional,
Public Facilities Transporation and Utilities.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Chairman Teele, that this matter be
PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Chairman Teele: Mr. -- Commissioner Winton, we have a number of people here from a school
and it's in your district. With your permission, I would like --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Ransom.
Chairman Teele: -- I would like to bring the item forward, out of turn, unless anybody objects.
The item is PZ (Planning & Zoning) --
City of Miami Page 223 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Is this Ransom?
Chairman Teele: Ransom Everglades, PZ --
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): 23 and 24.
Chairman Teele: Who's the lawyer for Ransom? That was your cue.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: PZ.23 is the item, Mr. Chair.
Unidentified Speaker: Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Teele: It's two items. It's 23 and 24, is that correct?
Unidentified Speaker: That is correct.
Chairman Teele: All right. Let's see the number of people that are here in opposition to the
Ransom --
Kent Harrison Robbins: I'm here. My name is Kent Harrison Robbins, 1224 Washington
Avenue, Miami Beach. I'm here and I represent 18 residents near Ransom. They were hoping
that this matter would be deferred until after 5, when they come home from work. I have no
objection to the children being allowed to make a presentation; however, I'd ask for the
remaining part of the hearing to be deferred until later this evening, when my clients get off work
and can come in here.
Chairman Teele: Well, I tell you how we're going to do this: We're going to set this for a time
certain for the second hearing, if it has a second hearing, as soon as this is finished, OK? Now,
in the County, just so that you know, first reading items are almost automatically approved. In
fact, there's no public discussion at all of an item on first reading in the County. No one's rights
will be minimized in terms of the second reading, if this were to go to second reading, but what I
do want to do is make sure that everybody's rights are fully preserved before this Commission
acts upon this finally, so this is what we're going to do: We're going to hear the plaintiffs side
now -- I mean, the petitioner's side now. We're going to recess the item, at your request, and
take it up after 5 p.m. Now, let me just tell you what that means. We have a 5: 30 meeting, in
which we have an executive session. We also have at 5 --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Time certain.
Commissioner Regalado: The moratorium.
Chairman Teele: -- 5 o'clock, an issue on a moratorium. Is that at 6--
Commissioner Regalado: 6:30.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 6:30.
Chairman Teele: 6:30, so we have a number of issues, so it could very well come up as late as 7
:30 by moving it to 5, so you need to think about that. We can go through it all now or we can
recess it, as you've recommended, but we cannot give you a time; only we can't say it won't come
up between 5 p.m.
Mr. Robbins: Could we possibly do it at 7: 30 time certain or 8 o'clock? I have a wedding to go
to, so I'd like to be able to go, if I can.
City of Miami Page 224 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: What time will your wedding be over?
Mr. Robbins: It starts at 6: 30. I can -- the service will be over by 7:15. It's at Matheson
Hammocks, and I can shoot back over here by 7: 30, 7: 45.
Chairman Teele: Well, if that's all right --
Mr. Robbins: No later than 8.
Chairman Teele: Now, you better make sure that that's all right with your clients.
Mr. Robbins: I'm sure my clients don't mind. I've talked to my clients; they don't even mind if it's
as late as 10 o'clock.
Chairman Teele: OK. Well --
Mr. Robbins: They don't mind that.
Chairman Teele: -- so that you can have a wonderful time at the wedding, we'll just take it up
after 8 p.m.
Mr. Robbins: After 8 p.m. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Carter McDowell: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Now, hold it, hold it, hold it.
Commissioner Winton: Hold it.
Chairman Teele: Hold it, hold it, hold it.
Mr. McDowell: Mr. Chairman, if I might?
Chairman Teele: But we're talking about the bifurcation.
Mr. Robbins: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: The first part, we're going to take up right now.
Mr. Robbins: I understand that.
Chairman Teele: At the applicant's request, we're going to take up now. All right.
Mr. Robbins: And I reserve my right to cross-examine any witnesses. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Now, is that procedure satisfactory with you?
Mr. McDowell: It is, but Mr. Chairman, in all honesty, if we're going to have them go --
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry, Commissioner -- I'm sorry.
Mr. McDowell: (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Thompson: I'm sorry. We need names for the record.
City of Miami Page 225 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. McDowell: For the record, my name is Carter McDowell, here representing Ransom
Everglades School. My office is at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard.
Chairman Teele: And did you put your name and address for the record?
Mr. Robbins: Yes, I did. I'll say it again, though. It's always good. Kent Harrison Robbins,
1224 Washington Avenue, Miami Beach.
Chairman Teele: And we have a matter of administrative filing that I'm not sure you've
completed with the Clerk.
Mr. Robbins: I filed my lobbyist registration.
Chairman Teele: Just talk to her. All right.
Mr. McDowell: It means, if we bifurcate this hearing, and --
Chairman Teele: We're going to bifurcate the hearing, or we'll put it back into the slot --
Mr. McDowell: We're happy to have it bifurcated under those --
Chairman Teele: And we'll take it up whatever time it comes up.
Mr. McDowell: We appreciate your willingness to take it up.
Chairman Teele: Whichever one you want to do.
Mr. McDowell: We're willing to go forward right now. It will mean my experts have to stay, but
that's OK.
Chairman Teele: Is the bifurcation satisfactory with you?
Mr. McDowell: I think it is better than the alternative, being here until 10: 00 at night. It means
some of us will be, but not all of us, and that's probably preferable.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Why don't we just pass it on first --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, just for the record --
Chairman Teele: You can't do that, the way we're -- everybody has to be given full due process.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes. Mr. Chairman, it's important that the applicant -- I think he just made note
of that. Because of the opponents have reserved right of cross-examination, which they have an
absolute right to that, all of his witnesses, everybody that -- be available later on --
Mr. McDowell: I cannot do that. My architect has a flight out of here at 8 p.m. tonight.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but hold on one minute. Who's the applicant?
Mr. McDowell: We are, sir.
Chairman Teele: You're going to put your full case on in chief right now.
City of Miami Page 226 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. McDowell: He is the -- Mr. Robbins has asked that he be allowed to cross-examine my
witnesses later.
Chairman Teele: He'll cross-examine them -- as soon as you do your direct, he'll cross-examine
them.
Mr. McDowell: That's -- that's fine.
Mr. Robbins: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Right now. Right here, right now.
Mr. McDowell: That's fine.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Mr. Robbins: I'm ready.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. McDowell: Mr. Chairman, I also -- well, thank you.
Chairman Teele: How long is your case going to take?
Mr. McDowell: Well, I was just about to say --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Two hours.
Mr. McDowell: This is a first reading of two ordinances that have to come back to you if they
pass on first reading in July. It is -- was our belief that we would put on a relatively short
presentation to you. We have been meeting with neighbors. We continue to meet with neighbors.
We intend to continue meeting with neighbors on this issue to see if we can reach consensus, and
it was our intention to put together a -- if you will, a short and sweet presentation. I have no
idea, though, whether the opponent is going to then have the opportunity to raise a bunch of
issues that I, then, won't have people to respond to.
Chairman Teele: Counsel, there are two conflicting policies to keep in mind. Short
presentations get a much more favorable response from this Commission, all things being equal.
Mr. McDowell: We're ready to go forward.
Chairman Teele: However, you should also remember that you must represent your client in a
diligent fashion. As you've indicated, there will be a second reading, if it goes forward, and that
also is the appropriate time to put the -- a longer case on and a more detailed case, but in no
way can I suggest that you should not represent your clients in a full manner.
Mr. McDowell: Well, let us move forward and we'll see where it goes. Thank you. Good
afternoon, my name's Carter McDowell, as I've already said, here --
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Do you want the department's
recommendation?
Chairman Teele: Yes, please.
City of Miami Page 227 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: Just real quick for the record. Planning and Zoning Department is recommending
approval. This is PZ.23 and 24. The Zoning Board had recommended approval to the
Commission, and the Planning Advisory Board had a motion to approve -- had a 4/2 vote, but it
requires 5 for a favorable recommendation. Therefore, it constitutes a denial, but it was a
motion to approve that only got 4 votes out of 6, so the Planning and Zoning Department
recommends approval.
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead.
Mr. McDowell: Good afternoon. Thank you very much for recognizing us. I particularly
appreciate your doing that.
Commissioner Winton: What item is this?
Mr. McDowell: One thing I might do just to start, so that you get a sense of the application and
the people here, I'd ask anybody who's here in support of Ransom Everglades application to
please stand and just be recognized for a moment. Thank you very much. I particularly
appreciate because, as you can see --
Commissioner Winton: Go kids.
Mr. McDowell: -- one of the tangible evidence of our commitment to this community is our kids
from the Summer Bridge Program that we run on this campus, and our head of school, and
Katrinia is going to talk about that a little bit for you, but I wanted you to recognize -- them to be
recognized. I handed out to you at the beginning of this application -- at the beginning of this
presentation some documents that I'm going to refer to, but first, let me give you a brief overview
-- and I'm trying to do this as quickly as I can. We have a whole PowerPoint presentation, but
we really want to hold that for second reading, as a courtesy to you. We know you have a very
long agenda today. Our request -- this is a view of the Ransom Everglades campus. This is
Emathla along the bottom of the -- Tiger Tail on this side, South Bayshore, and there's no
walking mike here.
Commissioner Winton: Where's the portable mike? Here you go.
Mr. McDowell: I think this is probably the best place. Just to give you an overview of the
request. This is the existing school campus. The darker color buildings are existing buildings,
and, indeed, there's an existing darker colored building here, and these are existing buildings.
We presently have GI (Government Institutional) zoning from Emathla to this red line. That's
our existing zoning. Our playing fields currently come to approximately this location. They've
been in use since 1979, but for some reason, when the City adopted its zoning ordinance with the
GI zoning in it, it only zoned a portion of our campus to GI. It should have, at that time, I
believe, zoned the entire campus that has been in use since 1979 as GI. We are here requesting
GI be extended to this boundary.
Commissioner Winton: What's it zoned?
Mr. McDowell: It is currently zoned R-1, and it is -- we do have an approval for the playing
field in this location. This is a house that's been occupied by the middle school director for a
number of years. Our head of school lives here. The reason that we show the land to the north
of that or to the northeast of that, I guess it is, just is for informational purposes only. It is not
part of this application, but in terms of disclosure, Ransom owns this house, that property and
this property. At some point in the future, we may be back to talk to you about those properties,
but we wanted to at least let -- we're required to disclose them, so we have shown them on the
plan. Why GI?
City of Miami Page 228 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Well, why does it say the one in light yellow is owned by Ransom also?
Mr. McDowell: Here?
Commissioner Winton: To the left, to the left.
Mr. McDowell: This?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. McDowell: Because candidly, that's an error, and I just saw it when you asked the question.
We do not own this house, and that is absolutely an error, and I apologize.
Commissioner Winton: OK All right. Thank you.
Mr. McDowell: Thank you for the question. I apologize that that's inaccurate. In our campus
plan -- well, let me take a step back. Ransom Everglades been an institution in Coconut Grove
for 100 years. Certainly, you've all seen the publicity and the banner around time, that is our
centennial year, and we are working on a centennial campaign to bring this campus up to
today's standards. It is tired. It was established in 1955. It is tired. It is in desperate need of a
facelift, and we need to add facilities that simply don't exist on this campus that are desperately
needed; a gymnasium, a new library and classroom building to replace existing outmode
classroom buildings; administration in other classrooms that are, in fact, replacing existing
classrooms that are already in that location. The question that the neighbors continue to ask,
and that I suspect has been posed to you all is why GI? And let me answer that as directly -- our
buildings -- indeed, all of the buildings, including specifically the gymnasium, are taller than 25
feet. You're not allowed to build a building, under the R-1 zoning, that is higher than 25 feet
without a variance. You all have been through many, many, many variance hearings, and you
know that the legal standard for a variance is that there has to be a hardship inherent in the
land; something that is unique about your property that will not allow you to achieve a
reasonable use of your property without that variance. I'm here to tell you that we have 8 acres
of land that we own that are rectangular. There's nothing particularly unique. Yes, we do have
a bluff across the front. It's a beautiful feature that we do preserve and intend to preserve, but
we could build a building anywhere on our campus, other than the fact that we desperately need
playing fields, which is what a lot of this application is about, so we need to build this -- we need
to build these schools -- these school buildings. We need to build this gymnasium. There is no
gymnasium on this campus, and there never has been. Every school that I'm aware of that wants
to be as excellent a school as Ransom is has gymnasium facilities for their children. We have
one and the other campus on Main Highway, we do not and never have had one on this campus.
We have made use of an auditorium facility here as a back up, but it really doesn't work, so we
can't -- we need the GI zoning to accomplish the building that we intend to include in this
program, but we've also faced a four-year odyssey with our neighbors. We sought approval
without GI zoning to put this playing field where you see it here four years ago. Under the R-1
zoning -- and it was appealed by our neighbors, and we've spent literally four years talking to
them, trying to work out a situation where they would not oppose what we need to do, and
candidly, they're still here opposing what we would like to do. We firmly believe, based on the
behavior that has been exhibited over the four years, that we are likely to end up in court, no
matter what we do, and therefore, we have moved forward with the most legally correct and
defensible position with regard to this campus, which is to seek GI zoning, which is an extension
of our existing GI zoning over the entire campus. However, in response to that GI zoning, we
have also -- and I've handed out to you and we are again proffering here to you, and to this
Commission, and to this City -- two declarations of restrictions. The first is a declaration of a
use. It's the top document on the package that I handed out to you, which I also gave a copy to
Kent Robbins. This is a declaration of use restrictions, and I would like to read paragraph 1 to
you: Notwithstanding the land use designation and zoning applicable to the property, the use of
City of Miami Page 229 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
the property shall be limited to primary and secondary school uses, uses customarily and
traditionally associated with private, primary, and secondary school use, and uses permitted in
the R-1 residential district. Therefore, with this covenant, which we are voluntarily proffering to
the City, and which we invite you and ask you to accept, we will not be able to use this property,
regardless of the GI zoning, for anything other than a school or an R-1 zoning. If you -- in
addition to that restriction, we have provided in this use restriction that it cannot be modified,
and this is in paragraph 5, if you care to follow it -- that we may not even file an application to
seek modification of this covenant, unless we submit written evidence of the approval of the
Coconut Grove Civic Club or if such club no longer exists, the Coconut Grove Village Council,
so this covenant, which will restrict the use of this property forever, through school and R-1,
cannot be modified unless the Coconut Grove Civic Club says it's OK first. I will say that we've
had conversations with the Coconut Grove Civic Club. They've been very cordial conversations.
They have not taken a formal position, as yet, that they want to accept that responsibility. We
chose the Coconut Grove Civic Club for a very simple reason: As far as we're aware, they are
the oldest civic organization in Coconut Grove. They have been around for decades, if not 100
years themselves. We looked for an organization that everyone could count on to be here now,
and 10 years from now, and 30 years from now, and 50 years from now so that the neighbors
would know that there would always be a watchdog on this issue, and they would not have to
worry about some unilateral action to change this declaration of restrictions, so that is the basis
on which we have chosen the civic club to be, if you will, the keeper of the flame for this
neighborhood. If they should not exist, the Village Council. I would like to address an issue that
may come up. The neighbors have said, please make it run to us individually. The school and I
personally have had several experiences where, when you need individual neighbors' approval
for anything, that there is an opportunity for individuals to ask for things; compensation or
otherwise. The school and the board of trustees will not put the school in that position. We're
happy to respond to an organization. We're happy to delegate that responsibility to an
organization, but we -- the trustees of the school are not prepared to expose the school to that
type of future issue, should it ever come up. The second document that I handed out to you is the
second declaration of restrictions that we have proffered. This declaration reflects a number of
compromises that we have made with the neighbors; no stadium with lighting, no building, and -
- et cetera; no building above 35 feet, other than the gymnasium; setbacks, landscape open
space, et cetera. I don't want to take more time here on first reading than necessary. The
document speaks for itself. This declaration is different than the declaration of use. It can be
modified by the City because these are what I believe are more traditional zoning restrictions,
but in order to be modified by the City, it would require notification to all property owners
within 500 feet; it would require a public hearing before this body; it would require a four fifths
vote of this body, and it would require the positive vote of the district Commissioner, in addition
to being -- it would have to be part of that four -fifths, so the district Commissioner would have
an absolute veto over any future modification of this covenant should it be -- ever be sought. We
don't expect to seek that modification, but candidly, we don't have a crystal ball when it comes to
things like setbacks and height limitations, and even what a school will be required to be in 2050
, and that is why that declaration is separate. Behind that document, which is actually fairly
long and includes a number of landscape plans and buffer plans, is a list that I think you'll find
fairly remarkable, that starts on September 12th and goes every few days, all the way through to
June 17th. That is a partial list of all of the meetings that we have had with various neighbors,
with various organizations, with literally anybody and everybody who would or wanted to talk to
us. It does not include many, many, many e-mails and letters and other things that we have
exchanged with our neighbors. Finally, returning to the GI issue for a moment, in the packet
that I handed out, the last few pages contains a list of the public and private schools in the City
of Miami, and I -- we had a display that shows and locates each of those schools. You will see
that, without exception, every public school, other than day care centers, in the City is zoned GI
or a more intense district. Some of them are in commercial districts; some of them are in
multifamily districts, but every -- without exception, every public school is covered by the GI
district. We are asking simply for the same treatment. We've also provided a list of the private
schools, the high schools and elementary schools and other than that, we do not include many
City of Miami Page 230 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
day care centers. That is certainly true. With the exception of three schools here in the Coconut
Grove area, all of the schools -- private schools are also zoned GI or a more intense zoning
district. Once again, we're asking to be treated fairly and the same as all of the other schools.
With that, I would like to turn it over to the Chairman of our board of trustees for a few brief
words. We have three or four very quick speakers. We would like to reserve time for rebuttal,
particularly since we're going to have a bifurcated presentation, and thank you very much.
Ghislain Gouraige: Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Ghislain Gouraige. I'm the President of
the board of trustees. I reside at 8601 Southwest 54th Avenue, in Miami, Florida. As you've
heard, we're celebrating our centennial this year, and throughout that 100-year period, Ransom
has been a key institution in the City of Miami, it's development and its growth. We've been at
this location for 55 years. We've had a tradition to honor and excellence over that period of
time, and it's that commitment to honor and excellence which is what's driving us to make the
renovations, to make the expansion that we want to make at that campus, and it's very important
for us to convey to you -- and the district Commissioner knows very well -- that we've been a
good neighbor in this community, a good neighbor for all the 55 years that we've been here, and
as part of this process, we've met with him on occasions. We've been told to work it out with
your neighbors, and with that spirit of being a good neighbor, we've kept an open door. We've
had invitations, open houses, at our expense, to invite the neighbors in the community to come,
to air out their concerns, so that we can come to an agreement, unopposed to you before the
Commission or through a part of this process. As a result of those conversations of those
meetings -- and by my count -- and I'm sure that I'm undercounting -- there have been over 40
meetings that we've had that were alluded to. On 40 separate occasions, the volunteers of this
board, the volunteers of this school have attempted to address the concerns of these neighbors,
and that's why we have the use restrictions. That's why we have the covenants that have been
alluded to, and even to this day, to the extent that we can, we're trying to make efforts to meet
and address the concerns, but we certainly ask you to support this application, you know, to
allow Ransom to continue doing the great things that it's done in this community. You'll see
what we're doing in the Summer Bridge Program. You know that we're commitment to
excellence academically, as well as developing the whole child, and we really ask that you
support this, to allow us to continue to be the good neighbor that we've been, and to represent
Miami in its finest. Thank you.
Ellen Moceri: I'm Ellen Moceri. I'm the head of Ransom Everglades School. I live at 1990
Tiger Tail, in the midst of all of this turmoil. It's really quite calm. I just want to tell you and
remind you that we are a school, we've always been a school, that's all we've ever wanted to be.
We've never sold our land for a major profit. We sold it always for safety and concern for our
children, and all we care about is kids, and on our Everglades campus, we need something that
most schools have, a gymnasium, a modernized library to support the thinking curriculum of the
21 st Century and expanded playing fields. When the school began in 1955, it was an all girls
school. Now, as a co-ed school, we need to offer athletic facilities that respond to Title 9, equal
opportunities for boys and girls. We don't want kids cut from sports in the middle school, and in
South Florida, it rains quite a bit, and we need to help our children come in from the rain and
still have athletic facilities. Finally, gymnasiums today are absolutely vital for the health
orientation of our curriculum, to help our children remain physically fit. We, for 100 years, have
been very good neighbors in Coconut Grove. On the Main Highway campus, we had been given
awards for renovating and maintaining two of the oldest structures in South Florida, the
Bogadah and the Band Cottage. We care about our environment. We care about the
authenticity of the architecture of Coconut Grove, and we care about the landscape and tree
canopy. Ransom Everglades, as you know, is a nationally renowned school, academically, and
Frank Nero of the Beacon Council and Donna Shalala of the University of Miami have praised
us for helping them attract and bring the best talent to businesses, law firms and medical schools
. Recently, the Wall Street Journal placed Ransom Everglades as the first school in Florida, and
one of the top two in the southeast for placing students in the most selective colleges in the
country, but I think the most important contribution of Ransom Everglades is the mission of our
City of Miami Page 231 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
school, to train a leadership class, to give more to the community than we take from it. We have
the only Summer Bridge Program in Miami -Dade County; a program for at -risk middle school
students, predominantly Hispanic and African American students, and they are all here today.
They are on our Everglades campus. They benefit from these resources. The summer program is
a cultural and educational program that is coupled with yearlong tutoring to help these students
graduate from high school and go on to college. Last year, we received a $2, 000, 000 grant to
expand this to Liberty City Charter School, Corpus Christy and Centro Mater in the City of
Miami. Because Ransom Everglades was willing to be the fiduciary agent for the oversight of
the grant, we were able to expand our program to over 200 students. The core of that program
is at the Everglades campus every summer. Ransom Everglades has also partnered with the first
Charter school in Coconut Grove, the Theodore Gibson Charter School. The principal, Julia
Gilbert, is here today. We have helped them celebrate their Bahamian culture. We provided
computers, the books, excursions to art activities, tutoring in the afternoon, and even painted a
beautiful mural on the building two weeks ago with our senior class. One of our graduates,
David Galagno, has also worked very hard in partnership to help maintain Peacock Park and
use it effectively for the entire City of Coconut Grove, and in the future, we hope to help partner
with the Coconut Grove Playhouse to keep them from going dark during their renovation.
Ransom Everglades has always been a good neighbor, responsible citizen, and one of the most
important institutions in South Florida. We give over $380, 000 in scholarships to Coconut
Grove students alone, and nearly 463 members of the RE (Ransom Everglades) community live
in Coconut Grove. They pay taxes to Miami -Dade County to support the public schools, even
though their children do now and in the past, attend independent schools, and at our middle
school campus, we only want a better school. We want to do what the Florida Council of
Independent Schools had told us to do, to be an even better school. We need a gym, a library,
expanded playing fields, and in the process, we want to really beauty the neighborhood, expand
green space. 65 percent of our land will be devoted to green space. We want to cut down on
the onslaught of McMansions, improve the safety of the entire area by a new entrance to our
school, and we just want to be what we've always been for 100 years, excellence in honor in
Coconut Grove. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Who is the co-chairman of your Summer Bridge Program?
Unidentified Speaker: The co-chairman? Oh, John Flickinger is the (INAUDIBLE) -- the co-
chair, Patrick Range of the --
Ms. Moceri: You're talking about the board of trustees?
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Ms. Moceri: I'm sorry. John Flickinger runs the program; Patrick Range and (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) Campo are the co-chairs of the board of trustees. Patrick Range is, I think,
near to you.
Commissioner Winton: He's on my staff.
Ms. Moceri: Is that the question you wanted me to answer?
Commissioner Winton: That was the question.
Ms. Moceri: That was it. Good. Thanks.
Chairman Teele: All right. Did you have any expert witnesses, counsel?
Mr. McDowell: I have both of the traffic engineers and our architect here, but candidly, they're
available to answer questions. I don't think I'm going to drag you through that process. We had
City of Miami Page 232 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
just a couple more people. To understand, we will see you back at second reading with more
detail, if you need that detail at that time.
Carlos de la Cruz, Jr.: Good afternoon. My name is Carlos de la Cruz, Jr. I'm Vice President
of the Board of Ransom Everglades and the parent of two children at Ransom. I just want to say
that Ransom is a school that truly represents all of the community, and we're very fortunate that
everybody in this community is having a chance to send children to this school, which does give
scholarships and stuff so that, you know, we can include everybody and ethnically, the diversity
that we have is unprecedented in any private school here in Miami, and we're very lucky, you
know, to have this school that is ranked as one of the top 10 day school in all of this country, and
to be able to send our school to the Ivy league schools in all the top universities in the northeast.
Ransom also gets involved the community in many ways. I can attest, personally, for example, to
its big involvement with Centro Mater; the first newsletter that's coming out from Centro Mater
was published at Ransom Everglades, and the school helps out organizations, such as this, to go
out and figure out ways of getting grants to grow the program, so I thank you very much, and I
hope you take all this into consideration.
Katrinia Wilson -Davis: Good afternoon. I am Katrina Wilson -Davis. I am the principal of the
Liberty City Charter School, which is Florida's first charter school. Eight years ago, when we
opened our doors, we opened our doors with 60 kids.
Commissioner Winton: How many?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: 60, in Kindergarten through Second grade.
Chairman Teele: The address?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: It is 8700 Northwest 5th Avenue. When I opened -- I was the founding
principal of that school, and at the time that we opened, I was scared to death because we were
what educational reform was in the State of Florida, not only in Dade County -- and I didn't
have a lot of friends because a lot of people saw us as being the enemy, but I can remember
knocking -- a knock at my door, and the first person to extend a helping hand to me was Ransom
Everglades Summer Bridge Program. They came to me, not asking what I could do for them;
they came to me saying, here is what we can do for you. They came to me and said, Katrinia, we
can help you with your children. We can help you provide positive experiences for them. We
can help you get them ready for middle school, and for me, that was like a godsend. Because as
I said, anybody that's ever been alone in a storm understands that there is nothing more
important than to have a friendly hand to reach out to you. I say to this Commission, you know,
so many of who you are as an adult is shaped by your experiences in your childhood. Our
children from Liberty City oftentimes are experiencing some stuff -- difficult things, but when
they are involved in the Summer Bridge Program, when they come over to Ransom, they are
treated with the kind of respect and dignity that is unmatched by any that I have seen. The
expectations that they set for the kids is just remarkable. Their goal is to try to help these
children become productive citizens. Someone said earlier that Ransom was not a developer. I
disagree with that.
I think they are developers, but they are developers of our future. They are developers of the
human mind. This is why they need their media center. They are developers of the human spirit.
This is why they need their playing fields, because that spirit needs to roam. So much of what we
need to be doing in our community is building for a brighter tomorrow by investing in our
children. If Ransom was the kind of school that sat on the top of a hill and looked low, then I
might have some reservations, but they are a school that's among their community. They are a
school that's reaching far beyond the limits of the City of Miami. They're reaching into North
Dade, they're reaching into South Dade, they're reaching into Central Dade, and they are
reaching out saying, "How can we help? Here is what we can have, " and trust me, being a
principal of a school with minimal resources, when somebody can say that to you, let me tell you,
City of Miami Page 233 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
it makes success a lot easier. I am proud to be associated with this school. I am proud to have
my children to be associated with this school, because when they go into Ransom, I know they're
going to be all right. Thank you.
(Applause)
Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. Now, we are a -- and that was a
moving presentation. We are a governmental body, and we would appreciate if you don't clap,
or applaud, or cheer, or boo or hiss. Maybe you can lick out your tongue at somebody, but other
than that, just sort of keep it to yourselves, OK? Thank you very much. Katrinia, before you
leave, let me just establish one or two things before you do leave. When did Ransom reach out to
you? You all -- when was the --
Ms. Wilson -Davis: 1980 -- 1996.
Chairman Teele: The Charter school was established in 1996?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: Yes.
Chairman Teele: And when did they reach out to you?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: They reached out to me in 1996.
Chairman Teele: And they've been with you each year since then?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: Each year since then. And keep in mind that --
Commissioner Winton: Could I interrupt one second?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: -- when they started with me --
Commissioner Winton: Well, hold on, hold on. Kids from Summer Bridge, you all leaving right
now. Thank you very much for coming. I hope you enjoyed your stay here, and I guess you'll be
getting the news soon. I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: And they've been with you every year thereafter?
Ms. Wilson -Davis: Yes. When they start -- when we started, we only went up to Second grade,
and so we had to wait until our children got in Fourth grade, and what Mr. Flickinger did, they
normally only accept children in Fifth grade, but he said, you know, you're special. We're going
to -- and I like to believe I am -- and he said, we're going to let your kids start in Fourth grade,
and so they -- John would come by the school. He would all -- that's enough?
Chairman Teele: I just wanted to make sure that this is a long-term commitment and --
Ms. Wilson -Davis: Oh, but you know what? See, the 21 st Century grant that we got is a five-
year commitment, and we got that in partnership with Ransom Everglades.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Ms. Wilson -Davis: John and I co -wrote that grant together --
Chairman Teele: All right.
Ms. Wilson -Davis: And it runs our after school and our summer program.
City of Miami Page 234 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much.
Ms. Wilson -Davis: You're very welcomed.
Chairman Teele: Any other questions? Counsel for the -- where is the opposing counsel?
Counsel, do you have any questions thus far of anybody or anything?
Mr. McDowell: No.
Chairman Teele: OK, fine.
Mr. McDowell: I don't have any questions at this time.
Chairman Teele: OK, fine. Go right ahead, proceed.
Mr. McDowell: That actually concludes our formal presentation. We have a few neighbors.
There are a lot of neighbors here to support us, but I'd like just a few of them to address you and
then well close our presentation.
Chairman Teele: All right. Before they address us, Mr. Attorney, please put on the record what
their comments should be about in terms of helping us to be deliberative in this process.
Mr. Maxwell: Item before you now is a comprehensive -- request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan, so their comments should be fact based testimony, and these are neighbors that would be
speaking now based on their feelings or observations about how a change in the comp plan
would affect their neighborhoods.
Chairman Teele: And just so that the record is clear, the discussion, Madam Director --
Mr. Maxwell: Madam Director.
Chairman Teele: Madam Director, just so that the record is clear, the discussion is regarding
the comp plan going from what to what? And the comments that everybody makes should be
about the comp plan change -- the request moving from --
Ms. Slazyk: It's from single-family residential to major institutional, public facilities,
transportation and utilities.
Chairman Teele: All right. Thank you.
Mr. McDowell: Mr. Chairman, I want to apologize, because I think all of our speakers have
addressed both the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning --
Chairman Teele: That's what I was trying to get --
Mr. McDowell: -- together and --
Chairman Teele: I mean, we've got a record being made here now, and I want to make sure that
the record is --
Mr. McDowell: I would certainly, if we're going to open a separate hearing -- We were trying,
as a courtesy, not to make more of your time than necessary. They are companion items.
Mr. Maxwell: You can incorporate it.
City of Miami Page 235 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. McDowell: So, we will incorporate all of those comments in the next hearing, but I just
wanted to make the point that everyone has addressed both issues.
Chairman Teele: We will allow the comments to address both PZ items and we will make sure
that the record is transmitted on both items to the other item. Counsel, is that satisfactory for
you?
Mr. Robbins: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: You need to be right here on the front row. This is your show. You're the man.
You are the man right now, so come on down and make sure that this is --
Mr. Robbins: Kent Harrison Robbins.
Chairman Teele: If you all would just move one seat over and let him have the end seat, that will
be fine. Yeah.
Mr. Robbins: I had the pleasure of sitting next to my clients, which is a very enjoyable thing to
do, so that's --
Chairman Teele: Well, that's fine, but you need to help us keep this moving.
Mr. Robbins: Thank you. No, we have no objection to accommodating the order and form of
this proceeding.
Chairman Teele: The procedure that we're saying, though, is we're going to allow comments on
both the comp plan and on the underlying --
Mr. Maxwell: What the applicant has said is that their comments so far have addressed --
Commissioner Winton: Both.
Mr. Maxwell: -- the comp plan and the zoning change, so when the second item comes up, the
companion item to this, their comments and all the testimony will be incorporated in the zoning
item as well, so your comments now should be directed at both as well.
Mr. Robbins: For the purposes of the hearings today, I have no objection to that. I believe that
we're trying to expedite matters for everybody.
Chairman Teele: Very good. All right. Yes, sir.
Dr. John Carpenter: I am Dr. John Carpenter. My home is at 3232 Emathla Street. This is a
statement representing the views of neighbors. Neighbors who actually, live near the school;
neighbors most severely impacted by the school development. The new library and gymnasium
will be much closer to our homes than to any others. That new 162 foot long building will be
only a few steps away from my front door. We support the school. We urge your approval of the
extension of GI zoning from the already existing large area of GI zoning. We urge you to
commend the Ransom Everglades board and administration for its voluntary commitment to a
detailed, legally binding and enforceable covenant to restrict all -- repeat "all" -- of the GI
zoned area to school uses and return the entire area to R-1 upon sell. There is more. The
covenant commits specific benefits and restriction guarantees. Tiger Tail and Emathla Streets
totally lined with deep landscaping and tree canopies, a new designer fence; illumination of
swale parking, green buffers at critical visual points. No dormitories, no night lights on playing
fields; no ingress and egress -- I mean, new ingress and egress efficiency with parking and
City of Miami Page 236 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
standing on campus. 65 percent green space over the entire campus; unsightly aged buildings
replaced and more, but we are disappointed with insistence by some selectively focusing only on
the small extension of GI, without concern about the much larger area of the existing and totally
unrestricted GI area of the campus. We are disappointed with attempts to alarm and demands
that undermine realization of a covenant such as attempted enrollment control, when in fact,
there already exists enrollment restrictions by state space requirements per student. We believe
strongly that given the growing awareness of existing GI and the neighborly commitment of the
school to restrict all GI to school purposes, and in the very likely possibility of selling to sell to a
party that will return to R-1 and to enhance Tiger Tail and Emathla the entire length of the
school campus, with deep landscaping and tree canopies, to enhance the entire property with
green areas. Given these commitments and more -- the majority of neighbors soon will express
their support and even their profound gratitude. We are deeply disappointed by hostile actions
that could result in our neighborhood losing a one-time opportunity to gain restrictions on the
totality of GI zoned (UNINTELLIGIBLE) property. We believe strongly that given the awareness
of the existing GI, that neighborhood commitment will continue to grow. For some reasons,
there are those who fear City participation in the process, and need to exclude City rather than
ensuring restrictions. Our neighbors can join together inclusively. We can honor the role of
government and effectively and consistently influence rather than exclude government. We
assume this is what schools teach in their social studies classes. We urge all of our neighbors to
join together. We urge you, as a board, to approve this application and formally recognize these
covenants as essential both for the advancement of this outstanding school and for a great
benefit to all of us neighbors. Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: All right. Are there any other -- how many more people are going to speak?
Come right on in. Come right on, ma'am. Are there any other speakers?
Unidentified Speaker: There's one more.
Chairman Teele: OK. You may proceed. Thank you.
Renee Betancourt: Good afternoon. My name is Renee Betancourt. I live at 3232 Emathla
Street, directly in front of Ransom Everglades. In fact, the school is less than 23 feet from my
front door. I believe that you will agree with me that the school's expansion and building plans
affect my home more than most. Yet, I am here today to tell you that I completely support the
school's request for an expansion of the GI zoning that they already have, as well as the
Comprehensive Plan. This existing GI area front all of Emathla and a large portion of Tiger
Tail, but this area is not presently protected under any covenant. The school has agreed to give
a restrictive, enforceable and legally binding covenant, which would protect this existing GI
area, as well as the extension area included in the present petition so that if the school ever sold
the property, the entire GI area would revert back to R-1. I do not believe that the school has
any intention of being anything other than the superb academic institution all of us know it to be.
All that they want to do is to significantly upgrade their facilities and beauty their campus for
the benefit of their students, and yes, of the entire neighborhood. In this regard, they have given
a use -- they have given a use restriction covenant. I also want to tell you that I first lived in
Coconut Grove in 1962 when me family came here from Cuba. I was raised on Natoma Street,
and in all, I have lived in the North Grove for over 20 years. During the past 15 years, I have
lived in Miami Beach and Coral Gables, but last year I returned to North Grove. I returned
because I could not find anywhere else in Dade County, the beautiful tree canopy, the
neighborhood charm, and the quality of life that exists here, preserving and protecting those
qualities is of paramount importance to me, because they are the very reason I choose to live
here. Ransom Everglades does not seek to destroy the beauty and quality of our neighborhood
and theirs; rather, they seek to improve it. I urge you to grant their petition for an extension of
their GI zoning. Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much. Now, did that other person get here? All right, sir --
City of Miami Page 237 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
ma'am. I don't have my glasses on.
Hilda Jacobson: Just walked in. Hi. My name is Hilda Jacobson. I live at 3224 Emathla
Street, with my two children, Russell, a student at St. Stevens Episcopal Day School, and I'm
proud to announce the graduate of Ransom Everglades, Andrea, my daughter, who just
graduated in May. My house is right across from the school, and as you have heard today,
Ransom is proposing to build a 35-foot high library and classroom building approximately 23
feet from my front gate, so you can imagine; yet, I stand here before you to urge you to please
support and approve Ransom's petition today. These past several months I've met with school
officials, board members, attorneys, architects, landscape and operation staff, and even a noted
tree expert hired by the school. We've toured the school grounds with school officials and the
school's architect so to obtain a better idea as to the exact physical location of the new buildings
and playing fields, and we've reviewed, in great detail, a restrictive, legally binding written
covenant that the school has prepared, which addresses the specific areas of concern that the
neighbors have communicated to the school. You've heard the contents of that written covenant
today, explained by those individuals who truly and honestly committed themselves 24/7
practically to work in good faith and with their neighbors, as their neighbors have chosen to
work with the school in reciprocity. There is no hidden agenda here for those who have worked
very diligently and openly to achieve a harmonious end, free of unnecessary potential litigation
for the school, or in delay tactics, and it clearly demonstrates today the evidence you have been
presented that Ransom is not a developer. It is -- and it should not be regarded as one. It is a
nationally recognized, prestigious educational institution that merely wants to provide its student
body with modern facilities, great playing fields, a beautiful campus and safer streets for all of
us, particularly along Emathla and Tiger Tail. I hope you agree with me today that Ransom
deserves our continued support and respect in this community by voting yes to their petition.
Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much. Counsel, did you want to make any concluding
statements?
Mr. McDowell: Just one of the neighbors who's asked to speak.
Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am.
Patricia Norton -Laird: Yes. Hi. My name is Patricia Norton -Laird, and I live at 3240 Emathla
Street. I represent the third neighbor that are the most immediate and most affected neighbors
along that street, of which there are only one other resident that fronts on that street, who is an
out -of -the -country owner, but I have lived in my home for 22 years. I have lived as a neighbor of
the school at 2121 South Bayshore Drive, which is also adjacent property on Emathla Street to
the school since 1960, and Ransom Everglades has continued to be a good neighbor all through
this time. I have been -- since I'm one of the older longstanding neighbors there and have not
moved for a long time, I have been involved in many things having to do with the school,
including some of the early discussions almost five years ago with neighbors, where some of this
anonymity became a problem. I want to support the school's change to GI. They already, as
you've heard, have GI zoning for most of the -- half of the property and they should get it for the
rest. I think a lot of the opposition, although there are a few neighbors on the other side that are
directly adjacent, most of the opposition I've heard all along have not been from immediate
neighbors. They are people who are a little bit farther away, and just, you know, in general, a
lot of people don't like change and they don't like the fear of what might happen, but I do believe
Ransom Everglades is here to stay, and I urge you, as another immediate neighbor, to support
their request. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much.
Mr. McDowell: Mr. Chair, thank you for your patience. Just for the record, in case any of the
City of Miami Page 238 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioners have a question, Ramona Alvarez, from David Plummer, our traffic engineers
are here to answer --
Commissioner Winton: Hold on. Mr. Chairman -- OK Go ahead.
Mr. McDowell: Again, for the record, our traffic engineers are here to answer any questions
you may have. Lisa Hammer, our horticulturalist, who works all the time in the Grove, is here,
who's worked with us on our landscape plans. Our architects from Architectonica, (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) are here to answer any questions, so we have our professional team here to
answer any questions that you may have, but I'm not going to ask them to speak tonight, and
we'll leave that for a future date, unless you have specific questions, as a courtesy in recognition
of the agenda that you face.
Chairman Teele: All right. Counsel, did you have any questions or that you wanted to ask with
any of the witnesses that have spoken?
Mr. Robbins: No, I do not.
Chairman Teele: All right. If not, then, are there any questions from Commission members
before we recess this item and take up the rest of the agenda, with the understanding that we're
going to get back to you at about what time, 8 o' clock, after 8 o'clock?
Mr. Robbins: If we do it later, it'll be better even, 8: 30.
Mr. McDowell: I bet it will be after 8.
Chairman Teele: Counsel, you need to tell us what time you'd like --
Mr. Robbins: I know your agenda is pretty long, so even in you want to do it 8: 30, that's fine
with us.
Chairman Teele: We will not take it up before 8: 30.
Mr. Robbins: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Is that satisfactory with you, counsel?
Mr. McDowell: As a courtesy --
Chairman Teele: We will not take it up before 8: 30.
Mr. McDowell: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: And if you need more time, call and we'll consider it. All right. If there are
comments or questions on this item at this point, Commissioner --
Commissioner Regalado: Just a question.
Chairman Teele: -- Regalado, Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Regalado: Question. What you're proposing is the change to GI and then, if this
ever is not used for the school, it reverts back to -- that's --
Mr. McDowell: Well, technically, it would not revert back because this Commission has to take -
City of Miami Page 239 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Mr. McDowell: -- an action to rezone it, but --
Commissioner Regalado: But you have --
Mr. McDowell: -- we have restricted it so it can only be used for R-1 uses, whether you change
it or not, and we have agreed -- we've been asked by neighbors if we would agree actually to
make a further modification to that covenant, where we would actually file the application and
we're prepared to make that change, assuming we can reach consensus with our neighbors on
the other issues, so that we would actually file the application to roll it back.
Commissioner Regalado: The other thing, Mr. Chairman, is that I've known some of the
programs that the school have done in the inner city of the City of Miami, and we thank you for
all you've done with the kids of Centro Mater and some of the schools in the Grove. I think --
and the board does mirror the City of Miami and I just wanted to say that, as a Miami resident,
I'm very thankful to the school for all the good things you have done. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. Then this item -- these items, item number --
Mr. Maxwell: PZ.23 and 24.
Chairman Teele: -- PZ.23 and 24 stand recessed. They will not come up -- they will come up
later tonight, but not before 8: 30 p.m.
Commissioner Winton: And, Mr. Chairman, we bifurcated the Ransom Everglades thing; heard
the first thing in the morning. Sent them away to see if they could come to some agreement.
Could we find out -- they're here.
Ms. Slazyk: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Winton: -- could we find out if they reached an agreement?
Chairman Teele: All right. What's the item number again?
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): PZ.23 and 24.
Chairman Teele: PZ.23 and 24. Counsel.
Mr. McDowell: Mr. Chairman, I -- for the record, Carter McDowell, offices at 2500 First Union
Financial -- I guess, it's Wachovia Financial Center. We were not directed so much to talk,
although we have been talking quite a bit --
Commissioner Winton: Excuse me. Hold on. Carter -- whoever's standing back there at the
back with the -- yeah, you're dealing with the lights. Thank you. Bingo. You made them
brighter. They were already too bright. OK, go ahead. Sorry.
Mr. McDowell: We have continued to talk to our neighbors in this period of time. However, I
think it was to come back for them to make their presentation. It is a first reading. Obviously,
we would like you to pass it on first reading, and we will see you back in July, and we are
committed absolutely to continuing to work with them to see if we can resolve those issues
between tonight and then, and we're here to answer any questions that you may have.
Chairman Teele: All right. Counsel is correct. We bifurcated the issue. We allowed the
appellant -- the --
City of Miami Page 240 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Robbins: Applicant.
Chairman Teele: -- the applicant to make its case, and now we're to hear you. Do you all have
a compromise, or are you ready to put on your case?
Mr. Robbins: We're ready to present our case.
Chairman Teele: And how was the wedding?
Commissioner Winton: Wow.
Mr. Robbins: The wedding was fine, but I missed the dinner because I rushed back to here at 8:
30.
Chairman Teele: Should use a cellphone. We could have told you. Go right ahead, Counsel.
Mr. Robbins: You'll have to give me your cell number next time.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, we missed dinner, too.
Mr. Robbins: My name is Kent Harrison Robbins and I want to say good morning to everybody.
There are two matters before you today: One is a proposed change in the planning designation
of the Ransom Everglades Middle School site, and the second is the changing of the zoning. The
Planning Advisory Board denied the change of the planning from R-1 to GI. There was a
concern before at that time about the -- what would be the appropriate zoning for a site that's
immediately adjacent to residential single-family homes in one of the most delightful areas of
Miami, and the question became at the time at the Planning Advisory Board was what can be
done in GI, Governmental Institutional use. This is what could be done next to single-family
homes when you change it from R-1 to GI. You can put auditoriums, libraries, museums and
galleries, financial institutions, adult and child daycare centers, hospitals, offices, businesses
and professional offices and clinics, churches, foster care homes, group homes, cemeteries,
convalescent homes, nursing homes, pharmaceutical laboratories; this is what GI presently
allows, and this is what would be permitted under GI, adjacent to these single-family homes of
the clients that I represent. Now, let's put in the record who I represent so it's very clear. I
represent Ben Cooney, Lynn Kislak, Alley Resoi (phonetic), Lawrence "Monk" and Kitty Terry,
Fred Verploeg, Anthea Williams, Joy Intriago, Richard Conjur, Maggie Conjur, David Wells,
Jim McMaster, Ron Nelson, William Hill. These are all people that live in the single-family
residential neighborhood. They have grave concern about what is going to happen for -- we
don't know what will happen at Ransom in two years, five years, ten years, and zoning is -- and
planning is supposed to speak for the future. Right now, Ransom's rationale is to allow a site
plan development, a specific site plan development and to put into place a zoning which would
prevent neighbors from filing effective objections against the proposed changing on site by
expanding to a GI zoning. This is not a sound and supportable grounds for replanning and
rezoning next to a single-family neighborhood. Good planning looks at the future and looks at
what potentially could occur on this site, and with the broad GI zoning, the danger is that any of
these uses can be put on that site. Now there is some discussion -- and, in fact, the Planning
Advisory Board recommended changing of the text of the GI zoning to restrict what could be put
on site. The restrictions were designated as to two issues: residential high-rise, residential use,
which under the present Code, you could put a Grovenor on the site, an R-4 designation, as well
as you could put office -- related office buildings on the site. That's what's allowed on the
present GI text. Now there has been some restrictions being proposed but those GI text changes
are in process, and they're supposed to go before this Commission for discussion next
Commission meeting so, right now, we're utilizing it going forward under the current GI text,
which allows a Grovenor, which allows high-rise office buildings, as well as allows all these
City of Miami Page 241 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
other miscellaneous, nonconforming or non -compatible uses, and that's what GI would allow,
and that's why the Planning Advisory Board could not get a majority of five -- of the vote to
approve recommendation of a GI designation for this site. Good planning looks for the future.
To understand the future and why my clients are so concerned about what has happened, they
look at what has happened on -- with Ransom Everglades in the past. Ransom Everglades
acquires property and has a history of selling property. They sold the property that they own
between Bayshore Drive and the bay, and it ended up becoming a development. They see a
constant aggregation of lots expanding the size of Ransom Everglades, and they see the
expansion of the buildout going forward. There is nothing that is being proposed today that
would restrict the number of students that will eventually go there, the enrollment or the capacity
of the school. There's nothing on there and there has been no discussions or consideration of
restrictions of growth. Now, let's be realistic, we live in a capitalist society that encourages
growth. That applies even to our institutions. Everybody wants to grow and expand. In fact, I
think the realism is if an institution does not expand and does not grow, it's seen as sick and, in
fact, that's recognition of when something is sick is when it doesn't grow, so what we have here is
inevitably a constant threat to the residents adjoining this property, a threat of expansion and
growth of an incompatible use adjacent to their homes, and what they wish to occur is for the R-
1 zoning to remain in place. That's what there preference is and, although, there is discussion,
the threat of converting to GI and allowing substantial expansion over time is a threat that will
only be encouraged by allowing it to go to GI from the R-1. I'd ask you at this time to vote no
against GI, and although we will be sitting down and talking to Ransom Everglades, it's a
concern that our zoning and planning laws should protect the residents, and it should be
residents first, and no matter how good a school the Everglades and Ransom is, no matter how
great their institution may be, it's an institution that's going to grow, expand and encroach on a
single-family residential neighborhood, and it's this Commission's responsibility to support
residents first. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Counsel, are you done?
Mr. Robbins: Yes, I am.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Do you have anyone that's going to be testing on your behalf?
Mr. Robbins: There will be some other people testifying, yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: On your side? Well, let's get them. Could you step up, please? State
your name for the record.
Lynn Kislak: Sure. My name is Lynn Kislak and I reside at 2001 South Bayshore Drive with my
husband Ben Cooney. I live next door, adjacent to the Ransom property that is the subject of the
rezoning application. My property is called Banyan Bluff. In other words, Ransom wants to put
GI zoning right next door to my home, converting an R-1 zoning that has been exclusively
residential in Coconut Grove to GI. To accommodate Ransom's growth interest, while at the
same time protecting the residential character of our neighborhood, I and my neighbors have
agreed to allow Ransom to build its campus within the R-1 zoning, according to its submitted site
plan. That will allow ransom to expand, as it needs to, while still preserving the residential
neighborhood and incorporating neighbor input into future expansion plans. Any of the Ransom
changes to the property will directly affect my property and that of many others. Even within the
R-1 zoning, Ransom must not be permitted to expand its campus without protecting the
neighborhood with adequate landscape buffers and lush tree plantings. The Historic and
Environmental Preservation Board previously approved the Ransom landscaping plan for some
of the property when Ransom was previously discussing expansion. Ransom must be required to
adhere to at least that degree of landscaping, buffering and setbacks in its quest to convert its
historically residential school into a much larger institution. In an August 8, 2000 letter from
Carter McDowell to Lourdes Slazyk, Ransom agreed to landscape conditions and use
City of Miami Page 242 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
restrictions that would be compatible with the neighborhood, and those limitations and
restrictions must be included in any approval. I have copies of that letter for the Commissioners,
and I would like to have it put in the record, please. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Could you please hand it to the Clerk to be put on the record?
Counselor, is there anyone else you wish to call? OK, ma'am, please state your name for the
record.
Anthea Verploeg: My name is Anthea E. Verploeg. I live at 1980 Tigertail Avenue. My
property is contiguous with Ransom's property on two sides. I live next door to Ransom. The
head of school, Ellen Moceri's single-family residence next to me at 1990 Tigertail, and the stone
house next to her, both owned by Ransom, do not need GI zoning. The playing fields exist now
on R-1 and do not need GI zoning, so that leaves the gymnasium -- the proposed gymnasium.
Most of the gymnasium is to be on existing GI, with only a few feet of gym extending onto R-1. If
Ransom must have GI for the gym, rather than a special exception or a variance, that is all they
need it for, a few feet, not eight acres. Ransom is insisting on GI for the whole property even
though they don't need GI. Why? One, so they don't have to deal with the neighbors ever again
and, two, so that any future property acquisitions automatically fold in because they already
have GI on all their property. First of all, they live in our neighborhood. They should have to
deal with us, as we have to deal with all of our neighbors. That's what is called a neighborhood
and, second, Ransom says it has spent years trying to deal with the neighbors but, actually,
Ransom has spent most of its time and energy acquiring property, mostly from deceased owners
who predated them in the neighborhood. In fact, Ransom does not intend to stop at eight acres.
This afternoon, Carter McDowell indicated that they were not seeking GI in the properties
beyond the Cooney and Verploeg properties. At this time, but that that they would be back,
presumably, after they have acquired the Verploeg and Cooney properties. The ultimate plan is
to have at least the current eight and three more; 11 acres zoned GI in the middle of the North
Grove along the ridge line. Taken with the Grovenor, that is a significant part of the ridge going
GI. The Ransom request for GI zoning on eight acres is unnecessary and will allow conversion
of the Ransom school from a residentially compatible school to the type of building intensive
institution that does not belong in a residential neighborhood. Ransom asserts that the
neighbors are unreasonable. In fact, we are currently circulating a petition to show Ransom and
the City Commission that we are very reasonable. At first, we were all shocked at the thought of
a 55-foot building and additional traffic being transferred from Emathla to Tigertail. However,
many of us, including those of us who have been identified by the school as the troublemakers
agree that this site plan, as proposed, is attractive, and the 55-foot gym will be flanked by two
enormous 70-foot trees as camouflage. Our petition says we will support the proposed site plan
on R-1, but not on GI. We would not oppose a variance, but the school is in our neighborhood,
which property is zoned R-1. In fact, although we just began collecting signatures five days ago,
we have already obtained 56 individuals' signatures and the support of the North Grove
Neighborhood Association Board. We think we are being generous to offer this compromise as
is there, and it accomplishes the goals of both the neighbors and of Ransom. Ransom can build
its 55-foot gym and regulation playing fields, limiting GI to that which is required. There is no
reason to give eight to eleven acres over to GI, giving Ransom carte blanche. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much. Is there anyone else? Sir, yes.
Jim McMaster: Jim McMaster, 2940 Southwest 30th Court. I think there's room for a
compromise here. I handed out this little map. You have the yellow area on the right-hand side;
Tigertail's at the top, South Bayshore at the bottom, and Emathla to the left. The yellow area is
the area that presently is zoned Government Institutional. The area outlined in pink is the area
that they're asking now to rezone from single-family to government institutional. If you notice on
the right-hand side, there's sort of a gray area. That actually is one of three houses in Banyan
Bluff that the school has already bought. From what I understand, the house on top of it --
second house in Banyan Bluff, they're working on buying right now, and on the right-hand edge
City of Miami Page 243 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
of the paper, you'll notice a gray area running from Tigertail all the way down to South
Bayshore. They already own those two estates, and that's what the previous lady was speaking
about, which if they can get these last few remaining properties, including hers, they'll have a
parcel of 11 acres in the heart of the North Grove. The Ransom Everglades Main Highway
campus is zoned single-family. They have built both a gym and an auditorium on that property,
both of them got variances. I do understand the problems they would have with a variance on
their gym, so the compromise I am proposing is, if you look at the blue area in the middle, that is
a lot, and you'll notice that the gym slops over half on the single-family lot and half on the
existing GI. If the City Commission voted to rezone only that one lot to GI, they wouldn't have to
worry about a variance. They could wrap these two buildings together, that and the library,
which is being put up on existing GI, and it wouldn't cause any trouble. They wouldn't have to
worry about one neighbor appealing their variance and taking it to court. The other thing they
area asking me for are playing fields. They're asking for five additional residential lots to be
zoned GI so they can put in playing fields, and that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
When the City of Miami went through this rezoning to GI back in 1990, this entire property was
zoned single-family. They rezoned the four lots in yellow to GI. Perhaps, the Planning Director
could tell you why they had six additional lots that they've owned since the '70s that the City of
Miami did not zone GI in 1990, and it would appear that the City decided to only rezone the lots
with the buildings on it in 1990, and to leave the other lots that were empty playing fields as
single-family, and so I'm suggesting you continue that tradition. They're asking for a new
building. It's a reasonable expansion. Give them GI on the one lot and leave the rest of it single
-family. The two most directly impacted abutting neighbors just spoke to you. You'll hear that
one of these neighbors is referred to commonly as "those people, " and how "those people" have
tied them up for five years. Times change. "Those people" now are being faced with eight acres
of GI next to them and, suddenly, playing fields are looking pretty good, so I think we have one
month between now and second reading. If I understand correctly, Ransom is going to the
Heritage and Environmental Preservation Board on July 20th. Those neighbors can appear at
that board and, by the time they get back here, you'll know whether, you know, those neighbors
are willing to compromise or not, so I do urge you today, on first reading, just to pass the one lot
and tell both the neighbors and the school to get their act together and come to a compromise.
Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Is there anyone else speaking in opposition?
Ron Nelson: Hello. My name is Ron Nelson, 2535 Inagua Avenue. I'm President of the Coconut
Grove Civic Club.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. May I stop you? Is there -- what, Item 29?
Ms. Thompson: 29.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there anybody here that needs an interpreter for Item 29? I guess
not. They could -- so we could send them home. It's getting pretty late. Sir, I apologize. You
may proceed.
Mr. Nelson: That's quite all right. Thank you. I'm -- unfortunately, I was not here earlier when
they came up before you. That was unfortunate. I don't know what presentation was made, so
I'm shooting from the hip. I will tell you that we had agreed that we would come to this meeting
tonight and try not to be adversarial, and try and get through this meeting, but nothing was ever
told to me that they were going to bring a bunch of children here and move to the front of the
agenda. Thank you all for making them come back later when we came at the time that we felt
we were going to be heard.
Commissioner Winton: I thought you didn't want to be adversarial.
City of Miami Page 244 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Nelson: That point needed to be made, though. OK I have another point that needs to be
made clear, as well. I was mentioned as client for the attorney that spoke. I don't know if I'm
officially a client or not, although I am in agreement with what he's stated. What I am here for is
that the school has offered, in lieu of being allowed to rezone this entire property GI, a covenant
to the Coconut Grove Civic Club. The Civic Club got a copy of this covenant and read it. We
have not agreed to this covenant. We feel as though the covenant should run with the neighbors.
The covenant was initiated by the neighbors. There are neighbors that live on Emathla that
initiated the idea of a covenant, yet, they're not included in the covenant. They do not want the
neighbors included in the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) because if they are included in the covenant, then
they feel that they could have adversarial neighbors again, and they don't want that to happen.
They want it to run with a group like the Civic Club.
Commissioner Winton: Ron, I think all those neighbors were here this morning; the Emathla --
Mr. Nelson: I think some of them are still here and, as I'm saying, they are not listed in the
covenant. The covenant is listed with the Coconut Grove Civic Club. I think those neighbors
should be included in the covenant, especially since they initiated it. Several offers have been
given back to the school. We are still in negotiation, as you heard from Mr. McMaster. One of
the offers is Mr. McMaster's offer. I would like to include in that that since the school has
offered a covenant to revert the GI property back to R-1 if they were to sell it -- I know you can't
address that covenant, but I need to let you know that has been offered -- that that same offer
should be included in Mr. McMaster's proposal. I have suggested that if the school is dead
serious about the fact that if they ever sell this property it will be sold as R-1 property, that the
agreement should state that if they ever sell this property, they will first revert it to R-1 before
selling it. Don't leave it up to the neighbors to make sure it's done, or up to the Civic Club to
enforce a covenant; just simply state, if we ever sell this property, we will first convert it to R-1.
That eliminates this idea of the covenant. I still like Mr. McMaster's idea along with the
statement that all GI property reverted to R-1 if they sell it. Again, this school is expanding. The
bought R-1 property in an R-1 neighborhood. They got to live with that. They can get their
playing fields in R-1. The neighbors have all gotten up here and spoken at other meetings and
said, hey, we're all for the school. We love them. We just don't want this entire property to go
GI. Give them their gym, just don't let them rezone it all GI, and I think you need to respect the
neighbors' wishes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Nelson: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's very -- Thank you so much. Counsel, is there anyone else that
you bring up? Please state your name for the record.
Joyce Nelson: Joyce Nelson, 2535 Inagua, Coconut Grove. I guess in my 14 years, this is the
latest I've ever been here, but also this is one of the more outrageous issues I have ever seen. I
just -- it was unbelievable that they were asking for this, but I agree with whatever everyone has
said today, and I'm hoping that you will really seriously think about this. It's a major, major
issue for the North Grove neighborhood, and I know, for a fact, that the neighbors have worked
very hard to come to a resolution for this. I've been to meetings and I know they've been to a lot
of meetings, so there has been a lot of thought.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Ma'am.
Norma Post: I'm Norma Post. I live at 2061 Tigertail Avenue, and I have to put my two cents in
because things that are not mentioned. One is I live directly across the property from Ransom.
I'm facing the back of the gymnasium and 100 feet of that GI zoning. I want you to know that the
neighbors, generally, and I do not like the idea of a 55-foot building, which does not conform in
City of Miami Page 245 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
any manner whatsoever with the neighborhood. It's going to stand out like a sore thumb because
they're building a one-story office under it, and a gymnasium above. That's what their plans are,
so I want you to know that we are making a tremendous concession in allowing them, granting to
them with a variance, or by what any means possible, we will agree to this 55-foot monstrosity,
just as they have down on Main Highway, the Ransom school has a gymnasium there, which they
were able to put there without a GI zoning, under R-1 zoning with a variance, so if it can be
done that way, without any change of zoning, whether you want to call it a special permit or
variance, or by some means whatsoever, we in the neighborhood -- because I have been
circulating the petition even though we're not -- we were not relishing the idea of this building,
we will agree to it. We will not fight it as long as there is no change of zoning. The north part of
the Grove is a very narrow strip of land between the bay and U.S. 1. You change anything there
and you have changed the entire region, and you have a different Coconut Grove, so I hope that
you will take this under consideration.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Post. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We realize it's late. All right. Counsel, is that -- sir.
David Wells: Hello. My name is David Wells. I reside at 2930 Seminole Street. I've been asked
by the board of the North Grove Neighborhood Association to speak a few words on their behalf.
The North Grove Neighborhood Association represents neighbors between 17th and 22nd
Avenue, between Tigertail and U.S. 1. There are approximately 350 homes in this area. The
main thought that the board has asked me to convey to you all is the board generally opposes
what ransom is trying to do based upon the premise that Ransom could achieve its goals without
rezoning the entire property GI, and you heard variants of that from people who proceeded me,
so I won't dwell upon it, but if that's their only purpose -- which is to meet -- to match the plans
they put before you, there's a way to do it that's less intrusive and gives the neighborhood a
greater say in future matters that go beyond the stated plans. Please keep that in mind. There's
room for a compromise here. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much. Counsel, you'll be reserving some time for
rebuttal. OK The appellant's side.
Mr. McDowell: With all due respect, that would be a second rebuttal. We're the applicant. We
made our presentation earlier. They're not the applicant.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh.
Mr. McDowell: Typically, you don't grant rebuttal to the opponents.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, you may proceed.
Mr. McDowell: Let me talk a little bit -- and we had hoped to do this simply in straight -- in the
most straightforward manner possible, and I guess I'm going to need to hold this up so that
everybody can see it. Let's talk a little bit about the facts of where we are and where we've been,
and how we got to where we are.
Commissioner Winton: But talk quickly.
Mr. McDowell: Ms. Kislak and Ben Cooney live here. The Verploegs live here. That's another
house that we are working with to acquire.
Chairman Teele: I'm having a hard time hearing.
City of Miami Page 246 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. McDowell: I'm sorry. I'll be more -- I'll speak directly into the mike. I guess I wasn't
speaking directly into the mike. I find it ironic that Ms. Kislak says to you that we should comply
with a letter of August 8, 2000, from an application that we filed in 2000, where the HEP (
Historic and Environmental Preservation) Board did approve our plans for -- to expand our field
within the R-1 district, because it was she and her husband, Ben Cooney, and the Verploegs and
the other neighbors who appealed that approval. Without that appeal, we would not be standing
here before you tonight. We spent -- and I think you'll remember -- and we continued that matter
month, after month, after month, after month, trying to reach a compromise and an approval.
We have -- we literally have been at this since 1998. You might ask why did we acquire a
different property -- additional properties to these in question. We didn't start out with that as
our goal, but in the meetings with our neighbors -- the ones who are complaining about the
expansion of the school -- it was they who said, you should consider acquiring our properties
and the property behind us, and you can, once and for all, meet your field needs and your
athletic needs for your school. We had not considered that as a school prior to that time, and it
was actually based on those discussions that we, indeed, moved forward to attempt to acquire
their properties and the additional property to the north of it, so it is not something that the
school reached out to do initially. We do need to provide additional fields and facilities, as you
heard in our presentation earlier today. I would note, particularly -- Thank you. Put that up
there --that we are now a co-ed school. We have to provide athletic facilities for boys and girls.
We need twice the amount of room that a single -sex school, such as Carlton needs. We have to
provide those facilities. It was suggested that we have a history of selling property for
development. The reality is, this school sold one piece of property once. It was across the street
from here, from this campus. It was across Bayshore Drive. It is now Bayshore Villas. The
school had nothing to do with the development. Why did they do that? They sold that piece of
property to acquire the property that is adjacent to the school at the time because one of our
students was almost killed crossing Bayshore Drive, and we determined that it was not good
policy to have our children having to cross Bayshore Drive to get to the athletic fields so, yes, we
sold a piece of property once to acquire the property next door. We've had that field in place
since 1979, when we -- from that time. Why GI? As I said to you earlier today, the reason for
GI is, candidly, because of the gymnasium and what we need to build, and because it is the
correct legal approach to a school. As I pointed out to you earlier tonight -- or earlier today,
excuse me -- actually, yesterday, to be exact -- every public school, every single public school in
this City is GI -zoned or a more intense zoning. All of the private schools, other than daycare
centers are GI -zoned or more intensively zoned with the exception of three, only three in
Coconut Grove; no place else in the City. The City determined -- we didn't determine that GI
was the right zoning for a school; the City made that determination. That is what your Code
provides for. We already have GI zoning on our existing campus. Your staff has correctly said
that this is not a major change in the neighborhood. This is simply conforming the zoning on our
property to the existing use, and it is expanding it slightly onto one lot. It is the most defensible
position. We, candidly, unfortunately, believe we will be in litigation over this matter no matter
what we do. Our neighbors have appealed before, and I believe you each got a copy of a letter
delivered by Ben Cooney. addressed to you, Commissioner Winton, in the last two days. That is
an attack on everything we have tried to compromise from day one. We have had 40-some odd
meetings with neighbors. We continue to meet and talk with our neighbors. We have proffered a
covenant, which I handed out to you earlier tonight. That covenant provides that regardless of
the GI zoning, which is the most defensible legal position and the correct zoning under your
Zoning Code and your planning documents, that regardless of that zoning, this property will be
used only for school uses and for R-1 uses. We've gone further and said, in the event of a sale of
any portion of the property, that the school or the future owner or the contract purchaser of that
property cannot take any action to oppose a rezoning of this property to R-1, single-family, that
is unless, of course, the entire neighborhood has changed, and there is no longer a single-family
neighborhood, since this covenant will last until, you know, 2050, or whenever it is. We have
agreed in concept with our neighbors in the discussions with Ron Nelson that we will even agree
to amend this covenant so that we will file the application, if that is part of a global consensus
City of Miami Page 247 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
reaching settlement. If that's part of that, we're prepared to do that so that then it would be up to
you to downzone the property. We can't downzone it ourselves. If we could, we would. We can't
. That legal authority rests only with you, so in the event -- but we would agree to file the
application, again, if it's part of a global settlement.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, how much longer are you going to need on your rebuttal?
Mr. McDowell: Not long. We would ask you to pass this on first reading. We would ask you to
pass it as we have applied for it, and let us continue talking with the neighbors. I want to say
one other thing, and it's the thing that I think is most -- well, certainly not true, and that is, if
somehow you give us this GI zoning, we will never have to talk to our neighbors again. We
cannot do anything on this piece of property without -- that involves any tree on our property
without going to HEP Board. That's what happened in the year 2000. We got HEP Board
approval and our neighbors appealed it. That's what started this whole program. Regardless of
the GI zoning, we will have to go to that board no matter what we do. We -- there is no place on
this property where we can build another building, other than in the middle of the field, which is
why we've acquired the property, without having to go through that process. It is a complete
misnomer that we would be -- never have to talk to our neighbors again. We don't expect that to
ever be the case. We don't want or need that to be the case. We also proffered a number of
other restrictions; 65 percent green space and other things. Given the hour, I'm not going to go
through it. I would ask you to please pass it as we have adopted it -- as we have applied for it
for tonight. We understand that, on second reading, that you can reconsider that. We are
committed to working with the neighbors to see if we can come up with a compromise. The
variance approach will not work for us. It is completely indefensible. We cannot go there.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. All right. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner
Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, I'm too tired to deal with all the rationale, so here's going to be
my message, because I'm a fan of Ransom Everglades School. I think what they've gone through
for four years is not rational. However, I'm also a fan of protecting single-family
neighborhoods, and I've been very consistent in that, and schools do have -- they can be a great
neighbor; they can be an awful neighbor, and so schools can have a significant impact on the
neighborhood, and the need for schools to have to come back before the community, I think, is
very important long-term, so here's what I think I'm going to do: I think I'm going to move a
motion -- and, Mr. City Attorney, I want you to pay attention because -- listen to where I'm going
. I'm going to move, on first reading, that we accept this application as -is. However, the
message that I would like to send, if I'm allowed to, is that I'm not necessarily in favor of, nor do
I think it's right to rezone all of this GI. I don't like that idea, but I don't want Ransom to go
through the ransom that they've gone through for the last four years. I think that is equally
wrong, and I like Jim's -- Jim McMaster's idea here, which is to create a GI zoning out of the
area where you really need GI zoning, and not to turn the whole thing over into GI, where 20
years from now, 30 years now, Lord knows what's changed, but I think it isn't fair to the
neighborhood, but I probably want to say that if we can't -- if Ransom can't reach agreement,
particularly, with the litigants, by second reading, I would like to, on second reading, go back to
a model like this. If we go back to a model like this, does that -- will that -- is that a substantial
deviation that will require another reading that takes us back to first?
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. It's in the same footprint, so you can reduce it without sending it back.
Commissioner Winton: OK, good, so here's my point. I'm likely, in second reading, to go back
to something like this. I may be willing to modem this somewhat, but to a concept like this, as
opposed to the whole GI zoning, but if Ransom can't reach agreement with the litigants in this
issue, then I'm liable to support Ransom's desire to take this whole site GI, so is that pretty clear
to everybody?
City of Miami Page 248 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Crystal.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir, you're recognized.
Chairman Teele: That's not the way to do it then, respectfully.
Commissioner Winton: OK, then help me.
Chairman Teele: The way to do this is to propose an alternative --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Alternative.
Chairman Teele: -- for first reading, and pass both the primary, the one that's here before you
now, and the other one, the alternative, on first reading, so they both will go to second reading,
but if you reduce it, you can't go back to the original --
Mr. Maxwell: He's not talking about reducing.
Chairman Teele: -- on second reading, and especially if they don't agree.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Chairman Teele: Then you come right back to first reading.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: So the way to do this is to take up the proposal as it is, and to also immediately
take up a second ordinance that will be the alternative, which reduces it.
Commissioner Winton: But can we do that? It's not been noticed.
Mr. Maxwell: You can do that, but I think what the Commissioner was -- yes, you can do that.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Mr. Maxwell: But you could also pass it with the larger figure, the footprint that's been applied
for and, on second reading, reduce it if you wanted to. You could do it both ways, and I think --
if I heard you correctly the first time --
Chairman Teele: That's probably a better way to do it.
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: But, again --
Commissioner Winton: I think that's what I --
Chairman Teele: -- I think -- from a legal point of view, but from letting the public know what
City of Miami Page 249 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
the options are, it may be better to have both of them out there, that way everybody can
understand. It's up to you.
Commissioner Winton: I don't care. I mean, the point I'm trying to make is that where I would
prefer to end up is in a model similar to Jim McMaster's, but I don't want this dragging on, and
so if we can't get some rational agreement out of the rest of the neighbors, then I don't think it's
appropriate nor any fair to put Ransom through what they've gone through that it is to have to
deal with this whole GI zoning, so if y'all want peace, then bring peace to the table once and for
all, and we can end up with a compromise. You don't want peace, I'm going to give Ransom
what they want. That's my point.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: So, Mr. City Attorney, whatever you think I ought to move is what I want
to move. Whatever you think I should move, I will move.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney, could you put the motion on the table?
Mr. Maxwell: Well -- what I heard was that you were moving -- you did not go with the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, he's moving everything.
Commissioner Winton: I didn't go with everything.
Mr. Maxwell: -- alternative. OK.
Commissioner Winton: I was looking to you for advice. I mean, that's what I just said.
Mr. Maxwell: You're moving the ordinance as applied for at this particular time.
Commissioner Winton: On first reading.
Mr. Maxwell: On first reading.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: First reading. All right. There's a motion to approve as --
Chairman Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- applied. Second. Open for discussion.
Commissioner Winton: And we will deal, at second reading, with some of the other conditions
that we might need to build in to whatever, but I don't -- you know, I'm too tired tonight.
Mr. Maxwell: Well -- you have two ordinances here. You have the comp. --
Unidentified Speaker: Comprehensive.
Mr. Maxwell: -- plan change. No conditions on that, and the covenant doesn't apply to that.
Then you have the companion zoning atlas change, which they would apply to.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Maxwell: What you're voting on now is the comp. plan change.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. There's a motion and a second. Open for discussion.
City of Miami Page 250 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Hearing none --
Mr. Maxwell: An ordinance of the Miami City Commission amending --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- it's an ordinance. Mr. City Attorney, read it.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Ms. Thompson: Roll call.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Clerk, call the roll.
Ms. Thompson: Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
(COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL.)
Commissioner Winton: Yes, but I want to make another point. I think that one of the things we
did today, Mr. Chairman, I think we don't want to do in the future. We bifurcated this discussion
and the problem with bifurcating it is that those residents, Coconut Grove residents, who came to
the meeting this morning and testified, were in favor of, and the ones that are opposed didn't
hear the ones that are in favor of, and so I think that process is awful because the neighbors
ought to be looking at each other, and we ain't the only bad guy here. I mean, so there were as
many neighbors testified this morning in favor of, and there -- residents, residents of Coconut
Grove -- testified in favor of as many this morning as did this evening, so that's the only problem
-- I just don't want to bifurcate these things in the future. I want all the neighbors to hear each
other and hear their points of view, and then we make a decision, and everybody on both sides
hears the decision we're making on the basis of what they've all heard each other say. Yes.
(COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL.)
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And the resolution passes unanimously.
Ms. Thompson: Ordinance.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Ordinance passes unanimously. It's pretty late. All right.
PZ.24 04-00559a ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AMENDING PAGE NO. 43, OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO.
11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-1
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SD-3 COCONUT GROVE MAJOR STREETS
OVERLAY DISTRICT AND SD-18 MINIMUM LOT SIZE DISTRICT TO G/I
GOVERNMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED
AT APPROXIMATELY 1990, 2000 AND 2020 TI G E RTAI L AVENUE AND 2015
AND 2035 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 251 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00559a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00559a Analysis.PDF
04-00559a Zoning Map.pdf
04-00559 & 04-00559a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00559a ZB Reso.PDF
04-00559a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00559a Legislation.PDF
04-00559 & 04-005559a Exhibit A. P D F
04-00559a corrected Exhibit A.pdf
04-00559a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from R-1 Single -Family
Residential, SD-3 Coconut Grove Major Streets Overlay District and SD-18
Minimum Lot Size District to G/I Government and Institutional to Change the
Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 1990, 2000 and 2020 Tigertail Avenue and 2015
and 2035 South Bayshore Drive
APPLICANT(S): Ransom Everglades School, Inc.
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Carter N. McDowell, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on May 24,
2004 by a vote of 6-3. See companion File ID 04-00559.
PURPOSE: This will change the above properties to G/I Government and
Institutional.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Companion.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ (Planning and Zoning) --
Carter McDowell: There's another companion ordinance.
Kent Harrison Robbins: Do you have a time certain for the July 22nd hearing?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's go ahead and pass the second and we'll get you a time certain.
All right.
Commissioner Winton: Well, we've got to figure out --
Mr. Maxwell: You have one more.
Commissioner Winton: -- what kind of time -- you've seen how well our time certains work.
City of Miami Page 252 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Mr. Robbins: We're trying our best.
Commissioner Winton: So are we.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All I could say is, pack a lunch, maybe a breakfast.
Commissioner Winton: It's a challenge.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: I like the concept of time certain. It just --
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman, we had a non -controversial D -- 16.
Mr. McDowell: We have a companion item.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, they have a companion item.
Ms. Slazyk: Well, there's --
Mr. Maxwell: This has --
Ms. Slazyk: -- a companion, which is the zoning change, PZ.25. Oh, I'm sorry, PZ.24.
Commissioner Winton: What's the significance of passing this --
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): 24.
Commissioner Winton: -- right now?
Ms. Slazyk: 24. I'm sorry. This is the one where you would be accepting the voluntarily
proffered covenant, and what I would ask is that the applicant, if they make any changes to the
covenant before second reading, that the -- our Law Department really needs them in advance.
Commissioner Winton: Well, and -- yeah -- so all these covenants may have potential to change
significantly at -- on the basis of how the comp. plan may change when we get -- so we don't
have --
Ms. Slazyk: It could because it would change the legal --
Commissioner Winton: -- any problem with changing all those covenants at the next go round,
right?
Mr. Maxwell: No.
Commissioner Winton: OK, because it's too -- I'm way too tired to deal with all these covenants
and rationalize through them, but I won't be too tired the next time we get here.
Ms. Slazyk: Right, and just -- what I just wanted to add for the record, it's related to their
covenant. We have an ordinance that the Planning Advisory Board had recommended this
Commission -- it's coming to you at the next meeting -- that is an amendment to GI that says
when GI -zoned property is being used for government or institutional zoning, when it ceases to
City of Miami Page 253 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
be used for that, it goes back to the most restrictive zoning around it.
Commissioner Winton: Hallelujah.
Ms. Slazyk: So the PAB passed a separate motion after they made their recommendation on here
urging your support of that ordinance, and it will be before you at your next meeting, so --
Commissioner Winton: Well, that's good.
Ms. Slazyk: Just as a sidebar --
Commissioner Winton: Let me ask you another question then. In order to put that into effect, do
both of these items have to always pass at the same time together?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Ms. Slazyk: The land use and zoning, yeah.
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. Whenever you amend your comprehensive plan, the --
Mr. McDowell: It would have been before you on --
Mr. Maxwell: -- zoning has to be consistent with it.
Mr. McDowell: That ordinance would have been here tonight, but the neighbors asked to defer
it at the Planning Board for a month.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK.
Mr. Robbins: May I respond to that?
Ms. Slazyk: No, it's too late.
Commissioner Winton: No, because I don't want to deal with it, so --
Ms. Slazyk: It's too --
Mr. Robbins: May I please respond to that?
Commissioner Winton: -- we'll deal -- no. We'll deal with it --
Mr. Robbins: There is a substantial change made --
Commissioner Winton: No.
Mr. Robbins: OK --
Commissioner Winton: We'll deal with it next go round. I'm too tired.
Mr. Robbins: Mischaracterization.
Commissioner Winton: I don't care.
Ms. Slazyk: All right.
City of Miami Page 254 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: I mean, I'm not --
Ms. Slazyk: So, PZ.24 is the zoning change and this -- like I said, it's for the covenant.
Commissioner Winton: All right. So, so move.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: And, Commissioner, may I also -- just quickly. The question you asked me, do
they have to pass at the same time. That's a comp. change and an atlas change. They have to --
the answer is that they can't be -- the comp. plan can't go into effect and leave an inconsistent
atlas change, so you could adopt one on first reading and not adopt the other one just yet, but
you couldn't do it on second reading. They would have to -- by second reading, they would have
to go together.
Commissioner Winton: Well, what I want to ask you next time -- I don't want to deal with it
tonight, but what I'll ask you at the next meeting is this plan to change the way GI works. I want
to know when that goes into effect, because that may be part of the solution also, so --
Mr. McDowell: We support the ordinance.
Ms. Slazyk: I think it's a citywide solution.
Commissioner Winton: We've been -- OK.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: OK Thank you.
Ms. Thompson: Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/0.
Mr. McDowell: Thank you very much. We will see you on July 22nd.
Commissioner Winton: And, hopefully, we have -- see July 22nd with peace.
PZ.25 04-00575 ORDINANCE
First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA BY AMENDING SECTION 1102, ENTITLED "
NONCONFORMING LOTS" RELATING TO THE R-2 DUPLEX ZONING
DISTRICT BY PERMITTING BY CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT NO MORE THAN
ONE SINGLE-FAMILY UNIT ON AN INDIVIDUAL NONCONFORMING R-2
DUPLEX LOT; AND BY MODIFYING PROVISIONS REGARDING
REPLATTING OF NONCONFORMING LOTS TO ALLOW REDUCTIONS IN
THE DEGREE OF NONCONFORMITY; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 255 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00575 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00575 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00575 Legislation.PDF
04-00575 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text
APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, Chief Administrator
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission
on May 19, 2004 by a vote of 7-0.
PURPOSE: This will allow single-family residences on nonconforming duplex
lots.
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.25 is the last item. This is a text
amendment concerning nonconforming lots and nonconforming -- two different amendments
with nonconforming lots. One of these was a request made when we did our nonconforming lot
ordinance that had to do with the West Grove and the ability to do single-family units on
individual nonconforming R-2 lots, and the other one is a provision to allow reductions in the
degree of nonconformity of nonconforming lots when there's a street or alley closure. These are
both things that we've been working on. Second reading I'd be glad to explain to it further.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward. The public hearing is closed. Madam Clerk.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 5/0.
PZ.26 04-00211a ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1818 AND 1884 NORTHWEST NORTH
RIVER DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "INDUSTRIAL"
City of Miami Page 256 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
AND "GENERAL COMMERCIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL";
MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED
AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
04-00211a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00211a Analysis.PDF
04-00211a Land Use Map.pdf
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211b Aerial Map.pdf
04-00211a PAB Reso.PDF
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211b Miami Riv Recomm.pdf
04-00211a Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00211a Legislation.PDF
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211b Exhibit A. P D F
04-00211a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00211a - submittal.pdf
04-00211a - submittal.pdf
04-00211a - submittal 1.pdf
04-00211ab - submittal.pdf
04-00211c - submittal.pdf
04-00211d - submittal.pdf
04-00211a - submittal.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 10544, from "Industrial"
and "General Commercial" to "Restricted Commercial" to Change the Future
Land Use Designation of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan
LOCATION: Approximately 1818 and 1884 NW N River Drive
APPLICANT(S): Balbino Investments, Inc, Contract Purchaser & River
Marina, Inc, Owner
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Recommended denial to the City
Commission on March 1, 2004 by a vote of 6-4.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval of a motion,
which failed (due to failure to obtain the required five favorable votes),
constituting a denial to City Commission on April 7, 2004 by a vote of 4-3.
See companion File Ds 04-00211 and 04-00211 b.
PURPOSE: This will allow a unified commercial development site for the
proposed Hurricane Cove Major Use Special Permit Project.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
City of Miami Page 257 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12550
Direction to the Administration by Commissioner Winton to schedule a discussion item
concerning the Miami River at the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for October 14,
2004; further Chairman Teele requested that said discussion item be scheduled for 2 hours as a
workshop.
Direction to the Clerk of the Board by Chairman Teele to provide additional notice for the
Planning Advisory Board' s workshop on the Miami River, which is scheduled to be held in the
Staff Room at City Hall, on Wednesday, June 30, 2004; further requesting that the Code
Enforcement Board meeting, which is also scheduled for this same date in the Commission
Chambers, be moved to the Staff Room in order that the Planning Advisory Board's workshop
may be televised in the Chambers. [Note: The Clerk reminded the Executive Secretary of
Hearing Boards on 7-2-04 to comply with directive.]
Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, please, we really need your cooperation. Madam
Director, you're recognized to proceed. Commissioner Gonzalez, you're recognized to handle
the matter.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I have a group of residents ofAllapattah that came in
support of this item. Among them, I have a group of senior citizens that have been here since 4
o'clock this afternoon. I just want to recognize that they are in support of this project, so they
can leave because, you know, it's almost 8 o'clock. They've been here four hours waiting for the
item to be called, so they are being recognized as in support of the project.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. -- Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
Mr. Maxwell: I suggest maybe you want to let a spokesman for one of them make the comment
real quickly.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Mr. Chairman, the City Attorney's suggesting that I should
have a spokesman to speak on behalf of the Allapattah residents. Yes, sir.
Gus Abalo: Commissioner Gonzalez, first of all, thank you very much for --
Mr. Maxwell: Name and address.
Mr. Abalo: -- getting us up on the docket for 26, 27 and 28.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Name and address.
Mr. Abalo: My name is -- I'm sorry -- my name is Gus Abalo, 1700 Northwest North River Drive
. We have close to 30 residents ofAllapattah, and also some residents that live on the south side
of the river, all greatly in favor of the project. Everybody believes that this is something that's
going to better the neighborhood and better the quality of life that they have, and also better the
services at the community center. Thank you again, and --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Mr. Abalo: -- we appreciate the time.
Lourdes Slazyk: OK For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Planning and Zoning Department. PZs (
City of Miami Page 258 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Planning and Zoning) 20 -- PZ.26 and 27 are second reading items for a change to the
comprehensive plan, land use amendment from industrial and general commercial to restricted
commercial, for the property at 1818 and 1884 Northwest North River Drive. The companion
zoning change is from SD-4, waterfront industrial and C-2, to C-1 restricted commercial. The
land use change was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Department. The
Planning Advisory Board had a motion for approval, which failed, constituting a denial. It was
a 4 to 3 vote, and this was passed on first reading by the City Commission April 22nd. The
zoning change, which is PZ.27, was recommended for approval by the Zoning Board, approval
by the Planning and Zoning Department, and passed by the City Commission first reading April
22nd. PZ.28 is the Major Use Special Permit, but we'll wait and do that presentation after the
land use and zoning items.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. We don't have a quorum. Oh, yes. We have Commissioner
Regalado. All right.
Chairman Teele: Madam Attorney. Ladies and gentlemen, let me explain where we are, please.
Where is that order of the day? The time is now 7: 45. We are now about to take up an item that
was set aside at 5 p.m., which is why I don't like time certain, Items 26, 27, and 28. Following
that item -- these items, we will then take up PZ.30, 31 and 32 that was set for a time certain of 6
:30. We want to apologize to everyone that is here on 27, 28 -- 26, 27 and 28, as well as those
persons that have been here waiting on items 30, 31 and 32, relating to the 27th Avenue and
Coral Way and the overlay district issues so, again, the reason for the delay is that we had one
item that took up a lot of time, and we could not take that item up until approximately 4 o'clock,
and then we, of course, got backed up. We sincerely apologize to everyone that is frustrated that
has been waiting, and we're asking the Manager to make available any refreshments that we
can, all right, like water, cold water. In fact, just go to any Commissioner's office and get cold
water, if you're frustrated and tired, and everybody's office is your office, so just please feel free
to make yourself at home. We really apologize. Counsel, can we move forward with this?
Lucia Dougherty: Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Mayor -- I mean, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Commission. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on behalf
of the owner and the applicant, which are the same in this case. Tony Acosta, a principal, is
with us today, as well as my partner, Gloria Velasquez. At your last meeting, you all passed, on
first reading, the down zoning and the down planning of this particular site from industrial to
restricted commercial. You noted the difference at that time between the industrial designation
and the restricted commercial. Industrial, again, allowing manufacturing, assemblage, storage
activity. The industrial designation -- I'm now reading from your comprehensive plan --
generally includes activities that would otherwise generate excessive amounts of noise, smoke,
fumes, elimination, traffic hazards, wastes and negative visual impact and, Mr. Chairman, with
your permission, I'm going to make only one presentation on all three items.
Chairman Teele: That's fine, and we will allow the public to make comment on all three items.
Ms. Dougherty: OK And what I'm going to have happen immediately, and reserve for rebuttal,
is I'm going to have the architect show you the Major Use Special Permit plans and project.
What I want you to note before I do that is that this project has been changed five different times.
We've reduced the height. We've reduced the density by 200 units. We've reduced the number of
buildings from four to three, but all before coming here. We've publicly -- we have a publicly
accessible river walk. The garages are lined entirely with townhouse units, along the river and
along the street between the building -- and in between the buildings. We've complied with the
Miami River Greenway Plan, as found by the Infill Committee, and the waterfront -- there will be
a waterfront ship store and restaurants, and there will be 1,000 new condominium units in
Allapattah, and I just want to talk for a minute about Allapattah. Allapattah is first -- was first a
community development target area, and I have this neighborhood plan, which was the last
actual plan created in 1994 through 1996, and it's very telling with respect to Allapattah today,
City of Miami Page 259 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
and I just want to read a few of the things that they were telling you in 1994. It said that the out
migration of middle income families and businesses will be accelerated unless you have a better
environment for living and working. It says the housing will continue to deteriorate because of
sever overcrowding, and the aging housing stock. However, the degree of deterioration can be
reduced if a comprehensive and aggressive redevelopment and rehabilitation strategies are
implemented. More importantly, it said, higher density housing development with more
amenities may occur within the vicinity of the Miami River and the Civic Medical Center
complex. This type of redevelopment will be marketed for Civic Center Medical -- Civic and
Medical Center employees. Also, mixed use commercial residential development is expected to
occur in these areas, and then the number of renter occupied units will continue to be high.
However, the rate could be decreased if more condominium units were put in Allapattah. Now,
this is in the Neighborhood Planning Program of 1994. Since that period of time, you actually
have a new consolidated plan that's coming before you, and Gloria is going to pass out the
consolidated plan and statistical evidence that is currently in that plan, and it's very interesting
because Allapattah has one of the highest employment areas in the City. It has the UM/Jackson
Memorial Medical Center, the Civic Center, and the Veterans Administration Center, Cedars
Medical Center, Richard Gerstein Justice Building, the State Attorney's Office, Miami -Dade
Community College, Lindsay Hopkins Technical Education Center, and guess what? It's the
highest employment area in the City, and Goodwill Manufacturing, the U.S. Department of
Commerce, is expanding its Goodwill and will anticipate 2,000 more jobs, but if you continue
looking at this handout that I gave you, there are only 6,096 units -- residential units in all of
Allapattah. Only 20 percent of those are home occupied -- are owner occupied. Then single
families, there is only 4,136 -- actually, take it back. There are 4,796 units in Allapattah that are
home occupied -- homeowner occupied, and here's an amazing statistic. You know how many
units there are vacant in Allapattah? 393. You have literally tens of hundreds of thousands of
people who work in the Civic Center and there are vacancies of 393 units. This will provide 1,
000 units, new homeownership occupied -- homeownership and occupied units on the river that
will be a real impetus for economic development for Allapattah. It's also consistent with the
residential zoning all around it, and I want to just -- this map -- this is the project that is
proposed. Immediately next to it to the east is the same zoning category that we're proposing,
which is the River Run condos, and the Miami River Yacht Club condos, or rental building. We
have, immediately to the -- cattycorner, the R-3 residential district, R-2 residential district, R-1
across the river, and also directly across the river from us, an R-4 residential district so, clearly,
residential is the category that the area should (INAUDIBLE) not industrial. Because what
happens when you have industrial? You have the same conflicts that Angel Gonzalez -- or
Commissioner Gonzalez has been pointing out just east of here, between the industrial and the
residential uses. This will eliminate that conflict, and then there was an issue about boatyards,
and whether or not this is going to be a loss of a boatyard. Well, this boatyard only has 27
upland slips, 27. We're keeping the marina, so at your last Commission meeting, Commissioner
Sanchez asked us to do a survey of all the boatyards in the City of Miami, and I've passed out
that survey, and what you'll see is that there are facilities for recreational and commercial
vessels of up to 70 feet in length; that there are 24 of them in the City of Miami currently; 15 on
the Miami River, two on Little River, two on Grove Key, one on Key Biscayne, and four in North
Grove. There are seven marine facilities offering the same services as Hurricane Cove, and at
any given time that this research was done, there are 92 available dry dock work slips on the
Miami River -- I mean, in these boatyards. There are only 27 that you're taking away. We only
have permits for 27 dry dock boat slips. That's all the loss is on this river. Now, what can it do
for the neighborhood? Where is that? Perhaps, you haven't actually seen Hurricane boatyard.
This is the conditions of the streetscape currently. Now you can understand why the folks who
were in the condominiums are happy to have a boardwalk, a greenway plan, some place to walk
to, because there is absolutely no access to the river until you get to Curtis Park, zero access
from 17th Street on, until you get to Curtis Park, so what will this bring? This will bring
landscaping, greenway plan, a river walk, some place to go and, actually, you'll be able to see
the river from 19th Avenue. This is what you see from 19th Avenue currently. You don't see the
river. You see a big blank wall, so right now I'd like to have Mouriz Salazar, who is the architect
City of Miami Page 260 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
with Salazar -- with Mouriz Salazar and this is Gus Salazar who's coming forward -- to show --
present to you the project and the plan.
Gabriel Salazar: Good evening. My name is Gabriel Salazar, partner with the architectural
firm Mouriz Salazar and Associates. I'll just go through a brief presentation of the concept and
the site planning, and a lot of the amenities that we're providing on this particular project.
Something interesting that -- if you'll look at this photograph. I just spent 21 days touring
through several major cities in Europe, and one of the things that fascinated me was a common
element; was that they all have rivers running right through the middle of them. They all had --
all the rivers were the front yards of their cities, promenades, parks, bridges, marinas, and that's
something I just wanted to emphasize, that this is a beautiful amenity that the City has, and I
think the vision and the time for this change is now, and what we're proposing in this particular
project, if you look at it, is we're looking at 1,075 units consisting of three buildings --
Chairman Teele: How many units?
Mr. Salazar: 1, 073 units consisting of three buildings. We have done extensive changes. One
of the things that we're providing is we're providing, first of all, a boardwalk that's going to tie in
through the whole river. You can see a boardwalk running through here, all the way through the
whole property along the river. We're enhancing that with landscaping. Actually, providing
actually town homes on the grade level looking at the boardwalk. We're providing, also, a park.
You can see there that ties into a pedestrian access and view corridor that we've created. If you
look at 19th -- I believe this is 19th Avenue -- we provide an actual view corridor and access for
the public to actually come in and enjoy the boardwalk and the park. Not only that, the
restaurant that's over here and the facilities that are -- will be there.
Chairman Teele: Show me 1 7th Avenue, approximately.
Mr. Salazar: 17th Avenue is east of us. It's east of us, and this is 19th, so it's a couple blocks
over.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You see the bridge?
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Mr. Salazar: Yeah, if you can see here the bridge, 17th, and this is the subject site right here,
and that's the North River Drive. So we've gone through a lot of -- gone through all the different
committees. We're providing a buffer. We're providing a buffer -- landscape buffer all along
North River Drive. We're providing townhouses at the grade level to buffer all of the garages. If
you look at the elevations -- and it's open design so that it provides all the amenities throughout.
This is a couple of the renderings that we're looking at -- put it on the photograph. This is a
rendering of what the pedestrian -- the promenade along the river walk will be; ties into the park
. It ties into the restaurant. We have also renderings of what the view will be from the water.
From the water, we're looking at -- even though we have the buildings in the background, we
have lined this whole -- the first four or five stories with townhouses. You don't see a single
parking garage structure. Well, actually, we're looking at doing some woodwork town homes, as
well, that can, hopefully, be used for marine use, so what we're looking at is providing an
alternative to this type of lifestyle, where at the same time you still have the marinas, but you're
changing the whole use from a more environmentally friendly type of use, so the marina still
remains, the restaurant. The dock master still stays. We're still going to have some possible use
of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) town homes along the river. It could be used also for marine, for yachts,
sales representative, and so on, so the change is really, I think, for the better, and I think this is
the vision. Hopefully, what we want to do is be able to carry this thing down with the promenade
and the river walk down that river. In terms of the buildings -- and we've got a model here that,
I think, probably shows this. From North River Drive, what we've done -- and, obviously, this is
City of Miami Page 261 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
a lot of effort between all the different boards, design review boards. What we've done is, along
North River Drive, we provided townhouses, with actual private entrance from the street level, so
it begins to relate to the neighborhood. We also taper the buildings. As you can see, we go from
15, 16, 17 stories up to the higher portion on the river side, because that's really -- you know,
that's further away from the neighborhood. That created opportunities to create special terraces
on these units, so the building has that animation. It's tapering up as you go towards the river;
we've done that. As you come around on the river side, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the same thing.
The model actually is better to explain this. We can see that this is all lined with town homes
along the river so that the promenade is more friendly in relates to this. This is what we want;
the image that we want. And I think that, in terms of the architecture, we're providing a very
simple clean architecture. I think we're providing homes for a lot of people that will live here in
the Civic Center, and we're creating a lifestyle that I think that a lot of people in this
neighborhood want. Now they can walk -- people that live here can walk and enjoy this park
and this boardwalk, as well. Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: What about parking?
Mr. Salazar: Parking -- we're providing all of the parking that's required, except that it's
buffered -- as you can see, it's in the podium, or in the base of the building, but it's all lined with
town homes so you can't see them, so it's all covered.
Commissioner Gonzalez: (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Salazar: Yes, that's correct. If you look at this plan here, this kind of gives you, in color, the
town homes that line the whole perimeter and all the parking is buffered. We definitely don't
want to see the parking and, obviously, you have drop-off points for guests and valet, and so on,
so I think it's an effort for many -- it's about seven months that we've been working on this thing,
all the different committees. I think this is what we've achieved with all the different committees
and design review boards, as well. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Did you say what the price points are going to be?
Ms. Dougherty: That's a very good question. I forgot to say that. This is actually going to be an
affordable housing project, meaning the project -- the -- and what I mean by that is like middle
income people who can actually afford to live here. It's going to start at $167, 000 a unit, so
these are not going to be ultra luxury. These are going to be -- our marketing tells us that we're
going to try to get folks from the Civic Center to live in Allapattah, instead of driving from North
Miami down Biscayne Boulevard past Kubik onto -- working in the jails, so that's our goal here,
is to market to those folks who live in -- who work in the Civic Center so they don't have to come
from Pembroke Pines and every place else to drive into the City of Miami, and as I said, right
now, Allapattah has 393 units that are vacant currently. There are no homeownership. We
literally have 20 percent of the people who live in the Allapattah own their own units or homes,
so this would make a critical mass and an economic development, and create a real
neighborhood where one doesn't currently exist, so we have our traffic engineer here, and he can
test. I'd like to put him on in rebuttal.
Chairman Teele: Before you do --
Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: -- let me just finish saying this. This word "affordable housing" is becoming
almost trite.
Ms. Sl azyk: Yes.
City of Miami Page 262 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Everybody's definition of affordable is different, and Mr. Attorney and -- we
really need to bring a stop to this. We need to adopt some type of standard for affordability, but
I'm not questioning your --
Ms. Dougherty: I understand.
Chairman Teele: I'm just trying to understand. What do you think your median price point will
be, median?
Ms. Dougherty: Median.
Chairman Teele: Median. I wasn't good in statistics.
Ms. Dougherty: You know what? I'll answer that in rebuttal, if you don't mind, because I don't
know the question -- I don't know the answer.
Chairman Teele: I see you have an economic study done, and I really commend you on going in
and doing the demographics study of Allapattah. I think that's very helpful to all of us, and we
really need to -- I assume the Planning Department -- Madam Director, I assume you all have
verified these numbers, and you all are incorporating this study and this research that is done,
and passing it over to the Planning Department so that we can, at least, review this information
and maybe make it a part of what we're doing as we go forward. The private sector is generally
a little bit ahead of government. Have you all reviewed the data that she has given us --
Ms. Dougherty: This is your data. I got this from the Consolidated Plan for the City of Miami.
Chairman Teele: The 300 -- the vacancies?
Ms. Dougherty: Yes. I got it from your plan. Here it is.
Chairman Teele: That's a phenomenal number.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's the 5-year Consolidated Plan?
Ms. Dougherty: Yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, I was (INAUDIBLE) with that (INAUDIBLE).
Ms. Dougherty: To answer your question, between 200 and $225, 000 is the median price point
per unit. I want to just put something on the record here. You know, Tucker Gibbs and I are
friendly adversaries, but he is a really class act. He is opposing me in this project, and he
pointed out something that may have been a mistake in our calculations in the FAR (floor area
ratio). We don't know that that's the case or not -- but we are going to -- to the extent that we
need to visit the recalculation of the FAR, we will do that at building permit stage, and assure
you and the Planning Department that we will have the right numbers at that time, and I think
that -- and I want to thank, publicly, Tucker for being such an upfront guy. And, finally, I
wanted to put in the record this Miami Herald article of March 10, 2004, where it says that the
University of Miami and the City of Miami are launching an initiative to transform the Civic
Center area into a cohesive neighborhood, and here they -- it actually says that few workers live
in the area, and few area residents, including some neighborhoods with high quality -- high
unemployment work in the Civic Center, the study found, and Donna Shalala was quoted as
saying, "People in the medical centers work long hours. They'd love to live in the area if they
could, but people just aren't going to come here to stay unless they can buy groceries, eat in a
restaurant and get their dry cleaning, and live in this area, " so with that, I would close, and
reserve some time for rebuttal.
City of Miami Page 263 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Gibbs. You've gotten all sorts of compliments.
Tucker Gibbs: I know, and now --
Chairman Teele: Your name for the record.
Tucker Gibbs: Yes. My name is Tucker Gibbs, law offices at 215 Grand Avenue, and Lucia, I
really appreciate those kind words, I really do, especially on a day like today.
Chairman Teele: But.
Mr. Gibbs: But, yes. OK Again, I represent the Durham Park Homeowners Association, which
is across the river from this project. Durham Park Homeowners Association. Durham Park.
They're on the south side of the river. Just for the record, I asked Lucia if I could borrow the --
her easel, but I didn't intend this to happen. OK, I think the easel issue has been taken care of.
Again, my name is Tucker Gibbs. I represent the Durham Park Homeowners Association. I'm
going to be speaking tonight on behalf of the association, and I'll be followed by Jack Luft, who
is our expert planner in this, and he'll be followed by Horacio Aguirre, and then other members
of the homeowners' association. Tonight I come to you to object, on behalf of my clients, to this
Major Use Special Permit, the land use change and the rezoning, and as we all decided that this
would be considered as one issue, I'm going to take them all at this point. We have five points
we want to bring to the attention of the Commission. Number one, there are internal
inconsistencies between the land use map change and the zoning map change, which I'll explain.
The project is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The project is inconsistent with
the Miami River Commission's Urban Infill Plan. The project is inconsistent with the City of
Miami Miami River Master Plan. The project also seeks to take advantage of two bonuses, the
planned unit development bonus and the affordable housing bonus that, in our opinion, is legally
-- are legally deficient, so let's look at the comp. plan amendment issue. I'm glad I'm not the only
one. OK. If you look at your packages -- and I have something I'd like to pass out also. In the
package that's being handed out are a series of documents that relate to my presentation tonight,
and also relate to the posters that we're going to be putting up for you all to see. The first issue
is the land use change, because as you all understand, in comprehensive planning, in any kind of
zoning, the key, the most important point, is your comprehensive plan, and you can't have a
rezoning without a comprehensive plan amendment, and this Major Use Special Permit cannot
go forward without a land use change, so let's look at the land use change. Is there a portable
microphone over there? Thank you. Hello. I'd like you all to -- The actual land use plan
change that you all have in your package -- and Mr. Aguirre's putting up on the -- just put up
there temporarily. If you all look at this map -- and this is in your package. It was in the
package at the Planning Advisory Board. You'll look at these boundary lines, and please notice
where the boundary lines are. The boundary lines are in the center line of the streets, where the
streets are the boundary, and they're on the center line -- it's on the center line of the river,
where the river is a boundary, but on this land use plan/land use map change, the shaded area is
the area the City and the applicant are determining is the area that's having the land use change,
but in reality the land use that's being changed extends from the center line of the street here to
the center line of the river here. I just want you all to take note of that. There's a legal reason
for this and there's a logical reason for this. If you look at zoning maps and you look at the
zoning map that's right here -- if you look at the zoning map up here, it says -- it does the same
thing. The boundaries for the zoning districts, the center line of the river, the center line of
streets. That's exactly the way the Code requires it. Section 300 of the Code specifically says
that the center line of the river, the center line of a street, are the boundaries for your zoning
code, and it says for the determination of zoning boundaries, the zoning atlas is the final
authority, and that's a copy of the zoning atlas. State law also requires the zoning code and
atlas, your land development regulations, to be consistent with your comprehensive plan. Your
comprehensive plan, which is adopted by ordinance, requires your land development regulations
City of Miami Page 264 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
to be consistent with that future land use map. We're all taking a trip somewhere and I'm going
to tell you where we're going in one second. The zoning atlas, right there, must be consistent
with your future land use map, and that is a matter of law. This application, the land use map
change, is not consistent. The zoning map is not consistent because it doesn't go out to the
center line. That's a Code requirement. This proposed land use map amendment is not
consistent with the zoning atlas. You can look at the two maps and see that. This is
impermissible under the State law and under your own comprehensive plan, but the questions
remains: Why have these zoning code and land use amendments been processed this way? And
there's a reason for this. Because if a land use map amendment is proposed for less than 10
acres, which is called a small scale amendment, it is presumed by the State of Florida
Department Community Affairs to be acceptable, and does not go through the rigorous review by
the Department of Community Affairs, the Regional Planning Council and other State, regional,
local planning agencies. By keeping the calculation of that land use plan map amendment to
less than 10 acres, the City avoids that rigorous review and, by the way, it also limits my client's
ability to challenge this. My clients are very limited in challenging the small scale amendment
as compared to a regular plan amendment that goes through the process. The site that is shaded
in in the land use map amendment that does not go out to the center line of the river or the
streets measures, I think, 7.81 acres. If you add to the center line of the streets and you add to
the center line of the river, guess what you get? 10.41 acres. It goes over the threshold and now
has to be considered a plan amendment -- a major plan amendment that goes through your
regular process twice a year, up to the DCA (Department of Community Affairs), to the Regional
Planning Council, and that is what nobody really wants, and that affects my clients and that's a
problem. The comp. plan amendment, as presented to you today, should be denied as by its
adoption, since it only encompasses the net lot area, the 7.81 acres. It creates an inconsistency
with the zoning map being proposed, which extends the district to the center line of the adjacent
streets and the river. Furthermore, these amendments are -- as presented, are nothing more than
a cynical attempt to maximize density. Remember, they get to count -- when they do this Major
Use Special Permit, they get to count to the center of the river, and they get to count to the center
lines to get their floor area ratio, because that's the gross lot area. They get to do that. They
take advantage of that, so they take advantage of one thing to get as much density on this
property, and they take advantage of another thing to be able to avoid the strict scrutiny that a
major comprehensive plan amendment review would entail. This is a major problem. Number
two, our position is that this plan -- this project is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive
Plan. You all have heard a lot about the port of the Miami River. The port of the Miami River,
according to the comprehensive plan, is a series of approximately 14 shipping and marine
related uses along the Miami River. Your comprehensive plan, the constitution of your land use
development program says, "The port of the Miami River, a group of privately operated and
owned commercial shipping companies located at specific sites along the river, shall be
encouraged to continue operation." The objective, which puts into play that goal says, "The
City of Miami shall help protect the port of Miami from encroachment by non -water dependent
or water related land use." The policies that implement that go on and further say, "The City
shall use its land development regulations to encourage the establishment and maintenance of
these uses," and it says -- the next policy says, "It shall also encourage the development and the
expansion, expansion of the port of the Miami River," and it also says, "Encourage the
development of compatible land uses along the Miami River." Note the language: "Shall be
encouraged to continue the operation." The language says, "The City shall help protect the
port; that the City should" -- note the amount of SD acreage on the river. Horacio. This map
will show you, along the Miami River, the amount of marine industrial zoned uses along the river
that have disappeared since the year 2000. Over the last three and a half years, the approved
changes, 17.37 acres have gone from SD-4, which is marine industrial, to residential. Pending
applications for changes, 10.11 acres, SD-4 to residential. That's a total of 27.4 acres out of the
79.8 acres. That's almost one-third of all the industrial property on the Miami River has been
rezoned in the last three and a half to four years. The question I have is: How does that
encourage the port of the Miami River? How does it encourage the development and expansion
when you are taking away industrial land from development?
City of Miami Page 265 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: And if you allow me, I took a tour of the Miami River last Friday --
and how many pieces you said you have lost?
Mr. Gibbs: We've lost 17.37 acres, and applied for --
Commissioner Gonzalez: You're probably --
Mr. Gibbs: -- probably that 27.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You're probably going to be ending up losing another 5 or 6 in the
next two or three months.
Mr. Gibbs: No, we understand. That's the 10.11.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because buildings are empty. You see signs that says "For Lease,"
For Rent"; they're abandoned. They look like a mess, and nobody wants to do any business in
the river.
Mr. Gibbs: My understanding is -- I understand you're saying that. I understand your
comprehensive plan says something different, the plan adopted as a policy by this City
Commission that you would encourage the development of the industrial uses on the river.
Approval of this project is just another nail in the coffin of marine industrial use along the
Miami River, and this systematic elimination of marine industrial uses along the river is contrary
to your comprehensive plan's dictate to encourage the continued operation and expansion of the
port of the Miami River. Your Planning Department is the guardian of your comprehensive plan
. Your plan says protect the marine industry. How is approving this land use change and
rezoning a Major Use Special Permit introducing a massive condominium project on a working
river, in a formally industrial zone, how is that impacting -- how is it effecting that provision --
those provisions? How is reducing the available land for expansion, the marine industrial uses,
implementing these provisions? The project is also inconsistent with the Miami River Infll Plan,
which is the strategic plan for the river development used by the Miami River Commission, which
was created by the State legislature. The goal of the Urban Infill Plan is to create a unified
vision for the future development of the Miami River and, to that end, the plan looks at the
neighborhoods along the river. They have a vision of the river, and I know people can sit there
and say, well, these are outsiders. What do they know about this river? You have professional
planners and you have appointed people on the Miami River Commission who were appointed
by this City Commission, the County Commission, the State legislature, Miami -Dade County,
people whose job it is to look at the Miami River and see the Miami River, and see it for what it
is: a community asset for the entire City of Miami, and important to the economy of Miami -
Dade County. The vision for the river set forth in the infll plan for the area of Allapattah, which
is the north bank between 17th and 27th Avenue, states the Allapattah neighborhood's waterfront
is zoned for waterfront industrial, park and residential use, with residential densities, including
duplex, medium density, multi family and high density, and is the home to thriving marinas and
two of the largest yacht bases on the river, which, at the time, that was the case. The
appropriateness of high density residential located directly on the river is highly questionable
and should be reconsidered. Likewise, lower density residential development may not be the
most appropriate use of this neighborhood's Miami River frontage. The Hurricane Cove Major
Use Special Permit is located in the middle river corridor, as set forth in the plan. According to
the plan, mid -rise development is appropriate here, and logic dictates this, as well. Look at the
river. Look at this map of the river. If you look at the lower river, which goes up to 17th
Avenue, the infll plan says this is where you want your residential development, right near
downtown Miami, right near East Little Havana; this is where you want it. The transition area
between -- and up here, north of 27th Avenue, which is mostly in the County, that belongs -- that
should be industrial, and that's the key.
City of Miami Page 266 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, that's very enlightening, what you're saying but, you know,
what you're saying -- you know who you have to tell that to? People like Mariano Cruz, who live
in Allapattah. Just go to my neighborhood. Go -- you know, walk the streets --
Mr. Gibbs: I have walked --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- and tell them --
Mr. Gibbs: I have walked Allapattah, and I've represented neighborhoods in Allapattah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- try to tell them what they should do, and the way they should live,
and they way they should conduct themselves in their neighborhood. Go and try to do that.
Mr. Gibbs: I'll answer that. Mr. Chairman, I'll answer that question, and I'd appreciate being
able to make my presentation, but I will answer that question. The point is, is that this is the City
of Miami, and all of us in this room, whether we're in Coconut Grove, or in the north area, or if
we're on Venetian Island, this is our city, and we care -- let me -- and we care about it, and the
river, this river is the heart and soul of this City, and there's a lot of respect on my side of the
dais for the people who live along this river, and Mariano Cruz may disagree with me on this
particular issue, but he'll be the first to tell you that he has sat beside me on many issues about
Coconut Grove, where he has spoken about Coconut Grove, and I've appreciated his help. It
doesn't mean that Mariano Cruz is my enemy. I have a lot of respect for Mariano. We may
disagree on this. This isn't a neighborhood against neighborhood issue. Please do not make it
that. This is about the City of Miami, and the plan -- the Urban Infill Plan says that the area
between 27th and 17th Avenue is a transition area. It's a transition area between the heavy
industrial and the purely residential, and it should be mixed, and nobody disagrees with that.
The Miami River Commission worked long and hard on this study. They solicited input,
including from the City of Miami's Planning Department, by the way. The bottom line here is,
when the Miami River Commission, which implements and which reviews this for consistency
with that plan, when they reviewed it, they determined it was inconsistent with their plan. It was
just too big, and Lucia talked about all the times they went and changed this plan, and it was still
too big. I can tell you when it went to the Urban Design Review Board, back in December, they
said it was too big, but if you don't want to pay attention to the Miami River Infill Plan, there's a
plan that this City Commission adopted, and that plan is called the Miami River Master Plan,
and it was presented to provide a long-term, long range vision for the river. I want to read you
what it says about the maritime industry. The function of the Miami River, as a working
waterfront, should be preserved. Scarce waterfront land should be reserved, wherever possible,
for use by businesses that are dependent on a waterfront location or are essentially related to the
maritime economy of the area. The river should grow as a shallow draft seaport, a lifeline to the
Caribbean basin, providing good paying jobs for City residents. New shipping terminals should
be located where they will not be detrimental to residential neighborhoods. The river's role in
the regional market for repairs, sales and service of boats and marine equipment should be
maintained and strengthened. The marine character embodied by the fishing industry on the
river should be preserved. That plan details the importance of this working river to the economy
of the City and the County, as it specifically states, to preserve the marine repair service
equipment and related industries. Their policy says protect boatyards and related marine
businesses, and then note Policy 1.1.3. It says to expand the local market for recreational
boating services provided by Miami River establishments -- and listen to this, guys. You all just
heard this about a half an hour ago -- "By supporting plans for a mega yacht marina and
general marina expansion on Watson Island" You all said that. Preserve the marine industry
on the river to service that mega yacht marina, and I'm sorry Mr. Herndon and his people aren't
here to hear it because if they're going to be spending the millions of dollars building a mega
yacht marina on Watson Island, and if you, the City of Miami want to get money from that and
you want to get your $2, 000, 000 plus a year, then you know what? You better decide and decide
City of Miami Page 267 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
quickly what this river is about. The Miami River Infill Plan says there are parts of the river that
should be residential, there are parts that should be industrial, and there are parts that should be
mixed, and the problem here is, on the one hand, you want the mega yacht marina, but if you
don't have anybody to service those mega yachts, it's not going to be worth anything. You are
destroying the marine industry on that river every time you change that zoning. Let's look at the
project itself. The project seeks to utilize every possible density and square footage bonus
available on this property. These bonuses account for a hell of a percent. Let's look at the
planned unit development bonus; 20 percent increase, 155,000 square feet they're adding for the
planned unit development. There's no clear definition of a planned unit development in the
Zoning Code, except that it exists for lots of 50,000 feet or more and has a common area. That is
the only definition for a PUD (planned unit development). The bonus language is equally
confusing and, therefore, defective and legally defective. Here's the language, and I'd like you
all to listen to it. "An increase in floor area of up to 20 percent over that allowed by the
underlying district when allowed under the limitations of the Miami Neighborhood
Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time of the application." This isn't even a sentence. It's not
a sentence. This language, presumably, describes something that is being granted, but it doesn't
have any language granting it. If it does grant a 20 percent bonus, who grants it? Do you grant
it? It's nowhere written in the Code. Does the Planning Director grant it? It's not in the Code.
What are the standards for granting it? 5,000 square feet in the common area. Is it totally
discretionary on your part? If it isn't discretionary on your part, is your approval even
necessary? Is this a matter of right? Your Code is absolutely silent as to this. Let's look at the
relationship between the planned unit development bonus -- the planned unit development and
granting the additional density in the bonus. What is that relationship? What is that nexus?
There is none. This bonus is a gift for free of 20 percent with no relationship to any planning
principles as it is granted without standards or criteria. Let's look at the affordable housing
bonus. I talked to Lucia about this before. There's a mis -- I think there's a miscalculation of the
affordable housing bonus because the affordable housing bonus, it's my understanding, should
be calculated by multiplying the base FAR by 25 percent, and I think that Lucia's architect
multiplied the base FAR plus the PUD bonus, which is an additional 20 percent, and multiplied
that by 25 percent, which creates a serious density problem because that adds more for the PUD
bonus -- I mean, it adds more for the affordable housing bonus. The way we see it, the
affordable housing bonus is 233, 985.15; that's what they're saying, 25 percent. This bonus
allows for an increase of 25 percent in number of units or upon a finding -- number of units or
square footage upon a finding that the increase would not cause the development to be
inconsistent with the comp. plan, violate concurrency, result in a variance. In addition, the
developer must pay a total a $6.67, which I understand has been changed. I don't know if it's
gone into affect yet or if it applies to this project, but I understand the change has been made by
the City Commission to increase that affordable housing purchase of $10 a square foot. Big
increase. 10 or 12? 12.50? 12.50. Again, that's a pretty hefty increase, and I say that with my
tongue firmly planted in my cheek, and I'll explain to you why. This bonus is an incentive to
provide a benefit to the community. Here, if those numbers are correct, the developer gets his
233,000 square feet, almost 234,000 square feet, and the City gets $2, 339, 000 to build
affordable housing. Sounds great, doesn't it? $2, 000, 000 for affordable housing, but let's look
at the trade-off. The developer gets 2,333 -- 200,985 square feet of condominium, which he can
sell for -- I don't know what the affordable housing rate is. I'm looking forward -- let's say two to
$300 a square foot, maybe less. Maybe one to $200 a square foot. I don't know. Let's say it's
between 200 and 300 -- 250. The developer -- if you do your math, the developer will get himself
-- at $250 a square foot -- about $58, 000, 000. You all get 2,000,000 for your affordable housing
trust fund.
Chairman Teele: Say that again.
Mr. Gibbs: If you do the multiplication of $250 a square foot and multiply -- you will get 58 --
the developer will get $58, 000, 000, $58, 400, 000, actually. If they sell their square footage that
they purchased from the City at $12.50 a square foot, they will have -- they will buy it for 12.50,
City of Miami Page 268 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
they'll sell it for 250, and they'll gross $58, 000, 000. The City gets that 2.3 for affordable
housing and construction. How much affordable housing does $2, 000, 000 buy? If you take $75
a square foot -- I'm not even talking about buying property. I'm talking about just building
something -- affordable housing at $75 a square foot, at 1,500 square feet a unit, you're going to
get about 20 units of affordable housing, and that doesn't include per -- and that's talking about
single-family housing. Maybe you can squeeze a little bit more in -- maybe you could double, if
it's in a building. The result: The developer's making millions; affordable housing gets a token.
Final thought on affordable housing issue, the ordinance -- I know that you all changed it
because I brought this issue up a year ago, but my question is, to this Commission, is: What is
the basis for the $12? My understanding was the old basis was $6.67, and it was based on a
study that was done many years ago. Is that study available? Do we know the basis of that
study? I don't know.
Chairman Teele: You're challenging --
Mr. Gibbs: The constitutionality, yes, of this affordable housing trust fund, as well as the PUD
bonus. There's no rational nexus between what it's seeking to do and what it actually does.
Chairman Teele: But, you know, that's an interesting argument, Tucker, because even if you are
right on all of your assumptions, why would you want to destroy -- I mean, the trust fund is a
mere victim in all of this, at this point. I mean, that doesn't enhance your argument.
Mr. Gibbs: Commissioner Teele, I understand what you're saying, and if this City had actually
done a study in the year since I brought this issue up last -- and I've discussed many a plan --
I've discussed many a Major Use Special Permits since the Grovenor special -- Major Use
Special Permit came through a year ago. I've been through a lot of them. I've never brought
this -- this is the first time I brought it up. It's not going to be the last time I bring it up tonight,
and I will tell you, if this City did nothing more than just take the CPI (Consumer Price Index)
and move it from $6.67 to $12.50, I wouldn't be saying it. I am absolutely appalled that this City
is willing to go along with that and, to me, I wouldn't challenge it if I knew this City was actually
going to do a study that dealt with the issue and looked at it from the point of the affordable
housing. Everybody's looking at it from the point of view of the developer. What can we do to
give a developer a bonus? What can we do to help affordable housing?
Chairman Teele: But I don't want to get a debate --
Mr. Gibbs: I understand.
Chairman Teele: -- but let me just say this. Those -- that is a very well -stated and a very good
issue, but that issue has nothing to do, really, with the development that's before us now --
Mr. Gibbs: It does --
Chairman Teele: -- in my opinion.
Mr. Gibbs: I understand.
Chairman Teele: Help me understand why you would make that argument on this development.
Mr. Gibbs: I'm making this argument on this development, and I'll be making it again -- and I'm
sure Mr. Hollo is here in the audience -- I'll be making it on Villa Magna at the next argument,
because as I told you, I've waited long enough -- and I've got to tell you something. I think the
people of Miami deserve better.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Tucker --
City of Miami Page 269 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Gibbs: They deserve better.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- what you're basically saying and putting on the record is it benefits
the developer and not the affordable housing issue.
Mr. Gibbs: Absolutely. That's exactly what I'm saying. Thank you, Commissioner. That's
exactly what I'm saying, but as a clarion call, I think that this Commission could deal with that
issue.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but I could agree with -- I could agree if he was making that argument if
it went from $6 to $3.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: He's still going to argue it, even if it was $20.
Mr. Gibbs: You know what? I think, if the City had a plan --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's the issue.
Mr. Gibbs: -- that actually talked about the nexus and made a -- I mean, because -- and
Commissioner Teele knows this. He's an attorney. He'll tell you, if there's a study out there that
says it makes sense to be $12.50, I can talk all I want and no court's going to buy it. I'm just
asking where the study is.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It may be relevant. I think you've made better points than that one,
although that's a stickler that you've been debating here for many years.
Mr. Gibbs: No, but I've debated that -- I brought that up one time on Grovenor. I never brought
it up again. The City put a patch on it, and like a lot of patches on a computer -- I'm sorry, I've
waited long enough -- it's crashed.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Gibbs: This project is just too big. Bottom line here is -- Oh, let me get finished with the
bonus, just to put it on the record.
Chairman Teele: I'll tell you one thing: When all of this is over, I'm going to make a motion that
the City Attorney hire you to develop a plan. I know how to shut down --
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Gibbs: I'd take the job if I wasn't conflicted out of doing this.
Chairman Teele: Well, that's my point.
Mr. Gibbs: I know.
Chairman Teele: I am an attorney, and that conflicts you out forever on that.
Mr. Gibbs: I understand completely.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You won't be here.
Mr. Gibbs: Anyway, our position is that the bonus is arbitrary and the payment has little, if any,
relationship to the provision of affordable housing. Finally, on the housing trust fund -- and
City of Miami Page 270 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
we're wrapping this up -- bottom line in this issue and all these Major Use Special Permits on
this, this project is just too doggone big. To put it in very basic terms, it's just too big. It's an
unwarranted intrusion of residential into a marine industrial area, an industrial area that you
are charged by your Comprehensive Plan, which is your constitution of land use, to enforce, and
what you're doing is you're turning your back on the constitution of your plan -- your plan,
which is the constitution. You're turning your back on the marine industry. You're putting an
incompatible use on the river, because I can tell you, every one of those people on that river --
and I sat in front of you on River Run South and told you this -- when you bring it to the
nuisance, there's a problem. Your Code Enforcement Division, every time a boat toots its horn,
every time they hear noise from boats going up and down -- shipping going up and down the
river, you're going to hear about it. It's going to come to your offices, and you all are creating
this problem. We urge you to deny this application. Thank you very much.
(APPLAUSE)
Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, we would ask your indulgence, that you not applaud or
jeer, or make any statements. Now, are you speaking -- Mr. Luft, are you speaking with Mr. --
Tucker, before you leave, show me again -- if you can take the portable mike -- show me the
project and show me where your clients are on this map.
Mr. Gibbs: I can show you here where it says "ingle family" -- single family residential. It's
right here. I could just show him. Their project is here. My clients are here.
Chairman Teele: So you're -- this is another one of those on -the -other -side -of -the -river?
Mr. Gibbs: You got it, but I will welcome you, as I have done, to sit in --
Chairman Teele: The last one was on the north side of the river and the south side was
complaining, and this is on the south side and the north side is complaining.
Mr. Gibbs: But I will tell you, I have sat in my -- I have sat at one of my client's homes and my
goodness, it's deceiving. It is very deceiving. You can -- you're right there. You're right there.
Chairman Teele: Parker -- I mean --
Unidentified Speaker: Tucker.
Chairman Teele: Tucker.
Mr. Gibbs: Tucker.
Chairman Teele: I live right there on the river, directly -- not on this one, but on the other one,
so I understand. My bedroom -- I can throw and hit the river in the middle of it, so I understand
how close it is, but the point that I'm making is is that somehow we've got to work to get the
people across these river -- on these projects to understand what's going on before we get here,
because this is going to be neverending.
Mr. Gibbs: Well, and may I make one suggestion to this Commission?
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Mr. Gibbs: You all have an opportunity, a golden opportunity. I understand the Planning
Advisory Board is meeting on Wednesday to discuss the river, discuss the river in its entirety. It's
time -- I implore this Commission to look at the Miami River Infill Plan. Look at another plan,
but you need to get a plan because, as Commissioner Gonzalez said, these pieces of property are
City of Miami Page 271 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
going, going and gone, and if we sit here and wait for plans to be created for years and years,
there's never -- there's not going to be one more industrial piece left on this river. You need to
make a plan. Whatever your plan is, make it. That's all we're asking for. Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And the way I look at it, I don't think government should intervene in
private enterprise, because I don't think government has the right to tell a piece of landowner,
you have to have this piece of land assigned to this business, "X" business or "Y" business,
because if the market is not there for that type of business, that landowner, every year, have to
pay taxes, have to pay solid waste, have to pay fees to the City, you know, and if we're willing to
say we're going to give every landowner along the river "X" millions of dollars every year to
preserve the land until someone decides to come in and do some kind of business with that land,
then you know, I'll be fine. I'll be the one supporting that, but I don't think we're in the position
where we can give millions of dollars away to preserve land for the future. Now, if there is such
a big market, what really concerns me about this river issue -- if there is such a big market --
and I encourage all of you to do what I did Friday. Take a tour of the river, from the Riverside
building to 32nd Avenue. I grant you, west of 27th Avenue, around 32nd Avenue, on the river
there are five or six companies that do shipment to Haiti, to Santo Domingo, to Bahamas, to --
OK, west of 27th Avenue, around 32nd Avenue, on the Miami River. From the Riverside
building to 27th Avenue, there is only four companies, and I was told by someone that one of
those companies is leaving. They're shutting down and they're leaving, OK. We have a lot of
businesses that do marine repairs, and there is no problem with the businesses that do marine
repairs. As a matter of fact, there is no problem with the businesses that do marine repair.
There is no problem with the businesses that are doing export and import, but we cannot force
people to start those type of businesses there if they're not profitable, because the people that are
in those type of businesses now are saying, "I don't want to be in this business. I'm shutting
down. I'm leaving. I'm selling my land. I'm selling this piece of property. I don't want to be
here." All right. We have a lot of small shops. They do canvas for the yachts. They do motor
repairs. They do a lot of service -- type of service industry, not shipping. There is only one
major company between -- and I wouldn't say it's a major company. It's a halfway sized
company between the Riverside building and 27th Avenue and, as a matter of fact, I went as far -
- because there has been a lot of misinformation about the Miami River; the amount of millions
of dollars that are produced by the river and the amount of employees, or people that are
employed on the river. I have requested, under a public record request -- and under the
occupational license -- every time you open a business, you have to procure an occupational
license, and you have to say how many employees you're going to have in that business, so I'm
requesting -- because I have been told that there is 8,000 employees on the river, so the
occupational licenses of these businesses have to reflect 8,000 employees, and if you multiply the
8,000 employees times whatever the occupational license is, we should be making a lot of money
on the river for taxes. I haven't got that information yet. I know that they're not closed to that
amount of employment, but time will tell. Next week, I should be able to get all that information.
They're working -- the administration is, right now, working on that information. I went down
the list -- we took -- and the Mayor went with me -- Mayor Manny Diaz went with me in this tour.
We took the name of every single business that is on the river to make sure to count them and
know exactly how many businesses there are, and I think that we count between -- from Riverside
building to 27th Avenue, we counted 14 businesses. All right. You see a lot of dilapidated
buildings. You see a lot of abandoned buildings. You see some lots that are for sale, and you
see some buildings that have signs that say "For Lease" or "For Rent." That's the reality of the
Miami River today. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. I think we need to go ahead and try to bring this -- are there going
to be any people speaking behind -- Mr. Gibbs, are you going to have other people speaking?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Opposition. Jack.
Chairman Teele: All right. Let's try to bring this to a close. Go right ahead, sir. Who are you
City of Miami Page 272 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
here with? You're here with Mr. Gibbs?
Mr. Gibbs: On this issue? No. Mr. Dickman? No, he's not here with me.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The court reporter.
Mr. Gibbs: Oh, the court reporter, yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh.
Mr. Gibbs: Yes, she is.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: She's been here all day.
Mr. Gibbs: She sure has. I've had a lot of items.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: All right. You all need to -- All right. Here we go.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Good for you, court reporter.
Jack Luft: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Jack Luft, and my address is
1717 Wynward Ward, Sanabelle Island, Florida. Comprehensive planning has been around for
a long time. In 1986, the State of Florida passed the Comprehensive Planning Act, which
changed dramatically the rules for comprehensive planning. Prior to that Commissions
regularly made changes and modifications to comprehensive plans, and they did so for good
reasons, for bad reasons, and for no reason at all and, by and large, they were free to do so.
Under the new State act, you're free to make changes, and you make many of them, but you must
make those changes in the context of a carefully documented and official established record for
how and why those changes are made. What you cannot do is you cannot have a comprehensive
plan that says one thing, that establishes, in black letters on a white page, a policy, a goal and a
set of objectives, and then proceed to explain why, for good reasons -- I'm very impressed with
Commissioner Gonzalez' reasons. I can't argue with them, and they may be good reasons for
amending your plan, but you need to amend the text. It is not enough to just come and change
the map if someone asks for it, even for a good reason. The problem with this application is you
aren't changing any text. Your goals, your objectives, your policies are remaining exactly the
same, and the State law says that your map must be internally consistent with your plan. This
map change is not, and that is the problem. Now, you had a very thoughtful study that was done
not too long ago, Miami River Corridor Study. You chose not to adopt it. This study did not
purport to say the river should only be industrial. Clearly, it's not. Nor should what is industrial
always remain industrial. This plan talked about a deliberate documented planned approach to
making changes; changes that need to appear in the text of your plan, but it was never acted
upon. Your plan says that the port of Miami River shall be encouraged to continue operation as
a valued and economic viable component of the City's maritime industrial base. There is only
one place in the City of Miami that that maritime industrial base can be located; it is on the
Miami River and it is in your industrial zone. That's it. There will never be another location in
the City of Miami, or for that matter, in Dade County, to place these uses. That makes this
particular use singularly different than any other land use and map amendment that you make in
this City. You routinely change commercial to residential and residential to commercial, and
industrial to commercial and so on, and it has to be said that, taken citywide, there is no
shortage of commercial; there's no shortage of residential, and there's no shortage of industrial,
per se, but this issue is different, and your plan says it's different because unlike any other land
use it says you shall encourage the continued operation and the expansion of this particular use
in this particular corridor, on this particular designated set of industrial lands. The problem is
when you, over time, make substantial and sequential map amendments, and you leave this
City of Miami Page 273 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
policy sitting here, you are saying, on the one hand, we are going to expand and protect the
marine industrial base of our City and then, over the course of several years, you irreversibly
change 30 percent of that, forever removing it from your base. Now that might be OK, and
Commissioner Gonzalez had offered some very good and persuasive reasons why that might be
all right, but what you must do is amend your plan to declare your intentions. That language
must appear in here, and it must say where and under what conditions, and for what reasons you
need to make these changes, and then your map amendments can follow, but you've never done
that, so we have a contradiction. Prior to 1986, you could get away with that but, today, if your
plan says one thing and your map says something else, and your actions take you in the opposite
direction, that is what we call an inconsistency, an internal inconsistency in your plan that is not
allowed. I'm not here to tell you that you're right or wrong in wanting to put residential on this
site. What I'm here to tell you is that if you want to do that -- and on another site or another site
-- then you need to change your plan, and you need to say on what basis are you doing this,
because you cannot state that you have a limited resource of land, a valued and irreplaceable
marine industrial base and then proceed to eliminate 50 percent of the property, and continue to
do so, and you've just heard Commissioner Gonzalez predict here tonight that several more
acres are up for consideration, and we would guess, perhaps, they too are going to be changed,
so the time has come -- and it may be an ear amendment. It may be in a more comprehensive
amendment to your plan, but the time has come to change your plan to reflect what it is you're
doing and why you're doing it. It has been said there are only 14 shipping companies on the
river. That was a statement in your plan in 1986, but there's nothing in the plan that says you're
committed to only protecting 14 businesses; it might be more. Now, you can sit here and say, "
More? It'll never happen." In April of this year the contract was signed by the Corps of
Engineers for the maintenance dredging of the Miami River, just two months ago. A long
process, of which this City is a part, you're paying two and a half percent of it, that is going to
take $60, 000, 000 of federal, state and local monies, and that river is going to be dredged to its
original dedicated depth of 15 feet. Why is that important? Because this port of Miami and the
shipping operations, which happen to be the 4th largest in the State of Florida, equal to Tampa
in terms of value, it's not an insignificant activity at all. This port, which is the vital base of
thousands of jobs in this community, the shipping companies own the Miami River, the port of
the Miami River. This aggregation of shipping companies has been leaving for 50 years with a
huge constraint. The Miami River has never had a maintenance dredging, and that's why it's
only 13 feet, and that's why the ships who are doing such a strong trade that puts them 4th in the
State of Florida have to contend with what no other port has to contend with, and that is they
can only go in and out at high tide, and high tide only occurs twice a day, and that only occurs
for a few precious windows of hours, and then you throw into that lockdowns of bridges at rush
hour and you may well lose one or two of those high tides, so in spite of these constraints, this
industry has actually grown, it has doubled in size since 1991, in terms of shipping, but guess
what's going to happen when that maintenance dredging occurs -- and it will start this year. The
river will go to 15 feet, and that will be the same as having a permanent high tide on the Miami
River 24 hours a day. Only the bridge dropdowns will be a constraint of coming in and going
out. The opportunity to grow -- the real opportunity to grow will occur for the first time in 60
years, and that's why your plan says you must encourage and sustain the economic viability and
the growth of this industry, which is about to see its major limitation removed and, yet, you
continue to remove land from your rolls. You continue to remap land, and my only difficulty
with that is you are not justing it; you are not documenting it; you have no projections of
marine growth, you are on the limb here participating in interlocal agreements saying let's
deepen the river to its original plan depth; let's make shipping now once again a full-time
operation but let's start changing the map. Let's start eliminating marine industrial land, and
you're doing it without any knowledge that I've seen, any study, any documentation whatsoever
that says this action, which cannot be reversed, is not going to contradict or countermand or
underline this officially adopted State Statute recognized goal and objective. If you want to
change the goal, change it. If you want to change the objective, change it, but you haven't, and
that's my problem with this particular amendment, and that's why, until you do, I will have to
take the position that this amendment -- this map amendment is inconsistent with your
City of Miami Page 274 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
comprehensive plan. It has no basis whatsoever for saying that you are not countermanding or
contradicting, or undermining your own goal and objective for maintaining, sustaining and
growing river industries, and your other actions of participating in the dredging, you speak to
that. Now, one final point. Your map amendment ostensibly should go to the middle of the river.
Mr. Gibbs has pointed that out. It wouldn't surprise me if the suggestion were to arise, OK, let's
not put the boundary line to the middle of the river. Let's put it to the channel line, and that way
we'll take just 2.41 acres out, or 1.41 acres or more, and we'll be under the 10-acre amendment,
but that would mean even in the middle of the river an industrial piece of mapped land use.
Now, you want to claim the right to go into permanent open space. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) was
telling you if it's a park and recreation zoning, we can infer that that's a permanent open space.
You cannot infer, on the map, that industrial zoning or industrial land use on your fixed land use
plan is permanent open space, even if it's in the middle of the river. You can't. This amendment
needs to go to the middle of the river and put in place the land use that you're seeking on the
future land use map and in your Zoning Code, if you want to count it in your development, just
like you need to go to the middle of the street. You don't go to the curb line. You don't go to the
edge of the parking lane. You go to the middle of the street, and that's the rules of construction
in your code, so this amendment, unless you can explain to me why you should be able to
arbitrarily extract pieces of the map and leave industrial in the middle of the river, is in fact,
absolutely, by the numbers of the applicant, 10.41 acres. It exceeds the small-scale amendment,
and it is not properly before you. It should be going through the first scale amendment review of
the State. Finally, on one aspect of the development that I feel compelled to comment on, this
project has one glaring problem, and it has obviously been struggled with, if you read the MUSP
very carefully, and that is the impacts of traffic on critical north/south arterial intersections, and
the project has just managed to bring those impacts into the level of service "E" category to
avoid collapsing the intersection, and do you know how they managed to do that by the
numbers? They said, this location is essentially the same as the Omni and Brickell, in terms of
mass transit access, in terms of pedestrian movements, and in terms of bicycles, and by saying
that, they can magically transform 17 percent of the trips from automobiles to bicycles and
pedestrians, and buses, but you'd have to buy the argument that this location at 19th Avenue and
the river, with no direct bus access from there to the Civic Center, is going to engender the same
kind of pedestrian traffic as the People Mover system and the transit system in downtown and
Omni. As the planner for your transit system and your station area plan for 10 years in the City,
I will tell you, it will not, and as a member of the Governor's Planning Council for six years on
bicycle planning in the State of Florida, I will tell you, you will not get more than one percent,
and that's my expert opinion. In other words, those assumptions are incorrect, and if you use the
proper numbers, those intersections fail, and when they fail, you have an adverse impact that
Section 1308 says you must mitigate, and there is no way to do it with this number of units. It
fails to meet the standards of protecting adverse impacts against neighborhoods. Thank you
very much.
Mr. Gibbs: Mr. Chairman, to make this go quickly, we have approximately five people who will
speak with -- or Mr. Vice Chairman, we have five people who will speak with a two -minute
limitation, and we'd also --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Tucker, could we --
Mr. Gibbs: We'll try to keep it quick and --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- ask you to keep it at two minutes, please?
Mr. Gibbs: Yeah, that's what I said, two minutes each. What I would like to do is just ask the
people who are here from Miami Neighborhoods United to stand up; those people who came to
say they were in support of our position to deny the land use change, the Zoning Code change,
and the Major Use Special Permit. These are people from all over the City of Miami. Miami
Neighborhoods United, would you please stand up and show your support for my clients? Thank
City of Miami Page 275 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
you. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Gibbs: And, with that, I'm going to hand it over to Mr. Aguirre, and then we'll have about
four other people, and we'll make it quick.
Chairman Teele: Before you do, let me tell the people that have come here from all over the City
how much --
Commissioner Gonzalez: From all over the City. That's very interesting that you address that
because --
Chairman Teele: Let me tell the people who have come here from all over the City that this is
your City Hall and we want you to feel free to come here, and we really appreciate the fact that
you're giving us your voice. Obviously, this -- zoning are not plebiscites; they are not a
discussion on how many are for it or how many are against it. It has to be based upon the
competent evidence that's in the record but, again, I want the people that are here from the --
what is this, Communities United?
Mr. Gibbs: Miami Neighborhoods United.
Chairman Teele: -- Miami Neighborhoods United to know that this is your City Hall, and to
please feel free to come. Thank you.
Horacio Aguirre: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good evening. My name is Horacio
Stuart Aguirre. I reside at 1910 Northwest 13th Street in Durham Park. I've been a resident of
Miami for 15 years. I'm a former banker and a principal in a commercial real estate firm. Mr.
Tucker Gibbs is our attorney, and I am especially affected by this situation. It's very grating
that you've been so patient to listen to all of this and we're very grateful to you. We consider the
proposed development very interesting, very appropriate, very necessary in some other place in
Dade County. Where it's proposed on the Miami River, we consider it to be irresponsible
development, and we consider it to be a major plague on the Miami River, and I measure my
words very carefully. The Miami River is a major resource for all of Dade County, especially for
the City of Miami. It belongs to all of the residents of the City of Miami. It is not the private
property of the Allapattah neighborhood We consider that Miami is the fun and sun boating
capital of the world. We have promoted this image throughout the entire world This property is
an indispensable working boatyard. It's a key element to the recreational boating community,
not just of Miami, but of all of Dade County. Killing this key recreational marine boatyard will
strike a serious and irreparable blow to all of the boating community. Without recreational
marine boatyards, boating in Miami will die, and property values on waterfront property will
significantly decrease. I tell you that the national media has taken an interest in these
proceedings, and has been reporting periodically that the recreational marine industry in
Greater Miami is at peril to the condominium developers. Please note this. It's already been
reported The Miami Herald wrote a very critical comment on this in February. Take note of
this. The condominium canyon that the developers are promoting, in concert with the City of
Miami, will do serious and irreparable harm, not just to the Miami River, but to all of the City of
Miami. Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: The Chair failed -- and I apologize. Are you here as an official of the Miami
River --
Unidentified Speaker: Marine Group.
Chairman Teele: You're recognized, please. Are you in support or opposition? Did you want to
City of Miami Page 276 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
be recognized --
Fran Bohnsack: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- in your official capacity as a representative of the Miami -- yes, please.
Come right forward.
Ms. Bohnsack: My name is Fran Bohnsack. I'm with the Miami River Marine Group, which is
an organization of the marine industry on the Miami River. Commissioner Gonzalez, I did want
to mention that the figure you quoted, the 8, 000 jobs, that actually comes from a 1990 Beacon
Council Report, and it's reflective of direct and indirect jobs and, of course, indirect jobs are a
huge part of the impact here. We're here because we've been working with the neighborhoods
for a long time to try to have good relationships for the working river and the residential, and
we're here in support of the neighborhoods' opposition to this particular development. Mr.
Gibbs mentioned to you earlier that in the year 2000, there were 79 acres of marine industrial
property on the river. In the year 2004, we have approximately -- after we consider what's
pending and what we know, as you observed, Commissioner Gonzalez, that will be changing --
we have 39 acres remaining. It's interesting to note that there are 32 marine industrial
properties within those 39 remaining acres, but 24 of them are in areas that are very susceptible
to the pressures of development of the kind that's taking place downtown and in the middle river.
We've been aware of that for a couple of years now, which is why we worked very hard with the
Urban Infill Plan in order to strike some balance. It was our anticipation that those marine
industrial properties downtown and middle river would move west and that, in fact, is
happening, but the loss of the marine industrial property is eroding what is essentially a critical
infrastructure, and if there isn't a line drawn somewhere, the properties that are marine
industrial that you have remaining will only number eight, and they are -- all of that data is in
the package that you received. Finally, I'd like to say that the size of the marine industry has
doubled. It's not a mere 14, as in the Comprehensive Plan, and in fact, this year currently, I'm
managing from the federal government over $2, 000, 000 to refurbish 22 of those sites to be
compliant with new international regulations against terrorism for homeland security, so I do
hope that you will realize that this industry is in jeopardy, and that it continues to erode, and
that if you want to save it, you save not only the working class persons' jobs, sustainable jobs in
Miami, but also the lifeline to the Caribbean that desperately needs the Miami River as a port of
entry.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Bohnsack: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Ma'am, please state your name for the record.
Ann Freemont: My name is Ann Freemont. I live at 2011 Northwest 14th Street in Durham
Park. I'm the treasurer of the Durham Park Neighborhood Association. I live directly across
from the west end of this development project. Enough has been said about commerce. I think
that's -- Miami is here because of commerce. It's -- that's why it's on a river, but I want to speak
for myself, as I was -- got a notice from the notice about this project. I am within 500 feet of it. I
go up and down the river twice a month, and I've been doing that since 1970, I've lived in this
neighborhood. I am a pleasure boater, and I -- that boatyard, I thought it would always be there
because we need it; the marine industry in Miami. The pleasure boaters need to have boatyards
to take care of their vessels. The City of Miami is a tenant to 700 boats in their marinas, and
those vessels need to be serviced, and there's another -- there's a total of over 4,000 vessels in
the water in our area. Thank you very much, Commissioners, for hearing us, and I'm very glad
you were here to listen to us, and I'm glad everybody was here tonight. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.
City of Miami Page 277 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ann Stetzer: Hello. My name is Ann Stetzer. I live at 1700 Northwest North River Drive, at
River Run Condominiums, and all I'm going to say is my husband and I are very opposed to this
project. Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Good evening, sir.
Thomas Kimer: Good evening. Thomas Kimer. I'm at 2001 Northwest 14th Street. I am
directly across the river, approximately right here. I'm especially affected in that I -- from their
property line, I guess, maybe it's probably less than 250 feet directly across from my home. I
was recently in Las Vegas and found it interesting that the Flamingo Hilton is also 28 stories,
and I paced off about 250 feet from the Flamingo Hilton, and if I have to continue looking that
far back over my head, I am going to -- you have no idea how large 28 feet -- 28 stories --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Stories.
Mr. Kimer: -- is from where my house will be. I'm a boat owner. At the last hearing, Mr. Gonza
lez questioned whether any of our residents shopped or did anything in Allapattah. I buy at MC
Marine. I buy at BNF Marine. I buy at Everglades Lumber, and I service my boatyard at
Hurricane Cove Marina. Mr. Acosta purchased a industrial zoned piece of property, and he's
doing a very good job running the boatyard. They've cleaned it up. It looks good, and I hope it
continues to stay that way. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Deborah Trujillo -Carpenter: Good evening. Deborah Trujillo -Carpenter at 2510 Northwest
North River Drive. I don't know about the rest of Allapattah but, in my neighborhood, it's 80
percent owner occupied. We have a very close and tight -knit neighborhood. I'm going to really
like jump around here. Parking that is required by these developments is not realistic in your
zoning. It's just not. You got to relook at this. What guarantee is that -- is there that these units
are not going to be purchased by people looking for investments? That's where most of the
condos are being purchased in Miami now. They're going to be sublet, and when you've got a
renter, you don't know what the hell is going to happen to your building. Plans are there for a
reason; they're well thought out, they're written down, they're passed by law. Let's stick with the
plan. This huge building -- this is a one-story building. This is a 28-story building. It's going to
completely dwarf everything in the neighborhood. It's going to be a huge radiator in the
summertime to the people in the north whose electric bills are going to go way up. In the winter,
it's going to block the sun to all of the people in the north for blocks, OK It's also going to block
the wind. I get a really nice breeze coming up the river. It's going to block all those people
across the street, and between the building, it's going to create a huge wind (UNINTELLIGIBLE
). Anybody who's been in any big city knows how the wind goes between the buildings. For
good river views, every great city in the world, along their river they have a promenade, OK
They do not have huge buildings right next to it. In London, there's a law that says that you
cannot take away people's sunshine. You take away the self-help boatyards, people are going to
be fixing their boats in their yard, and the fiberglass is going to go all over the place and the
children and the elderly people, who cannot afford to breathe bad air are going to be breathing
in even worse air. Mega yachts go by my house, beautiful, over 200 feet, need to be pulled by
tugboats; they need some place to be fixed, as well. Right across from me is Best Yacht Harbor.
They do a booming business. I don't know why there isn't more marine businesses like that
because they're always, always busy, and half the boats who go by hail them, and thank you very
much. I really appreciate the time you've given us.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Tucker, does that conclude your presentation?
City of Miami Page 278 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Gibbs: One quick (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- with one quick person (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Herbert Payne: It's me.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir. You're recognized. Please state your name for the record.
Mr. Payne: Yeah. My name is Captain Bo Payne. I own P&L Towing and Transportation Tug
Company on the river. I have two pieces of property on the river. I had three. I just had to
move out of one because of a zoning change in the upper river. I'd like to address just a couple
issues. One, I travel a lot in Allapattah. I grew up in Spring Garden in Allapattah. I don't live
there now, however. I see signs in your neighborhood, sir, that says "No more homeless
shelters, " that you don't want homeless shelters in Allapattah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Mr. Payne: I don't understand. If you don't want homeless shelters, then we've got to keep
people employed. We have to give people jobs. I think that the jobs that are produced on the
river are important to us and important to the people of Allapattah. I think that -- I think you're
confused about 8, 000 jobs directly on the river. I think it's in excess of 8, 000 jobs. However,
they may not be directly on the river. Those ships on the river, my tugboats, the small boats; we
buy fuel from people. We buy marine supplies. There are -- a lot of those places are in
Allapattah; a lot of those places are in other neighborhoods. The river does support a lot of
activity and a lot of employment. Just because it might not be right on the river -- you might be a
little confused there. Also, the dredging. You heard some people mention the dredging. The
river has been hindered by dredging. Dredging affects, or the silting up affects from not doing
dredging. However, finally, we've finally got our dredging done. I expect my business to grow.
I've bought two more tugboats to support that growth. My -- I've heard comments said in the
past about lower wages and stuff like that. My employees start at $30, 000 a year and end up
around 70 or $80, 000 a year. I know that's not a lot of money for some of the people in this
room, but that's a lot of money for people that live in Allapattah; a lot of money for me.
Commissioner Gonzalez: They make more than me, as a Commissioner.
Mr. Payne: That's -- I mean, I think that we need --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I miss these jobs.
Mr. Payne: I think that instead of building on the river and killing this resource we have, I think
we need to embrace this resource. You, yourself, have mentioned that the river's dilapidated and
this has happened and that's happened. I think that's happened because the City of Miami has
not embraced this economic engine that they have in their power. I think we need to do that now
. We're running out of property.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Payne: There's not much more.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you very much.
Mr. Payne: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Counsel, does that conclude your presentation?
(Applause)
City of Miami Page 279 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Gibbs: That concludes our presentation.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Gibbs: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We need -- please, we need to refrain from any celebration. Brett, will
you be -- is he the last one? Counsel.
Brett Bibeaux: I'm not a part of his presentation. I'm just here at the request of the City
Commission to provide our advisory recommendation.
Commissioner Gonzalez: What?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Well --
Commissioner Winton: At the request of whom?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- let's --
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chair, he made that recommendation last time. We've got seven to ten
people in the neighborhood who are willing -- who want to speak on this behalf. He's going to
read --
Mr. Bibeaux: I'll take half --
Ms. Dougherty: -- the same thing he read the last time.
Mr. Bibeaux: I'll take one minute.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Listen, go ahead and state --
Mr. Bibeaux: I'll take half of my time. Thank you. Honorable City Commission, good evening.
My name is Brett Bibeaux and I'm the Managing Director of the Miami River Commission, with
offices located at 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway. I am here to provide you with the Miami River
Commission's official statement, as requested in City Commission resolution 00-320, regarding
PZ.26, 27 and 28, which impact the Miami River. On March 1, 2004, Ms. Lucia Dougherty,
Greenberg Traurig and Mr. Ed Yorka, Marie Salazar Architects presented the pending
Hurricane Cove Project. By a vote of 6 to 4, the Miami River Commission found the proposal to
be inconsistent with the award -winning Miami River Corridor Urban Infill Plan, our adopted
plan of Miami River Corridor improvement initiatives. Thank you very much for your time.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much. Counsel, you're recognized.
Ms. Dougherty: We have about seven to ten people who would like to speak --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Also --
Ms. Dougherty: -- at two minutes apiece.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- did you reserve time for rebuttal?
Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir.
City of Miami Page 280 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Will you be rebutting? You will? OK Let's go ahead and have -- in
support. Please state your name for the record.
Elizabeth Wiseheart-Joyce: My name is Elizabeth Wiseheart-Joyce. I am an attorney. I
practice law with my brother Malcolm Wiseheart. Malcolm and I think that Hurricane Cove is
going to be good for all the interests on the river.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Excuse me. Could you state your address? Did you state your
address?
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: My home address is 5940 Grenada Boulevard, Coral Gables, Florida.
Malcolm and I -- we are the owners --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Please.
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: -- of the property that is most affected by this project. Our property is on
the river next door to the Hurricane Cove project, on the west side of it, at 2000 Northwest North
River Drive.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Excuse me, ma'am. Is your property the boat slips that are empty
now?
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: Yes, yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: How many boat slips do you have there?
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: 88.
Commissioner Gonzalez: 88 boat slips.
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: Our dad --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right now, they're empty, right?
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: Right now, they're empty and I'll tell you how that came to be. Our dad
bought the property in the early 1940s and leased it to the Hardy's, who ran it as Hardy's
Boatyard --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I remember that.
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: -- for the past 60 years. Last year, the Hardy's moved out and gave the
property back to us empty, so we put the property on the market to sell it, but when we heard
about Mr. Acosta's project and Hurricane Cove and the bright future that he was going to bring
to Allapattah and to the river, we took it off the market. We decided to fix it up. It was our
motivation to put money into the project. We're going to build a dock master's house and run it
as a marina, and I think that's why Hurricane Cove is going to be good for the river. It's going
to bring people to live on the river, people who are going to have boats, and if they don't already
have boats, when they get there and see how nice it is, they're going to want to have boats, and
we hope they're going to keep them at our marina. I know Hurricane Cove is going to have over
100 slips of their own; they're going to have a big marina, but we hope there's going to be a lot
of people that will want to keep their boats with us. Now, they're going to also want to have their
boats repaired at places nearby, so other businesses are going to benefit. Hurricane Cove is
going to bring jobs and life to the river.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am.
City of Miami Page 281 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: We think that Mr. Acosta is to be commended for what he's doing. You
know, it's been said that a rising tide lifts all boats. Well, Hurricane Cove is the rising tide and
the marine industry and the general public are going to benefit --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: -- so we --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much.
Ms. Wiseheart-Joyce: -- recommend you vote yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Tucker, state your statement for the record.
Mr. Gibbs: Yes. Mr. Vice Chairman, I would object to this abuse of rebuttal. Rebuttal is an
opportunity for opposing counsel --
Commissioner Winton: This isn't rebuttal.
Mr. Gibbs: -- to rebut the testimony that was presented before.
Commissioner Winton: This isn't rebuttal. This is --
Mr. Gibbs: It is rebuttal time because what happened was Commissioner Teele recognized
proponents, and the proponents closed their case and reserved time for rebuttal.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, OK
Mr. Gibbs: And my -- I have a real problem with that --
Mariano Cruz: It's a public hearing.
Mr. Gibbs: -- because basically what's happening is two bites of the apple for testimony.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Gibbs: The whole point of the process is that rebuttal is to rebut what we said, not --
Commissioner Gonzalez: So what --
Mr. Gibbs: -- to present testimony.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So what you're opposing, you're opposing the people from the
neighborhood speak on the issue. Is that what you're --
Mr. Gibbs: Absolutely not. What I would have a problem with --
Commissioner Gonzalez: What's the problem?
Mr. Gibbs: -- is that the opportunity -- and Commissioner Teele, who's an attorney, will verb
this -- when you make a presentation -- when you make your presentation --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, you stated --
City of Miami Page 282 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Gibbs: -- and say it's finished --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- Counsel, you -- with all due respect, you've stated your point for the
record. The other side is entitled, just like you were, to speak in opposition. They have every
right to speak in favor of the project.
Mr. Gibbs: Excuse me. I have a question for the City Attorney then, through the Chair.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Through the Chair.
Mr. Gibbs: The question is, when the proponents make their presentation, my side has the right
to respond to it, and their side has a right to rebut. In the rebuttal, if they bring up new
testimony, I have to go and rebut their testimony, too. This process is being abused.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman --
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, this is not my case in chief. This happens to be the public
hearing, and these are the public that's speaking.
Mr. Gibbs: And the public -- and the presentation made -- this is --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Tucker.
Chairman Teele: Counsel.
Mr. Gibbs: -- absolutely inappropriate.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel --
Mr. Gibbs: Absolutely inappropriate.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- please, please.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, you're recognized.
Chairman Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Dougherty, may I inquire? Was the speaker a
part of your case?
Ms. Dougherty: No.
Chairman Teele: You need to state this on the record.
Ms. Dougherty: None of the speakers who are speaking now are part of my case. This is the
public who have came out today to speak in favor or -- just like the public over there have
spoken opposed to it.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman --
Mr. Gibbs: This is ridiculous.
Chairman Teele: -- respectfully, I would ask that the opposing counsel's perspective is legally
correct. He should be afforded the same amount time to rebut anyone that is speaking now in
that we had the public hearing for those persons who were proponents. We went to those that
City of Miami Page 283 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
are in opposition. If we are opening it up now again for a public hearing for proponents, we
owe -- we have to give the opponents the same amount of time to preserve the record.
Mr. Gibbs: Don't clap. I --
Chairman Teele: To preserve the record.
Mr. Gibbs: And I understand that.
Chairman Teele: The rebuttal is for the lawyer in principal.
Mr. Gibbs: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: The public hearing closed for the proponents; it closed for the opponents. If it
opens again for the proponents, then the opponents should have an equal, but not more --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But this is the public --
Chairman Teele: -- of the amount of time.
Mr. Gibbs: Absolutely.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let's leave it closed then.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But this is the public speaking. They're not the expert witness --
Chairman Teele: I understand.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- testing on their behalf.
Chairman Teele: I understand, but we heard from all of the proponents.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Unidentified Speaker: We didn't hear from --
Commissioner Winton: We've heard from them before?
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gibbs: So you know what?
Commissioner Winton: No, you haven't. No way.
Mr. Gibbs: That's not my fault.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no, no, no.
Mr. Gibbs: That's not my job, it's Lucia's.
Commissioner Winton: The proponents never talked.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Tucker, Tucker. Tucker, they either have not had -- the public on their
side --
City of Miami Page 284 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: What --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- has not had the opportunity --
Unidentified Speaker: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- to address the Commission in support of the project.
Chairman Teele: And, Mr. Chairman, all that I'm saying is, if they have not had an opportunity
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Exactly.
Chairman Teele: -- then any opponent should be afforded an equal amount of time to rebut
anything that they're saying. I just think that we have to make sure that the times are balanced.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel.
Mr. Maxwell: I wouldn't disagree with that, sir, but I believe the question that was asked of Ms.
Dougherty by the Vice Chairman was whether or not she had rebuttal at that particular point,
and she said -- I think she said, yes, and then she asked for these individuals to speak. My
thoughts were that she was having these individuals speak in rebuttal to testimony that was given
by some of the citizens.
Ms. Dougherty: That is not the case.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That is not the case.
Ms. Dougherty: I had rebuttal --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So --
Ms. Dougherty: -- but there are the public who wants to speak in favor --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So --
Ms. Dougherty: -- of this process. They never had a chance to do so.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, for the record --
Mr. Gibbs: It's a great due process issue.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- let's put that on the record that they're not speaking -- they're not
part of your witnesses.
Commissioner Winton: She's put it on the record twice.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They're just public speaking --
Ms. Dougherty: These are not my expert witnesses.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Ms. Dougherty: These are not my witnesses.
City of Miami Page 285 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mariano, you're recognized.
Mr. Gibbs: Wait, wait. Can I --
Mariano Cruz: OK. Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street in Allapattah. In Allapattah,
where this project is going to be, in Allapattah, not in Durham Park, on the south side of the
river and things. Besides that, I happen to be Vice Chairman of Allapattah Business
Development Authority. We work, you know, with the community, with the business (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) and that. Board members are people from the community, working,
affordable housing. You can see our affordable housing being built in front of -- on the south,
right there on 14th Street and 24th Avenue, and now that was one (UNINTELLIGIBLE), and the
other one, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) plaza across from Jackson High School. That's what we're
bringing to the neighborhood. I'm going to say one thing. Where are all these people? Where
would they -- bringing all the homeless shelters and all the prisons and all the programs to
Allapattah and the public housing. Talking about big buildings, in the late '60s, they built the
three round towers 16 stories high there, blocking the sun from everybody and the residents. I
didn't see anybody there complaining about that. No. Because they didn't want that in their
neighborhood. Now, we want this in our neighborhood, and like Mayor Diaz said in New York,
the Commission and the Mayor, they bring prosperity to every neighborhood and ethnic groups,
to everybody, everybody, not just to Brickell Avenue or to Coconut Grove. The only time I was
in Coconut Grove about something, was when the people here didn't want the neighbor reserve
place being used for the homeless, and they fought there because they didn't want it here. They
want the homeless to go someplace else; that was the time. Now, they're building -- so, finally,
they won the fight and they're building something good there (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is building,
and talking about what the County has built in Allapattah lately. They built, yeah, affordable
rent at Allapattah Station and Santa Clara Station, and those buildings there don't pay any tax to
the City of Miami because they are -- everything is owned by the County. No, they get all kinds
of things. Where were all these people when all these things that nobody wants, all these
buildings, all these institutions that are part of the byproducts of society that are needed, but
nobody wants a prison next to them, and we got prisons --
Commissioner Winton: His two minutes should be up.
Mr. Cruz: -- in our neighborhood. No. We want a big --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank --
Mr. Cruz: -- nice building.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mariano --
Mr. Cruz: Why can't we have it? Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Could you please wrap it up?
Mr. Cruz: Anyway, I leave it up to the Commission.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much.
Commissioner Winton: Mariano, your two minutes are up.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Your two minutes are up.
City of Miami Page 286 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much for your testimony. Sir, you're recognized. Please
state your name for the record.
Commissioner Winton: Your two minutes are up.
Alberto Lamadrid: Hello. My name is Alberto Lamadrid. Wow. This is unbelievable here
today. I happen to have an investment on the Miami River at 2100 Northwest North River Drive
of about $2, 000, 000. I listened to all these people speak and think to myself, here I am going
through the permit process in order to get my business, my marine business, up and running. I
own Miami Yacht and Engine Works, the Cummins engine dealer on the Miami River. I was
allowed 11 boat slips due to the Manatee Plan, so I am restricted to only have 11 boats in my
marina -- 11 powerboats in my marina in order to be able to work. I pay $42, 000 worth of taxes
a year. You know, if Mr. Acosta wants to sell me his 27 boat slips, I would be more than happy
to service all those customers at my boatyard, and then there would be no issue here because
they can come to my yard and get their boat serviced. I have a $2, 000, 000 investment. I carry $
20,000 a month in order to get the Army Corps of Engineers to give me my permit in order to put
my business up and running, and you know what their answer is? Well, we'll get around to that
permit between a year or two, because I have 200 applications on my desk, and when I get to it,
we'll get to it. In the meantime, Mr. Lamadrid over here is carrying a $20, 000 a month, $42, 000
a year tax bill in order to try to promote the marine business, and I'm having a tremendously
hard time. I don't quite understand this. You would think that you would want me to go into
business right away so that I can service all these people. Mr. Acosta's been dealing with this
situation for two years. You know, I don't -- whether his project is right or wrong, I'm not one to
say that. All I know, he has 27 boat slips, according to the Manatee Plan, which he's allowed to
work on.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, for the record, you're in favor of the project or against the
project?
Mr. Lamadrid: I am in favor --
Commissioner Winton: (INAUDIBLE) like to figure out what he's saying.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Mr. Lamadrid: -- of the marine business on the Miami River, and I'm also in favor of citizens
that want to do and go through the process to be able to accomplish what their goals are, like
Mr. Acosta, that wants to make his project, to be able to do his project, so with all due respect,
after being here for four hours waiting to speak for two minutes, you know, I sincerely
appreciate it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I apologize for only allowing you for two minutes, but that's all the
time we could afford you. Thank you so much.
Mr. Lamadrid: That's OK As long as I was heard, I was -- I'm happy.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We lost quorum.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. OK, we --
Mr. Lamadrid: Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- have to stop because we lost quorum, so --
City of Miami Page 287 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: We lost a quorum.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's been a long day. We've been here since 8: 30 in the morning, OK,
and it'll probably go into, maybe, 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning, so bear with us. Get some coffee
brewed. Everybody stand up and stretch.
Mr. Gibbs: Is this the 7th inning stretch?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Everybody stand up and stretch. Let's take a five-minute recess.
Unidentified Speaker: We have quorum.
Commissioner Gonzalez: There's Commissioner Regalado. Let's finish this item, then we need
to take some recess because it's too much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. No, no, no, no. Let's go ahead and let's -- back to -- we're back.
We'll go ahead and finish this and then we'll take a recess, OK, so we're back on the record.
Hey, could we --
Joe Minor: Good evening.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir. Please state --
Mr. Minor: My name is Joe Minor. I live at 1700 Northwest North River Drive --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Meeting's called back to order.
Mr. Minor: -- on the same side of --
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry, sir. Can you state your name again for me?
Mr. Minor: Joe Minor.
Ms. Thompson: Thank you.
Mr. Minor: 1700 Northwest North River Drive, Number 105. I live on the same side of the river
as this development, just down the street from it. My wife is a doctor at Jackson Hospital, and
I've lived within two blocks of this development for the last nine years, and I'm fully in favor of
this project. We think that the development is going to enhance our side of the river. The
businesses and the jobs that are going to be created by it and the improvements to the
neighborhood are going to be very helpful to those of us that already work in the Civic Center
and live there, but it's also going to help attract more people there and, you know, we love that
part of the city but, you know, it's not a place where right now you'd want to raise a family, and
we think that if we can improve that side of the river, get some more businesses there, some more
services there, then more people will come to live there and stay there, so we're fully in favor of
this project and we hope you support it tonight.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Porfirio Mercado: My name is Porfirio Mercado. I live at River Run Condominium, 1700
Northwest North River Drive. I'm in favor of the project, the development, because of the
following reasons: Economic stimulus to the neighborhood, less pollution, two million in new
property taxes, revenue to help with the roads, sidewalks, streetlights and other basic services,
promote small businesses in the neighborhoods, neighbors who are not owners -- not renters,
new park within walking distance, greenway for walks, increased property values, opens up the
City of Miami Page 288 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
river area for more people to enjoy a beautiful neighborhood for everyone to enjoy. Thank you
very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
David Lefebure: Good evening. My name is David Lefebure. I'm a resident of the River Run
Condominium, 1700 Northwest North River Drive. I'm also in favor of the development. I think
it's a nice project that will make the neighborhood better. I have a direct view right now on the
Hurricane Cove. I think I'd rather have a view on that development than having cranes and
containers, or whatever that is not so nice to see. Thank you.
Geoffrey Pearson: Good evening. My name is Geoffrey Pearson. I live at 1700 Northwest
North River Drive, Number 803. I'm the President of River Run Yacht Club Condominium
Association and the Vice President of River Run Condominium Association. Collectively, I
represent 158 property owners. Both associations, through their boards, favor the construction
of the Hurricane Cove Condominium development. My prior presentations have stressed
environmental and economic concerns of Hurricane Cove Boatyard. Since Balbino Investments
purchased the 4-acre Hurricane tract, that once trash filled lot has been cleaned. It is no longer
an aboveground environmental hazard. Yet, the now clean self-service boatyard is still
underutilized. Had the property been viable as a boatyard location, one of the successful yards
on the river, such as Merrill -Stevens or Glass Tech could have purchased the property and
expanded their operations. It's very simple. Land always goes to its highest use. Residential
development can coexist with successful environmentally commercial ventures along the river, as
evidenced in cities such as San Diego and Jacksonville. The South Florida Business Journal
recently quoted Miami River Commission spokesperson Fran Bohnsack as saying that more jobs
are needed along the river corridor. The staffing requirements of the Hurricane Cove
Condominium project, when finished, will exceed employment levels of Hurricane Cove
Boatyard more than ever could happen. The attraction of 1,100 new families into Allapattah will
aid in reducing the quoted poverty levels that have been stressed in this community. The
increased tax base created by the Hurricane Cove Condominium project will add continued
growth in Miami by providing funding for necessary infrastructure. Miami is on a roll as never
before. The Biscayne Corridor and Brickell environs are enjoying great growth and economic
expansion. Denying the Hurricane Cove Condominium development will deprive Allapattah of
the renaissance that this Commission has planned for the City. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, is this -- Counsel -- Lucia, is this your last --
Ms. Dougherty: Yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Gus Puyans: My name is Gus Puyans. I live in 1700 Northwest North River Drive. Me and the
wife are both nurses at Jackson Memorial Hospital, and for the reasons -- not to repeat
everybody -- we are in favor of this project --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much.
Mr. Puyans: -- as stressed before.
City of Miami Page 289 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, you will have an opportunity to rebuttal, and then you --
Mr. Gibbs: Oh, I get the last word?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I will give -- I will -- so you -- listen, just to state on the record, I
don't want you to accuse me or this Commission of denying you the due process so, Counsel, you
will have an opportunity to cross-examine. Counsel, you're recognized.
Mr. Gibbs: Oh, no -- it's just I want to make -- OK -- a correction, that's all.
Ms. Dougherty. I first want to say that the comprehensive plan application that we made was
less than 10 acres. It was 7.91 acres, not 10 acres. We don't count to the center line of the river
for density. It's still the net lot area. We only count for our net lot for density. The FAR is
counted 70 feet into the water, which is the same -- from the property line, which is the same as
any other development, including Grovenor, 500 Brickell, et cetera. The port of Miami River is
a defined term in the City of Miami Comprehensive Plan. It is 14 commercial container and
shipping businesses. It has nothing to do with the site. This site was never one of those 14. This
is a large project. It's got a lot of units. It has got two bonuses. It's the same bonuses as the
FAR -- I mean, the same bonuses that the Grovenor got, for example, but each cost -- each unit
costs a whole lot less. This is a middle-class condominium association. This is starting at $167,
000, not a million or two. This project -- or this property never serviced mega yacht marinas.
They could never get on this site. They couldn't even get close to this site. We only had 27 boat
slips anyway, and they were for what could be hauled out on a very small portion of the river.
We have an affordable housing bonus of probably a million or over a million square -- I mean, $
1,000,000 that we'll be paying to the City, and what -- now, I'm going to take Tucker's word at
this, that we're going to have a gross income -- not income, but gross revenues of $58, 000, 000,
but what do we have to do for that $58, 000, 000? We have to buy the land. We have to build the
building. We have to finance the construction at probably anywhere from 15 -- 10 to 15 percent
interest, or maybe more. We don't even know what it costs now because costs are escalating.
We have carrying costs for the property. Well -- we -- I have clients who are paying 18 percent
interest right now on a construction loan, so banks will not lend unless you show 20 percent in --
a 20 percent profit. Banks won't lend, and you know that. You can't lend money unless you
show a 20 percent profit, so for this 58,000 -- oh, carrying costs, too. We have to pay insurance,
interest, carrying costs for the property. The entire time that this is going on, somebody is
paying the taxes on it, even though we've been in this for a million -- for a year and a half that
we've been at this process. Traffic -- we have a traffic consultant here and I'm not going to put
him on in rebuttal, unless any of you have any questions. We have, again, a loss of 27 boat slips.
This will not kill the recreational boating industry, as somebody had testified, so with that, Mr.
Commissioners, we would urge your approval of this application.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So you rest?
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Tucker, you're recognized --
Mr. Gibbs: Yes. A couple --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- for cross-examine.
Mr. Gibbs: No, I have couple of -- I have a correction I'd like to put onto the record.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: State them on the record, sir.
Mr. Gibbs: One of the -- no, not from Lucia -- one of the people who testified referred to Dr.
City of Miami Page 290 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Bohnsack as the Director of the Miami River Marine Commission. She is the Executive Director
of the Miami River Marine Group. It's a different group, and she's not the director of the Miami
River Marine Commission.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Gibbs: If you're only allowing me rebuttal -- to cross-examine, that's the extent of my
corrections. I would have added some things, but for the sake of brevity, I won't. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So the public hearing is closed, and we open it up to the Commission.
Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Gonzalez, you're recognized.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Lourdes, I just want you to clam for me -- because there has been a
lot of allegations here that the -- and I'm not a lawyer. I don't know if that is good or bad, but
I'm not a lawyer.
Commissioner Winton: I consider it good.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Is that good? Thank you. I knew that that was going to be your
answer. I'm not an architect. I'm not a planner. I'm not an expert on zoning, and there have
been some allegations here that the line goes to the middle of the river, halfway to the river,
halfway to the street, on the sidewalk, on top of a tree, under a tree. Are those allegations
correct?
Ms. Slazyk: No, they're not. Let me explain. The application for this land use change was under
10 acres.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: The net lot area is what's used for the calculations for a land use application.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Ms. Slazyk: For both a land use and the zoning application, the fees are based on that lot area.
They can only apply for the land that's under their control. They can't apply for a land use and
zoning change for land in the middle of the river because it isn't theirs. When we map land use
and zoning changes, we map them to the center lines of roads and to the center line of the river
for mapping purposes, but their application was definitely for under 10 acres, and the Florida
Statutes specifically say that a local government comprehensive plan amendments directly
related to proposed small scale development activities may be approved without regard to
statutory limits on the frequency of consideration of amendments to the local comprehensive
plan. Small scale development amendment may be adopted only under the following conditions:
the first one says, the proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer. Their use is 10
acres or fewer. Their application is --
Commissioner Gonzalez: So they qualms?
Ms. Slazyk: -- for less than 10 acres. We map --
Commissioner Gonzalez: So they qualms for the amendment?
City of Miami Page 291 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. They are definitely small scale. The other thing about the FAR calculation, Mr
. Luft stated that if an industrial zone were somewhere in the middle of the river, that it couldn't
be used for the calculations because it was industrial zone and not open space. The definition of
gross lot area includes lakes, rivers and bays toward this calculation. It doesn't -- there is no
limitation; that the zoning of the lake, rivers and bays must be the same zoning of the property
that's looking for -- to use that land for its calculations. If not, then every property adjacent to a
park would have to be park zoned in order to be able to use the gross lot area of the park, and
that was not the intent. If it's open, it can be used. There's no restriction as to the zoning of that
open space. There was also some question -- or some comments about the comprehensive plan
and the goals, objectives and policies. First of all, there was reference to this port of Miami
River element in the comp. plan. I will read for the record the definition of the port of Miami
River. Port of Miami River is simply a legal name used to ident some 14 independent,
privately owned small shipping companies located along the Miami River, and it's not a port
facility within the usual meaning of the term. The identification of these shipping concerns as
the port of Miami River was made in 1986 for the sole purpose of satisfying a U.S. Coast Guard
regulation governing bilge pump outs. The port of Miami -- this property is not one of those.
These do not apply to this property. The other goals, objectives, and policies in here that talk
about encouraging the development and expansion of the port of Miami River don't apply to this
property because they're not asking for an expansion. If one of those 14 properties or more, as
may be the case, were to come in and look for amendments to expand and, of course, we'd work
with them, and we'd encourage it, but it doesn't apply to this property. There's nothing in here
that says --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'd be the first one to support it.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. When they come, we'll support them. They're not coming, OK. There isn't
anybody that's come to ask for an expansion, which goes to the last point. Mr. Luft said that this
is an irreversible thing you're doing. It's absolutely not. You can always amend properties back
to the waterfront industrial category when the request comes. There hasn't been one. There
hasn't been one, so there is nothing irreversible about this. A change of zoning or land use is not
permanent. Any request can come back to you to rezone.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We need a motion and a second to open it for discussion. Do we have
a motion to approve?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Vice Chairman, based on the -- on all the information that have
been presented here and all the evidence that have been presented here on both sides, and based
on the expert opinion of our staff and the recommendation of the different boards, and on my
personal observation on a tour of the Miami River, something that I did because I want to make
sure that today I was well, well-informed of what was going on in the Miami River.
Chairman Teele: Excuse me, Mr. Presiding Officer. Mr. Attorney, you need to protect the
record. You need to protect the record. Now, the only thing you can make your decision on is
the evidence in the record. If you want to recess this and all of us do a tour, it'll be fine. I don't
have any problem doing that, but I'm sure you're not making any of your decisions based upon a
tour --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Based on a tour.
Chairman Teele: -- that was done ex parte. Could you just opine that for the record, please?
City of Miami Page 292 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I'm making the decision based on the evidence presented by both
bodies, by the professional staff, and by what the record reflects.
Chairman Teele: I mean, I think the courts would recognize that you have the right to draw from
common sense and from experiences in the norm -- in your normal course of duty, but you didn't
do a tour for this project; that's what I'm trying to establish.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, of course not.
Chairman Teele: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I did a tour of the river of Miami because I wanted to know the real
Miami.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Please.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Based on all of those facts -- and I know that there --
Commissioner Winton said earlier tonight that there's no way that we're going to be -- that
everybody's going to be pleased with our decisions. Some people are going to be happy. Some
people are going to be unhappy, and I think that the decision has to be made on the evidence,
and has to be made on the facts presented, and some people are going to be opposing it. That's
natural. We will never have everybody agreeing on one concept, or on one issue, so based on all
of those facts, I will move to approve PZ.26.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. There is a motion to approve. We need a second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a second for -- there's a second. We open it for discussion.
Discussion. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I think that one of the points that a number of people made that I think
we do have to -- and I know that -- because I've heard Commissioner Gonzalez say it before, you
know, this whole issue on protection of -- now, there's two parts to the marine industry. There's
the part that Fran's group represents that's more about shipping, but there's also the part about
pleasure boating, and there was an article also in -- I don't remember what it was in, but this
same issue is going on in Fort Lauderdale. It is not just a City of Miami issue. It's also a Fort
Lauderdale issue, and recreational boating is a huge part of our industry here, and I think that,
some way or another, we do need to -- someone said it out here -- we do need to figure out where
we draw the line in the sand, and I don't know what the right answer is, but somewhere I think
we do, or I think we do jeopardize seriously that part of the quality of life of our city, because
you do have to have some place to go fix your boat, and they put -- there's little bitty boats.
There isn't an income class out there that can't -- that doesn't have some -- that, if they want to,
doesn't have some sort of boat. I see little bitty boats out there that I wouldn't get in if I were on
a freshwater lake, nevermind on the ocean, and then there's big cruisers. I mean, it's -- it runs
the gamut and, some way or another, we have to figure out how we're going to absolutely protect
that industry, and while I'm supporting this project, Commissioner Gonzalez, we -- what we do if
we -- here's what happens if we don't figure out how to protect that industry. The pressure on
the owners of those sites, because the value of those sites is so much greater, I don't care how
successful your marine related business is, that kind of development makes that land worth 10
times what I can generate out of my business, even if it's very, very successful, and so the long-
term unintended consequence is that we could ruin, in particular, the pleasure boating industry
here, and you've said it before, and I know you believe in keeping it. I don't know what the right
answer is, but I would hope that maybe we have a Commission meeting where we have on the
agenda, absent development, so that this whole issue over the project doesn't cloud all the stuff
that we put on an agenda, maybe this fall in September or October, a discussion and bring some
City of Miami Page 293 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
people in to help us think about where we draw the line in the sand to protect the marine related
industries that we think are very valuable to get protected, and so that's the only thing I wanted
to say, in addition to my support of your project.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have to agree with you 100 percent, and I've been one that been
supporting to protect this industry, and I don't have any problem with the industry.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't have any problems with the industry, you know, but -- and like I
said a while ago, if one of these industries need to come before us to request assistance on
expansion of their business, listen, we need jobs. We need housing. We need jobs. We need
infrastructure. We need almost everything in this city. If a business is going to do an expansion,
it's going to create new jobs, and need the assistance of this City Commission, I'd be the first one
to support them, but at the same time, I don't feel that it is fair that we have a piece of land
abandoned and neglected, and neither one of the parties want to do anything with it, you know,
because it's not serving any purpose.
Commissioner Winton: And, you know, and that's the point -- if I may, Mr. Chairman -- that's
the point where the arguments coming from all the Miami River Commission -type people is a
tough argument. Part of what I really want to say to some of the marine industry people is, if
y'all want to protect something -- this is private land. Somebody said this is owned by the public.
This is private land. This is not public land. The river is public, but the land is in private hands,
and this is an interesting battle here that we've got to, some way or another, resolve, but part of
me wants to say, for some of the marine related people that want to keep the big shipping thing,
they ought to buy some of this land and keep it themselves; put it in their inventory. Put it in
their inventory and keep it in their inventory. They don't have to sell it to a developer, and if they
didn't sell it to a developer, it wouldn't come here before us so, you know, that's a piece of this --
some of this stuff that's laid fallow for 20 years. It's an issue, and I think it's a rational issue, so
that said, however, the flip side of it is, without question, that if we don't figure out where that
line is drawn, even as much as we may want to protect it, it's unprotectable (sic) because the
value of that with that is so much greater than any value you could ever calculate by running a
marine related business on the site, so if we don't figure out where the line in the sand is, we are
going to deal with this issue all up and down the river, and I think the noise will get louder, so
it's -- I'm done.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may, just to add. I think we can lose sight of the
balance that exists in the river. I think that we need to fully understand that the river itself is a
working river, a historical river, but a living river, and we need to have a balance, and if we
don't somehow figure out how we're going to do this -- because, you know, this project, which I
look and it's in an area that -- you know, yeah, it -- promote it with development and stuff, and
it's going to have a marina, but the thing is that we need to have a balance where those ships
that are going to be parked in that marina, or docked at that marina, are going to be able to be
serviced by businesses that are there and, you know, one of the things that I was thinking about
when all the statements were being made was, you know, here we are promoting a mega yacht
marina industry, which I have heard this Commission support it so many times because we're
being left out of that industry, and then, in a way, we are seeing that industry being lost in the
river, so I could understand that, but once again, you've got to take into consideration that a lot
of these businesses that are there vacant, without any -- I can't say the future because I don't
know what the future's going to bring, but we determine what the future brings to that river, so
that balance is very, very, very, very important to that river. Now, I'll tell you this much. I have
a question that I wanted to ask Lourdes because one of the statements that was made, and it
stuck in my mind, was that under the plan -- Jack, I believe you brought that out -- under the
plan -- the City plan, could this project be developed in that site, and does it have a basis to
develop? And I continue to ask that because, you know, people will say, well, it's out of scale.
City of Miami Page 294 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
It's a big blah, the setback, all that stuff. You need to state that for the record.
Ms. Slazyk: No. For the record, with the land use and zoning change, the project does comply
with the Code.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Does comply with the Code.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes, it complies with the Code.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. All right.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion. If I may, I'm in very much agreement with both sides of
this argument. I really do think, unlike some of the comments that have been made, the whole
issue of the Commission sitting in the zoning role is really to determine what the uses of land will
be. That's, essentially, the core business we're in when we sit in a zoning meeting. It is not up to
the property owner or the land owner, just like you can't put a rendering factory in a residential
area because of the Zoning Code, and there are some governments -- Houston, I think, is
probably one of the more prominent -- where you can have a $10, 000, 000 house and a junkyard
could come right next to you, where you have the -- sort of the market determines what the use of
the land is, but we, in Florida, through a whole series of acts going all the way back -- who was
the gentleman who died in the plane crash that was one of the architects of --
Unidentified Speaker: Sadowski.
Chairman Teele: Sadowski and others really have really worked hard through people like John
DeGrove (phonetic) and others in trying to develop, on a statewide basis, a comprehensive
approach to land use. Now, in 1980, the County -- Miami -Dade County was hot. Everything
was going right. The buildings were going on on Brickell. It was a place being written about in
the New York Times and everywhere. Everybody was coming and money was coming. There
were a lot of reasons for it; some notable and some un-notable, but the fact of the matter is,
Miami -Dade County was hot, and all of a sudden, organizations started getting created. People
started getting concerned about the rate of development, sprawl. They got concerned about
schools being overcrowded, and what it really got down to, Commissioners, was what was going
on on the County Commission agenda on Thursday, and Thursday's the day you do zoning, and
the land values that were being changed on Thursday made the Tuesday agenda look like a
warm-up session. Every time you take property and you convert it from an industrial use and
turn it into a residential use, you're making a lot of people money, so the pressure gets heavier
and heavier, and heavier and, folks, it's not going to get less.
Commissioner Winton: That's my point.
Chairman Teele: And I think Commissioner Winton is 100 percent correct. I'm going to support
this project. I'm going to support this project because I think -- assuming the FAR is correct --
but I think this project is a handsome project, and I am persuaded, based upon the overall
economic conditions, as stated on the record and in our master plan -- when you've got the kind
of vacancy, like 350 units, that is a community crying out for residential opportunities and
residential values. When you superimpose what is in the record, as it relates to the University of
Miami effort and our great President Donna Shalala's efforts to build something more like a $1,
000, 000, 000 research institute and process, I think, you know, it's clearly the kind of infill
programming that we need that this project addresses. However, we are running the risk,
Commissioners, of putting ourselves, like the Miami -Dade County Commission did in the late '80
s -- when everybody start hopscotching and developing, and turning farmland into
condominiums, and farmland into residential units, particularly in the -- what is now called the
Kendall area, and you know what happened? The people organized, they united, and they said,
we're going to vote all of those bums out; the good ones and the bad ones, and in 1990, there
City of Miami Page 295 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
was a total coup d'etat by the voters of Miami -Dade County Commission, followed up by 1992
continuation of the coup d'etat, because it was all about one thing. It was not about the airport.
It was not about the seaport. It was not about transit. It was about the fact that government did
not listen to the voters and the public, particularly, as it related to protecting neighborhoods,
and I think we're going down that road now, particularly, on the river, particularly on the river,
and I really believe that we should be talking about a moratorium on the river until we can
develop a comprehensive plan of how we're going to allow development to proceed in the river.
I'm not proposing that tonight, but I am suggesting one thing: That when the dredging is
completed -- that river is so dirty now, no self-respecting dog would jump in and swim across it.
I mean, dogs have sense, but when that river is dredged and you can see fish once again
swimming in that river the way they did some 30 or 40 years ago, I'm told -- because I've never
seen fish really swimming around the river today.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Floating, not swimming.
Chairman Teele: They're floating, but not swimming, and someone is saying how you could see
the fish leaping out of the water. When the river is dredged, you're going to see that again, and
then the pressure is really going to be on this Commission to allow every piece of property to be
a waterfront home, and I think we've got to get control of this thing in a comprehensive way
before this gets out of control. I'm not proposing that tonight, but I am suggesting that we need a
comprehensive plan for this river, as Commissioner Winton has said, as others are saying. We
need to sit down, perhaps, in a workshop with the Miami River Commission and try to come to
some consensus since we've -- the State has empowered them, because I think we're going to
continue to be confronted with opportunistic development, based upon the so-called economics,
and I respectfully suggest that our role and our job, even though we heard every farmer say I
can't make any money on this anymore. I need to turn it over to developer "X, " "Y," or "Z, " or
"L," "B," or "Z,"ifyou get the drift.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. "L," "B," or "A."
Chairman Teele: "L," "B," or " Z, " and it got out of control. We are bordering upon letting the
development on the Miami River get out of control, and I think we need to apply the brakes to
this before it happens. I think this project is a handsome project. It's a well -conceived project.
It's in the right neighborhood, it's addressing the right need, based upon the demographics of
this community, but I can assure you, when people see this, they're going to be people looking
for the low hanging fruit, and the next project is not going to be so well thought out, perhaps,
and so I just want to be on record as saying, even though I'm supporting this, this is not a
precedent for my vote in the future on any project on the river. I think we're really going to have
to take a hard look, and I would propose that we really set aside a meeting in October -- give
everybody enough time to start thinking about this, to ask the consultants and the staff to come
together with the Miami River Commission, and let us engage in a thought provoking process, so
I'm going to be supporting the motion -- the development, assuming that we can get something
on the FAR, and with one condition, Madam Director -- anytime, Madam Director. Did you
impose, as a condition on this development, the same condition we imposed on the other
development that is about six blocks up the river? This is 19th, right?
Ms. Slazyk: Oh, the one that the condo docks have -- actually, that's not in here. That's not in --
that the condo docks have a statement that they understand they're --
Chairman Teele: That this is a working river.
Ms. Slazyk: -- moving into a working river, yeah.
Chairman Teele: Because this protects Commissions in the future.
City of Miami Page 296 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: That's a great idea.
Chairman Teele: When people start complaining about the noise --
Commissioner Winton: That's a great idea.
Chairman Teele: -- we need to be able to pull out the docks and say, OK, when you bought this,
it was in the condo docks that this is a working river.
Commissioner Winton: And, you know, the Cloisters is required to do that in their condo docks,
relative to Peacock Park.
Chairman Teele: Exactly.
Commissioner Winton: That's all in there. This is an active park that has noise, and so it's
actually in the condo docks, and that's -- because they haven't moved in there, and I haven't
gotten the calls yet, but they're going to come, and I'm going to say, go look at your condo docks.
Chairman Teele: Madam Attorney, would you object to that language?
Ms. Dougherty: No, no. Absolutely, we agree.
Ms. Slazyk: We'll put that in -- I'll add it to the condition 6, that same language from the other
one. We have that at the office.
Chairman Teele: All right, so the motion is to approve the -- what is your motion, to approve the
staff recommendation?
Ms. Slazyk: Well, first one is actually the future land use map. This is a recommendation for
approval by Planning & Zoning. This will amend the land use classification from industrial and
liberal commercial to restricted commercial.
Chairman Teele: And that motion is by Commissioner Gonzalez and seconded by Commissioner
Winton.
Ms. Slazyk: That's PZ. 2 6.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Ms. Thompson: Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
Chairman Teele: Madam Director, the next item.
Ms. Slazyk: PZ. 2 7 is --
Commissioner Winton: Could -- excuse me.
City of Miami Page 297 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: -- the companion --
Chairman Teele: Hold on.
Commissioner Winton: Could we make a motion, though, or at least a directive to the
management to put this on an October agenda, you know, discussion of the Miami River -- some
sort of discussion? I don't think we want to figure it out tonight --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no.
Commissioner Winton: -- so it ought to be just a discussion item at a meeting -- maybe the
second meeting in September just to --
Chairman Teele: Second meeting in October.
Commissioner Winton: Or a second meeting --
Chairman Teele: Second meeting in October.
Commissioner Gonzalez: October.
Commissioner Winton: Because the discussion item is just going to be to create some direction
that'll do something later, because we're not going to figure it out tonight, so I don't want to --
Commissioner Regalado: (INAUDIBLE) do a workshop.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You better do it after the elections because --
Commissioner Winton: The first meeting in September, we can just say, look, we can think about
it a little bit. We'll have a subsequent meeting that's going to deal with it. The meeting in
September is for us to talk about it and develop a plan.
Chairman Teele: Well, let me tell you what I would rather do. We got the -- we have our
constitutional budget with the millage and all of that in September.
Commissioner Gonzalez: In September.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK. I'm with you.
Chairman Teele: And I really want to be careful --
Commissioner Winton: I'm with you, I'm with you.
Chairman Teele: -- about that. Why don't we agree on the first meeting in October --
Commissioner Winton: Fine. I agree.
Chairman Teele: -- to have a workshop, a two-hour workshop on this, and let's let the staff
figure out how they want to organize.
Commissioner Winton: Fine.
Mr. Gibbs: Mr. Chairman, just to remind you all, the Planning Advisory Board, this Wednesday,
has established that -- the 30th, has set that meeting as a workshop on the river, just so you know
. Unfortunately, it's scheduled for the COW (Committee of the Whole) room. It might be better,
City of Miami Page 298 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
after all of this, to maybe schedule it in here, or somewhere where people can actually be there
and it can be televised.
Chairman Teele: I think that's a very good idea, and I also think that we should ask the Clerk to
provide more notice on that, if we can.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Gibbs: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: You know, public --
Commissioner Winton: And we may get some great ideas out of that.
Chairman Teele: And do that out here. Would someone check to see the availability on
Wednesday of the Chambers, please?
Commissioner Winton: Anybody over there listening?
Chairman Teele: Madam Manager.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, I believe there was Code Enforcement in there; that's why we were using the
staff room.
Chairman Teele: Well, let's reverse that --
Ms. Slazyk: OK.
Chairman Teele: -- for the purpose of this meeting.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Mr. Gibbs: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right.
PZ.27 04-00211 b ORDINANCE
Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 25, OF THE ZONING ATLAS
OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401,
SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM SD-4 WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
AND C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL
FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1818 AND 1884
NORTHWEST NORTH RIVER DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY
DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A," CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
City of Miami Page 299 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00211 b SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00211 b Analysis.PDF
04-00211 & 04-00211b Zoning Map.pdf
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211b Aerial Map.pdf
04-00211b School Brd Recomm.pdf
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211b Miami Riv Recomm.pdf
04-00211 b ZB Reso.PDF
04-00211 b Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00211 b Legislation.PDF
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211b Exhibit A. P D F
04-00211 b FR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00211 b - submittal.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from SD-4 Waterfront
Industrial District and C-2 Liberal Commercial to C-1 Restricted Commercial
to Change the Zoning Atlas
LOCATION: Approximately 1818 and 1884 NW N River Drive
APPLICANT(S): Balbino Investments, Inc, Contract Purchaser & River
Marina, Inc, Owner
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Recommended denial to the City
Commission on March 1, 2004 by a vote of 6-4.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval to City Commission on March
22, 2004 by a vote of 7-2. See companion File Ds 04-00211 and 04-00211
a.
PURPOSE: This will allow a unified commercial development site for the
proposed Hurricane Cove Major Use Special Permit Project.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12551
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.27, then, is the companion zoning
change item. This is also recommended for approval by Planning & Zoning; approval by Zoning
Board from SD-4 and C-2 to C-1 restricted commercial.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move the approval of PZ.27.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's a public hearing.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
City of Miami Page 300 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: 111 second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection or discussion? Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Now, this -- we've held a public hearing on this. Is there anybody here that
was not heard on this item? All right, so that public hearing was complete. Madam Clerk, call
the roll.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The item has been adopted on second reading, 5/0.
PZ.28 04-00211 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE
SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5, 9, 13 AND 17 OF
ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR THE HURRICANE COVE
PROJECT LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1818 NORTHWEST NORTH
RIVER DRIVE AND 1884 NORTHWEST NORTH RIVER DRIVE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, TO ALLOW A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PER ARTICLES
5, 9, 13 AND 17, TO BE COMPRISED OF THREE BUILDINGS
CONTAINING 1,073 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH
RECREATIONAL AMENITIES, 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT, 2
,500 SQUARE FEET OF MARINE RETAIL, A 130-SLIP COMMERCIAL
MARINA, AND APPROXIMATELY 1,737 TOTAL PARKING SPACES;
DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT;
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 301 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00211 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00211 MUSP Analysis.PDF
04-00211 & 04-00211b Zoning Map.pdf
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211 b Aerial Map.pdf
04-00211, 04-00211a & 04-00211 b Miami Riv Recomm.pdf
04-00211 HEPB Reso.PDF
04-00211 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00211 MUSP Application.PDF
04-00211 Sp Ex Fact Sheet.PDF
04-00211 Sp Ex Analysis.PDF
04-00211 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00211 Sp Ex Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00211 Plans.PDF
04-00211 Legislation.PDF
04-00211 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00211 Exhibit B.PDF
04-00211 Exhibit C.PDF
REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Hurricane Cove Project
LOCATION: Approximately 1818 and 1884 NW N River Drive
APPLICANT(S): Balbino Investments, Inc, Contract Purchaser & River
Marina, Inc, Owner
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with
conditions*.
MIAMI RIVER COMMISSION: Recommended denial to City Commission on
March 1, 2004 by a vote of 6-4.
HISTORIC & ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD:
Recommended approval with conditions* of a certificate of appropriateness
to City Commission on October 21, 2003 by a vote of 7-0.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission
on April 7, 2004 by a vote of 5-2.
ZONING BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* of the special
exception to City Commission on February 23, 2004 by a vote of 9-0. See
companion File ID 04-00211a and 04-00211b.
*See supporting documentation.
PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Hurricane Cove Project.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0426
City of Miami Page 302 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Madam Director.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.28 is the Major Use Special Permit
. This was recommended for approval by the Planning & Zoning Department. We would ask the
two additional conditions be added; one, subject to the FAR verification and, two, subject to the
condo dock language regarding the working river, put the buyers on notice.
Chairman Teele: Is there a motion?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move PZ.28.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: The staff -- the Director -- with the conditions.
Ms. Slazyk: With the two additional conditions.
Commissioner Gonzalez: The conditions.
Chairman Teele: With the two conditions.
Commissioner Gonzalez: With the conditions.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion. All right. Now, we've also had the public hearing on this
item. Is there anybody that was not heard on this? All right. Then the public hearing was
complete. Madam -- Ms. -- Madam -- All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those opposed have the same right. All right. The item is unanimously
adopted, and that will complete this item. Thank you all very much for your participation.
Please leave quietly. We're going to be here for a long time.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's right.
PZ.29 04-00460 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS,
APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION TO
RESOLUTION NO. 98-450, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO
ARTICLES 5, 9, 13, 17 AND 22 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR
THE VILLA MAGNA PROJECT (F.K.A. BAYSHORE PALMS MUSP PHASE II)
LOCATED AT 1201 BRICKELL BAY DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO ALLOW A
MODIFICATION TO CONSTRUCT TWO RESIDENTIAL TOWERS
CONSISTING OF 909 MULTIFAMILY UNITS, 209 HOTEL UNITS WITH
RECREATIONAL AMENITIES, 30,850 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE,
AND APPROXIMATELY 1,460 PARKING SPACES AND TO INCREASE THE
FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) BY 20% (137,263 SQUARE FEET). DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT;
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
City of Miami Page 303 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00460 Exhibit A - 5th Modif.pdf.pdf
04-00460 Exhibit B- Corrected.pdf
04-00460 Exhibit C - 2nd Modif.pdf
04-00460 Fact Sheet - 3rd Modif.pdf
04-00460 Analysis - 2nd Modif.pdf
04-00460 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00460 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00460 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00460 Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00460 CC Reso 98-450.PDF
04-00460 Plans.PDF
04-00460 Legislation - 3rd Modif.PDF
04-00460 - submittal.pdf
04-00460 - correspondence gibbs.pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Amended Complaint.pdf
04-00460-Su bmittal-Analysis. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Appl. for Amdmt. to MUSP.pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Appl. for Amdmt. to MUSP.pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Binder. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Letter From Attny Dickman To Garcia-Toledo.pdf
04-00460-Su bmittal-Letters. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-List Of Associations. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Mandelstam v. S. Miami Commission. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Memo. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-PAB Minutes.pdf
04-00460-Su bmittal-Petition . pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Pinellas County v. Woulley.pdf
04-00460-Su bmittal-Presentation . pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Resolution . pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Resumes. pdf
04-00460-Submittal-Rinker v. City of N. Miami.pdf
04-00460-Submittal-State v. Goode.pdf
04-00460-Scrivener's Error Emails Refernece to Exhibit B.pdf
04-00460-Old Exhibit B.pdf
REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Villa Magna (f.k.a. Bayshore
Palms Phase II)
LOCATION: Approximately 1201 Brickell Bay Drive
APPLICANT(S): Tibor Hollo, Member, Excel.com LLC
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: A. Vicky Garcia -Toledo, Esquire
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with
conditions*.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with conditions* to
City Commission on April 21, 2004 by a vote of 8-0.
*See supporting documentation.
City of Miami Page 304 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Villa Magna Project.
CONTINUED
A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, with Commissioner Gonzalez absent, to CONTINUE item PZ.29 to the
Commission Meeting currently scheduled for July 22, 2004, at 5 p.m.
Direction to the City Attorney by Chairman Teele to meet with attorney Andrew Dickman and Mr
. Tibor Hollo separately, regarding alleged conflict of interest stated by Mr. Hollo against Mr.
Dickman.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Gibbs, you wanted to be heard?
Tucker Gibbs: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, on the next item is Villa Magna. We were going to ask for
a deferral of that. We're the opponents. I can tell you why. My documents are in the other room
. If you're --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no, no, no.
Commissioner Regalado: No. We're --
Chairman Teele: Hold it.
Commissioner Regalado: We're now on the moratorium.
Mr. Gibbs: But Ill tell you. It was the 5 o'clock item --
Chairman Teele: Parker --
Mr. Gibbs: But we can get it done quickly with a deferral.
Commissioner Regalado: No, we're on the moratorium now.
Mr. Gibbs: Oh, OK Not a problem.
Commissioner Regalado: We're not -- we're going to do the --
Mr. Gibbs: Because we could do --
Commissioner Regalado: We promised the moratorium. We're not going to do anything else but
the moratorium now.
Mr. Gibbs: OK. I accept that. I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.29 is the Villa Magna Major Use
Special Permit. This is actually a substantial modification to the Major Use Special Permit for
Bayshore Palms. The request is for 1201 Brickell Bay Drive, and they want to modem the
development program, increasing -- two residential towers, 999 multi family units, 209 hotel
units, 34,975 square feet of retail and 1,474 parking spaces.
Tucker Gibbs: Mr. Chairman, before Vicky starts, I'd like to ask for a deferral, and let me
explain to you why.
Chairman Teele: You want to state your name for --
City of Miami Page 305 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Gibbs: Yes, I'm sorry. My name is Tucker Gibbs, law offices at 215 Grand Avenue in
Coconut Grove, and I represent Topeka Holdings and a variety of other people, which I'll list
before the end of this hearing on this matter. We reviewed the sheets on this, the architectural
sheets on this and found there were some very serious discrepancies in the numbers. If you want,
I'll go all though them, but they totaled approximately 210,000 square feet of -- of square
footage. I'm sorry. It's late at night -- square footage on this property that is above and beyond
what is permitted and what was said. There's some serious internal discrepancies. In addition,
my understanding -- and Mr. Dickman can speak to this, is this has not gone to Shoreline Review
Committee yet. It needs to go to Shoreline Review Committee. Andrew.
Andrew Dickman: Mr. Chair, Andrew Dickman, law offices at 9111 Park Drive in Miami
Shores, Florida. I'm representing the Mark Homeowners -- Condominium Association, directly
to the north of this project. We, too, would like a deferral of this item. We had approximately 30
homeowners who were here tonight at 5 o'clock. You'll recall that we deferred this last time in
order to be here at 5 o'clock, and they all have but left for two or three, and we would, for that
reason, like to have a deferral on this. In addition, it is true that -- I inquired with the County
today at the Shoreline Review Coordinator, Terry Rolle, and he informed me that this item had
not gone before the Shoreline Review Committee.
Chairman Teele: Counsel.
Vicky Garcia Toledo: For the record, Vicky Garcia Toledo, with offices on the 25 floor of the
Wachovia Center. With all respect to Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Dickman, they were both here a month
ago when they asked for a continuance.
Mr. Dickman: I didn't ask for a continuance.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: They had that information. They could have brought that information at
that time. To bring it at the -- not even the 11 th hour. I think it's the 12th hour, or beyond, I
think is just totally inappropriate. Further, if they are correct, those are issues of fact and issues
of merits of the case, which should be presented, and we welcome their presentation of that
information, but I would ask you -- and also inform you that we had over 150 individuals here in
support of this application today, and many of them, as you can see, have had to go home
because of the late hour, but we would like to proceed with this matter.
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Chairman, a point of clarification. I did not ask for a deferral. The reason
this matter was deferred was because there was a notice problem. The City asked for the
deferral. Mr. Dickman asked for a time certain so his clients could be here. We did not ask for
the deferral, just to clam the record.
Chairman Teele: Madam Director, would you refresh the recollection as to the deferral? I'm
sure neither counsel would intentionally mislead.
Ms. Slazyk: No. The request was made by the Department because the notice had a --
Chairman Teele: All right, OK
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, there was a --
Ms. Garcia Toledo: By Mr. Gibbs. Mr. Gibbs brought an issue to the staff.
Mr. Gibbs: I brought it to the attention of the staff.
Chairman Teele: Yeah, but he only brought to the attention of the jurisdiction that we had a
City of Miami Page 306 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
defective notice. He was only serving the public. Look, you can have it any way you want it
tonight, ma'am. This is how we're going to do it. It's your choice.
Commissioner Winton: Not necessarily.
Chairman Teele: It's your choice. You can put on your case, with the understanding that we are
then going to recess the item and carry it over until the 8th of July -- hold on.
Commissioner Winton: No clapping.
Chairman Teele: -- and afford them the opportunity that they've asked for, or you can decide
that you would like to recess the case, as well, and we'll carry both sides over --
Mr. Dickman: That's right.
Chairman Teele: -- to July 8th, but I'm not -- at 2 a.m. -- you know --
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- there's too many court cases that have said --
Mr. Dickman: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: -- that this does not constitute a -- Mr. Gibbs can cite some of the cases where
judges have ruled 1 a.m. decisions on substantial issues does not constitute a --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Reasonable.
Chairman Teele: -- reasonable approach to this, so we need to be very careful at this point in
time. Now, Vicky, let me tell you -- let me give you my advice. If you put on your case at this
hour and it winds up being abbreviated, and they come in here in -- on July 8th, fresh and they
bring in 50 people and they take their time and put on their case, I think your client could be
very well -- it may not be on an equal plane, but it's your choice, but you will be afforded as
much time as you need to put on your case tonight, up to 3 o'clock, I would assume, or 3: 55, or
whatever time the Commissioner's got to leave. We're not going to stay here after he has to go,
but the time is now 2: 03.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: May I confer for a moment with my client?
Chairman Teele: Yes, ma'am.
Commissioner Winton: Well, let me add a new piece to the -- nevermind.
Chairman Teele: You would just move it.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: Also, I'm not going to be here on July 8th.
Chairman Teele: Well, we will hear it at a time that's convenient to both lawyers. If you would
like to be heard on July the 22nd, we'll hear it on July 22nd.
Tibor Hollo: If it pleases you, Mr. Chairman, my name is Tibor Hollo, 100 South Biscayne
Boulevard. When I found out that Mr. Dickman represents some of the people who are
objecting, I immediately sent him a letter whereby -- reminded him that he has represented me,
and he's -- he has a definite conflict in this case, not only that, he's piercing the ethics of his
profession. I am respectfully asking you to remind him of that, please.
City of Miami Page 307 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect --
Chairman Teele: Hold on just one minute --
Mr. Dickman: OK
Chairman Teele: -- but we need, Madam Attorney, and we'll take your comments under advice.
We need your decision, Madam Attorney, do you want to put on your case tonight, or do you
want to defer it until July 22nd?
Ms. Garcia Toledo: We would prefer to defer to July 22nd.
Chairman Teele: All right. Now, what we're going to do, in fairness to everybody, we're going
to hear this matter first -- this is a Zoning agenda, and it's been so unfair to everybody that sat
through this all night, so what time is going to be convenient for you all to put your case on, on
July 22nd?
Ms. Garcia Toledo: If we could do it immediately upon your return from the lunch break, that
would probably be the best.
Mr. Dickman: No, no, no, no.
Commissioner Winton: I don't think that works for the -- for both sides of this. This has to be an
after 5 o'clock thing.
Unidentified Speaker: Homeowner, homeowner.
Commissioner Regalado: No, 7 is already --
Chairman Teele: We've already given up 7, and 6 --
Commissioner Regalado: 7 is already --
Chairman Teele: It's going to be at least two hours on this, so --
Commissioner Winton: This needs to be 5 or 5:30.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: May we do it then at 5 o'clock, please?
Chairman Teele: We'll set it for 5 o'clock, and it's going to go on if -- if somebody's going to
come in by the -- it's going to take you at least 45 minutes to put on your case, right?
Ms. Garcia Toledo: At least.
Commissioner Winton: This will be --
Chairman Teele: So the opponents are going to start around 6 o'clock, so --
Commissioner Winton: This will be a 2-hour thing, at least.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: At least.
Chairman Teele: All right.
City of Miami Page 308 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Garcia Toledo: This one went almost three hours before the Planning Advisory Board.
Chairman Teele: All right. We would accept a motion, if you would make it Commissioner
Winton --
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Chairman Teele: -- to defer the matter to 5 p.m. on Thursday, July 22nd time certain. Moved by
Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Winton: As time certain as we ever get.
Chairman Teele: As time certain as we can get. Yes, sir.
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to put something on the record since Mr. Hollo has
brought it up. It's true; I worked at the law firm that's representing him now several years ago.
If I had ever met this gentleman, I would have remembered it, and I have never met him. I've
contacted the Florida Bar about the letter that he delivered to me two days ago, two days ago,
and they have told me, with confidence, that I don't have a problem.
Unidentified Speaker: I'll give follow up with the Ethics Committee.
Commissioner Winton: No clapping, please.
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, I would respectfully ask that the City Attorney meet with the
attorney and separately with Mr. Hollo, and --
Commissioner Winton: Well, isn't that really their risk, not ours. I mean, how's that our risk?
Chairman Teele: It's not our risk, but we're in a --
Commissioner Winton: I mean --
Chairman Teele: -- quasi judicial proceeding.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but that's their -- you know, I think that's their risk. They take that
risk on.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: Mr. Chairman, I think the only concern is that, as long as we can put my
client's letter into the record just to protect his interest in terms of protection of the record, that's
what we're --
Chairman Teele: I'm going to take it under advisement. I'm going to ask the City Attorney to
determine that at the time you offer it in evidence.
Ms. Garcia Toledo: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: This is a very serious matter, and I would hope that everybody would be very,
very conscious of the fact that these things have long-term implications, sort of like filing a
complaint against a police officer. It's always in the record, whether it's a crazy person or a
reasonable person so, please, Mr. Hollo, we respect you, but we would ask you all to truly try to
work this out without necessitating a formal action with the Bar, and I was asking, really, as a
courtesy to the lawyer to try to make sure that there is some help to mediate the matter, if the
City of Miami Page 309 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
attorney -- yes, sir.
Freddy: How are you? My name is Freddy (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I'm one of the Board of
Directors for Mark, and I just want to state for the record that we do not -- you know, we're not
in favor of this project, and --
Commissioner Winton: Why? What are we doing? Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Freddy: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Winton: Wait.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. You're out of order. You're totally out of order now.
Commissioner Winton: Totally.
Chairman Teele: You are totally out -- sir, you're total -- please be seated. You're being
represented by counsel. You cannot put that kind of statement on the record. This is a motion to
defer.
Freddy: What I am trying to do right now (UNINTELLIGIBLE) our counselor to be in a conflict
of interest. They were given enough time to be prepared for the case.
Chairman Teele: The City Attorney is not going to find your attorney. That's a matter between
the Florida Bar and anyone that makes that -- the City Attorney's request was to just try to make
sure --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It is way too late.
Chairman Teele: -- that everybody -- It's a little too late. Everybody take a deep breath. We're
going to move the deferral of the item, as stated by Commissioner Winton, and second by who,
Madam Clerk?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: By Commissioner Sanchez.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Gonzalez.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Doesn't matter at this time.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor of the deferral, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? And, again, we apologize to all of you for the lateness of the
hour and your patience. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hollo: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Winton: Well, y'all get to come back. Today -- no, which day is your birthday?
Is it this today or is it yesterday today?
PZ.30 04-00296b ORDINANCE First Reading
City of Miami Page 310 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A 120-
DAY TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF
APPLICATIONS FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT ORDERS FOR DEVELOPMENT
IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET IN HEIGHT, EXCLUDING ONLY SUCH PERMIT
APPLICATIONS THAT ARE COMPLETE AND FULLY APPROVED, SUCH
TEMPORARY MORATORIUM TO APPLY TO ALL PROPERTIES LOCATED
ON THE SOUTHWEST 27TH AVENUE CORRIDOR FROM CORAL WAY TO
US-1, EXCLUDING ONLY SUCH PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE WEST
SIDE OF THE CORRIDOR AND LOCATED BETWEEN US-1 AND
SOUTHWEST 25TH STREET; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND
JUDICIAL REVIEW; PROVIDING FOR DISSOLUTION UPON COMPLETION
OF THE 27TH AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY OR THE EARLIER OF 120 DAYS
OR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CURATIVE ORDINANCE ADDRESSING
THE REMEDIAL EFFORTS AND IMPLEMENTING STUDY RESULTS IN
WHICH CASE THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE REPEALED; PROVIDING FOR A
REPEALER PROVISION ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE REMEDIAL
ORDINANCE AND AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00296b SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00296b PAB Reso.PDF
04-00296b Legislation - Modif.PDF
04-00296b Exhibit A - Aerial Map.pdf
04-00296b FR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00296b Legislation.PDF
04-00296b - submittal.pdf
04-00296b - submittal 2.pdf
04-00296b - submittal 3.pdf
04-00296b - Catalonia memo.pdf
REQUEST: To Establish a 120-Day Temporary Moratorium
APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, Chief Administrator
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval, excluding only
such applications as are complete, to City Commission on June 16, 2004 by
a vote of 5-1. This item is related to File ID 04-00296 and 04-00296a.
PURPOSE: This will establish a 120-day temporary moratorium on the
acceptance of all development orders for development in excess of 40 feet
in height for certain properties located on the SW 27th Avenue corridor from
Coral Way to US-1.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Chairman Teele: All right. The moratorium was set for a time certain of 6: 30, is that right?
Commissioner Regalado: 6: 30 time certain.
City of Miami Page 311 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: It is now 10:13. We are going to take up the Coral Way moratorium -- I mean,
27th Avenue moratorium. We've done Coral Way. 27th Avenue. 27th Avenue. Madam Director
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.30 is consideration of establishing
the 120-day temporary moratorium on accepting applications for development orders for
development in excess of 40 feet in height, excluding only such permit applications that are
complete and fully approved. This moratorium shall apply to all properties located on 27th
Avenue, from Coral Way to U.S. 1, excluding only such properties located on the west side of the
corridor between U.S. 1 and Southwest 25th Street. This item went to the Planning Advisory
Board on June 16th, and the Planning Advisory Board recommended approval, excluding the
applications that are complete. They wanted to exclude that language because they felt that if
somebody had been in the process that long, that that was kind of unfair to change the rules at
the last moment. The Planning and Zoning Department's recommending approval.
Chairman Teele: Ladies and gentlemen, we really need -- don't force us to take a 5-minute
break here so, please, we need your cooperation, please.
Commissioner Winton: What is the project that's being set up here? What does that have to do
with the moratorium? Mr. Chairman --
Commissioner Regalado: I don't know.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): This is the moratorium.
Commissioner Winton: Because it's part of the confusion going on.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Which project is this?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: I thought we were discussing the moratorium and not a project.
Chairman Teele: All right. This is on the moratorium. Mr. Attorney, help me here. This is
about to get out of control. This is a subject matter on a moratorium?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: So what is this stuff?
Chairman Teele: I'm sure somebody's getting ready to throw themselves for the mercy of the
court here.
Alfredo Gonzalez: Will you let me respond? We're going to address the issue of the moratorium.
In our case, the moratorium --
Chairman Teele: Mr. -- Attorney Gonzalez, you are well-known to me --
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: -- but you need to ident yourself for the Commission.
City of Miami Page 312 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Gonzalez: My name is Alfredo Gonzalez. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Adorno &
Yoss, with offices at 2601 South Bayshore Drive. I'm here --
Chairman Teele: Pull the mike up a little bit to you.
Mr. Gonzalez: I'm here on behalf of Hector Garcia and Enterprise -- HG Enterprises of South
Miami, and this is a project that's specifically affected by this moratorium. Just wanted to give
you an idea of what the project looks, and we are addressing some of the issues that the SD
district will have on projects such as this. In order to do that, we saw -- we thought a visual
would be a good way to show you.
Commissioner Winton: Well, it may be, but right now I'd like to take those down so that we can -
- I can see the people and the microphone.
Mr. Gonzalez: No problem.
Commissioner Winton: You can put them up whenever that time --
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: -- will come.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Just --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: Lourdes said that what happened at the Planning Board, and I just
wanted to make sure -- to reassure the public here and watching at home that the ordinance that
we are about to discuss and, hopefully, approve is to establish 120-day temporary moratorium
on the acceptance of applications for all development -- for development in excess of 40 feet in
height, excluding only such permits that are complete and fully approved. The words that were
taken off in the Planning Board are in the original ordinance that we will be discussing tonight,
so just to make sure that the people understand that the words "complete and approved, " which
ignited the creation of what is today -- and you mentioned residents united throughout the City.
Only these two words provoked the -- this situation that we have citywide today, and I'm glad
because I really enjoy this kind of interaction between residents and elected officials. I really do.
There is another issue, Mr. Chairman, and that is that I have been doing some research, and
also I have been informed that on one of the buildings that was approved already, while the
moratorium was not in place because of the mistakes of the administration, the permits may have
been issued by mistake, and we will deal with that in -- immediately after that, if you allow that,
Mr. Chairman, so having said that, if you want to go on with the public hearing or whatever
needs to be done.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Chairman Teele: All right. Do we have people here in opposition to the moratorium? How
many lawyers and how many people do we have here, all right, that are going to be heard? OK
Commissioner Winton: Mr. --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no. Thank you very much. I wasn't asking for everybody -- the
City of Miami Page 313 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
people who are going to be speaking -- how many lawyers are here on behalf of clients? One,
two -- All right. Would you all please come forth and establish who you are and who your
clients are, and anyone that's speaking for themselves on a matter, just come forward, please.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman, before you go there, I'd like to make -- get a point of
clarification, and this is probably from the City Attorney -- and I had a copy of the transcript
pulled. I'm sure my fellow Commissioners will remember this, but during the Commission
meeting, on the public record, I asked for a carve out that was in my district, and it's tied to the
distance to the Metrorail, and I put on the record -- I think it was -- now, if I can remember this
straight and I might confuse it, but it was --
Commissioner Regalado: 26 or 25.
Commissioner Winton: -- 26, and then I moved it to 25th.
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Commissioner Winton: On -- all of it on the record. Didn't do it behind some -- I did it on the
public record, and then there were those in the community that accused me of all kinds of
baloney, which, you know, didn't go very far to make me want to be very supportive of this thing
after I helped Commissioner Regalado lead the charge to get this done, but that's how some
people are. That said, however, I'm prepared to move the boundary back to the first point, which
was -- let's see, 26th, it gets bigger.
Commissioner Regalado: 26th or 25th.
Commissioner Winton: To 20 -- from 25th to 26th only, however, if it doesn't impact the process,
so what I'm trying to do here is -- because there's some people that thought I was up to some sort
of shenanigan, even though I did it on a public record with opposing counsel sitting there
looking at opposing counsel; no one objected, but just to be crystal clear about it, I'm prepared
to move it back to 26th. Nobody objected to either one.
Commissioner Regalado: Johnny, nobody --
Commissioner Winton: But in the media, somebody objected --
Commissioner Regalado: -- objected. Nobody objected. In fact, they -- the people here, the
residents, agreed with carving out because of the explanation given of the Metrorail and the that.
I mean, I don't know what's the problem here, but whatever -- my only fear is that, if we
substitute a comma --
Commissioner Winton: And that's what I was asking. I don't want -- because I'm not -- I don't
want to jeopardize anybody.
Commissioner Regalado: They would tell us, you have to come back in 120 days because it's a
major --
Commissioner Winton: So I'm only willing to do it if it doesn't change any part of our process.
Mr. Maxwell: I think it would impact the process.
Commissioner Winton: You think it what?
Mr. Maxwell: Right now, you -- it's noticed that's going up -- we're including up to 25th Street.
If we go to 26th Street, if that includes additional territory --
City of Miami Page 314 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: No. It --
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Winton: -- decreases.
Commissioner Regalado: Less.
Mr. Maxwell: It does --
Commissioner Winton: No --
Commissioner Regalado: Less.
Commissioner Winton: Let me see.
Mr. Maxwell: That's the question. Is it less -- does it include area that's not covered --
Commissioner Winton: Oh, no. It adds more --
Mr. Maxwell: -- or does --
Commissioner Winton: -- into the moratorium --
Mr. Maxwell: It adds --
Commissioner Winton: -- by a block.
Mr. Maxwell: If it adds area -- and I think it does --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, it does.
Ms. Slazyk: It does.
Mr. Maxwell: -- then you cannot do that tonight.
Commissioner Winton: Then forget it. I'm doing it. OK.
Commissioner Regalado: Don't touch it.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you. I won't.
Commissioner Regalado: If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
Commissioner Winton: OK, I'm done.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Please.
Mr. Gonzalez: My name is Alfredo Gonzalez.
City of Miami Page 315 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry, Commissioner.
Mr. Gonzalez: I'm an --
Chairman Teele: All right. Hold on one minute. We're going to have to ask everybody that's
going to speak to please stand, raise your right hand and be sworn. If you're going to be
speaking on this matter -- oh, my God. All of you are -- if you're going to be speaking on this
matter, please stand, raise your right hand. Madam Clerk.
Ms. Thompson: Do you solemnly --
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just -- I will remind you that I have to go to work at 3:
30 a.m., so --
Commissioner Winton: Well, I suspect we'll be going with you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I've cleared my schedule for tomorrow. Go ahead.
Commissioner Winton: I have an 8:15 partners meeting.
Ms. Thompson: Do you solemnly swear -- I'm sorry. Before I do that, is there anyone that needs
a Spanish translator? OK. We're going to need to have the translator here, as well. OK.
Chairman Teele: How are they going to know, if they don't speak English, what you just said?
Ms. Thompson: Yes. She's here.
Chairman Teele: No. I said, how are they going to know what you just said.
Ms. Thompson: Ondina is going to tell them for me. Can you just pass her that mike, please?
Commissioner Winton: Is it hot in here?
Commissioner Regalado: Very, very.
Chairman Teele: It's getting hot in here.
Commissioner Regalado: Very hot.
Unidentified Speaker: It's just the item.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Manager, did you turn the air conditioner off? You're trying to get
us out of here early? I mean, we like -- we appreciate the thought, but I'd rather be cool.
Chairman Teele: I think it's all these 98.6's --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
City Clerk's comments translated by official Spanish interpreter, Ondina Suarez.
Commissioner Winton: Guess not.
Ondina Suarez (official Spanish interpreter): OK. We only have these two young ladies here to
my right, Commissioner.
City of Miami Page 316 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: You can do it to them directly, right? All right. Go right ahead.
The City Clerk administered required oath under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving
testimony on zoning issues.
Ms. Thompson: Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez: Can we go? Good evening. My name is Alfredo Gonzalez. I'm an attorney with
the law firm of Adorno & Yoss, with offices at 2601 South Bayshore Drive. First of all, I'd like to
salute you for your effort today. It's been a long day. You've been very diligent, very fair in your
deliberations. We ask you to bear with us. We're not asking you to do away with the
moratorium. We know how important it is to the Commissioner of the district, and to the people
of the district, and we think it will enhance the dialog that needs to occur in that area. However,
what I am here to ask you is to treat my client's application fairly and equitably. The definition
of a filed application is different from what is in the Code. My client has a complete filed
application long before there was even a discussion of a moratorium, as I'll get into in a second.
If we could simply remove that approved application, we would be OK with this. In fact, we are
the only project that's affected by this decision, and we are a project that did not cause all the
problems. Our project complies with each and every one of the Code sections that apply to our
project, each and every one, including 9073.2, whether with the interpretation that was
withdrawn or without it. We comply with that, and that is specifically a Code section that was
put in the record in order to protect residents close to multi -unit projects. The standard that is in
the ordinance is very, very strict. You all have to keep in mind -- and I think a background of
this application will help you -- what a developer goes through to get to this point. My client
spent over $300, 000 to get his plans in front of your City staff. That's what it took to file a
building application, but it took a lot more than that. My client came to this City in February
and said I have a contract with a subject to clause, a contingency clause that said, only if I can
build this project would I pay this much money for this property, $2, 500, 000 to be exact, which
we did pay. We came to the City and said, can we do this project, and the City said it, and said it
in writing, yes, you can do this project. We relied on that. We relied on that to our detriment.
We relied to the tune of $2, 500, 000, and close to $300, 000 in plans, surveyors, lawyers,
architects, the works, and we filed that application April 7th, but we didn't file that application
April 7th. We worked on that application between February and March to make sure that we
took into account the residents, and that we work with your staff to bring to you a project that we
would be proud of, and that's exactly what we did. Our project, again, meets your Zoning Code
in every way. We then filed our application April 7th. To that date, there had been no
discussion of a moratorium, at all, anywhere. In fact, not until two weeks later does this
Commission even start to discuss this issue, and it ended up passing a moratorium May 6, 2004.
That moratorium we have no problems with. It doesn't affect filed applications, such as my
client's. It is only when the 120-day moratorium comes into being, a whole two months after my
client had filed his application and four months before he had started the dialogue with the City,
that we run into trouble, because the approved language essentially says you have to be holding
a building permit. Well, we're not. We're in the process. There were other applications that
were processed faster than ours. That's not our fault. We are in the process. We should be
through with the process shortly. We hope you see the inequity in this. There are legal
standards that have been set out for us to review situations, such as my client's, and there are
two that are pertinent here. First of all, equitable estoppel. This is very simple. It is simply
inequitable to tell someone that they can do something, say it to them in writing, take their
money, give them a process number, and then say to them, no, you can't. That's just simply
unfair. There's something wrong with that, and the courts have agreed when they've looked at
cases like this. They say, when you detrimentally rely on governmental action, they will be
estopped, and it's -- the courts have been a lot more eloquent than I can be on this. They simply
have said, it's the rule of fairness. You can't invite me to a welcoming mat and then snatch it
away from me, and that's exactly what would happen to my client if you did this. These people
bet their entire fortunes when they come to the City of Miami to build a building. It is going to
City of Miami Page 317 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
affect my client drastically if you act this way. It will affect his bankers, and it will affect other
people that will invest in the City. There's a second issue you need to keep in mind, and that is,
even if this doesn't arise to the level of an equitable estoppel, the courts have said, if youfle an
application, you're entitled to a vested right to the zoning as of the date you filed it. It's only
reasonable. They understand how costly it is to file an application.
Chairman Teele: What's the citation on that?
Mr. Gonzalez: That case is Smith versus City of Clearwater. I have a copy for you, sir, if you
want it.
Chairman Teele: I'd like to see it.
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Can you have it -- well give you a copy right now. And that court said,
even if it doesn't rise to a substantial expenditure on the reliance upon the city's position, he is
still entitled to obtain a building permit, which is within the provisions of existing zoning, so long
as the rezoning ordinance which would preclude it is not pending. Well, when we filed it, there
hadn't even been a discussion of a moratorium, and even afterwards, the only moratorium that
was in place said that it didn't apply to our property. This board has a very difficult decision
today, and you've had many of them today. We're not asking you not to enact this moratorium.
Simply, don't apply it to the one application that went out of its way to meet your Code section.
Please don't do that. Understand that there's a tremendous investment in this, and that the affect
on this application will be to take away their ability to make a profit on this project. We will get
to that in a second because our architect would testes to that, and my client will also briefly
address you, but the public policy ramifications are as follows: One, we could file a lawsuit and
lose or win. Either way, there's a delay. Secondly, eventually, if your decision today -- and that
is not just the moratorium but the SD-24 regulations that would come into being and affect my
client if this all passes -- if you inordinately affect the value of my property, we're going to be a
Burt J. Harris case. You all are going to be in the same situation Miami Beach is in; West Palm
Beach was in, over one application. Over one application, and that -- the value of whatever our
losses, if we prevail, is going to be paid by everyone. It affects every district, but it's going to
benefit one single neighborhood. We think that is something you need to take into account in
determining what you're going to do today, but we think there's something more important, and
that is the message that we send to people in New York who are coming to invest here, to
developers, investors, our bankers. Our bankers were here last time. I really don't know if
they're here today, but they are deathly afraid of what happened. We have $2,800, 000 into a
project that's going to be halved in size. You just can't treat this issue without dealing with the
SD-24 rules, and I'll be very brief on this. The development community -- the investors, the
commercial property owners on 27th Avenue -- they were completely excluded from the process
of drafting the ordinance that's before you. They have had no time to sit down with staff, with
the neighbors and work out something -- some powerful legislation that would be good for all.
That's not what you have here today because we have not had a fair look at these issues. When
we looked at it -- and this is in general. My architect will get into it in a bit more specific. What
do we have? We have a district that's going to lower the height of buildings. It's going to reduce
the number of units you can build, thus affecting the amount of money you're going to make on
the project, but that also affects the type of construction you're going to have. You're simply not
going to have the same type of luxury, the same type of effect when you're building small
buildings on 27th Avenue. Incidentally, this is a major corridor in our city. This is a corridor
that's going to tie into the Metrorail system. This is precisely where you want to put density. It is
not anywhere else, if it's not here, and to the extent that you build a 7-story building or a 15-
story building, that unit owner has been affected. We need to work in getting them appropriate
landscaping, which we've done with our project; having decorative walls, making sure the
window treatments are acceptable. We might work on a transitional district, but to say to
people, particularly my client, "no, you can't go forward," after we told him he could, it's really
the wrong message to send out. We would ask you, please, to consider the fact that a developer
City of Miami Page 318 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
bets his entire fortune when he comes to your city, and he needs predictability. Please have this
moratorium apply -- not apply to filed applications. It is simply one. Every other filed
application has gotten their building permit, including the one that instigated all of these
problems. They have their building permit application or, otherwise, they're excluded. This is
the one application that this applies to. We would also ask you, on the SD-24 district, you're
going to have a moratorium in place. Take the time to have a dialogue. The South Florida
Builders Association is here. You're going to hear from them. Let's talk about it. It doesn't
mean that the draft is a bad draft. It just means we need to work on it. There may be things we
can do to get the neighbors what they want but, yet, allow for projects to be developed that
would be the envy of the entire city, and not projects that, by necessity, are going to be cheap
projects. I thank you for your time. Our architect is going to briefly speak to you, and then my
client will finish with just some brief words. Thank you for your time.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Sanchez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let them present what they're going to (INAUDIBLE).
Chairman Teele: Well, this is just one. It's about four people going to be -- four different
clients, apparently. Four different groups.
Mr. Gonzalez: This will be very brief. We know that you --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But this is the only development that's under that --
Mr. Gonzalez: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Gonzalez: But I was shown five projects --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But -- you know what? I'll do it right now. I'll tell you what. You said
the moratorium is -- the moratorium is placed on a resident's demand, because they're seeing so
much development, they basically want to slow down the process because it's really -- they're
concerned about the growth.
Mr. Gonzalez: Understand.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Now, you have made a very eloquent case. I think you made a good
case on the argument. One of the things that concerns me the most here is the Burt J. Harris
case. That's the thing that -- and I have to be very careful on what I say here because
somewhere along the line, I think this may end up in court, so I've got to be very careful. Now,
you are in compliance with 907.3.
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, we are.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
AUDIENCE: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They are. Well, listen --
Mr. Gonzalez: Why don't we ask your staff?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. We need to clarify that:
whether you are in compliance with 907. I'm just stating from what you said, because the only
City of Miami Page 319 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
concern that I have here, based on the statement that you've made --
Mr. Gonzalez: Right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- is the Burt J. Harris case. That's the only concern that I have right
now, and I just wanted to state that for the record, because you're the only applicant that's in
that process right now. I think the biggest discussion that's going to end up, when this is all said
and done, is really going to be pinpoint to the 907 and the interpretation of 907, which is going
to be the discussion because of the concern and outright concern of the residents pertaining to
907, and I'm sure that Commissioner Regalado later on will address that issue, and I certainly
want to jump in on the 907 issue, but I want to make sure that the statements that you're making
on the record are very clear, so --
Mr. Gonzalez: They're very clear.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Gonzalez: In fact, 907 is part of your Code, so my plans are going to have to meet that
Code in order to be able to get a building permit.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But it all depends how it is interpreted, and that's where the problem is
coming in; how we or the City, or you, or the residents, you know, define 907.32, whatever it is,
that's the thing that we have to clear, and I think the administration is the one that has to clear
that, and later on I will make some statements pertaining to 907.3.2.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Mr. Gonzalez: Can we continue? We'll just be brief.
Chairman Teele: Please, please. Counsel, you need to make all your comments from the mike,
though, please.
Yovanna Alvarez: Good evening. My name is Yovanna Alvarez. I represent Kobi Karp
Architects, located at 17100 Collins Avenue. I am here to discuss the Luxor residence project
located on 2301 Southwest 27th Avenue. I would like for you to consider that Mr. Garcia has
already applied for his building permit. It should be excluded from this moratorium. Mr.
Garcia is in the process for obtaining the permit. He has been approved by Zoning Department
and by the DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management) and has complied
with the existing zoning, which is on 0 and R-4. Mr. Garcia has already invested a great deal of
time, effort and money in this project. It will be very unfair for him to be forced to modem his
plans or to redesign this project, which was at this stage right now. If Mr. Garcia is required to
comply this moratorium, SD-24 overlay will cause extreme hardship to his project. Under the
SD-24, we will encounter several major problems. If you allow me to pass you --
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Clerk, why don't you have one of your assistants -- Best
Sergeant -at -arms I ever saw. Thank you.
Ms. Alvarez: As we have shown here on this scheme, which the SD-24 is forcing us to setback
the property 35 feet from our property line, which allowed us to do 40 feet for us to allow to have
our parking. When you see this scheme right here with our 35 feet setback, you will see that
we're forced to pull the building back, and lose all this units here, which is almost 39 percent of
our overall unit design. We are also forced to have a 13 feet seven setback, which in our
original proposal, we had an entrance that allowed us to have a drop-off. In this case, by
forcing us to move our building and only have 13 feet --
City of Miami Page 320 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Mr. Maxwell: I believe the counsel is directing her testimony right now to another item in the
packet, which is the actual amendment to the Code that's before you. I don't think that
information is for the moratorium. Moratorium is on stopping of all development for 120-day
period. What you're addressing now is the amendment to the Code, which deals with the
setbacks and so forth, I think.
Mr. Gonzalez: Yeah, the SD-24 district. We're happy to address it in the other item, if you want.
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah, I think that --
Mr. Gonzalez: It's just that there are two -- they're bound together in how they affect my client.
Mr. Maxwell: The question before the Commission right now is whether or not they are to
impose a moratorium on all development orders in that area. That's it.
Mr. Gonzalez: We're happy to address that next.
Mr. Maxwell: That's the only question before them right now.
Chairman Teele: All right. Would you restrict your testimony? Huh? I think we have a
problem on this one.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Huh?
Chairman Teele: We have a problem.
Truly Burton: Mr. Chairman. Do you want to hear -- this -- I'm -- my name is Truly Burton. I'm
here to testify regarding the moratorium. I represent the Builders Association of South Florida.
Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, respectfully, moratoria, as you know, are very -- is a very
serious situation. Our industry does take them seriously, and that's why I've, you know, waited
here until now to speak with you on this issue, and I'll be brief because I know that we're all
getting a little tired. Clearly, I think you need to take into concern -- into -- take into
consideration a variety of concerns. The neighbors' concerns are legitimate. In addition, I think
the developers that have submitted applications thus far and are this close to approval also have
legitimate concerns. This happened to us on the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor with
Commissioner Winton, who prodded us along to get things moving, but those development
applications did not stop. However, we live with the issue of a moratorium, if that needed to
happen, because although we don't like them, occasionally, they are warranted, and in this case,
perhaps a four month -- if you will, just taking a breather -- might be very, very helpful.
However, please don't stop those folks that are in the pipeline. It's very -- it would be very unfair
. Mr. Gonzalez made a -- an excellent presentation about the issue of unfairness and, effectively,
if the grandfather clause is drawn so tightly, it's equivalent to not having any grandfather clause
at all, and no relief for those applicants that might be -- that will be affected so, again, please let
those folks go through that have already preceded, and that are, like I said, complete
applications but have not received all their approvals. Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: Can I ask you something? This -- is this the first time that you come
before us, or you've been here before?
Ms. Burton: I was here for the Biscayne Boulevard --
City of Miami Page 321 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: She was here on Biscayne Boulevard --
Ms. Burton: -- Corridor, sir.
Chairman Teele: -- at length.
Ms. Burton: Yes, for the past several months.
Commissioner Regalado: You were here for the Biscayne Boulevard.
Ms. Burton: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: And it worked very good because it was parallel. The new rules
parallel the moratorium, and people who had their projects in the works were able to adjust.
That is why -- what I remember, but here is different. Here the administration made so many
mistakes that the moratorium is not able to run parallel to the overlay, and that is why it could
be marginal casualties in this situation, but it wasn't the fault of the --
Ms. Burton: I was going to say it's not the fault of the applicants --
Commissioner Regalado: -- developer.
Ms. Burton: -- or the neighbors.
Commissioner Regalado: It was the fault of the City. The City made incredible mistakes during
the process. The City did not make mistakes during the process for the moratorium on Biscayne
Boulevard, but it did made at least three or four mistakes that delayed the process for more than
three months, so I just wanted you to know that.
Ms. Burton: I appreciate that. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. What -- now, did I note the presence of -- Are you the applicant, sir?
Hector Garcia: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: All right. Please go right ahead. Pull the mike up a little bit to you.
Mr. Garcia: Thank you. My name is Hector Garcia, and I'm the president of the Luxor
Construction Group, LLC. I had a lot of things to talk to you about tonight, but it seems like the
focus is now on whether my development meets or exceeds 907.32, as clarified by Francisco
Garcia and later thrown out. Well, my project qualifies. Some of the neighbors here saying that
it doesn't qual, but I'm just going to give you a good mathematical equation. I have 38 feet
from the front property line on Southwest 27th Avenue; 38 feet from the property line, 20 feet is
required. I only needed to move this building three feet to the front and my project complied,
and I did and I got Zoning approval, and if I need to move it two more feet, I can still move it an
additional two feet, and I comply with 907.32, but that's not the problem with the neighbors.
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Yes.
Mr. Maxwell: Again, same situation. This goes to another item, the next item up.
Chairman Teele: I'm going to allow it. Go right ahead, sir. Thank you, counsel.
City of Miami Page 322 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Garcia: OK, so the problem with the neighbors is that they don't want the building with the
present zoning without the overlay district in place because the overlay has been designed to suit
their demands, and I can show it to you, if you allow the architect to show you how the new
overlay --
Chairman Teele: Sir.
Mr. Garcia: -- affects this development.
Chairman Teele: Sir, this is the point, and this is what the lawyer is trying to impose on me.
Hold on one minute. Please, please. Just wait. Hold on a minute. What the lawyer -- what the
City Attorney is saying is correct, and I'm allowing you a lot of discretion, but if you wait until
the next item comes up -- right, Mr. Attorney -- he'll be able to put all of this on the record; is
that correct? So it's not like we're not going to hear from you. You're just a little bit ahead of
yourself on this, and we will let the architect speak, but not -- but this is not the time for them to
speak. They speak on the next item.
Mr. Garcia: OK. Then I'm going to talk about something else directly to Mr. Commissioner
Tomas Regalado.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no.
Mr. Garcia: No?
Chairman Teele: No. All of your comments are directed to the Chair.
Mr. Garcia: OK.
Chairman Teele: We don't get into the he said, she said and that. You make your point, but this
is not a debate or a discussion between you and an individual Commissioner, or you and the
public, and please don't point at the people over there or over there. Just make your comments
to the Chair and that way we can get through this, please.
Mr. Garcia: OK, so then let me talk about the project a little bit and the reasons why I don't feel
that my project should be included in this moratorium affecting completed applications
submitted for permit with a process number in place and with Zoning approval. I think it is
unfair for this Commission to say that unless the building permit has the approval of the
plumbing with the toilets, the electrical with the panel, the air conditioning system and the fire
extinguishers in place, the moratorium should be in place as of to this application. We are
talking about zoning, so zoning says -- it's all about zoning here, so if I meet zoning approval,
then this moratorium, with regards to my application, should stop. If you got zoning approval
and if you meet 907.32 with or without -- or with the revised version that was later overturned
that will probably be approved later on, then you are in; that's all I ask for Zoning. It is about
zoning and that's it.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much.
Mr. Garcia: All right.
Chairman Teele: You'll be afforded the opportunity to come back when we take up the specific (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) .
Mr. Garcia: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. Did I see someone else here on this item? I thought I saw the State
City of Miami Page 323 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Water -- Freshwater Fish Commissioner. What happened to him?
Mr. Maxwell: He's in the back.
Chairman Teele: Come on up, Doc. Did you -- are you here in your official capacity, or are you
here as --
Dr. Quinton Hedgepeth: I'm not Commissioner anymore. Your governor decided to put a good
Republican in my place.
Chairman Teele: Well, sorry I raised the question.
Dr. Hedgepeth: OK
Commissioner Winton: Name.
Dr. Hedgepeth: I'm the --
Chairman Teele: Your name and address for the record.
Dr. Hedgepeth: My name's Dr. Quinton L. Hedgepeth. I happen to have one --
Chairman Teele: Address for the record, please.
Dr. Hedgepeth: 2375 Southwest 27th Avenue. I happen to have -- to be two neighbors down,
and --
Chairman Teele: Two what?
Dr. Hedgepeth: There's a church between myself and the applicant. I do not represent the
applicant. I do not have a permit, so I'd like to let my patients know I'm not developing, but I
feel sorry for my neighbor in that --
Chairman Teele: Dr. Hedgepeth, I think you're going to need to also come up when we bring up
the next item.
Dr. Hedgepeth: Right. Definitely. That's why I wasn't coming up until you called me.
Chairman Teele: Oh, OK. All right.
Dr. Hedgepeth: You know, but I've looked at his development and I feel that he's, you know, not
developed to the capacity with the existing Code as it is right now, and I've looked at what it's
going to be if this thing were to pass, so I don't -- I think we've had a long enough moratorium to
look over this, and I don't think we need to extend it and make it any longer, or any other
hardships on the gentleman.
Chairman Teele: All right. Why don't you just stand by when we bring the --
Dr. Hedgepeth: Right.
Chairman Teele: -- discussion out. Are there any other persons here that are generally on the
moratorium? All right. If not, the public --
Unidentified Speaker: That was in opposition or in favor?
City of Miami Page 324 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Hold on one minute. Hold on. Just hold on. Ma'am.
Sandra Holguin (as translated by Ondina Suarez, official Spanish interpreter): Hello. My name
is Sandra Holguin. I live at 2790 Southwest 22nd Avenue. I find myself really worried here due
to this moratorium, which is being imposed here at the City of Miami, which seems to be just a
means to -- for the following development coming up here in our city, instead of waiting to have
a complete study done of the city, something that makes common sense. Moratorium, even
though they might be temporary, will affect the contractors and developers, and those that are
standing behind them, as well as our city. Due to a lot of employment as well as monies to be
made here will be lost. Monies that the City needs to be able to pay for a lot of the services that
it offers now. These services including official employees, police officers, the firemen, the
paramedics, as well as those incomes which are used for community services. As for example,
for people who have housing needs, low income, so I ask you, where are these monies going to
come from to be able to pay for all of these expenses, which the City needs? How are you going
to do it, by raising the taxes on the residents here now, firing City employees, or stopping the
construction? Even if it were in a temporary form, this is going to cause a domino effect within
our community. Miami is a very prosperous place today due to the construction, and our
government needs to have a sense of common sense.
Commissioner Winton: Government never had a sense of common sense.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Sorry.
Chairman Teele: All right. Your time is about up, ma'am.
Ms. Holguin: Please do not have the moratoriums imposed in the City. Do not rush. We do
need a plan and that takes time. We need public meetings with all of the parties that will be
affected, so that they can all express their point of view.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Ms. Holguin: Miami does not have any other ways of growing except with the construction, and
the construction is one of the strongest incomes for us because it does not only move for the
developers. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you for that excellent presentation. Thank you. All right. Now, that
will conclude -- Are there any other people here in opposition? Now, how many more people?
We're -- Madam Clerk, we're going to limit everybody now to one minute, all right? To one
minute, all right. How many more people? Because we've heard all about all of this. Now,
please don't repeat what anyone else is saying. Please do that. Do not repeat what anyone else
is saying, all right? Go right ahead, ma'am.
Amira Berrio (as translated by Ondina Suarez, official Spanish interpreter): Hello. My name is
Amira Berrio. For me, as well as so many other people --
Chairman Teele: Where -- your address. Where do you live? Where --
Ms. Berrio: 1331 Southwest 62 Street. This moratorium, as well as special districts, we know
that this will affect our economy so beginning with the loan institutions, investors, architects,
workers. There's a lot of people that wish to invest in these buildings, because as myself, I wish
to live with a pool, private barbecues. A lot of the people wish and like these areas around here,
and the City of Miami needs income. As you know, our Mayor, Manny Diaz, resided at one time
in New York City. He received a great acknowledgement because of the progress in the City of
Miami, and this was due to the constructions, as well as the Commission --
City of Miami Page 325 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right.
Ms. Berrio: -- the Mayor, City Mayor. Please, I ask that you act with common sense.
Chairman Teele: Well, there's a book that someone wrote recently. It's called "The Death of
Common Sense, "so be careful. It may be dying around here, but we hope not. Please continue
to come to the Commission. Thank you very much.
Ms. Berrio: Thank you.
Hector Garcia, Jr.: Good evening, Commissioners, Mayor. My name is Hector Garcia, not the
applicant, but the son. I am the president of Havana Sky.
Chairman Teele: Your address, sir.
Mr. Garcia, Jr.: 290 Northwest 27th Avenue. I'm here to -- not to discuss the -- my father's
project in particular, but more in a broad sense of what the Commission is contemplating today.
I haven't been involved in moratoriums or zoning -in -progresses before. In fact, I went through
one that was 16 months long in the town of Davie in Broward County. That moratorium, which
was enacted about a month after we applied for our site plan approval process, caught us in the
process and there was no way that we could -- we can get out of it. It was properly noticed. It
was enacted before we had our applications filed. I think it will be a major, major err in your
judgment today to include applications that are in the pipeline that have been planned, that
hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent; that your staff has given letters to the
developers -- the purchasers that they can in fact build a building of "X" magnitude that zoned
and turn around --
Chairman Teele: All right.
Mr. Garcia, Jr.: -- and say that whatever you've done today, your plans, your financing is for
naught. You're starting from scratch.
Chairman Teele: All right. Your time has expired, sir. Thank you very much. All right. Who
else? Are you the -- is there anyone else? All right. Thank you very much.
Alberto Gonzalez: Good evening, Commissioner. My name is Alberto Gonzalez and my address
is 2183 Southwest 11 th Terrace. I'm here to let you know of my opposition against these
moratoriums. I'm against these moratoriums and special districts. 27th Avenue needs to be
developed. What really decreases a property value in a residential zone is houses that are not
well -maintained with trucks, boats and other things that are visible from their yards; people
repairing their cars, laundry handing on top offences, illegal additions that are rented in a
single-family unit, and I have seen these things. That is why I urge that this Commission,
associates and City Code Enforcement Departments concentrate their efforts on having these
neighborhoods comply with the Zoning Code. As they had stressed before, these developers have
met certain guidelines, and I'm sure they still have to proceed with others, but --
Chairman Teele: All right.
Mr. Gonzalez: -- you know, this is something that would be good, in my opinion, for the City and
for this zoning area where the moratorium was to be imposed.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much.
Mr. Gonzalez: Thank you very much.
City of Miami Page 326 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right. Now, that closes the public hearing related to those persons who are
opposed to the moratorium. We're going to hear from the people who support it.
Andrew Dickman: Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, Andrew Dickman, law offices 9111 Park Drive in Miami
Shores, Florida. I'm here on behalf of the Silver Bluff Homeowners Association. We have a lot
of people here, not only from Silver Bluff, but also other neighborhoods as membership in the
Miami Neighborhoods United. They want to speak not only on the moratorium -- in favor of the
moratorium, in favor of the SD-24, but they also want to express their views on the issue of 907,
and some of the incidents that have occurred with allowing some of the developments to go
through, and I would ask the Chair or the Vice Chair how should we go forward in order to not
have these -- our citizens come forward and have to speak on every item. Would you rather us
speak now, or to speak at a later date?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, you're going to -- I'm not -- Mr. Chairman, I believe they're
asking directions how to proceed with -- I think we should just take PZ (Planning & Zoning) item
after PZ item and then, at the end, you know, we could talk about 907.3.
Mr. Dickman: OK, so we will have an opportunity --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That would be my suggestion.
Mr. Dickman: -- to express on that.
Chairman Teele: That's a great --
Mr. Dickman: OK
Chairman Teele: -- the Vice Chairman's correct.
Mr. Dickman: OK, then we will -- if anyone would like -- well, first of all, let me just ask the
members of Miami United and also of Silver Bluff to stand up, the ones that are in favor of the
moratorium as it is written and not changed.
Commissioner Regalado: Let's deal with the (INAUDIBLE).
Mr. Dickman: They are here tonight to ask you to pass the moratorium.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel, may I just --
Mr. Dickman: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- ask you to direct your statements towards the moratorium only --
Mr. Dickman: Yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- pertaining -- be specific as to relevance of the --
Mr. Dickman: That's right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And not mix them because I know there's another one -- the following
PZ item is a different PZ item, then the other one that's pertaining also --
Commissioner Winton: Could we take these boards down off the -- whoever put those up?
Thank you.
City of Miami Page 327 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Unidentified Speaker: But I plan to use them.
Commissioner Winton: Well, put it back up --
Chairman Teele: Then put it up when you get ready --
Commissioner Winton: -- when you're ready to use it.
Chairman Teele: -- to talk.
Mr. Dickman: OK
Unidentified Speaker: I have a one-story house to put against the 14-story building.
Commissioner Winton: You can put it up when it's there. I can't see.
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Chair, my clients are very in favor of this moratorium. They feel that it's
absolutely needed because of the fact that the area where they live, adjacent to Southwest 27th
Avenue, has no protection for them. There is no special district. They don't have Class II
protection. They basically are looking at zoning that is Office and C-1, and anyone could come
in and pull a permit and build a very large building. We are asking that you not exempt out any
projects, whether the project that's before you tonight or any other projects. The specific reason
why the moratorium was written the way that it is with the language of fully approved is in order
to make sure that the developments that are rushing towards City Hall, or in the pipeline rushing
trying to get permit, do not end up on the streets of Southwest 27th Avenue. This is a very short
stretch of street between Coral Way and Dixie Highway. It affects a lot of people. While the
developer mentioned that it will impact him and mentioned a lot about the finance community,
think about the neighbors who live on both sides of 27th Avenue and how many people it will
impact there. I think you do need to worry about the message that goes out. I think you need to
worry about the message that this is a good place to have a home and to raise a family, and that
the City is not going to allow big buildings to be built right up next to your single-family homes
or your low density areas. That's the message I think you also should consider. I will leave with
that because I know there are a number of people that want to speak on this item, since we are
going to speak on each item, and ask you once again to approve the moratorium. It is necessary
and needed, and not exempt out any of the projects, and I would ask --
Commissioner Regalado: Can I move it?
Mr. Dickman: -- members of Silver Bluff to come on up and put your comments on the record.
Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Counsel, let me ask you this.
Mr. Dickman: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Are you familiar with this Smith v. Clearwater?
Mr. Dickman: The case in Clearwater? Not the specific case, but I will also tell you that in the
rule of Takings and Burt Harris, inequitable estoppel -- I'm sure your attorney will talk to you
about that -- this is a temporary moratorium. This is a temp --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Burt Harris does not apply on temporary moratorium.
Mr. Dickman: That's what I'm getting at. We're talking about the moratorium right now, and
City of Miami Page 328 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
this is a temporary moratorium, and I think you ought to ask your attorney about that because I
believe he will also tell you -- and this came up at the PAB (Planning Advisory Board) -- that
there -- that the attorney at the PAB hearing said he was not worried about any type of Takings
arguments when it's a temporary moratorium.
Unidentified Speaker: Mr. Teele, can I respond to your question a second?
Chairman Teele: No, sir. All right. Let's try to -- not to be repetitive. Just come right to the
mike, if you plan to speak. We're going to allow the first two speakers -- Why don't we hear from
the president of the association, first. Sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: If you hear from the president of each association that will --
Chairman Teele: And if we could hear from any other association president that's here that
needs to be heard, and then we'll hear from everyone else. Welcome, and we apologize to you
and all of the residents. We promised to take this up at 6: 30, and now it's 11 o'clock, so that
doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in us, and we apologize.
Josefina Sanchez Pando: Thank you very much, but it's a hard battle and we're here to work on
it. We thank you very much for having heard us tonight here and we, again, go --
Chairman Teele: Your name again for the record.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: I'm sorry. Josefina Sanchez Pando at 2110 Southwest 24th Terrace, and I
am speaking as President of Silver Bluff Homeowners Association and of Miami Neighborhoods
United. Like someone mentioned -- was it Commissioner Sanchez or perhaps it was you. At this
time, I don't know who said it, but it was said on that side of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Miami
Neighborhoods United was borne out of the need of bringing to the public and to the
Commission the way of strength. So many mistakes were done. No -- we were really just pushed
to a corner, and we're here fighting again. The problem with the moratorium is just temporary,
and we need it very badly. I don't want to start repeating myself. I am letting -- Grace, you
wanted to say something about it?
Chairman Teele: Thank you. Thank you.
Grace Garrido: Good evening. Grace Garrido, 3620 Southwest 20th Street, and I am here on
behalf of the Coral Gate Homeowners Association, lending support to the moratorium, because
we do need to look at things, and Commissioner Sanchez, you brought up the fact that the big
problem here was the interpretation of 907, and I do have something to say about that but I don't
think you want to hear it now. You want to hear it later, OK
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We're going to discuss (INAUDIBLE).
Ms. Garrido: Right. OK, so, therefore, I ask your support for this moratorium because it is
needed, and it will give us a chance to take care of what has been let go. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
Gisela Chiu: Hello.
Chairman Teele: Good evening.
Ms. Chiu: My name is Gisela Chiu. I am a resident of Silver Bluff. I've been a resident of Silver
Bluff for 37 years. I have seen it change, and I raised my family there. My kids went to the
public schools in the area. My question to you is: When you approve any of these major mega
City of Miami Page 329 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
projects, do you run a study on the impact on the schools that are already overcrowded, of the
streets, parking? Even if they provide the parking, you know that it's not enough. If you live
next to this building, would you approve this project? And that is one of my questions.
Chairman Teele: All right. (INAUDIBLE)
Ms. Chiu: When we moved here --
Chairman Teele: Excuse me, ma'am. Now, right now --
Ms. Chiu: Well, the moratorium. I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: -- right now, we're just talking about the moratorium.
Ms. Chiu: Well, I'm sorry. It's --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. No, you're fine, but we want to limit it --
Ms. Chiu: Yes, but my problem is that I think that it is needed, the moratorium, because all this
has to be addressed before it gets approved. It's not a question of not approving buildings or
approving buildings. It's -- the question is, sit down, study it before you approve it. Like, you
know, when we -- if it's always been low density, keep it low density. Go through the moratorium
. Approve some buildings, but not these humongous ones.
Chairman Teele: All right. Let's talk about --
Ms. Chiu: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you again. Ladies and gentlemen, just limit your -- let's forget about
this particular project. Let's just talk about the moratorium. Please, come right on.
Mr. Dickman: Let me just let them know what's going on because I think they may not know.
We're going to talk about the moratorium first, and then they were going to vote on that, and
then it'll be the SD-24, and then there's going to be a discussion on the 907, so if you're coming
up to talk, just talk about the moratorium, please. Sorry for the interruption.
Ron Nelson: Hi. My name is Ron Nelson, 2535 Inagua Avenue, Coconut Grove.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk.
Mr. Nelson: President of the Coconut Grove Civic Club. We're here in support of the neighbors
for the moratorium. As you know, we want to see these issues resolved, but resolved prior to the
building of these big buildings. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much. Next person, please.
Karen Denunzio: Good evening. My name is Karen Denunzio. I live at 1868 Southwest 17th
Terrace. I'm in Commissioner Regalado's district, and I've been here since 5 o'clock this
evening, and what I heard on several occasions -- I heard it from Commissioner Teele and I
heard it from Commissioner Winton -- hesitation on voting on certain issues, and I think that that
really speaks to the moratorium, is that there are issues that need to be addressed, and you want
to make sure that when you do vote on your issues, that you're voting on them wisely, and that's
the whole purpose of the moratorium. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much.
City of Miami Page 330 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Great comment.
Chairman Teele: Bringing out the big guns.
J. Veber: Good evening, Commissioners. J. Veber, 1028 Northwest North River Drive, Spring
Garden. I want to thank Commissioner Teele for supporting us, being our sole supporter the last
time we talked about smart growth in Spring Garden along the river, and I think if we had the
kind of moratorium we're talking about tonight along the river, we'd have the kind of smart
growth that Commissioner Garcia's been talking about --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez.
Mr. Veber: I'm sorry, Sanchez -- and I think we'd even have something that would please
Commissioner Gonzalez. I'm sorry. It's --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: (inaudible)
Mr. Veber: It's late.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Veber: It's late.
Commissioner Winton: Hey, Garcia.
Mr. Veber: What's my name?
Commissioner Winton: Garcia.
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
Mr. Veber: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you for being here.
Judith Sandoval: Judith Sandoval, 2536 Southwest 25th Terrace, Silver Bluff. I'm here to
present a petition that was signed last year by 37 residents of the Pines and Silver Bluff, and
submitted to the Zoning Board when we sought to defeat a project that was defeated. Thank you
very much for that. Similar to the ones that are going up. I have copies for --
Chairman Teele: Now, hold --
Ms. Sandoval: -- each of the Commissioners.
Chairman Teele: Hold on. We'll accept it, but we only want to talk about -- no projects, but the
moratorium, at this point.
Ms. Sandoval: This is not against the project. What we discussed -- we also wrote in our
petition was, we are against rezoning residential properties, these high buildings, the whole
thing
Chairman Teele: Does that petition say "moratorium, " at all?
Ms. Sandoval: No.
City of Miami Page 331 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right. We'll still admit it.
Ms. Sandoval: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Give it to the Clerk.
Ms. Sandoval: OK. The other thing I want to read to you is a statement by a gentleman named
Henry Olsen. It appeared in the Miami Herald this morning. In the article titled "Diaz Touts
Miami," this is the statement: The key -- after Mr. Diaz made his speech harping Miami -- I'm
talking about the renaissance city and all this growth that's needed -- this gentleman said, "The
key, Olsen said, " in sustaining -- "is sustaining an atmosphere where residents feel they can live
safely, raise a family and make money." This is the gentleman who invited Mayor Diaz to New
York. I am a New Yorker. I think this -- trying to carry Miami into New York is ridiculous. I
studied great cities all over the world All great cities have one thing in common: they are
composed of neighborhoods. New York is very proud of its individual neighborhoods, and
Miami should take care of the ones that are successful, safe and that's what we have in Silver
Bluff. Don't wreck it. Support the moratorium. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Oracio Stuart: Mr. Chairman, Oracio Stuart. I live at 1910 Northwest 13th Street, Miami,
Durham Park. I'm the President of Durham Park Neighborhood Association. We support our
brothers in Silver Bluff and support the moratorium. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you for being so brief.
Hugh Ryan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commission. My name is Hugh Ryan, 1860 Southwest
11 th Street, President of the Miami Shenandoah Neighborhood Association. We support our
neighbors and friends in Silver Bluff on this moratorium, and we believe it'll make a statement,
and we look forward to discussing the zoning ordinance following this. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you again.
Luis Herrera: My name is Luis Herrera. I represent the Vizcaya Homeowners Association and
supporting the (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Commissioner Winton: All right.
Mr. Herrera: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Nina West: Hello. My name is Nina West. I live at 3690 Avocado Avenue in Coconut Grove.
I'm a property owner at 175 Northeast 43rd Street. My daughter owns property at 176 Northeast
44th Street. I'm here to support the moratorium, to support my neighbors, but also because these
residents of Buena Vista, who are expecting huge amounts of development on Northeast 2nd,
Northwest Miami Avenue, already on Northeast 41st Street, would like the charrette -- the FEC (
Florida East Coast) charrette to come out, the studies to come out before more building goes on,
and we certainly support our neighbors on 27th Avenue who are in the same position that we are
. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. Thank you very much.
City of Miami Page 332 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Do you have any idea what she was talking about?
Joe Wilkins: Thank you. Joe Wilkins, 228 Southwest 23rd Road, Director of the Miami Roads
Neighborhood Civic Association and secretary of the Miami Neighborhoods United. I'm here on
behalf of the Roads Association to express our support for our neighbors in Silver Bluff. I do
have one very serious problem with the moratorium, and that is that it does not go far enough.
I'd like to see it extended up Coral Way, say to about 23rd Road, but that's a discussion for
another issue, another time. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you for being here.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: To 25th -- to 23rd Road?
Mr. Wilkins: More or less.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's where you live.
Mr. Wilkins: More or less.
J. C. Garrido: Good evening, Commissioners. J. C. Garrido. I live at 2324 Southwest 26th
Street. I've been living in Silver Bluff for over 24 years, and I'm in support of the moratorium.
It's only a temporary moratorium. I think it's a good idea. I'm always taking pictures around the
neighborhood, and I think pictures do speak 1,000 words, and this is what happens when you
don't study a building or a property the way you should. If -- I stressed at the last meeting, I
believe to the Zoning Board -- or was it Zoning Board? -- I don't recall now, but to take a look at
this building at 26th Street. These two buildings being proposed are double the size, at least.
The moratorium is temporary only, and I'm personally not against high-rise development. I
think it should be smart growth development, and the lady who came up here, I heard that she's
a connoisseur of all these cities around the world and she mentioned New York. New York is a
neighborhood. I respect each neighborhood. Our neighborhood is not being respected, you
know.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Mr. Garrido: The last thing I can say to you is that, you know, don't ask what you can do for
developers, but ask what you can do for the children of our neighborhood. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: No clapping.
Gloria Fox: I'm not so tall. Good evening. Thank you for hearing us, and I especially
appreciate this time, and I -- for everything you're doing for us. My name is Gloria Fox, 1674
Southwest 23rd Street. I just want to make a brief statement. At this point, we know we're urban
-- we're an urban neighborhood. We understand that's really something special. We understand
that means that you, as Commissioners, have a very delicate balance. It's not a matter of should
the Wal-Mart be five miles down the road, you know. This is a delicate balance and we
appreciate it. We appreciate that you take it very seriously. The one comment I would like to
say about this moratorium, in particular, is that this thing, through a comedy of errors, has been
rescheduled so many times that there has been a great deal of time for discussion. There's been
an incredible amount of time for anyone posting notices, not posting notices, sending letters,
sending second letters. There's been lots and lots of notice, and lots and lots of opportunity for
everybody to talk to staff so, please, as you're hearing things about what should happen with this
moratorium, please keep in mind that there's been way more time on this one than any normal
item would be. Thank you
City of Miami Page 333 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Thank you very much. This is the last speaker on the moratorium.
Sofia Granado: Good evening. I'm Sofia Granado. I live on 2729 Southwest 26th Street. I am
here because I agree with the moratorium because I -- there is a project for a building across my
street, on 26th Street and 27th Avenue, and the first project that I saw in here and the other
hearing there was -- there were two -- the two entrance and in the in and out of the cars in the
building, where are those across my street? They say that the City approved it because the
building was more beautiful not having any movement of cars on 27th Avenue, and my street is
very narrow, just 15 feet.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Ms. Granado: All right, and I don't agree with buildings higher than eight stories. 8-story
building on 25th Terrace and 27th Avenue is beautiful. It's very beautiful. It's very good for our
neighborhood, but not higher than eight stories. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Thank you for coming. All right. The public hearing is closed on this matter.
There is not going to be rebuttal, per se, on this. Mr. Gonzalez, I -- there's no rebuttal on this.
All right, so what we're going to do is close the public hearing. This is on the moratorium. Mr.
Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a motion?
Commissioner Regalado: Motion to approve the ordinance as it is. Question --
Chairman Teele: Is there --
Commissioner Regalado: -- and a question.
Chairman Teele: Hold it. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Second by Commissioner -- Vice Chairman --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: For the purpose of discussion.
Chairman Teele: -- by Vice Chairman Sanchez. Line up discussion, please. Commissioner
Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Question for the City Attorney. The ordinance would have an
immediate effect?
Mr. Maxwell: On second reading. Upon second reading, yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Well --
Chairman Teele: This is first reading.
Commissioner Regalado: But I thought that we discussed, when errors were made, that we
could have an immediate effect by doing emergency ordinance.
City of Miami Page 334 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Maxwell: No, sir, not emergency ordinance. Remember that you can't do emergency
ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, but you said that we could have an immediate --
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: The effective date will be immediate on the second --
Mr. Maxwell: Immediate on the second reading.
Chairman Teele: -- upon the second ordinance -- second reading.
Mr. Maxwell: It's immediate on the second reading, which has already been scheduled.
Commissioner Regalado: Which would be?
Ms. Sl azyk: July 8th.
Mr. Maxwell: I think it's scheduled for --
Ms. Sl azyk: July 8th.
Commissioner Regalado: July 8th, OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Regalado: So, as we speak, July 8th will be the kick off day for the new
moratorium.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Chairman Teele: July 8th will be the date for the second reading.
Commissioner Regalado: But it will --
Chairman Teele: We don't know whether it's going to pass or not.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I mean -- I'm saying, if --
Commissioner Winton: Assuming it passes.
Commissioner Regalado: -- assuming it passed, it would be the same day.
Chairman Teele: It would be effective immediately, according to -- with or without the Mayor's
action, right?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
City of Miami Page 335 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Further discussion on the ordinance.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Discussion.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner -- Vice Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I just want to state this very, very clear. People need to realize that
this is a temporary moratorium while we analyze and we study ways to address the massive
development in our City, and I think that we're making progress when it comes to -- where right
now the Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan is in place. We're having meetings throughout the
entire community. We're also looking to the City master plan, also known as Miami 21, to
address all these concerns, and I also think that it's very important that, as quickly as possible,
we rewrite or whatever the administration is going to do to bring forth the 907, which it clearly
address a lot of the concerns that people have that's confusing; that people that are developing
projects walk in and everything is a compromise. I think we need to address that because
Commissioner Winton made the argument -- if you were here, what's happening in the river with
the development is that we need to address these things, and this is the only way I think we're
going to take care of it. A step in the right direction is a temporary moratorium, not in the entire
city, but to take areas, especially the homeowners have taken the leadership on, and then later
on when the administration comes forthwith all these recommendations, implement them as
quickly as possible to try to address the concerns, because they're here for a reason.
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You know, they're not here -- because it's 12 o'clock at night. I'm sure
they could be home doing other things. They're concerned about what's going on in our
community.
Ms. Slazyk: Right. Just for the record, the 907 amendment is going to the July 7th PAB, July 8th
City Commission first reading, and July 22nd second reading is when we're planning.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And we'll address that later on, but let me -- on another issue, I
continue to have a problem with as right development.
Chairman Teele: We're going to be here all night.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Those are properties that really don't have to go through anything.
The developer buys the property and he builds, and I think some of those properties are the ones
that have created the biggest frictions in different neighborhoods because they get the property;
they don't have to go through design review. They don't have to do anything. They just come
forth and then, you know, they develop this project and, you know, you -- hey, you think it's a
good development and then you drive by and you go, "Holy cow." You know, it snuck in, but it
doesn't go through a process, so I know that in the master plan -- the City of Miami master plan,
Miami 21, it's going to address that issue. There's a lot of issues they need to address, but I just
want to let everybody know that we are moving forward with different vehicles to try to find the
solution to a lot of these problems. That's it, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, call the roll, please.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Winton?
Chairman Teele: Anybody got anything to say, say it in the roll.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
City of Miami Page 336 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Item's adopted unanimously by 5/0 vote. All right.
PZ.31 04-00649 ORDINANCE
First Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 6, IN ORDER TO ADD A
NEW SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT ENTITLED SD-24 SW 27TH AVENUE
SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT, ADDING AN INTENT STATEMENT AND
CREATING SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00649 SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00649 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00649 Legislation.PDF
04-00649 FR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00649 - Recommendations.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000 Text
APPLICANT(S): Joe Arriola, Chief Administrator
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval of a motion,
which failed (due to failure to obtain the required five favorable votes),
constituting a denial to City Commission on June 16, 2004 by a vote of
3-3. This is a companion to File ID 04-00649a.
PURPOSE: This will establish a new special district for SW 27th Avenue
from Coral Way to US-1.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Direction to the City Attorney and City Manager by Commissioner Winton to review, within one
week, every single detail related to the Catalonia project to make sure that Catalonia complies
with all requirements and qualifications; further stating that if any significant discrepancies are
found, then all necessary steps are taken to recta said problems; Commissioner Regalado
further requested that this review be completed before the moratorium issue is heard on Second
Reading at the Commission Meeting currently scheduled to be heard on July 8, 2004.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney announced that the meeting with appropriate staff
regarding the Catalonia Project is to be held in the City Attorney's Office on Tuesday, June 29,
2004 at 10: 00 a.m.
Direction to the Administration by Chairman Teele to work with the residents and the businesses
in the S. W. 27 Avenue Corridor to see if additional compromises can be reached.
City of Miami Page 337 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Direction to the City Clerk by Commissioner Regalado to give the Administration tomorrow, the
names of all the interested parties who spoke on the items related to the moratorium (PZ. 31)
and the text amendment (PZ.32) in order that they may coordinate meetings with said individuals
. [Note: The City Clerk sent to Ana Gelabert, Director of Planning and Zoning Department, the
requested information on June 28, 2004. J
Chairman Teele: Next item.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ.31 is the text amendment to create
a new SD-24, called the Southwest 27th Avenue Special Overlay District. The purpose of this
district is to add certain height limitations and other special district requirements. The process
we went through on this 27th Avenue district when I made the presentation to PAB (Planning
Advisory Board), we had just spent a lot of time and a lot of energy analyzing the exact same
situation, same depth properties and same impacts on Biscayne Boulevard. What we did was we
adopted a lot of the findings that we made on Biscayne Boulevard to the 27th Avenue Corridor
District. We're implementing a height limitation of 120 feet, with a rear height limitation when
properties abut R-1 and R-2 zoning of 25 feet, with a 45 degree angle from the back towards the
front. This pushes the bulk of the building up on 27th Avenue and away from the residential
neighborhood. It provides for better light and air flow. The FAR (floor area ratio) stays the
same. There is not an FAR reduction. We've relaxed the footprints and some of the setbacks in
order to, like on Biscayne Boulevard, allow the same FAR but in a different envelope. It's an
envelope that is shorter; it's a little bit wider and it provides a lot more protection to the
neighborhood at the rear. We've also instituted certain use limitations very similar, again, to
what we did on Coral Way, Biscayne Boulevard and Southwest 8th Street. We're recommending
that certain uses not be allowed, including CBRFs (Community Based Residential Facilities),
pool halls, used auto dealerships and the rest are listed in your package. There is also a Class II
Special Permit requirement for design review on anything new on 27th Avenue, or any additions
or any other work that's visible from a public right-of-way. We believe that this is the remedial
ordinance that will take care of some of the issues that were discussed on 27th Avenue, and we
would recommend approval.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: Lourdes, on -- I'm troubled because I have a lot of information about
the building that became the symbol of bad development in the Silver Bluff and, for that matter,
in the City, the Catalonia building.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They got a permit.
Commissioner Regalado: There were some issues with the alley back and forth. I have --
because I keep all the documents -- three or four e-mails contradicting each other regarding the
alley and the use of the alley. My understanding is that Ordinance 11000 has not been followed
in the permitting process of Catalonia. The question is: Can you, on the record, or anybody --
the Zoning Director, Public Works -- can tell us that the Code of the City was followed up to the
last detail in the Catalonia; that Catalonia got all the permitting process done by the Code?
Javier Carbonell: Javier Carbonell, Acting Zoning Administrator. Catalonia project was
reviewed under the Zoning ordinance, and it was approved at the end of March of this year.
That project was reviewed by several Zoning reviewers, and including the former Zoning
Administrator, Mr. Francisco Garcia. It was reviewed as conforming to the Zoning ordinance.
It was signed on the end of March, I believe the 20-something of March, by the Zoning
Processor, Joyce McPhee, and it was found to be in compliance then. It was -- I took a chance
to look at it later on and -- for issues of the alley, per se, and it was found to be in compliance.
Commissioner Regalado: So you are saying that there is no -- that it's airtight; that it cannot be
City of Miami Page 338 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
challenged in one single detail?
Mr. Carbonell: Anything can be challenged but, to the best of my knowledge, it is approved
correctly.
Commissioner Regalado: OK, because I think that there is evidence, at least some of the
residents do have that, that the process was not followed according exactly to the Code, and
probably there are some issues that do not belong to Zoning, maybe to -- maybe the issue of the
alley because, as of today, I have not been able to get the clear information on the alley used on
the plan.
Commissioner Winton: Tomas, could I help you?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Could I help you on this?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: I would like to -- Mr. City Attorney and Madam Manager, I want to
weigh in on this issue, and that is that --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You've got to be kidding.
Commissioner Winton: -- I would -- for Catalonia, I think that the City Attorney's Office and the
City Administration Office needs to review every single detail period related to Catalonia, and
make sure that Catalonia absolutely, 100 percent passes every single test, because Catalonia is
the poster child for bad development, and it's hurting -- don't clap, please -- it's hurting everyone
. It's hurting neighborhoods; it's hurting developers. It's the poster child, and I think that it's
our obligation, Mr. City Attorney, to review every single point, every single step; check every --
dot every "I," cross every "t," and make sure, absolutely sure, that that project meets every
single rule, qualification, whatever, and I think we need to do that review, and I think that review
needs to be done within a week.
Commissioner Regalado: And I think, you know, Commissioner Winton, what you said is the
only thing that will give me and many residents, and many people interested in good
development peace of mind because, as of today, sitting here, I think that there is something very
wrong with that building. It's impossible --
Commissioner Winton: It's awful.
Commissioner Regalado: -- to go through the process like a breeze and just appear right there
in one corner of almost residential area. I -- the only way to bring back the trust of the residents,
many residents now throughout the City, is to show that --
Commissioner Winton: And document.
Commissioner Regalado: -- exactly, and document, with the City Attorney, an entity that this
City Commission relies on for everything there is legal -- to show that this was done by the book
and, if not, then, you know, we got to do something, and I -- and it's important to have this
before, Madam Manager, before the July 7th meeting where we're going to have the second
reading for the moratorium.
Chairman Teele: All right. Now, listen, folks. It's 11: 40 -- hold on, hold on. This is going on,
and on, and on. We've got about 15 more items here. We've got one item that's got at least 100
City of Miami Page 339 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
people wanting to speak tonight. We're going to have to restrict ourselves and the public to the
comment, or we're going to have to either just defer everything else, because this is going to go
on -- and any judge looking at this record is not going to like the way this is going to be. You
can't make decisions that are of this importance at a time that we're moving -- getting ready to
drift into, so we need to be very careful and protect the record on something like this, or we need
to take a break and be -- come back in a little bit refreshed. Now, on the underlying item,
Madam Director --
Commissioner Winton: Put it on the record, right, Tomas?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Winton: He needs to put that on --
Commissioner Regalado: I think the City Attorney needs to say something on the record, Mr.
Chairman.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Yes. Mr. Chairman, we're asking and we're directing staff
to be in the City Attorney's Office 10 o'clock on Tuesday morning with all the documents and all
the information necessary for us to review this, and report back to the City Commission on
Catalonia; all the information substantial -- substantiating information regarding the questions
been raised by the Commission, 10 o'clock Tuesday morning.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
Mr. Maxwell: And we'll report back to the Commission.
Chairman Teele: And you'll report back to the Commission when?
Mr. Maxwell: We were given five days, I believe. We will meet that deadline. Five days -- so by
the end of next week.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Alex, for coming back.
Commissioner Winton: And, further, I think that if there are any significant discrepancies which
could call into question the issuance of the permit, I think steps need to be taken to correct that
problem, OK? Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Madam Director.
Ms. Slazyk: OK. The -- again, the issue before you is the text amendment. All this does is create
the new special district in the text of the zoning ordinance, and the companion item, which is PZ.
32, will apply it to the properties on 27th Avenue between Coral Way and U.S. 1, excluding the
25th to U.S. 1 west side of the avenue.
Commissioner Regalado: Does this include a Class II permit?
Ms. Slazyk: This does include Class II permits, though there --
Commissioner Regalado: For buildings over 50,000?
Ms. Slazyk: It includes Class II for all new buildings and any major additions, or any other work
that's visible from a public right-of-way.
City of Miami Page 340 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Class II permits trigger a public hearing.
Ms. Slazyk: No, they don't, unless they're appealed.
Commissioner Regalado: Unless they're appealed.
Ms. Slazyk: There is notice, though, and all adjacent property owners and all registered
homeowner associations will get mail notice, so they will know.
Commissioner Regalado: But there is a process of appeal?
Ms. Slazyk: Absolutely.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: And design review.
Chairman Teele: All right. This is not the item relating to a particular location. This is the text
amendment; is that correct?
Ms. Slazyk: This is a text amendment.
Chairman Teele: All right. We're going to be very strict. This is the text amendment. Mr.
Attorney --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Question.
Chairman Teele: -- read the title.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Question, question.
Chairman Teele: Hold on just one minute.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Question.
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We're talking about a Class II permit. Is this the item that is in the
agenda for Class II permits citywide on all projects?
Commissioner Winton: No.
Ms. Slazyk: No.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. All right.
Chairman Teele: This is an overlay in this area --
Commissioner Regalado: No, the 27th Avenue.
Commissioner Winton: Only 27th Avenue.
City of Miami Page 341 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. OK
Chairman Teele: Only on 20 -- read the text -- read the title so we're all clear. Everybody
please listen up.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: And the next item, Commissioner, would be the application of this ordinance.
Chairman Teele: All right. This is not the application of the ordinance. This is the text
amendment. I don't think there's anybody here, unless you are an architect -- well, I won't say
that. This is a technical issue. This is not about the underlying project. All right. Anyone here
in opposition to the text amendment will be recognized first. You're in opposition?
Don Deresz: I'm in opposition.
Chairman Teele: To the text amendment?
Mr. Deresz: To the text amendment.
Chairman Teele: All right. Go right ahead, sir.
Mr. Deresz: Right. My name is Don Deresz, 1852 Southwest 24th Street, Miami, Florida. As a
resident and with the Silver Bluff Homeowners Association, as president, I served on the
committee that set up Ordinance 11000, and it was approved back in 1990, and at that time --
Chairman Teele: Did you give us your name and address for the record?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, he did.
Mr. Deresz: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, he did. Don Deresz.
Mr. Deresz: Don Deresz. At that time, everything was in place to protect the residents. We had,
in Ordinance 11000, setbacks for residential office and commercial use. We --
Chairman Teele: All right. Tell us why you're against this text amendment.
Mr. Deresz: Yes, sir. I'm getting to that, please, please. Also, in the Code was setbacks and
height limitations regarding abutting zoning districts where taller buildings abut residential
districts on the rear of buildings over 40 feet; that's 907.3.2. There was also -- the ordinance
also included residential use of office or commercial with common lot lines or alleys, as applied
as R-4, and 612 -- SD-12 requiring at least 20 foot landscape buffer with no variance allowed.
Well, it was revealed to me recently that within a year, two of those statutes -- or two of those
sections of the ordinance that I just mentioned were repealed and, apparently, they were
repealed without any advertisements or notifications to the public.
Chairman Teele: All right. Your time is up.
Mr. Deresz: Please, sir, I'd like to finish, if I could. I've been here a long time. I'm going to ask
for one more minute, and then I'll sit down.
Chairman Teele: You'll be granted one more minute.
City of Miami Page 342 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Deresz: Thank you, sir. 907.3.2 simply states that -- as written in black and white -- that if
the rear of a building built over 40 feet in an office district abuts a residential district -- is next to
a residential district like ours, then any additional height of the many story building should be
set back one foot for every additional two feet in height. Now, the problem is is that some of the
building administrators -- or zoning administrators, when they've been looking at the definitions,
they've been looking at a heading of yards, and instead of looking at the subheading rear, they've
been looking at a subheading of side or corner, and that's what has been causing all these
problems, is the way that the City staff has been reading the definitions.
Chairman Teele: How do you want the text amendment to read?
Mr. Deresz: Pardon me, sir?
Chairman Teele: How do you want this text amendment to read?
Mr. Deresz: How do I -- how do what?
Chairman Teele: How would you like --
Mr. Deresz: What I'm saying is that the way we set this up --
Chairman Teele: I hear what you're saying.
Mr. Deresz: -- in 1990, it was just fine, but the changes were made without proper public
hearings within a year, and right now 907.3.2 is properly written. It's a mis --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Deresz: -- not an interpretation. It's just --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, we're addressing that next. 907, we're addressing it next. Exactly,
that's one of the concerns, the confusion of which side and the frontage.
Mr. Deresz: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: Why are you opposing the moratorium?
Mr. Deresz: My concern is that this text might affect the limitations that are now in place --
Chairman Teele: Look --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: This text right now --
Mr. Deresz: -- might be --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- is being rewritten, and it's coming --
Chairman Teele: If you've got some language --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- back at the next Commission meeting.
Mr. Deresz: The text that is right now, does that -- the way it is right now limits these buildings
from our neighborhood. I mean, who would want to put --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir.
City of Miami Page 343 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Hold on, hold on. You can't do that, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Frank, Frank, Frank, Frank.
Mr. Deresz: Who would want to put a one-story house in front of a 14-story building? What
kind of planning is that, or zoning?
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me, Don. Don, I've always --
Mr. Deresz: And --
Commissioner Regalado: -- follow your ideas because they are -- you're always intelligent and
very articulate --
Mr. Deresz: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: -- and you explain everything, but I would like to ask you what do you
think, as a person that worked on behalf of the neighborhoods doing zoning ordinance, what do
you think that we should include in this ordinance in the text?
Mr. Deresz: Go back to the way the ordinance was in 1990, without all the changes.
Commissioner Winton: But we're talking --
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Mr. Deresz: I mean, that's simple.
Commissioner Regalado: Look --
Mr. Deresz: We never had this.
Commissioner Regalado: -- let me ask the City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Listen --
Chairman Teele: -- let's don't get into a debate. We've got something here. We can't rationalize
this. If he's got some language -- is this first or second reading?
Unidentified Speaker: First reading.
Commissioner Regalado: First reading.
Chairman Teele: If he's got some language --
Commissioner Regalado: I was going to --
Chairman Teele: -- you need to work --
Commissioner Regalado: -- ask him to bring me the language of the original 1990, and then
we'll discuss that on the second reading. Simple.
City of Miami Page 344 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We're discussing that later on.
Commissioner Regalado: Huh?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 907's going to be discussed. That's what he's --
Commissioner Winton: Well, but it --
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no, no.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- addressing here.
Commissioner Regalado: But he's saying --
Mr. Deresz: There's no --
Commissioner Regalado: -- what he's saying is different, Joe.
Mr. Deresz: There's no reason to change the Code because the Code is well -written.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Mr. Deresz: It's the way the gentlemen --
Chairman Teele: That's your --
Mr. Deresz: -- are looking --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Interpret it.
Mr. Deresz: -- into the definition. It's not an interpretation. It's a mistake.
Chairman Teele: Don, that's your opinion.
Commissioner Winton: Don.
Chairman Teele: Let's hear from everybody else.
Mr. Deresz: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: And then let's ask you to work with Commissioner Regalado and the City
Attorney, and if there's some better language, we'll consider it.
Mr. Deresz: Thank you very much.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there anyone else here in opposition to the text language? How
many other people are going to be in opposition? All right. To the text language. All right, very
good. Counsel, you're recognized.
Alfredo Gonzalez: Yes, sir. My name is --
Chairman Teele: How much time do you need?
Mr. Gonzalez: Five minutes.
City of Miami Page 345 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, give him four minutes, please.
Mr. Gonzalez: My name is Alfredo Gonzalez. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Adorno &
Yoss, with offices at 2601 South Bayshore Drive. We are -- we believe this ordinance is
premature. We haven't had workshops. The development and investment community have been
specifically excluded from the drafting of this ordinance. That is not a good thing. This
ordinance is not the cure-all. What makes us think that 7-story buildings are the answer? There
has been no discussion about that. Brickell Avenue has lived very well with very tall buildings.
You ought to consider that. This is going to bring limitation in design, and it's going to bring
limitation in terms of what it's done, but it's going to do something else. My client is going to be
inordinately affected in the value of his property, and we're going to lose over 26 units to our
project that's already been reduced from 91 that was allowed to 66. I'm talking about 66 units;
yet, you're excluding us completely from the process. I think my client will go into the details of
exactly how we lose the units.
Hector Garcia: My name is Hector Garcia and I'm the President of the Luxor Construction
Group. We prepared these sketches just to compare the present design of our building with the
way that the building would have to be redesigned to comply with SD-24. SD-24 is too
restrictive because the setback requirements on our particular lot, because it's 160 feet wide, or
165 feet wide, are 20 feet from the rear setback. Well, the other lots that are less than 150 feet,
they only require 10 feet, so for an additional 15 feet in width, we have to set it back another 10
feet, but that's not the end of it. The most important issue is that we only allow 25 feet for the
garage. Before we have to setback the whole building one feet for every other foot over and
above 25 feet so, in other words, we need four stories for the garage. That's allowed under SD-
24 proposed, so our setback is 20 feet and our first floor garage and our second floor garages
occupies almost the 25 feet because we need to have 15 feet for the first floor to accommodate
the unloading vehicles, so now we need another 15 feet to reach 40 feet, so we have to set back
the building another 15 feet; that's 35 feet, 35 feet before we get into the first floor living area of
the building. If you allow me, I'm going to show you on the maps that I brought how it does
affect my building.
Chairman Teele: We're going to allow the speaker to have more time. We don't want to -- we
understand the gravity of this issue as it affects you, Mr. Gonzalez, and we want to extend the
courtesy to you and your client to have as much time as you need.
Mr. Gonzalez: Thank you very much. We appreciate it.
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
Mr. Garcia: This is the back of the building right now. We have set back 60 feet from the 10-
foot property line that we are required to under the present zoning, so our living areas start at
60 feet. Our gym and our multipurpose room is set back over 40 feet. We set it back within the
907.32. We have no problem with that. We've got 38 feet on the front. I'll show you the front of
the building in a little while, so this is what happens when we go under the new guidelines, very
restrictive. I have never seen guidelines so restrictive. We're required to go 20 feet from the
back, and we are only allowed four stories of garage, so this is what happens. In order to reach
40 feet, we have to set back the building to 35 feet. Now we are compliant with the new DS-24 (
sic) and we go into a 45 degree angle. That 45 degree angle makes us go back one foot
horizontal for every two feet. This is more restrictive than 907.32; that was two feet for every --
one foot for every two feet. This is one foot for every foot, so look at what happens to us. We go
up and we lose three stories. We lose all of these units here, a total of 24 units. That's -- but
that's not all. We had a 38-foot setback on the front so now, with the one on one, we are left with
13.7 foot on the front, so now we are on top of the sidewalk. Now we don't have a pretty
building anymore. We don't have a circular driveway. We don't have a drop-off. Now look at
what happens if we go over the 25 feet. If we go over the 25 feet, we lose the garage, because
City of Miami Page 346 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
you need a ramp to get in, so by losing all this section of the garage, then we're done. We can't
build -- we lose then one, two, three, four stories, plus all of this area here, so then on this
scenario, our project is only allowed 40 units, 40 units. This one allows us 48 units from 66. We
are now zoned for 91. Now we go down to 48 feet, but that's not all. If we decided that we
wanted to lose more units here in order to keep our (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and our drop-off, then
we go over the 25 -- with the 20 feet. Then we can have this. We lose more units. We have a
beautiful building with less units. We have this. We have this on the front. Right here. This is
the front of our building right now. We have a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) here. We had a drop-off.
This is our building. Now, if we bring it 13 and a half feet, we're on top of the sidewalk. I think
this is a cheap building what we have to design. We have diminished the quality and aesthetics
of the building. We still have the gym. Here, we lose the gym.
Chairman Teele: Who designed that? Did you say --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No.
Mr. Garcia: Kobi Karp Architect. She was here before.
Chairman Teele: I understand.
Commissioner Winton: Well, he was (INAUDIBLE).
Mr. Garcia: So this is the building that we have a permit in process. This is the front of the
building. This is the back of the building and this is no joke. This was built from the plans.
Now, if we are forced under SD-24 to be even more restrictive than 907.32, we can't comply. We
can't have this building. We lose all these stories. We can comply, probably, with SD-24,
unscathed maybe with six units if we had the same setbacks and the same regulations on 907.32
has; that is, you go back at 40 feet and you go two and one. This is -- but this is not all. We
have taken samples of neighbors' properties, properties that are not as big as ours.
Chairman Teele: But aren't we really getting now into -- aren't we going beyond the text
amendment and getting into the next item?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Mr. Garcia: Well, what I was trying to reach, Commissioner, is that we already have a
moratorium in place. You got 120 days. I don't think that 60 days to have a workshop and bring
all those affected landowners along 27th Avenue to put their input with the Planning -- I don't
think it's going to damage anything. You already have a moratorium in place. Nobody can
apply for a permit.
Chairman Teele: All right. You've taken about three times the amount of time that your lawyer
asked for.
Mr. Garcia: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: And I think you've gone beyond the text amendment. You've gone right to your
program now. Counsel, did you want to make any other comment on the text amendment?
Mr. Gonzalez: No. That concludes our comments.
Chairman Teele: All right. Before we open it up to those people in support of it, Commissioner -
- Vice Chairman, did you want to say something?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, the more I analyze this and the more that I see that the
City of Miami Page 347 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
counsel is making a record in his case, and I see the court reporter just typing along and putting
everything on a record --
Commissioner Winton: What item is this?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The biggest concern that I have when they put on the record Burt J.
Harris, Smith versus Clearwater, you know, the last thing that I want to do as a Commissioner --
and I think that you can relate to what I'm going to say, Mr. Chairman, since you're an attorney
-- is that well end up here -- and Mr. Attorney, you need to be very careful on this because you
guide us when it gets -- when we get to the point of the legal aspect -- the last thing that we want
to do is be back here in about a year voting on a settlement for one point some million dollars,
and I know that --
Commissioner Winton: One? It'll be more than that.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- anybody could sue anybody, and I don't know whether they're
building a case on the issue. Now, you need to guide me in the direction because I -- we have a
fiduciary responsibility, but we also have responsibilities to the residents, and I'm going to turn
to you -- because you're the attorney, I'm not -- as to what they've put on the record, what
argument they're presenting to see if -- because I know this is going to end up in court. This is
going to end up in court. I guarantee you because we've -- whatever action was taken here
today, they're going to take it to court. Now, you need to guide me in the right direction as to the
-- what was put on the record whether, you know --
Commissioner Winton: What our risks are.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- we'll end up cutting a check one day. That's the only concern that I
have. I mean, I hope you can relate to it.
Chairman Teele: I can more than relate to it. I -- look, bad facts create bad law, and the
concern that I have is, is if we get a bad fact situation, we're are going to very -- we could very
easily unravel not this moratorium and action, but all of them that we're taking because all the
judge has got to do is rule on one, and then everybody else will be in court saying, me, too, and
citing the precedent. They won't talk about the facts. They'll talk about the judge's rule -- ruling,
and we need to be very careful with the facts and ensure that the facts and the remedy that we're
trying to apply -- and don't just talk about what happened on Brickell, or what happened on
Biscayne. We've got to look at the facts of this situation and apply the appropriate application of
the law that we're trying to create in developing a rational and reasoned approach to addressing
our concerns, and I think the Vice Chairman is making a very -- he's throwing a very, very wise
caution light out here and asking the attorney to guide us in this, and there's only one attorney at
this dais for purposes of the City business, and that's the City Attorney, so was there anyone else
that wanted to speak in opposition? Doctor, are you here in opposition of the text amendment,
Dr. Hedgepeth?
Dr. Quinton Hedgepeth: (INAUDIBLE) affects.
Chairman Teele: You want to just put it on the record, please?
Commissioner Winton: Did the City Attorney answer --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: -- Vice Chairman's question yet?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I --
City of Miami Page 348 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Maxwell: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I just want to know if there's a high possibility that a year from now
we'll be voting on a settlement --
Commissioner Winton: He's talking about risk.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- about this issue.
Mr. Maxwell: Well, that depends on the use that the property could be put to after this
ordinance, as opposed to the use that it could be put to prior to the change. What I'd like the
Planning Department to do is to place on the record the difference in the use of the property,
what could be placed on the property now, as opposed to how that property can be used if this
ordinance is adopted and applied.
Commissioner Winton: For this specific property.
Mr. Maxwell: It would apply to any properties in that area the same way.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. But this is true for --
Mr. Maxwell: Now the --
Ms. Slazyk: -- the whole corridor.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Slazyk: The -- this, like the Biscayne Boulevard, we are not changing the FAR. We are not
down zoning. This is a change in the envelope. As a matter of fact, the height limits are higher
than what was adopted for Biscayne Boulevard, with the same rear limitations for protection --
further protection for the neighborhood.
Commissioner Winton: What's the height limit here?
Chairman Teele: What's the height limit?
Ms. Slazyk: The -- it's a 120.
Commissioner Winton: 120, oh.
Ms. Slazyk: Right, but the same 40-foot height limit for a parking structure, with a 25-foot
height limit up at the property line, and I believe they were talking about some -- and I may have
missed some of the presentation -- the setbacks and footprints are actually being relaxed in this
ordinance. What this ordinance does is it encourages a building that puts the bulk of the height
forward on 27th Avenue, with the lower part of the building adjacent to the neighborhood. It
allows some -- a little bit more width so that the FAR can be accommodated in a shorter
envelope, rather than a tall, thin envelope that's more imposing on the neighborhood, so --
Commissioner Winton: Did you just say that you missed the part of the presentation that they
gave where they were talking about --
Ms. Slazyk: Well, no. When they were talking about setbacks, I heard them --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
City of Miami Page 349 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: -- say something about bigger setbacks on 27th Avenue, and that's absolutely not
true. We reduced the setbacks, so I don't know if I misunderstood the presentation, but it's not a
bigger setback. It's a smaller setback, so what you do is you can fit your FAR in a different
envelope, and where it's true this ordinance requires a sharper angle -- a 45-degree angle from
the rear -- on this particular property, they could still fit their FAR if they did a "U" or an "L"
shaped building. You could still fit it, you know. The presentation wasn't accurate in showing
that you could still get the FAR in the new envelopes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So if they redesigned their building, they could get --
Ms. Slazyk: Yes, yes. The property is enough size that they could do a "U" or an "L" shaped
building, and what they lose on the top, they pick up in a different shape. That's all.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Ms. Slazyk: So this is -- and there is no -- we are not touching the FAR.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: You --
Commissioner Winton: Well, that might be good because that's a pretty ugly building.
Commissioner Regalado: You want to listen to somebody or --
Chairman Teele: All right. Doctor.
Dr. Hedgepeth: Are you ready? My name is Dr. Quinton L. Hedgepeth. My office is at 2375
Southwest 27th Avenue, and this adversely affects me. I just want to clear up one thing with
Lourdes -- my friend, Lourdes. The study you did was 80 -- was on the 100 foot lot, right?
Ms. Slazyk: I have drawings on 100 foot deep lots and 150 foot deep lots.
Dr. Hedgepeth: OK See, my lot is 85, and it adversely affects me, and one of these drawings is
an example of mine -- of my property. It would take away probably about 60 percent of my
development value of my property. I bought this property because I knew that the three most
important things in real estate was location, location, location. I got a good location. I'm
paying $5, 000 a month for a 8,000 square foot lot, and I just have a small building. It's an
investment is what it is, folks, and now what you're doing is going to take away 60 percent of its
value when the time does come for me --
Commissioner Winton: Are you backed up against a single-family house?
Mr. Hedgepeth: I'm right next door to the church.
Commissioner Winton: No. In the back --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. Back up, abutting.
Commissioner Winton: -- of your building.
Dr. Hedgepeth: Oh, I'm back -- and now, I've talked to the single-family house. He's -- he --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but I --
City of Miami Page 350 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Dr. Hedgepeth: -- would like to do something with me. He's --
Commissioner Winton: I know but --
Dr. Hedgepeth: He would like to, if possible.
Commissioner Winton: Well, that's probably not going to be possible, but that was my question.
If your lot backs right up to a single-family house -- and that's the whole point that we've been
making --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 907.
Commissioner Winton: -- for months, and that is that we don't want -- it's bad public policy to
create -- and we don't want big buildings built on these corridors right up against single-family
homes that are right behind it, and you wouldn't live in a single-family home where that was
going on, and neither would anybody else.
Dr. Hedgepeth: Let me add -- may I add --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Somehow we've got to protect those single-family homes.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Dr. Hedgepeth: OK, I agree, so I think that's part of the problem. Part of the problem is the due
process. This whole thing has been a committee -- nobody on this committee was -- has property
involved --
Commissioner Winton: We're going to change that.
Dr. Hedgepeth: -- in 27th, nothing.
Commissioner Winton: I'm going to introduce something that's going to change that --
Dr. Hedgepeth: But what you see now --
Commissioner Winton: -- because I agree with you 100 percent.
Dr. Hedgepeth: -- the 12 pages of restrictions placed on us, none of us that are property owners
along that corridor had anything to do with it. I walked along that corridor. I went to every
office. I talked to every landowner. Everybody on this corridor is against it, and what's
happening here is we're trying to make this into a developer/landowner type thing, you know,
single-family home. It's not. We're a community, you know. You got a lot of people that
invested a lot into this street, and there's not a better place in Miami to -- for development. From
what I know, it's a major area. We're right down from Metrorail. We can be to Coconut Grove
in any -- and, you know, this is where we need development in Miami. This -- you know, so I'm
for it, and what is the City going to do if I lose 60 percent of my value of my property? I mean, is
it going to compensate me, at all?
Commissioner Winton: Well, what are you going to do if what you get to do decreases by 60
percent the value of the house right behind you? You're going to compensate them?
Dr. Hedgepeth: That's what I'm telling you.
Commissioner Winton: And you're going to compensate the others?
City of Miami Page 351 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Dr. Hedgepeth: I have already talked to him.
Commissioner Winton: We're not talking about to him. It's the (INAUDIBLE).
Dr. Hedgepeth: I've talked -- he would like to go into something -- a transitional zone is what he
suggested, such that it would buffer the neighborhood. There are things that could be done if we
put everybody in the room together and worked, not if we take a select few with one viewpoint
and put them together to write public policy. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Let me ask the Planning Director something. What's that overlay district
behind commercial corridors, is it SD-12 or 10?
Ms. Slazyk: 12.
Chairman Teele: For parking?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. SD-12 is the -- it's a transitional district that allows parking to serve
commercial uses, but to occur on residentially zoned property.
Chairman Teele: Is there an SD-12 at all along 27th Avenue --
Ms. Slazyk: I don't believe there --
Chairman Teele: -- in the affected area?
Ms. Slazyk: Closer to Coral Way there is, but I don't believe there is on the southern end of 27th
Avenue.
Chairman Teele: So between U.S. 1 going north toward Coral Way, there are very limited --
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, SD-12 is not utilized that much here. No.
Commissioner Regalado: No. What -- the only buffer that there is on the east side from U.S. 1
almost to Coral Way -- actually, to 22nd Terrace, it's an alley; the famous alley which seems to
be owned by the City. It's being used by anybody, even the Fire Department uses, and that is the
alley that Catalonia is going to use for egress and ingress. I -- that's the only -- there is no SD-
12 in that area, just -- the only buffer is the alley.
Chairman Teele: But my point is this: One of the ways to deal with this also could be to look at
the -- the SD-12 is designed to also provide transition between a commercial and residential.
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): Well, it's really only for -- to allow for parking --
Chairman Teele: I understand.
Ms. Gelabert: -- but the zoning -- it is a transition, but only for the use of parking.
Chairman Teele: I understand that, but what I'm trying to get at is, along 27th Avenue, if you
had some SD-12 overlay, and if there were an SD-12, that restriction would not apply to that
particular lot; yes or no? If the -- in the case of what the doctor just gave, where he says I'm
right on 27th Avenue, a small lot. If the parcel behind him were an SD-12, would this provision
apply to that lot?
Ms. Slazyk: If it were under the same ownership and there was a Unity of Title, then that height
City of Miami Page 352 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
would not apply because he doesn't have to separate height from himself, but he could only use
the SD-12 property for surface parking, but there's still an overall height limit. It would change
the envelope a little bit, but --
Chairman Teele: I think it would change the envelope significantly.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. The other thing I just wanted to put in the record --
Chairman Teele: But, you see, this is the point that I think people are talking about. There are
some ways to balance this and blend this; give the neighbors what they want, but also look, as
you walk down this corridor, to address some of the commercial concerns, and in the particular
case that was just brought out, if you've got a neighbor who wants to be a part of a development,
and if the SD-12 were applicable there -- and I suggest that it would be -- if that abutting lot
were designated as SD-12, then the full impact of this ordinance would not have the affect that
we're talking about. Now it would be limited to parking. It'll be limited to some use associated
with the commercial building, but at least it would minimize the impact, perhaps; is that correct,
Madam Director, if there were an SD-12?
Commissioner Regalado: But there isn't.
Chairman Teele: I understand.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: But what I'm saying, and I think what Commissioner Winton and others are
saying, is that we really need to try to engage in a process and go down 27th Avenue and look
for ways to provide accommodation, because the goal is not to have a commercial structure, or a
structure that is negatively impacting residential, which we all want. Text amendment
discussions, debate. Are there people in support of this? Are there anyone who want to be heard
in support of this text amendment? Mr. Attorney.
Andrew Dickman: Well, once again, Andrew Dickman, for the record. Law offices at 9111 Park
Drive, Miami Shores, Florida, representing the Silver Bluff Homeowners Association. We're in
favor of this. Staff has said that this is not reducing FAR. They're as good as anybody, as we've
experienced on Biscayne Boulevard, making sure that FAR isn't reduced in order to not make the
City vulnerable to Takings and Burt Harris, and so forth, so we think -- we feel like this is a good
first step. It doesn't mean that it's the end of the road. If things need to be tinkered with and
improved, it can still be done, so we'd ask that you approve it as it is.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, if you close the hearing, I will move --
Chairman Teele: Well, hold on just one minute.
Commissioner Regalado: -- the ordinance.
Chairman Teele: Is there anybody else that needs to be heard in support of the text amendment?
Mr. Dickman: Mr. --
Chairman Teele: All right. The public hearing is closed.
Mr. Dickman: All right.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for a motion.
City of Miami Page 353 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: I would move on first reading the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: -- ordinance, the text amendment.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: There's a motion and a second. Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: I read it, sir.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, call the roll.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
(COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL)
Chairman Teele: I'm voting for it for first reading, but I really believe that the staff needs to sit
down and work with the residents, the homeowners, and the businesses in a more proactive way
to see if there is some more compromising that can be developed.
Commissioner Winton: Absolutely and, Commissioner Teele, if you don't mind, because that's
exactly what happened on the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor. We had everybody at the table. We
had the people radically opposed; we had the people that were kind of opposed; we had the
developers, and we had the property owners themselves. They were all involved and, at the end
of the day, we had as good an ending as you could get, so we need to do the same thing here.
Ms. Slazyk: Right. The thing is, we scheduled this for second reading for July 8th. I'm not sure
if there's enough --
Commissioner Winton: Well --
Chairman Teele: I really would recommend that we --
Ms. Slazyk: -- time to broaden the committee, but we'll -- I'll see what --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado, I really wish you would put this on the second
meeting in July, and allow for a little bit of time --
Commissioner Regalado: No, I would. I would, although I would require that the moratorium
be back --
Commissioner Winton: I have another thought.
Chairman Teele: This isn't moratorium.
Commissioner Regalado: -- on July. No, no, I understand that.
Commissioner Winton: I have another thought.
Commissioner Regalado: But just to make sure so we don't forget the words, you know, and say
-- if we say, let's do it on the 28th -- 22nd, no. The moratorium has to come back --
City of Miami Page 354 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Sl azyk: July 8th, yes.
Commissioner Regalado: -- on July 8th --
Commissioner Winton: Absolutely.
Commissioner Regalado: -- plus all the reports on the Catalonia legality by the City Attorney.
This, I think, it needs to have some kind of meeting between the residents, the same group of
residents and developers. I think it's no harm in that --
Commissioner Winton: And commercial property owners.
Commissioner Regalado: -- and the staff, so -- and we will deal with that on second reading.
Ms. Slazyk: So would you like this on July 22nd?
Commissioner Regalado: July 22nd, but you need to do the meeting before.
Chairman Teele: But the moratorium is still on July 8th.
Commissioner Regalado: The moratorium is still on July 8th and, Ana, you need to do the
meeting.
Ms. Gelabert: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean --
Ms. Gelabert: Commissioner, let me ask you, last time on the form of the committee, the names
were submitted to your office. Do you want to do the same with the developers, or the
developers that are here? We know who the committee -- the initial committee (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Regalado: You know who the committee are. The developers are welcomed to
either work with my office, or direct it to you. It doesn't matter. You can -- I mean, you can --
we've seen it here. Whoever is here should be invited; the developer, the doctor. I mean, people
that really shown interest in expressing their views, they should be invited, so through the City
Clerk, you can just invite it so we don't lose time in getting together a new committee. We know
who the committee are.
Commissioner Winton: And I would suggest there's two ways to think about this. One is that
y'all do the best job you can, and we realize 30 days is tough, tough, tough, and so I think that
my sense is -- so that we don't delay -- that you bring back -- do the best we can in the 30 days,
but that we all, Commissioner Regalado, be prepared to allow the committee and staff to work
on, for another 60 days, if need be, and bring back modifications. It may take a little longer to
make the -- put the modifications in place, but if there is a better agreement and a better deal
reached at the end of -- they can bring that back and we can modem the ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: Sure, no problem.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: But I think that if they work -- the City Clerk, tomorrow, will give Ana
the names of the interested parties that spoke here, and then your office will coordinate, and as
always, I would ask the City Attorney -- I cannot be there because we're discussing a zoning
matter, right?
City of Miami Page 355 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Mr. Maxwell: We're talking about now -- we're not talking about the moratorium. We're talking
about the actual ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: We're talking about --
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah, I would say on this one, you should not attend because you have a mixed
situation here. One -- the first item, the actual adoption of the legislation does not violate -- I'm
sorry -- the text amendment is a legislative change and on that you could attend, but because it's
also pliant --
Commissioner Regalado: But the meeting will not be limited to the text amendment.
Mr. Maxwell: That's right. It would be dealing with the --
Commissioner Regalado: It would include -- I mean, zoning and --
Mr. Maxwell: So I would advise you not to attend that meeting, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: OK, so you -- I just wanted --
PZ.32 04-00649a ORDINANCE First Reading
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PAGE NOS. 42 AND 43 OF THE ZONING
ATLAS OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THOSE PROPERTIES LOCATED ALONG
THE SOUTHWEST 27TH AVENUE CORRIDOR FROM CORAL WAY TO US-1
, EXCLUDING ONLY SUCH PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE
OF THE CORRIDOR AND LOCATED BETWEEN US-1 AND SOUTHWEST 25
TH STREET FROM C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AND 0 OFFICE TO C-1
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AND 0 OFFICE WITH AN SD-24 SOUTHWEST
27TH AVENUE SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT; SAID PROPERTIES MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A;" MAKING FINDINGS;
DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00649a SR Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00649a Zoning Map.pdf
04-00649a Aerial Map.pdf
04-00649a PAB Reso.PDF
04-00649a Legislation.PDF
04-00649a Exhibit A - Aerial Map.pdf
04-00649a FR Fact Sheet.pdf
REQUEST: To Amend Ordinance No. 11000, from C-1 Restricted
Commercial and 0 Office to C-1 Restricted Commercial and 0 Office with an
SD-24 Southwest 27th Avenue Special Overlay District to Change the Zoning
Atlas
City of Miami Page 356 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
LOCATION: Along the SW 27th Avenue Corridor from Coral Way to US-1,
Excluding Only Such Properties Located on the West Side of the Corridor and
Located Between US-1 and SW 25th Street
APPLICANT(S): Planning and Zoning Department
FINDINGS:
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended denial to City Commission
on June 16, 2004 by a vote of 3-3. This is a companion to File ID 04-00649.
PURPOSE: This will implement the new SD-24 Southwest 27th Avenue
Special Overlay District on portions of SW 27th Avenue from Coral Way to US-
1.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Regalado and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Sanchez
Direction to the City Attorney and City Clerk by Chairman Teele to ensure that the record on
items PZ-30, PZ-31 and PZ-32 related to the moratorium on SW. 27 Avenue cross-reference
each other and that the public hearing discussions be created as an addendum to each item.
Direction to the City Manager and City Clerk to schedule items PZ.31 and PZ.32 for second
reading on July 22, 2004 after 7 p.m.
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele stated that the moratorium (Item PZ.30) would be heard
on July 8, 2004, after 5 p.m. Commissioner Regalado further stated that the issue of Section 907
.32 related to the Catalonia project would also be heard on July 8, 2004.
Direction to the City Attorney by Commissioner Teele to meet with attorney Andrew Dickman
concerning the Catalonia project.
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele stated that the Commission may need to call a Special
Commission Meeting on Tuesday, June 29, 2004, to deal with issues surrounding the Catalonia
project.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Then PZ.32 is the companion atlas
amendment. I'd ask that that be approved on first reading, with the same understanding that
we'll address it through our meetings.
Chairman Teele: All right. Where are we now, Mr. Attorney?
Commissioner Regalado: PZ.23 -- 32, the last item.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): We are --
Ms. Slazyk: PZ (Planning & Zoning) --
Commissioner Winton: 12:30.
Mr. Maxwell: PZ.32 --
City of Miami Page 357 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Slazyk: PZ.32 is --
Mr. Maxwell: -- is application --
Ms. Slazyk: -- the atlas amendment. This is first reading. I'd ask that you approve it on first
reading with the understanding that this also go to the committee, and it may come back
modified on second reading.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Chairman Teele: All right. Hold on a minute. This is a public hearing. Anybody needing to be
heard?
Albert Gonzalez: Again, Al Gonzalez, office at 2601 Southwest Bayshore Drive, and I just want
to put into the record the fact that these are three companion ordinances, and I want to make
sure that what we put into the record gets spread through the three, and that we reiterate our
objections that we think we have a vested right, that we think we have equitable estoppel for this
to go forward. This is a bad ordinance, and that we think it's going to inordinately affect the
value of our land. Notwithstanding, what your staff is telling you, we think we can't get the FAR,
and that we're going to lose 26 units in this project. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. And, again, Mr. Attorney, Madam Clerk, let's make sure that the
record for the three items cross-reference each other, and that the public hearing discussions --
even though we've tried to keep them separated, let the public hearing packet be created as an
addendum to each one of them so that all -- each one will be an addendum to each other, so that
we don't have any confusion about what happened this night, and that -- I think that's the best
way to put the whole record together. Counsel, do you object to that? Is that --
Andrew Dickman: No. Thank you for that.
Chairman Teele: All right. Did you want to be heard in support of this, not necessarily but --
Mr. Dickman: Just to incorporate our vocalization of support from the last item, as well.
Commissioner Regalado: If you close the public hearing, I'm ready to --
Chairman Teele: Public hearing is closed. You're recognized for a motion.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I'll move PZ.32 ordinance --
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: We have a motion and a second. Mr. Attorney.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been passed on first reading, 4/0.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
City of Miami Page 358 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there anything else, Madam Director, associated with this that we
need to take up? Before anyone moves, please, would you announce again the public hearing
dates for the three items that we've done so that we can make sure that the record is complete?
Ms. Slazyk: OK. The moratorium that you approved first reading today will be coming back to
the City Commission on July 8th for second reading.
Chairman Teele: At a time --
Commissioner Regalado: At what time?
Chairman Teele: -- at a time --
Ms. Slazyk: Not before 5 p.m.
Chairman Teele: At a time not before 5 p.m. All right.
Ms. Slazyk: OK.
Chairman Teele: And the other two?
Ms. Slazyk: The other two are going to July 22nd for the regular 2: 30. It'll be anytime after 2:
30, no time certain.
Chairman Teele: All right. Hold on just one minute. These people have been so patient.
Madam President, why don't you come and tell us what time you'd like to -- you've got to come to
the mike, please, please. Can we get the City Attorney and special counsel that have been here
for eight hours back there, Hogan & Hartson, and can we get the Manager and the Public Works
Director on these other items to come out, please?
Commissioner Winton: What are we on now?
Commissioner Regalado: But he's just asking the time the public hearing for --
Chairman Teele: Madam, you've been wonderful, and I really appreciate the fact that the Miami
Neighbors United have been very, very proper and the decorum has been wonderful, so please
tell us what time you'd like for this item to be heard.
Josefina Sanchez Pando: After 6: 30.
Chairman Teele: All right. After 6: 30. Let's tentatively set it for --
Commissioner Regalado: 7.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: 7.
Chairman Teele: Let's tentatively set it for 7 o'clock.
Commissioner Winton: What Commission day is that?
Chairman Teele: On July the --
Commissioner Regalado: 22nd.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK.
City of Miami Page 359 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- 22nd.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Chairman Teele: This is not the moratorium. The moratorium we agreed to --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, OK. I've got it, so it's a regular P&Z (Planning & Zoning)
meeting.
Chairman Teele: It's the regular P&Z.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Ms. Sanchez Pando: OK
Commissioner Regalado: And --
Chairman Teele: Now hold on one minute. Somebody said that you may want to move the
Commission meeting.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but I'm having surgery on the 13th, but I think I'll be ready by --
when's the Commission meeting, second meeting?
Chairman Teele: 22nd.
Commissioner Regalado: 22nd.
Commissioner Winton: So I -- yeah, that's nine days. I'll be -- I may be a little -- but I'll be back.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: So that's fine.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: See how young you are. You can still move that way after midnight.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Clerk --
Commissioner Winton: I've had five Cuban coffees.
Chairman Teele: -- Madam Clerk, Mr. Manager, Agenda Coordinator, please record these --
Commissioner Regalado: 7 o'clock.
Chairman Teele: -- the time as a time certain for 7 p.m. on July 2nd for these two items, all
right? And we're going to hold to that no matter what we're doing because you all have been
wonderful, and we really do apologize for the delay.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Please excuse me. Can you say again when we're going to deal with 907.
32, what day?
Commissioner Regalado: July the 7th.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: The 7th?
City of Miami Page 360 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: During the --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. Hold it, hold it, hold it. No, no.
Commissioner Winton: 8th.
Chairman Teele: July 8th is --
Ms. Sanchez Pando: No, no, no.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, July --
Chairman Teele: July 8th is the moratorium.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes --
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: -- and there we will deal with the explanation of 907.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Yes. What day?
Ms. Sl azyk: July 8th.
Commissioner Winton: 8th.
Chairman Teele: Thursday, July 8th, at what time?
Unidentified Speaker: I thought we were going to do that today.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: 7.
Chairman Teele: At 7 --
Ms. Sanchez Pando: I thought we were going to do it tonight.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no. Hold it, hold it.
Commissioner Regalado: No, because we don't know if we're going to be here at 7.
Chairman Teele: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Regalado: July 8th is not a PZ agenda, so we may work during the day.
Chairman Teele: July 8th -- Thursday, July 8th at 5 p.m. time certain, we're taking up the
moratorium.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Please, as late as possible because it's hard to get -- you get paid to sit
there, but these people here lose a day's pay to come and help.
Chairman Teele: Not before 5 p.m, not before.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Not before 5.
Chairman Teele: Not before 5 p.m.
City of Miami Page 361 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Ms. Sanchez Pando: After 5.
Chairman Teele: After 5.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Good enough.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
Ms. Sanchez Pando: Thank you.
Unidentified Speaker: Supposed to be a discussion item.
Chairman Teele: Counsel.
Commissioner Winton: We need to get going.
Mr. Dickman: We're under the impression that we were going to have a discussion --
Chairman Teele: Counsel, you need to get on the record now, please.
Mr. Dickman: My clients are here and they -- I was under the impression, as well as they were,
that we were going to have a discussion about the 907 because there are some serious issues
about the Catalonia, and the issues that have been brought up.
Commissioner Regalado: But we asked -- I asked -- Johnny asked, for --
Mr. Dickman: This is the time --
Commissioner Regalado: The City Attorney is meeting on Tuesday at 10 a.m. Alex Vilarello is
coming back from his vacation only to check on all the documents on the Catalonia. We don't
know if there is illegality. I suspect that there is, in the Catalonia, but we need to have the report
from the City Attorney, and the best way to discuss that is having the report from the City
Attorney.
Chairman Teele: Counsel, have you met with the City Attorney?
Mr. Dickman: The --
Chairman Teele: Have you met with the City Attorney?
Mr. Dickman: I have written the City Attorney. I have tried to file an appeal to the Hearing
Boards. They refused my appeal.
Chairman Teele: All right. Hold on one minute. Mr. Attorney, will you all meet with counsel
separate and apart from all these other meetings, because I think as a member of the bar, sir,
you all have an obligation to try to work some of this stuff out.
Mr. Dickman: We have.
Chairman Teele: OK.
City of Miami Page 362 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Dickman: I've contact --
Chairman Teele: Well, have you met?
Mr. Dickman: I've written several letters and the -- candidly, Mr. Chair, this is a time sensitive
issue because the Catalonia, we understand, has pulled permits, and in order for us to appeal
those, we have a very short window, which I believe is Tuesday for us to appeal that, and that's
why we need to get some -- we need to know what is going to happen tonight or tomorrow, or
else we have to make some critical decisions.
Chairman Teele: Let me say this. Let me say this. Let me put everybody on notice. Let me put
everyone on notice. Mr. Attorney, I'm charging you to meet with the lawyers. We will call a
special Commission meeting on Tuesday, if necessary, to deal with this matter, if there is a time
sensitivity issue here, but it is not going to serve any purpose for us to start arguing about facts.
The facts have not been agreed to. You all need to do your work as lawyers. This is not a show
house, now. You all need to sit down, close the door and act as professional members of the bar.
Mr. Dickman: And we --
Chairman Teele: And deal with this thing in a very professional way. If the attorney tells us,
after meeting with you tomorrow, and Saturday, and Sunday, that we need to call a special
Commission meeting, as long as we can do it by noon on Monday, get the notice, we will call a
special Commission meeting, just to deal with that issue, within 24 hours of the time the City
Attorney gives us that notice.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But this is just not Catalonia. It's also 907.
Mr. Dickman: That's exactly right, but the point is --
Commissioner Winton: No. No, it's not.
Unidentified Speaker: (inaudible) of what happened (inaudible)
Commissioner Winton: I'm --
Chairman Teele: Hold on one minute, sir.
Commissioner Winton: You need --
Chairman Teele: Hold on one minute.
Commissioner Winton: Exactly.
Chairman Teele: How many --
Commissioner Winton: Sorry, go on.
Chairman Teele: How many issues are time sensitive?
Mr. Dickman: One issue right now --
Chairman Teele: And that's the one issue that I'm asking -- we're going to preserve the record
for everybody that you all meet with the Attorney and deal with it.
City of Miami Page 363 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Dickman: Mr. Chair, meeting with the attorney would only have -- for us to be able to file
an appeal, it's got to happen either on -- it actually has to happen on Monday, at the latest, so if
you could -- and maybe the attorney could say --
Mr. Maxwell: May I ask -- you're talking about appealing what, Mr. Dickman?
Mr. Dickman: A building permit that was pulled by the Catalonia.
Commissioner Winton: Well, then, file an appeal.
Mr. Dickman: We would have 15 days to do that.
Chairman Teele: Then, counsel, my advice to you --
Commissioner Winton: File it.
Mr. Dickman: File it.
Chairman Teele: -- would be to file an appeal.
Commissioner Regalado: File it tomorrow.
Chairman Teele: You know, and that just --
Commissioner Winton: Don't wait on us.
Chairman Teele: And now we've got -- and now the record is preserved.
Unidentified Speaker: File it tomorrow.
Mr. Dickman: We will do that.
Chairman Teele: If that's what you believe is the best way to represent your client, then file the
appeal.
Commissioner Winton: Absolutely.
Mr. Dickman: Unless you could stay the permit and say that it hasn't --
Chairman Teele: We're not going to --
Commissioner Winton: We don't know if we're going to do that. Geesh.
Chairman Teele: We don't agree on the facts yet.
Commissioner Winton: You guys are press -- you know, you're pressing my patience. I mean --
Commissioner Regalado: No. I mean, you should file.
Mr. Dickman: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: You should file tomorrow morning.
Mr. Dickman: OK
City of Miami Page 364 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: And, you know, really --
Chairman Teele: You should file, if he reasonably believes that he has a case.
Commissioner Regalado: Right, but we have directed the City Attorney to investigate. I mean,
we're talking here of an investigation, not a review or anything, so -- I mean, the City is trying to
clear this thing.
Mr. Dickman: And we appreciate that. We have asked for that from the City Attorney and
others prior to this meeting --
Commissioner Winton: Well, we just --
Mr. Dickman: -- and we are glad that you're doing it. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Well, we just have heard that and, Maria -- where is Maria? Where is the City
- - acting City Attorney?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): I'm still here.
Chairman Teele: Well, I understand you're still here, but you're not going to be here when the
manure starts rolling down. That's what I'm dealing with now. Where is Maria? Mr. Attorney -
- Madam Acting Attorney, effective whenever Alex leaves, I would hope that the lawyers would
give every lawyer that files an action or a letter, or notice with the City Attorney's Office all of
the courtesies and all of the due consideration that the Florida Bar contemplates lawyers should
extend to each other, and I really am offended that we're having this kind of discussion this time
of night, but I think -- counsel has put it on the record, and I think you all ought to meet with him
tonight to just figure out what he's been filing that is not getting an answer.
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Alex, please. OK, so this matter is going to be moved to the City Attorney's
Office, consistent with Commissioner Regalado's instructions. We will take it up on Thursday,
July 8th, not before 5 p.m., and I would hope that we can at least all agree on the facts. In the
meantime, I think you've heard three Commissioners say, counsel, if you reasonably believe your
client's rights need to be protected by filing an appeal, please feel free to do so. We will not take
offense. All right.
City of Miami Page 365 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA
DISTRICT 2
COMMISSIONER JOHNNY L. WINTON
SI.1 04-00712 DISCUSSION ITEM
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ISSUES:
A) COMMISSION STATUS REPORT ON THE COMMISSION
APPROVED LAWSUIT AGAINST MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ON WATER AND
SEWER OVERCHARGES.
B) COMMISSION STATUS REPORT ON THE CITY OF MIAMI
INVESTIGATION INTO MIAMI-DADE COUNTY OVERCHARGING
MUNICIPALITIES RELATIVE TO MILEAGE RATES.
C) DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL LAWSUIT AGAINST MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY TO RECOVER REIMBURSABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
FEES.
D) COMMISSION STATUS REPORT ON MIAMI-DADE COUNTY'S
PEOPLE'S TRANSPORTATION PLAN TAX RELATIVE TO THE CITY OF
MIAMI (UPDATE ON BRICKELL DOWNTOWN TUNNEL).
04-00712-email.pdf
DEFERRED
RESOLUTIONS
SI.2 04-00691 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO
APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, PURSUANT
TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 03-04-005, THAT THE FIRM MOST
QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES FOR AN IMPACT FEE
STUDY, FOR THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER IS TISCHLER &
ASSOCIATES, INC.; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE
AND EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH TISCHLER &
ASSOCIATES, INC., AT AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,
000, FOR A ONE-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR
TWO ADDITIONAL SIX-MONTH PERIODS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ACCOUNT CODE NO. 311047,
ENTITLED "EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT STUDIES."
City of Miami Page 366 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00691-cover memo. pdf
04-00691-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00691-reconnaissance analysis.pdf
04-00691-manager recommenendation.pdf
04-00691-exhibit- psa.pdf
DEFERRED
SI.3 04-00709 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE PROCUREMENT OF A NEW FIRE -EMS RECORDS
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ("RMS") FROM TIBURON, INC., UTILIZING AN
EXISTING CONTRACT, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ("RFP
") NO. 220009530 FROM THE CITY OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE ("FIRE -RESCUE"), AT A FIRST YEAR
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $607,276, WITH AN ADDITIONAL 10% FOR
FIRE -RESCUE'S ALLOWANCE TO EXPEND FOR UNFORESEEABLE
CIRCUMSTANCES, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $668,003,
INCLUDING ALL SOFTWARE, SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING, AND
ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES, WITH THE OPTION
TO EXTEND PRODUCT SUPPORT FOR FOUR ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR
PERIODS, WITH AN ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST CAPPED AT AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $43,109 FOR YEAR 2, WITH OPTIONAL YEAR
INCREASES LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN 5% PER YEAR FOR YEARS 3
THROUGH 5, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $853,
809; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIRE -EMS RMS,
SOFTWARE AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
ATTACHED FORM(S), SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
CONCERNING THE USE OF SAID FIRE -EMS PROGRAM BY THE CITY OF
MIAMI ("CITY"); ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ("CIP") NO. 313303, B-72806, ENTITLED
"FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPUTERS AND COMMUNICATIONS," IN THE
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $607,276, WITH A CONTINGENCY RESERVE
NOT TO EXCEED $60,727, FOR THE INITIAL PURCHASE NOT TO EXCEED
$668,003; ALLOCATING FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $185,806
, TO COVER COSTS FOR MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES FOR
YEARS 2, 3, 4, AND 5, FROM VARIOUS CIP ACCOUNTS, AND FIRE -
RESCUE'S OPERATING BUDGET, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL.
City of Miami Page 367 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
04-00709-cover memo.pdf
04-00709-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00709-price summary.pdf
04-00709-tiburon software and sevices.pdf
04-00709-equipment and software.pdf
04-00709-5 year pre paid plan.pdf
04-00709-payment schedule.pdf
04-00709-price summary 2.pdf
04-00709-tiburon software and sevices 2.pdf
04-00709-equipment and software 2.pdf
04-00709-estimated prices.pdf
04-00709-Kansas City RFP.pdf
04-00709-Kansas City RFP 2.pdf
04-00709-Kansas City RFP 3.pdf
04-00709-syst. implementation agreement. pdf
04-00709-pre legislation.pdf
04-00709-pre Kansas City ordinances.pdf
04-00709-award under Kansas City.pdf
04-00709-exhibit 1- license agreement.pdf
04-00709-exhibit 2- support agreement.pdf
04-00709-exhibit 3- implementation agreement. pdf
DEFERRED
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, to DEFER item SI.3 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for
July 22, 2004.
(Minutes for SI.3 and SI.4 are below.)
Chairman Teele: All right. Further discussion?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Is this on the consent agenda, Commissioner?
Chairman Teele: On any agenda, consent or otherwise.
Mr. Vilarello: There's three substitute items on the consent agenda, when you get to that, but the
Manager has requested that the deferral of Items SI.3 and SI.4 to the second meeting in July,
which is July 22nd. SI.3 and SI.4.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Wait, wait, wait.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Wait, wait, wait.
Chairman Teele: Wait, wait, wait.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Wait, wait, wait, wait.
Chairman Teele: What's SI.3?
Commissioner Gonzalez: What's SI.3 and SI.4?
Chairman Teele: Madam Attorney -- Madam Clerk, what is SI (Supplemental Item) ?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): That's your supplemental agenda.
City of Miami Page 368 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Supplemental agenda.
Chairman Teele: Where is it? I don't have it.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't have a supplemental.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: At the end. It's at the -- well --
Chairman Teele: Oh, I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, they have to have some control on these agendas, because
this is crazy. You know, we have three agendas for today. I mean --
Chairman Teele: Where is SI -- the supplemental agenda?
Mr. Vilarello: The items are a resolution authorizing the procurement of a new Fire EMS (
Emergency Medical Service) Record Management System.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't have it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't have a problem with SI.3; is that the one that he wanted to
defer?
Mr. Vilarello: And SI.4.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, would you pass out SI agenda items, please? SI.1,
supplemental agenda --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Which one is he on?
Chairman Teele: -- is a status report on Miami -Dade County.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There is no Si 1.
Chairman Teele: That's by Commissioner Winton. SI.2 is the --
Commissioner Regalado: I'm with you.
Chairman Teele: -- consulting services on impact. The --
Commissioner Winton: I'm not withdrawing any of the SI items that I have on there.
Chairman Teele: You only have one, as I see it, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. Well, there's four items. I think there's four items. Maybe it's
only one SI, but there's --
Chairman Teele: It's four issues here, "A," "B," "C" and "D."
Commissioner Winton: OK, great.
Chairman Teele: OK. SI.2 is the consulting service, 150, 000. SI.3 is the procurement --
City of Miami Page 369 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Fire EMS Records Management.
Chairman Teele: -- of a Records Management System. SI.4 is a purchase of Technology
Enhancement Data System.
Mr. Vilarello: SI 3 and 4 is what the Manager requested.
Chairman Teele: SI 3 and 4 are being withdrawn?
Mr. Vilarello: Are being requested to be deferred to your second meeting in July, which is July
22nd.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection on SI.3 and 4--
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move SI.3--
Chairman Teele: -- to be deferred?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and 4 to be deferred.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second? Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
SI.4 04-00710 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOGY
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, CONSISTING OF A COMPUTER AIDED
DISPATCH SYSTEM ("CAD"), LAW RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ("
RMS" OR "LRMS"), AND A PREMIER MOBILE DATA COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEM ("PMDC") FROM PRINTRAK INTERNATIONAL, INC., A WHOLLY
OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF MOTOROLA, INC., FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF
POLICE AND FIRE -RESCUE, UNDER AN EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NO. 317; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED
FORM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $6,678,803, FOR A PERIOD
NOT TO EXCEED TWO YEARS, UNTIL THERE IS SUCCESSFUL
IMPLEMENTATION AND A FULLY OPERATIONAL CAD, RMS OR LRMS,
AND PMDC SYSTEM, INCLUDING ITS RESPECTIVE FIRST YEAR
WARRANTIES, AND AN ADDITIONAL 5% OF THE NOT TO EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $6,678,803, FOR AN OWNER'S ALLOWANCE TO EXPEND
FOR UNFORESEEABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $7,008,803, AND A FIVE-YEAR MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AT AN INITIAL FIRST YEAR COST NOT TO EXCEED $476,000
, WITH INCREMENTAL ANNUAL INCREASES NOT TO EXCEED 5% OF THE
FIRST YEAR COST FOR YEARS TWO (2) THROUGH FIVE (5) AND
OPTIONAL MAINTENANCE YEARS, WHICH AT THE CITY OF MIAMI'S ("
CITY'S") SOLE DISCRETION, MAY BE EXTENDED FOR FIVE ADDITIONAL
ONE-YEAR PERIODS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE UNITED STATES
City of Miami Page 370 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COPS MORE 98 GRANT, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
142025.290512.6. 840, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5, 885, 593.31, AND
FROM THE FIRE FEE, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 313302.289301.860 AND/OR
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 313303.289401.840, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $1,123,209.69; ALLOCATING FUTURE FUNDS FROM THE
OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS, AS MAY BE
ADJUSTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE
ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCES OR
AS OTHERWISE ADJUSTED AS PERMITTED BY LAW.
04-00710-cover memo.pdf
04-00710-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00710-memo from ITD.pdf
04-00710-award under miami dade.pdf
04-00710-exhibit 1-system agreement. pdf
04-00710-exhibit 2- list of pricing.pdf
04-00710 - submittal.pdf
04-00710 - substitute back-u p. pdf
DEFERRED
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, to DEFER item SI.4 to the Commission Meeting currently scheduled for
July 22, 2004.
(Minutes for SI.4 are located under SI.3.)
ORDER OF DAY
Commissioner Winton: You know, I bet everybody that I knew that we'd get out at 3, even
though I said 2.
Chairman Teele: All right. Madam Clerk, what open items do we have that need to be taken up
tonight? If it doesn't have to be taken up, we're going to move it over.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): If I might, sir? If we start off, we've got approval of the
minutes. Commissioner Regalado has two items -- I'm sorry -- actually, three items. Then,
Chairman Teele, you have one item. Do you want me to tell you which ones they are?
Chairman Teele: No. Let's defer all of those items.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have --
Chairman Teele: Discussion.
Commissioner Winton: We have all of my County issues. I want to take those up.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have an emergency item for the Orange Bowl.
Chairman Teele: OK. Hold on. We're talking about the agenda. Is this on the agenda? What
else do we have open on the agenda?
Commissioner Winton: Supplemental 1.
Ms. Thompson: We have a discussion on the status report on the bus benches. You had your
executive session.
City of Miami Page 371 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: We did the bus benches. We did not do the executive session. Go right ahead.
Ms. Thompson: OK, and then on your supplemental agenda, discussions, Commissioner Winton,
concerning your Miami -Dade issues and consultant --
Chairman Teele: All right. Commissioner Winton, you're recognized on supplemental items
relating to Miami -Dade issues.
Commissioner Winton: No. We're going to roll those over to -- we need the whole public to hear
about this.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) needs to be listening carefully.
Chairman Teele: All right. So we're not going to take up anything else on the agenda, unless
somebody wants to bring it up. Pocket items, starting with Commissioner Gonzalez.
City of Miami Page 372 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
NON -AGENDA ITEMS
NA.1 04-00744 DISCUSSION ITEM
Direction to the City Manager by Commissioner Gonzalez to request the
Finance Director and the Budget Director to provide a financial report of the
Quality of Life Task Force listing all funds generated and expended from the
time of its inception through last weekend (June 19, 2004).
DISCUSSED
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, if you allow me a second, I would like to request from
the Finance Director. I want the amount of money that has been generated from the inception of
the Quality of Life Task Force up to last weekend. I want to know how much money that unit
generated to the City coffers, and I also want to know how much money we have spent. I want
an update and I want a balance. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: All right. Mr. Budget Director, Finance Director -- Madam Finance Director.
Where's the Finance Director?
Commissioner Gonzalez: They're all on vacation.
Chairman Teele: Let's get the Finance Director out here, because we don't want to have things
fall through the crack now. He directed Finance. Finance and Budget should work together, I
assume, but let's get the Finance Director to be clear.
Mr. Spring: Commissioner, if you would, we do -- I think our Director of Code Enforcement has
been keeping a track on the citations that were given out relative to the Quality of Life Task
Force, so we have that information, and just be a simple matter of tracking who participated on
each of the nights that the task force went out to garner the information regarding expense, and
we'll work on that, if you guys want to move on.
Chairman Teele: Where is the Finance Director?
Mr. Spring: He's not present at City Hall right now. We're --
Chairman Teele: Is there anybody from the Finance Department present?
Mr. Spring: No, no one from Finance is here.
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, whatever money has been generated --
Chairman Teele: Would you amend your direction, sir, to the Finance Director and the Budget
Director? At least, you can look him in the eye.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Mr. Budget Director --
Chairman Teele: Just trying to help you.
Mr. Spring: Appreciate it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- I need an update on how much revenues we have brought to the City
coffers from the Quality of Life Task Force. I don't care if it is citation for --
City of Miami Page 373 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Spitting on the sidewalk.
Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, any of the items that we have been working on.
Mr. Spring: OK
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK.
Chairman Teele: All right. All right. That's a direction. Madam Clerk, will you make sure that
that direction is noted?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: Please, and it's somehow controlled.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Also, I want the expenses, because I understand that we have upset
more than enough because of the operation, and since we're so tight in monies and we need to
cut services, I want to know what -- where the money's going, OK. The intent of the operation
was to use -- and I don't know if the Manager has expressed that to you, Mr. Budget Director
and Finance Director. The intent of this revenue was to continue the operations of the Quality of
Life Task Force, and make the operation sustain itself.
Mr. Spring: Yes, absolutely --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't care if it is code compliance monies. I don't care what kind of
money it is. I don't want that money to be diverted to any other account, so we can do some
playing around with those funds, OK? So, please provide me with all that information as soon
as possible.
Mr. Spring: Absolutely, Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you, sir.
NA.2 04-00748 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST ("TRUST") TO TAKE ALL
NECESSARY STEPS TO COMPLETE THE REPAIR AND RENOVATION OF
THE LIBERTY COLUMN MONUMENT, INCLUDING, ACCEPTING AND
UTILIZING FUNDS RAISED THROUGH PRIVATE AND COMMUNITY BASED
FUNDRAISING APPEALS, AS WELL AS RESOURCES AVAILABLE
THROUGH THE TRUST'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET; FURTHER
DIRECTING THE TRUST TO WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
COMMUNITY GROUPS FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE MONUMENT;
ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100, FROM THE
DISTRICT 3 OFFICE ACCOUNT NO. 00100.920918.6.930, TO "SAVE THE
HANDS" C/O PREMIER COMMUNITY BANK, 12405 TAFT STREET,
PEMBROKE PINES, FLORIDA, 33028, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
City of Miami Page 374 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
R-04-0431
Commissioner Regalado: The other items are just in the afternoon.
Chairman Teele: All right. Commissioner Sanchez. Vice Chairman Sanchez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, on June the 15th, the
memorial sculpture for honoring the Balsero situated on Chaplin Plaza, next to Bayfront Park
was vandalized. That's a monument right in between Bayfront Park and the Intercontinental
Hotel. The memorial sculpture came about from the labor of Humberto Sanchez. Who has no
relationship whatsoever, and he's here present today. As a tribute to the thousands who have
died in their journey to freedom on homemade rafts and inner tubes in the Florida straights.
Fortunately for us, there are many caring individuals in our community that have -- that care
and are willing to make a difference, and thanks to the community outpour and the support of Y-
100 Kenny and Footy for their assistance in raising funds to restore the monument, I want to
take this opportunity to thank the Mayor, and the Chair and all my colleagues for supporting me
on this issue, because I felt it's important. You read the paper. You saw what they did. It's a
hand that reaches out and basically, they vandalized and broke a couple of fingers and left one,
which isn't a very pretty gesture, but we have with us today -- and I would like to introduce the
gentleman who made this possible. His name is Mr. Humberto Sanchez, who I would like to
come up and address the Commission on this matter.
Humberto Sanchez: Thank you, Commissioner, Mr. Chair. Commissioner, I'd like to thank all of
you for your support. .
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Would you state your name for the record?
Mr. Sanchez: Yes. Humberto Sanchez. But especially, Commissioner Sanchez for taking the
initiative and we are right now working very closely with the Bayfront Trust, coordinating how
this whole thing is going to be reconstructed, not only the hands, be there's also other item that's
we would like to address at this time, and make sure that this memorial is better than what it was
before. I do want to recommend that somehow there should be some small funds dedicated, on a
yearly basis, just in case something like this may come up in the future. We're not going to be
around and able to be -- and this funds will be in the hands of some City department that may
oversee this memorial.
Commissioner Winton: Bayfront Park Trust.
Mr. Sanchez: -- so that they can do whatever it takes --
Commissioner Regalado: (INAUDIBLE) give it to the City.
Commissioner Winton: Don't give it to the City.
Mr. Sanchez: -- necessary to --
Commissioner Winton: It will be gone. Don't give it to the City. It's got to go to Bayfront Trust.
Mr. Sanchez: No, I don't think the City's going to disappear, but --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: On that note --
Commissioner Winton: Trust me.
Commissioner Regalado: The money would disappear.
City of Miami Page 375 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: It will get spent.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: On that note, let me just say that Kenny and Footy, who have taken
the leadership on this, and Y-100, have raised more than $10,000 already, and really we have
had an outpour of support through the community. People calling in to assist us in restoring this
monument, so we're making effort. I know that I want to take the opportunity to thank the chair -
- the Executive Director, Tim Schmand, who is here and have worked tirelessly with you and Y-
100 and all those that are calling to help us in raise money, so we're moving this forward, and
what I would like to do at this time is, agree with you, any money that -- later on, we'll address
that, because right now, it's going into a trust. We didn't want anybody, including Bayfront
Park, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to deal with that, so it's going into a bank account to restore the
monument, and I have a resolution that I would like to --
Commissioner Winton: Hey, Joe, what are the restoration costs estimated to be; do we know?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, we estimate it at about -- well, you could answer that question.
Mr. Sanchez: $22,000.
Commissioner Winton: 22?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, about $22, 000. We raised about -- and we'll raise the entire
money in the private sector.
Commissioner Regalado: But -- Y-100 has already 10 -- how many?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Raised -- approximately $12, 000 they're raised so far, so at this time,
I'd like to present a resolution for the record. It's a resolution of the City of Miami Commission
authorizing the Bayfront Park Management Trust to make all necessary steps to complete the
repairs and renovation of the liberty monument; accepting and utilizing funds raised through
private community based fundraising appeals, as well as resources available through the trust
capital improvement budget; further asking the trust to work in conjunction with the community
groups for the restoration of the mentioned monument; further providing support in the amount
not to exceed $100 from the District 3 office account to Save a Hand, CO Premiere Community
Bank, located at 12405 Taft Street, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33028, so moved.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor, signer by the sign of "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much, and we hope to start the restoration as quickly as
possible. I know that we will have a ceremony, and we hope to invite the Commission, the
Mayor, the administration, City employees, and all those that want to attend when we have the
ceremony. Thank you.
City of Miami Page 376 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Sanchez: Absolutely so, and again, thank you very much, you all.
Chairman Teele: Thank you.
NA.3 04-00549 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION CLASSIFYING
THE ITEMS LISTED HEREIN USED BY ALEJANDRO VILARELLO
DURING HIS TERM AS CITY ATTORNEY AS "CATEGORY A"
SURPLUS STOCK, AND DONATING SAID ITEMS TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1.00; AUTHORIZING
THE EXECUTION OF ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS RELATED TO
THE ACCEPTANCE OF SAID DONATION.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0436
A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and
passed unanimously, instructing the City Clerk to make arrangements with the protocol officer to
prepare the appropriate document to decree by the City Commission and the Mayor June 24,
2004 in the City of Miami as "Alejandro Vilarello Day"; further requesting that all members of
the Commission sign the decree. [Note: Protocol Officer prepared document without any
prompting needed by Clerk.]
Note for the Record: The Commission presented Mr. Vilarello with an engraved crystal plaque.
Chairman Teele: We have a -- we have all five Commissioners present, and we had said at 2: 30
we were going to take a moment to honor the City Attorney, and is the City Attorney here?
Commissioner Winton: You mean right after you beat him up?
Chairman Teele: All right. We're now in a position to take up PZ.1 and 2; however, we finally
have all five Commissioners on the dais, but we don't have -- Joel, I asked you -- where is he?
Mr. Maxwell: He was here.
Chairman Teele: The City Attorney. Ladies and gentlemen, the City Commission has the
responsibility of designating a City Manager -- I mean, a City Attorney, City Clerk and Auditor
General. The Mayor designates, for our confirmation, the City Manager. One of the moments of
mixed emotion is when one of the persons that works with us decides to move on for the
betterment of his career or her career, and we've reached that very sad point, a point of mixed
emotions, where we say goodbye to the City Attorney as he moves on to his next life.
Commissioner Winton: To make a lot more money.
Chairman Teele: To make a lot more money.
Commissioner Winton: Now, this is only about money.
Mr. Maxwell: Might have already gone.
Commissioner Winton: This is only about the money.
City of Miami Page 377 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: Unfortunately, now that we have all five Commissioners on the dais, we can't
seem to find the City Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: There he is. There he is.
Commissioner Winton: He's making a business call.
Chairman Teele: He's making a business call.
Commissioner Winton: He's doing billable hours.
Chairman Teele: And so, we recess momentarily to honor the City Attorney and for each
Commissioner to make any statement that they would like to make and, of course, remember that
Alex has the last word, so with that, I would yield to the Vice Chairman.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Vice Chairman. He's on a TV (television) interview. Commissioner
Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I would move that the City Clerk be instructed to go to
the Protocol Officer and draft a document declaring today, June the 24th of 2004 Alex Vilarello
Day in the City of Miami, by the City Commission and have, if possible, the Mayor and all
Commissioners sign during the day, so Alex can take it to his new office.
Chairman Teele: Is there a motion?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: It's been seconded by two or three Commissioners. Is there objection? Mr.
Manager, where are you?
Unidentified Speaker: He objects.
Chairman Teele: That's a joke. All right. Madam Clerk, would you call the roll, and how do we
get Joe Sanchez in here for the purpose of --
Commissioner Regalado: He just finished.
Chairman Teele: -- casting a vote? Madam Clerk, call the roll.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
(COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL)
Vice Chairman Sanchez: What are we voting on?
Commissioner Winton: Just say yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
(COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL)
City of Miami Page 378 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: It's unanimous, 5/2, declaring today Alex Vilarello Day.
(APPLAUSE)
Chairman Teele: And for comments, we will yield to the Vice Chairman, who will make the first
statement, coming down the line.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I've been here six years, and
truly, I've been blessed to meet a lot of great people, but I could tell you one individual who has
dedicated a lot of time and effort and a great commitment and astute to what I consider
municipal law, has been Alex, who I have the utmost respect working with you. I have never
seen an individual who works so hard, and so hard to do what's right, and so hard to please five
different individuals in this City, and I know that he's moving on. He is moving on and I wish
him the best. I know that your time here on myself, my staff and the residents of District 3, we
thank you for your dedication and commitment to making this City a better place, so Alex, I wish
you the best, and I think that you're going to do well anywhere you go because of what you stand
for and your commitment and your dedication to your job. God bless you, Alex.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Alex, I also want to tell you how much I appreciate everything that you
have done for the City of Miami, and I really appreciate, you know, the way that we work and the
responses that you have always been to the needs, not only of the City, but to each one of us
Commissioners, and people don't understand that sometimes you're even working on Saturdays
and even on Sundays, you're in touch with us and we're going over issues and things that are
related to the City of Miami, and you know, I hope that your successor be just half of what you
have been in, you know, in your dedication, in your commitment to the City and to all of us, and,
Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to read a resolution of the City of Miami
Commission classing the item listed herein, used by Alejandro Vilarello during his term as the
City Attorney as Category A surplus stock, and donating said items to the City Attorney in an
amount not to exceed $1.00; authorizing the execution of any necessary documents related to the
acceptance of said donations, laptop, D640 Serial number is J28C11, City ID Number 13325
and work station; a Hewlett Packard 300 fax and printer; one Boston community wooden chair,
model 988; continuation of health insurance benefit throughout September 30, 2004, and a
miscellaneous post as momentums. That is a motion. Can I have a second? You can have the
stapler, too, as far as I'm concerned. That's my motion, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second? Is there a second? Second by the Vice --
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- by the Vice Chairman. Is there unreadiness? It's called a golden parachute
. All those in favor, say "aye. "
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right. And the --
Commissioner Winton: A 6-year-old laptop's a golden parachute.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, right.
Chairman Teele: A 6-year-old laptop.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's obsolete, but you know -- OK.
Chairman Teele: And just so that the record is complete, it's also my understanding that there is
City of Miami Page 379 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
a picture that is in your office that is owned by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency),
and at the CRA board meeting, we will also authorize you to carry that with you.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Thank you, sir.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Alex, once again, congratulations with your, you know, next endeavor.
Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Alex, you should write a book. I mean, "My Life in the City",
but if you do write a book, just please write that, you know, whether you did a very good job or a
great job, the most important thing that you did for the City of Miami is that you always were
available for us in the City Commission, and that you always volunteer information. We have
gone through difficult years here in the City. I have been now nine years, eight years -- nine
years, and you know, I thank you. I thank you for being here. You've been a buffer between us
and some things, and we thank you. There wasn't anything we could do, so we can keep you, so
hopefully, the next City Attorney, which you would help us to find, will always be as available as
you were, because we had many questions in the past. We have many questions in the present,
and we will have many questions in the future, and we need the guidance of the City Attorney.
Thank you, and well, good luck.
(APPLAUSE)
Commissioner Winton: And, Alex, I think -- you know, I share all the same sentiments that my
colleagues have. You've been outstanding to work with. It's been a lot of fun working with you,
and you've done an outstanding job of making sure -- and you and I have had some great
debates, and I've always respected your willingness to do the debate and not just cave in, and
I've respected your opinion a lot, and I also have to say that having had the opportunity to be in
this job now for four and a half years, it's crystal clear to me now, watching government, that
there's two jobs I would never have. I don't care how much money they wanted to pay me. I
would never be the City Attorney and I would never be the City Manager. To have to put up with
all of us and everybody else, there is no way. I have a hard time putting up with all the stuff I've
got to put up with doing this job as it is. I could never do your job, so my hat's off to you. Best
of luck and when you're making all of that money, maybe we could have an Alex Vilarello
adopted park some day.
(APPLAUSE)
Chairman Teele: Thank you, Commissioner Winton, and just to make sure that everybody
understand it, we're not proposing to give him a park.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Chairman Teele: We're proposing that he, as a result of leaving, is going to make so much
money, he's going to give money to support a park --
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Chairman Teele: -- so that's what we're looking for, Alex.
Chairman Teele: But as a member of the Florida Bar, and as a person who has worked in legal
roles throughout the United States, I can say publicly and truly say that Alex, dealing with you as
City of Miami Page 380 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
a member of the Bar has been a delight, a pleasure, and a very personally and professionally
rewarding experience. I have learned from you and I have been able to watch you work closely
with the public and with your clients, and I can say that you have always operated in a very
ethical manner, and I think ethics is the one thing that the members of the Bar are striving
harder and harder to achieve that high legal standard Alex, the Mayor had indicated his
personal desire to be here today, as you know, he's out of town in New York, but he asked that
we do something that we generally reserve for heads of state, and that is, we break out the family
crystal and china and present to you, on behalf of a grateful City, a salute of this crystal
memento, which has your name and not the day you were born and died, but the day you came to
the City in 1998 and the year that you're leaving, 2004, was a grateful, grateful appreciation on
behalf of the Mayor, and the entire City Commission, the City management, and the public.
Thank you and may God bless you.
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Vilarello: Well, thank you and thank you for taking so much time with a very busy schedule
with a lot of people are here for business. I appreciate you all taking the time to say a few words
. When I found out you were doing something, you mentioned something this morning about a
proclamation, I heard something that was going on for the City Attorney, I was a little concerned
that it was going to be "You can't quit. We fire you, " so I appreciate that it wasn't that.
Commissioner Winton: I thought that was coming in one of the agenda items.
Mr. Vilarello: Well -- I thought that half jokingly, and then we got up to the CIP (Capital
Improvement Project) agenda, and I thought maybe I wasn't -- it wasn't going to be funny. It
was -- but obviously, it's been a privilege and an honor to work as the City Attorney and
represent this City. It's amazing in terms of how far this City has come in the last six years, and
it's an honor that I had an opportunity to play a role in the City's return to a very successful
point that it is today. It is -- as an attorney, I've always felt that it's important to have good
clients who know what they want to do and aren't afraid to talk about it, and I've been truly
blessed because they certainly don't have a problem telling me what they want to do and what
they want accomplished That -- as an attorney, that allows me to -- if I can't go exactly the way
they want to go with the fashion, the relief that they want in a lawful and appropriate manner,
and it's always been an honor and I've learned so much from each and every one of you --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's OK to say the words 'pain in the buttocks."
Mr. Vilarello: No, no. Well, I implied that, but that doesn't -- I don't want to say that, and
Commissioner Regalado, you should know that because of the attorney/client privilege, I won't
be writing a book.
Chairman Teele: Thank God for that.
Mr. Vilarello: But thank you very much, and I don't want to take any more time away from the
public, who's got business here before you.
Chairman Teele: Alex, you haven't -- you've been in the public sector how many years?
Mr. Vilarello: 18, 19 years.
Chairman Teele: Well, let me just say this. Let me give you one bit of advice. It would be very
nice if you started out by saying where you're going to be going, and where you can be reached
in the future. I mean, now you -- it's a different deal, so you're no longer the public sector.
Mr. Vilarello: I've got to get used to that.
City of Miami Page 381 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: You've got to get used to saying --
Commissioner Winton: Got to start selling.
Mr. Vilarello: I'm very happy to be going to the law firm of Akerman Senterfitt, with offices in
downtown Miami and Fort Lauderdale, Tallahassee, Orlando, et cetera, but I will be --
Commissioner Winton: Well, let's not get carried away.
Mr. Vilarello: -- happy to be coming back here in two years. I can't work here for two years,
but shortly thereafter, I'll be calling. Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Chairman Teele: Let me again express the appreciation to the public for being understanding.
Alex has worked on weekends, many, many hours; we'll be here tonight until 11 o'clock, 12
o'clock --
Commissioner Winton: 3.
Chairman Teele: And Alex has always been a -- very, very diligent, so we appreciate your
indulgence. Mr. Manager, we --
Commissioner Winton: My bet is that we will be here at least until 2 a.m.
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, let's try to beat that number.
NA.4 04-00719 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), BY A FOUR -FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING,
APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN
EMERGENCY, WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES AND
INCREASING THE CONTRACT AWARDED TO PROFESSIONAL GENERAL
CONTRACTORS INC., PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 03-829, ADOPTED
JULY 17, 2003, AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 04-0179, ADOPTED
MARCH 25, 2004, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $400,000, INCREASING
THE TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT FROM $2,449,031 TO $2, 849, 031,
FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "ORANGE BOWL STADIUM STRUCTURAL
REPAIRS 2003, B-30297 (FORMERLY B-3297);" AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 04-0179, TO REFLECT SAID INCREASE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT,
IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM; ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR
SAID INCREASE FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 324002.
04-00719.exhibit.Second Amendment. pdf
04-00719 - memo 1.pdf
04-00719 - contract amdmt - 2.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0428
City of Miami Page 382 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
until 2:15? The proper term, I think, is adjourn.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Adjourn.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): No, no.
Chairman Teele: But --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No, no.
Chairman Teele: No, no?
Mr. Vilarello: Recess.
Chairman Teele: That's what Joel's always said. It's under --
Mr. Vilarello: You don't want to adjourn the meeting.
Chairman Teele: But you don't want to use that term.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You adjourn the meeting, you've got to reopen, so it's --
Chairman Teele: All right, so we shall recess until --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Motion to recess.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Can we take another -- just one item?
Chairman Teele: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Reference to the Orange Bowl structural repairs.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Four fifths vote.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, this is a four -fifths vote.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Four fifths vote.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK, forget it. Take it in the afternoon.
Chairman Teele: 2:15.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. It's respectfully recommended that the City Commission adopt, by
a four -fifths affirmative vote, the City Manager's finding of an emergency waiving competitive
bidding procedures, and to adopt the attached resolution amending resolution number 03-829
and 04-0179 to increase the scope of work of the project entitled "Orange Bowl Stadium
Structural Repairs 2003, " job number B, like in boy, 30297, to take remedial action to repair,
replace some structural elements that are showing signs of overstress and need to be replaced to
preserve the life, health and safety of the public, and increasing the contract with professional
general contractors in the amount of 400, 000, from 2,449,031 to 2,849,031 to complete these
repairs. All of these remedial work will be a permanent component of the future major
renovation of the plan for the stadium. So move.
City of Miami Page 383 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
NA.5 04-00738 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO WITHHOLD ENFORCEMENT FOR A PERIOD OF THREE
YEARS, OF ARTICLE 4/SECTION 401 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000,
AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ZONING DISTRICT/SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS" RELATED TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE CITY
OF MIAMI ("CITY") WITH A SINGLE UNPERMITTED DWELLING UNIT;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO STRICTLY AND
CONSISTENTLY ENFORCE CITY ZONING CODE PROVISIONS RELATED
TO MORE THAN ONE AND MULTIPLE ILLEGAL UNITS CONSTRUCTED ON
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
DEFERRED
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, and was
passed unanimously, to schedule the resolution as stated above for Commission consideration at
its July 8, 2004 meeting.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez, did you have another item?
Commissioner Gonzalez: What is this, Frank? OK, I have an item here that I -- I consider --
which I consider to be very important. Now we have a problem. We have lost track of what
we're trying to do with the illegal units in the City of Miami. We have been concentrating on
working, you know -- on attacking one -- people that have one single efficiency or apartment,
and we are forgetting about people that have three, and four, and five illegal units that are really
causing a serious problem on the neighborhoods. I'm being told that the problem is that they're
working all across the board and they have no definition on what the objective is. I believe that
the objective should be to address the real problems, and the real problems are buildings that
have -- or single-family -- have three and four illegal units, so I have a resolution of the City of
Miami Commission directing the City Manager to withhold enforcement for a period of three
years of Article IV, Section 401 of Zoning Ordinance Number 11000, as amended, entitled "
Zoning District: Schedule of District Regulations, " related to residential properties in the City
of Miami City with a single unpermitted dwelling unit; further directing the City Manager to
strictly and consistently enforce City Zoning Code provisions related to more than one and
multiple illegal units constructed on residential property. The purpose of this, you know -- I've
been going through this through the Quality of Life Task Force. The idea with this is to
concentrate on these buildings that have -- that are creating excessive cars parked on the
neighborhoods and other eyesore problems in the neighborhoods. I have a case two blocks
away from my house. This is supposed to be a single family. It is 18 bedrooms and 17
bathrooms.
Commissioner Winton: Jesus, wow.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And we've been dealing with this property for two years and nothing
has been done, OK?
Commissioner Winton: You'd think we would --
City of Miami Page 384 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: And we're concentrating on other things that we shouldn't -- you know,
that -- we need to concentrate on the real problem and these are the places that are real
problems. I have in Allapattah a place where it's a duplex, and each one of the units has six
illegal units, you know, so I don't know. I just brought this to your consideration. You know, I
think --
Commissioner Winton: Kind of surprising that we have to have an ordinance for something
that's --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, let --
Commissioner Winton: -- logical, but --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well --
Commissioner Winton: -- if we need one, we need one, right?
Commissioner Gonzalez: But we need one.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let me --
Commissioner Winton: Why three years, though, by the way?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because we have so much of the other stuff to take care of, you know,
that we need time to work -- concentrate on cleaning up the other stuff, and then we go back and
start working on this, which has a less impact on the neighborhoods.
Commissioner Winton: Would you mind, though, making it 18 months, with the provision that
we could --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No problem.
Commissioner Winton: -- re -up it for 18 months? Because I would hate for us to be successful
and then we're stuck with this ordinance --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No problem.
Commissioner Winton: OK
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll accept the amendment to 18 months, and if needs to be extended
later on then well extend it.
Commissioner Winton: We'll extend it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So this is not to take any action for 18 months on --
Commissioner Gonzalez: One --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- illegal units pertaining to one illegal unit.
Commissioner Gonzalez: One illegal unit.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's not an amnesty, where you give them --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no, no.
City of Miami Page 385 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Winton: This is just directing logic.
Commissioner Regalado: And how about --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And just --
Commissioner Regalado: -- how about --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- if I may, Mr. Chairman? I know it's pretty late. If I may? Your
reasoning is to have Code Enforcement focus and apply all its resources to address --
Commissioner Winton: Big deals.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: The bigger offenders.
Commissioner Regalado: How about those who are already before the Code Enforcement.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Let me explain what he's trying to do. The biggest problem is when
we go see people with the three, four, five, six units. The first thing that happens is, why me?
The guy next door has it, so Code Enforcement now has to concentrate on going -- in a bunch of
cases -- and he's so very aware of it -- we're going to see the guys with one unit, so what he's
basically asking us, when we run into that, give us more time to take care of the big problems,
and if they come to us and say, well, my neighbor's got one unit. We don't have to.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, but my only concern is -- and just think about this. I could have
an illegal unit now for 18 months.
Commissioner Gonzalez: They have it anyway.
Chairman Teele: But let me tell you. I have no problem with what -- where we're trying to go,
but let me tell you the law of unintended consequences. If somebody calls and complains, a
neighborhood association calls and complains about something that's going on, and the Code
Enforcement people say we cannot enforce this, we're going to have a big lawsuit from one of
these neighborhood associations. I'm telling you. If this resolution is saying that we will not
initiate -- but if somebody calls and -- I mean, that's like, if somebody calls and turns somebody
in --
Commissioner Regalado: Change the resolution. Change the resolution in a way that would say
that one illegal unit will be the lowest priority
Chairman Teele: Or just change it to say that the City shall not seek the enforcement of this, but
if somebody calls it in, what are you going to do, you know? What are you going to do then?
Commissioner Regalado: We'll make it the lowest priority. The priority -- make it the priority of
Code Enforcement the repeat offenders, aggressive offenders.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I look at it the other way is that, you know what? (INAUDIBLE)
City of Miami
Page 386 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: The problem --
Chairman Teele: What does one illegal unit mean, or one illegal -- how did you say this?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Illegal unit.
Mr. Arriola: Commissioner, in some case --
Chairman Teele: A single un --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Single.
Mr. Arriola: In some places, it's called the granny, and it's basically, you know, the guy that
converted his garage to put his grandmother --
Commissioner Regalado: But you see all those --
Chairman Teele: His mother-in-law?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: -- single -- all those single illegal units are paying double garbage,
because when the crisis, the Fire Department went out there and made the people pay double
garbage fee, and people think --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't know, maybe --
Commissioner Regalado: -- and people think that they are within the law because the City told
them that they have -- that since they have two units, they have to pay --
Chairman Teele: For two.
Commissioner Regalado: -- for two.
Chairman Teele: I don't have a problem with where we're going, but I just have a big problem if
somebody -- if a neighborhood association calls in and says, OK, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. I
mean, on one hand, we're saying we're going to respect neighborhoods and, on the other hand,
you know, we got to figure out how we -- I don't think we ought to be out there looking for that. I
think Commissioner Gonzalez is 100 percent right. We have much bigger problems out there.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but then --
Mr. Arriola: This is basically --
Commissioner Regalado: -- there is the other thing, Mr. Manager. The other thing is, Code
Enforcement goes and sites an aggressive offender, three, and they leave, and they never come
back, and the neighbors call us because you guys don't do anything. You're not doing anything.
Oh, no, it's in the process. Oh, no, they will -- they have 45 days to respond. If they don't
respond, they have 45 days to go before the Code Enforcement. The problem is that we are not
aggressive. Even if by law we have to give them time, the neighbors should see the inspectors
coming back, and coming back, and coming back, because if we don't concentrate on the ones
that create the problems for the neighborhood, the people will think that the campaign is not
working and, to me, it's not working.
Mr. Arriola: The problem -- you say that, but if you look at what -- if you just come one day to
City of Miami Page 387 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
what Code Enforcement is facing today, you know we got a stack of cases this big, and we'll
bring them out, but you know they do get extensions and the Code Enforcement Board gives them
an extension, and they go through another extension, you know. We'd love to close it, but --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez, how do you want to --
Mr. Arriola: -- it doesn't happen.
Chairman Teele: -- handle this?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, let me tell you, you know. You know what my concern is. It's
late. I think we're all tired. I don't want to push the issue, you know. I think all of you know
what's happening out there. All of you may think and may come up with a --
Commissioner Winton: Hey, could we bring it back to next --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- we may come up with a --
Commissioner Winton: -- meeting?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah, just it back (UNINTELLIGIBLE) --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- with a solution.
Commissioner Winton: And try -- so I can help you --
Chairman Teele: Yeah, and I think the staff --
Commissioner Winton: I can't take anymore.
Chairman Teele: I think the Attorney should work with them, but let me just say this --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- Mr. Manager. I hope that your staff advised you of what happened in the
Model Cities Public Advocate meeting. The overwhelming biggest issue out there in Model
Cities right now is the lack of code enforcement. I mean, and there were at least seven or eight
people saying the code enforcement has gone south, and something's going on, and there -- and,
worse --
Mr. Arriola: And you know what? I will show you where we have a stack of cases that we've
gone and we've done it, and I have the proof. The problem is that, you know, you cite, and you
cite, and you cite, and it goes through a long, long process through the City. You can't go
everyday because if they've got 45 days before they go to Code Enforcement, our hands our tied.
I mean, I'm the first -- listen, give me an ordinance. We'll do more, but they have --
Commissioner Winton: Then bring back a recommendation to us.
Mr. Arriola: OK. That'll be fine.
Chairman Teele: Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez to place this item on the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
City of Miami Page 388 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: July 8th meeting --
Mr. Arriola: That'll be fine.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- for further action.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Chairman Teele: Motion and a second. Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
NA.6 04-00752 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION INSTRUCTING THE
CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO INTERCEDE AND
INTERVENE ON BEHALF OF MR. DOUG MEYER OF THE JUBILEE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ("APPLICANT"), WITH THE FLORIDA
HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY FOR THE PROJECT PUEBLO DEL SOL ("
PROJECT"), LOCATED IN ALLAPATTAH, BY REQUESTING THAT AN
ADDITIONAL 90-DAY EXTENSION BE GRANTED, IN AN EFFORT TO
PRESERVE THE FUNDS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED TO
SAID PROJECT, UNTIL THE CITY OF MIAMI ("CITY") CAN COMPLETE
TAKING CERTAIN ACTIONS, THAT ARE NOT AT THE FAULT OF THE
APPLICANT, REGARDING TRYING TO OBTAIN A NEW PARKING
VARIANCE; FURTHER STATING THAT THE CITY IS STRONGLY IN
SUPPORT OF SAID PROJECT, THAT IS IN THE ALLAPATTAH AREA,
WHERE HOUSING IS SORELY NEEDED.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0435
A motion was made by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed unanimously, requesting that the fees for the parking variance application be waived, in
an amount not to exceed $15, 000.
Chairman Teele: Any other item, Commissioner?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. I have an item. I have an issue related to some affordable
housing project in Allapattah. City Attorney, I understand that -- could you explain to the
Commission what the problem is with the -- your exception or whatever that expired?
Doug Mayer: Yes. For the record, my name is Doug Mayer. I am the Vice President and
Director of Development for Jubilee Community Development. We have a project called Pueblo
del Sol. There's a picture of it there. It's 44 units of condominium. This is homeownership in
Commissioner Gonzalez' district. We applied for and were granted a slight parking variance for
City of Miami Page 389 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
this project in 2002, in February. The problem with the way the law is written, you have one
year to pull your building permits, and you can get a one-year extension on pulling your
building permits. Our problem was when we bought the land, it was unplatted and,
unfortunately, the City will not issue you building permits on unplatted land. We have worked
diligently for a year and a half to get the plat resolved. It was voted and approved by this
Commission back in May, and it was registered on May the 14th but, unfortunately, that was
after our parking variance had expired. We literally found this out as we were ready to pay our
building permits and start this project. The City has $500,000 investment in this. You've already
paid for the design of the project. You've already paid for the water extension. All I'm asking is
give us a little more time.
Chairman Teele: Is the nature of what we granted a variance?
Mr. Mayer: It is a parking variance.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Yes, sir, and what happened was that they were granted --
they went to the Zoning Board and they requested a variance. The variance was good for one
year, as the Code requires, and they had an opportunity -- the opportunity was there to renew it.
They didn't renew it. They let it go. It's been expired now a year a half. There is no provision
for administering a variance of that -- it's been a year and a half.
Mr. Mayer: Even if we renewed it, it would still have expired in February. We would still be
here before you.
Chairman Teele: Is there any way we can extend it?
Mr. Maxwell: We've tried. We -- trust me, Commissioner, we've looked at every way we know to
try to assist Mr. Mayer.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. How do we --
Mr. Maxwell: We --
Mr. Mayer: My -- let me tell you what our problem is.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no.
Mr. Mayer: No. Just -- we've got a million one of State money.
Chairman Teele: Doug.
Mr. Mayer: If we don't close on it by July 8th, it's lost. If we lose the State money, the whole
project falls apart. It's a house of cards that has State, County and City money in it. If we don't
resolve this tonight, I'm afraid the whole deal is going to fall apart. We're going to use 44 units
of affordable homeownership --
Chairman Teele: I will do anything the City Attorney says we can do to solve the problem
tonight.
Mr. Mayer: OK
Chairman Teele: So all we got to do -- and all you all need to do -- is meet with the City
Attorney and tell us what to do.
Mr. Maxwell: And we --
City of Miami Page 390 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: I mean, you got four people here -- five, listening trying to tell us what to do,
but please don't keep describing the problem. What's the solution? Doug, what's the solution?
What do you want us to do?
Mr. Mayer: Give me 'til the end of September to pull my building permits, extend my parking
variance. That's all I'm asking. We went through the entire process. This -- you know, I hear
something that -- in all due respect to your City Attorney, he is telling you the letter of the law.
I'm telling you we followed the letter of the law, and what we're faced here tonight is a situation -
- it was catch-22 for us. We couldn't pull building permits because we couldn't get the plat, and
you can't get -- you can't pull building permits until the plat's approved. We were stuck. We
didn't have any other way to go. I would have liked to have brought this to you earlier, but we
didn't discover it until just a couple of weeks ago. I have talked to everybody in the --
Chairman Teele: What do you -- what -- Doug --
Mr. Mayer: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- you're frustrated; we're frustrated. What do you want us to do (INAUDIBLE
)?
Mr. Mayer: I want you to extend my parking variance through September.
Commissioner Winton: Why can't we do that?
Mr. Maxwell: Because you can't extend a variance. Only the Zoning Board can do that and, at
this point, it's expired. It's been expired for a year and a half. There's nothing to extend. The
only thing he could do is go back to the Zoning Board for a new parking variance.
Unfortunately, that won't help his situation. We even looked at seeing -- trying to find that
tentative plat that they had approved might satisfy the variance requirement, but it didn't
because it wasn't a building permit. The way the zone --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me ask you. Can you pull the permit based on the project, without
the additional parking and, then after you pull your permit, then come back and go through the
process and get the variance?
Mr. Mayer: Our problem is that one of our conditions of closing on the State money is to have
building permits in hand and they're aware of the fact that our -- because I had to provide them
with all of the documents for the closing and -- you know, what they want is a letter from the City
that says there are no outstanding issues, other than the payment of the building permit fees in
order to go forward with the project. If the City is willing to give me that letter, then I can close
on my funding, and we're OK.
Chairman Teele: But you're not going to have --
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Mayer, one of the questions that I had asked and we didn't get a response to
last week was whether or not you had pulled any permit whatsoever, any kind of permit over
there.
Mr. Mayer: You cannot -- you have to read your own regulations. You cannot pull building
permits if you don't have an approved plat. We did not have an approved plat until May 14th.
There was no way we could pull building permits.
Chairman Teele: Hold on. Take a deep breath. Just --
City of Miami Page 391
Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Mayer: I'm sorry. I'm --
Chairman Teele: It's 3 a.m. We're frustrated but -- you know, I'm willing to do a lot of things,
but I'm not willing to direct that we perjure ourselves --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No.
Chairman Teele: -- to the State. I mean, I'm willing to do pretty much anything, but we can't
direct the staff to say something that's not true.
Mr. Mayer: All I'm -- I guess what I was saying is, this is an issue that went --
Chairman Teele: How many --
Mr. Mayer: -- to a public hearing.
Chairman Teele: How many parking --
Mr. Mayer: It's 22 space variance.
Chairman Teele: How many are you providing, and how many --
Mr. Mayer: We're providing 75, and we're getting a 22-space variance.
Chairman Teele: Is there any place nearby that we can do a transfer of parking, or anything,
Madam Planning Director? Is there any other mechanism that we can impose, or we can try to
imply?
Commissioner Winton: Any City land nearby?
Chairman Teele: Any City land or is there any other land nearby --
Mr. Maxwell: You mean to satisfy their parking requirement?
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Mr. Maxwell: To satisfy their parking requirements?
Chairman Teele: Exactly. Madam Director, is there any other land?
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): The parking, Commissioner, has to be on site, and
the variance he was seeking it was he couldn't put it in. I would be more than happy to check to
see if there's anything that cannot come to mind right now --
Mr. Mayer: Yeah, I don't think there is.
Ms. Gelabert: -- but I don't think so because the parking has to be on site. The -- what I don't
know if it's on the second meeting -- if we have time to advertise for the second meeting on
zoning, but I don't know if -- did you check?
Mr. Mayer: Well, the problem is that the State granted me an extension of our closing to July 8
th, and they specifically told me they would not extend it beyond July 8th.
Commissioner Winton: Well, but what if we intercede on your behalf with the State?
City of Miami Page 392 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Mr. Mayer: Well, if --
Chairman Teele: What agency of the State?
Mr. Mayer: The Florida Housing Finance Corporation, but I can tell you that -- no, I don't
know. Maybe that's a solution.
Commissioner Winton: I've listened to this. I don't hear a single way that this could be solved --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No way.
Commissioner Winton: -- period by July 8th; can't be solved, so I think the only option we have
is for the City to intercede on your behalf with Florida Housing Finance Authority, and tell them
that we're going through all the motions to get this approved, and we need another extension to
"X" date, and can't we --
Chairman Teele: I think that's a brilliant idea. Mr. Attorney, how long would it legally take --
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's the only way.
Chairman Teele: -- for them to get back into the system, so that when we say we need an
extension, what's "X"?
Mr. Maxwell: 90 days. Oh, you're talking about for them to get a variance?
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Mr. Maxwell: I'd say about 90 days. We can -- at least in 90 days you can do it.
Mr. Mayer: If we go that route, I would appreciate it if the Commission would waive the fees
that we had to pay on our -- we've already paid them once. They're rather substantial for a non-
profit -- you know, in terms --
Commissioner Winton: What -- finish the sentence.
Mr. Mayer: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm just asking if you could waive the fees that we have to pay for the
variance. We've already paid them once.
Chairman Teele: The variance application.
Mr. Mayer: Yes.
Chairman Teele: How much are we talking about?
Mr. Mayer: If memory serves, it was about twelve or $14, 000, something like that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: 12 or $14, 000.
Chairman Teele: A minute ago you were talking about losing $2, 000, 000, $1, 500, 000, and now
we're down to --
Mr. Mayer: No. Well, that's a different issue. One is what we had to pay the City for the
application.
Commissioner Winton: I don't want to take --
City of Miami Page 393 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Chairman Teele: OK.
Commissioner Winton: I don't want to take that up right now.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Winton: We'll deal with that later.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah.
Mr. Mayer: OK
Commissioner Winton: We're -- we need to --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: -- figure out if we --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Winton: So, do we need a motion to direct the --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Pass a resolution so we can take that --
Chairman Teele: We need a motion --
Commissioner Winton: A resolution.
Chairman Teele: -- to instruct the City Manager and/or City Attorney to intercede and to
intervene in support of the application, requesting an additional 90-day extension, until the City
can complete taking certain actions that are not at the fault of the applicant, and to seek to
preserve the funds that have been committed to this project in a sorely needed area of Allapattah
where we need housing stock.
Commissioner Winton: And the City is very much in favor of this project.
Chairman Teele: And the City is strongly and very much in favor of the project, yeah.
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, you make that a resolution so we can -- we'll prepare it and --
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: It'll be in a resolution form. Moved by Commissioner Gonzalez. Seconded by
Commissioner Winton. Further discussion. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right. Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez to grant
a waiver of the application fees, not to exceed $15, 000 for the variance in this instance -- matter.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So move.
City of Miami Page 394 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
NA.7 04-00749
Chairman Teele: Is that OK, Commissioner?
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's OK.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those opposed, say "no."
Commissioner Gonzalez: And let me tell you. I'm shocked by the fact that a not -for -profit is
charged $15, 000 for a waiver on parking for an affordable housing homeownership project.
Mr. Maxwell: It may not be that much.
Chairman Teele: Well --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, it sounds a little stiff, too.
Chairman Teele: It sounds stiff --
Mr. Maxwell: Not that much.
Chairman Teele: -- but it works both ways, too. You know, the other thing is that we really don't
want these variances of parking in these --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I don't -- you know that I don't agree with waivers on parking
space.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: All right. Next pocket item.
Mr. Mayer: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: We'll look to hear from you on the 8th.
DISCUSSION ITEM
Moment of Silence in memory of Maria J. Chiaro's father.
MOTION
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed unanimously, to instruct the Office of Protocol to prepare a proclamation of condolences
to Maria J. Chiaro on the untimely passing of her father.
Chairman Teele: Next --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, before I present my pocket item, I want to state --
respectfully request that we have a moment of silence for Maria Chiaro's father who passed
away earlier today, and her dedication to her work. She is still here, so I would respectfully
request that we have a moment of silence for her father who passed away earlier today. Thank
City of Miami Page 395 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
you. God rest his soul. Also, we respectfully this Commission to prepare a proclamation of
condolence to be signed by all Commissioners and be given to her at the next Commission
meeting. So move.
Commissioner Winton: What did you say?
Chairman Teele: Second. I mean, a proclamation --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Resolution.
Chairman Teele: -- to be prepared to be signed by all. Second by Commissioner --
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- Winton. Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
NA.8 04-00728 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO THE "
SALUTE TO OUR FLORIDA HEROES" TO BE HELD AT BAYFRONT PARK
ON JULY 10, 2004; AUTHORIZING THE PROVISION OF IN -KIND SERVICES,
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $35,000, FROM THE DEPARTMENTS OF
POLICE, FIRE -RESCUE, AND SOLID WASTE; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
ACCOUNT NO. 0010000.921002.6.289; CONDITIONING SAID
AUTHORIZATIONS UPON THE ORGANIZER: (1) OBTAINING ALL PERMITS
REQUIRED BY LAW; (2) PAYING FOR ALL OTHER NECESSARY COSTS
WITH SAID EVENT; (3) OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY
IN THE AMOUNT AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER; AND (4)
COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MY BE
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER.
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0434
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele requested that this item be placed on the agenda for the
July 8, 2004 Commission meeting to discuss the issue related to the Special Events account.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have a resolution. It's a Salute to Our Florida
Heroes. It's an event honoring returning home national guardsmen soldiers. More than 5,000
guard members have been activated for federal service since 9/11. Florida National Guards
have planned a regional celebration at four hubs throughout the State. Ours is July the loth, at
Bayfront Park. We have confirmed 5,000 military personnel attending the event and, in
addition, it will be open to the public. Our Salute to Florida Heroes celebration will be attended
by the Governor, national leaders and senior officials. Each will be designed to honor soldiers
in armed air and their families. The program will include welcome ceremony, speeches by
honored guests, and presentation of valor, awards and entertainment. It's a resolution of the
City of Miami Commission related to Salute to Our Florida Heroes, to be held at Bayfront Park
on July the 10, 2004, authorizing the provision of in -kind service in the amount not to exceed $
City of Miami Page 396 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
35, 000 from Department of Police, Fire -Rescue and Solid Waste, allocating funds from the
account number 001000921002.6.298; condition said authorization upon the organizer
obtaining all permits required by law, paying for all the necessary costs with said event;
obtaining insurance to protect the City in the amount as described by the City Manager and, for
accompanying with all conditions and limitations as may be prescribed by the City Manager. So
move.
Commissioner Winton: I have no idea what you said.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Well --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I know it's late. It's a good thing.
Commissioner Regalado: One second. I just have a question. Is this -- the $35, 000 are
included in the Bayfront Trust donation, Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority, or that's
separate?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It is separate.
Commissioner Regalado: And where is that account coming from? Is this Special Events, or
what is it? I don't understand this.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The County has committed 75,000 in support, and Bayfront Park has
committed 30,000, and Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority has committed 20,000.
Chairman Teele: His question is what is the account number you read? What is that account?
Commissioner Regalado: Well, where is it coming from?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, the account number is -- it's coming from the Department of
Police and Fire -Rescue and Solid Waste. They're allocating from the account number 0010000.
921, what's -- et cetera, et cetera.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, that can't be the case because they have separate accounts.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I think -- my question is, the --
Chairman Teele: Where is the Budget Director?
Commissioner Regalado: My question is --
Larry Spring (Director, Strategic Planning, Budgeting and Performance): I'm right behind you.
Commissioner Winton: Right behind him.
Chairman Teele: What is this account? Who's account is this?
Mr. Spring: Commissioner, that is the non -department -- it's a non -departmental account
number.
Commissioner Regalado: So we are taking, for special events -- because the fund for the special
events, it's depleted -- we're taking that money for special events. That's what you're saying,
right? I'm just saying that there's a precedent here, and that when we need money, we go to that
City of Miami Page 397 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
same account.
Chairman Teele: Well, I'm all --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah. Write down the number.
Chairman Teele: -- I'm all in support of this, but this is the very point I just talked about. We
can't do in -kind. I mean, we -- that's something from the Oversight Board. We've not done in -
kind. It's got to come from an account, and the question is, where are these accounts for events
in the community. And I have no problem with this, but as long as this account's going to be
open for --
Commissioner Regalado: For everybody.
Chairman Teele: -- everybody.
Commissioner Regalado: That's no problem.
Chairman Teele: I mean, you know, that's the only issue here, so I mean, I'm all in favor of it,
but just everybody Xerox this account number and -- you know, and that's where it is, and Mr.
Director, I hope you -- I mean, because that was my point this -- earlier today about the ad -- the
income coming from the billboard stuff.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Billboard.
Chairman Teele: There needs to be an account where we are paying for Police, Fire and those
services, and we don't need to start doing what we did that got us into this trouble, and I have a
particular concern if we're asking Police to pay for anything that we're not reimbursing because
we've already heard from the Budget Director we've got a problem in the Police Department.
Now, you know, if we then push them into an anti -deficiency with in -kinds and all of that, we're
back to being part of the problem, and that's why I keep saying we need to have an account that
pays for Police and Fire, and all of these things that everybody's talking about, so we're not
asking departments to eat into their budget, and if this was an account that basically is going to
reimburse them, then I'm fine with it, but I'm all I'm saying is, make sure you give us a memo on
this account and how this money has been used before, and how we can use it going forward,
because we all have a lot of activities that we want to support.
Commissioner Winton: So maybe --
Commissioner Regalado: Hey --
Commissioner Winton: -- we should take none out of that account and go back to MSEA (Miami
Sports and Exhibition Authority) and Bayfront Park Trust and get the 35,000.
Chairman Teele: But you -- I don't know what this account is, Johnny. I mean --
Commissioner Winton: That's my point.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't know.
Commissioner Winton: (INAUDIBLE) probably doesn't make any sense.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't know because I know that the Special Events funds are
depleted completely.
City of Miami Page 398 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Because we don't want to open that door.
Chairman Teele: You don't want to open that door.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Look, wherever the money comes from the --
Commissioner Winton: I don't want to open it.
Chairman Teele: I mean, the door's being open now, and all I'm saying is --
Commissioner Winton: And that's what I'm saying. I'm saying close it before it opens.
Chairman Teele: But I don't have a satisfactory answer, Mr. Budget Director, as to what is this
account. It's a non -departmental account, but is it the Manager's account, the Mayor's account,
a reserve account?
Mr. Spring: It is the Manager's non -departmental account.
Commissioner Regalado: What?
Mr. Spring: That's what that account number is.
Commissioner Winton: I don't even know what that is.
Chairman Teele: It is the Manager's non -departmental account --
Mr. Spring: Non -departmental account.
Chairman Teele: -- just like there are non -departmental accounts for each of the five
Commissioners --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioners.
Chairman Teele: -- here for rollover or whatever.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Chairman Teele: And so, the question becomes, you know, what's sauce for the goose is sauce
for the gander, so I hope the Manager's prepared to break out 35 time four -- five.
Commissioner Regalado: Hey, July 8th, we raid the Manager's account.
Commissioner Winton: So there's my point. I think that this 35 ought to disappear off of this
resolution, and we ought to go back to MSEA, because this is a fit for MSEA, I think.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Johnny, the problem is this event is July the 10th.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Chairman Teele: And we can't --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And it's a good event. Come on, you know --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
City of Miami Page 399 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- it's --
Chairman Teele: It's a great event.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- a salute to our Florida heroes. These are national guardsmen
coming back. You decide what you want to do.
Commissioner Winton: OK, so it can come out of the Manager's account, but we ought to go
back to MSEA and get some more money.
Chairman Teele: Well, we can replenish this account. I think we should act on this right now --
Commissioner Winton: Me, too.
Chairman Teele: -- and then let's agree that we'll visit this on the 8th, and replenish it, if
necessary, whatever.
Commissioner Winton: Correct.
Chairman Teele: But we don't -- you can't have the --
Commissioner Winton: I agree with that.
Chairman Teele: -- not planning an event.
Commissioner Winton: I agree with that. I agree with that.
Chairman Teele: Motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I'm -- no. All of my stuff, I'm going to wait until next time.
NA.9 04-00742 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO IDENTIFY FUNDING FOR LAND ACQUISITION AND
MAKE SUCH LAND AVAILABLE TO MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A MIAMI-DADE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER
AS A COMPONENT OF THE LITTLE HAITI PARK PROJECT SUBJECT TO
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FUNDING APPROXIMATELY $20,000,000 FOR
THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SUCH MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY GOVERNMENT.
04-00742 - memo - 1. pdf
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0429
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado.
City of Miami Page 400 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move the Chairman pocket items. We have a pocket item, a
resolution of the Miami City Commission directing the City Manager to ident funding for land
acquisition and make such land available to Miami -Dade County for the development of a
Miami -Dade County Neighborhood Center, as a component of the Little Haiti Park project;
subject to Miami -Dade County funding, approximately twenty --
Chairman Teele: Million --
Commissioner Regalado: -- million for the design and construction of such Miami -Dade County
Neighborhood Center by Miami -Dade County government.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They're giving us that money, 20, 000, 000?
Commissioner Winton: What does that mean?
Commissioner Regalado: It means that he's asking $20, 000, 000 from the County.
Commissioner Winton: Is that what it means?
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is that the bond money?
Commissioner Regalado: That's the bond money.
Commissioner Winton: So moved -- second, or whatever.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean, good luck because it's --
Chairman Teele: All right. On discussion --
Commissioner Regalado: -- that is going down inflames.
Chairman Teele: -- on discussion, all we're saying is that the County will fund a neighborhood
center in the Little Haiti area. We will make the land and the footprint available for them to
build a neighborhood center, as a part of a joint activity.
Commissioner Winton: Ilike that.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
NA.10 04-00750 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION INSTRUCTING THE
CITY MANAGER AND THE APPROPRIATE CITY DEPARTMENTS,
SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, TO
COMPILE ALL PURCHASE AND SALES AGREEMENTS AND RELOCATION
FILE DOCUMENTS FOR THE VACATION OF BLOCKS 35, 36, 45, 46, 55,
AND 56 IN OVERTOWN, RELATED TO THE "URBAN MASS TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION ("UMTA")/OVERTOWN URBAN INITIATIVES PROJECT,"
THAT USED BONDED OR CITY TAX INCREMENT FUNDS, OR
City of Miami Page 401 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
GOVERNMENT FUNDS; FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO PUT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER AND MEMORIALIZE ALL PARTIES
DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE TRANSACTION; FURTHER DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO WORK WITH THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY IN RETRIEVING THE DATA RELATED TO THIS
REQUEST AND PROVIDING A REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION NO
LATER THAN TU ES DAY, JULY 13, 2004.
04-00750 - memo - 1.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0432
Commissioner Regalado: There's a pocket item on behalf of Chairman Teele. Resolution of the
Miami City Commission directing the City Manager to -- no, no. We did that. There's another
one here. Resolution of the City of Miami instructing the City Manager and the appropriate City
departments, specifically including the departments of the City Attorney, Economic Development
and Community Development to compile all the purchase and sales agreements and relocation
file documents for the vacation of blocks 25, 36, 45, 46, 55 and 56 in Overtown, related to the "
Urban Mass Transit Administration (UMTA)/Overtown Urban Initiative Project, " bonded or City
TFI, or government funds; further instructing the City Attorney to chronologize and memorialize
all parties directly involved in the transactions; further directing the City Manager and City
Attorney to work with the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Agency
and Miami -Dade County in retrieving the data related to this request and providing a report to
the City Commission no later than Tuesday -- you want to do this Tuesday, July 8th? I mean,
Thursday, July 8th, or Tuesday?
Chairman Teele: This is the report. This is just a report.
Commissioner Regalado: So it doesn't have to be given on the City Commission --
Chairman Teele: No. This is just a report.
Commissioner Regalado: -- Tuesday, July 13, 2004. So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
NA.11 04-00751 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO PROVIDE A FULL REPORT INCLUDING PHOTOS, ON JULY
8, 2004, PERTAINING TO THE PLACEMENT OF TRANSMISSION POLES
WITHOUT A PUBLIC HEARING, NOTICE OR COMMENCEMENT WITH THE
PUBLIC, CITY COMMISSION OR THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY, ALONG THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF NORTHWEST 11 TH
STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM THE OVERTOWN SUBSTATION TO THE
RAILROAD SUBSTATION; FURTHER REQUESTING THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE TO PREVENT SUCH FUTURE OCCURANCES,
City of Miami Page 402 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
ANYWHERE IN THE CITY OF MIAMI OF SUCH PERMIT ISSUANCE
WITHOUT A "PUBLIC HEARING;" FURTHER DIRECTING A WRITTEN
REPORT WITH DETAILED PHOTOS OF A COMPARISON OF THE
SUBSTATION LOCATED AT NORTHWEST 11 TH STREET AND 5TH
AVENUE TO THE SUBSTATION ON NORTHEAST 20TH STREET AND 2ND
AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA.
Motion by Chairman Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0433
Chairman Teele: On the last one, would you preside, Mr. Vice Chairman? I really want to say -
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, you are recognized at 3:13 in the morning.
Chairman Teele: I'm asking everybody to look at this because I've got to tell you. You know,
this is the stuff that's going to kill the City, and it could very well be in anybody's neighborhood.
The City has authorized Florida Power & Light to install humongous --
Commissioner Winton: I've been there.
Chairman Teele: -- poles right in the middle of Overtown, right in the middle of the development
area. This is on 11 th Street, and I got to tell you, you know. There was no notice.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: No discussion. We cannot do communities like this.
Commissioner Winton: Terrible.
Chairman Teele: This is being done under the cover of darkness.
Commissioner Winton: Yep.
Chairman Teele: This is a resolution asking the Manager to provide a full report, including
photographs, on the July 8th meeting, pertaining to the placement of Florida Power & Light
transmission poles, which were done without a public hearing notice and the commencement to
the public, along the right-of-way of 11 th Street and, specifically, requesting the City Attorney to
draft an ordinance to prevent future occurrences anywhere in the City of such issuance of
permits without a public hearing, and further requesting the Manager to provide a written report
detailing a photo comparison of the FP&L (Florida Power & Light) substations located at 11 th
Street, versus the one located on 20th Street. I would so move.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: And Mr. Manager, I mean, with all due respect, I'm going to show you a tale
of two cities. The substation right there by Brahman Cadillac and the one about 10 blocks away
is a tale of two cities. The one by Brahman Cadillac -- if you're going to have a substation, that's
City of Miami Page 403 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes June 24, 2004
what they should look like. Nobody wants a substation. The one in Overtown where the children
walk by every morning to go to school, looks like something out of the '20s, and it's been there.
You didn't put it there. It's been there. It's been there for 20 years, but now we're allowing them
-- Florida Power & Light to come put poles in and not even upgrade the substation. The
landscape -- there is no landscaping. There is no aesthetics, and we can't allow this.
Commissioner Winton: And we ought to be looking at all substations citywide on that very issue
because the ones in Coral Gables, I can tell you --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They don't get away with that.
Commissioner Winton: -- are much nicer than even the one by Brahman.
Chairman Teele: The ones in Coral Gables and the ones in Aventura, it's a tale of two cities,
and we let these people get away with just trashing our neighborhoods, unless they're Gucci (
UNINTELLIGIBLE) lobbyists down here representing developers. They wouldn't put something
like this on Watson Island. They wouldn't put something like this on Brickell, and that's why I
think we ought to go ahead and look at all of the substations in our City, but what I'm hoping is
that Florida Power & Light, if they need another permit for anything, they don't get it until they
upgrade all of the substations in the City, so I would ask that the Vice Chair would call the
question.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there a motion?
Chairman Teele: There was a motion made by me and a second by Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition having the same right, say "nay." Motion
carries unanimously.
Chairman Teele: We'll pass over any more -- any more of the items -- I know there's another
one, but let's just leave it alone.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I have to go to work.
Chairman Teele: All right. We will all now go to work with Commissioner Regalado and go on
his radio show.
Commissioner Winton: Didn't I say "and we're going with you?"
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, right.
Chairman Teele: The time is now 3:18 a.m. and we stand --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Adjourned.
Chairman Teele: -- adjourned. Thank you all very much.
City of Miami Page 404 Printed on 12/16/2004